Saturday, November 28, 2015



   Have you noticed how many times the "news" media get facts wrong?  There are no published corrections any more.  They just go about their "business" as if all they "report" is fact.  Hello, Brian Williams.

   I accessed Fox Cable News recently and there was Jon Scott saying that Presidential candidate Ted Cruz is "a son of immigrant parents".  Since when did his American mother become an immigrant?  Then  Jon and Jenna Lee referred to the foreign invasion of our country as "compassion".  Really?  Where is the compassion for my children and grandchildren?  We have laws in this country that need to be enforced and reinforced to protect natural born Americans.  It is manipulation and political correctness run amok!  These "reporters" need to research the propaganda they are spreading and report facts.  "Fair and balanced" indeed!

   Speaking of "natural born", do you know that only "natural born" citizens are qualified to be President of the United States of America?  Marco Rubio's Cuban born parents were not citizens of  the United States of America when he was born, which makes him an "anchor baby".  He is not a natural born citizen, but simply a citizen; you could even argue that he is a foreigner, also.  Therefore, he is not qualified to be President of America.  I posted about this back in June of this year.  Please see "Marco Rubio's Qualifications for President".  Please note that "naturalized" is not the same as "natural born".

photo courtesy of his bio. on internet search

   Frank VanderSloot, billionaire, endorsed Marco Rubio recently. When asked why he chose Rubio, his response was, he is "the best informed and most articulate candidate running" right now.  Well, Obama was articulate also but his vision and ideals are wrong for this country; and so are Rubio's,  Why can't these billionaires pick a candidate that is right for this country?  Let me answer this question:  they are in it for themselves, not for this country.

   During this political season, pay attention to how all the television media are trying to keep us from voting for Ted Cruz for President.  They give shout outs for many candidates for what is reported that they do, positions they take.  However, they ignore how Senator Cruz has been standing for The Constitution of The Untied States for years, not just during this political season.  Read his biography or go to his campaign page and read about some of his accomplishments.

   The Washington cartel and main stream media are afraid of Ted Cruz.  They are against Americans.  I say, "test the spirits".  Know the truth and the truth will make you free!  What do you say?

You are encouraged to leave a comment on this site.  We would love to hear from you.  Your participation gives us encouragement.

You are also invited to visit Oma at and

Sunday, October 18, 2015



Proposition 1: FOR
   The Constitutional amendment increasing the amount of the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation for public school purposes from $15,000 to $25,000, providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount, authorizing the legislature to prohibit a political subdivision that has adopted an optional residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation from reducing the amount of or repealing the exemption, and prohibiting the enactment of a law that imposes a transfer tax on a transaction that conveys fee simple title to real property.
   This is a tax break on school taxes for the elderly and disabled.

Proposition 2:  FOR
  The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100% or totally disabled veteran who died before the law authorizing a residence homestead exemption of such a veteran took effect.
   This is to honor the veteran by not penalizing the surviving spouse with increased taxes upon the death of the veteran.

Proposition 3: AGAINST
   The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.
   How stupid is this!  Of course you want your employees at the job site.  

Proposition 4: AGAINST
   The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit professional sports team charitable foundations to conduct charitable raffles.
   This looks like a case of your lobbyists at work.

Proposition 5: AGAINST
   The constitutional amendment to authorize counties with a population of 7,500 or less to perform private road construction and maintenance.
   Why would you want the county tax money to create and maintain private roads?  Only for rich people!

Proposition 6: FOR
   The constitutional amendment recognizing the right of the people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife subject to laws that promote wildlife conservation.
   This is an amendment to recognize that hunting and fishing by traditional methods are the preferred methods of managing and controlling wildlife population.  This helps keep the liberals at bay.

Proposition 7:  AGAINST
  The constitutional amendment dedicating certain sales and use tax revenue and motor vehicle sales, use,and rental tax revenue to the state highway fund to provide funding for nontolled roads and the reduction of certain transportation-related debt. 
   While this looks good on the surface, there should be a lot of discussion on this subject to verify this is the best way to handle the highways.  It ties up a lot of revenue specifically on roads, so if there is a downturn in the economy, the state's other services may suffer.

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and  


Thursday, October 1, 2015


Breitbart's September Primary Poll Results  has released the results of the Breitbart September GOP Presidential Primary.  Voters were asked for their first, second, and third choice.  Out of 171,862 votes cast, the first choice of 36% of the voters was Donald Trump.  Ted Cruz won 18% for the voter's first choice, followed by Dr. Ben Carson with 13%. 
   But let's look a little closer at the results.  For second choice, Donald Trump only received 8%, Ted Cruz had 18% and Dr. Ben Carson received 20% of the second place votes.

   Now, the third choice of the voters were:  Ted Cruz with 10% and Dr. Ben Carson with 15%.  Donald Trump did not register in the third choice category.

   So, adding the votes cast for first, second, and third choice were:  Dr. Ben Carson with 48%; Ted Cruz with 46%; and Donald Trump with 44%.  Maybe this shows that we really need to stop listening to main stream media.  Aren't they pushing Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio?  smh!

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Monday, July 20, 2015



 photo from facebook

   Donald Trump has stirred up a firestorm for saying that John McCain is not a war hero, even though he was a Prisoner of War.  I was personally cussed out on social media for distinguishing the two.  After seeking clarification, I conceded the point that the Senator deserves the title of "war hero".
   There really was a difference when I was growing up.  Elvis Presley accepted the call to serve.  He was labeled "patriotic" for serving.  Audy Murphy was labeled "war hero" for his many distinguished, selfless acts of courage in protecting his fellow soldiers, disregarding his own safety.  Those captured by the enemy were labeled "prisoners of war".  None of the labels were intended to subtract from the commitment or courage of any who served.
   Aren't we all weary of politicians?  When Donald Trump attacked Senator McCain regarding his military service, my social media lit up.  Those who served in the military felt personally attacked by his remarks.  My disclaimer is that I did not enlist.  One of my very respected facebook "friends" pointed out that a POW is a hero for "putting their ass on the line and having to endure such a thing".  He went on to say that if our men and women faced the enemy and took the fight to them, he would consider them a hero.  Point taken.
   Our dads, mothers, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, aunts, uncles all who served in a time of war are heroes.  I have to agree with my "friend".  Maybe he should school Mr. Trump.

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Thursday, July 16, 2015



facebook profile picture

   And this in today from William Bigelow at  U. S. Representative Lois Capps, D. from the 24th district in California has introduced a U. S. House resolution calling for the ban of the use of more words.  The latest words to be offensive to the democrats are.....wait for it...."husband" and "wife"!  Wouldn't you know?  In full disclosure, Mrs. Capps has had two husbands according to her facebook page.

   Rep. Lois Capps has decided marriage should no longer reference "husband" and "wife".  She is not alone!  The bill, H.R. 2976, has 31 Democrat cosponsors in the House, 11 of which represent different districts of California.
   The Democrat CoSponsors are:  
  • Don Beyer Jr., D - Virginia 8th District
  • Suzan DelBene, D - Washington 1st District
  • Donna F. Edwards, D - Maryland 4th District
  • Sam Farr, D - California 20th District
  • Ruben Hinojosa, D - Texas 15th District
  • Sheila Jackson Lee, D - Texas 18th District
  • Barbara Lee, D - California 13th District
  • Alan Lowenthal, D - California 47th District
  • Betty McCollum, D - Minnesota 4th District
  • Patrick Erin Murphy, D - Florida 18th District
  • Eleanor Holmes Norton, D - Washington DC
  • Adam Smith, D - Washington 9th District
  • Rick Larsen, D - Washington 2nd District
  • Sander Martin Levin D - Michigan 12th District
  • Mark Pocan, D - Wisconsin 2nd District
  • Mike Thompson, D - California 5th District
  • Niki Tsongas, D - Massachusetts 3rd District
  • Ami Bera M.D., D - California 7th District
  • Alan M. Grayson, D - Florida 9th District
  • Mark DeSaulnier, D - California 11th District
  • Raul Grijalva, D - Arizona 3rd District
  • Chellie Pingree, D - Maine 1st District
  • Eliot Engle, D - New York 16th District
  • Mike Honda, D - California 17th District
  • Eric Swalwell, D - California 15th District
  • Pete Aguilar, D - California 31st District

   You can read the bill in it's entirety at   Mrs Capps et. al.  are trying to change wording in our laws dating back to 1941 with her proposed amendments.  Shame be upon every American who has ever lived who believed that marriage is between a man and a woman!  Such homophobes!  Surely normal Americans just want to be mean to homosexuals!

