Archive for the ‘Texas Politics’ Category

Dirty Politics in Texas and Jeb’s Revenge on Trump

Wednesday, March 2nd, 2022

Will Jeb have the last laugh At Texans’ Expense?

Texas is a state with Open Primaries. The rules are that we don’t register by party, and despite some efforts to change it, in election after election, RINOs exploit it to their benefit. Tuesday was the Texas Primary, and one race in particular raised my eyebrows. Incumbent Attorney General Ken Paxton received forty-two percent of the vote, with George P. Bush finishing second. This means there will be a run-off in May, the winner of which will move on to the General Election in November.  There’s been one candidate that Democrats and RINOs alike have been attacking like crazy, for years, since he started in office as Attorney General. It’s been non-stop with Democrats and their RINO henchmen cooking up charges and phony scandals to attack Ken Paxton since he first ran.  He wasn’t supposed to get in to begin with, but when he managed to get into the office, he actually did some very good things, and has been a fairly conservative AG.  The establishment RINOs have other plans, and his name is George P. Bush. Yes, son of Governor Bush. No, not the Texas Governor, Bush, who went on to be President, but the other Governor Bush, JEB, who was governor of Florida and failed miserably in his campaign for the presidency in 2016.  Somebody needs to tell President Trump, and somebody needs to get him the message: George P. Bush is the plant the RINOs will use to at least temporarily turn Texas “Blue” as they tried to do in 2020. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, what we’ve seen executed in the Texas Primary is the first big step in Jeb’s Revenge.

They knew they wouldn’t beat Paxton in a primary-day head-to-head race with George P. Bush.  Ken Paxton is far too well-liked among conservatives in Texas, and he’s actually taken a number of steps none of the Bush-o-philes in Austin would ever have done.  His filing of one suit after the next against the Federal government on issues of immigration, and his post-election attempted suit against Pennsylvania, joined by more than twenty other states, was a daring and bold move if John Roberts hadn’t owed his manhood to the DC establishment.  No, if they were going to defeat Paxton, they’d need to use a well-tested strategy that works well and best in an Open Primary state like Texas.  They would try to split the Paxton vote by entering a couple of people who’ve circled the establishment drain, stealthily, who they could use to attack and weaken Paxton while clearing the way for Bush.

Eva Guzman, part of the Abbott wing of the Texas Bush-o-phile establishment, was the first to be injected, in June of 2021. She resigned her seat on the Texas Supreme Court in order to do so, offering no explanation for her sudden resignation at the time.  Within a week, she had filed paperwork with the Texas Ethics Commission signifying her intent to seek the office of Texas Attorney General.  Louie Gohmert’s last minute entry(November 2021) into the race was the tip that polling had shown insiders that Eva Guzman would not, on her own, be enough to force the run-off. Gohmert is thought by many to be a solid conservative, but the former judge owed favors. Certain people needed Paxton removed as an obstacle to George P. Bush’s expected ascension to governor.

This gave George P. Bush a couple of advantages. In the first place, he could let the other two challengers play hammer, pounding on Paxton, particularly Louie Gohmert, who falsely showed himself on his campaign page with President Trump, indicating to the uninitiated and uninformed that he had the support of the former President.  That’s dirty, because of course, Paxton had secured President Trump’s endorsement months before.  Here’s Gohmert’s deceptive, corrupt use of President Trump’s image in likeness overlaid with “Louie Gohmert for Texas Attorney General” logos:

This is the video you would be greeted with upon surfing over to Gohmert’s website.  This is disgusting. I wonder if the former President is aware of how unscrupulous Gohmert has been in misrepresenting himself in this way.  This was frankly the thing that has caused me to lose all respect for Gohmert. He’s clearly portraying himself on this website as though he had Trump’s endorsement for the office of AG, which is a deception. Gohmert also ran nasty attack ads against Paxton, while accusing Paxton of running attack ads I’ve never seen.

I feel terribly for the Texans who were cheated of their votes by Guzman, Gohmert and Bush by this strategy, but it’s not over.  You see, despite receiving the most votes in the Primary, Attorney General Ken Paxton will now face a run-off with George P. Bush, and it’s a clean slate. Now it’s a winner-take-all affair. Bush, who didn’t need to spend too much campaign cash, since he had the two fakers doing his dirty work, will be flush with cash, and of course, the Bush machine can generate more cash in Texas than anybody else.  This will now become the political version of a smash-and-grab, and they will now use all available dirty tricks to overcome Paxton.  This is how the establishment RINOs play their dirty smash-mouth politics.  They used two also-rans to bloody-up Paxton with the sole purpose of making it easier for George P.

This is CRITICAL for Donald Trump, however, because if George P. Bush becomes Texas Attorney General, who will next face re-election in 2026 along with all the top state-wide offices, guess who he will be in a position, along with Abbott, to sabotage in 2024?  Yes, that’s right.  For the Trump Train, this is a five-alarm fire. In 2020, Abbott could afford to sabotage Trump because he wasn’t up that year. None of the state-wide office holders were. So it would be easy to help rig the election for Democrat Joe Biden because for Abbott, he had nothing at stake. People like to talk about Trump’s four-dimensional chess and all that nonsense, but he’d better master the board in Texas quickly, or they’re going to submarine his ass in 2024. Why wouldn’t they?  Wouldn’t Jeb’s son delight in betraying Trump?  You bet.

In the longer run, it’s setting the stage for George P. Bush to become Abbott’s replacement before he goes off to run for President in 2028 or 2032. That’s the game, and if my fellow Texans want to be drilled in this way, stick around. The Bush family will lay a pipeline for you again, and it won’t involve any kind of lubricant Texans might have thought to expect.  This is the beginning of the next Bush Bum’s Rush to power. Paxton is to be their first victim, but he won’t be their last.  Donald Trump is the next target, should he run as many now expect in 2024. From the AG’s seat, Bush will be able to create havoc for Trump in the Presidential race.  Texans need to wake up before the Bush wing of the establishment runs over them again, just as they did in 1988 and afterward, tossing aside all the Reagan folk who’d been so strong in Texas, to be replaced by BushCo folk who will sing by the family hymnal.

I also expect some interference from Washington DC. Don’t be surprised when the crime family’s influence is used to wave around some cobbled-together BS story about Paxton come a week or two before the run-off, just in time to take hold, but too late to be debunked. They have friends everywhere, as they’ve shown, and while they got clobbered by Trump in 2016, they’ve learned now, and they know how to rig things.  Texans had better wake up and smell the coffee, or soon, they’ll be smelling Bush family BS again, maybe for decades to come. If George P. were to run for President in 2032, you won’t be rid of them until 2040! How long are you willing to let one family of sell-outs dominate your state and your country?

For my part, if George P. Bush manages to beat Paxton in the run-off, I will work my back-side off to defeat him in November, even if I have to get out and spend my evenings planting lawn-signs for the Democrats. It’s time for the Bush family dynasty to end, for good this time. We’re America, not Britain, and we don’t do royalty by birth.

As a related side-note, there are a few steps Republicans can take to stop these shenanigans. For one, we need a state constitutional amendment prohibiting any candidate in Texas from appearing in the same election cycle for more than one office. The more important measure is that we must convert Texas to a closed-primary state.  People should be required to choose a party and register as such to vote in a party primary. It’s like having a private club, but letting the public choose its officers. It’s preposterous, and nobody in their right mind would accept these terms in any other circumstance.  In Texas, once you’ve voted in the primary, you’re bound to that party’s ballot for any subsequent run-off.  Therefore, if you vote as a Democrat in the primary, you can’t go vote in a Republican run-off two months later.  The trick, however, is this: If YOU DIDN’T vote in the general primary for either party, you’re still eligible to vote in the run-off.

Does a voter have to vote in the general primary election in order to vote in a primary runoff election?

No. Section 11.001 of the Texas Election Code prescribes the specific qualifications necessary in order to vote in a Texas election. There is no requirement to have previously voted in the general primary election in order to participate in the subsequent primary runoff election. Therefore, if a qualified voter did not vote in the general primary election, they are still eligible to vote in the primary runoff election.

In this way, any number of actual Democrats who did not vote in Tuesday’s primary can show up and vote in the May run-off as Republicans. What this means is obvious, and it’s the reason Texas Republican voters had better wake up to how they’ve been played.  You must get this system under control, because it’s rigged for RINOs to defeat your conservative candidates every time if they have the resources to play the game. As long as they can manage to finish in the top two, the RINO can make it a one-on-one race letting the also-rans do damage to the chief opponent. That’s how the establishment has rigged this game in Texas, and if you don’t get with the program, in May, they’re going to steamroll you with another Bush, putting the Bush clan in the position to stymie Trump again in 2024.  Politics is a dirty, dirty, long game. The Bush family knows how to play it well. When he ran for Land Commissioner four years ago, I could see this coming.  I knew AG would be his next play. George P. Bush hasn’t even been practicing law. He wants to be your AG, so he can step up, and up.  That’s the Bush family plan. You’re the pawns. Ken Paxton is to be their first check-box on their hit parade.

Trump is next. They’re going to hit him in 2024 like you’ve never seen. They want to prevent him from having any influence over the future of the Republican Party.  What if he picks a VP with future prospects?  Wouldn’t that foul their plans? It just might, and so to avoid that possibility, they’re going to strike first with a well-positioned Texas AG who’s going to exact his low-energy father’s revenge. Hell, Jeb might run himself, in 2024. He’s just that arrogant, and if his son controls the AG’s office in Texas, imagine if Trump finds himself denied ballot access in the Lone Star State? The script almost writes itself.

The Immorality of Anti-Gouging Laws

Monday, August 28th, 2017

lace wedding dress

I live in Texas. I spent the weekend hunkering down in the deluge of the Northern-most outer bands of Hurricane Harvey.  Though not nearly as bad off as those under the hurricane and subsequent tropical storm away to our South and Southeast, we will have our share of drenching rains and attendant flash-flooding.  Watching television, I am struck by how Texas elected officials are spending so much time in front of cameras, including even Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. During several weekend appearances on FoxNews, Paxton reassured the audience that Texas has some of the strongest “anti-gouging” statutes anywhere in the country, with additional or enhanced penalties for those who “take advantage of the elderly.” I’ve seen enough of this in my lifetime to know that these laws are abominable. Not only do they violate the property rights of traders, but they also cause an irrational element to rush into our economics.  Politicians of any party who support these laws do so in opposition to all the laws of the universe, and further degrade our social fabric by institutionalizing vast immorality.  I urge the immediate repeal of such laws, and constitutional amendments at both the state and federal levels that would implement severe punishments on any public official who would attempt to intercede in this fashion dress in the free market. These laws result in the misallocation of resources, the violation of individual liberties on a massive scale, and in some instances, additional death and mayhem.  Perhaps worst of all, it encourages complacency and sloth, rewarding both with unjustifiably low prices, while punishing those who had the foresight and self-discipline to plan ahead.

