Just a select few quotes borrowed from Neil Boortz website: boortz.com or www.vicioussob.com
-"America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to 'the common good,' but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance -- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way." [Ayn Rand]
-"Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money --- only for wanting to keep your own money." [Joseph Sobran]
-"In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other." [Voltaire]
-"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests, " I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can." [Barry Goldwater]
-"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." [Samuel Adams]
-"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to runin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation of all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities." [Teddy Roosevelt in a speech before the Knights of Columbus]
-"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." [Ayn Rand]
-"Do we really think that a government-dominated education is going to produce citizens capable of dominating their government, as the education of a truly vigilant self-governing people requires?" [Alan Keyes]
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Friday, October 28, 2005
Media Problems: Wagging the Dog...
Well, its about time I started ranting about the
media. After all, I spent far too much money getting a
degree in the subject.
This morning I was talking to a friend about "Waggin'
the Dog." If you aren't familiar with the term, this
is when an administrations creates news events to
distract from less favorable news events. I.E. Bush
making a Supreme Court Nomination to distract from the
expected Libby indictment. Or Clinton bombing an
Asprin factory to distract from a stained dress.
Now, TO BE CLEAR, I'm not here to discuss
administrations wagging the dog. Whether you believe
that either of these examples is actually a case of
wagging the dog or not, I DON'T CARE. I gave one of
each so Dem's and Rep's can both like it or not. I
don't want or care for comments about either.
My point here is about the media. And media
susceptibility to wagging the dog.
One of the more disturbing trends in media over the
past twenty years is the tendency toward narrow run
sheets. By that I mean that the number of individual
topics discussed in any broadcast or newpaper in a
given day is decreasing. Much like commercial pop
radio where they play the same songs over and over and
over again.
How many times have you turned to the CBS/ABC/NBC
nightly news and seen the first 15-20 minutes
dedicated to a single story? Worse still are the
24-hour cable news networks (yes, even FoxNews who I
love). They'll list a few different stories at the
news breaks every half hour, and then spend the entire
rest of the hour talking about only 1 or 2 stories.
This narrow focus is begging to be wagged. Pardon the
pun, of course. Narrow news coverage and focus makes
the media FAR more susceptible to media manipulation.
When you are so dedicated to the "top story of the
day", not only do you spend far too much time in
speculation with worthless pundits (of whom I hope to
be one someday), but you leave yourself with no
peripheral vision.. Does anyone else have a clear
vision of the old cartoon where a horse with blinders
has a carrot dangled in front of his face?
The upside is that few of us get our news from the
majors anymore, and those of us addicted to cable news
usually watch such while surfing blogs and news sites
online. So maybe, just maybe there is hope for the
American people, if not for the media.
Still, how sad is it when CBS has to admit, in this
regard at least, that Yahoo has better news coverage.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Coburn tries to kill transportation projects funds
From the Tulsa World
By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
10/26/2005
WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn on Tuesday called
for killing funding for special projects approved
earlier in a massive transportation bill as he rolled
out a package to help pay for hurricane relief
efforts.
That part of the package pushed by Coburn, R-Okla.,
and several other senators, however, drew no support
from other Oklahomans, neither in Congress nor back in
the state.
Several expressed outright opposition.
Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., whose major role in putting
together the transportation bill helped boost the
state's share of the money, referred to the millions
earmarked for Interstate 44 in Tulsa as one of those
special projects appropriately prioritized.
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Coburn has attempted
to take the lead in finding spending offsets to pay
for storm relief.
"Congress is learning what the American people already
know," he said. "Charity requires sacrifice."
Coburn was joined in unveiling the new package by
Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona, John Ensign
of Nevada, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Sam Brownback
of Kansas and John Sununu of New Hampshire. GOP Sen.
Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
also is a member of the group.
With offsets totaling about $125 billion, their
package also calls for a 5 percent, across-the-board
spending cut for nonsecurity programs, a freeze on pay
raises for members of Congress and federal employees,
and a delay in the new Medicare prescription drug
program for all but low-income seniors.
"Among the American people there is a growing rumble
about our unsustainable fiscal course," Coburn said.
"I believe this package will help quiet that rumble
and build a bridge to fiscal sanity and
responsibility."
While other Oklahomans sympathized with his effort to
cut federal spending, they declined to go along with
his call for killing transportation funds.
"We desperately need it in the state of Oklahoma and
around the nation," Inhofe said.
"Besides that, what they are suggesting won't work."
Even if Coburn succeeds in killing all special project
money already signed into law by President Bush, he
said, most of the money would remain in each state
because it is part of the formula used to dole out
road funds.
Inhofe said all Coburn would succeed in doing is
taking away Oklahoma's authority to decide where the
money would go.
Rep. John Sullivan, R-Okla., stood by the project
money he helped get into the bill.
"When it comes to improving the condition of
Oklahoma's roads and bridges," Sullivan said, "the
safety of travelers should not be compromised."
Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., said the funding allocated
for Oklahoma's roads and bridges will be vital to
economic development, job growth and safety.
Gary Ridley, director of the Oklahoma Department of
Transportation, also defended the state's special
projects included in the bill.
Ridley said their funding should remain.
Both Gov. Brad Henry and Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.,
who hopes to challenge Henry next year in the general
election, declined to pick a side in the debate.
