Lets take the argument over Confederate Monuments to its logical conclusion, shall we?

Last week was not the first time I'd heard someone complain about Confederate War Monuments, but it had never really galvanized the left in this country until the disgusting violence that occurred last week in Charlottesville, Virginia.  I'm not really sure why, but some folks believe that the actions of a handful of absurd, lunatic racists, including one now charged with murder, is somehow connected to the existence of Confederate War Monuments that have been standing, many of them, for over a century.  All pretense aside, the truth is, the left has taken advantage of this tragedy to push the Confederate Monuments debate to the forefront simply to keep alive the flow of criticism directed at President Donald Trump.  Initially, President Trump was attacked in the press for not singling out "white supremacists" in his commentary condemning the violence.  Never known for letting an opportunity slip by, the left used this event to bring attention to the existence of numerous Confederate Civil War Monuments across the nation, but mostly in southern cities.  Anticipating that President Trump would not throw his southern supporters under the bus, the media's insertion of this topic into our cultural discourse was perfectly timed to keep the criticism of the President at a fever pitch.  Democratic leaders could not wait to express outrage at the continued existence of these statues and memorials, even though most, including House Minority Leader Nancy Polosi, have been working around Confederate Monuments for decades and only now are finding reason to complain.

Lets take this discussion in a logical direction, shall we? I'm willing to accept that many Americans are uncomfortable with Monuments to people who were slave owners and were fighting to uphold that inhuman practice.  But if we're going to get rid of monuments to men who supported slavery, lets at least be consistent.  Instead of singling out Civil War Generals Robert E. Lee and John Bell Hood, and statesmen like Confederate President Jefferson Davis, lets make a clean sweep of things and start at the beginning.  Lets go back to the writing of the Declaration of Independence and the birth of our nation.  We need to remove all statues and public acclaim for our most historic military hero and first president, George Washington; he was a slaveholder who made no effort to include abolition of slavery in the writing of the Constitution.  Neither did James Madison, James Monroe or John Adams.  Heck, Thomas Jefferson not only owned a plantation full of slaves, he kept a few females as concubines.  Has anyone thought about what we might call Washington State and Washington DC, now that we are abolishing all honorifics for persons who supported slavery?  Time to rename James Madison and George Mason Universities.  What will we do with our currency?  Shall we put Ronald Reagan on the dollar bill, and Bill Clinton on the nickle?  Who gets the honor of dynamiting half of Mt. Rushmore?

Better yet, lets include avowed segregationists on this list as well.  During the 1950's and 1960's, there were a number of high-profile politicians who put up one road block after another in an effort to block integration and the Civil Rights Act.  What about William Fulbright, famous for the Fulbright Scholarship?  President Bill Clinton dedicated a statue to his mentor Senator Fulbright, in a ceremony at the University of Arkansas in 2002.  Fulbright was a dyed-in-the-wool southern segregationist; do you homework so we can add him to the list, which will be a mile-long by the time we're finished.  I'm guessing somewhere along the way, someone from the left is going to suggest that we only focus on Civil War racists.  I'm okay with that, as long as you explain it to me and the American people.  Why is a slaveholder in 1861 more evil than one in the late 1700's?

At the end of the day, this is all about politics, which is disgusting, because I believe that many Americans truly are hurt by the idea of monuments to slave holders, and I sincerely respect their emotions on this issue.  But history is history, and we can't erase the past arbitrarily.  The Nazis were good at picking and choosing what parts of German history to trash and what events to embrace.  But don't hold your breath on this one.  As soon as the public gets a bit tired of this headline, the press will have another Trump-related scandal for us to digest.  These distractions have one true goal- the destruction of the Trump agenda.  Democrats are petrified not of Trump, but of the agenda on which he campaigned.  They realize that tighter border security and immigration reform will make our nation safer, that re-negotiated Trade Agreements will boast our exports, and that a stronger military will make us the most respected nation in the world, as opposed to Obama's effort to make us the most popular.  More jobs and less obsession with the fringes of our society is Making America Great Again.  Why is the Trump agenda so dangerous to Democrats?  Because after its implemented, and the economy takes off and real jobs return, we may not see another Democrat in the White House for some time.

