April 19, 2012

© 2012 jbjd

Thanks to the Republican Party of Texas (“RPT”) I am able to amend some misleading information I posted in the previous article, BALLOT ENTITLEMENT LAWS should DISQUALIFY PRESIDENT OBAMA in TEXAS. How they came to aid in this clarification, is a hoot!

On Wednesday, April 18, at around 5:30 PM EDT, I received a call from kjcanon, in TX. “Are you sitting down?” Needless to say, I was by the time I answered her question.

Seems she had just received a call from Mr. Jesse Lewis, who is the Executive Director of the RPT,  concerning her open records request. (She had listed her telephone number on that request.) According to Mr Lewis, the documents she asked for had already been forwarded to the email address she provided, and he wanted to know why she would claim otherwise. Immediately, she thought back to that complaint she had just filed 2 days earlier with AG Abbott, charging that Steve Munisteri, Chair of the TDP, a public official under the Public Information Act inasmuch as he certifies candidate names to the ballot; had refused to produce public records she requested, which were the basis of his certification. Could that office have possibly followed up so quickly? She asked Mr. Lewis what was the source of his information: “…I saw the JBJD (sic) blog…”

Turns out, the RPT had sent the materials on April 5, to the wrong address and then, seeing my blog, on Tuesday, re-sent the materials, again to the wrong address. Finally, after contacting kjc on Wednesday, they got it right. They also asked her to pass on this information to me, which she did. (They didn’t ask her to withdraw the public information complaint she had filed with AG Abbott but she did that immediately, too.)

Here are those RPT emails.

Notice that 2 documents were attached: one, designated “20120405091443653.pdf,” which contained multiple candidate applications to the ballot; and the other designated “order on party conventions.pdf.” This second attachment leads to the other subject raised by Mr. Lewis, which we will discuss first.

As the result of a settlement recently reached among the parties in the TX redistricting lawsuit, the dates were changed for several key party functions during the primary season, including the voting by party members during the actual primary contest and, the holding of the party state convention, which changes now conflicted with existing state statutes. Consequently, the federal district court ruling on redistricting matters (on remand from the SCOTUS) issued several orders with respect to these new dates, in which all such inconsistencies were addressed. (Four such orders were issued between February 28 and March 1!) Here is a snippet from an Order entered on February 28:

d. Sections 163.00, 191.007, and 191.008, Texas Election Code, are suspended for the
purposes of modfications (sic) to party rules made pursuant to this order.

Mr. Lewis, again obviously referencing the article he had read here on the “jbjd” blog, now informed kjc that, according to item “d” of this redistricting court order; the RPT wasn’t required to submit its rules to the SoS by January 5, the date which appears in the statute, in order to preserve the entitlement of their candidates to appear on the ballot, anyway! He would send along that court order for her reference.

Now, having not yet seen any of the documents to which kjc referred, I could only ‘guess’ at why Mr. Lewis was wrong. I reasoned that, obviously, a rule determining federal qualifications was not impacted by a court order necessitating changes in filing deadlines, which, without the court’s exception, would conflict with existing state laws. Then, I saw the order. The modifying language in section “d” makes clear, the only party rules exempted from the deadlines contained in those specific statutes, are those rules which must be modified pursuant to the changes imposed by the order, on the timetable for events occurring during the course of the primary season.  (Perhaps that’s why the RPT entitled that attachment, “order on party conventions.”) There is also this, from SoS Andrade:

All dates, deadlines or requirements not specifically adjusted by the federal court order remain as required under state or federal law. Calendar of Important Dates for Candidates for the 2012 Primary and General Elections

Before I complete the discussion of the rules, I want to focus on the other attachment which came in the mail, the Presidential candidate applications.  According to Mr. Lewis, the applications “are the only documents used to certify these candidates place on our ballot.” So, we looked for something in the form which confirms that the candidate has established meeting “federal” “qualifications.” Here is the form submitted by Charles “Buddy” Roemer.

Notice that this contains an oath or affirmation from the applicant swearing s/he satisfies the Constitutional requirements for the job.

Now, look at the TDP form submitted by Barack Obama (which also appeared on the previous post.)

No such self-authentication. (Had you already noticed that the application form supplied by the TDP contains no such oath or affirmation?)

Either way, neither the RPT nor the TDP can be said to ‘certify’ a Presidential candidate has met federal qualifications when the only basis for that certification is the candidate’s self-authentication.

Anyway, that was just the beginning of our work. On the RPT form, in the upper left corner, I noticed this blurb: Prescribed by the Republican Party of Texas, Rule #38, 10/2011. So, the RPT ostensibly has a rule with respect to establishing a candidate for President is federally qualified? How did we miss that? We searched through the RPT rules (and the TDP rules) for anything containing the numbers “191” or “192,” the sections of TX statutes dealing with Presidential candidates, and found nothing. Now, we looked at the RPT’s rule 38. Here is the section of that rule relating to the candidates’ applications:

Rule No. 38 – National Convention Delegates and Alternates – Amended February 29, 2012
Section 1. Presidential Primary, Application of Rule

Section 2. Method of Qualifying as Presidential Candidate
a. Filing: Any person eligible to hold the office of President of the United States may qualify to participate as a Presidential candidate in the presidential primary by filing with the State Chairman, not later than 6:00 p.m. the second Monday in December of an odd-numbered year preceding the presidential primary, a signed and acknowledged application for his or her name to be placed on the Presidential Primary ballot, accompanied by a supporting petition signed by a minimum of 300 registered voters of the state from each of a minimum of fifteen (15) Congressional Districts, or the payment of a filing fee of $5,000.

