Why was the New Quantum Leap Canceled?

 

 

Last week NBC canceled the new Quantum Leap after just thirty one episodes.  Why was the show canceled?  for one simple reason, because virtually no one wanted to watch it.  Out of a nation of 333 million Americans, only 1.36 million were watching this show.  How bad is this number?  The 2007 show Viva Laughlin is widely regarded as one of the worst TV series ever made.  This show was a comedy/drama and yes, musical (yes, I said musical) about the high stakes world of the casino business in Laughlin Nevada.  The show was so bad that it was canceled after airing only two episodes.  Three others had been filmed, but to this date have never aired anywhere.  When the studio got word of the cancellation, they were actually filming a scene, and immediately stopped in the middle of the scene.  As bad as this show was, it had over six million viewers.  That is how bad the ratings for the new Quantum Leap were.

So what went wrong?  Why did no one want to watch this new Quantum Leap?  To understand that, we must first understand the original Quantum Leap.

 

The Original Quantum Leap

The original Quantum Leap aired for five seasons between 1989 and 1993.  The first episode had over 23 million viewers, and the final episode had over 20 million viewers.

The original Quantum Leap aired in the midst of the end of an era of faith based TV programs like Highway to Heaven (1984-1989) and Touched by an Angel (1994-2003).  And the original Quantum Leap was just such a program, but with Science Fiction window dressing.

Like the earlier Highway to Heaven, Quantum Leap opened with the camera passing thru a  heavenly cloud-scape.  Both shows featured a duo in a semi-anthology, with a different setting and supporting cast each week.  Each week they would often be helping those supporting characters thru difficult decisions.   In Highway to Heaven, Jonathan was trying to earn his wings, and in Quantum Leap, Sam was trying to make the final leap home.  Each had a trusty helper who was a little more rough around the edges, and not what they were.  In Highway, Jonathan's helper was a non-angel, and in Quantum Leap, Sam's helper was a non-leaper.  It is clear to see that Highway to Heaven partially inspired Quantum Leap.

The parallels do not end there.  In the very first episode of Quantum Leap, it was suggested that God was guiding Sam's Leaps.  In the first episode of Season two, Al testifies to a Senate Committee that God has taken Control of Project Quantum Leap, and is using Sam to make right things that once went wrong.  On Catch a Falling Star Sam wants to remain in a leap, but Al points at the ceiling and says that Sam doesn't have much choice, that is up to "Him."  And in the final episode Sam meets either God, or God's messenger, in the form of "Al the Bartender", who tells Sam that he has been leaping because he wants to make the world a better place, that he can leap home anytime he likes, but that he can still do a lot more good. 

In the episode A Little Miracle Sam says "Leaping around in time has made me realize that, in some strange way, I'm a servant of a Higher Power."  In The Right Hand of God, just before leaping, Sam muses to himself about having (in the previous episode) messed with time, saying that the "Big Man Upstairs" would understand,  Immediately upon leaping he gets punched in the jaw and says "maybe not."  Later in that same episode Sam looks up saying "I sure hope you know what you are doing."

The Power of Prayer 

Leap of Faith shows Al's relationship with God. Al prayed for his father when he had cancer, yet his father still died. Al didn't want to have anything to do with God after this happened. However, when he sees Sam lying on the ground with a gun wound, Al begs God not to take him. Sam gets up, alive.

In A Single Drop of Rain, Sam leaps into Doctor William "Billy" Beaumont, returning to his hometown (Clover Bend, Texas), where everyone suffers from drought. Everyone expects him to make rain, but really Sam is there to keep William's brother and his wife together.  Nonetheless the people of the area are suffering horribly under the drought, and Sam wants so badly to help them.  Al tells him that Ziggy says that, as a matter of history it would not rain in Clover Bend for eight months, one week, four days, two hours, and forty-four minutes.  Sam can do a lot of things, but he cannot make it rain, when history shows it didn't rain for months.  At one point Sam is in an open field, looks to the sky and prays:

"I don't know who's running this show.  I don't know why I was chosen.  I bounce around from place to place.  I do everything I'm supposed to do.  At least the best way I can. But I don't know how to do this one.  I mean, You gotta help me.  I figure you owe me...for a couple times anyway. You make it rain.  You hear me? You make it rain!"

It is a moment very much like Jacob wrestling with God in Gen 32:22-32, and refusing to let go unless God gives him a blessing.

