By B.K. Carter 

There hasn’t been a lot of hot politicking this year it seems to me. Of course, I’ve been waylaid by my health so maybe it has been a lot hotter than I think. The candidates have thankfully left me alone but I still have some observations based on my 30 plus years of following Fort Bend politics. Are you surprised?

FBISD

In Fort Bend ISD, a slew of candidates are running but I’m not unhappy with the incumbents, Jim Rice and Dave Rosenthal. In fact, the incumbents have proven themselves over the last years, and I have come to believe it is imperative that we return their steady hands to office. Since there has been so little publicity about these races I fear the turnout will be low. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to go to the polls and return these two men to office.

Jim Rice and Dave Rosenthal

Lamar Consolidated ISD

Of the three races, I can only vouch for three of them. In District 1, Kathryn Kaminski has had over 30 years experience in child education. And Anna Gonzales in District 6 has a lick of sense. She is the wife of long-time Richmond city commissioner Jim Gonzales Both are fine examples of community service. Frank Torres has served District 3 for many years and he gets our nod to continue.

Kathryn Kaminski, Anna Gonzales, Frank Torres

Katy ISD

I know no one in this race except one. And you are going to hate him or love him. However, with his investigative skills and inquiring nature, I think he will make an excellent board member. It is former newsman Wayne Dolcefino in Position 1, the only contested race in Katy.

Wayne Dolcefino

Stafford MSD

Stafford will elect 3 trustees to serve and since two incumbents are running, Ed Castillo (i) and Greg Holsapple (i) you only have to make a decision about one. The incumbents should be re-elected as they are doing a good job in a thankless task.

Greg Holsapple and Ed Castillo

City of Missouri City

There are two races in Missouri City with incumbents in each position. We take no position on this race and you will have to wade through the 15 charter propositions yourself. We apologize for taking no position but we have not studied the candidates at all.

City of Richmond

The only two initiatives on the ballot deal with a home rule charter for Richmond. That is a very important question and should be passed as it allows the city to do many things the current general law rules do not. For example, under a home rule charter, Richmond could annex new parts of the city to expand its tax base.

City of Rosenberg 

Rosenberg has five races on its ballot and 11 propositions, most of which should be passed as it will allow the city to join the 21st century in governance. With this number of races and the propositions on the ballot, citizens of Rosenberg need to go to the polls.

On-line Voter’s Guide

After an extensive search for an on-line voter’s guide, I believe the best one for Fort Bend voters is

“The write idea online”

For information about individual candidates, go to “The Write idea online.”

The preeminent fraud—”helping” Veterans with the VA benefit commonly called Aid & Attendance. Getting yourself through the maze can be difficult, but it is worth the effort to wartime Veterans and Widows of Veterans during the difficult economic times we now face.

More Veterans and surviving spouses file claims for disability benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs each year. Wartime Veterans and surviving spouses may be eligible for a monthly pension benefit at age 65, are permanently disabled and unable to work, are homebound, or require regular aid and attendance of another either at home, in an assisted living environment, or in a nursing home. The program is based on financial need for assistance. The process is by no means an easy one, as claims frequently require extensive documentation and substantiation of myriad facts before the claim is settled. And there is widespread misunderstanding in regard to how to determine if you qualify for this important benefit and do the actual filing.

Is the company or the individual helping you to obtain Veterans benefits operating legally?

Federal Law dictates that no one may help a Veteran in the preparation, presentation and prosecution of an initial claim for VA benefits unless that person is accredited.

VA recognizes 3 types of individuals for purposes of accreditation:

1. Accredited Attorneys
2. Accredited Agents
3. Accredited Representatives of Service Organizations

What does it mean to help a Veteran with a claim?

The VA interprets its prohibition on preparing, presenting and prosecuting a claim to mean that talking to a Veteran or a Veteran’s qualifying spouse or dependant after that person has indicated an intent to file a specific claim or claims for benefits requires accreditation.

