Brownsville Tea Party Association

Archive for the ‘Topics’ Category

From American Thinker

December 6, 2011
Beat Back Barack
By William L. Gensert

There has been much talk lately about the need for the Republican presidential nominee to move to the center. This is a mistake. The only way to beat Barack Obama is to oppose him rigorously, relentlessly, and without remorse.

This election needs a fiscal, foreign policy, and economic conservative. The man to defeat Obama must present the nation a clear choice between further socialism under Obama’s control or prosperity through economic freedom, but that’s not all; he will need to show the world who Barack Obama is.

Americans may be inattentive, or even self-involved, but we are not idiots. Anyone can see the almost three years of failed Obama governance and know that the meme which the legacy media is trying to sell is a lie. Obama is not just a failure; he is a spectacular failure — and it’s not George Bush’s fault, or that of an obstructionist Congress.

Newton Leroy Gingrich wants your vote. Unfortunately for him, he has to lug around baggage he’d really like us to forget.  Well maybe we will, but not just yet.
 
Bag 1
Freddie Mac is one of the wildly corrupt government-subsidized lenders responsible for igniting our current economic woes.  In 2004, President Bush correctly diagnosed its problem as a serious lack of oversight, and tried to pass some reforms.  The Democrats in Congress blocked it (naturally). In 2006, John McCain warned of the impending economic apocalypse, while the Republican Congress was picking up where Bush left off, trying to get FM under control. And what was Newt doing?  Newt was working as a lobbyist for Freddie Mac, to the tune of $300,000.  He also was quoted as saying that FM was a “solid business model.”
 
Bag 2
In the 1990s, Newt led the fight to stop HillaryCare.  But in 2005, he started cozying up to its author, dedicated socialist and national disgrace Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt first lady in our nation’s history. He appeared with her at a press conference that year in support of-are you ready for this-healthcare legislation!
The New York Times later had this to say:
“ . . . Mr. Gingrich has been talking up Mrs. Clinton’s presidential prospects in 2008, to the chagrin of conservative loyalists who once regarded him as a heroic figure (emphasis mine). Last month, he even suggested she might capture the presidency, saying ‘any Republican who thinks she’s going to be easy to beat has a total amnesia about the history of the Clintons.’”  (On occasion, the New York Times accurately reports the news.)
 
“But he’s so smart!” Are you sure? It gets worse.
 
Bag 3
In this link, you can watch the commercial he made with another dedicated socialist, Nancy Pelosi, who actively promotes environmentalism for no reason whatsoever except to spread Marxism. When I saw this on television, my jaw dropped to the floor! Note at the bottom of the ad a line appears that says, “Paid for by the Alliance for Climate Protection.”  “What is the Alliance for Climate Protection?” you ask?  It’s an organization “committed to educating the global community about the urgency of implementing comprehensive solutions to the climate crisis” and it was started by another dedicated Marxist, the climate-fraud-pedaling, mentally unbalanced Al Gore.  The president and CEO for the Alliance for Climate Protection is professional leftist Maggie Fox, who is the past national president of America Votes, another Marxist organization that promotes socialism through election fraud.  Not smart, Newt.
 
Bag 4
Newt suffers from what is sometimes called “wandering eye.”  Others call it, “lusting after women you aren’t married to.”  He currently is on his third marriage.  I suspect the only reason he bothered to marry again was to create a more palatable candidacy, and to shield himself from the questions that would surely come.
 
At age 19, Newt married his first wife Jackie Battley, his high school geometry teacher.  (She was 26.) While married to Jackie, he hooked up with Marrianne Ginther, divorced Jackie & married Marrianne.  While married to Marrianne, he took up with House staffer Calista Bisek, 26 years his junior, and divorced Marianne to marry Calista.  Their affair went on during the Lewinsky scandal, as Newt led the investigation of Bill Clinton for perjury and obstruction of justice on account of his philandering. Nice.
 
