Monthly Archives: December 2010

2010 – The Year Hope & Change Actually Happened

For all of us, the United States of America changed on November 4, 2008. The cloaked communist Barak Obama, unvetted and unchallenged on his radical past by the liberal media, was able to pull off the hoax of the century and be elected to the most powerful position in the free world. His campaign of “Hope & Change” was the mantra that has since made the simple utterance or scribing of the very words like having acid poured on the tongue for conservatives.

We watched as he and the liberal communist in control of Congress began to shred the Constitution through government take over of private industry sectors, encroaching on states rights, attempting to bypass the 2nd Amendment with back door UN agreements, passing budgets that required mountains of debt  to fund, as well as the beginnings of the legislative forms of Cap & Trade and Obamacare. Every American was going be told how they would live with less energy and higher costs to prevent “climatechange”. By nationalizing healthcare, Americans were going to be regulated on being forced to purchase insurance – a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause at the least. Not only would Obamacare force you to buy insurance, the legislation itself would be the beginning of how to regulate what America eats, how it cares for itself, goes to the doctor, as well as how to provide “end of life” counseling for those pesky people who just refuse to die.

And this was just 2009…..

Years from now Obama may go down in history for something that I am sure he never intended – single-handedly resurging conservatism in America. He did the one thing that no one since Carter had done and that was to scare the hell out of the silent majority. Carter was just inept and stupid. Obama is a dyed in the wool communist that hates what America stands for: personal responsibility, capitalism, exceptionalism, & independence from the power of the iron fisted state. Since his swearing into office, Obama has been on a quest to destroy this nation and everything it stands for. He thought the nation was liberal enough for his plan and forgot that the conservatives have been napping on the couch.

Not anymore.

The emergence of the Tea Party, 912 Groups, and other conservative factions in 2009 was the beginning of something special. People who had been in the cycle of working, living, raising a family, paying taxes, and trusting in a political system that had become rotten with decay realized they had to change their lives politically to save our great nation. I fall into that category myself. We were unorganized and inexperienced, but we brought intelligence and drive to the political arena that neither majority party could have foreseen. The Democrats called us racist and the Republicans called us stupid and ignorant of the process of politics. Both parties were wrong and could not conceive of the political tsunami headed their way.

The wave started with national grass-roots efforts in the NY 23 Special Election in 2009 to replace John McHugh with Doug Hoffman over NRCC backed RINO Dede Scozzafava. Scozzafava could not win the race, so she showed true RINO colors by backing the Democrat candidate Bill Owens. This was a true act of treason to conservatives as the NRCC had not only endorsed a candidate in Scozzafava that supported same-sex marriage, card check, and abortion, but received over $900000.00 in financial support as well. This split in the Republican Party – Traditionalist versus RINO’s, cost what had been a GOP seat to Democrats and gave one more vote to Obama and his minions. When Owens won the race, it was clear signal that the Republican Party needed an enema in leadership and candidate selection.

January 1, 2010 began the rally to “change” politics as usual. First, we picked up a couple of breaks early in the year. Republican Chris Christie was sworn in as Governor of New Jersey in 2010 as a signal that America had indeed taken a shift to the right. Republican Scott Brown won the Massachusetts seat held by Ted Kennedy for forever. While Brown is not by any means a staunch conservative, he is an improvement over Kennedy. By now, conservative groups realized the Republican Party was the closest thing to a conservative party but it needed major overhauling. The primaries were where that change could happen – get rid of the RINO before they can elected by conservatives still in slumber on their couches in November. Candidates were recruited and funds were solicited for the Change in 2010. While the primaries were not all successes, the ground work was laid in the spring of 2010 that led to the rout in November. Obama, Reid, & Pelosi and the liberal communists in the 111th Congress were thoroughly rejected on November 2, 2010. The words “hope & change” can now be reclaimed by conservatives – it has been revoked from Barry O and the Obamanites.

So what lies in store for 2011?  Well, they are two levels to watch – federal and state. On the federal level, hope that the changes in people sent to DC will promote and defend the conservative agenda that they campaigned on and got them elected. Hope that this new Congress can begin the process of repealing, financially strangling, or doing whatever it takes to stop the damage done by the 111th Congress. We know it will take more election cycles and years to correct the damage done by Obama and the 111th Congress.  On the state level, the issue of states rights and other federal assaults did not play as heavy in 2010 elections as they will in 2012. That does not mean the state levels went unnoticed, but a simple reality that the focus was on the federal level and not enough resources were minding the state races. 2011 will be the year that eyes will carefully watch the US Capital and State Capitals. The carnage against RINO’s in the Republican Party will intensify in anticipation of 2012, as conservative groups are now well-organized and are getting the funds to make serious inroads on political candidate recruitment.

