Surprise! The Lottery Had a Near-Death Experience.

On April 23, 2013, the Texas House of Representatives voted to abolish the state lottery, a few hours later they voted to reestablish it.  That the sacrosanct lottery was voted down, at all, came as a surprise to people on both sides of this issue.  For those who object to the lottery it was a surprise because they had long ago resigned themselves to it, and figured that things like this would just keep on keeping on.  For those who expected the stamp of approval to be routine (it was a Sunset Review procedure) it was more of a shock than surprise that so many legislators actually had the temerity to oppose such a long-standing and, perceived by most to be, profitable government program.

In 1991 the people of Texas voted to amend the Texas Constitution and allow a state lottery to be instituted.  Most of us thought, because we had been led to believe so by the prevaricating Democrat governor, Ann Richards, that the money made from the lottery would go to educate the children of Texas.  Only afterwards did she disabuse us of that notion and let it be known that the lottery profits would go into the general fund and be spent for any purpose whatsoever.  Laughably, in a moment of Clintonesque honesty, she said she hadn't actually lied to us, she had just not corrected it when she realized this was the prevailing belief.  So, having given the rabble their comeuppance, she made sure the money from the lottery remained in the general fund.  That is until she, and her Democrat cohort, lost the election and the Republicans gained control of Texas in 1996.  In 1997 the money from the lottery was dedicated to the state education fund, the way we thought it was supposed to be originally, and has remained that way ever since.

In 2011, the lottery provided approximately $989 million of the $69.9 billion spent for education in Texas.  While nearly $1 billion is nothing to sneeze at, it is still much less than 2% of the total education budget.  On Wednesday, for at least a little while, a majority of the state House of Representatives believed there was a better way.

Some people are of the opinion that state-sponsored gambling can change a society's culture.  Their rationale goes like this; when the state, which most people subconsciously think of as the arbiter of smart, puts its imprimatur on a practice, that practice automatically becomes either much more, or completely, acceptable depending on past resistance to it.  With gambling, and especially with high payers like a lottery, a great number of people gradually can succumb to the subconscious perception that making a small wager and waiting for the big score is preferable to working hard, planning, and saving for the future.  As this perception grows, more and more individuals become less and less sophisticated about the odds of winning the lottery, not because they are stupid, but because as a legal, accepted practice they do not look at it as closely as they otherwise would.  It's conventional wisdom.  And since a government sponsored lottery is specifically designed to extract money from the public, this expectation just doesn't pan out for the participants.  The overall effect is to drain industriousness, foresight and ambition from a population.

 With this in mind, it may be reasonable to conclude that societies make a Faustian bargain when they seek to fund their governments with gambling profits.  For those of us who realize that government-sponsored gambling exacts a cultural and moral toll, the profit from a lottery is not worth the price a society eventually has to pay for it.

 I don't know if this is the reason most of the members of the state House of Representatives from Tarrant County voted the way they did but I do want to thank them.  The members of the Tarrant House delegation, who voted (twice) against the lottery and for personal responsibility were; Jonathan Stickland, Matt Krause, Giovanni Capriglione, Stephanie Klick, Craig Goldman, and Bill Zedler, all Republicans.

Democrat Lon Burnam and Republican Diane Patrick voted against it the first time, then voted for it the second time.  So much for the courage of their convictions.

Republican Charlie Geren voted, like a Democrat, for the lottery then did not vote the second time.

The rest of the Tarrant County delegation, Nicole Collier and Chris Turner voted for the lottery both times, they are Democrats.

A Radical Remedy for Texas' Washington Problem.

This post has been updated on April 10, 2013, find it at the end of this article.

The Houston Chronicle article by Richard Dunham entitled " Hutchison's retirement is big loss for Texas", and printed in Sunday's Star-Telegram, illustrates one of the Catch-22's of federal financing.  Although Dunham focused on the money that Texas was going to lose because Kay Bailey Hutchison would no longer be around to bring it back home, he inadvertently laid out the reasons that federal spending is so hard to control.

He describes John Culberson, the Republican representative, and "Taxpayer Hero" of the group Citizens against Government Waste,

from Houston and Culberson's philosophy of "if the federal government is going to spend tax dollars, Texas deserves its fair share", which, it is safe to assume, means that a politician who is concerned about his state and constituents should be willing to do just about anything to make sure that Texas takes its fair and rightful place at the federal money trough.

This attitude when multiplied by the thousands of politicians in America who feel the same way results in an enormous pressure, and reinforcement for the federal government to spend, and continue to spend money.  It also results in political butt kissing by federal, and to a slightly lesser extent state politicians of Washington elite heinies which pushes the power buttons of the aforementioned elites and revs up the spending cycle even more.  Making it well nigh impossible to reduce the national debt.  Politicians don't even bother with the national debt, they set their sights on reducing the deficit which is only the amount of debt growth.

It seems to me the only way to stop this cycle is to prevent the money from going to Washington in the first place.  If you take civil disobedience, rebellion, and revolution off the table, you're left with only one other choice that might remedy the problem, at least for a while.  It's hard for me to say this but that choice is a STATE INCOME TAX.  Since I've never filed from any other state but Texas and haven't paid a whole lot of attention to what other states do I'm not real clear on this but I think the amount of state income tax that a person pays is deducted from his federal income tax.  In other words if your state gets your money before Washington does, your taxes are (somewhat) reduced and the state keeps it .

So there you have it, Washington removes tax dollars from taxpayers, state politicians want to get some of the money back, so they lick the soles of the Washington boot.  This makes Washington feel good, taxes are raised, more money comes in and out, boot licking all around.  Rinse, repeat until the nation goes over the cliff.  A Texas state income tax can prevent some of this money from going to Washington in the first place, at least until the tax code changes.

Note: if you spot any gaps in logic or fact in this article please let me know.  I believe the beginning of wisdom is the acknowledgment of one's own fallibility and ignorance.  Joel Downs


 Update, April 10, 2013.
  I've had misgivings from the beginning about this, and after I uploaded the article, I started to think about how a tax would be implemented. That's when I realized that a state doesn't just say "Abracadabra" and have the money appear in its treasury. An entire bureaucracy has to be created and staffed to process and collect the new tax, businesses have to be forced to withhold more money from their employees paychecks with appropriate fines and prison terms for noncompliance, plus a million other details need attending to. And to start it off, every step of this undertaking has to be planned and legislated, which would first require a lot of very smart people working very hard for a long time, then require arm-twisting, log rolling, compromise, bribery, and no telling what other kinds of political mischief, all of which would have to be accomplished in 140 days on a semiannual basis. Bottom line; a state income tax is a bad idea, was a bad idea, will always be a bad idea.  So, I am withdrawing it.  I am somewhat encouraged because, when taken from the abstract, to the reality, it turns out to be a very hard thing to implement which if you don't like state income tax is a good thing.

Of course, this leaves us with the original problem of what to do about our politicians dutifully trying to get some of their constituent's money back from the federal government and in the process submitting to the federal boot on the neck.

Tales of 2A: How Awesome Is That?

Something that few people realize about the Second Amendment is that it was written, put into the Constitution, and ratified while two rebellions rocked the newly minted nation of the United States of America.

At the time the Constitution which includes the Bill of Rights, was written (1787), the new United States of America had already been through the Shays Rebellion (1786-1787).  The Constitution was ratified in 1791, just as the Whiskey Rebellion was gaining momentum (1791-1794).

The fact that a new government cemented the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms in a Founding document while in the midst of  rebellion(s) speaks volumes about the character of the Framers.  And the fact that the States went ahead and ratified the Constitution, with the Second Amendment included, speaks volumes about the character of those early politicians.

Historically, what governments do when faced with rebellion is to (attempt to) disarm the population.  The Framers did not do that, their commitment to liberty was so intense that they made sure that every citizen had the means of rebellion on hand and ready.  This would seem suicidal to today's politicians, but apparently the Framers felt differently.  It worked out all right too, the new country survived and became the greatest country on earth.

The commitment to principle of our long-ago Founders fills me with awe and reinforces my resolve to do everything I can to preserve the precious, precious political structure that we have in this country.  It is unique in history, and in the world.

Sequester Scare Tactics in the Star-Telegram.

In the Thursday, February 27 Star-Telegram, print edition, the Letter to the Editor most prominently displayed was from Joseph F. Cleveland Jr., President of the Fort Worth chapter of the Federal Bar Association. He states that the sequester will require the layoff of 25% of all Federal court personnel and then goes on to recount the horrible things that can come about because of this. What he fails to do is provide any kind of context. Are these employees going to be laid off for a day? An hour? A month?  Years? Do the consequences, go on forever? Or for just an instant?

