TexasCHLforum.com

juggernaut wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:a personal matter between a woman, her sperm donor

The sperm donor has no say, but he can be forced to pay child support.

dont do the crime if you cant do the time

marksiwel wrote:dont do the crime if you cant do the time

Does that apply to women too? Or does she still get to choose after the fact?

roberts wrote:

marksiwel wrote:dont do the crime if you cant do the time

Does that apply to women too? Or does she still get to choose after the fact?

Um...I'm not even going to get into that.


Back on Topic!


Will the Ballot have all 3 people running on it?

marksiwel wrote:Will the Ballot have all 3 people running on it?

If you're asking about the GOP Primaries, here's who will be on the ballot. https://www.1888932-2946.ws/TexasGOP/E- ... _09(1).xls

Here's the Democrats. http://www.txdemocrats.org/wp-content/u ... e-Name.pdf

Here's the independents who filed. http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/vo ... 0ind.shtml

I want to point out super BIASED reporting on the part of Channel 8 here in the DFW area. Channel 11 and 4 showed Medina in their news coverage of the debate, but Channel 8 did not even acknowledge she was there or even existed. How insulting to all of us! For citizens who missed the debate, and happened to only watch Channel 8 news, they did not even know she was present, much less get to hear one word of her platform. THIS IS WRONG on so many levels! This is not reporting the news, it is feeding propaganda to us.

On the drug question:

I was at the Fort Worth Gun Show. There was a booth there manned by Medina supporters. They steadfastly denied she EVER supported legalizing drugs. They said that was a misquote attributed to her and spread by the opposition.
I don't know either way, but I do think she is a breath of fresh air as someone else pointed out. She will be getting my vote.
I am seeing more and more comments from people that we need to send a message to our legislators that We, The People are ticked off.

Medina is a good candidate and electing her would start that message rolling IMO.
Go Medina!

Liberty wrote:I could learn to like Medina, but the issue of taxes really has me concerned. She wants to increase taxes by giving us a bigger sales tax?
I would think the first thing a libertarian Republican would think of would be reducing government.While she should be thinking of ways of eliminating Government agencys and reducing waste all she can think oabout is increasing our sales tax, which already is one vof the highest in the country. Bussinesses in Texas are having a tough time competing with companies out of state or on the internet. Ms. Medina plans will put even more pressure on small businesses that have to compete with tax free or lower tax states. I for one would love to see drugs decrimminalized. Its time government stopped being nannys let people live or destroy themselves as they see fit. The right of the to pursue happiness is also followed by the responcibilty Governt has no bussiness trying to protect us from ourself.

Her background is about being the a nurse and head of a club. doesn't particularly excite me either.

Rick Perry might be for the TTC but that has been rendered impotent by our wiser legislature. I am afraid if Medina got in as Gov some fools might actually take her serious and start increasing what is already a very high sales tax.

All that being said any of the three sure beats the best that the Democrats have to offer.

She was the head of the Republican party here in Texas. Unfortunately I do not recall at what level. Please note that as a part of her plan to increase sales taxes, she would like to ELIMINATE property taxes.

I was at the Fort Worth Gun Show. There was a booth there manned by Medina supporters. They steadfastly denied she EVER supported legalizing drugs. They said that was a misquote attributed to her and spread by the opposition.

No, she came out with a straightforward statement that could not be mistaken for anything else. If those Medina supporters really support her, they should not try to deny things just because it makes some folks uncomfortable. The mainstream politicians already do that, I hope her folks don't fall into that habit.

Purplehood wrote:
Please note that as a part of her plan to increase sales taxes, she would like to ELIMINATE property taxes.

Actually, that's somewhat backwards. Her goal is to eliminate Property Taxes, not to increase sales taxes.
Since Texas does not have an income tax, and obviously needs SOME source of funds, the sales tax would be increased to handle the shortfall.
A minor point, perhaps, but it seems unfair to say her plan is "to increase sales taxes".

Of course, the problem is that often when politicians say they want to replace one tax with another, the new tax gets implemented, but the old tax never quite manages to go away.

sjfcontrol wrote:

Purplehood wrote:
Please note that as a part of her plan to increase sales taxes, she would like to ELIMINATE property taxes.