So buckle up, eat your Wheaties, and get ready one wild ride for 2011.

You should have had a Merry Christmas, as that is screw up proof. Please have a healthy and Happy New Year.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Star of Bethlehem

In spite of all of the attempts from the liberal media, intellectuals, and atheists to eliminate the Christ from Christmas, the facts are that we celebrate the birth of the Son of God this season and the savior of mankind.

The liberal attempts at the complete secularization of Christmas are ignorant in their foundations. Santa Claus aka St. Nick is really about the 4th century Christian Bishop who became the patron saint of children, the poor, and even prostitutes. Yes – Saint Nicholas practiced the teachings of the church and of Christ.

Intellectuals conveniently ignore that piece of history. They do everything they can to discredit the bible and the historical fact that Christ was born to this earth.  While they do their best to continue to discredit the existence of Christ, even more evidence keeps coming forward about his existence and that of God’s control over the universe.

That evidence is the Star of Bethlehem. I am not about to attempt to recount the work done on this topic here. I am going share some excerpts and guide you to the site that has the data.  The theory behind the Star of Bethlehem is scientific data that revolves around the coming, the life, and the death of Christ as accounted for in the stars. Here is the excerpt regarding the coming of the King:

A Coronation   (top)

JUPITER. The name of the greatest god of Roman mythology. And the name of the largest planet of our solar system. Jupiter has been known from ages-old to the present as the King Planet. This greatest of planets is a “gas giant,” approximately eleven times the size of Earth and over 300 times more massive. It circles the Sun far beyond Earth, in an orbit of about twelve years duration. In ancient times, planets like Jupiter were considered “wandering stars.” Since humans have assigned kingly qualities to this giant wanderer for dozens of centuries, might it have something to do with our Star announcing the birth of a king? That will be our working theory.

It’s not enough to have a kingly name and reputation, of course. To be Matthew’s Star, Jupiter as viewed from Earth would have to do peculiar things. More precisely, as considered by a magus viewing from the Middle East during the years 3 and 2 BC, Jupiter’s movements would have to satisfy all nine identifying characteristics of the Star. In September of 3 BC at the time of the Jewish New Year, Rosh ha-Shanah, Jupiter began to do just that.

A magus watching Jupiter that September saw two objects moving so close that they appeared to touch. This close approach of celestial bodies is sometimes called a ‘conjunction.’ Our Middle Eastern viewer saw Jupiter coming into a close conjunction with the star, Regulus. Regulus takes its name from the word root which yields our word ‘regal.’ The Babylonians called Regulus Sharu, which means ‘king.’ The Romans called Regulus Rex, which means ‘king.’ So to start things, at the beginning of the new Jewish year, the Planet of Kings met the Star of Kings. <!– See it .–>This conjunction may have indicated kingship in a forceful way to a Babylonian magus (satisfying one qualification for the Star), but would it have startled him?

Probably not. Jupiter glides slowly past Regulus about every 12 years. Let’s assume our magus enjoyed a 50-year career, say from age 20 to age 70. We don’t know how old the Magi were, but if our man was in the second half of his career, he might have seen such a pass two or three times before. Jupiter’s orbit wobbles relative to Regulus, so not every conjunction is as close as the one he saw in 3 BC. Perhaps our magus recorded this event with some interest, but it is hard to imagine great excitement. Not from this alone. But, of course, there is more.

The planets move against the field of fixed stars. From Earth, they appear to be “active.” For example, were you to watch Jupiter each night for several weeks, you would see that it moves eastward through the starry field. Each night Jupiter rises in the east (satisfying a second Star qualification). Each night it appears to be slightly farther east in the field of fixed stars. All of the planets move like this.