Stated simply, no individual or organization other than those stated above may counsel or assist a Veteran or his/her family in any way whatsoever with an application for benefits. You DO NOT need to purchase an Annuity in order to qualify for the VA’s Aid and Attendance benefit. You need to be careful when repositioning assets because of tax consequences or penalties on existing retirement plans.

You may contact Robert Dornak, Accredited Agent, Veterans Affairs at 713 828 6951

Students celebrate Valentine’s Day at Wertheimer MS.

The popular holiday is named for St. Valentine was a priest who served during third century Rome.  According to Kaboose.com, legend has it that Emperor Claudius II, who ruled Rome during this time, decided that single men made better soldiers than those who were married.  Because of this, he outlawed marriage for young men with the intention of building a strong military base.  Supposedly, Valentine decided this ruling wasn’t reasonable and chose to perform marriage ceremonies for young couples secretly.  When Emperor Claudius II found out about Valentine’s disobedience, he had him executed! Though this was said to have taken place hundreds of years ago, we celebrate Valentine’s courage and romanticism still today.

Students and staff at Henry Wertheimer Middle School choose to celebrate this February holiday by deeming Wednesday, February 13 as “Love Day” and taking part in classic Valentine’s traditions on February 14th.  On “Love Day” everyone is encouraged to wear red, pink, or clothing decorated with hearts, while Valentine’s Day is celebrated with the sending of Skittles and carnations to show friends, teachers and family how much they are cared for.  It seems that many at WMS enjoyed the Valentine’s Day festivities.  “I think Love Day and Valentine’s Day [celebrations] are very nice and sweet…[students] get to share their feelings…”, says Payton Wilson, a student at Wertheimer. Many students also participated in the exchange of candy, flowers and other treats to show they care.

Another classmate, Sophia Boone spoke of the exchange of dozens of carnations and many bags of Skittles by agreeing, “It shows that you love each other and care about each other.  It reminds people that they have someone to rely on…” It seems that many students felt that it was a reminder about how much they are loved.  Although it is certainly fun to receive presents, I think that everyone can also agree that it feels good to give presents as well.   I think that the love was definitely felt by WMS staff and students during those two days!

After speaking to some classmates, it seems that love carries over to their family as well.  I found out that they also enjoy celebrating by creating Valentine’s Day cards for their loved ones and spending quality time together.  “I usually just hang out with my family and relax…we [also] give each other presents,” Sydney Billings tells me.

At Wertheimer, we view each other as a secondary family and make it a goal, not just on Valentine’s Day, but each and every day that everyone feels cared for.  Wertheimer is a great place to be!

By LeaAnne Klentzman

Here we are sitting on the edge of the fiscal cliff and possibly the end of the world (if you buy into the Mayan thingie) and what are our conservative, oh so fiscally responsible, Fort Bend Commissioner’s doing? Well, they are trying to pull off one of the biggest power grabs we have seen in recent history.

For the last 16 years outgoing sheriff and company have been, uh, how shall we put this nicely…they have been treating that court like the pavement princesses they are. For years if the Sheriff didn’t get what he wanted at budget time, he just did what he wanted anyway and went about his business, leaving his commissioner buddies to eat his dust.

They carped and whined but never stopped it when he did it and were forced, because of their own impotence, to fund it anyway. So, now that the old guy is out – the two commissioners who claim to be so fiscally responsible are out for the grab!

What Pct. 4 Commissioner James Patterson and Pct. 3 Commissioner Andy Meyers are doing is forming yet another full blown department to manage the cars that the county owns. Now, know up front that all departments or elected officials who have cars already have folks in place to manage their fleet…more than one in some cases.

Don’t let that get confused with the county’s Vehicle Maintenance Department which is a whole other animal in itself. It has not run well for years, but a commissioner’s crony is over it, so….

Anyway, what these guys have done is to sweep all the monies in all budgets for automobiles and put it in a line item that gives only them the power to control. In short, Commissioners, with their vast knowledge and experience in paper pushing, will determine what trucks, police cars, and heavy equipment will be ordered for the folks that really do the work.

