Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Racism doesn't belong to just one group of people. This is how we can all participate in the change. In a Free Society one does this...

"gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. "

It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails.


Glad I come across readings that make perfect sense every once in a while. This one did!

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Thank you FW Weekly, Thank you Dan McGraw for exposing the truth; some say the "dark side" of Ft. Worth City Politics

It's refreshing to know that there is a media outlet in town not afraid and/or that cares enough to expose examples of abuse of powers and wrongdoing in this great City of Ft. Worth. Luckily, I knew all about the use of criminal trespass law because I own a business in a part of the City that requires usage of such quite often. Sometimes business owners need it to get the vagrants off of our front door steps so that we and our customers can get in the door of our businesses. I can't tell you how many emails and personal hours I have had to put in, to get the City of Ft. Worth and the Fort Worth Police Department and District Attorney's office to work with us in order for someone other than the property owner to make use of the Criminal Trespass law. Still to this day, we have been unable to get such entities to cooperate with us so that one business owner can call the FWPD for another business owner to get vagrants off the property. The sitting council representative, Kathleen Hicks (my opponent for the District 8 City Council seat) and the church, mentioned in the story below, had no problem using a non-property owner to serve as the reporting person for the criminal trespass warning that was written for me.
These are all fine details that probably bore the average reader of this blog; however, it's just one more example of the fundamental contradiction that the CFW engages in, on a law enforcement level, political level and that thing the Mayor calls "The Ft. Worth Way." It doesn't add up when the hairs are split.

Please get to know me better, ask me questions, interview me, give me a chance to win your vote and/or financial support in my campaign for a City Council seat. I'm really a very caring, nice, easy to talk to, down to earth individual who cares about the issues. All I ask is that you give me a chance.

The FW Weekly article ran as follows: (again, thank you FW WEEKLY http://www.fwweekly.com/index.asp)

An Eastside activist wants to know why Hicks supporters were able to remove her from a town-hall meeting.

Suzette Watkins had plenty of reasons for attending the Nov. 8 town-hall meeting held in her part of East Fort Worth: She’s a resident and business owner there, an Eastside activist — and, though the election is six months away, she’s a candidate for the District 8 city council seat, currently held by Mayor Pro Tem Kathleen Hicks. Watkins, 46, wasn’t really planning to do much campaigning, but she was interested in the scheduled workshops on economic development, crime control, and other hot topics in the district.
“As a citizen of this area, I went to the meeting to learn as much as I could about all the issues facing this community,” said Watkins, a kennel owner. “But I didn’t get a chance to do that, and I find that very strange.”
The reason Watkins didn’t get a chance to go to most of the workshops: She was thrown out by the Fort Worth police. Watkins was given a criminal trespass warning, after others at the meeting complained that she was campaigning at the event. Four officers escorted her out of the public session, which was held at Carter Metropolitan CME Church.
The name of the chief complainer won’t surprise folks who are familiar with Eastside politics: the Rev. Wendell “Buck” Cass, a close advisor to Hicks and to the council member’s mother, former State District Judge Maryellen Hicks. And the “campaigning” that Cass found so offensive? Watkins said she handed out a few business cards with campaign contact information and parked her car in the church parking lot, with a campaign sign in the back window. And, she said, she stopped handing out cards when asked.
Cass doesn’t work for the city and doesn’t appear to be associated with the church, although neither church leaders nor Cass would talk about that with Fort Worth Weekly. So Watkins wants to know why he had standing to ask that she be removed — and why it was the Fort Worth Police Department’s job to stop someone from campaigning for public office at a public meeting.
According to police, Cass was acting on behalf of the church’s pastor, the Rev. Jerome Price, and Kathleen Hicks. In an e-mail, Fort Worth Police Capt. Bryan Sudan wrote, “The church was loaned to Wendell Cass and Ms. Hicks to do their town hall meeting, thereby giving them care, custody and control of the building for that purpose. [Watkins] was only criminally trespassed from the town hall meeting. However, I did speak with the pastor Rev. Jerome Price, who did want her to leave because her campaigning on the property could affect their tax-exempt status as a church.”
Neither Price nor Cass could be reached for comment. Hicks did not respond to repeated requests for an interview, but in an e-mail, the councilwoman said she bore no responsibility for Watkins’ removal.
“I never said anything to Ms. Watkins,” Hicks wrote. “All are welcome — in fact, she is a member of the District 8 advisory board and should get every mailing sent out. We hold a number of public meetings, and again, all are welcomed. The town-hall meeting is open to all citizens, and indeed, many attended from other districts. Unfortunately, you appear to be honing in on one person, when in fact this 4th annual event attracted a large crowd who were focused on all the good things going on in the area and how to make the community even better.”
(Watkins said she was unaware that she is on the District 8 advisory board: “If I am on that board, it is news to me.”)
Watkins said she arrived at the event at 8:55 a.m. and handed out a total of three of her campaign business cards before and after Kathleen Hicks’ opening remarks. She said Cass was sitting next to her while Hicks was speaking and told her afterward, “I’ll throw you out” if she passed out any more cards. Watkins said she told Cass she would not hand out any more of them — and didn’t.