If you purchase a large stock of some commodity, let’s use bottled water as our example,  well in advance of some localized or regional emergency, with the notion of selling it at some future date for a profit, you’re simply doing business.  If there comes to be some shortage of bottled water, you would be in a good position relative to the market, and would be able to increase your price to whatever level the market would bear.  The equilibrium price for bottled water would shift dramatically upward, and you would make a tidy profit, in a free market.  In Texas, as in many other states and localities, there are laws that prohibit the raising of prices for commodities for various items and commodities when an emergency is declared.  This extends to items like generators, pumps, flashlights, and other items frequently needed in the aftermath of some calamity, natural or otherwise.  The idea is that those who sell such items should not be left in a position to “take advantage of an emergency.”

This is a ridiculous notion.  Every trade in any market under every condition is a situation of either the buyer or seller (and most frequently, both,) believing they are in the more advantageous position in the trade.  What politicians call “price-gouging” is merely the natural result of a free market in the face of scarcity.  What politicians cynically do is to take advantage of the consumers’ sentiments in this situation.  If there are any profiteers in an emergency, people who are abusing their positions to make undue gains on the basis of tragedies, it is the politicians who make political hay off of disasters. These laws, all of them, are immoral and fly in the face of all rational economic theories. Let’s examine the consequences:

The owner of the commodity, in this case the seller/reseller is prohibited from getting the greatest possible value from his/her foresight, investment, and simple commercial activities. Why would anybody go through the trouble of stock-piling any commodity of any description, dealing with transportation and storage, as well as distribution, if merely the act of maximizing one’s profits is an activity to be punished?  This means if you merely prepare, following the model of the ant rather than the grasshopper, you can be seen as profiting from a disaster. Obviously, the net effect of this will be to discourage the stockpiling of commodities in the private market, and that can have yet another unintended consequence: Increased human suffering.

Human suffering will be increased under these laws because it doesn’t matter how cheaply a commodity may be priced if it’s unavailable in the place it’s needed at the time it’s needed, for customers willing and able to pay.  Imagine if this same mindset was applied to other aspects of life. Take for example the “convenience store.” Nobody would buy anything at the prices charged for common items in your average convenience store except for the fact that why you’re paying the premium price is for the convenience of getting the goods when you need them, where you happen to be when that need arises.  Naturally, if you apply the same notions manifest in these immoral “anti-gouging” statutes, then all convenience stores should go out of existence.  In fact, so should all big-box stores. All grocery stores should likewise go out of existence. In fact, anybody between the producer and consumer should be forced out of business if you are to take this idea to its logical conclusion, because what they all do is to profit by providing a convenience and efficiency in distribution.

Naturally, the things these statist villains ignore is their unremitting violence against individual liberty. Some of these people claim to be motivated by justice and freedom, but an examination of their advocacy in this context unmasks the truth: They don’t give a rip about your private property rights, or your life, or anything else.  Instead, they care deeply about maintaining power and the politically-obtained positions they enjoy because people don’t think these things through before making emotionally-based demands of their government(s.) If I own a warehouse full of bottle water, having taken the time, having invested the money and effort to build it, maintain it, stock it, and then protect it, why shouldn’t I be able to sell it for whatever price I can obtain?  What moral principles are in question? Obviously, this is another example of collectivism versus the individual.  More, if I need a bottle of water, who is Ken Paxton or any other politician to insert himself or the force of government if I am willing to pay even one million dollars for a bottle?  Does Attorney General Paxton have the right to stop me from drinking?  Naturally, because he’s a politician, he would argue that he’s merely forbidding somebody from taking advantage of my thirst, but what if the seller simply says: “Never mind, I’m not interested in selling.” Will Mr. Paxton put a gun to his head and force him to sell at a price Mr. Paxton permits?  You bet he will.  You can be assured that Mr. Paxton and all the other statist thugs are more than willing to do precisely that for their own political advantage, or to suit their own broken, irrational, and inconsistent moral exigencies.

The other problem with all of this is that it discourages rational behavior and planning.  Why worry about keeping a relatively small but nevertheless potentially critical household stock of important commodities? I have many things in excess of my immediate consumption needs, all on the basis of the idea that I don’t have perfect knowledge of all circumstances that may suddenly arise.  I have food storage, not a ton, but enough that we could subsist a few weeks, and we have enough water, and in a pinch, we have generators, and if things get really bad, I suppose that horses could come back as a means of transportation. The point is that we all make choices, and some of us make better choices than others. Those who make poor choices or simply act irresponsibly find themselves facing higher costs than those who make better choices and/or choose to prepare.  The anti-gouging law favors the irresponsible and those who make poor choices.

On Saturday, during the news coverage, a number of people were shown walking out along a rock out-cropping among the white-capped waves at the coast, taking selfies, and otherwise acting foolishly in what can easily devolve into a life-threatening situation.  The newscaster remarked that they were not only risking their lives but also the lives of first responders who would be called upon to save them if they happened to get blown or washed into the bay and caught in the strong current.  I am not a first-responder, but were I, I would refuse to risk my life for such people, and the mere fact that we ask first-responders to rescue such irresponsible people is the main reason we have so many irresponsible people.  Start letting such fools pay the full cost of their foolishness without any extraordinary measures to rescue them from their own choices, and suddenly, as if by magic, people will begin to make better choices.

Subsidizing sloth and stupidity never profits any society; neither does punishing ambition or foresight. Law should never demand the irrational, and must never impose the immoral, yet that is precisely what these laws manage to do.  For the sake of full disclosure, let me state that I am not now nor do I expect at any time in the future to be among those who could profit from the repeal of these laws, inasmuch as I don’t possess any substantial stocks of any commodities beyond those for my own uses.  On the other hand, should the day dawn in which I find myself in need of a commodity that has otherwise become scarce, I will be willing to pay such price as may be necessary to obtain it, should I have managed to fail to foresee and prepare.

Scarcity of an item at a particular time and place when combined with the quantity demanded by the market should always be the driver of the equilibrium price. When government intercedes in economics, it always, always has [allegedly]unintended negative results, even though governments and their cohorts in media do their level best to hide this fact from you. A more recent example of this is the debate over the repeal of Obama-care. Government stooges claim that were Obama-care to be repealed, some millions of people would lose their coverage.  What government stooges and their cohorts in media do not track, and desperately do not want you to track, is the number of people who lost coverage or saw the value of their coverage destroyed by the institution of Obama-care.  Government stooges do not want you to see the people who, in order to avoid the government fine, pay for insurance their health and risk levels would not justify.  Nobody tracks the opportunity cost of where all those dollars might have been spent or saved in other ways, that might have made marked improvements in the present or future standards of living of the people in question.  No, such numbers are harder to derive, and it’s much easier to claim some ridiculous numbers on the basis of who is in the government program at present as some measure of the program’s alleged successes.

I am certain that on some future date, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will claim that some number of Texans were spared from price-gouging by the immoral law he now so adamantly enforces, but there will never be a day when there will be a count of the people who were deprived of commodities because there was no seller selling it, due to the lack of potential profit.  Paxton, like every other statist thug on the planet, will claim a victory.  It is no different from Venezuela, where their dictators, current and previous, proclaimed victory over the free market by the compulsory lowering of prices, but not one word will be uttered about the extreme shortages of all the basic commodities, even toilet paper.  None but the politically-connected elites can find food or toilet paper, no matter the price.

One of the more frustrating things I encounter daily is the absolutely thorough economic ignorance of most people.  Clearly, our public schools don’t teach economics, or to the degree they do, it is only of the fraudulent Marxist derivatives.  One person I spoke with this morning complained bitterly of the twenty cent jump in the cost of gasoline we’ve seen since Friday, and actually applied the term “price-gouging” to describe it.  This is the prevailing nonsense among most of our people, and it is the reason cynical politicians like Mr. Paxton are able to make so much mileage on such immoral, irrational laws.

The truth is that at the moment, roughly one-fourth of the refining capacity of the United States is shut down in the wake of Harvey, and only some fraction of that will come back on-line soon.  The distribution chain is broken, with all of the flooding and so on, such that fuel tankers that routinely transport truckloads of fuel through the remainder of the state are not able to maintain their normal delivery schedules.  This leads first to spot shortages, as some gas stations run out of the commodity.  Depending upon how long this goes on, it will spread in broader and broader bands of localized shortages.  This drives prices.  Gas stations do not keep a large inventory of fuel.  They get daily deliveries, sometime multiple daily deliveries, and the price is adjusted based on the expected quantity demanded.  In any such environment, prices go up, and they can ratchet up quickly.  Much of it will depend on how quickly the refining and distribution channels are restored.  Still, most Americans do not understand economics, and don’t really care to.  Instead, like the throngs of the economically ignorant in Caracas, Venezuela, they only demand, but do not know anything about how the commodities they take for granted are delivered to them at the time and place they need them, or how that production and distribution chain is at the mercy of all sorts of factors.  No, like the multitude of nitwits who AG Paxton is racing to reassure, they only demand.  They give no thought to supply, or to its scarcity.

This is the direct byproduct of a people now too accustomed to governmental intervention in all facets of the free market.  Rather than a people who understand economics, and who understand the concepts of supply and demand, we have instead a country of people who expect the government to solve all their problems, and they believe that prices higher than they will happily pay are a problem to be addressed by government.  If you consider the absurdity of a people who will happily queue-up for the latest iPhone, shelling out hundreds of dollars for a device that can be made useless at any moment by a strong wind in their vicinity, who will not happily pay one hundred dollars for a case of bottled water in the place they find themselves in a time of scarcity, you begin to recognize the problem.  These are the same people who believe Internet should just “exist,” and bandwidth should just “be there,” without payment, and without cost to them, the consumers.  This economic irrationality is exceeded in scale only by the immorality of those who accept it.

We will become a country like Venezuela.  Some will say that we will have deserved it. Those who say that will not have been wrong.

 

Texas Liberty: Lost to History?

Sunday, December 22nd, 2013

As readers will remember, I’ve covered the case of Army Master Sergeant Christopher “CJ” Grisham, who was arrested, tried, re-tried, and finally convicted of a misdemeanor charge of “interfering with a public servant,” in Bell County, Texas.  The case arose out of a ridiculous case of officer over-reaction in a rural area of Temple, Texas, where Grisham and his son were on a hike for a merit badge for the boy’s scouting pursuits.  What bothers me most about this case is a circumstance that should cause every American to recoil in anger: Here was a man committing no crime, threatening no person, but an officer showed up and made a criminal of him by acting in outrageous fashion.  I’m not going to re-argue the case, as it is currently under appeal, but there is a subtext to this story that makes me ill.  Persons in the community claiming to be conservative, yet taking the side of the law enforcement officer in this case are cowardly fools.  There should have been no case.  There should have been no arrest.  There should have been no initial call from a passerby who observed the “armed subject.”  We live in a nation of cowards, and some of them claim to be “conservatives.” This wretched, skulking view of liberty sickens me. We have now supposed “conservatives” who pose as advocates of liberties they would rather you not exercise, and of all places, in Texas.

Let me assert from the outset that an armed person hiking along the rural roadways of Texas really ought not be a matter for law enforcement.  There is no law in Texas against openly carrying a long gun, whether rifle or shotgun, and Grisham was not threatening any person.  He wasn’t brandishing the firearm, or waving it around, or otherwise doing anything that would indicate any aggressive action.  Sadly, the mere presence of the firearm suggests to some very dim-witted persons a threat that does not exist.  These same nit-wits do not flinch at the presence of firearms on the persons of law enforcement officers, but slung from the neck of a citizen, it’s another matter.  It is either cowardice or malice that leads to such calls to law enforcement.

On the side of malice, there are those in every community who hate firearms, largely because they live in fear.  They are participants in a nonsensical agenda aimed at disarming the country, believing that some Utopia is possible absent guns.  These are the same dolts who supported the enactment of Obama-care, or who are happy to vote for every statist that promises them a paradise on Earth, free of want and fear.  These are the overt enemies of liberty, and Texans, of all the people in America, should shun them as reprobates.  They fear liberty as they fear life itself.  They are not fit to live among civilized people, and therefore seek to reduce civilization to a world of mandates and dicta from on high.

As bad as the open enemies of liberty may be, there is another group I estimate to be perhaps worse.  There are those who proclaim themselves “conservative,” but who are no less fearful or debauched in their thinking.  Actual conservatives do not live in fear of bogey-men.  They do not live in fear of inanimate objects or tools. They do not pretend to themselves that a society in which guns are forbidden from public view, or forbidden altogether will be somehow safe from harm.  All the evidence gathered about crime and guns over the last half-century demonstrates convincingly that the more citizens are armed, the safer their communities will be.  In stark contrast, the fewer citizens who are armed, the more common it will be for people to fall prey to monsters and madmen.  Those claiming “conservatism” as their general ideology should know better, and reason should be their guide, but what we really have is a number of people who don’t really believe anything except that “liberals are bad.”  They don’t adhere to principles, and they don’t really know why they’re “conservatives.”

One of the arguments you hear from this crowd is that “Grisham was only carrying to prove a point.” This bizarre logic would have you believe that somehow, if only for the sake of doing what the law permits, Grisham would be guilty of some crime.  What they are too cowardly to understand is that to retain our freedoms, we ought to exercise them openly and in full light of day as the means by which to reinforce their validity.  What they mistakenly believe is that we ought to have rights, but never to exercise them.  This bastardized view of liberty has led nation after nation, and civilizations from time immemorial to utter collapse and tyranny.  A right not exercised out of a fear of persecution is no right at all.  What one can learn from the Grisham case is that while many politicians and persons in Bell County Texas may claim to support liberty and gun rights, the truth is that they don’t support their exercise. In much the same fashion, Phil Robertson is being persecuted for his beliefs. None will dare say that he isn’t entitled to them, but too many will shrink from his right to state them.  So goes “free speech” or “free exercise of religion” in modern America.

There exists also some abiding but misplaced sense of fealty to local law enforcement.  I love the people who earnestly take up the defense of our lives and liberties, but I strenuously oppose any who would abuse citizens under color of law.  More, those who speak out about this subject are often ostracized for what boils down to simple boat-rocking.  Speaking out in a Texas community against the actions of law enforcement officers in some particular cases is tantamount to becoming a leper in the community.  It is the preposterous proclamation of the idea that “we have rights, but we ought never exercise them” that emboldens those with tyrannical mindsets to such actions.  Why did the officer in this case seek to disarm Grisham, who was doing nothing illegal, threatening no one, and harming not a soul?  Why did he do so without warning?  Why did he take on the power of the state as an aggressor?  The reason is simple: He believed he would be safe in so doing.  He believed he would get away with it, and thus far, the legal farce in Bell County courtrooms stage-managed by visiting judge Neal Richardson have borne out his belief.

What we really have here is a simpler question, truth be told: Was Grisham out to “interfere with a public servant,” or was a public servant out to interfere with a citizen’s free exercise of liberty?  I would conclude in this case that it had been the latter, but so many of my fellow citizens seem to fear such a “revolutionary” idea. Each year, Texans celebrate their own independence, and remember the Alamo, but then quietly and meekly ignore the meaning of those things they claim to hold dear.  Each and every time they participate in one of these sham trials against a citizen who had really done nothing but exercise the liberties they claim to support, they mark themselves as frauds and pretenders. “Don’t mess with Texas,” they’ll say in imitation of the state’s anti-littering campaign, but “go ahead and mess with Texans,” they’ll meekly admit.

When I decided with my family to remain in Texas after my military service, it was based on the idea that we would become Texans.  We wouldn’t try to re-shape the state or its people into the form or image of what we had escaped, but instead adopt to ourselves the history and culture of a freedom-loving place.  I believed that meant something special, which is to say that I believed at the time that Texans were fiercely protective of their freedoms.  Nowadays, seeing what passes for “conservatism” in so much of the Lone Star State, I’m no longer certain my assessment had been correct.  Texans may like the imagery of prideful independence, but slowly and surely, they are joining many of their fellow Americans in the slide into servitude.  I know there are still a number of Texans of the sort I had hoped to become, but their number is dwindling fast, much too fast, as it becomes increasingly fashionable to spout about liberty but never to exercise it.  It is this sort of cowardice that is uncharacteristically un-Texan, and yet it seems to grow like a cancer, metastasizing through the entire body of the state, undermining the appearance of independence still claimed by its residents.

Supposed “conservatives” in Texas who enable this decline are the more objectionable to me.  On the federal level, we have one conservative Senator, Ted Cruz, and one cowardly Senator, John Cornyn.  Cruz actually fights to the limits of his ability. Cornyn pretends to fight for us, but all too often fights against conservatism, joining with the left in their various plots and plans.  At the state level, it’s much the same. We have a number of crony capitalists who claim conservatism, but only a few hands-full of actual conservatives.  You might wonder how this could be the case in Texas, of all places, but the answer is clear: Too many supposed conservatives among the voting populace are similarly opposed to boat-rocking because too few really want freedom complete with its ups and downs; its rewards and risks.  We’re losing our culture, and it’s sad that having discovered the freedoms of Texas at twenty-five years of age, and having the courage to make of it our new home, I now find that the courage that had attracted me to the people and places of Texas is slowly bleeding away.  When I see shoddy argumentation demanding a surrender of rights while claiming to possess them, I know that this is not the Texas with which I had become so enamored in my youth.

Texas needs new leaders, and it needs them soon, but to get the sort of men and women who can save the state, we will need citizens with the courage and will to do so.  Texans invest a lot of time proclaiming their pride in this state, and what it purports to be, but the truth is that nowadays, that’s more boast than fact.  From the statehouse to the local governments, Texans are yielding liberty at an astonishing pace, as our “independent school districts” run wild, spending outrageous sums on unnecessary things, our local governments grow and become more reliant on the state, that in its turn becomes merely a localized, branch establishment of the federal leviathan.  CJ Grisham’s case is just one among many, as the cowardice of too many alleged conservatives comes to dominate our polity.   Everywhere, government entities are clamping down on liberties long-enjoyed but less and less frequently exercised.  We’re told by our neighbors and friends that we should not exercise them, for fear of retribution or rocking the boat, but one must ask what sort of sinking ship of freedom we’re aboard, that we no longer dare evince these rights by carrying them into execution.  Don’t speak out, or you will be ostracized.  Don’t walk in public with a firearm lest you be arrested for contrived causes.  Don’t be a Texan, whatever you may claim, because real Texans are going extinct, like the dinosaurs, and good riddance, it seems.

All hope is not lost, but it’s time to re-evaluate our position.  Christians now hide their faith lest they be publicly pilloried for it.  Conservatives refuse to be conservative, lest their noncommittal acquaintances think the less of them.  Men and women are now chastised for speaking of freedom, never mind exercising it.  Over the last several years, there has been talk of “the wussification of America,” but no place in the country has it become more evident of late than in Texas, perhaps precisely because of the contrast provided by its peoples’ former strengths. Where once dwelt a vast majority of rugged individuals among the blue-bonnets, we now find a population increasingly composed of shrinking violets who dare not stand for the right.  Any right.  We must endeavor to fight this slide, and we must do so in the city council meetings, the counties’ commissioners courts, and in the legislature.  Time for a resurgence of liberty in Texas is growing short.  The most important places in which we must make a stand are among our friends, families, and neighbors, among whom the number of gone-wobbly seems to increase daily.  It’s time for the voices of freeborn men and women to be heard, and if not in Texas, one must wonder where those voices will resound again.  It’s a damnable shame that as Texas begins the approach to its bicentennial, we may find ourselves in a state where our claims to liberty are all hat but no cattle.  Stand up Texans!  You have a famous heritage based on the bold and courageous, but so must your children and their progeny beyond.  We must exercise our rights, or yield them, surrendering them forever more.  One new Texan’s final diary entry must be our guide:

“No time for memorandums now. Go ahead! Liberty and Independence forever. “– David Crockett, March 5th, 1836

The Right to Live Without Fear?

Sunday, October 20th, 2013

MSGT CJ Grisham

In my area, I’ve been monitoring a case involving Army Master Sergeant Christopher “CJ” Grisham, who was unnecessarily assaulted, disarmed, and arrested by Temple policeman Steve Ermis while out on a hike with his son.  The case went to trial this week, and at its end, there was a hung jury with five of six jurors finding Grisham “guilty” on the class B misdemeanor charge of “interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duties.”  Prosecutors will indeed try the case again.  Apart from the preposterous expense of re-trying the case, and ignoring the biased manner in which the court trial was carried out by visiting judge Neal Richardson, there remains the simple relevant fact that at least five of the jurors were able to discern: CJ committed no crime.  He and his son were walking along a roadside in a rural part of Temple, the elder Grisham with an AR-15 slung from his neck, as well as his concealed handgun. There is no law against openly carrying a long-gun in Texas, and Grisham has a concealed handgun license, but as usual, there’s always somebody in a hurry to claim offense or that they had been in fear.

It was such a caller to Temple PD who initiated this case.  I want to address this post particularly to such people, as perhaps best represented by a person who wrote a letter to the Temple Daily Telegram, or who otherwise claim some offense against their psychological state: Get over it.  Your fears do not invalidate the rights of your fellow citizens.

Let us first stipulate that we have an obnoxiously large proportion of our society that no longer understands what constitutes a “right.”  I place the blame for this at the feet of a failed education system and failed parenting, as well as an ever-growing statist regime.  Examples of rights are things like free speech, free exercise of religion, freedom from wanton search and seizure, and freedom to self-defense and its implements(the right to keep and bear arms, for instance.) Things for which there can be no right would include “a right to food,” or “a right to health-care,” or a “right to education,” among many others.  Added to these material things provided by others to which one can have no legitimate right, there are also intangible things to which one can have no right.  For instance, our founding documents specify a “right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Neither does it demand simply “happiness,” nor does it suggest that such happiness as one may pursue ought to be provided by others.  This is because it is preposterous to suggest that if you’re unhappy, somehow, somebody will compelled to make you happy.  This is because your emotional or psychological state is entirely your affair.  Knowing this, let us examine the preposterous, childlike, almost infantile claim of those who wish government to protect them from “fear.”

One of the letter-writers to the Temple Daily Telegram attempted to make this case:  CJ Grisham may have a right to carry a gun, but in public spaces,  her fear should trump this.  Because the writer is afraid of guns, all who own guns must therefore yield the right to possess them.  Consider the following from the Temple Daily Telegram, under the title My Rights vs. his:

“I would like to say “thank you” to Temple Council members for not allowing Sgt. Christopher J. Grisham to dictate how they address the issue of carrying guns wherever someone chooses. The Second Amendment gives him or anyone the right to “own” a gun, when legal. However, it does not give them the right to impose their rights on everyone else. His rights end when they infringe upon my right to feel safe and free of fear when I go outside of my home and see people carrying guns.”

“Impose?”  This is the sort of inverted logic I expect from a third-grader.  It evinces a complete misunderstanding of the entire concept of rights.  If we are to subject the rights of citizens to the random, irrational and entirely variable fears of all other citizens, we must immediately embark upon a program to build a vast prison able to contain all seven billion humans, who once imprisoned must never be let out.  I might claim, and it would be true, that I am afraid for my life due to idiotic letter-writers who demand the disarming of their fellow citizens.  Let us now hold such letter-writers in prison, or at least prevent them from writing further correspondence lest I or others of a similar mindset be unnecessarily fearful.  We can extend this putrid argument of the timid to virtually any and every issue.  Once one has embarked down this path, there is no turning back.  CJ Grisham did not impose anything on any person.  He was minding his own business, on a hike with his son, when a police officer arrived to impose sanctions on him for the sake of some caller’s irrational fear, due to their ignorance of both the law and the concept of rights, or simply to malice.  No, we must not permit such folly to determine when rights end, or there will be no rights of any sort: No cars, no trucks, no airplanes, and no houses. No people.  Some one is fearful of virtually any thing, any one, or any action possible to imagine.

A sane adults’ emotional or psychological state is entirely under his or her control.  I am not responsible for how you feel.  CJ Grisham  was not responsible for the dubious emotional state of the caller who observed him walking alongside a rural road armed with a rifle.  I walk my property frequently with firearms in-hand.  Thankfully, I live far enough outside city limits that most passersby seem to recognize nothing particularly threatening or untoward about an armed man in the country.  Sadly, this is not always the case, and despite the fact that Grisham was breaking no laws, violating no rights, and frankly “imposing” nothing whatsoever on any other person, he was unnecessarily disarmed, assaulted, and arrested by a Temple police officer responding to that call.  If you want to know how tyranny grows, it is due in large measure to the sort of numb-skulls  who profess to be frightened of this or that.  What they seek is a peace of mind absent any other humans, and far too many public officials are willing to seek power by claiming to serve that need. Only in death can any person rightly expect to obtain a “freedom from fear,” but ultimately, death, its threat, and its implements are the sole tools available to politicians who promise it.

Consider Franklin Roosevelt’s so-called “Second Bill of Rights,” a litany of things to be provided, including mental or emotional states.  It would have been better to have termed it a “Bill of Violations of Rights,” would we have been honest.  Obama-care is a response to the very same thing: Some people must have their rights to life, liberty, and property denied due to the wants, wishes, and fantasies of others.  This practice of tyrants creating conflicts between the actual rights of some people and the wishes of some others is not new.  What is new has been the rapid advance of this bankrupt theory into our American culture.  Due to faulty education, negligent parenting, and a vast political engine based on exploiting human weakness, America has arrived at the point in history where it must now fail for the lack of individual rights and the courage that had maintained them.  “Rights” as conceived by our founders are disappearing under the crush of timid, slothful, morally-confused people with the ethics and standards of our lowest common denominator.  The hopeful aspect of Grisham’s mistrial is that one of the six jurors ultimately understood what had been at stake.  When CJ Grisham is re-tried, I earnestly hope that more who have understood the concept of rights will be on his jury.

At least five more.

You may remember the viral video of the event:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8r4MK3R4PI]

Editor’s Note: The Temple Daily Telegram is a paid subscription site for much of its content.  The letter posted is part of that content, and therefore not all of it is available without subscription.  I wouldn’t recommend the Temple Daily Telegram to any person, even were its articles available at no cost.  It is one of several regional newspapers of the local establishment, pandering primarily to cronies.  While there are occasionally stories or columns that contradict the party line, it remains our local version of Pravda, of former Soviet Union character. Update: The juror verdict count was earlier reported as 5 not guilty, and 1 guilty. Subsequent information provided to this blog substantiates the notion that this was actually backwards.

John Cornyn Isn’t Merely a Coward – He’s a Shameless Fraud Too!

Tuesday, October 1st, 2013

I explained to fellow Texans in a note last Friday why they shouldn’t support John Cornyn.  Today comes further evidence.  In an effort to further mislead Texans, and in an attempt to pretend his cowardice hadn’t been, this deceptive politician, this un-Texan, has posted a phony poll on his website asking a question based on a false premise.  The question itself is a lie.  He asks: “Do you agree with Senator Cornyn’s vote to De-fund Obamacare?” The truth is that he didn’t vote to de-fund Obamacare. Instead, he voted to permit Harry Reid and the Democrats to prevail.  His poll is garbage.

This deception brands this man as a despicable liar.  To explain for the readers not up to speed on the trick, John Cornyn joined with Democrats to close off debate on the House continuing resolution, permitting Harry Reid to amend it.  After it had been amended, Cornyn then voted against it, along with twenty-four other sell-out Republicans.  His phony poll on this webpage(see screen-capture of site below) asks if you agree with his vote to defund Obamacare.  HE DIDN’T VOTE TO DEFUND OBAMACARE!  He voted to permit Harry Reid and the Democrats to strip the Defunding language out of the bill, so that he could vote against that amendment and pretend to have voted against Obamacare.  The cloture vote WAS the vote.  Texans aren’t stupid, whatever Cornyn may think of us, and I suspect that as the truth spreads, Senator Cornyn will be heading home for good next fall.

Here’s the sleazy, dishonest poll on his website:

This Poll is a complete scam and fraud.

A number of Senators implied or directly accused Ted Cruz of trying to use the de-funding push to raise funds.  Meanwhile, Cornyn’s phony poll is nothing less than an attempt to solicit email addresses and names so he can later solicit funds.   More, since the poll is based on a lie, he’s shamelessly misleading voters both as to his actual position and to the effect of his votes. Classic “for it before against it” nonsense! Naturally, there’s no way to answer it without seeming to support him or Obama-care.

Heartfelt Note to Fellow Texans

Friday, September 27th, 2013

Betraying Texans

I’ve lived in Texas almost precisely one-half of my life.  In that time, I think I’ve done a fair job of becoming a Texan, instead of trying to turn Texas into that which I had escaped.  I’d like to thank Texans for their hospitality and patience as I’ve tried my best to assimilate.  I like to say that I am an American by birth, and a Texan by choice, but the truth is that I couldn’t have become a Texan without the forbearance of natives. I’ve noticed a tendency over my years here in Texas among many immigrants to the state to immediately set about turning it into the sort of liberal bastions from which they had fled, making them little different from Mark Levin’s description: Locusts.  Worse than the rank-and-file locusts are the carpetbaggers who come to Texas telling us how it ought to be more like their native states.  What I’ve learned along the way to becoming a Texan(or the most reasonable facsimile a non-native can be) is that Texans don’t like to be poked and prodded with a good deal of politically-correct claptrap.  “Say what’s on your mind, and move along, son.”  That’s an important lesson, but I’d like to tell Texans about another class of people who may not hold their best interests at heart. These are the expatriated Texans who go to Washington DC forgetting what Texas is or what Texans hold dear.  Today, I want to address one of these, who has spent a decade in Washington DC, and who is no longer a Texan, having been absorbed into the elitists’ ranks.  Once upon a time, John Cornyn may have been a decent politician, but now it is clear that he isn’t really a Texan any longer, however he may have begun.

On Friday, he joined with Harry Reid,Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer and the rest of the Democrats as well as several Republican sell-outs in voting for cloture(the procedure by which debate is ended in the Senate and a vote is held) on the continuing resolution to fund government while blocking Obama-care.  John Cornyn, after enabling the vote, then made a phony, impassioned speech against stripping the language from the bill that would have de-funded Obama-care. His vote for cloture enabled Harry Reid to carry out the modifications to the bill.  So you see, John Cornyn will now tell Texans truthfully that he voted against funding Obamacare, but it’s only a half-truth. While being able to claim this with a straight face, the fact is that Obama-care could not have been funded had he merely remained resolute and stood with our “junior” senator Ted Cruz in opposing cloture on the bill.  Whatever John Cornyn tells you from this day forward, you must know that on any and all issues, he will try to play both sides of the street, being for something before he’s against it, or being against something before he was for it.  If I’ve learned anything about Texans in my twenty-four years here, it is that this is not the temperament or practice of a real Texan.

Real Texans stand for what they believe.  Real Texans do not try to occupy both sides of a serious argument.  Real Texans do not try to carry out a complete and utter fraud against the people in whose service they are sworn, or otherwise sully the oaths they have taken.  John Cornyn has abandoned any claim to being a Texan, and since he is up for re-election in 2014, I am asking my fellow Texans, in just recognition of John Cornyn’s betrayals on this and other issues, to seek out an select an opponent worthy of replacing Mr. Cornyn as one of our two US Senators.  While Ted Cruz has been busy doing us proud, John Cornyn has been busy undermining him.  While Ted Cruz was fighting to defeat and defund Obama-care, John Cornyn has been back-stabbing and whipping other Republicans into supporting an affirmative vote on cloture.

This is a shameful situation.  As our nation’s economy hobbles along, its latest burden in the form of Obama-care’s mandate is going to destroy what remains of the healthier segments of the economy.  It is going to reduce the standard and availability of care for all Americans.  It is going to result in the denial of care, not as a “bug” but as a “feature” of the program.  It’s going to increase our national debt to knew heights.  It’s already causing employers to cut hours for workers, and while many think that they’re somehow immune, it’s clear that many of these will soon learn otherwise.  This law is so bad that they’ve exempted themselves.  It’s so bad that the unions who supported it, like the Teamsters, are now in favor of repealing it, saying that they can “remain silent no longer.”  All of this, John Cornyn and the other Republican sell-outs in the Senate have enabled.  When you lose your health insurance or your job; your hours are cut or your treatment (or the treatment of a loved-one) is denied by Obama-care, you can blame John Cornyn as one of the conspirators in your undoing. You should know this. You must not let him get away with his duplicity.

I wanted my fellow Texans to know this, so that when in 2014, any opponent rises to challenge John Cornyn, I will get behind that candidate, and if he survives the primary process, I will vote for a Democrat.  It is my long-considered conclusion that we are better off with lying Democrats who we know will be hard-core leftists than with lying Republicans who we cannot trust to abstain from betraying us.  John Cornyn will hereafter be known on this site as the Un-Texan, because his behavior and maneuvering in this [and other] issues has earned him the highest contempt real Texans can muster.  He will claim that it had been about a difference of opinion over tactics, but the truth is that he’s been following the lead and the advice of the DC consultancy, and he is doing now the bidding of political elements who care not for Texas or Texans.  He is beyond redemption.  This had been his last chance.  God may forgive him, but I, for one, will not.  Others may forget his betrayal, but I will not.  John Cornyn must go, and I will not be satisfied until he no longer sits in high office defrauding the people of the Great State of Texas.

I am now actively seeking a prospective challenger or challengers to Mr. Cornyn, because the simple fact remains that we Texans cannot tolerate – we must not tolerate –  this sort of duplicity from those who would claim to represent us.  John Cornyn betrayed Texas and Texans on Friday, and then sought to cover that up with a wholly symbolic gesture.  We Texans must remain people who will not prefer symbolism over substance, and we must not reward those who do.  It’s time we bring John Cornyn home, so that he might re-learn what it is to be a Texan, but I fear that if we unseat him, he will remain in Washington DC in perpetuity, working for or establishing his own lobbying firm.  More, I want him to live under Obama-care if the rest of us must.  The fight is not over, and it’s moving to the House of Representatives, but John Cornyn has just made our fight so much harder.  To Hell with John Cornyn.  I will fight for Texas with real Texans!

 

 

NY Times Expresses “Concern” for GOP by Trashing Ted Cruz

Wednesday, January 23rd, 2013

Best Use of Your Times

There’s something a bit more than preposterous about the premise of the NY Times Op-Ed suggesting that for the good of the party, Republicans leaders should ignore Ted Cruz and other conservatives in their caucuses because in that publication’s view, they’re too rigid and inflexible, and they have all the lies in the world ready to prove it. Given that this is published in the NY Times, conservatives will likely conclude as they should that the paper probably doesn’t exactly have the best interests of the Republican Party at heart, their contrived concern aside. Of course, it’s one thing to offer an opinion, but it’s a damnable shame to validate one’s opinion with lies and half-truths, but once again, the NY Times has little else to offer its readers. Remembering that this is the outfit that hid the holocaust, and covered for Joe Stalin and Fidel Castro(h/t MarkLevinShow,) it’s really not surprising to see the paper resort to this tactic. The Gray Lady sees no black or white, and holds in contempt all who do.  The paper’s motive is transparent: Marginalize conservatives in the Republican Party.

Their screed against Cruz is fundamentally wrong, in large measure because it’s based on a number of lies and distortions:

“Unlike 85 percent of the Republicans in the Senate, he would have voted against the fiscal cliff deal. He says gun control is unconstitutional. Breaking even with conservative business leaders, he would have no qualms about using the debt ceiling as a hostage because he believes (falsely) that it would produce only a partial government shutdown and not default.”

I realize it is the contention of the Times editors that gun control is constitutional, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Second Amendment protects the right of citizens to keep and bear arms just as the First Amendment protects the right of the NY Times to publish lies presented as fact.  The Op-Ed relates that Ted Cruz is willing to use the debt ceiling in order to force cuts in Federal spending, but the conclusion(a.k.a. propaganda) is that he believes a falsehood about the results of such an action. This contention is a lie.  The government of the United States takes in roughly $220-230 billion in revenues each month, and from that amount, paying the interest on the debt, paying for Social Security and Medicare, as well as paying our military can be accomplished.

What is not easily accomplished under such a scenario is to continue funding the endless string of other government programs and departments, some of which are simply bureaucratic fluff, but many of which comprise things like corporate welfare and crony capitalism, along with outrageous spending on items of dubious necessity to the operation of our government.  In short, the Times is lying.  Default is only a necessary result of a Debt Ceiling freeze if the President is unwilling to comply with his duty to pay the debts of the United States and thereby intentionally throw the country into chaos.  This is the truth the NY Times does not want you to know.  We should be so lucky as to have a Congress willing to put a stop to the out-of-control spending.  The Times wants the President to retain the propaganda tool of claiming that a Debt Ceiling impasse would lead to disaster.  It’s simply not the case.

Not satisfied with the growing influence of conservatives with a Tea Party flavor, the Times continued its farcical rant against Cruz:

“Considering the damage that this kind of thinking did to the country and the Republican Party over the last two years — a downgraded credit rating, legislative standoffs, popular anger, a loss of Republican seats — it might seem obvious that the party should marginalize lawmakers like Mr. Cruz. Instead, they continue to gain power and support. Party leaders named Mr. Cruz vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee”

Does the NY Times really expect readers to believe that Republicans had been to blame for the credit downgrade?  The only degree to which the GOP may be blamed is that in the final analysis, they compromised with President Obama, giving in and accepting a spending binge that caused credit rating services to downgrade the nation’s credit-worthiness, and before it’s over, will prompt more credit rating agencies to push the rating down. The popular anger in the country isn’t directed at Cruz, or other conservatives, unless “popular anger” is an expression used to describe the sentiment among the board of editors at the NY Times.  A winning presidential candidate is always expected to pick up seats for his party, thus the long-established political term we call “coat-tails,” just as it is long-held political convention to expect a President to lose seats in an off-year election, much like 2010.

The fact of the matter is that the NY Times is taking a shot at Ted Cruz because in his early popularity, they see the potential for damage to their left-wing agenda.  They want the Republicans to compromise with the President, but if truth be told, they’d rather there were no Republicans.  This is why they continue their campaign to marginalize conservatives, and it’s also why they apparently feel compelled to carry off an unconvincing pretense of concern for the Republican Party.  The Times isn’t interested in making the Republican Party a viable political force, but they know Republican leaders in Washington read their paper, actually believing some of the paper’s hogwash. Let’s concede that when it comes to propaganda that influences policy, the NY Times is an undeniable leader, but that doesn’t mean we must accept it as a permanent condition.  Their claim that Cruz is too rigid is simply another way of saying that he intends to keep his word to voters in Texas, where standing on principle isn’t an entirely foreign concept.

 

Liberty Needs Your Help in Coryell County Texas

Sunday, August 12th, 2012

Justice Denied

From time to time, we all encounter stories about a corrupt institution of local government, and we wonder at the mindset that must lie behind the corruption.  As it turns out, in my own area here in Central Texas, there is at least one corrupt institution of government, and if there is any justice on Earth, the demons who have used their authority to demolish a lady’s life will be made to pay.  Sadly, the system is rigged against her, and naturally, the authorities involved have a corrupt media in their pockets.  What makes this story all the more frightening for me, personally, is the fact that I know the lady involved who has been the ceaseless victim of an attack by cronyism between a few private interests and a local government.  I will now share with you this story, in the hope that you will find a way to help her cause.  We mustn’t leave government or justice to the corrupt sorts who use it for personal vendettas or personal gain, but in Coryell County Texas, the law has become the servant of criminals.

You should know that in Central Texas, one of the counties in the region is Coryell.  Its seat is the city of Gatesville, and its largest town, Copperas Cove, is on the Western edge of the Fort Hood military reservation.  To travel from Copperas Cove to Gatesville entails a thirty minute drive on Highway 116, a roadway that runs  parallel to the Western boundary of the military reservation.  It is along this rural Texas highway that this controversy was initiated, and it was enacted by parties in the Copperas Cove vicinity, and otherwise assisted by officialdom in Gatesville.  Before telling you the details of the case, let me tell you about its primary victim, a lady I have known for a dozen years, who is remarkable both in her person, but also in her personal history.  Her name is Marijeta Medverec, and if there is any justice in Heaven or on Earth, Coryell County will come to bear her name.

Marijeta is an immigrant to the United States.  She was born and raised in what had been Yugoslavia, when it was a part of the Soviet Bloc.  She was among the first handful of female fighter jet pilots in her country, being one of the first women in her country, and indeed in the world, to exceed the speed of sound.   She was also the first female pilot in her home country’s “commercial” air service.  She was trained in martial arts. When her son had a congenital heart condition, the government would not allow her to travel to the West to get it fixed, so she did something astonishing and courageous:  She defected.  She left behind everything, including her family, and defected to the West.