Newt explains his chronic cheating by saying he worked too hard. Maybe a good night’s sleep would have been better. I guess the reason most of us don’t cheat on our spouses is because we don’t work very hard.  Of his presidential bid, he has said, “. . . the American people will have to decide whether that’s [his moral lapses] their primary concern. If the primary concern of the American people is my past, my candidacy would be irrelevant.”  Given the fact that past actions are good indicators of future actions, I would say “irrelevant” pretty well sums it up.
 
Now that he has converted to Catholicism, he speaks eloquently about God’s forgiveness.  The message being conveyed is that he has repented, and God has forgiven him; And if God has forgiven him, why shouldn’t we?  I can forgive him, though I don’t see any need to.  He didn’t do anything to me.  He hurt his first two wives & his children.  He should seek their forgiveness, not mine. 
 
Has anyone ever noticed that when slick politicians get caught doing the wrong thing, they claim to have received God’s forgiveness in order to mingle two entirely different & separate issues.  Forgiveness is one issue.  Fitness to lead is quite another, and they have nothing to do with each other.  If you feel you should forgive Newt, by all means do it!  But the crucially relevant question is, is he morally competent to lead our great nation?  To answer that, ask yourself this question:  If his wives can’t trust him, how can I?
 
If Newt gets elected, and gets caught up in his old ways, there will be no press cover ups.  They will go after him on this, and every thing else like starving, rabid dogs.  Does this make anyone nostalgic for the humiliating years of the Clinton presidency?  

Hello?  What about having a first lady who clearly has no more respect for marriage vows than her husband?  Imagine a spectacle like that for a minute or two, and ponder the notion that for all of Newt’s great intellect, maybe he just isn’t presidential material.
 
Jan Shedd
11/8/11

Author Oleg Atbashian presents his book to a libertarian/conservative group Liberty on the Rocks in Colorado Springs, August 23, 2011.

Oleg Atbashian is a writer and graphic artist from the former USSR. Born and raised in Ukraine, he used to be a teacher, a translator, a worker, a freelance journalist, and at one time a propaganda artist, creating visual agitprop for the local Party committee in a Siberian town. In 1994, he emigrated to the USA hoping to live in a country that was ruled by reason and common sense. Ironically, he now lives in New York City. He is the creator ofThePeoplesCube.com, a satirical website where he writes under the name of Red Square.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ByJb7QQ9U

By Franz Emmanuel Kebreau

I have done extensive research on the subject because at one point, I was a Democrat. A few years ago, I was confronted with a fact that I knew to be false but after an investigation into the point, it turned out to be true. It was that Martin Luther King was a Republican.

This of course forced me to extend my research into other areas. What else could this Political Science Major be unaware of? The Truth became stranger than fiction. The list is quite long so here we go.

President Kennedy had little intention of enacting a Comprehensive Civil Rights Law during his 2 years in office. Tensions in society were running so high due to the riots and such that by the 1963 State of the Union address he had no other choice but to enact some kind of Law. Mind you, for the previous 100 years, it had only been the Republican Party who had supported any Civil Rights Legislations (I was not aware of these facts until I was 35 years old);

13th Amendment: 100% Republican Support Abolished Slavery
23% Democratic Support

14th Amendment 94% Republican Support Slaves to be Citizens
0% Democratic Support

15th Amendment 100% Republican Support Right to Vote for All
0% Democratic Support

CRA 1866 Enacted by the Republican Party Equal Rights

CRA 1871 Enacted by the Republican Party Anti-KKK

CRA 1875 99% Republican Support Anti-Discrimination
0% Democratic Support

———–It took another 82 years until the next Civil Rights Act———
———–The Democratic Party blocked every attempt to equalize citizens of color—–

CRA 1957 Enacted by the Eisenhower (R) Administration
Then Senator Kennedy Voted against this Bill
Filibustered by Democrats

CRA 1960 Enacted by the Eisenhower (R) Administration
The final version was watered down by then Senator LBJ
Filibustered by the Democrats

CRA 1964 82% Republican Support
63% Democratic Support

CRA 1965 87% Republican Support
Voting Rights 75% Democratic Support

I do not want the “government” to treat me any differently than any other citizen. Therefore, I consider equality of opportunity and equal voting rights to be the summation of Civil Rights in America. If anything extra is afforded me or anyone else merely due to the color of their skin, I consider that to be an entitlement and patronizing.