So, yes, both the TDP and the RPT filed ‘rules’ with the SoS by deadlines created either in the statute or through the court order(s). But neither party preserved its entitlement to the ballot by filing a rule that spelled out how it would determine conclusively so as to certify to the Sos; both the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are federally qualified for the job.


Freedom costs.


January 18, 2012
Today, I received this email from the Roemer in 2012 campaign, which I am passing on to you with the hope that, you will take the time to check out this candidate, who has earned my vote.
We are marching forward. It is as simple as that. We may not have the K Street or Wall Street money behind us, but we have the people behind us. We are working toward a new kind of politics. A kind of politics that isn’t divisive or about who raises the most amount of money. As Governor Roemer has stated many times, “He hates American politics but loves America.” By working together and saying NO to the special interest money, we can get America on the right track again. Below are a few updates.

Governor Roemer will be hosting an online Town Hall at the Yowie HQ in California this Friday at 4:00pm PT. Please spread this link to all your family and friends:

Governor Roemer will be a guest this Friday on Real Time with Bill Maher. Since it’s on HBO, anything can happen so expect Buddy to call out the other candidates by name and expose their ties to the special interests.

As you know, our campaign depends a lot on having a free and open internet. Congress is threatening this with two overreaching bills commonly known as Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA). We will be joining Wikipedia, Reddit, and others tomorrow in protest of these bills by turning our website, Facebook, Twitter and other social medial platforms off. Please join the cause and tell Congress to stop restricting our freedoms!

Thank you,

Carlos Sierra
Campaign Manager

P.S. We need help organizing our campaign in all 50 states. If you are interested in helping on the ground or online, please send an email with your contact information to


January 6, 2012

© jbjd 2012

For those of you who still haven’t visited the campaign web site of Buddy Romer, who is seeking the (R) nomination for the office of President of the United States; or worse, don’t yet know who he is; I pulled together this sample from videos compiled on that site, which illustrate why the man has earned my support.

And this…

And this…

And this…

If you believe that money has corrupted our political system then, please, lend your support to the only candidate who not only agrees with you but also is determined to do something about it. One small donor at a time.


January 2, 2012

©2012 jbjd

I like Buddy Roemer. In fact, I like him so much that for the first time in this general election cycle I donated money to a candidate’s campaign. His campaign. The “American Needs Buddy for President 2012” campaign. Twice. Well, almost twice. Actually, not at all.

See, I had sat on the fence long enough to lose the excuse, none of the current candidates for President who had reached my radar; merited my vote solely on the basis of ‘anything but Obama.’ Now, I was resigned to having to choose from among the least of all evils. And when I say, ‘evil,’ I do not mean, espousing views with which I disagree, because I am not primarily an issues voter. Everyone has issues; who’s to say, mine should take priority over everyone else’s? (Or theirs over mine.) Besides, who can accurately predict those issues which are yet to occur? That’s why I tend to look first for smart candidates able to think on their feet.

(This is why, as a teacher, I prefer open book tests. That is, for example, memorizing information can enable a user to operate a computerized industrial pneumatic drill. But without the ability to understand how this machine works, and how its work fits into the overall manufacture process; or to read and apply the operation manual; workers confronted with ‘glitches’ in operations, or documentation of software updates that will cure these ‘glitches’ will be  unable to implement these fixes without retraining.)

Then, just when I rationalized, I had to pick someone, anyone for President; Governor Roemer showed up on my screen. And I picked him. Not just because, he is the ‘best of the worst.’  And not because, theoretically, he is this smart comprehensive thinker. He actually has the track record that establishes, it’s true. (That points to another trait that attracts my attention: experience.)

But there is more that elevates Buddy Roemer above the rest of the political pack. Watch this.

Having done my homework with my new best candidate; I then decided to donate to his campaign, just one of the millions of small money donors he will need to offset the windfall contributions from big money contributors he has rejected. So, I went to the donation page on his campaign web site, and filled out the form. I pressed “Submit.” The form reappeared with instructions in bright red letters: ‘You made a mistake; check your information.’ So, I checked and re-checked the information and, again, pressed “Submit.” Same thing happened.

Just in case, I checked my bank account; and both contributions had been debited to my account! Now, I was guardedly upset. My chosen candidate, guilty of a campaign contribution scam? Say it ain’t so! I began searching for an email address and a phone number to the campaign so that I could advise them of the glitch on the campaign web site and, hopefully, reverse the double debit. I left messages explaining what had gone wrong.

That was 2 days ago, Saturday, New Year’s eve. Well, I just received a call back from a very pleasant man identifying himself as the FEC compliance officer for Mr. Roemer’s campaign. He explained, my message about the contribution glitch had been passed on to him; and he was eager to resolve my concerns. While we were on the phone, I pulled up my bank account on the computer. Sure enough, the debits no longer showed; and not because the double debit had been removed but because I hadn’t actually been double debited at all. Or even once.

See, the information relayed by pressing the “Submit” button on Roehmer’s site; appeared on my account moments before it was subsequently erased by the information relayed from Roemer’s site saying, ‘There is a problem with this form.’ And if I had checked the account again minutes later, I would have seen, my donationt had not been recorded at all. (Knowing what I know now, I can hypothesize that the reason my billing information was rejected likely originated at my bank, and was intended to protect the account from unauthorized withdrawals.)

In other words, I hadn’t actually donated at all to Mr. Roemer’s Presidential campaign. But I want to; the man gave me their mailing address so that I can make my contribution via the old-fashioned way.

This incident proved my point. That is, by endorsing Buddy Roemer for President, I had chosen the best candidate for the job. (Actually liking that choice came as a most pleasant surprise!)

%d bloggers like this: