West Texas Concerned Citizens Coalition

Battle in Brooks County - Part 1 of 2

2012-01-12T09:58:00.001-06:00

Battle in Brooks County - Part 2 of 2

2012-01-12T09:57:00.001-06:00

FALFURRIAS TEXAS - BORDER BANDITS

2012-01-12T09:47:00.001-06:00

World Magazine

COVER STORY
Issue: "Border bandits" December 03, 2011

Border bandits

Illegal immigration may be down, but ranchers and farmers in south Texas say the influx continues and it's becoming more violent and criminal
Jamie Dean

FALFURRIAS, Texas—When Linda Vickers leaves home to feed the horses on her Texas ranch each morning, she takes three things: her dog, her cell phone, and her pistol.

For Vickers, these aren't just the trappings of a typical rural rancher: They're a way to guard against the potential danger of illegal aliens and to call U.S. Border Patrol agents if trouble erupts.
Though she hasn't used the gun, the dogs have warned her more than once: A few months ago, Vickers says the dogs "went ballistic" when she walked into the tack room. She discovered two illegal aliens sleeping on the floor.

On another morning, a large man with a pencil-thin mustache followed Vickers from the barn to her home. She called Border Patrol agents, and they apprehended the Brazilian who had split from a group of 40 other illegal aliens. From her back porch, Vickers has watched groups of 10 or more illegal immigrants tromp through her land, and she admits: "It does feel like an invasion."

Vickers' experience isn't unusual among Texas ranchers, but it is notable for at least one reason: She lives nearly 70 miles north of the U.S-Mexico border. The ranch she shares with her husband, Mike Vickers, sits just outside the rural town of Falfurrias in south Texas, and a few miles from the final U.S. Border Patrol checkpoint heading north on Highway 281.

To clear that checkpoint, illegal immigrants have two options: Try to pass through it or try to go around it. Many try to skirt the checkpoint by fanning into the hundreds of thousands of acres of surrounding farmland—including the Vickers' ranch. Human smugglers—known as coyotes—often drop illegal immigrants south of the checkpoint. Another coyote meets them in the brush for an often-treacherous journey to a waiting car north of the station.

Remarkably, thousands try to pass through the checkpoint, often hidden in trucks and cargo. By late October, agents at the Falfurrias checkpoint had apprehended 9,106 undocumented aliens since January. A sign outside the five-lane checkpoint offered another disturbing statistic that underscores a disturbing reality about some of the traffic moving through these rural areas: Since January, agents at the Falfurrias station had also seized 291,829 pounds of narcotics.
The U.S. Border Patrol reports a sharp drop in illegal immigration, and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano says the border has never been more secure—but local officials and residents in rural Texas tell a different story: Even if some numbers have dropped, illegal immigration remains a consistent problem, and cartel-related drug smuggling poses serious threats.

Indeed, better border security in some areas may be funneling illegal immigrants and drug smugglers to rural lands where the defenses are weaker. A February report from the Government Accountability Office found that the U.S. Border Patrol has achieved operational control of just 44 percent of the southern border. That reality leaves some locals in rural areas fending for themselves and creates national security concerns that extend far beyond border areas.

Examining problems with border security first requires acknowledging progress: The U.S. Border Patrol reported in July that the number of apprehensions of illegal aliens declined by 61 percent over a five-year period. The numbers dropped from 1,189,000 in 2005 to 463,000 in 2010.

The agency acknowledged that a struggling U.S. economy and a weak job market could be factors in the apparent drop in illegal immigration. But agency officials also touted better enforcement efforts, including nearly 700 miles of border fence along the southwestern border. (Many Texans question the effectiveness of the border fence and point to large gaps in many parts of the wall.)

In an El Paso speech in May, President Barack Obama touted the federal government's doubling of Border Patrol agents since 2004, an effort that began under President George W. Bush. Some 20,000 agents now patrol the southwest border. Two months earlier, Napolitano highlighted the low violent crime rates in Texas border towns. She declared: "The border is better now than it has ever been."

Don't tell that to Mike Vickers. On a hot afternoon in late October, the Falfurrias rancher and veterinarian pointed to a fresh set of footprints in the sandy ground on his 1,000-acre ranch. Boot prints followed sneaker prints and revealed last night's chase: Border Patrol agents pursued and apprehended 15 illegal immigrants crossing Vickers' ranch.

The agents had help: Volunteers from Vickers' group—Texas Border Volunteers (TBV)—spotted the illegal aliens during a night watch and called Border Patrol to respond. They gave agents a GPS location for the group and tracked their movements until the agents arrived.

For Vickers, it was a familiar scene. The native Texan has lived in Falfurrias for 37 years and started TBV five years ago to respond to increasing immigrant traffic across the ranches in the area. (The cattle ranches are vast: Vickers' neighbor owns 100,000 acres.) Aside from the trespassing, Vickers says he's suffered costly property damage from immigrants cutting fences and breaking wells.

The rancher runs two-week operations about once a month, and volunteers from all over the country come to patrol for illegal crossings across two counties. On a recent night, volunteers gathered under a shelter on Vickers' ranch ahead of a night patrol. Night vision equipment and binoculars covered folding tables where three men sat, decked in camouflage. Deer trophies hung on an outside wall near a sign with John Wayne's picture and a quote: "Courage is being scared to death and saddling up anyway."

These guys don't look scared. Rich David—a paramedic from Wisconsin—comes twice a year sporting a handlebar mustache and bringing Wisconsin cheese and beer. He volunteers for two-week stints during his vacation time and says he's provoked to help private landowners protect their property: "Everybody's got to do something." In the last three years, Vickers says the group has reported more than 1,400 illegal immigrants to authorities.

On a pre-dusk patrol the same evening, Vickers pointed to signs of some of those illegal immigrants under a sparse bush: Empty food and drink cans littered the patch of land where a group of illegal aliens had stopped to camp and snack on Vienna Sausages, canned fruit, and five-hour energy drinks.

Sadly, the journey usually takes far longer than five hours, and some immigrants don't make it: Vickers has found dead bodies of immigrants who likely succumbed to soaring temperatures and dehydration. The local sheriff's department has recovered 55 bodies on ranches around the area since January.

Those who do make it follow paths that coyotes and immigrants have created during years of illegal crossings on the ranches. Vickers and his volunteers have given the paths names like "Smuggler's Row" and "Thorny Pipeline." They call another path "Bulls-Eye Crawl" after an elusive immigrant smuggler who wore cowboy boots emblazoned with a bulls-eye. (After years of trying, volunteers helped agents catch the coyote.)

Another path—"The Welcome Center"—got its name after a volunteer patrolman encountered a smuggler and 33 Chinese immigrants passing through the area. Vickers says that's not unusual: Though most of the immigrants are Mexicans, he says he's encountered Sudanese, Somalis, and Indians on his land. Authorities refer to these immigrants as OTMs, an acronym for "Other than Mexicans."

The U.S. Border Patrol reports that 87 percent of apprehended illegal immigrants come from Mexico. Another 11 percent come from South America. While a small percentage are from other countries, it's enough to alarm security hawks. The Border Patrol reported that OTMs apprehended in 2010 included illegal immigrants from four countries on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism: Cuba (712), Iran (14), Syria (5), and Sudan (5). Illegal immigrants came from other countries associated with terrorism, including Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen.

Meanwhile, reports of Mexican cartel activity abound: The Texas Department of Public Safety reports that six Mexican drug cartels have set up operational command centers in cities across the state.

On the same October day that agents caught 15 immigrants on Vickers' ranch, federal authorities revealed a thwarted Iraqi plot with a disturbing twist: The plan to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States in a crowded D.C. restaurant hinged on an Iraqi national seeking help from a Mexican cartel based in Houston.

That didn't surprise Vickers. "The disposition of the traffic has changed," he says. "They're more violent and they're more combative. ... And there seems to be more and more coming from all over the world."

Danny Davila has similar worries. The lone investigator for the Brooks County Sheriff's Department in Falfurrias works with just six deputies covering 950 square miles of territory. Though much of that territory is sparsely populated, the small force is facing big challenges: Davila estimates that immigrant-related issues absorb about 65 percent of the force's time.

Sometimes that means apprehending illegal immigrants coming to the United States to join families or look for work. Other times it means intercepting drug smugglers carting loads of narcotics from Mexico. Sometimes, it's both: Davila says cartels often run both human and drug smuggling operations. A smuggler might surprise an illegal immigrant who's paying for passage to the United States by requiring that he carry a load of drugs.

In a tiny office that Davila shares with his assistant, photos covering the wood-paneled walls show the results of a two-year effort to crack down on drug smuggling: In one photo, officers stand next to a stash of 2,280 pounds of marijuana. Another picture shows piles of drug money that officers seized with smugglers on the way back to Mexico: The bundles of cash came about $30 short of $900,000.

The department won a federal grant to establish a brush crew in 2009: The two-man team spent the year combing nearby ranches to learn the paths the smugglers most often use and begin tracking routes. The progress of the small force in two years points to hard work and heavy drug traffic.

In a lot behind the office, Davila walks through rows of dozens of impounded cars. Some still bear the marks of smuggling: a small, square hole cut behind the front panel of a black sedan shows a spot where smugglers hid tens of thousands of dollars in cash. Davila opens a nearby trailer, revealing another stash: It's filled with seized marijuana, including a common smuggling device—bundles of marijuana taped together and fastened with homemade straps. Smugglers carry the 90-pound loads on their backs through the brush.

It didn't take long for the deputies to interrupt a major smuggling operation: Authorities say that Jose Maria Carbajal smuggled thousands of pounds of marijuana through local ranches for years. When Brooks County deputies identified the routes and started intercepting substantial loads of the drugs, federal authorities say Carbajal plotted revenge with the notorious Zetas drug cartel in Mexico.

In a 19-page criminal complaint, federal officials say Carbajal told an informant that members of the Zetas cartel traveled to Falfurrias after deputies intercepted 1,100 pounds of the Zetas' marijuana. Carbajal said he showed cartel members where two of the Brooks County deputies lived, and that the cartel planned to kidnap at least one of them. Federal authorities arrested Carbajal during a February raid.

On a recent morning, Mo Saavedra headed out for brush patrol. The two-year veteran was one of the deputies threatened by Carbajal. He says he changed some of his routines for safety, but he kept working just as hard. In an unmarked pickup truck, the deputy lumbers through the brush of a nearby ranch with a semi-automatic rifle next to him in the front seat.

When the federal grant for the brush crew expired, Saavedra began making patrols alone. (His partner patrols during other shifts.) Since the department receives very little outside funding, the deputy depends on instincts and a good memory—the truck doesn't have GPS technology or a digital radio for secure communication. He says he's learned most of the territory by spending hours in the brush: "It's all hands on."

On this morning, Saavedra looks for signs of immigrants hiding in bushes, and slows when he sees a vulture circling. This time it's a dead animal, but the deputy has found dead bodies of immigrants who died in the extreme heat.

That's what bothers Davila most. Back in his office, the investigator has two three-ring binders filled with photos of the 55 bodies the department has found this year. One photo shows a woman with a bloated face, but many are unidentifiable remains like skulls and teeth. One photo shows an intact skeleton lying face-up, still clothed in a blue jacket and brown pants.

If an illegal immigrant grows too sick or weak to stay with the group, the smuggler typically leaves him behind. "They don't care if you're the 28-year-old mother of two," says Davila. "They've got your money, and if you can't keep up you die."

Another binder holds pictures and descriptions of 23 people reported missing this year. If family members in Mexico don't hear from a loved one who attempted to cross the border, sometimes they call the sheriff's office.

They might fax or email a photo and send identifying information. One photo showed a pretty young woman leaning under an arched doorway. Another showed a man holding a young child. The description said he was born in 1973 and offered this tip: "Male was left behind three miles outside of Falfurrias as he was unable to walk."

Dying from the elements isn't the only consequence met by some immigrants: Women and girls face the threat of kidnapping for a thriving underground sex trade in the United States. Others are sometimes raped or murdered. It's a reality that disturbs Davila: "That's no way for anyone to die. I don't care where you're from."

The investigator wonders what his small team isn't catching in the brush, and says more resources would help them apprehend more smugglers and protect the surrounding community: "If you just ignore it, it's not going to go away."

While federal authorities insist they aren't ignoring border issues, Texas Commissioner of Agriculture Todd Staples says they're at a minimum denying the severity of the problem. Staples' department released an independent study in September that included testimony from Texas ranchers afraid of the traffic crossing their property. One rancher said he's watched smugglers carry drugs across his property right in front of him. Another said immigrants have come to his door in the middle of the night asking to borrow his phone and his truck.

From his office in Austin, Staples said that ranchers have pleaded with him to ask for more protection of rural farmland. The commissioner says he's been met by "denial and rebuff" from federal officials. While he applauds the Border Patrol's work, and says he's thankful the president has continued to send more agents, he says the pace needs to accelerate, not slow down. That's especially true, he says, in rural areas with far less protection than border crossings.

He warns that without securing these rural areas, and committing more resources to fighting cartels in Texas, drugs and drug-related violence will continue showing up across the country: "It's not the tooth fairy dropping off these drugs in Los Angeles and New Jersey and Dallas and cities across the country."

If protecting rural areas means preventing illegal immigrants from ever crossing the border, some Texans agree that a border fence alone won't do the job. The federal government has completed about 110 miles of fence in the state. Vickers says he's against the fence, calling it a waste of time and money. Others say some barrier is better than no barrier, but that a wall won't keep out illegal immigrants willing to climb over or dig under.

At the border fence in places like Brownsville, illegal immigrants have another option: Walk right through. The 18-foot-high fence has gaps at points large enough to walk or drive through. Officials say that the gaps allow Border Patrol agents to travel through if needed and may have gates in the future. On a recent sunny afternoon, I walked through one gap in Brownsville that had a Border Patrol truck nearby. The truck was empty.

The landscape in Texas makes building a uniform fence difficult. In towns like Brownsville, the Rio Grande River cuts so close to city limits, federal authorities built the fence nearly a mile north of the border. That means a slew of homeowners and businesses own property north of the border, but south of the border fence. They call it a no man's land and say their property values have plummeted.

Vickers and others call for more boots on the ground to respond to illegal crossings, and more internal enforcement of existing immigration laws to discourage illegal immigration. That adds front-burner urgency to the back-burner issue of immigration reform in Washington, D.C.

For now locals like Vickers and Davila say they'll keep protecting as much of their community as possible. In an early November email, Davila wrote about an Oct. 24 accident in Falfurrias: A red Ford pickup truck full of illegal aliens and 500 pounds of marijuana struck the vehicle of an elderly couple from a nearby town. The immigrants had backpacked the drugs through the brush. "All subjects involved were critical, but survived the accident," wrote Davila. "Five illegals were arrested, and two absconded into the brush."

UNMANNED TEXAS BORDER CROSSING AT BIG BEND

2012-01-12T09:32:00.000-06:00

Two or three years ago, Ted Poe was on a tour of the SW border area (south of El Paso about 30 miles). There were some narrow metal bridges crossing the river and he threw a fit about those and I believe they were removed.

Now they want to open up this crossing again. Ever since this crossing was closed, the people (on both sides of the river in this area) have been complaining about having to travel 16 hours to get across. Apparently someone complained enough to get this opened up again. Bill Brooks, the public information officer at the BP Big Bend Sector (formerly called the Marfa Sector), is in favor of opening this crossing as are others. I think they have been talked into opening this crossing because of the remaining population of the little village on the other side and the hardships of those living there. Those Mexicans made their meager living on the tourists that would cross over and eat and buy handmade Mexican items and they would come across to the U.S. side to buy groceries.

Ordinarily the BP would not be allowed to patrol on National Park land...but the House Committee on Natural Resources passed H.R. 1505: National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act in October that has given the BP authority to patrol on NP land (within 100 miles of the border). Conservationists were not happy about it and complained about it being a form of government "land grabbing" and would cause a lot of damage to the parks...but apparently they haven't been to the borders in AZ and witnessed the tons of trash and garbage left by the illegals and smugglers!! I guess the Big Bend BP want to take advantage of this access to park land before the government changes its mind!!

I feel like a lot of others....that this is just going to open up another can of worms for the smugglers...and make it easier for the poor Mexicans to slip across with "a card" and then disappear into the U.S. like millions of others. The Mexicans have been coming across in this area for many years when the river is low enough to wade or walk across....which is probably dry now because of the drought. I believe the river between El Paso and Presidio is still being used by the smugglers....although it may have slowed down some after more and better armed agents were brought in.

I sent the article on this "plan" to Cornyn, AG Greg Abbott, our federal and state reps and senators. I would suggest contacting Perry's office and complaining about this. Since he is running for president...he will be more inclined to listen if he thinks he can get our support. He has been sounding very strong about securing the borders....and this would be a good time to complain to him about the crossing. The $2.3 million cost alone during a bad economy should be enough not to open it.

The Park Service started work on this facility the end of October and are saying it should be completed by spring (unless their plans are "changed")....so they are already building it. While it may be too late to stop the initial construction....complaints can be sent to:

William E. Wellman
Big Bend National Park Superintendent.
Big Bend National Park
P.O. Box 129
Big Bend National Park, TX 79834

Headquarters & Visitor Information
432-477-2251
432-477-1175 FAX
E-mail contact form at:
www.nps.gov/bibe/index.htm

John J. Smietana, Jr. is the Chief Patrol Agent at the Border Patrol Big Bend Sector (formerly called the Marfa Sector) in Marfa, TX, and can be reached at:

(432) 729-5200 or 1-888-536-6204

Bill Brooks is the public information officer for the BP Big Bend Sector and can be reached at: (432) 729-5200 or 1-888-536-6204

Mailing address:
Big Bend Border Patrol Sector
P.O. Box I
Marfa, TX 79843

From Pat Kennedy, WTCCC, Midland via e-mail

Read article here.

Obama Appoints La Raza Radical to Lead Our Domestic Policy

2012-01-12T08:41:00.000-06:00

FOR YOUR INFORMATION.....Barack Hussein Obama continues stacking the deck of government leadership in favor of wide-open borders and amnesty for all. His latest move: appointing the former senior vice president of the National Council of La Raza, Cecilia Muñoz, to head the Domestic Policy Council.

Cecilia Muñoz is a LaRaza radical amnesty advocate!!! My definition of an "amnesty advocate" is a demanding, arm-twisting behind closed doors, open borders lobbyist, that will stop at nothing to get their way in Washington....and National Council of LaRaza has produced some of the most outspoken radicals and determined amnesty advocates.

In 2008, LaRaza helped to register nearly 200,000 new Hispanic voters and helped more than 1.5 million eligible immigrants apply for citizenship. The actions of LaRaza will be as strong in the 2012 elections. LaRaza demands and is fighting for open borders and rights for all legal and illegal Latinos.

Janet Murgia, current president and CEO of National Council of LaRaza (NCLR), the largest national Hispanic civil-rights and advocacy organization in the United States, was a deputy assistant to Bill Clinton from 1994 to 2000. Murguia served as deputy director of legislative affairs, managing the legislative staff and acting as a senior White House liaison to Congress. Clinton granted six amnesties during his eight years in office.

Obama is granting his promised amnesties to the open borders activists...but through the back door of the White House!!! (Sneaky little devils aren't they!!)

Pat Kennedy
WTxCC

Read article here.

The New Republican Primary Rules Make It Possible for the Republican Establishment To Steal the Nomination From a Candidate They Don’t Like

2012-01-02T11:38:00.000-06:00

From: End of the American Dream

"New Republican primary rules are going to make it basically impossible for any candidate to wrap up the Republican nomination very early in 2012. In fact, the new Republican primary rules make a "brokered convention" much more likely and they also make it much more likely that the Republican establishment will attempt to steal the nomination away from a candidate that they do not like. How exactly they would do this will be discussed later in the article. The key is that most Republican primaries and caucuses will now allocate delegates using a proportional system rather than a "winner take all" system. Back in 2008, John McCain did very well in early "winner take all" primaries and wrapped up the Republican nomination very, very quickly. Nothing like that will happen in 2012. In fact, if the field remains crowded it is going to be very difficult for any candidate to accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates by the time the Republican national convention rolls around. As will be discussed later on in this article, that would move the power into the hands of the Republican establishment.

First, let's try to understand what these new changes are. Sadly, it appears that even most Republican voters do not understand how things have changed.

The following rule was adopted by the Republican Party back in August 2010....

"Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis."

This new rule means that delegates will be apportioned to candidates on a proportional basis in Republican caucuses and primaries that are conducted prior to April 1st. One notable exception to this rule is Florida, which got approval to remain a "winner take all" state. So Florida will be very important.

In addition, all of the states that are now using "proportional representation" do not allocate delegates the exact same way. Each state has slightly different election rules.

But in general, in most of the primaries and caucuses held before April 1st, delegates will be awarded to multiple candidates instead of to just a single candidate.

Therefore, it now becomes much less important who wins each individual state. Instead, the key is how many delegates a candidate picks up in each state.

The Republicans decided to go to such a system after watching the extended battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in 2008. The following comes from a recent Huffington Post article....

Don't look for a quick winner in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. After watching Democrats successfully ride their historic primary battle between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama all the way to the White House in 2008, the Republicans quietly adopted a new rule designed to extend their nominating process this time around.
The rule limits the ability of candidates to win large numbers of delegates in early primaries and caucuses – those held before April – because delegates must be awarded in proportion to the votes a candidate receives.

If proportional representation would have been used back in 2008, the Republican race would have looked much different. John McCain would have had to battle much, much longer to secure the nomination.

The following comes from fairvote.org....

Consider the 2008 Republican nomination contest. John McCain secured an essentially insurmountable lead on February 5, Super Tuesday. Sen. McCain had become the frontrunner heading into Super Tuesday by winning three key primaries: South Carolina, Florida and New Hampshire. His average percentage share in those contests was just 34.5%, and he never even broke the 40% threshold. Even on February 5, he won only 3 states with a majority of the vote.

Although McCain on Super Tuesday did not capture a majority of the popular vote (and did not, in fact, ever reach a majority of 50% of votes cast in primaries), McCain’s disproportionately large delegate count forced his leading opponents to drop out of the race.

Some even believe that an extended three way race between McCain, Romney and Huckabee could have resulted in a "brokered convention" back in 2008. The following analysis comes from a recent Daily Kos article....