Given my above statement, the Democratic Party, even if you sectionalize them by North and South, has never outvoted the Republican Party in any Civil Rights Law…Ever. The actual numbers play out like this;

Lifetime Republican Party support for Equal Rights for all Citizens: 94%
Lifetime Democratic Party Support for Equal rights for all Citizens: 35%

Now to the point of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This was a proposal that the Republican Party, during the Eisenhower Administration attempted to put forth but alas, their efforts resulted in the first Civil Rights Law in the previous 82 years…The Civil Rights Act of 1957 formed a Commission on Civil Rights. The Plan of the Commission was to eventually enact the very Comprehensive Law of 1964. Remember, this was the Bill that Senator JFK voted against, for political aspirations I’m sure.

JFK had his Justice department write the original Bill in early 1963. The first version passed the House but stalled in the Senate. Everett McKinley Dirksen (R), the minority leader in the Senate took it upon himself to REWRITE the entire Bill. It took him 1 weekend and he had 2 helpers, 1 Democrat and another Republican.

The final version of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was written by a Republican which means that since the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, every Civil Rights Law was written by a Republican with more Republican support than Democratic Party Support.

Due to Dirksen’s tenacity, a cloture vote was successful and the Senate passed the Bill. It then passed the Houses and became Law.

Some notes about its passage;

Robert Byrd (D) filibustered the Bill…the longest filibuster in American History
William Fulbright (D) voted against the Bill. He was Bill Clinton’s mentor.
Al Gore Sr. (D) voted against the Bill

Speaking to two Governors on Air Force One, then President LB Johnson was quoted saying, “”I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” according Ronald Kessler’s Book in relation to the Law.

So now let’s explore the Dixicrats. This has always been misrepresented. I wrote about it in my book, and I also made a video of it. Here is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdJsPsU55PM

The big question is, did the South really turn “Red” after the CRA of 1964? Well, I researched that also and found the following conclusions.

Presidential Elections (covering “The Solid South”)
The 11 Former Confederate States

Year Blue States Red States

1964 6 5
1968 6 (Segregationist Wallace took 5) 5
1972 Landslide
1976 Landslide
1980 Landslide
1984 Landslide
1988 Landslide
1992 4 7
1996 4 7
2000 0 11
2004 0 11
2008 3 8

At least in Presidential elections, the Solid South wasn’t so “solid” until at least the year 2000 or 36 years after the CRA of 1964.

Now let’s take a look at the Governorships.

Governorships since 1964
(The 11 former “Confederate States”)

State Blue Red Years until a “Red” Gov. was elected

Georgia 7 2 39 years
Mississippi 8 2 28 years
Alabama 9 3 23 years
Louisiana 6 4 16 years
Texas 5 4 15 years
South Carolina 5 5 11 years
Arkansas 9 3 9 years
North Carolina 7 2 9 years
Tennessee 5 4 7 years
Virginia 7 5 6 years
Florida 7 5 3 years

Total 75 39

That’s almost 2 to 1 Blue over Red. I looked at the facts and not the rhetoric. The facts point to a different conclusion all together. The South did not become “Solid Red” after the CRA of 1964.

After finding out that both Martin Luther King Sr. and Jr. were Republicans, I tend to deal only in facts and not with what I’ve been told.

Last Points

My former party, The Democratic Party says that they are for the “minority”. In this case, I’ll just say “blacks”. I believe in neither black nor minority but I defer to their thinking for this discussion. If that’s the case, then how could the following piece of history have been erased?

