Friday, December 30, 2011

Lumberton Man, Mike Bellow, Receives Hero Award for Saving Knife River Truck Driver After Crash in TX

It was a normal day for Mike Bellow on Sept. 24, as he and his son, Steven, were traveling along Hwy. 90 near Raywood. They were on their way to a convention, traveling along the country road enjoying conversation.
Things took a dramatic turn as Bellow witnessed an accident in front of him. A transit mixer was hit head-on by a motorist traveling in the opposite direction. The impact was horrendous and fire soon began to engulf the vehicles.
As Bellow watched the growing flames, Steven pointed out that the driver of the transit mixer was trying to get himself out of his vehicle. Not thinking of the danger he was putting himself in, Bellow ran to the vehicle and helped the driver escape the fiery wreckage.
Three months later, on Dec. 21, representatives from Knife River Corporation, the company whose driver was involved in the accident, gathered in Beaumont to honor Mike Bellow with an Award of Heroism from Knife River.
"We at Knife River are appreciative for the actions of Mr. Bellow that likely saved the life of one of our employees during a tragic situation," said Knife River General Manager Larry Rougeau. "It's not just anybody that would stop. I have seen many other accidents through the years where some people may stop but others tend to ignore them and keep on going. We feel blessed as a company to be recipients of his actions."
Knife River has given out numerous hero awards to employees for actions that were deemed to be acts of heroism, but the award to Bellow marks the first time in the history of the company that the award has been presented to someone outside the company.
Roy Kirkpatrick, South Region President of Knife River, said many people are afraid of liability issues, unsure of the situation, and unsure of what to do in times of crisis.
"I think his actions are a testament of who Mr. Bellow is," he said. "We perceive our jobs as an extended family, so it was one of our extended family members whose life he could very well have saved. This is something that we don't take lightly.
"Acts like this and saving a life are really taken into consideration, especially at this time of year. When you realize what could have happened and what could have taken place, had Mr. Bellow not come to his aid, this driver's family may be going through the holidays without him."
Bellow was joined by his family as the award was presented in the ceremony.
"I am grateful to God that I was able to help pull him out," he said. "I thought a lot about liability, but he was trying to get himself out of the wreckage and wanted help. I figured if God spared him it was my job to help get him out. That is what I tried to do."

Congerssman Poe Introduces SEND ACT: Send Veteran Iraq Equipment to Secure US/Mexico Border - 40,000 Killed

from Texas GOP Vote:

Texas Congressman Ted Poe's Statement:
For 10 years, thousands of American troops have fought against terrorism and for the liberation of Iraq. Many have sacrificed their lives on the altar of freedom on behalf of people in a land halfway around the world, leaving their families with the memory of their fallen heroes. Meanwhile, American taxpayers have spent billions of dollars on the military equipment used during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Now, the U.S. is withdrawing from Iraq and thousands of our desert warriors will soon be enthusiastically welcomed home.
The United States is leaving behind a massive amount of military equipment deemed to be too expensive to bring home. Over the past year, 2.4 million pieces of military equipment — worth at least $250 million — have been transferred for free to the Iraqi government, and more gifts are going to be in Baghdad’s Christmas stocking. But some of the modernized pieces of military equipment are coming home to America. The Department of Defense currently facilitates the distribution of this surplus equipment through the Defense Logistics Agency. One place in serious need of security and equipment is our southern border with Mexico.
There is a war raging in Mexico that has claimed the lives of more than 40,000 people since 2006. In 2010, there were more civilian deaths in the town of Ciudad Juarez (just down the road from El Paso, Texas) than in the entire country of Afghanistan. Mexico’s militarized drug cartels are a powerful army complete with narco-tanks, helicopters and a massive stockpile of dangerous weapons. The drug war has destabilized Mexico, yet the administration seems to think that the violence will not reach our citizens. The truth is it already has. Human trafficking and drugs flow north of the border every day. Money and firearms go south over our dangerous and insecure border. The narco-terrorists are fully operational in Mexico and in many major cities in the United States.
Those who say that the border is secure and the violence is contained in Mexico are living in a blissful state of denial far from reality. Case in point: Last week, three SUVs carrying Mexican Zeta cartel soldiers attempted to hijack a tractor truck rig loaded with drugs on a road in Houston and unleashed blazing gunfire. A shootout occurred with police who were tracking the truck. The truck driver was killed; a peace officer was wounded. Three Mexican nationals and another of unknown citizenship were charged with capital murder. Sadly, this brazen violence is a familiar scene on the streets of Mexico. And, now it has become a reality in the United States. The local head of the DEA, Javier Pena, said of the incident in Houston: “We are not going to tolerate these thugs using their weapons like the Wild Wild West.” Until Washington realizes that what happens in Mexico doesn’t stay in Mexico, more cartel shootouts on American streets are coming our way.
Yes, there are towns on the border that are relatively “safe.” But in the vast, wide-open, rugged and desolate regions along the border, between the safer legal ports of entry, the cartels are successfully smuggling illegals and drugs throughout the United States. The loyal local first responders of the southern border are in serious need of modern military equipment and well-trained manpower. Washington officials seem to live in a blissful state of denial about their constitutional responsibility to secure the border and protect our national sovereignty. Since the federal government refuses to give law enforcement officers in the border region the equipment and manpower they need, this equipment should be sent to local and state law enforcement to help stop the aggression against America. It’s time to quickly implement a strategy to defend against this threat to American sovereignty.
In order to respond to this dire situation, I have introduced the Send Equipment for National Defense (SEND) Act. This legislation mandates that the Secretary of Defense send 10% of eligible returning equipment from Iraq to state and local law enforcement agencies for border security purposes. Eligible equipment includes: Humvees, night-vision equipment and surveillance unmanned aerial vehicles. This would be made available to the officials who request it through an already existing DOD program. This is not a new idea. This legislation will simply utilize an existing program, expand it and make resources more readily available to the people who really need it — local and state governments. Washington must utilize all resources to protect America.
This equipment will strengthen the effort to provide intelligence to law enforcement officers so that they can detect and intercept the people and drugs that are compromising the sovereignty of the United States. Night-vision goggles, UAVs and Humvees could be on the front lines of the southern border. Night vision would give state and local officials the ability to see at all times of day. This would greatly enhance their ability to detect unwanted visitors. UAVs have already been a proven asset to border security. Currently there are six UAVs on the southern border (two in Texas). Since 2005, UAVs have been credited with intercepting 7,500 people and over 46,000 pounds of drugs. Using more of this type of equipment could fill in the massive gaps in surveillance of the remote, rugged areas along the border where the cartels roam.
Finally, this bill makes 10% of returning Humvees available to the southern border. On the other side of the Rio Grande River, the drug cartels have well-armed vehicles. Perhaps putting military vehicles in plain sight will make the narco-terrorists think twice before they travel illegally into the United States. This equipment could be a powerful deterrent to keep the bad guys out of America. Texas border sheriffs say Humvees are better than Chevy sedans at chasing down the cartel intruders.
The American people have invested billions of dollars in equipment used to secure Iraq. Now it’s time to use that equipment to secure the United States. The Border Patrol agents are doing the best job they can, but they need help. State and local officials can work with the federal government, defending the international border with Mexico. It’s time that Washington gives them the resources they need to protect Americans from cross-border crime. Sending this equipment to the southern border would give Americans a return on their investment by enhancing our national security.
The United States spends lives and dollars to protect other nations all around the globe, but we refuse to protect our own borders with the same ferocity. Let’s equip border law enforcement officers with the tools that they need to protect the sovereignty of this nation.