Coburn's efforts to kill special project money
triggered an unusual legislative brawl on the Senate
floor last week when he tried to kill funding
earmarked for Alaska projects.
Senators overwhelmingly rejected his efforts.
When the transportation bill passed the Senate, Coburn
joined Inhofe in voting for it as he had promised to
do during his 2004 campaign.
Coburn initially said on Tuesday that he did not know
whether he was sorry he had promised to vote for the
transportation bill, which traditionally is full of
so-called pork barrel projects.
"I didn't know that it was going to be that bad," he
insisted, even though the bill's final passage had
been delayed for years and had been the focus of
numerous news stories and even veto threats from the
Bush administration.
When pressed, Coburn eventually said he was not sorry
he made the campaign pledge.
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Candidate Forum Tonight - Reminder
Just a reminder.
Tonight (Thursday, Oct. 27th) at 7 pm, the Brazos
County Young Republicans will host a Candidates Forum
at the College Station Conference Center at 1300
George Bush Dr.
The forum will feature Republican candidates for
Congressional District 17, Van Taylor and Tucker
Anderson. Each will offer a 10 minute
self-introduction, then draw issue-related questions
prepared by local party leadership. Following the
event, time is scheduled for one-on-one interaction
and media interviews.
Hope to see you there.
Austin Moore
VP - Brazos County Young Republicans
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
Sunday, October 23, 2005
The Coburn Amendment... aka... Who's side are they on?
Not long ago, Congress let us down by passing a gross violation of public trust in the form of a pork-laden transportation bill to an extreme seldom if ever seen before. Then Katrina came along with its massive bill for rebuilding. At that point, so many of us began calling for repeal of the recent transportation bill and all pork removal as a way to pay for Katrina. To most in the House and Senate, this fell on deaf ears. After all, politicians are politicians and its far easier to buy votes than to earn them.
However, there are some true fiscal patriots in the Senate. Both Republicans and Democrats. Senator Coburn of my home state, Oklahoma, is one of these. And last Thursday, he made me truly proud. Knowing the amendment would go down to defeat, he offered it all the same, if for no other reason than to draw a line in the sand and learn just who is on the side of the American taxpayers, and who is clearly not.
"This amendment will transfer funding from the wasteful pork project, the "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska, to the repair and reconstruction of the "Twin Spans" bridge in Louisiana. According to published reports, the Alaskan pork project costs $220 million for a 5.9-mile bridge connecting Gravina Island (population 50) to the Alaskan mainland. The cost of the bridge alone would be enough to buy every island resident his own personal Lear jet."
This was but one example of ridiculous pork. These are funds that should have never been taken from our pockets or allocated to a personal pet project. Now that a genuine need exists, no public servant with even an ounce of personal integrity can honestly defend such expenditures. The wretched back room deals that defeated this amendment and all suggestions for like-minded measures to date are the great, loathsome bane of our legislative process. Those who will not stand for us, the American tax-payers, do not deserve even renomination by their own parties.
What follows are the vote details and the results. I am personally ashamed that my two CURRENT Senators, Cornyn and Hutchison, are among those who voted "nay". You may look up the details on thomas.loc.gov. I encourage you to let your voice be heard. If they are going to go out shopping for votes, we can go out shopping for candidates.
------
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill
Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate.
Vote Summary
Question: On the Amendment (Coburn Amdt. No. 2165, As Modified )
Vote Number: 262
Vote Date: October 20, 2005, 06:03 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2
Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2165 to H.R. 3058 (Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 )
Statement of Purpose: To make a perfecting amendment.
Vote Counts:
YEAs 15
NAYs 82
Not Voting 3
However, there are some true fiscal patriots in the Senate. Both Republicans and Democrats. Senator Coburn of my home state, Oklahoma, is one of these. And last Thursday, he made me truly proud. Knowing the amendment would go down to defeat, he offered it all the same, if for no other reason than to draw a line in the sand and learn just who is on the side of the American taxpayers, and who is clearly not.
"This amendment will transfer funding from the wasteful pork project, the "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska, to the repair and reconstruction of the "Twin Spans" bridge in Louisiana. According to published reports, the Alaskan pork project costs $220 million for a 5.9-mile bridge connecting Gravina Island (population 50) to the Alaskan mainland. The cost of the bridge alone would be enough to buy every island resident his own personal Lear jet."
This was but one example of ridiculous pork. These are funds that should have never been taken from our pockets or allocated to a personal pet project. Now that a genuine need exists, no public servant with even an ounce of personal integrity can honestly defend such expenditures. The wretched back room deals that defeated this amendment and all suggestions for like-minded measures to date are the great, loathsome bane of our legislative process. Those who will not stand for us, the American tax-payers, do not deserve even renomination by their own parties.
What follows are the vote details and the results. I am personally ashamed that my two CURRENT Senators, Cornyn and Hutchison, are among those who voted "nay". You may look up the details on thomas.loc.gov. I encourage you to let your voice be heard. If they are going to go out shopping for votes, we can go out shopping for candidates.
------
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 1st Session as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill
Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate.