That night,  the timeline is changed.... It rains!

 

Solving Problems with the Bible

In the episode "So Help Me God" Sam leaps into the body of an attorney, Leonard Dancey at the very moment he must plea on behalf of his client, Delilah Berry, a black woman in the Jim Crow South, who stands accused of murder. Based on looking in her eyes, he chooses to plead not guilty.

Sam discovers that she is accused of murdering the son of the most powerful man in town. Believing that a cover-up is afoot, but with a client unwilling to talk, Sam is able to ascertain that his client and the other witnesses have all sworn an oath on the Bible to tell a lie designed to protect the true killer – the murdered boy’s own mother.

 Sam prays that God would give him the right words to say as he tries to adjust to being a lawyer.  He prays again for help just as the trial starts.  Al gets Sam to quote Galatians 5:7-10 to the witness:

7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
10 I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.
(Gal. 5:7-10 KJV)

There’s talk of how they are God-fearing women, which is partly why they won’t testify (because they take the oath and the Bible seriously).  And of course, Lila quotes the title of the episode at the end when she agrees to learn to read, “So help me God.”

Sam calls the troubled mother to the stand whereupon she confesses to pulling the trigger. Sam secures an acquittal for his client.

Resist the Devil

In the Boogieman, Sam is confronted by Satan himself, who is not happy that Sam has been righting the things that he once made wrong.  Satan attempts to kill Sam, who is mysteriously delivered at the last minute (by God?).  And in three Season five episodes, Sam encounters evil leapers, who appear to be servants of Satan, trying to make wrong what once went right, and undo Sam's work. 

I write all of this about the original Quantum Leap to make the case very clearly, that the original Quantum Leap was faith based, even Bible oriented, programming, and that the Sci-Fi element was just a clever disguise.  

The New Quantum Leap

So why did the new Quantum Leap fail so miserably?  Why did no one want to watch this new show?  

The new show completely eliminated the faith based element that was the very core of the original.  God was mentioned only to dismiss the allegedly false theory that the original project team had had, that God was guiding the leaps.  

The faith based message of the original was completely replaced by a radical "woke" agenda.  None of the ensemble of characters were white men with no gender issues.  The only white male, was a cross-dresser.  And this appears to be no accident, but is said to have been built into the casting call, effectively, straight white males need not apply.  The woke propaganda of the show hit a milestone with the episode Let Them Play written by trans activist Shakina Nayfack, and supporting not only biological males competing with women in women's sports, but even the Gender transitioning of children (minors).     That week alone the ratings dropped from 2.1 million viewers to 1.75 million viewers (ultimately winding down to 1.36 million viewers).

Was the Original Quantum Leap Woke?

I keep hearing claims from fans of this recently canceled 31 episode failed Quantum Leap sequel, that the original Quantum Leap was "woke" for its time. Most of these claims seem to come from people who were very young, or not even born during the original run of the original Quantum Leap. I am 58 years old, and my wife and I watched the original Quantum leap during it's original run in the early 90's (it actually started in 89), and are still fans of the original. I was then, and still am, a political conservative. In fact I was, and am, politically involved, and during that time was serving as a GOP convention delegate. Now I would define "woke" (lots of people here have asked for a definition) as a recent term the agenda of the radical extreme left. The term "woke" did not exist in the early 90's and the liberalism of that time was no where near as radical as the "woke" agenda of today. Nonetheless, as a conservative that watched the show during its first run, it was *not* a radical left wing propaganda program, not by any means. The issues that the show tackled, such as racism, were *not* exclusively liberal issues in the early 90's. Conservatives of the 90's were just as opposed to racism as liberals, as we are today. There was only one episode that I can think of that leaned left at all, and that was the episode that dealt with gays in the military. However the show was far from gay-friendly, as the episode Good Night, Dear Heart, earned the ire of the homosexual community for its negative image of lesbians. In that episode a vulnerable emigrant girl is portrayed as having been preyed upon by a lesbian seductress, who ultimately murdered the girl, when the girl fell in love with a man, and decided to go straight and marry him. Certainly anyone who wants to portray the original Quantum Leap as having been "woke for its time" is terribly mistaken. I was a conservative activist then (and now) and was a fan and viewer of the show at the time, and I did not have any problem with the show being too liberal. To the contrary, I saw it then, and now, as a faith building, God friendly show that generally appeals to me as a conservative. So I just wanted to set the story straight here. The original Quantum leap was not "woke for its time". The racism of the 50's and 60's which the program dealt with, was not the status of conservatives of the 90'.

