Creationism materials said to be posted on the TEA Web site
This article is based on a release distributed by the Texas Freedom Network. The thrust of the release is that the State Board of Education could approve “newly proposed instructional materials that promote creationism.” I doubt that this will happen, for two reasons. One, the ideological composition of the Board has changed, and I cannot envision that the new mainstream majority will support creationism. The other reason is that the state doesn’t have the money to pay for these materials. To these arguments I might add that there is a cost issue; the use of creationist materials could lead to litigation similar to a Pennsylvania case (Kitzmiller v. Dover) in which the ruling was that teaching intelligent design in public schools unconstitutionally promotes creationism.
Creationist materials have no place on the Web site of the state education agency. (A brief search did not reveal any of the materials.) I hope that the new SBOE will put this issue to rest in its July meeting and concentrate on education instead of ideology and religion.
Karen says:
School are suppose to TEACH NOT Preach.
Reply »
Julie says:
I don’t know what to make of what the board may or may not do under its new mainstream majority.
It should stick to education, not religion.
But then there’s always the Legislature to deal with.
The Legislature passed a law requiring public school districts to offer a high school elective course on the literature of the Bible.
Did the Legislature provide any funding for that mandate? No, it just added it to the list of things the state requires school districts to do.
Reply »
Alan Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
I don’t see anything wrong with a high school elective on the literature of The Bible.
Regardless of what your religious beliefs are, if you are an American, the King James Bible has had a major influence on your country’s literature, art and even the vernacular language we use every day. If you don’t have at least a basic understanding of the KJV, a lot of the nuances of American literature will go completely over your head. I don’t think that entails allowing science classes to tell people the Earth is 5,000 years old.
Reply »
texun Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
The KJV is not the preferred translation for many large denominations, so it would be inppropriate to designate it as the required translation or version.
Reply »
Alan Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 6:15 pm
What most Christian denominations use is completely irrelevant to what a public school teaching about The Bible from a non-doctrinal standpoint. In terms of cultural and literary significance, it makes sense to use the King James Bible.
paulburka Reply:
April 27th, 2011 at 10:17 am
I don’t have a problem with an elective course on the Bible so long as it is taught as literature and not as theology. The question then becomes, how do you make certain that it is taught as literature and not as theology?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
Hey Republican Julie, what if the Lege had passed a mandate requiring schools to teach skills on diversity and inclusion? Would you be complaining about an unfunded mandate?
Reply »
Karen says:
Perhaps the parents who want their children to be taught religion in school should also be required to pay for the religious course?
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
It’s not going to matter if the legislature does away with the Teacher Retirement System defined benefit or annuity. There will be no incentive to get a Masters Degree or stay in the field for a career. Schools will become like fast food restaurants with an employee of the month that gets a bonus with a lot of turnover and education in Texas as we have known it will be gone forever. Who knew Republicans could try to destroy so much in one session.
Reply »
anon-p says:
The slides in question deal with the origin of life, for which the scientific consensus is murky.
Anyone familiar with the creation/evolution debate knows that.
Nowhere in the samples extracted did I see any intelligent design hypothesis advocated over evolution for the development of life once appeared.
And, the treatment of intelligent origins is as a mere hypothesis. Since actual, real scientists advocate the hypothesis and defend it, I don’t see why it should be avoided.
Unless you don’t like what some scientists are saying based on a philosophical predisposition, perhaps.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 10:15 am
can you point us to these peer reviewed defenses of the intelligent design hypothesis???
Reply »
anon-p Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 11:29 am
Anon> can you point us to these peer reviewed defenses of the intelligent design hypothesis???
Follow this link: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/03/no_peer-reviewed_id_research_j044851.html
A little past halfway down there are a dozen links.
You may find interesting in that article they say the following words: “We’ve also argued consistently against teaching intelligent design in schools …”
The horror!
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
From the abstract of the first article.