The context gap in this letter reveals its intent. And that intent is to scare people. Using the same method that a cruel, older child would use to frighten a younger child by telling him that there is a monster in the closet, Mr. Cleveland invokes the prospect of huge and terrible consequences if the sequester is implemented, but like the closet, the magnitude of the problem, like the size of the monster, is left to the victim's imagination.

When encountering budgetary scare tactics like this, remember that the sequester is $85 billion out of a Federal budget $3.62 trillion. And the sequester is a cut, not in spending but in the ANTICIPATED GROWTH of spending. If the Federal budget were $50 the sequester would be equivalent to $.10, in other words, one thin dime.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram should be ashamed of itself to give prominence, and oversize fonts to such an obvious, odious piece of propaganda.

Read the online letter here:
http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/02/27/4648559/cuts-will-hurt-courts.html#storylink=misearch

PENTAGON IS TO FURLOUGH 800,000 CIVILIANS, is this a bad thing?

PENTAGON IS TO FURLOUGH 800,000 CIVILIANS If you just read the headline you'd think that 800,000 civilians were going to be laid off, wouldn't you.  But if you read into the article you come to this confusing sentence. 

As I understand it, this means that 800,000 employees, each of which could face up to 22 days of furlough spread out from now until next September, with 30 days notice beforehand.  I base my interpretation on the above sentence from the article. (see screenshot)

I'm not sure that my interpretation is correct but if it's not is because the "THE HILL" report is not very precise.  Either they're trying to be deliberately confusing, or they need a smarter reporter and better editors.

STAY IN THE GAME.

Data from the Tarrant County elections office shows that approximately 20,000 more voters voted in the 2010 Republican primary than in the 2012 primary.  The 2010 elections were a banner year for conservatives all over the country and in Tarrant County.  I am going to assume that all, or nearly all of the 20,000 people who are missing from the 2012 Republican primary are conservatives who decided to make the effort to make a difference in 2010.  And I'm going to assume that the reason they did not vote in the 2012 primary is because: they accomplished what they wanted to do, or they have become disaffected with politics because they didn't get what they wanted.  This message is for them.

To the folks who got what you wanted.  If you think you can come in, work real hard, fix things, then leave because the job is done; you've got another think coming.  In politics the job is never done.  Victory and defeat only last until the next election.  You need to remain in politics and consolidate your gains for the next election.

To the folks who didn't get what you wanted.  Please don't go.  It is very important that people like you, conservatives, stay in the game.  Don't give up on politics.  It has become one of the factors that most determine the quality of life for the citizens in the United States.  If you have become disaffected because of the sometimes blatant disregard for the rules, and the seeming overwhelming power of the other factions, just remember, they would not have had to resort to such tactics if you, and people like you hadn't been nipping at their heels.  This means you have power, build on it and change the Party from the inside.  Never give up.

To all of you conservatives who were missing from the 2012 Republican primary, I know it's a chore, and a huge bore, especially for true conservatives who only want to be left alone, but you need to remain plugged in to politics to protect yourself and your way of life.  Pay close attention to local politics, City and County.  It is in local politics that political culture movements, which are the most enduring of change, are born and carried forward.  Talk to your neighbors, talk to your friends, talk to your relatives.  Profess your conservative ideals, and live your conservative way of life in such a way that people will admire it and want to emulate it.  There are numerous political clubs in Tarrant County.  Search them out, attend some meetings, get acquainted with other conservatives, join in and volunteer to help.

We've allowed a lot of liberties slip away, in this country, simply because we didn't pay attention.  It's time for that to stop. And we may disagree about the settings, speed, gear, temperature, etc., on the political bus but one thing that we all agree on is that it remain on the right-hand side of the road and keep traveling towards Libertyville.



Hat tip to Glenn Bucy for his Facebook post that provoked this train of thought.


Note: This is my take on this subject.  If anyone would like to point out mistakes in logic, reason, or facts, please do so. I believe that the beginning of wisdom starts with the acknowledgement of one's own ignorance. Joel Downs 

Seattle Times article about gun bill is not, or is no longer true.