   While introducing this bill,  she had the nerve to make a statement that ".....words in our laws have meaning...."   She went even further when she said "our values as a country are reflected in our laws.   Since she is the one who said, "words in our laws have meaning", tell me why The Supreme Court of The United States didn't read all of these words describing marriage that she is trying to go back and edit?!?  Our values as a country is not reflected by what 5 idiots on the Supreme Court decree!

   Please contact these elected Representatives and let them know what the meaning of the word "marriage" is.  Now is the time to stand up and be heard!  You didn't have anything to do with passing abortion, but here is your chance to take a stand on marriage!

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Saturday, July 4, 2015



  The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

   When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
   We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.--That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.--That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.  Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experiences hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.  But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their  former systems of government.  The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world:

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

--He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:
  • for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us
  • for protecting them, by a mock trial from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these States
  • for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world
  • for imposing taxes on us without our consent
  • for depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of trial by jury
  • for transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences
  • for abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
  • for taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable laws and altering fundamentally the forms of our government
  • for suspending our won legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever
  • he has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.
  • he has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  • he is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  • he has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.
  • he has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of frontiers, the merciless Indian savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
   In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.  A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
   Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.  We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.  We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.  We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
   They too have been deaf to the voices of justice and of consanguinity.  We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.
   We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name and by Authority of the good people of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.

   And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

then they all signed the document.

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts on this blog.  We would love to know how you feel about this.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Tuesday, June 16, 2015



   Today I was invited to listen in on Congressman Babin's tele-town hall meeting.  Those on the call were invited to ask questions during the meeting.  

   The Congressman's message was that he supports the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).  He said that he represents this business and that business and the other business and all the businesses agree that they want him to support the TPA.  None of the constituents on the call was for it.  However, Congressman Babin repeatedly schooled us on how great it is and why he supports it.

   Going back to the beginning, let me explain that Obama wants the TPA, commonly referred to as "fast track" so he can negotiate deals with eleven other countries.  Those talks, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) are currently ongoing.  Congressman Babin explained that Australia has made a deal with Japan to sell beef to them and if we don't allow Obama to fast track any deal agreements, the businesses in Babin's district will lose that trade.  Let me add, that the Republican leadership (Speaker Boehner) also wants the TPA to pass.

   The constituents on the call tonight voiced our concern about our trust issues with the Obama administration.  We told him that we voted for him to go to Washington and oppose Obama.  Passing the TPA is not opposing him.  While TPA does not prevent our representatives from voting on a final deal that Obama wants, it does prevent amendments.  So what ever he presents to Congress will get an up or down vote and passes with a simple majority.

   You remember Jonathan Gruber?  Congressman Babin was channeling Gruber tonight.  Those of us on the call were just too stupid to understand how great the TPA is.  He reminded me of Jeb Bush saying that he can convince Conservatives to accept amnesty.

What do you think about the TPP and TPA?  You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Monday, June 1, 2015



Marco Rubio, Official Portrait, 112th Congress.jpg

(photo courtesy of Wikipedia)

   Let us take a look at Marco Rubio's basic qualification for holding the office of The President of the United States:  He was born in Miami, Florida in 1971.  His parents were born in Cuba.  They came to America in 1956 and became naturalized American citizens in 1975. Basically, that is all the facts you need.  He is not a natural born American, thus, he does not have the qualifications to become President of the United States.  He is what is locally referred to as an "anchor baby", and was born a child of  Cubans.  You could even argue that he is a foreigner.


    Qualifications to hold the office of The President of the United States:
1)  must be a natural-born citizen of the United States
2)  must be at least thirty-five years old
3)  must have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years


   The 14 Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, which was part of the post civil war reforms, was ratified to offer protection to slaves and children of slaves in 1868.  There was no limit on immigration at that time, so there were no illegal immigrants.  The 14th Amendment offered to protect the rights of native born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently freed slaves.  I am sure Sheila Jackson Lee could testify to this, as she has said she is a freed slave.  The amendment was written in a way as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to Blacks born in the United States.

   Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment in 1866 (two years earlier during the discussion on the amendment) by stating, "Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States.  This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."

   Senator Howard's statement was reaffirmed by Senator Edgar Cowan, who stated:  "A foreigner in the United States has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is NOT a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word..."  Which clarifies the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to exclude people born in America from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete, i.e. foreigners.  (They have not applied for citizenship and gone through the process of becoming an American.)  With illegal aliens, who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.  Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

   There were also challenges that reached the Supreme Court to include foreigners who were non-citizens but were in America lawfully:  1898 - United States vs Wong Kim Ark, and 1884 - Elk vs Wilkins.


   The bottom line is that he is not considered to be a natural born citizen since his parents were not citizens at the time of his birth.  This prevents him from being eligible to hold the office of The President of the United States.  Natural born citizens are assumed to hold allegiance to their country of birth.

You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and

Saturday, May 30, 2015



Ted Cruz, official portrait, 113th Congress.jpg

(photo courtesy of Wikipedia)

   There has been a number of political attacks against Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz related to being born in Canada.  Surely these attacks stem from those who are threatened by a truly conservative candidate who is not intimidated by the liberal/democrat media.  This post is published to define the meaning of a natural born American.  

   First of all, let me explain why Barack Obama had to have a birth certificate from Hawaii instead of Kenya.  Barry Soetoro had an American born mother.  For him to be an American born in Kenya, his mother had to have physically lived in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the person's birth. 

    According to U.S. Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs,  "a person born abroad out-of-wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother at the time of the person's birth and if the mother was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the person's birth.  The U.S. citizen mother must be the genetic or the gestational mother and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child's birth to transmit U.S. citizenship. "  It is widely reported that his mother left the country when she was 16 years old and gave birth to him when she was 18.  The reports states that she was not living in America for the 12 months prior to giving birth, so he had to be born in the States in order to be a natural born citizen.

   Now, Ted Cruz, much like John McCain and John Kerry, are natural born citizens.  Again, according to the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs, "A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth.  (For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.)  The U.S. citizen parent must be the genetic or the gestational parent and the legal parent of the child under local law at the time and place of the child's birth to transmit U.S. citizenship."  
   So, as long as Ted Cruz's mother lived in the United States for 10 years, 5 which was after she turned 14, then gave birth to him any where in the world, he is a natural born citizen of the United States and qualified to hold the office of The President of the United States.  Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz's mother was born in Wilmington, Delaware.  She grew up there, then went to college in Houston.  So, it is documented that she was in The States for the qualifying 10 years.
1/9/2016:  UPDATE:  here is a copy of the birth certificate of Ted Cruz's mother:

image courtesy of

What are your thoughts?  You are encouraged to leave a comment and let us know if this post clarified the topic for you.

You are also invited to visit Oma at  and


Monday, May 18, 2015



   Texas, we have a problem.  Here is a house bill that was killed in this session of our state House of Representatives:  HB 4105. 

  HB 4105's bill title is:  Relating to the issuance, enforcement, and recognition of marriage licenses and declarations of informal marriage.  It had 90 co-sponsors, all republican.  It is currently on the General State Calendar, but I understand there was a "deadline" in there so the bills were killed on 5/14/2015.

  The piece of legislation that needs to be approved is:

By:  Cook C.S.H.B. No. 4105
  relating to the issuance, enforcement, and recognition of marriage
  licenses and declarations of informal marriage.
         SECTION 1.  This Act may be cited as the Preservation of
  Sovereignty and Marriage Act.
         SECTION 2.  The purpose of this Act is to affirm that the
  definition and regulation of marriage is within the sole authority
  and realm of the separate states and the people within those states.
         SECTION 3.  Subchapter B, Chapter 1, Family Code, is amended
  by adding Section 1.109 to read as follows:
  INFORMAL MARRIAGE PROHIBITED. (a) This state or a political
  subdivision of this state may not use any funds to issue, enforce,
  or recognize a marriage license or declaration of informal marriage
  for a union other than a union between one man and one woman.
         (b)  An employee or official of this state or a political
  subdivision of this state may not issue, enforce, or recognize a
  marriage license or declaration of informal marriage for a union
  other than a union between one man and one woman.
         (c)  This state or a political subdivision of this state may
  not use any funds to enforce an order requiring the issuance,
  enforcement, or recognition of a marriage license or declaration of
  informal marriage for a union other than a union between one man and
  one woman.
         SECTION 4.  Section 194.001, Health and Safety Code, is
  amended by adding Subsection (c) to read as follows:
         (c)  A county clerk may not file, and the vital statistics
  unit may not enter into the vital statistics system, a document copy
  described by Subsection (a) or (b) that is associated with a union
  other than a union between one man and one woman. If the vital
  statistics unit determines that the document copy is associated
  with a union other than a union between one man and one woman, the
  vital statistics unit shall provide the document copy to the
  attorney general.
         SECTION 5.  Section 118.018, Local Government Code, is
  amended by adding Subsection (d) to read as follows:
         (d)  If a state agency determines that a marriage license fee
  was collected for a marriage license that is associated with a union
  other than a union between one man and one woman, the county clerk
  shall remit $30 to the comptroller. The comptroller shall deposit
  funds remitted under this subsection into the general revenue fund.
         SECTION 6.  Section 118.019, Local Government Code, is
  amended to read as follows:
         Sec. 118.019.  DECLARATION OF INFORMAL MARRIAGE. (a) The
  fee for "Declaration of Informal Marriage" under Section 118.011 is
  for all services rendered in connection with the execution of a
  declaration of informal marriage under Section 2.402 [1.92], Family
  Code. The fee shall be collected at the time the service is
         (b)  If a state agency determines that a declaration of
  informal marriage fee was collected for a declaration of informal
  marriage that is associated with a union other than a union between
  one man and one woman, the county clerk shall remit $12.50 to the
  comptroller. The comptroller shall deposit funds remitted under
  this subsection into the general revenue fund.
         SECTION 7.  Except as otherwise provided by this section,
  Section 194.001(c), Health and Safety Code, and Sections 118.018(d)
  and 118.019(b), Local Government Code, as added by this Act, apply
  only to a marriage license issued or declaration of informal
  marriage recorded on or after the effective date of this Act. If
  this Act takes effect before June 1, 2015, Section 194.001(c),
  Health and Safety Code, and Sections 118.018(d) and 118.019(b),
  Local Government Code, as added by this Act, do not apply to a
  marriage license issued or declaration of informal marriage
  recorded before that date.
         SECTION 8.  This Act takes effect immediately if it receives
  a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as
  provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution.  If this
  Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this
  Act takes effect September 1, 2015.

The underlined is what we are wanting passed.


photo courtesy of Wikipedia








You are encouraged to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at (a Bible study site) and (a fun site about a variety of topics).

Monday, April 27, 2015



   Here is a little something you can take action from the comfort of your own home to help us keep our religious freedom.  Please contact these committee members of the Texas Congress 2015 and ask them to support HB 3567 and HB 4105.  There is no time to wait, please take action today and let your voice be heard.


1)  Patricia Harless     512-463-0496

2)  John Kuempel      512-463-0602

3)  Dan Huberty          512-463-0520

4)  Charlie Geren        512-463-0610

5)  Marsha Farney      512-463-0309

6)  John Smithee         512-463-0702

7)  Tom Craddick        512-463-0500


1)  Sylvester Turner   512-463-0554

2)  Helen Giddings   512-463-0953

3)  Renee Oliviera       512-463-0640

   Please also ask for the support of these bills from the Texas House State Affairs Committee Chairman:  

Rep. Byron Cook   byron      512-463-3567

   And let us not forget to contact our Governor:

Governor Greg Abbott  512-463-2000

   Please also contact Lt. Governor Dan Partick at 512-463-0001 and through his Chief of Staff's email: and tell Governor Patrick that you want him to pass the Texas companion bill to HB 4105 which is SB 673 by Senator Charles Perry.  Urge him to support HB 4105 and HB 3567

  You should also contact your local Representative and ask them to support these bills.  If you don't know who your Representative is, you can find out at  

   You can read these bills in their entirety at:

Thank you for getting involved.  It will take every Christian sacrificing a little time and effort to confront evil and preserve our rights to worship freely.

You are invited to leave a comment with your thoughts here.

