Texas Precinct Conventions will be OPTIONAL under New 2012 Republican Delegate Selection Process

The Texas GOP is entering into unknown and uncharted territory. We are now faced with having to do our Republican Conventions/Delegate Selection Process BEFORE we even have a primary election! This process has always been tied to the Primary election but this year it will not because of the belated Primary Election (see below for the normal process from previous years). The 62 members of the State Republican Executive Committee will be developing an entire new Convention/Delegate Selection Plan. We have already had a conference call in which we discussed the many different ideas and we agreed on the basic plan. This plan is VERY intricate and has many different moving parts, not to mention our hands are tied in many ways. Over the next 2 weeks, the RPT will pound out all the details of the plan. We will then have an emergency SREC meeting in Austin on February 28^th, 2012 and at this meeting we will vote to approve the plan. We cannot have the meeting any sooner because we have to have a 12 day notice before the meeting. The plan then has to be presented to the three Judge Federal Panel in San Antonio and then sent to the Department of Justice for approval (We can thank the unconstitutional Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act for having to do this). DOJ approval will then take at least a couple of weeks (usually takes 2 months but they will try to do it faster).

We are still developing the full plan and it is very complex. Therefore, right now I do not have the complete details of the plan to send out to everyone, but I will send out more information as soon as the RPT releases the details of this plan.

I know that everyone will have MANY questions about the new plan after reading this article. I ask that everyone please wait until we have all the details worked out and emailed out to everyone. We should have a draft with more details to email out in the next few days. After we release the complete plan, feel free to ask questions or share concerns.

Precinct Conventions will be Optional and will be the Morning of the County/Senatorial District Conventions.

The most important thing right now that I want to let everyone know, and this detail will not change, is that Republican Party of Texas Precinct Conventions will be optional. Each County Executive Committee will vote on whether or not to have them, and if they decide to have them, they will be on the morning of the County/Senatorial District Conventions which are currently approved by the Federal Panel to be on April 21^st (or April 14^th for some counties). This of course could change if needed but that is what we are planning for and we would not want to push it back much more so that we will have time to get ready for the State Convention June 7^th – 9^th, 2012 in Fort Worth, TX. We cannot change the date and location of the Texas Republican State Convention 2012.

This is a Glimpse How the Convention/Delegate Selection Process Will Work THIS YEAR:

Rumors had gone around that the Republican Party of Texas would not have precinct Conventions at all and instead we would jump straight into the County/Senatorial District Conventions and then the State Convention June 7^th – 9^th, 2012 in Fort Worth, TX.

In response, there have been many emails going around stating that the Republican Party of Texas has to have Precinct Conventions because we have to keep the grassroots involved and so we must not do away with the Precinct Conventions. I was one of those people insisting that the RPT does not eliminate the Precinct Conventions. There were many great ideas and plans submitted to the SREC showing us how we can still have Precinct Conventions. I was 100% in favor of using some of these ideas or coming up with a way to have precinct conventions.

The SREC had a conference call to discuss a new Convention/Delegate Process and we got a little eye opening session.

We looked at the timeline and realized that we have NO IDEA when our new delegate selection plan will even be approved by the DOJ. This makes it impossible to create a timeline that includes a separate precinct convention date before a County/Senatorial Convention because we do not even know when we will get approval or even if that approval will be in time to be able to have a Precinct Convention. On top of that, there is an ENORMOUS amount of work that would have to be done by the County Parties in a very limited amount of time. There are over 5500 precincts in Texas what would need precinct conventions/locations/organization and Precinct Chairmen (even though Precinct Chairmen will not have been elected yet). Even if we get approval in time for a precinct convention, and each county had the precinct conventions all combined in one location and used old precinct chairmen, the counties would simply not have enough time to organize 5500 precinct conventions and then have to turn around and quickly plan the county convention and process all the paperwork from the precinct conventions.

It is just not possible. There are MANY reasons why it is not possible and the reasons above are just a couple of the many reasons. Ya’ll know me and ya’ll know I fight for things. I was ready to fight for Precinct Conventions but we just simply do not have a choice.

We listen to the grassroots Republicans and we have come up with a solution so that we can still have Precinct Conventions.

You CAN still have Precinct Conventions if your County Wants to…

It would not have been fair for the State Party to FORCE all counties into scrambling to organize Precinct Conventions with limited time and resources. At the same time, we are listening to the grassroots and we WANT any County to be able to have precinct conventions if the Republicans of that county would like to and are able to. For this reason, we are allowing the Executive Committee of every county in Texas the option of voting to have Precinct Conventions in their county. We do not have a timeline set because of the DOJ approval holdup, so if a County approves having Precinct Conventions, the Precinct Conventions would be on the morning of the County/Senatorial District Conventions and at the same location. It does not seem possible to plan for Precinct Conventions in 5500 different locations and on a different date before the County/Senatorial conventions so the next best thing would be to have Precinct Conventions on the same day and same location as the County/Senatorial Conventions. I guess having Precinct Conventions for 2 hours before the County/Senatorial Convention is no different than having it for 2 hours on a Primary Election night like it usually is.