But the wandering stars exhibit another, stranger motion. Periodically, they appear to reverse course and move backward through the other stars. This may seem odd, but the reason is simple enough: we watch the planets from a moving platform—Earth—hurtling around the Sun in its own orbit. When you pass a car on the freeway, it appears to go backward as it drops behind. For similar reasons, when the Earth in its orbit swings past another planet, that planet appears to move backward against the starry field. Astronomers call this optical effect retrograde motion. See it .–>

In 3/2 BC, Jupiter’s retrograde wandering would have called for our magus’ full attention. After Jupiter and Regulus had their kingly encounter, Jupiter continued on its path through the star field. But then it entered retrograde. It “changed its mind” and headed back to Regulus for a second conjunction. After this second pass it reversed course again for yet a third rendezvous with Regulus, a triple conjunction. A triple pass like this is more rare. Over a period of months, our watching magus would have seen the Planet of Kings dance out a halo above the Star of Kings. A coronation. <!– See it .–>

The Birth of a King   (top)

Jupiter’s interesting behavior may explain the kingly aspect of the Star. But there are nine qualifications of the Star of Bethlehem. Many are still missing. How did Jupiter’s movement relate to the Jewish nation? Is its association with the Jewish New Year enough? Where is an indication of a birth? Some might say that the triple conjunction by itself would indicate to a magus that a new king was on the scene. Maybe. But there is more.

The Jewish nation is composed of twelve ancient tribes. Jewish prophecy states that a particular tribe will bring forth the Messiah: the tribe of Judah. The symbol of Judah’s tribe is the lion. You can see these connections in an ancient prediction of Messiah’s coming found in the first book of the Bible, the Book of Genesis, Chapter 49:

9 You are a lion’s cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness– who dares to rouse him? 10 The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.

 

 

 

 

This association of Messiah with the tribe of Judah and with the lion is a productive clue. It clarifies the connection between Jupiter’s behavior and the Jewish nation, because the starry coronation—the triple conjunction—occurred within the constellation of Leo, The Lion. Ancient stargazers, particularly if they were interested in things Jewish, may well have concluded they were seeing signs of a Jewish king. See it .–>But there is more.

The last book of the New Testament is, in part, a prophetic enigma. But a portion of the Book of Revelation provides clear and compelling guidance for our astronomical investigation. The apostle John wrote the book as an old man while in exile on the island of Patmos. Perhaps the austerity of this exile or a lack of companionship left him time to ponder the night sky. Whatever the reason, Revelation is full of star imagery. In Chapter 12, John describes a life and death drama played out in the sky: the birth of a king.

1 A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on his heads. 4 His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron sceptre…

 

 

 

 

A woman in labor, a dragon bent on infanticide and a ruler of the nations. We have already seen this ruler in the Book of Genesis, above. This would be the Messiah, in his role as King of Kings. If that interpretation is correct, then according to the gospel story the woman would be Mary, the mother of Jesus. The dragon which waits to kill the child at birth would be Herod, who did that very thing. John says the woman he saw was clothed in the Sun. She had the moon at her feet. What can he be describing? When we continue our study of the sky of September of 3 BC, the mystery of John’s vision is unlocked: he is describing more of the starry dance which began with the Jewish New Year.

As Jupiter was beginning the coronation of Regulus, another startling symbol rose in the sky. The constellation which rises in the east behind Leo is Virgo, The Virgin. When Jupiter and Regulus were first meeting, she rose clothed in the Sun. And as John said, the moon was at her feet. It was a new moon, symbolically birthed at the feet of The Virgin. <!– See it .–>

The sheer concentration of symbolism in the stars at this moment is remarkable. These things could certainly lead our magus to conclude that a Jewish king had been born. But even this is not the whole story. These symbols could indicate a birth, but if they were interpreted to indicate the time of conception, the beginning of a human life, might there be something interesting in the sky nine months later? Indeed. In June of 2 BC, Jupiter continued the pageantry.

Westward Leading   (top)

By the following June, Jupiter had finished crowning Regulus. The Planet of Kings traveled on through the star field toward another spectacular rendezvous, this time with Venus, the Mother Planet. This conjunction was so close and so bright that it is today displayed in hundreds of planetaria around the world by scientists who may know nothing of Messiah. They do it because what Jupiter did makes such a great planetarium show. Jupiter appeared to join Venus. The planets could not be distinguished with the naked eye. If our magus had had a telescope, he could have seen that the planets sat one atop the other, like a figure eight. Each contributed its full brightness to what became the most brilliant star our man had ever seen. Jupiter completed this step of the starry dance as it was setting in the west. That evening, our Babylonian magus would have seen the spectacle of his career while facing toward Judea. See it .–>

No one alive had ever seen such a conjunction. If the Magi only began their travel plans in September, when they saw this sight nine months later, someone may have shouted “What are we waiting for? Mount up!” At the end of their travel, which may have taken weeks or months, these experts arrived in Jerusalem. They told their tale, and “all Jerusalem was disturbed.” Herod wanted to know two things: when the Star had appeared, and where this baby was. The Magi presumably described the timing of events starting in September of 3 BC and continuing through June of 2 BC. Herod sent them to Bethlehem in search of the child with orders that they return to tell where he was.