After a half-hour workshop on housing and economic development, Watkins said, an ugly scene developed. In an e-mail sent out to news media, Watkins wrote that “Maryellen Hicks came up to me and yelled, ‘Little girl, you cannot campaign inside the house of God.’ ” Watkins said she refused to get in an argument with the retired judge and turned and walked away.
But the elder Hicks followed her, Watkins said. “I turned my back to her while she was yelling, and proceeded to walk off,” Watkins wrote. “Maryellen stayed about six inches behind me. I stopped suddenly and she bumped into my back. I turned around and looked her in the eye for about five seconds, then turned back around and proceeded to walk down the hall.”
Watkins said she did hand out several business cards for her dog kennel after the brush with Cass and Maryellen Hicks — standard procedure at such events. But she also said she didn’t see why simple political campaigning would be banned. No signs were posted saying that political activities were not allowed.

“I’m very confused on how this was handled,” Watkins said. “How can you bring city hall to District 8 and say there is no politics involved? Kathleen Hicks could spend a day telling voters how great she was. I couldn’t even hand out a business card.”
The legal issues are murky. Regarding trespass, the Texas penal code says a warning notice can be given by police after “oral or written communication by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act as the owner.” As for the tax-exempt status for the church, IRS rules say the status is endangered only if the church itself campaigns for one candidate over another.

Within the Eastside community, Watkins is sometimes controversial in her own right. On her blog, she routinely takes potshots at Hicks and other neighborhood leaders such as Don Boren; his wife, Wanda Conlin; and former mayoral and council candidate Louis McBee. Watkins once referred to all three as “puppets for Kathleen Hicks and the ones who do all of the important backroom deal-making.”
Conlin said Watkins “is sometimes hard to deal with. She is an in-your-face kind of person.” Conlin attended the town hall meeting, and said, “I barely saw [Watkins] at the meeting, and I didn’t see her doing any campaigning or causing any disturbance.”
Norm Bermes, another Eastside activist, said Watkins’ blog “often [takes] a very irrational approach to some of the issues over here. But I have worked with her on some things — especially the vagrancy problem, and [Watkins] does a credible job to get the area straightened out and improved.

“The way this was handled was very wrong,” Bermes said. “Kathleen Hicks, in a way, was campaigning at this city-sponsored event. Suzette Watkins should have had the same opportunity, as long as she was not creating a disturbance.”
McBee said Watkins’ treatment is par for the course for Fort Worth. When he was running against councilman Danny Scarth, McBee set up a campaign tent at the East Handley Recreation Center during early voting. The tent was well past the setback requirements beyond which campaigning is prohibited.

“The Fort Worth police told me I had to leave, and no one could quote me a law I was violating,” McBee said. “The political leadership in this town has the power, and they get the police department to do the dirty work on their behalf.
“This was a public meeting, and to throw someone out [seemingly] because she is running against the council member, is just way off base,” McBee said. “It is a violation of her civil rights. Kathleen Hicks needs to tell Uncle Buck to go home and stay away, because he is going to cause her great problems down the road.”

Sunday, November 16, 2008

3 years in the ground and the pipeline is leaking?

"The area has been partially excavated, and the operator is still searching for the "perimeters and depth" of the pollution
according to the report.
An attorney representing the Cole family, Jim Eggleston, questioned why the pipeline corroded after being underground for about three years."


Friday, November 7, 2008

Ridiculed, Violently opposed & Accepted

"All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Secondly, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher

The quote above grabbed my undivided attention because it's been a belief of mine that one of our downfalls in America is our inability, collectively as communities and individuals, to discuss, own, and address, the truths of matters and their statistics which prevents us (or one) from truly solving problems because we are seldom, if ever, dealing with problems at their root cause levels.

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Upset with both major Parties? Unhappy with the bailout? Consider Libertarian Candidates. Check out this discussion..and see where you stand.