In 2008, the Republican primary contest was decided quickly and relatively painlessly only because there were winner-take-all rules at the time. Those rules have been changed. If you take the current proportional delegate rules and apply them to the results of the 2008 race through Feb 5th, when the race was still heavily contested, something very surprising happens. John McCain, who took a commanding lead under the winner-take-all rules in effect in most states, instead ends up behind Mitt Romney by eight delegates (with a confidence factor of plus or minus 5 delegates.) The standings, with more than half the delegates decided, would have been as follows.
Romney 439McCain 431Huckabee 247Other 114
This year, there will be very few "winner take all" primaries, and most of those will be at the end of the schedule.
This is going to encourage candidates to stick around longer. The more delegates that a candidate can accumulate, the more leverage that candidate will have moving into the convention.
Right now, the Republican field is very crowded and nobody has been able to take a commanding lead in the polls. The possibility that no candidate will be able to accumulate more than 50% of the delegates by the time of the Republican convention seems to grow by the day.
If no candidate has won more than 50% of the delegates by convention time, then it is likely that we will have a brokered convention.
So exactly what is a brokered convention?
The following is how Wikipedia defines a brokered convention....:
A brokered convention is a situation in United States politics in which there are not enough delegates 'won' during the presidential primary and caucus elections for a single candidate to have a pre-existing majority, during the first official vote for a political party's presidential-candidate at its nominating convention.
Once the first ballot, or vote, has occurred, and no candidate has a majority of the delegates' votes, the convention is then considered brokered; thereafter, the nomination is decided through a process of alternating political horse-trading, and additional re-votes. In this circumstance, all regular delegates (who, previously, were pledged to the candidate who had won their respective state's primary or caucus election) are "released," and are able to switch their allegiance to a different candidate before the next round of balloting. It is hoped that this 'freedom' will result in a re-vote resulting in a clear majority of delegates for one candidate.
Okay, so how does all of this make it possible for the Republican establishment to steal the nomination from a candidate that they do not like?
It is actually very easy.
If the Republican establishment does not like the candidate that is leading in the delegate count, they can try to shoot for a brokered convention.
They can do this by encouraging candidates to stay in the race longer in order to water down the vote.
They can also do this by encouraging late entrants into the race in order to steal some delegates away.
In fact, there are persistent rumors that the Republican establishment is already lining up late entrants to enter the race. The following comes from a recent Wall Street Journal article....
Efforts are underway by some wealthy Republican donors and a group of conservative leaders to investigate whether a new Republican candidate could still get into the presidential race. The talk is still preliminary and somewhat wishful, but it reflects dissatisfaction with the two leading candidates, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.
Conservative leaders are looking into whether it is feasible for a dark horse to get on the ballot in select states. The deadline to qualifying for the ballot has passed in Florida, South Carolina, Missouri, and New Hampshire. But a candidate could still get on the ballot in states like Tennessee, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Michigan and Texas. At the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, voters write in their choice, so there is no formal filing deadline.
The chatter about potential new entrants include former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, businessman Donald Trump, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint.
If a candidate that the Republican establishment does not like gets out to an early lead, the Republican establishment will move heaven and earth in an attempt to keep that candidate from accumulating 50 percent of the delegates.
The goal would be to cause a brokered convention which would enable the Republican establishment to hand pick whatever candidate that they want.
In fact, if a brokered convention happens the Republicans could end up selecting someone that is not even running.
It certainly does not sound very American, but this is a very real possibility.
The Republican establishment is only going to go along with the will of the people as long as they pick the "correct" candidate.

That is why any anti-establishment candidate is going to be facing a huge uphill battle this year. It would be way too easy for the Republican establishment to force a brokered convention.

Any candidate that wants to avoid a brokered convention is going to have to accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates before the convention, and that is going to be very difficult to do under the new rules."

~Lordhawke

WHAT IS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?

2011-12-31T07:37:00.000-06:00

From Unfiltered News December 21, 2011 By Sid Preskitt

What is Sustainable Development?
“Sustainable Development” is the UN Agenda 21 “Plan For The 21st Century”
It is the UN plan to manage and control ALL human activity under Marxist/socialist principles.
Re-distribution of wealth is a built in feature of it.
In practicality, it is a direct economic attack on the United States.
In fact, Maurice Strong was the Chair of the 1992 U.N. Earth Summit in Rio where Agenda 21 was introduced. He made the intent clear when he was quoted saying that it was their responsibility to bring about the collapse of the industrialized countries.
It has been incorporated into federal policy with a series of Executive Orders starting with #12982 in 1994 and continuing this year with more creating the Rural and Ocean Council’s.
It is the primary reason that we can’t meet our energy needs with production from our vast natural resources whether it be petroleum, coal or timber.
It is the reason that the vital Keystone Pipeline project is being opposed.
It is the reason we export almost a trillion dollars annually buying imported oil when we have proven reserves totaling more than all the mid-east countries combined.
It is the reason American’s are exhorted to cut back energy use to 1990′s levels further crippling the economy while China and other countries are exempt. All based on a fraudulent premise put forth by the U.N. IPCC.
It is the reason that over 600 local governments in the U.S. are dues paying members of ICLEI which directs the local implementation of Agenda 21 and other U.N. policies that Congress never approved. (see: ICLEI.org)
It is the reason that the Secretary of Transportation announced that promoting motorized transportation is no longer their priority.
It is the reason that our seafood production is severely restricted with only limited access allowed to abundant marine resources.
It is the reason that some of the most productive areas of the oceans around the coast are being closed off in “Marine Protected Areas”
It is the reason that NOAA Director, Dr. Jane Lubchenco has made implementing the Agenda 21, Catch Share allocation system in every American fishery a top priority. In New England and Florida the results are American fishermen out of work and the Governor of Massachusetts declaring an economic disaster with a request for $21 million in federal aid.
Dr. Lubchenco’s response was asking for $54 million in additional funds to expand the program.
It is a primary reason that we import 84% of our seafood and export (re-distribute) nearly $11 billion to foreign countries like China and Vietnam in a seafood trade deficit.
It is the reason that our manufacturing base has been moved to foreign countries starting with NAFTA which had the goal of “promoting Sustainable Development”.
It is the reason that the Federal, State and local governments have been buying land in an effort to create the “system of protected areas” called for in the un-ratified U.N. Agenda 21 treaty.
It is the reason the U.S. Senate refused to even vote on the treaty when maps of The Wildlands Project were displayed on the floor of the Senate. The stated goal is “50% of the land in Core Wilderness areas with little or no human use” interconnected with Wildlife Corridors surrounded with Buffer Zones.
It is the reason that Volusia County, Florida now owns approximately 40% of the land in the County creating a “Conservation Corridor”.
When you put it all together it is a primary reason for the collapse of the American economy just as U.N. official, Maurice Strong wanted in 1993 when it all started.
Now, what are we going to do about it? ~Lordhawke

National Defense Authorization Act

2011-12-30T07:04:00.000-06:00

Conaway Chronicle Volume 6, Issue 10

National Defense Authorization Act

In Congress this week the National Defense Authorization Act passed the House and Senate, whereupon it was sent to the President for his signature. This bill is important because it provides pay and benefits for our troops, buys the weapons and equipment they need to do their job, and funds research to help meet future threats to our national security.

While this bill is central to a functioning national security, there was a misunderstanding regarding the detainee provisions. This provision does not address or extend new authority to detain U.S. Citizens. What it does do is affirm that the military may lawfully detain individuals who are engaged in armed conflict with the United States, as stated by the Authorization of the Use of Military Force. The bill adds explicit protections for American citizens as well as a prohibition against the President waving such protections.

This bill strengthens our ability to fight the War on Terror and enables a continued, steadfast national security plan.

Read the Bill*
*Detainee provision exempting U.S. citizens: page 655 & 657

Mike Conaway voted for the bill. So did John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison. I've dug into the background on the bill but there's too much legaleze for me. When I read the page indicated by Mike Conaway above, it seems rather straightforward that this will not pertain to American citizens or legal residents and that the President would also be resticted from using the waiver option against American citizens or legal residents.

But since when was anything straightforward coming out of D.C.? So I got to looking at who was objecting and what they were objecting to.

Montana has initiated a recall of their representatives who voted for the bill. " Montana residents William Crain and Stewart Rhodes are spearheading the drive. Mr. Crain is an artist. Mr. Rhodes is an attorney, Yale Law School graduate, and the national president of the organization Oath Keepers, who are military and law enforcement officers, both former and active duty, who vow to uphold their Oath to the US Constitution and to disobey illegal orders which constitute attacks on their fellow citizens." Source here. Oathkeepers, of course, has been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Now, the SPLC is a hate group unto itself; however, DHS is using them as a resource and published the directives sent out to all law enforcement indicating returning veterans, people believing in the Constitution or pro-life, people having Ron Paul bumper stickers, people wanting our borders secure, people with beliefs againt homosexuality, etc., might be terrorists based on the info given them by SPLC.
Here's a video of a Judge Napolitano report on it.
And, here's what Ron Paul has to say on it. No matter what you think about Ron Paul, you can't argue with his 100% adherance to voting Constitutionally in all his years as a Congressman.
Personally, I don't know what to think about this bill. Viscerally, I don't like it.

MEChA motto

2011-12-28T16:31:00.001-06:00

I was just watching a few MEChA members out in California..of course, they were busy calling everyone else a racist. Then somebody brought up the MEChA motto.

Por la raza todo. Fuera de la raza nada. Literal translation: For the race all. Outside the race nothing.

For the past few years, they've been trying to convince us that we misinpret this. That la raza means "people," "community," etc., etc., etc. Really focusing on the first part. You know, I hate to bring this up, but what about the latter part? If, in fact, we have misinterpreted what the saying means, then is MEChA for people but against animals, plants, extra-terrestrials? If they're for the community, does this mean one community will not help or associate with another community?

Logic just fails me here. It still seems that a Chicano organization with a motto like this is talking Chicano...not people, not community. Especially in view of this MEChA statement: "Chicano is our identity; it defines who we are as people. It rejects the notion that we...should assimilate into the Anglo-American melting pot...Aztlan was the legendary homeland of the Aztecas ... It became synonymous with the vast territories of the Southwest, brutally stolen from a Mexican people marginalized and betrayed by the hostile custodians of the Manifest Destiny." (Statement on University of Oregon MEChA Website, Jan. 3, 2006)

Joe Arpaio in the "Hotseat" again for doing his job!

2011-12-24T11:27:00.000-06:00

From Reuters via Internet:

A federal judge on Friday barred high profile Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio from detaining people simply for being in the country illegally, in a ruling that faulted the local lawman for enforcing federal immigration law.

The 40-page written opinion by U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow came on the same day he issued legal sanctions against Arpaio over destroyed documents.

The decisions come as a further blow for the controversial sheriff, who already has faced rebukes from the U.S. Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.

Both rulings by Snow stemmed from a 2007 civil lawsuit against Arpaio and his agency, which accuses his officers of racial profiling of Latinos in traffic stops the judge found were conducted as immigration sweeps.

The judge also said officers with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department (MCSO), which covers Phoenix and surrounding areas, circulated emails that "compared Mexicans to dogs" and portrayed them "as drunks."

"Local law enforcement agencies, such as MCSO, may not enforce civil federal immigration law," Snow said in his written opinion.

He added that the sheriff's agency was "hereby enjoined" from detaining "any person based only on knowledge or reasonable belief, without more, that the person is unlawfully present within the United States."

In his ruling, Snow also granted a request by plaintiffs to certify the lawsuit as a class action.

He defined the class action as encompassing all Latinos "stopped, detained, questioned or searched" by Arpaio's officers "while driving or sitting in a vehicle" on roads or parking areas in Maricopa County.

EVIDENCE DESTRUCTION

Snow also cited the admitted destruction of emails and patrol records by Arpaio's office related to the case. He noted the sheriff's agency never contested those documents were shredded rather than lost.

Further proceedings in the case are expected to be decided by Snow rather than a jury because the plaintiffs have not requested a jury trial.

Snow's sanctions against Arpaio and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office were outlined in written opinions issued a day after the judge heard oral arguments on the matter.

Separately last week, the U.S. Justice Department issued a scathing report accusing Arpaio and his deputies of engaging in a "pervasive culture of discriminatory bias" and violating civil rights laws by singling out Latinos for unlawful detention and arrests.

The same day, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security barred Arpaio's deputies from screening jail inmates for their immigration status.

Arpaio was given until January 4 to agree to negotiations addressing the abuses cited by the Justice Department or face a request for a court order requiring compliance.

The Justice Department's report and the similar allegations raised in the lawsuit relate to Arpaio's controversial efforts to crack down on illegal immigration in Maricopa County.

Those efforts have earned him accolades in conservative political circles. Several candidates for the Republican presidential nomination sought his endorsement, which ultimately went to Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Arpaio has denied that his department engages in racial profiling and accused the Justice Department under President Barack Obama of undermining immigration enforcement.

A lawyer for Arpaio was not available for comment.

The sheriff was a strong supporter of controversial new Arizona law SB 1070, requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they detain and suspect of being in the country illegally.

That law is under challenge by the Obama administration in a case the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide next year.

Aside from the allegation of racial profiling, Arpaio also faces a firestorm over media reports that his office might have given short shrift to hundreds of sex-crime investigations.

~Lordhawke

Obama and Holder taking on Arizona's SB1070

2011-12-20T06:13:00.001-06:00

Permian Basin Republican Assembly Next Meeting

2011-12-06T08:27:00.001-06:00

Patriots!

NO December meeting for Permian Basin Republican Assembly.

Mark your NEW Calendars for January 12, 2012. Randy Rivas, who is running against Seliger for the Texas US Senate, and Scott Dufford, Midland At-large City Councilman up for re-election will speak and answer your questions.

Address Reminder: Midland Memorial West Campus Classroom 1 - 4214 Andrews Highway at 7:00 p.m. Thursday, January 12, 2011. Use the east entrance under the portico - the classroom is just beyond the gift shop on the right.

Don't know Randy Rives? Here is his website and he can also be found on Facebook.

http://www.randyrives.com/

Have a Merry Christmas. May your New Year also be the best ever! See you next year!

Joyce Petrich

Permian Basin Republican Assembly, Treas.

EPA using Obama tactics to make an "end run" around Constitutional Law, and Congress

2011-11-22T19:17:00.000-06:00

Well, here they go again, sticking their filthy little noses where they don't belong! Take away a person's right to property, which the founders believed was the root of liberty, and you destroy his or her freedom!
These filthy beaureaucrats MUST be stopped from helping to destroy America!

Prepare To Have That Puddle in Your Back Yard Regulated!

Posted by Ben Howe (Diary)

Monday, November 21st at 5:00PM EST

Just as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used the Clean Air Act to broaden the scope of their authority way beyond its original intention with rules like MACT and CSAPR, the Clean Water Act is becoming a tool of overreach by the out of control agency.
Barack Obama and the EPA’s Lisa Jackson have made it clear through their actions that they will circumvent the legislature by using regulatory enforcement to enact Obama’s green dreams, and now it seems that circumvention includes the Supreme Court of the United States.
During the Bush presidency, a series of Supreme Court decisions acknowledged the limits of reach for the Clean Water Act. Most notably, the Supreme Court clarified that federal jurisdiction did not extend to wetlands and other “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act. Through the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook Country v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2001) and Raponos v. U.S. (2006) the Supreme Court established that private property rights still mattered even in light of the Clean Water Act and that the federal government did not have authority over them.
This of course isn’t stopping Barack Obama and Lisa Jackson from moving forward anyway.
It’s important to remember the original purpose of the Clean Water Act (1972). It gives the federal government and the EPA the authority to regulate “navigable waterways.” In other words, not a ditch out front with a lot of water in it and certainly not acres upon acres of private or state owned wetlands. Yet, regulating these types of waters is precisely what the EPA is in the midst of doing.
The Army Corps (pronounced core) of Engineers and the EPA are in the process of finalizing “Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act,” which is a fancy way of saying “we’re going to go out and change the definition of certain bodies of water so that we can pretend they fall within the Supreme Court’s definitions.”
The Barrasso-Heller Amendment, introduced by Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) and Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV), was created to prevent the Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA from incorporating those Obama changes into the regulatory guidelines, which serves the purpose of distinguishing precisely what the Supreme Court had already covered when it established the clear limitations of the Act.
The Property Rights Alliance and the American Farm Bureau Federation support the amendment, although its been met with predictable opposition from the left who have branded the amendment a “destructive measure.” One such bit of opposition is coming from the editorial page of the New York Times who incredibly claims that upholding the Supreme Courts decisions on the limitations of the Clean Water Act is somehow a “subversion” of its mandate.

Republicans just won’t give up on their misguided attempts to subvert the Clean Water Act. Senators John Barrasso of Wyoming and Dean Heller of Nevada plan to offer a rider denying protections to one-fifth of the nation’s wetlands and as many as two million miles of small streams. The House has approved a similarly destructive measure, so it is crucial that the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, and his Democratic colleagues block this legislation.

In April, the Obama administration proposed new guidelines restoring inclusive protections and promised to codify them in permanent regulations. This infuriated home builders and anyone else with an interest in filling in streams and wetlands. The House then voted to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers from carrying out the new guidance. The Senate bill would permanently prevent action to clarify the law. As always, the legislators driving these campaigns say their goal is to remove regulatory barriers to job creation. But the real issue is whether the country gets the clean water it wants and needs.

Of course. Believing that certain waters should either be at the discretion of the property owner or (gasp!) the state is exactly equivalent to wanting all Americans to drown in dirty water. Because let’s face it: without interference by the federal government, there’s no chance that we as mindless citizens could figure it out on our own.
Want to see how the EPA can use this type of authority to mess with law-abiding, tax-paying citizens?

Four years ago the Sacketts were filling in their lot with dirt and rock, preparing to build a simple three-bedroom home in a neighborhood where other houses have stood for years. Then three federal officials showed up and demanded they stop construction. The agency claimed the .63-acre lot was a wetland, protected under the Clean Water Act.
The Sacketts say they were stunned. The owners of an excavation company, they had secured all the necessary local permits. And Chantell Sackett says that before work began, she drove two hours to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, to consult with an Army Corps of Engineers official. She says the official told her orally, though not in writing, that she didn’t need a federal permit. “We did all the right things,” she says.
The EPA issued an order requiring the Sacketts to put the land back the way it was, removing the piles of fill material and replanting the vegetation they had cleared away. The property was to be fenced off and the Sacketts would be required to submit annual reports about its condition to the EPA. The agency threatened to fine them up to $32,500 a day until they complied.

But this is about clean water, not federal land grabs, right? Tell that to the Sacketts.
Lost in all of this is the fact that, since the introduction of the Clean Water Act (which yes, was needed at the time), our drinking water is remarkably clean. Consider how important it is that when visiting 3rd world countries (or most infamously, Mexico) that you don’t even drink the water there because an American’s body is il-prepared for the ravages of dirty water. Our water is so clean, we can’t even drink dirty water anymore or we’ll die! That’s saying something.
Yet, the government thinks it’s not good enough. And it won’t be until they have control over all water in America.
A few years ago, President Obama scolded the Supreme Court in front of the world during his State of the Union Address. I suppose it’s not shocking that he has such little respect for the division of powers in our government that he’d use the regulatory to trump the two out of three of them.

This is a shameful abuse of power by an unelected bureaucracy! ~Lordhawke

What has become of America?

2011-11-19T07:47:00.001-06:00

Good Morning; I found this at "Unfiltered News", a site produced by G. Edward Griffin, author of the book: "The Creature from Jekyll Island". It seems to describe the "norm" in America today.

WHAT HAS AMERICA BECOME? 2011 Nov 14 from Ken Huber, Tawas City, Michigan
Has America become the land of the special interest and home of the double standard?

Let’s see, if we lie to the Congress it’s a felony, and if the Congress lies to us it’s just politics; if we dislike a black person we’re racist, and if blacks dislike other races, it’s their First Amendment right; the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims; in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK but you better not use the word God in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but it is wrong to execute a mass murderer; we don’t burn books in America, we now rewrite them; we got rid of the threat from communists and socialists by renaming them progressives; we are unable to close our border with Mexico, but have no problem protecting the 38th parallel in Korea; if you protest against president Obama’s policies you’re a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag, it’s your first-Amendment right.

You can have pornography on your TV or internet, but you better not have a Nativity Scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all criminals in America, they are now called sick people; we can use a human fetus for medical research, but it’s wrong to use an animal.

We take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who do not want to work; we all support the Constitution but only when it supports our political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being politically correct; parenting has been replaced with Ritalin and video games; the land of opportunity is now the land of handouts; the similarity between Hurricane Katrina and the Gulf oil spill is neither President did anything to help.

And how do we handle a major crisis today? The government appoints a committee to determine who’s at fault, then threatens them, passes another law, raises our taxes; tells us the problem is solved.

What has happened to the land of the free and home of the brave?

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but I think this needs to be in every one's mail box. Maybe it will wake up more people to the problems we face. One can only hope! About the only things that were not mentioned, are the necessities of ousting the United Nations from our political process (and our land), and the dismemberment of the Federal Reserve and all it's associated "little" banks throughout America. Return to our Constitutional Republican form of government by putting staunch Constitutionalists into our halls of government.
~Lordhawke

"Soft" Corruption

2011-11-15T15:21:00.001-06:00

It's called "soft" corruption when Congress members do it. The rest of us would go to jail.

REMEMBER THIS WHEN YOU VOTE!

2011-10-31T18:41:00.001-05:00

From NRA-ILA Alerts:

Thank you, Justice Stevens and Mrs. Obama

Friday, October 28, 2011

In case any reader of our weekly Grassroots Alert has not decided how to vote in the 2012 presidential election, retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and First Lady Michelle Obama have volunteered to help him make up his mind.
Recently, Time magazine asked Stevens what he would fix about the American judicial system. Stevens' response: "I would make all my dissents into majority opinions." Fair enough, since he's entitled to think he is right, even when a majority of his former colleagues and a larger majority of the American citizenry disagree.
But then Time asked Stevens to single out one issue in particular, and he said, "I would change the interpretation of the Second Amendment." Referring to the Court's decisions in the Heller and McDonald cases that the Second Amendment protects individuals from federal, state and local infringements on their right to possess and carry arms, he added "The court got that quite wrong."
In his dissent in Heller, Stevens claimed that "there is no indication that the Framers of the [Second] Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution." And in his dissent in McDonald, he claimed that even if one assumed the Fourteenth Amendment protects a general right to self-defense, that didn't mean that a person has a right to have a handgun. As if to suggest some logic to his theory, Stevens said "while some might favor handguns, it is not clear that they are a superior weapon for lawful self-defense."
We have earlier noted the comment of another of the four justices who dissented from the majority's Heller and McDonald opinions, Stephen Breyer, to the effect that District of Columbia residents who don't like the city's onerous gun laws should go to Maryland. And Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, another of the Heller and McDonald dissenters, has publicly indicated her hope that a "future, wiser court" will reconsider the Heller decision.
Of course, Justice Stevens and another of the four dissenting justices in Heller, Justice David Souter, have since retired and been replaced by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who dissented from the majority's decision in McDonald, and Justice Elena Kagan, who joined the Court in August 2010 and who had a clear anti-gun record during her service in the Clinton White house.
Sotomayor and Kagan were nominated to the Court by President Barack Obama, of course. And not long ago, during a pre-2012 campaign event, First Lady Michelle Obama asked some of the president's most ardent supporters to remember the Court's two newest justices when they go into the voting booth next year. In the upcoming election, she said, "we're going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come . . . let's not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices . . . let's not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come."
Obama supporters will not forget, and neither should supporters of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment's margin of safety on the Court remains intact by merely one vote. Given the likelihood of at least one retirement from the Court during the next presidential term, the future of the amendment could easily hinge on Election Day 2012.