To qualify as the Star, Jupiter would have to have been ahead of the Magi as they trekked South from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. Sure enough, in December of 2 BC if the Magi looked south in the wee hours, there hung the Planet of Kings over the city of Messiah’s birth. <!– See it .–>

All but one of the nine Biblical qualifications for the Star have now been plausibly satisfied:

  1. The first conjunction signified birth by its association to the day with Virgo “birthing” the new moon. Some might argue that the unusual triple conjunction by itself could be taken to indicate a new king.
  2. The Planet of King’s coronation of the Star of Kings signified kingship.
  3. The triple conjunction began with the Jewish New Year and took place within Leo, showing a connection with the Jewish tribe of Judah (and prophecies of the Jewish Messiah).
  4. Jupiter rises in the east.
  5. The conjunctions appeared at precise, identifiable times.
  6. Herod was unaware of these things; they were astronomical events which had significance only when explained by experts.
  7. The events took place over a span of time sufficient for the Magi to see them both from the East and upon their arrival in Jerusalem.
  8. Jupiter was ahead of the Magi as they traveled south from Jerusalem to Bethlehem.

But the ninth qualification would require that Jupiter stop over Bethlehem. How could a planet do that? And did Jupiter do it?

To Stop a Star   (top)

The problem with a planet stopping is not what you might think. The problem is not that planets can’t stop. Just the opposite. The problem is that all planets are always stopped to the eye of a human observer. The sky moves above Earth at half the speed of the hour hand on a common clock. Its movement is imperceptible to the naked eye. So, if all stars are always stopped, what can Matthew have meant?

Perhaps you have already anticipated the key to this final mystery: retrograde motion. An astronomer tracking the movement of planets through the star field watches not so much on the scale of minutes, but on the longer scale of days, weeks and months. On this scale of time, Jupiter did stop. On December 25 of 2 BC as it entered retrograde, Jupiter reached full stop in its travel through the fixed stars. Magi viewing from Jerusalem would have seen it stopped in the sky above the little town of Bethlehem. <!– See it .–>

This is a wonderful 6 minute video from the author of the site:

To see and reference all the data, go to http://www.bethlehemstar.net/

Just one more tool in your pocket to torment the intellectuals who want to eliminate the Christ in Christmas.

Merry Christmas.

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Palin Factor

In the summer of 2008, the only folks who knew about Sarah Palin were Alaskan residents. The small business owner who became Mayor then Governor was leading an uneventful life until a tap came on the shoulder from GOP Presidential nominee John McCain. Its been a whirlwind since.

The fact that she added life to McCain’s miserable campaign and made him somewhat competitive put her on the political map for the 2012 Presidential race. We all know the barbecue she went through then and continues to go through to this day. The liberal media and leftwing blogs crucify her and/or her family daily to make themselves feel important in delivering their progressive message. Why the fury? Palin represents everything progressive liberals hate: Palin believes in God, guns, limited government, lower taxes, capitalism, a strong military, and the American Way. Feminists despise her pro-life stand as well as the fact she knowingly brought her son Trigg into the world with Down’s Syndrome.  Liberals and feminists believe Palin represents the worst of the red neck gene pool and want her type eradicated.

So, why is the Republican “establishment” gearing up to keep Palin down? Does she not represent the Party Platform? While the obvious answer is that she does represent the Party Platform, what she does not represent is the moderate wing of the Party and moderate leaders in charge. The reality is that a Palin Presidency could very well eliminate moderate leadership opportunity in the Republican Party for years.

So how do they combat the “Palin Factor”? There is an unholy alliance being forged between the liberals and RINO leaders to whitewash Palin and her credibility to win a shot at the 2012 Presidency.  Want proof? Let’s examine the evidence.

