Sunday, September 17, 2006
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Texas State Representative House District 33: Solomon P. Ortiz Jr. Defeats Mikal Watts at his Own Game. Or Perhaps GOD intervened.
Solomon P. Ortiz Jr. Defeats Mikal Watts at his Own Game. Or Perhaps GOD intervened.
“When Corpus Christi state representative Vilma Luna decided to give up her legislative seat in July to take a lobbying job in Austin with Hillco Partners, the Democratic party had every reason to believe that the seat would remain in the party's column.”
Let’s look a little further into this assertion.
Why did Vilma Luna step down?
One answer and the one on the surface would be as stated, “to take a lobbying job in Austin with Hillco Partners”. Vilma cited more family time as her primary reason. It goes much deeper than that Mr. Burka; remember Vilma Luna is their hero. It is not difficult to understand that the Utility of Vilma Luna was wearing thin like the Firestone tires that made Mikal and his Crew rich. He could have eventually got her into something she will be blamed for. As it is common knowledge in South Texas; Mikal Watts is about reversing the “Capelo” legislation. There were two tort reform bills, one originated by doctors (and endorsed by TLR) that capped non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases at $250,000 and another containing an assortment of protections for businesses, supported by TLR.
There's More.....
Friday, August 18, 2006
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
You give me, keep giving me the sweetest taboo
Send Sade polyphonic ringtone to your cell phone
Words and Music: Adu and Ditcham
If I tell you
If I tell you now
Will you keep on
Will you keep on loving me
If I tell you
If I tell you how I feel
Will you keep bringing out the best in me
You give me, you give me the sweetest taboo
You give me, you're giving me the sweetest taboo
Too good for me
There's a quiet storm
and it never felt like this before
There's a quiet storm
that is you
There's a quiet storm
and it never felt this hot before
Giving me something that's taboo
(Sometimes I think you're just too good for me)
You give me the sweetest taboo
That's why I feel love in with you (with you)
You give me the sweetest taboo
too good for me
(Sometimes I think you're just too good for me)
I'd do anything for you, I'd stand out in the rain
Anything you want me to do, don't let it slip away
There's a quiet storm
and it never felt like this before
There's a quiet storm
I think it's you
There's a quiet storm
and i never felt this hot before
Giving me something that's taboo
You give me the (you give me, you give me the) sweetest taboo
That's why i'm in love with you (with you)
You give me, keep giving me the sweetest taboo
Too good for me
You've got the biggest heart
Sometimes i think you're just too good for me
Every day is christmas, and every night is new year's eve
Will you keep on loving me
Will you keep on, will you keep on
Bringing out the best in me
Monday, June 26, 2006
Now this picture will be on top of every post you make My Lioness is Hungry
Ok let us see how it works
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Sunday, June 11, 2006
a bill sittin on capitol hill
Send this document to a colleague
Close This Window
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
NUMBER 13-02-230-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
NUECES COUNTY AND LARRY OLIVAREZ, SHERIFF, Appellants,
v.
GAYLE C. FERGUSON, Appellee.
On appeal from the 214th District Court
of Nueces County, Texas.
O P I N I O N
Before Justices Hinojosa, Castillo, and Chavez[1]
Opinion by Justice Castillo
This is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction.[2] In two issues, appellants Nueces County (Athe County@) and Sheriff Larry Olivarez (Athe Sheriff@) assert that the trial court erred in denying their plea to the jurisdiction. We reverse and render.
BACKGROUND
In March of 1996, appellee, Gayle Ferguson, an employee of the Nueces County Sheriff=s Department, applied for a posted position of training officer with the Sheriff=s Department but was not awarded the position. The position instead went to Stanley Repka. Ferguson consequently filed a grievance against the sheriff of Nueces County[3] with the Nueces County Civil Service Commission (Athe Commission@) for the sheriff=s failure to appoint him to the position.
The Commission issued a decision on December 16, 1996, that stated, AThe Commission holds that Sgt. Stanley Repka lacks the minimum qualifications for position number 015, Job Class & Title 1432 Training Officer@ and pronounced that the Commission was deciding in favor of Ferguson. However, the Commission made no findings, nor did it award the position of training officer to Ferguson.
The position was reannounced in May of 1997 with the same qualifications listed and Ferguson again applied. The position was reannounced later with different qualifications and awarded to Repka. Consequently, in November of 1998, Ferguson filed a lawsuit against the County and against Sheriff Larry Olivarez.[4]
While the lawsuit was pending, Ferguson, who remained in the employ of the Sheriff=s Department, was terminated after being disciplined repeatedly.[5] He appealed his termination to the Commission. The Commission issued a decision on the termination on August 15, 2001, wherein it made the following AFINDINGS AND DECISIONS@: AIt is the unanimous decision of the members of the Commission in regards to Grievance Number 02091-1, Gayle C. Ferguson v. Nueces County Sheriff=s Department to reduce the termination to a ninety day suspension.@ No other decision or finding was made.
On September 17, 2001, Ferguson amended his petition in the pending lawsuit. In his amended petition, he stated he was seeking Aenforcement of the Civil Service Commission findings of December 1996 by prospective injunction placing [Ferguson] in the position for which he was the most highly qualified in 1996" and Afull reinstatement from termination in 2001" as well as Aenforcement of the benefits attendant to the position of sergeant in the form of retroactive pay for the position as he would have earned if not terminated or suspended.@ He also stated that he was seeking Afull reinstatement without suspension expungement of his derogatory work record and full back pay,@ asserting that he was Aentitled to such relief under the Civil Service Rules, state law, and because such losses are a result of discrimination and retaliation.@ Ferguson also alleged that the acts and conduct of ADefendants@ as alleged in the petition constituted intentional infliction of emotional distress as A[they] had acted knowingly and intentionally to deprive Plaintiff of the rightful benefits of the position.@ Under the final section of his petition, entitled ADamages,@ Ferguson requested: (1) a temporary restraining order restraining appellants from conferring the status of Training Officer on anyone other than himself or from allowing anyone other than himself to function as Training Officer; 2) that ADefendant be restrained from suspending [Ferguson] retroactively and full back pay be awarded;@ and that (3) Aa temporary injunction be granted.@[6] Ferguson also requested that Aon final trial, Plaintiff have and recover judgment against Defendants for@: (1) Athe value of the loss of the position of Training Officer;@ (2) Adamages for negligent violation of employment policies and compensation and benefits due@ to him; (3) Aadditional sums for past and future damages sustained by [Ferguson] for intentional infliction of emotional distress and for mental anguish;@ (4) Afull back and front pay;@ (5) Aprejudgment interest and postjudgment interest at the maximum legal rate until all damage awards have been paid in full;@ (6) reasonable and necessary attorney=s fees; (7) costs of court; and (8) all other relief to which he might show himself entitled.
To this amended pleading, appellants filed a second amended plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss[7] on November 28, 2001, asserting that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Ferguson failed to file a petition in the district court within thirty days after the dates of the Commission=s decisions as required by local government code section 158.012(a).[8] Tex. Loc. Gov=t Code Ann. '158.012(a) (Vernon 1999). Appellants also argued that sovereign immunity deprived the trial court of jurisdiction over the tort claims alleged. After hearing arguments and reviewing briefs on the issue, the trial court denied the plea to the jurisdiction. This interlocutory appeal ensued.
ISSUES PRESENTED
In their first issue, appellants assert that the trial court erred in denying their plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss because they were immune from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. In their second issue, appellants assert that the trial court erred in denying the plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss because Ferguson failed to comply with the statutory requirements of local government code section 158.012(a), thereby depriving the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over the Commission=s decisions rendered on December 16, 1996 and August 15, 2001.
Ferguson presents no response to appellant=s first issue. To the second issue, Ferguson counters that he seeks to neither affirm nor reverse the Commission=s decisions since he should not be required to appeal to accomplish the clear ruling of the commission. Rather, Ferguson argues, he is entitled to immediate compliance or an enforcement ruling because no appeal was taken by the sheriff.
STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW
This appeal is strictly limited to our review of the trial court=s ruling on the plea to the jurisdiction. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2002). On appeal, because the question of subject matter jurisdiction is a legal question, we review the trial court's ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction under a de novo standard of review. Mayhew v. Town of Sunnyvale, 964 S.W.2d 922, 928 (Tex. 1998). To determine whether appellees have affirmatively demonstrated the court=s jurisdiction to hear the case, we consider the facts alleged in the petition, and to the extent it is relevant to the jurisdictional issue, any evidence submitted by the parties to the trial court. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm=n v. White, 46 S.W.3d 864, 868 (Tex. 2001); Bland Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 555 (Tex. 2000). Our task is not to decide the merits of the case but rather to examine the claims in the pleadings, taking as true the facts pled,[9] and determine whether those facts support jurisdiction in the trial court. Baston v. City of Port Isabel, 49 S.W.3d 425, 427-28 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2001, pet. denied).
We must construe the pleadings in the plaintiff=s favor and look to the pleader=s intent. County of Cameron v. Brown, 80 S.W.3d 549, 555 (Tex. 2002); Peek v. Equip. Serv. Co., 779 S.W.2d 802, 804 (Tex. 1989). A plaintiff bears the burden to allege facts affirmatively demonstrating the trial court=s jurisdiction to hear a case. Tex. Ass=n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440, 446 (Tex. 1993); Mission Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Flores, 39 S.W.3d 674, 676 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2001, no pet.). If a plaintiff pleads facts that affirmatively demonstrate an absence of jurisdiction, and the defect is incurable, then the cause is properly dismissed. Peek, 779 S.W.2d at 804-05; City of Austin v. L.S. Ranch, 970 S.W.2d 750, 753 (Tex. App.BAustin 1998, no pet.). However, the mere failure of a petition to state a cause of action does not show a want of jurisdiction in the court. Bybee v. Fireman=s Fund Ins. Co., 160 Tex. 429, 331 S.W.2d 910, 917 (1960). If the plaintiff=s pleadings are insufficient to demonstrate the court=s jurisdiction, but do not affirmatively show incurable defects in jurisdiction, the proper remedy is to allow the plaintiff an opportunity to amend before dismissal. Brown, 80 S.W.3d at 555; Peek, 779 S.W.2d at 805.
CLAIMS AGAINST SHERIFF OLIVAREZ
As a preliminary matter, we must consider the capacity in which suit is brought against Sheriff Larry Olivarez as such will affect our review of the claims against him.
A plaintiff may sue a governmental employee or official in the person=s official capacity, individual capacity, or both. Denson v. Tex. Dep=t of Crim. Justice, 63 S.W.3d 454, 460 (Tex. App.BTyler 1999, pet. denied). However, claims against governmental employees or officials in their official capacities are separate and distinct from claims against them in their individual capacities. Vela v. Rocha, 52 S.W.3d 398, 403 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2001, no pet.). Indeed, a person sued in his legal capacity is regarded as a distinct legal personage from that same person sued in his individual capacity. Elizondo v. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm=n, 974 S.W.2d 928, 931 (Tex. AppBAustin 1998, no pet.)(citing Alexander v. Todman, 361 F. 2d 744, 746 (3rd Circ. 1966); accord Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S. 534, 543-44 & n.6 (1986)). Thus, a person in his official capacity is a Astranger to his rights and liabilities as an individual@ and vice versa. Elizondo, 974 S.W.2d at 931 (quoting Todman, 361 F.2d at 746). A person filing suit against an individual solely in an official capacity thus cannot impose liability or recover damages from that same person in an individual capacity, nor can a suit solely against a person in an individual capacity result in liability or the execution of a judgment against the governmental unit that the person represents in an official capacity. Bender, 475 U.S. at 544 (quoting Brandon v. Holt, 469 U.S. 464, 471-72 (1985) and Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165-66 (1985)). Accordingly, the capacity in which a governmental employee or official is sued is significant because it affects the party upon whom liability may be imposed and from whom damages may be collected, as well as the defenses that may be raised. Jackson v. Stinnett, 881 S.W.2d 498, 500 (Tex. App.BEl Paso 1994, no writ).
In a suit against a person in an official capacity, a plaintiff is actually seeking to impose liability against the governmental unit the sued person represents, rather than on the individual specifically named. Rocha, 52 S.W.3d at 403 (citing Graham, 473 U.S. at 166). The suit is, then, in actuality, one against the governmental unit, which is the legal entity that will be held liable for any judgment rendered against the individual sued in an official capacity. Graham, 473 U.S. at 165-66. By contrast, a suit against a person in an individual capacity seeks to impose personal liability on the individual being sued for personal actions taken under color of state law, and so damages in that instance may be collected only from the individual defendant sought to be held liable and not from the governmental unit that employs the defendant. Id.
The capacity in which a governmental employee or official is sued likewise affects the immunity defenses that may be asserted. Rocha, 52 S.W.3d at 403 (AEach capacity involves a separate and distinct form of potential immunity . . .@). Persons sued in their official capacity may raise any defense available to the governmental unit, including sovereign immunity.[10] Gonzalez v. Avalos, 866 S.W.2d 346, 349 (Tex. App.BEl Paso 1993), writ dism=d w.o.j., 907 S.W.2d 443 (Tex. 1995)(per curiam); Bagg v. Univ. of Tex. Med. Branch at Galveston, 726 S.W.2d 582, 586 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ ref=d n.r.e.). An individual sued in an official capacity may enjoy the protections of sovereign immunity to the same extent as those protections are available to the person=s employer and thus, if the governmental unit would be immune due to sovereign immunity, so is the governmental official sued in his official capacity.[11] City of Hempstead v. Kmiec, 902 S.W.2d 118, 122 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1995, no writ). Persons sued in their individual capacities, on the other hand, may not rely on sovereign immunity protections for claims against them in that capacity, although they may assert the defense of official immunity. Gonzalez, 866 S.W.2d at 349. Finally, persons sued in both official and individual capacities may assert both official and sovereign immunity, although they enjoy sovereign immunity protection only to the extent that they were acting in their official capacity. Bagg, 726 S.W.2d at 586.
In the instant case, Ferguson did not explicitly state in his petition whether his claims against Larry Olivarez were brought against Olivarez in an official or individual capacity. When a petition fails to specify the capacity in which a person is sued,[12] we will look at the Acourse of the proceedings@ to determine the nature of the liability the plaintiff seeks to impose. Graham, 473 U.S. at 166 n.14 (citing Brandon v. Holt, 469 U.S. 464, 469 (1985)).
In examining these proceedings, we note that the amended petition describes Olivarez in the following terms: ADefendant, LARRY OLIVAREZ, SHERIFF is an individual employed with Nueces County and may be served at the Nueces County Courthouse, Corpus Christi, Texas.@ When referring to him specifically, the petition uses the term ASheriff Olivarez@ or simply ASheriff.@ No reference is made in the petition or in the record before us to claims against Olivarez personally, that is, in any individual capacity. Further, Ferguson does not allege in the petition that the actions he complains of, namely, the failure to promote Ferguson to the position he applied for in 1996 as well as his termination in 2001, were not acts within the scope of Olivarez=s authority as sheriff. Moreover, Ferguson makes the same complaints against the County as he does against Olivarez and his petition clearly contemplates that the County would be liable for any judgment recovered, not Olivarez personally. Lastly, and significantly, Ferguson never served Sheriff Olivarez, in either his official or his individual capacity,[13] nor did Ferguson request any service on Olivarez in any capacity. The only service requested, and made, in this cause was on Nueces County, by way of service on the county judge.
We conclude that Ferguson only asserted claims against Sheriff Olivarez in his official capacity as Sheriff of Nueces County. A sheriff, sued in an official capacity, is not an entity distinct from the county. Bowles v. Wade, 913 S.W.2d 644, 649 (Tex. App.BDallas 1995, writ denied), abrogated on other grounds, Essenburg v. Dallas County, 988 S.W.2d 188 (Tex. 1998). Thus, Olivarez is entitled to assert any defense the County may assert, Gonzalez, 866 S.W.2d at 349, and claims against him are subject to the same jurisdictional analysis as claims against Nueces County. Bowles, 913 S.W.2d at 649.
We turn then to the question of sovereign immunity.
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
In their first issue, appellants assert that Ferguson failed to allege a cause of action for which sovereign immunity was waived, and so subject matter jurisdiction was lacking in the trial court and their plea to the jurisdiction should have been granted. Ferguson does not respond to this issue in his brief.