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Jasper TX Councilman Tommy Adams Arrested for DWI - Jasper PD Shot Down by Attorney General

(update: I have just learned that the councilman was likely driving impaired by prescription drugs and not alcohol. This still results in a dwi charge because he was knowingly driving while impaired due to drugs.)

I have just confirmed with the Jasper County Sheriff’s Department (the County Jailer) that Jasper, TX City Council Member (mayor pro tem) Tommy Adams was arrested this afternoon (12-28-11) in Tyler County (Woodville, TX) and has been charged with Drunk Driving.

Jasper Councilman Tommy Adams - Photo from Beaumont Enterprise
Tommy Adams is the only Jasper, TX City Council Member to survive the three member recall election in November 2011. The three council members were in the recall election because of their role in hiring a seemingly unqualified Jasper police chief, Rodney Pearson, in a back room deal. Pearson had a criminal record at the time of his hiring. Pearson was also just recently had charges filed against him by Beverly Rauscher. Rauscher, a 60 year old physician assistant, said Pearson groped her sexually while she was working at Complete Healthcare in Jasper, TX.
Texas Attorney General tells Jasper Police Department to Hand over the Recording

An open records request was made recently to the Jasper Police Department. The request was to get a copy of a recording of Police Chief Pearson allegedly talking inappropriately (sexual talk) on his police radio. The Jasper Police Department did not want to release the recording. Jasper PD asked the Texas Attorney General to make a determination about whether or not they had to release the recording. The Texas Attorney General shot down the PD’s request to withhold the information. The AG also pretty much told the PD that they did not know what they were doing by requesting to withhold the info because the PD did not even give the AG any reasons for wanting to withhold the info. You can read the Attorney General Opinion below:


December 22, 2011

Captain Curtis C. Frame
Jasper Police Department
555 South Main
Jasper, Texas 75951

Dear Captain Frame:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 440205.

The Jasper Police Department (the "department") received a request for radio traffic involving a named individual during a specified period, including a reference to a "big black flashlight." (1) You state the department has no information responsive to the portion of the request pertaining to a "big black flashlight" during the relevant time period. (2) You ask whether the submitted information is responsive to the request and, if so, whether any of it is confidential and may not be released under the Act. We have reviewed the information you submitted.

Initially, we address your statement that "separation of protected information from non protected information could be a difficult task[.]" We note administrative inconvenience in responding to a request for information is not grounds for refusing to comply with a request under the Act. See Indus. Found. V. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 687 (Tex. 1976); Open Records Decision No. 497 (1988) (fact that it may be burdensome to provide information does not relieve governmental body of its responsibility under the Act). In this instance, the department has submitted information it deems is responsive to the request. Accordingly, we will determine whether any of the submitted information is excepted from disclosure.

Next, we must address the department's responsibilities under the Act. Section 552.301 of the Government Code prescribes the procedures a governmental body must follow in asking this office to decide whether requested information is excepted from required public disclosure. Pursuant to section 552.301(b) of the Government Code, a governmental body must ask for the attorney general's decision and state the exceptions that apply within ten business days after receiving the request. See Gov't Code § 552.301(b). Additionally, under section 552.301(e) of the Government Code, a governmental body is required to submit to this office within fifteen business days of receiving the request general written comments stating the reasons why the stated exceptions apply that would allow the information to be withheld. Although you generally ask whether the submitted information is excepted from required disclosure, as of the date of this letter you have not asserted any specific exceptions to disclosure or stated the reasons why any specific exception applies. Accordingly, we conclude the department has failed to comply with the procedural requirements of section 552.301 of the Government Code.

Pursuant to section 552.302 of the Government Code, a governmental body's failure to comply with the procedural requirements of section 552.301 results in the legal presumption that the information is public and must be released. Information that is presumed public must be released unless a governmental body demonstrates a compelling reason to withhold the information to overcome this presumption. See id. § 552.302; Simmons v. Kuzmich, 166 S.W.3d 342, 350 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2005, no pet.); Hancock v. State Bd. Of Ins., 797 S.W.2d 379, 381 (Tex. App.--Austin 1990, no writ) (governmental body must make compelling demonstration to overcome presumption of openness pursuant to statutory predecessor to section 552.302); Open Records Decision No. 630 (1994). A compelling reason exists when third-party interests are at stake or when information is confidential under other law. Open Records Decision No. 150 (1977). Upon review of the submitted information, we find some of it is subject to section 552.130 of the Government Code, which is a mandatory exception and can provide a compelling reason for non-disclosure for purposes of section 552.302. (3)

Section 552.130 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure information related to a motor vehicle title or registration issued by an agency of this state or another state or country. Gov't Code § 552.130(a)(2). Accordingly, the department must withhold the information we have indicated under section 552.130 of the Government Code. As the department raises no further exceptions, the remaining information must be released.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular information at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other information or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For more information concerning those rights and responsibilities, please visit our website at, or call the Office of the Attorney General's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable charges for providing public information under the Act must be directed to the Cost Rules Administrator of the Office of the Attorney General, toll free at (888) 672-6787.