Ninety-nine percent of the country does not know the name Hiram Rhodes Revels. Here is his story and why the Democrats are not for “black” people.

At the end of the Civil War, Jefferson Davis, the President of the Confederacy, was captured and subsequently imprisoned for 2 years. Prior to this time period, Mr. Davis was a Senator from the State of Mississippi. In 1870, the State of Mississippi filled the vacant post of Mr. Davis with one Hiram Rhodes Revels. The curious fact behind this exchange is that now Senator Hiram Rhodes Revels did not only replace the President of the Confederacy, but he was also the First Black Senator in U.S. History…and virtually nobody knows his name.

One last point to explain this lack of universal knowledge…Jefferson Davis, The President of the Confederacy was a Democrat and his replacement, Senator Hiram Rhodes Revels, was a Republican. Democratic leadership today will never share that history with their constituents of which I once was. That led me to believe that the Democratic Party is more interested in my vote than the Truth.

It gets bit deeper. 13 former slaves became members of Congress between 1870 and 1901. We as a nation killed our own citizens in a Civil War to FREE 4 Million slaves. 13 of those freed slaves became members of the U.S. Congress and the history books are silent to this fact. 640,000 Americans died in that war and the result was transformational yet, this groundbreaking and profound history is never taught in “left” leaning schools because it does not serve their agenda. All 13 of the former slaves were Republicans. I had to sift through the Library of Congress to reveal the following information…here it is for you in a video;

My belief is that the Party’s did not change. The tactics changed. They went from Pro-Slavery to Pro-Segregation to Pro-Entitlement, all of which results in nothing beneficial for the prosperity of an individual and is considered by many of my ilk, “Plantation Politics”.

All I want is the Truth and to be treated as an equal, no more and no less; as an equal. I do not need the Democratic Party telling me that I’m “black” or that I’m a minority who needs their assistance. I am not a color. I am Frantz Kebreau, an American Citizen.

For the Democratic Party, it has always been about “Control” over Freedom. Keeping the Truth from it’s constituents in order to maintain control over them is not what I want from my “Party”

Frantz Kebreau
CEO, Stolen History
Author of Stolen History
www.Frantzkebreau.com
If you would like more information, please take a look at the “Stolen History” Book and Audio versions at the link below.

http://frantzkebreau.mybigcommerce.com/index.php

“The Truth Shall Set You Free!!”

By Duane Rasmussen

Okay, I admit it. I’m a terrorist! At least that’s what the socialist Democrats would like to call me. It is now out of the bag. TEA Party members and followers are now being charged with terrorism by the politically degenerate followers of The Great Prevaricator. I’m proud of it if I can bring terror into the minds of those who would work contrary to our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. I want them out of office and out of any position of influence.

It seems everyone is debating the effectiveness of the TEA Party members and supporters in bringing some kind of halt to spending and holding taxes where they are in the passing of the Budget Control Act. One easy way to look at it is where are we today in relation to where we were during the Pelosi-Reid-Obama agenda of one year ago. That agenda was giving us a daily dose of damage to our American economy, destroying jobs with crippling regulations, oppressive spending and brand new taxes. To top it off, the Democrats passed a government takeover of healthcare, spending record amounts of money we didn’t have on a program we didn’t want. Then they raised taxes on hardworking taxpayers to pay for an $800 billion stimulus, claiming they should have spent more.

But on election day 2010, millions of American Patriots stood up and were counted as they said, “We’re Taxed Enough Already!”