Having No Precinct Conventions and Only a County/Senatorial District Convention Actually Allows for MORE Grassroots Republicans to be Involved

One of the reasons why I and others were insisting on having Precinct Conventions was so that all of the grassroots Republicans would still be able to be involved in the process. What I found out was that MORE people will have to opportunity to be involved if there are no Precinct Conventions. You see, when there is a Precinct Convention, each precinct selects delegates to go to the County/Senatorial District Convention. That means not everyone at the Precinct Convention gets a chance to be involved in the County/Senatorial Conventions. On the other hand, if there are no Precinct Conventions, EVERYONE gets to go to the County/Senatorial District Conventions. Everyone gets to be involved in that next step. Not having a Precinct Convention actually allows MORE Republicans to be involved in the process. It will also cut down on confusion and workload by having one date and location to be able to announce to all Republicans in the County.  Not having a Precinct Convention will of course mean the County/Senatorial Conventions will be much bigger than normal and it might take a little longer to decide on rules/platform changes.

The 155 National Delegates elected at the Texas Republican State Convention will NOT be assigned a Presidential Candidate to Vote for, initially.

Due to the Election being right before the June Convention (maybe even after), the National Delegates chosen at the State Convention will NOT KNOW who they will be casting their ballot for in the Presidential Nomination at the National Convention. Once Texas certifies the Presidential Primary Election Results, the national delegates who were elected at the State Convention will then be told who they will be voting for at the National Convention. It will still be proportional as already planned. Proportional means that if someone, let’s say Santorum, gets 60 percent of the votes in the Texas Republican Primary Election then Santorum will get 60% of the 155 national delegate votes that Texas has. The delegates just will not know who they will be pledged to initially because they will have to wait until the Primary Election Results are in and certified.

Texas Might Actually Have an Impact in the Republican Presidential Race – Brokered Convention Possible.

I would have never believed this, but it looks like Texas might actually still have a voice in the Presidential Race. It looks like we might have all 4 current Presidential Candidates stick in the race until the end. So far, no one has jumped ahead very much in the Delegate Count because the vote keeps getting split and different candidates are winning different states. This means that there STILL might not be a clear Republican Nominee by the time Texas Votes on May 29th or in June. Texas will have 155 delegates and could swing the election for a candidate. Or, if one candidate is already in the lead, let’s say Mitt Romney, and Texas gives most of our Delegates to Santorum or Gingrich, then that might be enough to deny Mitt Romney a chance to get a majority of delegates and we will end up having a brokered convention. At a Brokered Convention, Texas will have a full 155 Delegates and therefore would have a huge say in the negotiations at a brokered convention.

For Those of You Who Are New to This Convention/Delegate Selection Process, Below is a little History Lesson on How the Convention/ Delegate Selection Process Has NORMALLY Worked IN THE PAST in Texas:

Each Precinct in Texas has a voting location on Election Day. In the past, voters would go to their polling place on the night of the Texas Republican Primary Election Day and there would be a Precinct Convention. Republicans at the Precinct Convention would submit changes/additions to Republican Party rules and Platform values. They would also pick delegates to go represent their precinct at the County/Senatorial Convention. Next would be the County/Senatorial District Conventions. The delegates at the County/Senatorial conventions would vote on the changes/additions to the rules/platform that were passed up to them from the Precinct Conventions. The delegates at the County/Senatorial District Conventions would also select delegates to represent the County/Senatorial District at the State Convention. Then there is the Texas Republican Party State Convention. All the delegates to the State Convention will vote to create the new Party Rules and the New Biennial Texas Republican Party Platform. The delegates of the State Convention will also vote on things like to elect a State Republican Party Chairman, new SREC Members, Delegates to the National Republican Convention to vote in the Republican Presidential Nomination, and two National Committee members to serve on the Republican National Committee (RNC). There is then a National Republican Convention and the National Delegates from every State will vote to pick the Republican Presidential Nominee. That is how the process would normally look if we were not in this big mess.


Sincerely,
David Bellow
State Republican Executive Committee

TX SREC Emergency Meeting over New Delegate Selection Process Due to May 29th (or June) Texas Republican Primary Election

The San Antonio Federal Court over the redistricting lawsuit has declared that Texas will not have a Primary Election before May 29th, 2012. We have been told to plan for an election on May 29th but that we could also have it as late as June 26th, 2012.

