Legislature should eliminate cap on charter schools

State Board of Education awards final charters allowed under current law

AUSTIN – Today’s issuance of the last school charters allowed under current law makes it essential that the Texas Legislature repeal its cap on charter schools.

“Restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature now deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “The Legislature should get rid of its arbitrary cap on charter schools and provide parents with more public school options for their children.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which 209 entities had active charters. After two charter operators voluntarily consolidated under another charter to free up two additional slots, the State Board of Education issued the final eight charters at its meeting today. Yesterday, Sen. Dan Patrick filed legislation (SB 308) that would repeal the charter school cap.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If we value free markets and competition, we should allow as many public schools to open as students will attend,” Terry said. “And by the tens of thousands, Texas public school students and their parents want an alternative to their government-assigned campus.”

Terry emphasized that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school. Sixty percent of charter school students come from low-income families, and 81 percent are ethnic minorities.

“Many of these parents understand that traditional public schools have failed their children,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we need to encourage new options that meet these students where they are so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Improving health care without expanding government

As election season winds down and the 81st legislative session draws nearer, the focus now turns to legislative tactics and fulfilling campaign promises. Advocates of Medicaid expansion have already begun their push to extend Medicaid’s eligibility enrollment period, an effort to incrementally increase the number of people receiving subsidized health care.

In contrast, just last month, in an effort to reign in state spending on Medicaid, the federal government announced stricter guidelines on what Medicaid will cover. Texas would be well advised to follow suit and seek ways to cut Medicaid spending by reducing the public’s reliance on the program.

However, talk of extending Medicaid’s eligibility enrollment period from six months to 12 has been in the air in Austin since the legislature pulled a similar move last session that extended the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility period. That maneuver, along with other reforms, resulted in a 42 percent growth in CHIP enrollment and a dramatic increase in costs.

The growth of CHIP recipients and the growth in Medicaid recipients that would likely follow an extension of the eligibility period is the result of people remaining enrolled in government programs long after they have exceeded the income limit.

If the goal of extending eligibility periods is to increase individuals’ access to health care, then we can improve that without expanding government programs or spending taxpayer’s dollars.

The way to create more access to health care is to create a more diversified market with more points of access and more provider options.

Today, we funnel people to the highest cost provider – where either the patient pays a nominal fee and the insurance company picks up the rest, or the government pays the entirety of the bill. Why are patients getting eye exams in the hospital or paying more than $100 to be diagnosed with strep throat and prescribed medication?

What if consumers had an alternative to the highest cost provider; the “Wal-Mart” version of health care, if you will? Someone who could make the diagnosis, prescribe the medicine needed, and send you on your way for less than $50 and all in under 30 minutes.

Providers like these exist; they are nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants and many of them work in what people in the medical community call retail clinics. These clinics offer a new model of providing primary care that focuses on providing convenient patient care at low prices.

Often located in retail shopping centers and open late with no need for an appointment, they are directly responding to the demands of their consumers, many of which are the uninsured targeted by government programs.

Forty-three percent of their patients are between the ages of 18 and 24 – the population with the highest uninsured rate – and 33 percent of their patients pay out of pocket for their care, a practice unheard of at a traditional primary care provider’s office.

Unfortunately, Texas is missing out on the rapid growth of this health care option. Laws that limit the scope of practice and require strict oversight for nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants hamper the development of these clinics and limit access to care.

These clinics are a direct response to the needs of patients, but protectionist regulations aimed at ensuring job security and enforced under the guise of consumer safety are limiting Texas’ ability to adequately respond to the needs of its citizens.

These providers could also serve as way to meet the growing demand for health care providers in our state; however, additional requirements that force these providers’ to operate under the watchful eye of physicians make it difficult for these caregivers to provide services in the areas where they are most needed.

Legislators have the opportunity to give Texans the option of affordable, convenient health care by eliminating onerous state regulations. The question is, will they seize the opportunity.

Kalese Hammonds is a health care policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Obama's Change? Forward to the Past

First it was John Podesta (former White House Chief of Staff for the Clinton Administration) who was named to head President Elect Obama's transition team.

Then Obama named Rahm Emanuel (former Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy for the Clinton Administration) as Obama's White House Chief of Staff.

Earlier this week the name of Senator Hillary Rodham Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton (former First Lady for the Clinton Administration) began to be bandied about as a possible nomination for Secretary of State.

Shortly thereafter Eric Holder (former Deputy Attorney General of the United States for the Clinton Administration) was named as the designated nominee for the Attorney General's Office.

Now wait folks, I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here...

Former Senator from South Dakota, Tom Daschle (Minority/Majority Leader of the Democrat Senate Caucus during President Clinton's Administration) has just been named to be Secretary of Health and Human Services for the Obama Administration.

Yep, I am definitely seeing a pattern now. It would appear the "Change for the Future" and "The Audacity of Hope" for the Obama Presidency lies not in the future, but in the past.

In the Eighties we had the science-fiction movie "Back to the Future," now we have the political fiction administration "Forward to the Past" starring a whole host of former Clinton Administration has-beens.

Not much "hope" for "change" with a team of holdovers from the Do Nothing Administration soon to take (or should I say retake) office in the White House. Especially when they will be teamed up with the Do Nothing Democrat Congress.

Zero plus Zero still adds up to Zero.

Yep, Obama's supporters are looking more and more foolish and gullible. They voted for "change" and they're getting the same old tired gang. Too, too funny!

I suppose that is what happens when you get your news from SNL, NPR, and the New York Lies; an uninformed electorate who vote for the first snake-oil salesman to come along.

Hey you Liberal idiots, I'm laughing at you, not with you.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Big Three Bailout: This Says It All

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: Monopolies or markets?

On Monday, the Texas Public Policy Foundation hosted "Monopolies or Markets? How to Power Economic Growth," a Policy Primer on electric deregulation. During his keynote remarks, House Regulated Industries Committee Chairman Phil King discussed Texas' successful transition to a competitive electric market and what should be done to keep Texas on the path toward energy independence. We caught up with Chairman King following the event for this conversation on the Texas electric market.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation: Don’t lock children out of charter schools

AUSTIN – Tens of thousands of Texas school children will be locked out of the school that can best meet their needs once the State Board of Education hits the Texas Legislature’s cap on charter schools later this week.

“The State Board of Education has done what it can to promote competition and innovation in Texas public schools,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “But restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature will deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which the State Board of Education has issued 209. The State Board of Education’s Committee on School Initiatives is expected to recommend the final six charters at its 1 p.m. meeting today, with the full board expected to approve those charters at its 9 a.m. meeting tomorrow. Both meetings will take place at the Texas Education Agency headquarters, located at 1701 N. Congress Avenue in Austin.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If this cap is not lifted, the waiting list will grow, preventing even more students from attending a public charter school,” Terry said.

