We've also brought the reblog button back to the toolbar that appears at the top of the screen when you're logged into WordPress.com. Note that you'll only see the like and reblog options while you're looking at individual posts.
So for those of you who have been readers here. I just wanted to drop by and let you all know that I am moving on. I am getting back into blogging and unfortunately can’t continue on here. The San Antonio Conservative is no more. I no longer live in San Antonio and I was eager to not only talk politics, but bring along a side of something else. I plan to attempt that with my new blog titled “brand politics.” I encourage all of you to update your blogrolls and read my new blog. Its just the beginning for this new project. In fact there is only one post thus far. But it should be fun. I am already excited about the new site.
So since my career might take me to any number of different locales, this blog is one that I can continue with no matter my geographical location. What I will be doing over at brand will be a mix of mostly politics (I am after all a Political Science graduate) but will also mix in my love of sports, music, entertainment, movies, and all else that is typical for 25 year olds. So thanks to everyone who ever read this blog, my first real project in the blog world. I appreciated all the comments and all those who listed my on their blogrolls. Because of you all, I actually stuck with a blog for more than a year. Previously, my longest running stint on a blog was about 3 or 4 months. So thank you.
You can get to the new blog by clicking here. A more permanent domain is coming soon.
See you in the blogosphere.
Seems as though my readership has obviously dwindled. Why wouldn’t it? There hasn’t been any new posts or material in quite a long time. So I just wanted to post here to let everyone know what has happened. To say I got busy with work is somewhat of a cop out, but it would be true. I began working some long hours. When I finally wanted to delve back into blogging, my domain name was expired and new posts weren’t displaying properly. Then towards the latter part of 2010 I was offered a position with the Rick Perry Gubernatorial re-election campaign. I felt it would be a conflict of interest for me to talk about the race when obviously I was biased toward one candidate. True, I do have a general biased based on my political beliefs, but now that one candidate was “paying the bills” as it were, I decided to step away. I also didn’t want to touch on politics in general so that my comments would not be used in anyway to relate back to my job.
Once the campaign was over, I was in a car accident and on the job hunt. I found a new job relatively quickly and unfortunately that took me away from San Antonio. So as such I am no long a San Antonio Conservative. I work now for a minor league professional hockey team in the Rio Grande Valley. So until such a time as I move back to San Antonio, this is it for the blog. Feel free to keep in touch via twitter or facebook.
While the video is a bit confusing and goes by a bit quickly … it clearly explains it all. Don’t worry about being confused, the process that Congressional Democrats are using is quite confusing. Well … here goes:
Well it looks like the Obama-care plan is full steam ahead for a “vote” sometime soon. From reports out Wednesday it looks like the planned Saturday “vote” is out as the Congressional Budget Office is not expected to score the legislation until sometime on Thursday. But while Democrats in Congress are planning to play the end around on the legislative process and force this form of reform on the American people in the face of mounting, growing, and fierce opposition to it.
The current plan is to utilize an arcane and rarely used parliamentary provision to “pass” the healthcare legislation. This is called the “deem and pass” rule.
House lawmakers would be going on record for health care reform. But they wouldn’t be casting a vote for the Senate bill alone.
Instead, under a process called a “self-executing rule,” the House could simultaneously approve the Senate bill while voting on a package of changes to it. This would “deem” the Senate bill to be passed, without compelling members to vote for it directly. Basically, under the procedure, the Senate-passed health bill would be “deemed” to have passed if House members vote in favor of a rule governing another bill.
Democratic leaders are considering the option because many House Democrats don’t want to cast a vote in favor of the unaltered Senate bill, which they oppose for numerous reasons. But the House must pass the Senate bill in order to move on to the package of changes intended to correct all the things about it that they don’t like.