Exhibit A – Criticizing Palin’s “choices” in the US Senate Races:
They started by criticizing of her backing of specific individuals in the US Senate race. Specifically Joe Miller in Alaska, Sharron Angle in Nevada, Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, and Ken Buck in Colorado. Well, lets dig a little deeper into those choices. Turns out Palin was spot on by backing Miller, as Murkowski, the Republican turned Independent back to Republican incumbent, is already back to pork projects for special interests with earmarks in the recent Senate Omnibus plan http://shybarbarian.com/2010/12/christmas-comes-early-corrupt-rino-murkowski-pays-back-indian-supporters-ten-fold/. Sharron Angle was taking on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the landslide of money he brought to the table. Most of the conservatives in Nevada had left over the poor economy and Angle still came close to knocking off Reid. O’Donnell was running in a deep blue state that had little chance of victory in the first place, but Palin’s efforts for O’Donnell made the race competitive. Buck came very close in Colorado in a state that went from red in 2004 to deep blue by 2008 due to a decade long effort by Democrats. Ever wonder why the Democrat Convention was held in Denver? Do some surfing on “The Colorado Model” and get full detail on how this happened. It is the blueprint the Dems have had for turning red states blue. The Weekly Standard had a great article in 2008 on it: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/316nfdzw.asp. Giddy from too much Tea Party support and the political caffeine it injected into the party, RINO leaders in the US Senate whined that Palin’s 4 choices cost them a majority in the upper chamber http://www.examiner.com/post-partisan-in-national/republicans-turn-on-sarah-palin-jim-demint-for-losing-the-senate. Having been in DC in the summer of 2009 , I personally know Republicans were viewed as having a snowball’s chance in hell of gaining enough Senate seats to be near a push, much less a majority. To now hear them complaining about Palin screwing it up for them is ridiculous.

Exhibit B – Get Republican Moderates to criticize her resume:
Joe Scarborough, the former Florida Congressman and lawyer, blasted Palin in an opinion he gave on November 30 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45687.html. Joe came out and used the liberal left agenda of accusing Palin of “antiintellectualism” (some serious scrabble points for that one Joe!) that MSNBC is known for. In the same rant, he states that if the  “…party of Ronald Reagan, Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio wants to return to the White House anytime soon, it’s time that Republican leaders started standing up and speaking the truth to Palin”.  Are Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio iconic enough to be mentioned with Reagan? Was Reagan ever accused of being an intellectual? Isn’t Barry O the greatest intellectual ever elected? Stuff the intellectual BS Joe – the libs at MSNBC have completed their lobotomy of you.

Guess Joe was following the lead of columnist Mona Cheren, who had chimed in the week before:  http://patriotpost.us/opinion/mona-charen/2010/11/19/why-sarah-palin-shouldnt-run/. She echoes lamentations of a Palin run, citing two critical flaws in her presidential-less demeanor: 1. Lack of a  proven record; 2.  Weakness on substance. Hmm, if my memory recalls Palin ran a small business with her husband (Todd still operates it today), she was a Mayor, and she has been a Governor. All of these are volumes more than Obama or many of the so-called Republican front-runners. While she did exodus early from the Gov position, that had more to do with digging herself out of a mountain of financial debt that Alaskan RINO’s had piled on her with false ethics charges she had to defend.

Exhibit C – Get the Left Wing Kooks to Start Analysis on the Forgone Conclusion of Failure of a Palin Presidency.
On the same day Charen issued her criticism, left-wing nut Sheldon Filger took the stance of trying to scare folks into thinking through Palin as President. Filger blames Palin for McCain’s loss to Obama. He writes “… Ms. Palin as a possible successor to an elderly and illness-prone Senator McCain, had he prevailed in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, was a leading factor in persuading many independent voters, and even some Republicans, to cast their votes for Barack Obama.” I could have sworn she was married…. Poor Sheldon, like many liberals, has not a clue to the fact McCain would have been truly pasted had it not been for Palin.
 
Exhibit D – Work up some Baloney Polls to show Palin would lose to Obama if the 2012 General Election were held today
After what happened on November 2, 2010, I simply do not know how this could come up and be talked about without laughing out loud. However, this has not stopped the Republicans from doing exactly that. Let’s be blunt – Palin, not Romney or Pawlenty or Huckabee or Jindall or Perry or Gingrich, came out and campaigned for conservative candidates flying under the Republican banner and kicked the crud out of Obama. Obama won Round 1 in 2008 without a track record and Palin won Round 2 in 2010 pummeling Barry with his failed agenda. Give her another year to get SarahPAC running and she can be formidable.
 
