Congressional candidates silent as Federal Courts (once again) mess with Texas' election laws

"But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."
Revelation 21:8

We've discussed previously how Congress has the authority to shut down the various, ongoing, Federal lawsuits against Texas' election laws.  We've also discussed how the failure to do so is one of the biggest marks against Texas' congressional delegation.  That remains the case.

During the 2018 election cycle, we've discussed how shutting down this nonsense would be one of the easiest ways for a candidate to stand out.  We've also discussed how that's not happening.  That also continues.

In that context, we present last week's news out of San Antonio:

Texas has less than a week to tell a federal judge in San Antonio how it will begin complying with the National Voter Registration Act, a decades-old federal law aimed at making it easier for people to register to vote by forcing states to allow registration while drivers apply for or renew their driver’s licenses.

U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia ruled more than a month ago that Texas was violating the law, sometimes called the Motor Voter Act, by not allowing Texas drivers to register to vote when they update their driver’s license information online. But it wasn’t clear until this week what exactly state officials would have to do to address that — and by when they’d have to do it.

Now, Texas and the Texas Civil Rights Project — which sued the state over the issue in 2016, saying Texas’ current system disenfranchised thousands of voters and violated the U.S. Constitution — have until Thursday to propose a detailed fix for the system. After that, Garcia will weigh the proposals and order a remedy.

And what, pray tell, has been the response of the Republicans in Texas's congressional delegation?!?  Nothing.

Likewise, what has been the response of the candidates for the various runoffs for the various Congressional seats?!?  Likewise nothing.

The place where this is most infuriating is CD-21.  Chip McCall and Matt Roy are both solid conservatives going to ridiculous lengths.  Well, here's a local issue, starring a Clinton appointed judge.  This is the lowest of low hanging fruit.  Yet, neither seems interested.  We'll probably get more childish name calling.

Bottom Line: Early voting began this morning; if any candidate looking for late momentum wants to pick it up, it's sitting right in front of their face.

McCall and Roy are BOTH acting like FOUR YEAR OLDS

"When I was a child, I spake as a child: I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things."
1 Corinthians 13:11

This is dumb:

- McCall, asked about Facebook regulation: “I think my opponent knows more about this. He ran a super PAC and bought a bunch of data from Cambridge Analytica."
- Roy: "Completely false." SAEN mischaracterized the connection. "I had nothing to do with Cambridge Analytica. Zero."

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) April 12, 2018

This is even dumber:

.@cfgAction mail ties @VoteMattMcCall to @NancyPelosi in #TX21 runoff against Club-backed @chiproytx: pic.twitter.com/gLtCi1NR0N

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) May 2, 2018

Here's the thing: We've known BOTH Matt McCall and Chip Roy for several years.  They are BOTH solid.  That's why this has been depressing to watch.

And it's not just this Cambridge Analytica/Nancy Pelosi kerfuffle.  Attacking Chip Roy as some sort of "Washington insider" is asinine (the man worked for Ted friggin' Cruz).  Likewise, attacking Matt McCall as a "government contractor" is equally stupid.

Bottom Line: We suppose, with so little difference between the candidates on issues, it was inevitable that minuscule distinctions would get blown out of proportion; we could still do without the childish name calling.

Congressional Races continue offering significant upgrade opportunities

"And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart."
Galatians 6:9

While last weeks results for state legislative races were a mixed bag, the congressional races went very well.

Some thoughts on the six open seat Republican district:

• CD 2 - Neither run-off candidate stands out in a good way, but Kevin Roberts was such a lousy state rep that it suggests one should support the other guy by default.

• CD 3 - Van Taylor wins without a runoff.

• CD 5 - Bunni Pounds is rapidly consolidating conservative support. We've never met the woman, but numerous sources we trust have nothing but good things to say about her.  We just wish she had a different name.

• CD 6 - Ron Wright qualifies for runoff while finishing 24 points in front of closest rival.

• CD 21 - Matt McCall and Chip Roy are both solid conservatives.  We've known them both for many years and the differences are due to personality and style, but the philosophical underpinnings are identical.  Either one would be a significant upgrade over the current 32 year incumbent.