Editor’s Note: This paper presents a different paradigm than the traditional view. It is, in the view of the Journal, an exploratory paper that does not give a complete justification for the alternative view. The reader should not assume that the Journal or the reviewers agree with the conclusions of the paper. It is a valuable contribution that challenges the conventional vision that systems can design and organise themselves. The Journal hopes that the paper will promote the exchange of ideas in this important topic. Comments are invited in the form of ‘Letters to the Editor’. Really? Letters to the editor? Not sure that counts as being scientifically peer-reviewed.
anon-p Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Anon> From the abstract [...] Really? Letters to the editor? Not sure that counts as being scientifically peer-reviewed.
In your haste to pounce on the “letters to the editor” comments solicitation, did you miss the reference to the “reviewers” in the text you cited?
anon-p Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
I’m supposed to ignore that you belittled a journal with professors from MIT, Columbia, Duke, and a host of other notable universities as “questionable?”
I provided you with evidence the paper was peer reviewed. Actually – you provided it in the cite. Now you want me to dig up the actual peer review because you don’t believe the very editorial note you cited nor the front page of journal’s website which lists among publication benefits, “An efficient and constructive peer review process” ?
I’ve grown tired of this shifting goalposts game and I’m not going to participate anymore.
Clearly, you will not be satisfied until Darwin and Gould reanimate to give their blessing to intelligent design, in your apparent estimation.
Even then, I have my doubts.
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 3:06 pm
A link to the actual peer review in a scientific journal would be nice. A link to the publication in a questionable journal doesn’t really count.
Reply »
anon-p Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
I figured it wouldn’t take long to pull out the ole ad hominem club.
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
Yes, asking for evidence the article has been peer reviewed as ad hominem. Maybe you should ask for a dictionary for your birthday.
Ted Baxter says:
“actual, real scientists”
Wrong.
Reply »
Red says:
I can’t wait until the SBOE starts promoting the debate over the Theory of Gravity. It’s a theory too!
Reply »
Devil's Advocate says:
Glad you mentioned gravity. We understand its affects to some degree but actually have no idea what it is. Bone up on the various unification theories and you’ll see that our mastery of what is is not mastery at all.
Now back to the previously uninteresting, tired debate.
Reply »
Red Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Re: Devil’s Advocate
Well, general relativity and gravity is fairly well understood. When we get to the infinitesimally small is where all the action is. But, we promote the study of particle physics cause we might find the “God particle”
Reply »
Sboe member says:
Paul,
You yourself said you could find no posting on the TEA web site so why is a story?
You have only facilitated the liberal agenda ( oops, that prohibited ideology stuff) of TFN who generally send out a fund raising pitch with every press release. Please just send them a check instead next time.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Duh! I get tons of GOP press releases begging for donations. Dems too. Everyone pitches for donations these days.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Dear S.B.O.E. member:
Soon Texas won’t even be able to say Thank God for Mississippi when speaking about education if we keep going the direction we are right now.
Reply »
Karen says:
Are you kidding? Liberal agenda???? The individuals on this blog are conservatives. There are many conservatives that oppose this junk. Whatever happened to religion being a private matter between you and God. Practice whatever religion you please but don’t force your religious beliefs on me.
Barbara Forrest on Louisiana’s Creationism Repeal
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/barbara-forrest-on-louisianas-creationism-repeal/
Reply »
Karen says:
I am a Methodist and the Tea Party crowd are coming after my religion simply because we don’t agree with their political agenda. Could your religious beliefs be next?
Tea Party Nation calls for the end of the United Methodist Church
http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/12/tea-party-nation-calls-for-the-end-of-the-united-methodist-church/
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
The theocrats are taking over!!! Run for your lives!!!
No wonder the Democrats that Burka genuflects to can’t get any traction in Texas.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
No, I did not say that theocrats are taking over. I said that I don’t want religion forced on my children. I send them to school to be educated and take them to the church of my choice for religious beliefs. If I wanted my children to be educated in religion, I would send them to a religious private school.
Creationism is based upon religion not science IMHO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_public_education
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 27th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Yes, wikipedia is the definitive source of truth. Ha!
teainfo says:
The science materials have essentially been submitted as a bid. The State Board will make a decision in July about which materials to purchase.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Many worship environmentalism seem have no problem with its mandatory orientation in public schools.
