I had a very depressing conversation with a lady representing the "Growing Green Conference" that they are touting to be here in Aransas Pass on the 24th and 25th of Feb. I asked, "Is this a participatory gathering or do we just listen to someone blow smoke up our collective skirts?" The answer was, we just listen. Then I asked would there be a charge? I was told "$99." To which I replied, "Just for the big business types, huh?" No average citizen has $99 to blow on listening to a bunch of Bloviating.
Since I am into wind and solar energy production I thought this might be something very useful, but it appears it is not for us little guys, its just a conference financed by our tax money to allow various municipal, county, state officials to spend MORE of our tax money on junkets to the coast. Maybe we could call that "Stimulus"?
I recently saw the effects of the new wind farm north of corpus, at least I suspect that is what sparked the change in the law. It used to be that small wind generation plants could dump their excess into the grid and be ASSURED that they would be paid for it. The law changed, now you may not get paid for it. Yes, you can still dump it in there but they dont have to pay you for it anymore.
The little guy, the tax payer, is being cut out again and they dont make any bones about it when they charge $99 to attend a speech, and pick up some brochures. AND they are using OUR money to finance it. This is being financed by grant money (more of our taxes) just to propagandize the population.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Monday, January 31, 2011
Is Obama Trying To Hand Egypt Over To The Muslim Brotherhood?
Obamas attempts to walk a fine line between the protesters and the legitimate (if not the best) government of Egypt is a bit disconcerting. He keeps slipping of to the side of supporting the protesters while saying he supports no one over any other. I find it odd that he didn't step in and support the opposition in Iran a short while back when the Green movement was asking for his support.
But this article at Newsmax.com may hold a clue to what he is up to.
Newsmax.com reports,
Most observers fear that the U.S. efforts to encourage the protest movement will lead to a behind-the-scenes takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood, the long-outlawed Islamist movement responsible for the assassination of Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar Sadat, and that spawned Ayman al-Zawahri, No. 2 of al-Qaida.
Maybe that is just exactly what he wants!! Maybe a take over by an outlaw Islamist movement is what the administration is rooting for??
It would not be a surprise to me as I am not too sure that the administration is rooting for me, an American Citizen. The recent comments by administration lackys that indicate they want to shut down natural gas production in Texas show me they dont have my interests at heart. Texas is still one of the states that is above water in this economic mass drowning, Texas is furnishing energy that may be cut off by a war in the middle east, and Obama wants to shut down our energy production. Where is he getting the Kool Aid?
Why would he put his boot on the neck of Texas? Because the administration hates Texas. Texas is the home of George Bush and its all Bushes fault. Texas is bucking the trend and staying an economically viable state without his help making his economic policies look bad. So Obama has to control Texas by any way he can even if it means shutting down the energy production that the rest of the nation needs.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
But this article at Newsmax.com may hold a clue to what he is up to.
Newsmax.com reports,
Most observers fear that the U.S. efforts to encourage the protest movement will lead to a behind-the-scenes takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood, the long-outlawed Islamist movement responsible for the assassination of Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar Sadat, and that spawned Ayman al-Zawahri, No. 2 of al-Qaida.
Maybe that is just exactly what he wants!! Maybe a take over by an outlaw Islamist movement is what the administration is rooting for??
It would not be a surprise to me as I am not too sure that the administration is rooting for me, an American Citizen. The recent comments by administration lackys that indicate they want to shut down natural gas production in Texas show me they dont have my interests at heart. Texas is still one of the states that is above water in this economic mass drowning, Texas is furnishing energy that may be cut off by a war in the middle east, and Obama wants to shut down our energy production. Where is he getting the Kool Aid?
Why would he put his boot on the neck of Texas? Because the administration hates Texas. Texas is the home of George Bush and its all Bushes fault. Texas is bucking the trend and staying an economically viable state without his help making his economic policies look bad. So Obama has to control Texas by any way he can even if it means shutting down the energy production that the rest of the nation needs.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Why Does Obama Want A Key To Shut Off The Internet?
Recently Obama has been clamoring for the legislation that would allow him to shut down the Internet when ever he felt it was needed. The clamor will probably go underground now. They will want to hide the effort for a while. We must take this to our legislators and tell them why Obama should not have that power.
If you don't know why it is important that he doesn't have that ability, just look at what happened Friday when the demonstrations broke out in Egypt. What was the first thing the government did? Why did they do it? They freely admitted that they shut down the Internet so that the demonstrators, that were calling for democratic elections and the ouster of the dictator, would not be able to organize and communicate with each other.
Obama wants that power. He wants the power to quell an uprising. If King George had been able to shut down communication among the colonist there might not have been a United States. Paul Revere and other riders were able to communicate so that the colonists were able to put together an insurrection to throw the Red Coats out of the country. Obamas call for the power to shut down the Internet is equivalent to King George calling for the confiscation of all horses in the colonies.
We must not let Obama get that power. If he gets that first, by stealth, the next power he will be after is the ability to squelch the "right to keep and bear arms". If he had both of those the country would be in deep S**t!
The first and second amendments are under attack as they have never been since the forming of this nation.
There is a reason the first and second amendments are the first and second. Its is because they are the very foundation of the system of "checks and balances". With a population that is able to communicate and a population that is armed, there is a check on the excesses of a corrupt government. The founding fathers knew this. After all, it was because they had a free press and were armed that they were able to throw out the Dictator, King George, and found this wonderful country that we call home.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
If you don't know why it is important that he doesn't have that ability, just look at what happened Friday when the demonstrations broke out in Egypt. What was the first thing the government did? Why did they do it? They freely admitted that they shut down the Internet so that the demonstrators, that were calling for democratic elections and the ouster of the dictator, would not be able to organize and communicate with each other.
Obama wants that power. He wants the power to quell an uprising. If King George had been able to shut down communication among the colonist there might not have been a United States. Paul Revere and other riders were able to communicate so that the colonists were able to put together an insurrection to throw the Red Coats out of the country. Obamas call for the power to shut down the Internet is equivalent to King George calling for the confiscation of all horses in the colonies.
We must not let Obama get that power. If he gets that first, by stealth, the next power he will be after is the ability to squelch the "right to keep and bear arms". If he had both of those the country would be in deep S**t!
The first and second amendments are under attack as they have never been since the forming of this nation.
There is a reason the first and second amendments are the first and second. Its is because they are the very foundation of the system of "checks and balances". With a population that is able to communicate and a population that is armed, there is a check on the excesses of a corrupt government. The founding fathers knew this. After all, it was because they had a free press and were armed that they were able to throw out the Dictator, King George, and found this wonderful country that we call home.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Friday, January 28, 2011
Radical Imam prefers US to Mexico......Sneaks In!!