GAO Finds Serious Conflicts at the Fed

2011-10-19T13:21:00.000-05:00

October 19, 2011

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 - A new audit of the Federal Reserve released today detailed widespread conflicts of interest involving directors of its regional banks.

"The most powerful entity in the United States is riddled with conflicts of interest," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said after reviewing the Government Accountability Office report. The study required by a Sanders Amendment to last year's Wall Street reform law examined Fed practices never before subjected to such independent, expert scrutiny.

The GAO detailed instance after instance of top executives of corporations and financial institutions using their influence as Federal Reserve directors to financially benefit their firms, and, in at least one instance, themselves. "Clearly it is unacceptable for so few people to wield so much unchecked power," Sanders said. "Not only do they run the banks, they run the institutions that regulate the banks."

Sanders said he will work with leading economists to develop legislation to restructure the Fed and bar the banking industry from picking Fed directors. "This is exactly the kind of outrageous behavior by the big banks and Wall Street that is infuriating so many Americans," Sanders said.

The corporate affiliations of Fed directors from such banking and industry giants as General Electric, JP Morgan Chase, and Lehman Brothers pose "reputational risks" to the Federal Reserve System, the report said. Giving the banking industry the power to both elect and serve as Fed directors creates "an appearance of a conflict of interest," the report added.

The 108-page report found that at least 18 specific current and former Fed board members were affiliated with banks and companies that received emergency loans from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis.

In the dry and understated language of auditors, the report noted that there are no restrictions in Fed rules on directors communicating concerns about their respective banks to the staff of the Federal Reserve. It also said many directors own stock or work directly for banks that are supervised and regulated by the Federal Reserve. The rules, which the Fed has kept secret, let directors tied to banks participate in decisions involving how much interest to charge financial institutions and how much credit to provide healthy banks and institutions in "hazardous" condition. Even when situations arise that run afoul of Fed's conflict rules and waivers are granted, the GAO said the waivers are kept hidden from the public.

The report by the non-partisan research arm of Congress did not name but unambiguously described several individual cases involving Fed directors that created the appearance of a conflict of interest, including:

•Stephen Friedman In 2008, the New York Fed approved an application from Goldman Sachs to become a bank holding company giving it access to cheap Fed loans. During the same period, Friedman, chairman of the New York Fed, sat on the Goldman Sachs board of directors and owned Goldman stock, something the Fed's rules prohibited. He received a waiver in late 2008 that was not made public. After Friedman received the waiver, he continued to purchase stock in Goldman from November 2008 through January of 2009 unbeknownst to the Fed, according to the GAO.

•Jeffrey Immelt The Federal Reserve Bank of New York consulted with General Electric on the creation of the Commercial Paper Funding Facility. The Fed later provided $16 billion in financing for GE under the emergency lending program while Immelt, GE's CEO, served as a director on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

•Jamie Dimon The CEO of JP Morgan Chase served on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York at the same time that his bank received emergency loans from the Fed and was used by the Fed as a clearing bank for the Fed's emergency lending programs. In 2008, the Fed provided JP Morgan Chase with $29 billion in financing to acquire Bear Stearns.At the time, Dimon persuaded the Fed to provide JP Morgan Chase with an 18-month exemption from risk-based leverage and capital requirements. He also convinced the Fed to take risky mortgage-related assets off of Bear Stearns balance sheet before JP Morgan Chase acquired this troubled investment bank.

To read a more detailed analysis of the GAO report prepared for Sen. Sanders, click here.

To read the full GAO report, click here.

http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=70c40aba-736c-4716-97d1-45f1a1af10a0

Allen West, Once Again. This guy is Great!!!

2011-10-11T14:45:00.001-05:00

Heee, hee. I really like this man

2011-10-11T14:43:00.000-05:00

WOOOOHOOOO!!!!

2011-10-11T14:42:00.000-05:00

I like Adam West...maybe as much as I like Jeff Sessions. Real men. Real Americans.

Well, we're certainly finding out now

2011-10-11T10:29:00.000-05:00

The Endangered Species Act

2011-10-10T02:50:00.002-05:00

2011-10-10T00:23:00.000-05:00

FOR YOUR INFORMATION......!!!!
Pat Kennedy
WTxCC

From: Jim
Subject: Fwd: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - ADVISORY:10/14 Hearing on McCaffrey-Scales Border Report
Date: Sunday, October 9, 2011, 11:21 AM

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Mike Rosen
October 7, 2011 512.633.4550

MEDIA ADVISORY

Homeland Security Oversight Hearing

McCaul to Examine Report Substantiating Mexican Drug Cartel Incursions, Need to Secure the Border

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX) will chair a hearing of the Homeland Security Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee to present to Congress a comprehensive military assessment of the U.S.-Mexico border, authored by General Barry McCaffrey (Ret) and General Bob Scales, Ph.D. (Ret). Both Generals and Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples, who commissioned the report, will testify.

The report, Texas Border Security: A Strategic Military Assessment, demonstrates that Mexican drug cartels are attempting to establish safe havens in Texas as a launching point into the rest of the United States. Among the findings the hearing will examine:

Ø Cartels’ intention to influence all levels of government throughout the Americas

Ø Cartels’ intention to establish sanctuary zones in the U.S. one county deep

Ø Poorly resourced U.S. tactical efforts to stop cartel incursions; vulnerability to corruption

Ø Increasing likelihood that competition to control distribution territories and corridors will result in greater violence in Texas, as the Mexican military gains more control in Mexico

Ø The need to designate Mexican drug cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Friday, October 14, 2011

HEARING: A Call to Action: Narco-Terrorism’s Threat to the Southern U.S. Border

TIME: 10:00AM EDT

LOCATION: 311 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, D.C.

Live Webcast

*McCaul-Staples press availability to immediately follow.

Witnesses:

General Barry McCaffrey
United States Army (Ret.)
President, McCaffrey Associates

Major General Robert Scales, Ph.D.
United States Army (Ret.)
President, Colgen, LP

Commissioner Todd Staples
Texas Department of Agriculture

Chairman McCaul on the hearing:

“This report is a call to action. Every American needs to be aware of the threat these narco-terrorists pose to our communities in every state, and to our national security. Generals McCaffery and Scales have done a great service for our country identifying this threat.

To date, this administration has buried its head in the sand rather than confront the extraordinary magnitude of the cartels’ incursions and operations in the United States and the propensity for increased violence. If the White House does not heed the warning that now is the time to commit to a comprehensive strategy to secure the border, it unfortunately may take a catastrophic event to gettheir attention.”

# # #

The link to the Live Webcast didn't work. I think I tracked it down and have put a link in there that should work. ~Faye

Dems Want Law To Keep Obama Records Secret

2011-10-09T23:55:00.000-05:00

Last Updated: Tue, 10/04/2011 - 12:42pm

In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.

Ironically, Obama revoked a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president. In 2001 Bush penned an executive order severely limiting public access to his presidential records. Shortly after swearing in, Obama killed it as part of his much-ballyhooed commitment to government transparency. At the time, the new president claimed that he was giving the American people greater access to “historic documents.”

It was the right move. The Bush Administration did indeed demonstrate a disappointing penchant for secrecy and Judicial Watch was a frontrunner in the effort to make records public. Examples include: The Dick Cheney Energy Task Force records that JW pursued before the United States Supreme Court; Attorney General John Ashcroft’s order advising government agencies to withhold all discretionary disclosures; invoking executive privilege to block the House Government Reform Committee’s probe of the Campaign Financing Task Force.

If the Democrats’ proposed measure (Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011) becomes law, former presidents will be allowed to assert a new “constitutionally based privilege” against disclosing records of their liking. Here is how it would work; the Archivist of the United States would be required to notify the former president, as well as the incumbent, of intentions to make records public. Anything that either the former or current president claims should be kept private won’t be released.

The veteran Brooklyn congressman (Edolphus Towns) who recently introduced the law in the U.S. House has yet to explain why it’s necessary. What’s certain is that Obama has failed miserably to keep his promise of running the most transparent administration in history. For examples read highlights from Judicial Watch’s testimony before Congress earlier this year. JW was invited to testify in separate House and Senate hearings during “Sunshine Week,” a national initiative by the news media, nonprofits and other organizations to promote government transparency and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/oct/dems-want-law-keep-obama-records-secret

And Perry got his sealed...sounds to me like they've both got something to hide from the voters. ~ Faye

http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/perrys-travel-security-costs-will-stay-secret-until-after-2012/2011/08/22/gIQANIZBjJ_story.html

November 8 Election - 2011 Constitutional Amendments

2011-10-09T23:10:00.000-05:00

This post is going to give some info/links on the 10 Propositions we have to vote on shortly. I'm going to post what TURF sent me in an e-mail because I don't see it on their site. They were explicit on Prop 4 and said they opposed Prop 2 also but didn't give a reason. I think it's pretty obvious that both propositions are giving beauracracies the power to tax us and increase our property taxes through the issuance of bonds without having to ask us. The rest of the organizations I'll just give links to so you can go to them direct.

Here's TURF:
Beware of Prop 4 on Nov. 8!

On November 8, Texas voters will once again head to the polls to decide whether or not to approve 10 new ballot propositions passed by the 82nd Texas legislature. Prop 4 is based on the Constitutional Amendment HJR 63 authored by Rep. Joe Pickett (D - El Paso). Prop 4 would expand Transportation Reinvestment Zone (or TRZ) authority to counties.

TRZs heist property tax appraisal increases within the designated zone to pay for transportation projects, including to subsidize toll roads (which would be a DOUBLE TAX). TRZs allow local governments to use your property taxes to back bonds, and they don't have to go to the voters to do it. Your property taxes aren't going to go down once your city (which already has this authority) or county (who will get this authority if you vote 'yes' on Prop 4) sells bonds dependent on ever increasing property tax appraisals!

TRZs are a way for STATE legislators to punt on their responsibility to build and maintain STATE highways and their responsibility to end diversions of the gas tax to non-road uses, and allows them to outsource tax increases for roads by passing it down to the LOCAL level.

Spread the word! Vote 'No' on Prop 4!

Eagle Forum analysis of propositions and their recommendations here.

Empower Texans analysis of propositions and their recommendations here.

Houston Tea Party analysis of propositions 4-6 and their recommendations here

Texas Legislative Council analysis of propositions and pro/con arguments here.

.

Big Union; Big Power Play

2011-10-08T17:41:00.001-05:00

Once upon a time in America...organized labor unions were a good thing; they brought us a 40 hr work week, protected children from unethical labor practices, and on and on. Now, however, they appear to have been taken over by greedy union "bosses" and socialists; read what Mark Mix has to say:

"Once again, it's all about power.

Big Labor has seized on the so-called "Occupy Wall Street" protests to push for more power over American workers and the economy.

"The challenge is, how do you transfer protest into power?" asked one Communications Workers of America (CWA) union boss, sensing an opportunity to turn up class warfare against job providers and force more workers into dues-paying ranks.

You see, despite the early media reports, "Occupy Wall Street" isn't just a reaction against the bank bailouts.

It's looking more and more like yet another excuse to demand bigger government, more spending, and higher taxes.
No wonder Big Labor is so eager to bus in protestors and subsidize the rallies -- all paid for by forced dues.
For instance, union officials are using the protests as the next phase in their corporate campaign against Verizon.

You may remember the recent ugly strike -- with hundreds of reports of sabotage and vandalism. Phone lines were cut, denying service to Verizon customers. Independent workers were subjected to harassment and even violence.

Now CWA union officials and "Occupiers" are working together on a boycott against Verizon products and services until Verizon gives in to the union hierarchy's demands.

Meanwhile, one widely circulated list of Occupiers' demands includes the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill.

As you may recall, that legislation would eliminate the secret ballot in workplace unionization drives and open workers up to harassment and intimidation by aggressive union organizers.

If the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters were truly concerned with special privileges and bailouts for a select few, they'd look no further than at their new allies at Big Labor.

Big Labor has received its own bailouts and sweetheart deals courtesy of the Obama Administration. The auto bailout, ObamaCare, and so-called "stimulus" all lined union-boss coffers.

Union bosses enjoy special privileges afforded to no other Americans, including the ability to seize dues or "fees" from unwilling workers and exemption from federal prosecution for acts of violence committed in the so-called "pursuit of legitimate union objectives."

(This is nothing short of "legalized crime")~Lordhawke

Big Labor's special privileges could prove to be even more destructive should the "Occupy Wall Street" protests turn violent.

Protest, of course, is a fundamental exercise of First Amendment rights to speech and association.

Let us not forget that compulsory unionism violates those very same principles." Mark Mix

As a side note, I saw the beginnings of this type of activity in 1959 (or 1960), when my Dad was Security Chief of Police at Kennecott Copper Corp. Chino Mines Division, and he and his men had to patrol company property for several long days during the Mine-Mill strike, to make sure nothing untoward happened to Kennecott property. Some of the union leaders seemed to be trying to stir up trouble by driving through the mining district towns with a pick-up truck mounted with a loudspeaker, broadcasting union propaganda, even though at that time, New Mexico was (and still is, I believe) a "right to work" State. ~Lordhawke

Obama the "Underdog"?! Ha!

2011-10-07T19:05:00.000-05:00

I can't believe our dictator in chief actually believes this garbage!

Posted by Erick Erickson

Tuesday, October 4th, 2011

Barack Obama told ABC News yesterday that he is the “underdog” in 2012. He actually raced to embrace the title George Stephanopolous threw out there for him. There was no deliberation, no pause — just an immediate “absolutely” to lay claim to the title.
First understand that the Obama wants to be the underdog because of America’s fixation with rooting for the guy behind. He sees it as a positive.
Second, understand that underdogs do not get to take campaign bus tours through swing states at taxpayer expense on buses paid for by taxpayers and also fly around in a blue and white 747 and get pretty much as much free press as he wants, including great photo ops in front of Congress talking about jobs.
Underdogs do not get that.
Incumbent Presidents get that. And incumbent Presidents do not, more than year from an election get to call themselves “underdogs,” if ever they do. When a President is a year from election, sees his popularity going down, and can’t even muster enough Democrats to vote for his jobs plan because they neither fear nor respect him, the President is not an underdog. He is a loser.
This President is a political loser. Every time he speaks the stock market goes down. Every time he acts boldly, independents attribute it to increasing political desperation without seriousness. Every time he tries to lead, his own party privately mocks him.
Jimmy Carter was no underdog and neither is Barack Obama. With the trappings of power, the brightest men in the room to advise them, and massive war chests — Obama’s is the biggest there is — he is not an underdog.
And it’s not just because he is a political loser. Americans cheer underdogs. No one is cheering Barack Obama.

~Lordhawke

Bernie and Bernanke

2011-10-07T16:31:00.000-05:00

Senator Bernie Sanders

2011-10-07T16:15:00.000-05:00

I've been watching Bernie Sanders for several years. He's a self-admitted Socialist. Being a Socialist, however, has not prevented Bernie from seeing what is actually going on and trying to fight it. A while back I posted an article from his site that showed the Federal Reserve had secretly sent another SIXTEEN TRILLION dollars to foreign banks. I didn't see that on any other legislator's site. They know and they're keeping their mouths shut. Now Bernie's figuring out that the NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, SPP trade agreements have deliberately destroyed our economy. I could have told him that if he'd read the CFR report, "Building a North American Community," he'd have known this several years ago. For all I know, Bernie voted for NAFTA, CAFTA, and GATT. The SPP has not yet been approved by our Congress but is fully functional with its 30 committees working their destruction of our country and our form of government every day...illegally.

At any rate, it's interesting to watch the Left become as cognizant of what's been going on as evidenced by not only Bernie, but the protests to shut Wall Street down. The TEA Party has been aware and it got them into the streets. Of course, our corrupted media has tried to discredit the Wall Street protests by focusing on some of the outrageous demands of the protestors while shutting down on the actual reasons they're protesting both Wall Street and the Federal Reserve. They attempted to discredit the TEA Partiers. They're still trying. But one of these days, the Wall Street Protesters and the TEA Partiers are going to be in the street yelling at each other and they're each going to take a breath and realize they're combatting the same things...just from different angles.

Here's Bernie on the unfair free trade agreements.

Oh, Yeah...They Can Steal Your Property and They're Doing It

2011-10-07T15:02:00.002-05:00

EPA Overreach

2011-10-07T14:57:00.000-05:00

Agenda 21: Conspiracy Theory or Real Threat

2011-09-30T22:41:00.000-05:00

by CenterStage

in Radio

Airdate: Fri, Sep 9, 2011

Listen to internet radio with CenterStage on Blog Talk Radio

Agenda 21: Conspiracy Theory or Real Threat, Part II

2011-09-30T22:36:00.000-05:00

by CenterStage

in Radio

Airdate: Fri, Sep 30, 2011

Listen to internet radio with CenterStage on Blog Talk Radio

SHEILA JACKSON LEE LEAVES US ALL SPEECHLESS.

2011-09-30T06:07:00.000-05:00

From Redstate Briefing:

Recently, Congresswoman Shiela Jackson-Lee went on the air with Tavis Smiley of PBS. During her appearance she was kind enough to explain something to all those crazy conservative bloggers. “Shut up!” And while we’re all zipping the soup-coolers, we’re also supposed to lay off the racial politics.
For those of us hoping for greater detail, we are still unsure as to whether we should “Go to Hell” first, and then shut the yaps, or whether that works the other way around. However, she is handy with a totally non-racial and uncontroversial piece of advice for anyone who expects to do business with the Federal Government once Barack Obama’s new jobs bill has been passed.

She also said that if Obama’s jobs bill is passed, that contractors who “do not look like”* her need to make sure that if they get federal money, their workforce “better be reflective of those suffering double-digit unemployment.”
“I don’t consider it discrimination, I don’t consider it affirmative action,” she added.

Now before we all rush to judgment about members of Congress who are differently-able, it helps to review some prior public statements of Shiela Jackson-Lee. She claims that Venezuela is a friendly nation and a US ally soon after Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called US President George W. Bush the devil. She seems enamored with the notion that the US succeeded in The Vietnam War. Gob-smacking historical ignorance follows below.

She continued, “Today, we have two Vietnams, side by side, North and South, exchanging and working. We may not agree with all that North Vietnam is doing, but they are living in peace. I would look for a better human rights record for North Vietnam, but they are living side by side.”

(HT:CBS News)
No tribute to the intellectual firepower of Congresswoman Shiela Jackson-Lee would be complete without her famous visit to NASA JPL. She wanted to know if the Mars rover would have any footage of where the astronauts planted the flag before. She also drinks the other dark cola, because Pepsi, you see, has racist commercials.
Oh, and who could possibly forget….

One of Lee’s crusades as a Representative of subtropical Gulf Coast Houston has been to end what she calls the government policy of giving hurricanes “lily white” names. “All racial groups should be represented,” she told The Hill Magazine, adding that she hoped the weather establishment in the future “would try to be inclusive of African American names” such as “Keisha, Jamal and Deshawn.”

At that juncture, I realized something. I couldn’t think of anything that would describe Shiela Jackson-Lee’s mental incapacity. Depleted Uranium is dense. So is the gravity field in the vicinity of a highly-complexioned hole.(The Congresswoman did tell me to stop playing the race card.) But nothing adequately serves as a metaphor for the hardness of Shiela Jackson-Lee’s head. It would score a 14 on The Moh Scale.
She wins, I have nothing left to say….

Texas Border Security Report

2011-09-27T06:04:00.002-05:00

FOR YOUR INFORMATION.....article/report below!!!!

In April, 2005, the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps began conducting border watches on the Arizona border to bring awareness to the out-of-control illegal smuggling and violence on the U.S./Mexico border.

In October, 2005, the first Texas MCDC border watch was conducted on a private ranch in the S.Texas border area. Law enforcement along the Texas border was undermanned and outgunned by heavily armed drug cartels/smugglers and human smugglers that were bringing in thousands of illegal aliens that were flooding across the Rio Grande and through private ranch land on a daily basis. The Texas border sheriffs, border agents and other border law enforcement and property owners had already been begging and pleading for help in their areas for several years...but apparently no one was listening...until border watch groups started making their voices heard loud and clear in 2005.

In February, 2006, Governor Perry established the "Texas Border Security Strategy" and in the 80th Texas Legislative Session, the Texas legislators created the "Border Security Council" through Senate Bill 11 and appointed 11 people from across the state to serve as council members and advise the Governor on the allocation of $110 million dollars from state homeland security. A 92-page "Texas Border Security Council Report to Governor Rick Perry" was produced in 2008 by the council recommending performance standards, reporting requirements, audit methods and other procedures for the funds.

During the fall of 2007, the Security Council held five public meetings across the state and heard testimonies from citizens, ranchers, home owners, business owners, law enforcement and elected officials. It was finally through these meetings that public and government officials seemed to grasp the severity of the unsecured Texas border and proceeded to act.

Governor Perry has reported that the state has received $400 million dollars from the Department of Homeland Security in the last 4-5 years to provide for more border agents, better weapons to the border agents and border sheriffs, cameras ($100 million dollars on cameras that didn't work the first time!) and sensors, helicopters, planes, boats and other equipment to help in the surveillance and apprehension of illegal traffic and drugs across and along the Rio Grande. The Texas Department of Public Safety and the Texas Rangers were added to assist the border agents and sheriffs which has been a significant help in apprehending smugglers and drugs....and for a while in 2006 and 2010...the National Guard provided backup assistance to the Border Patrol.

I fully believe it was (and still is) the private and public actions of volunteer border watch groups such as the Texas Border Volunteers in S.Texas and many other concerned Americans across the country that have gotten the public, the news media and the government moving in the right direction. These dedicated people are still keeping the border and illegal issues alive and in the public's attention...and will not rest until their mission is accomplished!!

It was the Texas state government that took action...but has it been enough??

No!...we are not there yet!!! There is still much to do to fully secure the borders and stop the flow of drugs that are addicting and killing the citizens of this country and increasing the crime rates....and stopping possible terrorists!!

After six+ years of S.Texas property owners, volunteer border watchers and many dedicated Americans pleading, begging and complaining about the out-of-control invasion of illegal aliens and drugs crossing the Rio Grande....Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples and the DPS, with the direction of the 82nd Texas Legislature, via House Bill 4, and two highly qualified generals....are finally addressing these very important issues (article/report below)!! The report backs up what concerned Americans have been telling the public and the government for six+ years!! How much and how soon any of this report turns into serious action we have yet to see!! We have been down this road before!!