The problem with this late election is that we have to have the Republican Party of Texas State Convention at the beginning of June. Typically, we have a Precinct Convention, then a County Convention, and then the State Convention. The Precinct Convention, by law, is on the night of the Primary Election. With a May 29th, Primary there will be no time for all of that.

The only option that we have is to not tie the convention process tied to the Primary Election night.

We will have to go ahead and have the Precinct and County Conventions (maybe even the State Convention) BEFORE we have the Primary Election.

the State Republican Executive Committee will be having an emergency meeting (via telephone) with the RPT Chairman, Steve Munisteri, sometime in the next couple of days. We will then have an emergency meeting in Austin to vote to approve a new process. We will be coming up with a new convention/delegate selection process and timeline. We then have to present what we come up with to the 3 Judge San Antonio Federal Panel.

As soon as we come up with something, this information will be pushed out to everyone.

If anyone has any comments or suggestions for the SREC regarding a new process, please email me with you idea and I will pass it along.

Thanks!

Sincerely,

David Bellow
State Republican Executive Committeeman
Senate District 3
mdbellow@gmail.com



Below is the latest update from the Republican Party of Texas:

Urgent Redistricting Update X: Primary Moved Again

This afternoon, the San Antonio three-judge panel indicated that the April unified primary election will be postponed and that it was probable (but not a certainty) that the new primary date will be May 29th. As previously reported, on Tuesday, county clerks and elections administrators testified that they need 88 days of lead time to prepare for a primary election from the date that new district maps are issued. Today at the hearing, the Texas Secretary of State's office indicated that this timeline could be shrunk to 77 days and reduced even further if military ballots were accepted for a short period of time after the primary.

Consequently, new maps need to be in place sometime between early and mid-March in order to maintain the May 29th primary date.

Chairman Munisteri discussed with the Court the problems a May 29th primary creates for the party's delegate selection process for the RPT State Convention. He reiterated that it is impossible to comply with the current Texas Election Code as it pertains to delegate selection, with the primary on May 29th and the State Convention in the first week of June. He strongly urged the Court to issue an order that would allow the State Republican Executive Committee to adopt a new delegate selection process which varies from the Election Code. He told the court that if there is sufficient time for planning, that in consultation with party leadership, he had several different options in mind which: would allow district conventions to still occur on schedule, allow for a May 29th primary, and still allow for a convention the next week. In general terms, he suggested different options which would completely de-couple the selection of delegates to the State Convention from the primary election.

The Court indicated it was very likely that they would grant such a request from the State Party, provided it received U.S. Department of Justice pre-clearance. Chairman Munisteri made the case that DOJ pre-clearance is not required in a case where the changes are made as a result of court order. However, the Court indicated that they thought it was a safer route to obtain pre-clearance. A Department of Justice attorney testified that his office would expedite such a request and anticipated that the approval time could be reduced from a couple of months to a couple of weeks, thereby allowing the change to occur.

The Court instructed both political parties to consult on a new schedule for a May 29th primary. It also invited the state parties to put forth separate proposals as to how they would select delegates and conduct their conventions. Chairman Munisteri is hoping to hold a telephone conference with members of the Republican Party of Texas Officials Committee tomorrow to go over various options. He plans within the next few days, to have a separate telephone conference with the entire SREC to go over recommendations from the Officials Committee. It is his hope that a consensus plan can be agreed upon by the SREC. If this is accomplished, he will distribute this plan to all County Chairmen to obtain their input, and then once a final plan is agreed upon - to propose the plan to the three-judge panel in San Antonio.

It is the Chairman's goal to develop a process around existing Senatorial and County conventions so as to minimize inconvenience and logistical problems. It remains his objective to keep the State Republican Convention scheduled as planned during the first week of June. We will provide further information over the next few days as to developments in this regard.

Also on Wednesday - Chairman Munisteri, RPT lawyers and staff spent another day in the courtroom listening to final arguments in the redistricting case. It appears as though there is an agreement between the Attorney General and the Democrats on a new Texas State Senate map. As soon as we have full details, we will provide them to you - but it is expected that the final lines will make it possible for a Republican to win the district in controversy, SD 10, although not a certainty.

At the time the hearing concluded, General Abbott's team had not reached agreement with all the plaintiffs on all districts pertaining to the Texas House map. With one set of plaintiffs, there is still a battle over Republican districts HD 144 (currently held by Ken Legler), HD 117 (currently held by John Garza) and HD 81 (currently held by Tryon Lewis). Another set of plaintiffs wanted to change the lines of another 30 districts on the State House map in an even larger grab for seats.

