Think about the things that Texas is known for. Oil, trucks, cowboys, cows and big city life. Also, a gun loving governor and a booming economy. Oh, yeah and the myth that everything is bigger in Texas, right? We've got big trucks, big hair and...big government? Big government, you say? Sadly, yes.
Back in 1999, the Texas Legislature signed a bill into law that granted a panel of doctors, appointed by the hospital in which they work, to help with end of life directives. What does that mean, exactly? Well, if you wanted to go all Sarah Palin, then, I guess you could call these death panels.
As we all know, the 83rd legislative session of the Texas house is coming to a close. This year proved to be a fairly quiet one, until now. The current legislative body has apparently being working on drafting what they would have you believe is an improvement to the law already in place. My state representative, Bill Callegari happens to be one of the co-authors and he is
down right proud of his work on this bill, according to his staffer,
Steven, Representative Callegari feels it would be 'morally wrong' not to pass this bill. They are selling this as an upgrade, if you will. SB 303 and
HB 303 are up for consideration, and from my own personal research, along with others, this bill is just as bad. Hey, don't take my word for it, take a look for yourself. Texas Right to Life is an organization that believes that this bill should not be passed in it's current form. You can even read their own pro-life stance here. I would tend to agree with their philosophy on life. Life is sacred. It's so sacred that it's enumerated in our Declaration of Independence, "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Also for your viewing pleasure, I have a side-by-side comparison of the current law and the proposed bill and Texas Right to Life's stand on the bill.
There are other groups here in Texas that have raised some legitimate concerns about the passage of this bill and Texas Home School Coalition is one of them. You can read their own blog about this bill here. This bill could also prove to hinder the rights of parents to decide their own child's fate when end of life decisions need to be made. That's a sobering thought.
I called Representative Callegari's office and I started off the conversation with a question that seemed simple enough to answer. I asked him that since Representative Callegari is a Republican representative, what does he see the role of government in every day citizens lives. He tried to roll me with an actual story that he thought would sell me on the idea of this bill needing to be passed. I thanked him for the information, but wondered if he would answer my original question. He couldn't. His answer was that Rep. Callegari doesn't feel that this bill creates death panels.
I also called a few other representatives and they relayed that they had met with and interviewed a number of doctors and talked to groups like Texas Alliance for Life and after that, they were more comfortable with the bill. My question is, what about the constituents? Where do they factor in? They are the folks who got you elected, are they not? The answer that the staffer seemed hung up on was that Representative Callegari felt that it would be morally wrong not to pass this bill.
I also asked where this bill had originated; why it was authored in the first place, and he assured me it was his own constituents. Well, I'd like to meet some of those liberty lovin' folks! #sarcasm, people! He also assured me upon my questioning that Rep. Callegari isn't beholden to any lobbyist groups because he doesn't need their money to win elections.
One of the other things that concerns me is that Steven told me that these 'end of life' situations usually only crop up two times a year. Yeah, TWO times a year! So, let's knee jerk legislate this problem away, shall we?
This is why it's so important to stay active and vigilant when it comes
to government on all levels, whether it be local school boards and mud
districts, our state government, or all the way to the nations capitol.
It's called tyranny 'creep' for a reason, ya'll.
Believe it or not, I have yet to hear from Representative Callegari himself. Hey, I'm still waiting....
*This article was originally published on the Texas GOP Vote website and you can view it here.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Friday, May 10, 2013
Happy Birthday, Political Chicken!
Hard to believe, isn't it? The Political Chicken is officially a year old. Seems like just yesterday it was an idea 'hatching' to become a reality. Then before you know it, the egg cracked open and the blog was born.
The blog has been through a lot in a year's time. It lived to tell about a postponed primary and endorsed candidates in said primary. It has survived the passage of Obamacare by the Supreme Court as 'constitutional' and the reelection of Obama himself. It also shared insight from a biblical worldview on the war on women as well as some personal, emotional moments.
The Political Chicken blog to date has been viewed a little over 4,000 times. Not too shabby, if I do say so myself. The most popular blog post was...drum roll, please...Sex, Lies and Politics with 398 views! See, I knew I should have started every blog title with the word 'sex'. Damn! As Iron Sharpens Iron follows in second place with 256 page views.
One of my personal favorites that I wrote just for fun, is titled I Got Nowhere Else To Go, in which I poke fun at a few of my fellow political activist buddies. Yeah, that's how I roll.
Someone told me today that I like to throw bombs, and I guess I can't argue with that. So, as you peruse the site, you'll find some of those as well. One in particular that I like a lot is A Tale of Two Senators. Check it out, you might like it, too.
Well, that's all for now. Thank you all so much for your support and encouragement as I've written and vented and expressed and endorsed. You've been fabulous, but this is only the beginning! MUAH!
The blog has been through a lot in a year's time. It lived to tell about a postponed primary and endorsed candidates in said primary. It has survived the passage of Obamacare by the Supreme Court as 'constitutional' and the reelection of Obama himself. It also shared insight from a biblical worldview on the war on women as well as some personal, emotional moments.
The Political Chicken blog to date has been viewed a little over 4,000 times. Not too shabby, if I do say so myself. The most popular blog post was...drum roll, please...Sex, Lies and Politics with 398 views! See, I knew I should have started every blog title with the word 'sex'. Damn! As Iron Sharpens Iron follows in second place with 256 page views.
One of my personal favorites that I wrote just for fun, is titled I Got Nowhere Else To Go, in which I poke fun at a few of my fellow political activist buddies. Yeah, that's how I roll.
Someone told me today that I like to throw bombs, and I guess I can't argue with that. So, as you peruse the site, you'll find some of those as well. One in particular that I like a lot is A Tale of Two Senators. Check it out, you might like it, too.
Well, that's all for now. Thank you all so much for your support and encouragement as I've written and vented and expressed and endorsed. You've been fabulous, but this is only the beginning! MUAH!
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Why I'm Voting 'No' on the Lone Star College Bond
So, okay. We're facing an election. Again. This time it's not dirty, sexy, national level politics. It's dirty, sexy local level politics. Politics is always dirty, ain't it? This time we're talking bond election for a local community college system, Lone Star College System.
What goes through your mind when you hear the word 'bond'? I always want to put my hands up in front of my face and shrink back in horror to try to hide from it. I immediately think, debt, piles of money that the tax payer will owe, bondage and no, not THAT kind of bondage. Come on, now, this is a family show. Ahem.
So, in order to avoid such a 'knee jerk' response to this bond, I decided to peel back the layers and find out a little about the bond. First, let's talk dollars. How much IS the bond referendum? It's for $497.7 million dollars. Second question I usually ask is, WHAT are they going to spend it on? Here is a broad scope of things to start with:
Okay, so we can go to the next question, WHY? Here is information taken straight from the Bond Referendum website: The 2013 bond referendum expands capacity to meet unprecedented student
population growth. In the five short years since the last bond
referendum in 2008, LSCS has added 30,000 students, which is equivalent
to adding the combined total enrollment of five medium-sized colleges
like Alvin Community College, Lee College, Galveston College, Temple
College and Victoria College. Here are a few videos from a meeting that I helped coordinate in order to find out more information. Forgive me, they are raw, unedited footage.
Seems pretty straight forward at this point, right? Well, not quite. You see, there are a few more questions I want to have answered, and I haven't heard back from the college in order for me to recommend a 'yes' vote. The questions I had and still have are:
-What is the graduation rate of students?
-What number of students are transferring to a four year school?
-What has enrollment been? (I think the current number of students enrolled is 90,000.)
-What is the current debt load of the district?
All of these questions I called and left messages for the head of the accounting department, Diane Novak. She then passed my information on to Jed Young and he called me and took down my questions and promised to email me the answers to these questions. I have not heard back from him to date. Here are the links to the two videos that I recorded the night of the meeting. Ray Laughter speaking to a group of concerned citizens.
Thankfully, I wasn't the only one with questions. I found this information posted on Google Plus from a Leslie P. "Carl Joiner, Treasurer - I'll Google that name, see what I find. Yeah. Carl Joiner, President of Joiner Partnership, they design buildings. Buildings for school districts, colleges, and fire departments (government buildings, paid by tax dollars). His wife is their VP of Interior Designer. His son is their Director of Construction. So they can design the building inside and out, and build it. How helpful.
And all of the advertising investment he's making to ensure that these bonds get passed. Well, golly, he's just being a good public servant." She also links to Mr. Joiner's website here.