Palin may not be the “perfect” candidate; neither is anyone else that will seek the office. Americans want someone they can trust and who will shoot straight with them. Palin has those qualities.  Palin is also a staunch supporter of literal interpretation of the Constitution in her beliefs and it shows in how she lives her life. Remember, the majority of Americans that live in that great swatch of red across the US have a whole lot in common with Palin: they may not be the most educated, but they are not idiots either. Palin is also underestimated by those who think she is a buffoon. While her tv show “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” may not be everyone’s cup of tea, the show is doing something for Palin that no other potential candidate (Huckabee excluded) has going for them – their own show getting their name out to millions of Americans every day. This may be exposing every nook and cranny of her and her family, but in the end Americans will feel they know Palin before ever casting a vote. This is far more than any other potential candidate can say right now. What’s even better is that this gig pays her for the publicity, not the other way around. Fox News has done wonders for Mike Huckabee, but Mike cannot attract the attention or the money that Sarah can. Furthermore, do people really know Huckabee better from his show? Bet Mitt wished he had his own show….
 
Whoever takes on Obama in 2012 will have to be able to 1. Campaign endlessly, 2. Have name recognition, 3. Raise money, 4. Have a seriously thick hide, 5. Raise money, 6. Have charisma. Palin’s qualities will help her perform in each of these areas. While she is still considered a novice in fundraising, she will be able to raise money to compete head to head with any primary candidate. If she wins the nomination, my guess is she will be able to take on Barry O and get corporate dollars due to the simple fact business hates Obama and will want to see this commie crud get ousted from office. Palin has enough brains to surround herself with folks smarter than her that can help her do the job should she reach the oval office. I already hear the Mitt supporters crying out for him and that he is the man. My issue with Mitt is I am not sure he has the toughness for the run. Why else did he bow out in 2008 and leave the Republican Party to McCain? No disrespect to Huckabee, I voted for him, but he was too unknown at the time to knock off McCain. I am still pe’od at Mitt for abandoning the Party and I am not the only one. We know Sarah has the stamina to make the run and she does not run from the personal grenades that get lobbed in a campaign.
 
Whether the liberals or RINO’s like it or not, Palin is the factor for the Republican Party Presidential Nominee in 2012.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Sorry Joe – It’s time to go

An emotional  tornado is tearing across the Texas political landscape right now in the form of the race for Texas Speaker of the House. Google “Texas Speaker Race” and you will get a myriad of news from across the stratum on what is happening and why. What I will report here will be a speck on the back of an elephant in comparison of the data on the net for the subject.

So if you live outside of Texas and are reading this, you might wonder why this race impacts your state. Every state representative chamber, be they called a legislature or assembly, has a presiding Speaker. State governments are modeled after the federal model and that means that most bills will originate in the representative chamber. Tax bills must always come from the lower chamber. Who you have as Speaker has great impact on the bills that come to the floor through Calenders Committees for chamber vote consideration.

If you want to strangle, nullify, or just make an over-reaching federal bill miserable it has to start in the state House. Hmm – would Obamacare be such a bill? Can the right Speaker introduce  and ramrod legislation through to combat un-Constitutional bills? You bet they can! There is a great desire in Texas to put in legislative form a great big “Thanks Barry, we’ll pass on your benevolence” bill for all the un-Constitutional laws headed our way in 2011 and beyond.

So for your consideration, the Texas Speaker of the House Race.

Joe Strauss became Speaker of the House under controversial circumstances in the 2009 Session for Texas. The current Speaker was Tom Craddick, the first Republican Speaker of the House in Texas since the Civil War. Craddick, while conservative, had a habit of using the position for political gain. He was the Texas Hammer and he made enemies on both sides of the aisle. What also hurt Craddick was the Texas was slipping in Republican House seats under his leadership. When the 2009 Session began, Republicans had a 2 seat advantage at 76-74 and when you factor in the RINO’s that were part of the 76, Republicans really did not control the House in 2009.