 

Conclusion

There is nothing like the original Quantum Leap on television today.  It was the end of an era.  We will likely never have a sequel or reboot that recaptures this quality, because the liberal  media has a different message they want to shove down our throats today.  But fortunately we can vote by changing the channel or turning their trash off.  And when we refuse to watch, they lose.  The new Quantum Leap is just such an example.  virtually no one wanted to watch this show.  It was just the latest example of the axiom "Go woke, go broke."

Why HD 91 is Ground Zero in the Fight for Texas

  

Why HD 91 is Ground Zero in the Fight for Texas

James Scott Trimm

 

The Paxton acquittal has created a great deal of energy in the grass roots against the Phelan Establishment RINOS, an energy which the media has characterized as a GoP civil war.  House District 91 is ground zero in this war on the Uniparty.

Why is House District 91 ground zero?  Because the HD 91 State Representative is Stephanie Klick, who was recently identified as one of Dade Phelan’s Dirty Dozen in the mini-documentary The Texas Heist.  Not only did Klick vote with 61 Democrats to impeach Ken Paxton, she was also one of only eleven Republicans to vote for taxpayer funding of Child Gender Modification Support and Referral programs.  And her Texans for Fiscal Responsibility rating has sunk to 49!  Klick is a committee chair and has used that position to kill several GoP priority bills in recent years.

Moreover, Klick's top two donors are Dade Phelan and the infamous TLR (Texans for Lawsuit Reform), which was closely linked to the effort to impeach Ken Paxton.  These two donors combined alone, donated a staggering $795,546.26 to Klick!  

House District 91 is also important, because it is located in Senate District 9 held by Kelly Hancock, who was one of only two Texas State Senators to vote with the Democrats to remove Paxton from office.  While Hancock is not up for reelection until 2026, he himself lives in HD91.  We need to oust Klick in 2024 to build a foundation on which to build, in order to defeat Hancock in 2026. 

Most importantly, HD91 is a competitive district.  Not all of Phelan’s Dirty Dozen are vulnerable, but Klick is very vulnerable.  She is challenged by true conservative David Lowe.  Lowe arose in the last election cycle from being an unknown, to dragging Klick to a run off and finally falling short by less than 800 votes, making this a very winnable election for David Lowe.

Additionally, there has recently been an anti-establishment grass roots uprising in North Richland Hills (all of which is located in HD91).  It is important to note that North Richland Hills is home to Hancock and Lowe.  In a recent city election, citizens of this city elected anti-establishment maverick Blake Vaughn to the City Council.  When the North Richland Hills City Manager had proposed a Tax Increase, Vaughn rallied the citizens against the rest of the council.  Nearly 500 citizens emailed the council and so many citizens showed up to the hearing to speak, that many had to watch from an overflow room on a monitor.  The result was that the City Council backed down and passed the “no new revenue rate” instead of the City Manager’s proposed rate.  So it appears that North Richland Hills is a city ready to take on a fight with the establishment. the prefect place from which to mount an offensive against the establishment.

The race for House District 91 has statewide implications, and conservatives throughout Texas should be paying close attention to this race. 

David Lowe is a grassroots candidate.  He needs your support to combat the huge RINO establishment donors.  You can donate to his campaign at his website at https://www.davidlowefortexas.com/

 

 

Stephanie Klick's Death Panels

Stephanie Klick's Death Panels
By
James Scott Trimm

 

 

Back 1999, The Texas Legislature unanimously passed the draconian Texas Advance Directives Act (TADA). Under TADA, when a doctor and a patient (or his/her surrogate) disagree about appropriate end-of-life treatment, the disagreement is taken before an ethics review committee.

TADA only provided a ten day period for the patient's family either to find another facility to accept the patient or to obtain a court injunction to extend their life. If no other facility will accept the patient within the period of time and the family is unable to obtain a court injunction, then the hospital is legally permitted to withdraw life sustaining-treatment from the patient, and simply let them die, regardless of their wishes, their living will, or the wishes of their family.  Folks, this is one of those “death panels” about you have been warned.  