Actually, that's somewhat backwards. Her goal is to eliminate Property Taxes, not to increase sales taxes.
Since Texas does not have an income tax, and obviously needs SOME source of funds, the sales tax would be increased to handle the shortfall.
A minor point, perhaps, but it seems unfair to say her plan is "to increase sales taxes".

Of course, the problem is that often when politicians say they want to replace one tax with another, the new tax gets implemented, but the old tax never quite manages to go away.

I don't see your point as there is no fundamental difference in the statements.

Purplehood wrote:
I don't see your point as there is no fundamental difference in the statements.

Really?! The difference seems quite obvious to me.
I'll try again...
The goal is to eliminate Prop Taxes.
Implementing that requires SOME form of income to the state (mainly to support schools, but for other purposes as well).
That would be accomplished by raising sales taxes.

Sales tax increase is a result of implementing the goal, not the goal itself.

i.e., she did NOT say to herself, "I want to increase sales taxes -- how can I accomplish that? I know! I'll drop property taxes!"

Okay, I will now officially revise the following:

Please note that as a part of her plan to increase sales taxes, she would like to ELIMINATE property taxes.

Please note that as a part of her plan to eliminate property taxes, she would like to raise sales taxes.

WFAA, the BELO Broadcasting station to air the next debate has an article listing the "criteria" for selecting who is qualified to debate:

"The criteria for participation includes whether a candidate: receives significant levels of public support in independent public opinion polls, e.g.15 percent, which is the minimum used by the Commission on Presidential debates; has received substantial campaign contributions from varied sources; has previously held significant public office(s); has received a substantial level of votes in prior elections for the same or comparable office(s); will be reported by news agencies in election night returns; and, has received significant news coverage from a wide range of media outlets."

http://www.wfaa.com/news/politics/Guide ... 34067.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The hypocrisy that BELO displays overwhelms me. To exclude a viable candidate for Governor from debate, is doing the State of Texas AND the voters in this State an extreme disservice.

I will not watch the debate, nor will I listen to it. Nor will I ever again purchase any copy of the Dallas Morning News, or any other newspaper subsidary of BELO Corp.

If KERA can include Medina in a Gubernatorial debate, then so can WFAA. It's the good old boy network raising its ugly head again in an attempt to persuade voters to "their" line of thinking.

[gets off the soapbox]

P.S. If you click on the link and scroll down to the bottom you get: "Comments have been turned off for this article."

So we all agree that to eliminate property taxes, that sales tax would have to go up.
Its not clear how much it would go up, nor is it clear how much sales would drive our purchasing out of state, or through the internet. It is clear that increasing sales taxes would change the way we spend our money, although we don't just how much. The laws of unintended consequences kicks in here. But I wouldn't want to own a retail store in Longview El Paso or Orange if this ever happens.

They tell me that Cigarettte tax revenue goes done everytime they increase taxes.. People roll their own. quit, or or buy them out of low tax venues

Liberty wrote:They tell me that Cigarettte tax revenue goes done everytime they increase taxes.. People roll their own. quit, or or buy them out of low tax venues

No savings in rolling your own anymore... the tax went up on this latest hike on a one lb can of loose smoking tobacco from $1.10 to $24.78 per lb. That's a 2,000% tax hike.

I don't like taxes period....however, eliminating property tax and increasing sales tax would be one way of getting some revenue back out of govt housing dwellers; out of state temporary workers; those who may have housing provided as a part of salary (some ministers parsonages for example; college presidents, etc.).

Pros and cons each way.

Just guessing that no one who watched that will be voting for the devout (insert unstated religion here) who donates to the PLO and sent millions to "charities" that funneled it to ummmm?
"The day ___ is elected Governor of Texas, is the day business as usually stops in Texas"
I guess that's what happened to Wall Street on 9/12 (after 9/11) too .... it CHANGEd "business as usual"

When are the Democrat Debates, I want to watch THOSE.
I bet no one even asks about their feelings about Congress' investigation results of the "charities" that were funnelling money to _____.

Yeah, this should probably get moved to the political section instead of the CHL discussion section.

I just heard on the Wells Report that BELO has relented and WILL include Medina in the next Republican Governor Debate.