With regards to the Congressional districts (discussion of which took up most of the day) the prime battleground appears to be over CD 33, 25, 23, 35 and 27. Of particular concern to the Republican Party of Texas is CD23, which is represented by Congressman Quico Canseco. General Abbott's map is roughly equivalent to how that district was configured before redistricting, while the Democrats are pushing for an increase of Democrat voters there.

There was also a big argument with the Democrats over CD 25, currently represented by Lloyd Doggett. Travis County and other Democratic plaintiffs are arguing that the district should not be converted to a Republican district, since in their opinion the district is protected under the Voting Rights Act - General Abbott's team disputes this. There are also several different proposals regarding Congressional District 33 in Arlington. Additionally, Congressman Joe Barton's legal team (led by former State Representative Joe Nixon) argues that the configuration of that district in the Attorney General's compromise proposal is not allowable under current legal standard. At the end of the hearing today, there was also no agreement on the Texas Congressional map.

Chairman Munisteri issued the following statement regarding today's proceedings. "I am disappointed that the San Antonio three-judge panel again delayed the Texas Primary Election. The Secretary of State's witness today indicated that if the panel would issue maps within the next few days - that an April 24th primary could still be accomplished. However, now that it is apparent that April is out, the RPT will continue to fight to oppose any further slippage in the primary schedule. We will work hard with our Party leadership to come up with a plan to preserve our State convention."

At this juncture, it appears that there will not be an agreement between all parties regarding all districts. Therefore, at this time, it appears that the three-judge panel will have to decide where the final lines are for the Texas House and Congressional districts.

Special Advisory to all Republican county chairmen, precinct chairmen, and party activists from Chairman Munisteri - I am hopeful that the SREC will come up with a plan for the three-judge panel that will still allow district conventions on the date scheduled. Therefore it is our advice that you not cancel your plans to go forward with district conventions until otherwise instructed. I am hopeful that within the next week or so, that we will have a telephone conference with all county chairs to provide them more information on any proposed plans. The RPT is committed to working with each of you to come up with a workable solution to this unprecedented challenge. Thank you again for your patience and hard work.

Watch this FUNNY Political video from Tim Hawkins called "The Government Can"

FUNNY video from Tim Hawkins. It is called "The Government Can" and he makes fun of the oversized and over reaching government. It is VERY funny and has a GREAT tune that will get stuck in your head! haha

IMPORTANT TX Redistricting Update: NO April Election. One May 29th Primary or Split April/May Elections

The San Antonio Federal Court had a Texas Redistricting hearing yesterday, 2/14/12. We had hoped for more clarity of when we will get to vote. After the hearing, things did not look so good…. Instead of clarity, we got chaos. A Unified April Election is OUT (won’t happen) and we still do not know when we will vote! We might even be forced to have our Precinct, County and State Conventions BEFORE we even have the primary election!

Remember last week the Court said they wanted a unified April Primary? I am not so gullible to believe every word that this liberal leaning court says and so for the past couple of months I have been adamant that the courts and the Democrats will keep pushing things back and we will either have a unified May primary or a split primary. Guess what, the court changed their mind yesterday about wanting to have a Unified April Primary (is anyone surprised?) and now there will be NO Unified April Primary! There is just no time.

Now it looks like we will have one unified Primary Election on May 29th or June 26th, OR we will have a split Primary (two elections) with the Presidential and Statewide elections in late April and all the other elections in May/June (or whenever the redistricting battle is settled).

Both the Democrats and the Republicans are OK with a split election now that there is no time for a unified April Primary, if there was a way for it to be funded. A split election would cost more money than one election, so unless the state comes up with the money, Texas will not have a split primary and instead we will have one unified Primary Election on May 29^th or even as late as June 26^th.

After the conclusion of the hearing today 2/15/12 (or whenever the court feels like it because we are apparently their puppets right now), the court will tell us whether or not we will have a split election or one unified election pushed back to May/June.

We are going to have some major problems if we do not have a split election and instead have one unified election in May/June. We have to have Precinct, County and a State Convention. This is required and we CANNOT move the date of our June 7^th Republican State Convention. The Precinct Conventions, by Law, are on the Primary Election Day. If the court dictates that Texas will have one unified Primary election in May or June, then it will be impossible to have our conventions on Primary election day. We will have to beg the court/judges/dictators/kings for Judicial Relief to allow us to have our Precinct and County Conventions BEFORE the Primary Election Day and NOT tied to the Primary Election in any way.

So that is basically what is going on. WHAT A MESS! How much longer will we just sit here on the sidelines waiting on the court instead of being more proactive and pulling everything out of our sleeves in order to fight the unconstitutional actions that are being taken against us?