Our borders are not as secure as Washington and others claim they are and more must be done!!! We can only hope that the following report will take the Texas border to the final stage of security that will give relief to those living along the U.S. side of the Texas border and stop the flow of illegal foreigners and illegal drugs crossing the Rio Grande...and spreading across the country!!

The Texas border is the longest first-line of defense against this invasion and what happens there determines what happens across the country. Again...only time will tell...but we are closer to a solution than we were six+ years ago...and many thanks to those of you who have continued on this long and somewhat frustrating journey....and as someone said six+ years ago:

“We must prevail, we will prevail. We shall overcome the effort by many to identify this movement as irresponsible; we will be victorious in proving the skeptics wrong. Our efforts will change the course of history and ignite others to stand with courage to make a change. Many are waiting for the outcome and will, themselves, be motivated with a new sense of activism; we will be leaders who will make a difference, role models who will influence future generations.”

Pat Kennedy
WTxCC

From: Jim
Subject: Texas Border Security Report findings are released
Date: Monday, September 26, 2011, 2:49 PM

By Scott Lawrence
2011-09-26 15:01:26

AUSTIN — From Texas Department of Agriculture - In an effort to protect U.S. citizens from spillover cartel violence while continuing to emphasize the critical need for enhanced Texas/Mexico border security, Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples today released “Texas Border Security: A Strategic Military Assessment.” The independent study, co-authored by retired General Barry McCaffrey and retired Major-General Robert Scales, was unveiled as part of the Protect Your Texas Border Summit at the Capitol.

Click here to read the entire Texas Border Security Report.

“Washington keeps telling us our border is more secure than ever, but this detailed military assessment, by two of America’s top generals, offers proof to the contrary,” Commissioner Staples said. “It’s time to shed the cloak of denial and protect our citizens and national security. Would Washington stand by and allow terrorists from Canada to make daily incursions into New York? The answer is a resounding, ‘No.’ We expect and demand that same level of protection in Texas. It’s time for Washington to uphold its constitutional duty to protect Americans on their home soil.”

Commissioned jointly by the Texas Department of Agriculture and the Texas Department of Public Safety, the report offers a military perspective on how to best incorporate strategic, operational and tactical measures to secure the increasingly hostile border regions along the Rio Grande River. It also provides sobering evidence of why Texas landowners and officials have called for increased federal support to defend our southern border.

“During the past two years, the southwestern United States has become increasingly threatened by the spread of Latin American and Mexican cartel organized crime,” said Gen. Barry McCaffrey (Ret.). “I congratulate Commissioner Staples for his vision in creating awareness of the inadequate attention paid to violence stemming from the drug cartels in Mexico and Latin America.”

“The violence and ongoing threat to our security reflect a change in the strategic intent of the cartels to move their operations into the United States,” said Maj. Gen. Robert Scales (Ret.). “American cities and rural areas now have Latin American drug, gun and human smuggling cartels operating inside our borders.”

Among the generals’ findings were:

• Living and conducting business in a Texas border county is tantamount to living in a warzone in which civil authorities, law enforcement agencies, as well as citizens, are under attack around the clock.

• Criminality spawned in Mexico is spilling over into the United States. Texas is the tactical close combat zone and frontline in this conflict. Texans have been assaulted by cross-border gangs and narco-terrorist activities.

• Federal authorities are reluctant to admit to the increasing cross-border campaign by narco-terrorists.

• One reason for this disparity between reported and actual cartel activity in Texas is that the 17,000 local and state law enforcement agencies that provide data to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) are not required to categorize these crimes as “drug related.”

• Reform at that operational level is dependent on bringing more “boots on the ground” to the fight for border security.

• Texas is the frontline in this escalating war and the potential consequences of success or failure will affect our entire nation.

To review the report in its entirety click here or go to TexasAgriculture.gov and click on popular links.

The 82nd Texas Legislature, via House Bill 4, directed the Texas Department of Agriculture to fund an assessment of the impact of illegal activity along the Texas/Mexico border on rural landowners and the agriculture industry. Commissioner Staples immediately partnered with the Texas Department of Public Safety to commission Generals McCaffrey and Scales for this important study.

About the Generals

General Barry McCaffrey is the former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Bill Clinton and former Commander of all U.S. troops in Central and South America. Retired Major-General Robert Scales is the former Commandant of the United States Army War College.

Dear Mr. President, How Do You Sleep at Night?

2011-09-22T16:16:00.000-05:00

Muffingate - DOJ Taking Spending Lessons from Pentagon

2011-09-22T16:15:00.002-05:00

The Pentagon has a long held a reputation of wrongful spendingsuch as $100 for a hammer, $300 for a toilet seat and more recently spent $720 million dollars in late fees for storage containers.

Evidently, the Department of Justice has been paying close attention to the Pentagon’s example.

A recent audit by the inspector general found that the DOJ was paying outlandish prices for food at different Justice meetings and functions. On just 10 conferences they spent $490,000. The press has already labeled this as ‘MuffinGate’. Some of the extravagant spending included:

$65 dinners

$76 lunches

$41 breakfasts

$1.03 per ounce of tea and coffee

$16 muffins

$10 cookies

$32 per person for Cracker Jacks, popcorn and candy bars.

$5 each for Swedish meatballs

In 2009, the DOJ spent $120 million of taxpayer money on 1,832 conferences. At a time when America is in an economic crisis, people are losing their jobs and homes, our government should be more fiscally responsible.

With the Pentagon wasting nearly three quarters of a billion dollars on late fees, and the Department of Justice wasting millions more on food, one has to wonder what other government departments are wastefully spending taxpayer money.

In private business, the people responsible for this type of wanton spending would quickly find themselves in the unemployment lines. Our government employees need to be held to the same standards. If I were a congressman, I would be demanding a government wide audit investigation and accountability hearings. Every person found to be responsible should be immediately dismissed from their government job and if warranted, criminal charges filed against them.

Once federal employees see first-hand consequences for improper and illegal spending practices, perhaps they’ll start being more fiscally responsible with taxpayer monies and save the government billions of dollars.

Godfather Politics http://godfatherpolitics.com/1066/muffingate-doj-taking-spending-lessons-from-the-pentagon/#ixzz1YiaOvDSR

Linda's got Perry Poop up and running

2011-09-21T23:31:00.001-05:00

Linda's got Perry Poop up and running. Here's you a link.

http://indyamericans.com/

EPA Regulations Will Cost 1.44 Million Jobs!

2011-09-21T19:24:00.001-05:00

From: RedState Briefing
Posted by Ben Howe

Tuesday, September 20th at 9:35PM EDT

Last week, I wrote about how the EPA was warring with industry, one can only assume in an attempt to destroy jobs. As that war continues, I thought it might be helpful to put some actual numbers in front of our readers so they can get the clearest picture possible about just how many jobs are being lost in the name of environmental protection against the man-made theory of global warming.
National Economic Research Associates (NERA) used the Federal Government’s own data in finding that Obama’s proposed EPA regulations would cost America over 180,000 jobs per year between 2013 and 2020.
This includes effects from the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) as well as Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) rules.
Here’s a break down of just a handful of the states affected by these regulations:
Projected Job Losses between 2013-2020:
Pennsylvania: 59,000
Ohio: 53,500
West Virginia: 38,500
Michigan: 40,000
Illinois: 48,000
Indiana: 51,500
Wisconsin: 24,500
Iowa: 26,500
Minnesota: 12,500
Florida: 135,000
Missouri: 76,000
Total nationwide will be in the range of 1.44 million jobs lost.
There are ways to help prevent this. If you haven’t heard of the TRAIN act, it may be voted on this Friday and it will hopefully be a way to reign in some of this tyrannical regulation:

The TRAIN Act (H.R. 2401, “Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act of 2011”) establishes an 11-member federal interagency committee, chaired by the Department of Commerce, to analyze the cumulative impacts of a number of major EPA regulations. A final report on the results of the analysis is due to Congress by August 1, 2012.

It bears repeating, though I know I mention this every time, that this is precisely what President Obama said he would do. He is systematically destroying the coal industry, and the toll on American jobs is extremely high.
If an industry becomes obsolete, there is no preventing the shedding of jobs as the market transitions to a new good or service. That is not what’s happening here. What’s happening here is the targeting of a bedrock American industry by a President who thinks he’s saving mother Earth.

Lordhawke says: Personally, I don't think he really cares about Mother Earth so much as he wants to do the bidding of the International Banksters and destroy America! This is exactly what he has been told to do by the Money Masters! This is also a part of Agenda 21; they will use whatever means they deem necessary to place America under UN domination and control.
~Lordhawke

Government Agenda 21 Update: Family Farms Are Under Attack

2011-09-20T05:26:00.003-05:00

Posted on July 31, 2011 at 1:07pm by Mike Opelka

Is the US government starting to implement the policies of the United Nation’s plan for global management of people and resources known as Agenda 21? The latest efforts out of the Department of Transportation (DOT) seem to indicate this is happening. And they are starting by targeting America’s farming communities with costly and oppressive regulations.

In Late May, the DOT proposed a rule change for farm equipment, and if it this allowed to take effect, it will place significant regulatory pressure on small farms and family farms all across America – costing them thousands of dollars and possibly forcing many of them out of business. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), part of the Department of Transportation (DOT), wants new standards that would require all farmers and everyone on the farm to obtain a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) in order to operate any farming equipment. The agency is going to accomplish this by reclassifying all farm vehicles and implements as Commercial Motor Vehicles (CMVs).

(It is also important to note here that DOT Secretary Ray LaHood holds a seat on the newly created White House Rural Council. A powerful group whose members have ties to George Soros and The Center For American Progress.)

The move by the DOT appears to be “legislation through regulation.” By reclassifying all farm vehicles and implements as Commercial Vehicles, the federal government will now be able to claim regulatory control over the estimated 800,000 farm workers in America, at the same time, overriding the rights of the states.

This proposed change literally means family farms could no longer legally allow young workers, not old enough to drive and seniors who no longer drive on the public streets, to operate a tractor… even on the family’s private property.

Waco, TX television station KXXV has the story:

The proposed change also means ANYONE driving a tractor or operating any piece of motorized farming equipment would be forced to pass the same rigorous tests and fill out the same detailed forms and diaries required of semi-tractor trailer drivers. This reclassification would bury small farms and family farms in regulation and paperwork.

Some of the additional paperwork and regulation required:

Detailed logs would need to be kept by all drivers – hours worked, miles traveled, etc.

Vehicles would have to display DOT numbers

Drivers would need to pass a physical as well as a drug test – every two years.

The Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation (WFBF) is one of many farm organizations not happy about the idea and has sent the DOT a letter expressing this opinion:

“WFBF opposes any change in statue or regulatory authority that would reclassify implements of husbandry or other farm equipment as Commercial Motor Vehicles (CMVs)”

WFBF Director of Governmental Relations Karen Gefvert continues, explaining the excessive cost to farmers if this allowed to move forward:

“The proposed guidance by the FMCSA would result in an initial increased cost to each Wisconsin farmer and employee of $124 just for the CDL license, permit and test; not to mention the time and cost for the behind-the-wheel training that is several thousand dollars.”

Additionally, Illinois farmers believe this regulation will also force new restrictions on trucks used in crop-share hauling. (One estimate claims more than 30% of Illinois farmers utilize shared land.) These crop-share trucks are typically limited-use vehicles that often travel fewer than 3000 miles each year, mainly hauling crops from the fields to nearby grain elevators. To require them to follow the same rules as semis would also mean a farmer would be forced to purchase substantial insurance.

The Hancock Journal-Pilot covered the story:

Earlier this year, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) began to define crop-share tenant farmers as “for-hire“ carriers and implements of husbandry as ”commercial motor vehicles.“ The ”for-hire” designation for crop-share tenant farmers would have a dramatic effect on farmers because it voids exemptions from the Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) program and would require a minimum of $750,000 in insurance coverage for the farmer.

The DOT is holding hearings for public comment on the topic, but only through Monday, August 1st and farmers all across the country are rightfully concerned. No matter what the feedback is from the people who actually grow the food, it appears that the DOT’s mind is made up. Just last week, DOT Administrator Anna Ferro posted an Op-Ed addressing the controversial regulation. The opinion piece closes with this statement:

Everyone in this Administration – from President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Secretary LaHood on down – is committed to the long-term success of America’s agricultural industry. In many ways, agriculture is the backbone of our economy – feeding hundreds of millions of Americans and billions more around the world. As the largest user of freight transportation in the nation, the agricultural industry is also one of USDOT’s most important constituents. We hope that this comment period is the start of a new and productive relationship. We may not ultimately agree on every issue, but we will always listen — and do our best to help America’s farmers succeed.

(A personal aside, when someone tells you, “We may not ultimately agree on every issue, but we will always listen… ” it has always been my experience that they are going to do whatever they wanted to do in the first place. The “listening” was just to make you feel better.)

The FMCSA has said their intent is to create uniformity in how federal safety regulations are carried out across America. The farming community and many of the states that would be affected by this change feel differently. Almost to a man, the farming community believes this to be a local issue, best handled by state governments, and not some Washington DC agency.

To make a comment to the DOT visit – www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Federal electronic docket site. Or you can fax your comments here 1–202–493–2251.

H/T – All the active Farm Bureaus working to protect their rights and states rights. And to the ever-vigilent “Resist UN Agenda 21” groups (you know who you are)

~Georgia

This could help us here in Texas..please read what Karen has to say!

2011-09-19T01:04:00.001-05:00

Many of you have asked for the bill number we are supposed to address on September 20. Attached is the bill but it does not yet have a number. The American Planning Administration will be in DC attending a meeting on September 20 and will be asking the Senate not to support the item in the budget for 2012 that will cut off funding to many of these agencies implementing Agenda 21 across the country. This is big and the APA as well as many other NGO's and foundations will be lobbying the Senate hard on this issue. The Senate must support these cuts and we must let them know that ANY Senator that votes for striking these cuts WILL be our main focus during the 2012 elections to ensure they do not get elected again. I will be sending out a reminder on Sept. 19. In the meantime please make sure everyone you know and members of your group are on board and are willing to participate. Once this bill gets a number I will be tracking it and letting everyone know when we need to take our next action.

Karen Bracken

Note from Faye. The bill was attached. I can't seem to get it posted on here. If you're interested, e-mail me at fayehall@cableone.net and I'll be glad to forward it to you.

FW: NTC: A21 Committee Meeting #2 - Notes - Recording

2011-09-19T00:54:00.001-05:00

We have some great bloggers on board to expose this terrible program are you all ready to rumble?? Has anyone talked to KWEL, Anderson, about the below…most of Midland and Odessa don’t know they have been infested with this blood sucking program called Agenda 21…don’t forget Monday Oct. 24th. I think every state is going to select the same color shirts to wear that day. We will show them how Moms, Dads and grandparents organize. We are American Property Owners and we VOTE.

G.

From: Deborah Wiseman

Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 7:08 PM

To: Mel Moss; Zack Maxwell - Arlington; Erick Howell; Cindy Carriger - North TX; Cindy Barnett; Camille Johnson; robert kecseg; Ross Kecseg; Wendy; Georgia Stapleton; Liz Moser

Subject: Re: NTC: A21 Committee Meeting #2 - Notes - Recording

my blog to all of you:

Totalitarian Program ‘Agenda 21′ Now in Effect!

Sep 13, '11 8:20 PM

for Steelnpearls' network

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.

- George H. Bush

Agenda 21 isn’t coming. It is here. Most don’t know about it. They’ve never heard of it, but it is creeping in the back door right now. So, look behind you. It may already be in your backyard.

What is Agenda 21? It is a United Nation’s program presented and approved in Rio in 1992. At that time American conservatives laughed it off. “This is too crazy,” they said. “Impossible. It will never happen. Not here!” Well, it is happening. It is happening here and it is happening now. Agenda 21 is a totalitarian comprehensive environmental program that, when fully implemented, will direct where you live, how much water you can use, and how and where you can travel.

Agenda 21 is being marketed as a worldwide effort to ensure that all human beings will have access to adequate housing, health care, water and food. Of course this will require a massive redistribution of wealth from prosperous countries to poorer countries. Predictably, capitalistic countries, like the United States, will suffer lower standards of living.

It’s noteworthy that Presidents George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, through Executive Orders, have signed onto Agenda 21. Hundreds more governors, mayors, and county commissioners have also signed on.

Agenda 21 and related programs will eliminate many things we hold dear. These have been declared “unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them:

All private property rights (property ownership)
All forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer
Livestock production and most meat consumption
Privately owned vehicles and personal travel
Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel
Single family homes
Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting
Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people

It’s not coming from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part. It is seeping in through local city and county governments. Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as “smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.” You will hear them often. Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth. Not a joke.

179 countries, including the United States, initially signed on to the Agenda in 1992. Many more have joined since then. It is already in progress in 600 U.S. cities. You can check the list of committed countries and cities at: http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=11454. You can also read the specific programs being implemented.

Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every square inch of planet earth. As a biblical worldview dims in the world man falls to the bottom of the food chain.

If Agenda 21 succeeds animals will become more important than man as will plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.“

Agenda 21 is just another attempt by man to recreate heaven on earth. David Chilton, in his insightful book Paradise Restored, presents an important historical dynamic. Chilton submits that man, ever since he was expelled from Eden, has tried to get back in. Each time he tries, he creates another hell on earth. Agenda 21 will be no different.

Many socialistic, communistic, and liberal organizations and international leaders are behind Agenda 21 and its related programs. It will take dedication of time and effort on our part to truly understand all the implications of this pervasive program. The investment of time will be worth it.

I encourage you, no, beg you, to learn of this Agenda. Take the time. Think of the world your children will inherit if we don’t stop it and similar assaults on our freedoms. Do not make the mistake of writing this off as some conspiracy theory. It may or may not be a conspiracy, but it is not a theory. It’s here. Look behind you.

For more information on details concerning implementation of Agenda 21 please check out:

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ (Actual document-40 chapters, 294 pages)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esJY2SK_4tE
(Glenn Beck)

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

http://green-agenda.com/

http://vigilantcanuck.com/2010/08/22/agenda-21-reduction-of-the-worlds-population-by-80-to-90-percent/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVTGK1uYqJo

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2011/09/08/feds-accusing-nyc-suburb-segregation (Hannity-Agenda 21 in action).

Deborah

--- On Sun, 9/18/11, Liz Moser wrote: I didn’t make this one G.

From: Liz Moser
Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 5:02 PM

Thank you for joining the A21 Committee Meeting #2

There were 7 people in on the call.

Here is the recordings - attached.

Next Meeting Oct 5th @7:00pm

Call in number: 1-858-400-8433 - then enter passcode 661872#

A21 Committee Meeting #2 - Action Steps

1. Keep up with the compiled lists: A21 symptoms & Non-gov Organization (attached)
2. Share a written report of how you locally fought against a part of A21
3. Educate - tell everyone about A21/Sustainability - Ideas: bumper stickers, silk screened products (Debra W. does this) such as T-shirts/grocery bags/etc. (We could all order together), local radios - such as BlogTalkRadio, call into local radio shows and get a word in about Sustainability, good way to approach new people is the money - show the corporate welfare example or funding mandate.
4. Order UN A21 pamphlets - reply what you want:

Options:

1. Freedom Advocates pamphlet - $3.00 each (after 100) includes wildlands maps - Michael Shaw - sends free 2 sided flyers with orders - we can request 1000 - checking on cost. www.freedomadvocates.com -
2. Freedom21 = pamphlet - $2.00each (after 125) - Henry Lamb - Since cheaper probably best to order and give to every government official - all of your representatives!!! (sends free 2 sided flyer with orders (checking on 1000 cost) www.freedom21.com
3. John Birch Society - pamplet - $15 for 100! (shorter pamphlet - good for new people citizens or representatives) www.jbs.org
4. Go to Redevelopment the Unknown Government - www.redevelopment.us - you can copy what you want and make your own flyer
5. Look up Catherine Austin Fitts - horn blower

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9dGHuRExiM
6. John Marler - Webinar - Sept 28th - more to come!!! Mark Your Calendar!

Cheers,
Liz

Well, the Irish MEP's got asked if we want to be a NAU

2011-09-18T21:14:00.001-05:00

I was watching this video about Ireland and their fight against the Lisbon Treaty. I almost dropped my teeth at around 57:00. That's an Irish man and the woman is an Irish MEP (Member of Parliament)!!!! Did you happen to get asked if you wanted to become a NAU (North American Union) with Mexico and Canada? I didn't either. But someone obviously asked at least the Irish MEPs.

California Banning Walmart?

2011-09-17T06:53:00.002-05:00

Dang, Michelle, it was a joke!!!!!

2011-09-17T05:38:00.040-05:00

I've caused some laughter in the OA when I've used my fear of Michelle Obama and Meme Roth grabbing my French fries in a metaphorical reference to this Administration's proclivity for usurping our Constitutional rights. Well, yesterday Twilight Zone moved into Nightmarish Reality. Michelle Obama appeared with Darden Restaurants, Inc., which is the parent company of Olive Garden and Red Lobster, to announce that french fries will no longer be listed on the children's menus...no pictures of french fries either. And, I don't know if this is true or not, but there was even some discussion about a minor not being able to order french fries without parental permission. Are we going to start carding for fries like we do for alcohol? Don't laugh. It's not just this one thing about french fries...LA has at least tried, I don't know if they passed the regulation or not, to ban fast food places from entire communities...these were usually minority communities which have been given the designation of "food deserts." New York City liked LA's ordinance so well, they asked for the whole program so that they could copy it. There's ordinances being instituted against fast food restaurants being located within 500 ft. of schools. McDonald's has been forced to get rid of Ronald McDonald. There was some program where Michelle and her food police put cameras in schools to record the kids' trays with their food selections and then record the trays again when the kids were through eating.

And this is not just Olive Garden and Red Lobster. Darden Restaurants, Inc., is the parent company of many chains in addition to Olive Garden and Red Lobster. A while back, Michelle was appearing with Walmart and Walgreen executives who were announcing that they would be making our food choices "healthier."

I've also run across info that this may be a payback to the Obama Administration for granting waivers from ObummerCare to companies with payrolls that include a lot of part-time, low-pay employees; i.e. fast food restraurants. And all the while Miss Michelle BusyBody is working hard to control your food choices, there are pictures and stories all over the net about what the Obamas are eating...carrot sticks no where in sight.

Wake up, America. They're not only grabbing your french fries. They're grabbing private property rights, land, eliminating jobs through governmental agencies like EPA, DOT, DOJ, Fishing and Wildlife, DHS, lowering your standard of living and destroying your savings and the economy through the Federal Reserve...

I ran across this comment under an article discussing Michelle's ordering a 1700 calorie meal which, to me, kinda summarizes a lot of America's current reaction:

Posted by Br. France Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:50pm PDT
She probably took in a total of 300 or 400 calories. Most of those from the diet Coke.