Neal Falgoust
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division
Ref: ID# 440205
Enc. Submitted documents
c: Requestor
(w/o enclosures) 

1. We note the requestor narrowed a portion of her request in response to the department seeking a ruling from this office. See Gov't Code § 552.222(b) (governmental body may communicate with requestor for purpose of clarifying or narrowing request for information).
2. The Act does not require a governmental body that receives a request for information to create information that did not exist when the request was received. See Econ. Opportunities Dev. Corp. v. Bustamante, 562 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1978, writ dism'd); Open Records Decision Nos. 605 at 2 (1992), 563 at 8 (1990), 555 at 1-2 (1990), 452 at 3 (1986), 362 at 2 (1983).
3. The Office of the Attorney General will raise a mandatory exception on behalf of a governmental body but ordinarily will not raise other exceptions. See Open Records Decision Nos. 481 (1987), 480 (1987), 470 (1987).
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US
An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Facts (stats) about Corporations, Profits & Taxes - Even some Conservatives Misunderstand - Socialism is Invading American Minds

I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance a couple of weeks ago. This individual is a conservative East Texan. Unfortunately, this individual, like many other individuals (including conservatives), has fallen into the trap of believing everything he sees on the news instead of looking into the facts. It is vitally important for Americans, especially conservatives, to always research the facts about an issue. It is so very easy to be going along as a conservative and then the next thing you know you are spouting liberal ideas because you have been misled by what has been pounded into your brain by the liberal media. My case in point is the conversation I had with this conservative East Texas acquaintance.
Do the Rich Pay a Smaller Percentage of Income in Taxes than the Middle Class? Facts Prove Otherwise
At some point during our conversation we got into a discussion about taxes, profits and corporations. The conversation up to this point had been very non-controversial. We were agreeing about most everything. Then out of nowhere this guy said that corporations and rich people are not paying any taxes and that they should pay their fair share. I asked him what he meant by “fair share”. He said that corporations and rich people have so many loopholes that they end up paying a less percentage of their income than everyone else. He then said that to be fair, everyone should have to pay the same percentage, about 15% to 20% of their total income.
I told him that corporations and rich people would LOVE his idea of everyone paying the same percentage because currently the rich people pay a much higher percentage of their income than everyone else. He did not believe that rich people pay a higher percentage of their income than he does. He even used the example of Warren Buffett getting on the news saying that millionaires pay a lower percentage than their secretaries. I told him that there are some individuals in all income levels who get around the tax rates, but on average the rich pay a higher percentage than everyone else. He did not believe me so I got online and showed him that, according to information from the IRS and the Tax Policy Center, after all the loopholes, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15 percent of their income in federal taxes. Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.
Furthermore, a small percentage of rich people actually pay most of the taxes in America. The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The bottom line is that, if “fair share” is measured by what percentage of income is paid in taxes then rich people pay their fair share and more.
Billions in Profit is not really Profit when Companies have Billions in Debt and Billions are needed to Invest and Expand
This individual still did not believe me. He kept harping about corporations bringing in billions of dollars in profit and not paying taxes. He specifically used the example of Exxon Mobil (this is what he sees on the news of course). I told him that just because a company makes billions in profit does not mean they are greedy or not paying their fair share. First of all, everyone who works for Exxon Mobil pays individual taxes on the income they make from the company. Second, the amount of profit a company makes is deceptive. Oil Companies might make billions of dollars in profit but they have billions of dollars in debt that they have to pay back. Also, the oil business is not cheap. Some oil platforms are as big as the Empire State Building and cost a bunch of money. The profit people see oil companies making will likely go to pay the company debt or to store up in the bank to pay for massive future expenses like drilling new wells. Drilling new wells creates jobs by the way.
According to Euro Pacific Capital, facts have a pesky habit of mucking up an otherwise well-tailored story. While it's true that US corporations have a record amount of cash on their books, as is widely reported, they are also carrying a record amount of debt, which is hardly reported at all. Since 2005, U.S. corporations have added a half a trillion dollars of cash to their balance sheets. While that sounds like a lot, they have simultaneously added more than three times that ($1.8 trillion) in debt. Given the exposure that the debt creates, carrying large cash reserves should be viewed as an act of fiscal responsibility rather than unnecessary frugality. Sadly, like the rest of our struggling republic, many American companies are on the ropes, perhaps one good punch away from a knockout. With a high percentage of consumers and all levels of government still drowning in debt, it's very fortunate that at least one sector has cash in reserve.
I did find it odd that this individual only mentioned oil company profits. I guess the media does not talk about profits from other companies so this individual I was talking to do not know that other companies make billions of dollars in profit too, like Warren Buffett. Buffett, who was the one who falsely stated that rich people pay a lower tax rate than middle class people, has yet to send in any extra tax money to the IRS even though he complains that he does not pay enough.
Socialism is Invading America like a Frog Killed in Boiling Water
Once the facts were presented about how much the rich actually pay in taxes, and how much debt that companies have compared to the profit they make, this individual was still not satisfied. It was never about making the rich pay their fair percentage I suppose. This individual was not looking for free handouts. He has a job and works hard. He is not some Occupy Wall Street nut job protester. Over time though, he has been told that rich people do not pay enough. He has fully bought in to that idea and he is just not happy with the fact that someone is making millions and he is making $50,000 a year. That is capitalism though. No one is stuck making the salary they currently make. Everyone has the opportunity to step out and work hard and start a company or get more education, which then gives someone the chance to make more money for themselves. Not only is that capitalism, it is also a very important part of keeping the American economy strong. For the chance to make more money, people will work harder and invest more and try to expand their businesses and come up with new innovations. If the incentive of making more money goes away then so does the drive to work hard, to come up with new ideas, and to take risks to expand businesses.
I finally asked this individual if he knew that what he was saying was leaning towards socialism. He got very upset and said that he was not a socialist. He hunts and does not like Obama. I told him that whether or not he thinks he is a socialist, it is socialistic to believe that it is not fair that the rich make so much profit and it is socialistic to think they need to “share the wealth.” In fact, it sounds a lot like when Obama told Joe the plumber that rich people should have their profits taken and shared with everyone else to spread the wealth. The conversation pretty much ended there.
It is like the old saying, if you put a frog in boiling water then the frog will jump out, but if you put a frog in regular temperature water and slowly turn up the heat then the frog will stay in and boil to death. This individual that I had this conversation with would never go along with socialism if you told him it was socialism. Over time though, even conservatives are starting to believe the lies that they are constantly being bombarded with from the liberals and the media. They would never go along with full-fledged socialism, but they will agree to compromise on one small issue and then the next year they will compromise on another small issue, and then they will get mad at people making more money than them because they is what the media tells them is going on, and then, over time, all the small compromises will add up and we will have socialism without anyone even knowing, or believing, that we have become socialist.
The Bible Sets the Example that We Should Follow
America is great because of the Christian principles it was founded on. As America slowly abandons those principles, America will see more problems.
One good story that the Bible tells us is the story of a man in who agreed to do a job for a landowner for one denarius but then complained about his pay compared to another man’s pay. The Bible (Matthew 20:1-26) says that the landowner answered and said, “Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way.” I guess the NBA Players Union did not read that portion of the Bible when they decided to protest their multi-million dollar a year salaries….
The Bible also says we should take care of those in need. I agree with that completely. Conservatives are not greedy and are not against helping people in need. In fact, conservatives tend to give more of their money to charitable organizations than liberals. We just believe that our churches can do more to help the needy with the money we give it than the government can. I also believe that it perception of what we “need” has been distorted. People need food and shelter. People do not need big screen televisions, steaks and fancy cars just because your neighbor has those things. We should be content with what we have instead of coveting what others have. The great thing about America though is that if you want those fancy things, it IS possible for you to attain them, because we are a capitalistic society and not a socialistic society.
Back to the subject of conservatives giving more to charity than liberals, according to Arthur C. Brooks in an article on Real Clear Politics:
-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Monday, December 26, 2011

The Sunset Commission: How Texas Keeps Government Efficient and Small - by Senator Nichols

Input Needed to Determine which Texas Government Programs to Kill

Ronald Reagan once said that the closest thing to immortality is a Federal Government Program, but NOT in Texas!

The following is a letter from Texas Senate Republican Caucus Chairman Robert Nichols

Nichols is a member of the Sunset Commission. He explains the Sunset Commission (they kill government agencies) and he asks for input from fellow Texans. In January the Commission will start to meet regarding the future of 24 Texas Government agencies.

From State Senator Robert Nichols about the Sunset Commission:

The unfortunate nature of government is to grow larger as more laws are passed, more agencies are created, and new programs are added. While good government often requires new approaches, innovation and efficiency can be strangled in the red tape of bureaucracy.

In Texas, we try to keep state government efficient and small through the sunset process. Unlike their federal counterparts, state agencies in Texas are not allowed to exist indefinitely. Instead, the existence of an agency must be legislatively justified on a regular basis, usually a period of every 12 years. If an agency or board is not continued through legislation, it will automatically be discontinued. The Texas Sunset Advisory Commission, on which I proudly serve, makes recommendations not only for which agencies to continue to operate but also how agencies might operate more efficiently and better serve the public. The commission meets and votes year round, not just during session. Since 1977, when Sunset began in Texas, 78 agencies have been abolished including 37 agencies that were completely abolished and 41 that were abolished with some functions transferred to other agencies. In 2011, the Legislature completely abolished two agencies and transferred the duties of four others. I guarantee you won't miss them. Sunset reforms from the last legislative session are estimated to have saved the $161 million in the state's current budget.

The goal of Sunset is not just to save taxpayers money, which it does. The goal is also to hold agencies accountable and make their processes as fair and transparent as possible. For example, during the last session legislators restructured youth justice programs in response to abuse experienced by young inmates. The Sunset Commission also makes across-the-board recommendations for all agencies such as policies to prevent conflicts of interest by board members.

Beginning in January, the Sunset Commission will review and make recommendations for 24 agencies. These include the Texas Education Agency, Ethics Commission, the Higher Education Coordinating Board, and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Part of what makes Sunset so effective is input from the public. Not only do two members of the public serve on the Sunset Advisory Commission, but public input is welcomed throughout the entire Sunset process. Anyone can communicate concerns to Sunset staff who review an agency, testify at a Sunset meeting, or testify at a legislative hearing. To learn more about how you can directly participate, you can visit the Sunset Web page at: Of course, you may also contact my Capitol office directly at 512-463-0103. As a member of the Sunset Advisory Commission, I am especially eager to hear from the people of Senate District 3 how state agencies may better serve you.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Federal Judge in Redistricting Battle is Brother in Law of Texas Democrat Senate Caucus Chairman

Judge Orlando L. Garcia is the Brother-In-Law of Democrat State Senator Leticia Van De Putte. Van De Putte was recently the Texas State Senate Caucus Chairman for nearly a decade and she is one of the most liberal Democrats in Texas. Judge Orlando Garcia should have stepped down because of this clear conflict of interest.

I was speaking to a State Senator the other night (he will remain anonymous). We were talking about Texas Redistricting and about the US Supreme Court stopping the ridiculous abuse of power by the two Judges in the San Antonio Federal Court. It was almost as if the Democrats were single handedly allowed to redraw the maps, and then these Judges just used what the Democrats had drawn.

This State Senator asked me if I knew that one of these 2 Federal Judges was the brother in law of the Texas Democrat Senate Caucus Chairman. I almost did not believe him at first because, well, if this was true then it would have been all over the news, but I had never seen this on the news.

Maybe Judge Garcia and Senator Van De Putte do not communicate with each other? Wrong! The State Senator I was talking to told me that Judge Garcia is known to eat dinner nearly every Sunday night with Senator Van De Putte.

Maybe Senator Van De Putte does not have an opinion about Redistricting battles in Texas? Wrong! Senator Van De Putte was very vocally against Republicans in the 2003 Texas redistricting battle. She accused Republicans of trying to hurt minorities in redistricting. That sounds very familiar to what is being said in this year’s redistricting battle. Senator Van De Putte very likely played a hand in making sure this redistricting lawsuit was filed in San Antonio where her brother in law is the Federal Judge. Senator Van De Putte also very likely used her relationship with the San Antonio Judge to inappropriately affect the court’s decision. I guess if you do not want the Elected Officials of Texas to draw the maps as required by the Constitution, then the next best thing would be to ask your brother in law Judge to redraw the maps right? This is judicial activism and corrupt government at its worst.

Also, a reader just sent this comment in to me: Sen Van Putte was also co-chair of the National Democrat Convention in 2008. The lawsuits filed in Justice Orlanda Garcia's court were funded by the National Democrat Redistricting Trust. The National Democrat Redistricting Trust was given a favorable ruling by the FEC, ruling the donors could remain anonymous.

Redistricting Panel Conflict of Interest, Media Cover Up

This relationship between Judge Garcia and State Senator Van De Putte is shocking. Just as shocking is the fact that the media has completely ignored this clear conflict of interest. There was a Republican State Representative, Sarah Davis, who heard about this conflict of interested and objected to this conflict of interest, but the Federal Court quickly shot down her motion. The State Senator that I was talking to mentioned that the Texas Attorney General’s staff did not want to make a big deal about it because this was the beginning stages of the redistricting battle and they did not want to make the Federal Court mad because that might cause the Judges to rule against the State Drawn Maps. That plan sure didn’t work though because the Judges still went on to completely overstep their boundaries and re-draw the Texas Redistricting Maps in favor of the Democrats!

According to Daniel Greer of Agenda Wise, the United States Judicial Code provides for the disqualification of a judge if his spouse or a person within the third degree of relationship to either individual is a party to the proceeding. Democrat legislators sued to have maps drafted during the session disqualified and redrawn by judges. Democrat Senator Leticia Van De Putte is the sister-in-law of one of the three judges on the panel who redrew the maps, Judge Orlando L. Garcia. Since the state was sued, it’s officers are a party to the suit, making Garcia’s relation to Van De Putte a conflict of interest.

Senator Cornyn Statement on Attorney General Holder’s Hypocritical Criticism of Texas’ Voter ID Law

See the Statement from Senator John Cornyn Below
But first, before Senator Cornyn’s statement, here it a quick rant from me about Eric Holder’s little visit to Texas
In TX, Eric Holder Ignores Democrat Voting Fraud & Hypocritically Requires ID Just to Hear Him Speak
The United States Attorney General Eric Holder paid a visit to Texas. He tried to accuse Republicans of voter fraud while ignoring that most cases of voter fraud are by the Democrats. He did not mention that he let the New Black Panthers off the hook for intimidating voters at polling places. In 2008, there was massive Democrat, Obama election related voter fraud in Indiana and Eric Holder has yet to visit, or even call Indiana even though the state has repeatedly asked for help. He spoke about how Voter ID in Texas elections would somehow be discriminating to minorities, and yet he hypocritically required everyone show ID in order to be able to go see him speak. He made it seem as though Hispanics could not get elected unless the lines were redrawn in Texas to favor Democrats, and yet he failed to mention that more Texas Hispanics were elected to office in 2012 from the Republican Party than from the Democrat Party. Eric Holder is a Farce as the Attorney General and he should be fired for his knowledge of the fast and furious gun running government program that led to a Border Agent getting killed by guns bought as part of this program.

The following is a Statement from Texas Senator John Cornyn Regarding Attorney General Eric Holder’s Criticism of Texas’ Voter Identification Law:

Senator Cornyn: Voter ID Laws are Reasonable, Constitutional, Necessary

The following op-ed, authored by Senator Cornyn, ran in the Sunday edition of the Austin American-Statesman.

Speaking Tuesday at the LBJ Presidential Library, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder criticized state voter-identification laws designed to prevent fraud. Holder asked: "Are we willing to allow this era our era to be remembered as the age when our nation's proud tradition of expanding the franchise ended?"

I agree with the attorney general that Americans must aggressively uphold the integrity of our electoral process. That is precisely why I support voter-ID laws, which are reasonable, constitutional, and necessary.

Over the past two decades, there have been thousands of allegations of voter fraud throughout the United States. Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now recently pleaded guilty to voter-registration fraud in Nevada, and scores of individuals in Minnesota have been convicted of voter fraud related to the 2008 election.

In a poll conducted in June, an overwhelming majority (75 percent) of registered voters — including 77 percent of independents and 63 percent of Democrats — said that Americans should present photo ID before casting their ballots. To date, 16 different states have enacted a photo-ID mandate, and another 15 states have required voters to show some form of personal documentation, such as a utility bill or a bank statement (though not necessarily a photo ID).
These 31 states include both Republican and Democratic strongholds, along with many swing states. There are only three states (Oregon, Vermont, and Wyoming) that do not have a voter-ID law on the books and did not consider one when their legislatures met in 2011.

Critics of voter-ID statutes claim that they suppress voter turnout, but there is no evidence to support that view. In Georgia, turnout rates have actually gone up since the Peach State adopted a photo-ID law. And according to a 2007 University of Missouri study, "The only consistent and frequently statistically significant impact of photo ID in Indiana is to increase voter turnout in counties with a greater percentage of Democrats relative to other counties"

Some contend that lower-income Americans cannot afford to comply with these laws, but every single state with a photo-ID requirement allows voters to obtain a government-issued photo ID at no charge.

Here in Texas, where the new voter-ID measure is scheduled to take effect on January 1, not only will citizens be able to get a free photo ID, they will also receive provisional ballots if they forget to bring their ID to the polling station. The Texas Secretary of State will be obligated to educate voters about the ID rule, and each Texas county will have to provide multilingual reminders both before and on Election Day. All voters above the age of 70 will be exempt from the requirement, as will all disabled voters.

The Supreme Court has ruled that such laws are constitutional. In 2008, the court upheld Indiana's voter-ID law, which is substantially similar to the Texas law. Writing for the court, Justice John Paul Stevens explained that "the application of the statute to the vast majority of Indiana voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.'"

In the face of clear Supreme Court precedent, and despite the fact that lawyers at the Justice Department have not completed their review of voter-ID laws, Holder has publicly compared them to literacy tests and poll taxes. This comparison is outrageous. The attorney general has clearly prejudged voter-ID laws. Even worse, he is sending an unmistakable message to his own department in the midst of their review.

By urging Americans to campaign against voter-ID laws, Attorney General Holder has once again placed himself on the wrong side of a critically important issue, not to mention the wrong side of public opinion. Safeguarding the credibility and soundness of our voting process is vital to the health of American democracy. Does the Attorney General really want us to become a nation where the federal government discourages efforts to preserve electoral integrity?

