Tag Archives: Texas

It May Not Be Terrorism But it Sure is Criminal

April 29, 2013

What attention the explosion at the West, Texas fertilizer company has been getting from most of the main stream media has been to cover the lives of the first responders who died in this tragic event along with some of the residents of West who also suffered from an explosion that registered an equivalency of a 2.1 earthquake. And as unsettling as all that is, it’s what you haven’t heard or seen in the media that will disturb you the most.

Today I live a little over a hundred miles north of the small central Texas town of West in a region that became popular with many descendants of Czech immigrants in the late 19th century. West is perhaps best known by visitors passing through this small community off of Interstate 35 for the kolaches that are a pastry favorite of the Czechs, most notably sold at the Little Czech Bakery at exit 353. In fact the town was officially designated “Home of the Official Kolache of the Texas Legislature” in 1997.

I know the town of West best from the mid-1960’s when a teenage friend of mine and I would travel down there most Sundays so we could watch the Dallas Cowboys play on the TV set at the VFW hall in West. The VFW was also located at exit 353 but on the opposite side of I-35 from the Little Czech Bakery. Don and I both dropped out of high school in 1966 to join the Marines but before that, when he had his little Austin-Healey Sprite, we traveled the 70 something miles from Dallas where I lived at the time.

In the 60’s the Cowboys hadn’t yet become America’s Team so sell outs to the game weren’t always assured. If the local game didn’t sell out two days before it was played it was blacked out in the area. Thus the trip to West, which for us, with gas around 25 cents a gallon then, made it cheaper to drive to West than to buy a ticket and watch the Cowboys play at the Cotton Bowl. Texas Stadium had yet to be built.

The Little Czech Bakery is part of a business that also supplies other needs for travelers sold in the attached Czech Stop. As the picture on the right shows, this popular roadside stop was just 3 miles south of where the fertilizer plant was that exploded April 17th.

So this brief but memorable history with the town of West came back into my consciousness following the horrible explosion of the fertilizer plant. The interest that developed for me following this explosion became focused on what caused it and any subsequent investigation to discover what led to the death of 14 people and where many homes and a 50-unit apartment building were completely devastated beyond repairs. It is this lack of media coverage regarding the investigation of what caused the explosion that grates at me.

Unlike the thoroughness by which we learned of the who and what of the Boston Marathon bombers as well as coverage regarding the victims, we have only been left with the somber reality of the fertilizer explosion by the televised tributes to its victims. With the exception of the Dallas Morning News, why hasn’t the MSM here locally done more to expose what the conditions were at the West Fertilizer plant?

Though a “spokesman for the F.B.I. in San Antonio said Thursday there had been no indication of criminal activity in the West plant explosion,” I would challenge that presumption with the facts we have. It may prove true that there was no certain individual or group that willfully set the fire that ultimately led to the detonation of the ammonium nitrate stored there. A quantity by the way that’s been revealed to be “1,350 times the amount … that would normally trigger safety oversight by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).” But we do have evidence of misleading information from the owners of West Fertilizer, Inc. as well as what appears to be negligence on the part of of Texas oversight agencies that any honest prosecutor might deem worthy of a court’s interest.

Here’s what we know.

The West Fertilizer Co. was cited for failing to obtain or qualify for a permit in 2006 after a complaint [by nearby residents] of a strong ammonia smell.
Because of deep-budget cuts that undermans federal regulatory agencies, OSHA has inspected the West plant exactly once in the company’s 51-year history. That 1985 inspection detected multiple “serious” violations of federal safety requirements for which the company paid a grand total of $30 in fines. OSHA’s 1992 process-safety-management standard for highly hazardous chemicals is supposed to protect against disasters like the West explosion, but it wasn’t in place for that inspection.
The failure of OSHA to do due diligence here is related to a conflict between OSHA and the state of Texas regarding the number of employees at the plant. “Some plants with 10 or fewer employees are exempt from oversight by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. A spokesman says the Texas plant had 13 employees when the accident occurred, but state records show it had only seven.”
The fact that the “West Fertilizer Co. was handling 2,400 tons a year [in 2006] of potentially explosive ammonium nitrate in a warehouse near schools, houses and a nursing home” as noted in a Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TECQ) permit apparently didn’t raise any “concerns, either internally or with other agencies, about explosion risks or the proper management of a chemical already notorious in Texas history.”
Bryan W. Shaw, Gov. Rick Perry’s appointee as TCEQ chairman, told the Dallas Morning News that “the state chemist and the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration [have] responsibility for regulating fertilizer fire and explosion risks. But the regulatory scrutiny for ammonium nitrate storage that Shaw outlined does not exist”.
The logical state agencies for oversight are disavowing their responsibility to cover the hazards of storing ammonium nitrate, a chemical in fertilizers used by domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh to blow up the Murrah Bldg. in Oklahoma City back in 1995. “We don’t, at TCEQ, evaluate the explosive threat associated with these types of facilities,” said Perry appointee Shaw. And according to agency spokespersons, “the federal pipeline agency governs only transportation, not storage. The head of the state chemist’s office, Tim Herrman, said his agency has no legal authority or expertise to pursue fire or explosive safety at places that store ammonium nitrate.”
The knowledge Texas state agencies had about how “a routine fire getting out of control and superheating a container with a large volume of ammonium nitrate, widely used as a fertilizer and as an explosive [apparently failed to] discuss fire or explosive risks with the company or each other.”
A West Fertilizer, Inc. risk management plan, given to the EPA, stated that there was a “no” checked under fire or explosive risks, even though they also reported having as much as 54,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia on hand. “The worst possible scenario, the report said, would be a 10-minute release of ammonia gas that would kill or injure no one. The second worst possibility projected was a leak from a broken hose used to transfer the product, again causing no injuries.”
Apparently the first responders who died in this explosion were either unaware or uninformed that when dealing with a fire where anhydrous ammonia was present that water should not be used. Using water to fight such a fire“ will result in warming of the product, causing the liquid to turn into a vapor cloud,” says the website of Calamco, a growers’ cooperative in California.

Now when you take all of these facts into consideration and then throw into the mix the apparent anti-regulatory attitude by Governor Rick Perry and most state agency administrators, especially the TCEQ, then it wouldn’t take a rocket science to draw the reasonable conclusion that criminal charges are not out of the question regarding the explosion at the West Fertilizer plant. But it’ll be a cold day in hell before our so-called representative form of government seeks to criminally prosecute any business that some state officials themselves are culpable of for conditions that caused the deaths of innocent Texans.

After Tim Herrman defended his agency against any negligence, I found it interesting that “the Office of the Texas State Chemist, a division of Texas A&M University, is fighting a Dallas Morning News request for inspection and inventory records, citing national security concerns regarding ammonium nitrate, which can be highly explosive and used in bombs.” To understand now how something poses a threat to our national security but at the time didn’t seem important enough to convey to the appropriate agency is the height of hypocrisy and seems more to be the actions of one attempting to expiate themselves for their failure in this matter.

This lack of attention to the safety of our workplaces and neighborhoods is no accident. It is the product of a concerted attack by the US Chamber of Commerce, industry trade associations, and conservative think tanks on what they see as onerous regulatory programs – but ones that were enacted by Congress over the years to protect the public from irresponsible corporate misconduct. SOURCE

The corporate media in this country along with overly corporate-friendly government officials will go out of their way to expose every facet to justify their prosecution of the so-called “War on Terror” but don’t expect them to police themselves when it comes to criminal negligence or willful disregard for the public’s safety by devotees of “free-market” capitalism.

In a Washington Post op-ed piece, labor reporter Mike Elk noted that the “decline in [media] coverage has created an environment in which companies may feel as if they can get away with massive safety violations because they will face little scrutiny from the media and the public.” A reporter at the Charleston Gazette who covered workers’ safety for many years, Ken Ward Jr., in a tweet to Mike Elk a few days earlier summed it up best when he said, “Terrorists want media attention, so we give it to them. Unsafe industries don’t want media attention – so we give that to them.”

I can’t speak for all North Texans, but I know that my memories of the West, Texas I knew as a teenager have had sufficient consoling with all of the reporting done about the victims in that tiny town conveyed by the MSM. It’s time now for some serious efforts to expose the people and the conditions that led to this awful disaster even if that goes all the way to the governor’s mansion. No more soft pedaling of the poor performances of the West Fertilizer Company owners and the state agencies we entrusted to carry out basic safety inspections.