Well, the cat is out of the bag now. The radical Imam, Said Jaziri, was caught being smuggled into San Diego CA from Tiajuana, Mexico.
But I was told by Mr Obama that I had nothing to fear from radical Islamics coming into the country by our southern border? It turns out, once again, the administration hasn't a clue. They want to avoid the problem so the plan is to minimize the problem so we don't get worried. Its easier to propagandize the population than to act on correcting the problem. This is another lesson gleaned from the novel, "1984". It was easier to change the news to portray the enemy as the one you were currently fighting and ignore the fact that the enemy was your friend last week. I am beginning to think Obama was a ghost writer for H.G. Wells and actually was the brains behind that novel!! Every time I turn around I see Obamas face on TV....just like Big Brother in "1984".
But back to Jaziri. He was thrown out of France and Canada. If he was too radical for France then there is no hope that he might moderate. When returned to Tunisia he complained that Canadian officials had mishandled him. Canada doesn't mishandle ANYONE. If they actually did, then there might be hope for Canada after all.
But why would he prefer the US to Mexico after he was safe there...or was he?
It seems that the Mexican rules on illegal immigrants...yes, they use that term, even though the President of Mexico thinks we in the US should not use it, are much harsher than ours. In a recent article by Michelle Malkin she highlights Mexican immigration law.
In particular the racist and intolerant views of the Mexican law toward "illegal aliens". Michelle reports that, "The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset 'the equilibrium of the national demographics.' How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?" And if immigrants don't improve “economic or national interests” they are not welcome in Mexico.
Somehow I don't think Said Jaziri would have passed either of those tests. So what would the Mexican government have done with him if they had discovered him lurking in Mexico without the proper papers? Well, again Michelle reports, "Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim)."
Wow, now I understand why Jaziri wanted into the US so badly. If he got caught here he would be subjected to a couple of months freedom to walk around until his hearing came up....spawning homicide bombers in his trail..then at the hearing they would find that he might be deported...if they can find transportation, if his lawyer agrees, and if it would enhance Obamas re-election bid.
But the President of Mexico thinks that the Arizona law is too restrictive and profiling. Wonder where he gets that Cool Aid he is drinking?
Dwelling on the Mexican law, however, is not the point of this article. The point is that a radical Imam snuck into the country by our "open" southern border, under the watch of Janet Napalitano and Barrack Husein Obama. We caught this one, but how many have we missed? Where are they hiding? Are they living in your town getting ready to bomb your favorite marketplace?
We need to close that border NOW, not tomorrow.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
But I was told by Mr Obama that I had nothing to fear from radical Islamics coming into the country by our southern border? It turns out, once again, the administration hasn't a clue. They want to avoid the problem so the plan is to minimize the problem so we don't get worried. Its easier to propagandize the population than to act on correcting the problem. This is another lesson gleaned from the novel, "1984". It was easier to change the news to portray the enemy as the one you were currently fighting and ignore the fact that the enemy was your friend last week. I am beginning to think Obama was a ghost writer for H.G. Wells and actually was the brains behind that novel!! Every time I turn around I see Obamas face on TV....just like Big Brother in "1984".
But back to Jaziri. He was thrown out of France and Canada. If he was too radical for France then there is no hope that he might moderate. When returned to Tunisia he complained that Canadian officials had mishandled him. Canada doesn't mishandle ANYONE. If they actually did, then there might be hope for Canada after all.
But why would he prefer the US to Mexico after he was safe there...or was he?
It seems that the Mexican rules on illegal immigrants...yes, they use that term, even though the President of Mexico thinks we in the US should not use it, are much harsher than ours. In a recent article by Michelle Malkin she highlights Mexican immigration law.
In particular the racist and intolerant views of the Mexican law toward "illegal aliens". Michelle reports that, "The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset 'the equilibrium of the national demographics.' How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?" And if immigrants don't improve “economic or national interests” they are not welcome in Mexico.
Somehow I don't think Said Jaziri would have passed either of those tests. So what would the Mexican government have done with him if they had discovered him lurking in Mexico without the proper papers? Well, again Michelle reports, "Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim)."
Wow, now I understand why Jaziri wanted into the US so badly. If he got caught here he would be subjected to a couple of months freedom to walk around until his hearing came up....spawning homicide bombers in his trail..then at the hearing they would find that he might be deported...if they can find transportation, if his lawyer agrees, and if it would enhance Obamas re-election bid.
But the President of Mexico thinks that the Arizona law is too restrictive and profiling. Wonder where he gets that Cool Aid he is drinking?
Dwelling on the Mexican law, however, is not the point of this article. The point is that a radical Imam snuck into the country by our "open" southern border, under the watch of Janet Napalitano and Barrack Husein Obama. We caught this one, but how many have we missed? Where are they hiding? Are they living in your town getting ready to bomb your favorite marketplace?
We need to close that border NOW, not tomorrow.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Why Is Theft Legal?
Government is just like a dieter. It promises you it will loose weight and then just keeps on eating.
Everyone, on both sides is saying in 10...or in 20....or in 30 years Social Security will be bankrupt. Some even say it is already bankrupt. But no one wants to stop eating.
Government keeps stealing from the trust fund and replacing the money with IOU's The IOU's will be paid in the future with inflated money and without interest. Now, tell me, would you loan money to someone without insuring that what you got back had the same value? If you would please post back to me, I need some of that free money.
Even though everyone is fully aware of the theft that is going on, no one wants to stop the robber. Why? Because the robber is a voter. His/Her vote will help keep the politicians in office. The Democrats don't want to stop the theft and will sit on their hands until there is a rioting populace burning down the Government. And the Republicans are exactly identical. Whoever jumps first on the robber will loose the next election because all the robbers friends will vote against that party! Sure, they are a minority, but they are the "Balance" that will tip the scales in the favor of the robber.
I will be 75 years old this year and I receive a Social Security check each month. BUT.....I would gladly give it up if the government would be able to assure me that I would see DEflation and not INflation for the rest of my days on this earth. But they cannot offer me that because deflation would make their debts increase. They would have to pay back all their borrowing with money that was worth MORE than it was when they borrowed it. Government cannot afford that as they have no real income except what they can extract from you and there is a limit to that.
The government has a vested interest in inflation. The government tells us that 2 or 3% inflation is normal and is good. It isn't normal or good. It is just the way government pays for their diet of spending. When a business spends it produces a product that is sold for income to support that spending. When the government spends it produces NO PRODUCT that it can sell so it must stoop to theft to get the money it needs to continue producing nothing and robbing the people.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Everyone, on both sides is saying in 10...or in 20....or in 30 years Social Security will be bankrupt. Some even say it is already bankrupt. But no one wants to stop eating.