Reply »
texun Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Sorry JBB, even in Austin I know only half a dozen or so people who actually worship the environment–and they approved of Perry’s call for rain prayers.
If we’re going to open up “creation” as a market, let’s include the Babylonian version. Lots of blood and guts there and kids could probably find video games based on it. I’ll bet they’d remember it.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
John,
Climate change is not a religion. Are you are creationist and a climate change denier?
Public Schools’ Global Warming Teachings:
A Rich Field for Mining for News Stories
excerpts
“Efforts along those lines abound and in some cases have succeeded. In at least three states — Texas, South Dakota, and Louisiana — laws exist to make sure climate change lessons are balanced equally with a denier’s point of view, if they are taught at all.
“The evidence that climate change is happening is clear. This is an issue that is not 50-50,” said Teresa Eastburn in a telephone interview. Eastburn is the education coordinator at the Boulder, Colorado-based University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, which has held in-depth climate change workshops, webinars, and multi-week seminars for about 700 K-12 educators in the past five years.
“Science isn’t about sides or rhetoric, it is about evidence. There is a misconception that the science of climate change is up for debate. Now, politics has entered how science is taught, but [politics] certainly doesn’t belong in the science class,” she said. “I could see that it could be a part of a social studies course, about what to do about climate change. Social studies is where teachers grapple with politics, economics, and some of society’s issues.””
http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/06/teaching-climate-change-as-edu-news-beat/
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
more fact-free drivel from jbb. Just saying something doesn’t make it true jbb. Just like wishing for cheesy-poofs doesn’t make them appear.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
How could anyone foolishly suggest environmrntalism is a religion?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
Some wackjob wingnut writes a fact free article about what HE thinks people concerned with the environment think and thats your proof??? Can you find something that’s not made up out of whole cloth by some bed-wetting wingnut?
Reply »
Karen says:
Yep, here is the article.
Proposed Instructional Materials Put Science Education, Public Schools at Risk in Texas
Vendor’s Creationist Materials Could Be Used in Public School Science Classes Around the State
http://www.tfn.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6509
Reply »
anita says:
Speaking of God, what to make of Perry issuing a call for prayers for rain, but instead of rain we get tornados?
Clearly, God doesn’t think highly of Perry. What have we done to deserve His wrath?
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
Whose wrath? Perry or God?
Didn’t Perry issue the call for prayers for rain AFTER the weathermen put rain in the forecast?
Reply »
anita Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
God’s wrath — and I got no rain, just tornados.
Truth be told, I prayed for a new governor, one with some common sense and integrity. Note that I was limited in my request — just seeking “some” common sense and integrity. God has yet to answer my prayer.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
Anita, I’m hearing Louisiana is considering pushing a birther bill in light of the Obama birth certificate controversy.
Texas wouldn’t go down this road and follow suit, wouldn’t they ?
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:28 pm
I’m pretty sure Leo Berman has one in the works and had hearing the other day. My rep. Sid Miller is a bither. ROTFL.
There is no controversy. Here is a website with factual info and has debunked all of the Birther BS and links to other good sites too.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
God will probably punish Perry in some physical way (stroke, heart attack, etc) like he did to Alabama’s George Wallace, who got shot and paralyzed to the waist down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace
You think Texans are facing Rick’s wrath, take a closer look at Alabama to see why Wallace ran the state like a bannana republic dictatorship for over 20 years including his 1st wife’s term as governor.
Reply »
anita Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
Briscoe, do you really think God “punished” George Wallace by pulling the little puppet strings on a fellow mortal soul to shoot him? That’s kinda bizarre, downright weird.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
April 27th, 2011 at 11:18 am
Anita, I was meaning to state that Wallace was bitter about his 1958 loss to Patterson in the Dem primary for AL Governor, when Wallace was a moderate and had the backing of the NAACP and the ACLU including several Jewish groups, then 4 years later, Wallace went hard right and began adopting violent racist rhetoric with his segregation rants.
Reply »
anita says:
The wrath is from God, not Perry. Note the capitalization of ‘His’.
