XML FeedsTEAGUES MISLEADING LIES
By on Aug 21, 2010 | In From the Desk of Doyle Pruitt, NM State Politics, Lies and Rhetoric | Send feedback »
Dancing For the Media
Many people have listened to the lies spread by Harry Teague and his working for the service men and women of America. To introduce a bill in Congress is relatively easy and to bring it to committee or the floor is also fairly easy, especially when you are running for re-election in November. Of course this is if you have the majority of the Congress on your side and helping in getting you re-elected, such as House Majority Leader Pelosi.
Once the bill has been introduced though, it has to be voted on by the sitting body of the Congress and this is where the rub comes in. As a Congressman, Teague can make a big show to the veteran organizations, such as the VFW, Legion, Retired Veterans Assoc, Am-Vets, or any other area that will give him the time of day. Now comes the shell game.
All the Dems have to do is delay the bill introduced for a length of time to milk it for its value, while Teague holds court at the different organizations to show he is 100% behind the veterans, making a big play to the media at the same time. The bait and switch comes when the bill comes to a vote. Behind closed doors and in cocktail lounges and coffee rooms the agreement has been made to vote the bill down when it comes up. Now you have a bill that has been defeated, but Good Old Boy Harry Teague has been working for the veterans, at least according to the media and the hype put down by Good Old Boy Harry.
In the case of the bait and switch, the veterans lose out, but Harry is spouting his rhetoric to the world that he is 100% behind the veterans. The veterans think they have a winner in Harry so they go along with his lies and try to freeze out Steve Pearce, who is not only a veteran, but a member of the VFW and many other veteran organizations as well. Pearce is also a combat veteran, who flew many sorties for his country. Now ask yourself which man is for the veteran and which is spouting lies about what he stands for.
I am taking the liberty of posting Harry Teague’s voting record below in the hopes of showing his voting record, bills introduced and bills passed. Study them with care and then make an educated decision as to who will represent the veterans best. Do you want a lying cheat who has sold his company employees down the river with the Health Care reformation of his company?
Do not undersell, or be deceived by Harry, for he has been a quick study and an accomplished politician since he was elected. Don't let him make you a victim of the 'shell game'. He has learned to lie, cheat and steal from our pockets and can stand in company with all politicians who have their own agenda. To study his record more in depth you can visit the U S Congressional site for all the information below.
The Teague Record 2007 through 2010
Current Elected Office Committees:
Current Elected Office Staff Members:
- Chief of Staff: Adrian Saenz
- Scheduler: Alexandria Rossetti
- Legis. Dir.: Peter Ambler
- Press Secy.: Kara Kelber
- Veteran Affairs LA: Nate Howard
- Military LA: Nate Howard
- Health LA: Kate Alexander
- Foreign Policy LA: Kate Alexander
- Government Affairs LA: Peter Ambler
- Medicare/Medicaid LA: Kate Alexander
- Social Security LA: Peter Ambler
- Immigration LA: Kate Alexander
- Homeland Security LA: Peter Ambler
Current Elected Office Key Votes:
These are our key votes and this is how Rep. Harry Teague voted on our issues.
|
Status |
Name of Legislation |
Date |
Voted |
Score |
|
|
06/24/2010 |
Not Voting |
|
|
P = Passed |
= Voted With Us |
|
A = Agreed To |
= Voted Against Us |
|
R = Rejected |
= Not Scored |
|
C = Confirmed |
= Ineligible to Vote |
|
F = Failed |
How are Your Representatives Voting - Current Elected Office Bills:
Here is Rep. Harry Teague's co-sponsorship status on our key legislation. Send Rep. Harry Teague a message that you will vote him out in November.