Vote Summary
Question: On the Amendment (Coburn Amdt. No. 2165, As Modified )
Vote Number: 262
Vote Date: October 20, 2005, 06:03 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2
Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2165 to H.R. 3058 (Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 )
Statement of Purpose: To make a perfecting amendment.
Vote Counts:
YEAs 15
NAYs 82
Not Voting 3
Friday, October 21, 2005
It's all about faith...
Put aside the issues. They don't really matter anyhow, at least not in the long run.
Abortion wasn't an issue when this country was founded, and 50 years from now it probably won't be a concern either. Whether birth control advances to the point that unwanted pregnancies do not exist, or the tree-huggers are right and we wreck the environment and our health to the point that no man can achieve an erection and all babies are conceived in labs.
The War on Terror could not have been imagined 50 years ago, and 50 years from now it will simply be a chapter, or worse paragraph, in a 6th grade history text book. Maybe my grandchildren will ask me about 9-11 for a school report and I'll be able to bore then to tears.
Even issues like Social Security and Medicare will fade. Eventually they will collapse. When they do we'll replace them with a new program. Better or worse, it will take no time before we begin forget the old way and start to see the new system as the only method we know.
No, my friends, in the long term, conservative vs. liberal is not a matter of issues, nor should it be. There is a bigger, deeper rift. One which dominates these issues and though seldom debated on its own merits is the larger context to every battle we wage within this country. Simply put, it is a matter of faith.
Now, I'm not talking religion here. Its not that kind of faith. I'm talking about the faith you feel in your gut, not what flows forth from a pulpit. I'm talking about the instinctual, tactile faith you have in humanity.
Do you trust the individual? Do you trust the group? Where is your faith?
My faith is and always has been in the individual. My trust is firmly in the conscious, intelligence, resourcefulness, and will-power of a man left to create his own destiny. Because of this, I am conservative. Proudly so.
I think back on my time at Oklahoma State University, and consider the friends I had in the Greek Fraternal system. Talking after class, splitting a pitcher at Joe's, or just walking across campus with any one of these individuals and you were likely to have spent your time engaged in pleasant and occasionally stimulating conversation. Generally nice guys and girls, often with interesting and unique views on the world. But that was on an individual basis. Put more than two frat boys in the same room, and... well you may not have intended to visit Jackass City that particular day and time, but your ticket just got punched all the same.
You see the power of the group is to reduce. To take all the specialized gifts inherent in any collection of individuals, and reduce these to the lowest common denominator. You don't beleive me? Visit a mall the week before Christmas or the day after. Go to any concert featuring the teenie bopper, boy band flavor-of-the-week. Go sit in a bar any night the local team is on ESPN. Or for that matter, sit in the peanut gallery of the US Senate for one afternoon.
Do any of these and you'll understand that the group strives to find common ground, to find what unites. This, of course, leads to a downward shift. The lowest common denominator. The bigger the crowd, the lower they must think.
Consider for a second, the mighty oak.
Forgive me the metaphor, but what is an essay on political philosophy without a metaphor or two.
The higher an oak reaches into the sky, the broader its branches spread. The wind then can whip among the leaves and branches and not damage the tree. In fact branches on opposite sides of the tree can sway in completely opposite direction, and yet the tree survives.
However, to the group, no individual branch or leaf is important, only the base of the trunk matters, for that is what keeps that tree as a whole, intact and upright. So in "tree think", screw the branches. Screw the leaves. All that matters is that trunk.
Now that's all well and good. Nothing wrong with wanting to keep the tree firmly rooted.
Problem is, I want to see the tree grow. I want to see the limbs and branches stretching so high into the sky... I want to stand on the surface of the moon and barely have to stretch as I reach out and pluck the fruit of democracy and freedom from this American oak tree.
Alright, metaphor thoroughly exhausted. So, ridiculous and curious as it is, of course I'll keep referencing it.
Point is...
Liberals for too long have talked about the "mountain top," about broad visions for a perfect society, all the while placing their faith not in individual achievement, but in group think and group control. Their programs call for the government, the base of the tree, to direct the sway and twist of the individual branches and leaves. They don't seem to understand that the only mountain top which can be achieved in a society that operates in the context of its lowest common denominator is a mountain made of dung.
To the contrary, conservatives place our faith in individual achievement. To us, that base of the trunk is just that: a base. It serves to support us, protect us, and little more. Yes, it unites us at the most basic level, but we do not plan from that point. We do not take direction from it. Each leaf, each bud, must be allowed to twist in the wind as best suits it. Allow the individual parts to flourish as best conditions allow them, and the tree will grow, and spread and be beautiful.
Hey, why not another metaphor...
We are all born with that mountain before us and begin to climb. And when someone slips, and slides halfway down, the liberal philosophy is that we should all climb back down to that individual, and restart the climb together, holding hands and singing "Kum Ba Ya."
The conservative philosophy is for each climber to go at his or her own pace, gaining skills and confidence. And then, when you've reached the top, tie a line and toss it down to those below you.
You see, its not about abortion, gay rights, terrorism, prayer in school, welfare, or even the words "under God" in the pledge. Those are only shots, not the war. Its a matter of faith. Misplaced trust in groups, or confidence that within all of us there is a champion, who if encourage yet allowed to develop unique talents and skills can climb to the mountain top, yet who can never be drug there.