Now keep in mind, these are two men, who in past lives were a schoolmarm (Patterson) and a self-proclaimed businessman (Meyers) want to select everything from the vehicle itself to the stripes on the sides and the radios inside. Who would have imagined there could be that much slush to go around in the car world?

In any event, doesn’t it make more sense to leave the car wrangling to those who know how to do it and for you commissioners to watch the roads in your precincts you were elected to watch and help folks get the service they need in your area? Just say’n…

This power grab to control vehicles is really the last straw. You are already forcing elected officials to buy products that they do not want, which are bigger, and often more expensive than they need all in an effort to capitulate to your demands. In some circles that is called extortion. Now, you want to control the vehicles, really? And then, after Commissioners have formed this new bureaucracy, it will need to be staffed, headed by a long time stooge, who will be supported by a pack of stooges and stoogettes. Really!?!

The problem with all this is, well….the problem is leaving. Done. Gone. Retired as of January 1. So, guys, get over being scraped off the bottom of his shoe for the years before and do your job by letting others do theirs now.

If any elected officials are out of line, spank them, but don’t punish ALL elected officials and the taxpayer because you were too afraid or failed to stop the last one. Status quo was thrown out in May.

These particular commissioners are supposed to be conservative. Are you forgetting your mantra…NO more BIG government? We don’t need MORE government waste, you so conservative Republican Commissioners. We need more responsive officials who do what they were elected to do.

We the people, remember us – the voters – we have selected who we want to serve US, and believe we are on our way to accomplishing just that to some small degree. Oh and by the way, we are watching you others.

Now please, we are running up on a new year. It is time to grow up and act like adults. No more underhanded backroom stuff, Andy Meyers (and yes sir), folks are repeating what you say.

No more flow charts with task assignments for other ELECTED officials either, James Patterson. Each elected official shall be held accountable; however, you commissioners need to let them do the job they were elected to do, not play Big Daddy.

Money is still tight and we, the voters, want the best services available for the best dollar. You guys do your job by running your precincts. and let the folks who were elected to run the county do theirs.

It’s a shame that Sheriff Milton Wright is going to sully his tenure as sheriff by acting so bad at the end. When Wright’s fair-haired boy Craig Brady didn’t get elected sheriff this past election, Wright, who had turned the sheriff’s department over to him many years ago, pitched a hissy fit and decided to support the Democratic candidate. Wright’s chief deputy Brady candidate didn’t even make the run-off out of a field of four so Wright, who had enjoyed the support of Republicans for the past 16 years, showed his true colors and abandoned the party that had clutched him to its collective bosom.

Not only did he support the Democratic opponent, he left his job and during office hours, took the Democrat around to the business people in the community. Not that he had ever worked that hard anyway.

So after serving for 16 years without any public acknowledgement of extra-martial affairs, accepting drug money, letting friends off, or any number of other things that have caught up with other Texas sheriffs, Milton Wright has turned Democrat and turned his back on his party. He has promoted his “friends” at the last minute which will mean a large expenditure of tax funds, and when the various boards and commissions have refused his actions, he has acted like the stumbling old actor that doesn’t have sense to leave the stage with his dignity intact.

I know I have not been a friend of the sheriff although I supported him when he was first elected. Heck, there are those who say I got him elected although I’ve never bragged about that lately. I haven’t been his friend because I saw what he was doing to the sheriff’s department and what he let his chief deputy do whether from laziness or stupidity, one can only guess.

From the very beginning when I started questioning his actions, he retaliated against me and the Star and tried to keep our readers from being informed about things they should have known about in order to protect themselves and their neighbors. When he used taxpayer funds to hurt taxpayers, I knew we had elected a sheriff with questionable morality or intellect.