I have blogged literally for years about the evils of these Texas Death Panels.  When opportunities to reform this act have presented themselves, Pojman’s Texas Alliance for Life has run interference.  For example in the 84^th Texas Legislative session (2015) Texas Alliance for Life actually supported House Bill 2351, which was supposed to be a bill to reform these death panels, but in reality this Bill only perpetuated the death panels.  

Texas Right to Life wrote about this bill (Which Pojman and TAL supported):

HB 2351 by Representative Patricia Harless (R-Spring) will also be heard today in the House Committee on State Affairs.  The stated purpose of HB 2351 is to reform hospital ethics committees (death panels), which currently hold unlimited power to remove medical treatment from patients after providing ten days notice to the patient or family.  Under the current Texas Advance Directives Act, hospitals may remove life-sustaining treatments including a ventilator, dialysis, food, and hydration from patients, even if the patient or their family has expressed a desire to continue such care and treatment.  Treatment can be withdrawn from any patient for any reason, including discrimination against a patient who is elderly, terminally ill, or disabled.

Rather than actually reforming the draconian ten-day law, HB 2351 instructs the hospital committees to write and circulate their own regulations about conflicts of interest for their own ethics committees about their own decisions on withdrawing treatment from patients.  HB 2351 also instructs facilities to write and implement policies for withdrawing treatment from patients with disabilities.  However, this section establishes yet another dangerous loophole through this provision by adding: “unless the disability is relevant in determining whether a medical or surgical intervention is medically appropriate.”  HB 2351 does not actually provide specific details about what the policies should be, just that hospitals should adopt policies on these topics.
(Committee to hear dangerous bills masquerading as Pro-Life, April 8, 2015)

In defending their silence on the Pro-Life issue of the life of Chris Dunn, Joe Pojman's Texas Alliance for Life (TAL) finally spoke.  On their Facebook page TAL wrote:

Many pro-life individuals have been gravely concerned about the tragic case of Mr. Chris Dunn, a 46-year-old man who was admitted into a Houston hospital in mid-October and was on a ventilator. Some media accounts and a pro-life organization misrepresented the situation as one in which the hospital intended to kill Mr. Dunn by removing the respirator that was considered necessary to sustain Mr. Dunn's life. The claims were made that the hospital had judged that Mr. Dunn's life was not worth living….

To help correct the record and to explain the ethical issues involved with end-of-life care, Dr. Beverly Nuckols, a family physician and board member of Texas Alliance for Life, and Deirdre Cooper, our public policy analyst, authored the following article on Public Discourse. We highly recommend every pro-lifer reads it [sic].

In defending Methodist Hospital’s Death Panel’s decision to discontinue life-sustaining treatment from Chris Dunn, Nuckols and Cooper wrote:

"It is entirely possible, even plausible, that the doctors—and Dunn’s father, in his role as surrogate—could have understood Dunn’s death as an unintended but foreseen side effect of a morally legitimate object. That object, by their own profession, was to stop the suffering caused by the treatment to sustain his life."

(Balancing the Rights of Patients and Doctors: Another Perspective on a Tragic Case; by  Deirdre Cooper and Beverly Nuckols )

That’s right, a TAL board member and the TAL public policy analyst just declared that "to stop the suffering caused by ... treatment to sustain ... life" is "a morally legitimate object."! 

In the 87th Legislative Session a bill was filed in the Texas House to end the Ten Day Rule with it's Death Panels, in Texas.  The Bill was HB2609 which was assigned to the Public Health Committee, chaired by Stephanie Klick.  Klick intentionally slow walked this bill, making sure that it "died in Calendars".  She held the bill 28 days before even giving it a hearing.  (By contrast she gave a hearing to HB2213 , a bill to protect exotic animals, on day nine). 

 

 

She then held the bill another two weeks before bringing the bill back up to the committee for a vote.  Even after that, she held the bill two more weeks on her desk, before walking it down the hall and submitting it to calendars.  After 68 days, Klick finally submitted the bill to calendars, knowing that by that point it would "die in calendars", and never reach the House Floor! Klick slow walked this bill do death, and guaranteed that death panels, like the one that took the life of Chris Dunn, would continue in Texas.

 

 

 

 

It is no surprise that in the following election cycle, Klick earned the endorsement of Texas Alliance for Life. 

 

This last session Klick authored and pushed thru her own bill (HB 3162), a bill which did not abolish death panels in Texas at all, but preserved them, merely extending the period before the death panel decision takes over, from ten days, to a mere twenty five days.  That's right, Klick's supposed "solution" was not to eliminate Death Panels in Texas, but to preserve them, and only add a mere fifteen days to the lives of their victims! And for this the establishment is already singing her praises!  Our thimble runneth over!