Duuuuhhhhh!!!!!!!

.

Americans for Prosperity Video on Agenda 21

2011-09-17T03:05:00.001-05:00

Americans for Prosperity is putting out videos on Agenda 21. Yee Ha!!!

Here's one. I put one on this site where California is kicking people off their land. It's under Agenda 21.

Dem Rep. Schakowsky: 'You Don't Deserve To Keep All Your Money'

2011-09-15T08:52:00.000-05:00

WHY ARE OBAMA AND UNION BOSSES WORKING TO DESTROY COMPANIES AND JOBS?

2011-09-14T20:52:00.000-05:00

Posted by LaborUnionReport (Profile)

Tuesday, September 13th, 2011

The question needs to be asked: Is it ignorance or malice? There was a time after the subprime mortgage meltdown when, if sound decisions on policy and financial initiatives had occurred, the American economy may not have been hobbled as badly, its credit rating might not have been downgraded, the recession might have been curtailed and so many Americans might not have been so negatively affected. However, rather than helping a recovery by letting the quasi-free market adjust, contract and expand again, at almost every turn, Barack Obama and the union appointees and crony capitalists within his administration are, whether out of malice or ignorance, seemingly doing everything they can to destroy an already fragile economy. It’s really no longer a question of ”if,” but “why.”

In 2008, Barack Obama was caught on camera explaining his redistributionist desire to spread the wealth around. At the time, in classic Saul Alinsky fashion, Obama’s union pushers tried deflecting the issue by the stomping on the reputation of ‘Joe the Plumber,’ the man who asked Obama an innocent question.
Now, 18 months after his first stimulus failed, Barack Obama has cynically proposed spending another one-half a trillion dollars (paid for by redistributing the wealth of the not-so -wealthy). Even pundits realize it is a “nakedly political” plan to paint his political opponents as ‘radical.’ However, even with the politicization apparent, policies of Obama and his union cronies go beyond the typical ‘tax and spend’ stereotype afforded to Keynesian liberals.
Unfortunately, from coast to coast, the Obama Misery Index (OMI) is leaving almost no sector untouched. From the seemingly politically-motivated raid in Nashville on legendary (and non-union) guitar-maker Gibson to the EPA killing 500 jobs in Texas, the attacks on America’s job creators are not only disturbing, they are alarming. Is it ignorance or malice?
In addition to the union appointees at Obama’s National Labor Relations Board attacking Boeing (and the potential long-term spillover effects across the economy), as well as its assault on Right-to-Work States, the NLRB’s new mandate to require all private-sector employers with two or more workers to post union notices, coupled with its proposal for ambush elections and the recent micro-union ruling, is causing more and more businesses to spend resources in preparing to be attacked by unions than creating jobs. Is it ignorance or malice?
Adding to this pro-union, bureacratic quagmire, the NLRB has also poured a gallon of cold water on companies that may have been contemplating merging with or buying already-unionized companies. In yet another NLRB ruling, the union appointees have forbidden employees from getting rid of an unwanted union immediately following a merger or acquisition.
This means that if a unionized company is floundering (as so many are) and another company comes along that may extend a lifeline by either merging with or buying the unionized company, there will be added pause if it also means buying the union. As a result, if a merger or sale does not happen and the floundering company fails, the employees (who may not have even wanted to remain unionized) lose their jobs.
Then, there’s the Department of Labor’s scheme to reclassify all sorts of service providers as ‘persuaders’ and cause them to report their earnings to the Department of Labor. While largely misunderstood, the proposal will cause both companies and vendors (who may have no knowledge about unions) to make their financial dealings public or go to jail. Such are the types of people who are being targeted by Obama’s union regime:

Communications consultants who coach management on how to structure and effectively manage employee teams
Productivity consultants who design and implement total quality management teams, giving employees a voice in the success of their companies’ products.
Safety consultants who help establish safety committees that give employees the ability to voice safety concerns to their employer to resolve safety issues
Human resources consultants that design, write, or implement employee handbooks or policies
Compensation consultants who design and administer pay or incentive plans for companies

None of these would seemingly have anything to do with unions, however, because all of the activities that these types of consultants do may indirectly persuade employees in the exercising their rights to unionize, these consultants will be faced with either reporting their total income to the Department of Labor, go to jail, or get out of the business entirely.
If the individuals leave their respective industries (or companies choose to go without the help), how does a workplace that is less safe, less team-oriented, and less structured help America’s competitiveness? Is it ignorance or malice?
In another example, in June, the Department of Labor issued a stunning ruling that a private construction project must pay “prevailing wages” (i.e., union wages) on a $700 million project under the Davis Bacon Act because it is on land leased by the federal government.
According to the Washington Post, this could raise the project by $20 million or more.

"Whatever the law’s merits, it has been pretty well settled that Davis-Bacon applies only to structures funded, owned or occupied by the U.S. or District governments, as its plain language suggests.
Now, with the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen, that understanding has been upset. A Labor Department regulator has ruled that Davis-Bacon covers the CityCenter DC project, a $700 million private-sector complex under construction downtown at the site of the former convention center. The decision is astonishing, both because it is such a stretch legally and because of its implications — which range from a financial hit for the District to higher costs for development across the country."

While the bureacrat at the Department of Labor expects the District of Columbia to pick up the tab for the increased costs, that may not be of any comfort since, ultimately, it is the taxpayers who will pay the price.

"Never mind that the District’s actual control over construction amounts to little more than the usual regulatory oversight, or that long-term leasing of municipal land is a common economic development tool not previously thought to convert office-retail complexes into public works. Never mind that Ms. Leppink’s expansive reasoning could apply to all future commercial redevelopment of land belonging to the District or to the federal government anywhere."

From the the beginning, Barack Obama had claimed he wanted to transform America. His primary pushers—union bosses—have long wanted to change the America’s economy to more of a statist nation. Unfortunately, while many voters hoped Mr. Obama’s election would change things for the better, it is quite clear that the opposite has occurred. As a result, America will be poorer for generations as a result while union cronies control large portions of the federal government.
While it is true Mr. Obama inherited a mess, he and his administration are making it exponentially worse.
The question is: Is it ignorance or malice?
Knowing what I know, I have to believe it is malice! ~Lordhawke

Rand Paul Smacks Down Nanny State

2011-09-12T15:53:00.002-05:00

Texas' Leadership Conundrum

2011-09-12T13:46:00.000-05:00

By MQSullivan (09/06/2011)

With Texas' top two elected office-holders eyeing moves to federal office, Texans face the real possibility of our next legislative session being overseen by a governor and lieutenant governor not elected by the people but instead selected by the state’s senate.

With Rick Perry’s presidential bid gaining steam, and David Dewhurst in the race for the US Senate, we could find both men resigning their current offices in late 2012. While not a constitutional crisis, such a scenario creates a leadership conundrum for Texans to thoughtfully consider.

Our state's constitution provides for an orderly transition of power when vacancies occur in the top offices. If the governor resigns his office, the lieutenant governor -- elected statewide, separately from the governor -- moves into the governor's mansion. The senate then picks from among their own a new lieutenant governor.

In the legislatively proscribed order of gubernatorial succession, the president pro tempore of the Senate, Speaker of the House, the Attorney General and the chief judges of the Court of Appeals are all in line to be governor if those proceeding in order were simultaneously unable to serve. Even then, a new lieutenant governor would be picked by the senate.

Let's say both Gov. Perry and Lt. Gov. Dewhurst win their respective federal races. President-elect Perry would likely resign first, to focus on the presidential transition, moving Mr. Dewhurst (Senator-elect, as it were) to the office of the governor.

The state senate would convene to select from among themselves a new lieutenant governor. Once the new lite-guv was sworn in, Mr. Dewhurst could resign and head off to DC. This new lieutenant governor (who just 15 minutes before was a state senator few Texans had heard of) moves up to governor. The senate, still hanging around, would pick yet another new lieutenant governor (also a state senator, who you had probably heard even less about) from the remaining 30 senators.

If such a scenario plays out, it might make voters suddenly pay a little more attention to the senatorial "club" than in the past. By then it’ll be too late, which is why we must begin asking tough questions now.

Why? The senate doing the picking for the new governor and lieutenant governor won't be elected in 2012 and seated in 2013, it will most likely be the current senators. Worse, it will be a lame-duck senate with members who didn't seek re-election or were defeated in the 2012 cycle.

The senate is currently composed of 19 Republicans to 12 Democrats. In practice, it's more like a half-dozen conservatives, a few quasi-conservatives and 19 or more moderates and liberals. (Gerrymandering, incumbency power and voter apathy have conspired to ensure the state senate looks less like Texas, ideologically, than one might presume.)

Nothing stops the senate from populating the offices of governor and lieutenant governor with washed up pols who lost re-election bids, vacated their seats, or are simply out of touch with the state’s electorate. Given the peculiar voting blocs and deal-swapping in the state's senate, the governor and lieutenant governor could well be a moderate Republican or Democrat.

The kind of leadership the senate picks will have immediate consequences. The 2013 legislative session is going to be fiscally trying, perhaps even more difficult than the recently concluded session. Indeed, budget debates in 2013 will make those of 2011 seem almost benign in comparison.

And don’t think lobbyists and Capitol insiders aren’t giddy about the prospect of influencing the selection of a new state leadership more beholden to them than Texas’ taxpayers.

Frankly, many senators would prefer not be asked where they will stand on the question of who will be allowed to ascend. They'd certainly prefer not to provide any straight answers.

Texans cannot afford a “let’s wait and see” attitude from our senators. As voters, we need to gather public commitments -- especially from Republican senators and candidates -- about how they will approach the selection process.

Thanks to redistricting, every single senator will be on the ballot in 2012. Waiting until after the November election to ask them about state leadership won't matter. Make the senators go on the record before getting your support; make them describe how they will vote and publicly commit to picking a sound conservative.

Voters should demand to know, and soon, if their senator plans to let chamber comity and special interests trump the conservative conscience of the Texas majority.

http://www.empowertexans.com/issues/Texas_Leadership_2013_Conundrum

2011-09-12T13:15:00.000-05:00

In this MegaVote for Texas' 11th Congressional District:

Recent Congressional Votes

Senate: Leahy-Smith America Invents Act

Senate: Motion to Proceed; Debt limit disapproval

House: Intelligence Authorization Act, FY 2012

Upcoming Congressional Bills

Senate: Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act of 2011

House: Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act

House: Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recent Senate Votes

Leahy-Smith America Invents Act - Vote Passed (89-9, 2 Not Voting)

The Senate gave final approval to this bill that would change the way patents are awarded from “first to invent” to “first to file.” The overhaul is intended to speed up the process of awarding patents. The House passed the bill in June. President Obama is expected to sign it into law.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison voted YES

Sen. John Cornyn voted YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Motion to Proceed; Debt limit disapproval - Vote Rejected (45-52, 3 Not Voting)

The Senate rejected this motion to take up a resolution that would have disapproved a $500 billion debt limit increase. Under the budget law enacted on August 2, the debt limit was increase by $400 billion. A second increase of $500 billion will take effect unless Congress passes a disapproval measure.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison voted YES

Sen. John Cornyn voted YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recent House Votes

Intelligence Authorization Act, FY 2012 - Vote Passed (384-14, 33 Not Voting)

This House bill would authorize spending for the 16 intelligence agencies in the upcoming fiscal year. The cost of the bill is classified. The Senate is expected to take up the bill later this year.

Rep. K. Michael Conaway voted YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upcoming Votes

Surface and Air Transportation Programs Extension Act of 2011 - H.R.__

Both chambers are expected to work on bills to extend authorizations for the Federal Aviation Administration and highway funding.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act - H.R.2218

This House bill would encourage the expansion and replication of successful charter school models.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act - H.R.2587

The House may take up this bill that would limit the authority of the National Labor Relations Board to rule on issues of where a company locates its facilities.

We missed the party N.G.O. 64th annual conference training/party to further implement agenda 21 sustainable development

2011-09-11T16:31:00.000-05:00

Some of you might have this information but am sending just in case you don’t.

Georgia
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any C.O.G., example North Central Texas Council of Governments, and I.C.L.E.I., International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, usually are in attendance to the annual training sessions.

N.G.O.s from around the world attend to learn advancement, mostly their own personal advancement…(after all, they do receive a hefty paycheck), in getting citizens on board to volunteer for the implementation of global governance, of course they, volunteers, don’t know the real reason. Look at the cost of membership..peanuts to what this organization makes on a daily basis. Fort Worth for their membership, paid N.C.T.C.O.G. close to $75,000.00 to be a member of their organization for 2011. This is just the price to be a member locally ; this does not include impact studies, plans, soft ware and other programs. You can do the math…I wonder what Irving, Dallas, Arlington have paid to N.C.T.C.O.G.. There are other N.G.O.s by other names in other areas of Texas and the United States…they all have the same goal in mind, same plans for infrastructure concerning our water, resources, roads, lifestyle, living accommodations. Conformity in lifestyle, infrastructure to bring about global equality.

Corporations,..G.E., PepsiCo, for two examples, big business has jumped on board because of tax incentives, tax breaks, federal grants, Private, Public, Partnerships, see this link to sell big corporations on the idea of greening, global warming and sustainable development, smart growth, economic development

http://www.trst.com/art-ant-cam.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/ngoconference/shared/Documents/Conference%20Schedule%2030August.pdf

Below is the link to members and the Executive Board members

http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/ngoconference/shared/64th%20Annual%20UN%20DPI%20NGO%20Conference%20Corporate%20Sponsorship%20Form-FINAL.pdf

Labor Department Seeks New Rules To Restrict Use of Young Farm Workers

2011-09-10T19:12:00.000-05:00

U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

By Fred Lucas

(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. Department of Labor is seeking to update child labor laws to put more restrictions on farm workers under the age of 18 from working with manure, pesticides, driving tractors and engaging in certain other agricultural activities.

Department officials made the announcement on Wednesday during a conference call with reporters.

Public comment for the regulations is open until Nov. 1 of this year. The rules have not been updated since 1970, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said during the call. The current rules under the Fair Labor Standards Act already prohibit young workers from certain tasks.

“Children employed in agriculture are some of the most vulnerable workers in America,” Solis said. “Ensuring their welfare is a priity of the department, and this proposal is another element of our comprehensive approach.”

Exemptions would be made under the proposed rules for children who work on farms owned by their parents.

The strengthened child labor rules, which would be enforced by the department’s Wage and Hour Division, would bar agricultural work with pesticide handling, timber operations, manure pits and storage bins. Farm workers under the age of 16 would not be allowed to participate in working on tobacco. This would include cultivation, harvesting and curing tobacco.

The rules are also designed to stop anyone below the age of 18 from being employed in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials. Prohibited places of employment would include country grain elevators, grain bins, and grain silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.

Further, farm workers under the age of 16 would be banned from using all power-driven equipment, including tractors, with an exemption for student learners.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/labor-department-seeks-new-rules-restric

Hilda Solis...colorful character with "close ties to NCLR" ...and MEChA, I bet. 2011 Honoree for Excellence in Government Service at the MALDEF Gala Awards. Just type her name in your search bar. Betcha before long, you'll be livid.

"Although some of La Raza’s government funding was earmarked by congress, virtually all of it was doled out by the Obama administration. Sixty percent of La Raza's take came from the Department of Labor—run by Hilda Solis. They lobbied hard for her appointment and honored her with an award. She paid them back—with millions of our tax dollars." ~ Tom Tancredo http://townhall.com/columnists/tomtancredo/2011/07/29/por_la_raza,_nada/page/full/

Sheriff Tony Demeo - Nevada

2011-09-10T18:28:00.000-05:00

How much more will we take?

2011-09-10T18:18:00.001-05:00

Greetings Americans;
Well, I must admit, I'm flabbergasted by these videos! I'm pretty sure our Founders would not have put up with this kind of absolute CRAP! Our government has gone completely over the edge of sanity by attempting this! It seems to me our so-called representatives in federal government are ignoring everything we tell them we need, except welfare, of course.
I submit that our representatives have fallen for the international money masters siren song, and are going to do what ever big money tells them to do, and to hell with what "We, the People" are trying to get them to do: HONOR YOUR OATH OF OFFICE!
Things are progressing at such a rapid rate, that it's hard to try and keep up with it all.

AMERICA, WAKE THE HELL UP!! YOU ARE LOSING YOUR FREEDOMS, YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY, YOUR AMERICAN HERITAGE, AND YOUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS!

We must not allow these TRAITORS in government to institute AGENDA 21; we must not allow these TRAITORS to tell us what we may eat, where we may live, what we must drive, and where we may go or not go.

If Dictator Obama is allowed to make and ratify the Small Arms Treaty now before the United Nations, we will lose our "Liberty Teeth"; our firearms, the means to tell the usurpers NO! If Dictator Obama can make an "end run" around Congress and "enact" laws by executive fiat, such as his "back door" amnesty; that "We the People" have decried loudly not to do, the American SouthWest will be forfeit! If we allow Dictator Obama to force us into his UNCONSTITUTIONAL healthcare plan, "We, the People" will be in such debt as to be forever slaves to that debt!

It is PAST time to demand an end to the Federal Reserve System and ALL central banks, and return to Congress the power to print and coin our own DEBT FREE CURRENCY! "We, the People" must demand our government put an end to our involvement in the United Nations, and deport that organization to some other country. "We, the People" must demand that our Armed Forces are removed from ALL foreign nations and their petty wars and squabbles! "We, the People" of the united States of America, must, at all costs, secure our own borders, and let the rest of the world take care of itself!

Last, but most assuredly NOT least, "We, the People" must remove from power, those who would "sell America down the river" to foreign banks and money men; these people are nothing less than TRAITORS, and should be dealt with and treated like TRAITORS! ~Lordhawke

Raids are increasing on farms and private food-supply clubs

2011-09-10T18:10:00.000-05:00

14 Jul 2010 1:32 PM

When the 20 agents arrived bearing a search warrant at her Ventura County farmhouse door at 7 a.m. on a Wednesday a couple weeks back, Sharon Palmer didn't know what to say. This was the third time she was being raided in 18 months, and she had thought she was on her way to resolving the problem over labeling of her goat cheese that prompted the other two raids. (In addition to producing goat's milk, she raises cattle, pigs, and chickens, and makes the meat available via a CSA.)

But her 12-year-old daughter, Jasmine, wasn't the least bit tongue-tied. "She started back-talking to them," recalls Palmer. "She said, 'If you take my computer again, I can't do my homework.' This would be the third computer we will have lost. I still haven't gotten the computers back that they took in the previous two raids."

****
This is a long article, but it lists several more raids in various parts of the country and documents the amount of force being used. ~Faye

Read the rest of the article here.

Food Raids:A Sampling from the 1st half of 2011

2011-09-10T17:43:00.002-05:00

Food Safety Bill: Unconstitutional

2011-09-10T17:35:00.002-05:00

Ok. If this was noted as being unconstitutional before last Christmas, what's going on?

I'm a BAD AMERICAN!

2011-09-10T17:28:00.006-05:00

YES, I'M A BAD AMERICAN
I Am the Liberal-Progressives Worst Nightmare. I am an American.
I believe the money I make belongs to me and my family, not some Liberal governmental functionary be it Democratic or Republican!
I'm in touch with my feelings and I like it that way!

I think owning a gun doesn't make you a killer, it makes you a smart American.

I think being a minority does not make you noble or victimized, and does not entitle you to anything other than what you work for and earn. Just like me.

I believe that if you are selling me a Big Mac, do it in English.

I believe everyone has a right to pray to his or her God when and where they want to.

My heroes are John Wayne, Babe Ruth, Roy Rogers, and whoever canceled Jerry Springer.

I don't hate the rich. I don't pity the poor.

I know wrestling is fake and I don't waste my time watching or arguing about it.

I've never owned a slave, or was a slave, I haven't burned any witches or been persecuted by the Turks and neither have you! So, shut up already.

I believe if you don't like the way things are here, go back to where you came from and change your own country! This is AMERICA.
If you were born here and don't like it you are free to move to any Socialist country that will have you.

I want to know which church is it exactly where the Reverend Jesse Jackson preaches, where he gets his money, and why he is always part of the problem and not the solution. Can I get an AMEN on that one?

I think the cops have every right to shoot your sorry rear if you're running from them..

I also think they have the right to pull you over if you're breaking the law, regardless of what color you are.

And, no, I don't mind having my face shown on my drivers license. I think it's good..... And I'm proud that 'God' is written on my money.

I think if you are too stupid to know how a ballot works, I don't want you deciding who should be running the most powerful nation in the world for the next four years.

I dislike those people standing in the intersections trying to sell me stuff or trying to guilt me into making 'donations' to their cause.

I believe that it doesn't take a village to raise a child, it takes two parents.

I believe 'illegal' is illegal no matter what the lawyers think.

I believe the American flag should be the only one allowed in AMERICA!

If this makes me a BAD American, then yes, I'm a BAD American.
We want our country back! ~Lordhawke

We NEED GOD BACK IN OUR COUNTRY!

County Sues Farmer For excessive crops on his own land

2011-09-10T17:09:00.000-05:00

Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown

2011-09-10T17:05:00.000-05:00

Rawesome Organic Foods Video of Armed Raid with Guns Drawn

2011-09-10T17:02:00.000-05:00

Raw Milk Raid - Amish in Lancaster, Pennsylvania

2011-09-10T16:58:00.000-05:00

Raw Milk Raid - Loganville, Wisconsin

2011-09-10T16:54:00.000-05:00

FDA Raids Kansas Winery - for Elderberry Juice • KSN News • June 3rd, 2011

2011-09-10T16:46:00.000-05:00

I just remembered something...back when we were getting all the bad stuff from China, wasn't the FDA's excuse was that they had had their budget reduced and they did not have the personnel to sufficiently inspect the Chinese products? Hmmmm. ~Faye

Raw Milk Raid - Healthy Family Farm in California

2011-09-10T16:40:00.000-05:00

Now Obama Wants Our Gitfiddles

2011-09-10T16:22:00.000-05:00

From Conservative Action Alerts:

Obama Administration Pushes Gibson to Kill American Jobs

More than 14 million Americans are unemployed, and it looks like Obama wants to increase those numbers by closing down Gibson Guitar factories in Tennessee in order to send jobs overseas.

Two weeks ago, armed agents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Homeland Security raided the corporate headquarters and four Gibson Guitar factories in Memphis and Nashville, and confiscated 24 pallets of Indian rosewood and ebony, as well as guitars (more than $500,000 in product) and computer files.

Obama's Justice Department authorized the raid, and cost Gibson more than $1 million in lost profits, because the company was forced to shut down production and send hundreds of works home-after they were interrogated by Homeland Security.