There's already another blog out going against the bond and they cite the flagging enrollment rate as a reason to vote 'no'. Here is a quote from that blog: "However, there is good evidence that recent growth in enrollment may be leveling off. LSCS’s 2011-12 Comprehensive Annual Report is introduced with a letter from Chancellor Richard Carpenter that states, “The next several years will prove challenging with anticipated continued restrictions in state funding and flat enrollments” (Emphasis added).
When I read about the information on Google, I cringed a little because we always seem to find ourselves being pushed to support what I call cronyism. Also, if there is really a flagging enrollment that's a problem as well. So I'm saying vote 'no' on the Lone Star College Bond. The End.
What goes through your mind when you hear the word 'bond'? I always want to put my hands up in front of my face and shrink back in horror to try to hide from it. I immediately think, debt, piles of money that the tax payer will owe, bondage and no, not THAT kind of bondage. Come on, now, this is a family show. Ahem.
So, in order to avoid such a 'knee jerk' response to this bond, I decided to peel back the layers and find out a little about the bond. First, let's talk dollars. How much IS the bond referendum? It's for $497.7 million dollars. Second question I usually ask is, WHAT are they going to spend it on? Here is a broad scope of things to start with:
- New instructional and support buildings – 996,000 sf
- Renovations to existing facilities – 252,000 sf
- Increase parking – 5,630 spaces
-
Improve campus safety and security
- Expand and upgrade technology infrastructure
- Improve traffic flow and campus access
Seems pretty straight forward at this point, right? Well, not quite. You see, there are a few more questions I want to have answered, and I haven't heard back from the college in order for me to recommend a 'yes' vote. The questions I had and still have are:
-What is the graduation rate of students?
-What number of students are transferring to a four year school?
-What has enrollment been? (I think the current number of students enrolled is 90,000.)
-What is the current debt load of the district?
All of these questions I called and left messages for the head of the accounting department, Diane Novak. She then passed my information on to Jed Young and he called me and took down my questions and promised to email me the answers to these questions. I have not heard back from him to date. Here are the links to the two videos that I recorded the night of the meeting. Ray Laughter speaking to a group of concerned citizens.
Thankfully, I wasn't the only one with questions. I found this information posted on Google Plus from a Leslie P. "Carl Joiner, Treasurer - I'll Google that name, see what I find. Yeah. Carl Joiner, President of Joiner Partnership, they design buildings. Buildings for school districts, colleges, and fire departments (government buildings, paid by tax dollars). His wife is their VP of Interior Designer. His son is their Director of Construction. So they can design the building inside and out, and build it. How helpful.
And all of the advertising investment he's making to ensure that these bonds get passed. Well, golly, he's just being a good public servant." She also links to Mr. Joiner's website here.
There's already another blog out going against the bond and they cite the flagging enrollment rate as a reason to vote 'no'. Here is a quote from that blog: "However, there is good evidence that recent growth in enrollment may be leveling off. LSCS’s 2011-12 Comprehensive Annual Report is introduced with a letter from Chancellor Richard Carpenter that states, “The next several years will prove challenging with anticipated continued restrictions in state funding and flat enrollments” (Emphasis added).
When I read about the information on Google, I cringed a little because we always seem to find ourselves being pushed to support what I call cronyism. Also, if there is really a flagging enrollment that's a problem as well. So I'm saying vote 'no' on the Lone Star College Bond. The End.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Are You There, God? It's us...the Tea Party.
You know, it just occurred to me that this
whole idea of government providing a sense of security isn't a new
phenomenon. Remember, there is nothing new under the sun. Think for a
second about Moses and the Israelites and how he led them to freedom
from the Egyptians. Talk about 'herding cats'. I can't even begin to imagine how he must have felt.
The Israelites grumbled and complained against Moses because of the quality of the food! Manna and quail wasn't good enough for them. They used to say things like, "If only we had died by the Lord's hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death." Think about how frustrated Moses must have been with them. Seriously; die? They would have rather DIED than to have been led to freedom.
Now, let's think for a minute about the party of politics that believes in bigger government, bloated government, if you will. The one who believes that the government is there to provide safety and security as it pertains to a way of life. How it manages to perpetuate this idea that the government should provide, well, EVERYTHING for you no matter how much freedom or liberty you must give up to obtain the 'goodies'. Hey, I could be talking about EITHER party at this moment because they have both shown tendencies to overreach for the greater good, haven't they?