Death by acts of terror doesn’t even register on this graph

More people in this country have and will die from such industry negligence and regulatory agency incompetence than any acts of terrorism have or ever will. Since May, 1886 there have been 23 attempted or successful acts of terrorism; domestic and foreign. Of those 23 there have been a total of 3291 Americans killed. 2976 of those occurred on September 11th, 2001. Due to work place safety issues some 4500 workers die each year on the job. Just because some have problems viewing criminality beyond the desperate acts of low-income people or those with middle eastern ancestry is not something that decent people should abide by.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Smoking gun in West, Texas, fertilizer blast: lack of government oversight

Why did West, Texas, build homes and a school next to a ‘time bomb’?

Posted by lbwoodgate in Texas/Local stories Tags: anhydrous ammonia, bomb making material, crony capitalism in Texas, Dallas Morning News, negligence by Texas state agencies, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Texas, West fertilizer plant esplosion, worker safety

16 comments

Why Can’t Texas Cash in on the Marijuana Bonanza?

April 18, 2013

I rail against my native state Texas for the wellspring of stupid politicians we have been seeing over the last few years but the state does have some economic benefits for its citizens. So why can’t they see the financial gold mine that other states are beginning to realize by legalizing pot?

In a depressed economy where politicians are unwilling to raise taxes to pay for vital social services and equally vital infrastructure, you would think they could get beyond outdated taboos and unreasonable fears to find the necessary resources to sustain such services. There’s a natural product out there that’s been around for centuries that suffers from this stigma. One that not only has medicinal benefits to it but when properly regulated could reduce crime and prison populations while generating revenue to put people back to work in construction and the essential public services of education, law enforcement and firefighting services.

Marijuana has long been the victim of social biases that prevents its entry into the market place along the lines that alcohol and tobacco have. The alleged “evils” of marijuana have always overshadowed its economic value. The hemp cultivated from the Cannabis plant has the ability to produce seed foods, hemp oil, wax, resin, rope, cloth, pulp, and fuel.

movie poster for “Devil’s Harvest”, a 1942 film about an investigator who goes after the people who are corrupting the nation’s youth by spreading the weed of Satan–MARIJUANA!!!

There are, like any controversy, pros and cons to marijuana’s use as a euphoric substance. But before we tackle the facts and myths about marijuana lets come to terms with two arguments that hang over the use of any drug.

The Social Stigma of Marijuana

Any mind-altering chemical can impair judgement where some choices under the influence could jeopardize your health and well-being. But if the effects of the buzz that marijuana gives you was the only reason to prevent legalizing it, then alcohol and caffeine would have to be banned as well as other controlled substances (and some not so controlled) that currently make million$ for chemical and pharmaceutical companies.

There’s also the point of view that getting high in any fashion seems unnatural and thus unnecessary. Only weak-minded people want to get high, or so the argument goes. Yet natural states of high are built into our physiological system so that argument has little merit. Socially acceptable highs that don’t consist of controlled substances are the high we get from sugar and food. Getting “high on Jesus” or the high we get from winning a competitive sporting event are responses that many promote, not condemn.

There will be a propensity to induce this natural high, even by artificial means, to reduce the ill-effects of stress in today’s world where depression is reaching epidemic proportions. Alleviating excessive stress is necessary for sound health but not everyone can attain a state of nirvana through exercise and yoga therapies, not to mention the time it takes to achieve these states by using such tactics. Life styles that develop and sustain healthy diets, exercise, 7-8 hours of sleep and are filled with healthy doses of sex and genuine love for other humans, usually avoids the need for getting high from manufactured sources. But finding such ideal conditions in today’s fast-paced world has become more a thing of the past.

I don’t dispute that natural processes have advantages that unnatural measures haven’t but I am only making the point that getting high is not an innate evil and avoiding it is not necessarily something that should be done at all costs. Making marijuana illegal is not going to stop anyone who wants to try it. It does increase the risk of providing a product that has unsafe levels of THC, not to mention other toxic elements that get picked up through the less than ideal conditions of growing, harvesting and handling it from producer to consumer.

Considering the Facts

So, considering these two overarching points let’s look at the myths and facts on marijuana put out by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), that governmental agency that currently supports what most assume is the general consensus of the American people.

Myth #1: Marijuana is harmless

This is a straw man that of course can easily be knocked down but is not a myth that anyone sensible would argue. Depending on where they got their marijuana, what one’s existing health conditions are and the frequency they use it, marijuana like anything else can be harmful. Drinking too much water can be fatal. Too much Jesus and too much Mohammad can and has been fatal since the days of the Crusades. Too much food or the wrong foods can be fatal. So suggesting that proponents of legalizing marijuana are claiming that the weed is harmless is simply a red herring that ignores the caveats that apply.

One of the claims the ONDCP makes here is that the health threat is greater based on “the fact that the marijuana available today is more potent than ever”. The potency currently is regulated by drug lords whose sole aim is to make it more addictive and thus more profitable. When licensed pot dealers who are regulated by U.S. inspectors meet standards that control potency, where this is a threat, it then becomes contained. But how big of a threat is this really?

The Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) notes that “Although marijuana potency may have increased somewhat in recent decades, claims about enormous increases in potency are vastly overstated and not supported by evidence. Nonetheless, potency is not related to risks of dependence or health impacts. According to the federal government’s own data, the average THC in domestically grown marijuana – which comprises the bulk of the US market – is less than 5 percent, a figure that has remained unchanged for nearly a decade.”

Myth #2: Marijuana is not addictive

I can personally vouch for this but again that doesn’t mean this applies in all instances. The government claims that “recent research shows that use of the drug can indeed lead to dependence. Some heavy users of marijuana develop withdrawal symptoms when they have not used the drug for a period of time.”

The key term is “heavy users”. According to the DPA “a federal Institute of Medicine study in 1999, fewer than 10 percent of those who try marijuana ever meet the clinical criteria for dependence, while 32 percent of tobacco users and 15 percent of alcohol users do.”

Perhaps the best argument that disputes the government’s claim about marijuana being addictive is that studies have found that addiction is not the result of some external substance. It’s a neurological disorder, making addiction a health problem. Ten kids can meet after school and smoke a joint but none will become addicts unless their brain isn’t wired properly to prevent this health defect.

In his book Clean, David Sheff takes an in-depth look into the causes of addiction. Though he finds that teens are especially prone to drug use and more likely to become addicted the earlier they start, any addiction that does occur “is almost always a symptom of another illness like PTSD, depression or obsessive disorder that likely doesn’t get treatment during any recovery program”.

Myth #3: Marijuana is not as harmful to your health as tobacco.

This would only be a fact if the average pot smoker toked as many joints a day as the average smoker. At the height of my smoking days I would consume two packages a day of cigarettes. During this same period I may have had inhaled a total joint in one week’s time. I know several people who smoked at least a reefer once or twice a day, everyday. I’m pretty sure that most smokers I was acquainted with smoked at a bare minimum 10 -15 cigarettes a day.

The ONDCP actually makes this case for me when they point out that “regular use of marijuana appears to be at least as damaging as regular use of tobacco”. These are their words, not mine. Notice they say regular use of marijuana, not the casual users or infrequent tokers. And then they fall short of any absolute by stating that this “appears” to be the case.

This entire argument should be pretty much dismissed because beyond the ONDCP’s claims based on a 1990 study entitled “Pulmonary complications of smoked substance abuse” and published by the Western Journal of Medicine, there is a more recent one from the University of Alabama at Birmingham and University of California at San Francisco, that finds “Occasional marijuana use does not appear to have long-term adverse effects on lung function. In fact they found that “cigarette smokers saw lung function worsen throughout the 20-year [study] period, but marijuana smokers did not. “

Myth #4: Marijuana makes you mellow.

Yes it does but it can also make you anxious and if you are prone to violence without ingesting marijuana, guess what? You’re going to be even more so at a heightened state induced by smoking the weed. Again, potency levels can be in play here but the research the ONDCP claims, regarding violence levels and marijuana use, doesn’t make us aware of what the behavior traits prior to smoking marijuana are of the “kids who use marijuana weekly” and who they found to be four times more likely to be violent than non-users.

“According to that study, incidences of physically attacking people, stealing, and destroying property increased in proportion to the number of days marijuana was smoked in the past year. Users were also twice as likely as nonusers to report they disobey at school and destroy their own things.” Was this a pattern of behavior prior to smoking weed and was weed the only drug being used here? What was the mental health state of these individuals? We don’t know any of this because the ONDCP fails to make such correlations.

Myth #5: Marijuana is used to treat cancer and other diseases.