To me, this is a brilliant discussion and a better starting point than I'm hearing from the Democrats or the Republicans. So glad I voted for some of the Libertarian candidates:

Below is a post from a Libertarian site. Not that I agree 100% with every word, but I love the discussion, ideas and reasoning. I hope The Libertarian Party will come alive in the months and years ahead as main parties are really ONE in much of what they say and do (BAILOUT OF 2008!!) and aren't doing a whole lot for "the people."

"You have had an opening created with Ron Paul, where many have found themselves upset with both parties, but with no alternative that is either viable or doesn't violate some of their principles. There are disenfranchised fiscal conservatives coming together with people such as myself who are on the left, but are disgusted by the bailout, the federal reserve's policies, the war on drugs, the foreign policy choices, the massive military spending, etc. That is truly strange bedfellows, and you should take advantage of this opportunity while you can. Regardless of who wins (looks like Obama, but who knows), neither is going to be able to stop the coming deep recession/depression that is going to make life harder across the board for all of us. 2012 is your chance , imo. I have been very interested in politics and economics for many years, and have found the Libertarian Party compelling for many reasons, but there are some things I just cannot get behind. To me it seems like the Republicans and Democrats debate about Tier 2 issues, which while still important and effect many people...they do not offer a choice on what I consider Tier 1 issues: The Federal Reserve, The "Bailout" plan, the war on drugs, Imperialism.
I am VERY compelled to the libertarian party because of things I've heard about their views on the federal reserve, our monetary policy, currency issues, and LETTING companies who make bad bets fail. I also agree very much with their stance on the war on drugs, as this is a private issue, and the government has no business involved in it. On Imperialism, what I hear from Ron Paul, about pulling out of all of these military bases around the world, and ending this imperialist "policing" of the world, I agree with. Here are where I have issues with the Party:"

2.8 EducationEducation, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education.
2.9 Health Care We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.
2.10 Retirement and Income Security Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We favor replacing the current government-sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals." I cannot, and most people will not, get behind the view that the free market is best to provide education. This will undoubtedly leave less fortunate areas, hitting the minorities the hardest, without access to good education. Their chances will be even slighter than they are today. This is completely unacceptable, and in fact radical. You are going to have to take much more moderate stand, where you give ACCESS to those who want to opt out of public schooling to do just what you propose, but you are going to have to accept public education as a necessary evil, I suppose, because (a) it is vital to those who are less fortunate than yourselves to give them at least a basic education and chance to better themselves and (b) because it will NEVER fly politically and you turn people away just on this alone. Period.
Next, healthcare. Again, this free market will solve everything attitude simply doesn't work. It doesn't work because it will get corrupted, and business will exploit it at every turn. Again, this country can afford to give the basic level of care that other industrialized countries all over the world afford their citizens. We can have a healthcare plan, and then have the OPTION to keep your existing "free market" plan. You will never have a chance in hell without accepting this as another necessary evil. You have to pick your battles. And there are many to be had, most of which MANY Americans agree with you on, and the 2 main parties are ignoring.Lastly, The retirement thing. You are going to have to meet halfway on this one. I agree that those who want to take on retiring for themselves should not be forced into any retirement plans, or forced to take money from their checks on Social Security..., but for the vast majority who don't have the time, knowledge etc, there still needs to be those programs. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a safety net such as this, as you will end up paying for their mistakes of misallocating their retirement money anyway, short of letting them die homeless and starving (not exactly a great party platform). Compromise.... you should push to allow those WHO CHOOSE to not be forced to contribute to these programs of retirement (obviously those who chose to do so would not receive any benefits from it either, but they could invest it how they see fit). Whether or not you become a viable alternative or not depends on you making these necessary compromises. You will have pissed off and betrayed republicans coming together with pissed off and disappointed democrats, and you can have an enormous effect in 2012, but in my opinion, you will have to embrace some of the left's values that they WILL not compromise on. If you did, think of what could be accomplished. Massive cuts in spending by cutting back unnecessary wars and bases across the globe. Ending the war on drugs. Dissolving the Federal Reserve, and having our money backed by gold again. Ending foreign economic aid, or at least radically cutting back. Ensuring individual rights and liberties , regardless of race, sex, etc. Putting a wall inbetween church and state, and ending the tax exemption of churches. (real) election reform, ensuring privacy, and more. Those things would be revolutionary. What do you have to do to get them? Compromise on healthcare, education, and retirement. On each, allow the public system to go on, while allowing vouchers, charters, exemptions etc for those who wish to opt out. That is your shot. This is an opening you might not have again, and Ron Paul has gotten the ear of many young , and energized people on the right, but also MANY on the left. Take advantage and do the smart thing.