Sovereign Immunity and Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Sovereign immunity, unless waived, protects the State of Texas from lawsuits for damages absent legislative consent. Gen. Servs. Comm'n. v. Little-Tex Insulation Co., 39 S.W.3d 591, 594 (Tex. 2001). Sovereign immunity derives from the principle that the sovereign may not be sued in its courts without its consent. Tex. Workers' Comp. Comm'n v. Garcia, 862 S.W.2d 61, 72 (Tex. App.BSan Antonio 1993), rev'd on other grounds, 893 S.W.2d 504 (Tex. 1995)(en banc). Sovereign immunity encompasses two principles: immunity from suit and immunity from liability. Fed. Sign v. Tex. S. Univ., 951 S.W.2d 401, 405 (Tex. 1997). Immunity from liability protects the State from judgments, even where there is an express consent on the part of the Legislature to permit a suit. Id. Immunity from liability is an affirmative defense that must be pled or else it is waived. Jones, 8 S.W.3d at 638 (citing Davis v. City of San Antonio, 752 S.W.2d 518, 519‑20 (Tex. 1988)). Immunity from suit, on the other hand, bars a suit against the State unless the State expressly gives consent to the suit. Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 405. Immunity from suit, then, deprives a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over the governmental agency, even if liability is undisputed. Travis County v. Pelzel & Assocs., Inc., 77 S.W.3d 246, 248 (Tex. 2002).
A county is a governmental unit protected by sovereign immunity. Id. Likewise, a public official sued in an official capacity is protected by the same sovereign immunity enjoyed by the governmental unit he represents. Morris v. Copeland, 944 S.W.2d 696, 698-99 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 1997, no pet.)(holding that suit against the sheriff was a suit against the county, and both were immune from suit by virtue of sovereign immunity). Accordingly, we must determine whether the claims raised in Ferguson=s amended petition are ones for which sovereign immunity has been waived and, if so, whether Ferguson has properly pled such claims so as to invoke jurisdiction in the trial court. See State Dep=t of Crim. Justice v. Miller, 51 S.W.3d 583, 587 (Tex. 2001)(finding that a mere reference to a basis for waiver of sovereign immunity in a petition is not enough to confer jurisdiction; the reviewing court must examine the scope of the waiver and whether the allegations in the petition fall within the scope of that waiver).
Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
The State may waive its sovereign immunity by express legislative permission via a resolution granting permission for a person to file suit in a specific case or by way of a statutory authorization for waiver, either in particular circumstances or as to specific governmental entities. Jones, 8 S.W.3d at 638; Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Brownsville Navigation Dist., 453 S.W.2d 812, 813-14 (Tex. 1970); City of San Antonio v. Cortes, 5 S.W.3d 708, 711-12 (Tex. App.BSan Antonio 1999, no pet.). Certain provisions of the Texas Constitution are self-enacting, and thus provide the right to bring an action against the government for violations of the provisions without the need for legislative consent. Steele v. City of Houston, 603 S.W.2d 786, 791 (Tex. 1980). However, suits brought pursuant to constitutional provisions are limited to equitable relief and do not allow a claim for monetary damages except to the extent specifically enunciated in the constitutional provision. City of Beaumont v. Buillion, 896 S.W.2d 143, 149 (Tex. 1995)(determining that no private right for damages was permitted for violations of state constitutional rights and vacating jury award of damages); O=Bryant v. City of Midland, 949 S.W.2d 406, 414 (Tex. App.BAustin 1997)(op. on reh=g), aff=d in part and rev=d in part on other grounds, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000)(holding that the state constitution did not authorize an action for an award of money, specifically an award of back pay, for violation of state constitutional rights); Fraiser v. Yanes, 9 S.W.3d 422, 427 (Tex. App.BAustin 1999, no pet.)(recognizing a Anarrow exception@ to the bar of money awards for constitutional violations in a suit for equitable relief to enforce a right to compensation specifically set forth in the constitution).[14]
Characterization of Suits and
Prohibition Against Seeking Monetary Damages
Certain actions against state officials have been found not to implicate the sovereign immunity doctrine, and for such actions, no consent is required. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm=n v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 855 (Tex. 2002). Specifically, no consent is required when suit is filed seeking only a declaration or enforcement of rights. Id. This may be by way of a suit under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act or in a suit alleging ultra vires or unconstitutional deeds. The former are actions against the State or state officials to settle Auncertainty and insecurity with respects to rights, status, and other legal relations.@ Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '37.002 (b)(Vernon 1997). The latter are actions seeking declaratory relief against state officials who allegedly act without legal or statutory authority or who act pursuant to an unconstitutional law. Rylander v. Caldwell, 23 S.W.3d 132, 135-36 (Tex. App.BAustin 2000, no pet.); Bagg, 726 S.W.2d at 585-86. Suits that only seek to compel state officials to act within their official capacities do not attempt to subject the State to liability. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 855.
The Texas Supreme Court has consistently distinguished between suits in which only a declaration or enforcement of rights against the State is sought and suits seeking money damages against the State. Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 404; W. D. Haden Co. v. Dodgen, 158 Tex. 74, 308 S.W.2d 838, 841 (1958); Cobb v. Harrington, 144 Tex. 360, 190 S.W.2d 709, 712 (1945); see also Dewhurst v. Gulf Marine Inst. of Tech., 55 S.W.3d 91, 97 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2001, pet. denied). The former are not considered suits against the State for damages, and so no legislative consent is required. Cobb, 190 S.W.2d at 712.
The supreme court has been adamant, however, that where a party brings a suit ostensibly to determine or protect rights but actually seeks monetary damages, sovereign immunity bars such a suit. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 856; Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 404; Dodgen, 308 S.W.2d at 841-42. That is because a suit for money damages attempts to control state action by imposing liability on the State. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 856. The supreme court has roundly condemned such actions, stating, Aprivate parties cannot circumvent the State=s sovereign immunity from suit by characterizing a suit for money damages, such as a contract dispute, as a declaratory judgment claim.@ Id. Therefore, sovereign immunity is not waived for a request for declaratory relief that also seeks money damages and such a suit can only be maintained with legislative consent. Id. at 860; see also Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 405 (even if party did not need legislative consent to pursue a suit to determine its rights, it needed legislative consent to seek its requested money damages from the State; lacking consent, the case was properly dismissed for want of jurisdiction); Denver City Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Moses, 51 S.W.3d 386, 392 (Tex. App.BAmarillo 2001, no pet.)(declaratory judgment action that also sought restitution was a suit for money damages over which the trial court had no subject matter jurisdiction absent the State=s consent to suit); TRST Corpus, Inc. v. Fin. Ctr., Inc., 9 S.W.3d 316, 323 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1999, pet. denied)(a suit seeking a declaratory judgment of rights, money damages, and an order enforcing rights through injunction, judicial foreclosure, and/or constructive trust was a suit against the State for which sovereign immunity was not waived, and so could not be maintained without legislative permission).
The Burden on Plaintiffs
Accordingly, plaintiffs who sue the State under state law[15] must establish a waiver of sovereign immunity in order for the trial court to have jurisdiction, except where the suit is: (1) not actually a suit against the state, such as an ultra vires action or an action taken pursuant to an unconstitutional law, see Caldwell, 23 S.W.3d at 135-36; Bagg, 726 S.W.2d at 585-86; (2) does not seek to impose liability on the State, seek money damages against the State, or seek to control state action, as in a declaratory judgment suit, IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 855; or (3) a suit alleging constitutional violations of a self-enacting state constitutional provision and seeking the appropriate relief provided by such provision. Steele, 603 S.W.2d at 791.
However, in all other state actions against the State, the plaintiff must: (1) allege legislative consent to such suit in his petition, either by reference to statute or express legislative permission, Jones, 8 S.W.3d at 638, unless a pleading of consent is not required for the particular type of action;[16] and (2) plead facts which fall within the scope of the waiver relied on, Miller, 51 S.W.3d at 587. Aside from certain exceptions,[17] absent a pleading of consent in the petition, the trial court is without jurisdiction to hear the case. Missouri Pac. R.R. Co., 453 S.W.2d at 814; City of San Antonio v. Cortes, 5 S.W.2d 708,711-12 (Tex. App.BSan Antonio 1999, pet. denied); Tex. Parks & Wildlife Dep=t. v. Garrett Place, 972 S.W.2d 140, 143 (Tex. App.BDallas 1998, no pet.); Holder v. Mellon Mortgage Co., 954 S.W.2d 786, 804 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1997, rev=d on other grounds, Mellon Mortgage Co. v. Holder, 5 S.W.3d 654 (Tex. 1999). Moreover, even if consent is pled in the petition, or when no specific pleading of consent is required, a plaintiff must still plead facts in the petition that fall within the scope of the consent relied upon. Miller, 51 S.W.3d at 587.
Ferguson=s Pleadings
As we have noted, the question before us is whether the plaintiff=s live pleadings before the trial court at the time of the plea to the jurisdiction, in this case, Ferguson=s amended petition, affirmatively demonstrate the court=s jurisdiction to hear the case. Id.; Baston, 49 S.W.3d at 427-28; City of Hidalgo Ambulance Serv. v. Lira, 17 S.W.3d 300, 304 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2000, no pet.).
We observe initially that the petition makes no reference to any basis for waiver of sovereign immunity. Ferguson does not allege in his petition that Sheriff Olivarez acted ultra vires,18 does not claim any legislative or statutory consent to maintain his action, and specifically repudiates the County=s claim that this is an attempted appeal of the commission=s decision, for which there would be an express statutory waiver for an action against the County, assuming that the provisions of section 153.012 of the local government code are met. Tex. Loc. Gov=t Code Ann. '153.012 (Vernon 1999).
Moreover, review of the petition readily demonstrates it is a suit for money damages, not a suit for declaratory or injunctive relief. Ferguson makes no reference to a declaratory judgment and seeks no declaratory relief against the Sheriff or the County.19 As for injunctive relief, while in early portions of the petition Ferguson claims he is seeking a prospective injunction placing him in the position which he claims he was wrongfully denied in 1996, as well as reinstatement to the position from which he was terminated,20 Ferguson does not request the court to issue a permanent injunction reinstating him in his prior position or placing him in the disputed position. Instead, Ferguson asks that upon final trial he receive judgment for Athe value of the loss of the position of Training Officer@ and Aback and front pay,@21 among other money damages, as well as prejudgment and postjudgment interest on all damages. In determining the nature of a lawsuit, we do not rely on the terms used to describe the cause of action but rather consider the facts alleged in the petition, the rights asserted, and the relief sought. Karagounis v. Bexar County Hosp. Dist., 70 S.W.3d 145, 147 (Tex. App.BSan Antonio 2001, pet. denied)(quoting Billings v. Concordia Heritage Ass=n, Inc., 960 S.W.2d 688, 693 (Tex. App.BEl Paso 1997, pet. denied)). We are mindful as well of the supreme court=s exhortation that parties may not Acircumvent the State=s sovereign immunity@ by bringing a suit whose essence is Afor a recovery of money from the State,@ Cobb, 190 S.W.2d. at 712, under the guise of a suit to determine or protect rights. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 855-56; see also Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 404. The suit in the instant case is one for money damages, and hence it cannot be maintained without legislative consent. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 855-56.
Ferguson=s AEnforcement@ Claims
The only allusion that Ferguson makes on appeal to some authority permitting the maintenance of his suit is a reference in his discussion of the second issue on appeal that he is entitled to Aseek equitable relief@ under article I, section 19 of the Texas Constitution, citing City of Midland v. O=Bryant, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000) for support. See Tex. Const. art. I, '19.22
We agree with Ferguson that the Texas Constitution permits a party to seek equitable relief for the violation of certain constitutional provisions, including article I, Section 19, even without legislative consent. Buillion, 896 S.W.2d at 149; Steele, 603 S.W.2d at 791. However, we do not find that Ferguson=s petition is such an action.
Review of the petition reveals that Ferguson does not claim violation of article I, section 19 of the Texas Constitution or, indeed, of violation of any constitutional provision of any sort. Having wholly failed to plead such a claim in his petition, Ferguson may not now rely on it as a basis for waiver of sovereign immunity. Perry v. Tex. A&I Univ., 737 S.W.2d 106, 109 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 1987, writ ref=d n.r.e.)(finding that where plaintiff did not allege a violation of constitutional or property rights in her petition against a university, but instead sought to impose liability and recover in monetary damages, the trial court did not err in granting a plea to the jurisdiction since there was no pleading that took the plaintiff out of the general rule that trial courts have no jurisdiction to impose liability on the State without legislative consent). It is axiomatic that a trial court cannot have jurisdiction over a claim that was never pled. See Hicks v. Lamar Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist., 943 S.W.2d 540, 543 (Tex. App.BEastland 1997, no writ)(holding that where plaintiff on appeal asserted exceptions which would permit the trial court to have jurisdiction, but had failed to allege the exceptions in his petition before the trial court, jurisdiction did not lie).
Additionally, we note that Ferguson sought money damages, not equitable relief, in his suit. Although a request for money damages does not affect the jurisdiction of the trial court over a claim of a violation of article I, section 19, even when the State is a defendant,23 there is no right to a money judgment for such a violation. Tex. A&M Sys. v. Luxemburg, No. 14-00-00105-CV, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 7058, at *31-32 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.], October 3, 2002, no pet. h.)(reversing award of Aback salary and attendant benefits@ against university system for violation of right of due course of law under state constitution because constitution does not provide right of action for damages); Univ. of Tex. Sys. v. Courtney, 946 S.W.2d 464, 469 (Tex. App.BFort Worth 1997, writ denied)(op. on reh=g)(claim could not be brought against university system for monetary, non-equitable damages under the state constitution=s due process provision); Alcorn v. Vaksman, 877 S.W.2d 390, 404 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1994, writ denied)(en banc)(holding university officials immune in their official capacities for monetary claims based on violations of the state constitution); accord Tex. State Employees= Union/CWA Local 6184 v. Tex. Workforce Comm=n, 16 S.W.3d 61, 67 (Tex. App.BAustin 2000, no pet.)(where appellants sought equitable relief in form of order reinstating them to jobs rather than monetary damages, relief sought was permissible under article I, section 19).
There are certain actions for which the legislature has expressly waived sovereign immunity and permitted a plaintiff to subject the State to suit and liability for back and front pay and other monetary damages related to employment, as well as for injunctive relief, such as actions under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act24 or the Texas Whistleblower Act.25 Tex. Lab. Code Ann. ''21.002(8)(C),(D), 21.051, 21.258(b), 21.2585, 21.259 (Vernon 1996 & Supp. 2002); Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. ''554.001, 554.003, 554.0035 (Vernon 1994 & Supp. 2002). Ferguson=s Aenforcement@ claims, however, are not brought pursuant to these acts or any other for which the legislature has provided a waiver of sovereign immunity.
Thus, since the petition in the instant suit attempts to subject a governmental unit to liability for money damages without the necessary legislative consent, the face of Ferguson=s pleadings affirmatively demonstrate a lack of jurisdiction in the trial court. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d at 855-56; Fed. Sign, 951 S.W.2d at 405; Moses, 51 S.W.3d at 392; TRST Corpus, 9 S.W.3d at 323.
Ferguson=s Tort Claims
Furthermore, as to Ferguson=s claims of tortious actions, specifically, Aintentional infliction of emotional distress@ and Anegligent violation of employment policies,@ we note that Ferguson does not assert that the Texas Tort Claims Act26 provides the necessary waiver to maintain such action. In any case, such a claim would not avail him as to either alleged tort as neither falls within the scope of such act.
As to the intentional tort, the Texas Tort Claims Act specifically preserves sovereign immunity as to intentional torts. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '101.057(2) (Vernon 1997). Thus sovereign immunity is not waived for a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
As to the negligence claim, assuming that a claim of Anegligent violation of employment policies@ is an attempt to raise a claim of negligent implementation of a discretionary policy, Ferguson has failed both to state a claim and to plead facts that would support such a claim. Negligent implementation of policy is a theory of liability predicated on the distinction between negligent formulation of discretionary policy, for which sovereign immunity is preserved, and negligent implementation of that same formulated discretionary policy, for which it is not. City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750, 754 (Tex. 1995). To state a negligent implementation claim, a plaintiff must identify a particular policy adopted by the governmental unit and state facts which raise a claim that the policy was negligently carried out at the operational level. See Tarrant County Water Control & Improvement Dist. No. 1 v. Crossland, 781 S.W.2d 427, 433 (Tex. App.BFort Worth 1989, writ denied)(holding that allegation of a general policy to warn of danger did not make the State liable for the particular decision to design a bridge without lights); Waco v. Hester, 805 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. App.BWaco 1990, writ denied)(finding that a claim of negligent implementation of policy was asserted when the plaintiff complained of specific violations of implementation of the city jail=s policy regarding segregation of prisoners).