Terry noted that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve low-income and minority students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school.

“Many charter schools focus on students who have fallen through the cracks of the public school system,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we should increase the range of educational settings and options available to them so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Automotive Industry Bailout: Management, Union Out of Touch

Watching the CEO's of the Big Three automakers fly into Washington D.C. in their private jets...three of them...I couldn't help but be reminded of the album released by Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen entitled, "Lost in the Ozone Again".

I can't help but be struck by how out of touch with the average American these members of the elite managerial class are. We have seen other evidence of this lack or perspective by other executives in other industries - the recent excesses of AIG executives comes to mind. Having only days before secured $85 Billion in federal funds to prevent their corporation from failing, they indulged themselves in a lavish $440,000 "retreat" at the St. Regis Resort in Los Angeles, including $23,000 in "spa treatments."

This "Let them eat cake," mentality appears to be endemic to this managerial class. Members of this elite group protect their own. Those who have manifestly failed in their assignments rarely suffer the consequences of their failures. They are merely picked up by the board of directors' brethren and hired by the board of some other corporation. They receive huge compensation packages and even larger "golden parachutes" that make termination or forced retirement prohibitively expensive.

Now I am a capitalist, a free-marketer who believes that government involvement in private industries is not just counter-productive but destructive. Our economic model, the model which made America the most powerful economic force in the world depends on the right of businesses to succeed or fail based on their ability to respond the market forces and the needs of their customers.

Businesses must be allowed to fail when they are no longer viable. Survival of the fittest is not only "the law of the jungle," but should be the law of the market. Competition breeds innovation and keeps prices down.

Capitalism is a two-edged sword. The truth is I have never had a problem with CEO's and other corporate executives making as much money as their stock-holders choose to pay them. If corporate stock-holders choose to give their corporate executives %300 Million golden parachutes, more power to them. Too me these levels of compensation seem wasteful and foolish, but if the market sustains them that's the stock-holders business, not mine...or the government's.

When I do have a problem is when these same wealthy executives come to congress, cap-in-hand, looking for tax-payer dollars to bail them out for poor decisions. That they did so in their corporation's private jets - each separately - suggests that these corporations have not gone to any lengths to cut their overhead costs.

I also have a problem when members of our government, beholden to external parties - like unions - seek to use tax-payer funds to pay those external parties back for their financial and political support. It is clear that the prime motivation behind the push - primarily by Democrat members of Congress - to provide $25 Billion in federal funds is motivated by their political indebtedness.

Corporate America has been gradually moving toward the Democrat Party as they look for a partner to help them compete in the global market; pretty much the antithesis of our historical economic model. I hope they enjoy their new partners in business because if things continue in the direction they are currently moving, these corporate executives will soon be working for the government.

Democrats favor the bailout by a margin of 60:36 Republicans disapprove by the same margin, 65:35. These numbers grant us a unique look into the mindset of both parties. Democrats have always leaned towards the socialist model of economics, Republicans towards the capitalist model. Democrats don't want to be forced to compete for jobs and compensation; they want to be taken care of by a paternalistic government.

What is disturbing is that as many Republicans are supportive of the bailout proposal as do. I've heard all of the arguments, mainly consisting of dire predictions for our economy should the bailout not occur, but until the UAW workers accept contracts which put labor costs-including employee buyouts and pension costs equal to those of the Japanese and Korean car manufacturers' employee expenses, I will remain unsympathetic.

I have heard no compelling evidence that, given carefully structured government warranty guarantees, says that people will not buy a car from a company in Chapter 11 provided the restructuring is based on a sound business plan.

I suggest that the Big Three begin by selling off their fleets of private jets.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas Senator John Cornyn to be Named NRSC Chairman

Go John Go!

I have a big shout out and congratulations to our own Senator John Cornyn for being named National Republican Senate Committee Chairman. This is a really great first step to renewing the Republican Party in Congress.

John is a strong Conservative and has been one of the most effective voices for Conservatism in Congress. Here's the Dallas Morning News' story:

Texas Sen. John Cornyn chosen to lead National Republican Senatorial Committee

02:35 PM CST on Tuesday, November 18, 2008
By TODD J. GILLMAN / The Dallas Morning News
tgillman@dallasnews.com

WASHINGTON – The dwindling ranks of GOP senators chose Texan John Cornyn this morning to lead their campaign effort for the next two years.

"The right policies and the right message are very, very important, but they don’t count for much unless you can win elections," Mr. Cornyn said after Senate Republicans elected leaders for the new Congress. "Now we’ll get to work."

Counting the Senate’s two independents, Democrats will control 58 of 100 seats, up from a one-vote majority just a few years ago but still shy of the 60 needed to ward off filibusters.

Democrats hope to pick up another one to three seats in coming weeks, as contests in Alaska, Minnesota and Georgia are settled.

Let's all hope that this is a portent of things to come and Conservatives will reassert their leadership in the Senate Republican Caucus. Enough with the RINO's.

Once more; Congratulations Senator Cornyn, I wish you great success in this new challenging role. If anyone can set things right, I know you can.

Hip, Hip, Hoorah!

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

NASA, James Hansen, Busted Again for False Global Warming Data

Well folks, here we go again. The eggheads at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) have been caught with their pants down again.

James Hansen's gang of Global Warming thugs have been playing with the temperature numbers again. They reported on November 10th, 2008 that this past October was the "warmest October in 129 years." Turns out that they "mistakenly" plugged September's data into the October slot.

GISS claims that it was an innocent mistake, but this is not the first instance of AGW theory advocates have fudged the data. I reported back in June that the temperature data from the 1970's had been "adjusted" downward to make recent temperature data seem more extreme than previously thought.

This "error" is either a deliberate attempt to deceive the American public into believing their AGW lies in which case, the whole lot of them ought to be sacked, or it is a case of gross incompetence, in which case the whole lot of them ought to be sacked for incompetence.

It appears that a jump of over three quarters of a degree in one year (far exceeding that of any previous year) was insufficient to arouse susupicion among those lauded "scientists."

Thankfully a couple of bloggers were more curious and observant. It took less than a week for two AGW Skeptic's blogs (DENIERS! Burn them! Burn them!) Watts Up With That and Climate Audit to blow a mile wide hole in GISS's data.

The repeated efforts by these priests of the Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming to deceive the world into buying their flawed theories based not on actual data, but on their computer models is shameful and proves again just how desperate these Gorebots are to prove their dying theories and save their shallow, misguided careers.