Obama's Justice Department is claiming that Gibson violated Indian law by importing ebony and rosewood fingerboards that were not 100% manufactured in India.

Had the fingerboards been manufactured solely in India, and not finished in America, the product would be legal. So, it looks as though Obama wants to ban the "Made in the USA" label, by sending all of our manufacturing jobs overseas.

Please CLICK HERE to SEND FAXES to every members of Congress and tell them to investigate the Obama appointees who are responsible for the raids against the Gibson Guitar Company. This administration is imposing regulations irrationally and in a hostile manner.

Many have speculated that Obama's Justice Department is attacking Gibson because they operate non-union manufacturing plants, and their CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, is a big contributor to Republican candidates.

This might sound far-fetched at first, until one learns that Gibson Guitar's top competitors -- who are unionized and big supporters of Obama - have not been raided, and they, too, import unfinished rosewood and ebony fingerboards from India.

According to the Wall Street Journal, "Federal agents first raided Gibson factories in November 2009. ... Gene Nix, a wood product engineer at Gibson, was questioned by agents after the first raid and told he could face five years in jail."

Juszkiewicz says that Gibson employees are being "treated like drug criminals." And he can't believe that federal agents told workers that they could face criminal prosecution for sorting wood in the Gibson Guitar factory.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) agrees, and that is why she invited Juszkiewicz to be her special guest at Obama's jobs speech on Thursday - so Obama would have to face the fact that his Justice Department is killing American jobs.

"Gibson Guitar is at the heart of this jobs debate, and is an example of exactly why President Obama has it wrong when it comes to getting our economy back on track," Rep. Blackburn said. "Maybe if the President spent more time finding real solutions to empowering small business owners and less time hindering businesses like Gibson, we'd see more new jobs being created.

Please CLICK HERE to SEND FAXES to every members of Congress and tell them to investigate Obama appointees who are responsible for the raids on the Gibson Guitar Company. This Administration is imposing regulations irrationally and in a hostile manner.

According to a court filing made by the Obama Justice Department, the Gibson Guitar Company is being told by the Administration to move its manufacturing overseas ... to Madagascar.

This Administration is spending millions of dollars to pursue Gibson in an attempt to force the company to send all of its manufacturing jobs overseas. At a time when Obama is claiming that he wants to create jobs, his Justice Department is doing everything it can to eliminate Gibson's American workforce.

In an attempt to rationalize the department's injustice, Eric Holder is using the Lacey Act of 1900 for his reasoning behind the raids on Gibson. The Lacey Act was originally passed to regulate trade in bird feathers used for hats, and it was amended in 2008 to cover wood and other plant products.

Obama's Justice Department is not criminalizing the import of rosewood and ebony, rather the manufacturing process that is being completed here, in America.

Since the Indian rosewood and ebony fingerboards are not finished by workers in India, the feds are claiming that the product is illegal to import into the U.S. --- not because of U.S. law, but because Obama's Justice Department wants to interpret India's law whichever way it sees fit, in order to push the Administration's agenda.

"I think they're taking the position that we should be shifting these jobs overseas," Bruce Mitchell, the chief legal counsel for Gibson told Fox News. "We have - probably 40 people in our factory here who are doing the inlays into the fingerboard. ... If all that was to be done over in India, then ... those jobs would be lost."

According to Fox News, "... India is perfectly happy to ship the fingerboard 'blanks' to the United States. In a letter dated July 13, the deputy director general of foreign trade for India confirmed that ‘fingerboards made of rosewood and ebony is freely exportable.'"

CLICK HERE to SEND FAXES to every members of Congress and tell them to investigate the government's raid on the Gibson Guitar Company. The actions of the Obama administration is hurting American companies and American workers by attempting to force Gibson to send its manufacturing jobs overseas.

The fact that Obama's Justice Department has issued warrants and raided Gibson based on their interpretation of Indian law, is frightening!

The Daily News in Memphis is reporting that: Juszkiewicz is striking back against the raid of his company's factories and offices in Memphis and Nashville by "... letting the U.S. Justice Dept. know that he's telling his employees to keep making the instruments."

Juszkiewicz said that in 2009, the feds seized $500,000 in goods from Gibson factories, and the company is suing the government in Federal Court in Nashville to get their property back. (The government hasn't charged the company with any wrongdoing.)

"We feel totally abused. We believe the arrogance of federal power is impacting me personally, our company personally and the employees here in Tennessee, and it's just plain wrong," Juszkiewicz said in a statement released to the media.

The Obama administration's attack on Gibson is expected to cost the company more than $10 million, and even more if the company is forced to export all of its jobs overseas.

Tell every member of Congress to investigate the Obama appointees who are responsible for the raids on Gibson. The Obama Justice Department is imposing regulations irrationally, and it's hurting American companies and the American workforce.
***************************************************************************************

*******************************************************************************

As I've said before, sending these blast faxes is expensive and I myself don't use them. I've been running across things like this for a while now and I'm getting down right angry and upset. So I'm going to get them all together so we can see the whole picture. Then we'll figure out what we can do about it. Oh, I'm setting up a new category to stick them all in... OBAMA RUNNING AMUK. ~ Faye

ACORN, "PROJECT VOTE": COMING TO A TOWN NEAR YOU?

2011-09-10T07:16:00.000-05:00

By NWV News writer Jim Kouri

August 15, 2011© 2011 NewsWithViews.com

The ACORN/Project Vote gang has not gone away, and continues to help generate fraudulent voter registrations that can lead to voter fraud.

Documents from the Colorado Department of State showing that ACORN and its affiliate, Project Vote, successfully pressured Colorado officials to implement new policies for increasing the registration of public assistance recipients during the 2008 and 2010 election seasons were uncovered on Friday by a public interest group.

Following the policy changes, the percentage of invalid voter registration forms from Colorado public assistance agencies was four times the national average, according to Judicial Watch, the public-interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption.

The documents, obtained pursuant to a June 8, 2011, Colorado Open Records Act request to the Colorado Office of the Secretary of State, include approximately 400 internal emails. They relate to a complaint by ACORN and Project Vote that the state of Colorado was in violation of Section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Under Section 7, states are required to offer voter registration services at all public assistance agencies, including unemployment offices and food stamp offices.

As a result of this collaboration between ACORN, Project Vote and Colorado officials, the number of voter registrations at Colorado public assistance agencies rose from 3,340 in 2007 to almost 44,000 in 2010.

In a February 15, 2011, email to Project Vote, Christi Heppard, Special Projects Coordinator for the Elections Division of the Colorado Department of State, wrote, “…I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the numbers.”

However, the collaboration also led to a large number of invalid and duplicate voter registrations. A total of 8% of rejected registration forms came from public assistance agencies in Colorado in 2009-2010. This is more than four times the national average of 1.9% for that same time period.

According to the documents, Amy Busefink, who at the time was under indictment on 13 voter registration violation charges in Nevada stemming from her time as regional deputy director for ACORN, later managed the online program for Project Vote nationally, including Colorado.

In a May 14, 2008, “pre-litigation” letter, ACORN and Project Vote complained to the State of Colorado that it was in violation of the NVRA, and subsequently set up a meeting with Colorado officials to discuss the matter. According to the documents, that meeting took place on July 2, 2008, at ACORN’s offices. On June 9, 2009, not satisfied with Colorado’s response, Project Vote election counsel Donald Wine II threatened litigation: “CDHS [Colorado Department of Human Services] has had a year and a half to comply with the NVRA. We are left with no choice but to prepare for litigation.”

In response to this threat, the Colorado Office of the Secretary of State evidently went to extreme measures to accommodate ACORN and Project Vote’s demands, including:

•Offering to help push a “legislative fix” to allow people without a driver’s license or state identification to register to vote online. According to a January 27, 2010, email from Director of Division of Elections Judd Choate, “The Secretary’s office would support such a fix. We just need a legislator on board and begin the process of drafting the bill.”
• Sending spreadsheets of voter registration data to Project Vote on a bi-weekly basis for more than two years.
• Posting a Project Vote-produced presentation on the Colorado Secretary of State web site.
• Hosting several meetings between Project Vote personnel and representatives of state welfare offices.
• Ensuring that changes to voter registration forms were approved by Project Vote.

Project Vote’s Busefink ultimately entered an Alford plea to two gross misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters. (An Alford plea is similar to a nolo contendre plea where the defendant does not admit the act and asserts innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.)

Democrat Bernie Buescher, who served as Colorado Secretary of State from January 2009 through January 2011, received support from the Secretary of State Project, an organization funded in part by liberal financier George Soros and organized by the leftist group Moveon.org. (In April 2010, Buescher campaigned with former State House Speaker Terrence Carroll for a proposed bill that would have implemented universal mail-in balloting, same-day voter registrations and pre-registration of 16 year olds. Facing stiff opposition from county election clerks, the bill was tabled on April 21, 2010.)

According to the documents, while Colorado officials took measures to satisfy the demands of Project Vote related to the registration of public assistance recipients, Buescher sought a waiver from the Obama administration that would allow a delay in sending out ballots in time for the military to vote in the last election. The Department of Defense rejected the request, according to Judicial Watch officials.

“The ACORN/Project Vote gang has not gone away, and continues to help generate fraudulent voter registrations that can lead to voter fraud. These emails clearly demonstrate that the corrupt organization ACORN/Project Vote had an inappropriate level of influence over the electoral process in Colorado,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton.

“Colorado officials bent over backwards to abide by the demands of ACORN/Project Vote, which an activist facing criminal charges helped run. So it comes as no surprise that there was a sharp increase in voter registration irregularities. And it is shameful that the concern for voting rights of the citizens of Colorado did not apparently extend to military personnel in the state. If we’re going to protect the integrity of the 2012 elections, attention must be paid to the continuing nefarious activities of ACORN/Project Vote.”

If this can happen in Colorado, it can happen ANYWHERE, and most probably has! America: be on guard! If we do not turn the tide of Socialism now, there could very well be blood running in the streets in our future, as witness what is happening in foreign countries. ~Lordhawke

Bureaucrats run amok: EPA now classifies milk as a pollutant.

2011-09-09T20:47:00.001-05:00

This is an old story, but I just had to go find something on it because of the EPA's currently classifying hay as a pollutant in the story below. It's really getting stupid out there. But put it all together...our lizard, the prairie chicken, CDL's for farmers, milk/hay/CO2 declared pollutants, buffer areas around waterways...the list goes on and on. ~ Faye

Bureaucrats run amok: EPA now classifies milk as a pollutant.

by editor on June 16, 2010

In case you doubted that government bureaucrats are committed to controlling every aspect of our lives, please be aware that they’ve now categorized milk as a pollutant.

Northern Michigan’s Channel 9 has the details:

The Environmental Protection Agency intends to classify milk as a hazardous waste; in the same category as oil.

That means, farmers would have to come up with an oil spill prevention plan which could cost them thousands of dollars.

The Senate Agricultural Committee passed a resolution today urging the EPA to take back those regulations.

This new interpretation of the EPA’s Clean Water Act will require dairy farmers to develop oil spill prevention plans for their milk storage tanks.

As one farmer said in the video, “The majority of milk is water, in the high 80s percentile is water. The rest of it, three and one half percent, is solids of the fat and a portion of that is oil. And because of that small amount of oil in milk they’d like to relate it to motor oil or fuel oil and put it in the same category.”

To put this in terms a dairy farmer would appreciate, bureaucrats are good for only one thing: sucking from the government teat.

Source: 9and10News.com

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/epa-classifies-milk-as-pollutant

EPA Declares Hay a Pollutant in Effort to Antagonize Small and Mid-Sized U.S. Cattle Feeders

2011-09-09T20:35:00.001-05:00

September 1, 2011 Billings, Mont. – During his presentation on the status of the nation’s new country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law, and on behalf of the R-CALF USA COOL Committee, R-CALF USA member and Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate was asked a non-COOL question that set convention goers on their heels during the 12th Annual R-CALF USA Convention held August 26-27 in Rapid City, S.D.

“Has the Environmental Protection Agency declared hay a pollutant?” an audience member asked. Callicrate responded affirmatively and explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently initiated a formal enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for, among other things, failure to store his hay in a pollution containment zone. “Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,” Callicrate said. “How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?”

Callicrate is permitted to handle 12,000 cattle at a time in his feedlot, which is considered a small to mid-sized feedlot in an industry now dominated by mega-feedlots such as those owned by the world’s largest beef packer – JBS-Brazil – with a one-time capacity of over 900,000 cattle; or the other mega-feedlot that also feeds hundreds of thousands of cattle at a time and is owned by the nation’s second-largest beef packer - Cargill; or the other handful of mega feedlots with capacities of hundreds of thousands of cattle such as those owned by Cactus Feeders, Inc. and Friona Industries.

In comments submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice, R-CALF USA estimated the above named mega-feedlots feed 18 percent of the nation’s fed cattle each year while one-fourth of the nation’s cattle are fed in feedlots with a one time capacity of 50,000 head or more. The largest of feedlots are getting larger and Callicrate’s feedlot is among the group of small to mid-sized feedlots that are being pressured to exit the industry so beef packers and corporate feedlot owners can increase their respective capacities. Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) show that 45 feedlots with one-time capacities of between 1,000 or more cattle but less than 16,000 cattle have exited the industry from 2008 to 2010.

R-CALF USA contents beef packers are deliberately forcing small to mid-sized feedlots out of business through unfair and abusive cattle-buying practices that effectively restrict market access for all but the largest of feedlots. “The proposed GIPSA rule (USDA Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration rule) will put a stop to such unfair and abusive practices, but only if USDA issues a final rule,” said Callicrate.

Callicrate’s feedlot is the perfect example. In late 1998, the nation’s largest beef packers blackballed Callicrate because he called attention to the unfair buying practices of the corporate meatpackers. Callicrate was forced to cease his feedlot operations until 2000 when he opened Ranch Foods Direct, a meat processing and distribution company in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and began marketing his own beef more directly to consumers.

“I believe the EPA’s enforcement action is a premeditated effort by EPA to partner with the beef packers to finish the job the beef packer’s couldn’t do alone,” said Callicrate adding, “along with my feedlot, the EPA has filed enforcement actions against five other smaller feedlots, including one with only 400 cattle.

Callicrate said the EPA does not appear to be going after the corporate feedlots. “EPA is turning a blind eye toward the mega-feedlots that are a real risk for pollution and, instead, is antagonizing small to mid-sized family operations in an effort to help their packer-partners capture the entire live cattle supply chain away from family farm and ranch operations.”

We thought the Obama Administration was going to bring about a change to the ongoing corporate control and corporate dominance that has been decimating the U.S. cattle industry. I guess we’re seeing that change right now. Rather than reduce corporate control and dominance the EPA is overtly partnering with the corporate beef packers to accelerate the exodus of sustainable, independent family operations. This really smells,” Callicrate concluded.

Note: For satellite photographs of Callicrate’s feedlot compared to larger, industrialized feedlots, go to http://nobull.mikecallicrate.com/

http://r-calfusa.com/news_releases/2011/110901-epa.htm

Government Regulator Sues Wall Street Banks For Fraud In Subprime Mortgage Dea

2011-09-09T20:25:00.000-05:00

The federal government late Friday filed lawsuits against 17 financial institutions, including some of the nation’s largest banks, alleging a pattern of fraud in their packaging and selling of roughly $200 billion worth of mortgage-linked securities. The suits amount to one of the most significant legal actions to emerge from the rubble of the financial crisis nearly three years ago.

The allegations by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which is seeking unspecified compensation, penetrate the heart of Wall Street’s role in helping lead the economy to ruin. The FHFA claims these institutions knowingly peddled shoddy deals without informing investors. When the housing market crashed, and those deals went south, the damage rippled through economies around the globe, plunging nations into recession.

The legal action, which comes in addition to separate allegations of dubious mortgage and foreclosure practices at some of these banks, may roil financial markets next week, and is likely to have dramatic political consequences for the Obama administration. The banks, some of which have lately been subjected to punishing speculation about the adequacy of their capital reserves, could face massive losses. A spokeswoman for the FHFA said it was “premature” to judge what the actual penalties from Friday’s lawsuits might be.

The FHFA alleges that banks repeatedly made false claims to the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac about the very nature of the loans banks were selling. In many cases, the FHFA claims, banks sold the shoddy loans even after a third-party analysis company informed the banks that billions of dollars’ worth of mortgages did not meet the specifications that the banks made in legal filings and in statements to Fannie and Freddie, which are still owned by U.S. taxpayers.

“Make no mistake: fraud is a business model,” said Janet Tavakoli, president of the Chicago-based consulting firm Tavakoli Structured Finance.

“Unfortunately, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were often tagged with a lot of these loans,” she continued. “Whether they were willing victims in some cases is almost irrelevant at this point, because now it is a matter of public interest, since taxpayers had to bail out Fannie and Freddie. The whole ballgame has changed."

Representatives for the banks were either unavailable to comment, or declined to comment, on Friday evening. The institutions being sued include Ally Bank, Bank of America, Barclays, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, First Horizon, General Electric, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Societe Generale, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Nomura and Royal Bank of Scotland.

Bank of America and Deutsche Bank each released statements Friday saying that Fannie and Freddie are sophisticated investors, with the ability to assess complicated securities. The banks claimed that Fannie and Freddie have said the losses were caused by broader economic forces.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were among the most sophisticated, powerful and heavily regulated financial institutions in the U.S. mortgage finance system,” Bank of America said in a statement. “They claimed to understand the risks inherent in investing in subprime securities and, in fact, continued to invest heavily in those securities even after their regulator told them they did not have the risk management capabilities to do so.”

But the mortgage giants were deceived, the FHFA claims. Banks concealed crucial information about the investments they were selling, so that even the most sophisticated investor would be left in the dark, lawsuits allege.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did not know, and in the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have known, of the untruths and omissions,” the lawsuit against Goldman Sachs says. If Fannie and Freddie had known, the suit continues, they would not have bought the securities.

Near the center of the allegations is the relationship between the banks and an independent firm known as Clayton Holdings, which analyzed mortgages for these bank clients. Clayton, which found problems with many of these loans, got national attention last fall when a former executive gave explosive testimony to a government panel.

Wall Street banks bought pools of subprime home loans to turn into securities, and submitted a percentage of those loans to Clayton for review. Clayton found that as many as 28 percent of these loans failed to meet basic standards, the company revealed in September of last year.

But nearly half the time, banks went ahead and purchased the bad loans anyway, using this information to go back and buy the loans on the cheap, according to Clayton data and testimony from the former executive.

Worse, the banks didn’t tell investors about Clayton’s concerns, the FHFA alleged Friday.

Goldman Sachs, an FHFA lawsuit claims, also bet against the securities it was selling, and reaped profits from doing so. Such bets were the subject of a lawsuit brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which resulted in a $550 million settlement last year, and has contributed to an ongoing public relations nightmare for the Wall Street titan.

“Goldman was like a car dealership that realized it had a whole lot full of cars with faulty brakes,” wrote journalist Matt Taibbi, in an article that the FHFA quotes in its lawsuit. “Instead of announcing a recall, it surged ahead with a two-fold plan to make a fortune: first, by dumping the dangerous products on other people, and second, by taking out life insurance against the fools who bought the deadly cars.”

The lawsuits put intense pressure on the Obama administration, which has long insisted that U.S. banks are healthy, while pushing for a cheap and speedy settlement over separate allegations that banks committed widespread fraud in the foreclosure process.

The suits also underscore tensions over housing policy between President Barack Obama and Edward DeMarco, acting FHFA director. DeMarco, a holdover from the Bush administration, has rebuffed a push from Obama insiders to spur mortgage refinancing for underwater borrowers.

The government took over Fannie and Freddie in the summer of 2008 as the mortgage giants suffered massive losses, and DeMarco is bound by that takeover deal to limit losses for taxpayers. Some housing experts have criticized the Obama team's push for refinancing, saying it has failed to eliminate excess bubble-era housing debt for underwater homeowners.

Nevertheless, the FHFA's move prompted applause from Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.), one of the top mortgage experts in Congress, and a persistent critic of big bank abuses both during and after the housing bubble.

"I don’t agree with Mr. DeMarco on every issue, but I have consistently supported FHFA’s efforts to pursue legitimate claims for fraud and breach of contract to limit taxpayer losses," Miller said. "Not pursuing those claims would be an indirect subsidy for an industry that has gotten too many subsidies already. The American people should expect their government not to give the biggest banks a backdoor bailout."

The administration has long sought to maintain the stability of major financial firms in the aftermath of the politically unpopular bank bailouts of 2008 and 2009. Although the bailouts were initiated under President George W. Bush, Obama continued the policies, and has repeatedly touted Wall Street's health as evidence that the programs were successful. Further losses absorbed by banks could weaken the economy and stymie job creation.

The suits include at least one explicitly political problem for Obama. The FHFA's targets include General Electric, an international beacon of American business whose CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, currently serves as a top economic adviser to Obama.

Stock market investors have hammered financial institutions in recent weeks, as worries that the economy could be entering a new recession combined with fears that these companies could be on the hook for many billions in legal liabilities -- and could face losses from exposure to troubled European banks.

The value of Bank of America shares at closing on Friday had sunk to a third of its so-called book value, according to its recent financial statement. The closing price of $7.25 a share was just cents higher than its price before the widely-admired investor Warren Buffett injected several billions into the company last week.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/02/banks-sued-subprime-mortgage-deals_n_947349.html

Here is a list of banks named in the lawsuit and how much they sold to Fannie & Freddie.

Ally Financial Inc. f/k/a GMAC, LLC - $6 billion

Bank of America Corporation - $6 billion

Barclays Bank PLC - $4.9 billion

Citigroup, Inc. - $3.5 billion

Countrywide Financial Corporation - $26.6 billion

Credit Suisse Holdings (USA), Inc. - $14.1 billion

Deutsche Bank AG - $14.2 billion

First Horizon National Corporation - $883 million

General Electric Company - $549 million

Goldman Sachs & Co. - $11.1 billion

HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. - $6.2 billion

JPMorgan Chase & Co. - $33 billion

Merrill Lynch & Co. / First Franklin Financial Corp. - $24.8 billion

Morgan Stanley - $10.6 billion

Nomura Holding America Inc. - $2 billion

The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC - $30.4 billion

Société Générale - $1.3 billion

Total: $196.132 Billion

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/youre-guide-to-the-fhfa-bank-lawsuits-2011-9#the-numbers-1#ixzz1XVaon5Jg

AARP & ObummerCare

2011-09-09T09:19:00.002-05:00

Illegal Immigration Tax Break?!

2011-09-06T19:05:00.000-05:00

How's this for raising the hair on your neck?