Enter the Gang of 11. I blogged about this group in August (See https://darrenyancy.com/2010/08/22/the-great-texas-rino-hunt/) and how they helped Strauss become leader with their vote and that of 65 Democrats. Craddick gets the boot and the 2009 Session begins. Along with getting the Gang of 11 plum committee assignments, liberal Democrats were also appointed to powerful committee chairs. That Session was a disaster for Texas with conservative bills like Voter ID and others getting “chubbed” away by Democrats. Democrats got a higher percentage of their bills passed under Strauss than Republicans. Strauss supporters claim that Joe played the hand that he was dealt and should not be persecuted for it. While there might have been some argument for that, when you campaign fundraise for Democrats like he did for Patrick Rose and you are a Republican, it causes issues. On top of that, you have Strauss’ own record on social issues that is less than stellar and conservatives were not happy with Strauss. Combine that with Barry O going wild in DC and Texans decided enough was enough.

When I blogged on this in August, I neglected to point out that carnage had already begun for the Gang of 11. Reps Delwin Jones and Tommy Merrit were defeated in primaries and Brian McCall heard competitive footsteps coming and bolted to take the chancellor position at Texas State University. Geren had a primary opponent as did 2 Strauss Lieutenants Vicki Truitt and Todd Smith. With the current mood in Texas, they will almost be assured of primary opponents again.

Texas voters put Republicans in a super-majority on November 2 with a 99-51 seat make up in the House starting in January. It is a voter mandate not being taken lightly and the electorate feels there are better options than Joe Strauss for House Speaker.

Rep. Leo Berman was testing the waters in the summer for House Speaker, but withdrew in October and threw his support behind new challenger Warren Chisum. Both Berman and Chisum had been Chairmen under former Speaker Craddick and made no bones about their distrust for Strauss. Berman has filed ethics charges against Strauss claiming misuse of campaign funds in his recent donations to Republican candidates in the fall election (http://parkercountyblog.com/2010/11/10/4740/). As you can imagine, there is no love lost there. From talks I had with state reps all over was that Chisum had zero traction. He was considered baggage from the Craddick days, hailed from an area of Texas losing population in a re-districting year, and was too cozy with oil & gas interests to get much-needed eminent domain legislation passed in Texas.

On November 11, McKinney Representative Ken Paxton entered the race and everything changed. Paxton has great ratings from every conservative outfit, has stood for social and fiscal conservatism and would appear to be a shoe in. But hold the phone – Joe had “pledge” cards from more than enough members to get re-elected and declared the supposed race was already over and for the average Joe to stay out of the race. This has caused a fury amongst the electorate and for good reason-  elected officials were put in office by the people of the state of Texas and they should reflect the will of the people. With roughly 26 Republicans  backing Paxton or “not” supporting Strauss ( I hear the unpublished amount is closer to 45), voters are now being told that the reps will do what they feel is in the best interest of their districts. As such, conservatives are getting in a foul mood and want action taken on having a fair shake at the House Speaker position. Most feel a Republican Caucus is the solution and pressure is coming at House Members like being in an industrial grade vise for one to happen and happen fast.

However, there are issues with a caucus. The first is transparency. A caucus is secret ballot and Members argue that runs against grain of the platform. The second is that there is no rule in the Republican Party of Texas or in the House Rules to require a caucus. On top of that, no rule exists to requires the caucus decision to be binding, meaning a victor could come out of caucus and still face defeat on the floor by opposition vote. These issues are causing some Members that should back Paxton publicly pause at the thought of rocking the boat for what they perceive to be a lost cause. There is some logic for this argument. If there are not enough votes to make a difference why make an enemy of the guy that can control the agenda. They need to help their districts, right?

Representative Bryan Hughes of Mineola was threatened with being drawn out of district when he was considering withdrawing his support from Strauss. A complaint was filed with the General Investigating and Ethics Committee over the incident and a kangaroo court was held on November 23, 2010 by committee chairs appointed by Strauss. The accused of making the threat, Rep Larry Philips of Sherman, was not sworn in as was Hughes to give testimony. Of course no wrongdoing was found and now questions abound about the legality of the hearing (http://www.empowertexans.com/issues/did_chuck_hopson_break_the_law). 

So, if we follow the logic of not upsetting the apple cart, should Texas House Members go with the flow?