This year has been one of the coldest in the past decade and this past October ranks as the 70th warmest October in the past 129 years, not the warmest as was reported.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a myth...bordering on a lie...intended to force the most successful economies into the doldrums of mediocrity. That was the intended purpose of the Kyoto Accord and it continues to be the intended purpose of Albert Gore, Jr.'s and James Hansen's efforts today.

The data have repeatedly shown AGW to be a lie based on a false assumption. Atmospheric data don't support the lie, recently oceanic data failed to show the temperature rise scientist expected, and now these "scientists" have been forced into distorting the data to continue their charade.

Time to wake up and smell the faux science folks.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Bailout for GM, Ford, and Chrysler Nothing More Than Sop to Unionized Inefficiency

Throwing good money after bad. That seems to be the only ideas coming out of Washington these days and the GM $25 Billion bailout is a perfect example of pandering at the tax-payer's expense.

It's the worst idea to come out of Washington yet in response to the current financial crisis; lets give $Billions to the bloated unions of the automotive industry.

Make no mistake, the proposed $25 Billion bailout for GM is nothing more than that; a sop to the UAW. Everyone knows this, the Democrat demagogues who are pushing the bailout idea know this, they are simply providing a payback for union support in the past election. Republicans know this, that's why they are fighting the GM bailout plan.

There has been a lot of criticism, some of it well deserved, directed at the management of the big three auto-makers, but it is not the manufacture of SUV's and other gas-guzzling vehicles that has been the primary cause of economic distress for US automakers, it is the power of unions in non-right to work states that has been the most egregious negative force on manufacturer profitability.

It is time for the big three to declare bankruptcy and break those bloated union contracts.

I know, I know, I've heard all of those dire predictions of 3 million displaced workers should the automotive industry fail, but those absurd predictions are predicated on a lie. Bankruptcy does not mean the end of a business, it means the restructuring of a business.

Filing Chapter 11 won't mean the loss of millions of jobs, that's just more union/Democrat demagoguery. What it would mean is restructuring those industries with a more profitable business model, more rational benefits packages for their employees, and more realistic pay scales for their employees.

Toyota manufactures a majority of the automobiles they sell to Americans right here in the good ole' USA and they manage to do so profitably. The reason why is simple; they aren't locked into huge pension and benefits packages like the Big Three.

It is estimated that labor under the current contracts between the Big Three and UAW workers cost over $73/ employee. Toyota America costs run about $48/employee. This means that Toyota America has an advantage over GM, Ford and Chrysler of better than $25/employee.

On a per vehicle basis this amounts to an increased cost of $1400.00 in healthcare and pension benefits to current and retired auto-workers over that of Toyota.

Of course it gets even better than that, the unions have also garnered an additional overhead of $1000.00 in holiday pay, work rules, plant-shutdown-pay and line-relief to UAW workers. Thus every automobile that GM manufactures comes with an automatic $2400.00 penalty in union associated costs; expenses that Toyota doesn't have to pay.

Forcing GM and the other United States automobile manufacturers into Chapter 11 would enable them to restructure their debts, renegotiate more reasonable contracts with the unions and instantly become more competitive in the automotive market.

Of course sacking management would probably be a reasonable action as well, which is why GM is begging the government to bail them out at tax-payer expense. Those fat-cat managers won't be able to collect their huge bonuses if they are forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

For those of you average citizens who are inclined to feel sorry for the UAW workers, just remember those hourly numbers:

1. Average hourly compensation for the Big Three, $73
2. Average hourly compensation for Toyota, $48
3. Average hourly compensation for all American workers, $28.48

Democrats need to explain why those "average workers" making $28.48/hour in total compensation should be forced to foot the bill for those Big Three autoworkers pulling down over two and a half times as much money and benefits as those same "average workers."

Break the unions, restructure the automobile manufacturers, and revitalize our economy with tax-breaks. End all corporate taxes (after all, customers pay corporate taxes, not corporations), completely eliminate the capital gains tax, and increase tax incentives for research and development.

Do the above and make the current tax rates permanent and this economy would turn around virtually overnight.

Of course none of this will happen now, because Democrats control both Houses of Congress and the White House, and the unions control Democrats. What will happen instead, is a bailout for the Big Three automakers, forced unionization of Toyota America, an end to the tax-cuts President Bush put in place, an increase in corporate taxes, and an increase in the capital gains tax-rates.

And that is a recipe for economic disaster.

• In six months, GM and the rest will be back for more money because nothing will have been done to solve the core problems in that industry.
• Because of the draconian tax system, the economy will sink into a nighmarish recession which the Democrats will blame on Republicans even though they have been in control of the economy since January 21st, 2007
• Job losses will sky-rocket as will government spending, plunging us into further economic misery.
• More jobs will be lost to overseas companies, again due to the draconian corporate tax-rates imposed by Democrats.
• Gasoline prices will be up over $4.00/gallon by next summer and they will not fall, because Democrats will not support further domestic exploration.
• Energy prices will also sky-rocket as "green" initiatives restrict our ability to build coal-fired electric plants and government invests $ Billions into untested, unproven alternative energy sources.

Pretty grim stuff for the average American citizen. Democrats won't care, because they want high gasoline and oil prices. They figure to leverage your misery into forcing you to use mass transit and drive smaller, more dangerous vehicles.

America always deserves the government for which it votes. Unfortunately the idiots who earn that $28.48 and still voted for Obama and the Democrat Party will force the rest of us to suffer along with them.

The one bright spot in all of this is that probably by 2010, but certainly by 2012, American voters will see once again that the Democrat Party model of high taxes and increased government spending doesn't work (and never has) and the pendulum will swing back towards the free-market model of Conservatism and Republicans (if they don't screw it up).

We may not unseat the messiah of the Democrat Party in 2012, but we will begin to make inroads in Congress and by 2016 the Republican Party will be back in the White House. My only concern is how we survive long enough economically to get there.

I would much prefer a strong economy to the narrow, doubtful pleasures of political gamesmanship, but then I'm a Conservative and therefore unlike my Democrat friends, place the good of my country over the good of my party.

It is time for unions to die their long overdue deaths. They served a real purpose a hundred years ago, but they have been the primary drag on our economy for forty years or so, extorting unrealistically high wage and benefits concessions from corporations, institutionalizing inefficiency, and protecting incompetence.

We see these effects in virtually all industries (and especially so in our federal government where employees are virtually impervious to attempts to terminate them), but nowhere is the problem unions cause more readily apparent than in the problems of our automotive industry.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Bailout Frenzy: Will the Last Capitalist in Congress Please Turn Out the Lights?