From Redstate Briefing:

Posted by Daniel Horowitz (Profile)

Friday, September 2nd,2011

Throughout the entire debt ceiling imbroglio, Democrats incessantly regurgitated the talking point about the need for “a balanced approach.” They were so uniform and synchronized that they sounded like the sheep in Animal Farm. Ironically, their idea of a balanced approach was singularly focused upon Oil Company and corporate tax deductions, which are negligible compared to the crushing debt. The targeted oil tax deductions would have brought in $2 billion in annual revenue, while the cancellation of the corporate jet depreciation deduction would have saved only $3 billion over 10 years!
Well, it turns out that illegal aliens, most of which pay zero in net taxes, enjoyed $4.2 billion from the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) last year. That’s more than the annual revenue from the selected oil tax deductions and corporate jet deductions combined!
Yesterday, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Collection released a shocking report detailing how illegal aliens are able to utilize a filing loophole to obtain billions in ACTC funds. The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and ACTC (unlike the base child tax credit) are totally refundable and can award the recipient with a negative tax balance. Appropriations for the EITC in FY 2010 were $54.7 billion and $28.3 billion for the ACTC. While EITC appropriations are protected from illegals (those who don’t engage in identity theft) because they are only awarded to those who provide a valid Social Security number, the same cannot be said for the ACTC.
Here is the punchline of the Inspector’s report:

Many individuals who are not authorized to work in the United States, and thus not eligible to obtain a Social Security Number (SSN) for employment, earn income in the United States. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) provides such individuals with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) to facilitate their filing of tax returns. Although the law prohibits aliens residing without authorization in the United States from receiving most Federal public benefits, an increasing number of these individuals are filing tax returns claiming the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC), a refundable tax credit intended for working families. The payment of Federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization, which contradicts Federal law and policy to remove such incentives.
Because concerns were raised by Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and the IRS regarding noncompliance with EITC requirements, a law was passed in Calendar Year 1996 to deny the EITC to individuals who file a tax return without an SSN that is valid for employment. As such, filers using an ITIN are not eligible for the EITC. The change in the law was made prior to the establishment of the ACTC. However, the same law prohibits aliens residing without authorization in the United States from receiving most Federal public benefits, with the exception of certain emergency services and programs.
Nonetheless, IRS management’s view is that the law does not provide sufficient legal authority for the IRS to disallow the ACTC to ITIN filers. In addition, the Internal Revenue Code does not require an SSN to claim the ACTC and does not provide the IRS math error authority to deny the credit without an examination. As such, the IRS continues to pay the ACTC to ITIN filers.

According to the latest employment data, we’ve lost 2.57 million jobs since Obama took office, even though there are 5.1 million additional people of working age in the country. Illegals are not only competing for scarce jobs; they are enjoying billions in handouts ensconced in the tax system, due to willful negligence on the part of the IRS. For most Americans, they are the most belligerent agency in the government, yet they are suddenly indolent in going after illegals. Obama wants them to clamp down on tax deductions for corporations that pay billions in taxes, while blithely allowing them to ignore billions in refundable handouts to those who shouldn’t be here in the first place.
Talk about a balanced approach!

This ought to "frost" everyone's cake!

~Lordhawke

Picking on the TEA Partiers - 2

2011-08-31T04:56:00.002-05:00

Picking on the TEA Partiers - 1

2011-08-31T04:48:00.000-05:00

Thank you, Buddy Saunders. I've never heard of this guy either.

Billions at stake as Exxon fights for lease on Gulf of Mexico's Julia field

2011-08-30T09:39:00.001-05:00

Russell Gold
From: The Wall Street Journal
August 18, 2011 3:12PM

EXXON Mobil is fighting the US government to keep control of one of its biggest oil discoveries ever, in a showdown where billions of dollars hang in the balance for both sides.

The massive Gulf of Mexico discovery contains an estimated 1 billion barrels of recoverable oil, Exxon says. The Interior Department, which regulates offshore drilling, says Exxon's leases have expired and the company hasn't met requirements for an extension. Exxon has sued to retain the leases.

The court battle is playing out just when Barack Obama's administration has made an issue of unused leases, which deprive the Treasury of valuable taxes. It also comes as regulators are being careful not to be seen as lax in their dealings with large energy companies, in the wake of last year's BP spill in the gulf.

The stakes are high: Under federal law, the leases - and all the oil underneath - could revert to the government if Exxon doesn't win in court.

The loss of the leases would be an enormous black eye for Exxon.

The company hadn't disclosed the size of the discovery, in what is called the Julia field, until it was mentioned in the suit Exxon filed against the Interior Department last week in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

The Texas behemoth faces the sobering prospect that it may have made the largest discovery ever in the Gulf of Mexico, only to lose it. Tens of billions of dollars of oil could slip through its hands because it failed to follow federal rules for getting a lease extension while it moved forward with plans to get the oil out of the ground.

Exxon spokesman Patrick McGinn said the company expected to get the extension, which he said was traditionally granted as a matter of course. "You state your case and you got it. (This) was unexpected."

This high-stakes standoff is likely to spark a political, as well as legal, showdown between the federal government and the nation's largest oil company. It has also roped in Norway's Statoil ASA, which owns 50 per cent of the Julia find. Statoil said it filed its own suit against the Interior Department to preserve the leases on Monday, in the same Louisiana federal court.

Exxon is the field's operator and lease-holder.

A spokeswoman for the Interior Department said, "Our priority remains the safe development of the nation's offshore energy resources, which is why we continue to approve extensions that meet regulatory standards."

The Interior Department, which oversees offshore oil development and collects royalties, has been trying to show that it has become a tougher, but still fair, regulator of the Gulf of Mexico's oil riches.

Its reputation was battered when lives were lost and an environmental disaster unfolded after the massive Deepwater Horizon well blow-out and oil spill last year, when BP sought - and the government approved - last-minute changes to the well design, which some investigators say contributed to a chaotic environment aboard the drilling rig. The government was roundly criticised for weak oversight of safety rules.

Now the department must decide whether to fight Exxon in court or settle and allow it to develop the oil. Turning the leases over to another company would mean further delays to the tax royalties that would go to government coffers. At current prices, potential royalties paid to the government over the lifetime of a one billion-barrel field would be about $US10.95 billion ($10.38bn).

The oil industry, led vocally by Exxon, has said that developing oil fields in the deepest reaches of the gulf takes time to do safely. And by threatening to take away a massive discovery, the industry says that the government is sending the message that oil companies need to be in a rush to produce.

The possibility that Exxon could lose this oil will likely send shockwaves through the industry. "This is unprecedented," said Amy Myers Jaffe, associate director of the Energy Program at Rice University in Houston. "The question is: Do our offshore rules allow for flexibility? You don't want to let companies sit on a discovery. We definitely don't want to send the industry a message that you need to be in a rush or we'll take the oil away from you."

Exxon's lawsuit said the government has granted "thousands" of extensions over time. It said the government's denial of its extension relied on legal interpretations that it "had never before applied and had never before articulated". Statoil asserted in its lawsuit that no request for an extension for a deep-water development "had ever previously been denied". The Interior Department couldn't comment on this.

The Exxon discovery is believed to be the largest in the Gulf of Mexico since BP found the Thunder Horse Field in 1999, and it could be larger. The find also cements the Gulf of Mexico as a rich exploration area with large amounts of undiscovered oil that may keep oil companies active for years to come.

"This is very deep water, very complex structures and difficult-to-produce oil," said Exxon's Mr McGinn.

The dispute over Exxon's plans for the Julia field began in October 2008 - about a month before its 10-year leases expired - when it applied for a five-year "suspension of production".

Such extensions are "fairly common", said Elmer P Danenberger III, a former federal official who oversaw US offshore-drilling rules until he retired in 2009.

"I can honestly say that people who manage that program are really strict, which they need to be, or it will be abused. If you don't have a commercial discovery and a plan for moving ahead at the end of the lease term, that's it."

In February 2009, the government denied Exxon's request for an extension and, after a brief appeal, denied it again the following April. Exxon said in a letter at the time that it was "committed" to producing the oil, but the government said it didn't present a specific plan. The government contended this didn't meet legal requirements and denied the application.

More appeals followed, but Exxon lost its final appeal in May. The final decision hinged on whether Exxon had a concrete "commitment" to produce the oil in December 2008, when its lease expired. The director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals at the Interior Department ruled that it didn't.

Exxon is known in the industry for moving slowly and studying all options exhaustively before committing billions of dollars. But even if it loses this court case, all might not be lost. The Julia field consists of five leases - or square blocks in the Gulf of Mexico - and only three are being disputed. The other two aren't set to expire until 2013.

Additional reporting: Deborah Solomon, Angel Gonzalez

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/billions-at-stake-as-exxon-fights-for-lease-on-gulf-of-mexicos-julia-field/story-fn91v9q3-1226117513708

Battle for the California Desert: Why is the Government Driving Folks off Their Land?

2011-08-30T08:20:00.001-05:00

Calif. School Superintendent Volunteers for $800K in Pay Cuts

2011-08-30T07:49:00.000-05:00

Some people give back to their community. Then there's Fresno County School Superintendent Larry Powell, who's really giving back. As in $800,000 - what would have been his compensation for the next three years.

Until his term expires in 2015, Powell will run 325 schools and 35 school districts with 195,000 students, all for less than a starting California teacher earns. "How much do we need to keep accumulating?" asks Powell, 63. "There's no reason for me to keep stockpiling money."

Powell‘s generosity is more than just a gesture in a region with some of the nation's highest rates of unemployment. As he prepares for retirement, he wants to ensure that his pet projects survive California budget cuts. And the man who started his career as a high school civics teacher, who has made anti-bullying his mission, hopes his act of generosity will help restore faith in the government he once taught students to respect...

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/blog/id.8359/blog_detail.asp

Beware of Prop 4 on Nov. 8!

2011-08-29T23:17:00.001-05:00

On November 8, Texas voters will once again head to the polls to decide whether or not to approve 10 new ballot propositions passed by the 82nd Texas legislature. Prop 4 is based on the Constitutional Amendment HJR 63 authored by Rep. Joe Pickett (D - El Paso). Prop 4 would expand Transportation Reinvestment Zone (or TRZ) authority to counties.

TRZs heist property tax appraisal increases within the designated zone to pay for transportation projects, including to subsidize toll roads (which would be a DOUBLE TAX). TRZs allow local governments to use your property taxes to back bonds, and they don't have to go to the voters to do it. Your property taxes aren't going to go down once your city (which already has this authority) or county (who will get this authority if you vote 'yes' on Prop 4) sells bonds dependent on ever increasing property tax appraisals!

TRZs are a way for STATE legislators to punt on their responsibility to build and maintain STATE highways and their responsibility to end diversions of the gas tax to non-road uses, and allows them to outsource tax increases for roads by passing it down to the LOCAL level.

Spread the word! Vote 'No' on Prop 4!

Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21, globalist policies

2011-08-29T23:02:00.002-05:00

Selling Texas to foreign creditors while jabbing Obama for same

By Terri Hall
Founder
Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom
August 15, 2011

Rick Perry may be good at invoking states rights and property rights, while disavowing ‘foreign creditors,’ but his actions as Texas’ longest serving governor tell a different story. Public private partnerships (or P3s) are part and parcel of the United Nations’ Agenda 21. Two of the purposes of Agenda 21 are to abolish private property and restrict mobility and P3s act as the vehicle to do it. Perry made P3s a centerpiece of his transportation policy since he stepped in as governor.

It started with the Trans Texas Corridor, known at the federal level as high priority corridors, corridors of the future, or the NAFTA superhighways. Just in Texas, it was to be a 4,000 mile multi-modal network of toll roads, rail lines, power transmission lines, pipelines, telecommunications lines and more. It was going to be financed, operated, and controlled by a foreign company granted massive swaths of land 1,200 feet (4 football fields) wide taken forcibly through eminent domain.

Called the biggest land grab in Texas history, it was going to gobble up 580,000 acres of private Texas land (the first corridor alone was to displace 1 million Texans) and hand it over to well-connected global players using P3s, who would gain exclusive rights to determine the route and what hotels, restaurants, and gas stations were along the corridor in a government-sanctioned monopoly for a half century. It was the worst case of eminent domain for private gain ever conceived.

Property rights shredded

The Trans Texas Corridor, and P3s in general, represent an imminent threat to private property rights. While lawmakers repealed the Trans Texas Corridor from state statute only months ago due to the public backlash, the re-named corridor (‘Innovative Connectivity Plan’) and its threat to property rights lives on through P3s. Two such projects underway by a Spanish developer, Cintra, will charge Texans 75 cents per mile in tolls (nearly $13 a day while Perry claims he hasn’t raised taxes or indebted Texans to foreign creditors) to access lanes on two public interstates -- I-635 and I-820. A third project being developed by the same company for two segments on SH 130 is, perhaps, the only leg of the Trans Texas Corridor TTC-35 project that will ever be built.

While Perry distracted Texans and tea partiers with ‘emergency’ resolutions on state sovereignty during the 82nd legislature, P3s spread from transportation projects to virtually every other type of public infrastructure in a bill, SB 1048, passed by the Texas legislature which he signed into law June 17. Now all public infrastructure, including public buildings, schools, nursing homes, ports, mass transit, etc. can be auctioned-off to private interests in long-term sweetheart deals with taxpayer subsidies and profit guarantees using P3s.

P3s give a private corporation the power to tax the public, whether through charging tolls or other so-called ‘user fees,’ to access their own public infrastructure, and, perhaps more insidious, allowing well-connected private entities to profit from concessions on land taken through eminent domain.

Why shouldn’t the original landowner be able to profit from developing his/her land instead of having the government take it in the name of a “public use” and give it to another developer, one with government connections? Perry’s administration of P3s is like his administration of his Emerging Technology Fund that’s been highly criticized for steering taxpayer money to Perry’s campaign donors -- a case in point, Dan Shelley.

Shelley worked for Cintra, who had its sites set on developing the Trans Texas Corridor. Shelley lands a job as Perry’s aide, steers the $7 billion corridor P3 to his former employer Cintra, then goes back to work for Cintra. That’s how Perry does business -- pay to play.

Texas “Open for Business”

While Perry is staking his campaign on Texas being the top net jobs creator, Perry’s version of Texas being “Open for Business” isn’t about low taxes and less regulation as much as it is about doing business with foreign companies, including selling off Texas’ sovereign land and public assets to foreign creditors, an issue which Perry’s first television ad uses to take aim at President Obama.

Aside from the P3s, Texas has 20 active deals going with the Chinese and has 32 foreign trade zones (FTZs), a vehicle to ease the flow of foreign goods into the United States that are chalk full of tax breaks for importers. Perry’s office promoted these FTZs in a document entitled Foreign Trade Zones: Texas Wide Open for Business and even dedicates a web site for Texas FTZs, http://www.texaswideopenforbusiness.com/.

A recent Washington Post article documents Perry’s work to get Chinese government-owned telecommunications company Huawei, to base its U.S. operations in Texas, a company that the U.S. government has deemed a threat to national security noting that “three times since 2008, a U.S. government security panel has blocked Huawei from acquiring or partnering with U.S. companies because of concerns that secrets could be leaked to China’s government or military.”

Perry’s coziness with the Chinese and foreign investors exposes a huge weakness in his right flank -- illegal immigration and open borders. The Trans Texas Corridor has been linked to the global plan to economically integrate North America, with the eventual goal of a common security perimeter modeled after the European Union. Perry ushered in in-state tuition for illegals and has long been an obstacle to immigration reform or any Arizona-style immigration law.

Perry’s record paints a much different picture than what candidate Perry would have us believe -- that he’s a states rights, Constitutionally limited government conservative that’s responsible for the “Texas miracle.” In reality, he’s more like an Agenda 21 globalist willing to sell America to the highest bidder.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21, globalist policies - San Antonio Transportation Policy

Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/transportation-policy-in-san-antonio/rick-perry-tied-to-agenda-21-globalist-policies#ixzz1V8WLRtO9

Open Letter to Rush & Hannity: Steer clear of Rick Perry

2011-08-29T22:45:00.000-05:00

Written by Terri Hall

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Note: Sean Hannity went on a tirade against toll hikes in New York and New Jersey. Then in the same show praised Rick Perry as a conservative. Rush has been on the Perry bandwagon along with Glenn Beck. Either these guys don't vet a candidate's conservative credentials before they back 'em or they're going along with the establishment that truly fears an outsider they can't control, like a Ron Paul type of candidate.

Dear Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck,

There's something you've got to know. I'm a Texan, and Rick Perry is the BIGGEST toll-tax happy Governor in the nation. He's trying to turn every single lane of a highway near my house into a tollway and make us pay TWICE for what's already built and paid for. He's doing it all over Texas with over 500 toll projects being contemplated RIGHT NOW, while he tries to tell America he's cut taxes.

Even worse, he's trying to sell-off our public highway system to foreign companies in public private partnerships or PPPs (right out of the the Agenda 21 playbook). PPPs are sweetheart deals with massive taxpayer subsidies (that socialize the losses and privatize the profits) and charge us 75 cents PER MILE to access our PUBLIC roads.

On one road in DFW that translates to $13/day in new taxes or over $3,000 a year MORE per year just to get to work. Meanwhile, he signed a budget that INCREASED diversions of our state gas taxes to non-road uses (fuel taxes are supposed to be Constitutionally dedicated fund only for roads, so he's violated the Texas Constitution!). That same budget was 'balanced' using accounting gimmicks putting payments to Medicaid and schools into the next budget year to get them off this budget’s books and make it look ‘balanced,’ plus he’s amassed a whopping $31 billion in road debt in just 5 years -- meanwhile State spending has nearly doubled on Rick Perry's watch...yet he claims to be all about upholding the Constitution and purports himself to be a fiscal conservative.

And all this is aside from his biggest albatross....the Trans Texas Corridor. It was to be a 4,000 mile network of toll roads 1,200 feet wide (that's FOUR football fields wide - would have bisected whole communities and displaced 1 million people on just the first corridor) and the biggest land grab in TX history forcibly taking 580,000 acres of private Texans' land and handing it over to a foreign company in one of these PPPs for a HALF CENTURY. Texans rebelled and the legislature finally repealed it, but Perry still lists it as one of his many accomplishments.

If you don't like the unaccountable taxation of toll roads (in the hands of unelected bureaucrats no less), then you won't like Rick Perry. Steer clear. Then there's his corporate welfare slush funds, the HPV vaccine mandate (as a pay-off to campaign donor Merck and its lobbyist, a former Perry staffer Mike Toomey), his weakness on illegal immigration and securing our borders, the revolving door between his aides and those doing business with the state, steering public money and high level appointments to his campaign donors, and the list goes on and on. Perry's rhetoric doesn't match his record.

If you want more info, we Texans have formed a grassroots organization established to fight this stuff: http://www.texasturf.org/.

Who’s paying Perry’s security costs?

2011-08-29T22:32:00.000-05:00

By Sari Horwitz

Saturday, Aug 27, 2011

Since Rick Perry joined the presidential race this month, his campaign entourage has included not just the standard array of political advisers and aides, but a squad of Texas law enforcement agents.

The security forces scout and secure locations days in advance. Well before the governor’s visit to Tommy’s Country Ham House in Greenville, S.C., the weekend of Aug. 20, more than a half-dozen suited and armed agents were giving orders to the crowd of more than 400.

How much is this ever-present phalanx of state policemen costing the taxpayers of Texas? They won’t know at least until after next year’s presidential election, thanks to a provision, tucked into a school finance bill in July, that will keep the governor’s travel records sealed for 18 months.

Although security around public officials has been tightened considerably since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the secrecy that surrounds Perry’s travels is unique, according to Ken Bunting, executive director of the Missouri-based National Freedom of Information Coalition.

And the governor’s critics contend that it has as much to do with politics as safety — especially after the embarrassment for Perry when taxpayers learned that they had been paying for scuba gear and golf cart rentals for officers who accompanied Perry and his wife to the Bahamas in 2004.

“I’m appalled,” said Democratic state Rep. Lon Burnam. “He wants to keep the details buried when he goes to the Bahamas.”

Indeed, this is a battle that has been raging since long before Perry decided to run for president.

Texas newspapers have tried for years to see Perry’s travel records, which would include the costs of the governor’s security detail. But the state Department of Public Safety, run by Steve McCraw, a former FBI official and a longtime Perry friend, has said that the safety of Perry and his family could be jeopardized if the public knew how many officers accompany them, where they stay and Perry’s traveling patterns.

After the Houston Chronicle, San Antonio Express and Austin American-Statesman sued the DPS, two Texas courts ruled that the records should be released. They were overturned last month by the state Supreme Court. But the case is still alive: the Supreme Court sent it back to a lower court, ordering DPS to cite precisely which records would put Perry in danger if they were released.

In the meantime, during a special session that ended July 1, the Texas Legislature, at Perry’s urging, added language to a school finance bill that will seal the governor’s travel records for 18 months — until after the 2012 presidential election. The measure would cover the records going forward, not those in the past, which have been the subject of the court fight.

One Republican legislator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described the governor as “extremely concerned” about keeping his records sealed, and said Perry was actively lobbying key legislators to get it passed in the waning days of the special session. The legislator said Perry’s wife, Anita, also was pressing legislators on the issue.

The move to seal the records has drawn criticism from Republicans as well as Democrats.

“The money belongs to the people of Texas and they need to have an account of it,” said state Rep. David Simpson (R), a freshman from Longview who was elected with tea party backing. “You can do this without jeopardizing security.”

State officials say they do provide summaries of the information for an array of top officials, but not the specifics, citing security concerns.

“The governor believes that we need to strike the right balance of transparency and accountability to taxpayers while maintaining a priority on security,” said Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Perry.

Before Perry’s travel records were sealed, Texas newspapers were able to shed some light on his travel and the cost to taxpayers, including the Bahamas trip.

The records, reported in 2005 by the Austin American-Statesman, showed that Perry and staff members had traveled the previous year to the Bahamas for a meeting with top campaign donor James Leininger, a supporter of public school vouchers and charter schools, his wife, and Grover Norquist, a national anti-tax advocate. The records showed $4,200 in taxpayer money was spent for the squad of six state troopers who went along, including costs for renting scuba gear, golf cars and cellphones, according to the newspaper.

Perry said later that the trip was to discuss education policy and finance with his political and technical advisers “in a setting removed from daily distractions.”

In 2009, Perry traveled to Israel where he was given the “Defender of Jerusalem” award. According to a local television report, he and his wife flew first class at more than $5,000 per ticket, paid for by an energy company financier. Four security detail officers also went on the five-day trip at a cost of more than $70,000 to taxpayers. The expenses included $17,000 for rooms at the King David Hotel, nearly $13,000 for food and more than 350 hours in overtime pay.

Perry has said in the past that most of his frequent international travel has been to promote Texas and draw business to the state.

Open-records advocates in Texas say taxpayers have a right to know the costs of Perry’s security detail and the trips, especially long after the travel has occurred.

“The Perry administration is trying to hide the true cost of his out-of-state travel to the taxpayer,” said Craig McDonald of Texans for Public Justice.