This is another straw man created by anti-marijuana supporters and is mentioned in the ONDCP’s report. What supporters of medicinal marijuana claim is that it has been proven helpful for treating the symptoms of a variety of medical conditions. Big difference between implying that it directly “treats cancer” and treating “symptoms of cancer”. In its report the ONDCP does state “that THC, the primary active chemical in marijuana, can be useful for treating some medical problems. Synthetic THC is the main ingredient in Marinol®, an FDAapproved medication used to control nausea in cancer chemotherapy patients and to stimulate appetite in people with AIDS. Marinol, a legal and safe version of medical marijuana, has been available by prescription since 1985.”

It further claims that marijuana as a smoked product has never proven to be medically beneficial and sites a 1999 study from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) that “concluded that smoking marijuana is not recommended for any longterm medical use, and a subsequent IOM report declared, “marijuana is not a modern medicine.” Yet Several state legislatures appear to have found sufficient evidence that disputes this claim along with the testimonies of many cancer patients who smoke the rope to alleviate their pain symptoms. It also ignores the fact that Big Pharma gets a cut in the legal sale of Marinol® In those states that have legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes patients are allowed to grow their own and thus save the expense of a drug store purchase.

What really caught my eye is the ONDCP’s claim that “medicines are not approved in this country by popular vote. Before any drugs can be released for public use they must undergo rigorous clinical trials (emphasis mine) to demonstrate they are both safe and effective, and then be approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Our investment and confidence in medical science will be seriously undermined if we do not defend the proven process by which medicines are brought to market.”

The image of the FDA as one that looks out for the interests of American consumers has been seriously tainted over the last few decades. So-called “rigorous testing” is often nothing more than those tests that the companies themselves have done and submitted to the FDA for review. These tests are then signed off on by FDA officials who are under pressure from corporate friendly directors often appointed by conservative administrations. One WSJ report noted in the case of Menaflex, a new device to treat knee injuries, that “some senior FDA staff members complained in documents that the handling of Menaflex, made by ReGen Biologics Inc., shows how political and industry pressure can influence scientific conclusions.”

The deaths of some 60,000 people occurred when the FDA failed to do due diligence with the reports from Merck with their nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug,Vioxx, after it was discovered that they “were developed by the company’s marketing department, not its scientific department.”

So until the FDA can be shown to once again serve the public’s interests rather than pharmaceutical lobbyists, we needn’t feel intimidated by the ONDCP’s claims about “our investment and confidence in medical science” is being undermined regarding medical marijuana. For more on the FDA’s recent history for easy approval on pharmaceuticals read, The Problem with Fast-Tracking Drug Approvals: Pharmas Fail to Follow Up

Addendum, Ad nauseam

The remaining five myths posted on the ONDCP’s web page are equally filled with vagueness and misinformation or inadequate information. Comparing marijuana’s use to the Ecstasy drug is an irrelevant apples to oranges comparison. And if the main reason the government feels that someone’s marijuana use is hurting those other than users because of the “violent” nature of marijuana trafficking, then it only seems reasonable that we remove this problem by taking it away from unregulated drug lords.

Not only do we remove the violence but we control the conditions its grown under and processed for sale. The money we save decriminalizing it by removing it from court dockets and emptying prison space will be additionally enhanced by the tax revenue we garner from its legitimate sale. Then of course there is the additional jobs benefits this new business creates.

Underage kids are no more likely to get their hands on it as a legalized substance than they are in its current state. Even the ONDCP admits that “if kids want marijuana, they can find it. More than half (55 percent) of youths age 12 to 17 responding to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health in 2002 reported that marijuana would be easy to obtain. The survey indicated that most marijuana users got the drug from a friend, and that almost nine percent of youths who bought marijuana did so inside a school building.”

But here’s the clincher that ONDCP makes. “[N]early 17 percent of the young people surveyed said they had been approached by someone selling drugs in the past month. In the 2000 survey, more than a quarter of 12 to 17 yearolds (26.6 percent) reported that drugselling occurs frequently in their neighborhoods”.

It only seems logical that the need to “push” marijuana in locations where kids gather is because there are no legal outlets that can be monitored for underage sells. Strict regulation and monitoring of known suppliers in a legal environment diminishes, if not removes, this vulnerability to our nation’s youth.

Reality Check

Let’s be clear here though. Like any controlled substance there are hazards that can occur. Abuses in all aspects will prevent a scenario where those who shouldn’t have access to marijuana are unable to do so. Like smoking tobacco, drinking alcohol and eating unhealthy foods, parents and society have an obligation to provide accurate information and utilize all resources to educate our kids about marijuana smoking. Proper education is something we are always obligated to do despite any industry’s effort to circumvent such education to protect their profits.

Rather than using science to appeal to their intellects we will fail as we currently have to prevent inquisitive kids from trying something that society considers taboo. Taboo not for the right reasons but for the fairy tales we tell them that discredits our authority in their eyes once they discover that they won’t grow horns from its use. There’s nothing to prevent concerned citizens to diligently educate kids about marijuana as they do other drugs, especially alcohol, in a child’s formative years; in their homes, their schools, churches and youth clubs.

If a child or young adult then makes the choice to use pot, then clearly there are drivers there that not even attempts to banish its access will stop. Throwing them in jail may have a “scared straight” effect but it will also give them a criminal record that will follow them in their early attempts to seek gainful employment and could even associate them with a true criminal element that may carry on once they’re no longer incarcerated

Once we resolve to act like intelligent adults not motivated by irrational fears, then we can take control of a product that has too long been socially demeaned and its users relegated to a criminal icon. We remove the stigma and the legal costs that takes this thing out of the dark shadows and make it a profitable source of revenue that creates jobs and funds for the essential public services that the anti-marijuana crowd seem all to willing to cut taxes for.

Now if only these facts will penetrate the thick skulls of the ideologues and bible thumpers here in Texas we may solve our budget issues they created in the first place.

The Top Five Special Interest Groups Lobbying to Keep Marijuana Illegal

Wednesday, 02 May 2012 08:59

Posted by lbwoodgate in Economy, Social Discourse, Texas/Local stories Tags: Cannabis, Controlled substance, economic and social benefits to legalizing pot in Texas, Health, legalizing pot, Marijuana, Office of National Drug Control Policy, Social stigma, Texas

7 comments

What is it About Texas Politicians Who Have No Shame?

April 16, 2013

Texas used to have a healthy mystique about it that was often the envy of other states and far away places like Lithuania. That’s been lost for future generations now since the presidency of George W. Bush and a host of other Texas politicians who have been in the national spotlight of late. The butt of many jokes, Texas is now too often seen as a place where “stupid” comes to breed.

In a recent Senate roll call vote to see if a bill containing gun control legislation could come to the floor for a debate, the two Senators from Texas both voted against it. They were two of the 31 Senators who cast a vote against a debate on the package which includes a comprehensive package that expands background checks for gun purchases, increases penalties against gun trafficking, and invests in school safety. One of the amendments that will be proposed is a watered-down version for universal background checks offered by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa. A full-throated universal background check amendment could prevent criminals, gang members and mentally unstable people from buying a gun. The Manchin-Toomey compromise falls short of this and was even spoofed on SNL

In what was once considered the world’s greatest deliberative body, Senator Cornyn and junior Senator Ted Cruz voted to oppose discussion on any gun control measure including this important issue. It’s no secret that both are opposed to most if not all attempts to rein in gun violence, especially measures to inhibit the purchase of deadly assault guns like those used in the mass shootings this country has seen over the last 30 years. But that gun control measure will do little if we don’t also try to control who purchases any firearm for the very intent of inflicting harm on innocent people.

Recent polls show that a vast majority of Americans favor this sensible type of measure over every other suggestion that gun control advocates have presented. What doesn’t make sense about ensuring that a wife beater, a vengeful gang member or someone who has a criminal record that includes armed robbery or murder is restricted from buying a weapon that puts them at a distinct advantage over their victims? Currently there are background checks required if you purchase your weapon through a licensed gun dealer. But 40% of all firearms are sold through gun shows and private sells that are not governed under the same guidelines.

Most of the Senators who oppose added gun control measures will likely vote against this bill once it comes to the floor but appeared willing to allow their constituents the right to hear their pro and con views.

I suspect however that the gun-advocate supporters in the Senate will actually say very little other than some NRA talking point that has little basis in fact. They simply didn’t want to appear foolish as someone who would deny the constitutional prerogative of speaking freely and openly on a matter of grave concern. So what were Cornyn and Cruz thinking?

This is after all, in theory at least, a democracy. Only in dictatorships or oppressive oligarchs is speech suppressed that is critical of those in power. And therein lies the rub. Where does the real power lie?

