Texas Governor Search

I Pledge Allegiance to the Constitution

2009-04-16T07:30:00.004-05:00

I Pledge Allegiance to the CONSTITUTION of the United States
And to the Republic Which It Created;
One Nation, Under God,
Divisible If Need Be,
With Liberty And Justice For All

That's how Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge of Allegiance, would have phrased it if he hadn't been a socialist but a true patriot. It would have served our school children and public officials every day far better by reminding them what their true allegiance must go to. Substance over symbol!

The way things stand, a public official's oath of office is a one-time shot in the dark, as soon forgotten (to most) as it is made. If every public occasion started out with this pledge instead of the one to the flag, we may live in a better, freer country today.

All of A Sudden, Rick Perry Talks Sovereignty

2009-04-15T04:28:00.006-05:00

Rick Perry proudly hijacked Texas State Rep Brandon Creighton's 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolution yesterday and displayed it all on the press page of his official website.

Did Perry have a sudden change of heart?

Looks more like a change of tune. He has learned to whistle this new tune by joining his sovereignty-destroying neocon brethren, formerly in power across the US but now relegated to Obama snipers, in hitching a ride on the Ron Paul wagon.

One does not have to go far to see the real Rick Perry in action. All it took was a Google News search of his name in quotation marks, and this article popped up: "TexGovPerry'sCampTrying to Hide Source of Last-Minute $1M Donation". Apparently, Perry's real MO is decrying something supposedly shady his political opponent is doing and then doing the same thing himself.

Ever the consummate politician, Perry has now joined the Ron Paul revolution, it would seem, from his mouthing off how much "we talk about the Texas Constitution here in Austin, but now it's time to talk about the US Constitution, too." Yeah, right. I've never heard Perry utter the word "Constitution" in public. Have you?

I'm afraid if Rick Perry was forced to walk his talk, he would be torn into pieces as his mouth would be going one way while his legs would try take him the other way. How comforting for Perry that such is not (yet) a requirement for a political career in America. If Americans (and particularly Texan-Americans) were smart, however, they would make it so.

One way of accomplishing that would be to elect Debra Medina as Texas governor. She already fulfills that requirement. Always has.

TEXAS IN MORTAL DANGER: Drug Cartels to Collapse Mexico!

2009-02-22T12:42:00.009-06:00

GLENN BECK, HOST: OK. There is California. Let's try this one. Mexico is the 12th largest economy and second largest trading partner with the U.S. And I don't know if you have noticed this. Grab a fire extinguisher. It's on fire. Close to 6,000 people were killed by rival drug gangs which is twice as many as in 2007. Texas is terrified that the violence is going to spill over the border.

In a minute, I will explain how the whole world is going to change if Mexico collapses. The number one place for kidnappings is Mexico City. Who do you think number two is for kidnapping? You know, I was thinking Bogota, Columbia. Maybe some place in Somalia.

Well, close. It is Phoenix, Arizona where there were almost 400 reported kidnappings last year and many more went unreported.

Excuse me? John McCain was on the campaign trail for how many months, and we never heard about this and it's happening in his backyard? No one is talking about it, because it's not in anybody's best interest, you know, except yours and mine.

SEN. DAN PATRICK (R), TEXAS STATE SENATOR: Hi, Glenn. Thank you for your passion on everything. It comes through.

• Video: Watch Glenn's interview with Senator Dan Patrick

BECK: Thank you. Thank you.

PATRICK: Thank you, Glenn.

BECK: I have been, and I know you have been, too - talking about the border, not because ...

PATRICK: Yes.

BECK: ... much to many people's chagrin here in America that I don't hate Mexicans. I don't hate people who are different than me. Almost everybody on the planet is different than me. I mean, look at me.

PATRICK: Right.

BECK: The problem is this is a dangerous situation. People feel disenfranchised. Mexico is on the verge of collapse. You've got massive murder problems and drug problems. What are you are guys worried about? And how are you preparing in Texas for a possible push into America from people just fleeing a drug state?

PATRICK: Well, Glenn, we had hearings a couple of weeks ago. And I asked our Homeland Security Director Steve McCraw of Texas if he feared the collapse of Mexico and did we have a plan. And he didn't deny the fact that it is a concern.

And since that subcommittee meeting we had a few weeks ago, he has been working with Gov. Perry and I'm meeting with him in a few days, as a matter of fact, to see their progress on developing a plan.

You will love this term, Glenn. The United States has a plan called "mass migration" as opposed to the collapse of Mexico. And we need a plan here in Texas because there are two scenarios, Glenn. One is a slow collapse, an economic collapse of Mexico in which hundreds of thousands would come here over a period of time.