 

Texas still has death panels, and we can now thank Stephanie Klick for continuing to have Death Panels in Texas!  They are now Stephanie Klick's Death Panels.  

 

 

David Lowe Announces Run Against Klick for HD91

 

Today Conservative Champion David Lowe announced that he is running against RINO Stephanie Klick, for Texas House District 91.  David Lowe is a combat veteran, and well known conservative activist.  In the 2022 election, Lowe forced Klick into a runoff, and forced her RINO support mechanism to spend upwards of one million dollars, and engage in dirty tricks, just to manage a victory margin of a mere 789 votes.  

During the 88th Legislature, Klick earned official GOP condemnation by name in a resolution passed by the Tarrant County Republican Party, when she joined 61 Democrats to vote for an illegal impeachment of Texas Conservative Hero Ken Paxton:

 

 

In addition, RINO Klick, blocked all bills to protect children from gender modification in the 87th Legislative session, and voted in the 88th Legislative Session for Taxpayers to Fund "Support and Referral" for Child Gender Mods.   In fact, during her 2022 election campaign, while debating with conservative David Lowe, Klick actually referred to the gender modification of children as "a type of care"!!!!

In his announcement today, David Lowe stated:

I am announcing my candidacy... because Texans keep voting right, but getting left... The need for a bulldog in the legislatures, who is willing to take on the most politicians, has never been greater|.  During my previous campaign, I was ferociously attacked but never wavered.  I only marched on, as I did in combat in Afghanistan.  Texas is at a crossroads, and we need genuine freedom fighters to take on the likes of Stephanie Klick and Dede Phelan.  That is why I am answering this call to duty as well....

His entire announcement letter is at the bottom of this blog.  I invite everyone to visit David Lowe's campaign website at: https://www.davidlowefortexas.com 

Also, if we are to change the RINO establishment, we must all, throughout Texas, work to replace RINO legislators who are vulnerable in their districts.  Stephanie Klick's district is just such a target.  She is vulnerable, as was shown by the fact that David Lowe forced her into a runoff in her last election.  Please consider donating to the David Lowe Campaign, by clicking here: 

Help replace Klick... with your own CLICK for David Lowe!

Because Texans keep voting right, but getting left!

- James Scott Trimm

In full disclosure, I live in Klick's district, and intend to help David Lowe in his campaign.

 

 

Texas Taxpayers to Fund "Support and Referral" for Child Gender Mods

 

 

Taxpayers to Fund "Support and Referral" for Child Gender Mods

By James Scott Trimm

Texas State Representatives like RINO Stephanie Klick will be taking a victory lap as this session closes, pretending to have protected children from Child Gender Modification.  In fact there was a bill (HB41) that would have criminalized the procedures as child abuse, yet RINO Stephanie Klick. who chairs the committee that oversees such bills,  killed that bill, never even giving it a hearing.  Instead she spearheaded thru a watered down bill that did not actually criminalize these procedures, nor did it define them as child abuse.  In fact, while this bill punishes doctors, it has no penalty at all for parents who give their children blockers that they obtain from out of state.  Even this was a bill which Klick blocked last session, and only passed thru this session because she paid a high political price in the last primary, being forced into a run off with Conservative champion David Lowe, over he blocking of these bills.

In fact this new bill only regulates and does not criminalize the practice of Gender modification in Texas.  Fox News has reported that Texas Children's Hospital, which has a so-called "gender affirming care" program, has announced that it will now simply "modify" its "gender-affirming care to comply with the new law," while it "remain dedicated and to educating and amplifying the importance of safe, high-quality transgender medicine programs." They say they will "continue to offer psychological support and any form of care within the bounds of the law" and will refer families to alternatives out of state for hormone blockers and surgeries.

Stephanie Klick, who referred to these procedures as "a type of care" in a debate in her last campaign, with her opponent David Lowe, voted with other Texas Lawmakers, to use your taxpayer dollars to pay for this "support and referral" program.

Conservative champion Tony Tinderholt proposed an amendment to House Bill 1898 which would have deprived funding a children's hospital to be used "to provide mental health services affirming the child's perception of the child's sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child's biological sex."  