Sincerely,

David Bellow

State Republican Executive Committee

Official Statement from the Republican Party of Texas

The Republican Party of Texas issued a statement about all the new developments after yesterday’s Redistricting Hearing in San Antonio. This statement is as follows:

Redistricting Update IX: Valentine's Day Hearing Update

Today in San Antonio, the three-judge panel began a full day of hearing final arguments in the Texas redistricting case, which affects the scheduling of the state primary and state convention. We can report that the Court appears to be backing off of its stated intention to have a unified April Primary Election. This comes after assorted county election officials stepped forward to testify that it would be impossible to hold a unified April Primary Election - even if they had maps today.

Although the Republican Party of Texas had Harris County Clerk Stan Stanart appear before the panel to testify that an April 24th primary election is still doable, our sense is the Court now believes that April is no longer viable for a single unified primary. From the Court's questioning, it seemed that at least one judge and possibly two would prefer to go ahead with a Presidential primary and statewide races in April and the other races at a date to be determined in the future. How the extra primary election would be funded appears problematic at this time. We won't know until the Court rules whether these conclusions are correct. Our best estimate right now is that there will be a single unified primary on May 29th, absent the state coming up with funds for a split primary.

Because the Texas Democratic Party's lawyers backed up Chairman Munisteri's testimony at the hearing that it is practically not possible to move the State Conventions at this late date, one thing we know for sure (and the Court is aware of this fact), is that you can't schedule the primary after the State Conventions unless (as the Democratic lawyer stated) the State Parties can find a field somewhere to hold their conventions and if we could guarantee good weather.

Chairman Munisteri testified to the Court that it would be impossible to select delegates in accordance with the process prescribed in the Election Code, if the primary was not held until May 29th and the state convention began on June 7th. However, the Court signaled that it would be open to judicial relief to allow the State Parties to select their delegates in a way that didn't require precinct conventions to be tied to the primary. The Texas Democratic Party lawyer went a step further and argued that even though the Election Code prescribes the process, that it is their position that the Election Code is unenforceable because the political parties are private organizations and thus they could change their rules without a court order. The RPT believes it would be risky to do so and prefers the route of obtaining judicial permission prior to such action. In the event the Court schedules a May primary, Chairman Munisteri plans to schedule an emergency teleconference with all SREC members and Republican County Chairs to discuss alternative processes for picking State Convention delegates, in the hopes of coming to a consensus as to what to suggest to the court for relief.

The court also heard presentations from several plaintiffs and the State of Texas as to their position relative to how maps should be drawn. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court directed the three-judge panel to issue new maps that were neither the legislative-drawn lines, nor the subsequent lines issued by the San Antonio three-judge panel in November. In issuing that directive, the Supreme Court set forth the criteria by which lines could be altered. Specifically, the Supreme Court said that if the San Antonio panel found there was a "not insubstantial" chance of violation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, that lines could be altered to comply with Section 5. A Washington, D.C. three-judge federal panel has had a trial on Section 5 so as to make a final determination as to violations, but the Supreme Court indicated that the San Antonio three-judge federal panel should issue interim maps which correct any deficiencies in districts in which the "not insubstantial" standard was met. Moreover, the San Antonio three-judge panel has jurisdiction over Section 2 violations of the Voting Rights Act and the Supreme Court indicated that if there were violations of this provision, that lines could be altered as well.

In recent orders, the San Antonio three-judge panel had directed the plaintiffs and the State of Texas (representing the legislative maps) to see if they could agree which districts fell under these criteria and suggest fixes. Last week, the Attorney General put forth a proposed set of maps which addressed potentially problematic districts while at the same time, tried to stay as close to the original legislative maps as possible. Some of the plaintiffs' groups agreed to some of the proposed lines. The hearing today flushed out the differences, with each party stating their differences and arguments thereof. The Attorney General's proposals put forth what it believes are 50 Texas State House districts which have an opportunity for minorities to elect their candidates of choice - a number which meets the benchmark (2010) plan's number of 50 such districts. Some of the plaintiffs' groups however, want 51 or more of these districts, and a much larger number of "coalition" districts, which would likely elect Democrats, but would not have a majority of their citizen voting age population be comprised of a single minority group. Another group of plaintiffs which opposes the suggested lines put forth by the Attorney General, was arguing for 67 majority-minority districts in the State House. In effect, their proposed maps would substantially reduce the number of Republican legislators.

The Latino Redistricting Task Force, which represents a number of the Latino groups, has indicated that they would not object to much of the proposed map, but they disagree over House District 144 (currently represented by Representative Ken Legler). The Attorney General's map draws that district with 48% registered voters with Spanish surnames. The Latino Redistricting Task Force would not accept any lines for HD 144 that do not have at least 50% of registration of Spanish surnames. That particular plaintiffs' group was also willing to accept the proposed Congressional maps which would split the four new Congressional districts into lines which would result in two new Republican districts - an improvement over the three-judge panel's maps but which is down one from the maps originally drawn by the Legislature. Many of the other plaintiffs' groups opposed the proposed Congressional map and wanted at least one more Democratic Congressional district in addition to the two new Democratic districts contained in the Attorney General's map. Congressman Joe Barton has intervened, and is arguing for one more Republican district.