My friends, it IS a matter of faith. Where is yours?
Abortion wasn't an issue when this country was founded, and 50 years from now it probably won't be a concern either. Whether birth control advances to the point that unwanted pregnancies do not exist, or the tree-huggers are right and we wreck the environment and our health to the point that no man can achieve an erection and all babies are conceived in labs.
The War on Terror could not have been imagined 50 years ago, and 50 years from now it will simply be a chapter, or worse paragraph, in a 6th grade history text book. Maybe my grandchildren will ask me about 9-11 for a school report and I'll be able to bore then to tears.
Even issues like Social Security and Medicare will fade. Eventually they will collapse. When they do we'll replace them with a new program. Better or worse, it will take no time before we begin forget the old way and start to see the new system as the only method we know.
No, my friends, in the long term, conservative vs. liberal is not a matter of issues, nor should it be. There is a bigger, deeper rift. One which dominates these issues and though seldom debated on its own merits is the larger context to every battle we wage within this country. Simply put, it is a matter of faith.
Now, I'm not talking religion here. Its not that kind of faith. I'm talking about the faith you feel in your gut, not what flows forth from a pulpit. I'm talking about the instinctual, tactile faith you have in humanity.
Do you trust the individual? Do you trust the group? Where is your faith?
My faith is and always has been in the individual. My trust is firmly in the conscious, intelligence, resourcefulness, and will-power of a man left to create his own destiny. Because of this, I am conservative. Proudly so.
I think back on my time at Oklahoma State University, and consider the friends I had in the Greek Fraternal system. Talking after class, splitting a pitcher at Joe's, or just walking across campus with any one of these individuals and you were likely to have spent your time engaged in pleasant and occasionally stimulating conversation. Generally nice guys and girls, often with interesting and unique views on the world. But that was on an individual basis. Put more than two frat boys in the same room, and... well you may not have intended to visit Jackass City that particular day and time, but your ticket just got punched all the same.
You see the power of the group is to reduce. To take all the specialized gifts inherent in any collection of individuals, and reduce these to the lowest common denominator. You don't beleive me? Visit a mall the week before Christmas or the day after. Go to any concert featuring the teenie bopper, boy band flavor-of-the-week. Go sit in a bar any night the local team is on ESPN. Or for that matter, sit in the peanut gallery of the US Senate for one afternoon.
Do any of these and you'll understand that the group strives to find common ground, to find what unites. This, of course, leads to a downward shift. The lowest common denominator. The bigger the crowd, the lower they must think.
Consider for a second, the mighty oak.
Forgive me the metaphor, but what is an essay on political philosophy without a metaphor or two.
The higher an oak reaches into the sky, the broader its branches spread. The wind then can whip among the leaves and branches and not damage the tree. In fact branches on opposite sides of the tree can sway in completely opposite direction, and yet the tree survives.
However, to the group, no individual branch or leaf is important, only the base of the trunk matters, for that is what keeps that tree as a whole, intact and upright. So in "tree think", screw the branches. Screw the leaves. All that matters is that trunk.
Now that's all well and good. Nothing wrong with wanting to keep the tree firmly rooted.
Problem is, I want to see the tree grow. I want to see the limbs and branches stretching so high into the sky... I want to stand on the surface of the moon and barely have to stretch as I reach out and pluck the fruit of democracy and freedom from this American oak tree.
Alright, metaphor thoroughly exhausted. So, ridiculous and curious as it is, of course I'll keep referencing it.
Point is...
Liberals for too long have talked about the "mountain top," about broad visions for a perfect society, all the while placing their faith not in individual achievement, but in group think and group control. Their programs call for the government, the base of the tree, to direct the sway and twist of the individual branches and leaves. They don't seem to understand that the only mountain top which can be achieved in a society that operates in the context of its lowest common denominator is a mountain made of dung.
To the contrary, conservatives place our faith in individual achievement. To us, that base of the trunk is just that: a base. It serves to support us, protect us, and little more. Yes, it unites us at the most basic level, but we do not plan from that point. We do not take direction from it. Each leaf, each bud, must be allowed to twist in the wind as best suits it. Allow the individual parts to flourish as best conditions allow them, and the tree will grow, and spread and be beautiful.
Hey, why not another metaphor...
We are all born with that mountain before us and begin to climb. And when someone slips, and slides halfway down, the liberal philosophy is that we should all climb back down to that individual, and restart the climb together, holding hands and singing "Kum Ba Ya."
The conservative philosophy is for each climber to go at his or her own pace, gaining skills and confidence. And then, when you've reached the top, tie a line and toss it down to those below you.
You see, its not about abortion, gay rights, terrorism, prayer in school, welfare, or even the words "under God" in the pledge. Those are only shots, not the war. Its a matter of faith. Misplaced trust in groups, or confidence that within all of us there is a champion, who if encourage yet allowed to develop unique talents and skills can climb to the mountain top, yet who can never be drug there.
My friends, it IS a matter of faith. Where is yours?
Friday, October 07, 2005
The Tao of Jack Burton
"Just remember what ol' Jack Burton does when the earth quakes, the poison arrows fall from the sky, and the pillars of Heaven shake. Yeah, Jack Burton just looks that big old storm right in the eye and says, 'Give me your best shot. I can take it.'" -- Kurt Russell (as Jack Burton) in Big Trouble in Little China.
