Sunday, August 24, 2014


The “cream of the crop”, “top of the game” advertising executives in this country make a great deal of money helping companies maximize the best return possible for the money they spend. In smaller companies, these decisions aren’t made by well trained experts and there are no studies to give them feedback on whether they are spending their money well. In a rural county like Liberty County the choices of where to advertise are limited but the decision of how this part of the budget is still very important. 

Research nationwide has been done on internet advertising that might benefit local Liberty County advertisers. To our knowledge only one local blog collects ad money for advertising. With the trend in the country obviously moving toward collecting consumer information and targeting customers on blogs that are proven winners for advertisers, it is difficult to understand why any local company advertises with the local blogger. The host of that blog has advertisers but they are research-based and targeted to each person who views the blog.  

The local company hoping to benefit by spending their hard earned money does not have that capability. His ads appear to everyone who views the blog. There is no target. Readers of that blog and advertisers should take note. When you goon that local blog, the host of the blog will have sold an ad to some company based off of your interest. For me, it may be clothes for grandchildren, but for another person it may be bow hunting equipment.
The local company may need to rethink their decision to post ads on a blog if they are comforted by seeing other ads on there. Some are well placed ads that are not local, but (as we have said) targeted. Others may be local advertisers wasting their money. There have been at least three local blogs with fairly high readership. But readership in terms of numbers is not necessarily the best way to spend advertising money.

If readers are holding their collective noses and quickly checking to see if there have been any local wrecks, your money may be better off spent in Christmas bonuses. These readers may never see your ad, or they may hate the site so much they wonder why you advertise on it. neither is good for business.

Corrupt prosecutors who play political games...

There's nothing like Texas when it comes to treating what most consider the normal business of politics as a major crime, especially when the prosecutor is of the opposite party persuasion. That appears to be what happened to Gov. Rick Perry, who is facing charges that vetoing funds of the Austin County prosecutor's office constitutes a felony that could send him away for more than 100 years if he were convicted, which seems highly unlikely.

Saturday, August 16, 2014


The indictment of James Richard Perry is one more in a growing list of examples of elected officials using the power given to them to eliminate what some might refer to as those “pesky little participants in our democracy.” We have seen it lately with grand juries, elected boards, IRS officials, and a whole host of others. Indicting someone needed to be taken down a peg or fired or dragged through the courts because of one thing or another when in truth anyone with a brain knew the person being whacked. This newest mess with James Richard Perry from Paint Creek, Texas better be resolved in a way that does not harm him or this country might as well pull up chairs and grab a front row seat while those we give power to use it to destroy the country using deception and the power given to them to end the great experiment known as the United States of America.

One thing working for those who would hate to see that happen is James Richard Perry is not only a fighter that will use the courts if necessary to vindicate himself, he is also the Governor of Texas. I said Texas. Texans know Governor Perry is guilty of nothing and the courts in Texas rarely have the bizarre outcomes other states experience. In fact, in Texas the people attempting to get Perry out of the their way may find that the courts will do more than just say Perry is innocent. The courts may punish this cowardly and openly deceptive abuse of power.

 Perry needed something to help change the image left with Americans in  the last Presidential race and this may or may not be just the ticket. Overcoming the negative stereotype of him being shallow pretty boy from a conservative-crazed Texas that was either suffering from Alzheimers or stupidity should not be difficult. This indictment could be the game-changer he needs to generate a fresh start and a new image. An image that is closer to fact than the wild fiction the media enjoyed last time.

Perry is eyeing a presidential run in 2016, and though I would hope conservatives have other and better choices, his stock went up with me as soon as the Democrats lied and said this whole thing was plain and simple. The Governor did something wrong and he must be punished. If Perry artfully uses this occasion to be a victim, martyr and fighter, it could be just the rehab he needed. If he had no politicak ambitions,he might could make a pile of money in a lawsuit on this little scheme that has been perpetrated on him. But Perry is a politician and if he plays this right he will get something more valuable than money – he will be getting a lot more media attention than he would in the coming days and weeks.

There is little question that the indictment is absurd. And after watching the video of Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg’s behavior after her drunken-driving arrest, it’s no wonder that Perry declared a loss of public confidence in her ability to lead the public integrity unit. If you have not watched the video yet, trust me it’s on its way to being a political classic.

While proper prosecution of people that are harmful to society is a good thing and reassures the public that the checks and balances in our democracy are working. Concocted, phony and retaliatory prosecutions serve only to reinforce the public’s skepticism about the motives of our country’s political leadership and undermine the public trust. If we needed further erosion of the public faith in our government, this indictment certainly supplies it. It should backfire and the only one that should suffer are those who tried to deceive the American public and harm a citizen by using false pretenses

Bogus charges against a political foe erode the relevancy of legitimate corruption charges when they are actually needed and warranted. By pursuing Perry’s indictment, the Democrats might actually do Perry some good. But in the meantime, they are contributing to the further disintegration of the ability of our two-party system to create a government that functions.
Travis County has a reputation for this kind of stuff and, with this grand jury acting at the behest of special prosecutor Michael McCrumo, they are sure to keep to keep that reputation.

The basic facts of the case are simple. Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg, a Democrat, pled guilty to DWI and served 45 days in jail. After serving her jail sentence, Lehmberg refused to step down and continued to be the supervisor of the Public Integrity Unit. In response to the audacity of her contnuing to serve in this capacity, Governor Perry announced that unless she stepped down he would veto funding of that unit. Later he followed through and did veto the bill.

Perry is not accused of abuse of power for actually vetoing the bill because state law says the Governor can veto a bill for any reason he wants to or no reason at all. Governor Perry is accused of threatening the D.A.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Consider the source...

In a recent series of events Allen Youngblood of i-dineout blog has become the news/story in Liberty County.  Youngblood in an attempt to draw readers in to his blog has created a controversy at the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office.  Youngblood has harassed and stalked the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office and harassed Sheriff Bobby Rader.  The continued series of meaningless stories and open records act request’ by Youngblood- pointed at the Sheriff’s Office is not only bizarre, it’s histrionic and self-dealing.
Youngblood the Clown

Youngblood creates a controversy by splashing lies about the courthouse security being taken away and how the judges will not have any protection.  He continues to manufacture controversies concerning the tools the sheriff needs to police Liberty County and protect its people.

The truth is, Bobby Rader is a good man and a great sheriff.  The sheriff is not perfect but... Rader is doing as much as he can with what little he has been given.   Rader wants to police more of the county but is short handed plain and simple.  In a modern world, the protection of the people should come first before the county’s other needs but... not in Liberty County.

Next time you hear someone questioning our sheriff Bobby Rader, consider the source.

Note: Stay tuned for an upcoming LCSO story from HCN Cleveland News.

Saturday, August 9, 2014


Here we go again. The local blog run by A-L-L-E-N Y-O-U-N-G-B-L-O-O-D with his crazy drama queen reporting is once again clouding up serious issues and making it difficult for county officials to do there job.
Youngblood has gone from a completely moronic report that challenges whether law enfocement should be prepared to fight crime and have available the necessary force to deal with situations reported across the country to hysterics about wanting to be called out by name (as if Bobby Rader is physically afraid to confront Allen Youngblood). We are truly a troubled county if Youngblood is deciding whether or not the sheriff's department needs easy access to explosives.

Like a woman scorned, Allen is demanding attention. In his most recent rant, Youngblood tells the Sheriff  how to respond when he injects his own goofy view and his bizarre twist on Sheriff Bobby Rader’s duties. Youngbloods spell out his name in all caps while demanding the Sheriff refer to his proper name when talking to the public about his spin-filled stories and the comments on his blog.

The article preceding this literary masterpiece, Youngblood tells his readers, “Sheriff Bobby Rader disgruntled with the fact that County Government is out of money to lavish on the Sheriff’s Department has sent a letter to District Judges, County Court at Law Judge and copied County Judge Craig McNair threatening to pull LCSO Deputies responsible for Courthouse security out of the courthouse on October 1, 2014.” He entitles this article (which is an obvious attempt to demonize Rader), “Rader Threatens County Officials”.