First it was TARP, the $700 Billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, intended to provide liquidity in the mortgage lending sector of our economy to "keep our economy running."

Congress wisely said no to this socialist obscenity when it was first proffered as THE solution to the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and mortgage-banking industry collapse. Even having that powerful fiscal Conservative, John McCain "suspend" his campaign to fly into Washington DC and bless this disaster wasn't enough to sway Congressional Republicans.

Ah, but Conservatism's victory was short-lived. Congressional wonks simply did what they usually do and sweetened the deal with another $150 Billion in pork...you remember pork, John McCain, don't you? That did the trick.

Suddenly congressmen who became dyspeptic at the thought of asking American tax-payers to fork over three-quarters of a trillion dollars, overcame their initial nausea and readily voted in favor of this, even more egregious, obscenity.

Even the usually fastidious swinophobe John McCain couldn't wait to place his imprimatur on this porcine abomination. Urgency was all the rage. We were told that TARP was essential if the American economy was to survive. There was no time for careful reflection; no time for debate or even serious questions. Just trust Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson...or was the Pat Paulson, hard to tell the difference...and he, in his infinite wisdom, will show us the way.

Well a fool (337 of them actually, 74 in the Senate and 263 in the House) and his money are soon parted and on October 3rd the House voted to approve the TARP-Revised (the Senate approved it on October 1st). They did this in spite of the very vocal and strenuous objection of a majority of tax-payers; if congressional phone-calls and e-mails and national polling data are to be believed.

Such is the arrogance of our elected representatives leaders.

A couple of weeks later, the news comes out that the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank) had already handed out over $2 Trillion in loans to various banks (the names of which are being withheld) in a further effort to boost liquidity (an effort which to date, has failed miserably). So suddenly the $700 Billion (which was rejected as fiscally irresponsible) that evolved into $850 Billion (apparently fiscal irresponsibility depends on whose pork is being basted), ballooned to $2.85 Trillion.

Ah but the United States Santa Claus (a.k.a. Congress) isn't finished. Now they have decided, in their own generous (with your tax-dollars), socialist way to extend their (our) largess to corporations in financial distress.

Corporations are queuing up for their turn at the tax-payer trough.

• General Motors, $50 Billion? Sure, why not?
• AIG (recipient of $85 Billion already) another $25 Billion? Go ahead.
• Chrysler? Ford? Hey, the more the merrier.
• Airline industry? Well, everybody needs to fly.

What's next, Joe's Bar & Grill? No worries! Our government is rich. If you need more money, no problem, they'll just print some more.

Now we are seeing cities begging for their fair share. There's no end in sight.

Even President Bush, generous to a fault...no I mean it...really, to a fault, is having second thoughts about this treasury free-for-all. Sorry George that horse is out of the barn and you're the guy who opened it. A lot of us could have told you this was going to happen, but you wouldn't have listened.

Oh and the real kicker; Swami Hank Paulson knew his plan wouldn't work. He told the press:

"It was clear to me by the time the bill was signed on October 3rd that we needed to act quickly and forcefully, and that purchasing troubled assets—our initial focus—would take time to implement and would not be sufficient given the severity of the problem.”

Err...WHAT? What's that you say? You lied to us? What was it that Paulson told us back in September?

"I am convinced that this bold approach will cost American families far less than the alternative-a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets unable to fund economic expansion. The financial security of all Americans...depends on our ability to restore our financial institutions to a sound footing."

Uh...excuse me Mr. Secretary, you left out a few things back then, didn't you? Like, well, let's see...

"This is just the thin end of a huge wedge aimed at the backsides of every American taxpayer."

Or maybe,

"My goal is the eventual institution of a Socialist Economy."

Or probably most appropriate,

"I haven't got a clue as to what I am doing or how to solve this problem, but I figure if we just throw money in every direction, something is bound to happen, so trust me."

The really bad news is that this ballooning "$700 Billion bailout" has shown no signs of slowing down as it is now approaching the $5 Trillion mark. Whatever legacy President Bush had left has probably now been flushed down the toilet of history with his blind trust of Hank Paulson.

By the time this economy shakes out of the upcoming catastrophe, President George W. Bush will be lucky to be rated above Richard M. Nixon, or "GASP!" even Jimmy Carter.

Folks, Paulson was a Democrat before he was Treasury Secretary, so none of his Socialist Economic and Fiscal Policies should come as a surprise. He's a believer in a big, interventionist, paternalistic government. It was this moronic concept of "bi-partisanship" that gave us Mr. Paulson. President Bush has some sort of burning need to be looked at as a nice, reasonable guy. That's why so many of us were rankled by his term "Compassionate Conservative." It was a kowtow to those who falsely asserted that Conservatism was cold-hearted and uncaring.

Now we are paying the price for his personal insecurities. They have arisen time and time again, first with his retention of (Democrat) Norm Minetta as Transportation Secretary and his naming of (RINO) Colin Powell as his Secretary of State (we see how appreciative Powell was when he endorsed Obama for president); it has culminated with (Democrat) Paulson, now dismantling our economy piece-meal by handing out tax-payer money willy-nilly to everyone who requests it.

Unfortunately Corporations have decided to cash in (literally) on this Government Boondoggle and who can blame them? In one fell swoop, they have abandoned the concept of "laissez faire" for "lend me some cash."

Frankly, I'm wondering if I can figure out a way to wrangle a couple of million for myself...hey, if they're giving it out to everyone, I want my "fair share." Of course, by the time the US Treasury finishes printing all this new money, it'll only be worth about 20 bucks.

Bailing out businesses that are failing because they are poorly managed and deserve to fail will only further weaken American businesses and rewards those failed managers and their over-paid union employees.

Bad businesses are supposed to fail. That's how the free-market works. Poorly run businesses fail and are replaced by those whose management understands the market and can succeed. What we are doing now is the equivalent of feeding the weakest and sickest of a herd of cattle and culling the healthy.

Thanks a bunch, President George. You are really trying to wrest the last vestiges of respect I have for you out of my grasp.

Long Live Our American Republic (or is that Socialist Republic?)!!!!

Oh! Will somebody please pass the pork rinds?

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Courage in the face of adversity

We are not living in ordinary times. Our current troubles are many – the global financial mess, the credit crunch, the Wall Street bailout, threats of a recession, and the mortgage meltdown, just to name a few.

And yet, while the trials ahead may test our strength and challenge our will, we must, nevertheless, approach them with a steely resolve knowing that rash action and a panicked mindset will only worsen our present condition.

Rudyard Kipling said it best:

“If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
…
“If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same
…
“Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it.”

Now, that’s not to say that the headlines in the near future won’t continue to be scary – they almost certainly will. Markets will remain volatile, unemployment may rise, and the nation could enter a legitimate recession.

But we, and our nation’s leaders, in particular, should remember that what our country needs most right now is a steady hand to guide us through the storm and return us back to the principles that built this country – truly free markets, limited government, freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility.

Holding fast to these principles has not only made us a great country, it has made us the greatest country and we would do well to remember that. But the need for strong leadership guided by these core principles extends beyond just Washington, D.C. The movement to begin rebuilding our fragile economy begins at the state and local level, and there is no better example of these principles in action than Texas.

Even today as the world’s economies spastically react to the ongoing crises and threaten to implode under the stress, Texas’ robust economy remains remarkably strong.

The state’s September 2008 unemployment estimate came in well below the national average, 5 percent versus 6.1 percent, respectively. Texas’ gross state product – a figure used to measure the state’s economic productivity – swelled in comparison to the national economy, 4.1 percent vs. 1.5 percent during fiscal year 2008. And most importantly, Texas continues to add jobs to its economy – 250,000 over the last 12 months and 1.3 million in the last five years.

It’s no coincidence that Texas’ uninterrupted prosperity in the face of a national economic emergency comes at a time when Texas government is moving toward greater fiscal responsibility and becoming increasingly transparent.

As we move forward, Texas’ continued commitment to limited government, fiscal conservatism, and low taxation, both in times of excess and shortage, will only strengthen what is, arguably, the nation’s strongest economy.

While the global crisis remains a tremendous external threat to the Lone Star State, the fact of the matter is Texas’ economic fundamentals are in place to weather this financial storm. Other states, not as fortunate, need not strain themselves to understand the formula behind Texas’ success: low taxes plus limited government plus fiscal responsibility equals a stronger economy.

The Honorable Talmadge Heflin is Director of the Center for Fiscal Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin. He is a former chairman of the Texas House Appropriations Committee.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Democrat California Legislators Appeal to Courts to Overturn the Will of the People On Proposition 8

I have always been impressed with the Democrat Party's dedication to the principles of democracy. They speak of it so eloquently. They advocate it so broadly when speaking of sharing the wealth of others with those "less fortunate." It seems they just can't get enough of it...unless they disagree with its consequences.

Take California for example. The people approved Proposition 8, 52.3% to 47.7% - a margin of over half-a-million votes. They did this in spite of the fact that proponents of the proposition were out spent by its opponents by slightly less than $2 Million.

Thus the will of the people, as expressed by California voters is to amend the state constitution to define marriage solely as the union between a man and a woman. The vote overturned the California State Supreme Court ruling that declared same-sex marriage was a fundamental right for California citizens.

Seems the people of California, just like most Americans, don't like rule by judicial fiat. Simply amazing, no?

But wait, Democrats in the state legislature have suddenly decided that democracy only counts when the will of the people agrees with their own narrow political philosophy. I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

Anyway, here's the LA Times report concerning this issue.

Democratic legislators ask state Supreme Court to void Prop. 8

Opponents contend that a ban on gay marriage can only be done by a revision of the state Constitution involving the Legislature. The Prop. 8 campaign leader calls the effort 'a Hail Mary.'

By Dan Morain
November 11, 2008

Reporting from Sacramento -- Forty-three Democratic legislators, including leaders of the California Senate and Assembly, filed a brief Monday urging the California Supreme Court to void Proposition 8.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata and incoming President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg signed the friend of the court brief, filed with the state Supreme Court.

No Republican legislator signed the petition, though Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, denounced the anti-gay marriage measure over the weekend.

With almost 11 million ballots tallied, Proposition 8 had 52.3% of the vote to 47.7%. Although many ballots remain to be counted, the 500,000-vote spread is viewed as insurmountable.

"The citizens of California rely on the Legislature and the courts to safeguard against unlawful discrimination by temporary, and often short-lived, majorities," the legislators said in the document, written by attorneys at the firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

Yep. We can't allow those "short-lived majorities" to make laws, that ability should be restricted to the courts. Those Democrats sure do uphold the rule of the will of the people...when it suits them.

Perhaps the Supreme Court of the United States should overturn this last Presidential Election; after all, the margin of victory was not much greater than that of Proposition 8 (53% to 46%). Maybe the Supreme Court of the United States should decide who is to be our President rather than relying on these "short -lived majorities."

In fact, I say let's just do away with voting entirely. The courts can make all of our laws and the American people can be relieved of the burdensome task of making decisions. I'm sure our Democrat Party friends would love this...provided the judges and justices made their decisions in accord with the Democrat Party agenda.

Funny, I seem to remember a lot of Democrat whining and screaming following the 2000 Presidential Election; seems they were not so enamored of having the court decide the victor in an election (which of course the court didn't do).

I can't remember a clearer example of Democrat hypocrisy...since the Obama campaign ended. Imagine trying to overturn an election simply because you disagree with the will of the people. Why such an action would be...un-Democrat-ic.

The sheer hubris of these people is a sight to behold. Once more we are shown how arrogant and elitist Liberals are. They have proven over and over again their contempt for the American voters.

The Democrat Party; truly the Party of the people...occasionally.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Obama Set To Disappoint Extreme Left, May Surprise Right

Will Malven
11/08/2008

While it's far too early to make any serious attempt to evaluate what his Presidency will be like, Barack Obama is making some interesting noise from the lectern and mentioning some interesting names as prospective cabinet members in these early, post election days.

No, I haven't lost my mind, I do not expect him to govern from the Right, nor even the Center, but he may surprise a lot of us by becoming a far more moderate President than his personal and political history indicate.

Rahm Emanuel, while acutely partisan, is no wild-eyed Left-wing moonbat, he is by all accounts a pragmatist with higher aspirations and his selection by President-elect Barack Obama to be his White House Chief of Staff has some of those on the far Left shaking their heads and complaining.

Information has a way of changing a person's views, assuming that person is at least semi-rational, and I am certain that President Elect Obama is receiving a rude awakening as to the threats America faces as he begins to get those uncensored intelligence briefings.

We are already hearing grumbling from those on the extreme Left who, in their usual delusional way, believe that they were responsible for Obama's election.

I have always maintained that one of the differences between Conservatives and Liberals is that Liberals hate the messenger and Conservatives hate the message of their opponents. Unfortunately there has arisen, among some on the Right, a nasty strain of extremists who appear to hate their political opposites on the Left. This is very disturbing to me.

I neither hate, nor wish for the failure of, President-elect Barack Obama. I hope that his is a wildly successful Presidency. I hope that he is able to strengthen our position with our allies, strengthen our national security, and lead our economy to unparalleled prosperity at home. I hope that what he plans to do as President is good for the nation and our citizens. To do otherwise is, to me, irrational and dangerous.

But, I am a realist, and while that is my fervent hope, I fully expect his administration to be somewhat akin to that of Jimmy Carter's abysmal failure. Of President Carter's good intentions, I have no doubt, but running a nation entails far more than good intentions and intelligence, it requires wisdom. It requires the ability to see and move beyond the feel good rhetoric that usually accompanies Democrat candidates.

Good intentions are the stuff that dreams and Liberal rhetoric are made of and do not automatically (or often) translate into either good or successful policies.

So I will hope for the best, expect the worst, and if we're lucky, we will come out somewhere in the middle. But, come what may, we will survive and move forward. After all, we survived the "malaise" of the Carter years; we will survive President Barack Obama.

Long Live Our American Republic.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Not A "Change" Election, A Rejection Election...No Record Turnout

Well, here's an eye-opener for those "true believers" out there who believe that this election represented a sea-change in the opinions of the electorate.

You remain as delusional as you were in voting for "THE ONE." We now know that the selection by the MSM press of John McCain and the efforts on his behalf by "inside the beltway elite" because he was "the only Republican who can win this election," caused Conservatives to stay away from the polls in large numbers.

Obama's victory came, not from a ground-swell of "average Joes" rebelling against Conservative values and embracing expanded government and the agenda of "change" (whatever that means), but from an overwhelming rejection of John McCain as the RINO he is.

If, as has now been demonstrated, black turnout for Obama broke all previous records due to his presence on the ballot and the history-making breakthrough of electing a black man as President of the United States and if voter turnout did not significantly increase, as has now been proven, then that means that there were a heck of a lot of voters who rejected all of the candidates and stayed home.

I had substantial anecdotal evidence from Conservative blog sites that supported that assumption, but now the numbers prove it.

Report: '08 turnout same as or only slightly higher than '04

Posted: 01:55 PM ET
From CNN Associate Producer Martina Stewart

WASHINGTON (CNN) – A new report from American University’s Center for the Study of the American Electorate concludes that voter turnout in Tuesday’s election was the same in percentage terms as it was four years ago — or at most has risen by less than 1 percent.

The report released Thursday estimates that between 126.5 and 128.5 million Americans cast ballots in the presidential election earlier this week. Those figures represent 60.7 percent or, at most, 61.7 percent of those eligible to vote in the country.

“A downturn in the number and percentage of Republican voters going to the polls seemed to be the primary explanation for the lower than predicted turnout,” the report said. Compared to 2004, Republican turnout declined by 1.3 percentage points to 28.7 percent, while Democratic turnout increased by 2.6 points from 28.7 percent in 2004 to 31.3 percent in 2008.

“Many people were fooled (including this student of politics although less so than many others) by this year’s increase in registration (more than 10 million added to the rolls), citizens’ willingness to stand for hours even in inclement weather to vote early, the likely rise in youth and African American voting, and the extensive grassroots organizing network of the Obama campaign into believing that turnout would be substantially higher than in 2004,” Curtis Gans, the center’s director, said in the report. “But we failed to realize that the registration increase was driven by Democratic and independent registration and that the long lines at the polls were mostly populated by Democrats.”

Though Sarah Palin was a strong enough attractive force to sway some Conservative voters to support McCain, her presence on the Republican ticket was not enough to overcome the strong visceral dislike for him that Conservatives have. They rejected him even though he was running against the most Liberal Democrat since Johnson (though at least Johnson understood the importance of winning wars rather than losing them...even he wasn't that stupid).

Clearly, if the Republican Party wishes to regain power in Washington, they must move back toward the values that put them in power to begin with:

• Smaller government
• Low taxes
• Less spending
• Strong foreign policy
• Secure borders
• Strong military
• Strong pro-life justices and
• A rational energy policy - enough with this Global Climate Change crap

To this list, I might add a second effort to get term limits passed into law, but I doubt that will happen in my lifetime. To me, if you can't achieve what you have set out to do in 12 years, it's time to go home and let someone else try. These lifetime seats are what cause men like Ted Stevens (R-AK) to become so detached from the rest of us that they feel entitled to feather their nests at tax-payer expense.

When Republicans run on strong Conservative principles, they win. When they attempt to "cross the aisle" and turn into Democrat-light...well we just saw the result.

Republicans got a well deserved thumping because they turned their backs on their core values and the base.

The facts are clear: return to the Constitutional principles that built this great nation; you win. Listen to the RINO pundits like Peggy Noonan (isn't she just so very precious), David Brooks (the man has been around the Liberals at the New York Lies that he has become one), George Will (another precious soul...George why don't you stick to baseball?), and the rest of the elite, ivy-league, pseudo right; you get thumped...very soundly.

There's going to be a real rough and tumble battle for the leadership of the Republican Party. If they turn Right, they will be rewarded...heck I might even rejoin the party.

It's going to be fun watching all of those Obama-bots become disillusioned as they see their messiah reveal his feet of clay. He will be forced to govern from the Middle or he will be another one term failed Democrat President (that's Jimmy Carter for all you pea-brained Obama-bots...the worst President in the past century).

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: A change in climate for climate change policy

With a new president taking office in January, could 2009 be the year that the environmental movement gets its climate change legislation? Kathleen Hartnett White, Director of the Foundation's Center for Natural Resources and former Chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, has written a new commentary in which she lists six reasons why that might not be the case. She goes through them with us on this week's PolicyCast.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: A Change in Climate for Climate Change Policy

With President-elect Barack Obama and larger Democratic majorities in the U.S. Congress, the conventional wisdom has been that next year will be "all systems go" for the type of major climate change legislation that President George W. Bush had been blocking. However, in this week's commentary, Kathleen Hartnett White, Director of the Foundation's Center for Natural Resources and former Chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, lists six reasons why she believe that won't necessarily be the case.

---

A Change in Climate for Climate Change Policy

By Kathleen Hartnett White

Come what dramatic political and economic changes may occur, a refrain persists within the media, industry, and the U.S. Congress that onerous federal mandates to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) are inevitable. I don’t think so.

In less than a year, many unanticipated developments have complicated the political dynamics of “ending the era of fossil fuels” through the enactment of carbon reduction mandates. Consider six such developments that may give pause to policymakers otherwise inclined to support these measures:

* When the price of oil topped $4.00 a gallon and food inflation reached almost 8 percent, most voters got it: price and security first! At least a dozen recent polls show that three-fourths of likely voters put far more importance on the U.S. oil supply than global warming. This prevalent public opinion dissolved the U.S. Congress’ long and intransigent opposition to increased domestic oil production. In late September, the 30-year bans on offshore oil production expired. The rapid decline in the price of oil, as a result of economic slowdown, has not yet squelched broad support for more domestic oil production.

* Energy independence has become a battle cry across the political spectrum. The painfully high price of oil increased the public’s recognition that there are no near-term, realistic alternatives to the dominance of fossil fuels in the U.S. energy supply. American dependence on unreliable, if not inimical, sources of foreign oil worries Main Street far more than it used to.

* The European Union’s (EU) Emission Trading System (ETS), once the model for a U.S. program, continues to fail. Europe’s program is not reducing CO2 and has lead to higher energy costs. The U.S. has reduced more CO2 by market efficiencies and without any complicated cap-and-trade programs. Growing numbers of EU member countries, including Italy, now want to delay (read: scratch) the ETS because of economic woes approaching crisis proportions.

* By the time the Lieberman-Warner bill (S.2191) made it to the U.S. Senate floor last summer, the veil on its staggering cost had been lifted. The world’s most ambitious, enforceable carbon regime to date, S.2191 would impose exorbitant costs and require unprecedented expansion of the federal control, but would yield no measureable effect on global climate unless China and India undertook similarly draconian programs.

* Far more substantial climate science emerges and is a game-changer for the reigning science from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Observational evidence from NASA satellites indicates little to no heat-forcing effect from manmade CO2. This NASA data is empirical science, far superior to the uncertain IPCC computer models.

* And the clincher: the specter of global recession. Worldwide financial turmoil presents the most hard-hitting obstacle to mandatory CO2 reduction. While figures may differ, no one doubts that CO2 reduction mandates would lead to far higher prices for fuel, power, food, and other basic consumer goods. Until the U.S. and global economies stabilize, the least prudent among us might delay CO2 regulations that would overturn our energy economy.

Amidst the current economic maelstrom, some congressional leaders perversely cling to carbon regulation as a new federal revenue source to compensate for a reduced tax base. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the federal government’s auction of carbon allocations, e.g., power companies forced to buy permission to keep generating electricity, could generate trillions in revenue. Inconvenient facts, however, may have changed the political climate necessary for major CO2 reduction programs absent available control technology.

In the last year, many policy makers and voters have learned some hard facts about energy and the economy. If an ounce of reason might prevail, climate change policymakers would acknowledge that mandates are premature and impracticable. Immediate steps should be toward extending the new empirical climate science and market-based development of energy efficient technologies.

Natural variability – or change, simply speaking – is the hallmark of climate and politics; not easy to predict and never inevitable.

Kathleen Hartnett White is Director of the Center for Natural Resources at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin. She is the former Chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Congratulations to Obama and Democrats - Time Now to Pray for America

Well it appears that emotions once more trump reason in the American electorate.

There are many reasons for this Obama victory, not the least of which is the sudden collapse of our economy during a Republican administration.

I can't help but think that, had John McCain stood strong opposition to the obscene $700+ Billion bailout and for true Conservative principles, he might have won this election, but that was never in him. McCain in the end is a RINO Republican who has never truly believed in our free market, low tax system. These RINO beliefs cost him with his base and muddied the differences between the Democrat and Republican Parties (of course the unfettered spending of the Republicans under President Bush and President Bush's own spendthrift tendencies didn't help.

What is necessary now is to bury, once and for all, the inane idea that Republicans need to nominate a RINO to win elections. If nothing else, this election has proved that old saw to be the miserable lie we Conservatives have always known it to be.

John McCain was the definitive Middle of the Road, RINO, "Go Along to Get Along" candidate. Up until this election, he was the Democrat's favorite Republican. Up until this election John McCain was the darling of the mainstream media. They couldn't sing his praises enough.

So let's disabuse ourselves of this lunacy once and for all. Conservative Republican Candidates WIN. RINO's lose.

Ronald Reagan won because he was an unapologetic Conservative. George H. W. Bush won solely because the American people believed they were electing a continuation of the Reagan Administration.

He lost his re-election bid because the American electorate found out they had misjudged him; that he was a moderately liberal RINO Republican.

George W. Bush initially won because the American people were tired of the corruption of the Clinton years and because people believed that he was a "Compassionate Conservative."

In the end, that "Compassionate" term destroyed him and his party.

If the Republican Party is to recover from this election fiasco, they must strike out in a bold Conservative direction. Candidates like Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, and other young stand out Conservatives must be thrust to the forefront.

If Republicans fail to make this adjustment; if they attempt to lay the blame of this loss at the feet of Sarah Palin or Conservatives, they will return to the "also ran" status they held for so long in the 60's and 70's.

To quote Betty Davis in All About Eve:

"Fasten your seat belts, it's gonna be a bumpy ride."

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

------------------VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!------------------

Ignore the polls, they're biased.

 

Just go out and vote Republican.

MAKE THE PUNDITS LOOK LIKE THE IDIOTS THEY HAVE BECOME.

Even though I have declared myself as an Independent and renounced my Republican allegiance, I am not a fool.  In this election, the only sane choice is to vote Republican.

 VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

Democrats cannot be allowed to hold a super-majority in the Senate, it grants them far too much power and history has already proven how dangerous they are under those circumstances.  Democrats must not be allowed to increase there majority in the House for the same reason. Power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely...one has only to look back to the Carter fiasco to know the truth of those words...double-digit unemployment, double-digit inflation, and double-digit interest rates, an emasculated military and a weak and feckless foreign policy are their legacy.

Vote for sanity!  Vote for America.

It is true that the Republican Congress from 2001-2006 failed miserably to adhere to their own core beliefs, but even in the face of that failure, the economy didn't tank until Democrats took over Congress in 2007.  If Democrats can do that in two years, imagine what they will do over the next two to four years with a Marxist at the helm of our government.

Country First!!!

John McCain

President 

Sarah Palin

Vice-President

John Cornyn 

Senator from Texas

Ted Poe 

Representative, District 2

John Culberson

Representative, District 7

Michael McCaul

Representative, District 10

John Faulk

Representative, District 18

Pete Olson

Representative, District 22

Eric Story

Representative, District 29

Vote Republican!!!!  

Our nation depends on you!!!

VOTE A STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN TICKET 

(it's fun, it's easy, and there's nothing wrong with it...and a whole lot right with it).

Don't be intimidated!

Don't be dissuaded!

Don't be discouraged!

GET OUT THERE AND VOTE!!!

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

DO IT NOW, OR LOSE IT FOREVER!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

McCain Victory Dance!!!...Maybe?

Well, call me blindly optimistic, but I believe that, once all of the dust settles, McCain will prevail.

I don't base this belief in what the polls say, they are wrong more often than not.  I base it more in what I see happening in the Obama campaign.  There are signs of desperation.

If this election was a lock in their internal polling, they would not be campaigning so desperately in so many states.  Obama has set a pace almost equal to that of John McCain and Sarah Palin over the past week.  Historically this is unusual for a campaign that is sure of its victory.

I also have faith in the American electorate.  I do not believe they will elect this con-man.  

Obama is so transparently unqualified and dishonest that I cannot believe the American electorate will fall for his line of garbage.

The caveats in all of this are:

• First, the level of early voting, which means that much of what has been revealed about Obama's true agenda: the destruction of the coal industry, his ever descending numerical description of who he believes the "rich people" are ($300K/year, $250K/year, $200K/year, $150K/year courtesy of Joe Biden, and now $100K/year courtesy of Bill Richardson), the fact that fully half of Barack Obama's campaign contributions have come from undisclosed sub-$200 donations-as a friend pointed out-how difficult is it for a single computer to generate 1000-$200 donations under fictitious names, and the admission by Tom Brokaw and a number of other leading Democrat leaning pundits that they have no idea who Barack Obama is (meaning, of course, that they have given him a complete pass and failed miserably to perform their jobs) have all come about very recently and after many have cast their ballots...which is the reason the Obama campaign has made such a strong pitch to get voters, especially the elderly, to vote early.
  
• Second, I was fooled by my misguided faith in the wisdom of our electorate in 1996 when America voted for Bill Clinton a second time.

Still, I remain cautiously optimistic.

Only time will tell us what happens today and where this nation is headed, down the dead-end road of a failed socialist philosophy, or upward towards prosperity and stability.

The most disturbing thing in this election is the underlying threat from the Obama supporters of a violent reaction should he lose.  This sort of voter intimidation cannot be measured but it has been present from the beginning.  There are a significant number postings on the kook fringe blog forums calling for this sort of behavior, places like democraticunderground.com and dailyKos.com and a significant number of voters who are intimidated by such a threat.

The most hopeful thing about this election is the tendency of McCain supporters and Conservatives to either tell pollsters how they are voting or to state honestly how they voted.

I hope and believe that McCain will win this election...narrowly.  He has always been the worst of the candidates who were vying for the Republican nomination and he was chosen for the most part by the massive cross-over voting in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida (yes there was a lot of it there as well), but with all of his faults, he is infinitely preferable to this least qualified Presidential candidate in America's history.

Victory for McCain...and may God Protect This American Republic should he lose.  

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Vote Republican Tomorrow - For America's Sake - For Your Sakes!!

Now I ask...beg you to cast your vote with your brain, and vote for the McCain/Palin ticket.  They have a proven record, a more Conservative social agenda, they believe in an energy independent America, and (in spite of McCain's vote for the insane $700 billion bailout program) a far more Conservative economic agenda. Lastly, John McCain is correct, the word victory in relationship with Iraq has never been uttered by Obama. McCain is committed to winning in Iraq and Afghanistan, which will increase stability in the Middle East.

   

Their opponents Obama/Biden, on the other hand, represent a huge step back to the halcyon days of America's failed experiments with socialism under Democrat President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal and later under Democrat President Lyndon Baines Johnson's Great Society. As to American energy independence, Barack Obama will "bankrupt" any company that attempts to build a coal-fired power plant, he will "consider" drilling on the outer continental shelf (McCain has committed to offshore exploration), and he will bankrupt "big oil" by imposing a huge windfall tax on them. Lastly, Obama is determined to turn our near victory in Iraq into the usual Democrat supervised defeat.  He will allow Iraq to sink back into an unstable nation subject to tribal wars and takeover by terrorists.

Unfortunately, it appears that more people in our electorate are voting with their emotions rather than their brains.  

• They don't see that under Obama's "voluntary" federally funded medical coverage, corporations will gradually shift the burden of health care to our federal government resulting in a European style single payer system and the consequent rationing of health care services...if you are too old (fat, infirm, whatever) you will not get that transplant or that critical-care surgery because it would be better given to someone with a greater life-expectancy.
  
• They don't see (or care) that his "tax plan" is untenable and will result in tax increases on all middle-class wage earners.
• They don't understand (or care) that the fairness doctrine is simply a means of censoring dissent and will clamp down, not just on Conservative talk shows, but any media outlet that dares to question government policy.
• They are angry and they won't stop to consider (or care to consider) the ramifications of electing an untested, inexperienced, under-qualified, neophyte into the highest, most powerful office in the world.

Today's electorate, if the vote as the polls all predict, are confirming what Hitler observed about human nature and "The Big Lie" in his book Mein Kampf:

"..in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. 

It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes."

In other words, Obama's core beliefs (his actual ones, not the beliefs he claims in public) are so far beyond the norm for most Americans that they cannot be convinced that anyone who seems as pleasant and attractive as he could possibly hold such extreme beliefs, so they readily accept his explanations or otherwise rationalize such irrational extremes.

In my auto-biographical description written for this website in March of 2005, I list my core beliefs, and among them is the following assertion:

"That the left is and has for the last eighty years, sought to undermine American society in hopes of filling the void with a utopian socialist state."

I still hold that belief and I believe that Barrack Obama is dedicated to this path and will do anything in his power to achieve it, including intimidation (which he has already used), deception (which he has, again, proven all too ready to use), and corruption of the electoral process through illegal campaign donations and massive voter fraud through his various surrogate organizations (ever heard of ACORN?).

Should Obama win, America will probably survive.  We survived a similar corrupt and incompetent President in Jimmy Carter and we survived eight years of the most corrupt administration in modern history with Bill and Hillary Clinton.  My only caveat (and it is a big one) is that both of those administrations believed in America and the basic American system. 

Barack Hussein Obama does not hold those same beliefs and therefore lacks those basic loyalties which preserved our system of government during previous dalliances with authoritarian and socialist administrations. It is because of his long term immersion in Marxist and Black Liberation theories, under the tutelage of men like Frank Marshall Davis, Asa Hilliard, Jacob Carruthers, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah White, and William Ayers that Obama represents the threat to our nation that other previous Liberal Democrats didn't represent. 

With a strong majority in the House and a "super-majority" in the Senate and given the current  extreme left-wing Democrat leadership in both Houses of Congress, Democrats could wreak havoc on our economy and our security unlike anything America has ever experienced. We can only hope that there remain enough strong-willed "moderate Democrats" or at least enough who love our country to stymie any of these more extreme goals.

May God Save Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below