But he has the chance of leaving the stage with some of his dignity intact. He is but a bit player now. However, he refuses to imbue the pride in the office now that he never did when there. It’s time he quit trying to get his “friends” more pay and bigger titles. Come on sheriff. You’re just embarrassing yourself.

By LeaAnne Klentzman

While we have said for years that there has been no adult supervision over at the Sheriff’s Office; since the primary when their heir apparent lost his bid to Constable Troy Nehls in the Republican Primary, the Sheriff’s Office has been a rudderless ship.  Many employees have told the Star they are just trying to survive until the first of the year.

Tragedy is what again brings this leadership issue to the forefront.  On the same weekend as Sheriff’s personnel were mourning the loss of one of their detectives and the hospitalization of another, a third was out playing bumper cars in the parking lot of a local beer joint. The fatal motorcycle crash is under the investigation of the Katy police department; the Star is still waiting to hear if alcohol played a factor in that accident. However, not far away in time or space was another incident involving sheriff’s personnel. In this incident a deputy was in the parking lot of a south central beer joint; off Crabb River Road near US 59.  In this incident a deputy, who had been enjoying the adult beverages of the establishment, went to his truck and (depending on who you believe) cranked up a game of parking lot bumper cars, with at least 4 possibly 5 vehicles in the lot.  He was not arrested, no report was taken, nor has any sanction or disciplinary action been taken against him.

This deputy was fortunate enough to have been shielded by his fellow co-workers that were providing security at the bar. According to insiders, those deputies called their bosses in the jail, which in turn called and had a patrol sergeant pick up Bumper-car deputy and take him home.  Inquiries into this incident were made to Patrol Administrators; none were returned.  Fortuitously, two of the Patrol administrators happened to be celebrating at a political function just days later.  Imagine their surprise when they were asked about the incident. One puffed up and spat that “HE” did not talk to the media; the other laughed and said so what of it. As of today’s press deadline, over two weeks after both incidents, no action has been taken.  Bumper- car deputy remains on patrol answering calls for service and issuing citations.  Imagine his creditability the next time he takes the witness stand and one of the local attorneys ask him about Bumper-cars during a trial.

Leadership void is a misnomer; it is the sucking sound of a leadership vacuum!

Recently there have been many public comments made concerning the pending 83rd Texas Legislative Session and how legislators will expand the “School Choice” options available in Texas. Some state business organizations are already floating trial balloons to tout an agenda of allowing an unlimited number of open enrollment charter schools in the State, granting vouchers for students who wish to attend private schools and allowing these same students to attend public schools part-time, among other initiatives.

Before we expand the number of charter schools allowed in Texas or issue vouchers to attend private schools, we should examine why the Texas Legislature enabled charter schools to be created in the first place and then examine how well those charter schools have performed, both academically and cost-effectively. The Honorable Thomas Ratliff, State Board of Education District 9, recently issued a news release in which he said, “If a charter isn’t improving student learning, why isn’t it shut down?  There are too many examples of charter schools NOT enhancing student performance.  This seems to be in direct conflict with state law.  The Legislature needs to give the Texas Education Agency and/or the State Board of Education [SBOE] more authority to close these charters and protect kids.  And we [the SBOE] should be held accountable for the use of that authority.”

The Texas Education Agency’s 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 Snapshot data for open-enrollment charter schools and traditional public schools in Texas reveals that Charter schools have lower attendance rates and higher dropout rates than traditional public schools. Over the five school years analyzed, fewer charter school students passed each of the TAKS tests, especially the math and science TAKS, than students in traditional public schools, except on the 2011 Writing TAKS where the results were parallel. In addition, fewer students in charter schools met the state’s standards for college readiness, as measured by the percentage of students who took the SAT and ACT exams and the average scores on each of those exams. In short, scrutiny of charter school effectiveness seems to be in order before granting unlimited Charters.