After reading the article, it is very difficult to understand where the title of the article came from. We can only assume Youngblood is a scared little man that feels threatened by almost anything and he is projecting his on fears on the letter Rader sent officials, or that A-L-L-E-N Y-O-U-N-G-B-L-O-O-D has a personal vendetta against Rader or on half of someone who plans on running for sheriff in 2016. There simply is nothing “threatening” in the letter. It is a heads up on areas Rader will be cutting unless the county finances get better. If you did not know Bobby Rader and his relationship to all of these Judges, you would still be hard pressed to grade Youngblood’s article anything better than an “F” .

The article before Youngblood’s prejudiced and slanted views on Rader’s letter to the Judges is a numerical comparison showing Rader’s Sheriff’s office has had nice increases in the budget and implies he is unusual for asking for more money and ungrateful for what he has gotten. Readers only have to think back to the last five Sheriffs to realize everyone of them has complained about a shortage of money and manpower and uncompetitive salaries. Where was Youngblood’s criticism then. It was present, except he argued the total opposite back when Sheriffs were Democrats. He implied the LCSO needed more money and resotrces when his buddies were pushing for more money.

AL-L-E-N Y-O-U-N-G-B-L-O-O-D needs to be quiet if he wants to help solve county problems. He is one of the problems. His silence would help.  

The county needs more deputies but our budget is tight. If Youngblood wants to help he should listen to one or two of the comments written into his blog (though most of the posted comments are obviously from people who never wanted Rader to be sheriff.

The Liberty Courier has looked into some of the suggestions that are in the public domain and have narrowed our suggested focus down to one thing. Rader needs more manpower, as the previous five sheriffs have expressed. As conservatives, we are very excited to report that Liberty County Commissioners should vote “no” and save the money on looking for someone to run our jail. It is a waste of taxpayer money. In surveys of jails that are able to run attractive cost efficient facilities, it is obvious our jail does not have the updated money saving features some in Texas have. It is also obvious that this is not the time to modernize our jail. Some jails for example have a computerized gate system that allows them to have a guard in a control room use computers to open and close gates to escor prisoners to their destination. Efficiencies like this are out of our reach at this time.

 So Youngblood could have written an article explaining why Rader and Commissioners have dragged their feet on suggestions they take the jail back. 
But the real “reporting” Youngblood has missed is the one about the offer from Polk County. The Liberty Courier has checked out some of the facts and believes Liberty County and the Sheriff could solve their economic woes by accepting the Polk County offer. It includes medical and everything else except for transportation. 

Youngblood should be reporting that there are enough facts to accept their offer an go forward. In his report, if Youngblood wants to influence things positively (which there is little doubt that he is not just helping someone prepare to run for sheriff), he could ask what part of the huge savings will go to help Sheriff Rader get the department up to the kind of numbers needed to adequately cover a county this size. 

Instead, Youngblood is in a different universe. His writing provides false or misleading information to taxpayers and can result in so little public pressure to make these changes that Commissioners merely vote for a study to do something we already know is not the best solution. 

If Republican commissioners can’t wade through all of the histrionics on Youngblood’s website and immediately, or as soon as possible, sign up with Polk County, then we may join Youngblood in his conclusion that we need new public officials. But our money is on “common sense”. We believe taxpayers will get to sigh a sigh of relief because we believe there is one best solution and that the best solution is to use the modern economically efficient facilities in Livingston for now.

 In the meantime, could the person or persons badmouthing Bobby Rader please be a little less obvious and less deceptive in your comments. Too many people know Bobby rader to believe your misguided approach.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014


The Tea Party unseated Eric cantor in his primary race and they may not be finished. Below please find a cut and paste reminding voters that progress may not be over for this cycle:

Kansas, August 5: Senator Pat Roberts versus Milton Wolf
Roberts, a 33-year Washington veteran, sought to head off a Tea Party challenge to his reelection by veering sharply to the right. A onetime chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, this year he voted against the farm bill, and he opposed a spending bill that contained a major project for Kansas State University. Roberts’ challenger, a radiologist who has never held elected office and is a distant cousin of President Obama, hasn’t done himself any favors: He was found to have a bad habit of posting his patients’ X-rays online and making insensitive comments about their injuries, some of them fatal. But Roberts can’t seem to stop reminding voters he’s a bit out of touch, whether joking to the New York Times that his Kansas residence these days consists of his friend’s recliner or telling a local interviewer recently, “Every time I get an opponent—I mean, every time I get a chance, I’m home.” The latest poll had Roberts up 20 points, prompting Wolf to declare he was closing the gap.

Bonus Kansas undercard: Representative Mike Pompeo versus former Representative Todd Tiahrt. Eight-term former congressman Tiahrt has decided he wants his old job back from Pompeo, who was elected to represent Wichita in 2010 when Tiahrt ran unsuccessfully for Senate. The staunchly conservative Pompeo practices what he preaches in his crusade against federal spending. Tiahrt charges that he’s depriving the state of the federal spending it dearly needs. Their battle is a showdown between today’s sharply ideological conservatism and the more pragmatic Republican brand of yesteryear. Koch Industries, which is based in the district, is backing Pompeo.

Michigan, August 5: Representative Justin Amash versus Brian Ellis
In this fascinating House primary, the establishment-incumbent-versus-Tea-Party-challenger dynamic is inverted. Amash is a staunch libertarian in the mold of former Representative Ron Paul, frequently casting lonely, futile “no” votes against bills practically everyone else supports, then taking to his Facebook page to explain why he thinks this or that piece of routine legislation violates the Constitution. Speaker John Boehner stripped him of his committee assignments for his refusal to play by the rules, and now the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are trying to take Amash out. But by all accounts, it isn’t working. Ellis’s scorched-earth ads—one (quoting one of Amash's colleagues) called Amash “al-Qaeda’s best friend in Congress"—seem mostly to have rallied voters to the incumbent's side. If Amash wins, he won’t be the first libertarian-leaning incumbent to survive an assault from the business establishment: Representative Walter Jones, the iconoclastic anti-war congressman from North Carolina, beat back a challenge from a well-funded Bush administration veteran back in May.

Tennessee, August 7: Senator Lamar Alexander versus state Representative Joe Carr
Let’s pause to note that Tennessee holds its primary on a Thursday, which is just nuts. Before being elected to the Senate in 2002, Alexander was a two-term governor, secretary of education under George H.W. Bush, and two-time failed presidential candidate known for his trademark red-and-black plaid shirt. These days, he chronicles his campaign-bus travel with a first-person “Little Plaid Blog” on his campaign’s website. Unlike Cochran or Roberts, Alexander has taken nothing for granted in his reelection campaign, raising lots of money, marshaling the state’s Republican elite, and maintaining a ubiquitous presence at home. But Alexander voted for immigration reform last year, and that has prompted the anti-amnesty crowd that helped take out Cantor to rally behind his challenger. Talk-radio host Laura Ingraham held a rally in Nashville for Carr last month. Polling is all but nonexistent, and the immigration issue has heated up on the right in recent months.

Alaska, August 19: Dan Sullivan versus Mead Treadwell versus Joe Miller
This one isn’t so much a battle for the soul of the GOP, but it will determine what Republican challenges Democratic Senator Mark Begich in one of this year’s most closely watched Senate races. National Republicans have rallied around Sullivan, a former state natural-resources commissioner, but polls show Treadwell, the lieutenant governor, remains in the hunt. (Confusingly, there will be another Dan Sullivan on the ballot at the same time: The identically named mayor of Anchorage is running for lieutenant governor.) Meanwhile, Joe Miller, the Sarah Palin-backed attorney who beat Senator Lisa Murkowski in a 2010 GOP primary—only to lose to her write-in bid in November—is back, having learned important lessons from last time around, according to the Alaska Dispatch News: “Asked what he’s learned from his last race, and what he’s doing differently today, Miller said he won’t let federal informants inside the campaign,” the newspaper reported. Though he is not expected to win the primary, some Republicans fear he might run as an independent in November and siphon votes from the GOP nominee. Miller has not ruled out the possibility


Monday, August 4, 2014


The first proof Israel has a right to the land they now occupy is because of all of the archeological evidence. All the archeological evidence supports it. Every time there is a dig in Israel, it does nothing but support the fact that Israelis have had a presence there for 3,000 years. The coins, the cities, the pottery, the culture -- there are other people, groups that are there, but there is no mistaking the fact that Israelis have been present in that land for 3,000 years. It predates any claims that other peoples in the region may have.