Monday, December 19, 2011

2011: NFL & SNL Criticize Tebow Christianity - 2010: NFL & Obama Support Abdullah’s Muslim Fasting & Faith

2011: Tim Tebow, Quarterback for the Denver Broncos, has been greatly criticized and even mocked by NFL players and the Media/SNL for openly practicing his Christian faith.
2010: Two Muslim NFL players, Husain Abdullah and Hamza Abdullah, do not eat or drink for a month during the daylight on NFL practice and game days, and they take time out in the day to pray. Obama Invites these Muslim players to the White House, players and coaches support their fasting. One coach even fasted with them for a couple of days. SNL doesn’t dare criticize them or the Muslim faith and the Media has highlights their actions in a positive light.

NFL & SNL Allows Mocking and Criticism of Christianity but Would Never Allow Mocking of Muslim Faith
Tim Tebow has been one of the most sensational NFL players this season. He has won several games with last minute heroics. Tebow can sometimes be seen kneeling down on the sideline of a game to say a prayer. This has been called “Tebowing.” Although Tebow publically practices his faith and praises God, he is very humble and has never stated that God is on his side is the reason why the Broncos are winning. Tebow works hard in practice and in games to try to help his team win. Recently, Detroit Lions player Tony Scheffler and Stephen Tulluch kneeled in a game against the Broncos, clearly to mock the prayer that Tebow does. Former Broncos Quarterback Jake Plummer publically stated that he does not like that Tebow publically practices his faith. Saturday Night Live (SNL) recently did a show mocking Christianity and, specifically, Tim Tebow’s public expression of faith. SNL’s skit depicted a fake Jesus telling Tebow to stop openly practicing his faith and to read a football playbook instead of just relying on God to win games for him.
Muslim NFL players, Husain Abdullah and Hamza Abdullah, observe Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting and prayer, every year. They will not eat or drink at all during daylight hours for the entire month of Ramadan. This includes no drinking water during practices and games. Husain Abdullah openly says that Allah is always first before the NFL. He even says that Allah is his nourishment during the day when he does not eat or drink, and also that fasting helped him play better to get drafted. The NFL coaches and players went out of their way to support and encourage these two Muslims openly practicing their faith. The Minnesota Vikings had Husain Abdullah work with the team's nutritionist on a meal and hydration plan. Hamza Abdullah openly encouraged teammates, trainers and coaches to fast with him. Some players agreed to only drink water, and even head athletic trainer Eric Sugarman agreed to fast for a day or two. While Hamza was fasting, Cardinals cornerback Michael Adams told him that he seems like he is really at peace. The Abdullah brothers were even invited to Obama’s Iftar dinner at the White House to celebrate the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Double Standard – Attack on Christianity but Respect for Islam (and fear of violent attacks from Muslims)
What if Detroit Lions player Stephen Tulluch and Tony Scheffler mockingly bowed toward Mecca during a game against the two Muslims? What if fellow players told these Muslims to stop asking them to fast and that they would be better liked if they did not practice their faith. There would be apologies from the NFL and the Liberal Media would blast the players for mocking the Muslim religion.
What if SNL were to do a show where Mohammed told the Abdullah brothers that not drinking water during practice is silly and that Jesus is the real Son of God. What if SNL, whose studio is mere miles from where Muslims killed 3000 Americans, did a skit where these Muslim players were asked to read the football playbook more instead of the Koran, and to stay away from the terrorist playbooks that some Muslims followed when they attached America on 9/11. All Hell would break lose if that happened and Muslims terrorists might even attack the SNL studio like when the Muslim’s rioted when a Danish cartoon simply poked fun at Allah, killing many innocent people.
I do not believe in the Muslim faith. I do not care that these Muslim NFL players practice their faith. That is not my point. I believe that anyone is should be allowed to believe what they want. My point is that it is completely unacceptable for the NFL and the Media to allow the bashing of Tim Tebow for openly practicing his Christianity while at the same time they pander to the Muslim faith and would never allow anyone to be criticized for openly practicing Islam. Heck, SNL has never once poked fun at the Muslim faith at all ever since I can remember, but they sure have poked fun at Christianity.
What if President Obama invited Tim Tebow to the White House this Christmas specifically to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. There would be outrage and cries of Obama to keep church and state separated. It is completely ok though for Obama to celebrate Ramadan with Muslim NFL players. Heck, Obama even gave Osama Bin Laden a proper Muslim Sea Burial but refused to give a proclamation recognizing Easter.
There is a double standard and clear hypocrisy in America. In my opinion, there is even an all-out war against Christianity. Families of dead US Soldiers have to fight to say a prayer at the military burial of their hero sons and daughters. Texas Towns have to fight to be allowed to celebrate Christmas and have Nativity Scenes. The founding fathers of the United States of America are probably rolling in their graves right about now because they openly expressed their (mostly Christian) faith, even more than Tebow or Governor Rick Perry do!

One Last Point: Tim Tebow has never responded negatively to any of the criticisms hurled his way. He is always respectful, even when people are making fun of him. Tebow really does live what he believes and I respect him for it. 

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Complaint & Charges Filed Against Jasper, TX Police Chief Rodney Pearson - Woman Says He Groped Her Breast

Update: After this article went up, the local media picked up on the story. KBTV Fox 4 was the first tv station to do a story on it. click here to see it

Also, after this article came out, Stephanie Davis has come forward and testified that Beverly came to her the day of the incident and was very upset and distraught about Pearson touching her.

More East Texas Corruption….
This article is the first media outlet/news agency/blogger to report on these “groping” charges being filed against the Jasper, TX Police Chief
Beverly Rauscher has filed a Criminal Complaint and Charges against Jasper, TX Police Chief Rodney Pearson. Rauscher claims that in October 2011, Pearson came up behind her back and put his hands around her from behind and squeezed her breasts very aggressively.

Rauscher said that the incident happened at Complete Healthcare Services in Jasper where she was employed as a Physician Assistant to Dr. Martin Gilliland. Pearson would frequently visit the facility because Dr. Gilliland was friends with Pearson and Pearson’s wife, Sandy Pearson, worked at this facility as the administrator. Rauscher was very upset after Pearson groped her, and she told Pearson to leave her alone and go into the other room with his wife.

Rauscher then complained to her boss, Dr. Gilliland, about what had happened. Rauscher says that she was afraid to go to the police because Pearson was the Police Chief and she says that Pearson had already harassed her because she signed the Jasper Recall Petition. She was also afraid to lose her job because the Dr. Gilliland is friends with Pearson and Pearson’s wife is the Administrator.

Rauscher could not forget what happened and she has stayed very upset over the incident. Rauscher recently got a new job and was about to move out of Jasper when she realized that, because she was moving, she would be able to come out of hiding and file her complaint without fear of being harassed. On December 13th, 2011 at about 11:30AM, Rauscher and a friend went to the Jasper County Sheriff’s Department. She met with Investigator Bob Walker and filed charges against Rodney Pearson. Captain James Carter was also in the room and he was used as the prop so that Rauscher could show the investigator what Pearson did to her.
Rauscher told Investigator Walker that, although he was in plain clothes, Pearson was on duty as the Police Chief when the incident happened. Walker said that he would need to get that information verified because the charges are different depending if he was on duty or off duty. Captain Carter also told Rauscher that he would get the Texas Rangers involved. Hopefully they do not get the Texas Ranger that is friends with Pearson or the Texas Ranger that is the brother of Pearson because that would certainly defeat the purpose of having an “outside agency” investigate. It was not that long ago that a Texas Ranger Ken Parks tried to get killer Captain Robert Arnold (Orange TX Police Department) off the hook for killing an unarmed war veteran, James Whitehead, even though Ken Parks did not even investigate of speak to any witnesses.
Jasper Police Department Withholding a Recording of Chief Pearson Talking Inappropriately on Police Radio – Wanted to Show Someone his “Big, Black Flashlight”
Jodi Ellis has filed a Texas Open Records Request with the Jasper Police Department. What does Ellis want? Ellis wants the police department to hand over a recording of Police Chief Rodney Pearson speaking inappropriately over the police radio. Allegedly, while Pearson was driving in a police vehicle that he does not normally use, Pearson’s knee was resting on the Police Radio and the Mic was keyed. This means that everyone can hear what Pearson was saying and Pearson had no idea that they could hear him. While the radio was keyed, Pearson could be heard talking to someone. One of the things that Pearson allegedly said was “I would like to show you my big, black flashlight.”
If these allegations were not true then you would expect the Police Department to comply with the open records request and hand over the recording right? This recording is not something that is sensitive or top secret because anyone with a police scanner can hear what is said over the police radio. Well, the Jasper Police is not handing over the recording. They want to try to keep from having to release the recording and they have asked the Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to allow them to keep the recording secret. I cannot imagine that the Attorney General will allow the Jasper Police Department to keep the recording secret so it is only a matter of time until that recording comes out.
Click Here to Read My Previous Article About Jasper, TX Corruption – Council Hired Criminal Police Chief – Discrimination Lawsuits Filed – Recall Election Ousted 2 Council Members
Here is a summary: Several Discrimination lawsuits have been filed this year against the Jasper, TX City Council after the council allegedly hired Police Chief Rodney Pearson in a backroom deal based on his race and not his qualifications. Pearson was the least qualified candidate and he had a criminal history. After being hired, Pearson went on to fire and demote some of the white officers. There was a recall petition to oust 3 of the council members (Terrya Norsworthy, Willie Land and Tommy Adams). The council tried to keep the election from happening but a Federal Judge told the City they had to do the recall election. These council members gave Pearson a $5000 pay raise only after 6 months even though no city employee is allowed a pay raise until after one year. The recall election resulted in the people of Jasper ousting 2 of the 3 council members involved in this scandal.
Just when you though this could not get more interesting….
 Jasper, TX Officials Say Convict Activist “Bishop Guillory” Posed as a Department of Justice Agent While defending Chief Pearson and the Council in this Jasper Recall Election – Click Here to read this story
Of course, Bishop Guillory defends Police Chief Rodney Pearson and says on his website that I am a racist because I think Pearson is a bad guy. Maybe Bishop Guillory likes people who harass and grope women? I sure don't! Race is not even a factor in this situation. I support several black politicians, including Conservative, East Texas State Representative James White. I don't care what color you are. I only care what you believe. Regardless of color, I don't like liberals. I like Conservatives.

And of course, much of the liberal media has tried to make it seem as though Jasper is just full of racists who only ousted these council members because of racism and not because the council members are incompetent and the police chief is a criminal.... just plain silly. The residents of Jasper have had MANY black leaders over the years and they never tried to recall them! That is because it is not about race, it is about irresponsible actions by these city officials.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Federal Court Orders April 3rd, 2012 Texas Primary Election – RPT Must Stand Up to RNC

Redistricting Update: San Antonio Federal Court signs order pushing all Texas Primary Elections back to just one date, April 3rd, 2012. No split Primary dates.

When the US Supreme Court took up the Texas Redistricting Case, I wrote an article explaining that the likely thing to happen would be a split primary (March and May) with some of the elections, including the Presidential Primary Election, happening in March and the rest of the elections being pushed back until May so that the US Supreme Court can make a ruling. The is what the Republican Party of Texas was initially going for because it will devastate the ability of Texas to have a say in the Presidential Primary Election if we pushed the Texas Presidential Primary back to a later date like in May.

Well, many elected officials on both sides of the isles did not like the idea of a split Primary because it might be confusing.

Well, after lots of debating, both sides of the redistricting battle have come up with an agreement on when to have the Texas Primary Election and whether or not there will be two primary dates or just one.

There will be just ONE primary election in Texas and it will be pushed on April 3rd, 2012

The federal court accepted the agreement to have the Texas Primary Election on one date and pushed back to April 3rd, 2012.

I will Push for the Republican Party of Texas to be able to change Texas back to a Winner Take All State so that Texas will have more say in Presidential Primary Election

Pushing the Presidential Primary in Texas back a whole month will certainly hurt the ability of Texas to be able to have a say in the Presidential Primary election. The election might be practically over by the time Texas votes and it will be MONTHS after the first Presidential Primary results in January.

Because of ridiculous RNC rules, the Texas Republican Party was FORCED to change the way our Presidential Primary Delegates are selected. In the past, whichever Republican Presidential candidate who won Texas got ALL of the Texas Delegates in the National Presidential race. We were forced to do away with this winner take all system and switch to a proportional system so that the Texas delegates are split proportionally based on the election results. This weakens the voice of the State of Texas in the National Presidential Primary Race. Whichever candidate wins Texas should get all of the delegates from Texas so that Texas can actually impact the Presidential race. With Texas being proportional and with the new Primary election being pushed back to April, Texas will have very little say in the Presidential Primary.

The Republican Party of Texas MUST change our primary delegate selection back to winner take all if we are going to have any say at all in the Presidential Primary Election and as a State Republican Executive Committeeman (SREC) I will fight for that. I have heard that Texas will not be allowed to resubmit their delegate selection plans to the RNC, but I believe Texas needs to stand up against the Republican National Committee (RNC) and demand that they allow us the ability to change our delegate selection back to winner take all since it is not our fault that the liberals took Texas to court and forced us to change our Primary Election Date.

Click Here to see the Signed Court Order pushing Election to April 3rd, 2012

Here is a Summary of the New Texas Primary Election:
February 1, 2012 - New residency deadline for candidates seeking election to the Texas House and Texas Senate. (There is no residency requirement for Congress).
February 1, 2012, 6:00 p.m. - New deadline of court-ordered reopened filing period, in which candidates for all offices have the opportunity to amend, withdraw or file a new application for the ballot.
February 3, 2012 - New deadline for Democratic and Republican county executive committees to conduct drawing for candidate order on ballot.
April 3, 2012 - Date of the 2012 General Primary Election.
April 14 or April 21, 2012 - Date of County and Senatorial District Conventions, as determined by the State Chair of each political party.
June 5, 2012 - Date of the 2012 General Primary Runoff Election.

Also, Click Here to see the Propositions that will be on the Texas Republican Primary Ballot

In TX, Eric Holder Ignores Democrat Voting Fraud & Hypocritically Requires ID to Hear Him Speak

The United States Attorney General Eric Holder paid a visit to Texas. He tried to accuse Republicans of voter fraud while ignoring that most cases of voter fraud are by the Democrats. He did not mention that he let the New Black Panthers off the hook for intimidating voters at polling places. He spoke about how Voter ID in Texas elections would somehow be discriminating to minorities, and yet he hypocritically required everyone show ID in order to be able to go see him speak. He made it seem as though Hispanics could not get elected unless the lines were redrawn in Texas to favor Democrats, and yet he failed to mention that more Texas Hispanics were elected to office in 2012 from the Republican Party than from the Democrat Party. Eric Holder is a Farce as the Attorney General and he should be fired for his knowledge of the fast and furious gun running government program that led to a Border Agent getting killed by guns bought as part of this program.

True the Vote emailed me a great summary of what happened at the rally, what Eric Holder said during his speech, and how Eric Holder is just plain wrong.

Below is the Email from True the Vote about Eric Holder and the Rally Against Him:

Austin: Successful Rally to Oppose AG Holder's Attack on Election Reforms
On Tuesday, December 13 a rally was held near the LBJ Library at the University of Texas, Austin to highlight the attack on election reforms launched inside by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. Holder went to Texas to denounce the Lone Star State's voter ID laws and claimed that simple voter ID laws were somehow discriminatory. Holder ominously claimed that he would use the power of his office to "enforce civil rights protections" during the upcoming 2012 elections.
Outside the LBJ Library nearly 200 citizens gathered to hear a multi-racial panel of six speakers denounce Holder's partisan attempts to push the administration's agenda to turn a blind eye to continuing voter fraud that consistently favors candidates from the Democrat Party.
The rally was sponsored by the Houston-based True The Vote, a grass roots voter integrity project staffed by volunteers. True The Vote is a nation-wide organization that has affiliates across the country, every day citizens interested in the integrity of the elections in their home district.
True The Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht said she was thrilled by the turnout that was arranged on only a few day's notice:
"We gathered for the purpose of setting the record straight and people came from all over Texas to hear a host of speakers all representing different sides of the issue. All were clearly saying that the thought that photo voter ID laws would in some way suppress the vote or would in some way disenfranchise voters is on its face a farce. This is only being done to advance a politically motivated agenda that has at its core the themes of victimization and race baiting."
In his comments AG Holder cited one Republican in Maryland that was convicted of trying to trick black voters into staying home on Election Day, but what this single case has to do with voter ID laws was unclear. Holder's intent, it seems, was to dismiss vote fraud from Democrats while shifting the blame to this one Republican. Holder did not mention such Democrat fraud as that seen in the 2008 Indiana primary, the New York Democrat that recently pleaded guilty to vote fraud, or any of the other such cases that can be easily found in the news.

It should be noted that at least one major case of voter suppression occurred during Holder’s tenure at the Department of Justice but it went ignored by his office. In 2008 a pair of militant Black Panther Party members used bats and weapons to intimidate white voters from entering a Philadelphia voting place. Ultimately Holder’s office decided not to prosecute this clear case of voter suppression.
There were five other speakers that appeared after Engelbrecht. Those speakers were: Anita MonCrief, the founder of the Boots of Liberty Task Force (BOLT) and the Editor-in-Chief of Emerging Corruption. MonCrief is also known as the ACORN/ Project Vote Whistleblower. Adryana Boyne, the National Director of VOCES Action a non profit organization that educates and empowers Hispanics with conservative fiscal and moral values. Election lawyer J. Christian Adams who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice and whose book Injustice: Exposing the Racial Agenda of the Obama Justice Department is a must read for anyone interested in the hard facts of the DOJ. C.L. Bryant, a native of Shreveport, LA and a former president of the NAACP’s Garland, Texas Chapter. And finally, George Rodriguez, President of San Antonio Tea Party. Rodriguez served as a presidential appointee under both Presidents Bush and Reagan and is also the nation’s first Hispanic Tea Party President.
The crux of the rally was to spur citizens to get involved. "'Democrat or Republican voter fraud is unacceptable but it is up to us to stop it," said Engelbrecht,
"Here's my message today - everyone listening needs to take stock of the situation facing our country, and then ask themselves what they are doing to make things better. What are you doing? There are all kinds of places and ways that citizens can directly engage and work for the good of this country and hold to what made us great. True the Vote is a great example -- a great way to serve in a desperately needed and critically important area -- protecting the sanctity of the vote. Our election process was always intended to be run by American citizens for the good of America and Americans. We need to take our process back and need to educate ourselves in the ways we can get engaged."
One last bit of irony -- if not hypocrisy -- was experienced as people lined up to enter the LBJ Library to hear AG Holder rail against voter ID laws. As each person entered the library they were required to present their photo IDs in order to be allowed in to hear the speech.