Another scheme to cut funding for public schools being touted by some business groups is “Scholarships for Excellence,” simply another term for private school vouchers. Vouchers would help the wealthy at the expense of the poor. Under most plans, the voucher would not completely fund tuition at a good private school. So, only parents who can afford the rest of the tuition could take advantage of such programs; and since most private schools don’t provide transportation for students, only parents who can drive their children to and from the private school would benefit from the so-called “School Choice” voucher program. Public funds belong to all of us as they are contributed by all taxpayers for the purpose of educating all of the five million children enrolled in Texas public schools for the collective good and future of our great state.

Allowing students enrolled full-time in open enrollment charter schools to attend public schools part-time acknowledges the fact that charter schools do not have a complete curriculum to round out a student’s overall education. It will place an unfair burden on public schools to provide these students with classes in fine arts, sports and other enrichment programs that charter schools cannot provide.

Vouchers will hurt, not support, the state’s public schools and will jeopardize the quality of education available to most students. The legislature has a constitutional duty to support and maintain a system of public schools in this state (Texas Constitution Article 7, Section 1). State statute imposes a further duty upon the legislature: The mission of the public education system of this state is to ensure that all Texas children have access to a quality education that enables them to achieve their potential and fully participate now and in the future in the social, economic and educational opportunities of our state and nation (Texas Education Code §4.001).

Just as we hold our school districts accountable for student achievement, we should also hold the State Legislature accountable for supporting a public school system that provides a quality education for all students as the state constitution requires.

School Choice is a broad term that in itself sounds laudable: empowering parents with greater choice over which school their child attends. However, allowing an unlimited number of charter schools that are not held to the same standards as other public schools and providing publicly funded vouchers to subsidize private school tuition for middle class students will be detrimental to our public schools, and thus to  most of our students and  families, our communities and for the State of Texas.

The Legislature needs to uphold its constitutional duty to support and maintain a system of public schools in Texas, and fund it adequately and equitably. Let’s not squander the next legislative session with arguments over school choice to benefit a few; rather let’s focus our efforts on improving our public schools which do and always will educate the majority of our students. If you agree, let your legislators know.

Editors note: These comments are his alone and he is not speaking on behalf of the FBISD Board.

By Steve Brown

Racism is extremely difficult to prove, while easy to deny. It’s generally defined by people using their power to oppress others based on race. So, when Republicans entered the 2011 Legislative Session and soon amassed a super majority in the State House along with a majority in the State Senate, they used their power to steamroll perhaps one of the most deliberately racist agendas in recent memory.

According to two federal panels, Texas Republicans imposed strict, unforgiving burdens on the voting rights of minorities and the poor. This wasn’t a finding borne out of an extension of partisan tensions. Rather, these judges were mostly appointed by Republicans, and were bound only by the rule of law.

Let’s take the case of redistricting the state’s congressional and legislative districts. When the 2010 census was released, Texas found itself the beneficiary of four new congressional districts. Our Hispanic population accounted for more than sixty-five percent of our state’s growth. Blacks made up thirteen percent of our population explosion, and Asian Americans were ten percent of that growth. So when Texas was allotted four additional congressional seats, the Texas Legislature and Governor agreed that none should be crafted to give minorities the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. The court found that Texas couldn’t prove that its newly crafted districts weren’t drawn without “intentional discrimination” against the state’s Hispanic and African American populations.

Intentional discrimination is a very powerful term. It implies a willful and deliberate act of injustice against minorities. Texas lawmakers used their power last session to infringe upon the rights of others, and the court’s verdict was racism.

With Texas’ Voter ID case, a three judge federal panel found a similar pattern of discrimination against minorities, as well as the poor. The Texas law would have required voters to show a government issued photo identification card before voting. Despite the fact that voter fraud is practically non-existent, and that fraud is more likely to happen through mail in ballots than by voter impersonation, Texas Republicans made this issue an emergency item last session. The court’s unanimous ruling found that the law disproportionately impacted minorities and the poor. Sufficient evidence demonstrated that the cost of obtaining a photo id would fall most heavily on African American and Hispanic voters.

These recent rulings of “intentional discrimination” and voter suppression aren’t limited to just Texas. Laws enacted by Republicans in Florida were blocked that would have restricted voter registration drives and reduced the number of days of early voting. Ohio’s Republican governor signed a law that would have wrongfully discarded certain provisional ballots and limited weekend early voting. In Wisconsin, judges found that their Voter ID law would create a “needless and significant impairment of the right to vote.”

The good news is that the Voting Rights Act works, which includes provisions requiring that any change to an election system in certain states must first be pre-cleared by either the Justice Department or federal courts. The bad news is that we now know that certain Republicans will use their power, given the opportunity, to intentionally oppress the rights of minority voters.

If only there were similar safeguards to protect against educational, health and infrastructural apportionment policies designed with discriminatory constructs. Not to mention protections for other non-ethnic groups like women or the gay, lesbian, transgendered and bisexual communities. Let’s face it, we can’t assume that “convicted racists” would limit their practice to just voting.

It’s now clear that the current crop of Republican elected officials consider minority’s emerging political clout as a threat. Their systemic assault on minority voting rights is troubling, and I find it hard to accept that reasonable people would want to be associated with such blatant racism.

Texas deserves a Legislature that seeks not to “intentionally discriminate,” but to unite all around our shared quest for justice, fairness, equality and happiness.

Steve Brown is the Chairman of the Fort Bend County Democratic Party. Connect with Steve on Facebook atfacebook.com/sbrown2 and on Twitter at twitter.com/electstevebrown.

District Judge
For: Brenda Mullinix

Brenda Mullinix is running for District Judge in the 387th District Court. In Fort Bend, this judicial district was designated as a family court, hearing divorces, child custody, property settlement, adoptions, etc. Mullinix is uniquely qualified for this as she is board certified in family law, a designation that is hard to come by and requires extra legal training. There are few in Fort Bend with this designation. There are even few in Texas.

Mullinix has, for the past 7, almost 8 years, been the associate judge to retiring judge Robert Kern in the 387th. In other words, she has been practically doing the job anyway, or at least half of it.

In my 30 years of covering Fort Bend County, I have never heard a bad word against Brenda Mullinix or Judge Robert Kern for that matter.

I believe that her work as the associate judge for that court entitles us to call her Judge Mullinix anyway. Please make sure this is permanent for the next four years by voting for her in the Republican primary on May 29.

State Legislature, Dist. 26
FOR: Jacquie Chaumette

I’m also going to ask you to vote for Jacquie Chaumette. I know Chaumette will be as surprised as I am about my asking you to vote for her as I yanked her sign out of my yard and ran over it a few times. My son rescued the sign and passed it on to Patti Kaminski who asked why there were tire marks on her sign.

Here’s why:

I called Chaumette who was out block walking at the time. I asked her that when she got elected and was in Austin and someone, maybe a Democrat, offered a bill to rescind the trans vaginal sonogram law (that’s the one that says anyone who gets an abortion has to listen to the baby’s heartbeat before she gets an abortion and the only way you can hear a heartbeat in early pregnancy is to use a probe up a lady’s vagina) would she vote for it.

She thought about it for a while then called me back and said no she would not repeal it.

I told her it was deal breaker, medical rape and a lot of other things. This occurred by email so there wasn’t a bunch of hanging up on each other.

But it caused me to rip up her sign and throw it in the back yard. It happened to land in the driveway and I happened to run over it a few times.

Then I called Sonal Bhuchar and she told me the same thing, and I figured Rick Miller and Diane Miller were sure to say the same thing. So at least until the November election, I’m supporting Jacquie Chaumette. For one thing, I’ve finally learned to spell her name, but mainly because she is the hardest working candidate I’ve ever seen. She has also been an excellent Sugar Land city council member and worked hard there. Plus Chaumette has the background to make a great legislator, what with her degree and all.