For someone like Cruz, who campaigned on the theme about how his father fled the dictatorship of Fidel Castro to come to this country and make a life where people were, among other things, able to speak freely seems contradictory for him to oppose an honest and open debate on this issue. He knows he also can vote against this bill once it’s time, so why would he and Cornyn choose not to even allow any debate that would include universal background checks?

The Power of the NRA

Though 14 years ago Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, told Congress the NRA supported “mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show”, today he and NRA President David Keene now oppose such checks for a variety of reasons, most of them that struggle with credibility issues. From complaining to how much of a hassle this regulation would impose on “law-abiding citizens” to the obvious fear mongering argument that this legislation would lead to the slippery slope of confiscation, the NRA has dodged and weaved around how nine out of ten Americans favor universal background checks.

“When you cut through the clutter of the gun-control debate,” say William Saletan with Slate.com, “this is the easiest conclusion to draw: The NRA has no compelling argument against universal background checks. Checks don’t regulate what kind of firearms or ammo you can buy. All they do is keep guns out of the hands of criminals, abusers, and mentally ill people. That’s worth $5 and two minutes of your time. Pass the law.”

Clearly then the pressure here being put on Senators Cornyn and Cruz is NOT from their constituents. Even in pro-gun Texas where the NRA is trusted more on the issue of guns than Barack Obama by a 47% to 43%, more Texans favor a ban on assault-style weapons by a 49% to 41% margin. They also oppose the NRA’s suggestion to arm public school teachers and to putting armed police officers in every school. It is highly likely then that they would also support a universal background check, especially when you consider that across the country 84% of gun-owners and 74% of NRA members are supportive for “requiring a universal background-check system for all gun sales”.

So this can only lead to one conclusion. Cruz and Cornyn, like so many other politicians are dismissive of their constituents where there are powerful corporate interests that counter them. In this case it is the gun manufacturing lobby who are pulling the strings to cancel out the people who actually elected them. And who best represents the gun manufactures than the NRA.

In its early days, the National Rifle Association was a grassroots social club that prided itself on independence from corporate influence.

While that is still part of the organization’s core function, today less than half of the NRA’s revenues come from program fees and membership dues.

The bulk of the group’s money now comes in the form of contributions, grants, royalty income, and advertising, much of it originating from gun industry sources. SOURCE

Cruz received more money than any other Republican, on the Senate Judiciary Committee, including Charles Grassley from Iowa, in just his first year as a U.S. Senator along with earning the NRA’s top rating of A+. And though Cornyn only had an A rating from the NRA, he did receive $12,450 in donations last year.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas uses a life size photo of a Remington 750, a popular hunting rifle, to make a point about the proposed ban on certain kinds of guns

I haven’t been able to pinpoint information on donations from specific gun manufactures, but Cornyn has, over his Senate career, voted in favor of the gun industry in all of the gun-related legislation that has made it to the Senate floor for a vote, including the one in 2005 that prohibited lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

Most of the manufacturers’ donations to candidates are likely these days, in lieu of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United case, to be filtered through SuperPacs that allow unlimited money while keeping donor information secret. Following the outcome of another federal court case known as SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission multiple SuperPacs began to appear. One was the Texas Conservative Fund that spent its entire load – $5,872,431 – opposing Ted Cruz’s primary opponent, David Dewhurst. Dewhurst had an A rating from the NRA but failed to get the personal endorsement of Wayne Lapierre that Cruz received.

Cruz and Cornyn are clearly patsies for the gun industry. While cowering to the moneyed special interests and allowing the wing-nuts that support an over-zealous interpretation of the 2nd amendment provide a front for them, these two have demonstrated that Texas is once again in hot pursuit of winning the race to the bottom.

* Texas GOP rejects ‘critical thinking’ skills. Really.

Posted by lbwoodgate in Gun Control, Texas/Local stories Tags: crazy in Texas, free speech, Gun control, gun manufacturer lobbyists, Joe Manchin, John Cornyn, National Rifle Association, no votes on debating gun control legislation, NRA, Pat Toomey, Ted Cruz, Texas

10 comments

Why Texas is Winning the Race to the Bottom

April 14, 2013

Extremism of any stripe is always profoundly ignorant and detached from reality. Feeling passionate about an issue always needs to be accompanied with arguments that people can identify with and that have plausibility. But don’t inform Texas politicians about this. They’ll have you skinned and boned for such heresy.

Zealots who oppose any and every kind of gun control legislation have demonstrated just how far they are willing to take their fanaticism in recent months. Abortion opponents have also gone to extreme measures to prevent any woman from ending an unwanted pregnancy. So it comes as no surprise that this duel fanaticism would show up in a political campaign and no-less than a bumper sticker slogan.

Steve Stockman is running for re-election in a the new 36th Texas congressional district that was formed by the GOP after winning majorities in the House back in 2010. The 36th includes all or part of the following counties: Chambers, Hardin, Harris, Jasper, Liberty, Newton, Orange, Polk, and Tyler. Apparently Stockman is out to take the crown away from Louie Gohmert for most bat-shit crazy congress creature in Texas. Gohmert‘s 1st district was also part of the GOP gerrymandering that allowed him to defeat the Democrat incumbent.

If Stockman’s bumper sticker isn’t evidence enough of his poor mental state then perhaps this tweet of his that expresses a convoluted thought about women and gun threats will help convince you.

Lord knows how much safer moms are with their infant children handling a gun than a criminal who , according to Stockman, will surely cross paths with them.

Now in the event that there really is anyone in his district that would take Stockman’s claim serious about babies, they would have to ignore the reality that a baby is no longer in the mother’s womb and therefore have no need to feel threatened by abortion, assuming of course their brain had developed such capabilities to think in terms of abortion. Why do I feel I even have to explain such an obvious point? Because “stupid” is starting to reach epidemic levels here in the Lone Star State

If fetuses were even capable of understanding that their prospects for a bright future are severely limited with such people as Stockman and Gohmert in positions of political leadership, they would probably pull the plug themselves.

Steve Stockman and Louie Gohmert: Two of the reasons why Texas is winning the race to the bottom and making Mississippi look like an intellectual’s haven

Posted by lbwoodgate in Texas/Local stories Tags: abortion extremists, babies with guns, GOP, gun extremists, Louie, Louie Gohmert, Steve Stockman, Texas, Texas politicians, United States

12 comments

Stupid in Texas

February 18, 2013

There are times when I am convinced that if we actually were able to recover a live species of homo neanderthalensis, with their smaller brains, that they would come across as Einsteins when matched up to some contemporary Texans today.

There was a time when I was proud to be a citizen of the Lone Star State. It has a dynamic history and a lot of great people have hailed from Texas, including Sam Houston, Buddy Holly and Sandra Day O’Connor. At age eleven I formed a Texas Braggart club from a kit I bought at the local five & dime store. I was the President and my friend Raul Ramirez was the V.P. It lasted about 3-months before disinterest set in and the failure to recruit new members or collect any dues could be secured to sustain us.

John Connally was running for governor of Texas as a Democrat but would change stripes in 1973, a few months after giving the eulogy at LBJ’s funeral. Liberal Senator Ralph Yarborough lost his bid for re-election in the 1970 Democratic primary to the more moderate Lloyd Bentsen. In 1979 William P. Clements became the first Republican governor of the state of Texas.

Following a scandal involving a slush fund for paying SMU football players Clements decided not to run again, paving the way for Ann Richards, a sensible progressive, to eek out a victory against an acerbic multi-millionaire Republican candidate, Clayton Williams. But the writing was on the wall for progressives and the Texas Democratic Party by 1994. Richards lost her re-election bid to George W. Bush and the prospects of ever seeing a progressive or even a moderate hold that office again were clearly not in the foreseeable future.

It was at this point in time that a migration of political and religious extremists started flooding into the state from so-called liberal bastions like California, Massachusetts and New York, and in association with the native-born wing nuts, we have seen a dramatic dumbing down of the state. Texas has since become the butt of many jokes and any pride I may still hold for it is quickly diminished by the eye-rolling I experience from people who reside beyond the opposite sides of the Rio Grande, Sabine and Red rivers.

This herd of fundamentalistic John Birchers have assimilated themselves into the state GOP changing the character of that Party where many now think Attila the Hun was a RINO. Since taking control of both state legislative houses and the governor’s mansion, these people have managed to prevent the state from rising above its sub par level of academic mediocrity over the last two decades.

No better evidence of this exists than when the Texas GOP stated in their 2012 platform their opposition to critical thinking for fear it might reveal some of the flaws in the backward thinking that these people practice.

Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority. SOURCE

Is it any wonder then that Texas ranks 50th among the states in the percentage of its population 25 or older with a high school diploma. Why bother? It doesn’t take a high school education to fill all of the minimum wage jobs Governor Perry has bragged about bringing to Texas.

This dumbing down of citizens in the state of Texas has been apparent for quite some time now. It was becoming clear as the nation and the world watched with astonishment as the man from Crawford, Texas who occupied the oval office at the time invaded Iraq after creating the largest deficit to date by draining the budget surplus to give taxes to the wealthiest Americans. It would become crystalized however following the actions of the Texas State Board of Education.

In 2010 some of the troglodytes on that commission wanted to make some changes in Texas school books that demoted the author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, while elevating the sociopath of the 1950’s “Red Scare” era, Joseph McCarthy. Texas was sending strong signals to the world that stupidity was in vogue.

This low-brow thinking is not taking any holidays either. In fact, it appears to be a badge of honor by conservative office holders. Just recently the U.S. Senate voted on renewing the 1994 Violence Against Woman’s Act (VAWA) and it passed, despite the fact that 22 Republican men voted against it. It will come as no surprise to learn that two of those men made up the Texas delegation to the Senate; new Tea Party candidate Ted Cruz and two-term Senator, John Cornyn.

Their reasons for opposing the bill have been trumpeted by ultra-conservative political and religious groups which include the Heritage Foundation and evangelist James Dobson’s creation, the Family Research Council. But the arguments lack substance based on the research of an exhaustive VAWA fact sheet .

The fact that all of the other U.S. Senators, including all of the women, voted for it would indicate that people like Cornyn and Cruz who voted against it did so because of their strong ties to organizations that poll heavily against anything suggesting government oversight or that even hints at “feminism”.

Violence against women gets worse every year as this study done by the American Public Health Association revealed.

Femicide, the homicide of women, is the leading cause of death in the United States among young African American women aged 15 to 45 years and the seventh leading cause of premature death among women overall.1 American women are killed by intimate partners (husbands, lovers, ex-husbands, or ex-lovers) more often than by any other type of perpetrator.2–4 Intimate partner homicide accounts for approximately 40% to 50% of US femicides but a relatively small proportion of male homicides (5.9%).1,5–10 The percentage of intimate partner homicides involving male victims decreased between 1976 and 1996, whereas the percentage of female victims increased, from 54% to 72%.4

The majority (67%–80%) of intimate partner homicides involve physical abuse of the female by the male before the murder, no matter which partner is killed.1,2,6,11–13 Therefore, one of the major ways to decrease intimate partner homicide is to identify and intervene with battered women at risk. The objective of this study was to specify the risk factors for intimate partner femicide among women in violent relationships with the aim of preventing this form of mortality. SOURCE

But clearly the lack of critical thinking by Senators Cruz and Cornyn have lived up to the ambitions of their state Party leaders. Apparently a woman needs a little physical reminder every now and then to help her remember her place in the traditional social order for some here in Texas.

Sorry ladies. You’ll have to develop some high levels of testosterone if you want to avoid this in the future. But we have made it easy for you to purchase a pair of equalizers. We’re a firm believer in violence begets violence.

Posted by lbwoodgate in Society and Politics Tags: 22 republican senators oppose VAWA, battered women, dumbing down texas education, Intimate relationship, John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, Texas, texas gop opposes critical thinking, United States Senate, VAWA, victims of abuse, Violence Against Women Act

42 comments

Ultra-conservatives in America and Their Resistance to Change

July 30, 2012

Not all change is good but it is inevitable and some of it is necessary. The political and Christian right in this country risk appearing backwards as they dig in their heels to fend off 21st century changes.

Hostile anti-Obama protesters feel threatened by policies they feel will undermine their traditional American way of life which tends to exclude other cultures and religions.

I have been guilty many times in the past of labeling most extremist on the right as ignorant slugs whose grasp of reality, history and many facts often reflect some levels of mental deficiency. But I have come to the conclusion that such people, though at times poorly informed, are not always ignorant. In fact many of them are just as intelligent as the liberals they attack for being intellectual elites. There are of course those who still hold to debunked notions of global cooling and the President being a practicing Muslim, but these do not make up that larger population I want address this post to. Liberals are not without their ideologues but unlike their conservative counterpart, change is not something to dread but to embrace and rebuild with.

So what I am finding then is not for lack of a brain from those on the right wanting to “take America back” to a period in our history that has long ago disappeared or who proclaim God is punishing this country with terrorist attacks and mass murders by madmen because we have strayed from some earlier set of values. It is, I honestly think, a conscious decision they have made to limit their contemporary views to only those notions they locked into at a more immature age, with perhaps some childhood anxiety disorder holdovers. It’s as if they have gotten a glimpse of a future that resembles nothing like their accustomed to and have made a conscious decision to freeze time in their mind and refuse to allow it to take its natural course. They then proceed to create an apologetic culture over time to confront the reality of inevitable change.

When you look at the language of Tea Party types and fundamentalist Christians you see notions spelled out in ways that sound more familiar in a junior high school setting; having a more sophomoric argot to them. Ideas are expressed in more simplistic ways that accommodate an adolescent view and seem trivial in light of broader experiences. Their mental faculties have not been diminished physiologically and they are quite capable of expressing an intellect with high IQs in most areas. But in their socio-religious view of life their growth appears stunted and all too ready to reject a social dynamic that develops layers of knowledge over time. The concept of WASPs – white Anglo-Saxon protestants – comes to mind when considering many on the right today as they try to deal with the changing make up of American families in the 21st century.

Why does the changing traditional image of American families seem threatening to many conservatives today?

The simpler, broader concepts of “mom, apple pie, God and country” still holds a pleasant but narrow image from a past era for today’s hardcore right-wing contingent within conservatism. To such people however, mom is never a teenage girl who had an unwanted pregnancy, diabetes from too much apple pie is beyond comprehension, the Judeo-christian concept of a universal creator remains the only acceptable view (orthodox interpretations primarily) and many still see the country as it existed for many years as the domain for white male property owners. Capitalism has been woven into biblical scripture and wealth is nearly universally seen as the ultimate end to one’s pursuit of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. To discredit those who have vast fortunes is to engage in a social blasphemy of sorts.

This state of mind is, I feel, an intentional choice because it preserves a familiarity of the bygone era. We all harbor this to some degree. We also all tend to resist most changes. But for many on the Christian and political right in this country today, the magnitude of change we are inevitably experiencing as a democracy with its emphasis on freedom is change that cannot be tolerated. No amount of critical thinking seems to be capable of altering this dogmatic stand either.

When it comes time for us all to go out into the world on our own, beyond the control of those who have filled our minds up to this point, we inevitably run into challenges to those perceptions that were narrowly defined in our subconscious during the brain’s formative years. By the time I was seventeen I was sure Christianity, especially Roman Catholicism, was the one true religion. Americans, especially Texans, were the greatest people ever and the envy of the world and that equal economic opportunity was there for everyone who expended the right amount of energy, no matter what your gender, religious beliefs or race were. Naturally I heard this from the authority figures within a paternalistic white American, christian culture and since I was a physically white male American born in Texas and raised in the Catholic church, I failed to see how women and other people of differing races, cultures and belief systems seldom shared this view. How could I? I had never interacted sufficiently, if at all, with such people.

But then somehow the mechanisms of control lost sight of me and allowed me to gain a higher education and this, to the shock and dismay of many, opened doors that had heretofore been closed. Some of them had in fact been nailed shut. Perhaps this was the dread of former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum expressed in his campaign about higher education.

I found that these countervailing views that grabbed me at a young adult age seem to fit in areas that my traditional upbringing could not quite reconcile. Not everything I began to absorb satisfied a hidden hunger. In fact I found some objectionable, at first. But there was enough there that allowed me to see that perhaps I had in fact not been given all of the information that was out there to make an informed decision. Just coming to the realization that an open and honest debate on issues was an option was something of an awakening for me.

Deeply held views that demonized and rejected gays, held minorities and women to an inferior status and saw all other manifestations of religious faith as broken and even corrupt, began to fragment. As this became more unsettling to me, my parents and others would try to assure me that though some customs and tradional views they raised me with were not absolutes, I was not to concern myself with such doubts because the older notions had been around “forever”. Surely, they presumed, this must carry greater weight that time often honors. To think outside this preset mold I was warned was to invite Lucifer and Stalinists thoughts into that world that had been carved out for me.