But should they do this they face stiff challenges ahead. Forget about the fact that the government will begin collecting taxes in 2011 and not begin providing services until at least 2013 or 2014! But the federal government will face challenges in the legal arena from the states. Just today, Idaho Governor C.L. Otter (R) signed a measure that instructs his state attorney general to sue the federal government if the current form of healthcare reform is passed by Congress. The measure requires the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance. Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states.
Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states. But the state measures reflect a growing frustration with President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. And that is not all that reflects that growing frustration. For the first time, the most recent Gallup poll shows that more Americans disapprove of the job President Obama is doing than approve. In the poll, 47 percent of Americans disapprove of Obama’s job performance compared to 46 percent who approve. Obama’s job approval rating fell to 46 percent last week, an all-time low for the president.
The plunging rating threatens to weaken the president’s influence beyond the health care debate to pass a largely ambitious agenda that includes immigration overhaul, climate change legislation and education reform. It could also put distance between Obama and Democratic lawmakers up for re-election in November who see no benefit in having an increasingly unpopular president stump for them. Obama’s campaigning efforts have already failed to help notch victories in gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey and the Senate contest in Massachusetts in replace Ted Kennedy.
Another State Attorney General, Republican Kenneth Cuccinelli, who last month went to court to oppose the federal plan to regulate greenhouse gases, said in the letter that using the so-called “deem and pass” rule would expose President Barack Obama’s signature domestic initiative to a constitutional challenge.
Cuccinelli joins other Republicans who have opposed the possible maneuver. ”Based upon media interviews and statements which I have seen, you are considering this approach because it might somehow shield members of Congress from taking a recorded vote on an overwhelmingly unpopular Senate bill,” Cuccinelli wrote in the letter to the Democratic speaker. “This is an improper purpose under the bicameralism requirements of Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, one of the purposes of which is to make our representatives fully accountable for their votes.”
And so, it appears that while there might be a temporary victory for Congressional Democrats and the President, there would still be an uphill battle to face if this form of reform takes effect. And that uphill battle, rolls directly towards the November elections of 2010. And I therefore leave the Democrats and my fellow Republicans with this tonight. It’s a piece of advice if you will. Americans send people to Washington, D.C., to be their representatives — to cast votes that represent the will of the people…and right now, the people a’int willing to take this.
First off, I know … the gaps continue between posts to the blog, and interestingly enough what compels me to write today is a story about unemployment benefits. What’s interesting is that the reason from my absence this time is that I found a new job and have been busy training and getting on the floor and starting up. But now the schedule is more concrete and stable and I can now find the time to write. Thankfully.
So yes, back to the original question. Aren’t unemployment benefits supposed to be temporary? At least I thought they were. However a new article in The Washington Post on Tuesday spoke about how some of the 11.4 Million people who are out of work in America today are able to or have been recieving their unemployment benefits for as much as 99 weeks. 99 WEEKS!! Seriously?!?! That is almost two full years on unemployment insurance. TWO YEARS!! So is there really an incentive to find a job. And say if I lose my job in about a year when hopefully the economic situation is somewhat more “rosy” shall we say. Will I be able to get almost TWO YEARS of unemployment benefits?
The other situation that brought this to my attention was the debate in the Senate about a week ago, where Senator Lamar Alexander (R-KY) held up an extension of unemployment benefits, not because he thought it was similar to welfare…but because the extension was not paid for! There was an uproar from the public and one instance stood out for me in the public uproar. A woman, from Kentucky (who was unemployed) said in response to a question about the merit of Sen. Alexander’s hold on the bill on the basis of it not being paid for … (paraphrase) ‘I understand unpaid bills, but where are these people going to get their money from. Is Sen. Alexander gonna pay out of pocket?’ WHAT?!?!?
My response to that is that unemployment benefits were never meant to be paid out for this length of time. This is tantamount to welfare. I don’t doubt that the situation is difficult for people who have been unemployed. I was unemployed myself. But regardless of the economic crisis … should these benefits be nearly endless. Back in the 1990′s and 2000′s when the economy was stable and creating jobs… I am sure there were some people who became unemployed. We did not endlessly extend their benefits. I am sure their situation was nearly as rough and possibly even worse. What makes this any different? Unemployment is difficult no matter the economic situation. It would have been just as difficult back in the 90′s as it is today I assume. It is time for fiscal responsibility in Washington.