"When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, looks you crooked in the eye and asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye, and you remember what ol' Jack Burton always says at a time like that: 'Have ya paid your dues, Jack?' 'Yessir, the check is in the mail.'" -- Kurt Russell (as Jack Burton) in Big Trouble in Little China.
"Now I'm not saying that I've been everywhere and I've done everything, but I do know it's a pretty amazing planet we live on, and a man would have to be some kind of FOOL to think we're alone in THIS universe." -- Kurt Russell (as Jack Burton) in Big Trouble in Little China.
"When some wild-eyed, eight-foot-tall maniac grabs your neck, taps the back of your favorite head up against the barroom wall, looks you crooked in the eye and asks you if ya paid your dues, you just stare that big sucker right back in the eye, and you remember what ol' Jack Burton always says at a time like that: 'Have ya paid your dues, Jack?' 'Yessir, the check is in the mail.'" -- Kurt Russell (as Jack Burton) in Big Trouble in Little China.
"Now I'm not saying that I've been everywhere and I've done everything, but I do know it's a pretty amazing planet we live on, and a man would have to be some kind of FOOL to think we're alone in THIS universe." -- Kurt Russell (as Jack Burton) in Big Trouble in Little China.
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Nov. 8th Constitutional Amendments
On November 8th, 2005, we in Texas will be going back to the polls. The focus of this vote is not those seeking public office, but rather a series of proposed constitutional amendments.
Since 1876, Texas voters have approved some 432 amendments to our state constitution, and now we are asked to consider 9 more. I'll save the rant about how ridiculous these numbers are for a future date.
Of course, the second proposed amendment is going to gather most of the press coverage, and at that will capture most of our attention as well. This is the proposal setting a clear definition of marriage. Call it a Defense of Marriage Amendment. Call it a Anti-Gay Amendment. I really don't care which side of the fence you fall on here. Frankly, I still haven't made up my own mind about that particular amendment. And even more frankly, that's NOT the point of this post.
There are 8 other amendments with equal constitutional weight and we must not lose the forest for the trees. Below, I have listed the basic information of each of these amendments as shown at:
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2005novconsamend.shtml
These other amendments will be far harder to understand, particularly any far reaching effects. Yet to me, that makes it all that much more important for each and every voter to invest time researching and understanding each of these proposals. And with an expected high turnout over the Marriage Amendment, that means high turn out of underinformed voters who won't have taken two seconds reading the other 8 before they enter the voting booth. We must not be them.
So I beg you, please read through these, ponder them carefully as you consider how you will vote. There are a number of resources on the web to help wade through these topics. As I continue my own research, I'll offer up any and everything that I can find.
-Auz E. Moto
--------------------------
Prop. 1 HJR 54 Sponsors: McClendon - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment creating the Texas rail relocation and improvement fund and authorizing grants of money and issuance of obligations for financing the relocation, rehabilitation, and expansion of rail facilities."
Brief Explanation
HJR 54 would create a Texas rail relocation and improvement fund in the state treasury and would authorize grants of state revenue and issuance of public debt to relocate, rehabilitate, and expand privately and publicly owned passenger and freight rail facilities and to construct railroad underpasses and overpasses.
--------------------------
Prop. 2 HJR 6 Sponsors: Chisum - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
Brief Explanation
HJR 6 would provide that marriage in Texas is solely the union of a man and woman, and that the state and its political subdivisions could not create or recognize any legal status identical to or similar to marriage, including such legal status relationships created outside of Texas.
--------------------------
Prop. 3 HJR80 Sponsors: Krusee - Ogden
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment clarifying that certain economic development programs do not constitute a debt."
Brief Explanation
HJR 80 would provide that local economic development program loans or grants (other than debts secured by a pledge of ad valorem taxes or financed by the issuance of any bonds or other obligations payable from ad valorem taxes) do not constitute or create debt. Any provision of state constitutional law that may prohibit or limit the authority of a political subdivision of the state to incur debt does not apply to those loans or grants.
--------------------------
Prop. 4 SJR 17 Sponsors: Staples - Gattis
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the denial of bail to a criminal defendant who violates a condition of the defendant's release pending trial."
Brief Explanation
SJR 17 would authorize a district judge to deny reinstatement of bail or new bail to a person accused of a felony, if the person's bail had been revoked or forfeited as a result of the person's violation of a condition of release related to the safety of a victim of the alleged offense or to the safety of the community.
--------------------------
Prop. 5 SJR 21 Sponsors: Averitt - Flynn
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to define rates of interest for commercial loans."
Brief Explanation
SJR 21 would authorize the Legislature to exempt commercial loans from state usury laws that set maximum interest rates. "Commercial loans" are loans made primarily for business, commercial, investment, agricultural, or similar purposes and not primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.
--------------------------
Prop. 6 HJR 87 Sponsors: Farabee - Lindsay
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment to include one additional public member and a constitutional county court judge in the membership of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct."
Brief Explanation
HJR 87 would increase the size of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct from eleven to thirteen members by increasing from four to five the number of public members and by adding a constitutional county court judge. The additions would ensure that the commission has an odd number of members, which is required by another provision of the state constitution.