State Rep. Charlie Geren (R), the House Administration Committee chairman, said the provision to seal the records came largely at the insistence of DPS head McCraw. McCraw was appointed to his post by a commission of Perry appointees shortly after a fire was set at the governor’s mansion in 2008.

The fire, which almost destroyed the 153-year-old mansion, was started by an unidentified person who tossed a Molotov cocktail on the front porch. No one was in the home, which had been closed for renovation.

While Perry pays for most of his travel from his campaign account and donated funds, costs for the security detail are paid largely out of the state highway fund, derived from a gasoline tax and vehicle registration fees.

horwitzs@washpost.com

Staff writers Philip Rucker and Karen Tumulty and news researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.

http://mobile.washingtonpost.com/rss.jsp?rssid=597&item=http%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2finvestigations%2fperrys-travel-security-costs-will-stay-secret-until-after-2012%2f2011%2f08%2f22%2fgIQANIZBjJ_mobile.mobile&cid=961405&spf=1

New Song

2011-08-29T00:22:00.000-05:00

END GAME - full length

2011-08-28T22:21:00.001-05:00

The Fall of the Republic - Full Version

2011-08-28T18:11:00.001-05:00

Barney Frank Caught Lying About Fannie Mae

2011-08-28T14:45:00.003-05:00

Oh...I've got to save this one on the toothless, slobbering wonder also.

Democrats and Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae

2011-08-28T14:39:00.000-05:00

Saving this 'cause Fox is going to tell me again one of these days that it's all the Republicans' fault and I don't want this far from my fingers.

Good site to find out what's actually going on

2011-08-26T17:04:00.001-05:00

The National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers puts out this site. You can get info not only from the U.S. but what's being put out in other countries' publications.

http://m3report.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/nafbpo-calls-for-new-immigration-policy-to-be-rescinded/

Ahhhhh... not for the faint-hearted. These guys don't pull no punches.

National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers - smugglers' fees

2011-08-26T16:57:00.000-05:00

The National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers (NAFBPO) extracts and condenses the material that follows from Mexican and Central and South American on-line media sources on a daily basis. You are free to disseminate this information, but we request that you credit NAFBPO as being the provider.

Friday, 10/1/10

Frontera (Tijuana, Baja Calif.) 9/30/10
Arizona law SB1070 boosts smugglers’ fees

Crossing over to “the other side” (read: the U.S.) used to cost Mexicans two thousand dollars or more; however, smugglers’ rates have now reached $4,500 dollars starting last June. The approval of Law SB1070 in Arizona has allowed the “coyotes” to fill their pockets due to the criminalization of immigrants in that state. New York’s Tepeyac Association, which looks after the rights of immigrants, pointed out that, nevertheless, this 125% increase has not impacted the attempts to cross the border.

Migrants have changed routes now. Arizona is no longer a viable option and now people attempt to cross mostly through New Mexico, California and Texas, according to Joel Magallanes, executive director of the Tepeyac organization. Magallanes added that prices not only impact on Mexicans: it’s the South Americans who must come up with a larger payment to reach the “American dream.” It used to cost them $7,000 dollars, while now the “pollero” (“chicken herder” or smuggler) demands some $15,000. Central Americans have a slight discount, but their cost has risen from the previous $6,000 and has now reached $10,000. The Tepeyac group also pointed out the insecurity on the border and the current high volume of the Rio Grande River, both of which increase the risk for those who attempt to reach the neighboring country.

http://www.frontera.info/EdicionEnLinea/Notas/Noticias/30092010/471...

Rep. Gutierrez says Immigrant Voters put Obama in Office

2011-08-26T06:41:00.000-05:00

In sharing his joy over Obama's latest immigration policy with the Latino community, Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) let it slip that "immigrant voters" helped put Obama in the White House. It is illegal for immigrants-- legal or illegal -- to vote in U.S. elections.

Gutierrez confirms what many in the U.S. already believe: Illegal aliens are voting in U.S. elections -- to the benefit of the Democrat Party -- and each time an illegal alien votes, it cancels out a vote cast by a U.S. citizen.

Following the Obama Homeland Security Department's policy change on illegal alien deportations last Thursday, New York's Congressman Peter King slammed Obama's deportation policy as a blatant attempt to bypass congressional authority and grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens by fiat.

While the move caused anger among many GOP lawmakers and citizens groups, it was praised by the Democrats.

"This is the Barack Obama I have been waiting for and that Latino and immigrant voters helped put in office," Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) told New York Daily News reporter Jack Straw.

Rep. King, who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee accused Obama of cherry picking which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore.

“This new non-enforcement policy announced by the Obama Administration Thursday is a blatant attempt to grant amnesty to potentially millions of illegal aliens in this country, and is totally unacceptable. In reality, this decision to vastly expand the exercise of ‘prosecutorial discretion’ in enforcing our federal immigration laws means that the Administration will now be, in a huge number of cases, simply ignoring those laws," said King.

King (R-Nassau) cited Obama's remarks from July: “On July 25, in a speech to the National Council of La Raza, the President himself said, ‘I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own…but that’s not how our system works…That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.’ Apparently the President’s understanding of how our system of government works has changed since last month,” King sternly noted.

“The President and members of his Administration must enforce this nation’s laws, just as they have sworn in their oaths of office to do," said the visibly angry Congressman King.

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and is a columnist for The Examiner (examiner.com) and New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News KGAB (www.kgab.com). Jim Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe actor Michael Moriarty.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10237/pub_detail.asp

PRESS RELEASE: ECTOR COUNTY LAUNCHES “NO REFUSAL” WEEKEND

2011-08-25T14:54:00.000-05:00

To combat the serious and often deadly problem of impaired driving, local law enforcement agencies will join together Labor Day Weekend to launch Ector County’s first “No Refusal” Weekend. All suspected impaired drivers who refuse breath testing will be subject to blood testing to determine their blood-alcohol concentration.

In Ector County, as well as the rest of the nation, anyone driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 grams per deciliter or higher is considered legally impaired. On a first offense, this is a Class B Misdemeanor. Beginning September 1, 2011, if the (BAC) is .15 or higher, the offense is enhanced to a class A Misdemeanor.

In 2010, there were 25,032 alcohol-related crashes in Texas, resulting in 1,057 deaths and 16,877 injuries. Texas leads the nation in alcohol-related crashes and fatalities. Of those, 24% were young people between the ages of 20 to 25, even though this age-bracket is only 9% of the population. Most occurred on Saturday, and the greatest number occurred between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m.

BAC test refusals are increasing across the nation. The “No Refusal Weekend” is designed to address this issue. Police and other law enforcement officials work in coordination with prosecutors and judges to quickly obtain “blood draw warrants” for drivers who refuse BAC testing. With the approval of a judge, anyone suspected of impaired driving who unlawfully refuses to provide a breath sample is subject to blood testing at the scene, a medical facility, or nearest jail facility. In this case, offenders will be transported to a medical facility for testing.

Joining in Ector County’s First “No-Refusal” Weekend are: Texas Department of Public Safety; Ector County Sheriff’s Office; Odessa Police Department; U.T.P.B. Police; Judge Susan Redford; Justice of the Peace Chris Clark; Municipal Court Judge Carol Gregg; Judge Joe Connally; Municipal Court Judge Dennis Jones; Judge James Rush; Ector County District Attorney’s Office; Odessa Regional Medical Center; Stop DWI/TWD, Inc.; and the Ector County Attorney’s Office.

via Cindy Weir-Nutter

Gov. Deval Patrick’s stand on illegals is indefensible

2011-08-25T08:23:00.000-05:00

By Howie Carr

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

It’s going to take some politician’s kid getting killed by a drunken illegal alien before the hacks finally figure out that there’s a mighty big problem here.

You know what happened in Milford on Saturday night. A totally smashed illegal from Ecuador is accused of running a stop sign and mowing down a 23-year-old American on a motorcycle, and then proceeding to drag him, screaming, under his truck for a quarter mile.

When the illegal finally ran off the road, the American became disentangled. He was still alive. But then the illegal backed his truck back over him, according to prosecutors.

Told later he’d killed the young man, Matthew J. Denice, cops say the illegal shrugged.

At his first appearance in court Monday, Nicolas Guaman needed a translator, even though he’s been in the country for five years. Apparently he’s picked up at least a bit of our lingo along the line — in the cab of the truck, cops found cans of Budweiser cerveza, which he was somehow able to purchase.

Right now the pols are fighting over a proposal to round up illegals such as Guaman before they kill. It’s called Secure Communities. You can figure out where the top hacks stand. Gov. Deval Patrick would prefer to give them free tuition to state colleges. Mayor Mumbles Menino recently pronounced that car theft by an illegal alien was not a crime worthy of deportation.

And of course there’s Attorney General Marsha Coakley’s famous quote: “Technically, it is not illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts.”

But even moonbats at least claim to want to get the violent criminals out of society. It’s just that they want to decide what laws will be enforced and which ones won’t.

So far we know this about Guaman. In addition to being arrested three times since 2007 for driving without a license, the Milford police said he got a year of probation for assault and battery on a police officer. This was apparently the same incident in which the alleged killer, according to the Middlesex News, was also charged with attacking a firefighter “after a 2008 incident in which he interfered with the treatment of a family member who had allegedly attempted to enter someone else’s house.”

Gov. Patrick’s flack yesterday issued this statement about Matthew Denice: “Our deepest condolences go out to the family and friends of the victim of this terrible crime. . . . The Governor’s policy is that serious criminals who are here illegally should be deported.”

Maybe, Deval, you should think about doing it before, rather than after they actually killed somebody.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1360938

SOVEREIGNTY LOST IS LIBERTY LOST!

2011-08-24T18:34:00.000-05:00

August 24, 2011 6:00 AM

By: Bill Wilson

Mr.Wilson is the President of Americans for Limited Government.

"Only now, nearly four years into the economic maelstrom of the financial crisis, do we see the real cost: national independence and sovereignty. It isn’t our money the Masters of the Universe want. It’s not land or other hard assets they crave. It’s our freedom they want, and the freedom of every other developed nation.

Now, I understand that at first blush such a statement may come across as a bit “black helicopter-ish” in tone and content. But, look at the facts.

Europe is the more severe and apparent case, but the same process is taking place in Japan and the United States. Greece and the other second-tier economies were allowed to borrow at will, piling on debt so high that their small populations could never repay them." (Exactly where the U.S. is headed.) "And, then the rug is pulled out from under them. What was the price of bailout? Submit to dictates from the EU. Greece was handed a laundry list of actions it had to take. Effectively, their governments were shoved aside while international bureaucrats took control.

Now, we learn that the same thuggish process has taken place in Italy. Prime Minister Berlusconi reportedly said, “With all those letters and communiqués, they [according to the paper, ‘they’ refers to the European Central Bank, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel] made us appear as a government under a compulsory administration. This is not true. Also, they decided to intervene in favour of our bonds to save themselves, not Italy.”

Ireland, Portugal, and Spain have also tasted the boot of the EU masters — either do as they say or drown. But, as Mr. Berlusconi so aptly points out, it is not Italy or Greece or any other country that is being “saved,” it is the banks and the tiny handful of plutocrats who own and run them. He warned that “if today it’s our turn, tomorrow it can be Paris’s turn.”

Entire nations of Europe are being pillaged to cover the bad bets of the banks. And the ultimate sacrifice demanded is their national integrity, their national independence. No more authoritative voice than socialist currency manipulator George Soros demands nothing less. In a column published recently, the socialist money-man called on Germans to, in effect, suck it up — pay the tab for Europe. Full national integration with nations losing the right to make fundamental spending decisions — sovereignty — is the price Soros and his predator band demand. (Sounds like the precursor to a "World currency" to me.)

A similar fate awaits the U.S. We have a President who proclaims the problems can be addressed if we just fix our “broken” political system. Parroted by Obama-poodle Ezra Kline in the Washington Post, there never is a discussion of exactly what changes have to be made to our political system in order to “fix things.” But given Obama’s authoritarian tendencies and the demands of his union and radical “green” backers, you can be sure of one thing: America will surrender even more of its independence to international gaggles, alphabet-soup U.N. agencies, and the world financial overseers.

From day one, Obama has pressed to submerge the United States under the thumb of others. His refusal to acknowledge the unique role of America in the world, his constant bowing and scraping to “world opinion,” and his unilateral implementation of un-ratified treaties all point to where he wants to take us.

The incessant call to bind the productive nations of the world into world organizational control, whether the U.N., the IMF, the World Bank, the G22 or other lesser known bodies, is becoming the hallmark of the economic crisis. Gordon Brown, the former socialist Prime Minister of Great Britain, wrote just this week of the need for a “world solution” to the financial crisis. Others are joining the chorus.

Americans were warned of this early in our history. As George Washington observed in his Farewell Address, “foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” America, or European nations or Japan for that matter, will not find prosperity or peace by submitting to the internationalists. The World Governance crowd has nothing for us. They are the enemy of all that is truly American.

So, my first suggestions for budget cuts to the extra-legal Super Committee would be to eliminate all funding for the IMF, the World Bank and the U.N. If we need to spend money overseas to support and defend the U.S., let accountable, U.S. employees spend it, not unelected, faceless bureaucrats who in their heart hate American independence and sovereignty."

Mr. Wilson is a very wise man; his statements above are exactly in line with what I have been researching to date. The Money Masters, including and especially George Soros, are at the heart of all the world's ills! These people, the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and all the others who finance the whole world, are the most vile, evil creatures to walk the face of earth. They practice usury of the worst kind! If we wish to remain free, we must divorce ourselves from them and their kind; expose them for the gutter rats and vermin that they are! ~Lordhawke

News from Minuteman PAC

2011-08-24T10:46:00.000-05:00

Today's Illegal Immigration News

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

POLL: VOTERS FAVOR BORDER CONTROL OVER AMNESTY

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll shows that Obama just may be catering to a losing minority when it comes to forcing Amnesty on America.

According to the Rasmussen national telephone survey of Likely Voters, 61% deem border control as the most important aspect of immigration reform while just 31% say it’s more important to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants already here. At the same time, 57% of voters agree that the goal of U.S. immigration policy should be to keep out national security threats, criminals and those who would live off our welfare system welcoming all immigrants that do not fall under those categories.

These results have remained consistent in surveys dating back to 2006.

HUNTER BILL WOULD SPEED UP DEPORTATION

In response to Obama’s “blatant disregard for the law,” Arizona state Rep. Duncan Hunter is planning to introduce a bill that would speed up the deportation of thousands of illegal immigrants whose deportation cases are jamming immigration courts. Rep. Hunter’s effort comes as a stark contrast to the new Obamnesty measure cancelling all pending deportation cases except those of illegal immigrants convicted of additional crimes.

The bill would:

Require that immigration officers order the immediate removal of an illegal immigrant who has not been continuously living in the U.S. for a period of four years, unless he or she has been charged with a crime, plans to apply for asylum or is determined to be a national security risk.

Require that immigration officers refer immigrants who are seeking asylum to an asylum officer only if the immigrant has been in the country for less than a year.

Make it clear that the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to expedite the removal of criminal immigrants.

Limit the ability to grant stays of removal to illegal immigrants who have been ordered removed.

Hunter is currently seeking co-sponsors and is likely to introduce the bill next month after Congress returns from its summer break.

News from Independent Texans

2011-08-24T10:38:00.000-05:00

Dear Friends:

We know, we know -- you keep looking for PerryPoop.com. It's not quite ready yet -- stay tuned. You'll love it, promise!

For those of you who live close enough to Lexington (Lee County), especially if you live in GMA 12 (Bastrop, Brazos, Burleson, Falls, Fayette, Freestone, Lee, Leon, Limestone, Madison, Milam, Navarro, Robertson, and Williamson counties), please come THIS Saturday:

LEXINGTON AREA: THIS SATURDAY, AUGUST 27, 2 to 5 pm

Lexington Senior Citizens Center, 547 Third Street

A "Water Wonks 101" presentation is followed by a strategy session on upcoming state elections. Come prepared to talk to us about your own county commissioners, state representatives and state senators. (If you need a ride, please reply and let us know where you need a ride to and from. Car pools will be coming from Bastrop.)

SAN ANTONIO AREA: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 3:30 to 5:30 pm

Independent Texans Meeting, John Igo Library, 13330 Kyle Seale Pkwy.. The agenda is the same as Lexington's above.

SAN ANTONIO: SEPTEMBER 12-13

Don't forget the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance State Conference.

We'll be there on Monday for the water panel and more! Get details & tickets here now.

HOUSTON - our apologies for the late notice about a water forum (not ours) tonight. See information below. If you make it, send us a report please.

You can share this message here.

Independently yours,

Linda Curtis
Independent Texans
IndyTexans.org
PO Box 651
Bastrop, TX 78602 (new address!)
512-535-0989 office
512-657-2089 cell

A free and open to the public will take place at The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston’s Brown Auditorium in the Caroline Wiess Law Building. The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, is located at 1001 Bissonnet (enter via the Main Street door). Additional parking at The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston is available until 7:00 p.m. for $6 in the museum garage located at the corner of Binz and Fannin Streets.

Urban Growth and Competition for Water

Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 6:30 p.m.

Panelists:
Jason Afinowicz, Water Resources, Freese, and Nichols, Inc.,
Dr. James Lester, Vice President, Houston Advanced Research Center,
Edward G. Vaughan, Chair, Texas Water Development Board

Moderators: Eric Berger, Houston Chronicle Science Writer; and Thomas Colbert, Associate Professor, University of Houston, College of Architecture

Gaming the Border: a Report from Cochise County, Arizona

2011-08-24T03:24:00.000-05:00

Message to Congress: IMPEACH OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS NOW!!

2011-08-23T18:24:00.000-05:00

From an ALIPAC brief:

August 23, 2011

Contact: Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)
(866) 703-0864 Press@alipac.us

Public approval levels of Barack Obama are crashing to new lows shortly after his administration has announced an effort to bypass the Congress, the Constitution, and the American public to create a form of executive order Amnesty for illegal aliens.

The Department of Homeland Security announced last week that many illegal aliens would no longer be deported. This policy conflicts with existing federal laws that say all illegal aliens are to be deported. The US Constitution specifically states that immigration policy is to be set by the Congress, not the Executive Branch.

ALIPAC would like to publicly thank Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich. (202) 225 - 2106) for announcing today she will hold Congressional hearings to prove Obama has violated the US Constitution with his amnesty.

An extensive collection of scientific polling data collected at ALIPAC.us shows clearly that a large majority of Americans, across racial and partisan lines, oppose any form of Amnesty for illegal aliens similar to the kind Barack Obama has created in an authoritarian way.

With this news being Obama's latest major policy announcement, his crashing numbers are likely in response to the news of "Obama's Amnesty" reaching the public.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) is playing a key role in distributing this news to the nation.

"Obama decreed this unlawful Amnesty for illegal aliens on a Thursday while the Congress is in recess," said William Gheen of ALIPAC. "Our first mission has been to alert the public about this move via online activism, national press releases, and numerous talk radio interviews. As word spreads of what Obama has done, his approval ratings drop."

Rasmussen Reports presidential tracking polling indicates that Obama's approval ratings have hit new lows for the last two days in a row with Obama's 'presidential approval index' rating hitting -26 today! Only 19% of Americans now strongly approve of Obama while 45% now strongly disapprove.

Barack Obama's approval levels are also hitting new lows following his Amnesty for illegal aliens decree in Gallup polling, which usually generates numbers more favorable to the president than other polling organizations.

Gallup is currently showing Obama's approval levels reaching 53% disapproval vs 40% general approval for August 19-21. This is a negative index of -13% which is a new approval low for Gallup readings on Obama.

"Obama just took steps to put over 300,000 illegal aliens and eventually millions more in direct competition with American workers at a time of historic unemployment. He has done so in a way that is illegal and unconstitutional," said William Gheen. "We are calling on the media to alert more Americans about what Obama has really done here, and we are calling on the Congress to begin the impeachment process immediately."

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC has launched an effort to build up public and congressional support for the impeachment of Barack Obama following congressional hearings that discovered the administration of Barack OBama has been using the ATF, CIA, FBI, DEA, and Department of Justice to buy thousands of assault weapons for the Mexican drug and illegal alien importing cartels.

ALIPAC's Impeach Obama Facebook page has quickly become the largest in the nation with over 23,000 supporters in the first month. An online petition website which is building up strength for national protests calling for the Impeachment of Obama has received 4,000 signatures so far.
Visit ALIPAC's Impeach Obama Facebook Page at... http://www.facebook.com/ImpeachPresidentObama

Visit ALIPAC's Online Petition and Protest Planning site at.. http://againstamnesty.com/

To schedule interviews or learn more about Barack Obama's dictatorial actions and impeachable offenses, please visit www.ALIPAC.us
Just because Obummer's poll numbers are tumbling, that doesn't mean we can sit back and relax! We MUST keep the pressure on the Senate and Congress to initiate Impeachment Proceedings against Obama and anyone else who has attempted to make and "end run" around the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Obama has declared himself dictator of America by his actions, and we need to get rid of him and his minions, NOW!

Who knows, maybe this action will wake up our representatives to the fact that We, the People are the government of the united States of America, and they are our servants; NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!! ~Lordhawke

One Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

2011-08-23T12:50:00.002-05:00

Lawmaker Wants Investigation Into Administration's New Deportation Policy

2011-08-23T11:22:00.001-05:00

Tuesday, August 23, 2011 at 10:57AM

Staff

Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.) says she will hold hearings into whether the Obama administration’s new deportation policy violates the Constitution.

In a statement, Miller, who chairs a key House border security subcommittee, declared that the new policy, in which the administration will focus deportation efforts on illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds over other illegals, “is nothing more than an administrative amnesty; one that ignores our laws and provides a pass to the countless individuals who are in the nation illegally.”

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R), who last year signed one of the toughest illegal immigration laws in the nation, also referred to the plan as “backdoor amnesty.”

Miller said that the administration’s decision breaks a promise made last year by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who said at the time that her agency would not “grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the Nation’s entire illegal immigrant population or large classes of such population.”

Here’s Miller’s reaction to that statement:

“The policy announced by DHS last week and the explanation Secretary Napolitano made in her response one year ago clearly conflict. It once again seems clear that this Administration fully intends to travel down the road of amnesty which has failed in the past to stop the flow of illegal immigration and made our borders less secure. I believe that this action could pose an imminent threat to our efforts to gain operational control of our borders and requires vigorous oversight. The Administration should be put on notice that I intend to call a hearing in the very near future to exercise the appropriate oversight function of Congress and to make certain we are doing everything in our power to enforce the laws and secure our borders.”

http://www.talkradionews.com/news/2011/8/23/lawmaker-wants-investigation-into-administrations-new-deport.html

*****

National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers calls for new immigration policy to be rescinded