Government keeps stealing from the trust fund and replacing the money with IOU's The IOU's will be paid in the future with inflated money and without interest. Now, tell me, would you loan money to someone without insuring that what you got back had the same value? If you would please post back to me, I need some of that free money.
Even though everyone is fully aware of the theft that is going on, no one wants to stop the robber. Why? Because the robber is a voter. His/Her vote will help keep the politicians in office. The Democrats don't want to stop the theft and will sit on their hands until there is a rioting populace burning down the Government. And the Republicans are exactly identical. Whoever jumps first on the robber will loose the next election because all the robbers friends will vote against that party! Sure, they are a minority, but they are the "Balance" that will tip the scales in the favor of the robber.
I will be 75 years old this year and I receive a Social Security check each month. BUT.....I would gladly give it up if the government would be able to assure me that I would see DEflation and not INflation for the rest of my days on this earth. But they cannot offer me that because deflation would make their debts increase. They would have to pay back all their borrowing with money that was worth MORE than it was when they borrowed it. Government cannot afford that as they have no real income except what they can extract from you and there is a limit to that.
The government has a vested interest in inflation. The government tells us that 2 or 3% inflation is normal and is good. It isn't normal or good. It is just the way government pays for their diet of spending. When a business spends it produces a product that is sold for income to support that spending. When the government spends it produces NO PRODUCT that it can sell so it must stoop to theft to get the money it needs to continue producing nothing and robbing the people.
Jim Isbell
=================================================================
The Free Republic
=================================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
Ronald Reagan was Right
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Moving To The Center, Thats Good?
I have refrained from posting for a few days because all there is on the news is discussion of how discourse caused murder and how to keep guns out of the hands of the population in general. Neither of which I agree with. Besides, there is no reason to argue with idiots. And, as has been said before, "If you have nothing to say it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
However in two days we will be hearing some drivel from our President that needs to be countered before it happens.
In two days Pres. Obama will say that we need to spend more money to bring the economy back. Back to what? Back to where it was before the collapse? Isn't that where we DON'T want to go? They have already spent nearly 1 trillion dollars on several programs that were supposed to keep the unemployment rate below 8% and it has been near 10% the whole time. Two years and nothing has changed. So do we want to try what hasn't worked for two years? Why? Is there evidence that the world has changed and that now it will work? Of course not.
The solution to getting the ball rolling again is Taxes. Yes, I said Taxes. Can you imagine what would happen if we instantly dropped the corporate income tax to 15%? That would be below the Canadian corporate income tax. Thousands of businesses and jobs would pull back to the US like a huge vacuum cleaner, like a black hole. And like the collapse of a star into a black hole there would shortly be a huge explosion into a Nova. In just a few months there would be full employment AND the return of taxpayer jobs and the influx of businesses trying to escape the higher taxes in the rest of the world would create an explosion of US business like the world has never seen and the increased taxes from the volume instead of the excessive taxes on a few would level the national debit in just a couple of years!!
Some say Obama is moving to the center. But only with his talk. He is not actually moving to the center, he is only stretching his neck so that his head looks like its in the center but his body is still far left. Has he stopped pushing the national health care debacle that will eliminate thousands of jobs? Has he stopped pushing Cap and Trade which will eliminate thousands of jobs?
No, he is still far to the left and the position of his rhetoric makes no change in his policies.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
However in two days we will be hearing some drivel from our President that needs to be countered before it happens.
In two days Pres. Obama will say that we need to spend more money to bring the economy back. Back to what? Back to where it was before the collapse? Isn't that where we DON'T want to go? They have already spent nearly 1 trillion dollars on several programs that were supposed to keep the unemployment rate below 8% and it has been near 10% the whole time. Two years and nothing has changed. So do we want to try what hasn't worked for two years? Why? Is there evidence that the world has changed and that now it will work? Of course not.
The solution to getting the ball rolling again is Taxes. Yes, I said Taxes. Can you imagine what would happen if we instantly dropped the corporate income tax to 15%? That would be below the Canadian corporate income tax. Thousands of businesses and jobs would pull back to the US like a huge vacuum cleaner, like a black hole. And like the collapse of a star into a black hole there would shortly be a huge explosion into a Nova. In just a few months there would be full employment AND the return of taxpayer jobs and the influx of businesses trying to escape the higher taxes in the rest of the world would create an explosion of US business like the world has never seen and the increased taxes from the volume instead of the excessive taxes on a few would level the national debit in just a couple of years!!
Some say Obama is moving to the center. But only with his talk. He is not actually moving to the center, he is only stretching his neck so that his head looks like its in the center but his body is still far left. Has he stopped pushing the national health care debacle that will eliminate thousands of jobs? Has he stopped pushing Cap and Trade which will eliminate thousands of jobs?
No, he is still far to the left and the position of his rhetoric makes no change in his policies.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Spin Or Just Denial??
Over the past few days I have been watching the Democrats speak against the Health Care Bill repeal and it just amazes me. Either they are in denial or they are out and out liars just trying to spin their answers.
One Democrat today said that the Republicans were going against the voters who voted for them to go after the economy and NOT to repeal ObamaCare. I wonder where he was when the lead up to the election was taking place? Of course he left out that repealing ObamaCare would be a boon to the economy. So the Republicans are going after two birds with one stone. That is efficiency.
This Democrat also said that going after ObamaCare was a bad move because, "look at what this bill will mean", insuring 15 million people and keeping them out of the emergency rooms. What? I wonder what flavor of cool aide he is drinking. The 15 million people that are being covered are all being moved to Medicaid, where the states are responsible for the cost. Its just moving the cost from the emergency room budget to the state tax rolls. I wonder how that will affect California!!! Or is it? It is well known that Medicaid patients are one of the largest users of the Emergency room!!! So it increases the cost to the state AND does NOT reduce the emergency room use. But he conveniently left out that part.
Another Democrat decries the use of several days to repeal ObamaCare as a waste of time that could be better spent on recovering the economy since the President will veto it anyway. It seems that loosers always want to shift the focus of the winners. First, showing small business that Republicans are serious about reform or repeal of ObamaCare will cause small business to be more confident in the future and more likely to expand. So two or three days to vote to repeal, whether it happens or not, is good for the moral of small business. Good for the economy!!