--------------------------
Prop. 7 SJR 7 Sponsors: Carona - Hochberg
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing line-of-credit advances under a reverse mortgage."
Brief Explanation
SJR 7 would authorize new options for reverse mortgage agreements for senior homeowners allowing them to draw advances at unscheduled intervals, if and when needed, and only in the amounts needed, during the loan term. These are in addition to options that would allow a lump sum payment after settlement or regular periodic, predetermined equal amounts over a term of years or the lifetime of the homeowner. Additionally, SJR 7 would: (1) prohibit the agreement from requiring the use of a credit card, debit card or similar device to obtain an advance; (2) prohibit the charge or collection of a transaction fee solely in connection with any debit or advance, after the time the extension of credit is established; and (3) prohibit the lender or holder from unilaterally amending the extension of credit.
--------------------------
Prop. 8 SJR 40 Sponsors: Eltife - Hughes
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment providing for the clearing of land titles by relinquishing and releasing any state claim to sovereign ownership or title to interest in certain land in Upshur County and in Smith County."
Brief Explanation
SJR 40 would clear individual land titles by relinquishing and releasing all claims of state ownership interests, including mineral interests, in two local areas, namely, a roughly 4,600 acre area located roughly 14 miles southeast of Gilmer, Texas, and a separate 900 acre area located north of Tyler, Texas.
--------------------------
Prop. 9 HJR 79 Sponsors: Krusee - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for a six-year term for a board member of a regional mobility authority."
Brief Explanation
HJR 79 would authorize the Legislature to provide staggered six year terms of office for board members serving on regional mobility authorities, with no more than one-third of the board positions being appointed every two years.
Since 1876, Texas voters have approved some 432 amendments to our state constitution, and now we are asked to consider 9 more. I'll save the rant about how ridiculous these numbers are for a future date.
Of course, the second proposed amendment is going to gather most of the press coverage, and at that will capture most of our attention as well. This is the proposal setting a clear definition of marriage. Call it a Defense of Marriage Amendment. Call it a Anti-Gay Amendment. I really don't care which side of the fence you fall on here. Frankly, I still haven't made up my own mind about that particular amendment. And even more frankly, that's NOT the point of this post.
There are 8 other amendments with equal constitutional weight and we must not lose the forest for the trees. Below, I have listed the basic information of each of these amendments as shown at:
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2005novconsamend.shtml
These other amendments will be far harder to understand, particularly any far reaching effects. Yet to me, that makes it all that much more important for each and every voter to invest time researching and understanding each of these proposals. And with an expected high turnout over the Marriage Amendment, that means high turn out of underinformed voters who won't have taken two seconds reading the other 8 before they enter the voting booth. We must not be them.
So I beg you, please read through these, ponder them carefully as you consider how you will vote. There are a number of resources on the web to help wade through these topics. As I continue my own research, I'll offer up any and everything that I can find.
-Auz E. Moto
--------------------------
Prop. 1 HJR 54 Sponsors: McClendon - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment creating the Texas rail relocation and improvement fund and authorizing grants of money and issuance of obligations for financing the relocation, rehabilitation, and expansion of rail facilities."
Brief Explanation
HJR 54 would create a Texas rail relocation and improvement fund in the state treasury and would authorize grants of state revenue and issuance of public debt to relocate, rehabilitate, and expand privately and publicly owned passenger and freight rail facilities and to construct railroad underpasses and overpasses.
--------------------------
Prop. 2 HJR 6 Sponsors: Chisum - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
Brief Explanation
HJR 6 would provide that marriage in Texas is solely the union of a man and woman, and that the state and its political subdivisions could not create or recognize any legal status identical to or similar to marriage, including such legal status relationships created outside of Texas.
--------------------------
Prop. 3 HJR80 Sponsors: Krusee - Ogden
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment clarifying that certain economic development programs do not constitute a debt."
Brief Explanation
HJR 80 would provide that local economic development program loans or grants (other than debts secured by a pledge of ad valorem taxes or financed by the issuance of any bonds or other obligations payable from ad valorem taxes) do not constitute or create debt. Any provision of state constitutional law that may prohibit or limit the authority of a political subdivision of the state to incur debt does not apply to those loans or grants.
--------------------------
Prop. 4 SJR 17 Sponsors: Staples - Gattis
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the denial of bail to a criminal defendant who violates a condition of the defendant's release pending trial."
Brief Explanation
SJR 17 would authorize a district judge to deny reinstatement of bail or new bail to a person accused of a felony, if the person's bail had been revoked or forfeited as a result of the person's violation of a condition of release related to the safety of a victim of the alleged offense or to the safety of the community.
--------------------------
Prop. 5 SJR 21 Sponsors: Averitt - Flynn
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to define rates of interest for commercial loans."
Brief Explanation
SJR 21 would authorize the Legislature to exempt commercial loans from state usury laws that set maximum interest rates. "Commercial loans" are loans made primarily for business, commercial, investment, agricultural, or similar purposes and not primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.
--------------------------
Prop. 6 HJR 87 Sponsors: Farabee - Lindsay
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment to include one additional public member and a constitutional county court judge in the membership of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct."