There’s no Obama birth certificate controversy. There are a number of George Wallace-types who can’t seem to accept that the American people elected Barack Obama to be our president. That’s the controversy.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Sadly Anita, you are correct.
Reply »
kool arrow says:
Someone should take a poll and find out how many birthers sit on the SBOE. A birther is by definition a right-leaning, extremist conservative therefore if they believe in intelligent design (an A+ euphemism and sing-song quality in one) then they voted for Perry and probably prayed (for tornados).
Does anyone out there honestly believe that Perry will run for president in 2012 and win? No one outside of Texas (except them pesky tea partiers or about 12% of total voters) will vote for him.
No wait I see a dark-horse candidate saddled up wearing a witch costume coming into focus. Could it be the first horseman of the Apocalypse? Naw, it’s just Christine McDonnell.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat Reply:
April 27th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Kool Arrow, Perry is just worried about his LEGACY when the state’s newspapers will write bad things about him, and didn’t he say newspaper endorsements are a waste of time during last year’s campaign ?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
sadly we can ask our indocertinated children of any age, “what is your greatest fear?” and they will answer as one, “the environment being destroyed by capitalists”, then in unison they will lift their voices to the heavens and softly chant “ummm ummm ummm Obama.”
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
John,
As usual, your so called facts are false.
http://millercenter.org/president/bush/essays/biography/4
excerpts
“Clean Air Act
Bush took the lead with the other significant piece of domestic legislation he signed while in office: the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Ironically, an environmental disaster aided his efforts; in March 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground, and more than 10 million gallons of oil spilled into Prince William Sound in Alaska. The Exxon Valdez disaster made the public more receptive to the need for environmental protection. Bush also showed his support for the environment by appointing the first professional environmentalist to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) when he chose William Reilly as its head in 1989.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 built on the first bill passed in 1963 and subsequent bills in 1970 and 1977. The 1990 amendments focused on three aspects of clean air: reducing urban smog, curbing acid rain, and eliminating industrial emissions of toxic chemicals. Although critics were concerned about the cost of the act and its effect on an already weakened economy, President Bush was deeply committed to environmental issues and claimed that by working with the business community to find innovative ways to improve the environment, the economy and the American people could both benefit. Congress passed the bill with significant support, and on November 15, 1990, President Bush signed the act.”
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
Karen seems particularly annoyed today that some person somewhere might actually choose to question Darwinian evolution. So, here’s a question for you (think about this carefully this question might trap you):
Name for me anything, any one thing about Darwinian evolution that you know to be true.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 6:21 pm
I did not say you could not question Darwinian evolution now did I.
Frequently Asked Questions About Evolution
excerpts
“A scientific theory stands until proven wrong — it is never proven correct.”
11. Does evolution prove there is no God?
No. Many people, from evolutionary biologists to important religious figures like Pope John Paul II, contend that the time-tested theory of evolution does not refute the presence of God. They acknowledge that evolution is the description of a process that governs the development of life on Earth. Like other scientific theories, including Copernican theory, atomic theory, and the germ theory of disease, evolution deals only with objects, events, and processes in the material world. Science has nothing to say one way or the other about the existence of God or about people’s spiritual beliefs.”
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html
Karen says:
John,
More info you might want to read.
http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/facts/offshore.htm
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Sadly J.J.B. believes public education equals indoctrination although the word he uses is misspelled. If he means indoctrinated it is still misspelled. A public education is one of the most important parts of the Texas Constitution. Yes, the property tax, which he probably resents, is the primary source of financing public education. Now if you can follow me now, even renters contribute to property taxes because when I rent a property I have to consider the property taxes on the property to decide what to charge for rent. Property on a lake front has an increased value because of the location and I have to charge more for rent. In the same county I can rent a house for less because the property taxes are lower simply because of location. No, public schools don’t indoctrinate students they take every one that enters the front door and try to educate them. Reading, writing, and mathematics, not indoctrination. I am opposed to the over emphasis on testing to evaluate students and teachers. I believe we need more vocational classes instead of fewer, and fewer football palaces and more teaching that prepares students to make a living wage even if they don’t go to a university. K.D.F.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Kenneth,
I agree with you 100%.