She went to the United States.  She joined the United States Army as a private.  She did so because she knew that it would increase her odds of being stationed in Germany, from where she would eventually smuggle her family out.  She had seen the villainy of socialism, and as one of that system’s premier examples of what a human could do, she went on to do even more.  She became a physician’s assistant, and she went on to retire from the U.S. Army as a Lt. Colonel, a disabled veteran and veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom who has seen and done more in her life than most of us would ever imagine.

Marijeta was not yet finished, however, as she decided she would have a horse farm and riding school in order to work with disabled children and anybody at all who wished to learn the rigors of horsemanship and good animal husbandry.  She bought a small piece of land just North of Copperas Cove, Texas, where our case begins, and on her small sixty-acre parcel, she began to bring the horses she had already acquired, and began to add to this with more animals, including charity cases, such as an old blind horse, nearly 30 years old, and some others, whose owners could no longer afford to feed them in our current economic travails.  She worked at least two, but usually three full-time jobs as a medical professional in order to pay the feed bills, the hay bills, the vet bills, and still keep everything else going.

To say Marijeta is a driven person is to understate the matter.  She is the sort of person whose life is a refutation to all who say “life is hard, it’s not my fault,” and she is the very picture of human achievement.  I am a person who thrives on work, and I disparage readily those who lay about and complain about their situation, but truly, I am a mere shadow of the sort of person Marijeta has been across the whole span of her fruitful life.  She is clever, engaging, disciplined, and compassionate almost to a fault.  In the dozen years I have known Marijeta, I have never known her to do wrong by any living thing, except perhaps herself.

More is the irony that in July of 2012, Sheriff’s deputies arrived on her property and seized all of her livestock.  The oafs trailered out her old blind horse, her mares, her gelding, her prized breeding stallion, as well as her cattle(ten head) and her goats(45) and donkeys.  They left behind her guinea hens, her dogs, and her cats.  All of this was done in a highly-publicized media circus orchestrated by the Coryell County Sheriff’s Office.  The claim was that some of the animals were in imminent danger of death from some sort of neglect or mistreatment.  That claim is an utter lie, but one might wonder how it could be that such a claim would come to be made in the first place.

Marijeta had a brief marriage to a person of local notoriety in the Copperas Cove vicinity, and that man has friends.  That man actually introduced Marijeta some years ago to the Sheriff’s deputy, one of his buddies, and the man who turned out to be the officer who initiated the investigation that resulted in this seizure.  The warrant for the seizure was issued by Justice of the Peace Coy Lathan, an elected JP who has served in Coryell County, but who is neither an attorney nor a scholar, as defined by the standard meaning of those terms.  The warrant would never have passed muster in a real court, which is presumably the reason it was sought in the JP court.  I suppose that if you want to do something really ugly to somebody, you ought to begin in a Kangaroo Court where the authority is on your side, and easily swayed to your cause.

More, the JP Court is limited in law to issues in controversy not to exceed $10,000.  Any dozen of her animals would cross that threshold, and yet to the Kangaroo court this went without delay, a County Attorney playing hatchet-man and pulling stunts in open court that might have gotten him a contempt charge in a civilized county.  Why could he get away with it? Because Coy Lathan is apparently unfamiliar with the rules of civil procedure governing the conduct of a hearing or trial in a court in the State of Texas.

The Deputy who initiated and conducted the investigation was one of only two witnesses for the prosecution, a prosecution for which no actual charge existed at the time of the hearing-turned-trial, although one was subsequently concocted to fill in the blank on the form.  The other witness was a “friend of a neighbor” who had been in the vicinity of Medverec’s property twice in the period of a half-dozen years.  On Medverec’s side were a number of witnesses, including a licensed, practicing veterinarian, who had examined the animals only a few days before the seizure(when Medverec got suspicious about the poking-around by the Deputy in question.)  Other witnesses included a skilled farrier, who is also a police chief and animal control officer in another jurisdiction.  There were roughly two hands-full of witnesses on Medverec’s behalf.  Medverec’s attorney actually asked what sort of plea he should be entering, since he didn’t understand whether this legal farce was hearing or a trial, and what were the charges if it was the latter.  She was not accorded the ability to request a jury trial.  She was deprived of all the ordinary civil liberties accorded to the accused, because upon the commencement of the procedure(?), she hadn’t been charged with anything.    There was not even a court-reporter present to make a permanent legal record of the hearing/trial/farce.

Yes, this is the state of justice in Coryell County, Texas.  You may have had your own dealings with the “good ol’ boys” where you live, but these are prototypes for the worst of the breed.

In the end, after hearing all the testimony, Justice of the Peace Lathan(a damnable heresy that he should hold such a title) said he would retire to consider the case, and that he would issue his decision the following morning.  His decision defied all law, all equity, and all logic.  He ordered Medverec’s horses returned to her, but ordered that the county would keep her goats and cows in order to satisfy the cost of the care of her animals.  He ordered that a veterinarian must monitor her animals regularly.  (As if this wasn’t already the case???)  What he did was to steal from Medverec.  That’s it.  It was official oppression, and when she lawyered-up, they got a bit worried, so they backed-off but they could not help it:  Lathan had to try to hide his idiocy or corruption(coin toss?) in issuing such a warrant, and in issuing such a seizure order, and if he didn’t do this, the county would be stuck with the bill for the animals’ care, that should never have occurred in the first place.

Of course, if you think this ended the controversy, you’d be mistaken.  Medverec knows a thing or two about government oppression, and she’s fought worse thugs than these.  She instructed her lawyer to file a suit, and she is currently figuring out if she is able to file an appeal at present, since it turns out that in the rush to get her horses home, she may have waived the ability to appeal. The rush to get her horses home was caused by the fact that her thirty-nine head were sharing a one-hundred gallon water trough that remained empty most of the time, and in this mass environment, her horses were becoming injured.  They also had injured her stallion, at one point during the seizure process, threatening to shoot him, and actually drawing their guns on her when she attempted to intervene.  I want you to consider the picture of a woman of slight build, stepping between armed official thugs and a horse, and the thugs drawing their guns on her.  That’s what Marijeta is up against.  These people who were there to seize her animals from alleged “imminent danger of death” ran over one of her goats, killing it, and injured her prized stallion, subsequently turning out a herd of horses into a barren pasture with insufficient feed, hay, water, and shade.  Who was the imminent danger to her animals?

Now come the stories of threats.  The rumor is that the veterinarian who had examined her animals and who testified on her behalf in the show trial has been told that he will get no more contracts with the county, particularly if he continues to testify on her behalf in any future court actions.  A neighbor shot one of her guinea hens, on her property.  During the hearing, she had windows smashed and tires slashed.  There is no point in reporting it to the authorities since it seems the authorities may be in collusion with the criminals.  I have begun to fear for Marijeta’s life, as the sort of thugs who clearly run that backwards county are the very sort who would kill to silence the truth.  The media is not covering this, since they would now look like idiots, having trumpeted the phony story from the outset.  The relation between local media and local authorities is incestuous, at best.  How did the media know to be at some remote property in Coryell County for the seizure pictures and footage?  They were tipped, but who tipped them?  There is only one answer:  A person or persons within the County government were seeking a propaganda decapitation strike. The media has many relationships with local government, and in our vicinity, it is clear one can trust neither.

I will be updating this story as more information becomes available.  In the mean time, I need your help.  We need to bring severe scrutiny upon Coryell County.  The cattleman’s association there has already seen the danger implicit in this action, and is agitating for the ouster of the Sheriff.  Others in the community have had similar things done to them, and they are now beginning to tell their stories  to the slim degree the media will cover it.

I’ve had the distinct privilege to know Col. Medverec for more than a decade.  She’s a first-rate horseman, and she’s a talented, dedicated medical professional.  She’s a workaholic, and she doesn’t deserve this treatment here in her adopted home.  This travesty should never be permitted, and it’s clear that so long as the current government of Coryell County, Texas is left in place, there can be no justice for its residents, and there can be no safety for their rights either.  I am absolutely floored by the corruption implicit in this entire case, and that it seems to have been concocted by cronies only makes it worse.  Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Coryell County, Texas, where crooks wear badges and black robes while retired veterans with livestock are understandably nervous.

I would ask readers to contact the Texas Attorney General’s office on Col. Medverec’s behalf.

Email Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

You can also attempt to contact Coryell County Judge John Firth, chief administrator of Coryell County, not that it will do any good.

Email Judge Firth

For my part, I am going to use every resource I can in the area to battle on Medverec’s behalf.  This is a crime being enacted under color of law, a.k.a. “Official Oppression.”  Marijeta is a proud woman, and she has not solicited any sort of financial support, but I am going to ask her how people can donate to her defense against this outrageous act of corrupt government.

Why Support Cruz? Watch THIS Video!

Tuesday, July 31st, 2012

On Tuesday in Texas, we are having our run-off between Ted Cruz and moderate Republican David Dewhurst.  This video was created in support of Ted Cruz by Roderic Deane, and rather than offering all the reasons to support Cruz, I’ll let the video speak:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gadSyWK_xEQ]

Already, the dirty tricks are in full swing, as Dewhurst continues to court Democrats to vote in the Republican primary and vote for him in order to sabotage Ted Cruz. Texas conservatives need to show up and vote. The polls will close at 7:00pm. Get it done!

Ted Cruz has been endorsed by leading constitutional conservatives from around the country, including Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Jim Demint, Rand Paul, Rick Santorum, and a host of others.

 

Polls Open in Texas Run-Off: Voted For Cruz Yet?

Tuesday, July 31st, 2012

Now's The Time!

If you’re a Texan, you know we have a US Senate seat up for grabs, and you know Lt. Governor David Dewhurts is out to claim the seat, no matter how many lies he must tell, or dirty, distorted ads he must run.  The simple fact of the matter is that there is only one conservative in this race, and it’s Ted Cruz.  Now is the time to swell at the polls, and to send a constitutional conservative to the United States Senate.  Polls open around Texas at 7:00 am on Tuesday, July 31st, and this is the opportunity for Texans to get out there and support a real constitutional conservative.  On your way to work this morning, get the job done.  It’s going to be a tight race, and you can affect the outcome, so let’s get out there and vote for Ted Cruz!

This has been a tough campaign season, and Ted has been out making the case for getting the Federal Government under control. If we are to have any chance to repeal Obama-care, this is a must-have seat, and we dare not fill it with a politician like David Dewhurst who has a long history of going along to get along.  Ted Cruz has vowed to work to repeal every last word of Obama-care.  He doesn’t want to fix it, replace it, or otherwise “improve” it because he knows that’s not possible.  Politicians can put all the lipstick on Obama-care they want, but it’s still a pig, and it is destructive of our liberties.  We simply can’t trust this mission to another Texas moderate Republican.

Ladies and gentlemen, the time is now:  The polls are open. Go vote for Ted Cruz!

Sarah Palin Rocks The Woodlands For Ted Cruz!

Saturday, July 28th, 2012

Revving The Crowd for Cruz!

On Friday, I drove the two-and-one-half hours from my home to the Ted Cruz rally at The Woodlands, just North of Houston.  The venue was Town Green Park and the speakers included a number of Tea Party leaders, like Amy Kremer, and also Senator Jim DeMint(R-SC.)  Ted Cruz gave a very encouraging, impassioned speech about what he would do if elected to the Senate, and he appropriated Barack Obama’s catch-phrase “Yes, We Can” in a little dialogue with the crowd, asking the crowd “Can we repeal Obama-care?”  On cue, the crowd responded with a thundering “YES WE CAN!”  Cruz exuded confidence, but the truth is that with early voting now ended, the real crunch is on from now until Tuesday to turn out the vote across Texas on his behalf.  In her customary form, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin made her speech to thundering applause and enthusiastic support.  It was a remarkable speech, and Palin was fiery with the energy and passion that have made her the premiere speaker in the Republican party over the last four years.  Conservatives turn out for Sarah Palin, and there’s simply no escaping that fact.

(Note to GOP establishment: You may want to rethink this plan to exclude her from the convention in Tampa next month.)

I was also heartened to see so many of my friends from TxO4P on hand, including Josh Thuma, who was so enthusiastic in Indianola, Iowa last September, so it was no surprise that at The Woodlands, he followed up in similar form, waving signs and cheering-on all of the speakers.  I saw Cynthia Dixon and Del Parker, and some other faces I recognized, so I decided that rather than spending my time trying to capture the event, I would simply join in the fun.  It was a good time for all, and Jim DeMint gave an excellent talk about needing help in the Senate, meaning he want more constitutional conservatives.  He went on to extol the virtues of Ted Cruz, introducing the candidate to great applause, and Cruz made mention of the effort to repeal Obama-care, saying he would work every day until it had been repealed, killing off the notion of replacement: “Every last word…” must be repealed, vowed Cruz.  The crowd roared in approval.

Hearing the Roar

Cruz went on to introduce Governor Palin, and the crowd’s cheering was so loud from my vantage point that I couldn’t hear the first few words of her speech.  As always, when Governor Palin speaks at such an event, she speaks as much for those gathered as to them.  This event was no different, and she focused in particular on three themes, including the wreck Obama has made and is making of the country, and the intractability of the permanent political class in the mission to restore our constitution, and naturally, how Ted Cruz will be an important player in that fight.  She mentioned that she intended to try out Chick Fil-A on her way back to the airport, and as always, Governor Palin made good on her word, later posting this on her Facebook page:

The Palins Stop at Chick Fil-A

She wore the boots  Governor Perry gave her on a previous visit to the Lone Star State, saying “at least in that one case he made a good decision,” but also gently chiding Perry for his present support of David Dewhurst in the primary against Ted Cruz.  She mocked Obama’s assertion of last week in Texas that he’s seeing “shades of purple,” implying that the state might one day go Democrat.  With the amnesty-by-executive-order that Obama has put in place, there can be little doubt that is part of his aim.  Governor Palin exhorted the crowd to not let Texas go purple or blue.  Said the Governor:

“There will be an Alaskan-sized blizzard on the Brazos before Texas turns blue for Barack.”

“Damn straight.”  (So said many in the crowd.)  She also went after the “lap-dogs in the media practicing yellow journalism,” but then she shifted her focus to the permanent political class in Washington DC that has managed to confound some of the efforts of the Tea Party patriots who sent more conservatives to the House in 2010, managing to co-opt some of them.  She was brilliantly on point as she made clear that politicians in both parties have failed to carry out their constitutional responsibilities, passing Obama-care over the objections of the American people, and failing to enact a budget in four years, but she reminded the crowd:

“There’s nothing wrong with America that a good, old-fashioned fair election can’t fix.”

She then explained that she was supporting Ted Cruz because he is a common-sense, constitutional conservative, saying “Ted Cruz represents the positive change we need.”

Sarah Palin, Ted and Heidi Cruz, Jim DeMint

You can watch the video here, courtesy of  the BarracudaBrigade:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CPFyYHRV_o]

As has been the case at events in which Gov. Palin speaks, after the conclusion of her remarks, and to the cheering of the crowd, she and Todd went off-stage and to the rope line, where she signed autographs for a long while, and as usual, the rope-line was mobbed.

I don’t have a firm grasp on how many people were in the park for the event, but I would guess there had been well over one-thousand, perhaps closer to twice that number, despite the sweltering heat.  One thing is certain: Texas really is Palin country, and all who want to support a common-sense, constitutional conservative in this election ought to follow Governor Palin’s lead.  With early voting over across the Lone Star State, what remains is election day, Tuesday, 31 July.  Let’s get out the vote and put Ted Cruz over the top!

 

 

Palin to Rally for Cruz in Texas; Dewhurst’s Desperation Showing

Thursday, July 26th, 2012

Desperation

I hate that this is the case, but I must say that the antics of Lt. Governor David Dewhurst are despicable.  Dewhurst began running a new ad this week on the Internet featuring a woman crying about her son who killed himself, implying that Ted Cruz was somehow to blame is a scandal.  I find it offensive that any politician seeking to be the Republican Senate candidate would run such an ad, but I cannot believe any even vaguely conservative Texan would knowingly vote for this man.  The internal polls must not be looking all that spiffy for Lt. Gov. Dewhurst.  It’s time we go to the polls and give him a taste of how bad it can get.

On Wednesday evening’s show, Mark Levin also addressed this latest attack ad by Dewhurst.  Here’s audio:

 

Alternative content

Dewhurst is an amoral politician who seeks only power.  The worst part may be that a large number of Democrats may be voting in this run-off as Republicans in order to skew the vote in Dewhurst’s favor, and he’s quietly courting their support.  Democrats clearly realize Dewhurst is a guy who will frequently go their way in tough votes in the Senate like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, or Lindsey Graham.  They expect he will be a reliable aisle-crosser.

What this means is that you had better turn out for Ted Cruz, or the liberal Republicans and the Democrats will combine to elect another squish.

To the polls, Texas Conservatives!

In related news, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and South Carolina’s Senator Jim Demint will be rallying in support of Ted Cruz on Friday at the Woodlands, near Houston, and I will be there to join in the support!

Texans, get out there and show your support!  Show David Dewhurst he can’t get away with skewing reality this way, and vote for Ted Cruz!

 

Texas Conservatives: Have You Voted for Ted Cruz Yet?

Monday, July 23rd, 2012

Time to Vote!

Early voting has started today across the Lone Star State.  We don’t need any more RINOs in Washington DC, so don’t procrastinate. David Dewhurst is pulling out all the stops, and hurling more garbage at Ted Cruz.  Sarah Palin posted a message to Facebook earlier today reminding us to support Ted Cruz and you should check it out. Remember, you can help Ted Cruz overcome the disinformation of David Dewhurst by going to his website here.

Now get out there and vote, Texans!

 

Texas Conservatives: Make a Stand With Ted Cruz

Wednesday, July 18th, 2012

A Conservative for Senate

If you’re a Texas conservative, don’t forget that early voting begins next Monday, and runs through Friday.  We have a run-off between Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, a big-time insider who is spending money like it’s going out of style, to smear his opponent, Ted Cruz, who has been endorsed by Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Jim Demint, Ron Paul, many other serious conservatives in the Republican Party and the conservative movement.  It’s time to stand up, it’s time to be counted, and while you’re at it, you can join the latest Levin Surge, by heading over to TedCruz.org to donate.  Every little bit helps, and remember, Ted has pledged that should he win on July 31st, he will immediately go to work raising money and lending support to other constitutional conservatives, not just here in Texas, but around the country, so that we can re-take the Senate and stand some chance of repealing Obama-care, and restoring our Republic.

I have my doubts about whether we can save the country at this late date, but if we can, it will only be by pushing the RINOs aside and carrying the ball across the goal-line ourselves.  It’s time to mobilize if you haven’t already, and if you’re a Texas conservative, or if you’re an American who simply wants conservatism to prevail, and take our best chance at reversing our decline, here’s your chance to truly make a difference.

Visit TedCruz.org to contribute. Let’s put Ted over the top!

CNN: Perry Goes Home(UPDATED-Endorses Newt)

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

Going Home

USAToday is reporting that Rick Perry is suspending his campaign.  The Texas Governor is coming off of his best debate performance, but he was dealt some real set-backs after poor-than-expected performances in earlier debates.  Perry is the longest-serving Governor in Texas History, and his entry into the race last August was greeted by anticipation of a vigorous campaign.

Whatever else you might say about Perry, he certainly provided some moments of entertainment on the campaign trail, and in the debates, and not everything funny about what he said was at his expense.  I personally enjoyed when he took on Mitt Romney a little.

Update: National Journal is reporting that Perry will endorse Newt Gingrich

No Light at Tunnel’s End?

Saturday, January 14th, 2012

GOP: Is the Light Fading?

I think it dawned on me two or three days ago, after the New Hampshire primary, that most of the people with whom I discuss politics are more frustrated, but it’s not evidenced in the words they’re choosing so much as in the way they’re saying them.  They’re disgusted by Obama and his power-grabs, but more than this, they are tired of watching the GOP try to lead them to slaughter again in 2012.  It’s bad enough to watch Obama  walk all over the newly-minted Republican majority in the House of Representatives, but to see that the party has done nothing to substantially improve our position in the coming elections is frustrating in the extreme.  Worse, Tea Party members are seething over many of the same things, noting that with Boehner and the boys on Capitol Hill, there’s been no willingness to stand up for our conservative values.  Watching this primary process play out has been like feeding the party’s base feet-first through a meat-grinder. Various surveys reveal that as much as 60% of the party would like more choices, which is to say more conservative choices, and it’s been apparent for some time that most are not happy with the “inevitable nominee,” Mitt Romney.

When the people with whom I discuss politics come to the subject of Speaker John Boehner, virtually every one of them regards him as weak, and most will offer some form of mimicry of tears and whining.  These are conservative people, and not a crowd of leftists to whom John Boehner should be natural fodder for mockery.  To see people who turn out in election after election for the Republican party now openly mocking the highest-ranking Republican now serving in our government is an astonishing development for which I cannot remember a precedent in all my life.  What seems to lead to this growing contempt is the sense that in all of these  elections, we go forth to the polls to support a party that walks away from us and our values in the end, and to add insult to injury, cries about it.  None of the Republicans with whom I speak are happy about the direction of the party, and worse, since this is Texas, some are noting the antics of our governor in his campaign and have begun to whisper that he’s an embarrassment too.  Most seem to think that since he’s fallen well below the 10% mark in polling, he ought to “just come on back home before he makes a fool of us all.”

So it is that the GOP is now largely being defined by dueling caricatures of a Massachusetts big-government  liberal, an outcast libertarian, a former Speaker(who at least didn’t cry), a former Senator who whiffed last time at bat, an Obama Ambassador, and a Texas gunslinger, while the rest of us are left standing in astonished dismay at the spectacle: How are we to win anything with these as our standard-bearers? This is the problem most conservatives I know now face in horror, as they try to see any reason that they should see some light at the end of the tunnel, with any of these as the vehicle.   To be sure, after more than a year of “Mitt is most electable,” emanating from the establishment media like bad gas, there is a certain group that will settle for the Massachusetts liberal because they see him as less embarrassing than the remainder.  So goes the predictable lamentations about our situation, and yet I must wonder if there isn’t some hope, somehow, that we will resurrect the Republican party, but failing that, replace it with something better.

I was having a conversation with a neighbor on Thursday, and he owns a ranch, complete with several hundred head of cattle, but he is also an entrepreneur, owning several businesses.  He’s twenty years my senior, and he doesn’t waste too many words, so when we wandered into the subject of politics, he turned his head and spat, turned back and said: “The problem with our party is that they keep trying to win with professional losers. They ought to try that Palin gal from Alaska.  At least she seems to know what the hell is going on.”  I really had no answer for that, except to nod approval, and say “Yeah, but she’s not running.”  He murmured “I know it, so you’d better get used to Obama,” as he turned his head and spat again, as if for punctuation, and finished his thought: “We’re in for pure hell…but we’ll make it through.”

It’s fair to say my neighbor isn’t probably representative of the average American.  He’s a veteran who served in Vietnam, and he bears the scars of a life of hard labor, and his skin is leathery from years under the punishing wind and Texas sun, but he is representative of a fair bit of political thought in middle America, inasmuch as he’s spent his time building and growing businesses, and running his cattle operation, and made good use of the talents with which he was gifted.  He lives a simple life, and doesn’t have a large number of frills, not because he can’t afford them, but because he doesn’t need them. When the Republican Party walks away from this man, they’re walking away from the base that shows up to elect Republicans to city councils, county precincts, and legislatures.  They walk away from a man who you will never find at a protest rally or Tea Party event, but who has never failed to show up at the polls.  The fact that this man is now resigning himself to four more years(or an eternity) of Obama should tell you something about how he views the state of the GOP, as much as it tells you about his view of the political future we face.

Part of the problem really lies with us.  For too many years, we have ceded governance to a permanent political class that rules with elections serving only as a formality that gives legitimacy to their rule over us.  Many speak in vague terms of “change,” and “throwing the bums out,” but seldom do we actually pursue that goal.  Everybody hates Congress, except for their own Congressman and Senators, so that foolish polls asking about the “approval rating of Congress” has no bearing whatsoever on the fact that in election after election, more than 90% who seek re-election return without fail.  We often lament the fact that this seems to be the best the party has to offer, but is it?  Is our mostly silent assent to be led by a party that only theoretically represents our interests a signal that we are satisfied?  The Tea Party hints that  this may not be true, but like my neighbor who never fails to vote, it’s clear we need to become a good deal more active and stop waiting for a solution from the top.  It may be the last remaining spark of light at the other end of the tunnel we have, but we should follow it nevertheless.

Texan Running For Congress Understands Democrats

Sunday, November 6th, 2011

Talking to Democrats in Terms They Understand

Roger Williams is running for Congress in the 33rd District.  He’s a former Texas Secretary of State, and a long-time Republican fund-raiser, but I haven’t read much about his positions on issues yet, so I won’t issue an endorsement just yet.  He has a website, and I give it an “A” for originality.   The headline quote on his page may say it all:

“While the President enjoys his vacation, I tried to talk some sense into his party’s leadership. As you can see in the video, I gave them tough love & tough talk about the importance of the free market – we need to put the liberal donkey days behind us.”

That said, I certainly like his sense of humor. Here’s the video he mentioned:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6etfJgZQ7A]

Ease up, Democrats. Laugh a little.

Now They’re Going After Crockett Keller

Saturday, October 29th, 2011

The Complaints Have Come In

I have to admit that I am surprised it has taken this long.  The left and the Islamic front in this country is thoroughly embedded and I am not surprised that these people would immediately turn to government, in this case, the state of Texas, on the basis of discrimination.  These people all complain about the importance of the first Amendment when it suits them, but when it doesn’t, well, they will ignore it as long as they are able. Crockett Keller has the right to refuse service to anybody he wishes, on any basis whatever, and what the complainers will now contend is that since he is certified by the state of Texas to be a Concealed Handgun License instructor, that anti-discrimination laws extend to him.

KVUE is reporting that the State is now considering whether to deprive him of this source of revenue, and guess what?  Keller isn’t backing down.  Good for him!

If you haven’t heard the radio advertisement at the heart of the controversy, I covered it here.  Patriots, many of us got a chuckle from this ad, but Mr. Keller’s rights are no laughing matter.  He has a right to decide with whom he will do business, and if the State doesn’t like it, that’s too bad for the State.  In KVUE’s story, Keller is reported to have said the following:

“I call it exercising my right to choose who I instruct in how to use a dangerous weapon,” said Keller.

Indeed. Frankly, in my view, he’s exercising a responsibility of instructors under the law.  If you missed his original disclaimer, he said:

“If you are a socialist liberal and/or voted for the current campaigner-in-chief, please do not take this class. You have already proven that you cannot make a knowledgeable and prudent decision as required under the law. Also, if you are a non-Christian Arab, or Muslim, I will not teach you the class.  Once again, with no shame, I am Crockett Keller[phone number omitted.] Thank you and God bless America.”

Two things are apparent to me from the KVUE story:

By virtue of the KVUE reporter’s punctuation, the reader is being slightly misled.  These were not precisely the words Mr. Keller spoke, or the way in which he spoke them.  My quotation above is verbatim, directly from the radio ad, minus only his phone number, as noted.

The KVUE story has omissions and punctuation that change slightly the meaning, in a nuanced fashion.  It’s reasonably accurate, but I would prefer in a case of such controversy that the reporter would bother to get it 100% right.

Nevertheless, I am still inclined to say that Mr. Keller’s right to do commerce with whomever he pleases. His first Amendment rights apply also.

Back to the KVUE story, it reports that a statement has been released by the Texas Department of Public Safety on the matter:

“The Texas Department of Public Safety certifies individuals to teach coursework and provide training required to be taken by individuals seeking to qualify for a Texas concealed handgun license. Certified instructors are required to comply with all applicable state and federal statutes. Conduct by an instructor that denied service to individuals on the basis of race, ethnicity or religion would place that instructor’s certification by the Department at risk of suspension or revocation. The Department became aware of the statements in question yesterday and has begun an investigation into the matter. The Department will take appropriate administrative action based on the findings from the investigation.”

Given the inaccurate quote of Mr. Keller’s ad as posted in the story on KVUE, I have made a request of the TxDPS for a link to their full statement if it is posted online, or otherwise confirm the statement for accuracy and completeness. If this turns out to be accurate, I will be making a recommendation to all my readers who care about free speech and matters of conscience.  This issue has come up in other forms before, for instance in the case of doctors who do not wish for reasons of conscience to perform the procedure, whether they were in the military, or in a corporate health-care environment. In any event, I am waiting to see what TxDPS provides.  I will update this story as more information becomes available.

I’ll be honest with you.  If you voted for Obama, I don’t think you have the requisite judgment to carry a handgun, concealed or otherwise, particularly if you’re now contemplating voting for him again.  I can just hear the scowling of leftists. They always whine about “choice” and “conscience” when it comes down to what they will or won’t do, but let some poor old guy in west-central Texas express his choice and his conscience, and they go crazy.

One Reason to Love Texas

Friday, October 28th, 2011

A Texas Original

I’ve lived in Texas for more than two decades. Soon, I’ll have spent half my life here, and one thing Texas never lacks is its own particular flavor. Once you get away from the large cities, you find people to be a good deal more plain-spoken, and that’s the way we like it. Sometimes, that tendency to plain-spoken candor leads to what might seem unusual, mildly offensive, but most frequently hilarious to non-Texans. Crockett Keller owns a store in Mason, Texas, a small town in a vast county with not much to see. It’s called Keller’s Riverside Store, and it isn’t much to look at, just the sort of place you expect to see in a west-central Texas town.

Nestled near the Llano River, one of the services Mr. Keller offers is the instruction necessary to obtain a concealed-carry handgun license.

Here is his radio advertisement for that class. Pay close attention to the last 20 seconds:

 

 

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TepdEvqV8lw]

 

 

 

Update: Now they’re going after Crockett Keller

Texas Republicans Have a Clear Choice For Senate in 2012

Thursday, October 20th, 2011

Ted Cruz

In 2012, the Republican Senatorial primary will come down to a fight between former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz and current Lt. Governor David Dewhurst.  Dewhurst is the guy who was for the In-State tuition for illegals before he was more recently against it.  He supported an income tax for Texas.  Meanwhile, Cruz has been a strong advocate of liberty, and has won landmark cases before the US Supreme Court.  I support Mr. Cruz unreservedly over David Dewhurst, who is another Austin big-government Republican who likes to hang out with all the liberals at all the cocktail parties among the “liberal smart set.”  Mr. Cruz appeared on Mark Levin’s show during the final hour on Wednesday’s show.

It’s time to take Texas back for conservatives.  Mr. Dewhurst isn’t a fair representative of Texans or conservatives, but now we have a chance to correct all of this because when Mr. Dewhurst seeks a seat in the US Senate  next year, we can send him back to Austin for a couple years longer until we finally ditch him in 2014 in favor of a Tea Party candidate.

Ted Cruz looks like a promising up-and-comer in the conservative movement. Texans should pay particular attention to this primary race. He’s got the endorsement of Jim DeMint, and Rand Paul among others.

I encourage you to learn about Ted Cruz at his website.

To hear the full interview with Ted Cruz, listen below:

To check out Mark Levin’s audio archive, go to his site and click the Audio link on the menu.