You are also invited to visit Oma at

Sunday, April 12, 2015



   Today, Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy for President of the United States.  I know that just sends a thrill down your leg.  She said she wants to be "your champion".  Well, it is 3am.  Do you really want her answering the phone again?  Let's ask Tyronne Woods, Glen Doherty, and Sean Smith.  These are my champions.  She will abandon you just like she abandoned them.

    For those of you who are not familiar with my champions, the following is an excerpt from the Rush Limbaugh Show describing some of what happened 9/11/12:

RUSH: Okay, coming up in the next hour, ladies and gentlemen, some of the highlights from a Saturday night show on Fox. Jeanine Pirro had the father of Tyrone Woods on. There's something that has come up about Benghazi, about Tyrone Woods that needs to be pointed out with a question asked about it, and it's this: The consulate was being shelled by mortar fire. Now, Tyrone Woods, Navy SEAL, violated three orders not to go.
And it's not correct to say, folks, that they were ordered to stand down. That doesn't quite cut it, because what that really means is they were told not to go help. They were told not to relieve the ambassador. They were told not to offer assistance. That's what they were told. They weren't told to stand down. What that means is, “Sit tight and don't go there and don't help.” He violated orders. He went over there.
He found where the mortar fire was coming from. He painted it with his laser. Now, folks, talk to anybody in the military. There's only one reason you do that. He was painting where that mortar fire was coming from because he figured there was air support that was then gonna take that mortar location out. That's why he was lasering it. He was effectively lighting it up.
He thought there was air support. He thought there was cover. Because all he did was tell the terrorists at the mortar control place where he was! They were able to find him, and it was that mortar fire that killed him. Now, why would he light it up? Why would he paint it if there was no assistance? He clearly thought there was. This becomes more outrageous as the days go by and as we continue to learn more and more about it.
RUSH: Jim Hoft at the Gateway Pundit has run across a bombshell blog post from a former Delta operator, BlackFive. “Having spent a good bit of time nursing a GLD (ground Laser Designator) in several garden spots around the world, something from the report jumped out at me. One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION!
“Probably an AC130U,” an airplane on station. This is a former Delta operator. This guy has painted targets with lasers, which guide the bombs from the aircraft. In this case, the Specter is the C-130 out of Italy. We're told we didn't have any assets. We're told the assets were told to “stand town” and the people were told to “stand down.” But BlackFive, this former Delta operator, said (summarized), “Wait a minute, I heard that Tyrone Woods was painting the target.” In other words, he was giving the laser-guided bomb the target.