This Democrat also wants time to debate. This is an UP or DOWN vote, nothing to debate. Do we repeal the ObamaCare Bill or do we not. There will be no additions, amendments, changes, just, yes or no. But I have noticed that politicians ON BOTH SIDES, seem to have a problem with yes or no answers. Those are two words that they just cannot understand when posed as a question. Of course they have no problem saying YES to spending, and NO to tax cuts. I think I now understand why it is only in modern times, since the Great Depression that spending has gotten out of hand. They needed the income from the Income Tax to have something to spend. Prior to the depression there was no income tax! Now days they dont even need income, just inflation!!
Another Democrat says that "Once the people get to know ObamaCare, they will like it." Well, its been over a year and they still don't like it. And they like it less every day. 75% against and 25% for was the last poll I saw. When is the turnaround in sentiment supposed to start? Maybe after the turnaround in unemployment? I doubt that it will ever happen. Under the current President I doubt that EITHER will happen.
Either these Democrats have been drinking the Presidents cool aide and really believe what they are saying, or they are liars. Neither possibility is encouraging for the American People and our future under Democratic leadership.
Make Obama a one term President as the former vice president is predicting.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
One Democrat today said that the Republicans were going against the voters who voted for them to go after the economy and NOT to repeal ObamaCare. I wonder where he was when the lead up to the election was taking place? Of course he left out that repealing ObamaCare would be a boon to the economy. So the Republicans are going after two birds with one stone. That is efficiency.
This Democrat also said that going after ObamaCare was a bad move because, "look at what this bill will mean", insuring 15 million people and keeping them out of the emergency rooms. What? I wonder what flavor of cool aide he is drinking. The 15 million people that are being covered are all being moved to Medicaid, where the states are responsible for the cost. Its just moving the cost from the emergency room budget to the state tax rolls. I wonder how that will affect California!!! Or is it? It is well known that Medicaid patients are one of the largest users of the Emergency room!!! So it increases the cost to the state AND does NOT reduce the emergency room use. But he conveniently left out that part.
Another Democrat decries the use of several days to repeal ObamaCare as a waste of time that could be better spent on recovering the economy since the President will veto it anyway. It seems that loosers always want to shift the focus of the winners. First, showing small business that Republicans are serious about reform or repeal of ObamaCare will cause small business to be more confident in the future and more likely to expand. So two or three days to vote to repeal, whether it happens or not, is good for the moral of small business. Good for the economy!!
This Democrat also wants time to debate. This is an UP or DOWN vote, nothing to debate. Do we repeal the ObamaCare Bill or do we not. There will be no additions, amendments, changes, just, yes or no. But I have noticed that politicians ON BOTH SIDES, seem to have a problem with yes or no answers. Those are two words that they just cannot understand when posed as a question. Of course they have no problem saying YES to spending, and NO to tax cuts. I think I now understand why it is only in modern times, since the Great Depression that spending has gotten out of hand. They needed the income from the Income Tax to have something to spend. Prior to the depression there was no income tax! Now days they dont even need income, just inflation!!
Another Democrat says that "Once the people get to know ObamaCare, they will like it." Well, its been over a year and they still don't like it. And they like it less every day. 75% against and 25% for was the last poll I saw. When is the turnaround in sentiment supposed to start? Maybe after the turnaround in unemployment? I doubt that it will ever happen. Under the current President I doubt that EITHER will happen.
Either these Democrats have been drinking the Presidents cool aide and really believe what they are saying, or they are liars. Neither possibility is encouraging for the American People and our future under Democratic leadership.
Make Obama a one term President as the former vice president is predicting.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Its 2AM And I Screwed Up
Its 2 o'clock in the morning and I just got out of bed to write this because my conscience was bothering me. As I lay in the bed rethinking the afternoons events I was reminded of the huge crowds of people that used to listen to Adolf Hitler and swoon over his words. A always wondered why no one stood up to speak against his vitriol. Then I realized that I had just done the same thing. Yes, there were many in those crowds that disagreed with Hitler, but they stood silent while he raved on and on. They stood silent while he murdered millions of people. And, now I know why they didn't speak, why I didn't speak.
First, lets be clear, I am a TEA Party leader. I believe in the TEA Party's desire to have a constitutional government and fiscal responsibility. I and my team staged four TEA Party events in support of TEA Party goals. We worked hard to overthrow the Good Old Boys in South Texas and replace them with conservatives. I am a conservative American..... somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan.
But this afternoon I went to a TEA Party gathering to listen to someone speak on Republican responsibilities to the conservative cause. What I heard appalled me and made me uncomfortable. In fact I haven't been that uncomfortable since the time I was in Guatemala some years ago and we were in a private home watching a movie. The movie was "Romero", a movie about the Catholic priest and two nuns that were apparently gunned down by a government sponsored death squad. It had only been a few years previously that the movie was banned in Guatemala by the forces that were then in control. As I sat there I wondered, "When will the doors burst open and a death squad open up on us with Uzi's?" I was uncomfortable even though I knew the government had changed.
This afternoon the speaker made me feel that discomfort again. That speaker is the type of speaker that gives the TEA Party a bad name.
He used racial slurs to refer to my President. Barack Obama IS my president even though I don't agree with him very much, if any. In the military we were taught to respect the uniform no mater who was wearing it. To the military, this man is their Commander In Chief. I am a veteran and he is my Commander In Chief. To me he is the President of the United States.
This speaker used derogatory terms to refer to the Speaker of the Texas House and my Representative to that body. I did not appreciate that. This speaker spoke of "getting in their face" and called many of the Texas Representatives RINOs, thats a political slur and is uncalled for in reasonable discourse. He said no one listened to him. I am NOT surprised. I wonder if HE would be surprised that last Tuesday I spent three hours in my Representatives office and that I exchanged many ideas with him and that he listened to me. It was because I didn't get in his face and call him a RINO. It was because I tried to reason with him as one reasonable man to another. We respect each other.
But I sat there quietly as the speaker raved on until I finally got up and left quietly. Just as perhaps many German citizens did from Hitlers speeches. I did not stand up and tell the others there that he was wrong. I was afraid I might make someone mad or make an ass of myself. Because of my inaction there may have been those there that thought this was typical of the TEA Party. It is definitely NOT typical. They may never come back. At least two who left after I did, told me that they would not be back. One told me that his wife was of mixed ancestry and he did not like the term "Half Breed". I too am a "Half Breed", half Irish and half Spanish. I also do not like that term. How many others will hear from these two men and will decide to avoid the TEA Party and all the good it stands for? How many in the crowd heard this attack on the President and felt uncomfortable? If I am far to the right, and it bothered me, you can bet there were many others that were bothered.
I cannot go back and undo my inaction this afternoon. But maybe by writing this piece someone will read it and relate it to those who were there and were as appalled as I was. Maybe. But I am ashamed of my inability to stand up and face that speaker and tell him that he was wrong.
It wont happen again. I may make an ass of myself, but I wont have to get up at 2 AM to write a letter. Next time I will sleep soundly knowing I did the right thing.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
First, lets be clear, I am a TEA Party leader. I believe in the TEA Party's desire to have a constitutional government and fiscal responsibility. I and my team staged four TEA Party events in support of TEA Party goals. We worked hard to overthrow the Good Old Boys in South Texas and replace them with conservatives. I am a conservative American..... somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan.
But this afternoon I went to a TEA Party gathering to listen to someone speak on Republican responsibilities to the conservative cause. What I heard appalled me and made me uncomfortable. In fact I haven't been that uncomfortable since the time I was in Guatemala some years ago and we were in a private home watching a movie. The movie was "Romero", a movie about the Catholic priest and two nuns that were apparently gunned down by a government sponsored death squad. It had only been a few years previously that the movie was banned in Guatemala by the forces that were then in control. As I sat there I wondered, "When will the doors burst open and a death squad open up on us with Uzi's?" I was uncomfortable even though I knew the government had changed.
This afternoon the speaker made me feel that discomfort again. That speaker is the type of speaker that gives the TEA Party a bad name.
He used racial slurs to refer to my President. Barack Obama IS my president even though I don't agree with him very much, if any. In the military we were taught to respect the uniform no mater who was wearing it. To the military, this man is their Commander In Chief. I am a veteran and he is my Commander In Chief. To me he is the President of the United States.
This speaker used derogatory terms to refer to the Speaker of the Texas House and my Representative to that body. I did not appreciate that. This speaker spoke of "getting in their face" and called many of the Texas Representatives RINOs, thats a political slur and is uncalled for in reasonable discourse. He said no one listened to him. I am NOT surprised. I wonder if HE would be surprised that last Tuesday I spent three hours in my Representatives office and that I exchanged many ideas with him and that he listened to me. It was because I didn't get in his face and call him a RINO. It was because I tried to reason with him as one reasonable man to another. We respect each other.
But I sat there quietly as the speaker raved on until I finally got up and left quietly. Just as perhaps many German citizens did from Hitlers speeches. I did not stand up and tell the others there that he was wrong. I was afraid I might make someone mad or make an ass of myself. Because of my inaction there may have been those there that thought this was typical of the TEA Party. It is definitely NOT typical. They may never come back. At least two who left after I did, told me that they would not be back. One told me that his wife was of mixed ancestry and he did not like the term "Half Breed". I too am a "Half Breed", half Irish and half Spanish. I also do not like that term. How many others will hear from these two men and will decide to avoid the TEA Party and all the good it stands for? How many in the crowd heard this attack on the President and felt uncomfortable? If I am far to the right, and it bothered me, you can bet there were many others that were bothered.
I cannot go back and undo my inaction this afternoon. But maybe by writing this piece someone will read it and relate it to those who were there and were as appalled as I was. Maybe. But I am ashamed of my inability to stand up and face that speaker and tell him that he was wrong.
It wont happen again. I may make an ass of myself, but I wont have to get up at 2 AM to write a letter. Next time I will sleep soundly knowing I did the right thing.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Thursday, January 13, 2011
The Aftermath Of Armageddon
Its been a few days since the massacre in Arizona and you would think by now that cooler heads would have prevailed. But, NO, it seems the Left is just getting started with Gun Control, Free Speech, and limitations on the movement of people.
These are the tools that those that would enslave us will use to do the job. First scare us into following their lead then after we have given up our freedom, they will take the reins. This was the same tactic that was used by the "Manmade Global Warming" scam. First they scared us by offering scenarios that painted a bleak future for the human race. Then while we were reeling from the effects of the predictions, and before we could gather our wits to research and find that it was all a scam, they tried to pass legislation to enslave us using us as their willing participants.
Luckily we are awakening from the stupor that Al Gore tried to put us into. We are beginning to see that MGW doesn't exist. We are rejecting "Cap and Trade". And while oil prospecting and drilling are not yet back to the levels they need to be, we are working on that. Nov 2nd 2010 was the first step and Nov 6th 2012 will be the second step.
Today I got a report that there are some people that will not attend the TEA Party event in Portland on Saturday because they are fearful of large crowds since last weeks massacre in Arizona. As FDR said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." As much as I don't like quoting FDR, in this case he is right. Submitting to fear and not attending the TEA Party is enabling the Left to take your freedom. That is the beginning.... It wont stop there.
Now they are trying to pass legislation to to further enslave us, Gun Control, and Speech Control. If we allow that we are doomed to fail in upholding the goals of our conservative movement to uphold the Constitution.
Can you imagine a law that outlaws guns within 1,000 feet of a federal official. The first one affected would be that official, stopping him/her from carrying a weapon to defend themselves!!! Then making it criminal for me to carry a legal firearm while having dinner in public because at any moment a federal official might walk in and make me an instant criminal. This is asinine!!
And limiting the language that can be used on talk radio is negating the 1st amendment directly. It is "NewSpeak" as was used by "Big Brother" in the novel 1984. Oddly this idea is supported by a Democrat that, during the campaign, said he wanted his opponent to be lined up against a wall and shot. This even though the evidence is that the accused killer didn't listen to radio or TV political discourse ANYWAY.
They haven't gone after the 10th amendment yet.... But from my reading of the Constitution and the interpretation that the Progressives propose of its meaning, I think the only thing that the 10th amendment still protects for the states is the right to secede from the union!! Maybe not a bad idea.
That madman can cause you, through fear, to do more harm to yourself than he did to you. This is the goal of all suicide bombers. They do, by fear, what they are not able to do by law or reason.
Do Not Surrender to the madmen of the world.
I chose to live free because even if that choice leads to my demise, in the interim, I will have lived better than those who have surrendered. Emiliano Zapata said it best when he said, "I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees."
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
These are the tools that those that would enslave us will use to do the job. First scare us into following their lead then after we have given up our freedom, they will take the reins. This was the same tactic that was used by the "Manmade Global Warming" scam. First they scared us by offering scenarios that painted a bleak future for the human race. Then while we were reeling from the effects of the predictions, and before we could gather our wits to research and find that it was all a scam, they tried to pass legislation to enslave us using us as their willing participants.
Luckily we are awakening from the stupor that Al Gore tried to put us into. We are beginning to see that MGW doesn't exist. We are rejecting "Cap and Trade". And while oil prospecting and drilling are not yet back to the levels they need to be, we are working on that. Nov 2nd 2010 was the first step and Nov 6th 2012 will be the second step.
Today I got a report that there are some people that will not attend the TEA Party event in Portland on Saturday because they are fearful of large crowds since last weeks massacre in Arizona. As FDR said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." As much as I don't like quoting FDR, in this case he is right. Submitting to fear and not attending the TEA Party is enabling the Left to take your freedom. That is the beginning.... It wont stop there.
Now they are trying to pass legislation to to further enslave us, Gun Control, and Speech Control. If we allow that we are doomed to fail in upholding the goals of our conservative movement to uphold the Constitution.
Can you imagine a law that outlaws guns within 1,000 feet of a federal official. The first one affected would be that official, stopping him/her from carrying a weapon to defend themselves!!! Then making it criminal for me to carry a legal firearm while having dinner in public because at any moment a federal official might walk in and make me an instant criminal. This is asinine!!
And limiting the language that can be used on talk radio is negating the 1st amendment directly. It is "NewSpeak" as was used by "Big Brother" in the novel 1984. Oddly this idea is supported by a Democrat that, during the campaign, said he wanted his opponent to be lined up against a wall and shot. This even though the evidence is that the accused killer didn't listen to radio or TV political discourse ANYWAY.
They haven't gone after the 10th amendment yet.... But from my reading of the Constitution and the interpretation that the Progressives propose of its meaning, I think the only thing that the 10th amendment still protects for the states is the right to secede from the union!! Maybe not a bad idea.
That madman can cause you, through fear, to do more harm to yourself than he did to you. This is the goal of all suicide bombers. They do, by fear, what they are not able to do by law or reason.
Do Not Surrender to the madmen of the world.
I chose to live free because even if that choice leads to my demise, in the interim, I will have lived better than those who have surrendered. Emiliano Zapata said it best when he said, "I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees."
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Monday, January 10, 2011
Whose Fault is It? Bushes, Palins, rhetoric, TEA Party????
The tradegy in Arizona was NOT the TEA Partys fault. Nor was it George Bushes fault, nor anyone else that had been named by the left wing zelots of the blogosphere.
In fact, recent comments have said that the accused perpetrator was actually a left wing crazy. But I dont blame it on the left wing either. No one is responsible for the actions of a deranged mind.
BUT... the Left Wing IS responsible for their outreageous charges. They and they alone could curb their rhetoric aimed at blaming the tragedy on the right for their own political advantage. If the accused perpetrator had been a Right Wing Kook as is charged by the left, but not born out by interviews with his fellow students, it still would not be the fault of the Right Wing. The freedoms that are given to us in this great nation include the right to believe what we will. No one has forced anyone to believe anything so no one can be blamed. But in this case the fact that he is apparently a left wing kook not a right wing kook makes the various left wing bloggers look silly in their accusations.
What are the signs of a deranged mind? A FOX news anchor said that in his opinion the man was deranged because he:
1) stated that he didnt trust the Government. Gee, I dont trust the government either, am I deranged?
2) stated that he did not want to pay his debts with a currency not backed with Gold. Opps, perhaps I also am deranged...I, too, would prefer a gold backed currency.
Are these what makes one deranged? No, of course not. If that were true then I could be committed. No, what makes one deranged is that he thinks he can correct the percieved wrongs by killing a fellow human being. This is a deranged mind.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
In fact, recent comments have said that the accused perpetrator was actually a left wing crazy. But I dont blame it on the left wing either. No one is responsible for the actions of a deranged mind.
BUT... the Left Wing IS responsible for their outreageous charges. They and they alone could curb their rhetoric aimed at blaming the tragedy on the right for their own political advantage. If the accused perpetrator had been a Right Wing Kook as is charged by the left, but not born out by interviews with his fellow students, it still would not be the fault of the Right Wing. The freedoms that are given to us in this great nation include the right to believe what we will. No one has forced anyone to believe anything so no one can be blamed. But in this case the fact that he is apparently a left wing kook not a right wing kook makes the various left wing bloggers look silly in their accusations.
What are the signs of a deranged mind? A FOX news anchor said that in his opinion the man was deranged because he:
1) stated that he didnt trust the Government. Gee, I dont trust the government either, am I deranged?
2) stated that he did not want to pay his debts with a currency not backed with Gold. Opps, perhaps I also am deranged...I, too, would prefer a gold backed currency.
Are these what makes one deranged? No, of course not. If that were true then I could be committed. No, what makes one deranged is that he thinks he can correct the percieved wrongs by killing a fellow human being. This is a deranged mind.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Friday, January 7, 2011
Straus for Speaker of the House? I think not!!
I received this from the Morrisonreport. If it is true then Straus is the last man we would want for the Speaker of the House. The sources for this report are linked at the bottom of the page so you can check it out yourself.
===================
"A new session of the Texas Legislature is about to convene, and the first order of business will be electing a Speaker of the House. This ballot will be the single most important vote House members will cast during the entire session, as the Speaker has tremendous power to set the agenda, appoint committee chairmen, kill bills, etc. During last session, which was divided almost equally between Republicans and Democrats, RINO Joe Straus was Speaker. Straus used the power of his office to thwart conservative goals and paid off the liberal Democrats who voted for him by not rocking the boat. He even helped some of them campaign for re-election against conservative Republicans this past November.
This is totally unacceptable, and there's no reason Straus should be elected Speaker in this session, because Republicans now enjoy a super-majority in the House. Voters went to the polls all over Texas in November, and we made our voices clear: we want a truly conservative legislature which will work hard to enact a real conservative agenda. We've had enough of "me too Republicans" in the House whose main career goals seem to be making friends with Democrats.
Naturally, Joe Straus and his cronies are insisting that they heard us loud and clear, and this session will be different, and Straus will fight for a conservative agenda. Conservatives aren't buying this line, thankfully. If a man won't stand for conservative principles when the going is tough, there's no reason to believe he'll do so when the wind is at his back. We've seen enough of Joe Straus over the years to know exactly where he stands on the issues. He made that crystal clear during the last session, and he's not the conservative leader Texas conservatives need. All across the state local conservative groups are demanding that Straus be replaced as Speaker.
Party leaders are aware of this, and have scheduled a caucus meeting before the actual start of the session to settle on one GOP candidate for Speaker. The plan is to meet in private and pick a candidate everyone agrees on, rather than fight internal party battles in a public forum. This is nothing out of the ordinary; political parties do this sort of thing all the time. In fact, this is exactly why we have primaries, so the parties can agree on one candidate for the general election, instead of a half dozen people from each party vying for office.
Amazingly, though, one Democrat is denouncing the planned caucus as "racist" - because Democrats aren't invited! Rep. Joseph Deshotel (D-Port Arthur) has written an open letter making the ludicrous claim that this meeting violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because most of the Democratic representatives in the Texas House are minorities, while most of the Republican legislators are white. Here's a brief excerpt from his letter:
"The forty-nine (49) Democratic legislators not being allowed to participate in what is tantamount to the election of the Speaker consist of forty-two minorities; fifteen (15) African Americans, twenty-five (25) Hispanics and one (1) Asian. Should the Republican Caucus Bylaws be followed an additional two African-Americans and four Hispanic Republican Elect members and one Hispanic former Democrat would be denied a vote as well. These forty-nine minority House Members and the eight millions Texans they represent are being disenfranchised from the Speaker's election."
These days we're seeing more and more outrageous claims of "racism", but this one really takes the cake. First of all, the Voting Rights Act is a nearly 50 year old law that unconstitutionally discriminates against southern states. It's a racist law that presumes black people can only be represented by black people, and that white voters in southern states are wicked racists who are always out to deny black people their right to vote.
Second, the Voting Rights Act doesn't even apply to this caucus, which isn't an election at all. It's a private meeting for Republican legislators to discuss internal party affairs. There is still going to be a vote in the House for Speaker; the idea that this meeting will somehow invalidate the votes of minority legislators when they cast their votes for Speaker is completely ridiculous. No one takes this argument seriously; Rep. Deshotel has embarrassed himself and his cause by writing this letter. Crying "racism" when you don't get your way is rapidly losing its force in America.
However, this letter does further demonstrate why Joe Straus is unfit to hold the office of the Speaker of the House. That's because Rep. Deshotel has pledged his vote to Straus. How can conservatives support a candidate who's acceptable to a liberal left wing Democrat like Joseph Deshotel, who stoops to accusing Republicans of being racists for not allowing Democrats to have a say in their internal party affairs? We already knew that Joe Straus was too liberal, but this disgraceful episode reveals just what kind of company he keeps. Joe Straus has got to go. We deserve a true conservative as Speaker of the House, not one who counts men like Joseph Deshotel among his supporters."
====================================
The Establishment VS the People
Dallas Morning News
Trail Blazers Blog
Deshotel: On Republican Caucus Speaker Election
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
===================
"A new session of the Texas Legislature is about to convene, and the first order of business will be electing a Speaker of the House. This ballot will be the single most important vote House members will cast during the entire session, as the Speaker has tremendous power to set the agenda, appoint committee chairmen, kill bills, etc. During last session, which was divided almost equally between Republicans and Democrats, RINO Joe Straus was Speaker. Straus used the power of his office to thwart conservative goals and paid off the liberal Democrats who voted for him by not rocking the boat. He even helped some of them campaign for re-election against conservative Republicans this past November.
This is totally unacceptable, and there's no reason Straus should be elected Speaker in this session, because Republicans now enjoy a super-majority in the House. Voters went to the polls all over Texas in November, and we made our voices clear: we want a truly conservative legislature which will work hard to enact a real conservative agenda. We've had enough of "me too Republicans" in the House whose main career goals seem to be making friends with Democrats.
Naturally, Joe Straus and his cronies are insisting that they heard us loud and clear, and this session will be different, and Straus will fight for a conservative agenda. Conservatives aren't buying this line, thankfully. If a man won't stand for conservative principles when the going is tough, there's no reason to believe he'll do so when the wind is at his back. We've seen enough of Joe Straus over the years to know exactly where he stands on the issues. He made that crystal clear during the last session, and he's not the conservative leader Texas conservatives need. All across the state local conservative groups are demanding that Straus be replaced as Speaker.
Party leaders are aware of this, and have scheduled a caucus meeting before the actual start of the session to settle on one GOP candidate for Speaker. The plan is to meet in private and pick a candidate everyone agrees on, rather than fight internal party battles in a public forum. This is nothing out of the ordinary; political parties do this sort of thing all the time. In fact, this is exactly why we have primaries, so the parties can agree on one candidate for the general election, instead of a half dozen people from each party vying for office.
Amazingly, though, one Democrat is denouncing the planned caucus as "racist" - because Democrats aren't invited! Rep. Joseph Deshotel (D-Port Arthur) has written an open letter making the ludicrous claim that this meeting violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because most of the Democratic representatives in the Texas House are minorities, while most of the Republican legislators are white. Here's a brief excerpt from his letter:
"The forty-nine (49) Democratic legislators not being allowed to participate in what is tantamount to the election of the Speaker consist of forty-two minorities; fifteen (15) African Americans, twenty-five (25) Hispanics and one (1) Asian. Should the Republican Caucus Bylaws be followed an additional two African-Americans and four Hispanic Republican Elect members and one Hispanic former Democrat would be denied a vote as well. These forty-nine minority House Members and the eight millions Texans they represent are being disenfranchised from the Speaker's election."
These days we're seeing more and more outrageous claims of "racism", but this one really takes the cake. First of all, the Voting Rights Act is a nearly 50 year old law that unconstitutionally discriminates against southern states. It's a racist law that presumes black people can only be represented by black people, and that white voters in southern states are wicked racists who are always out to deny black people their right to vote.
Second, the Voting Rights Act doesn't even apply to this caucus, which isn't an election at all. It's a private meeting for Republican legislators to discuss internal party affairs. There is still going to be a vote in the House for Speaker; the idea that this meeting will somehow invalidate the votes of minority legislators when they cast their votes for Speaker is completely ridiculous. No one takes this argument seriously; Rep. Deshotel has embarrassed himself and his cause by writing this letter. Crying "racism" when you don't get your way is rapidly losing its force in America.
However, this letter does further demonstrate why Joe Straus is unfit to hold the office of the Speaker of the House. That's because Rep. Deshotel has pledged his vote to Straus. How can conservatives support a candidate who's acceptable to a liberal left wing Democrat like Joseph Deshotel, who stoops to accusing Republicans of being racists for not allowing Democrats to have a say in their internal party affairs? We already knew that Joe Straus was too liberal, but this disgraceful episode reveals just what kind of company he keeps. Joe Straus has got to go. We deserve a true conservative as Speaker of the House, not one who counts men like Joseph Deshotel among his supporters."
====================================
The Establishment VS the People
Dallas Morning News
Trail Blazers Blog
Deshotel: On Republican Caucus Speaker Election
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Thursday, January 6, 2011
End of Life Counseling or Death Panels???
What you call it all depends on how it is handled.