Not just no, but hell no. Comfort and concessions on principle have created this mess and its time for a political enema. Even if you toss out the alleged ethics charge on campaign contributions, and the potential threats to influence other members,  the lousy performance in 2009 and Strauss’ social votes demand a look at another candidate. The caucus needs to be held and let the results be known and we deal with it. I and other conservatives are willing to grant secrecy in a caucus vote to get the change needed. If a representative takes it in the political shorts and cannot become a committee chair or no conservative legislative agenda they introduce gets passed because they did the right thing and supported the electorate, they will double their support. While Texas has some very real issues to deal with on a state level in January, the state is growing in conservatism and can be a bell weather for other states to garner strength from. We need leaders in charge that not only reflect the electorate, but do the right thing for the party. Strauss may indeed be squeaky clean on the allegations, but the appearance is enough to look at other candidates that have no such baggage.

How does this impact your state? If Texas is successful in replacing a RINO with a social and fiscal conservative, hopefully other states will take the reins and follow. If state legislatures around the nation get aggressive this next session in rejecting the over reach of Obama, DC will have no choice but to stew in its juices until a conservative  sweep is complete in 2012. So how can anyone outside of Texas help? Get your groups to call and fax the offices of Texas House Members in support of Joe Strauss. Here is a list of Strauss Supporters (51 are Dems…):

Aliseda, Jose
Allen, Alma
Alonzo, Roberto
Alvarado, Carol
Anchia, Rafael
Anderson, Charles “Doc”
Aycock, Jimmie Don
Beck, Marva
Bohac, Dwayne
Bonnen, Dennis
Branch, Dan
Brown, Fred
Burnam, Lon
Button, Angie Chen
Callegari, William “Bill”
Carter, Stefani
Castro, Joaquin
Coleman, Garnet
Cook, Byron
Creighton, Brandon
Crownover, Myra
Darby, Drew
Davis, John
Deshotel, Joe
Driver, Joe
Dukes, Dawnna
Dutton, Harold
Eiland, Craig
Eissler, Rob
Elkins, Gary
Farias, Joe
Farrar, Jessica
Fletcher, Allen
Frullo, John
Gallego, Pete
Garza, John
Geren, Charlie
Giddings, Helen
Gonzales, Larry
Gonzales, Veronica
Gonzalez, Naomi
Gooden, Lance
Guillen, Ryan
Gutierrez, Roland
Hamilton, Mike
Hancock, Kelly
Hardcastle, Rick
Harless, Patricia
Harper-Brown, Linda
Hartnett, Will
Hernandez, Ana
Hilderbran, Harvey
Hochberg, Scott
Hopson, Chuck
Howard, Donna
Huberty, Dan
Hunter, Todd
Jackson, Jim
Johnson, Eric
Keffer, Jim
King, Susan
King, Tracy
Kleinschmidt, Tim
Kolkhorst, Lois
Larson, Lyle
Lavender, George
Lewis, Tryon
Lozano, J.M.
Lucio III, Eddie
Lyne, Lanham
Madden, Jerry
Mallory Caraway, Barbara
Margo, Dee
Marquez, Marisa
Martinez, Armando
McClendon, Ruth Jones
Menendez, Jose
Miles, Borris
Miller, Doug
Miller, Sid
Munoz, Sergio, Jr.
Murphy, Jim
Naishtat, Elliott
Nash, Barbara
Oliveira, Rene
Orr, Rob
Otto, John
Patrick, Diane
Pena, Aaron
Phillips, Larry
Pickett, Joe
Pitts, Jim
Price, Four
Quintanilla, Chente
Raymond, Richard
Reynolds, Ron
Ritter, Allan
Rodriguez, Eddie
Schwertner, Charles
Scott, Connie
Sheffield, Ralph
Shelton, Mark
Smith, Todd
Smith, Wayne
Smithee, John
Solomons, Burt
Strama, Mark
Straus, Joe
Taylor, Larry
Thompson, Senfronia
Torres, Raul
Truitt, Vicki
Turner, Sylvester
Veasey, Marc
Villarreal, Mike
Vo, Hubert
Walle, Armando
Weber, Randy
Workman, Paul
Zerwas, John

 The Texas House website is http://www.house.state.tx.us/index.php 

Just to be fair, if that is possible with my slant in this article, here are the current candidates for Texas Speaker and their voting records.

Warren Chisum:

 http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=5477

Ken Paxton:

 http://www.votesmart.org/summary.php?can_id=49425

Joe Straus: 

 http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=49917

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized