Wednesday, November 15, 2006

The Danger of the New Tone

The new buzz is that there is a New Tone in Washington now that the Democrats have reacquired congress. What needs to be examined is at what cost to liberty was this New Tone established. The phrase “New Tone” is akin to the phrase “zero tolerance” as practiced in our public schools. Zero Tolerance means that both the bully and his victim are punished equally for a disturbance on the school grounds. It reminds me of the parable told by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago. There are two kinds of criminals, he relates: the political and the criminal. During shipment to the prison camps the politicals became lambs for slaughter by criminals, because if a criminal was caught with a weapon, that was to be expected – after all he was a criminal. However, if a political was caught with a weapon – now that was a crime against the state!

Therefore to properly interpret the newspeak of Zero Tolerance you must understand that if a bully attacks another student in the school hallway, that’s to be expected. He’s an angry bully/gang member, under-educated, possible minority and product of a bizarre home life and therefore not responsible for his actions. He must be rehabilitated, not punished. Now the victim, he will not only be held responsible for defending himself and creating an unsafe environment for others, but will be sent to sensitivity training so he can better understand the rage of his attacker and learn to diffuse this anger by resisting the urge to rightfully pummel his tormentor into crying out for his Uncle.

We used to be a people that celebrated when the schoolyard bully got what he deserved. We used to be citizens that could handle a rough and rowdy political debate, but no more. The Stalinism of the New Tone has dropped an iron blanket on political discourse. Today’s political debates are now highbrow Forums with rules of engagement that would satisfy even United Nations bureaucrats. There are now New Tone unwritten rules such as:
  • Democrat women cannot be challenged on any topic because they are the weaker sex.

  • Those suffering from hardships cannot be challenged on any topic unless you have experienced the same pain, and even then, conservatives suffering hardships will be viewed as shameless panderers.

  • Presentation of facts proving allegations of lying and fraud will be considered a personal attack and is not allowed.

  • Directly confronting the other forum participant will be considered a personal attack and is not allowed.

  • Presenting evidence of a Democrat incumbent’s voting record will be considered a personal attack and will be considered shamelessly rude and insensitive by Moderates.

  • Anyone that does not adhere to the rules of the forum or does not graciously and profusely thank those conducting the forum that just whipped his ass will get an “X” in the box next to the question, “Does he/she work well with others?” and will be deemed not fit for public service.

So, rest sweetly America, because the same stupidity that sends your daughter home from school because of a Tweety Bird keychain bearing a pair of nail clippers, that punishes your son for daring to defend himself when brutally assailed by a hoodlum, or publicly pillories anyone who doesn’t toe the politically correct line, is now the standard operating system for our electoral process.

Moderates will not have their mental health troubled by the need to sort through truth and lies in order to make an educated decision. Nor will they have their dinner disturbed by anything negative, or by gory pictures from the front lines on The War on Terror. News is to be no more disturbing than the weathercast or the sports chatter between the anchors on TV. Moderates have spoken and the iron blanket has descended. The press can continue to report what they want us to think because that’s not divisive or requiring of analytical thought. Politicians will continue to be politic rather than representational. Human nature reigns supreme in Washington D.C. and throughout the world. Moderates refuse to know and therefore they will not tremble in fear for the innocents, whose deaths we won’t learn of unless their bodies are uncovered should their oppressors fall from power. It will only be those American political prisoners that still hold the dream of liberty and freedom to tremble and be afraid because they alone know that the Moderate is the most deadly of all political powers because Moderates absolutely will not confront evil but will undermine every last vestige of imperfect men struggling to do the right thing. The Moderates have come into power and in the Stalinist tactics of the New Tone’s enforced civility their peace of mind will not be disturbed!

Friday, November 03, 2006

Democrats Support the Military Again...NOT!

The jackalope checked Drudge Report this morning and news was enough to send a lesser mere jackrabbit running for the burrow in fear. But, the jacklope will not run in the face of danger.

Iran has exhibited the capablity to blast Israel off the face of the map.
"Iranian state radio said: "The maneuver is aimed at providing security in the region without the intervention of trans-regional powers, which are trying to justify their presence by portraying the region as convulsive."

The jackalope understands completely that her American idea of security in a region is a far different picture than security under an ayatolla. She's not anxious to be forced to wear a burka and it ain't just because her beautiful antlers would make the outfit fit funny! And so, she fears for the safety of her jackalope brothers and sisters through out the Middle East. Jacklopes are creatures that enjoy their liberty
and freedom.

So, in light of all that, she reads that some DEMOCRAT Congressman from New Jersey fears that troops overseas should have their votes considered for VOTER FRAUD, which in Dem-speak is translated - the votes were misinterpreted as Republican when they should have been and soon will be DEMOCRAT or the votes will be tossed out as illegitimate.

Like, hmmmm are we sensing that the Democratic Party has a certain animous for our men and women serving our country?

The jackalope growls in her low husky voice, "Don't be thinking Chet Edwards (D-TX Congressional District 17) is any different from his kinfolk up in Washington. He just sounds like us, but he sure as hell ain't one of us!"

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Another Resounding Vote of Confidence in the Military...not!

Edwards' Statement on Kerry Comments
October 31, 2006

“As Co-Chair of the bipartisan House Army Caucus and as someone who has represented over 40,000 U.S. Army soldiers who have served in Iraq, I think Sen. Kerry’s comments were at worst deeply offensive, if intended for our troops serving in Iraq, or at the very least, a tasteless and inappropriate criticism of the president. I would continue to urge elected officials on both sides of the aisle not to play politics with our War in Iraq or our War on Terrorism.”

And there you have it folks, Chet Edwards (D) boldly chastising John Kerry via e-mail to Chet's District 17 constituents! That'll really straighten Kerry out on a thing or two! How about ponying up, trick rider? To borrow a phrase from Mary Matalin, "Riding pretty high up in the stradle, there cowboy!"

So, let the jackalope parse this out for y'all, pardners:

"As Co-Chair"
(I'm John Kerry [D-MA] and I served in Viet Nam... I mean, I'm Chet Edwards [D-TX] and I don't want anyone to forget how powerful I am)

"of the bipartisan"
(I'm the meanest s.o.b. those Republicans have ever dealt with. They do it my way, or it's the highway to the media for me, to make comments meant to scare the absolute bejeebers out of my constituents, their constituents, America's constituents until those Republicans cry like babies. Who's your Daddy, huh?)

"House Army Caucus and as someone who has represented over 40,000 U.S. Army soldiers who have served in Iraq,"
(I play those guys like a civil rights pimp 'cause it's all about me and my power. Did I tell you that I'm Chet Edwards [D-TX] and that I'm a powerful member of Congress?)

"I think"
(starting to straddle)

"Sen. Kerry’s comments were at worst"
(hesitation to parse while in straddle mode)

"deeply offensive, if"
(Laura Ingraham has her "but...monkey"; the jackalope has her "if...varmint")

"intended for our troops serving in Iraq,"
(Kerry said it was, but I'm not quite sure...I'm looking into filing a report to look into this assertion, this baseless charge, this swiftboating of a proud veteran, who served in Viet Nam. Who as the last presidential candidate for the Democrat Party, the Party I serve... my constituents up as useful fodder for the progressive ideals I hold near and dear to my heart)

"or at the very least,"
(and he's riding in full straddle, heading for the finish line, and it's a doozy of a race here folks! A doozy of a race!)

"a tasteless and inappropriate criticism of the president."
(and here's the water-boy bringing a fresh pail for our prize pedigree gelding—who twisted a hoof while serving in Viet Nam—but ran a tough race even though swift-boated in the first quarter mile by the evil Karl Rove and that idiot, President Bush, who was selected, not elected)

"I would continue to urge elected officials on both sides of the aisle"
(Republicans need to shut their faces up, and that goes for Stuff't Suit Tony Snow and his doughboy friend, Rush Limbaugh. Don't make me whip this out!)

"not to play politics with our War in Iraq or our War on Terrorism.”
(Do I sing "God Bless America" now? Oh, wait! Hell, I forgot I keep pushing to rip out every endorsement of the Judeo-Christian religion from every aspect of Amerikan lives because I'm a liberal-progressive, pro-abortion, drive-your-15-year-old-across-state-lines-for-a-partial-birth-abortion, Jack-Daniels-sippin', partisan-as-they-come, lying-son-of-a-gun-and-you-kant-do-a-damn-thing-about-it kinda man. Y'all be quiet in there, now. Y'hear? An don' forget to vote for Chet Edwards [D-TX 17] or y'won't be gettin' no more VA health care! Y'know what I mean?)

Yep, ol Chet...he's for you, vets...NOT!!!

Where's Chet?

Chet Edwards (D) of Texas Congressional District 17 and incumbent seeking yet another term in office because it's a job and he's used to it, has yet to make any comment condemning John Kerry's (D-MA) elistist remarks concerning our military. The jackalope has made it clear that Chet Edwards (D) has hoodwinked our precious veterans into believing he actually cares about them. The truth is, Chet uses our veterans like a civil rights pimp to secure power and ensure his next election. Chet was there defending John Kerry (D) presidential candidate when the veterans that actually served with Kerry came out with the swift boat ads. Chet treated those veterans like they were partisan hacks presenting lies and distortions. In the last election, Chet participated in Wesley Clark's forum on how to get Democrats elected. They weren't going to get "swift boated" like John Kerry and actually have to address a difference of perception as to their necessity to serve the country! Chet gave a lesson on how to conduct a bare knuckles political brawl and bragged about not letting the opponent define him. Like the tenured government employee that he is, Chet was fighting back hard to preserve his own thick slab of bacon, while deceiving our veterans that it was their bacon he was saving.

When it comes to preserving respect for our military, Chet's as missing in action as Amber Alert flower-child Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Chet's just an also-ran congressional incumbent member of a political party that repeatedly makes it clear that they loathe the military. So, the jackalope cries out for veterans to stop fearing that Chet won't sign their pension or health care checks anymore, because he never did in the first place. The jackalope's America reveres and respects those that served in our military. Veteran's Affairs operates on a year by year budget, but if they have a shortfall, they know all they have to do is ask. But in conscience to the taxpayers the request must not be made to cover lax spending responsiblity. We do still live in a system of checks and balances.

The jackalope urges veterans to not vote simply because of fear. This is the United States of America for crying out loud! But if the jackalope's dear readers know of a veteran convinced he will lose his pension or health care without Chet Edwards, I urge loving wives, sons, daughters, grandchildren, even great-grandchildren to not trouble their precious veteran to change his mind. Just simply vote for a man, Van Taylor that will be a great voice added to a political party that respects everything these men and women have done for us and will never have them cowering in a corner in fear for their check.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Dead Party Walking

The latest John Kerry silver foot-in-mouth exhibits precisely the arrogance that links today’s Democrats to the Federalist Party of the 1790’s. The Federalists were satisfied with the status quo and were without a vision about how to navigate the new nation further along the path of liberty and freedom. They were caught unaware of the emergence of a new man, the egalitarian. Their own talents, initiative, and relationship to God rather than to man created these new men. They were successful because of liberty and freedom rather than being descendents of a family of privilege or connections to those in power. Sensing the power of these new entrepreneurial men, Thomas Jefferson gathered various grassroots groups into a classical republican campaign that pushed forward the experiment of a government by the people and for the people into new territories of liberty, freedom and equality. By the turn of the century, America had shed itself of the Federalist Party.

The Federalists had unintentionally fallen into the well-worn shoes of their English overlords, believing in the strength of their power simply because they were in power rather than because of the strength of their ideas. And such is the case of today’s Democrat Party: a party with absolutely no new ideas to further the greatness of this nation. They are a party believing that the only problem that faces the nation is their own lack of power. Lack of power is hardly a resounding vote-garnering issue since the only people that want them back in power are their cronies in business, politics and the media. It should be crystal clear to all that John Kerry’s sense of elitism is not an anomaly in the Democratic Party. He speaks as the Democrat’s last Presidential candidate and current voice of the party. It should be noted that this is the way virtually all Democrats view the huddled masses they govern. Just as Kerry’s elitism is viewed distastefully, it was this same sense of elitism, and assumption of political posterity that finished off America’s first political party. Kerry’s complete repudiation of any apology to our troops should be viewed as a ticking time bomb set to go off this election cycle bringing complete destruction of today’s Democrat Party. American liberty and egalitarianism refuses to bow under arrogance. Not Kerry’s snotty remarks about our troops to Bill Clinton wagging his nasty finger in our face. Unwarranted arrogance is not an American virtue.

But elitism alone is not significant enough to warrant political death. It is the complete absence of ideas of vision that is their ultimate foe. Every idea proposed is a re-tread of the same-old same-old. Listen to Texas Congressional District 17 incumbent Chet Edwards (D) and you hear the litany of Democrat blindness. The shtick is that Edwards is some sort of “maverick” conservative in the Democrat Party, but nothing could be further from the truth. He proposes raising taxes on the “rich” – anyone making over $30K – while providing “tax relief” to the “middle class” – those who pay no taxes at all, but would now also receive a check from the munificent government via Chet Edwards. He scares veterans with base-line budgeting carney-ism, threatening their peace of mind because “he cares more” than evil republicans. He scares seniors about the idea of social security reform that wouldn’t affect them but would be of great benefit to their grandchildren. And then Chet has the onions to sign on to AARP’s plan to raise taxes on social security to make their piddlin’ checks even smaller. He wants to tax e-commerce, repeal the Bush tax cuts, tax to bring down the deficit, tax to keep schools in the sorry state they’re in, tax to pay for partial-birth abortions, and yak, yak, yak. It’s just a big “Eminent Front” – a put on – without a new thought in the entire refrain. And all across the nation there is district after district offering one of these also-ran retread incumbents as the “vision” of the American future. It’s just LBJ and the Great Society taxing us into prosperity all over again.

It reminds me of the joke that floated around in those heady days of Democrat opulence and regality via The Great Society.
Moses told the people to pack up their shovels, load up their camels, and saddle up their asses because they were headed for the Promised Land.

LBJ told the people to throw down their shovels, light up their Camels and sit on their asses, because this was the Promised Land.

And such has been the last 40 years of Democrat control. The same group of people speaking down to the same subservient people who bow in fealty while hoping for a scrap of government largesse because the tax man has effectively removed any discretionary cash from the family wallet. Even though it has been shown that tax cuts bring in more government funds to cover not only the current budget but also bring down the deficit, the tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend Democrat plan is repeated ad nauseum. Their vision is simply to control every aspect of our lives while rewriting the “broken” Constitution to deny us our own rights and liberties yet extending those rights to every citizen of the world. “We shall willingly oppress ourselves because we are free to do so” is the standard they will impose on us because of their elitist sensibilities and backwards vision.

Those that would say that the Republicans in Congress deserve to lose are only breathing new life in this walking dead monstrosity of political elitism. Instead, let us hasten Democrat political demise by sticking with our own team as riddled with human nature as humans are prone to be. And as far as a new political vision try this one:

Imagine a future with no Democrats serving even locally as dogcatcher. Where a triumphant Republican Party eventually splits into Republicans and Libertarians. Where the order of the day is watching Washington powers begin “The Game” as to which political party can butt out of our lives the fastest. Now, there’s a political vision!

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Welcome American Thinker Readers

The jackalope is humbled by your many positive comments for her post on The American Thinker. Just three months ago I started The Jackalope's Voice to support Van Taylor (R) in the Texas District 17 Congressional race against the eight-term incumbent Chet Edwards (D). District 17 is President Bush's personal district and it is considered a real slap in the President's face that Chet Edwards (D) was the only Democrat to survive the DeLay redistricting map.

If any of you dear readers happens to be a national syndicated radio host, it would fill the jackalope's heart to overflowing joy to have this race get national attention. Van Taylor is a Marine and was the leader of the reconnaisance team that rescued Jessica Lynch. He is humble and strong in his convictions. In short, Van Taylor is the kind of man we need to strengthen our Republican majority in Congress. The jackalope believes that a stronger majority is what is needed in Washington. She understands that even though the Democrats are in the minority, their drive-by media friends make them sound like a larger voice.

Chet Edwards (D) is everything the Democrat Party stands for. He uses "bi-partisan" in every sentence, which in demo-speak means Republicans must relent and desist. For a quick overview please check these posts: Play Until You Pay , Trick Rider, Who Needs a Hindrance When It Comes To Oil?, Chet's Tax Irons are in the Fire - Beware, Who's Your Daddy?, It's Not the Money, A Good Shepherd is Not a Demagogue, and finally Why Chet Edwards Should Not Be Reelected.

Also interesting are these posts on a political forum - not a debate - held between Van and Chet: What We Learned and Another Thought About Last Night's Forum. The jackalope was very disturbed by the way the forum was conducted. Many of you may have experienced this new tone forum and have niggling thoughts about them.

Once again, I want to thank new readers of The Jackalope's Voice.


Nancy Coppock

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Another Thought About Last Night's Forum

There was something niggling in the jackalope's brain about the manner in which last night's forum was conducted. Her conclusion: prohibiting confrontation in a political forum makes it as mind-numbingly dull as a weekly inter-office meeting. Not only a complete joke but actually dangerous to democracy. Only someone with something to hide would want this.

To conduct a Political Forum with the silly politically correct rules of decorum, where no one says a thing about their opponent is akin to secret police enforcing peace and tranquility in a totalitarian state! Politics is a blood sport and those that can't handle the fight because they haven't the interest to sort out who is telling the truth should NOT vote. Enforced tranquility so that no one's sensiblities are disturbed is an affront to democracy!

The jackalope has observed that quiet and mannerly doesn't always mean there is learning going on in a classroom and it certainly doesn't mean issues are being explored in a debate. This loathing of true debate is dangerous to our political freedom and is nothing more than politeness enrobed in a civil ascetism that allows elitists to decide for the masses who and what can be said or even thought. Civil Asceticim is a philosophy that leads straight to oppression. The jackalope prefers the raucous rowdiness of democratic freedom to the meek, mild platitudes of a politician lying to her face without her having the freedom to call a snake, a snake. Or even more bluntly - the jackalope is a tough little gal - don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

The Party's So Over...

For those confused or disgusted with this current political election I offer these words of explanation. What we are witnessing is the death of a political party. The present Democratic Party is peculiarly the same as when Thomas Jefferson rallied a grassroots republican revolution in opposition to the Federalist during the 1790's. In Jefferson's mind the Federalists had become the same as the English monarchy in their elitist sensibilities of government. To counter this he collected a wide assortment of grassroots groups into a republican coalition and changed the direction of the nation. As Joyce Appleby records:
...the Jeffersonians coalesced around a set of ideas — radical notions about how society should be reorganized. These ideas were propagated less by a class of men — that is, persons tied together by common economic intereststhan by a kind of manmen attracted by certain beliefs.Their common vision about the reform of politics and the liberation of the human spirit… Ideas — not interests or old loyalties or institutional identities — supplied the unity for success. (emphasis added)

Today the ideas pushing the political forum are:
  • The war against Islamic fascism that threatens freedom throughout the entire earth - for without liberty under our own Constitution the other ideas are moot.

Only then come the ideas for the continuity of the American Dream:
  • permanent tax cuts,
  • border control,
  • reform of the entire method of collecting taxes (e.g. flat tax or national sales tax),
  • protection of private property,
  • and other such ideas that dismantle the power of the federalist government.

The current Democratic Party has corrupted itself so far in their American self-loathing that they are in every sense at odds with the Constitution they have sworn not only to abide by, but to protect. If they desire to represent our enemy, then they should move to the totalitarian countries they seek to protect while extending upon our enemy the protection of our American Bill of Rights that they seek to deny their own American citizens. Their generation has so railed and rebelled against the "power of America" that they have spiritually joined with those sworn to destroy us. It is much like the conversation in Dostoyevsky's The Idiot. Substitute "American" for "Russian" and the message is clear:
Well, my fact is precisely that Russian liberalism is not an attack on the existing order of things, but an attack on the very essence of things, on the things themselves, not merely on their order, on the established order in Russia, but on Russia herself. My liberal has gone so far as to deny Russia herself; in other words, he hates his own mother and he beats her. Every Russian failure and misfortune stirs him to laughter and virtually delights him. He hates national traditions, Russian history, everything. (emphasis added)

And then,
Not so long ago some of our liberals effectively took this hatred for Russia as sincere love for their country, and congratulated themselves on seeing better than others what that love should be; but now they have become more frank, and even the words 'love for country' have become an embarrassment to them and the whole conception has been banished and dismissed as harmful and trivial.
Both quotes from the Henry and Olga Carlisle translation, ©1969

An astute politico can hear Hillary Clinton screeching that she is patriotic and that she has a right to screech about having the right to question the President of the United States. Or throw up as the media ponders whether it is "proper" to wear a flag pin or come out in support the troops.

How long the current Democratic Party maintains control of the nation depends upon this election. It is true that the world is on a headlong descent into chaos. The Bible tells us so. However, do we go down with an emasculated whimper or do we stand up and fight back the status quo until the bloody end? I say we must be in the world but not of the world and desire to hear, "Well done, good and faithful servant."

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Amongst Our Weaponry are Fear, Surprise, Ruthless Efficiency...

At last we have been apprised of the true horror of an interrogation at Guantanamo. According to The Village Voice:
In the thirteen months I was in Cuba, I was interrogated ten to twelve times. I was interrogated in a separate room and always alone. I would be brought there, and my legs would be shackled to a chair. One or two Americans in plain clothes interviewed me. A typical interrogation consisted of questions about my family, education record, language skills, background …what I intended to do in the future… purpose of my missionary activity… who funded it … what I was doing in Afghanistan … The sessions lasted between one and two hours each and I was asked questions the whole time.

Even more horrifying:
For Afghan detainee Shah Mohammed Alikhil, who does not allege actual or threatened ill-treatment during interrogation, it was the repetition of the interrogations, and the absence of any prospect of resolution thereby, that was stressful:
My first interrogation started at the end of my first month of imprisonment in Cuba. Three Americans with a translator interrogated me. They asked me the same thing [as before, during incarceration in Mazar-i-Sharif and Kandahar prior to transfer to Guantanamo] and did not tell me anything else. There was no torture or mistreatment. The second interrogation started a month after the first interrogation. No new questions were asked this time again. And some months later I was interrogated again, without any sign of progress in my case, and again no new questions were asked. I was exhausted and tired of living like that. I was hearing noises and seeing ghosts [hallucinating].

Sounds like my trip this summer where I helped my brother and sister-in-law in their move from San Diego to Denver. I drove the plush mini-van complete with DVD player so my sister-in-love could sit in back with the 3 kiddos. Hearing again and again those same questions: “When are we going to be there?” and “What town are we in?”, the stress, the strain. Hearing Roadrunner dropping a bomb on the Coyote, over and over and over again…. I was close to hallucinations myself.

But wait, there’s no end to the diabolical devices of torture at Camp Delta when just this past Friday we learned of the most dastardly torture device of allThe Comfy Chair!
Aside from a large metal ring in the floor for securing shackles, and a big red button on the wall labeled Duress, the room looks like a teacher's lounge. It has white cement-block walls and a concrete floor, but a large Persian rug softens the bleak appearance. There's a coffee maker (Starbucks Barista Quattro), a television, and a DVD player. Three black office chairs face a dark wood coffee table and a plush blue La-Z-Boy chair.

Today the detainees who are still interrogated regularly—about 25 percent of the camp's population, say officials—apparently nestle into a recliner.

We have met the enemy and he is us. Have we completely stopped making sense?

Sunday, September 24, 2006

The Constitution Is Not A Suicide Pact

Thomas Lifson - American Thinker - has an interesting article concerning Australia's brave stand on immigration. I then found an interesting post at

This post caused the jackalope to ponder once again the misunderstandings comprising the culture war here in America caused mainly by fear and loathing for Judaism and Christianity. It is believed by many that these two religions are the enemy of freedom and liberty when rightfully these two religions are the foundation of freedom and liberty. The only enmity organized religion has is with hedonism, but even that according to proper teaching, is tempered with love. It is true that believers can range between the legalism of the noisy gong and the ditziness of a clanging cymbal but Christianity without love is meaningless.

However, the jackalope wonders why it is not the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that bond Americans together and are the beliefs to be defended against immigrants that would change our country into the country they left. And so I wrote:
I also enjoyed Mr. Lifson's piece on Australia's immigration approach. However, your post makes me ponder why belief in the Constitution and The Bill of Rights is not what binds together the American way of life. I realize the post was a flip rhetorical against living under Sharia Law, but I detect an animus toward Judaism and Christianity that resents anyone from believing anything that would snap a perpendicular moral chalk line between man and God. But freedom of religion is only one part of our Constitution and it is time to get back to the foundations of what was established September 17, 1787.

The Bill of Rights were not written to promote aimless hedonism, but rather to identify those rights pre-ordained in every man, instead of bestowed to men by a government. The purpose was to provide a check on government, but in every aspect government has crossed the established boundary and put a check on our freedoms. Organized religion in America is a red herring when it comes to loss of liberty. For that, check your local government.

My point is: If people don't believe that "all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - that to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...” then I would say to immigrants, don't come here just as the Australians are declaring.

To Americans such as yourself, I say, don't get so hung up on the concept of Creator - even though belief in God is what provides me with a foundational system that explains aptly this crazy world we live in and I would pray that you too would come to this knowledge - but rather zealously protect your preordained rights of man: Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness, i.e. the creation of wealth and protection of private property. Most of the social bickering in this country would disappear if we concentrated on supporting the ideas of the documents that bind us together instead of trying to make them say something different from what is actually written. Like I tell those that want to change the by-laws of the Boy Scouts: "If you want to send your boys off on campouts with homosexual men, go start your own damn club!" This is not an indictment against homosexual men, but a respect for the written by-laws.

Thursday, September 21, 2006

A Ticking Clockwork Orange

Yesterday, a caller to the Rush Limbaugh show, stated: "We aren't like our enemy. Our enemy is true believers that are totally committed to our destruction." And nothing exhibits that assertion better than McCain's straw dog argument concerning Bush's request that Congress codify rules of interrogation. This practical request is turned into a farce by Sen. McCain and Co. and their circular argument that has no answer except to do as the President has requested. Truly, we aren’t like our enemy because we aren’t true believers totally committed to the destruction of our enemy. Instead we are living in A Clockwork Orange, where to deprive someone of the life goal of killing infidels to obtain a heaven of virgins is considered insensitive, demeaning, and for some even criminal on our part. We have met the enemy and he is us.

Friday, September 15, 2006

Things My Daddy Told Me

In light of the previous post, the jackalope is moved to relate some words of wisdom from her Daddy. We were all sitting out on the covered patio one Sunday afternoon and Daddy opened up and told us this parable.

As the jackalope has revealed in her profile, she has a very "special" sister. As Dad related the story, Sister was in the backyard playing with the dogs. She had a hulahoop and a whistle and when she blew the whistle, the dogs would take turns jumping through the hoop. It was really an amazing thing to watch.

Well, coming into the Edenic scene was a gang of young toughs who hearing the whistle were drawn to the sound and while standing on the fence supports began their taunts and catcalling. This of course made Sister start screeching and we all know young toughs derive great pleasure in tormenting the "special".

Around the corner comes Daddy to see what the hullabaloo was all about. Seeing the young toughs, he begins by recommmending the boys get off the fence because they might hurt themselves. No response. Dad immediately rachets up the dialogue in his scary Daddy voice, "Get off the fence y'little sonsofbitches or I'm goin' to whupyourass!!"

Immediately, the boys decided they heard their Mama callin' them and disappeared.

After telling us this story, Daddy then sat there for a moment before delivering the meat of the parable:
"Sometimes you just can't talk Vacation Bible School with people." (!)

And Now For Something Completely Different

For those that think "getting along" with the rest of the world is the highest goal, an article by Tanvir Ahmad Khan, former foreign secretary and ambassador of Pakistan, reveals how difficult it is to "get along" with someone wearing a virtual reality headpiece.

He celebrates the union of Fatah and Hamas in Lebanon after "Israel's brutal invasion" and states:
colonisation of Palestine remains the principal object of this status. Ehud Olmert's convergence plan represented a vital state in this process which also needed neutralisation of Hamas and Hezbollah. The Olmert plan was designed to achieve territorial expansion and fail-safe national security in a single political manoeuvre.

As to President Abbas' failure to disarm Hamas, Ahmad Khan, believes it comes from President Abbas' "recognition of Hamas' role in crafting a more effective Arab negotiating stance in the days ahead." Ahman Khan continues in this virtual reality by declaring that Abbas "knows only too well how Israel turned the Oslo agreement into a process for unreciprocated Arab concessions in the quest for final status talks."
Ahmad Khan then breathlessly proclaims:
A new and robust partnership between Fatah and Hamas demolishes the Israeli myth that there is no credible interlocutor on the Palestinian side. It will also be a necessary hedge against pressures for unilateral Arab concessions.

At the same time, this partnership (between Hamas and Fatah) offers by far the best opportunity for Hamas to separate what can be pragmatically done at this delicate juncture of history and what is better left to another time, another generation.

Ahmad Khan's conclusion (reality delusion) is:
A sovereign, viable and continuous Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital is still the best way to make the world safer than it has been for decades.

In Ahmad Khan's world, Hezbollah tunneling under the border between Lebanon and Israel to kidnap Israeli soldiers had nothing to do with the fracus. That, along with his willingness that Lebanon be represented by two known terrorist groups brings the logical conclusion: This is not a problem that can be solved by dialogue alone and it's way too early to let the Democrats back into power.

Thursday, September 14, 2006

What's True About The War On Terror

When it comes to understanding all the elements of The War On Islamofascism, Amir Taheri is a voice to be listened to. Check him out here and feel great that America is doing the right thing for the Middle East!

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Mewling, Puking Infants of the Left

James Lewis of The American Thinker says it best when it comes to putting the Left in charge of the War on Terror. Can we really stand by here in District 17 and help appoint Nancy Pelosi as the next Speaker of the House by electing Chet Edwards? Van Taylor will support our President. It used to be that our elected officials sought to make every vote toward the better good. Chet will only continue to devolve every issue the President puts forth because that's what he's done with the Republican leadership in the house.

Give Young People Control of Their Own Security

The jackalope is a big supporter of privatizing social security for younger generations. Van Taylor is too! It goes without saying that Chet Edwards is not. Chet uses his aforementioned scare tactics against our older generations in his effort to prevent this change for younger people. Chet is wrong and Van is right.

If this republic is to survive we must elect representatives that have a better idea.

Van Taylor is one of those men.

Thursday, September 07, 2006

Veterans: Don't Let "The Man" Get You Down!!

Just a passing note: Has anyone ever heard Chet Edwards ever say anything positive and uplifting about our troops? I'm searching, but I haven't seen a thing.

I heard him on WTAW talk radio yesterday, and he had every opportunity to praise the troops and it didn't happen. He just likes to scare them with the standard manipulation of baseline budgeting Democrats have been using for years. A cut in the rate of growth is still growth. Going from 11% growth for veterans affairs to a 9% growth years from now, is still growth. And besides, the VA operates on a year by year budget. They ask, they get. No one wants to give our Vets a short straw. Be comforted and fear not! As the daughter of a disabled Vet, I just want to punch men like Chet Edwards in the eye for attacking your peace of mind. Don't be fooled by an evil worker.

A Philosophical Treatise: Why Chet Edwards Should Not Be Re-elected

It just hit me like a two-by-four in the face that God, who is omnipotent, could have made us puppets, but he gave us free will in our religious beliefs, and government shouldn't limit that free will.
Chet Edwards (D)

Contrary to Mr. Edward’s statement and his beliefs – he can believe whatever he wishes – both of these points: a) God gave us free will in our religious beliefs and b) government should not limit our free will, are false.

The entire Old Testament is the history of God revealing Himself to man and instruction in what constitutes correct belief in Him. Many beliefs are designated as offensive to God, such as worship of other gods and actions contrary to His commandments. Over and over the people to whom God chose to reveal Himself are punished for not believing correctly. Being a merciful God, prophets were sent to warn the people that their actions would bear consequences because correct religious belief is mandatory to God. Even more offensive to the heart of man comes the statement by Jesus:
I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
John 14:6

This statement is not a break from the original revelation of God to man, but rather a fulfillment of promises made by God and a provision of salvation for Gentiles in His holy plan for man. Praise You, merciful Father.

Apart from anarchy, which is the absence of government, the agreement to the limitation of our free will is what creates government. Not wanting to begin in pre-history, but in direct development of our own Declaration of Independence and Constitution, Magna Carta limited the free will of kings and noblemen while securing rights of man for commoners. The Declaration of Independence was written to inform the current government that we were dissatisfied with the actions of that government and of our intent to secure a new and better government suited to our purposes.

The American rule of law was formed to defend our natural rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness i.e. personal wealth and property. Under this rule of law, we agree to check our own free will which is to take what belongs to another – life, liberty, personal wealth and property - in order that our own rights to those possessions are defended. Under the Constitution, Americans agree to accept these rules and methods of addressing grievances. The first 10 amendments to that constitution – The Bill of Rights – secured individual rights before government. Meaning that we already possess these rights, but under the Constitution, these pre-ordained rights would be recognized and defended, not bestowed and controlled by government.

These two points are important philosophical foundations that reveal the true character of Chet Edwards and his understanding of the purpose of government. In order to pursue “a more perfect union” – for I hope that our elected officials are intent upon that ideal – it is mandatory that we elect representatives that respect our Constitution, the rights it agrees to preserve and defend, and the rules under which we have agreed government to operate. In perverting that ideal, Mr. Edwards reveals that he has departed from that agreement. It is for that reason he is not an appropriate representative for the people of the 17th District.

Note: The first essay in this Philosophical Treatise

Monday, September 04, 2006

A Glimpse of Hell

Are we ready for a Democratic Party controlled House of Representatives? View this letter sent by Democrat leaders to President Bush. Scary stuff.

Friday, September 01, 2006

So That's the Reason for the Reactor

This just in: Drinking heavy water cures cancer!

For Teens - Abortion Riskier Than Pregnancy

Adolescent women experience far graver risks of mental and emotional health problems from abortion than they do by carrying their “unintended pregnancies” to term according to a new US study. The study, published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescents, proves without a doubt that abortion — not the “unintended pregnancy” — causes severe mental health problems in young women.

Why I Write

There is a great moment in the movie National Treasure when the character Ben Gates, frustrated because no one believes his warning of a threat to steal the Declaration of Independence, looks upon the revered document and reads the line:
…it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

Not only do we have the right, we also have the DUTYthe responsibility — to do something to provide new Guards, representatives, for the future Security of our nation.

The prophets spoke the words of God, confronting the leaders whose responsibility it was to lead the people in righteousness, to care for the weak and the poor, to guard the rights of the widow, orphan, and afflicted, and to execute justice throughout the land. The leaders had a way of saying they were doing these things, but the results of their deeds were the opposite.

Snapping a chalk line on the reality to results of the deeds of our elected officials is our Right, indeed our Duty. Knowledge without action is death. Stepping forward in calling others to examine the results of the deeds, rather than blindly accepting intentions and claims as end means, is necessary if we are to remain a viable, strong republic.

Thursday, August 31, 2006

He Was JUST Joking

Republicans get accused of leaking CIA information and outing the covert agents and they want to somehow turn the issue against us somehow about not being patriotic because President Bush said the other day we're asking questions about the Iraq War and the intelligence information. They always play offense and I think that that's an important lesson.Chet Edwards

It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House — that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson — is untrue.

Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming — falsely, as it turned out — that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

Sorry Chet, you took him seriously when Joe was just poking for fun.

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

It's Not the Money, It's the Message It Sends

What is the correct ethical response of elected representatives when juggling the act of constituent requests with the responsibilities of serving the nation? Chet Edwards (D) boasts of his efforts to protect those serving in our military. The jackalope has made it clear she is skeptical of his efforts, and his dealings with constituent insurance company American Amicable is a case in point.

According to Congressional Committee Meeting hearings, one of the products American Amicable offered was mutual funds with a 50% first-year commission — a product that has virtually disappeared from the civilian market. The reasons behind the success of marketing such a punitive product to the recruits are: their young age, their financial inexperience, and the use of retired military officers to make on-base compulsory briefings that turn out to be a sales pitch boiler room.

American Amicable approached their representative Chet Edwards for help. They were seeking a stay against a ban prohibiting them from selling insurance and financial products on military bases, stateside and overseas because of fraudulent practices and specious products. Edwards chose not to examine the dubious practices of his constituent even though they were a recognized predator of the same military he swears he champions. Edwards facillitated a meeting between his predator constituent and a Lt. General, who just happened to be the new bride of his long-time friend in partisan congressional politics, Martin Frost (D). The predator constituent company promised their days of "miscreatin'" were behind them. The Lt. General said "Okay, then." A certain amount of money was added to the Congressman's campaign war chest. And voila, the ban was stopped and on the hustle went.

The jackalope is always stunned by the paltry sum people accept in exchange for doing something sleazy to another person. But that's another issue. In the tempest of ethics, constituents, war chests, and standing firm for our military, it seems the military always gets a pounding when Chet's on the case. It was never about the money, it's just the message it sent.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

A Good Shepherd is Not a Demagogue

When deciding who will represent us in government it would be useful to contrast each candidate with the character of a good shepherd. The good shepherd would risk his own life to defend his flock from thieves and predators while resisting the impulse to tell scary stories to the vulnerable lambs of what their life would be like without him. The good shepherd sings lullabies of comfort and safety while shouldering the burdens of responsibilty to the flock on himself. This is not to imply that the good shepherd does not prepare his sheep for hardships to come. Should the grazing become sparse, the good shepherd prepares his flock for the rugged journey to a new meadow. He comforts the new mothers to fear not for their young, because he is there to carry those that falter or grow weary. The rams are encouraged because of the steadfastness of their shepherd. When the shepherd calls them to follow, they step out in trust knowing that their shepherd will provide their needs to the utmost of his ability. The shepherd is prepared with food and water for the journey and travels with purpose seasoned by grace. These are the qualities of a good leader.

Here in District 17 we are currently represented by a demagogue rather than a good shepherd. The demagogue unnecessarily scares his flock of constituents in order to gain power. The specific target of Chet Edwards (D-TX) is veterans and he never misses an opportunity to scare them. His own campaign site is full of articles that detail his fear-mongering efforts disguised as the work of the good shepherd.

Consider this article by the Associated Press headlined:
Lawmakers Work To Fill $1 Billion Gap In Funding For VA
Previous efforts failed in wake of pressure by GOP to keep spending levels down

According to the opening lines, Chet speaks in the tone of a good shepherd protecting his flock. The article is definitely written in a manner that would make the reader believe so. The story ends well with the VA receiving $1.5 billion to cover the $1 billion shortfall, but that wasn't because of Chet's work but rather the work of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX).

In the previous link it was the tiny quote by Rep. Jeb Hensarling that revealed Chet's character. Chet Edwards is one of a handful of representatives serving on both the budget and appropriations committtees. Each committee has rules concerning issues that can be addressed: appropriation issues in appropriation committees and budget issues in buget committees. Bringing up an appropriation issue for the VA in a budget committee meeting was calculated to net sound bites to scare the bejeebers out of the targeted victims. Presenting the request for the VA before the Appropriations Committe of which he is the Ranking Minority leader, would have been the appropriate forum, but would not have generated the sparks necessary for enflamed rhetoric. "I was accused of making partisan attacks."

But the partisan stunt was executed not only to scare our veterans, but also to create a political embarrassment for the administration. Chet's plan involved raising taxes and increasing the budget deficit and would be totally unacceptable to Republicans who are cutting taxes to grow the economy and bring down the budget deficit. Viewed logically, Chet's actions were: a) politically oriented rather than a pragmatic service to the nation and b) a self-serving and malicious attack on the peace of mind of our veterans and those now in service.

I'm grateful to know the Good Shepherd and I hope He is your Shepherd, too. By His Grace, the Good Shepherd is a friend of mine. You, Chet Edwards, are no good shepherd.

Monday, August 28, 2006

The B/CS Eagle Has Decided

The Jackalope has learned from reliable sources that a favorable article on Van Taylor was spiked by The Eagle. The reporter is no longer available for comment. We wish her well in her journalistic career.

The Jackalope is not surprised by this information as her voice was also silenced by The Eagle.

Trick Rider

Chet Edwards (D) finally requested removal of a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee internet ad showing flag draped coffins of American soldiers killed in Iraq. The furor over the ad, along with Chet’s request, finally caused the ad to be pulled after 2 1/2 weeks of collecting campaign donations for congressional Democrats. Concerning the effectiveness of the ad: “It was more successful than we’d ever dreamed,” said DCCC spokesman Bill Burton.

Are we to believe that Chet, after eight terms in Congress, was totally unaware of the production of the offensive ad?

Or did he know, but was unable to stop Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) from producing and running it?

Or did the ad run its full intended course, with Chet, feigning outrage, continuing his charade as a Democratic Party maverick by finally demanding its removal?

Or maybe he's just a trick rider on two ponies fixin' to rip his pants.

The Truth Should Hit Everybody

Although heralded as a hawk on the War on Terror, the Jackalope has searched the web extensively for Chet Edwards' (D) quotes to substantiate this claim. When fellow congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA) was attacking our troops, Chet Edwards made this ambiguious statement:
It sends a message that the American people are increasingly unsure about the operations of the Iraq war and that it is no longer a debate over whether one is a hawk or a dove, but should we be or should we not be in Iraq. People would make a mistake if they attack (Murtha) personally.

Hardly a resounding defense of our troops and overlooks the obvious message Murtha's comments sent to our enemies — the guys shooting at our military. Chet always seems ready for a quick partisan dig. Here he neither defended the troops nor condemned Murtha. The truth should hit's time Chet was smacked.

Saturday, August 26, 2006

Who's Your Daddy?

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

We all know the classic western script where the larger than life cattleman solves the problem of settlers moving in, or the widow owning the land with the spring fed lake, by hiring a dark, nasty man to take care of the problem. The big cattleman never wants to actually know the methods of his man because knowing ignites complicity, which could land even a cattle baron in front of the judge.

The dark, nasty hired man wants power and prestige and he doesn’t care what he has to do to get it. He’s a ham-fisted brawler able to knock a man standing in his way down to the dirt quick. He enjoys eliciting fear when he walks down the street or into a room.

Here in the Brazos Valley that man is Chet Edwards (D) of the spread called District 17. Chet maintains an iron grip on his territory by sinking his big hands into the Federal Trough and bringing home the bacon. Edwards swaggers into town bragging about how he not only pushed aside any lesser beings standing in line at the House Bank but makes it sound like he forced all the other congressmen to toss their own wallets into his hat so he could bring back even more. Like our cattle baron, the recipients of this mammon may not like his methods, but acknowledge he does get the job done. Some may even quietly grin at Chet’s strong-arm tactics; giving a wink and a nod to his devilish nature and marveling at how he seems to get away with it.

But just because Chet brings home the bacon don’t confuse him with Daddy. Chet’s the kind of man that would drive your underage daughter across state lines so she can get an abortion without parental consent. Having a 100% NARAL rating gets big campaign dollars along with the added bonus of striking fear into those suckers in Congress with moral convictions.

As recipients of Chet's money we should be aware of the blood attached. Are we willing as a society to build great monuments at the expense of innocents? Can we maintain an advancing society by undermining the moral foundations? Should we accept the money without asking how it was obtained? Does blood money really spend just like cash?

This election will tell if the Brazos Valley is still a safe place for the settlers or if an immoral thug has outgunned us.
No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.
Matthew 6:24

Friday, August 25, 2006

Chet's Tax Irons are in the Fire - Beware

When it comes to taxes, Chet Edwards has more than one iron in the fire. If it's the homemaker's iron, he believes tax cuts are good. He said, "This helps working families to better meet their own family budgets while freeing up more dollars to put back into the economy." Now that makes sense to me even though I'm not a Harvard Business School graduate like Chet. When the marriage penalty tax is repealed then families have more money to spend. The money they spend helps build the economy. As the economy improves, wages increase and new jobs are created. When wages increase, the taxes collected by government increase and the government collects more money than projected. So, the little homemaker iron in Chet's fire is a "good" iron because it makes money for the government. Now, that's a sweet deal.

But Chet's got another iron in the fire--the class warfare iron. Watch out for innocent bystanders when Chet's swinging this red-hot branding iron. Evidently tax cuts for the rich don't grow the economy like the little homemaker tax cut did. Chet said, "This sends a terrible message to our troops here at home, in Iraq, and Afghanistan that this Congress would cut $507 million in vital military construction projects and $735 million from military healthcare in order to pay for the tax cuts they passed just a few days ago." Recognize the smell of a burning red herring?

It's a nasty low blow. Caring nothing for the military he says he protects, Chet casually burns the peace of mind of our brave men and women in uniform to use that class warfare branding iron one more time. Talk about striking while the iron is hot…maybe it's more like time to pull the plug.
Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil worker...Philippians 3:2a

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Chet's Demagoguery Rebuked II

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 7
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

It's true Van Taylor owns EXXON MOBIL stock and he respects and even reveres the words "... that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness..." The American pursuit of happiness is what drives men like his Great-Grandfather to pursue a dream that became a world-wide company, a giant of industry. Yes, he inherited EXXON stock but what Mr. Edwards won't tell young people is that he voted against privatizing your own social security account.

Through privatization, young people could direct their own account; investing their own money in an assortment of approved mutual funds and stocks, experiencing the creation of wealth and even will the proceeds to their heirs just like Van's family has been able to do. He believes young people should have the opportunity to equality through investing their own retirement funds in proven growth funds like EXXON MOBIL stock instead of the current social security method which is to write young people an I.O.U. and file it in a metal file cabinet. No investment, no interest, no future wealth.

Who needs a hindrance when it comes to oil?

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 6
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

Van Taylor's Great-Grandfather was a visionary who helped found a company that not only provides gasoline at the best market price possible, but created jobs for hundreds of thousands of men and women. Today, EXXON MOBIL stock is owned by teachers and other state employees through Teacher Retirement Funds because it is a dependable growth investment. If Mr. Edwards cared about the price of oil, he would have voted for drilling for oil in ANWAR when he voted for drilling for natural gas in the Gulf and on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. When Mr. Edwards finally votes to override the 25 year old ban on drilling off-shore... well, he's been there for 16 of those 25 years and how long have regular Americans known that America was too dependent on Middle East Oil? Van Taylor's family participates in creating a product that keeps America moving forward while Chet's been a hindrance for 16 years.

Reconquistadors vs. The Rule of Law

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 5
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

170 years ago, men inside The Alamo drew a line in the sand solidifying their resolve in resisting a despot and his desire to re-negotiate land grants previously signed and sealed in the Mexican court of law. It was this blatant disregard of the rule of law that united Mexican citizens, both brown and white, to declare their independence and create a new man, a man of myth and legend, The Texan.

The rule of law is the greatest ideal in preserving the rights of man by encouraging peace, stability, and the continuity of civilization. The rule of law defends all men equally and apart from war, is the only thing that stands between common men and despotism.

The willingness to defend the rule of law is what established the Republic of Texas and what makes the state of Texas the wealth creator it is today. Only those that covet the property of others are desirous of overthrowing the rule of law. We must resist those that would make promises that will never be honored to those ignorant to the benefits they enjoy because of that rule of law.

A Strong Mexico

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 4
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

…it is very true that I threw up my cap for liberty with great ardor, and perfect sincerity, but very soon found the folly of it. A hundred years to come my people will not be fit for liberty. They do not know what it is, unenlightened as they are, and under the influence of a Catholic clergy, a despotism is the proper government for them, but there is no reason why it should not be a wise and virtuous one.
Santa Anna during interviews
after his capture at San Jacinto

The Mexican government is now only two elections into the establishment of a second political party since these words by Santa Anna doomed the Mexican people to a future of despotism. A one party system invites cronyism and corruption and is hardest on the poor and powerless. Van Taylor will work with President Bush to promote a foreign policy that gives stability and continuity to the 2 party democratic system now just beginning to emerge in Mexican politics. A strong democratic/republic government in Mexico is in the best interest of the United States and the best way to halt the need of illegals to leave their homeland in order to provide for their families.

Chet's Demagoguery Rebuked

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 3
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

No attack on a Texas oil man ever put gas in an 18-wheeler!

Chet Edwards On Drugs

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 2
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

A word to our young voters on Chet’s idea of equality. Every job you apply for today seems to require random drug tests. You understand that it’s dangerous to your employers and fellow employees to have a person working under the influence. You live in a “You use, you lose” world. And that’s the law and you know its requirements. But that’s just for you in the private sector because Chet voted NO on subjecting federal workers to random drug tests. That’s Chet Edwards on drugs. Scary, very scary.

Play Until You Pay

TX Congressional Dist. 17 Election 2006 Post 1
Van Taylor vs. Chet Edwards

Chet’s a midnight basketball kind of guy when it comes to juvenile crime. He supports spending $61 million to fund Girls and Boys clubs which could be a real service to our community, but not when the $61 million was diverted from money allocated for violent offender imprisonment and truth-in-sentencing programs. Mr. Edwards also voted NO when it came to appropriating $1.5 billion for states to improve their juvenile justice operations: building and renovating juvenile correction facilities, hiring juvenile judges and probation officers, and most importantly development and administration of a graduated sanctions program for juvenile offenders.

However, if wayward children push that criminal free throw line until a heinous act receives the death penalty, Chet turns into an unwavering hard-liner. He voted NO on replacing death penalty with life imprisonment and YES on making death penalty appeals harder. So, with Chet it’s “Midnight Basketball” until you get the death penalty. Where’s the mercy in that? Any parent knows that instilling personal discipline and character in a young person is an everyday task. Justice is the correct response for each stage of infraction. That’s why implementing a graduated sanctions program is so important. With Chet, it’s play until you pay — big time.