These are just a few thoughts as I get back into the swing of things on the blog. … And FYI … look for some new San Antonio Conservative Online Radio Shows online at blogtalkradio.com coming soon.
If you want to read the article about Unemployment Benefits from The Washington Post – go to:
Here are some links to watch a replay of the BELO Debate with the three GOP Gubernatorial Candidates. Governor Rick Perry, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, and former Wharton Co. GOP Chairwoman and activist Debra Medina.
I will post a blog entry on the debate and the primary election, which is coming up in 32 short days.
It has been a year since I started this blog. Yes there have been times where I have not been able to post as much as I would like or at all. But today I reflect back on the day that I started this blog. It was January 20, 2009 and the Inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States. A lot has changed since that day, and a lot still has not. The things that have not interest me for a President that was elected on a wave of “CHANGE WE CAN HOPE IN (or something…)”. If you asked me what I think the State of our Union is here is what I would say:
My fellow Americans…the State of our Union is troubled. The true core of our Union is strong, because the core of our Union is the people. The American people continue to have an entrepreneurial spirit, a charitable spirit, and a strong sense of character. However, the current state of affairs out of Washington have left the American economy and the American public in a troubled state of affairs. Currently, 10% of our citizens is out of work, and struggling to pay their bills and take care of their children. However, this Administration and this Congress have done nothing but provide smoke and mirrors as solutions to this problem. The stimulus package that was passed last year did not stimulate the economy and did little to boost consumer confidence. It seems that the liberal Democrats have forgotten the basic premise in economic that consumer spending accounts for 70+% of our economy. The stimulus they passed only increased government spending and did little to help the consumer. Rather than empower the American people or American businesses to invest in this economy and truly bring it back from the brink. Our government and our country can no longer afford to spend the way we are spending. Our national debt is skyrocketing, and is devaluing the true value of our currency and our economy. There needs to be some serious change in Washington, pork spending and other government expenditures need to be trimmed and fast. I would advocate the development of an independent panel that would recommend to the President which agencies and programs could “sunset” and reduce the overall cost and budget of the federal government. The size of our government must be reduced and government spending must be brought under control. The government can not be the sole creator of jobs in this country, small business owners are the true job creating engine of this country.
We need true bipartisan health care reform, without a government funded, government executed, government facilitated health insurance program. We need this government to focus on the economy and our troops in the war zone. We do not need government to increase taxes because this will in the end reduce economic growth. We need to give the money back to the people who earn it and truly and realistically reduce spending in Washington. The freeze being proposed by the President tonight does little to alleviate the true spending concern, it simply halts the spending level at its already elevated level. This can not continue for much longer. There needs to be change.
These are just a few quick thoughts I had time to jot down before the State of the Union Address tonight. I will post my reaction to the address tonight and as we continue I will to detail what I think the State of our Union is right now and how it can be addressed.
This is a news release from awhile back, I have been meaning to post it to the site but I hadn’t had internet access for awhile. Now that I am back online I am posting it now. This is from my friends over at the Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT) – and just an FYI I will have another post about YCT tonight!
For Immediate Release
January 6, 2010
Contact: Tony McDonald, Vice Chairman of Legislative Affairs, 512-923-6893
Laura Elizabeth Morales, Senior Vice Chairman, 956-821-7925
Where Does YOUR Incumbent Stand?
YCT Releases Ratings of the 81st Legislative Session
(Austin, TX) Since 1975, Young Conservatives of Texas have provided Texans with reviews of the voting records of legislators as a public service. YCT strives to measure each representative and senator’s fidelity to conservative principles. YCT is proud to release the 18th installment of our Legislative Ratings, the longest running and most respected legislative ratings in the state of Texas.