The ancient Philistines are extinct. Many other ancient peoples are extinct. They do not have the unbroken line to this date that the Israelis have. Even the Egyptians of today are not racial Egyptians of 2,000, 3,000 years ago. They are primarily an Arab people. The land is called Egypt, but they are not the same racial and ethnic stock as the old Egyptians of the ancient world. The Israelis are in fact descended from the original Israelites.

The second proof of Israel's right to the land is their historic right. History supports it totally and completely. We know there has been an Israel up until the time of the Roman Empire. The Romans conquered the land. Israel had no homeland, although Jews were allowed to live there. They were driven from the land in two dispersions: One in 70 A.D. and the other in 135 A.D. But there was always a Jewish presence in the land.

The Turks, who took over about 700 years ago and ruled the land up until about World War One, had control. Then the land was conquered by the British. The Turks entered World War One on the side of Germany. The British knew they had to do something to punish Turkey, and also to break up that empire that was going to be a part of the whole effort of Germany in World War One. So the British sent troops against the Turks in the Holy Land.

One of the generals who was leading the British armies was a man named Allenby. Allenby was a Bible-believing Christian. He carried a Bible with him everywhere he went and he knew the significance of Jerusalem. The night before the attack against Jerusalem to drive out the Turks, Allenby prayed that God would allow him to capture the city without doing damage to the holy places.

That day, Allenby sent World War One biplanes over the city of Jerusalem to do a reconnaissance mission. You have to understand that the Turks had at that time never seen an airplane. So there they were, flying around. They looked in the sky and saw these fascinating inventions and did not know what they were, and they were terrified by them.

Then they were told they were going to be opposed by a man named Allenby the next day, which means, in their language, "man sent from God" or "prophet from God." They dared not fight against a prophet from God, so the next morning, when Allenby went to take Jerusalem, he went in and captured it without firing a single shot.

The British government was grateful to Jewish people around the world, particularly to one Jewish chemist who helped them manufacture niter. Niter is an ingredient that was used in nitroglycerin which was sent over from the New World. But they did not have a way of getting it to England. The German U-boats were shooting on the boats, so most of the niter they were trying to import to make nitroglycerin was at the bottom of the ocean. But a man named Weitzman, a Jewish chemist, discovered a way to make it from materials that existed in England. As a result, they were able to continue that supply.

The British at that time said they were going to give the Jewish people a homeland. That is all written down in history. They were gratified that the Jewish people, the bankers, came through and helped finance the war.

The homeland that Britain said it would set aside consisted of all of what is now Israel and all of what was then the nation of Jordan -- the whole thing. That was what Britain promised to give the Jews in 1917. In the beginning, there was some Arab support for this action. There was not a huge Arab population in the land at that time, and there is a reason for that. The land was not able to sustain a large population of people. It just did not have the development it needed to handle those people, and nobody really wanted this land. It was considered to be worthless land.

Mark Twain -- Samuel Clemens -- took a tour of Palestine in 1867. This is how he described that land. We are talking about Israel now. He said: "A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. A silent, mournful expanse. We never saw a human being on the whole route. There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."

Where was this great Palestinian nation? It did not exist. It was not there. Palestinians were not there. Palestine was a region named by the Romans, but at that time it was under the control of Turkey, and there was no large mass of people there because the land would not support them.

This is the report that the Palestinian Royal Commission, created by the British, made. It quotes an account of the conditions on the coastal plain along the Mediterranean Sea in 1913. The Palestinian Royal Commission said:

"The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track, suitable for transport by camels or carts. No orange groves, orchards or vineyards were to be seen until one reached the Yavnev village. Houses were mud. Schools did not exist. The western part toward the sea was almost a desert. The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many villages were deserted by their inhabitants."

That was 1913.

The French author Voltaire described Palestine as "a hopeless, dreary place." In short, under the Turks the land suffered from neglect and low population. That is a historic fact. The nation became populated by both Jews and Arabs because the land came to prosper when Jews came back and began to reclaim it. If there had never been any archaeological evidence to support the rights of the Israelis to the territory, it is also important to recognize that other nations in the area have no longstanding claim to the country either.

Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.

Historically, Israel gained its independence in 1948.