It took about two-thirds of my life to finally accept that much of what I was taught as a child and young adult was subject to debate and some of it, not all, was unlikely to stand up to scrutiny. I had what I call “a road less traveled” epiphany. Rather than view this as a failure of family upbringing or a conspiracy of some sort, I found it beneficial to accept this as part of the maturation process in life. Those adolescent ideas and ideals that got me through my young life served a purpose that allowed me to focus on less complicated matters that tender young brains were better able to handle. The real failure I have discovered comes in believing too deeply that much of what we are taught are absolutes and are inflexible. It takes a certain amount of courage to step outside that box we have become too familiar with where pushing the envelope was often discouraged. The status quo was held up as my security blanket.

Think of the temper tantrum young children throw when their notion of getting a toy is altered because the condition of good behavior gone bad has effected this outcome (provided you have a parent willing to enforce discipline). Your world is momentarily shattered and you engage in a kicking, screaming fit to re-established that happier moment before Mom or Dad enforced the conditions that prevented you from getting what you wanted. Such behavior seems harmless at such an early age but when such mechanisms carry over to the adult world, especially regarding critical matters that will effect long term outcomes for ourselves and others, it can create some conflicts that lead to acts of aggression on local and even a global scale.

When immature christian thinking sees Islam as nothing more than an evil based upon their view of what is or isn’t a “true” religion, then the positive aspects of the Muslim faith are ignored and even twisted to suggest some hidden agenda exists with the consensus. When immature heterosexuals claim that the legality of marriage was only intended to be between a man and a woman, they ignore the vital element of relationships that strengthen self-esteem and make us productive members of society. When immature patriots think only older, narrowly defined traditions masked as “original intent” have greater value than those conditions that the social dynamics of today present us, they blind themselves to modern reality and pigeon-hole all cultures to fit out-dated concepts. All of these reactions limit the gifts and talents that others can bring to the table in making this a more just and free society.

By using the language and promoting the notions that had meaning for us as an adolescent and expecting it to always bear fruit as an adult is a trap that is easy to fall into. The failure to allow new and varied experiences to refine what was thought to be chipped in stone is a trait that will prevent the human race from advancing and sustaining a quality of life that ensures ours and the other species’ survival. Not all change is good and we need to move cautiously where angels dare to tread. But the converse is equally true and we need not be afraid of expanding views once deemed sacrosanct.

We need to take with us into the future those elements that have and will continue to serve us as the needs of a 21st century confront us. All others need to be either respectfully laid to rest or disposed of in the unceremonious manner that we take out the daily trash with.

“Immaturity is the incapacity to use one’s intelligence without the guidance of another.” – Immanuel Kant

Posted by lbwoodgate in political fringe groups Tags: 19th century America, adolescent fantasies, Catholic Church, God, GOP, immature concepts, Religion, Republican, Rick Santorum, Texas, traditional American views, WASP culture

18 comments

Want To Be Seen As “Cool” In Texas? Buy a Gun Silencer.

April 4, 2012

Being cool is different to different people. To the very wealthy it’s how they can dispose of their excess wealth by being the first to buy a piece of modern art that cost more than many people’s job income each year, as Morley Safer showed us in a segment on last Sunday”s “60 Minutes”. For other’s, being cool is all about peeing in your pants. Here in Texas, never wanting to be outdone by anyone else, we have a combination of the wealthy arrogance and Billy Madison immaturity to convey what’s cool.

Nationwide, more than 22,000 [gun] noise suppressors were sold this year — 9 percent more than last year — and the most were sold in Texas for at least the third year in a row…

“People just want them,” Glen Furtardo said, … manager at the Winchester Gallery gun store in east Fort Worth. “It’s like tattoos. … They have come out of the closet. Now everyone gets them.”

DeWayne Irwin, who owns the Cheaper Than Dirt gun store in north Fort Worth, said he has steadily seen sales of silencers rise, along with ammunition and guns, over the past two years. “Ninety percent of the people who buy them just think they are so cool,” Irwin said. “This is Texas.” SOURCE

For many of us who were born and raised in the Lone Star State we have slowly watched too many people in it devolve into a dysfunctional, undereducated caveman-like society. Texas has a progressive legacy with such people as Sam Houston, John Nance Garner, Sam Rayburn, Miriam A. “Ma” Ferguson, Molly Ivins and Ann Richards.

The state can lay claim to some of the music greats like Buddy Holly, Willy Nelson and Stevie Ray Vaughn. Military heroes ranged from John Coker in Texas’ fight for independence to Audie Murphy’s Medal of honor action in WWII and carried through with today’s highly decorated William Harry McRaven, who currently serves as ninth Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command and who’s credited with organizing and executing the special ops raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden.

There was a certain pride Texans had that was the envy of many in the other 49 states. We still project to many around the world an enduring mystique of the American cowboy that symbolizes the rugged west of an earlier time. But over the last few decades Texas is becoming the butt of many jokes and is being represented by some of the most notable mental midgets of our time. The disease that has festered was perhaps sparked by the infamous Texan who killed President Kennedy back in 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald. Since then the state has gradually edged toward the ideological red of the political spectrum that now divides us as a people.

The rest of the world now sees buffoonery coming out of Texas either in the personal images of George W. Bush, his “turd blossom”, Karl Rove, or the current self-serving, coiffed governor, Rick Perry. It’s the state that wants to secede from the union, built an expensive, ineffective wall along the Rio Grande to keep their cheap labor force out, engaged in revisionist history in school text books affecting the rest of the nation’s school systems and along with several other red states, implemented a law requiring an intrusive vaginal sonogram for any woman contemplating an abortion.

We have the highest number of people without health insurance coverage and rank near the bottom in the important educational categories of science and math. And even with the third-most millionaires of any state, with 381,165, Texas is still only #25 in Median Household Income, reflecting the low wage base for most working families.

So it wasn’t surprising, after watching Bill Maher’s “New Rules” segment last Friday to discover that Texas, along with several other states now allows you to buy silencers for both handguns and hunting rifles. Evidently the law has been around for a few years and as a Texan who owns no gun(s) I was unaware of this law. Maher’s revelation in his “New Rules” segment sent me googling for information on this subject which brought me to Anna Tinsley’s story in the Ft. Worth Star telegram published back in December 2010

Its’ a good story. It doesn’t bash gun owners and even slips a comment in from a Dallas volunteer for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence to question why a citizen who arms themselves for security reason needs a silencer. Recent events in Sanford, Florida might provide a clue for this. Texas too has a “stand your ground” law that allows you to shoot people who you suspect pose a threat to you anywhere away from your home. A noisy handgun or rifle going off might disturb the neighbors watching the current episode of “Survivor”.

We may be dumbing down in Texas but we are considerate about disturbing our neighbors as suggested by Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson “if you’re getting rid of squirrels in your back yard”. Patterson, a former state senator who shepherded conceal-carry legislation in 1995, hunts wild hogs by attracting a herd of them to a feeder and picks them off as they’re eating. The silencer serves “a practical use if you want to shoot one without scaring others off”, he says.

What I found especially amusing in Tinsley’s story were those gun owners who might use silencers on them as they fire off rounds with other like minded people.

Some people take their silencers to shooting ranges. Others might take them to “machine gun shoots,” where gun lovers gather to fire at targets.

An un-cool person might purchase ear protection headsets where many are reasonably priced for around $50. But only the cool Texan would spend between $199 to $6,000 for a gun silencer.

Who wants to look like this

when you can look like this

Those of us who have to suffer these troglodytes can only shake our heads and wonder how much further this state will recede into the shallow-minded abyss that thinks being cool entails using a weapon solely intended to kill and then shows concern that it’s use will exceed normal decibel levels.

Posted by lbwoodgate in Texas/Local stories Tags: Bill Maher "Real Time", Billy Madison, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, George W. Bush, gun silencers, John Nance Garner, stand your ground laws, Texas, Texas sells most gun silencers, troglodytes in Texas

17 comments

The Silence is Deafening

October 5, 2011

The existential question that asks,“If a tree falls in the woods, and no one hears it, does it make noise?”, seems to be in play here regarding falling gas prices. The answer to the question would be “no” if it was measured by the sound of Tea Party types taking back their diatribes that blamed federal policies and regulations on high gas prices earlier this year.

Is Obama to blame for declining gasoline prices?

For those of us who live in Texas, Michigan and Missouri we have seen the price of gas drop below three dollars a gallon recently. No change has occurred with federal regulations governing oil production from what it was earlier this year when gas was at or over $4 a gallon around the country, yet there is nary a word from the anti-Obama crowd about how his “socialist” policies have allowed this to happen.

This denier contingent will no doubt remain silent until prices once again rise but can they honestly be taken seriously any longer when their claims have been aptly muted after seeing that global market conditions, consumer demand and speculation by traders have impacted these swings in price?