Brief Explanation
HJR 87 would increase the size of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct from eleven to thirteen members by increasing from four to five the number of public members and by adding a constitutional county court judge. The additions would ensure that the commission has an odd number of members, which is required by another provision of the state constitution.
--------------------------
Prop. 7 SJR 7 Sponsors: Carona - Hochberg
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing line-of-credit advances under a reverse mortgage."
Brief Explanation
SJR 7 would authorize new options for reverse mortgage agreements for senior homeowners allowing them to draw advances at unscheduled intervals, if and when needed, and only in the amounts needed, during the loan term. These are in addition to options that would allow a lump sum payment after settlement or regular periodic, predetermined equal amounts over a term of years or the lifetime of the homeowner. Additionally, SJR 7 would: (1) prohibit the agreement from requiring the use of a credit card, debit card or similar device to obtain an advance; (2) prohibit the charge or collection of a transaction fee solely in connection with any debit or advance, after the time the extension of credit is established; and (3) prohibit the lender or holder from unilaterally amending the extension of credit.
--------------------------
Prop. 8 SJR 40 Sponsors: Eltife - Hughes
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment providing for the clearing of land titles by relinquishing and releasing any state claim to sovereign ownership or title to interest in certain land in Upshur County and in Smith County."
Brief Explanation
SJR 40 would clear individual land titles by relinquishing and releasing all claims of state ownership interests, including mineral interests, in two local areas, namely, a roughly 4,600 acre area located roughly 14 miles southeast of Gilmer, Texas, and a separate 900 acre area located north of Tyler, Texas.
--------------------------
Prop. 9 HJR 79 Sponsors: Krusee - Staples
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for a six-year term for a board member of a regional mobility authority."
Brief Explanation
HJR 79 would authorize the Legislature to provide staggered six year terms of office for board members serving on regional mobility authorities, with no more than one-third of the board positions being appointed every two years.
Candidate Forum...
Sorry I haven't been posting much lately folks. Obviously, I've been simultaneously busy and lazy. Aside from the general crap of work and what not, the YR's are planning a big event here in College Station later this month, and you know me, I'm right in the mix of it.
-Thursday, October 27th, 7pm, College Station Conference Center-
The Brazos County Young Republicans will be hosting a candidates forum at College Station Conference Center. The evening of Oct. 27th at 7 pm, all three candidates for the Republican nomination for Texas Congressional District 17 will be speaking before the crowd and answering questions. Van Taylor, Tucker Anderson and Bentley Neddles (sp?) are vying for the opportunity to challenge incumbent democrat Chet Edwards in the 2006 general election.
So come on out and meet our champions. Its time to take this district back.
-Thursday, October 27th, 7pm, College Station Conference Center-
The Brazos County Young Republicans will be hosting a candidates forum at College Station Conference Center. The evening of Oct. 27th at 7 pm, all three candidates for the Republican nomination for Texas Congressional District 17 will be speaking before the crowd and answering questions. Van Taylor, Tucker Anderson and Bentley Neddles (sp?) are vying for the opportunity to challenge incumbent democrat Chet Edwards in the 2006 general election.
So come on out and meet our champions. Its time to take this district back.
WORDS WE CAN'T TAKE BACK
Have you ever spoken and wished that you could immediately take the words back...or that you could crawl into a hole? Here are the Testimonials of a few women who did...
FIRST TESTIMONY:
I walked into a hair salon with my husband and three kids in tow and asked loudly, "How much do you charge for a shampoo and a blow job?" I turned around and walked back out and never went back. My husband didn't say a word...he knew better.
SECOND TESTIMONY:
I was at the golf store comparing different kinds of golf balls. I was unhappy with the women's type I had been using. After browsing for several minutes, I was approached by one of the good-looking gentlemen who work at the store. He asked if he could help me. Without thinking, I looked at him and said, "I think I like playing with men's balls."
THIRD TESTIMONY:
My sister and I were at the mall and passed by a store that sold a variety of candy and nuts. As we were looking at the display case, the boy behind the counter asked if we needed any help. I replied, "No, I'm just looking at your nuts." My sister started to laugh hysterically, the boy grinned, and I turned beet-red and walked away. To this day, my Sister has never let me forget.
FOURTH TESTIMONY:
While in line at the bank one afternoon, my toddler decided to release some pent-up energy and ran amok. I was finally able to grab hold of her after receiving looks of disgust and annoyance from other patrons. I told her that if she did not start behaving "right now" she would be punished. To my horror, she looked me in the eye and said in a voice just as threatening, "If you don't let me go right now, I will tell Grandma that I saw you kissing Daddy's pee-pee last night!" The silence was deafening after this enlightening exchange. Even the tellers stopped what they were doing. I mustered up the last of my dignity and walked out of the bank with my daughter in tow. The last thing I heard when the door closed behind me
were screams of laughter.
FIFTH TESTIMONY:
Have you ever asked your child a particular question too many times? My three-year-old son had a lot of problems with potty training and I was on him constantly. One day we stopped at Taco Bell for a quick lunch in between errands. It was very busy, with a full dining room. While enjoying my taco, I smelled something funny, so, of course, I checked my seven-month-old
daughter, and she was clean. Then, I realized that Danny had not asked to go potty in a while, so I asked him if he needed to go, and he said "No". I kept thinking, "Oh Lord, that child has had an accident, and I don't have any clothes with me." Then I said, "Danny, are you SURE you didn't have an accident?" "No," he replied. I just KNEW that he must have had an accident,
because the smell was getting worse. Soooooo, I asked one more time, "Danny, did you have an accident?"
This time he jumped up, yanked down his pants, bent over and spread hischeeks and yelled, "SEE MOM, IT'S JUST FARTS!!" While 30 people nearly choked to death on their tacos laughing, he calmly pulled up his pants and sat down. An old couple made me feel better by thanking me for the best laugh they'd ever had!
LAST TESTIMONY:
This had most of the state of Michigan laughing for 2 days and a very embarrassed female news anchor who will, in the future, likely think before she speaks. What happens when you predict snow -- but don't get any....a true story.
We had a female news anchor who, the day after it was supposed to have snowed and didn't, turned to the weatherman and asked: "So Bob, where's that 8 inches you promised me last night?" Not only did HE have to leave the set, but half the crew did too they were laughing so hard!
FIRST TESTIMONY:
I walked into a hair salon with my husband and three kids in tow and asked loudly, "How much do you charge for a shampoo and a blow job?" I turned around and walked back out and never went back. My husband didn't say a word...he knew better.
SECOND TESTIMONY:
I was at the golf store comparing different kinds of golf balls. I was unhappy with the women's type I had been using. After browsing for several minutes, I was approached by one of the good-looking gentlemen who work at the store. He asked if he could help me. Without thinking, I looked at him and said, "I think I like playing with men's balls."
THIRD TESTIMONY:
My sister and I were at the mall and passed by a store that sold a variety of candy and nuts. As we were looking at the display case, the boy behind the counter asked if we needed any help. I replied, "No, I'm just looking at your nuts." My sister started to laugh hysterically, the boy grinned, and I turned beet-red and walked away. To this day, my Sister has never let me forget.
FOURTH TESTIMONY:
While in line at the bank one afternoon, my toddler decided to release some pent-up energy and ran amok. I was finally able to grab hold of her after receiving looks of disgust and annoyance from other patrons. I told her that if she did not start behaving "right now" she would be punished. To my horror, she looked me in the eye and said in a voice just as threatening, "If you don't let me go right now, I will tell Grandma that I saw you kissing Daddy's pee-pee last night!" The silence was deafening after this enlightening exchange. Even the tellers stopped what they were doing. I mustered up the last of my dignity and walked out of the bank with my daughter in tow. The last thing I heard when the door closed behind me
were screams of laughter.
FIFTH TESTIMONY:
Have you ever asked your child a particular question too many times? My three-year-old son had a lot of problems with potty training and I was on him constantly. One day we stopped at Taco Bell for a quick lunch in between errands. It was very busy, with a full dining room. While enjoying my taco, I smelled something funny, so, of course, I checked my seven-month-old
daughter, and she was clean. Then, I realized that Danny had not asked to go potty in a while, so I asked him if he needed to go, and he said "No". I kept thinking, "Oh Lord, that child has had an accident, and I don't have any clothes with me." Then I said, "Danny, are you SURE you didn't have an accident?" "No," he replied. I just KNEW that he must have had an accident,
because the smell was getting worse. Soooooo, I asked one more time, "Danny, did you have an accident?"
This time he jumped up, yanked down his pants, bent over and spread hischeeks and yelled, "SEE MOM, IT'S JUST FARTS!!" While 30 people nearly choked to death on their tacos laughing, he calmly pulled up his pants and sat down. An old couple made me feel better by thanking me for the best laugh they'd ever had!
LAST TESTIMONY:
This had most of the state of Michigan laughing for 2 days and a very embarrassed female news anchor who will, in the future, likely think before she speaks. What happens when you predict snow -- but don't get any....a true story.
We had a female news anchor who, the day after it was supposed to have snowed and didn't, turned to the weatherman and asked: "So Bob, where's that 8 inches you promised me last night?" Not only did HE have to leave the set, but half the crew did too they were laughing so hard!
Unprecedented Child Custody Ruling
A seven-year-old boy was at the center of a courtroom drama today when he challenged a court ruling over who should have custody of him.
The boy has a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge initially awarded custody to his aunt, in keeping with child custody law and regulations requiring that family unity be maintained to the degree possible.
The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her.
When the judge then suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried out that they also beat him.
After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.
After two recesses to check legal references and conference with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Oklahoma Sooners of the University of Oklahoma, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.
GO POKES!!!
The boy has a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge initially awarded custody to his aunt, in keeping with child custody law and regulations requiring that family unity be maintained to the degree possible.
The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her.
When the judge then suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried out that they also beat him.
After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.
After two recesses to check legal references and conference with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to the Oklahoma Sooners of the University of Oklahoma, whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.
GO POKES!!!
Yes, this is my town... -OR- Why Aggie Jokes aren't jokes.
We are the Aggies - the Aggies are we
True to each other as Aggies can be
We've got to FIGHT boys
We've got to fight!
We've got to fight for Maroon and White
After they've boosted all the rest
They will come and join the best
For we are the Aggies - the Aggies are we
We're from Texas AMC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)