Reply »
Karen says:
John,
And, more…..
Halliburton Brings In Record $5.3 Billion In First Quarter, Credits Increased U.S. Oil Production Under Obama
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/26/halliburton-brings-in-record-5-3-billion-in-first-quarter/
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Van Jones the deposed Czar said Mother Earth should have the same rights as humans. The worship of environmentalism by liberals is a known fact. The indoctrination of school kids into the worship of environmentalism is also a known fact. “mommy what will happen to the polar bears?” “will the capitalists kills them all?” as Al Gore the pulitzer prize/oscar winner said?
Question for you environmental worshipers, “did Al win the Oscar or the Pulitzer for his work of fiction. This proves once again, as LBJ said “if you tell a lie enough democrats will believe it”.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 9:46 pm
That I can’t provide any evidence to support. Just trust me.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
The GOP worships money and somehow have convinced themselves that the Bible/Jesus agrees with them. Not true.
What does the Bible say about money and wealth?
http://www.twopaths.com/faq_money.htm
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 9:52 pm
Maybe teaching 30 years still has some effect. There is no church of environmentalism only science that makes some of us concerned about extreme changes in the weather patterns. I am a rancher and we have already made adjustments to when we fertilize hay and have experienced and observe these changes in real time every year and the last ten years have changed the way we operate our ranch.
Reply »
Karen Reply:
April 26th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
We are farmers and ranchers too and we have too.
Reply »
Karen says:
John,
Please provide your source for your claims regarding LBJ or Gore.
You want to play who tell lies? Okay. Here is a pretty darn good example of GOP lies.
The Truth-O-Meter report card on Michele Bachmann
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/sep/21/bachmann-and-truth-o-meter-collected-works/
Reply »
Julie says:
Karen,
Pay no attention to John. he likes to make ridiculous statements.
He’s the same person who believes the Republican Party is liberal because it doesn’t favor abolishing Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare.
Reply »
Briscoe Democrat says:
Julie, Perry has ZERO chance of being President, VP or in a cabinet gig in a GOP administration because folks don’t want to see another Texan in the White House.
So next year, we’re gonna get used to seeing the GOP field with Daniels, Pawlenty, Romney (my pick to win the nod and he’s got $$$ and lots of it), Gingrich, Roemer, and maybe some dark horse.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Things I’ve learned this week from my liberal friends:
The more you give the government, the more the government can give back to you.
Liberals do not worship the environment.
***Note for my liberal friends, learn to google. That way you won’t be so uninformed when the men folk are discussing biddness.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“Pay no attention to John. he likes to make ridiculous statements.”
As wacky as many of the far left zealots that comprise the vast majority of the commentators here are, the most ridiculous is the phony who calls herself (himself?) Julie the Republican.
Like a good Republican, Julie’s answer is to raise taxes. As a fellow Republican, I wish I had thought of this. Because you see by raising taxes on undertaxed people and growing government to an more gargantuan size than ever before, we will expand our economy, encourage a favorable business climate, attract more businesses to come to Texas and encourage high earners to stay in Texas and keep paying taxes into the treasury. Plus having high taxes creates good will between the citizens of the State and the government resulting in citizens being less likely to try to avoid paying taxes. I am so glad that Julie the Ridiculous Republican Poser (RRP)has submitted comment after comment for the need to raise taxes because Lord knows we need to start emulating places like California and Illinois where the taxes are high and the employement and economic outlook is bright and limitless.
Yes, Julie the RRP realizes how silly it is to see Governors like Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie implement austerity programs in New York and New Jersey and reject the call for more taxes. What those states really need is more taxes to put things right in those states. More taxes are the key to economic development, more jobs and consumer confidence. This is what Republicans have always stood for, and it is time to get back to raising more taxes.
Reply »
Julie says:
Anonymous,
The only one talking about growing government is you.
I’m suggesting that the Legislature do the right thing for Texas by providing adequate state funding to avoid tens of thousands of teacher layoffs and to prevent the closing of a large number of nursing homes in the state.
Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst had this to say today: “I am asking you (the Legislature) to put our school children, the less fortunate, our nursing home residents, our universities, and public safety, as well as the hopes and aspirations of all Texans first.”
I’m asking the very same thing. Put Texans first, not the interests of the Tea Party, which has a one-line mantra, cut taxes no matter how badly we damage services to children, the elderly and others.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“do the right thing for Texas”
“providing adequate state funding”
“Put Texans first”
What kind of Republican talks in this kind of weasly language? The answer is a Democrat who is a fake Republican.
When Republicans talk about how to handle our current budget predicament, we don’t talk in words like “we need to implement spending policies that will ensure the greatest economic opportunites for the citizens of the State of Texas”. We say, “We need to cut the budget”. So, what’s all this B.S. about “putting Texans first” and suggesting that the “Legislature” needs to provide “adequate state funding” (are the members of the Legislature going to pull out their wallets and pitch in to collectively cover the deficit?). Do you work for Rahm Emanuel or Robert Gibbs or something?
If you think that raising taxes in this time of economic challenges is the way to go, then just come out and say it. We must raise taxes. That’s how you do it.
It is time for the state government to learn to get by with less as milions of other families have to do when times are tight. To suggest that employees of the state are incapable of working harder to make the best of scarcer resources in this time of economic challenge says a lot about the fact that you really don’t think much of the workers. Families across this nation are finding ways to reduce expenses and to live within their means on reduced budgets. State government needs to take a lesson from the families across the nation who willing to do the right thing and reduce consumption in lean times rather than go around bitching that they deserve more money and they are being mistreated if pepople don’t hand over some more money to them.
Reply »
Julie says:
Anonymous,
The problem with your perverted logic about who is a Republican is that no one put you in charge of defining who is a Republican.
You indicate that only a Democrat would put Texans first. If that’s the case, then Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is also a Democrat, by your silly definition. Dewhurst has also stated the Legislature should put the interests of Texas first.
You say Republicans believe that cutting spending is the only way to go.
You clearly don’t understand the Republican Party, which does not rule out tax increases. The party’s platform states, “We believe government should tax only to raise money for its essential functions.”
Lt. Gov. Dewhurst says the Legislature should provide sufficient funding to protect essential services like education. Dewhurst is opposed to the draconian cuts in the House budget that would gut essential services, resulting in the layoff of tens of thousands of public school teachers.
Another Republican, Gov. Rick Perry has signed about half a dozen tax increases into law that raised state taxes by billions of dollars. Since Perry has signed off on higher taxes, I suppose that makes him a Democrat, too, under your way of thinking.
You say, “It is time for the state government to learn to get by with less as milions of other families have to do when times are tight.” Mr. Anonymous, the millions of families you mention will have to live with a whole lot less than they do now if the House’s awful budget is adopted by the Legislature. They’ll have thousands of fewer teachers to teach their children and thousands of seniors will lose their homes because scores of nursing homes in the state would close. And tens of thousands of low income families will lose critical social services.
Your beliefs do not represent the core principals of the Republican Party. Instead, you’re embracing the views of the EXTREME far right, which has been busy trying to repaint the GOP as the party of “NO.”
Reply »
Maldives Resort says:
Fantastic goods from you, man. I’ve take note your stuff previous to and you are just too fantastic. I really like what you’ve got right here, certainly like what you’re saying and the best way by which you are saying it. You are making it enjoyable and you still take care of to keep it wise. I cant wait to learn far more from you. This is really a great website.
Reply »
לספירת says:
Unquestionably imagine that that you said. Your favorite reason seemed to be at the web the simplest thing to take note of. I say to you, I certainly get annoyed while people think about worries that they plainly don’t realize about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the highest and also defined out the whole thing without having side-effects , folks could take a signal. Will probably be back to get more. Thank you
Reply »
Twitter Alternative for affiliates says:
Amazing issues here. I am very glad to see your article. Thank you so much and I am taking a look ahead to contact you. Will you kindly drop me a e-mail?
Reply »