Update: 02.21.13, the referenced Bill has now been pulled.

Does Texas Need to Spend More Money On Mental Health?

This long-winded, Chicken Little, the sky is falling Dallas Morning News article goes on and on about how Texas ranks 49th in mental health spending without citing one example of why more money needs to be spent. The closest they come is in assuming that because there are more people in Texas now than 10 years ago, there are more people who need mental health services. Isn't it possible that when people come to Texas, conditions are so good that their depression lifts and they don't need it? Or, that people who are motivated to move to Texas are more mentally fit to begin with? Or, the native Texan is simply more clearheaded than people in other states, as evidenced by the fact that, in Texas, there are more Republicans in elected office than Democrats?  http://dallasne.ws/VbRcWr

What Happens when Guns are Banned/Unbanned

In an article published by the Wall Street Journal, former Washington D.C. prosecutor, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro writes about the effect a gun ban had on that city. Read the whole thing here.   Besides the descriptions of the lengths to which the D.C. police went to keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, creating many injustices and human rights abuses along the way, the article also tells of the effect the gun ban had when it was implemented and when it was, partially, lifted. The two paragraphs that illustrate this are reproduced below.

BANNED

UNBANNED

It is my view that the proposed Federal legislation concerning guns is nothing more than a veiled attempt to disarm the American people. It does nothing new to address the actual problem. It is only a rehash of past legislation. The Leftist politicians who consider us to be children and want to take away our rights and liberties "for our own good" could accomplish that task so much more easily if we were defenseless.

Hey, Bud Kennedy. I beg to differ.

In a scorn filled, contemptuous column entitled " Texas sheriffs' boasts about guns nothing but hot air " Bud Kennedy denigrates Texas sheriffs in general then zeroes in on Collin County Sheriff Terry Box to portray as the wood whittling, domino playing, hayseed politician intent on hoodwinking his much smarter constituents.  It is somewhat of a brain twister, trying to understand how a dumb hick persuaded the smart voters of Collin County to return him to office for 37 years but I reckon cognitive coordination isn't one of Bud's strong points. Bud must feel that, as a good Progressive, he is duty bound do battle with anyone who offers resistance to the ongoing, and so far, futile effort of the Left to disarm the American people.

Kennedy makes the assumption that Sheriff Box is stating that he won't enforce federal gun laws only as a ploy curry votes in the next election. I take the Sheriff at his word; that it is his deeply held belief that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms.  Add that sentiment to the undeniable fact that federal laws go unenforced all the time, and couple it with the very real prospect that the sheriff and his deputies will be the ones charged with enforcing any new laws, he then, is only stating what flows logically from those conditions; that Federal gun grabber laws will go unenforced in his jurisdiction.

Don't believe me? Then take a look at the illegal alien statutes, a panoply of federal laws that go mostly unenforced by local cops, ...and the Feds, and the President.  This is so widespread that some cities pass ordinances that specifically forbid local law enforcement to take action based upon them, then proudly pronounce themselves "Sanctuary" cities.

According to this, story, a county sheriff has the power to defy federal coercion.  But even if a sheriff doesn't have the legal right to not enforce laws he views as unconstitutional, as a practical matter, if he doesn't like it, if it doesn't serve an enforcement purpose, it will not be enforced.  The unofficial precedent for not enforcing an unpopular law was established when Officer Oop decided that no real crime had been committed and let somebody walk.

From the cop on the beat on up to the highest officials in the law enforcement infrastructure, they all have tremendous latitude when it comes to enforcement of individual statutes. Bud Kennedy's huffing and puffing notwithstanding.

Is the Star telegram attempting to groom Wendy Davis for bigger things?

Today there was a fawning article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram entitled "Is Senator Wendy Davis poised for a statewide race?".  About halfway through, there is a paragraph that links two freshman Tarrant County state representatives, Jonathan Strickland R-HD 92, and Giovanni Capriglione R-HD 98, with Davis.  The reporter, Dave Montgomery, stated that she was teaming up with Stickland on a companion bill, and was a Senate sponsor of Capriglione's bill.

It seemed odd that two Tea Party backed, freshman Republicans, who had defeated, or run off, a long serving incumbent would make common purpose with a Democrat who had gone out of her way to garner Republican antipathy in the last session.  So, I decided I would check.  It was easy enough to go to the Texas Legislature online and find out if Wendy Davis had indeed had anything to do with the legislation of these representatives.

Of course, the first person I checked on was my own representative, Jonathan Stickland.  He has written and filed five bills so far.  Representatives Krause and Sheets are listed as co-authors of the military family bill, HB 202   No mention of Davis on this page but I wasn't expecting it.  The article stated that she was the author of a companion bill.

Then I went to Senator Davis' webpage and looked up her legislation expecting to find a companion bill as stated in the article.  I did find a companion bill, but not for Stickland's legislation.  Wendy Davis has authored exactly one bill, SB 178,  which turned out to be the companion to Capriglione's bill, HB 524.  That's all, she has not co-sponsored a bill, co-authored any bills, or authored any other bill besides that lonely one.

So, I guess you could say that the Star-Telegram got it one quarter right.  They said she wrote a companion bill for Stickland, and was a Senate sponsor for Capriglione.  What can the officially verified through Texas Legislature online is that she did nothing for Stickland, and wrote a companion bill Capriglione. There is no such category as "Senate Sponsor".

If the Star-Telegram is going to try to foist a liberal Democrat upon the citizens of Texas, it should at least get the details right.

Bud Kennedy; Propagandist

In this article, I use an assumption.  The assumption is that Bud Kennedy is a Leftist propagandist.  The reason I believe this to be correct is; he is a journalist for a mainstream newspaper, he has survived and prevailed for many years working for said newspaper, which I think would not have happened unless he was a committed Leftist. Conservatives don't stay, and lukewarm Leftists don't get promoted in the mainstream newsroom. Also in his writings, that I have intermittently scanned over the last few years, I've never detected a wisp of conservatism. From what I have observed he is a full bore, proud Leftist. This is not to say that Kennedy is stupid, he is very intelligent and also very competent in his craft.  But his Leftist worldview long ago overwhelmed his common sense, if he ever possessed any.

 I believe he is a propagandist because he throws seemingly unrelated facts into an article.  Unrelated until one realizes those facts serve a broader purpose and message such as the one examined below.

On May 29, Bud Kennedy wrote an article entitled "Tea Party's vision comes to fruition in Tarrant elections".  In one paragraph he referenced Jonathan Stickland. This is a screen shot of it.

I received an e-mail from Jonathan today rebutting the inferences made in that paragraph and I would like to use this incident to show how this particular journalist works as propagandist.  Attempting to plant ideas and opinions in the minds of readers without the them knowing it. 

I have deconstructed the paragraph in question and broken it down into the two parts which I think are the real messages.  These messages are; Jonathan Stickland is the spiritual brother of disgraced politician Tom Delay.  And Jonathan Stickland is an anti-Semite who equates Jewishness with evil. This is not saying the reader comes away with the exact verbal messages written above but that the readers gets this seed of doubt in the subconscious. That's the goal of propaganda.

 Jonathan Stickland is the spiritual brother of disgraced politician Tom Delay.  In his rebuttal e-mail, Jonathan Stickland wonders why Kennedy referenced a job he once had as a pest control technician instead of his present employment.  It does seem odd. To answer this question, one must look at the situation from the viewpoint of a propagandist and consider the propagandist's  goal.  Facts of a situation; a politician (Stickland) who at one time supported his family as a pest control technician.  Goal; use these facts to make the most damaging link possible.  Question; which disgraced, conservative politician has been linked, again and again, to his business in pest control?  Answer; Tom Delay.  We can wait for another time to debate whether or not Tom Delay was railroaded, but the fact is, in the popular culture, Tom Delay is known as the former bug killer turned crooked politician who's been tried and convicted of being crooked. The fact that Stickland once did this too foreshadows future misbehavior. This is my explanation for Kennedy's odd reference.

Jonathan Stickland is an anti-Semite who also believes Jewishness equates with evil.   A close reading of the paragraph shows Kennedy does not say that Stickland said, or even knows, that Straus is Jewish.  He, Kennedy, simply throws in the fact of Straus' Hebrew extraction. The reason he used that fact and the reason he constructed that sentence the way he did was so that the word "Jewish" would be juxtaposed near the word "Christian", which was spoken by Stickland.  This is in order to link, in the reader's mind, the word "Jewish" and the word "Christian" with Stickland's words about evil, the implication being that Stickland, the subject of the paragraph, is an anti-Semite.  Then, the cherry on top of the propaganda sundae , the word "evil" twice repeated by Stickland no less, plants in the idea that, Stickland not only is an anti-Semite, but he also believes Jewishness equates with evil.   The fact that so many people became concerned about Stickland's "anti-Semitism", see rebuttal e-mail,  proves how effective this ploy was.  And Kennedy plays along with this mis-perception when he doesn't even mention, in his June 2 update, the fact that he, not Stickland, brought up Straus's ethnicity.  This type of character assassination of Conservatives by Leftists, has been going on since the end of World War II.  And it has been wildly successful until the last few years.

Intelligent and competent propagandists never tip their hand, and they never use untrue statements.  The propagandist arranges true facts and cultural stereotypes in such a manner that a false and, in the case of Conservatives, damaging subconscious impression is left in the mind of the reader.  And if the propagandist is clever enough, the reader is completely unaware of it.  We are barraged by thousands of these messages every day and they build up.  The only way to combat them is to arm one's self with knowledge, consider the political leanings of the author and/or news entity, and never ever rely for one's information, or opinions, on a single source.


Note: This is my take on this subject.  If anyone would like to point out mistakes in logic, reason, or facts, please do so. I believe that the beginning of wisdom starts with the acknowledgement of one's own ignorance. Joel Downs

A Political Masterstroke at the RPT Convention

Someone came up with an extremely clever way to save Joe Straus from embarrassment today. A silent walkout had been planned for his speech and many people were on board for it. There had been much loud talk about it. A Tea Party group was giving away "Oust Straus" stickers in the exhibition hall. A yellow flyer was even handed out to the convention attendees in anticipation of his speech.

However, immediately before he spoke, it was announced that all the Republican candidates, incumbents and newly nominated, were being  "introduced" and then they walked out on the stage. As soon as they all had assembled,  Joe Straus strode briskly out in front and said a few words without the usual build up.
UPDATE: Subsequent conversations with people who know show  the candidates thought they would be off the stage before Straus made his speech.

The genius in this move was the fact that most of the convention attendees had voted for those very candidates, and to walk out would imply disapproval of him or her. So every one, that I could see, stayed put.  There were a few catcalls but Straus's speech was so short, it didn't have time to grow into an organized howl.  If most people were like me, they were dumfounded and a little bit amused at the way they had been outfoxed. It was one of those "How simple! Why didn't I think of that?" moments.

This won't change anyone's mind about Straus but at least he didn't lose as much face as he could have.

Well played, Joe.

UPDATE; I have become aware of a video made by a convention attendee. It shows the camera holder exiting the arena and about 10-15 people chanting in the hallway. A good shot of the candidates coming out on stage can be seen at minute 0-1:27, and the number of protesters can be seen beginning at minute 5:19.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gC4T_3O0UM

To Anonymous commenter "Cindy"

This is for the anonymous commenter who calls herself Cindy.  I have removed your comment on Voter ID...
 because it is off-topic. It doesn't have anything to do with the subject of the post you appended it to.  However, I am reproducing parts of it here as screenshots so I can ask questions.  The rest of your allegations are anecdotal and cannot be verified one way or another.  If you would clear up these questions, I would appreciate it.

First question:

You allege that Jason McCaffity ran a dirty campaign for the HEB City Council and lost.  HEB?  I was not aware that the city of HEB existed, much less an HEB City Council.  Could you give the year that he is supposed to have run this race and where you found this information?

Second question:

You allege that McCaffity is an unpaid reserve officer in the Godley Police Department.  Do you have any documentation, online links, or any other way that this can be verified?

Third question:

You allege that the police departments of Hurst, Bedford, Southlake, Keller and Euless are conducting a joint investigation into the theft of campaign signs. I did a Google search and came up with nothing.  Is there a way this allegation can be verified?

Cindy, you are welcome to repost your comment in full along with the answers to my questions.  These are serious allegations you have made.  As for the rest of your comment, at this point, to me it appears to be run of the mill campaign slander, of the type practiced far too often in this election season.

Congratulations to the permanent Party Chair

Congratulations to Jennifer Hall on becoming the Tarrant County Republican Party chair. Thank you Jennifer Hall and Bob McGrath for conducting a positive campaign.