The second is what I call a Colombian collapse of Mexico, an assassination of the president, the drug cartels taking over the country, civil war breaking out on the streets, people fleeing for their lives, not for a job.

We have to be prepared in the United States for both and Texas must be prepared.

BECK: What do you think -

PATRICK: We're already seeing violence on the border, on our side.

BECK: What are you going to do? Violence on the border - nobody even understands this. If I said, America - 20 people were beheaded last year on our border.

PATRICK: Right.

BECK: Would you be amazed? How about if I tell you 20 people were beheaded on our border last month? And nobody knows about it. What are you going to do for these bodies?

PATRICK: Yes, we found 1,000 bodies on the border in our last reporting year, by the way, Glenn. And what we're going to do is - what we need to do is we need the Federal Government to do their job and enforce the border, number one.

BECK: Dan, Dan -

PATRICK: We have 19 border crossings with Mexico. Number two, Texas - we should be calling out our national guard. We should be calling out Texas guard. We should be beefing up our sheriffs on the border. We should be beefing up our Department of Public Safety on the border.

BECK: It would be nice if candy bars came out of my butt, too.

PATRICK: We need to do all of those things and we need to do them now.

BECK: And I can eat all day. But they're not going to come out of my butt. So why are we talking about that? The government is not going to do it.

PATRICK: Glenn - Glenn, it will be done if we have leadership, if we have leadership here in this state and if we have leadership in the country.

BECK: Hang on -

PATRICK: And at some point, leaders will emerge, Glenn.

BECK: Oh, my god. It's a candy bar. It's not going to happen, Dan.

PATRICK: Leaders will emerge, Glenn.

BECK: You know what? I'm going to do this -

PATRICK: It will happen.

BECK: I'm going to do this - I'm going to eat chocolate for the next week, in hopes that I can make candy bars come into my pants. You keep trying to find a leader that is actually going to clean up the border. I bet I make candy bars in my shorts faster than you can find a leader.

PATRICK: And you know what, Glenn? I share your passion on these issues, and it is up to each of us. I have to lead from where I am. I'm not the president and I'm not the governor.

But I'm a state senator who has had enough of this. And I'm going to continue to push this issue by going to the border, by talking to our homeland security director, by talking to our governor and doing everything I can to push the issue.

BECK: Dan -

PATRICK: We all have to do everything we can ...

BECK: I know -

PATRICK: ... whether you're a sheriff on the border or a senator in Austin. And I'm not going to quit, Glenn. It's not an option.

BECK: Dan, look. I'm not taking it out on you.

PATRICK: I'm not going to quit talking about it.

BECK: I know, but there is - you know and I know there is something spoiled down on our border and we are part of it. Our government is part of it. I don't know what it is. You go and try to rat it out. You let me know. I'm going to be here trying to make candy bars in my pants.

PATRICK: I work on it every day, and the answer is not to do nothing. The answer is to continue to talk about it, bring forth a plan and execute that plan ...

BECK: I know.

PATRICK: ... and make America stand up and notice like you have and I have.

BECK: OK. Thanks a lot, Dan.

PATRICK: Thanks, Glenn.

BECK: We'll talk again.

Only a constitutional Governor will protect our border!

Debra Medina - Texas Governor 2010
Texas needs a governor who obeys the Rule of Law - not one who wants to rule us by her law.

WE HAVE A CANDIDATE!

2009-02-18T07:35:00.004-06:00

Debra Medina has just decided to run for Texas governor n 2010.

Many of you will know her as a staunch, committed advocate for the rule of law, the Constitution, and fairness in the deliberative process that makes our country what it is.

She is a long-time GOP county chairman from Wharton County, but she stood up to the entire state party leadership last year at the State Convention in Houston when she was forced to sue them in a court of law because they refused to follow their own rules and state election law.

She was the running mate of Paul Perry at that convention in his bid to gain the state party chairmanship. When she spoke, the leadership cut her microphone off! That's how threatened they felt by her insistence that they should follow their own rules -among other basic considerations of simple fairness. Still, Paul and Debra gained in excess of 30% of the vote.

She has been long time rule-of-law advocate in a world where politicians forget their oath to uphold the Constitution even while they are swearing it. She is what Texas needs in the governor's mansion in order to show our legislators how it's really done in a Constitutional Republic.

This is great news for Texas.

Will You Limit Your Government - or Your Freedom and Prosperity?

2008-12-30T22:26:00.005-06:00

That really is the question.

To increase the one, you have to limit the other. There's no two ways about it.

If confronted with that choice, which one will you increase??

Naturally, there is only one sane answer. Yet, good, well-meaning, but horribly deceived and misled Americans are constantly choosing government over freedom and prosperity by their daily actions, behaviors - and voting patterns.

Why?

The reason is that nobody is being told that this is what the choice boils down to. The big - and going - lie from the government/corporate establishment is: "Hey, vote for us, and we'll get you freedom and prosperity, too ... uhh, ... eventually, at least ... I think!"

It's the siren song of modern politics, and we are taking it all in as if it was a beautiful symphony. We smoked the establishment's crack and believe we can fly as we jump out of a twntieth-floor window.

All that needs to happen for Americans to find their way again is to make it very clear to them that these two are incompatible. If you increase one, you MUST and WILL limit the other.

Proof:

Freedom has never suffered more than during times when government power increased the most. Bush's legacy is that he literally gutted Lady Liberty, more than any other president in US history, (short of maybe Lincoln, FDR, and Nixon), to the point at which she almost expired.

Her last hope is not Obama, it's YOU.

Obama will absolutely not give up the power Bush has stolen and bequeathed to him; he will only wear a nicer smile as he cuts her heart out as well.

What will you do?

Will you finally take the shackles off of Lady Liberty and put them on your government, or will you stand by as she finally bleeds to death while she lies handcuffed on the floor, holding her spilling bowels in her hands?

The choice - as always - is yours.

The Good News and the Bad News ...

2008-12-27T23:20:00.002-06:00

This isn't rocket science.

The really good news is that you absolutely CAN do it. It WILL work.

The (sort of) bad news is that, in order for it to work, you have to actually DO it.

Talking about it isn't going to work.

Holding meetings about it isn't going to work.

Only DOING it will work - and only YOU can make it work.

And that's how we come full circle. The "bad" news becomes good news because this means that it is absolutely and undeniably within your power to do it and to succeed.

So, do you really want to be free - or are you just playing?

While Railing Against CEO Bonuses, Congressmen Boost Their Own Pay

2008-12-20T16:04:00.008-06:00

As I said in the last post - yes, we the people really ARE out to lunch.

We give Congress a popular approval rating of 8 percent - and then proceed to re-elect 97 percent of them! Now, they pay us back for our stupidity by raising their own pay - for superior performance, I suppose.

It's like giving a guy off the street your car keys, paying him to take you home - and then giving him a pay raise when he takes you where he wants to go, instead. Then, give him the keys to your house as well and pay him rent to live in your own house. If you do that, you have just become the quintessential American voter.

Just read this:

"A crumbling economy, more than 2 million constituents who have lost their jobs this year, and congressional demands of CEOs to work for free did not convince lawmakers to freeze their own pay.Instead, they will get a $4,700 pay increase, amounting to an additional $2.5 million that taxpayers will spend on congressional salaries, and watchdog groups are not happy about it."(Read more ...)

That's the problem with "watchdog groups" - they watch too much and do too little.

Our politicians are laughing at us - and rightly so. As long as we continue to vote the way we do, we deserve to be laughed at and ignored.

The bottom line: You can either continue as you did before, whatever that was - or join the Lunch Mob Revolution.

To find out what that is, read on below.

Bon appetit!

Are We the People Out to Lunch?

2008-12-14T15:21:00.012-06:00

Yes, we are.

What are we doing there?

We are taking the country away from outlaw politicians - politicians who break the law they were given to live by: our Constitution.

The People are assembling a Constitutional 'Lunch-Mob'.

We are on strike!

We no longer support the two-faced, one-party system.

We are building an army of Constitution-minded voters who can vote any like-minded candidate into office - and any outlaw incumbent out!

How do we do that?

By simply having lunch.

It all started here in Texas with the Texas Governor Search project, but now we go national.

We meet for lunch once a week with nine friends who vow to protect our constitutional right to disagree* with out government - from any government, party, public education or media interference.

We help each of them set up their own lunch group within their own circle of friends, and teach them how to help their friends do the same.

One chapter in each state, then one in each major city of each state, and then down the line from there.

Once there are enough of us, we 'filter up' candidates for our state's highest offices - and for representatives to the federal Congress and Senate.

By that time, we will have enough members to vote them into office - and their incumbent, law-breaking opponents out.

No one will be able to stop us because we have no central organization, no membership applications, no central database, no command center - nothing.

All of our members only know the group they were invited to have lunch with - and their own lunch group which they started themselves.

Ideas and communication flow very fast up and down the chain. Nobody 'takes orders'. We only take ideas.

The media don't know us. Nobody has a "big name". Nobody has a big following. It's just you and your friends and your freedom. That's all - but we will roil the corporate and political establishment!

They will never know how strong we are - until it's election time again.

Our message to corrupt politicians, party, and corporate leaders:

"It's the Constitution, stupid!"

We will teach them to obey our law. It is our law to them.

Elected and appointed lawbreakers will be punished by immediate removal from office at the next election - or by recall in states where recall is available.

Corporations that sponsor or lobby corrupt politicians will not see us in their checkout line.

Our numbers will be large enough to make recall available in every state, for any office, against any elected or appointed law breaker.

We will enforce the Constitution on them. We know we can no longer entrust its enforcement to our politicians themselves.

That is our goal, and it's what we will achieve.

Why? Because all we have to do to achieve it is to go out to lunch. It's easy, it's fun - and it's unbelievably effective!

This is what we call 'turning a vice into a virtue'. Until recently, Americans were asleep at the wheel. We, the unsung fourth branch of government, were absent from the political controls of the country.

We elected officials and let them do what they wanted. We were quite literally out to lunch. It almost cost us our country - but now we go out to lunch to take the wheel back into our hands.

It is a non-violent revolution. It is a legal revolution. We are restoring the rule of law.

We are America at Lunch!

No one can stop us.

======================
* To Disagree, We Need to Be Free! This Right to Disagree with our government must be preserved for us to stay free. It is what unites all of us - left, right, green, 'red", "blue", black, white, rich, poor, man woman - you name it. We all share the same desire to be free. Government and the corporate media try to divide us along these lines. Now, we have found what unites us all along these very same lines! We will not be denied.

What do you do with Corrupt Politicians? You 'Lunch' Them!

2008-12-13T10:25:00.006-06:00

If it comes to your state legislator, senator, US congressman, etc., and they turn out to be corrupt, you simply take them out.

... to lunch, that is.

It's easy. Get ten friends together and invite them. Then, have your friends each get ten of their friends. Now you have a hundred people there. That's the first surprise (it also makes your share of the politico's lunch ticket much cheaper.)

Then, you tell them that if they start voting along constitutional lines, you all may consider supporting them at the next election. Otherwise, you'll be sitting here talking to their opponent come election time.

The above is a paraphrased version of Daniel New's "How?" page on his website "The Independent Conservative."

But why stop there?

If each of your ten friends' friends do the same (invite ten friends to lunch) and explain to them why it's important to have law-abiding politicians (and that the Constitution is the law they swore to abide by when they took their oath of office), you now have a thousand voters. Voters who will not evaluate a politicians by the promises he makes, but by the kinds of laws he actually voted for.

Politicians can (and usually do) lie about what they're "going to" do - but they can never lie about what they actually did do. That's how you teach your friends to recognize bad politicians!

Take this system three more levels down from there, ten by ten, and you have a million voters in your state who will compare a candidate's voting record to what your state constitution allows them to vote for.

That ... is powerful.

It will allow you to clean up your state and send only clean representatives to Washington DC to represent you there, and all you have to do to get there is - eat lunch!

What could be easier - and more fun - than that?

How do you do this?

You develop a set of core handouts that each fit on one page or so. They must explain why we need our politicians to obey the Constitution. It's quite simple: they make laws they expect us to obey - so we are making sure that, in doing so, they obey the one law that we gave them: the Constitution!

It's only fair, isn't it?

And here is the real reason:

To Disagree, You Must Be Free

We all disagree with each other. That's natural. Because of that, we also tend to disagree with our elected officials quite a lot. That's natural, too. Yet, if we allow our officials to get away with murder because we don't hold them to their oath of office (to uphold and defend the Constitution), they get power hungry and start whittling away at our freedom, at our right to disagree and to express that disagreement in any way we choose, short of doing actual violence to each other.

It doesn't matter if we are left, right, green, red, blue, black,or white, or whatever. We MUST have the right to disagree - and that, at rock-bottom, is what our state and federal Constitutions were written to guarantee us.

The only problem is that we don't enforce the law on our politicians.

Why not?

Because they have split us up into political parties and special interests along financial, economical, and ideological lines while lying to us that "their party" represents "us" while "the other party" represents "the others" who are supposed to be our enemies.

It's as simple as that.

The truth is, of course, that "the others" are not our enemies at all. The politicians and party leaders who tell us this, on the other hand - are.

Learning to vote along constitutional lines unites all of us. It is our front-line duty as citizens to make sure we remain free to disagree. In that, we are all on the same page.

Then, once that minimum, base-line freedom is guaranteed, that's when we get to go back and play in our ideological sandboxes to iron out whatever (usually minor) differences we have.

That's the Purpose of the "Lunch-Mob" Network

It is our tool for uniting - under the Constitution - against corrupt politicians who want to take our freedom to disagree (with them) away from us.

It is also our tool for educating ourselves and our future political candidates about three things:

a. The fact that there is a law that controls them;
b. That it is designed to keep us free, and
c. That, for this very reason, it limits their power.

Everything else is ideological flotsam and belongs into discussions we have with each other, not into considerations as to whom we will vote for and why. If they won't keep us free, none of their election-promises to "fight" against our ideological opponents on our behalf will matter one bit. It will just be an excuse to get our vote so they can get - and keep - their power.

In other words, voting is about freedom, not about politics!

If we can get that much into our and our 'lunch-mob' companions' brains, and if we use the lunch-mob network to expand the number of brains we get it into, then our freedom will be guaranteed.

If we don't, then it won't.

Everything else is secondary.

Some Politicians Are Just Like Slinkies ...

2008-12-10T21:47:00.002-06:00

How Independents can CONTROL their Government(s)

2008-12-10T07:33:00.007-06:00

Yes, this is an old hat.

It's nothing new - except for the sheer power with which it allows regular people to get control of their government and their intertwined banking system (I hesitate to add "again" at the end of this sentence because I am not sure people ever really had control!).

Party politics are out.

Parties are power structures that reward despotic manipulators, pathological liars, and spineless sycophants to weasel their way into positions of influence. Once there, they have "something to lose" which, when combined with the realization that humans are fallible, inevitably leads to attempts at CYA (cover your ass) when things go wrong - and there you have it: a recipe for disaster. Power becomes an end in itself.

Freedom of the people? Constitution? Rule of law? Sorry. Those romantic considerations are out the window. "Realpolitik" is the name often attached to this type of unmitigated, small-bore despotism - and that inevitably translates itself into despotic decision making once in control of an entire administration, a chamber of the legislature, or whatever.

What's the answer to all this? Take your friends out to lunch.

In case you think I lost my mind, consider this:

1. You get together nine of your like-minded (or semi-like minded) friends and buy them lunch at a cheap restaurant (or to a BYOF BBQ at your house if you're too broke).

2. Pass out a one page flier that impresses on anyone why it's important to force politicians to obey the law we gave them to live by - the Constitution.

3. Tell them you will help them do what you just did, and teach their own lunch group how to do the same, etc.

Yes. It's network marketing. So what? Got a better idea? Yes, it's been tried before, and we're still in trouble, so it can't really be that effective, can it?

Two points on that issue: (1) previous methods have always involved the looming threat of some unattractive sounding required activity like "phone calling" or "block walking" or whatever, and for that reason did not sound like pure, unadulterated fun. (2) we were never, in the history of this country, in as much trouble as we are in right now. That's a great motivator.

Just imagine this for a moment (yes, I know, things like that never go by the numbers, but so what? Imagine anyway): If you take this system six levels down, in your own state, and you have a million people in your pathetic little lunch network. One more level, and you have ten million!

Hint: Rick Perry won the last Texas gubernatorial election with a grand total of just under 1.8 million votes. (Imagine several exclamation marks at the end of the preceding sentence.)

Why will this work? It's effective, it's fun, and people are finally getting pissed off enough to get something this easy and this fun- actually done.

There is one critical component to this: you need to, excuse me, you MUST be able to explain to regular folks who haven't spent a minute of their lives thinking about the US Constitution (and especially their state's constitution) why it's important that politicians obey the law that prescribes what they are allowed to do and what they are not allowed to do.

More on that later. I have to go to work. Here is a hint:
"To Disagree, You Need to Be Free!"

Next, you have to be able to explain that statement in about half a page of text or less. It's really self-explanatory, if you think about it.

WE NEED A VOTER'S OATH

2008-12-06T13:22:00.009-06:00

Why is our system of government breaking down?

It's breaking down because voters don't know what their candidate's highest duty is once he or she gets elected, and nobody is reminding them.

We the People are the legitimate fourth branch of government and the ultimate check on its power - but we don't know what our duty is. It's the same duty as that of the people we propose to elect:

"To preserve, protect, and defend
the Constitution of the United States
and of this State, so help me God."

If we were required by law to swear this very oath every time we go to vote, before we enter the voting booth, things would look quite different around here.

I can already see the ACLU types jumping up, foaming at the mouth, and screaming that this is just another poll tax or literacy requirement, or whatever other "scheme" to keep voters out of the voting booth - and if they did, they would be 100% correct! It is a scheme to keep voters who don't support your and my freedom from voting into office people who don't, either; people who we already know will swear their oath of office with their fingers crossed behind their backs.

How can we allow people who refuse to support our form of government to elect the officials who will run it? That's like allowing shareholders of the competition to vote for your board of directors, to say it in 'corporatese.' It's idiocy. It's insanity - and it's precisely the reason why we are where we are today. We are allowing the domestic enemies of the Constitution to run the show for us.

Can we blame them if they destroy our state and country? No we can't. We can only blame ourselves.

Any candidate running under the constitutional banner should support the voter's oath of office, for the voter is the highest office holder in our republican form of government. He is the source of all legitimate power - so he'd better be a legitimate voter, as well.

The first state that passes a statute requiring voters to swear the same oath their candidates will be required to swear will be the first state to break completely free from the shackles of runaway government. There's simply no two ways about that.

Let that state be Texas!

Of course, people can still lie when they raise their right hand. There is no legitimate way to guard against that - but the very fact that they are required to raise their hand and repeat these words will be a powerful reminder that the Constitution exists, that it is a law to be followed, and that - like all laws - it must be enforced against those who refuse to follow it.

So, maybe we should alter the voter's oath just slightly to reflect that duty:

"To enforce the Constitution of the United States
and of this State upon those whom I elect, so help me God."

It is bound to make at least a few ordinary Texas voters curious: "Hey, what does that Constitution I'm swearing to enforce actually say? How can I swear to uphold it if I don't even know what it says - and why the hell haven't I learned what it says in (public) school??"

And how can voters enforce their Constitution? Easy. The can enforce it simply by consistently - and mercilessly - unelecting those who prove by their official actions that they have sworn a false oath.

It will be a most salutary experience for Texas voters - and it will do our state's government, and that of the United States, a world of good.

Strong Border Security is a Vote-Getter

2008-12-06T12:19:00.002-06:00

NumbersUSA (click title) reports that Georgia's US Senator Chambliss who recently won a closely contested runoff election against his pro-amnesty opponent scored 100% on the organization's immigration survey.

Something to remember for any candidate who wants to run for Texas governor in 2010.

It's also something to remember for any voter who is thinking about reelecting Rick Perry or voting for Kaye Hutchinson, should she actually decide to run.

Will Kaye 'Bailout' Run? Who Cares?

2008-12-05T07:42:00.004-06:00

Kaye Bailey Hutchinson is making noises (again) about running for TexGov. Trying to score points with conservative repubs, Perry's folks call her "Kaye Bailout" because she voted for every one of them. No wonder. She has strong ties to the banking 'community', being the co-founder of Fidelity National Banks of Dallas and a former seniro vie president and general cunsel for RepublicBank.

Texas absolutely does NOT need another governor who is soft on the Border, and Kaye has proven that she is during her time in the US Senate.

What else does she stand for? Not much. She may lie down for a few things, though - like political contributions from Spanish corporations wanting to manage the Trans-Texas Corridor, for example. She holds several transportation-related committee positions in the Senate and has never seen a "free trade" bill she didn't like.

One thing is for sure: Being a lawyer, she will be creative in finding ways to get around the Texas Constitution when it comes to signing laws. It's all relative, you know, and nothing really means what it says. She also has strong banking connections, having been involved in a number of bank startups as you can see on votesamrt.com.

The True Rulers of Texas

2008-11-30T20:58:00.008-06:00

You may regard that statement as a myth, but if you think about it from a constitutional point of view, it is the unmitigated truth.

We the People do rule Texas. It's just that we have allowed our elected servants to get away with murder for too long, so they have lulled us into the belief that they rule us. Nothing could be further from the truth, legally speaking.

We rule this state and, via our Constitution, tell our government what it is allowed to do and what it is not allowed to do. The problem is that we have forgotten. We don't ever read out state Constitution, and we rarely if ever read our national Constitution, so we never remind them of their legal limitations. We do not enforce our law on them because we no longer believe that we have the power to enforce it on them - but we do. The state Constitution is legal proof of that fact. If we elect a law-abiding governor for a change, and then start electing law-abiding legislators, the truth of this statement will become very clear to all.

Nobody questions that the people of Texas are free to elect whom they want. There may be hurdles imposed by the Democrat and Republican wings of the ruling party, but though formidable, they are far from unsurmountable.

It is time to remind them (and ourselves) of this basic fact. Electing a state governor who is on our side, not "theirs", will go a long way toward doing this. We really cannot blame them. We ourselves have forgotten, so they quite naturally forgot as well.

Isn't it time for a REAL change?

Why Not Go National?

2008-11-30T12:14:00.001-06:00

Anybody interested in duplicating this effort many times over on a national scale, in 50 states? Here is a suggestion published on the C4L website: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=5236

Be A Follower - Follow this Blog

2008-11-25T22:27:00.003-06:00

Might seem a bit strange coming from me, but if you like what you read here, please become a 'follower' of this blog by signing up in the margin immediately to your right. It helps us gain readership and adds to the buzz about what we're doing.

No Taxes in Texas!

2008-11-25T18:55:00.006-06:00

Before she found out she couldn't run for governor as planned, one the most show-stopping planks in Penny Langford-Freeman's platform was her goal to simply abolish property taxes in Texas, period!

Can you imagine what effect that will have on Texas homeowners? Just think about how much you would save in the process, and you have an idea. Retirees living on fixed incomes or even social security? They would never lose their homes to the taxman.

Question: Well, how would governments and school districts fund their activities then?

Answer: With less money, of course.

This goes back to the - completely unjustified - assumption that government "needs" that money to fund whatever. Not true. They can do with far less, trust me, and we will all be better off in the process.

School districts? Let parents educate their children. Storefront schools can spring up to teach the children of single parents who need to work. Yes, that will cost money, but who says education must be free? It's never free. It comes out of your pocket in either case, whether through taxes or via the free market.

Imagine how it would feel if the state no longer had a perpetual mortgage on your property! Once you have worked long and hard enough to pay off your purchase mortgage, the house will finally be yours. What a concept. Too radical? Maybe - for socialists.

Forcing governments to cut back on taxing, borrowing, and spending is a free citizen's primary duty. Don't want to be free? Well, you can always move to a high-tax state like California, if you really insist. Nothing wrong with that. That's the beauty of living in a free country.

The concept of abolishing property taxes isn't new. It's being discussed all over the country. It's just that most of the proponents of the idea want to replace the tax with another tax of one kind or another.

Bad idea.

It all goes back to the question: What is the legitimate function of government? In this country, it's to protect people's rights and property - and that's pretty much it. If you endow your government with more duties than that, you progressively cede control over your personal life.

And we all know how that ends up, don;t we?

Why are we in a global financial crisis? Because we have allowed our government(s) to get away with an illegal power-grab by instituting the constitutionally unauthorized Federal Reserve System and giving it monopoly power over the money supply and interest rates. The result: below-market interest rates caused irresponsible borrowing and lending, starved investors of needed returns, and thereby created fertile ground for "innovative" investment vehicles like bundled mortgages, CDO's and credit default swaps - and their current collapse is what's dragging the world economy down. All of that came in the name of "stabilizing" the business cycle - through government power.

Now the government must create and spend trillions of dollars it doesn't have and can't afford to tax us for - and we will end up paying for it in lost jobs, lower wages and living standards, and a mounting national debt burden that is more than two times larger than the amount of dollars circulating in the world. It's not different at the state level. Too much power in government always creates more problems than it solves.

Who wants that? If you do, please read the paragraph above dealing with your essential freedom of movement one more time.

What A Real Texas Governor Can Do

2008-11-24T23:46:00.004-06:00

He could be an agenda-setter for every governor in the country by simply throwing his predecessor's rubberstamp away and sharpening his veto pen, instead.

A freedom-minded governor will veto every single unconstitutional law the legislature puts before him. What a change that would be. If the legislators can override his veto, so be it - but it will send a powerful signal to the whole country. Yes, the Constitution does ocunt. Yes, it is a law. Yes, it does control what governments are allowed to do - and what they are not allowed to do.

That is especially true for the Texas Constitution. It - and the people who elect him - will be his staunchest allies. Force the legislators who are trying to squeeze an unauthorized law by him justify their bill on constitutional grounds. The effect will be a freer, prouder, more self-reliant - and more prosperous population.

This has never been tried in recent history. It would make more constructive political waves than Obama in Washington could ever hope to make. The national headlines will belong to the governor of Texas, and so will the power to set the tone of the political discourse in this country.

A freedom-loving governor will also not have to worry about getting reelected. He will just do his duty and then go home again.

Is Ken Griffin for real?

2008-11-23T17:00:00.000-06:00

Get a load of the guy in the YouTube channel at the bottom of this page. I only found him today. He is running on some of the same issues, but appears to be confused about where our property taxes go (he thinks the federal government collects them). He also likes both Ron Paul AND Hugo Chavez(?!) I can't think of two more inconsistent preferences than those, if you ask me.

Will Ron Paul Be Texas Governor?

2008-11-23T14:51:00.000-06:00

That depends on you.

Here are link to two articles that deal with the subject:
http://www.breakthematrix.com/node/29785
and
http://www.nolanchart.com/article5501.html

He would be the best currently known potential candidate - bu twe can't heave it all onto his shoulders. Yet, if he agreed to run, that would be tremendous, so why not ask him or suggest it?

A Policy of Freedom

2008-11-23T03:02:00.000-06:00

(Please read the posts below before this one)

Too many run-of-the-mill candidates from the two major parties use only a rhetoric of freedom while pursuing a common policy of power. Well, to be honest, all parties want that. Parties are power structures. They exist for the sole purpose of (a) achieving power, and (b) maintaining it. Everything else is window-dressing.

That's why we generally tend to favor independents. However, if you are of of that rare breed that Texas Congressman Ron Paul represents so honorably, you are our man or woman - regardless of what party you belong to and want to run under.

The only difference between the major parties is the target audience of their rhetoric of freedom. Left-liberals target people whose idea of freedom is freedom from traditional moral 'restrictions', free education, and free health care.

The right-conservatives rhetoric of freedom is freedom from liberal government, only. Not freedom from conservative government. As eight years of Bush-Cheney have amply proved, so-called 'conservative' government doesn't favor any other form of freedom, at all.

That's not what we want. We want freedom as defined by our Founders' vision: freedom from oppressive government, period! We don't care what rhetoric you or anyone else adheres to. We want candidates who are serious about pursuing a policy of freedom.

How to Apply

2008-11-23T02:43:00.000-06:00

How do you apply to be one of the candidates we sponsor? ("We" means Liberty-minded, legitimate, Texas voters who insist that Texas politicians - especially our governors - understand and obey the law they were given to operate under namely, the Texas and US Constitutions.)

Here is what you do:

1. Prepare a resume (don't worry. No prior management experience is required);

2. Write a two page essay outlining your platform as a Texas governor.

3. Send it to this email address with "TEXAS GOVERNOR CANDIDATE" in the subject line.

That's all. We will consider and then help elect anyone who satisfies the criteria listed in the first post on this blog.

There will be a new website, soon. It will have the URL www.texas-governor-search.com. On that website you will be able to register (free) as a voting member. A committee of ten free Texans will vet the candidate applications and pick the top three. Registered members will then be able to vote until the candidate with the most votes is selected. That candidate will receive our undivided support.

It matters not what party banner you want to run under, or whether you want to run as an independent. The only thing that will disqualify you (once you satisfy the constitutional requirements and are free of any criminal record, of course) is if you have a (to us) detectable policy of power, rather than freedom.

(Please keep reading on below)

Do You Want a Boss or a Servant? (after all, you are paying him)

2008-11-23T01:45:00.000-06:00

When you vote for Texas governor, do you vote for someone you could tolerate as your boss - or for someone who will truly serve you?

The problem is that most Texas have accepted the idea that their governor will be their boss for two years, so they are voting for the one who promises them the biggest paycheck and the most fringe benefits. If that is your attitude toward voting for your next governor (or for any politician for that matter), better think again. That's not the way it's supposed to be.

I have news for you: YOU are the boss. Ever heard the term "public servant"? Isn't it strange that politicians always claim they want to serve you when they ask for your vote and then try to boss you around once you elected them?

Here is an example (from TransTexasCorridor.blogspot.com):

"Perry's $200 billion corporate welfare boondoggle program would kick tens of thousands of Texans off their property, then lease it to a Spanish Corporation, who would profit from their debt, gas taxes and toll fees for the next 50-70 years. This is happening, even though 90% of Texans, only now learning of the TTC, don't want the project. Two-thirds of Texas voters don't want Perry either. Still, he slithers into office with 39% of the vote. Why? Because there is no runoff election in Texas. When the Houston Chronicle asked Perry if he was concerned about being a minority governor, he snapped, 'I don't think that matters one twit [sic]. We'll still have 100% of the authority'."

This blog is dedicated to locating candidates who think and act otherwise. We are looking for candidates who say what they think and do what they say, and who respect those who put them in office - even after the election.

The prime criteria that will be applied to any candidate for Texas governor who wants the support of those who (will) read this blog are these:

Must be able to read English.
Must be able to understand the Texas and US Constitutions when reading them (this disqualifies most politicians, judges and lawyers);
Must be able to comprehend and willing to live up to his constitutional oath of office. It goes like this: "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm), that I will faithfully execute the duties of the office of governor of the State of Texas, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this State, so help me God.

What people (not only Texans) generally forget is that the US and state constitutions govern governments and politicians, not people. The Texas Constitution is your law given to your politicians. Please remember that when you make up your mind about which candidate you will support and vote for in 2010.