We have all banged our heads up against the wall over the last few years at this very idea. Yet, the overreach continues, and slowly it becomes more egregious each time. We've seen tyranny creep into our lives and have, except for recently, stood idly by while it happened
I always go the TSA as probably the most glaring insult to the freedoms of Americans and travelers from everywhere...well, almost everywhere. First there was the shoe bomber, so the solution to make us feel safer? Take off all the shoes! Next, the underwear bomber. Thankfully, we don't have to take off our underwear...yet, but I'm sure it has come up in conversation. Nah, instead they just feel up our private parts on the outside of our underwear. Oh, yeah, I feel SO much safer now. Yet, people still walk through the 'nudi-scanners' as I so fondly refer to them, because they honestly believe it will make them safer.
Tea party and conservative activists bemoan the fact that we can't get the American people to 'wake up' and take a look around at the freedoms being forfeited by us on a daily basis. I'm guilty of this bemoaning, too. Now, hang with me for a minute while we walk in Moses' shoes. Seriously, think about it. He heard grumbling and complaining all. day. long. The people were hot. The people were thirsty. The people were hungry. What did he do about it? He talked with God. He prayed about it. Moses prayed to God and asked Him for help. If Moses did that, can't we all do it, too? It seems like a very simplistic approach, doesn't it? How much better off would be be, as a country, as a movement, if we just humbled ourselves and prayed?
The Israelites grumbled and complained against Moses because of the quality of the food! Manna and quail wasn't good enough for them. They used to say things like, "If only we had died by the Lord's hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death." Think about how frustrated Moses must have been with them. Seriously; die? They would have rather DIED than to have been led to freedom.
Now, let's think for a minute about the party of politics that believes in bigger government, bloated government, if you will. The one who believes that the government is there to provide safety and security as it pertains to a way of life. How it manages to perpetuate this idea that the government should provide, well, EVERYTHING for you no matter how much freedom or liberty you must give up to obtain the 'goodies'. Hey, I could be talking about EITHER party at this moment because they have both shown tendencies to overreach for the greater good, haven't they?
We have all banged our heads up against the wall over the last few years at this very idea. Yet, the overreach continues, and slowly it becomes more egregious each time. We've seen tyranny creep into our lives and have, except for recently, stood idly by while it happened
I always go the TSA as probably the most glaring insult to the freedoms of Americans and travelers from everywhere...well, almost everywhere. First there was the shoe bomber, so the solution to make us feel safer? Take off all the shoes! Next, the underwear bomber. Thankfully, we don't have to take off our underwear...yet, but I'm sure it has come up in conversation. Nah, instead they just feel up our private parts on the outside of our underwear. Oh, yeah, I feel SO much safer now. Yet, people still walk through the 'nudi-scanners' as I so fondly refer to them, because they honestly believe it will make them safer.
Tea party and conservative activists bemoan the fact that we can't get the American people to 'wake up' and take a look around at the freedoms being forfeited by us on a daily basis. I'm guilty of this bemoaning, too. Now, hang with me for a minute while we walk in Moses' shoes. Seriously, think about it. He heard grumbling and complaining all. day. long. The people were hot. The people were thirsty. The people were hungry. What did he do about it? He talked with God. He prayed about it. Moses prayed to God and asked Him for help. If Moses did that, can't we all do it, too? It seems like a very simplistic approach, doesn't it? How much better off would be be, as a country, as a movement, if we just humbled ourselves and prayed?
Sunday, March 24, 2013
A Tale of Two Senators
Look, I know you are all probably sick of hearing about voting records and continuing resolutions and funding this or that. Deal with it. It's going to get worse.
So, I wrote a little blog, titled Versions of the Truth, in which I document the tale of two stories, one in which it was reported that Congressman Culberson had in fact voted to fund Obamacare, and the other, in which he had not. Guess who told the version that he had not voted to fund Obamacare? If you guessed his office, you guessed correctly.
Fast forward about a week or so. The same CR came up for a vote in the Senate. Now, mind you, the line item for the Health and Human Services is listed in the summary of the bill and the story I got from Culberson's office was that therein was the confusion. The line item only funded WIC and not Obamacare. Via Redstate.com, I read that Senator Cornyn had voted FOR the continuing resolution and that Senator Cruz voted AGAINST the continuing resolution. Wow.
So, I thought a call to Cornyn's office was in order to find out what really happened. According to Claire, Senator Cornyn does oppose Obamacare. He just didn't want to see a government shut down, and I told her I thought it might be a good thing to have a shut down. She didn't agree. It gets more interesting than that, because unbeknownst to me, Big Jolly was writing a blog the same time I was, he just got his out first. Ha! According to Big Jolly aka David Jennings and a press release from Senator Cornyn's office, Cornyn was able to accomplish the following:
Not being well-versed in policy and how it's written coupled with being a skeptic I decided I wanted to compare notes with Senator Cruz's office. I called Senator Cruz's office to find out why he didn't vote for the resolution. Guys, I gotta tell ya, you could have knocked me over with a feather when these words came across my phone and I'm paraphrasing, of course: "Because it had Obamacare funding in it. The Senator voted on principle. He came to Washington to represent the will of the people of Texas and he's not going to vote to spend money on Obamacare." Wow.
The staffer whose name I failed to get, then went on to say that Senator Cruz is not afraid of a government shut down. That if the government did shut down, it was only the non-essentials that wouldn't get funded. He also recalled the result of the government shut down of 1995; say it with me, a BALANCED BUDGET! He went on to say that what's going to cause a shut down is if we keep spending money the way we are because we are borrowing $.40 on every dollar. Wow.
So who are you going to believe? I'd put my money on Cruz every time.
But wait, there's more. Oh, yes, just this morning, I received a post on my Facebook wall about this very vote that still has folks disputing via Redstate, so of course I felt the need to finish up this blog and share my knowledge. Erick Erickson stands by his original story, that yes, John Cornyn did in fact vote to fund Obamacare, and now by saying he didn't, he's simply lying. All we want as constituents is the truth. Is that too much to ask?
So, I wrote a little blog, titled Versions of the Truth, in which I document the tale of two stories, one in which it was reported that Congressman Culberson had in fact voted to fund Obamacare, and the other, in which he had not. Guess who told the version that he had not voted to fund Obamacare? If you guessed his office, you guessed correctly.
Fast forward about a week or so. The same CR came up for a vote in the Senate. Now, mind you, the line item for the Health and Human Services is listed in the summary of the bill and the story I got from Culberson's office was that therein was the confusion. The line item only funded WIC and not Obamacare. Via Redstate.com, I read that Senator Cornyn had voted FOR the continuing resolution and that Senator Cruz voted AGAINST the continuing resolution. Wow.
So, I thought a call to Cornyn's office was in order to find out what really happened. According to Claire, Senator Cornyn does oppose Obamacare. He just didn't want to see a government shut down, and I told her I thought it might be a good thing to have a shut down. She didn't agree. It gets more interesting than that, because unbeknownst to me, Big Jolly was writing a blog the same time I was, he just got his out first. Ha! According to Big Jolly aka David Jennings and a press release from Senator Cornyn's office, Cornyn was able to accomplish the following:
- The Continuing Resolution denies President Obama the nearly $1 billion dollars in additional funding he requested for implementing the health insurance exchanges;
- It lowers spending levels, something that has not been done in years; and
- Keeps the sequester cuts in place
Not being well-versed in policy and how it's written coupled with being a skeptic I decided I wanted to compare notes with Senator Cruz's office. I called Senator Cruz's office to find out why he didn't vote for the resolution. Guys, I gotta tell ya, you could have knocked me over with a feather when these words came across my phone and I'm paraphrasing, of course: "Because it had Obamacare funding in it. The Senator voted on principle. He came to Washington to represent the will of the people of Texas and he's not going to vote to spend money on Obamacare." Wow.
The staffer whose name I failed to get, then went on to say that Senator Cruz is not afraid of a government shut down. That if the government did shut down, it was only the non-essentials that wouldn't get funded. He also recalled the result of the government shut down of 1995; say it with me, a BALANCED BUDGET! He went on to say that what's going to cause a shut down is if we keep spending money the way we are because we are borrowing $.40 on every dollar. Wow.
So who are you going to believe? I'd put my money on Cruz every time.
But wait, there's more. Oh, yes, just this morning, I received a post on my Facebook wall about this very vote that still has folks disputing via Redstate, so of course I felt the need to finish up this blog and share my knowledge. Erick Erickson stands by his original story, that yes, John Cornyn did in fact vote to fund Obamacare, and now by saying he didn't, he's simply lying. All we want as constituents is the truth. Is that too much to ask?
Sunday, March 10, 2013
What If 'Fine' Isn't Good Enough?
Wow. Just wow. Now, I know this could be perceived as beating a dead horse, but I thought since I was sharing the voting records of our elected officials, I figured why not share a bit more, right? We all have a right to know what's going on with OUR government and OUR money, right? Okay, now that we all agree, let's proceed.
I find it interesting AND fabulous that ever since Ted Cruz was elected to U.S. Senate how much he and Senator Cornyn's votes have matched identically. Seems to me that the real junior Senator from Texas would be Senator Cornyn. Just look at all the attention and headlines Cruz has been getting for standing up for his beliefs and convictions and not backing down even when others are saying he should just sit down and shut up. You have to wonder if Cruz wasn't there, would Senator Cornyn's votes be as 'conservative' as they are. Well, let's have us a little look-see.
Checking back with my source on the FreedomWorks Scorecard, when Senator Cornyn had Senator Hutchison to pal around with, they were both voting pretty poorly. Senator Hutchison was by no means a bastion of conservatism, as her votes scored lower than Senator Cornyn did. If you look at the 2013 scorecard, Senator Cornyn and Senator Cruz both have grades of 100%. That's a big improvement from last year. That to me is a testament to what a great leader Senator Cruz has turned out to be. I know that Senator Cruz isn't perfect, but he's doing a whole lot better than 'fine'.
I know some folks might say that he's doing better now with the addition of Senator Cruz. Yeah, but there are other reasons, personal reasons I have for not wanting Senator Cornyn to get reelected. What are they? Oh, good, I knew you'd ask! I am an advocate for ParentalRights.org and have been for about four years. My first political involvement was a visit to Senator Cornyn's Houston office with about twenty other concerned parents about the UNCRC, or the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of a Child. We went there in an attempt to see if he wouldn't sign on as a co-sponsor to the Parental Rights bill that would keep the UNCRC from being ratified to the US Constitution; to protect parental rights AND US sovereignty for that matter. Guess what? He couldn't be bothered because his plate was too full at the moment. Really? Too busy to defend the Constitution and parental rights? That's too bad.
Another one is during a trip to Washington, D.C. to attend a Freedomworks activist boot camp, we paid a visit to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which Senator Cornyn chaired at the time. They often use the money that they raise to put behind incumbent candidates during the primary, thus, giving an unfair advantage to the incumbent over any primary challenger. The person that they were prepared to support was Orrin Hatch in Utah. The people that were part of the boot camp from Utah felt that this was wrong, as we all did and I still do. Our protest took place outside their building in which some chanting ensued. Heh. "The people choose, NOT the party," we shouted. Another one of my favorites was, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, Orrin Hatch has got to go!" Yeah, clever, I know. Our shouts and protests fell on deaf ears. I hate to say it folks, but once a statist, always a statist. To me, that's not 'fine'.
Speaking of fine, I also seem to remember that at the 2012 State Republican Convention Senator Cornyn had an introduction video set to the tune of "Walk The Line" but instead switched it out with "If Cornyn's mine, we'll do just fine." REALLY? What if 'fine' isn't good enough for the people of Texas? I know his definition of 'fine' hasn't been good enough for me. Next year he's up for reelection. Wonder if the people of Texas couldn't do better than just 'fine'?
I find it interesting AND fabulous that ever since Ted Cruz was elected to U.S. Senate how much he and Senator Cornyn's votes have matched identically. Seems to me that the real junior Senator from Texas would be Senator Cornyn. Just look at all the attention and headlines Cruz has been getting for standing up for his beliefs and convictions and not backing down even when others are saying he should just sit down and shut up. You have to wonder if Cruz wasn't there, would Senator Cornyn's votes be as 'conservative' as they are. Well, let's have us a little look-see.
Checking back with my source on the FreedomWorks Scorecard, when Senator Cornyn had Senator Hutchison to pal around with, they were both voting pretty poorly. Senator Hutchison was by no means a bastion of conservatism, as her votes scored lower than Senator Cornyn did. If you look at the 2013 scorecard, Senator Cornyn and Senator Cruz both have grades of 100%. That's a big improvement from last year. That to me is a testament to what a great leader Senator Cruz has turned out to be. I know that Senator Cruz isn't perfect, but he's doing a whole lot better than 'fine'.
I know some folks might say that he's doing better now with the addition of Senator Cruz. Yeah, but there are other reasons, personal reasons I have for not wanting Senator Cornyn to get reelected. What are they? Oh, good, I knew you'd ask! I am an advocate for ParentalRights.org and have been for about four years. My first political involvement was a visit to Senator Cornyn's Houston office with about twenty other concerned parents about the UNCRC, or the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of a Child. We went there in an attempt to see if he wouldn't sign on as a co-sponsor to the Parental Rights bill that would keep the UNCRC from being ratified to the US Constitution; to protect parental rights AND US sovereignty for that matter. Guess what? He couldn't be bothered because his plate was too full at the moment. Really? Too busy to defend the Constitution and parental rights? That's too bad.
Another one is during a trip to Washington, D.C. to attend a Freedomworks activist boot camp, we paid a visit to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which Senator Cornyn chaired at the time. They often use the money that they raise to put behind incumbent candidates during the primary, thus, giving an unfair advantage to the incumbent over any primary challenger. The person that they were prepared to support was Orrin Hatch in Utah. The people that were part of the boot camp from Utah felt that this was wrong, as we all did and I still do. Our protest took place outside their building in which some chanting ensued. Heh. "The people choose, NOT the party," we shouted. Another one of my favorites was, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, Orrin Hatch has got to go!" Yeah, clever, I know. Our shouts and protests fell on deaf ears. I hate to say it folks, but once a statist, always a statist. To me, that's not 'fine'.
Speaking of fine, I also seem to remember that at the 2012 State Republican Convention Senator Cornyn had an introduction video set to the tune of "Walk The Line" but instead switched it out with "If Cornyn's mine, we'll do just fine." REALLY? What if 'fine' isn't good enough for the people of Texas? I know his definition of 'fine' hasn't been good enough for me. Next year he's up for reelection. Wonder if the people of Texas couldn't do better than just 'fine'?
Saturday, March 9, 2013
Versions of the Truth
I don't know about you, but I like for people to tell me the truth; the honest truth. I don't want your version of the truth. Ever since my last blog post about Representative John Culberson's voting record on some key spending bills called Just The Facts, Chicken!, my attention has been focused on him to see what he's going to do next; if he's going to reign in his spending habits, or continue to push us over the fiscal cliff. Unfortunately, I don't have good news.
Earlier in the week, on Thursday, to be exact, there was a continuing resolution that was voted on by the House of Representatives called H.R. 933; a resolution that will fully fund Obamacare. According to Yvonne Larsen, a contributing blogger for Big Jolly Politics, who states in her blog, All But One! that: "With the exception of Representative Louis Gohmert (TX-01), every single Republican from the Texas delegation of the U. S House of Representatives voted to fund Obamacare. They even broke their own rules to do it." Huh. Interesting.
So, I go to Representative Culberson's Facebook page and lo and behold there is a blog post by one of their staffers about that very CR, titled The Truth About Obamacare and Continuing Resolution. They seemed to have been getting phone calls about why Congressman Culberson would have voted to fund Obamacare. Heck, according to his legislative staffer, he'd already vote to repeal Obamacare something like thirty-four or thirty-five times! So why not vote to fund it? He'd kept one part of the promise to REPEAL it. He never mentioned not funding it.
My next step in investigating this was to call his office directly. I felt like there was something I was missing and I wanted to get to the bottom of it. So here is in short the phone conversation I had with their staffer: She said that there were essentially 12 appropriations bills all combined into one bill. One of the agencies that was to be funded was the Labor and HHS which funds things like WIC and is the agency that funds Obamacare. They voted to fund all of these things together, so that's where the confusion comes in. She assured me that every year, these agencies have been funded at lower levels, therefore only leaving enough money to fund WIC and NOT Obamacare. Okay, that may make sense, but this reason that they voted for it makes my blood boil. They voted for it in part, from my understanding is that if they had voted no that the bill wouldn't have gone anywhere in the Senate anyway. SO WHAT?!? Take a stand! Vote 'no'!