 

Stephanie Klick voted "nay" to this amendment, meaning that she voted for your tax dollars to be used to counsel children to "affirm" to a child that their sex is other than their true biological gender! 

Stephanie Klick has continually shown her true colors in supporting this reprehensible practice of grooming little boys for castration and little girls for mutilation and sterilization! - James Scott Trimm

 

Texas House RINOs Vote to Illegally Impeach Paxton

 

Texas House RINOs Vote to Illegally Impeach Paxton

By

James Scott Trimm

 

Saturday was a sad day for Texas Conservatives as the Texas House voted illegally to override the results of a Texas election and impeach Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.  

Under Texas Law a Texas official may not be impeached and removed from office for any act alleged to have been committed prior to his or her most recent election.  The Statute (Government Code, Title 6; Subtitle B Chapter 665  Subchapter D Sec. 665.081)  shown below states, under the heading "NO REMOVAL FOR ACTS COMMITTED BEFORE ELECTION TO OFFICE" as follows: "An officer in this state may not be removed from office for an act the officer may have committed before the officer's election to office."

Those supporting the impeachment have argued that the Statute is invalid because the power to impeach is granted to the Legislature in the Texas State Constitution, can can only be limited by a Constitutional Amendment, not merely by a Statute.  However the Texas State Constitution (Art. III, Sec. 11) under "RULES OF PROCEDURE" that "Each House may determine the rules of its own proceedings." And since the Statute in question was passed by both Houses, it certainly constitutes "rules of its own proceedings" which it has "determined" for itself.  In other words, the Legislature must follow its own rules, and the laws that it has passed governing its own operations are binding upon itself according to the Texas State Constitution.

 

The allegations made against Ken Paxton were all made prior to his most recent election last November.  These allegations were used by his Primary opponents and his General Election opponent in their campaigns against him in both the Texas Primary and in the General Election. Millions of dollars were spent by his opponents putting these allegations before the public  

Here are some initial findings (from my friend Tom Glass) about what the Texas Supreme Court has said about the anti-disenfranchisement provision. This is from In re Brown, 512 S.W.2d 317, 320-21 (Tex. 1974)

"Judge Brown raises several objections to the proceedings as a whole which require discussion. First, petitioner says that his re-election to his office after the commission of the things for which he was charged operates as a complete defense to any disciplinary action. He relies upon Article 5986, Vernon's Ann.T.C.S., which says: 

No officer in this State shall be removed from office for any act he may have committed prior to his election to office. 

 Article XV, Section 7, of the Texas Constitution authorizes the Legislature to provide for the removal of officers for whom the modes of removal are not provided in the Constitution. This proceeding is authorized by the Constitution, and for that reason Article 5986 is not applicable. However, the spirit of that statute was applied to a proceeding to remove a judge pursuant to Article XV, Section 6, of the Texas Constitution in the case of In re Laughlin, 153 Tex. 183, 265 S.W.2d 805, 808 (1954). The rule was there stated:

 'Neither may removal (of judges) be predicated upon acts antedating election, not in themselves disqualifying under the Constitution and laws of this State, when such acts were a matter of public record or otherwise known to the electors and were sanctioned and approved or forgiven by them at the election. This holding is in harmony with the public policy declared by the Legislature with respect to other public officials. Article 5986, R.C.S.' 

 The rationale for the doctrine is the sound reason that the public, as the ultimate judge and jury in a democratic society, can choose to forgive the misconduct of an elected official. Reeves v. State, 114 Tex. 296, 267 S.W. 666 (1924). The underlying basis for the principle is that the public can knowingly return one to office in spite of charges of misconduct. Public access to full information was the basis for this court's approval of the rule in Laughlin, supra, as appears from the portion quoted above. Matters of public record or matters which are otherwise known to the electors may be forgiven, says the opinion. Brown, In re, 512 S.W.2d 317 (Tex. 1974)"

 

Texas voters chose to reelect Ken Paxton, being fully aware of these allegations, and this is an illegal conspiracy of RINOS and Democrats to undo the results of a Texas election! 

 Moreover the Impeachment was done, in the words of Matt Rinaldi the Chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, 

...without considering any direct evidence, without allowing legislators to to interview or cross-examine witnesses, without placing witnesses under oath, without allowing members to talk to investigators, without making witness transcripts available to legislators, without subpoenaing witnesses with direct knowledge of allegations, and without allowing the Attorney General to present evidence or argument.  The result of this indefensible process was to impeach based solely on accusations, hearsay, rumor, innuendo, ans speculation.

