Brownsville Tea Party Association

Archive for the ‘Left Wing Lunacy’ Category

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.

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 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.

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.

A lot has happened since my last posting, and I wont’ even attempt to summarize everything up to now. But for me, the most significant news item in the last few weeks has been Weinergate. Anthony Weiner finally resigned from Congress the other day, and good riddance to bad rubbish.

The fact that Democrat Congressmen can still be shamed out of office gives me hope. I’m not hopeful that LibProg Dems will ever become moral creatures. I’m hopeful, not delusional. What sustains me is the thought that Weiner’s antics are still repulsive to many people; enough, anyway, to cause him to slink away to whatever rock he can crawl under. So there is still real hope for this country.

LibProg Dems, however, are a lost cause and simply must be defeated. There is no other option, no halfway “reaching across the aisle” crap. Creeping progressivism got us here, teetering on the edge of an economic precipice that threatens our way of life and the lives of succeeding generations of Americans far into the future. It’s just crazy. LibProgism is undiluted insanity.

From Judicial Watch

In a perplexing development ignored by the mainstream media, the Obama Administration suspended tens of thousands of deportations last year and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano lied to a Senate committee to cover up the astounding figure.

Read the rest of this entry »

If you don’t know the controversy surrounding Rep. Anthony Weiner, google “weinergate” and watch one or two of the videos circulating the Internet. That should bring you up to speed.

Three questions.

1. Did he do it?

2. Does it matter?

3. Who will play Rep. Weiner in the inevitable movie?

Of course he did it. The supposedly “media-savvy” Democrat Congressman could have avoided the carnival sideshow treatment by a normally supportive media with an admission of guilt, followed by a promise to “do better for my constituents who deserve better,” or some such blather.

But Weiner didn’t go that route. I guess he considers himself above all that. If he can dictate to us what kind of health care we have or the kind of car we drive, if he has that kind of power, who are we to question him about anything? So he ducked the question, tried to change the subject, repeatedly, and failed utterly.

Even Jon Stewart, his old college bro, made fun of him on his show. When your antics make The Daily Show, you’ve become a parody, a joke. If Weiner had any sense of decency or honor, he’d resign. But he won’t. Because he’s a Democrat, and when you’re a Democrat and do wrong the Barney Rule comes into play.

“What is the Barney Rule?” you ask. Democrat Representative Barney Frank’s gay lover ran a brothel in the basement of the Congressman, and got away with it. Frank also got one of his buddies a 6-figure job at Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Look up the word “corrupt” and you’ll see a picture of Barney Frank.

Frank and Weiner. Weiner and Frank. Funny how things turn out. It’s like a very bad SNL skit. It probably will be a very bad SNL skit.

Does it matter? I think so, yes. If Weiner is lying, then he’s a lewd pervert who has disgraced himself, his family, and Congress. If Weiner isn’t lying, and his account was “hacked,” then all government officials who engage in social media are at risk of being publicly humiliated, blackmailed, and so on. It’s a national security issue, or could be.

As for who could play Anthony Weiner in the inevitable Weinergate movie, Nicolas Cage comes to mind. Johnny Depp, maybe.

If logic and reason were all that was necessary to defeat leftists and their ruinous ideology, conservatives would win every election and movie stars would earn minimum wage.

I was a bystander in an online debate recently over the subject of anger in parenting (“It’s bad for parents to be angry when they punish their children” and the counter-argument “No, it isn’t”). The debate was interesting in an academic way, but the vast majority of people who vote aren’t swayed by logic or reason.

That’s why Alinsky in particular and the Left in general are so effective: They appeal to raw, unbridled emotion. It’s also why LibProgs since Wilson have been pining for the moral equivalent of war (William James, I believe) as an organizing force to impel people to “get in line” and “do their fair share.”

After all, wars are not logical. Each side in a conflict portrays the other as an evil villain that must be defeated in order to preserve or restore harmony. That’s how you convince young men to go off to war to kill people and break things.

Did you notice how animated, loud, boisterous, and angry the protesters in Madison, WI, were? Contrast that with the solemn, polite, sentimental, and tidy 9-12ers and Tea Partiers.

Who do you think would win in a street fight?

My money’s on the SEIU goons and unionista thugs.

I think we need to inject more emotion into the debate if we ever hope to defeat the LibProgs. Nobody cares how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. But they’ll watch every emotion-charged episode of American Idol.

What good is having a super-majority House in the Texas Lege if our Republicans are going to ignore the Conservative mandate the voters sent them in November, and instead — behind the exceptionally failed “leadership” of Speaker Joe Straus — are going to vote for more government intrusion and more government regulation while diminishing personal freedoms and liberties?