Sheriff
FOR: ABC

In case you don’t do a lot of texting, that stands for “Anybody But Craig,” and it means any of the three other people running who aren’t Craig Brady. There have been many stories in this newspaper in the past 6 years about Craig Brady which point out why he shouldn’t be sheriff. He has spent 1/2 million dollars trying to be sheriff so far, and it is money down a rat hole as far as I’m concerned.

There are three other people in the race: John Minchew, Troy Nehls, and Billy Frank Teague–any one of whom would make a far, far better sheriff than Kenneth Craig Brady.

This week on the online internet edition of this newspaper we are running an online poll like we usually do. However, this week we have the sheriff candidates listed and ask for you to vote your choice. You can find it as www.fortbendstar.com.

Fort Bend County Democratic Party Chair Steve Brown recently penned a lying, hate-filled editorial against me, in a transparent attempt to avoid debating real policies, by engaging in petty character assassination. Let’s be honest, these attacks are coming from the top, from Obama, because I represent the only credible alternative to what he represents.

What Brown writes off as my “obscure 1933 banking standard” policy, is nothing less than the Glass-Steagall Act of President Franklin Roosevelt, the law which made it illegal to bail out Wall Street speculators with other peoples’ money. The speculative bubble that blew out in 2008 never could have even formed, if Glass-Steagall hadn’t been repealed, and major national labor organizations (AFL-CIO, machinists, teachers, and farmers), numerous Democratic Party organizations (including the Harris County Democratic Party), and 59 members of Congress have endorsed reinstating this “obscure” law. President Obama, however, opposes Glass-Steagall, because he is a puppet of international finance. Thus, the world is experiencing a hyperinflationary financial meltdown, while crooks on Wall Street and the City of London are being given trillions, instead of jail sentences.

The Democratic Party of Obama has written off colonizing the Moon and Mars. Had President John Kennedy’s legacy not been abandoned, the United States would already have landed a woman on Mars by 1984. Doing so would have employed millions of people in science, technology, engineering and math. We would have developed fusion energy, and a myriad of other fundamental breakthroughs, and every aspect of society would be upgraded by the spin off technologies. Instead, today, our next door neighbors are being laid off in the tens of thousands, and decades of skilled labor and scientific insight is being lost, because Obama has left us without a national mission in space exploration. Additionally, Obama’s defunding of crucial weather satellites, is threatening to leave us in the dark about even simple long-term weather forecasting. By 2020, Galveston might be as vulnerable to hurricanes as it was in 1900.

What then, if he rejects the outlook of the two greatest Democratic presidents in American history, is the tradition of Obama?

Since 9/11, an internationally financed coup d’êtat of executive power has been run against our Constitution. Obama promised to reverse this, but has instead accelerated it. He extended the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and secret prisons. Obama declared himself above Congress, in his authority to declare and conduct war, as in the bloody regime change of Libya. He demanded the NDAA include authority to indefinitely imprison U.S. citizens without trial. He’s declared the authority to assassinate U.S. citizens with drones, based on secret evidence, without due process. He chairs an unelected “SuperCongress”, mandated to cut the budget without the consent of the regular Congress. His healthcare legislation uses “cost-effectiveness” methods to ration care deemed “too expensive” by an unelected board, and when the Supreme Court questioned its Constitutionality, he attacked them as unelected activists. This is the president that Steve Brown, and my opponent KP George, is defending when they attack me.

If this sounds all too familiar to you, then let me adapt a popular saying: “If the mustache fits, wear it.” I have placed the Hitler mustache on Obama, but he earned it by his actions. Impeach him now, or by November, we may already have had thermonuclear world war rain its terrible hell down upon our heads.

I stand with World War II veteran Lyndon LaRouche, as a Democrat, and loyal patriot, proudly in the tradition of Roosevelt and Kennedy, in opposition to Obama. I am calling on you, my fellow patriots, to join with me, as I organize everywhere in the last two weeks before the May 29th primary.

Kesha Rogers is a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination to U.S. Congress in the 22nd congressional district of Texas.