The State Senate map has really only one district in dispute - that being Senate District 10, the district held by State Senator Wendy Davis. Apparently the Attorney General and the plaintiff Democrats are not that far apart in respect to their proposals. Under virtually every anticipated scenario, at the very least that senate district would be winnable by a Republican candidate. The final battle over the lines will determine whether it is a toss-up district, or one where the Republicans will have a slight advantage.

To complicate things further, the Department of Justice sent a lawyer who argued that there were five Texas House districts on the previously-drawn legislative map, which the Department of Justice is insisting be changed because of violations to the Voting Rights Act. The DOJ lawyer also stated emphatically that the federal court panel has limited authority to alter deadlines that were controlled by federal statute.

At this time, it seems more likely than not, that all the parties will not come to an agreement on the Congressional and Texas House maps. Therefore, we are assuming that once the hearing is concluded tomorrow (Wednesday, Feb. 15) that the final map lines will be decided by the three-judge panel as opposed to the parties in the lawsuit. To add another wrinkle, one of the judges suggested that if the primary will have to be delayed until May anyway - that the San Antonio three-judge panel may delay their decision for at least a while to see if they get a ruling out of the Washington D.C. three-judge panel regarding potential Section 5 violations so that they can incorporate the decision into their deliberations.

After attending in full and testifying at the hearing, Chairman Munisteri issued the following statement - "It is the Republican Party of Texas' position that a single unified primary is still possible for April. If the Court delays the primary further, it will be a great disappointment to Republicans who wish to have early participation in the Presidential primary process. I would like to applaud the work of General Abbott's Deputy Attorney General for Defense Litigation, David Mattax, who I thought did an excellent job refuting the Democrats' contention that Republicans intentionally discriminated against minorities, as well as providing excellent rebuttal district by district to the plaintiffs' attorneys contention that more districts needed to have their lines altered with the intent of creating additional Democratic districts."

The hearing will continue tomorrow, but is expected to conclude by 2:30pm. We should know tomorrow for certain, whether we have a split primary or a unified primary. We should also know whether April is definitely out. We hopefully will have some guidance as to what flexibility the parties will have in altering the delegate selection process. We will provide a further report after tomorrow's hearing.

Advisory to all Republican county chairmen, precinct chairmen, and party activists - In the event that the primary is pushed back further, the RPT will still seek court relief to allow district conventions to go forward on the dates you already have scheduled but with the different delegate selection process. Consequently, at this time - we urge you not to cancel your district conventions as they still may occur on the same day. We anticipate having a conference call with the SREC in the next week to discuss the situation and examine options together. Thank you for your understanding and patience in this difficult situation.

Help SAVE Texas State Parks! Donate Now or Visit a Park Soon (amazing pictures attached)

Have you been to a Texas State Park or Historic Site? If you have not, there is probably a park close to you that you didn’t even know about. You should know about them though. Texas Parks are amazing (see pictures below). See map below or click here for an interactive map to see where all of the State Parks in Texas are.

According to Texas Parks and Wildlife, Visitor fees provide about half of the parks' $69 million operating budget. Record heat and drought and several devastating wildfires have dropped visitation and revenue by as much as 25 percent. There is a $4.6 million gap in the 2012 park system operating budget.

As a conservative, I would not advocate for raising any kind of taxes to cover the budget gap. Government cannot keep feeding money into everything, even good things. If needed, I would advocate for simply cutting some of the expenses that, although they are important to the modern functioning of parks, are not needed to allow the park to stay open to the public and protected. You see, there is always something good that the government COULD put money into (like State Parks), but the question is, is it the job of the government to tax people to give money to every good thing out there, or should people who care about these things give of their own will to help out? I would argue for the latter. I might not be for raising taxes to cover budget shortfalls of non-essential programs (like State Parks), but I am FOR State Parks (they are awesome!) and I am FOR helping to save the State Parks when they are in trouble. That is why I am writing this article. We can help keep State Parks afloat in this time of crisis by making a donation or by simply visiting a park. We don’t need government to solve everything through taxes. We can do it ourselves! In fact, conservatives actually give more to charities than liberals. Liberals try to talk the talk, but conservatives actually walk the walk.