The national average for regular unleaded gasoline is $3.51 per gallon, down from a high of $3.98 in early May. Last week’s plunge in oil prices could push the average to $3.25 per gallon by November, analysts say.

Prices for oil, gasoline and other commodities dove last week along with world stock markets over concerns the global economy is headed for another recession. When economies slow, demand for gasoline, diesel and jet fuel falls as drivers cut back on trips, shippers move fewer goods and vacationers stay closer to home. SOURCE

But for those of us who can see the writing on the wall, the anti-Obama crowd will find some measure of revenge for being exposed as frauds by continuing to blame the White House for lower demand because unemployment rates will continue to be high for the foreseeable future.

In a related story, there was a local incident here where a gas well drilling company “was pumping contaminated wastewater into a tributary of Hickory Creek.” It was discovered by city government workers. Though the story made the front page of the Denton Record-Chronicle it was posted in the “crime blotter” section so the name of the company wasn’t revealed. According to the report “city employees visited a well site in the 3100 block of Airport Road on Thursday and saw that a pit liner had been buried on the property and a pump was forcing the contaminated water from it into the nearby creek. A man at the site saw the city officers and turned off the pump.”

It should be noted that Hickory Creeks feeds into Lewisville Lake directly upstream from the City of Denton’s drinking water intake structure.

City employees took samples of the creek water and learned that contaminants were far above the level allowed from wastewater. A subsequent laboratory test showed the contaminants were 10 times higher than the last time the creek water was tested, the report noted.

The company did not have a permit from the city or a state regulatory agency to pump the wastewater into the creek, the report states.

City employees sent a notice of violation of the water code to the company, and company officers agreed to clean up the site. The company was required to shut down the well site until the cleanup took place.

According to the police report, officers monitored the cleanup, and 24,360 gallons of wastewater were removed from the creek and 48 cubic yards of dirt were taken away. SOURCE

This apparent crime of the dumping toxic waste in Hickory Creek by this private gas drilling company ought to raise the ire of all concerned citizens. But it will come as no surprise that little or no response will come from those who shriek the loudest about getting government out of business practices and let them police themselves.

What makes this story even more relevant is that there’s been a lot of hollering by political extremists on the right here about keeping government out of the private sector, specifically targeting the EPA in its attempts to regulate CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plant; something they feel will generate higher utility bills and take jobs away. Our Texas district 26 Congressman, Michael Burgess, was on the local CBS network the other day repeating the Republican talking point about how such action by the EPA will kill jobs as it allegedly threatens to shut down Texas’ 18 coal-fired power plants.

But there is no evidence to support this contention. The only power plant that could be affected by new EPA regulations in this state could be the Welsh Power Plant near Pittsburg, Texas, owned by American Electric Power. However, a recent piece by Daniel J. Weiss and Valeri Vasquez with the Center for American Progress has discovered that it is more likely that AEP is threatening to shut down this plant along with 21 others of theirs around the country simply to “to stoke congressional and public opposition to EPA’s efforts to reduce toxic air pollution.”

AEP’s threat to close these plants due to the pending EPA air toxics rules is also somewhat misleading. Last year, it announced a plan to close five units at the Phillip Sporn Plant in New Haven, West Virginia. Source Watch, a nonprofit that publishes “documented information about the corporations, industries, and people trying to sway public opinion,” reported on AEP’s 2010 retirement plans.

In October 2010, Ohio Power Co. filed an application with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio for the approval of a December 2010 closure of the coal-fired Philip Sporn Power Plant unit 5…In September 2009, Appalachian Power filed an integrated resource plan (IRP) in Virginia that projected a 2010 shutdown for Sporn unit 5. The same IRP projected that Sporn units 1-4, with 580 MW of total capacity, would be retired in 2018.

In other words, AEP planned to close this plant five months before EPA’s March 2011 proposal to reduce toxic air pollution from coal-fired utilities. Yet AEP has included closing these units under “AEP’s current plan for compliance with the [EPA] rules as proposed includes permanently retiring the following coal-fueled power plants.” SOURCE

According to the Sierra Club AEP has consistently opposed better clean-air standards and has fought efforts to require modern pollution controls. Closing down the Welsh plant would avoid costly court costs because in 2005 the Sierra Club and Public Citizen sued AEP “for thousands of violations at its Welsh power plant in Texas”

The threats from coal plant emissions have been well documented about the costs to our environment and human health.

This evidence, showing once again that the claims by free-marketers are far from reliable, will go unnoticed by such people. Their purist notion that there is no room for government oversight of for-profit companies simply refuses to acknowledge that “the markets” are not some disconnected holy entity but are the creation of imperfect people who often over-indulge their self-interests traits.

Posted by lbwoodgate in political fringe groups, Texas/Local stories Tags: allowing corporations to police themselves, American Electric Power, anti-government forces, Daniel J. Weiss, declining gasoline prices, Denton Record-Chronicle, EPA, Obama and lower oil prices, Obama haters, Texas, United States Environmental Protection Agency

6 comments

Leadership Skills Missing?

October 1, 2011

Four GOP candidates this last week have made comments that say a lot about their character or lack thereof and whether they have the leadership skills to sit as this nation’s Chief Executive. Let’s take a look at each one.

Visiting her friend Laura Ingraham on her talk show this last Friday Michele Bachman made several comments about China that may or may not be true but are out of line for someone who wants to represent themselves as “the leader of the free world.”

“I’m not sharing something I shouldn’t, but China has blinded United States satellites with their lasers,” said Bachmann, who reiterated that she sits on the House Intelligence Commitee.

“They’ve also supplied arms to the Taliban, and they’ve helped North Korea deliver missiles to Iran and Pakistan. And they’ve assisted Iran with their nuclear program.”

She also mentioned China’s “cyber attacks”on the U.S. and “currency manipulation.”

“China has widespread intellectual property theft of United States intellectual property,” she said. “Don’t forget that. They’ve also been engaged in industrial espionage against the West as well. And they actively have engaged in cyber attacks both on our military and on our commercial companies.” SOURCE

It’s true that China is not an ally of ours but neither are they considered an enemy either, and for good reason. They own a large amount of our current debt and setting them up as a foe weakens any efforts we have made in closing the cold war hostilities between the two governments while opening their markets further for trade which can only aid our weak economic condition at this time.

Her comments also presume that another sovereign nation doesn’t have the right to protect itself against viable threats from other nations as we do. Those satellites are more than likely spying on Chinese operations that are considered critical to the Defense Department and if the shoe were on the other foot we would do the same thing. And if China is in fact aiding countries that we are enemies with, is this anything different from what we do enable our national security through the support of countries like Israel, the Philippines, the Ukraine and South Korea who pose a threat so close to Russia and China?

Perhaps Bachman is just assuring Americans that she is not unaware that the world is a dangerous place and she knows who to keep an eye on but her diplomatic tact here is missing and indicates a failure of leadership to deal with this issue in ways that don’t antagonize a super power that we are trying to convince that it’s in their best interests to work with us than against us. As the Chief Executive you deal with these issues behind the scenes and not by waving a menacing finger in their face.

Rick Perry is apologizing for something he shouldn’t simply to keep his red-meat supporters from thinking he supports illegal immigration. He said he erred in last week’s presidential debate, when he said that opponents of in-state college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants were heartless.

“I probably chose a poor word to explain that. For people who don’t want their state to be giving tuition to illegal aliens, illegal immigrants in this country, that’s their call; I respect that,” Perry told the conservative magazine Newsmax in an interview posted online Thursday. “I was probably a bit over-passionate by using that word and it was inappropriate.”

The interview seeks to temper the fallout from last Thursday’s debate in Florida, when he defended in stark terms the legislation he’d approved as governor that granted in-state college tuition to the children of illegal immigrants.

“[I]f you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart. We need to be educating these children, because they will become a drag on our society,” Perry said. – SOURCE

It is heartless to deprive the children of illegal parents a right to an education because through no fault of their own they are here because their parents sought a better life for them. Who would punish any child for the violations of law their parents have committed?

I am wondering however where Perry comes off accusing other people of being heartless after showing no remorse for having the highest rate of prisoner executions in the free world (234), saying he’s “never struggled with that at all” when asked if he had trouble sleeping with the idea that any one of those who were executed might have been innocent. Can he be that oblivious that the justice system in Texas is broken when it’s been revealed that during his tenure as Governor more people serving sentences in Texas prisons have been exonerated (41) “through DNA testing than in any other state in the country” and that he allowed the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham who may quite likely have been innocent of the charge that he killed his children.