• CD 27 - Michael Cloud scores a surprisingly strong second place finish while the widely expected front runner underperforms for a front runner.

Bottom Line: Obviously, you need to win the run-offs, but we should be very satisfied with the primary results in Congressional races.

CD-21: Nobody Stands Out in Cliche Filled Candidate Forum

"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him."
Colossians 1:16

Last we, we wrote a blog post discussing the lack of creativity or intellectual bandwidth in the various races for open congressional seats across Texas; unfortunately, last night's candidate forum for the CD-21 race sponsored by the Travis and Hays County Republican parties was a textbook example of what we're talking about.

The forum was loaded with boilerplate Republican rhetoric: "Founding Fathers," "Constitution," "Cut spending [without specifics]," "Reduce regulation [without specifics]," "Strong Christian," "Rebuild the Military," "Ronald Reagan," "Servant Leadership," "Drain the Swamp."  Everybody hit their talking points.  But we hope you'll forgive for saying that, after hearing them repeatedly over the past decade, those talking points have become rather stale.

Instead, the candidates seem to be differentiating themselves based on resume and endorsements.  If we're going to play the resume/endorsement game, Chip Roy will win.  The man spent a decade in D.C., yet managed to escape with his soul and his integrity intact.  As for the others, nobody stands out.

Honestly, the most interesting candidate in this race is the worst one.  Jen Sarver is a loathsome political hack (aka. Bush crony) who made a name for herself several years ago by the depths to which she was willing to stoop to carry water for the UT Politburo.  What makes her interesting in this race, however, is that she's running as an unapologetic RINO.  In a race where 15 candidates are attempting to cram into the "conservative" lane, Sarver has the "moderate" lane to herself.  In a divided field in a district that includes Joe Straus' San Antonio stomping grounds, that might be enough to make the runoff.  This website does not support Jen Sarver's candidacy in any way, shape, or form...but we are nevertheless VERY curious to see how she ends up doing.

In terms of policy, the only candidate who (kinda, sorta) stood out was Matt McCall.  Matt endorsed using Article 3, Section 1 of the constitution to remove abortion and marriage from the Supreme Court's jurisdiction.  He also vaguely alluded to the need to abolish full cabinet departments.  On the other hand, Matt also supports placing immigration related sanctions on Mexico, a move that would be DOOMED to backfiring spectacularly.

We will also confess to a soft spot for Sam Temple, a longshot borderline-Anarchist who chided the other candidates for various stupid acts of fearmongring.

Bottom Line: Meh....

Matt McCall: Restore Economic Growth!!!

"Consider the work of God;
For who can make straight what He has made crooked?"
Ecclesiastes 7:13

Matt McCall discusses the difference between free enterprise and fascism/socialism:



Highlights:

• "We did not become the greatest country in the world, the greatest economy in the world, by being fascist or socialist."

• Fascism = Government control of the means of production
• Author's Note: Cronyism, or Big Business/Big Government collusion are also commonly used term to describe a fascist economic system.

• Socialism = Government ownership of them means of production.

• Capitalist economy is based on freedom.

• "Envy has never gotten us anywhere except 20 trillion dollars in debt and $200 trillion worth of unfunded mandates."

Matt McCall endorses RESTORATION of CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY!!!

"The soul of a lazy man desires, and has nothing;
But the soul of the diligent shall be made rich."
Proverbs 13:4

Back in the day this website focused primarily on national issues, the usurpation of the ELECTED Congresses' authority by the administrative state was one of our major bugaboos; thus, we were pleased to learn about this recent proposal from United States Senator Mike Lee:

First, Congress must reclaim its power of the federal purse. Our formal budget process, which dates to 1974, has fallen apart, and we must restructure it for a post-earmark world. We need to bring entitlement programs back onto the actual budget and bring self-funding federal agencies back under annual appropriation.

Second, we need to reform legislative “cliffs” that loom behind expiring legislation — at the end of the fiscal year and when the federal debt nears its statutory limit — to realign the incentives of the American people and their government. Congress must take back control of actual federal lawmaking. Today, the vast majority of federal laws are unilaterally imposed by executive-branch agencies.