Save Texas State Parks: Click Here to make a donation, or you can make a donation when you complete your Motor Vehicle Registration, or you can Visit a State Park to Help

Explore the Beautiful and Amazing State Parks in Texas (see pictures below):

From West Texas to East Texas and north to south, there are 94 different places to discover and draw about 8 million visitors annually. If you live in East Texas where the rivers are brown, you might be very surprised to visit a state park in central Texas, like Garner State Park, where the water is crystal clear and you can float through cliffs and beside large cypress trees. If you are from West Texas, where there are no forests, you might be surprised to drive through the dense tall trees of an East Texas forest surrounding one of the many massive lakes, like at Lake Livingston State Park. There are State Parks with waterfalls and State Parks with Caves and State Parks on the Beach. There are State Parks with massive monuments and Battleships, like San Jacinto Battleground where Texas won independence from Mexico and became the Republic of Texas. Did you know there are mountains in Texas? There are! Driving through the Davis Mountains State Park in West Texas is amazing. The mountains are green with vegetation and the views are breathtaking. If you don’t want to go up into the mountains you can visit the grand canyon of Texas, Palo Duro Canyon in the Texas Panhandle, the second biggest canyon in America behind the Grand Canyon. And of course there is Big Bend Ranch State Park. Have you heard of Big Bend National Park? Well Big Bend ranch State Park is right beside the National Park and the State Park offers 300,000 acres of rugged outdoors with waterfalls, mountains and canyons.

I could go on and on about State Parks in Texas, but you get the point. If you have not visited a State Park in Texas, go to the Texas Parks and Wildlife website and plan your next visit to go see the remarkable places in Texas that you never even knew about! You will be doing yourself a favor by seeing the wonders of Texas, and you will be doing the Park System a favor because more than half of the Parks’ operating budget comes from the very small entrance fee charged to enter the state park. Or you can click here to make a 100% tax deductible donation to help fund the State Parks in Texas.

Below is a Map of the Texas State Park Locations. Click Here to go to the Interactive Map Online

Below are pictures of some of my favorite Texas State Parks.

I did not take these pictures myself. They were located on Google images. If you click on the title of each picture there is a link that will take you to the website where the picture is located. I don’t want to take credit for someone else’s awesome picture.

Devil’s River:

Big Bend Ranch State Park:

Devil’s River Waterfall:

Garner State Park:

Devil’s River Cliff:

Lake Livingston:

Lake Livingston:

Palo Duro Canyon State Park:

Kickapoo Cavern:

Davis Mountains State Park:

Davis Mountains State Park:

East Texas Forest:

Mustang Island State Park:

Pedernales Falls State Park:

Pedernales Falls State Park:

JFK: A Mediocre President and Adulterer/Pimp/Womanizer

New, shocking details released this week about JFK pimping out interns gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

I remember well over a decade ago learning about John F Kennedy in a Lumberton, TX High School government class. He was a popular president so I thought I was going to learn about all the awesome things he did. I found out that he is really only popular because he was tragically killed. As a president, he does not stand out as one of the best. He was not a bad president I suppose and he did do some positive things, but he really do much of anything compared to other accomplishments of past Presidents. The Cuban Missile Crisis was successful, but he also failed in implementing the Bay of Pigs. He pushed for the Civil Rights Act but could not get that passed. It was later passed under President Johnson and was pushed by the Republicans but opposed mostly by the Democrats. JFK was mediocre, certainly not one of the greatest Presidents. He was not killed right after he got elected. He was the president for almost 3 years before he got killed so he did have some time in office to get things done.

What makes him such a bad president is the horrible moral example he set for America. He was an adulterer and a pimp. He used his power to get young girls brought to work for him and then he would have sex with them in his wife's bedroom and even pimp the girls out to his friends and sit there and watch. His actions would certainly get and CEO of a company fired or even put in jail or at least face civil penalties if that CEO treated interns like JFK treated them.

Bill Clinton should feel relieved after this new information about JFK has come out. Clinton was not near as bad as JFK.

Sorry everyone, JFK was not one of the best presidents in history. It is tragic that he was killed, but that does not change the fact that he was mediocre as president and was a monster womanizer.

Read the story below to see this new information that has come out about JFK having sex with interns and pimping them out:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from The New Republic:

I knew that John F. Kennedy was a compulsive, even pathological adulterer, given to taking outlandish risks after he entered the White House. I knew he treated women like whores. And I knew he had more than a few issues with his father about toughness and manliness and all that. But before I read in the newspaper that Mimi Alford's just-released memoir, Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy And Its Aftermath, described giving Dave Powers a blow job at JFK's request and in his presence, I didn't know that Kennedy had an appetite for subjecting those close to him to extreme humiliation.