“One of the former SEALs was actively painting the target. That means that Specter WAS ON STATION! Probably an AC130U,” an airplane. A ground laser designator is not a briefing pointer laser. You do not ‘paint’ a target until the weapons system/designator is synched; which means that the AC130,” the Hercules, “was on station. Only two places could have called off the attack at that point; the WH situation command (based on [presidential] direction) or AFRICOM commander based on information directly from the target area.”
And we first learned of AFRICOM with our really wonderful, great caller last week.
“If the AC130 never left [Italy] (as Penetta [sic] says) that means that the Predator that was filming the whole thing was armed. If that SEAL was actively ‘painting’ a target; something was on station to engage! And the decision to stand down goes directly to POTUS!” That’s from this former Delta guy, and this is what got Tyrone Woods killed. Because by painting the target, he was also illuminating himself.
He was targeting a laser-guided missile to the mortar-fire encampment, location. I don't know what the military term for that is, but where the terrorists were firing mortars, he had found it and he was painting it for a strike. He thought that there were assets in the sky. There would be no reason -- you don't need a Delta operator to tell you this. Common sense. There's no reason to paint that target and give yourself up in the process if there's no attack.
Why point the laser at a target that's gonna guide the missile if there isn't a missile? So what all of these military people who know this stuff are thinking -- and you can see this popping up now on various blogs all over the Internet. There is an outrage bubbling up because the lies are being compounded, and none of it makes any sense. What Panetta and the White House and the State Department and all these other people are saying doesn't make any sense, when put in context with the actions taken by the SEALs on the ground.
So the conclusion these guys are coming to is that the asset was there to launch the laser-guided missile. Tyrone Woods was painting the target, but the missile wasn't fired. So the question becomes: Who ordered no attack, after having the asset? And if it wasn't the Hercules it means the drone that was videotaping this -- which is what enables the White House and the State Department to see it in real time, the drone up there -- then the drone was armed and somebody pulled the order to have the missile fired from the drone.
This is outrageous, folks. This is just unacceptably outrageous. It's not just the incompetence here. It is now the lying and the cover-up that is really getting to people. Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, was on Fox. He’s been all over the place, but he said some really powerful stuff on Saturday night.
RUSH:  Okay, folks, please bear with me here.  I'm gonna get to the sound bites of Charles Woods el quicko, but I want to make one more point about Tyrone Woods painting the mortar target with his laser in the expectation -- by the way, BLACKFIVE is a website run and operated, frequented by former military types, including a lot of Delta operators, Delta Force, Special Ops.  They're livid.  He wouldn't have painted the target if he didn't think there was an asset that was gonna fire on the target.  That mortar encampment is what killed him.  When he painted it he gave his location away.  Cell phones have night vision capability.  He gave himself up.
Now, here's what's interesting.  On the campaign trail in Denver, on October 26th, Barack Obama said this:  "The minute I found out what was happening, I gave the directive to make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to do.  I guarantee you everybody in the CIA and the military knew the number one priority was making sure our people are safe."  Now, our ambassador in Libya was killed in the consulate in Benghazi on September 11th.  For three weeks after that, Obama said the morning after the attack was over he ordered increased security in our embassies in the region.  Then October 26th he changed the story.  He said, "The minute I found out what was happening I gave the directive."
So here's what military experts are asking now.  If the operative story from Obama is that he had given orders to do whatever it took to secure the lives of these people, who didn't follow them?  In other words, who ordered either the AC-130 or the drone not to fire on the target Tyrone Woods had painted with his laser?  Because Obama is out there on record, he gave the order, do what's necessary.  So Obama's trying to cover himself by saying, "Look, I'm not the one that told anybody not to use the military."  He's out there now saying he essentially gave the order to do what was necessary to defend and protect these people.  So the question now has become, well, who disobeyed orders?  And of course the logical conclusion is that Obama never gave the order, that he's just lying now, saying that he did.
Wait 'til you hear Pat Caddell.  You can't follow this story and learn more and more without becoming physically angry and repulsed -- you just can't -- at all of the cheap lying and rear-end covering that's going on here.  It's just unacceptable.  We are the United States of America.  The idea that they don't have the ability to defend and protect people in that kind of situation is simply absurd.  And the idea that we wouldn't take the action necessary to do so is also absurd.
Okay, Saturday night on Fox it is Justice with Judge Jeanine, Jeanine Pirro.  She interviewed Charles Woods, the father of security agent, former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, killed in the attack at the consulate at Benghazi.  This is the young man painting the target with the laser.  She first said to him, "Mr. Woods, what did the president say to you?"
WOODS:  He came up to me and in not a very sincere voice said, "I'm sorry."  Now -- and then we shook hands, gave him, you know, like that, and then what I said to him was, "Mr. President, I appreciate your service."  And I said, "I am at peace."  And I could tell that he was not at peace.  And I said, "My heart grieves because I've lost my son.  My emotions have gone up and they've gone down, but the reason that I am at peace is because I know that God is in control of every situation.  That's why our family is handling this much better than you would expect."

RUSH:  That's what he told President Obama.  Jeanine Pirro said, "Why do you think no help was sent?  You know that your son, Ty, was on the ground asking for backup. He was pleading for an AC-130.  How does that make you feel?"
WOODS:  The Navy SEALs are extremely honorable, and they have a code of ethics, a code of honor.  And part of that code of honor is they will never leave anyone behind.  Okay, why did they allow them to die?  Why didn't they send help?  When it came out this last week that whoever it was -- I'm not gonna say who it was, but whoever it was in the White House was watching this live feed of my son being murdered, then I decided, it's time to do two things.  One, is this is not political, okay.  If this becomes political, that would dishonor my son's life and his death.  But what we want to do is we want to honor my son, and we also want there to be truth and justice, as well as forgiveness.
RUSH:  He wasn't going to go public with any of this.  That was the nature of her question.  He wasn't gonna go public until he found out that they started to lie.  When he found out that there was video of this in the Situation Room at State Department, people were watching this, and no help was sent, that's when he decided to start doing interviews.  Then Jeanine Pirro said, "You feel your son risked his life and that your son was murdered. You've made some strong statements here."
WOODS:  The legal definition of murder would not fit into this.  Let's put it this way.  My feeling is, that in fact it was murder.
PIRRO:  And if you could say something to the president, what would you say?
WOODS:  I would say, if it was you, Your Honor, I totally forgive you. But for your benefit, I would want you to turn your life around and head the other direction so that blessings can continue to flow into your life.  I want the best for you, and that means you need to stand up, admit your fault, and then change the direction of your life.  I love this country of ours.

