Archive for February, 2010

Terrorists could use smart meters!

Well, now the news is coming out that smart meters could be used by terrorists to cause blackouts. (Duh!) It seems that terrorists can hijack the meters in order to shut off the electricity or gas that the smart meter controls. Instead of physically turning off the meter, they only have to plant a virus and send computer codes.

Doesn’t that make you feel safe? With such technology we are MORE vulnerable to terrorism. Who was it that thought that such a program was good for Texas? -CONgressmen Lloyd Doggett and Gene Green. Even though the SEA (Scientist and Engineers for America) support him (Doggett), with all that education, it seems that they did not do all their homework on this one. Let’s face it, with the policies he supported (increasing the debt, voting for the stimulus [of which the Austin area gets a large portion for smart technology], removing our incandesent light bulbs, raising the tax on pipe tobacco 775%, forcing people to buy medical insurance against their will, and removing loop holes from the tax code) who could ask for more. With the smart grids, whole communities are now at greater risk of danger. Since the grid is interconnected with a central control, it will not take much to knock them out of commission. I guess that since he voted to raise taxes on energy, now he wants to make us more vulnerable as well. Those vulnerabilities are not only to terrorist actions, but also to privacy concerns. The smart meter will be able to tell third parties how much energy you are using, what your are using, etc. which is none of their business.

Consider how Gene Green is wanting all the critical infrastructures of Houston (the medical center, port of Houston, NASA, transportation control, chemical plants and pipelines all hooked into the so-called smart grid. Having all such grids with one central control is asking for a disaster.

Experience ought to tell you that anything out of Mordor on the Potomac (Washington) that has the label ’smart’ attached to it is anything but.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

NC League Meeting

North Carolina League of the South News & Information Service
Thursday, 25 February 2010

This Saturday, February 27th!

NC LS Winter Conference and Nathaniel Macon Institute (NMI): Saturday, 27 February 2010, 11AM-4PM

“The Myth of the Conservative Republican Party: 155 Years of Big Business & Big Government”

Join us in the Allred Banquet Room, K&W Cafeteria, Burlington, NC. The Ramada Inn & Conference Center in Burlington is our host hotel,

please call 336.227.5541 for rates.

The Nathaniel Macon Institute lectures are “continuing education” for members and guests alike, bring a notepad and plan to participate in Q&A after each talk.

The Conference will feature a Book Fair with many hard to find titles on pertinent topics for purchase.

All members are encouraged to attend and to bring at least one guest to enjoy the day of learning.

Admission (at the door) is $10 per person, $15 per married couple.

For more information, see www.northcarolina.chapterlos.org or email bernhard1848@att.net.

Conference Schedule:

11:00AM-11:15AM

Welcome & Introductions

Bernhard Thuersam, NC LS State Chair

Dr. Tom Minsel, NMI Director

11:15AM-12:15PM

“Mad About Sarah”

Michael C. Tuggle, LS Board member, former NC LS State Chair and LS Rebellion! blogger.

12:15PM-1:30PM

Dinner on your own, K&W Cafeteria

In-Room Open Forum: Moderator, Dr. Tom Minsel, NMI Director

1:30PM-2:30PM

“The GOP’s False Choice”

Jason Crawford, Recovering Former Republican

2:45PM-3:45PM

“The Myth of Republican Conservatism”

Steve Kropelnicki, Asheville attorney and Southern National Congress NC Delegation Vice Chair

3:45PM-4:00PM

Closing Remarks-Adjourn

Bernhard Thuersam, NC LS State Chair

Directions:

The K&W Cafeteria and the Ramada Inn are located in Burlington, just off Interstate 40/85 at Exit 143. At the end of the exit ramp, turn right (from east),

then immediately turn left at the first traffic light. The K&W Cafeteria will be in view. Both can be seen from the Interstate.

——————————————————————————–

Annual National Flag Day Observance, Saturday 6 March 2010. Old Capitol Building in Raleigh.

2PM-3:30PM. Speaker: I. Beverly Lake, former North Carolina Chief Justice.

Technorati ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Remember the Alamo!

Today, 23 February is the anniversary of the start of the siege of the Alamo. As sons of Texas, we are called to remember that event. Let us recall the event and ponder what we have done with that heritage.

1. Those men swore allegiance to TEXAS, not the US. Many were wanted in the US for crimes. They were loyal to TEXAS.

2. They were standing up against tyranny. They opposed a government who did not keep its promises made in the Constitution.

3. They stood for freedom of worship.

4. There were whites, blacks, and Hispanics united in the fight for liberty.

5. They were opposed to military rule (e.g. martial law) in Texas.

6. They were opposed to illegal incarceration done by Mexican authorities.

7. They fought for the liberty of the Texas Republic.

8. They fought for the freedom to bear arms.

9. They fought against unfair taxes on coffee, toabacco and other items the Mexican government taxed.

10. They fought against a government that ignored their voice. Not only did the Mexican Congress not listen to them, Santa Anna shut down their representative.

Any questions? See any parallels?

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Rethinking the 14th amendment & founding fathers

The Pentagon is now exploring ways of removing citizenship from those who are considered terrorists. Since the 14th amendment gave everyone citizenship based on being born in the States, they now have to deal with the consequences of that choice. Now they want to find a way to strip people of a government given right based on birth. I wonder if they have considered that if you take away citizenship (or in this case, serfdom) from people, then you also loose any authority to tax them. If they aren’t yours, you can’t tax them. They used the 14th amendment as a way to legalize abortion, and now they want to find a way around it. Talk about some warped thinking…If you think that is warped, consider what the empire is doing at FEMA.

Training at FEMA now rethinks the founding fathers. In this clip, a trainer discusses how the founding fathers are now considered ‘terrorists‘. I wonder, why the folks at FEMA are addressing this issue at all. If they are to assist with crises (like hurricanes, floods, etc.) why bother with terrorist-oriented training? The only reason such training would be necessary is if FEMA is used in a more diabolical manner against the citizenry (oh, excuse me-subjects). This lecture also reveals how they are redefining many aspects of history and the events in the United States to fit their mindset, rather than let the facts speak for themselves.

In terms of what they do, the federal government (aka the empire) is showing through its actions, that it is not the kind, caring agency of commercials. It is a scheming, monstrous, impersonal agency that only wants to expand its power and control.

In terms of the 14th amendment, they created this mess, now let them figure out a way to extricate themselves from it. Had they followed the Constitution, the amendment would have never been passed LEGALLY, and they would not have to deal with this issue. Since they forced that amendment on the people, now they have to deal with the ramifications of those decisions made in previous generations.

In a free South, these matters would not be issues. Issues such as anchor babies and finding ways to remove citizenship would not be a concern. The founding fathers would not be demonized and maligned.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Cronyism in Texas: Nothing New

Solomon once remarked that there is “Nothing new under the sun”. No where is this more true than in Texas politics. Allegations are made that one candidate is meddling in school affairs or that cronyism is a problem. This is nothing new. Those who are shocked or swayed by such ads have not studied Texas history very deeply. When the Ferguson’s (who were progressive democrats) were in office, cronyism was the rule of the day. Jim Ferguson made threats against UT, and meddled in their affairs quite often. He was not the last governor to meddle with Texas universities either. Texas has a long line of Governors who meddled in the universities and universities that meddle in politics.

Texas also has a tradition of whoever controls the State house controls the districting within the State. When the democrats did it for decades, little was said, but when Tom Delay dared to exercise his influence and another party changed the districts, all hell broke loose. I mention Delay, since he was my Congress critter for a while and I resented all the money pouring in from across the State and from other States that were meddling with my Congressional district. What does California or New York have to do with MY representative? Those States were meddling. It is amazing how the democratic machine was accepting of that kind of cronyism, yet scream when such policies are used against them.

It was more disturbing when a district attorney from Travis County stuck his nose in the business of MY Congressional district. He needed to mind his own business in Austin rather than meddling with another part of Texas.

Do not be swayed by the rhetoric. Cronyism and meddling in university politics or the politics of redistricting is part of Texas politics. It has been for decades, even before the republicans came into any influence in Texas. We need more parties. The stranglehold the two party system puts on politics in Texas is bothersome, but what is new?

If you live in a district where your representative or CONgress critter raised your taxes, or did not increase your liberties, or did not stand up to federal oppression or take overs,…you need a NEW REPRESENTATIVE and CONgress Critter.

I applaud John Culberson for his efforts at live streaming information to the public about what is really going on in CONgress and Ron Paul for his courageous stands regarding the Fed. There are other unsung heroes who tried to expand our freedoms and protect our liberties.

Then, there are some who voted to take away our water rights, light bulbs, raised our taxes (while giving themselves a raise), tightened the tax laws on what Americans earn overseas, made sure that tort reform was NOT a part of Obamacare (in order to protect the trial lawyers) forcing you to purchase healthcare with financial penalties and other such mischief. If your representative took stands to reduce your liberties or raise your taxes (like Lloyd Doggett wanting a 775% tax increase on pipe tobacco), they need to be removed from office.

We need more liberty, not less. We need less federal programs. We need the feds out of healthcare, not controlling it. We need the freedom to keep our monies rather than taking more from us and delivering less.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Withdraw Consent

Withdraw Consent
Jeff Brower

It’s well known throughout the land that the South is the most Christian region of America. People call us “The Bible Belt,” either with affection or disdain. It’s equally well known that the South is the most openly patriotic region as well. But what happens when our patriotism trumps our Christianity? What happens when worship of God becomes perverted into worship of the state? What happens when we allow humanistic law to supplant God’s law as the foundation of civil government? I’ll tell you what happens—corruption, injustice, and tyranny—exactly what we have today in America. When that happens, moral and just people must withdraw their consent. Otherwise, we become accessories in the crimes and abuses of the state.

Many Christian Southerners are deeply confused over this simple, self-evident truth. Many pastors, who ought to be our spiritual leaders, are the worst offenders. You can often tell who they are. They’re the ones whose churches fly the American flag atop the Christian flag—that is, in a place of sovereignty. It would be wrong to symbolize the sovereignty of the state over the sovereignty of Christ even if our government were moral and just. But when government has degenerated into anti-Christian despotism, this practice is even more intolerable. Yet these are the same pastors who most often demand, “As a Christian, how can you advocate withdrawing consent? Romans 13 tells us to obey the governing authorities.”

A correct reading of Romans 13 would pose the question, “How can we not withdraw our consent?” Romans 13 tells us the civil magistrate, or governing authority, is a minister of God. The civil magistrate receives his authority from God and, as His representative, has no other authority. If the magistrate operates outside of God’s authority, he is no longer a minister of God and His Law, but a minister of Satan. God established the civil magistrate to be His servant or representative on Earth to uphold just law and restrain evil-doers. What do we do when he does not espouse the law of God as his standard? Such a magistrate has declared himself to be autonomous, which means he seeks to be a “law unto himself.” For such a magistrate, legislation simply becomes a means to realize his personal ambitions, greed, and lust for power. Such a magistrate would be exhibiting the very definition of tyranny—ruling apart from the sanction of God. If we obey this earthly ruler absolutely, then we have established him as the ultimate sovereign in place of God’s sovereignty.

Blind obedience to a magistrate who rules autonomously, even if our submission tries to assume a position of moral superiority, is a sin. (“I am obeying the wicked ruler as an act of sacrifice.”) God requires us to fear and obey the civil magistrate only insofar as the ruler himself fears and obeys God. In I Peter 2:13-15, we are again instructed to submit to the civil magistrates. However, we find in verse 17 the guiding principle under which this instruction is to be carried out—we must fear and obey God first.

Here’s a classic illustration of the principle from the Old Testament: the Hebrew midwives were commanded by Pharoah, the civil magistrate of Egypt, to put to death the male children being born of Hebrew women. Exodus 1:17 tells us the midwives refused to obey the Pharoah’s direct command. They feared God and knew His law was sovereign over the command of the Pharoah. In contrast, today we tolerate the forcible murder of thousands of innocent children protected in the womb, arguably the most sacred place on earth. Is our tolerance seen by God as tacit approval? Should we obey such a wicked practice by paying taxes to the state responsible for this holocaust? Yet we do it. Why? Out of fear of punishment? Yet whom should we most fear? They midwives answered correctly, and we see that God showed His approval of their brave obedience in Exodus 1: 20-21: So God was good to the midwives and the people multiplied, and became very mighty. Because the midwives feared God, He established households for them.

The Scriptures give us many other examples of God’s people disobeying the civil magistrates who have ceased to be servants of God or who issue commands in opposition to His Word. A principle is established that is consistent with every act of righteous disobedience to a wicked civil magistrate. The people of God didn’t just quietly sit on the fence to avoid having to make a choice. They did the exact opposite of the unGodly commands! To do less is to fear man rather than God. God is not fully obeyed unless we also do the complete opposite of tyranny.

In Daniel 6, King Darius decreed that no one could pray to any god but himself. Daniel refused to obey because he knew Darius had no such jurisdiction. But Daniel went further than quiet disobedience. He immediately went to his rooftop, made sure all the windows were open for anyone to see, and prayed three times a day to God. In I Kings 18, Jezebel commanded that the prophets of God should be destroyed, yet Obadiah preserved a hundred prophets alive in a cave. He did not stop there in his resistance. He not only refrained from slaying them, but also cared for them with meat and drink. In Acts 4, the Apostles Peter and John were arrested and ordered by the rulers and elders of the people to stop preaching in the name of Jesus. They replied boldly, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to heed you rather than God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking of what we have seen and heard.” Upon their release they immediately resumed leading worship and publicly preaching Christ with all confidence. In Acts 5:29, they are heard saying, “We must obey God rather than men.”

It’s clear in Scripture that God not only holds individual men accountable for ignoring the evil acts of civil magistrates, but also holds His Church accountable. This is not good news for the “Obey the authorities in all things” crowd. Look at Leviticus 20:1-5 for a crystal clear example of how God responds to people who tolerate sin. Verse 5 says, “Then I Myself will set My face against that man and against his family, and I will cut off from among their people both him and all those who play the harlot after him, by playing the harlot after Molech.” We become harlots of the state when we choose to remain silent, thinking there is nothing we can do and voting for the lesser of two evils.

Examples abound in Scripture of collective responsibility when the people tolerate unGodly rulers. We see that whenever Israel failed to oppose their king who had abandoned the service of God, He chastised them for their negligence, ignorance, and stupidity. All of King Saul’s men died with him on the battlefield. Judgment fell upon these men because they did not oppose Saul when he violated the Law of God, but instead applauded his wicked persecution of David and the priests of the Lord. When the evil King Manasseh defiled the temple (II Chronicles 33), God afflicted all the people as well as Manasseh. Why? To warn Israel that if they did not keep the king within the limit of his authority, they would all be guilty and suffer because they offered no resistance to tyranny. In Jeremiah 5:30 the prophet exclaimed, “The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority; and My people love it so!” God promised terrible judgment, including the absolute destruction of Jerusalem because His people tolerated sin from the prophets, priests, and princes. In verse 4:22 God called His children “stupid” because they tolerated sin. Ultimately God holds his people accountable for the acts of evil rulers because of the principle of implied consent—thus their complicity—in the rulers’ outrages and abuses.

How far does the principle of withdrawing consent extend in Scripture? Even to the separation of a whole people from an unjust regime. II Chronicles 10 records the story of the new, inexperienced, and self-centered King Rehoboam, son of Solomon, and his reign of folly. As he applied the heavy hand of tyranny, the people rejected his reign. In verse 16 we see that “all Israel departed,” splitting the ancient kingdom into Judah and Israel. When King Rehoboam sent his deputy, Hadoram, to coerce them back under his authority, the sons of Israel stoned Hadoram to death. Verse 15 makes it clear this revolt was approved by God.

Yes, Romans 13 instructs us, “Let every soul be subject to the governing authority.” Every soul. That means all men and necessarily includes the civil magistrates themselves. They are just as subject to the authority of God’s law and civil law as any other man. The President and Congress are just as subject to the rule of law as any private citizen. If they rob the governed, they are thieves and ought to be punished as thieves, the same as any private person. If they commit murder in the name of the state, they are murderers just the same. They are not exempt from God’s laws simply because they hold public office. Why do we tolerate the special privileges these tyrants grant themselves? Who is to blame but the politically lazy citizen unwilling to do the hard work of sustaining the republic? If we do not withdraw consent from such governments, we must suffer the same fate as tyrants’ subjects around the world who tolerate corruption for a handful of crumbs from the oligarchs’ table, and whose consent forges the chains of their servitude.

I am not advocating that we take up arms and rush out in violent rebellion. Someday, someday soon in fact, it may be necessary and morally justified to defend ourselves in arms against the criminal state, but that day is not yet. If it does become necessary, it will not be we who are in rebellion, but the ruling class which has rebelled against the civil covenant and violated the declarations and laws which guarantee the basic rights of Southerners. The Scripture has much to say about how we should resist tyranny as well as making it clear that we should resist. But that must remain the subject of another article.

First, we have to get our hearts and our minds right before the Lord. When the civil magistrate rules outside the sanction of God by violating His laws, we are no longer constrained to obey him. We must choose to obey God rather than men. We can hide from this responsibility behind a false teaching of Romans 13, or behind false teachers and preachers who ought to know better. Let us heed the call of the Southern National Congress, kneeling in intercession before a mighty, just, and sovereign God who holds the fate of our Southern nation in His hands. Then, as we continue in repentance and prayer, we must begin to Withdraw Consent from a government which has forfeited our allegiance by its rebellion against God; and which moreover has abrogated its own laws, the Constitution of the United States, refusing to be bound by it and to govern under its constraints.

________________________________

Jeff Brower is a Florida Delegate to the Southern National Congress. This article contains edited excerpts from a paper written by an exceptional 17-year-old man named Michael Billings. He delivered his original persuasive speech dressed in the spirit of the occasion of an Independence Day Jubilee. You can read these and many other writings from and about Michael in Life Is But a Vapor, edited by Wesley Strackbein and published by Vision Forum Ministries. On November 4, 2007, this brave defender of the faith was called home to be with the Lord. Michael G. Billings was 19 years old.

Technorati , , , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

More government meddling in North Texas!

North Texas has more than its share of meddling Statists who want the empire to have more influence and power in Texas. One of the meddling Statists is Al Armendariz. He is a former chemical engineering professor at SMU and presently the head of EPA’s Region 6, which includes Texas (Gee, just like reconstruction, we are no longer viewed as a State, but as a nameless region). Mr. Armendariz does not like the Ozone related to the cement plants in North Texas. He views the engines used at the plants as a problem. His solution-MORE FEDERAL POLICIES. He wants to tell Texans how to operate their businesses. Even though he served as a college professor, he believes he knows what is best for Texas businesses and Texans.

It is not just the cement plants that will suffer. The EPA regulations are now putting public transportation in North Texas in jeopardy. The EPA under the leadership of Armendariz also wants to slow down if not stop drilling for natural gas in the area as well. Although the regime talks clean energy, such policies which hamper energy development are stifling economic growth for Texas. Remember to look at what they do rather than what they say. In Armendariz’s case, the EPA is being used to stop natural gas exploration, stop mass transit, override state regulatory powers and slow down if not stop cement production in the area. That is not job or growth stimulus, that is retarding growth of everything but the agencies power.

Fortunately, Governor Rick Perry and Texas has filed suit in federal court to slow down the power grab and contest CO2 being considered a ‘greenhouse pollutant’. The logic of asking the fox to render a wise judicial decision concerning the hen house escapes me, but at least he took a stand.

To make matters worse, the head of the regime is now claiming that the recent North Texas snows was due to man-made climate change. So here is a politician and political activist who is now claiming to have scientific credibility.

Once more the solution is LESS government meddling, NOT more government meddling.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Coincidence?

The eyes of the nation were on Austin, Texas yesterday with the crash of a plane into the IRS/CIA building in that city. There are many ironies regarding the incident. 1) Hazmat/firetruck were in place prior to the accident, 2) Austin police and BATF were recently colluding in obstructing gun shows in that city. The collusion/cooperation occurred soon after tea parties had protests in Austin, which may be coincidence or weird timing. 3) Alex Jones had predicted a false flag operation prior to its occurrence 4) There are reports that the FBI Dallas office dispatched agents to Austin the day before the attack. 5) The pilot who flew the plane was not associated with the Tea Party movement. 6) His facebook page with his reported suicide note was not put up by him, but rather by a person known as ‘Emily’.

These incidents may be coincidence, although in today’s political environment, there are few ’surprises’. Ever major incident is planned. In sorting through the information as it becomes available, the key question to ask is “Qui Bono?” (Who benefits?). When you have the answer to who benefits from such acts, you have the clues as to what it was really about. The evidence is not adding up. What makes this one disturbing is that it is happening in Texas. Such an incident would give the empire reason to have the city crawling with feds as the rhetoric regarding secession heats up in the Lone Star Republic.

The parallels are too close to Oklahoma City. That incident occurred during the Clinton regime and put a damper on the growing militia movement which was growing at that time. Will this incident put a damper on the tea parties and secession? Let us hope that people will see through the scripted incidents and maintain our steadfastness.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Ignorance of the law…

The comments of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia are disturbing. In a letter addressed to him on the secession issue, he claimed that there is no right for a State to secede. His comment is in variance with previous the Supreme Court of Texas v. White. Such a comment raises concern as to whether he is familiar with the law and is competent to render a decision on the matter. When he uses the Pledge of Allegience as supportive evidence for his position, there is a real problem.

In the Texas v. White case, often cited by anti-secession forces, the issue in question was the legality of the secession of Texas from the Union. The case refused to examine the legality of how Texas joined the Union, even though that was a key issue in the case, since the secession convention of Texas merely undid the illegal acts done which led to annexation. The annexation of Texas was illegal in that 1) It was done in violation of the US Constitution 2) It was done in violation of the Texas Constitution 3) Military occupation occurred prior to the citizens voting on the issue. The whole annexation was rigged. The SCOTUS court refused to look at those issues and merely took a stand that the way Texas left the Union was not acceptable. The decision was not a unanimous one either. Bear in mind that the legality of secession was never settled. The SCOTUS refused to try Jefferson Davis because they would have had to deal with the issue. But, …Justice Scalia does not want to do the sweat work of research himself to be able to adroitly handle such legal matters.

His comment which is variance with case law along with his use of the Pledge for support of his position raises serious concerns. Either he is ignorant of the law regarding the secession issue or law schools spend more time on indoctrination than education.

His comment is further troubling in that in Lawrence v. Texas, the SCOTUS resorted to using international law for its ruling. The use of international law creates problems since ‘Secession’ is a recognized option in international law. As a member of the SCOTUS, he needs to decide which body of law he will use in considering the matters before them. Rather than pick and choose, he needs to be consistent. Are we under the Constitution, (which the founders said allowed secession) or international law (which does allow secession). His comments makes it clear that the SCOTUS is resorting to cherry-picking what set of law they are using and that they are being intellectually lazy in dealing with issues such as secession.

William Rawle’s book on the Constitution addresses the issue of Secession. The founders considered it an option. Perhaps Scalia is ignorant of such scholarship or perhaps he does not want to do the work of researching the matter like a judge should. Prior to Texas leaving the Union, the best legal minds in the State considered the option long and hard before calling for a Secession convention. Scalia may need to spend some time on this matter as well.

In order to render decisions on law, the judge must be consistent in applying the law. The judge needs to be well versed in the law, and the case law that has been established. Using the pledge of allegience as supportive documentation is shabby legal work (not to mention lazy).

His comments reveal more about his thinking process than he would probable be comfortable with. It shows shallow reasoning, the elevation of popular opinion above legal precedent and limited scholarship on States Rights issues.

In a free South, there would be an educated judiciary. It would be expected that the court would have persons who have demonstrated scholarship, an awareness of the law and judicial wisdom rather than persons who have won a popularity contest. Even I, as a layman know that using the Pledge amounts to hearsay, and is not admissible as evidence in a court case addressing an issue as important as people deciding for themselves what is the best government for them. The true government of the people, by the people and for the people rather than decided by a court that is ignorant of the issues.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Texas Businesses have more courage than Congress does!

A group of Texas businesses is doing what many elected CONgress critters do not have the courage to do. They are standing up to the tyranny of the empire! Rather than join the parade of destruction and strangled jobs led by the likes of CONgress critter Lloyd Doggett of the 25th Texas Congressional District, followed by Charlie Gonzales and Gene Green, these businesses are filing papers in federal court to challenge the federal government monitoring and controlling greenhouse gases. This is diametrically opposed to the actions of Lloyd Doggett, Gene Green and Charlie Gonzales who want limits on greenhouse gases and want to enforce those limits.

Could it be that these Texas businesses know more about what is good for Texas and Texas jobs that the Congressman from the 25th district? Although the working people of Texas know what is best, men like Doggett and green activist like Luke Metzger think that they know better.

In the present situation, the EPA (as an extension of the regime) is threatening to enforce greenhouse rules IF CONgress does not pass legislation. This is nothing more than bullying tactics. It is the use of threats, since the EPA does not have the legitimacy to act in this matter. Once again the regime is walking all over the working man. Rather than expand liberty, this regime does not pass up any opportunity to limit freedoms. In this case, it is about limiting CO2, yes good old carbon dioxide. The EPA is operating on the assumption that man-made CO2 contributes to global warming. The regime uses almost any excuse to expand its power, even when it is a myth.

The ability to put Texas to work is important. Strangling jobs based on bad science does not make good policy. Strangling jobs through such un-necessary limits on CO2 is also bad policy. In the name of pampering a pet group, men like Doggett have stifled the people they represent.

It is my hope that the people of Pasadena and the Gulf Coast will show their appreciation of Gene Green and his gutting of their jobs in the upcoming elections. I hope that the people of San Antonio, where Tesoro and Valero call home will see that Charlie Gonzales is NOT their friend. He is taking actions that severely hamper their ability to do business.

The answer my fellow Texians is LESS government. We need less nanny policies. We need a government that stays out of our business.

Liberty for Texas and the South!

J Murrah

Technorati , , , , , , , , , , , ,

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!



http://rpc.technorati.com/rpc/ping