Third, Congress must take back control of actual federal lawmaking. Today, the vast majority of federal laws are unilaterally imposed by executive-branch agencies. The bureaucrats in these agencies then serve as police, prosecutors, and courts in the ensuing cases. All major regulations should be affirmatively prioritized and approved by a vote of Congress.

Finally, we must clarify the law governing executive discretion, which right now allows presidents and federal bureaucrats to ignore or rewrite federal statutes, so long as they have a clever enough reason.

Reform in these four areas would put Congress back in charge of federal lawmaking and put the American people back in charge of Washington — just as the Founders intended.

Learn more about the Article 1 project here.

And guess who endorses the Article 1 project?!?

This is exactly right. I fully support the efforts of Mike Lee and Jeb Hensarling. The career politicians have created...
Posted by Matt McCall on Friday, February 5, 2016

Matt McCall COMPLETELY Re-Frames the BORDER Debate!!!

“You shall not remove your neighbor’s landmark, which the men of old have set, in your inheritance which you will inherit in the land that the Lord your God is giving you to possess."
Deuteronomy 19:14

Matt McCall, our endorsed candidate in our home congressional district, is has a POWERFUL new video about the border:



Highlights:

• "If the Federal Government can't defend the border, then what good is it?!?"

• The last 30 years we've gone from 3 million illegals to 13 million illegals.

• "The border is not just about the border, nor is it just about immigration, it's about nationhood."

• "We respect Mexico...they need to respect us."

• "Our own professional politicians are desecrating these men's graves by not protecting our borders the way they did."

• "Mexico isn't banana land, it's the fifteenth largest economy in the world."

• "Countries don't have friends, they have interests" and it's time we stood up for our own. 

Matt McCall: Get back TO THE CONSTITUTION!!!

"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."
Matthew 5:18

Fantastic op-ed from Matt McCall in today's San Antonio Express News:

What does the Constitution have to do with America’s financial situation? Socialism and economic fascism drive wealth to the top 1 percent, not free market capitalism. When I traveled to the Soviet Union as a young man, there were millionaires and billionaires, and everyone else was dirt poor. Government regulation, which only large businesses can afford to deal with, crushes small businesses that create 80 percent of new jobs, and it drives other jobs overseas. Instead of voting for the limited government that can return our country to solvency, professional Republican politicians have continued to vote for big government, big spending, and the mechanisms that enable special interests.

....

[Republicans] have merely opposed specific policies and programs and spending increases rather than fighting for and getting results for our values. They run for office on a platform of limited government, but once in office they preserve big government and try to ride it better than the Democrats. But the people want to kill the beast.

The solution is for the Republican Party to be the party of the Constitution. When Republicans get caught arguing over $3.2 trillion in spending vs. $3.3 trillion, they are on the Democrats’ playing field. Our values and our country lose. Gramm-Rudman, which tried to reduce the size of government by cutting spending, failed as has any iteration of it. The only way to cut the size of government is by cutting the size of government — with the Constitution.

We must take the 10th Amendment, dust it off, and ask, “Why and on what Constitutional grounds is the federal government in this or that business?” What Constitutional grounds does the federal government have in running a Department of Education or an EPA, which have only been around since the 1970’s, or any other or agency?

We can get rid of departments of the federal government and return power to the states. In times of crisis, major change is possible and necessary. Will we double down on the era of Big Government? We must not. We must reduce the size and scope of the federal government, not by trying to “rein in” spending or by “reining in” any of these various bureaucracies, but by killing them. Constitutionally.

Read the whole thing here (same article available here if you have issues with the paywall).

Matt McCall discusses Second Amendment

"Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me."
Nehemiah 4:18

Well said Matt:



Highlights:

• "If we get rid of guns in society, then only the criminals will have guns."

• "We're safer with guns."

• "Human nature has not changed one iota."