Ferguson made no assertions of negligent implementation in his petition. He did not allege any negligent implementation of any County policy, nor did he identify any policy that the County adopted or plead any facts that would demonstrate the violation of such policy. In short, Ferguson did not raise a claim of negligent implementation of policy in his petition and so may not rely on it to establish jurisdiction in the trial court. See Tex. Dep=t of Transp. v. Bederka, 36 S.W.3d 266, 272 (Tex. App.BBeaumont 2001, no pet.)(finding that a petition did not state a claim for negligent implementation where it contained no allegation that governmental unit made a policy decision to perform a discretionary act but failed to implement that decision); Hicks, 943 S.W.2d at 543.
Moreover, even if such a claim had been made, the assertion of a negligent implementation theory of liability arises only after a plaintiff has properly asserted a waiver of immunity under section 101.021 of the tort claims act.27 Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '101.021 (Vernon 1997); City of Orange v. Jackson, 927 S.W.2d 784, 786 (Tex. App.BBeaumont 1996, no writ). Since Ferguson did not assert any claim that fell within the scope of section 101.021 of the tort claims act, the theory of negligent implementation liability does not arise in this case. Jackson, 927 S.W.2d at 786. Accordingly, there is no waiver of sovereign immunity as to Ferguson=s tort claims.
We sustain appellants= first issue.
APPELLANTS= SECOND ISSUE
As our resolution of appellants= first issue is dispositive, we need not address appellants= second issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.1.
CONCLUSION
Having determined that Ferguson failed to state a claim for which sovereign immunity is waived, we must now decide whether his petition is incurably defective or whether, under the facts alleged in his petition, the petition might be amended to allege a cause of action within the trial court=s jurisdiction. See Brown, 80 S.W.3d at 555; Peek, 779 S.W.2d at 805.
As we have noted, Ferguson=s suit is one for damages and thus cannot be maintained without legislative consent. As Ferguson has never claimed, either to the trial court or this Court, to have legislative consent for this suit, we conclude that it is not possible for the petition to be amended to confer jurisdiction on the trial court. City of Houston v. Northwood Mun. Util. Dist. No. 1, 73 S.W.3d 304, 313 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 2001, pet. denied); TRST Corpus, 9 S.W.3d at 323-24.
We sustain appellants= first issue on appeal, reverse the trial court=s order denying the plea to the jurisdiction, and render judgment dismissing Ferguson=s claims against appellants for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
ERRLINDA CASTILLO
Justice
Publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).
Opinion delivered and filed
this 27th day of November, 2002.
[1] Retired Justice Melchor Chavez assigned to this Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas pursuant to Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. '74.003 (Vernon 1998).
2 We have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal pursuant to section 51.014(a)(8) of the civil practice and remedies code, which provides that an appeal may be taken from an interlocutory order that grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit as defined in section 101.001. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '' 51.014(a)(8), 101.001 (Vernon Supp. 2002). It is undisputed that the City is such a governmental unit.
[3] At the time, an individual other than Larry Olivarez held the office of sheriff.
[4] The petition did not specify whether Larry Olivarez was being sued in his official or individual capacity.
[5] In his amended petition, Ferguson asserted that the bases for the disciplinary actions were Abogus@ and that he was treated disparately. He also alleged that the reasons given for his termination were a pretext for discrimination and retaliation.
[6] Ferguson did not provide any more specifics in the petition about the temporary injunction being sought.
[7] The docket sheet indicates that appellants filed a plea in bar of jurisdiction with the original answer on December 31, 1999 and a first amended plea in bar of jurisdiction on September 11, 2000 in conjunction with their first amended answer. No hearings appear to have been held on these prior pleadings, and neither the docket sheet nor the record before us reflects any other filings of pleas to the jurisdiction.
[8] Section 158.012, titled AAppeals,@ reads:
(a) A county employee who, on a final decision by the commission, is demoted, suspended, or removed from the employee=s position may appeal the decision by filing a petition in a district court in the county within 30 days after the date of the decision.
(b) An appeal under this section is under the substantial evidence rule, and the judgment of the district court is appealable as in other civil cases.
(c) If the district court renders judgment for the petitioner, the court may order reinstatement of the employee, payment of back pay, or other appropriate relief.
Tex. Loc. Gov=t Code Ann. ' 158.012 (Vernon 1999).
[9] We must take all factual allegations pled as true, unless the defendant pleads and proves that the allegations were fraudulently made in order to confer jurisdiction. Cont=l Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444, 449 (Tex. 1996). Appellants have not asserted that Ferguson made any fraudulent allegations for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction.
[10] Sovereign immunity does not, however, apply to actions taken pursuant to the application of an unconstitutional law, even though the actions are within the scope of a person=s official capacity and are mandated by law. Rylander v. Caldwell, 23 S.W.3d 132, 135-36 (Tex. App.BAustin 2000, no pet.).
[11] The Dallas court of appeals, in Smith v. Davis, interpreted Kmeic as holding that a governmental employee sued in an official capacity Amay in some cases enjoy the protections of sovereign immunity to the extent those protections are available to his employer,A namely, @when the governmental unit is made a party to suit.@ Smith v. Davis, 999 S.W.2d 409, 413, 416-417 (Tex. App.BDallas 1999, no pet.)(emphasis added). We disagree. We note that Smith relies on Kmeic for this proposition, yet while in Kmeic the governmental unit was a party to the suit, this fact was not relied upon as a prerequisite to application of the protection of sovereign immunity to a governmental official sued in an official capacity. See City of Hempstead v. Kmeic, 902 S.W.2d 118, 122 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1995, no writ). Nor has this Court imposed such a requirement. Thomas v. Collins, 853 S.W.2d 53, 55 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 1993, writ denied)(finding suit not maintainable on grounds of sovereign immunity in suit filed only against director of Texas Department of Corrections in an official capacity). More importantly, since a suit against a person in an official capacity is simply another way of asserting a suit against the state, then if no suit against the state may lie due to sovereign immunity, no suit may lie against a person sued only in an official capacity. Kmeic, 902 S.W.2d at 122; see also McCartney v. May, 50 S.W.3d 599, 605-06 (Tex. App.BAmarillo 2001, no pet.)(disagreeing with Davis and holding that governmental employees were entitled to summary judgment in their official capacities, based on sovereign immunity, even though the state agency for whom they were employed was not a party to the suit); Alcorn v. Vaksman, 877 S.W.2d 390, 403 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1994, writ denied)(en banc)(finding that state employees were entitled to sovereign immunity when sued in official capacities for acts performed within the scope of their authority, even though the state was not named as a defendant). We agree with the May court that whether the governmental unit is named as a party or not does not affect the ability of an employee of that unit to rely on the defense of sovereign immunity as to claims against the person in an official capacity. May, 50 S.W.3d at 606.
[12] Ideally, in order to avoid confusion, the relevant capacity should be included in the style of the suit when filed. Morris v. Collins, 916 S.W.2d 527, 530 n.2 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1995, no writ)(O=Conner, J., concurring).
[13] Nevertheless, Olivarez did file a general denial in answer to the suit jointly with Nueces County.
[14] Yanes involved a suit under article III, section 52(e) of the Texas Constitution, which deals with payments of medical expenses by counties for county law enforcement officials injured in the course of official duties. Fraiser v. Yanes, 9 S.W.3d 422, 424 (Tex. App.BAustin 1999, no pet); see Tex. Const. art. III, '52(e).
[15] The State may be sued for federal constitutional violations or under certain federal statutes which provide for a waiver of sovereign immunity. See Morris, 916 S.W.2d at 531 (noting sovereign immunity does not bar federal civil rights claims and violations of federal due process).
[16] It is not necessary to specifically plead consent in a petition where there is a general statutory right to bring suit against a particular governmental entity or a particular type of claim. Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Brownsville Navigation Dist., 453 S.W.2d 812, 813-14 (Tex. 1970); City of San Antonio v. Cortes, 5 S.W.3d 708,711-12 (Tex. App.BSan Antonio 1999, no pet.).
[17] See footnote 16.
18 Moreover, an ultra vires suit may not be maintained against an official in his official capacity; such a suit may only be brought against an official in his individual capacity. Dillard v. Austin Indep. Sch. Dist., 806 S.W.2d 589, 597-98 (Tex. App.BAustin 1991, writ denied); Bagg v. Univ. of Tex. Med. Branch at Galveston, 726 S.W.2d 582, 584-85 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ ref=d n.r.e.). The exception to this rule is when the claim made is that the official was acting within the scope of official authority but pursuant to an unconstitutional law. Camacho v. Samaniego, 954 S.W.2d 811, 821 (Tex. App.BEl Paso 1997, writ denied).
19 Nor is this a suit for mandamus. Ferguson=s petition to the trial court did not request mandamus relief, and his brief before this Court is not an original proceeding brought pursuant to appellate rule 52. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. Ferguson appears before us in this appeal solely in his status as appellee in an interlocutory appeal in a suit for damages. We express no opinion as to whether mandamus would have been appropriate under the facts of this case if a petition for mandamus relief, rather than a suit for monetary damages had been sought, although we note that a sister court of appeals recently reversed a trial court that refused to grant a writ of mandamus to compel a sheriff to abide by a decision issued by the civil service commission. See Sheppard v. Thomas, No. 01-01-00822-CV, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 7279 (Tex. App.BHouston [1st Dist.], October 10, 2002, no pet. h.).
20 We note that if Ferguson had sought injunctive relief, the trial court would have been faced with a request that Ferguson both be reinstated to the position from which he was terminated while simultaneously being placed in the position he was denied. Since the alluded-to injunctive relief was never requested in the petition and Ferguson instead sought a money judgment, the trial court was never faced with this conundrum. We note too that the first alluded-to potential injunctive request (placement in a disputed position) would have been an attempt to control state action and thus barred by sovereign immunity. See King v. Tex. Dep=t of Human Servs., 28 S.W.3d 27, 33 (Tex. App.BAustin 2000, no pet.)(finding the trial court had no jurisdiction over a request for injunctive relief placing plaintiff in position which he claimed he was deprived of because of discrimination, as such request was barred by sovereign immunity).
21 A claim for back pay, other than one to recover for services rendered or to prevent unjust enrichment, is a claim for damages at law. See Securtec, Inc. v. County of Gregg, No. 06-01-00164-CV, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 5991 at *22 (Tex. App.BTexarkana, August 20, 2002, no pet. h.)(claim seeking back pay for denial of an opportunity to perform a contract was one for legal, not equitable, relief); see also Jackson v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 994 S.W.2d 396, 400 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1999, no pet.)(A . . . although couched in terms of >injunctive relief= . . . a claim for back pay constitutes a claim for damages under Texas law . . .@)(in case seeking back pay for deprivation of Acorrect salary@ resulting from employer=s refusal to reclassify position and adjust pay grade); O=Bryant v. City of Midland, 949 S.W.2d 406, 414 (Tex. App.BAustin 1997)(op. on reh=g), aff=d in part and rev=d in part on other grounds, 18 S.W.3d 209 (Tex. 2000)(finding that request for back pay for officers who had been prevented from serving as licensed peace officers was a claim for damages, not equity, noting that action for monetary relief is action at law rather than in equity); see also Huckabay v. Moore, 142 F.3d 233, 242 n.10 (5th Cir. 1998)(noting that even though back pay is considered an Aequitable award@ under the Texas Human Rights Act, that does not mean that a claim for back pay is not an action at law).
22 This is the Adue course of law@ provision and reads, ANo citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disenfranchised, except by the due course of the law of the land.@ Tex. Const. art. III, '19.
23 A suit brought for a violation of article I, section 19 of the constitution that seeks money damages would not be barred by sovereign immunity as the constitution itself provides a waiver of sovereign immunity for violations of this provision. Steele v. City of Houston, 603 S.W.2d 786, 791 (Tex. 1980); Tex. State Employees= Union/CWA Local 6184 v. Tex. Workforce Comm=n, 16 S.W.3d 61, 67 (Tex. App.BAustin 2000, no pet.). However, claims for money damages in such a suit would be subject to summary judgment. Vaksman, 877 S.W.2d at 404.
24 Tex. Lab. Code Ann. '' 21.001-.556 (Vernon 1996 & Supp. 2002).
In fact, Ferguson alleged in his amended petition that he was seeking a right to sue from the Corpus Christi Human Relations Commission and would amend his pleading on receipt of notice; however no allegation of any violation of the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act is raised in the amended petition.
25 Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. '' 554.001-.010 (Vernon 1996 & Supp. 2002).
26 As a general rule, governmental entities are immune from tort liability under the doctrine of sovereign immunity unless the legislature has waived immunity. Harris County v. Dillard, 883 S.W.2d 166, 168 (Tex. 1994). The Texas Tort Claims Act provides for a limited waiver of sovereign immunity for certain tortious acts. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '101.021 (Vernon 1997). Whether a particular claim falls into any of the exceptions from the general doctrine of sovereign immunity provided for in the Texas Tort Claims Act is entirely dependent on the statutory language. Dallas County Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Bossley, 968 S.W.2d 339, 341 (Tex. 1998).
27 The Texas Tort Claims Act provides that governmental units are liable for:
(1) property damage, personal injury, and death proximately caused by the wrongful act or omission or the negligence of an employee acting within his scope of employment if:
(A) the property damage, personal injury, or death arises from the operation or use of a motor‑driven vehicle or motor‑driven equipment; and
(B) the employee would be personally liable to the claimant according to Texas law; and
(2) personal injury and death so caused by a condition or use of tangible personal or real property if the government unit would, were it a private person, be liable to the claimant according to Texas law.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 101.021 (Vernon 1997).
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Dear Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CCISD, Legislators & South Texas Judiciary
Attention:
In an agressive collateral campaign in advocacy of South Texas as a Whole; the issue of Education must be for the children (our future). I submit in good faith my "TWO CENTS" (Dos Centavos).
The items addressed will fall in 3 categories; legislation, quality assurance and the Judiciary Evolution.
Legislation - Students need to be able to earn and get paid weekly. WIA JOB Grants
attendance selective railroading must cease immediately. It is a racket of cushy JOBS and truant officers who cannot discourage even the skipping in the middle of the school day. I remember MR Gonzalez (GONZO) at Carroll High School back in the days of punch card bubble in "chad like" attendance cards. Student office workers picked up the cards every period and they were processed immediately. Any irregularities were addressed AND Gonzo, Mr Lyons & Mr Mon were on patrol with the cutting edge in technology Walkie Talkies. Not one other school in CCISD had them at that time. Janitors were the security. My point is where is the lag and why now that this area has been significantly beefed up. How are these kids tardy or hiding out or coming and going without someone noticing. Then they file against the parent for contributing to truancy and the student is fined and the parent has no defense even if there was never any communication from the district informing the parent. No attorney is provided as the crime is punishable by fine only. WATT about the people who cant pay? I have watched JAG lock students and parents up. 1 student $500, 2 Parents $500 each equals $1500. Community Service is an option but is it worth the association with hardened Juveniles. If there is a chance of being jailed an attorney must be provided. Any appeal is denied and handed back without signature of Court. There is no transcript of the proceedings so strong arm tactics are practiced and rules are ignored to get rich off of the poor.
quality assurance
Judiciary Evolution
incomplete work in progress
Friday, May 19, 2006
i could not speak english and "tanto" (actually it might have been "tonta"
i could not speak english and "tanto"
Posted on May 20, 2006 at 02:45:43 AM by This belongs @ the top jfk/d1
eb: "For the last twenty years,Hispanics have had control of institutions and agencies of government and power in South Texas and throughout the southwest..and has life improved for hispanics because of it? I'd submit to you it has."
ok it is possible alot more of our parents realized the importance of "learning english"
to the point i was denied my first language deliberately,hence i forgot it
at 4 i went to headstart
i could not speak english and "tanto"
i think it meant "dense"
but i was removed from my family who spoke to me in spanish
i am grateful but i was once accused over the cb radio-"i bet dhe has blond hair and blue eyes"
that was sooo hilarious cuz if they had seen me.........
i used to wish i had blonde hair and blue eyes cuz i thought that was "pretty"
now why did that person accuse me of having blonde hair and blue eyes?
cuz of the way i talked?
cuz she could not see me?
if only my mom would have heard it!!
she would have thought she did her job!
no one would accuse me of being a dumb mexican
Monday, May 15, 2006
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Friday, March 17, 2006
TLR special session 101
again perry and his "delay" crabdicks are going to try and armstrong their colleagues and shape "public policy" but the average citizens are engaged and sick of their "enronneous" lies!
'public school" is money they want to take---why?
cuz their kids go to PRIVATE school!
they dont want to pay taxes for any children ala rangel pharmacy school,law school etc.....
but a$m-qatar???
but wait they write off the tuition to the irs ????
no one gets money to pay for their kids care---- why only the rich?
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Sunday, February 05, 2006
dannoynted1's blogspots
dannoynted1
kenedy-ranch.com
kenedyranch.net
South Texas Watchdog Authority
South Texas Judicial Watch Dog
Sarita Kenedy East
John G & Marie Stella Kenedy Foundation & Trust
microsoftdotcom
BILLGATESDOTCOM
corpuschristical...
Corpus Christi
OMNI
The 105th
Leonardo Da Vinci
spohn foundation hospitals
maria magdalena
kiii
vatican bank
love
keys
THE VATICAN & THE RICHEST DIOCESE IN THE WORLD
tana
tana
Bob Rowling
BARBIE GIRL
la parra
superbowl XL
Monday, January 30, 2006
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper!
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 6:31:25 PM
I will be sending you the Article. It claims Mr Von Wade is a racist anti hispanic militant! I have never viewed you as that type of man. However there are more issues I have with this publication! I am the main proponent for the Fernandz cause which is a cause I beleived in and still beleive in. I have discovered the Family is controlled by a meglomaniac and since I have fought for this cause believe I should be able to post against this cause as well. Well they have banned me! I will develop this story more over the next few days and hope I can get some support with regard to the first amendment that Defenzor is supposed to stand for!
Collapse all posts in this thread
Author
Replys
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Here are the links! 1/3/2005 6:34:49 PM
kenedyranch.net & defenzor.net http://b4.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?user=defensornews
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 6:41:20 PM
Well, that may be a little over board, but sometimes Eric, you kinda bring it own yourself. i think more people on the other side of issues would take you more seriously if you didn''t fill up so much air time with just empty name calling retoric. I mean, I agree with you on the smoking ban issue, but every time you mention it you have to add all filler. capitalist haters, communists, socialists, militant(comeon, they may be pushy but militant is a stretch) and this goes for anyone not on your side, you try to anaize the situation at times, but you just fill it up with some much non-substancial name calling. it''s the same as the superleft calling anything US realated as capitalist pigs/nazis...ect ect... It adds nothing to the debate, turns alot of people off, and adds to the divide. just a thought.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Good Point Sidewalk Cipher! 1/3/2005 10:36:32 PM
I am new in here and am not familiar with Mr Von Wade; however I do agree with you with respect to the name calling it is really just theatrics and filler. I say this with all due respect and will practice this ethical stance myself! I will be reading the postings from the past! Apropos! I have been posting on the two sites defenzor.net & kenedyranch.net for quite sometime. Everything was alright until I wanted to be critical of an element for which I do not represent. I am from the Body of Christ and reside from within! I have been battling with the Kenedy Foundation And Trust who i refer to as KFATSO. I have also stood up to the Catholic Church here and in the Vatican for our Diocese is the Richest Diocese in the World! I have exposed the pedophiles of Parkdale Baptist Church & the Roman Catholic Church under Bishop Rene Gracida. I also have exposed the fraud & corruption of the Church Universal & KFATSO. I have enormous information and evidence to back up my words! Tell KFATSO & the Fernandez people they woke up a Sleeping Giant.
EVWPosts: 321
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 11:06:03 AM
I''m really surprized at your lack of education Sidwalk. Those words are not ""filler"" or ""name calling"" as you put it. They have specific definitions that have specific meaning to the subject I am discussing. Pick up a dictionary and discover for yourself. Second, what the hell does that have to do with a bunch of loose-cannon extreamists calling me a racist because they can''t beat me in a debate? Maybe you and those Defenzor types have something in common. I''d watch it if I were you Sidwalk. Your walking a very thin line for someone who cowers away from calling in on the air to make your points because you expose a great intellectual weakness when you do. If you want to go toe to toe with me then stop hunkering down behind your computer and be a man. Call into the show as you have done a couple of times before. You didn''t do so well when you couldn''t search the web for someone else to quote verbatim. As I remember, when cornered, you simply kept repeating some juvenile, over simplistic, unreasonable expection. It was pretty weak. But I guess you bring this on yourself.
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 12:55:51 PM
Did I hit a sore spot or what? Your right, i''m not a professianl talker, I do better when I can think it out, rethink, and check my facts. Plus I don''t have control of the program, so I can''t interupt you to clarify missunderstandings, and a 2 min call is hardly enought time to hash out any important issue with any clarity. If you seriously want to debate some of these issues, you should post more on your web site. Where there is time to analsye, check, reply, the way a real debate works. A two minute call dosn''t really get into the meat of anything, it''s just entertainment, and good at highlighting issues that may have sliped passed so others can go look deeper. a talk radio show realy isn''t the best fourm for true inteletual debate. They have specific definitions that have specific meaning to the subject I am discussing Well, like the smoking thing. You could have taken the time to go into more of the details... who are these anti-smoking groups? all I''ve heard you say about them is the name calling. Have you ever even mentioned thier names or postitions in the community? Who is their leader? who is their spokesman? What is their motive? All I''ve learned about it from your show is they are anti-capitalist commies. I''ve heard you mention the health issues aspect and that some of the science is ""junk science"" well... why not some more details? Any specific studies you can quote? What about finding out what studies and research the antismoking group is basing their position on and telling us the relyablit of those studies? Insted you jsut say their wrong, anyone who supports it is wrong, then people call in and say they agree with you and repeat the reasons you just said. what the hell does that have to do with a bunch of loose-cannon extreamists calling me a racist because they can''t beat me in a debate? Look, I don''t agree with them, but you make an effort to isolate yourself in your extreme right wing retoric. Like I said it''s the same as the super lefties who go on and on about the evil american empire, ""down with capitalism"" while they buy new shoes at the mall... It''s empty retoric... what does calling the antismoking people anti-capitalist add to the debate? As for the racism thing... its pretty much the same thing your doing... not methodicly going over and presenting the evidence, but taking what ever sounds good and going retoric crazy. They are probley upset at your stance on imigration or something (which i pretty much agree with) But insted of methodicly going over the issues and presenting a clearly laid out counter point to your stance, they just say erics a racists blah blah blah. Your walking a very thin line for someone who cowers away from calling in on the air to make your points because you expose a great intellectual weakness when you do. Like I said, I don''t get paid to talk, and don''t have control over the show or enough time to really disscuss an issue... and if i remember when you first started this site you posted quite a bit, untill people started to analyse and dissmantle some of your arguements, then you''ve kinda dissapeared... what happened there? not as fun when you don''t have control over the situation? And I don''t see why you get so offended at an honest critique of your show... Its your show do what you want, I just think it would be a bitt better with more facts and less jabbering... but thats just me. And I understand your just a talk show, your not really there to be super intiletual, if you did it would bore a lot of your listners and they would tune out... And your job, at the end of the day, is nothing more than to get people to tune in... gotta move those units.
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 1:47:14 PM
You were owned Sidewalk. Face it. You jumped on the band wagon and Eric pulled you back on the muddy sidewalk of your reality. Two minutes? I have often heard callers getting a great deal more than 2 minutes air time, myself included. You just have to be interesting, which for you might well be a handicap. As for your true intellectual debates. You are beaten on the facts with near regularity, why would anyone bother taking up your banner? Your claims of honesty in your critique are laughable. Your initial post tacitly accepted the initial racism accusations against Eric and you took the time to beat a good man while you thought you had him down. THEN When an apology would have been most appropriate, you instead seek to demean and belittle Eric''s show as nothing more than ""moving units."" You are dismissed. Hardcore Harry
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 2:30:37 PM
Again, a perfet example.... no reasons or examples just ""your wrong"" and name calling. I can understands Eric''s appeal. I have often heard callers getting a great deal more than 2 minutes air time, myself included Even if you get an entire 15min or however long the segments are thats still only enought time to skim the surface of big issues. People that think that is enough time to get fully explore the deatils of major events are the ones that think CNN, Fox and the cable news networks have ""in depth"" reporting. They don''t, they skim the top like all the rest... for good reason. you instead seek to demean and belittle Eric''s show as nothing more than ""moving units."" You concider that demeaning? Thats his job? Why does radio exist or any media for that matter? What is the structure of our whole economy? profits. Media does that for advertising. meida sells a audience to advertisers, thats their busniess. Thats why CNN and Fox don''t dive into the boring details of world events. The atention span of the american public is very short, if they get board hearing about the complex interrelationships of the world economy they change the channel and miss the Tide commercial. Same holds true for Erics show, hes not there to change the world with the best information he can provide, just to keep you interested to hear about the Sharp Shooters new special. Your claims of honesty in your critique are laughable. Your initial post tacitly accepted the initial racism accusations against Eric and you took the time to beat a good man while you thought you had him down. ????? If I made it seem I think eric is a racist then I must have been unclear. I''ve known racists... Eric is not one. I don''t know how else to prove thats my honest belief. Beat him when he''s down???? I''ve actual thought about posting a topic about this allready but never did. I just think he uses too much jibber jabber name calling insted of diving into more facts. But it''s his show he can do what he wants, I''m sure he has no research team and after 4hours talking on air I don''t think he wants to spend time doing in depth research. Thats fine, but the fact that I have an opinion about his show shouldn''t be taken as an insult. Eric seems like a cool guy sometimes. I don''t agree with him alot of times, but I don''t agree with alot of people, that has no bering on them as a person. Unless its some massive dissagreement, like they like to beat their wife or trip old people, that kind of dissagreement will get you a punch in the mouth.
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 3:38:02 PM
You addressed the racism charge one post too late Sidewalk. Like I said, your initial post reeked of bandwangoning. Hardcore Harry
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
sure... 1/4/2005 4:05:09 PM
You addressed the racism charge one post too late Sidewalk. Like I said, your initial post reeked of bandwangoning. 1/3/2005 6:41 PM Well, that may be a little over board, but sometimes Eric, you kinda bring it own yourself. i think more people on the other side of issues would take you more seriously if you didn''t fill up so much air time with just empty name calling retoric. Yea, I jumped on the ""eric''s a racist band wagon"" I forgot you can''t read...
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Your feeble powers of Justification 1/5/2005 1:02:51 AM
You amaze me with you feeble powers of justification. Just how far is a ""little"" overboard? So, are we to assume that perhaps you entertained a ""little"" merit to the accusations? If not, there is nothing in you statement that dismissed it outright. No. In fact reading it one is left to assume that you embraced it. You certainly DID NOT vehemently denounce it as unjust and uncalled for. Someone calling someone else a racist is a mighty heavy charge. If, as you seem to suggest it is in response for what you call ""empty name calling rhetoric"" on Eric''s behalf it is STILL in no way justified. NO, INstead you do what? You place the blame on Eric for ""bringing"" it on himself. NONSENSE! Yes, I will repeat yet again, YOU tacitly implicated yourself in that post and there is no amount of spin on your part that can put it aright. Again, an apology would have better served your cause. Instead you offer empty excuses. Hardcore Harry
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Sidewalk_Cipher, do you read... 1/4/2005 7:14:16 PM
...even read" name=20773
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Sidewalk_Cipher, do you read... 1/5/2005 9:07:14 AM
Sidewalk_Cipher, do you read...even read ""El Defensor?"" Nope, never have, and I haven''t read the artical that mentions Eirc, thats why I tried to stay away from that part of it. My whole point was Eric paints himself into a right wing cornor with his retoric... Which makes him a target for people who paint themselves into diametricly oposed corners. I have no idea what the artical is acusing him of, so how could I say he didn''t do it, But I also know i''ve never heard any racisim in Eric, so it sounds overboard to me. The debate would be Eric owning you right from the starting gate and you quoting ad nauseum from the two aformentioned sources and or disecting each and every sentence of Eric''s. Guess we will never know... But you have to admit, If you want to challange someone to an open debate, This is really the fare forum for it.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Re: Sidewalk_Cipher, do you read... 1/5/2005 12:15:40 PM
For the record, it was not I who posted the second part of the issue you rebutted. I assume you were responding to both mine, then, Harry''s quote.
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Sidewalk_Cipher, do you read... 1/5/2005 12:30:24 PM
I assume you were responding to both mine, then, Harry''s quote. yup
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Eric has never (en re time)... 1/4/2005 7:12:41 PM
...during the times I have heard him, hung up ona caller. Does anyone ever remember such a time? Additionally, he has given me much time. Lago and O''Reliey are different cases. Lago lets you get in your point, but his minions normally cut off callers that Will" name=20773
randallpretPosts: 882
Re: Eric has never (en re time)... 1/6/2005 5:01:27 AM
Capt, I know I heard Eric do it once and then brag about how he was able to I will admit it was out of character for eric but he did do it. The caller did not make much sense but eric still hung up on him. I can not remember how long ago it was but I know it happened. I have also heard Eric call people morons, idiots, commies and nazis. He called those who want to ban smoking from restuarants, smoke nazis. I don''t see any point in using such names, I don''t care if they are in the dictionary or not, you are getting too personal when you do that. We need to stick to the issues and not make the people we are debating with the issue. I am not a saint and I have slipped up a few times but I do my best to avoid making personal attacks or being hostile towards anyone on here no matter how many personal attacks or hostilies they throw my way and I have had plenty thrown my way.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Re: Eric has never (en re time)... 1/6/2005 12:15:13 PM
I know I once heard him deny someone who wanted to call back who had hung up in a fit of passion...I imagine he (or then Dawn, no Giovanni) would have to cut off a caller that used profanity. As to cutting someone off for not agreeing with them, like Mike Savage...I have yet to see this happen.
randallpretPosts: 882
Re: Re: Re: Eric has never (en re time)... 1/7/2005 4:11:29 AM
I have to concede that I never did hear eric hang up on someone just because they disagreed with him but I have heard him hang up on someone once at least. The caller was trying to talk over him maybe I can not remember. He was an unruly caller from what I remember and I did understand why eric did hang up on him. You have to be careful with what you allow to be put on the air. Mike Savage hangs up someone at the first hint of disagreement sometimes, that is uncalled for but it is his show.
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Re: Eric has never (en re time)... 1/7/2005 9:35:38 AM
I have to concede that I never did hear eric hang up on someone just because they disagreed Yea, I can say I''ve never heard him flat out hangup on someone... but he does have that little volume knob he likes to use. If Eric has a point to make, and the caller hasn''t finished or wants to say something, Eric will simply turn them down... say what he wants then let them respond. Its a needed control for a flowing entertaining talkshow, but for a true debate it kind of unevens the playing field.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Political beliefs, Sidewalk... 1/4/2005 7:09:04 PM
...are personal. If you think that someone" name=20773
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Seriously.... 1/4/2005 4:15:15 PM
If you want to go toe to toe with me then stop hunkering down behind your computer and be a man. That really is quite a backwards statment. You would rather me call into YOUR show that you control for me to go ""toe to toe"" Why not step out from behind the protection of your volume knob and enter into a debate in a level forum? This is the best place for a true debate, it''s equal on all sides, no one has any advantage over another. You used to... why no more? There is no other motive on the message board other than excange of ideas, no commerical breaks to interfear, no need to keep it catchy and flowing... only true exploration of facts. So, if you dislike me that much, want to go ""toe to toe"" to prove me wrong or what ever stop hiding behind your radio show and step into equal grounds.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Eric and Sidewalk... 1/4/2005 7:16:16 PM
...my I suggest attrending Curtis Rock''s Republican Future Activity on the 20th of January. I will be there and many more would if you two attended!!!
randallpretPosts: 882
Re: Eric and Sidewalk... 1/6/2005 5:06:06 AM
You can count on me being there if I can get the time off. It will be neat and interesting to meet everyone in the person, I just hope no one attempts an assassination of me because I am a communist :).
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Seriously.... 1/5/2005 12:46:01 AM
A laughable challenge Sidewalk. Let''s see, you would have as your source material Nietzsche and some punk rock band no one has ever heard of. The debate would be Eric owning you right from the starting gate and you quoting ad nauseum from the two aformentioned sources and or disecting each and every sentence of Eric''s. The gauntlet you throw out is as emtpy as your arguments. Hardcore Harry
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Re: Seriously.... 1/5/2005 12:13:17 PM
Harry, Don''t forget denying he [Sidewalk] said things he said! (just kidding, with regards to Sidewalk)
condotTTTTPosts: 94
JAIME KENEDENO/ANTON SCOTT TRYING TO LURE U TO HIS TRAP 1/10/2005 5:06:30 AM
XXX
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
XXX IS RAY FERNANDEZ 1/10/2005 6:41:34 AM
AT LEAST AT KENEDYRANCH.
CalPosts: 719
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 2:14:19 PM
i think more people on the other side of issues would take you more seriously if you didn''t fill up so much air time with just empty name calling retoric. A GREAT BIG AMEM TO THAT STATEMENT. TRUER WORDS WERE NEVER SPOKEN. BERNIE SEAL GAVE THE OTHER PEOPLE TIME TO TALK. BOTH ""LAGO"" AND ERIC DO NOT DO THIS.
Texas CowgirlPosts: 16
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 4:33:59 PM
Actually sidewalk_cipher I believe you have it all wrong here. I picked up a copy of the December 14, 2004 print eddition of the ''El Defenzor''paper from Enrique''s Mexican Food today and read the article in question partaining to the accussations against the talk show host Eric Von Wade. The name calling and racist statements seem to be directed against Eric Von Wade and not from him towards others. Try to stick to the topic and we may be able to make some forward progress. However, name calling from either side is very unproductive and inflamatory. Go read the article for yourself, then try to make some educated comments on the matter in question. That is what I did. Thank you Mr. Sidewalk_cipher and others.
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 4:39:52 PM
I haven''t read the artical and wasn''t commenting on it. My comments were about Erics show in general, I''ve been thinking it for a while and was acctually gonna make a post about it but then this poped up so I put it hear. while eric is a name caller it''s more toward the lefties, I don''t think i''ve ever heard him say anything ""racists"" or called anyone race based names. sorry for the confusion.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Sidewalk... 1/4/2005 7:18:22 PM
"
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/5/2005 1:08:36 AM
I believe the apology should be directed with sincertity toward the offended party Sidewalk. Hardcore Harry
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/5/2005 9:06:10 AM
I believe the apology should be directed with sincertity toward the offended party Sidewalk.I believe the apology should be directed with sincertity toward the offended party Sidewalk. Ok, sorry your a dummy...
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 7:00:58 PM
Your words represent a seperate issue.
Texas CowgirlPosts: 16
Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 10:38:58 PM
I have been listening to your program for some time now and I find it completely wrong of such a newspaper to attack someone whom they obviously don''t know very well. Not only did they attack you, but they didn''t even let you defend yourself. Why is that? What are you opponents affaid of? What do they not want the rest of us to know? I am interested in what is the real reason we are hearing about this now? If anyone knows anymore please comment.
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 10:48:18 PM
I looked at that http: and I didn''t see anything that said Eric''s name in there, why didn''t someone put down which post is was and what did it start with. Here we go again someone always has to say they are offended and that they were the ones being talked about, some people never grow up man.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/4/2005 12:59:33 AM
The Article is in the actual print edition of Defenzor issue before Christmas. It has Mr Von Wade in Bold letters! I will be supporting my claim with a hand delivered copy if Mr Von Wade cannot obtain one himself. Hell they should have sent him a copy since he was the subject. I am only informing Mr Von Wade of this occurrence. I do have issues with this Newspaper and I do beleive in many of the Newspapers Causes. But to me it is not about ethnicity or color!
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
King Ranch: A Tickler of Events to Come! 1/4/2005 2:08:28 AM
Isn''t it intriguing that the voting boxes that determined LBJ''s election were controlled by a man who worked for the interests that controlled our drug-running railroad in Laredo-- the Tex Mex? Is it the same drug network in Florida that controls those Broward County boxes? The same man was implicated in the death of the son of a South Texas attorney, alleged to have been killed by Mexican assassins mentioned in the Torbitt Document as having been involved in the Kennedy assassination. DUVAL COUNTY. Duval County (Q-15) is in south central Texas about fifty miles inland from the Gulf of Mexicoqv and seventy-three miles north of the Rio Grande. It is bordered by Webb, La Salle, McMullen, Live Oak, Jim Wells, Brooks, and Jim Hogg counties. San Diego, the county seat and most populous town, is on the Texas Mexican Railroad at the intersection of State highways 44 and 359 and Farm road 1329, about fifty-two miles west of Corpus Christi and eighty miles east of Laredo. Duval County''s reputation for political corruption peaked with Lyndon B. Johnson''s election to the United States Senate in 1948. The famous Box 13, which gave Johnson his eighty-seven-vote victory, was actually in Jim Wells County, but the manipulation of the returns was almost certainly directed by Parr. In the 1900 presidential election Duval County went Republican, but since that time, thanks largely to the efficiency of the Parr machine and the customary tendency of Hispanics to vote for Democrats, the county has delivered majorities to the Democratic party on the order of 94 percent in 1916, 98 percent in 1932, 95 percent in 1936, 96 percent in 1940, 95 percent in 1944, 97 percent in 1948, and 93 percent in 1964. In fact, only once between 1916 and 1972 did the Democratic candidate receive less than 74 percent of the vote in Duval County; that year, 1956, a mere 68 percent voted Democratic. Even after the demise of the Parr machine in 1975 Democrats continued to dominate. In the 1988 and 1992 presidential elections 82 percent of the county''s voters cast ballots for the Democratic candidate. See: http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/DD/hcd11.html The remainder of Parr''s political career was highlighted by a seemingly endless series of spectacular scandals, involving election fraud, graft on the grand scale, and violence. His most celebrated scheme decided the outcome of the United States Senate race between Coke R. Stevenson and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1948. With Stevenson the apparent winner, election officials in Jim Wells County, probably acting on Parr''s orders, reported an additional 202 votes for Johnson a week after the primary runoff and provided the future president with his eighty-seven-vote margin of victory for the whole state. Amid charges of fraud, the voting lists disappeared. Even more sordid controversies followed. As strong challenges from the Freedom party, consisting mainly of World War II veterans, developed in several South Texas counties, including Duval, two critics of Parr''s rule and the son of another met violent deaths. While denying Parr''s involvement in two of the killings, his biographer, Dudley Lynch, concedes that the evidence against Parr in the shooting of the son of Jacob Floyd, an attorney for the Freedom party, was both ""highly circumstantial"" and ""highly incriminating."" After this third murder, Governor Allan Shivers, Texas attorney general John Ben Shepperd, and federal authorities launched all-out campaigns to destroy the Parr machine. Investigations of the 1950s produced over 650 indictments against ring members, but Parr survived the indictments and his own conviction for federal mail fraud through a complicated series of dismissals and reversals on appeal. In the face of another legal offensive in the 1970s and a rebellion within his own organization, he finally relented. While appealing a conviction and five-year sentence for federal income tax evasion, the Duke of Duval committed suicide at his ranch, Los Harcones, on April 1, 1975. See also Boss Rule. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/PP/fpa36.html While you can''t play ""what-if"" with any certainty, you have to wonder whether the area from San Antonio and Corpus Christi south would have known the same emptiness that prevailed in the in-between sections of Tamaulipas, Nuevo León, Coahuila, and Chihuahua if the Anglos hadn''t turned their particular talents and drives Valleyward. It started as a land of great ranches, which in themselves invite sparse settlement, and it might have remained as untaken as the country between Del Rio and Fort Stockton if Colonel Uriah Lott had not perceived that with a railroad, the Valley could become a year-round fruit and vegetable garden for much of the United States. Lott buttonholed B. F. Yoakum, who at the beginning of the twentieth century sent Captain J. E. Hinckley reconnoitering through the Valley into Mexico to find a way of tapping the riches-almost entirely potential-on either side of the border. He enlisted the irresistible enthusiasm of Theodore Roosevelt, who envisioned a road that would eventually extend all the way through Central America, where he had designs on the Panama Isthmus. Anglo American survey crews came in, built a steel bridge between Brownsville and Matamoros suitable for locomotives or buggies, and began planning other routes that would connect such diverse places geographically as New Orleans, San Antonio, Memphis, and Chicago. Down in Mexico, President Porfirio Diaz, who welcomed yanqui development (translated sometimes as exploitation), encouraged Yoakum and his cohorts, and even offered to help underwrite the cost. Some of the Anglos backing Yoakum remain memorable names three-quarters of a century after the event-Robert J. Kleberg, Robert Driscoll Sr., John G. Kenedy, Caesar Kleberg, and John J. Welder--to name only a few. On January 12, 1903, they received their charter to do business as the St. Louis, Brownsville, and Mexico Railway, to extend from Sinton to Brownsville, with reticulation of future roads to branch northward and eastward from there. The foundation of the paper work for connecting the Valley with the United States and Texas had been laid. Actually, the Anglos had been in the Valley since the period of the War against Mexico. They had been slow to arrive because the area from the Nueces River to the Rio Grande was disputed. Mexico had refused to accept Santa Ana''s cession of the region to Texas, which meant that an enormous region in truth belonged to no one. Or worse, to whoever could take and hold it. It would have been comparable to a modern Lebanon except that fortunately it was empty of people. Then developers brought in the St. Louis, Brownsville, and Mexico Railway. The year was 1903, two decades after Texas had shut down land grants to railroads. No help would come from that source. Rumors of incoming railroads had been spread before, but no rails or locomotives had been seen. But like the neglected maiden who suddenly has three suitors, Brownsville began to be courted by the Southern Pacific and the Frisco-Rock Island, as well as the St. Louis, Brownsville, and Mexico railroads. The town fathers voted to raise a bonus of 12,000 acres on either side of the projected road to the distance of four miles, plus $40,000 in cash, and forty to fifty acres within Brownsville itself for depot grounds plus twenty more acres for shops. The list of endorsers reads like a Who''s Who of Texas for the first half of the twentieth century. Up in St. Louis, another syndicate of almost a hundred business leaders were banding together to see that the railroad got underway. The bulk of the capital would have to come out of Missouri. Ironically, the railroad that brought in the Yankees and the high-gear economy to the Valley went into receivership in 1913, a condition brought on largely by insufficient freight. When the Valley began its boom in the 1920s, the railroad came back, only to run into the growth of the trucking industry. See: http://www.public-humanities.org/tjfall97.html Dutch-born Uriah Lott, who had secured the financial assistance of Mifflin Kenedy and Richard King in the building of the Texas-Mexican Railroad to Laredo, was also hoping to give the Lower Valley the same access to the ""outside world."" A railroad to the Lower Valley would also give Corpus Christi another rail outlet. In 1889, consequently, Lott received a charter to build the St. Louis, Brownsville and Mexico Railway. A.M. French, chief engineer on the project, ran several different lines to the river, but eventually agreed on a road that would join the Texas-Mexican Railroad some fifteen miles west of Corpus Christi at what is today Robstown. After sod was broken on the line on July 26, 1903, sweaty laborers set out hacking a right-of-way through the brush south toward the Lower Valley. See: http://riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Past/Book/Part2/railroad.html A native of New York and a steamboat pilot and captain by trade, King came from Florida to Texas and the Rio Grande in 1847 for Mexican War service. Commanding the steamboat, Colonel Cross , he served for the War''s duration, transporting troops and supplies for the United States Army. He remained on the border after the Mexican War and became a partner in the Brownsville steamboat firms of M. Kenedy & Company (1850-1866) and its successor, King, Kenedy & Company (1866-1874). The principal partners were Richard King, Mifflin Kenedy (1818-1895) and Charles Stillman (1810-1875). These firms dominated the Rio Grande trade, on a near monopolistic scale, for more than two decades. See: http://www.king-ranch.com/sideshow1.htm Between 1862 and 1865 Stillman, King, and Kenedy transported Confederate cotton to Matamoros under contract for payment in gold. Stillman bought much of the cotton and sent it to his textile complex at Monterrey, but he sold even more of it in New York through his mercantile firm, Smith and Dunning. The United States government was a major purchaser. On one sale at Manhattan Stillman netted $18,851 on a gross of $21,504. His cotton buyers in Texas included George W. Brackenridge, and one of his major suppliers was Thomas William House [father of Col. E.M. House]. By the end of the war Stillman was one of the richest men in America. He concentrated his investments in the National City Bank of New York, which his son James later controlled, and supplied Brackenridge with $200,000 in the 1870s in order to establish the San Antonio National Bank. Stillman married Elizabeth Pamela Goodrich of Wethersfield, Connecticut, on August 17, 1849. He built a notable home in Brownsville in 1850 and lived in Brownsville and New York City until 1866, when he moved permanently to New York. He died there in December 1875. See: http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/SS/fst57.html Henrietta King In 1854, King had married Henrietta Maria Morse Chamberlain, a Presbyterian missionary''s daughter. King Ranch Archives describe Henrietta King as mild-mannered with an iron will which carried her through the prolonged absences of her husband. She had been well-schooled, and was known to give polish and luster to her well-known, generous husband. She also proved she had fortitude, when, pregnant with her fifth child, she was present at the Ranch when the Union cavalry raided Rancho de Santa Gertrudis in 1863. Although the family moved to San Antonio following the raid, she moved them back in 1866 to continue the King family''s ties to the land. Upon her husband''s death when she was 53, Mrs. King controlled a vast area of South Texas and a business that was immensely successful, but not without problems. She immediately turned to Robert J. Kleberg Sr., a young lawyer who had been involved in the Ranch''s legal business for several years. She appointedhim business manager on Jan. 1, 1886; six months later, he became her son-in-law when he married the youngest King daughter, Alice Gertrudis. Under Mrs. King''s and Kleberg''s guidance, cross fences were built to divide the sprawling acres into manageable pastures. They embarked on a brush control program. They suffered through South Texas'' most crippling natural occurrence, drought. They helped to build the town of Kingsville in 1903-04. And continuing Captain King''s prowess in diversifying, the Ranch became involved in banking, lumber, leather goods, newspapers and publishing, retail businesses and dairy farming. Under her leadership and that of Robert Kleberg, the Ranch''s South Texas holdings had grown to 1.2 million acres, 94,000 head of cattle, 4,500 horses and mules, and 1,000 sheep and goats. Estate taxes, operational debt and lawsuits challenging the estate''s division caused uncertainty. In her will, she stipulated a 10-year trust to give her heirs time to settle differences and arrange her affairs and assets. Her ultimate goal was to preserve the King Ranch as a single entity according ""to my wishes and the wishes and views of my late husband, Captain Richard King."" In response, Alice King Kleberg, Henrietta''s youngest daughter and Robert''s wife, consolidated much of King Ranch by buying out other heirs. Thus, in 1934, Mrs. Kleberg created King Ranch, Inc., and it was this entity that inherited Alice''s part of the Ranch as well as the other property which she had purchased. She sold stock in the new corporation to her five children, and descendants of Robert and Alice Kleberg are the 60-some shareholders of today''s King Ranch. From a Family Business to a Corporate Environment. The last quarter of the 20th Century has brought further changes to King Ranch. Since 1977, all overseas ranching operations except for that in Brazil was sold. The King Ranch''s Corporate History statement credits James H. Clement and his successor John B. Armstrong with guiding the Company to eliminate debt and ""...through the difficult Texas business environment of the 1980s and (they) oversaw the painful, and sometimes stormy, transition from a family business enterprise to the present corporate structure with outside directorship and professional management."" Since 1988, the King Ranch Chief Executive Officer has not been a King family member, although the corporate board of directors still includes some descendants. By the early 1970''s, King Ranch holdings totaled, worldwide, approximately 11.5 million acres. In 1974, with the death of Bob Kleberg and Dick, Jr., in poor health, the Family selected James H. Clement, Sr., the husband of King''s great granddaughter Ida Larkin, as President and CEO. Together with successor John B. Armstrong (husband to King''s great granddaughter, Henrietta Larkin), Clement steered the Ranch though the difficult Texas business environment of the 1980''s. They also oversaw the transition from a Family business to a modern corporate structure -- based primarily on the lines of business established in the early years. Eventually, many of the foreign operations were liquidated as the focus shifted back to the traditional domestic lines of business. See: http://www.king-ranch.com/legend.htm See: http://archives.tamuk.edu/database/House.htm (Wedding Announcement - Henrietta Kleberg Larkin to Thomas Reeves Armstrong) Armstrongs mix gentility, old-fashioned Texas ranching Cowboys and candidates, princes and presidents have visited over the years By Mary Lee Grant © July 13, 1999 Caller-Times http://www.caller.com/1999/july/13/today/local_ne/3122.html ARMSTRONG - In the brush country south of Sarita, a few miles east of U.S. Highway 77, sophistication and political power have mixed with the independence of Texas pioneers. Here, 6-foot-4-inch Tobin Armstrong, the descendant of a Texas Ranger and a Yale scholar, and the petite brunette, Anne Armstrong, former U.S. ambassador to Great Britain, hold court. Guests at the 50,000-acre ranch have included former president George Bush; his son and presidential candidate Gov. George W. Bush, the Rockefellers and Prince Charles. Armstrong Ranch still is an old-fashioned Texas ranch, run by Tobin Armstrong, who oversees it by Suburban and mobile telephone. A colony of cowboys who live in houses surrounding the big house work the 2,500 Santa Gertrudis cattle while riding thoroughbred horses, the Armstrong version of cow ponies. ""One of the best things about this ranch is that it is a grandchild magnet,"" said Tobin Armstrong, who has five children and 12 grandchildren, who visit the ranch frequently. The Armstrong Ranch was purchased in 1852 and settled in 1882 by John Armstrong III, a Texas Ranger from Tennessee. He had come to South Texas to clean up the border and became famous for capturing the notorious outlaw John Wesley Hardin. His sons combined the sophistication of an East Coast education with the ruggedness of a ranch upbringing. Charlie Armstrong, Tobin Armstrong''s father, graduated from Yale in 1908 and returned to South Texas to manage the ranch. Charlie''s brother, Tom Armstrong, graduated from Princeton and Harvard Law School before going to work as an executive for Standard Oil Co. The Armstrongs were instrumental in bringing polo to South Texas, and when Prince Charles came to visit, Tobin arranged a match for him on the ranch''s polo field. ""I never rode a bought horse,"" Armstrong said. ""I raised and trained my own thoroughbreds."" Tobin Armstrong was tutored at home until he was 9, when he was sent to private school in San Antonio. He attended the University of Texas and Texas A&M University. Ties between the Armstrong Ranch and the King Ranch always have been close. Tobin''s older brother, John Armstrong, married the King Ranch''s Henrietta Kleberg, and his uncle, Tom, married her mother, Henrietta Kleberg Larkin. John Armstrong was the last family member to serve as president of the King Ranch. Despite the international circles in which they move, the Armstrongs are still ranchers to the core, talking of weather and rainfall as readily as business and politics. ""Look how green the grass is,'''' Anne Armstrong said on a recent hot day. ""We haven''t had it like this for several years. It will be good for the cattle."" Staff writer Mary Lee Grant can be reached at 886-3752 or by e-mail at grantm@caller.com ANNE LEGENDRE ARMSTRONG Armstrong, Anne Legendre (1927-...), was the first woman to serve as United States ambassador to Britain. President Gerald R. Ford appointed her to the office, which she held in 1976 and 1977. She had previously been the first woman to hold the Cabinet-level post of counselor to the president. She was named to that position by President Richard M. Nixon in 1972 and served under both Nixon and Ford. Anne Legendre was born in New Orleans and graduated from Vassar College. She married Tobin Armstrong, a Texas cattle rancher, in 1950. She served as vice chairman of the Texas Republican Party from 1966 to 1968. In 1971 and 1972, she was cochairman of the Republican National Committee. As counselor to the President, Armstrong was a member of the president''s Domestic Council, the Council on Wage and Price Stability, and the Commission on the Organization of Government for the Conduct of Foreign Policy. Source: http://school.discovery.com/homeworkhelp/worldbook/atozhistory/a/723253.html CURRENT SEC FILINGS RE: ANNE L. ARMSTRONG: http://www.secinfo.com/$/SEC/Name.asp?X=anne+l%2E+armstrong ""Anne L. Armstrong"" Latest Filing: 3/29/0 as Signatory As: Signatory (Director, Officer, Attorney, Accountant, Banker, Agent, etc.) List All Filings as Signatory Search Recent Filings (as Signatory) for ""Anne L. Armstrong"" ""Anne L. Armstrong"" has been a Signatory for the following 11 Registrants: American Express Co American Express Co Capital Trust I American Express Co Capital Trust II Boise Cascade Corp Boise Cascade Trust I Boise Cascade Trust II Boise Cascade Trust III General Motors Capital Trust D General Motors Capital Trust G General Motors Corp Halliburton Co ANNE L. ARMSTRONG, 71, Regent, Texas A&M University System; Member, Board of Trustees, Center for Strategic and International Studies; Member, National Security Advisory Board, Department of Defense; former Chairman of the President''s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, 1981-1990; former Ambassador to Great Britain; joined Halliburton Company Board in 1977; Chairman of the Health, Safety and Environment Committee and member of the Management Oversight and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees; Director of American Express Company and Boise Cascade Corporation. Source: http://www.secinfo.com/dScRa.6Mx.htm 1931. Following his election to the House of Representatives in November 1931, Congressman Richard Kleberg asked Johnson to come to Washington to work as his secretary. Johnson held the job for over three years and learned how the Congress worked. See: http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/biographys.hom/lbj_bio.asp LBJ was a sleeper put in power by the King Ranch, which as was shown in part I of this series, is closely tied to Anne Armstrong, is a director of Halliburton. In 1942 until he left public office, LBJ was financed completely by Brown and Root, now part of Halliburton. In 1960 LBJ was thrust upon Kennedy as his vice president so LBJ could carry Texas for Kenney. LBJ had proved in 1948 that he and his team could guarantee winning the Texas vote. In 1963 Kennedy was killed most likely by an assassination network operated by the King Ranch group and Clint Murchison in Mexico. Murchison was, of course, very close to Rockefeller. As soon as LBJ became president, he escalated the war in Vietnam, which primarily benefited Brown and Root. If this year''s election fraud is allowed to stand, what does Halliburton, headed by Dick Cheney, have planned for us? Although individual men die a generation at a time, networks of families live on. That is what Cheney represents. Thus it comes as no surprise to see what is happening in the presidential election is focused at the moment on Broward and Palm Beach Counties, Florida. A network such as Cheney represents is always prepared for any exigency. This same network was prepared to carry the vote in 1948 when Lyndon Johnson ran for the United States Senate. But Johnson was a Democrat, you say! Not so. He was an egotist and a pragmatist-- he did whatever he had to do to promote Lyndon. His opportunity to broaden his horizons came during the Depression, when he was offered a job in Congress working for a man, seemingly not unlike George W. Bush, a scion of a wealthy ranching family in South Texas with no real abilities or interests, who was elected to Congress on his name and needed someone to do the work for him--Congressman Kleborg. Part One of this series showed the history of Congressman Kleberg, and the King Ranch which his family owned--a ranch which was acquired with profits made from the shipping of contraband munitions during the Mexican War--a war orchestrated by persons who used Barbara Bush''s ancestor, Franklin Pierce, to take the land south of the Nueces River from Mexico after Texas was annexed as a state. The ranches in this territory, owned by Richard King, Mifflin Kenedy and their partner Charles Stillman, operated as a buffer between the U.S. and Mexico. Resentful Mexicans, who felt their land had been stolen from them, engaged in continual raids across the new Rio Grande border. To counteract these raids, the Texas ranchers used the Texas Rangers, commanded by William G. Tobin to chase away the raiding parties. Tobin''s family has continued its ties with the King Ranch family ever since. The Tobin family is intermarried with the King-Kleberg family and with the Armstrongs of San Antonio, Texas. From the present generation springs Anne Armstrong, who is a director of Halliburton alongside Dick Cheney. She has also served on the board of American Express with Henry Kissinger and Vernon Jordan--not to mention having been in London as Ambassador to the Court of St. James. British banking interests have been interested in the King Ranch since as early as 1882 when Mifflin Kenedy sold his adjoining ranch to a syndicate of Dundee, Scotland, called the Texas Land & Cattle Co., Ltd. (See The King Ranch Tom Lea). Within a year of that sale, King considered selling to the syndicate, but the deal was never closed. Another syndicate of unnamed eastern capitalists attempted to buy the ranch in 1907, the same year that Bostonian F.S. Pearson was involved in building railroads from Mexico through west and north Texas to connect to St. Louis. In 1902 the ranchers turned to B.F. Yoakum, friend of Uriah Lott, the creator of the Tex-Mex Railroad. As a result, a corporation was formed with shareholders including the Kings, Klebergs, Armstrongs, Kenedys and others--with Uriah Lott as president. The railroad became the St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexican Railway--which like so many other railroads built by Lott was financed by G.H. Walker & Co. of St. Louis. WAS LBJ A TOOL OF THE DRUG LORDS? Once Lyndon Johnson began to make himself heard in Congress, he quickly attracted the attention of Franklin Roosevelt. He was groomed for many of the endeavors he would use to make his name by FDR backers such as Joe Alsop, who had begun his undercover intelligence career in the O.S.S. Alsop and his brother Stewart were related to FDR by marriage on his mother''s side--the Delano family whose role in the opium trade has been documented previously on this website--as well as being the sons of Eleanor''s first cousin, Corinne Robinson Alsop . In fact, it was Joe Alsop who in 1963 repeatedly suggested to Johnson that the only way to keep the Washington Post off his back was to appoint the Warren Commission to investigate the assassination. The Alsop, Delano, Roosevelt and Forbes families of Boston and New York were interwoven by marriage and by financial investment in enterprises such as the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad. These families stem from a syndicate created by Thomas Handasyd Perkins of Newburyport, Massachusetts--forced out of the lucrative African slave trade to establish an alternative shipping empire based on opium. By the 1830s, the Russells had bought out the Perkins syndicate and made Connecticut the primary center of the U.S. opium racket. Massachusetts families (Coolidge, Sturgis, Forbes and Delano) joined Connecticut (Alsop) and New York (Low) smuggler-millionaires under the Russell auspices. http://www.tarpley.net/bush7.htm This account is supported by historical research conducted by John K. Fairbank in his 1968 article for the American Historical Association, posted at http://www.theaha.org/info/AHA_History/jkfairbank.htm . Fairbank indicates that the opium profits were invested in the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad and the Michigan Central. A man named John N. Alsop Griswold of New York, a Russell & Company partner at Shanghai, returned to become president of the Illinois Central in 1855 and was later chairman of the CB &Q. The CB & Q was, of course, based in St. Louis, and it constituted the northern extension of the same railroad that dipped southerly into Mexico through Kingsville and Laredo. It was financed by the same opium profits. See the NewsMakingNews article at http://www.newsmakingnews.com/lmharvardpart3.htm This railroad now stretches from Mexico to Canada under the control of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe. http://www.tmm.com.mx/english/ihistoria/inuevatmm3.htm This railroad was the primary beneficiary of NAFTA. It is also steeped in allegations of drug smuggling. http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/wardrugs.html and http://www.insightmag.com/archive/200007103.shtml Alsop was aided in his handling of Johnson by Floridian, Phil Graham, the son-in-law of Eugene Meyer--the only man besides Bush''s Uncle Herbie who is known to have invested in George H.W. Bush''s first oil company in Midland, Texas. In December 1959, in preparation for the 1960 election, Graham was already busy planning how to clinch the Democratic nomination for Lyndon. As soon as Phil realized that Johnson was not going to make it, he hatched the plan for Kennedy to select Johnson as his running mate. Johnson himself would later credit Phil with pushing Kennedy to choose him. He told biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin that Phil ""told Kennedy to make me vice president."" Once Kennedy clinched the nomination, Phil and Joseph Alsop hurried to his suite at the Biltmore and explained the virtues of Johnson as running mate....According to Pierre Salinger, John Kennedy''s press secretary, Phil [Graham] was one of the elite group of journalists--others were Ben Bradlee, Joe Alsop, Walter Lippmann--who could simply pick up the telephone and call JFK. They were very close. But the man who really gets credit for electing LBJ is usually said to be George R. Brown of Brown & Root. In the 1930''s the Brown brothers were in a two-bit construction business, paving the streets of small towns in Central Texas. Almost overnight, in 1942 after teaming up with Johnson, they won their first government contract to build a dam, then a naval air station in Corpus Christi, near the district Cong. Kleberg had represented. Their next opportunity was to expand into shipbuilding. By 1947 George Brown was placed on the boards of a number of multi-national corporations with interlocking directorates. During George Brown''s tenure on the ITT board other directors included Allan Kirby, an heir to the Woolworth fortune, Robert Young, a former stockbroker turned railroad tycoon connected with Allegheny Corp., and Robert McKinney-Young''s cousin-of Davis Manufacturing. The names Allan Kirby and Robert Young provide a strong clue to Brown''s other connections. Allan Kirby had had virtual control of Allegheny since 1937. Solomon Warfield had secured a number of shares of Allegheny preferred stock, ""issued in a storm of controversy by the banker J.P. Morgan, who was a chief investor for King George VI and Queen Elizabeth at the time they were Duke and Duchess of York,"" for his niece, Wallis Simpson (later the Duchess of Windsor), which she inherited upon his death in 1927. This stock had always been her ""first investment favorite,"" according to her biographer Charles Higham. When the Duke and Duchess became friends with Robert Young, allegedly after being introduced by mutual friend Robert Foskett after they moved to the Bahamas, Young and his wife Anita became one of their few close friends. Both Foskett and Young were directors of Allegheny and lived in Palm Beach, Florida. By 1941 Young owned a controlling interest in the Allegheny Corporation, a holding company which owned the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad of Baltimore. In 1954, after a long proxy struggle, and with the aid of fellow Texans Clinton Williams Murchison, Sr., and Sid Williams Richardson, Young gained control of the New York Central and became the chairman of its board. On January 25, 1958, Young apparently committed suicide with a shotgun at his winter mansion in Palm Beach, Florida. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/YY/fyo12.html Before his death, Young had convinced Murchison to entertain the Duke and Duchess and their entourage at his secluded ranch in the interior of Mexico in January 1950. This is the same ranch that has been alleged to have been used as a haven for the assassination team which operated out of the King Ranch. http://www.newsmakingnews.com/torbitt.htm There was testimony given in a Texas murder trial that there were twenty-five to thirty professional assassins kept in Mexico by the espionage section of the U. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation; that these men were used to commit political assassinations all over North, South and Central America, the East European countries and in Russia; that these men were the absolute world''s most accurate riflemen; they sometimes took private contracts to kill in the United States; that the contact man for employment of the riflemen was a man named Bowen posing as an American Council of Christian Churches'' missionary in Mexico; that you could reach Bowen through the owner of the St. Anthony''s Hotel in Laredo, Texas. Albert Alexander Osborne, alias John Howard Bowen, alias J.H. Owen, a charter member and employee of the A.C.C.C., met Lee Harvey Oswald and accompanied him to Mexico City in late September of 1963. Osborne, alias John Howard Bowen, was discovered to have another person working with him who also used the alias John Howard Bowen. The second person also traveling as Bowen was Fred Lee Crismon, another agent for the munitions makers police agency, the Defense Industrial Security Command. Crismon also posed as a missionary and also used other aliases. Among the cognomens for Crismon were Fred Lee, Jon Gould and Jon Gold. Osborne and Crismon also bore a marked resemblance and appeared to be about the same age. Crismon was a Syrian immigrant and had been closely associated with Osborne since the 1920''s. Crismon, Osborne and their riflemen charges in Mexico were based at Clint Murchison''s huge ranch when not posing as missionaries in other areas of Mexico.
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 10:50:20 PM
Jaime what in the heck is the Fernandz cause?