“Now is the chance for citizens to see where their incumbents stand and how they really voted,” said Laura Elizabeth Morales, Senior Vice Chairman.
Legislators are scored on a scale from 0 to 100, with points being awarded for each correct vote.
“YCT strives to choose votes that offer a clear choice between conservatism and liberalism,” explained Tony McDonald, Vice Chairman for Legislative Affairs.
The 81st Legislative Ratings also include a comparison of scores between House committee chairs from the 80th and 81st Sessions, a feature added to the ratings to assist voters in comparing the change in House leadership.
“Now that the candidate filing deadline has passed, we hope voters will take a look at how their incumbents performed and decide whether they need to be replaced in the primary or general election,” remarked McDonald.
YCT congratulates the members of the Historic Honor Roll, whose career ratings rank above 90%: Rep. Ken Paxton, Rep. Wayne Christian, Rep. Tan Parker, Rep. Jodie Laubenberg, Rep. Charlie Howard, Rep. Carl Isett, Rep. Joe Crabb and Sen. Jane Nelson.
YCT also congratulates the 81st Session Rookies of the Year: Rep. Randy Weber and Sen. Joan Huffman. Representative Weber tied for the highest score in the House, with a 97.
“We would like voters to be aware of who the Certified RINO’s, or ‘Republicans in Name Only’, are,” adds McDonald, “Rep. Charlie Geren, Rep. Delwin Jones, Rep. Tommy Merritt, Sen. Kip Averitt, and Sen. Kevin Eltife, all scored below 60% in the House and 50% in the Senate, respectively. Texans can also add Rep. Chuck Hopson to that list, who, while classified as one of the “Highest Scoring Democrats” for the session, recently switched to the Republican Party. Voters should keep this in mind as these candidates campaign as ‘Republicans’.”
The complete ratings can be found online at www.yct.org.
Click here to see the Google Docs version of the YCT Ratings
Last night the voice of voters in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was strong and clear. They wanted to send a message to Washington that the American people are not lock step behind the liberal Democratic agenda. For months (maybe a year) Democrats have been telling us that the American people overwhelmingly support their efforts on healthcare reform. They know that this is not true, and no matter how many times they say it in front of the cameras it won’t be true.
Last night, the people of Massachusetts took a stand. Took a stand against out of control spending, balooning deficits and debt, and a Congress that is out of touch with the desires and the needs of the American people. As Scott Brown said in his victory speech last night, “We Can Do Better!” Here is a video with excerpts from the victory speech last night (From CBS News on YouTube):
So far the response from the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress is that the addition of a 41st Republican to the United States Senate, and an end to the filibuster proof Democratic majority means little or nothing. To them, this doesn’t change their agenda and in essence will only make them work harder to pass their liberal agenda. There is even talk about moving further to the left, when clearly that is not what the voters of Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts have responded to. I am not sure if this one victory in Massachusetts means Republicans will run the table like they did in 1994, but it certainly puts that within reach. The American people did vote for change in 2006 and 2008, they did want to give the Democrats a chance to do better than Republicans had done. Republicans learned the lesson, and have committed themselves back to the principles our party has always believed in. Limited government, reducing spending, and cutting taxes to truly stimulate the economy. However simply being the Republican candidate is not going to be the answer for getting elected in this cycle. If you don’t have the proven record (a new face or something like that), and even if you are an incumbent Republican … basically what our party needs to do is to make a tangible promise to the American people like we did in 1994 and stick to it. We did pretty well after ’94, balanced the budget and reduced the national debt. We got blinded by the power and spent like we were Democrat-lite. We need our 1994 moment again…maybe Scott Brown can be the spark that brings that about.
But there is no doubt… this is the beginning. Republicans and conservatives need to capitalize upon it now and maybe … just maybe … we can take back Congress in 2010 and the White House in 2012.