Matt McCall discusses the Debt

"Whoever loves wisdom makes his father rejoice,
But a companion of harlots wastes his wealth."
Proverbs 29:3

Matt McCall discusses the national debt that has increased by a factor of 10 during his 30 year incumbent opponent's time in Congress:



Highlights:

• "We've been kicking the can down the road for a long time, and if we don't change our ways immediately, all our kids are going to have is an empty can."

• "We do not have to become Greece."

• We do not have to be Japan, "with 20 to 30 years of grinding deflation."

Matt McCall discusses the Border

“You shall not remove your neighbor’s landmark, which the men of old have set, in your inheritance which you will inherit in the land that the Lord your God is giving you to possess."
Deuteronomy 19:14

Matt McCall discusses the failure of Washington D.C., led by 30 year incumbent Lamar Smith, to secure U.S. Borders:



Highlights:

• No more explosive issue today.

• "There was a time when you came to this country you had to prove you would not be a burden."

• "I believe you can get back to the place...where the border actually means something."

Bottom Line: As Matt McCall explains on his website, "When Lamar Smith went to D.C. 30 years ago, we had 3 million illegal aliens in our country. We now have 13 million. It’s time for results on the border."

Our First Round of 2016 Candidate Endorsements

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

It's that time in the political cycle.  With the Texas Republican primary only three and a half months out, we must separate wheat from chaff.  Therefore, Cahnman's Musings endorses the following candidates:

PRESIDENT

Ted Cruz (Previously Donated):

Among the candidates running, Ted Cruz defines the problems facing the United States best; because Ted properly defines the problem, he's able to properly discuss solutions.

Early in this campaign, Ted coined the phrase "Washington Cartel" to describe the entrenched culture he is running to break up and replace.  It's a devastatingly accurate phrase.  On issue after issue, corrupt career politicians in both parties have colluded with lobbyists and the media to pass the lobby agenda while stiffing voters.  Nothing is going to change in D.C. until you blow up the corrupt insider culture.  America's problems pre-date the current President and will, unless radical change occurs, continue long after he leaves.  Ted Cruz would be that radical change.  While other candidates have taken on bad ideas in the other party, no one in this race has taken on his own party like Ted Cruz.

It's uncanny how closely, after 4 years of observation, Ted's views on DIFFICULT public policy issues continue to mirror our own.  On issues like the border and national security, Ted strikes a middle ground between hawks and libertarians that draws on the best ideas of both but avoids their respective excesses.  Ted Cruz is the only candidate with a plausible path to the White House who understands our DESPERATE need to reign in the Federal Reserve.  Ted Cruz made the grotesque Export-Import "bank" a household name.  When it comes to judicial nominations (and saving babies), Ted Cruz has stated that he's NOT afraid of a confirmation fight.


UNITED STATES HOUSE

Matt McCall, CD-21:

In the Congressional district where we reside, Matt McCall is running for the second time against a 30 year incumbent who has failed to deliver.

We've been disgusted with our 30 year incumbent congressman since he voted for the TARP bailout in 2008.  Three years later, this 30 year incumbent attempted to pass a hideous invasion of internet privacy called SOPA.  Over 30 years, the incumbent has run up a record we described in 2012 as: "Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad."

Despite having lived in his district for most of the past seven years, we'd never met the incumbent Congressman until earlier this year.  Strangely enough, Matt McCall's underfunded 2014 campaign managed to capture 34% of the vote.  Since then, the incumbent has voted modestly better, but a couple months of better votes cannot repair years of violated trust.  Matt McCall would be a fresh start.  Between a 30 year incumbent and a fresh start, the choice is obvious.

TEXAS SENATE

David Simpson, SD-1:

The best symbol for this race is the back microphone in the chamber of the Texas House of Representatives.

There is more than one good candidate in this race.  Between those good candidates, David Simpson is the one who was most frequently a public thorn in the side of House leadership.  There's a reason why Jonathan Stickland and Konni Burton support David Simpson.

On the policy front, David Simpson is the only candidate in this race to vote against Governor Abbott's godless act of socialism "pre-K" scheme.  The clearest way to send a message to Governor Abbott over "pre-K" would be to send David Simpson to the Texas Senate.  Finally, it's not a secret this website supports marijuana legalization.

TEXAS HOUSE (Running for Re-Election)

Jonathan Stickland, HD-92 (Previously Donated):


You know someone terrifies leadership when they resort to intimidation and lawlessness to stop him; Team Straus has done this to Jonathan Stickland more times than we can count.

Jonathan Stickland has a habit his colleagues despise: he reads bills.  Because Jonathan Stickland reads bills, Jonathan Stickland comes prepared to ask his colleagues difficult questions on the Texas House floor.  They HATE that.  Last session, at personal peril and legal expense, Jonathan Stickland (with an assist from Dan Patrick) killed a bill that would have granted law enforcement authority to rent-a-cops from the Federal Reserve.  For that alone, Jonathan Stickland deserves re-election.

Jonathan Stickland is the conscience of the Texas House of Representatives.  Jonathan Stickland keeps the Texas House of Representatives honest.  Jonathan Stickland has carried legislation to promote conservative priorities like Constitutional Carry and repealing tuition subsidies for illegal aliens.  Jonathan Stickland is a conservative champion.  Let's send Jonathan Stickland back for another two years!!!

Matt Rinaldi, HD-115:

This one was the most difficult decision.  That's not because of anything Matt Rinaldi did; Matt Rinaldi's awesome.  We just have such a low opinion of Matt Rinaldi's opponent that we're not sure he needs our help.

Before he was sworn in, Matt Rinaldi set the tone for the session when he publicly disemboweled the Joe Biden of Texas Republicans in a debate over the speaker's race.  During the session, Matt Rinaldi used social skills to play good cop to Stickland's bad cop.  By the end of the session, Matt Rinaldi had edged out Stickland as the most conservative representative.

One note about Matt Rinaldi's opponent: A former state representative, Matt Rinaldi's opponent is the latest entitled, narcissistic, progeny of a Texas political dynasty to attempt to buy public office.  Think of the Bush family minus the ethics and manners.  While there are plenty of positive reasons to vote for Matt Rinaldi, striking a blow against political dynasties is another good one.

Tony Tinderholt, HD-94:

The #3 conservative last session, Tony Tinderholt is the latest sensation to emerge from Tarrant County.

Early in the session, Tony Tinderholt filed a complaint against a lawless Travis County judge who attempted to use a probate case to re-write Texas' marriage laws.  In so doing, Tony Tinderholt gave Jon Stewart a fit.  If Tony Tinderholt can give Jon Stewart a fit, he's alright in our book.

Tony Tinderholt took out a Straus lieutenant in 2014.  Now, Team Straus is looking for revenge. Re-electing Tony Tinderholt would preserve a seat that had been in RINO hands until very recently.

TEXAS HOUSE (Challenger Candidates)

Jeff Judson, HD-121:

Jeff Judson is the strongest challenger Joe Straus has ever seen; that alone is sufficient reason to support Jeff Judson.

Jeff Judson is the former President of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.  Jeff Judson has run successfully for local office in the district.  Jeff Judson has defeated left-wing transportation proposals locally and is well versed in transportation policy.

Jeff Judson is also an outspoken school choice supporter.  Education is the most liberal policy realm in the Texas House, and Joe Straus has pledged to maintain the status quo if he returns.  Joe Straus is an obstacle to structural governmental reforms, and Jeff Judson is the strongest candidate to remove that obstacle.

Thomas McNutt, HD-8:

Thomas McNutt is running against Byron Cook; that alone is reason to support Thomas McNutt.

Thomas McNutt is a fourth-generation steward of one of the most successful family-owned businesses in Texas' History.  Thomas McNutt supports economic liberty and, unlike the incumbent, opposes illegal immigration.  Thomas McNutt will NOT kill 8 pro-life bills in committee out of spite.

Thomas McNutt has been endorsed by Empower Texans, Texas Right to Life, and Texas Values.  Corsicana is a conservative stronghold and its residents deserve better than a lawless state rep who supports corrupt, liberal, "leadership."  Thomas McNutt is the conservative consensus choice to replace a prominent member of the corrupt cartel that runs the Texas House.