Get involved and take action!
|
Bill Name |
Our Position |
Cosponsor? |
||
|
H.R.4525 - Concurrent Receipt for Chapter 61 Retirees and Those with Less than 50% Disability |
Support |
Yes |
||
|
H.J.RES.45 - Senate Approves Medicare/TRICARE Doctor Payment Cut Delay |
Support |
No |
||
|
Support |
Yes |
|||
|
H.R.1478 - Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act |
Support |
No |
||
|
H.R.333 - Disabled Veterans Tax Termination Act |
Support |
No |
||
|
H.R.2254 - Last Chance for "Blue Water Sailors" |
No Position |
Yes |
||
|
H.R.2302 - Military Retired Pay Fairness Act of 2009 |
No Position |
No |
||
|
H.R.2419 - Military Personnel War Zone Toxic Exposure Prevention Act |
Support |
No |
||
|
Support |
No |
|||
|
H.R.2254 - The Agent Orange Equity Act |
Support |
Yes |
||
|
H.R.1428 - Include Parkinson’s Disease Among the Diseases Presumed Caused by Agent Orange. |
Support |
Yes |
||
Green means that this is our preferred co-sponsorship position.
Red means that this is not our preferred co-sponsorship position.
The old cliché in law enforcement is “follow the money trail”. By following the links blow you can follow that trail and see where the money to elect Harry came from. Study this and tell me who got screwed:
Pac Contributions http://capwiz.com/usdr/bio/fec/?id=62230&cycle=2009-2010
SAFETY BEFORE BEAUTY WITH THE CITY MEDIANS by: Michael Swickard
By on Aug 20, 2010 | In From the Desk of Doyle Pruitt, Local Politics, Guest Blog | Send feedback »
Main Purpose
Quick, what is the main purpose of city streets? It is to get the citizens to where each of us is going in the safest and most efficient manner. Note that safest is said before efficient in that sentence – and hopefully in the design of our city streets.
Safety engineers have spent decades making us safer as we travel. However, people have purposefully made our divided streets ever so much more dangerous, and they will be downright crabby if we complain about their actions. I can stand the criticism much more than I can stand needless deaths on our city streets.
I am talking about the medians that separate the two directions of travel on our divided city streets. It seems someone got the bright idea a few years ago that those medians should be “improved” – that they should be “beautified” by the addition of trees, rocks and boulders. I like that kind of landscaping in yards, but not in the street medians.
Medians of divided streets are specifically constructed to give drivers safety space in case “stuff” happens. Example: People on motorcycles will tell you that occasionally a driver in a car is inattentive. The driver of the motorcycle can just let the car run over them (not much fun) or they can move out of the way by driving onto the median long enough to escape. At least that is the plan of streets with a median.
They can, unless beautification project people have put trees, rocks and boulders in the median. The unexpected happens and in an instant, BLAM! – someone hits a ton of boulder instead of just safety space.
For Those “whoops” Moments
I am thinking of myself much like I do with the seatbelt and helmet laws: At times my driving has small moments when, frankly, it sucks. If I am lucky no one is close and I say to myself, “Whoops” and get back where I should be.
But if I make incidental contact with, say, a motorcycle I would hope and pray they are well enough protected that they just say to me, “Michael, you must be more careful” or words to that effect instead of the incidental contact leading me to cause their death.
We should not put ANYTHING at all in the street medians that would degrade safety. This is a test of thinking: If people say we need the beauty and it only kills a couple people a year, we need to remove them from a position of leadership. If they admit they had not thought of it and now that they see how dangerous this is, well, pat them on the back and support them.
Likewise Las Cruces has been trying to get a grip on a sign ordinance. The sticking point is they want signs that are not distracting. HELLO, no business wants a sign that is not distracting. But that is why the city council gets the big bucks to think carefully. Obviously safety must be included in the sign ordinance.
The Core Job of Government
The core job of government is to protect citizens. It is so easy to be distracted by all of the other interests in a community, but safety is the central aspect of government. Often what starts out as a genuine concern for the safety of citizens gets hijacked by the fact it produces revenue.