Voter ID, What I'd like to see on a bumper sticker.

The letter of recommendation handed out to Precinct 3213 voters

See below the letter of introduction and recommendation I left on doors and handed out to voters as I bicycled my precinct.

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

Hello, I am Joel Downs, the Precinct Chairman for Precinct 3213. If you are reading this letter you live in Precinct 3213.  As Precinct Chairman I am trying to get acquainted with the Republicans in the precinct who vote in the primaries.  I've looked at the voting records and identified you as one of these people.  Hope you don't mind.

The events of the past three years have caused me great concern.  Concern about the future of our country.  For the first time in my life, I am beginning to doubt that the USA will remain a free country.  The American culture seems to be changing to one of unrealistic  entitlement, and complete self absorption.  A significant proportion of college graduates actually expect to be given a job at the highest rate, no matter their real qualifications, just because they have a college degree.  I could go on and on but I think you get the idea.

Anyway, I hope to become acquainted with you, and if you want to become politically active, I will help you in any way I can.  Because the only way, I believe, this country can be saved, is by vigorous, conservative action from the Grassroots.  It begins here with people like you and me, we must begin this task.                                    

In this sack you will find a flyer listing all of the early voting locations in the county.  I am doing this to encourage you to vote early because it is so much easier than voting on election day.  It is also more convenient.  Some of these locations are probably on your way home from work.  The only downside is that you have to vote electronically.  If you prefer paper ballots, you will have to wait till election day.

The candidates in positions listed below are the ones that I will be voting for in the Republican primary.  I have listed only a small part of the reasons I'm voting for them.  I'm not telling you who to vote for, just letting you know who I'm for and hope you agree.

If you want to put a Republican candidate's sign in your yard, I can get it for you. Thanks, Joel Downs, 817-308-9878

Kenny Marchant, Congressional Representative District 24. Marchant is a respected member of the House of Representatives with a good rapport and influence.  I think he should remain in place.

Ted Cruz, Congressional Senator or from Texas. I have seen Cruz speak, and I know his record.  Ted Cruz is a principled conservative, and well spoken.  He will be a positive conservative influence in the Senate.  Cruz also has the best chance of any of the candidates of knocking off David Dewhurst.  The troubling thing about Dewhurst is that he called for a constitutional convention and doesn't appear to realize the mistake he was making.  The last time a constitutional convention was called, the entire Constitution was rewritten.  Granted, Dewhurst called for the convention in order to add a balanced budget amendment, but you don't go to these extreme measures, risk the disruption of the Constitution just to balance the budget.  If the Constitution is to be changed, let's do it by amendment.  I am amazed that Dewhurst is this ignorant of history.  He should not be serving in the United States Senate.

Kelly Hancock, State Senate District 9.   Hancock is the more conservative of the candidates running for this office.  He is not as well spoken as Todd Smith, but remember Todd makes his living by speaking, he is a lawyer. As Senator, Kelly Hancock will author, sponsor, and to pass more conservative legislation.  He will make decisions that are more founded in conservatism.

Jonathan Stickland, State Representative District 92.  Stickland is a movement conservative, not interested in allowing a slow slide into socialism.  He will continue the trend towards more conservative legislation coming out the Texas Legislature.

Gary Fickes, Tarrant County Commissioner Precinct 3.  Fickes has been a Commissioner for several terms, he has performed well, and knows a lot about the job, especially the roads.  The commissioners court is a big influence on how many, where, and how large the state roads built in Tarrant County will be.  Fickes has a huge amount of institutional knowledge about this subject, and he makes good decisions.  The commissioners court appoints the board members of the Tarrant County health system.  Gary Fickes, in concert with other commissioners has always made sure that the board members enact policies that are sound, and do not give away the store to illegal aliens, unlike other large Texas counties.  For this reason, the Tarrant County health system budget has always been balanced, and some years has had a surplus. Gary Fickes should be reelected.

Jennifer Hall, County Chair, Tarrant County Republican Party.  Hall was elected temporary County chair when Stephanie Klick resigned to run for higher office.  She hit the ground running and has performed very well in that position, raising thousands of dollars in donations, and presiding over the court induced chaos that has been the 2012 primary season.  Jennifer Hall has had no previous experience as a County chair, but she has performed remarkably well and will be a huge asset in the years to come.

Jason McCaffity, Constable Precinct 3.  McCaffity has been a Texas peace officer for 14 years, he has a Masters degree in Business Administration, a Bachelors degree in Law Enforcement Administration, a Masters Peace Officer Certification, and is a graduate of the Police Management College.  As Constable, he will continue to improve the Precinct 3 Constable department.

Kevin Carey, Judge 153rd District Court, .  A County District Judge is on the first level of the people we select to make and/or enforce the rules for us.  Kevin Carey is a lifelong Republican and conservative with 22 years experience as a litigator.  He will make wise, fair and conservative decisions in his court.  He understands the danger of frivolous lawsuits and will make decisions accordingly.

The Candidates I recommended to Precinct 3213

The following are pics of the recommendations I left on doors and handed out to voters in precinct 3213.

David Dewhurst and the Depth of Dumb, why I voted for Ted Cruz

I made a departure when choosing Ted Cruz to be the US Senator from Texas in that I voted more against another candidate, than I did for Ted.  Ted Cruz is a conservative and he is smart.  I think he will make a good senator, but the larger reason I chose him is because I believe he has the best chance of knocking David Dewhurst out of the race.  I don't trust Dewhurst, I believe he is reckless and ignorant of history. Here's why.

In 2010, David Dewhurst called for a constitutional convention that would suspend the amendment process and rewrite the Constitution to include a provision for a balanced-budget.  Balancing the budget is a laudable goal, but does he realize what happened the last time a constitutional convention was successfully called?

In 1787, the 13 states convened a constitutional convention.  When it was over the Constitution had been completely rewritten, for the better it turned out.  But do you think this would happen today?  Do you think that a constitutional convention would keep our Constitution intact and only make improvements that we want?  Once a convention is called, there is no way to control the agenda or excluding anyone.  And those of us who have observed the way the Left has operated politically in the last 50 years are completely terrorized by this prospect of them getting their hands on the Constitution.

But not David Dewhurst. He continued to push for a constitutional convention, even after being apprised of the historical consequences of such a move.  He disregarded the voices that were telling him that this was a wrong thing to do.  He argued for a constitutional convention, and argued that he could control it, long past the time that a less determined person would've given up.

Calling for a constitutional convention because the amendment process is too slow and too difficult, can be likened to stepping out on a concrete driveway with your baby in one hand and the pair of diapers in the other, then throwing the baby and the diapers up in the air, and the expecting them to come back down fully assembled, with the new diapers wrapped around the baby's freshly powdered and wiped little butt.  Think something like this is going to happen?  David Dewhurst would.

He would throw that baby up in the air, throw those diapers up in the air then expect the baby to NOT splash like a watermelon on the concrete driveway, the fresh diaper to NOT be snagged by a passing hawk and he would also expect the dirty diaper, the one full of poo, to NOT come down and hit him right in the face.

David Dewhurst is a man of historical ignorance and recklessness.  He shouldn't be allowed to serve in the United States Senate.

Vote For Ted Cruz

Hancock-Smith, SD9 Senate, How I voted and why.

I voted early in the Republican primary.  In the Texas Senate District 9 race I voted for Kelly Hancock.

Both candidates are decent, principled conservatives.  However, Kelly is the more conservative of the two. He is an instinctive conservative.  He will author, sponsor, and work for conservative legislation.

Todd Smith is a reliable vote for any conservative legislation that comes across his desk. the operative phrase here is "comes across his desk", Todd cannot be relied on to initiate conservative legislation.

Todd's brand of conservatism has lost and will continue to lose ground to the Left.  The Left, the people who think collective solutions from the government are the end-all and be-all of fixing things, solving our problems.  The Left, the ones who think that communism just may be a good idea.  The Left, the ones who fervently believe that socialism is a good idea.  The Left, the ones who are so ignorant of history they don't realize that collective solutions to society's problems -socialism, communism, Leftism in general- have been responsible for more misery, and more deaths of innocent people than any other ideology in the last hundred twenty years.

If conservatism was likened to a thermometer, Kelly would be at 98°, and Todd would be at 72°.  Both temperatures are preferable to the Left's temperature of 30°, but Kelly's is higher than Todd's.  This is why I voted for him.

If you want to see the temperature of conservative legislation coming out of the state capital go up, then vote for Kelly Hancock.