Bo French, HD-99:

Bo French is running against Charlie Geren; that alone is reason to support Bo French.

Just this morning, Bo French was endorsed by Empower Texans.  As they write: “Bo French is a bold champion for values and principles that Texans hold dear,” said TFR’s president, Michael Quinn Sullivan. “Bo French’s smart, no-nonsense approach to good public policy is precisely what taxpayers are demanding. Just as importantly, French will fight the cronyism and corruption that has infested so many levels of government.”

Tarrant County is the leading edge of Texas' grassroots renaissance.  Up to this point, HD-99 has resisted these countywide, statewide, and national trends.  On March 1st, voters in Northwestern Tarrant County will have the opportunity to send Bo French to Austin to represent their conservative values.

Jay Wiley, HD-47:

We've known Jay Wiley since he ran for Austin City Council in 2014.  After he (barely) came up short in that race, we had hoped Jay Wiley would run for HD-47.  Thankfully, he did.

Jay Wiley is the choice for Travis County taxpayers based on local issues alone.  Unlike the silent incumbent, Jay Wiley was a vocal opponent of the recent courthouse bond.  The husband of an ob-gyn, Jay Wiley has committed himself to reducing your property taxes by eliminating the odious entity known as Central Health.

While it's in Travis County, HD-47 is one of the safest Republican districts in Texas.  There's NO reason for Travis County conservatives to pull punches.  Whether your motivating issue is property taxes, defending babies, property taxes, illegal immigration, property taxes, anything else, or property taxes, Jay Wiley is the clear conservative choice in HD-47.

CD-21 candidates address Central Texas Republican Assembly

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

The Central Texas Republican Assembly held a special meeting this afternoon to hear from Congressman Lamar Smith; Matt McCall, his main opponent in the March primary, briefly addressed the group as well.

Smith's Prepared Remarks:



Highlights:

• Obama bad re: Keystone.

• Budget deal bad

• Paul Ryan -- re: Immigration - Saying the right things though he hasn't done them in the past.
• Something, something, "regular order."
• Phony crises followed by rushed bills: "That time is over."

• Kevin Braday as Ways and Means chair good.

• Iran deal bad.

• EPA bad

• National Science Foundation wasting lots of money.

• Patent Reform -- Sponsored "America Invents Act."
• Sponsored by Democrat Pat Leahy from Vermont in Senate.
• Heritage writes about the 2011 version of the bill: "The patent reform legislation pending in Congress has a serious flaw: It delegates to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) of the Department of Commerce the power to both hike the fees imposed on Americans who deal with the USPTO and then spend the revenue derived from those fees, without any further congressional exercise of the appropriations power. When the House of Representatives considers the patent reform bill, it should, in addition to addressing any other flaws in the bill, adopt an amendment to provide that the USPTO may spend the revenues it receives from fees “to the extent and in the amounts provided in advance in appropriations Acts” and not make the fees available to the USPTO to expend without fiscal year limitation."

Smith Q&A:

Highlights:

• Why should we send you back after 30 years of the problems getting worse?!?
• Blames Harry Reid and John Bohener.
• Seniority -- Typically takes 20 to 25 years to become a chairman.
• Author's Note -- We can think of no greater condemnation of the status quo than the statement above.

• "What assurances did you get" from Ryan re: Amnesty?!?
• Ryan doesn't trust Obama.
• Hastert rule.
• Sends reading material to other members re: Border Issues.

• Attending official candidate forum?!?
• "We'll see who files."

• "America invents" act screws small inventors.
• "I hope you're an outlier."

• How many calls did you get re: Bohenher and Ryan?!?
• Wouldn't answer but did say his office usually gets about 500 constituent contacts per week and that it takes a dozen contacts to get their attention and about 50 to flip their vote.

• Will the pattern we've seen at the state level (coalition of D's and liberal R's running everything) continue at the federal level?!?
• Give Paul Ryan a chance.

Matt McCall's remarks:

Highlights:

• "I'm Matt McCall and I'm running against Mr. Smith."

• "On the one hand he tell us he's this senior powerful member of congress...on the other hand he tells us he's only one out of 435."

• Over 30 years, which one of our values has Mr. Smith advanced?!?
• Debt up from $2 trillion to $20 trillion.
• 60.  MILLION.  ABORTIONS.

• If Paul Ryan can skip several levels of seniority to become speaker, seniority doesn't matter.

• "One man can do a lot."

Bottom Line: The contrast between a 30-year incumbent like Lamar Smith and a grassroots candidate like Matt McCall speaks for itself; thanks to both gentlemen for taking time out of their day to address the group.

Lamar Smith's Ex-Im Flip Flop

“No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”
Luke 16:13

Matt McCall raises some good points in his latest newsletter:

Lamar Smith voted to reauthorize the Export-Import bank in 1997, 2002, 2006, and 2012.  Last week, he voted against it.  Why the sudden change?
 
On Facebook, Smith says:
 
“When the bank uses taxpayer funding to help a foreign company buy an American-made product, that same company gains an advantage over American businesses.”
 
No joke.  It’s been doing that for his entire tenure in Congress.  Why change stances now?
 
Lamar has dropped in the polling from 80% to 70% to 60% in the last three Republican primaries, and as a result, all of a sudden he’s grown a conservative spine.  Do you trust that it will remain if he’s re-elected?

Read the whole thing here; Watchdog has a FANTASTIC write up about the CD-21 race here.

Why doesn't Lamar Smith want to debate?!?

"Can anyone hide himself in secret places,
So I shall not see him?” says the Lord;
“Do I not fill heaven and earth?” says the Lord.?
Jeremiah 23:24

Fascinating tidbit from Matt McCall's campaign update:

Two months ago, I was invited to a debate with Lamar Smith, Michael J. Smith, and John Murphy, the contenders for the Congressional seat for CD 21.  I immediately accepted.  The invitation came from the Kendall County Tea Party Patriots, run by Earl Smith.  The debate is scheduled for November 9.  November 9 was chosen because that week Congress is out of session and Lamar Smith is in the district.
 
Earl Smith informed me that he had been contacting Lamar Smith’s office continually for the last two months, trying to get a response regarding the debate, without success.  Earl was finally able to ask Lamar about it in person at a public forum last Tuesday.  Lamar said it was the first he’d heard about it and that he would get back with Earl by the end of the evening.  He did not.
 
On Wednesday, an invitation went out by email for a private reception at a supporter’s home for Lamar Smith---scheduled for the evening of November 9. 

 Read the whole thing here.

Bottom Line: This wreaks of Dewhurst's 2012 strategy in the U.S. Senate race, perhaps the time has come to break out the duck costume.

Matt McCall endorses Ted Cruz's SCOTUS amendment

"And he said to them, “Collect no more than what is appointed for you."
Luke 3:13

Last Friday Ted Cruz proposed a constitutional amendment that would require retention elections for U.S. Supreme Court justices; Matt McCall endorsed the idea this morning:

I highly recommend you take 3 minutes and read Ted Cruz's recent comments on the Supreme Court decision. 

It is a fantastic read, but the article is summed up with the following statement:

"I am proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution that would subject the justices of the Supreme Court to periodic judicial-retention elections. Every justice, beginning with the second national election after his or her appointment, will answer to the American people and the states in a retention election every eight years. Those justices deemed unfit for retention by both a majority of the American people as a whole and by majorities of the electorates in at least half of the 50 states will be removed from office and disqualified from future service on the Court." - Senator Cruz

----

We must step up for states right's and we must elect federal congressmen willing to take every step necessary to defend a state's right to push back against an oppressive and tyrannical federal government.

Read the whole thing here.

Matt McCall keeps his word

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

Having given Lamar Smith a run for his money last time, Matt McCall declared his candidacy for the United States House of Representatives last week:



Highlights:

• "America is We the People and I love We the People."

• "I respect Mr. Smith and his service."

• "It's been 30 years now, at the end of this term, and as the military has a policy and tradition that after 30 years your work is done, and it is time to pass the torch."

Matt McCall infiltrates Travis County

Cahnman's Musings has obtained a video recorded in an undisclosed location near Central Austin:



Highlights:

• Polling company "might be full of manure" but latest poll has race at 48% - 48%, +/- 3.8%

• "People might not be ready to fight for liberty, but I think they're willing to fight against tyranny."

• "We don't need your help in six months or for six months, we need your help right now."

• People at the polls work best.

• He was wrong on high turnout.

History Lesson: Lamar Smith disarms our Veterans

From Gun Owners of America, January 2008:

As most Americans were preparing for the Christmas holidays last month, the U.S. Congress pulled another fast one when only few people were watching.

It was December 19. Most Congressmen had left town and were either at the airport or in the air returning home. They weren't in Washington, DC, because their party leadership had told them that all the major votes were over... that the only legislative business left related to non-controversial issues, such as when Congress would return from Christmas break, etc.

But it was then, with most of the Congress gone, that the House and Senate passed the Veterans Disarmament Act without a recorded vote. It was a huge deja vu, as this was the method that a previous Democratic Congress used -- together with compliant Republicans -- to pass the original Brady Law in 1993.

....

But there were a few key Republicans who helped cosponsor the legislation: Representatives Michael Castle (DE), Christopher Shays (CT) and Lamar Smith (TX). And dishonorable mention goes to Tom Price of Georgia who was physically present on the House floor on December 19. It was Rep. Price who asked for the Unanimous Consent agreement to pass the Veterans Disarmament Act without a vote.

[Emphasis added]

....


On the other hand, GOA was able to secure a few modest concessions which should provide some protection to gun owners -- though NOT NEARLY ENOUGH PROTECTION TO JUSTIFY SUPPORT of this bill.

So having said that, what are the implications of this legislation for Americans with psychiatric diagnoses?

Although we succeeded in forcing the deletion of the ratification of the BATF regulations, per se, section 101 (c) (1) (C) contains new language which could make you a "prohibited person" (unable to own a gun) based solely on a medical finding (by a psychiatrist or psychologist), provided:

* That you had "an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority"; and

* In the future, that you had notice that you would be made a "prohibited person" as a result of the agency action (section 101 (c) (3)). [NOTE: This was added pursuant to negotiations over GOA's objections to the bill.]

However, even these modest gains have severe limitations. Up to 140,000 veterans had their gun rights taken away as a result of a diagnosis of a mental disorder such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). But this new law does not require two important things for those 140,000 people:

1. The new law does not require that a veteran needed to have any knowledge of the ramifications of the "diagnosis" in the past -- and the fact that this diagnosis could disarm him or her for life. How many veterans suffering from PTSD simply went to Veterans Affairs, hoping to get treatment, but now face a lifetime gun ban because of the new law?

2. Also, the act does not require that the disarmed vets even knew they had a right to appeal their diagnosis. Many of the 140,000 Americans who have now lost their Second Amendment rights first received a letter from Veterans Affairs telling them that, due to their diagnosis, a "guardian" was being appointed for them to handle their affairs. As stated above, how many vets realized that this action would deem them as "mental defective" under the 1968 Gun Control Act and strip them of their gun rights?

Moreover, how many vets realized they could challenge this action by appealing the diagnosis? If they didn't realize the significance of this VA letter, most likely, the vets did nothing, as they were more concerned with getting the monetary benefits that such a diagnosis would bring. But, whether they knew these things or not, this new law would still validate the removal of their Second Amendment rights.

 Read the whole thing here.

Congressman Lamar Smith spends money on ... ALIENS?!?

Sigh, way to go Congressman:

Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas scheduled a hearing Wednesday on the search for aliens. Of course, being an astute federal lawmaker, Smith disguised the topic in very scientific-sounding language, such as “Astrobiology: The Search for Biosignatures in our Solar System and Beyond.”

The search for human life on other habitable planets might someday provide us with an escape hatch when we’ve finished spoiling the environment Earth. So this is a necessary hearing, in the long term.

But aren’t there budget and debt ceiling deadlines coming a little sooner that maybe everyone in Congress should be discussing? We’re just saying.

Learn more about Lamar Smith's primary challenger here.