We see that many of the traffic laws in our towns and cities were initially tied to safety. But each municipality has long since come to depend on the revenue from the tickets, which seems a bit strange. It puts them in the business of hoping citizens offend because they need the money. How sad.
What the last century has shown is if our towns truly want people to stop offending by doing things that are unsafe; collecting a nuisance tax does not get it done. It seems to say that we are very concerned with safety but we are more concerned with collecting money.
This just does not look right for the kids. They think we are stupid and they are right. We say our first goal is safety and then we do all of these other things instead of focusing on safety.
Swickard is a weekly guest columnist for this site. He can be reached at Michael@swickard.com
POLLS IN FAVOR OF GOP
By on Aug 18, 2010 | In From the Desk of Doyle Pruitt, National Politics, Planning for the Future | Send feedback »
Ground Zero Mosque Controversy Grows, Democrats Losing
With just 76 days left before midterm elections, Republicans have seized an all-time record lead in generic party preferences; a clear signal that Democrats urgent need to resolve the ground zero mosque disputes and get back to business if they hope to avoid a political meltdown in November. For Democrats, the timing of the polls could hardly be worse.
Reports are coming out of the White House that Rahm Emanuel has been working hard on damage control, working the phones to stop further Democratic defections caused by President Obama's undecided methods of supporting construction of the mosque/cultural center so close to ground zero. Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid split away from the president, saying the mosque should be built in another location. A flurry of swing-district New York Democrats also are siding with Reid on the matter and urging that a new location be found, including Representatives Mike Arcuri, Mike McMahon, Steve Israel, and Tim Bishop.
The division among Democrats, combined with poll numbers, brings to the front the prospect of a massive GOP landslide in November. Gallup reported Tuesday that the GOP has seized the largest margin of advantage in the history of the firm's tracking of the elections. Pollsters use generic ballots to ferret out which party is favored by voters irrespective of specific candidates or individual races.
Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport confirmed to Newsmax that Tuesday's result is the largest GOP lead the organization has ever recorded in generic-ballot polling. When filtered for likely voters, the Gallup result is tremendously stronger. The GOP lead has increased by another 5 points, bringing it in line with a new Rasmussen survey. The Rasmussen Reports survey released Monday depicts Republicans with a 12-point lead over Democrats on the generic ballot. That result probably does not reflect all the fallout from the ongoing mosque controversy.
GOP Gaining Ground Each Day
Almost 70 percent of voters say a mosque should not be built two blocks away from where Muslim terrorists destroyed the Twin Towers. Democrats reacted sharply to the latest developments, urging Democratic leaders and the White House to regain control before it's too late. "Democrats need a middle road correction of course," said Schoen. "They need to emphasize fiscal discipline, balanced budget, holding back on spending and most of all pointed focus on stimulating the economy and private sector job creation."
A communications strategist who advised the 2008 Obama campaign, David Morey, told CNN: "The danger here is an incoherent presidency." Morey urged the president's advisers to rethink their communications efforts to the public. "Simpler is better, and rising above these issues and leading by controlling the dialogue is what the presidency is all about," he said. "So I think that's the job they have to do more effectively as they have in the past."
Many in the know thik it is too late for the Democrats to regain the ground they have lost at this late date. "In some ways, there's nothing they can do. The momentum is behind the GOP and the president isn't on the ballot" and might not help them that much this year if he were, Perino tells Newsmax.
But Perino warned that the GOP must avoid overconfidence, to be able to deliver a stunning turn on the Democrats in November. "I still think the GOP should not count any chickens," Perino warned. "They must stay focused, argue on the merits, avoid mistakes and gaffes, and point out the policies they would push that will turn the economy around."
Republicans Need to Stay Focused
Republicans are not unified in their opposition to the president's nuanced position. Important figures such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin have challenged Obama, but GOP New Jersey Governor. Chris Christie made headlines by pleading with fellow Republicans not to overreact to the proposed $100 million mosque. Sorry fellows and girls, you can’t have it both ways.