The likelihood that Alford is making this story up is extremely remote. She didn't come forward on her own. She was outed, partially in a 2003 Robert Dallek biography, and then by name by the Daily News, as "JFK's Monica," because when she began her affair she was a White House intern and a 19 year-old rising sophomore at Wheaton College. (In the book Alford reveals that Sally Bedell Smith was actually the first journalist to contact her--by phone, about a year before the Dallek book came out--and that she declined to speak to her then.)

Alford's story is entirely believable. She was an attractive, naive recent graduate of Miss Porter's School. Miss Porter's was also the alma mater of Jacqueline Kennedy and of a slightly older White House secretary named "Fiddle" with whom Kennedy was also having an affair, or so the First Lady believed--there was also a purported dalliance with Fiddle's close friend "Faddle," a secretary in the press office--and it isn't lost on Alford that this descendant of Boston's lace-curtain Irish had a thing for Social Register girls. Her fourth day on the job she was invited upstairs to the private residence. Kennedy led Mimi into his wife's bedroom (the First Lady was away), unbuttoned her blouse, touched her breast, pulled down her underwear, dropped his pants, climbed on top of her, and fucked her. When she told him she was a virgin he became a bit more compassionate, but neither in that sexual encounter nor in any other did he ever kiss her on the lips.

This part of Alford's story doesn't really add anything to what we already know about Kennedy. Nor does it really change my opinion of the 35th president. But this part does:

Dave Powers was sitting poolside while the President and I swam lazy circles around each other, splashing playfully. Dave had removed his jacket and loosened his tie in the warm air of the pool, but he was otherwise fully clothed. He was sitting on a towel, with his pants leg rolled up, and his bare feet dangling in the water.

The President swam over and whispered in my ear. "Mr. Powers looks a little tense," he said. "Would you take care of it?"

It was a dare, but I knew exactly what he meant. This was a challenge to give Dave Powers oral sex. I don't think the President thought I'd do it, but I'm ashamed to say that I did. It was a pathetic, sordid, scene, and is very hard for me to think about today. Dave was jolly and obedient as I stood in the shallow end of the pool and performed my duties. The President silently watched.

Afterwards, Alford says she was "deeply embarrassed," and as she climbed out of the pool she "could hear Dave speak in as stern a tone as I ever heard him use with his boss. 'You shouldn't have made her do that,' Dave said. 'I know, I know,' I heard the President say. Later, a chastened President Kennedy apologized to us both." Alford believes that Kennedy showed "his darker side ... when we were among men he knew. That's when he felt a need to display his power over me." Kennedy didn't just have a thing for Social Register girls; he had a thing for humiliating Social Register girls. He also had a thing for humiliating his fellow Irishman, Dave Powers.

Maybe Kennedy wasn't this much of a creep all that much (though Alford also tells of him once forcing her to take an amyl nitrite "popper" in Bing Crosby's living room). But the poolside ritual of humiliation is not easy to reconcile with any kind of worldly tolerance for Kennedy's peccadilloes. Perhaps the fairest conclusion to make is that Kennedy did some good things in his public life (and also some bad), but that he was capable of monstrous cruelty that's hard to forgive and also hard to equate even with that of successors like Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon (or with any in his less polished younger brother Ted, whose own private life had plenty of dark moments but whose public accomplishment ultimately outshone JFK's). Clinton shared many vices with President Kennedy, but I can't imagine him ever doing anything like this. I don't usually say this about scandal stories, but Alford's tale ought to occasion further reassessment of a president we already knew to be morally compromised.

Congressional Candidate Forum TOMORROW (Thursday) for New East Texas Congressional District 36

For those of you who do not know, East Texas has a brand new Congressional District. It is Congressional District 36. This District is very Republican and there is no incumbent so that means the candidates are all new. This new district is not really being challenged in this big redistricting mess so it SHOULD stay the same after the Redistricting Battle is over. A picture of this new CD 36 is below. It includes the east part of Harris County, Liberty County, Orange County, Hardin County, Polk County, Tyler County, Jasper County, and Newton County

I am already pretty sure about who I will be voting for, but I didn't want to publicly say who I am supporting until after the redistricting mess was sorted out, and I wanted to wait until after this local congressional forum.

Everyone needs to go to this forum in order to see all the candidates and be informed about who they should vote for when we go vote (whenever that might be)

The forum will be in Silsbee, TX at the High School at 7pm. It is being put on by the Hardin County Republican Women.

Here is the information:




2012 GOP Congressional Candidate Forum

February 9, 2012 from 7:00– 9:00pm
Silsbee High School Auditorium

Meet and Greet from 6:00-7:00pm

Current Confirmed Candidates:


Jerry Doyle, Col. Jim Engstrand, Ky Griffin, Sen. Mike Jackson, Lois Myers, Stephen Takach, Daniel Whitton