In this case, I’m talking about the statewide smoking ban (as an amendment on Senate Bill 1811):

The Texas House tonight passed an amendment to create a statewide smoking ban.

The close vote, 73-66, came during debate on the enormous budget-related bill, Senate Bill 1811.

The amendment by Rep. Myra Crownover, R-Denton, was one of a few opposed by the measure’s House sponsor, Rep. Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, that actually passed.

The amendment would ban smoking in public places, which would include bars and restaurants because they are places where anyone would be welcome.

But some of Crownover’s tea party-leaning Republican colleagues fought her on the amendment because they believed it would infringe on rights of business owners.

No, we don’t believe it would infringe on the private property rights of business owners, we know that it infringes on the private property rights of business owners. What other legal activities is the House comfortable with prohibiting? What legal activity are they going to go after next?

Making sure that we find a good Conservative candidate to primary Ms. Crownover when she’s up for re-election should be one of the top priorities of Conservatives. Right along side of putting Speaker Straus out to pasture as well.

This still has to make it through the Senate, those Republicans haven’t shown much more of a Conservative backbone than their House counterparts.

UPDATE and Correction:  I was looking at the wrong record vote. My representative, Paul Workman (R-HD 47) voted NO to this freedom-robbing bill. Good for him. I originally posted that he voted in favor of it.

Business owners and a free market should be allowed to decide if smoking is permitted in a private business or not. If there is no market for a bar where smoking is permitted, then it will fail on it’s own without any government intrusion, as expressed by Rep. Jose Aliseda, R-Beeville, who succeeded in exempting pool halls:

“I am not a smoker, but I believe that a private business owner should have the right to choose their own business model.”

Well, at least we have at least one Conservative in the House GOP. In November 2012, we will look to add a bunch more Conservatives to the Texas Legislator (by kicking out a bunch of Republicans). Yeah, I’m talking about you, specifically Mr. Workman. I hope you enjoyed enriching all of your construction industry buddies and personal interests as best you could in your freshman session, because you are one-and-done, sir.

Public employees are indispensable. No city or town can do without its firefighters, police, paramedics, sanitation workers, and so on. Even the tiniest of municipalities need people to sweep the floors of City Hall, stuff sheets of paper into manilla folders, round up stray dogs and cats, and so on. I have no idea how many city, county, state, and federal employees there are in Brownsville, but there must be quite a few.

Public employees are indispensable, but it really irks me when I read about public employees threatening to strike over benefits, pay, or whatever. At some point, collective bargaining becomes a euphemism for a shakedown, for extortion. You don’t want to cross firefighters or the police because . . . Why, exactly? If the city doesn’t give in to the demands of, say, the firefighters union, will they decide to no longer put out fires? Or will they continue in their capacity as firefighters, only in a somewhat more diminished capacity, meaning they’ll take their time getting to the blaze?

So we’ve gotten to the point where over the years public employees have demanded and been given class “A” benefit packages and retirement benefits that were unsustainable and unrealistic back when they were instituted, but were instituted anyway. And we’re broke.

Scary stuff.

From the McAllen Tea Party

In some of these posts over the past few months, we told you about some of the information being taught in our public schools. Some of you were skeptical. 

Well, this should really shock you as it did one of the school board members who objected to the reading and to one of the teachers in the meeting. He just hung his head apparently in shame, then walked out of the meeting.

On Glenn Beck’s radio program this morning, an excerpt from a Tuscon school board meeting was played wherein a young woman read portions (including page number references) from a book used in the Controversial Ethnic Studies Curriculum for grades 3 through 12. 

This seemed to be an emotional reading for the people attending the meeting so we researched it to find the actual video.

We found it.

References to “Blood-sucking Capitalists”, the “F” word, “S—”, and “BullS—” appear to be used quite extensively throughout the book.

Caution: This video contains language you may not want to hear! But, that’s kind of the point, isn’t it? Should the “offensive” language in a public school textbook be censored in a public meeting but not in the classroom? What about the kids? 

I’m thankful that this young woman cared enough to review the textbook and then had the courage to confront the school board.

What are our kids and grand-kids being taught? 

Shouldn’t we be more involved in our kids’ education?

By Amy Eldred

Today Texas was graced by the presence of “dear leader” who told us we were basically full of bullcrap when it comes to the issue of the border.

According to Obama, problem’s fixed and we should shut up.  I thought you all might appreciate this video clip of Congressman Lamar Smith debunking the lies that were spewed in El Paso.  

Funny . . . Obama turns up to pander for the. Hispanic vote and raise campaign $$ but won’t acknowledge the devastation caused by weeks of fire and a long drought.  You think he saw any scorched earth from Air Force One?