When Christie spoke at a bill-signing ceremony in Trenton, he said it would be wrong to "paint Islam with a brush of radical Muslim extremists that just want to kill Americans because we are Americans. But beyond that, I am not going to get further into it," he stated. “I would be guilty of candidly what I think some Republicans are guilty of. The president is guilty of playing politics with this issue and I simply am not going to do it."
A group of conservative Arab-American and Muslim leaders wrote GOP leaders a letter stating, "While we share the desire of all in our party to be successful in the November elections, we cannot support victory at the expense of the U.S. Constitution or the Arab and Muslim community in America." It remains unclear whether a deal can or will be worked out to relocate the mosque to another location. No meeting has been set or scheduled at this time and there is no projection of such a meeting in the near future.
Letter to Jeff Bingamen
By on Aug 17, 2010 | In From the Desk of Doyle Pruitt, Guest Blog | 1 feedback »
Las Cruces
About Immigration By: Charlie Revie
Senator Jeff Bingaman
Thank you for your response concerning illegal immigration, dated July 26, which arrived by US Postal Services, today, August 16. In the future, I welcome your response by email as it is more reliable.
In that response you made several notable statements the most notable being:
“I understand the need to reform our broken immigration system and enhance our border security. I am please that additional resources have been deployed in New Mexico, and I am encouraged that border security agencies are now staffed at record levels. However, we must face reality that while we are making some headway, more must be done … I continue to believe that maintaining border security is critically important, and will continue to support efforts to secure our nation’s borders.”
Senator, you are now the second of my two Senators and one Representative who speaks with forked tongue! You say one thing and then act in the opposite direction … that, Sir, is equivocation with intent to deceive!
I could certainly take your words at face value, yet you and Sen. Tom Udall are pushing hard for passage of S. 1689 which would designate more than 800 square miles of southern Dona Ana County as “federal wilderness” and would disenfranchise several historical ranching operations and would open corridors for illegal aliens and terrorists as have already been well documented in Arizona, south of I-8 and west of Tucson.
There are already documented instances where various NM agencies will not proceed south of I-10 with out armed escort. The one or two people I know who live in that area are always armed!
Respectfully,
Charles Revie
GOVERNMENT PLANS TO SEIZE WESTERN LAND
By on Aug 17, 2010 | In From the Desk of Doyle Pruitt, Government Interference, International News | Send feedback »
Seizing Land Without Vote of Congress
In February, a leaked memo from the Department of the Interior revealed that the Obama administration was considering as many as 17 new national monuments throughout the West. This would close huge tracts of land to development. This leak has angered many due to the fact that Congress did not authorize its printing.
Congressman Rob Bishop(R-Utah), Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus and Ranking Member on the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks Forests and Public Lands, has uncovered 14 more pages from the document that were previously not available to the public or the media. The new pages show federal bureaucracy has contempt for the legislative process and the brain processes of elected representatives. “Should the legislative process not prove fruitful, or if a nationally significant natural or cultural land resource come under threat of harm, the BLM would recommend the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act (to accomplish the taking of the land)”.
In a statement Bishop hit the Obama administration with, “These pages are further evidence of the Obama Administration’s aims, under the guided by Secretary Salazar, to control western lands by unilaterally locking them up without input from local residents and parties of interest, nor the approval of Congress. Plotting behind closed doors is sneaky and is in the face of this Administration’s so-called ‘transparency’,” Bishop said. “Thousands of westerners whose livelihoods depend upon access to our public lands stand to be affected by these decisions and yet this document blatantly goes out of its way to exclude their input or participation. If there was any question about whether or not this Administration has declared a war on the Western public, these documents are evidence enough of the truth of the accusation.”
This is the type of government we have elected to take care of our people; a government that is intent on taking us back into the dark ages and leaving our country to the dictatorship or worse. The Obama administration has shown that it is not interested in our people, but in seeing us returned to the live we lived in the 1700s when we first declared our independence.