Texas CowgirlPosts: 16
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/3/2005 11:00:30 PM
I believe (although I am not sure) that Mr. Kenedero was talking about the Fernandez Cause which has to do with a blood line existing from the Kenedy bloodline. It speeks of the possibilities on the website mentioned in the posting above. I think that it is ''Kenedyranch.net''. I didn''t see the accusations on the website either, but I don''t believe that people should not publically mis-inform people. Fear leads to anger, and anger leads to hate. People fear what they don''t know or understand. I would also like to see the article for myself.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Here is some more insight? 1/3/2005 11:34:49 PM
Letters To The Editor -- Corpus Christi Caller-Times, Sept. 26, 2004 ""Dont Fear Truth"" by Claude V. D''Unger The Caller-Times recently reported that the Texas Supreme Court is considering weighing in on the effort of Dr. Ray Fernandez to secure DNA testing of the remains of South Texas rancher, John G. Kenedy Jr. Fernandez, the Nueces County medical examiner, is trying to determine once and for all, if he is a direct descendant of Kenedy. To do this, it is necessary to exhume the late rancher . Kenedy''s estate and that of his sister are worth hundreds of millions of dollars and are basically left in a charitable trust and foundation. The Catholic Church is probably the largest beneficiary of this largess. The trust, foundation and church seem deeply concerned about the perceived loss of a dead person''s money. It appears all of the custodians, trustees, lawyers, as well as the church are ready to spend whatever it takes to prevent one thing -- the truth. No one has stepped up and said, ""Let''s get to the truth of the matter."" After all, DNA testing can go either way. Fear of the truth isn''t healthy and trying to hide it is even worse. There is no moral justification for hiding or trying to hide the truth about Ray Fernandez''s lineage, whatever it may be. Signed: Claude V. D''Unger
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Texas Monthly Article 1/3/2005 11:38:39 PM
http://kenedyranch.netfirms.com/texasmonthly.htm
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
This is the Case the Fernandez Cause is Based on! 1/3/2005 11:31:45 PM
Kenedy Mystique Senior editor Gary Cartwright on researching the Kenedy family, one of the state''s ranching dynasties. Interview by Lauren Smith Appeared in The Texas Monthly (Sept edition) texasmonthly.com: How did you first hear about the possibility of Johnny Kenedy''s body being exhumed? Gary Cartwright: There were a number of newspaper stories about the Kenedys and the Fernandez family in the Austin American-Statesman and other newspapers starting in January when Judge Guy Herman first issued an order to exhume the body. Pamela Colloff, another Texas Monthly senior editor, had also gathered some material on the subject and put me in touch with a former TM intern now working at the Corpus Christi Caller-Times who had some firsthand knowledge of what was happening in Kenedy County. Pam has a great knack for pitching a story idea, and her pitch was so compelling that I realized I''d better stake claim to this story before she jerked it away from me. texasmonthly.com: Did you ever visit Sarita at a time when it was not so desolate? Have you seen photos of the place during its ""French Riviera of Texas"" days? GC: I had probably driven past Sarita before, without knowing it. If you drive U.S. 77 from Kingsville to Brownsville, you pass right by Sarita, but all you can see from the highway is a blinking yellow light and a water tower off in the distance. But no, I never saw it during its prime. In the early 1900''s, when the railroad first reached Sarita, there was a small land boom as promoters tried to lure people from the frigid Midwest to what they were billing as ""California Texas."" For various reasons—including the constant threat of hurricanes—it never took off. The little town of Riviera, which is five miles north of Sarita, was founded by a speculator from St. Paul who thought Baffin Bay, which separates the northern part of the Kenedy ranch from a section of the King ranch, looked like the French Riviera. He built a fancy hotel on a wide boulevard lined with palm trees and a dance pavilion that extended out over the bay. A hurricane in 1916, I think it was, wiped him out. You can still see part of the foundation of the hotel in the community of Riviera Beach, and some of the pilings from the old pavilion still stick out of the water. I have seen the French Riviera, and believe me, it looks nothing like Baffin Bay. texasmonthly.com: Who or what were your main sources in gathering this extensive history? GC: A book titled If You Love Me You Will Do My Will, by Stephen Michaud and Hugh Aynesworth, told the story of Sarita Kenedy East (and, by extension, the entire Kenedy family), and it was probably my best source. There were several other books, including TM writer-at-large Don Graham''s wonderful history of the King ranch, Kings of Texas, that were helpful. Then I found a treasure trove of information at the Kenedy Ranch Museum of South Texas, in Sarita. A number of third and fourth generation vaqueros and their families still live in Sarita, and they were all interested in being interviewed—at least those who spoke English. texasmonthly.com: How long did it take to compile the time line? GC: The book on Sarita Kenedy East that I just mentioned had a family history chart, and I located another chart at the museum in Sarita. Also, the Austin law firm that represents the Fernandez family had done extensive research on the Kenedy family and had a lot of information that it made available to me. The lawyers for the Kenedy foundation and the Kenedy trust were helpful too. I took me four or five weeks to absorb everything to the point where I could make sense of it. Senior executive editor Paul Burka, who edited the article, has a talent for organizing complicated family histories—he also edited a similar article I did on the Waggoner ranch last fall—and he helped me enormously. texasmonthly.com: Is it difficult to write a story with such a great deal of background information? GC: It is indeed difficult to write this kind of story. Sometimes you have so much information that you get lost in the mass of it. I have learned to take it slow and to rewrite many times until it becomes clear in my mind. On the other hand, this story was easier than some because (with the exception of the lawyers) there were no living antagonists to negotiate. I hate getting caught between two embattled parties, which it often the case in journalism. texasmonthly.com: In your story, Ray Fernandez says his quest is about ""my mom and our family."" Do you believe that? GC: Yes, I believed Ray completely. He was almost painfully honest. At first I was cynical—I''m always cynical when there is a great deal of money at stake—but Ray had such a strong emotional commitment to his family and to solving the mystery of his heritage that my doubts were quickly resolved. texasmonthly.com: Why is the Kenedy ranch so important to Texas? GC: This was one of the great ranches of Texas, smaller than the King ranch next door but in some ways more traditionally Texas. The Kenedy family was instrumental in bringing the railroad to South Texas. texasmonthly.com: If you could have interviewed just one of the deceased Kenedys, whom would you have picked? Why? GC: Sarita Kenedy East interested me more than the others. She was a tough, strong-willed woman, yet in many ways vulnerable. She apparently felt comfortable moving among the families of her vaqueros and went out of her way to help them. She must have been something of a cowgirl, able to ride and shoot and drink whiskey with the best of them. She was also a devout Catholic, as were many of the people I met in South Texas, and proud of her Mexican heritage. I think it would have been fun to share a glass of whiskey with Sarita and to talk about ranch life. texasmonthly.com: What did most of the people you encountered think about exhuming Johnny Kenedy''s body? GC: People in Sarita seemed divided on the subject. Many of them objected on religious grounds: One does not disturb the dead. But some of them thought that digging up the body and testing it for DNA was the only fair thing to do. I think many of them had empathy with Maria Rowland, the Kenedy maid who gave birth to that child back in 1925. texasmonthly.com: Do you think Elena Kenedy knew about Ann? Do you think Johnny Kenedy is Ray''s grandfather? If so, what evidence is most convincing to you? GC: Yes, I''m convinced that Elena knew about Ann. As one of the lawyers said, ""a wife knows."" And my hunch is that DNA tests will prove that Johnny was the father. Other DNA tests from Kenedy family members indicate a strong possibility that Ann was a Kenedy. Nobody knew about DNA in 1925, but today it''s our best evidence in numerous legal cases. texasmonthly.com: Are there many historians who focus on South Texas? GC: Many books have been written about the King ranch, which, to many Texans, is South Texas. But there are few books about the Kenedy ranch or the other big ranches down there. Researching this story was my first close experience with South Texas and I loved it. It remains wild and desolate and in places looks much as it must have looked hundreds of years ago. I used to think South Texas was Padre Island, but I know better after doing the Kenedy ranch story.
Texas CowgirlPosts: 16
Re: This is the Case the Fernandez Cause is Based on! 1/4/2005 12:00:55 AM
Wow! Now thats alot to swallow! Seems as though this a pretty big ''cause''. How does this cause have to do with an article talking about Eric Von Wade? I don''t get it. I understand there are two issues here, but how do they relate to one another? I also believe in the right for people to know their heritage and I also believe in peoples other rights, i.e. freedom of speech, own guns, ect. So could you please explain how these two topics connect? Maybe it''s just me. The third website referred to some sort of printed ''newspaper'' of the Defenzor???? Does anyone know about this? Please write back if you do.
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: Re: This is the Case the Fernandez Cause is Based on! 1/4/2005 7:33:06 AM
What''s up surfer girl, yea like I said there''s always going to be some lamebrain out there that will try to attack someone when they are practicing their free speech to turn what you said around to mean that you are talking about them directly...these people act like they are from another country...sad sad sad people in this country..//Scott
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: This is the Case the Fernandez Cause is Based on! 1/4/2005 7:37:20 AM
Thanks a bunch Jaime, I read some of that stuff on the defenzor and all I saw was someone on there saying ANGLO this and Anglo that like WE were the ones that killed someone back then...tell me where prejudice comes from. God will literally squash anyone that puts down another because of their skin color due to the fact THAT HE CREATED EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. Many people will go to the judgement day thinking I fought just for MY people..well they can go right ahead and mess up their eternal lives, than again I don''t think they KNOW GOD to start with like so called Jesse Jackson I wouldn''t call him reverend. He is not taking a stand for ALL people just his own.//Scott
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Mr Von Wade is not down? This will springboard him to another level! 1/4/2005 10:23:21 PM
I think EVW can ""take a licking & keep on ticking"". It seem like Sidewalk can take a few blows and remain committed to his arguements also! This is a good group of online advocates.:)
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Mr Von Wade is not down? This will springboard him to another level! 1/5/2005 1:25:47 AM
Sidewalk is like Mike Tyson''s opponent''s pre Buster Douglas. He shows up he takes a punch and then it is lights out. Seriously, I think he does better at pop culture type issues than he does at political ones. At least there he does enjoy a bit of consensus. I will freely admit that I have shared a similar opinion on a few occaisions with Sidewalk. Although, I don''t really agree with his adoration of punk rock. The only exception to this would be music from ""The Clash."" (Some of their tunes are pretty darned good IMHO). Hardcore Harry
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
BLAH BLAH BLAH 1/5/2005 10:14:44 AM
Sidewalk is like Mike Tyson''s opponent''s pre Buster Douglas. He shows up he takes a punch and then it is lights out. Look, I said Eric uses too much empty retoric... no one has tried to dissprove that or show how the retoric isn''t empty and highly valuable peices of information. All you''ve said is I''m wrong your right... OFFER SOMETHING!!
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
The clash... 1/5/2005 2:28:59 PM
The only exception to this would be music from ""The Clash."" (Some of their tunes are pretty darned good IMHO). Well Hot Damn Harry... You dig the Big Labowski and the Clash... for jar head goon you have good taste in pop culture. The Big Labowski really does perplex me though, you said you admired the life style, but the Dude was like the poster boy for lazy pot head slackers. Thats why I think he''s cool, not a care in the world, just bowling and Creedence... thats great! But for a military man, shouldn''t that care free unstructred life style be dispised? I always picutured you as the other Labowski... all mean and cut throat and constantly pointing out the short comings of the slacker life.
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: The clash... 1/5/2005 2:52:49 PM
You ever read the book the ""Tao of Pooh?"" I picture Jeff Bridge''s Labowski as a sort of Pooh. He is the ""uncarved block."" He just ""is."" Actually if I had to pick a Big Labowski character I most resemble I''d have to say it was John Goodman''s. ""Mark it an 8."" Hardcore Harry
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: The clash... 1/5/2005 3:33:17 PM
Actually if I had to pick a Big Labowski character I most resemble I''d have to say it was John Goodman''s. I could see that...
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: Mr Von Wade is not down? This will springboard him to another level! 1/5/2005 12:46:37 PM
We all have to agree to disagree, like I said if everyone were just like me in this world and shared my exact same views it would be a boring would that''s why every single human being that has ever set foot on this Earth has absolutely diff DNA, God being the creator..the secular world can''t explain that one..a big explosion caused that? Eric can take anything because he knows what kind of people are saying this stuff from the Defenzor..they wouldn''t say anything about me because if they sue me they couldn''t get any $$ out of me..that''s what it''s really all about. This world White Black Hispanic Cubans and the such have 2 different kinds of people those that get into the American system and do something with their lives and on the other hand the lamebrain that just want to sue or look for a hand out. What a way to live always saying ""woah is me"". None of us had anything to do with the way we were born or what color, once you have this attitude than you will succeed. I went in the Navy at 19 just like any of these Handout people could have, after that I was able to get a good job. I read one time in the blotter some chic talked about all of us well off people on the southside. Maybe if she would have gotten off her butt and made something of herself than she too would be able to live a little better life while here on Earth.//Scott
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Tex: Things are not that simple! Quit being so judgemental! 1/5/2005 2:41:57 PM
A lot of people have sued Defenzor but I do not know any who have been sued by Defenzor! I wander how many times Eric has been sued? There has been a history of discrimination toward minorities in S Texas and now reverse discrimination. Do we want to make things better?
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
There is no such thing as"
My friend, there is no such thing as ""reverse discrimination."" Discrimination is when a group, any group, is given an injustice or subjugated. It is wrong inall cases. ""Reverse Discrimination"" would describe a condition where there was the ""opposite"" of discrimination...thus, tolerance. Additionally, the idea of ""reverse discrimination"" assumes that ""white people"" are the superior race. Why do I say this? Because discrimination is wrong in all occasions no matter who is discriminating. The idea that Minorities (such as myself)are the only one capbale of being discriminated against assumes that the Majority is somehow above the Majority. To me, such titles are now arbitrary. In my sphere of existance, Hispanics are the numerical majority to all other groups. My point is to refer to discrimination as the evil it is and not to make arbitrary distinctions.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Capitan: Pardon my terminology? 1/5/2005 6:07:02 PM
My words were not intended to establish a class hierarchy. Reverse Discrimination is a word I was unaware of the connatations you presented. Discrimination stems from the corrupt in our world. It is a machanism of the elite who use it to better themselves and those around them! It is about haves & have nots!
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Capitan: Pardon my terminology? 1/5/2005 6:40:42 PM
Exactally, all discrimanation is wrong. Once we idenitfy that fact, then the true fight against it is winnable!!!
dannoynted1Posts: 558
""KEYS Radio Host Promotes ""Borderline"" Violence Against our People! 1/4/2005 1:03:49 AM
It is only fair to inform u of an unseen adversary
texdisvetPosts: 262
Re: ""KEYS Radio Host Promotes ""Borderline"" Violence Against our People! 1/5/2005 12:33:37 PM
Can you explain what you just said Dannoynted1
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Captain Carralles I agree with you about the two publications! 1/4/2005 8:10:08 PM
I agree Capt! I know Defenzor really does mean good & they are very good people! I know Homer Villareal as we have debated (agreed & disagreed) several hours! Truly he has inspired, educated, & mentored me as I was a primary beleiver in many concepts I truly beleive in fighting for! I also beleive Both factions have common ground that could bring many together in South Texas! I do not beleive Mr Von Wade is Racist as I do not beleive Defenzor is only fighting for it''s ""Raza"" either! I have been banned for 39 days for posting Adversely to a cause for which I have earned every right to rebuke! The Fernandez cause has stemmed out of the Fernandez Lawsuit involving the Kenedy Foundation. I thought maybe they were gold diggers at first when they asked me to help with thier battle. After working with them I now know Ann Fernandez is the Daughter of John G Kenedy Jr. But I also know her daughter in law Marie Fernandez wants it more than everyone else together! Now Defenzor claims they are not public people but when I was fighting for Ray & Marie Fernandez; it was Okay to use everyone''s name including Ray & Marie Fernandez & KFATSO officials as well as clergy of the Church Universal. This is a lot to read so I will be posting more later!