RUSH:  That is the father of Tyrone Woods.  And that was, folks, powerful.  She asked him, "If you could say something to the president, what would you say?"  "I would say if it was you, Your Honor, I forgive you. But I would want you to turn your life around, head the other direction.  I want the best for you, and that means you need to stand up and admit your fault and then change the direction of your life."  Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods.  Next question from Geraldo Rivera.  This was last night on Geraldo's show.  He said, "How do you feel about calling the president a murderer?"
WOODS:  If this attack on American citizens, on American soil, happened 2,000 miles away from Washington, DC, say in Los Angeles or in Seattle, would you have waited seven hours before you sent the first airplane?  Would you have waited seven hours until the attack was over?  Would you have waited a couple of days until you had all the videos and all the information before you responded in a responsible military way?

   You can read the rest of the discussion by googling Tyronne Woods/Benghazi/rush limbaugh.

   This post was not endorsed by any political candidate, nor was money exchanged from foreign sources.  The make up artist was fired before filming.

You are invited to leave a comment with your thoughts.

Monday, January 19, 2015



   First of all, please allow me to define "lawlessness" with synonyms from  anarchy, disorder, chaos, reign of terror, mob rule.....  When there is lawlessness, there is chaos.  
   Laws keep order in society; they serve as a guideline of acceptable behavior.  Without law, there would be chaos and we would be reduced to animalistic "survival of the fittest".  They are to be amended when needed.  When those in power ignore the law, we have tyranny.  To learn about tyranny, you can access   

   Now, let us discover why God gave us laws.  We take this explanation from www.biblelaw101:  The reason why any government has laws is to keep order and punish lawbreakers.  Laws reveal what is acceptable to society and what is unacceptable.  Another reason is for economic growth:  When we do not obey the laws, such as drug laws or traffic laws, it affects our ability to work.  It also affects other's ability to work.  Those addicted to drugs might break into some one's home and commit crimes such as theft or personal injury.  Those who do not obey traffic laws might cause a wreck and get hurt or hurt someone else.  When people are injured, they are not productive.  A nation cannot be prosperous if too many non-productive people are supported by productive people.  Hitler's reign comes to mind here, as he had death panels.  Oh, and then there is our President.

   When our government chooses which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore, we have chaos. There is a system in place, laws, regarding legal immigration.  When people invade our country, steal our money, and do us harm, they should be punished, not rewarded.


   Keeping our focus on illegals being in our country and our government wanting to reward their behavior, let us focus on a few of The Ten Commandments:
   1.  You shall not kill.  Many of the illegals came here by paying human smugglers.  These are ruthless people.  I recall a story in the news in the past about how 19 people were transported in a tractor trailer truck by a human smuggler.  Unfortunately, the weather was so hot that those inside the trailer perished.
   2.  You shall not steal.  Any way you examine it, the fact is that illegals steal from Americans.  Either they don't pay taxes or they enroll in schools paid for by legal citizens or they use guns to take our money away from us.
   3.  You shall not covet.  This is the last of the commandments, but it is powerful.  The stealing and killing and all sorts of meanness is perpetrated because of these people wanting what you have but refusing to earn it the way you did.  Someone must have told them that if they want what belongs to you, all they have to do is come and declare it is theirs!

   BUT if our government from the White House to the local court house decides which laws are to be enforced, no citizen, whether legal or illegal, will respect our laws.  Chaos.

You are welcome to leave a comment with your thoughts.

You are also invited to visit Oma at and