Join me in my Congressional Campaign as we work for limited government and accountable representation.

After months of serious contemplation, I have decided to run for Congress.  Over the past two years, I've been asked on numerous occasions to consider taking this step, especially by persons who had been present during one of my speaking engagements.  I'm running because I no longer have any faith that Congress functions in the best interests of the people, and I believe I can make a difference.  My opponent, Congressman Lamar Smith, has been representing the 21st Texas District in the U.S. House of Representatives for more than thirty years.  During that time, he has voted in a manner which is reflective of the opinions and interests of his constituents, although he hasn't been the most prolific of legislators.  The most pressing issue regarding Representative Smith is that he chosen to make a career out of holding this seat, and he isn't alone.  Its more than obvious that way too many members of the 115th Congress have prioritized re-election over addressing the people's business.  Simply put, Congress has been dysfunctional for some time, and the major reason we've reached this point is because the Senate and the House of Representatives has become an employment agency, and its a very safe job to have, let me assure you.  The re-election rate for incumbents in the House of Representatives has risen to ninety-one percent, and the number of Congressmen and women who have been in office for more than two decades continues to grow, even though each and every one of these respective legislators is aware that the Founding Fathers intended something different. 

Aside from the issue of perpetual re-election, Congress is crippled by a lack of occupational diversity.  Over fifty percent of Congressmen and women are attorneys, and a disturbing percentage have never truly had a job outside of "government service".  The writers of the Constitution envisioned a House of Representatives that mirrored the people it represented- doctors, teachers, farmers, soldiers, carpenters, designers, nurses, engineers, businessmen and women, law enforcement, etc.  They correctly understood that for a Representative Democracy to function as designed, it truly must stay a Representative Democracy.  A quick review of the roll call in the 115th House of Representatives does not in any way resemble a slice of America today.  Moving back in that direction, by electing officials who understand the value of including more Americans in the legislative process, will go a long way to restoring the people's faith in government.


Before deciding to take on this challenge, I understood the difficulties in running for Federal office.  The rules have become progressively more complicated, and the information requested by the Federal Election Commission is very intrusive.  The real issue, though, is and always seems to be money.  We all seem to agree (at least the folks who I've been meeting on the campaign trail) that money has taken over the political process and "something needs to be done".  I can assure you, the men and women who are already in office, or at least the great majority, have no interest in making the process more accessible to the average person.  Its all about getting re-elected, so if the process discourages people, then why make any changes?  Be that as it may, I must ask for donations or I will not be able to mount a competitive campaign.  Its a given that my opponent will have more resources.  Anyone interested in currying favor will almost always donate to the incumbent. Political Action Committees also tend to support incumbents, as they understand the ninety-six percentile rule and want to keep/increase whatever influence they've already established.  For challengers like myself, we must spend all the more time on the streets, shaking hands, meeting folks, and giving you the chance to tell us your perspective.  I welcome this dynamic in the process, and I look forward to every opportunity to introduce myself and to meet you and your families.

As part of the process, I created an account with the online service "Crowdpac", which provides candidates the opportunity to raise funds online by reaching out to a wider audience.  After my candidacy was announced on Social Media, I received hundreds of emails and messages of support.  I've been writing this blog for over two years, I know people are unhappy and I know the average American is truly frustrated with a system that only seems to represent the fringes of our society.  I've heard you, and because I've established a bit of a presence in the blogosphere and occasionally find myself speaking about current events on Fox News, I've decided to dedicate myself one-hundred percent to returning the People's House to the people.  In order to be successful, I need your support.  I need you to mention me to your friends and family, and I need your vote.  But for those who are able, I also ask you for a donation to my campaign.  I understand that not every person is able to donate to political causes.  The important thing to realize, though, is that EVERY DOLLAR MATTERS.  Crowdpac is just as happy to accept donations of twenty-five dollars as they are two-hundred dollars.  I'm certainly not a typical politician; in fact, I think its fair to say that I'm not necessarily comfortable in these shoes.  But I believe in my message and my campaign, and I believe we can win.  Last year the American people surprised the establishment by choosing a president who intends are ending "business as usual", and ushering an era of new faces and fresh ideas to Washington DC.  I am part of that movement.