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Captain Carralles I agree with you about the two publications! 1/5/2005 12:57:17 PM
I also beleive Both factions have common ground that could bring many together in South Texas! Thats exactly my point... but as long as Eric calls anyone who dosn''t agree with him a capitalist hating degernarte commie... and the Defenzor or who ever on ""the raza"" side call anyone who looks at imigration from a different perspective ""racists"" the common ground will never be found. That was my whole point! More people on the other side of issues would take them seriously if they chilled out on the emotional retoric and just stuck to methodical facts.
cccghPosts: 868
Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/5/2005 4:59:21 PM
Not long ago my youngest son, who has a quick temper, was out playing with the neighborhood kids. There were two little girls who happened to be black. They were loud and whining alot and my son quickly tired of it so he told them to go home to their mother. They went home with their feelings hurt and I don''t blame them. BUT, the mother came out in the street to my 9 year old son and started yelling at him calling him a racist and tried to grab him. All this in front of all the other children. He was scared and humilitated. I didn''t find out until after he had come in and refused to come out of his bedroom. The other children told me what that woman had done to him. Take note, she is a substitute teacher here in CCISD. When I counciled my son, he had NO idea what ""racist"" ment. I believe him. He has never shown attitude towards any other person based on their skin color in his life and if he ever did and I found out he would have serious trouble with me. This family is one I have healped many times in the past when the mother came knocking on my door for rides to the doctor or sugar for her kitchen. I thought she was a nice person back then. But her loose use of the term ''racist'' to my young son changed everything. If she had a problem with the boy, she should have acted like an adult and come straight to me before attacking my son in the street with false accuations. When I hear others being called a racist NOW I have a difficult time believeing it. I think some use the term too broadly and out of anger and falsely ruin good people''s reputation. It is a shame and I have dumped that woman from the list of people I take the time to acknowledge. If the name is true, call it, if not, hold your tongue.
sidewalk_cipherPosts: 3178
Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/5/2005 5:25:11 PM
BUT, the mother came out in the street to my 9 year old son and started yelling at him calling him a racist and tried to grab him. Thats kinda crazy... yelling a kid calling him a racists... Along the same lines as picking on old ladies and animals. When I counciled my son, he had NO idea what ""racist"" ment. I believe him. It reminds me a the South Park Episode where Chef wants the south park flag, a black man hanging by a noose surrounded by white guys, changed because it''s racists. The school has a debate and the Stan and Kyle join the side of it shouldn''t be changed, and Chef thinks they have turned racists. But it turns out they didnt'' see the flag as a black guy getting hung by a bunch of white guys, they just saw some people hanging someone... ""because the color of someone''s skin dosn''t matter"" The nievity of kids is great... And I hope I will remain the eternal child.
cccghPosts: 868
Re: Re: Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/5/2005 5:39:43 PM
:) Hi Sidewalk. Well, he understands the right and wrongs of treating people badly just because they look different than himself. From the moment my children could understand I have tried to teach them to respect others. Now, the boy does have a temper and whining little girls are a hot button for that temper and I will never stop trying to teach him paitience and will punish him when he is wrong in the use of his temper towards others. But that woman pissed me off to the extreme level of my own paitience with her actions to my child. I will not tolerate crap like that and if she ever has the nerve to ask me for help again my answer will be NO.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
CC: I agree with everything U Said but the throwing away part! 1/5/2005 5:40:55 PM
Maybe U should elevate yourself to another level & reason with the woman. She was standing up for her kid in the best way she knew how! Sometime after your forefathers and recent relatives have been enslaved & mistreated for 100s of years it just doesnt get corrected overnight. On the same subject maybe the lady should show more of an effot also! Good point!
cccghPosts: 868
Re: CC: I agree with everything U Said but the throwing away part! 1/5/2005 5:51:08 PM
I suppose you are right in a historical way but it still does not excuse her actions here in the present. She should reason with me and apologise to my child. Before this happened I treated her and her family with nothing but respect and friendship and I would have never treated her three children in such a way. My son refused to play with the other children in the neighborhood for 5 months after that happened because he was so humilitated and scard of her. I can not forgive so easily when I see my baby hurting so much.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
CC: I understand your feelings 1/5/2005 5:57:43 PM
But we must all forgive as Jesus forgives us. He did not suffer on the cross for us to keep these things that harden our heart! Of course to recieve forgiveness we must ask for forgiveness. An apology from the lady would be a tremendous gesture. Pride is standing in the way of neighbors!
cccghPosts: 868
Re: CC: I understand your feelings 1/5/2005 6:08:39 PM
Your right. Maybe someday we can mend this. The main point of the story is that terms such as racist should be used with caution lest they lose their meaning and impact.
HardcoreHarryPosts: 2055
Re: Re: CC: I understand your feelings 1/5/2005 7:23:45 PM
""The main point of the story is that terms such as racist should be used with caution lest they lose their meaning and impact. "" EXACTLY!! Cheapen the word as this parent did to your son or this paper has done to Eric and one day the word will cease to have meaning. Some opinions ought to be reserved for the most dire circumstances. I tried reading their website and it was Anglo this and anglo that. That term in itself is dispicable because the Angles and Saxons were invaders where my ancestors came from. Hardcore Harry
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Harry: Moderation is key if we want to unite and therefore a better S Tx 1/5/2005 8:48:58 PM
I think there are many interpretations depending on who''s shoes a person stands in. Meaning Perspective! Education from both left & right! Listen to each other! I have been saying it is about haves & have nots. Not Anglos or Gringos, Mexicans or hispanics, Blacks, Jews, or Asians etc. This unification is about bringing an end to the discrimination and $$$$ tier system that oppresses many a hard worker! It is about the Government & Elitist getting away with it because they can!
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Anglo is not the term for"
...many South Texans use the term ""Anglo"" to describe ""white people."" This is a misnomer, Anglo means England, the Land of the Angles, who were Norse invaders. Many of the people targeted as being Anglos are German, Poles, and of other European stock (including Spanish who are not Moors (Moros).
LONEWOLFPosts: 547
Re: CC: I agree with everything U Said but the throwing away part! 1/6/2005 3:07:53 PM
""She was standing up for her kid THE BEST WAY SHE KNEW HOW"" SHE CAN SOMEHOW COME TO BE TRUSTED WITH THE CARE AND EDUCATION OF A CLASSROOM FULL OF CHILDREN BUT ""THE BEST WAY SHE KNEW HOW"" TO DEAL WITH A MINOR SPAT BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS IS TO WRONGLY ACCUSE A LITTLE BOY OF BEING A RACIST. -- THE LOWERING OF THE BAR FOR BOTH TEACHERS AND PARENTS CONTINUES. ""Sometime after your forefathers and recent relatives have been enslaved and mistreated for 100s of years it just doesn''t get corrected overnight."" YOU KNOW NOTHING OF THAT WOMAN''S LINEAGE SO FOR YOU TO MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT HER BEHAVIOR IS THE RESULT OF HUNDREDS OF YEARS OF ENSLAVEMENT AND MISTREATMENT OF HER FOREFATHERS IS AT BEST, FATUOUS. I''M NOT SURE WHICH IS MORE DISTURBING. HER BEHAVIOR OR YOUR BLITHE, INANE DISMISSAL.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Lonewolf: It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out? 1/6/2005 3:44:22 PM
The lineage and enslavement go hand in hand when it involves a black person calling one a racist! Very few blacks & hispanics in S Tx had ancestors who were enslaved. Maybe a slight presumption on my part but accurate nonetheless. As for her being a sustitute teacher here in the Body of Christ (CCISD) these actions speak volumes for the District''s inept approach. There are a lot of teachers who care but the ones who only care about getting paid and thier computers are giving all a bad name. I left this district for that very reason. Then maybe it is the objective difference between personal life & others not persionally related to her. I was not taking up for her in the slightest! But we all need to start having a little more understanding of each other. I can see there is no tolerance in your approach? Try a little love & understanding! Children are innocent & they should not suffer from the adults who continue to perpetuate the cycle. Be a Man & take the first step. Listen to the other side!
LONEWOLFPosts: 547
Re: Lonewolf: It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out? 1/7/2005 2:45:35 PM
What exactly do you mean by ""I can see there is no tolerance in your approach.""?
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Did, El Defenzor, ban you... 1/6/2005 12:52:43 PM
...or the Fernandez Group? I am unclear on that subject.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Yes, I am banned for 30 days for attacking the very cause I fought for! 1/6/2005 2:06:22 PM
I fought a huge battle for the Fernandez Cause which I still beleive in. However the wife of Ray Fernandez developed a big head after they were out of the woods. Now that I helped them do the research and fond the DNA and after they agreed to compensate me for the research and attorney dossiers I put together the wife tried to cut me out! I will explain more if you need! Yes, I am banned for 30 days for attacking the very cause I fought for! It is wrong in every principle Defenzor stands for! Ask Homer!
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
In find it hard to belief... 1/6/2005 2:44:08 PM
...that they could ban anyone. This webpage is full of topics and threadsters that disagree with Eric Von Wade. I have never known him to ban anyone, nor delete a post (unless it was a commercial) fo rits content. We have a whole host of people here who freely show ideas.... Sidewalk_Cipher- A skeptic of governmental actions and foil for Eric, others and sometimes me. Randalpret- A self-described communist. Numerous Liberals and Conservatives. I can''t understand the logic behind banning someone, it is Undemocratic, Un-Constitutional and Un-American. Is it a forced" name=20773
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
I can post from a different IP or Computer but if I put my name they delete 1/6/2005 4:02:30 PM
It says to me when I click the link: Sorry You Have been banned from this board! I have saved all of my postings and have defended this Newspaper & the Fernandez Cause valiantly! Now I have seen that Marie Fernandez was only using myself & Defenzor to achieve a goal. Her promises in writing and in person were never intended to see fruition. I have led a huge number of people to support this cause. To be abandoned repeatedly after beleiving trusting & having faith in them; It is my duty to inform everyone of these inexcusable actions! What if the Fernandez''s win control of KFATSO? We surely do not want Marie tellin her husband (our medical examiner) how to jerk around poor people! She is a Meglomaniac!
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Defenzor claims legal reasons 1/6/2005 4:21:06 PM
JAIME WE WILL NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ELEVATED ATTACKS. THEY ARE PROBABLY NOW LITIGATION ISSUES. YOU HAVE BEEN A FREQUEST POSTER, BUT YOU OVERSTEPPED YOU BOUNDRIES AND IMPLICATED THE STANDING OF THE DEFENZOR. YOU WILL BE BANNED FOR 30 DAYS. -- EL DEFENZOR
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Re: Defenzor claims legal reasons 1/6/2005 4:47:28 PM
I am affraid that the Defensor Staff is deadly affraid of Law suits, maybe more concerned about CYA (the covering of a certain body part) than meeting its goal. That will have to be addressed. Many minority organizations are quick to file lawsuits, I wonder if that mentality is having lasting impressions on the WEBMASTER. A twisted form of" name=20773
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
Of Course I will continue Capt. I am elated to have found this room! 1/6/2005 7:13:08 PM
I am still getting to know the board as will be the case for a while! You Captain are a personality anywhere you write! I hope I can keep up! This board is representative of free speech. It is something I beleived Defenzor would retain. Especially after fighting the Taft City Government who tried to ban his newspaper. I fought that battle with Defenzor! Ask Mayor King if the FBI paid him a visit. Now as for the threat of lawsuits yes, the Fernandez attorney team is becoming rather extensive and they are the ones who could not handle the truth. They had every opportunity to defend themselves but how can you defend if you know you are guilty and the accuser can prove every last word. I have an explanation from Homer if you would like to read it I will email it to you? I used to live in Kingsville and I know Gus & Gus Jr. Aramie and I had another Carralles girl in my class. I do not remember her name but she was a senior in the fall of 2001! i was a substitute at the time. I want to work to bridge a rift of miscommunication in S Tx.
Capt CarralesPosts: 3383
Jaime, call the show!!! 1/7/2005 6:00:34 PM
I dare you to call into EVW. It will surely test if EVW is a racist or not.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
What language should I speak? English or Spanish? 1/7/2005 6:21:32 PM
Truly, I do not beleive EVW is Racist! I am a much better writer than a talker. I am not an Entertainer and I will be glad to meet face to face one on one with you or Mr Von Wade! An associate of my team has already visited the studio and they are aware of the connection. I hold many values in common with you & EVW as well as Homer. I am much more conservative than is Defenzor.
Jaime KenedenoPosts: 1497
DEFENZOR WANTS TO PLAY BY THIER OWN RULES! 1/7/2005 8:10:00 PM
DEFENZOR WANTS TO PLAY BY THIER OWN RULES! UNFAIR I CANNOT DEFEND MYSELF AND ANY FACTUAL EVIDENCE I POST IS DELETED YET THEY WANT TO KEEP UP DEFENDING MARIE FERNANDEZ! JAIME''S WIFE TO DEFENZOR: ""I''M GONNA FU.KING SURE YOU..."" Posted on January 7, 2005 at 07:49:52 PM by DEFENZOR WEBMASTER Jaime, you and your wife (Dannoyted1) and NEMO (You again as determined by same server IP) are hereby banned for six months. We now interpret your actions as hostile ones. We now have turned the knob to a defensive mode and rightfully so in our own business and personal interests. Jaime, we never expected this from you. It is so petty; we treated you as if you were “Hispanic”; you took advantage of that privilege. Jaime, initially, you were banned because we did not allow you to blast a target (a family that you had a falling out with). In our estimation your actions were perceived as “hurtful”. The initial “banning” was subtlety, an attempt to protect you from “legal” consequences, a subtle attempt to encourage you to reconsider your use of emotionally charged “words” and “phrases.” In the end, you did not contain your indignation – but released it against those that considered you a friend. Jaime, you have violated the rules outlined earlier in this board (e.g., name calling, legal threats, etc); you even have ignored the “banning” a few times and sough new ways to post on our message board. Such deviancy needs to be stopped – NOW!!! A sign of wisdom consists in not abusing an entrusted friendship. The wise person is the one who is a master of himself. There is a Mexican saying, “El enemigo del hombre es su necedad; su amigo, la inteligencia” (The enemy of a person is his/her stupidity; his friend is his intelligence). As a newspaper, we have higher obligations than many others whom their concern orbits around only their needs. Expand your thoughts and enlarge the world. MY RESPONSE KEEPS BEING DELETED BUT THEY WANT TO KEEP THIERS UP Leave my Posting your wife threatened me & my family first! Posted on January 7, 2005 at 08:57:33 PM by Jaime Matilde said, "" Quit attacking Marie Fernandez or else she might do something to you or your family"" ""Leave B Out of this he is a good man"" If you bring B into this I am going to have to say a few things myself"" And the comment to f sue you was in respect to the position as kenedyranch.net webmaster! Not Defenzor! Keep erasing & I will keep re pasting.
The RealistPosts: 202
I pride myself on Keeping it real, ""El Defenzor"" 1/9/2005 2:47:38 PM
based on what Eric has said and done I must say that he is not a racist. He bashed Liberals and some Democrats, but that is not racism. El Defenzor is not racist either, but its 60''s era rethoric smakes of it. they are acting as if Mexicans are being slaughtered in the streets! Thisis the most tolerant time in American History, the need to GET REAL! This Kenedy Ranch/ Catholic Church thing has gone on along time,if it ended today; I think the Catholic Church would have had enough. The Fernandez case...I don''t know very much about it but...I don''t think there is evidence of RAPE here. Get Real!!! Men and women f....have sex people. It won''t be the first time inappropiate sexual activities have taken place between a boss and a subordinate...shades of Bill Clinton? In REALITY, I am glad to have the people from El Defenzor. Welcome. Oh yeah, on this issue... Capt Carrales, I''ve read your posts at that site...you seem to be trying to do good but you get very ethnic there. Plus, I don''t think they want to listen to you. Curmudegeon, they won''t listen to your admittedly racist views at Kenedyranch.whatever. All you are goingt o do is to bring them down on Eric for having racists at his site. Jaime, are you hispanic? You are right, you don''t have to be Hispanic to be part of their movement...victories for liberty are for everyone. BTW, what exactally is meant when y''all say ""la raza."" Oh yeah, one post is enough...we normally just keep information like you have posted in on thread. Harry, don''t be so defensive. Let them talk. Keep it REAL!
condotPosts: 94
SICKO JAIME/ANTON 1/10/2005 4:50:56 AM
Mr. Anton Scott Haley, you are profoundly confused. I have never met you, nor challenge you to a fight at “Whataburger”... You are experiencing metal lapses. You should seek medical help. Sometimes being unemployed is a reflection of a deep depression or something more serious. To repeat I don’t know you. I asked who you were to find out about the allegations. You accused the wives of many prominent men in the community of having affairs with other men. Such false attacks hurts their family, children and reputations unjustly. I hear the respective parties will be filing legal action. This website you have implicated in serious legal matters. The Federal Trades Commission prohits one huge media entity to attack a smaller one (especially a minority owned one). KEYS radio has tried to keep conservative talk radio alive in South Texas. You have committed irreparable damage. I just pray and hope that no party from this media entity egged you on. You have not in your five senses. To repeat, I do not know you. You seem to feel GOD LIKE FEELING. Captain Carrales says you are overwhelmed with “free speech” but it is more than that in my estimation. Again, I do not want TO FIGHT YOU. PLEASE DO NOT CONSIDER HURT ME NOR MY FAMILY. I know there is a WARRANT out for an ANTON; I hope it is not you. Seek medical attention, as soon as you can.
C.evansPosts: 154
Re: Article on Eric Von Wade In El Defenzor Newspaper! 1/17/2005 4:04:28 PM
Interesting accusations! I do not get a chance to post here often but, I have never never heard EvW say anything that could be considered racist. I have listened to his radio show as much as possible for about 3 years now--so I guess I am a relative new-comer. All I have to say is that, from looking at the links provided for that hispanic publication. In my own humble opinion, I do not agree with anything THEY have so does THAT make me a racist? Best regards-C.Evans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
August 2, 2007
kingalonzoalvarezdepineda13 - you are a total hipocrit! You judge others so harshly while doing the very thing you claim you hate. Every morning your SPAM emails jam my computer up at work and I can't get my work done for about 5 - 10 minutes until your crap finishes downloading (kinda like you did with this opinion section). When asked to stop emailing the DMC campus you don't even reply or stop. You think you are so justified in raising a stink- but when others don't want to hear your opinion you cram it in their face anyway. YWith your approach - even if what you are saying is true- no one wants to hear it because it's SO obnoxiously done. You need to get the log out of your own eye.