TEA Party members have not just changed the debate, they have changed the results. Sure, they are not the extensive results TEA Party members in many instances were working for, but they are a good step in the right direction. The people will take even more of their country back when they gain control of the Senate and the presidency along with the continued control of the House in 2012. The Great Prevaricator has not given up on more taxes. All good socialists want to level the income field. He needs to be stopped at each and every turn. We must not let him destroy our country,

More In Two Weeks
Ad Paid For By Duane A. Rasmussen

Not much comment on my last mention, so let’s try again. How is it that we have some 16 “Gamblin’ Halls” between Port Isabel and South Padre Island operating with abandon, awarding large cash prizes against state law and the enforcers of our laws fail to act? It starts on the local level where laws do not provide for background checks and publication of the names of ALL of the owners. The places of operation have no names so you have to hunt them down. Are they paying all required taxes based on some established method that is verifiable? What do they contribute to their city? Since it is a purely a cash business, who can determine that illegal funds are not being laundered through the gambling process? Come on city councils, county board and law enforcement agencies. Get on the ball!

How ironic and disingenuous can one be? The greatest spender in the history of our nation is now on Capital Hill railing on Republican leadership and demanding the House and Senate hammer out a budget deal that will include tax raising. Strange indeed, since it was The Great Prevaricator who hailed the stimulus a success in creating jobs only to discover the Feds spent nearly $280,000 for every job allegedly created!

Now Obama says “we’ve got a unique opportunity to do something big, to tackle our deficit in a way that forces government to live within its means.”

Grassfire Nation is among those who have declared that our nation’s true debt stands at a mind-boggling $120 trillion – dwarfing the popular $14.3 trillion number reported by the liberal media. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government’s publicly held debt is set to explode to 101 percent of GDP in 10 years – more than the value of everything produced in the U.S. in a given year.

Any, and I repeat ANY, of our representatives who votes for any kind of bottom line tax increase, deserve our thorough tongue lashing and removal from office at the earliest opportunity. It is a question of saving America!

More In Two Weeks
Ad Paid For By Duane A. Rasmussen

We read last week the updated game hall ordinance for the city of La Feria. They now will charge a non-returnable application fee of $3,000 and a non-refundable license fee of $6,000 for administrative costs of investigation, inspection and licensing. Further, each gaming device earns the city an annual occupational tax of $15. Interesting.

The war goes on between the Republicans and Democrats in Congress. The Senate turned down the House-passed Cut-Cap-Balance bill only to now threaten with a widely antagonizing bill from the Gang of Six that professes to shrink spending while probably increasing taxes. The Senate bill is likely to be defeated, too, unless enough Republicans switch their votes to the Democratic hopes found in the Gang of Six proposal.

It is odd, but our Great Leader benefits no matter what happens. If the debt limit is not increased, he will blame the Republicans for any negative that happens. If the limit is increased, then he can continue the outrageous spending until the next limit is reached and we start the cycle all over again. If he cannot sign a debt limit bill without new taxes, then why is it that the House cannot sign a bill that has new taxes? The people most directly have elected their representatives in the House, according to the Constitution that clearly states that the House shall do the spending. The president is the last block against Congressional action. But Congress can still over-ride the president. Must all of our serious government action resort to this tactic by a weak president?

We must hope that our Democratic friends will soon see through the smoke and look beyond the mirrors. Certain congressional and administrative liberals and socialists seem bent on keeping the economy in the dumps, driving companies out of business, preventing job creation, shutting down energy production, keeping the dollar weak, running up even more debt and keeping as many of us as possible slopping from the government trough. Is that any way to live in a free society?

More In Two Weeks
Ad Paid For By Duane A. Rasmussen

By Chris Rowan

American Thinker is my favorite place to go for thoughtful conservative commentary. Sometimes, the comments that follow a piece are just as interesting as the article itself. The comment below followed an article by George Picard titled “Obama’s Racial Spoil System.” It is an excellent article, but what really caught my attention was this comment:

Stanley Kurtz coined a term to describe Barack Obama’s modus operandi as a state senator. He gave him the moniker Senator Stealth. One way of understanding Barack Obama’s stealthiness and capacity for hiding and befogging is that he is psychologically Islamic. Christianity calls for a boldness and directness of expression — the yea that is yea. However, Islamic doctrine is less straightforward. For example, the Islamic doctrine of taqiya means concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of imminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury. It is impossible to imagine Barack Obama bravely leading soldiers in battle, but he has demonstrated an affinity for drone weapons. Does this affinity reflect his psychological incorporation of taqiya?

This theme of “otherness” in Obama is nothing new. But when you consider taqiya against the backdrop of Obama’s presidency so far, there are some interesting parallels. Twenty years of Jeremiah Wright had to have some effect.

Join us on Sundays from 1:00 pm to 2:00 in front of the Paseo Plaza along FM 802. Bring your signs or use one of ours.

Let’s look at Barack Hussein Obama’s promise to provide more open government when he came into office. The Heritage Foundation reveals below.

In February, the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent a request to the White House for Health Reform, or WHOHR, created by Obama two years ago as the “sanctum sanctorum of ObamaCare.” The committee wanted records of WHOHR’s proceedings on health reform. It seemed to be a fair request, Heritage reports. ObamaCare, after all, was Obama’s signature achievement. Surely, WHOHR kept a detailed scrapbook of treasured memories. Obama responded tersely: Providing the requested information “would be a vast and expensive undertaking” that “also would implicate longstanding Executive Branch confidentiality interests.” In short: Go fly a kite, Heritage writes.

Candidate Obama said the Clintons “made one really big mistake (with their 1993 health care plan), “and that is they took all their people and all their experts into a room and they closed the door.” Under Obama’s guidance WHOHR did the same thing. Obama promised on at least seven occasions that he would “be on C-SPAN, it’ll be streaming over the Net.” Never happened.

After Congress rammed ObamaCare through, Diane Sawyer of ABC News asked Obama about his promises to be open. “We had to make so many decisions quickly in a very difficult set of circumstances that after awhile, we started worrying more about getting the policy right than getting the process right.” He claimed transparency while still not getting the policy right.

Meetings were not always accessible because the White House maintains several row houses 100 yards outside the White House complex where officials meet with lobbyists hidden from public view. Tim Carney, press secretary, said, “We never said that there was a way to get every name in every meeting.”

The Associated Press reports that the 35 largest federal agencies received 544,360 requests under the FOI Act in 2010 – almost 41,000 more than the previous year – yet responded to nearly 12,400 fewer requests. So much for the tinhorn socialist’s promises.

More In Two Weeks
Ad Paid For By Duane A. Rasmussen

As the United Nations wrapped up its recent climate conference in Bonn, talks organizer Christiana Figueres proclaimed that climate change is the “the most important negotiation the world has ever faced.” Faced with real problems – financial meltdowns, unemployment, war and genuine human suffering – the world no longer agrees.

It’s a good thing human productivity doesn’t threaten the global thermostat the way the U.N. would have us believe. If it did, we’d be cooked. Countries rich and poor are backing away from commitments they made years ago during rosier economic times, before the public became aware of Climategate, renewable energy costs and genuine debate.

The Kyoto Protocol, the only binding international agreement signed since the global warming scare began, expires after 2012. Canada, Russia and Japan have declared they will not renew; China and the United States never signed it, and the U.S. has made it plain it is not about to. And poor countries are becoming less enamored about signing on, as they realize hard economic times mean there will be little climate “mitigation” and “restitution” money coming their way from (formerly) rich countries.

Here is what makes Liberal-Progressives vote Democrat:

1. They believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.

2. They believe the government will do a better job of spending the money they earn than they would themselves.

3. They believe that Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

4. They are way too irresponsible to own a gun, and know that the local police are all they need to protect them from murderers and thieves.

5. They believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if they don’t start driving a Prius.

6. They are not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

7. They think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.

8. They believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrats see fit.

9. They believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

10. They think that it’s better to pay billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

11. They vote Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most wonderful country in the world, they were promised “HOPE AND CHANGE”.

12. But mostly, they vote Democrat because their heads are so firmly planted up their behinds, it’s unlikely that they’ll ever have another point of view.