Yvonne Larsen raised another question after I shared this information with her. Why were they in such a hurry to pass the bill? They didn't even allow for the seventy-two hour wait time that they promised. No, they were in such a hurry, they voted after the bill was only posted for forty-seven hours. Sounds a little fishy to me.
On a side note, while having a conversation with this staffer, who was very helpful, by the way, I told her some things that I thought she needed to hear. I let her know, nicely that Republicans are bad at messaging; that this information they posted about the CR was done in reaction to the response of the constituents, not as a proactive measure. Then again, if we had known about it, we probably would have called and told him to vote no. She assured me that they are very active on social media and do try to get their message out. Culberson is known for his 'cut spending and reduce government waste' stance, so I asked her what have they eliminated. She couldn't name any specific program or agency right off the top of her head. Go figure.
Not to get preachy here, but the Bible says something about a person's word, ya know, when you give someone your 'word' that you are or aren't going to do something. Above all, my brothers, do not swear--not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your "Yes" be yes, and your "No," no, or you will be condemned-James 5:12. Unfortunately, it doesn't say anything about the things you didn't mention that you might do or the things you didn't promise. We usually just get some version of the truth.
Earlier in the week, on Thursday, to be exact, there was a continuing resolution that was voted on by the House of Representatives called H.R. 933; a resolution that will fully fund Obamacare. According to Yvonne Larsen, a contributing blogger for Big Jolly Politics, who states in her blog, All But One! that: "With the exception of Representative Louis Gohmert (TX-01), every single Republican from the Texas delegation of the U. S House of Representatives voted to fund Obamacare. They even broke their own rules to do it." Huh. Interesting.
So, I go to Representative Culberson's Facebook page and lo and behold there is a blog post by one of their staffers about that very CR, titled The Truth About Obamacare and Continuing Resolution. They seemed to have been getting phone calls about why Congressman Culberson would have voted to fund Obamacare. Heck, according to his legislative staffer, he'd already vote to repeal Obamacare something like thirty-four or thirty-five times! So why not vote to fund it? He'd kept one part of the promise to REPEAL it. He never mentioned not funding it.
My next step in investigating this was to call his office directly. I felt like there was something I was missing and I wanted to get to the bottom of it. So here is in short the phone conversation I had with their staffer: She said that there were essentially 12 appropriations bills all combined into one bill. One of the agencies that was to be funded was the Labor and HHS which funds things like WIC and is the agency that funds Obamacare. They voted to fund all of these things together, so that's where the confusion comes in. She assured me that every year, these agencies have been funded at lower levels, therefore only leaving enough money to fund WIC and NOT Obamacare. Okay, that may make sense, but this reason that they voted for it makes my blood boil. They voted for it in part, from my understanding is that if they had voted no that the bill wouldn't have gone anywhere in the Senate anyway. SO WHAT?!? Take a stand! Vote 'no'!
Yvonne Larsen raised another question after I shared this information with her. Why were they in such a hurry to pass the bill? They didn't even allow for the seventy-two hour wait time that they promised. No, they were in such a hurry, they voted after the bill was only posted for forty-seven hours. Sounds a little fishy to me.
On a side note, while having a conversation with this staffer, who was very helpful, by the way, I told her some things that I thought she needed to hear. I let her know, nicely that Republicans are bad at messaging; that this information they posted about the CR was done in reaction to the response of the constituents, not as a proactive measure. Then again, if we had known about it, we probably would have called and told him to vote no. She assured me that they are very active on social media and do try to get their message out. Culberson is known for his 'cut spending and reduce government waste' stance, so I asked her what have they eliminated. She couldn't name any specific program or agency right off the top of her head. Go figure.
Not to get preachy here, but the Bible says something about a person's word, ya know, when you give someone your 'word' that you are or aren't going to do something. Above all, my brothers, do not swear--not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. Let your "Yes" be yes, and your "No," no, or you will be condemned-James 5:12. Unfortunately, it doesn't say anything about the things you didn't mention that you might do or the things you didn't promise. We usually just get some version of the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)