"Do I believe in anything?"

One of those attacking Perry’s “heartless” comment is Mitt Romney.

“I fundamentally believe that it doesn’t make a lot of sense for American taxpayers to pay for the college education of illegal aliens particularly at a time when American taxpayers are having a hard time financing education for their own children,” Romney said Tuesday on conservative talk radio.

Romney is merely trying to score points with the extreme right base within the GOP but again, doesn’t this show a lack of leadership where inflammatory statements only serve to alienate a growing population in this country who, whether legal or illegal citizens, have provided great benefits and service to this country? Isn’t Romney aware that Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez, an illegal immigrant, was the first American serviceman to die in Bush’s War in Iraq?

And lastly, there were the comments by Ron Paul that at least were consistent with his Libertarian views but demonstrated an inability to see beyond his black and white political views when commenting on the death of known al-Qaeda member, Anwar Al-Awlaki, who was targeted and killed by a U.S. drone attack.

I don’t think that’s a good way to deal with our problems,” Paul said in a media avail after his remarks at the Politics + Eggs event here. “He was born here, Al-Awlaki was born here, he is an American citizen. He was never tried or charged for any crimes. No one knows if he killed anybody. We know he might have been associated with the underwear bomber. But if the American people accept this blindly and casually that we now have an accepted practice of the president assassinating people who he thinks are bad guys, I think it’s sad.

“I think what would people … have said about Timothy McVeigh? We didn’t assassinate him, who certainly he had done it. Went and put through the courts then executed him. To start assassinating American citizens without charges, we should think very seriously about this.”

Someone should have informed Mr. Paul that Timothy McVeigh was captured before it was known he was the Oklahoma City Bomber. It’s an apples to oranges comparison to view the two in the same scenario. Had McVeigh become a fugitive of the law we would have hunted him down and brought him to justice as recently happened with U.S. fugitive George Wright after 40 years.

Al-Awlaki was not a fugitive from justice but a professed enemy of the U.S. hiding in hostile foreign territory and appeared to be deeply involved with conspiracies to do harm to American life and property. Such people are no longer covered by the Constitution or so says “Kenneth Anderson, an international law scholar at American University’s Washington College of Law, [who says] U.S. citizens who take up arms with an enemy force have been considered legitimate targets through two world wars, even if they are outside what is traditionally considered the battlefield.”

I have commented on where I feel President Obama has failed at leadership skills but for those on the right who would criticize him on this subject, there doesn’t seem to be much they’re offering that can stack up against him. The anticipation that New Jersey governor Chris Christie may enter the race to offset these extremist in their Party is perhaps a good sign. But one should ask why they are ignoring perhaps the only level-headed candidate that is currently running on the GOP ticket – John Huntsmen. Is it because “crazy” has it appeal to the GOP base?

Posted by lbwoodgate in 2012 Presidential Elections, Society and Politics Tags: appeasing the political base, Cameron Todd Willingham, China, GOP presidential candidates, illegal immigration, John Huntsman, leadership skills for president, Michele Bachman, Mitt Romney, Republicans, Rick Perry, Ron Paul, Tea Party crazy, Texas

7 comments

Rick Perry Invokes “God” Status

September 16, 2011

: How dare they over rule me.

In an LA Times news report by David Savage we learn that

the “U.S. Supreme Court stopped Texas officials Thursday evening from executing a Houston murderer who was sentenced to die after jurors were told he posed a greater danger to public safety because he is black.”

The justices acted on an emergency appeal after Texas Gov. Rick Perry and state judges refused to intervene.

Buck, a 48-year-old auto mechanic, was sentenced to die for the fatal 1995 shootings of an ex-girlfriend and a man. His attorneys did not dispute his guilt but argued that prosecutors should not have used his race to argue for a death sentence.

The sentencing dispute arose because of an unusual provision in Texas’ death penalty law. Jurors were required to consider whether a convicted murderer would pose a future danger if he were sentenced to life in prison rather than death. In a series of cases, Dr. Walter Quijano, a psychologist, testified that blacks posed a greater risk of “future dangerousness” than whites. SOURCE

That ought to be clear to most people as these photos released by the governor’s office of Buck and white serial killer Jeffery Dahmer show

“Our justice system may have gaps and flaws in it, Perry said, and innocent people have been wrongly convicted and executed but I’ll not waste the tax payer’s money and give wrongly accused and sentenced people another trial. If I did that we’d have to lay off more teachers. Besides, I have a new governor’s mansion to build so my people will have a worthy place to ~~worship~~ visit me.

The Governor insists that his decision to ignore the Buck case and most of the 235 death penalty cases that preceded this one came from a higher power. Channeling the memory of Richard Nixon who in February 1973 said when being accused of orchestrating the Watergate break in that “When the President does it, that means it is not illegal”, Perry told reporters that “when I do anything that means it comes from the ultimate authority.”

This reference is linked to the ties Perry has with fundamentalist Christians in Texas and his attempts to pursue God through prayer to end years of serious drought in the state. The prayer fest held in April this year not only failed to produce significant quantities of rain but was followed by the warmest, driest summer ever experienced by any state in American history.

It was perhaps this obvious failure of Perry’s that restrained him from sending the Texas Rangers to arrest those Supreme Court judges who stayed the execution of Duane Buck just hours before he was scheduled to die by lethal injection. According to the LA Times story “Perry, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, was campaigning in Iowa on Thursday, leaving Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst to preside over the execution. After the stay was issued, Dewhurst’s office said he would have no comment. A Perry spokeswoman in Austin said, “This is a matter before the courts.”

But unidentified sources said Perry was seething and already had started drawing up plans to stack the court once he was elected President-for-life

Posted by lbwoodgate in Humor, Satire, Social Discourse, Texas/Local stories Tags: Capital punishment, David Dewhurst, God and Perry, Richard Nixon, Rick Perry, Rick Perry satire, Supreme Court of the United States, Texas, Texas and the death penalty

7 comments

Tag Archives: Texas

It May Not Be Terrorism But it Sure is Criminal

Here’s what we know.

The West Fertilizer Co. was cited for failing to obtain or qualify for a permit in 2006 after a complaint [by nearby residents] of a strong ammonia smell.

The knowledge Texas state agencies had about how “a routine fire getting out of control and superheating a container with a large volume of ammonium nitrate, widely used as a fertilizer and as an explosive [apparently failed to] discuss fire or explosive risks with the company or each other.”

What is it About Texas Politicians Who Have No Shame?

Most of the Senators who oppose added gun control measures will likely vote against this bill once it comes to the floor but appeared willing to allow their constituents the right to hear their pro and con views.

This is after all, in theory at least, a democracy. Only in dictatorships or oppressive oligarchs is speech suppressed that is critical of those in power. And therein lies the rub. Where does the real power lie?

The Power of the NRA

Why Texas is Winning the Race to the Bottom

If Stockman’s bumper sticker isn’t evidence enough of his poor mental state then perhaps this tweet of his that expresses a convoluted thought about women and gun threats will help convince you.

Lord knows how much safer moms are with their infant children handling a gun than a criminal who , according to Stockman, will surely cross paths with them.

If fetuses were even capable of understanding that their prospects for a bright future are severely limited with such people as Stockman and Gohmert in positions of political leadership, they would probably pull the plug themselves.

Stupid in Texas

No better evidence of this exists than when the Texas GOP stated in their 2012 platform their opposition to critical thinking for fear it might reveal some of the flaws in the backward thinking that these people practice.

Is it any wonder then that Texas ranks 50th among the states in the percentage of its population 25 or older with a high school diploma. Why bother? It doesn’t take a high school education to fill all of the minimum wage jobs Governor Perry has bragged about bringing to Texas.

Violence against women gets worse every year as this study done by the American Public Health Association revealed.

But clearly the lack of critical thinking by Senators Cruz and Cornyn have lived up to the ambitions of their state Party leaders. Apparently a woman needs a little physical reminder every now and then to help her remember her place in the traditional social order for some here in Texas.

Ultra-conservatives in America and Their Resistance to Change

Not all change is good but it is inevitable and some of it is necessary. The political and Christian right in this country risk appearing backwards as they dig in their heels to fend off 21st century changes.

“Immaturity is the incapacity to use one’s intelligence without the guidance of another.” – Immanuel Kant

Want To Be Seen As “Cool” In Texas? Buy a Gun Silencer.

The Silence is Deafening

Leadership Skills Missing?

Search Blog Content

America Honors Leaders, Not Politicians

Bet on solar power

What I have written recently

Blogroll

Archives

Follow “Woodgate's View”