This sham process involved secret meetings by a committee of just five House members, who simply delivered a report on Wednesday and held a vote on Saturday on Memorial Day weekend.  Neither the public, nor the vast majority of House members were even aware that such secret hearings were being held to impeach our Attorney General until this last Wednesday.  And rather than conduct hearings before the entire House, the House was simply asked to accept and ratify a report from just five members!

The following are the RINOS that voted with Democrats to illegally impeach Ken Paxton and take away your right to vote for Attorney General.  An "A" means they voted illegally to impeach, an "N" means they voted against this illegal impeachment:

It is time to clean "House" in Texas!

Its Time to End Property Tax in Texas!

 

 

For years our Texas Legislature has promised us tax relief, but they never seem to deliver.  After every session they take a victory lap, claiming to have delivered tax relief, and yet every year our property taxes seem to go up, and not down.  This last session they are claiming to have delivered the biggest tax break in Texas history, but once again they have used fuzzy math, included past compression and have not adjusted their numbers for inflation.  

In fact this last year the State had a 33 billion dollar surplus.  That means Texans were over taxed by 33 billion dollars.  But did our legislature return this money to the taxpayers? No.  They voted to keep it, and find more places to spend it.  

Ronald Reagan said that spending is the leading cause of taxation, and that if you want to lower taxes, you must reduce spending.  He illustrated this point by comparing government to a child who spends too much money.  The solution, he said, was that you quit giving them so much money, and they will quit spending it.  

But our RINO State Legislature has lost sight of these conservative principles, and knowing they have overtaxed Texans, look for even more things on which to spend taxpayer dollars.  

And even when our legislature creates the illusion that they have provided tax relief (when have your taxes ever actually gone down?)  it is usually based on the homestead exemption.  Sadly this kind of alleged tax relief shifts the tax burden from home owners to renters.  Landlords do not enjoy homestead exemptions, and pass their tax burden to their renters, who pay hidden property tax in their rent.  This means we are robbing renters to benefit homeowners. 

So the time has come to end property tax in Texas!  Yes, this can be done.  It would need to be phased out over ten years.  But first, let me explain why this must be done.

Under the property tax system, property owners, in effect, rent their property,  Their property tax, is effectively rent. and if they fail to pay their rent, the state will foreclose and evict them.  This means that the government is landlord over every property owner in Texas (short of Churches and other tax exempt property).  And what do we call it when the government owns all the property?  When the government owns all property, that is called "Communism".  That's right, the Texas property tax system is back door Communism.  And because of this, Texans are never secure in their homes.  A Texan can spend a lifetime of work paying off a home,  and never feel confident that in their old age, after their working years, that the government will not tax them out of their homes, or even worse yet, leave behind a widow who is taxed out of her home!

Yes we can end property tax in Texas.  We will need to phase it out over ten years.  For the first five years we will pay down the next years tax with the annual surplus (the amount by which Texans are already being overtaxed each year) and we will need to phase in a voluntary tax.  By this I mean a very slight increase in sales tax, perhaps a quarter percent.  

Property tax is an involuntary tax, it is a tax on not being homeless (as explained above, even renters pay property tax built into their rent).  We do not charge sales tax on basic groceries in Texas, because we do not want to tax people for simple being survival (eating), so why should we tax them for shelter?  Taxation is theft, and if we must be taxed, let that tax be voluntary, on things you choose to buy (not, for example, groceries).  Whatever your property tax is, imagine that spread out among everything you buy in a year, so to replace the property tax revenue would be a very slight increase in sales tax.  

This will take an amendment to the Texas State constitution, so that once we kill this monster, it will stay dead and never be resurrected.

Imagine the economic prosperity Texas would experience from eliminating property tax.  Property tax is a hidden tax built into every product and service you buy.  Most products you buy have been stored in a warehouse and then brought to a retail location on which property tax is paid, and built into the price of that product.  Moreover all the employees that were involved must be paid enough to pay their property taxes (even if they rent) and that is built into the price of products and services as well.  Property tax is a viscous cycle of hidden taxes!

If the Texas Legislature wants to truly deliver meaningful tax relief to Texans, they can do so by simply proposing a Constitutional amendment before the voters and give Texans the opportunity to vote on this!

Lets end property tax now!

James Scott Trimm