If you are forced to take it without asking it means that SOMEONE thinks you NEED it. Or, in other words, someone thinks you should make that decision which means they think death, for YOU, is a valid option. This is what the original language in the Obama Care bill forced. It made mandatory, annual end of life counseling for all recipients of Medicare, whether they asked for it or not. This indicates that someone in government thought that after 64 years of age everyone should consider suicide at least once a year!!! That is a death panel.
OK, the administration has backed off of that stance. But as this article points out, there is more to this than meets the eye.
Obamacare Pushes for Early Death
In this article on Newsmax.com they report that the "government is [STILL] developing and widely disseminating “decision aids”; that is, brochures". And as the article says, "that is none of their business".
In my opinion that is like having a beneficiary of your last will and testament advising you on the benefits of suicide!!! The government has a vested interest in whether you live or die once you are on Medicare..AND Social Security!! Do you really want them to be advising you on whether you should commit suicide or not? They stand to gain perhaps $25,000 a year from your demise!!! If they can convince enough people to choose death, they might be able to balance the budget.
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not against the counseling being available if and when you ask for it. But even then, it should not be from "government guidelines" or from government written "decision aids". It should be from your doctor and from his/her experience with similar patients or from your Pastor or Imam, or whatever. The choice of the source of your information should be YOURS, not the GOVERNMENTS.
Personally, I would never commit suicide. I am too much of an optimist. My worry would be that the day I decided to end it all, the next day they would discover an instant cure for my illness!!! I will wait until my maker calls me home and not one day earlier.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
If you are forced to take it without asking it means that SOMEONE thinks you NEED it. Or, in other words, someone thinks you should make that decision which means they think death, for YOU, is a valid option. This is what the original language in the Obama Care bill forced. It made mandatory, annual end of life counseling for all recipients of Medicare, whether they asked for it or not. This indicates that someone in government thought that after 64 years of age everyone should consider suicide at least once a year!!! That is a death panel.
OK, the administration has backed off of that stance. But as this article points out, there is more to this than meets the eye.
Obamacare Pushes for Early Death
In this article on Newsmax.com they report that the "government is [STILL] developing and widely disseminating “decision aids”; that is, brochures". And as the article says, "that is none of their business".
In my opinion that is like having a beneficiary of your last will and testament advising you on the benefits of suicide!!! The government has a vested interest in whether you live or die once you are on Medicare..AND Social Security!! Do you really want them to be advising you on whether you should commit suicide or not? They stand to gain perhaps $25,000 a year from your demise!!! If they can convince enough people to choose death, they might be able to balance the budget.
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not against the counseling being available if and when you ask for it. But even then, it should not be from "government guidelines" or from government written "decision aids". It should be from your doctor and from his/her experience with similar patients or from your Pastor or Imam, or whatever. The choice of the source of your information should be YOURS, not the GOVERNMENTS.
Personally, I would never commit suicide. I am too much of an optimist. My worry would be that the day I decided to end it all, the next day they would discover an instant cure for my illness!!! I will wait until my maker calls me home and not one day earlier.
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Non-Consentual Sex Partners
This article:
912 Project - Jared Law
makes the point that calling Illegal Immigrants, "Undocumented Workers" is like calling rapists "non-Consentual Sex Partners".
I think that Political Correctness has now gone over the precipice. At first I thought PC was just a little overly sensitive, but now it is obvious that it is really just a form of "NewSpeak". In the novel "1984" the world was ruled by Big Brother and there was a government department that had as its sole purpose, redefining words in such a way that they were not critical of the government. If the government was "retreating" in a battle, then the department of NewSpeak would redefine retreat to mean "advancing to a position of sustainable military action". The next week when the enemy was retreating, the definition was changed again.
Today the liberals have redefined "Liberal" to be "Progressive". Now, how can anyone be against progress??
They redefine "Illegal Immigrant" to be "Un Documented Worker" even though he/she may not be a worker at all, he/she may be a panhandler and may actually have documentation ... from his native country....
Janet Napolitano defines a "patriot" that exposes government weaknesses as a "Terrorist". I guess if you are for the downfall of the government so that you can replace it with a form more to your liking, as the current administration seems hell bent to do, then anything that might thwart that goal IS terrorism.
Obama calls "Death Panels" "End of life counseling" and rule by Legislative and Judicial arms of the government is replaced with "Regulation by Government Agency" and "Recess Appointment"
It wont work in the end because Obama underestimates the intelligence of the American people. We are a lot smarter than we look. Just because for the last 60 years we have been taking it lying down, doesn't mean we will continue. We will learn the language and no matter how they redefine it we will learn the new definitions. We are no longer going to have non-consensual sex with a government bent on screwing us. We are fighting back, we are calling the Progressives what they are, "Rapists".
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
912 Project - Jared Law
makes the point that calling Illegal Immigrants, "Undocumented Workers" is like calling rapists "non-Consentual Sex Partners".
I think that Political Correctness has now gone over the precipice. At first I thought PC was just a little overly sensitive, but now it is obvious that it is really just a form of "NewSpeak". In the novel "1984" the world was ruled by Big Brother and there was a government department that had as its sole purpose, redefining words in such a way that they were not critical of the government. If the government was "retreating" in a battle, then the department of NewSpeak would redefine retreat to mean "advancing to a position of sustainable military action". The next week when the enemy was retreating, the definition was changed again.
Today the liberals have redefined "Liberal" to be "Progressive". Now, how can anyone be against progress??
They redefine "Illegal Immigrant" to be "Un Documented Worker" even though he/she may not be a worker at all, he/she may be a panhandler and may actually have documentation ... from his native country....
Janet Napolitano defines a "patriot" that exposes government weaknesses as a "Terrorist". I guess if you are for the downfall of the government so that you can replace it with a form more to your liking, as the current administration seems hell bent to do, then anything that might thwart that goal IS terrorism.
Obama calls "Death Panels" "End of life counseling" and rule by Legislative and Judicial arms of the government is replaced with "Regulation by Government Agency" and "Recess Appointment"
It wont work in the end because Obama underestimates the intelligence of the American people. We are a lot smarter than we look. Just because for the last 60 years we have been taking it lying down, doesn't mean we will continue. We will learn the language and no matter how they redefine it we will learn the new definitions. We are no longer going to have non-consensual sex with a government bent on screwing us. We are fighting back, we are calling the Progressives what they are, "Rapists".
Jim Isbell
=======================================================
The Free Republic
=======================================================
July 3rd 2010 Speech
April 17th 2010 Speech
Trinity Base - in Defense of our Republic
American Majority
Red State
Blog Mirror of The Free Republic
My Facebook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)