Jay Dean is no conservative!

 

Jay Dean has been endorsed by Straus group
Texas Alliance for Life

Check out a posting from Sue Evenwel on
Texas Alliance for Life

 

By:  Sue Evenwel (reblogged)

I am sooo disappointed! You almost had me fooled Mr. Hayes!

Do not vote for this man if you care about Pro-Life legislation.  He now owes Joe Straus!

Texas Alliance for Life is anything but a pro-Life organization.  It is a front for Joe Straus, and has been on the wrong side of nearly every pro-life initiative.

The is a BIG disappointment to see Mr. Hayes receive this endorsement.

Last night I asked candidates at the NTCC Forum if any of them would vote for Joe Straus as Speaker..Have they received and money from Straus or his agents…or have received promises from House leadership.  Well how about an endorsement!

Texas Alliance for Life has given money to Straus supporters like Bennett Ratliff, who believes a woman has a right to choose.

It’s no longer a secret or coincidence that Bennett’s brother, Thomas Ratliff and Philip Hayes were meeting together at Herschel’s last week when Judy Kent and I just happened by for a cup of coffee.

Shame on you Mr. Hayes for trying to fool the voters pretending to be a conservative.  TAL is extremely weak on anything that says Pro-Life.  You all remember what David Barton said at the Reagan Day Dinner……The way you vote on Pro-Life issues, gives you a pretty good indication of how you vote on other issues.

During the 83rd legislative session, TAL’s interference with H.B.2 led to the drama on the Senate floor that propelled Wendy Davis into the national spotlight.  TAL worked behind the scenes to water down and finally reject the 5 month abortion ban, that was originally in the bill, leaving the bill with only the abortion clinic regulations.

---

Jay Dean has been endorsed by Texas Medical Association who support end of life decisions to be up to the hospital personnel

---

 

Jay Dean’s donation to Speaker Joe Straus

---

Jay Dean’s mailer on”Restore Traditional Marriage” yet in 2014 . . .

“I did a letter of support for their celebration

that is going to be read at their celebration,”

Jay Dean – 2014

---

 

Jay Dean admits he is with the Establishment

---

 

---

Jay Dean on immigration – only those who rape, rob or kill are criminals?

---

---

 

Conservatives FIGHT to protect our Constitution, 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, right to life, too much government, Obamacare, to secure our border, etc.
Conservatives have known for many years that collaborating with democrats only moves us further left

---

 

Democratic Organizing for Action Vik Verma
thinks Dean is a conservative. That settles it, right?

 

Paxton: The President Must Respect the Rule of Law

His immigration decrees are not just harmful and illegal; they’re unconstitutional. American immigration law is composed of thousands of pages, written by dozens of Congresses and federal agencies over a span of decades, and signed into law by numerous U.S. presidents.

But President Barack Obama has decided that all that doesn’t matter, and that he can now rule by decree.

Regardless of whether you support or oppose the president’s amnesty plan, the simple fact remains that, in the United States, no individual may or should have that much unchecked power. It flies in the face of the rule of law, which in any government is all that stands between freedom and tyranny.

The rule of law is at the very heart of the case that Texas filed against President Obama in December, an action that has been joined by 25 other states, forming a bipartisan coalition. These plaintiffs are concerned about the president’s unilateral use of executive power to accomplish through edict what he could not achieve legislatively.

And that’s why the full injunction that we won from U.S. district judge Andrew Hanen is so important: It has stopped the president from single-handedly enacting what is effectively a whole new system of laws, in the process granting amnesty to millions of people who came to this country illegally.

Before the court issued its injunction, the federal government was hard at work hiring staff and preparing to distribute forms and information for millions of illegal immigrants to apply for work authorizations. As the court’s opinion made abundantly clear, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to “put the genie back in the bottle” and undo this step once it has been taken.

That was, of course, before last week’s admission by the administration that it had already begun granting expanded employment authorizations to illegal immigrants, in direct contradiction of what it told a U.S. federal court.

It’s also important to remember that the president’s illegal action is a slap in the face to all the people who have tried to come to the United States through established, legal means. The president aims to reward instead those who felt the law shouldn’t apply to them.

All that is disturbing, but more disturbing still is when any president usurps power by circumventing the legislative process to create new laws by decree. No president can legally do that. Our founders considered such assertions of power to be the essence of tyranny. That’s why Texas and our fellow states stood up and challenged the president’s unconstitutional and illegal actions.

President Obama’s autocratic directives would have had a major impact on every state. They would have placed stresses on our economy, our schools, our public-safety programs — practically every aspect of society. But not only did President Obama leave the states out of the discussion; he circumvented Congress as well, cutting our representatives in Washington out of the process completely. It’s not surprising that Congress has been hesitant to fund DHS after President Obama’s actions, seemingly agreeing to restore funding only after our injunction was in place.

The president may not like that Congress writes our immigration laws, but that doesn’t give him the right to pretend those laws don’t exist. And it doesn’t give him the authority to replace them with ones he made up on his own.

President Obama himself has said numerous times over the past few years that he lacks the authority to do precisely what he is now trying to do. In October 2010, during an interview on immigration, he said, “I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.”

Then, last November, at the announcement of his sweeping executive order, he proclaimed, “I just took an action to change the law.”

What had changed since he made his initial assertions? His attitude, perhaps. A Republican takeover of Congress, definitely.

But the law of the United States hasn’t changed. And that’s what makes his actions not only illegal, but unconstitutional.

Consider also the precedent that may be set. Allowing President Obama’s actions to stand sends the message that any president is now the supreme authority in the nation. This would give the president unchecked power to legislate from the Oval Office.

Along with 25 other states, Texas will continue to fight as long as it takes to preserve our American democracy and restore the rule of law.

— Ken Paxton is the attorney general of Texas.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415209/president-must-respect-rule-law-ken-paxton

Texas Solution is a False Hope

By Dale Huls

One cannot look at the either the 2012 Texas Solution or the Staples-backed 2014 update in a piece-part fashion.  The entire plank is a fraud in that it does not offer any border security or immigration reform solutions to the perceived problem. The premise of this being a “solution” is simply misrepresentation.  The one point that everyone agrees upon is border security.  Yet, border security is addressed as a worthless platitude with no real direction or substance behind it.  It is not specifically directed at the Federal or State level.  This is the same as every Republican politician and candidate claiming he or she is “conservative” to the point where the word has actually lost its value as a descriptor.

Indeed, one must take the entirety of the immigration plank and place it in context.  What is it that the 2012 Texas Solution purports to solve? Does it offer a path to Border Security? No. Does it offer solutions to the byzantine immigration laws and in-country enforcement? No.  What it does do is address Republican big business interests by incorporating a “path to cheap labor” as a fundamental core component of Republican Immigration Policy at the State and then to the National level.  What rubbish!  Since Republicans can never give as many benefits and entitlements as the Democrats, they are prepared to offer the PROMISE of jobs in order to curry political favor with Hispanic groups.  Think about that.  With participation in the American workforce at historic lows and a shrinking GDP, the Republican “solution” is more jobs for non-Americans!  When Staples was asked about protecting American workers, his response was we will just make it more expensive for employers to hire foreign workers over Americans through visa fees.  Well guess what, employers driven by cheap labor costs will still hire under the table if a guest worker with a visa costs more than an undocumented illegal alien.  Managing such a comprehensive program will be a bureaucratic and costly nightmare.  We cannot control or manage today’s current student visa program.  How can we possibly manage millions of guest workers across America?  Consequently, it is my belief that the professed “market-based” solution with a low-skill guest worker program as its centerpiece will not SOLVE America’s illegal immigration issues.

The conclusion that I and many others have reached is that the “Texas Solution” is a political fig leaf that really does nothing to SOLVE border security or immigration reform issues.  This is Texas Republican leadership indulging in political gamesmanship to ostensibly court the Hispanic vote and provide benefits to their corporate interests. The RNC is now looking at the Texas Solution as a model for the national platform.  Moderate Republican 2016 presidential candidates that embrace an “America Solution” immigration plank will be able to point to Texas as the reddest of red states and claim a conservative position on immigration and border security that is consistent with their own.  The result will be to immunize moderates against true conservative candidates offering real solutions to a broken immigration system and failed border security policies.

Grassroots should be focused on separating the issues of border security and immigration reform above all else.  Border security should never be linked to legal immigration reform efforts or in-country immigration enforcement activities.  There are no technical or legal impediments to protecting America’s borders.  The only issue preventing a secure border is of a political nature.  America does not have to become a “police state” to enforce the rule of law as applied to the border.  The US Government protects its military installations, it protects the secrets of Area 51 from intrusion and prying eyes, it polices it national parks, and it protects its assets overseas from illegal trespass.  America put a man on the moon, surely it solve the puzzle of border security.  If the Texas Governor, Lt. Governor and the candidates for these same offices all believe that Texas can close the border to 80 – 90% of all illegal traffic, then why does the Texas Republican Platform not call for the funding of such a DPS border surge?  Our Texas Rainy Day fund is being siphoned off for education, water projects and road funding.  Why not use some of the Texas taxpayer’s money to fund a Texas border surge?  The Texas Republican Platform should demand real solutions for border security rather than hollow calls to “secure the border.”

And finally, does anyone really and truly deep down believe that a guest worker program will win the hearts and minds of the Hispanic communities in Texas.  Democrats offer big government solutions to minority communities.  They offer food stamps, welfare, housing, education and many other entitlements and benefits.  What are Republicans offering – guest worker visas.  However, what would happen if Republicans truly engaged minority communities on the immigration issue as a “humanitarian” issue.  What if Republicans were to offer solutions to reduce crime, end the drug pipeline, eradicate the dehumanizing sex trade, promote economic freedom, and terminate the human slave trade? Do you think the decent folks in Hispanic communities could buy into this message and outreach?  Do you think that conservative Hispanic families would feel safer and thus more open to Republicans?  Do you think that the religious communities would see value in supporting these Republican values and principles?  I think the answer would be yes.

It’s time to change the game.  For Republicans to become a credible alternative in the Hispanic and Asian communities in Texas, our “solution” must be on a fundamental level that will impact minority Texan’s lives and families.  We need to change the narrative from how do we compromise over illegal immigration to a positive message of caring for minority communities that have suffered from the ills of an unsecured border and broken immigration system.  We must reject false choices such as the Texas Solution and craft fundamentally sound policies and positions that fall back on founding principles such as the protection of Life…Liberty…and the Pursuit of Happiness for all Texas communities.  We must not allow our Hispanic and Asian populations to fall into despair by failing to address a major root cause of crime and human misery in their communities.  If Republicans believe in the principles of economic freedom, personal freedom, and the hope for a better tomorrow, then by God, they should start acting like it.

ICE: Most illegals have ‘close to zero’ chance of being deported…

 

 

 By Brian Bennett

WASHINGTON — Immigration activists have sharply criticized President Obama for a rising volume of deportations, labeling him the “deporter in chief” and staging large protests that have harmed his standing with some Latinos, a key group of voters for Democrats.

But the portrait of a steadily increasing number of deportations rests on statistics that conceal almost as much as they disclose. A closer examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S. are less likely to be deported today than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data.

Expulsions of people who are settled and working in the United States have fallen steadily since his first year in office, and are down more than 40% since 2009.

On the other side of the ledger, the number of people deported at or near the border has gone up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency’s deportation statistics.

The vast majority of those border crossers would not have been treated as formal deportations under most previous administrations. If all removals were tallied, the total sent back to Mexico each year would have been far higher under those previous administrations than it is now.

The shift in who gets tallied helped the administration look tough in its early years but now may be backfiring politically. Immigration advocates plan protests across the country this week around what they say will be the 2 millionth deportation under Obama — a mark expected to be hit in the next few days. And Democratic strategists fret about a decline in Latino voter turnout for this fall’s election.

Until recent years, most people caught illegally crossing the southern border were simply bused back into Mexico in what officials called “voluntary returns,” but which critics derisively termed “catch and release.” Those removals, which during the 1990s reached more 1 million a year, were not counted in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s deportation statistics.

Now, the vast majority of border crossers who are apprehended get fingerprinted and formally deported. The change began during the George W. Bush administration and accelerated under Obama. The policy stemmed in part from a desire to ensure that people who had crossed into the country illegally would have formal charges on their records.

In the Obama years, all of the increase in deportations has involved people picked up within 100 miles of the border, most of whom have just recently crossed over. In 2013, almost two-thirds of deportations were in that category.

At the same time, the administration largely ended immigration roundups at workplaces and shifted investigators into targeting business owners who illegally hired foreign workers.

“If you are a run-of-the-mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting deported are close to zero — it’s just highly unlikely to happen,” John Sandweg, until recently the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in an interview.

Even when immigration officials want to deport someone who already has settled in the country, doing so is “virtually impossible” because of a lengthy backlog in the immigration courts, Sandweg said. Once people who have no prior removals or convictions are placed in deportation proceedings, actually removing them from the country can take six years or more in some jurisdictions, Sandweg said.

Deportations of people apprehended in the interior of the U.S., which the immigration agency defines as more than 100 miles from the border, dropped from 237,941 in Obama’s first year to 133,551 in 2013, according to immigration data. Four out of five of those deportees came to the attention of immigration authorities after criminal convictions.

Many of those convictions are related to crossing the border — the other big consequence of the change in the way border removals are handled.

A growing number of people caught trying to cross the border now have a formal deportation order on their records. Entering the country without legal authorization is not a crime. But once a person has been deported, he can be prosecuted if he reenters the country.

The policy of deporting border crossers and then prosecuting people who reenter has increased the number of immigrants charged in federal court. In 1992, immigration offenses accounted for 5% of federal convictions. In the subsequent two decades, the share of immigration cases on the federal docket increased sixfold, according to a study by the Pew Research Center.

In 2012, immigration offenses made up 30% of federal convictions, second only to drug cases, which made up one-third.

The new system has criminalized immigration violations, notes Chris Newman, legal director for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, based in Los Angeles.

Immigration activists have pressured Obama to use his executive authority to stop deporting immigrants with close family ties in the U.S. and no criminal history other than immigration-related violations.

Deportations at the border can have an impact on families living within the U.S., said Doris Meissner, who headed the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service from 1993 to 2000. An increasing portion of people illegally crossing the border today have lived in the U.S. before and have long-standing links to U.S. communities, she said.

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402,0,3514864.story#ixzz2xulIFxgi

Cruz: Shakes Up Business as Usual and Gets ‘MAN OF THE YEAR’ #tcot

He is not my boss, but he is my Senator!

It’s not surprising, but very well deserved.  Congratulations Senator Ted Cruz. 

TED CRUZ: MAN OF THE YEAR

He’s both principled and effective

Ted Cruz stood on the floor of the Senate and answered his critics: “….do you expect me to remain here silent, or to shrink from the discharge of my duty?… I will speak in spite of all the intimidations, or threats, or discountenances that may be thrown upon me.”

Actually, Ted Cruz did not say that. But the fact that it is so easily believable that he did say it says exactly why Ted Cruz, Time magazine’s selection of the Pope notwithstanding, is the real “Man of the Year.” In fact, while Cruz did make Time’s shortlist, he also popped up in a Rasmussen poll just behind the Pope and President Obama as 2013’s “most influential person.”

The man who said the words above was another celebrated Senator from Texas.

That would be Sam Houston, one of the fathers of Texas independence and the first United States Senator from Texas, as he rose on the Senate floor in 1854 to oppose the Kansas-Nebraska bill. Kansas-Nebraska, an overwhelming favorite with Houston’s fellow Democrats, repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and reopened the issue of extending slavery that had presumably been settled by the Compromise of 1850. Houston, correctly as it later turned out, saw the bill as fueling the fires of civil war.

His fellow Senate Democrats were infuriated with Houston. Already viewed with suspicion for what was termed his “eccentric dress and his habit of whittling pine sticks on the Senate floor while muttering at the length of senatorial speeches,” Houston was now assailed as a “traitor.”

Today, the term of art is not “traitor” — it’s “wackobird.”

And the target is another United States Senator from Texas — Ted Cruz.

As was true of Sam Houston, these kinds of attacks do not come the way of the unaccomplished or the politically fearful. If Houston is today seen as both a Texas legend and American hero, it is less remembered that he was once the subject of fierce controversy, not only in the Senate but back home in Texas as well. Yet Houston stood tall as a torrent of abuse rained down on him. In the 20th century, Senator John F. Kennedy would cite Sam Houston’s political courage and his accomplishments, selecting Houston as one of eight senators celebrated for their impact both on the Senate and America in JFK’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book Profiles in Courage. Houston and his senatorial colleagues from different eras in American history were held up as examples of senators who persisted in spite of “the risks to their careers, the unpopularity of their courses, the defamation of their characters” and ferocious attacks on “their reputations and principles.”

Nothing describes Ted Cruz better than that description of Sam Houston by John F. Kennedy.

Not for Cruz the idea that he was elected to represent Washington insiders, consultants and the Republican Establishment to his fellow Texans. Cruz is of the belief that his presence in the Senate gives him the responsibility to represent Texans in Washington, not Washington to Texas.

In the doing of actually representing his constituents — the citizens of Texas who have had it up to here with Washington shenanigans that are now costing them jobs, damaging their businesses and losing them their health care — Ted Cruz has established himself Houston-style as one of the nation’s most important — make that effective — Senators.

Here’s a short list of accomplishment that is extraordinary for a freshman senator:

• Obamacare: Cruz and fellow freshman Mike Lee of Utah were pilloried for rallying the grassroots in a call for the defunding of Obamacare. Contrary to the line from the White House, Democrats and their allies in the liberal media, it was the Obama administration that insisted on shutting down the government unless Obamacare was funded. In spite of the vitriol directed at Cruz, he and Lee have been repeatedly vindicated as Obamacare kicked in and began wreaking havoc on both the American health care system and the larger economy. Just as Ronald Reagan did repeatedly during his time in the White House, Cruz and Lee drew a philosophical line in the sand to contrast the differences between the parties.

• Gun Control: Along with Rand Paul and Mike Lee, Cruz led the fight to stop the Obama gun control initiative in its tracks. The key here was insisting on a 60-vote threshold on the Motion to Proceed, a parliamentary maneuver that effectively activated the conservative base and fingered wavering “red-state” Republicans and Democrats. The Obama gun control bill crashed and burned, infuriating the President who quickly walked into the Rose Garden and made his fury well known, blistering senators who had followed the lead of Cruz, Paul and Lee.

• Syria: Cruz again stepped into the breech, this time on a critical foreign policy issue. Standing resolutely against the idea of a US air attack on Syria unless there were identifiable American interests at stake, Cruz’s view won the day.

• Immigration: The son of a Cuban immigrant, Cruz was out front in the fight against the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” (four Republicans and four Democrats) who had fashioned a deeply flawed immigration bill that essentially promoted amnesty first while relegating border security to a lagging second place. Cruz stepped up with a tough border security plan and other measures that kept the bill from reaching more than 70 votes, reducing the immigration bill’s chances in the House. It is noteworthy that House Speaker John Boehner, fresh from castigating conservatives over the budget deal, is reported ready to begin a push for immigration next year. Setting up another clash between conservatives and the GOP Establishment — and providing Cruz yet another opportunity for leadership.

• Drones: Last but not least, Cruz stood with Rand Paul in Paul’s historic filibuster against U.S. drone policy. It was Cruz who forced Attorney General Eric Holder to acknowledge that yes, in fact, the Constitution really did keep the Obama administration — or any administration — from using drones to kill U.S. citizens on U.S. soil if said citizens did not represent an imminent threat.

What has been the result of all this Cruz activity?

Contrary to the notions floated by Washington’s Establishment minions, polls taken after the government shutdown that was supposedly such a horrific experience show something very curious indeed.

Take this CNN/ORC poll which was published on CNN’s site with this headline:

CNN/ORC poll: Democrats lose 2014 edge following Obamacare uproar

Read more here: http://spectator.org/articles/57187/ted-cruz-man-year

 

Senator Cruz at Iowa Republican Picnic

 

Texas Senator Ted Cruz speaks on family, immigration, IRS, 2nd Amendment, grassroots, and making a difference. 

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Cruzat