Texas Republicans Set to Flex Their Muscles in 114th Congress

Texas will be sending 25 Republicans and two very powerful Senators to the 114 th Congress which is set to kick-off in January, 2015. Key committee chairmanships for six of those House Republicans will give Texas control of nearly one-third of the House’s twenty-one committees.

This positions Texas representatives to flex their muscle in the effort to extend the Texas model of success to the other 49 states. For the first time in history, Texas will send twenty-five Republicans to the House of Representatives with the addition of Texas’ first black Republican federal lawmaker, Will Hurd (R-San Antonio) from San Antonio. Hurd defeated Democrat incumbent Grassroots freshmen Dr. Brian Babin (R-Tyler) and John Ratcliffe (R-Rockwall) will also be joining the Republican Delegation from Texas.

Ratcliffe defeated Texas oldest-ever Congressman , Ralph Hall in the Republican Primary and Babin replaced Steve Stockman who decided to run for the U.S. Senate against John Cornyn and failed. In the Senate, Senator John Cornyn will become the Senate Republican Majority Whip, the 2 nd most powerful position in the U.S. Senate having handily won re-election by defeating his Democrat opponent.

Senator Ted Cruz, Texas’ junior Senator, will continue to represent a powerful voice in the Senate for grassroots issues. The combination of powerful Texas Republican leadership in the House and Senate is being compared to “the days of legendary House Speaker Sam Rayburn and President Lyndon B. Johnson” according to an article by Kevin Diaz in the Houston Chronicle . Diaz also reports the ascension of Rep. Bill Flores (R-Bryan) to the influential Republican Study Committee regarded by many as the “conservative spine of the GOP conference.”

Flores has talked of promoting a “Texas model” in Washington, according to Diaz. “The fact that there are all these people in leadership positions allows us to promote the Texas way of doing things,” he said. Texas Republican’s will now chair six committees in the U.S. House according to the list published by Speaker John Boehner. This represents nearly one-third of the House committee chairmanships.

Rep. Michael McCaul’s election to chair the House Homeland Security Committee could mean a final resolution to generating a bill to secure the border. McCaul’s district stretches from Northwest Harris County to East Travis County. “Now, with a good-faith partner in the Senate, the time is ripe to get things done and finally achieve control down there,” McCaul said of his plan to bolster the border. Diaz reported that McCaul also sees one of the roles of these Texas committee chairmen as building a bridge to mediate the divide between the tea party wing of the Republican Party and House leadership in Speaker John Boehner’s office.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-San Antonio) will chair the Science, Space and Technology Committee and said the will focus on NASA funds on space exploration and blocking Democrat’s efforts to shift money away from the space agency that supplies many high-paying jobs to the Texas economy. Democrats have attempted to shift the agency’s focus to the environmental science of climate change. Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Midland) picks up another committee chairmanship important to Texans and the state’s economy. He will chair the House Agriculture Committee. Agriculture is one of Texas leading industries.

The control of the powerful House Armed Services Committee will fall on Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Amarillo). Texas plays host to fifteen military bases all across the Lone Star State which significantly contribute to the economic stability of the state. The House Committee on Financial Services will be chaired again by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Dallas).

This committee has oversight of the nation’s banking system, housing, insurance and the securities and exchanges. It also influences monetary organizations and financial counter-terrorism activities. And finally, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Dallas) was appointed to Chair the House Rules Committee.

The Republican’s from Texas will make up nearly 10 percent of the growing House Republican majority. Congressman Kevin Brady (R-The Woodlands) said the leadership positions awarded to his fellow Texans is a “tribute to their hard work.” Brady, however, lost in his bid to become the first Texan to chair the House Ways and Means Committee since Bill Archer’s chairmanship in the Speaker Newt Gingrich era. “One of the lessons is that when you lose leadership as a state, it takes time to regrow that leadership,” Brady told the Chronicle . “Now, from the days of Bill Archer, Tom DeLay and Dick Armey, it has taken some time to rebuild.” Bob Price is a senior political news contributor for Breitbart Texas and a member of the original Breitbart Texas team.


Famous Words of Inspiration...


Powered By AMZ QuoteCash

Boehner Negotiates Terms of Surrender to King Barack’s Executive Amnesty

Republicans in Washington, under the tutelage of House Speaker John Boehner, are planning a full-scale cave to President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty, by aiming to fund Obama’s immigration action in full this week.

Boehner on Tuesday pitched colleagues on a plan that utilizes bills from the reliably conservative Reps. Ted Yoho (R-FL) and Tom Price (R-GA), but ultimately fully funds Obama’s executive amnesty until at least March—and then will likely do so at that point in time as well.

The government funding portion would keep most of the government open until September 2015 but would only supply monies to the Department of Homeland Security until March, Politico’s John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman note in a Tuesday piece. Current government funding runs out on Dec. 11, so to avoid a government shutdown before Christmas, Congress has to do something soon. But conservative-movement leaders say the forthcoming plan from Boehner and the other members of GOP leadership (including Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Majority Whip Steve Scalise) using Yoho and Price is a phony, toothless battle.

“A House vote on the Yoho bill would be purely symbolic, since it has no chance of being brought up in the Senate,” Rosemary Jenks, NumbersUSA’s director of government relations, told Breitbart News. “Americans expect Congress to take effective action to stop Obama’s lawless amnesty, not only to protect their jobs and wages, but also to protect the Constitution of the United States. Defunding the amnesty is the only way to stop it.”

Daniel Horowitz, the senior editor of the Conservative Review, added that this plan is a “joke” and Boehner knows it. “Leadership’s attempt to sugar-coat their failure to address Obama’s amnesty in the CROmnibus, is a toothless, stand-alone bill that will never force the issue, and they know it,” Horowitz said.


Famous Words of Inspiration...


Powered By AMZ QuoteCash

Baffling: Bush Admin Covers Up WMDs in Iraq

The old WMD story has recently resurfaced and if what I’ve read is true, I’m beyond outraged. The back story:  Back in 2006 the Pentagon feared that the insurgents (particularly Al Qaeda in Iraq, now ISIS) would use remnants of Saddam’s chemical weapon stockpile against US troops particularly for use in IEDs. Of course, that implies that WMDs were present and had the potential for use — something at the time, few wanted to talk about. Just this week the New York Times (in a random act of journalism) published this : From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule. The Times goes on to indicate that nearly 5,000 chemical weapons shells were found from 2004-2011 around a country that was supposedly void of such weapons according to Bush’s critics. So, Bush was vindicated, right?  We found stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq — some nerve and mustard agents even wounded 17 American soldiers.  The weapons may not have been new, but they were there with the potential to harm others. But here’s where the whole thing gets completely f@^&ed up in my mind.  Apparently: The American government withheld word about its discoveries even from troops it sent into harm’s way and from military doctors. The government’s secrecy, victims and participants said, prevented troops in some of the war’s most dangerous jobs from receiving proper medical care and official recognition of their wounds. And who spearheaded the effort to cover up something that would have mostly vindicated President Bush’s reason for war, bolstered his loyal defenders, and reinforced the justness of our soldiers’ sacrifices? Karl Rove is the one being thrown under the bus .  “We don’t want to look back,” was Rove’s response to then Senator Rick Santorum who received photographs of these weapons straight from the front.  Apparently, this disclosure was deemed politically “dangerous” to reveal in the 2006 election cycle, indicating that the public narrative was too entrenched to argue with… even if it was a complete distortion?! Mark Levin had a few things to say about this.  I agree with just about all of his sentiments.  If true, my impression of the Bush Administration and Karl Rove is irreparably altered.  I’m not surprised that this is the same government preparing to send thousands of troops to fight (and likely catch) Ebola .

Read the original here:
Baffling: Bush Admin Covers Up WMDs in Iraq


Famous Words of Inspiration...


Powered By AMZ QuoteCash

There is Plenty of White Guilt to Go Around But has It really Helped the Blacks.

Shelby Steele is the author of White Guilt. I found the book fascinating especially after the uprising brought about by the self destruction of little Trayvon. All of a sudden America was faced with the illogical cries that everything is unfair in this country because of color. And I had my own observations on this matter but it was interesting to read the remarks brought by a so called black conservative who claimed to live through the bad times in America. So let’s see if we can understand what this is all about. First off we see all these liberals like the NY Times and writers like Lambro feel that they must give in to this white guilt. They need to recognize it and do their mea culpas. But does this really help the black folks? Last week O’Reilly had been on the “need for a family” roll to make things work. And that could be true, but it would be like trying to prove that CO2 caused climate change while exhaling CO2. I am surprised that O’Reilly didn’t throw out religion in the mix. If you don’t have the ten commandments to lean on, then what would stop a black person from whooping a white person for no really good justifiable reason. Let’s see if we can work through some of Steele’s arguments. First off my summation is easy. For a hundred years the black leaders are trying to place the responsibility and blame on the white folks. All these white males that for decades have stolen the souls from the blacks. My answer is just like alcoholism, the blacks need to take care of their own problems. When you read how Malcolm X set up businesses in bad neighborhoods, why didn’t community organizers like Obama organize businesses in bad neighborhoods and clean up the neighborhoods? They had the people, they had all that government money and they played the white blame game instead of enticing businesses and factories to build in these neighborhoods. Are you telling me it was impossible for the blacks to police their own neighborhoods! Other nationalities have done that for ages. Before we get carried away, let’s make something perfectly clear. Most Blacks are doing quite fine. And they have done well for decades. Look at the Obamas. They didn’t live in no ghetto. It might come down to about 20% of the blacks have problems, excluding those in prison etc. And whose a black? Obama and Tiger are only 50% black. But they still don’t stand for Blacks standing on their own. It is always the white guy’s fault. And the white guy owes reparation! But what about the 20% of other races that are not doing so well? One of O’Reilly’s guest a PhD black said poverty comes first. And these folks are not capable of working their way out of poverty. Most people actually do. Why can’t a lot of these black folks? Maybe because they are blaming the whites instead of blaming themselves. Well that’s what the NY Times thinks and they can’t be wrong. So Steele tries to fabricate a story between Slick Willie and President Eisenhower. And how in a few short years society has changed. But Steele is hypothesizing that Social Authority has become the rule of the day. Steele writes: ” (P82) this guilt is the vacuum in moral authority created by all of white America’s moral failings and infidelities to democracy: racism, sexism, imperialism, materialism, conformity, environmental indifference, educational inequality, superficiality, greed and so on. other issues — women’s rights, the plight of farm workers, degradation of the environment, black and white poverty… oppressiveness, greed, exploitation, and violence were the essence of American character.” So everything in America that is wrong is the white man’s fault. Therefore we have White Guilt. And that is what drives the so called black civil rights leaders who in turn pressure businesses and liberals and the businesses and politicians cave in. Most important is that the whites on the NY Times feel exonerated when they pat themselves on the shoulder for speaking out for this white guilt. But Steele makes the argument that it doesn’t eliminate White supremacy, it only enhances it. Most of these white liberals including Pelosi don’t ever see the ghettos. They go home to their penthouse apartments. Good example was Zimmerman. Everyone who followed the case and knew a little about the law came to the conclusion before the verdict that Zimmerman was innocent. (Some would say not guilty). So since that didn’t work we have to go after him with a civil suit. And it was difficult to find any liberals discussing the causality brought by little Trayvon that may have been the problem. Can we call that black guilt? The funny part about all of this is that we have a black president and we have more White Guilt than ever. But if you look under the covers I think Obama’s follies are fueled by global socialization /communistic issues rather than race. Steele goes on to make the argument that once we invoke all these fixes like school busing, lower test standards, etc. for blacks, we have not made the blacks whole. They are still considered inferior to whites which maybe is the cause for the problem as determined by Steele. If you can’t be equal why not use White Guilt as an excuse to get the whites to give more to the blacks. It is just a circle of life that will not end until the whites grow up and the blacks take responsibility for their own future! They always throw out the word slavery as the big guilt monger. But they never discuss the good parts about slavery. First off most of the blacks who were descendants of Slaves in America would probably be dead today if they were not brought to this country on slave ships. Remember Barack’s grandfather allegedly was one of the first in his tribe to wear white man’s clothes. He was ridiculed for it by his dad. But he was smart enough to understand where prosperity would come from. We are talking about the beginning of the 1920′s or later. How many of your grandparents were walking around with just their genitals covered? Africa lacked modern medicine. And most of the successful plantations took good care of their slaves. And remember that many of the slaves were sold by black folks. And I would imagine slavery was probably a bit better then living in a Baltimore prison today. Slavery lacked all freedoms, but how free are the black folks today who don’t have good jobs and actually want to work. No system is perfect but it is time to stop reacting to the make believe world of white guilt. There was one part where Steele would get very angry. It seemed when Blacks felt they were not fully appreciated as a “worker” or a contributor to the community. Some thoughts for example: “Like you are black so we know how you think”. Steele obviously is a well educated Black, and like any other race or nationality in the world, you don’t want to be assumed or taken for granted. I am with Steele. We need to bury the White guilt trip and like MLK and Malcolm X whose goals included that all men be created equally and treated equally. This did not include affirmative action, locking up white Hispanics for self defense, and dumbing down tests so women and non-whites can get a job before more qualified white males. For decades certain blacks were adamant in believing that only blacks can teach blacks. That has not worked out too well. If we had a real president he would be more concerned about inviting jobs into this country rather then taxing the folks who have jobs so we can create more “system sucking jobs” than we could ever need or pay for! There are many Steele quotes and connotations in the book. One thing he mentioned was the fact that our founders did not like the idea of having slavery in the country. So they considered shipping the slaves back to Africa. Now that would have been a hoot. That is one statistic you don’t read about. After slavery was abolished and many white Americans were killed and maimed in the process, how many folks returned to Africa to be free from white guilt? Read Steele’s book, but let’s quit playing to the game of White Guilt. I grew up in the North East and I never saw any of this garbage. I wonder if any of these lies are actually true? Everyone always feels there is an injustice for not getting hired etc.. Maybe it had nothing to do with race. It may have been that someone was more qualified than you were or worse yet, you weren’t qualified at all! So tell me again why you should get the job? There is Plenty of White Guilt to Go Around But has It really Helped the Blacks. by Rev. Bresciani syndicated from The Land of the Free .

Read the original:
There is Plenty of White Guilt to Go Around But has It really Helped the Blacks.


Famous Words of Inspiration...


Powered By AMZ QuoteCash

Entrepreneurs’ property rights at stake in France

By Dr. Sylvain Charat It happened on a cold of day during the last French presidential campaign in a small industrial town called Florange, in Eastern France. On February 12th, 2012, the campaigning and would-be president Francois Hollande climbed a small truck ladder to get on the roof. Up there, surrounded by union strikers and red flags, the contender took the microphone to talk to hundreds of steel workers in front of him. They were about to lose their jobs: labor costs and social regulation hampered the factory’s competitiveness and Lakshmi Mittal, the Indian owner, did not have any other solution than to shut it down if it did not want to lose money. In this tense social context, the union comrades staring at the Socialist candidate François Hollande may have felt like they were looking at a new Che Guevara. “When a company wants to get rid of production unit, but does not want to sell it, we will force it to find a buyer who will take over the activity,” promised the candidate. The crowd cheered at this man who, if president, would have the government dispose of entrepreneurs’ properties. Yet Francois Hollande had forgotten something he should not have: Property rights are protected by the French Constitution. The right to private property is a fundamental right, originating from the concept of individual sovereignty, which is the very foundation of Western liberal government. But on that small truck’s roof, Francois Hollande merely wiped it out. His promise to the communist and far-left unions was as clear a threat to the constitutional right of property as to the freedom of settlement protected by the European Union. The promise could not be kept since as president, Francois Hollande would swear to protect the Constitution. Yet, once elected, Francois Hollande wanted to keep his words and it must be pointed out that the French president is not the kind a man that gives up easily. He asked the government along with three members of parliament to draft a bill that would enforce his collectivist promise. And the bill must be written in such way that it would be accepted by the French Constitutional Council. On April 30th, 2013, the draft was ready and presented to the president. Obligation gave way to pressure. This pressure would increase on the entrepreneurs – owners according to a four-step procedure. First step: The owner who wants to shut a factory down must inform the workers’ committee and look for a buyer during three months. During this period, the owner must give a reasoned reply to each purchase offer he would receive and inform the workers’ committee. In other words, unions will closely monitor the owner. Second step: If the workers’ committee thinks that the owner did not act dutifully and in good faith, then the committee could go to court and request the president of the commercial court to intervene. But, can unions be trusted to decide about an owner’s good faith? The threat of going to court is always present. Third step: The judge will decide if the owner has made the necessary efforts to find a buyer and if he has turned down serious purchase offers. If ever the feeling is that the owner did not do his job then he will have to pay a penalty. Fourth step: The commercial court could ask the owner to pay a penalty fee that will amount to twenty times the national minimum wage per lost jobs. It means that $36,400 would have to be paid to the government for each laid off worker. And the owner should be happy not to be thrown in jail. The French government and the three members of parliament made their best effort to weaken entrepreneurs’ property rights. They gave the workers’ committee a limitless influence that hampers the very principle of property. The owner cannot simply decide whether to shut down. It is no longer in his ability to do so. He is being deprived of his rights and will be forced into a government-approved exchange or pay a fine. The bill, called the “Florange Bill”, is actually about to change the very essence of property rights in France and enforce the collectivization of production that will actually dispossess entrepreneurs from their property. Entrepreneurs should be concerned. If this law is passed, any private property owned by a business could become a mere “trusteeship held for the benefit of society as a whole” as Ayn Rand put it for one of her collectivist characters in “Atlas Shrugged”. Yet in France, the novel is becoming reality. —  Dr. Sylvain Charat is a graduate from the University of the Sorbonne, Paris, was chief of staff for a former French Minister of Finance in the French National Assembly, and is now a public affairs consultant, specializing in the welfare system. He is also a contributing scholar with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College , and his daily analysis can be found at his “ Welfareship Explained ” blog. Entrepreneurs’ property rights at stake in France by Guest Authors syndicated from The Land of the Free .

Go here to read the rest:
Entrepreneurs’ property rights at stake in France


Famous Words of Inspiration...


Powered By AMZ QuoteCash