One fund has raised over $20 million for the Boston Marathon Victims. That’s nice, some of the survivors have a long road ahead of them.

 West, TX Disaster Relief Fund has Raised a little over $10,000 and hopes to raise $50,000. The Red Cross is claiming. they have raised enough money for West Texas disaster relief.

Any new donations to the South Plains Red Cross will go to the general disaster relief fund. Shannon Smith says donations received now are going towards future disasters because as of right now, West has what it needs.

“The chapters there, because they’re so much larger, San Antonio and Austin, right now, their needs are being met at the moment. But of course that can change.” Said Smith.

Why the difference?

This morning the Texas Legislature decided that the lottery was a bad thing and voted to kill it.

House Bill 2197 began as a seemingly routine proposal to continue the operations of the commission that oversees the lottery until September 2025. But opposition mounted after one lawmaker called it a tax on the poor, and the House eventually voted 82-64 to defeat the measure.

A short time after the vote, the House called an abrupt lunch recess and could reconsider the measure if any lawmaker who voted against it offers such a motion. Unless lawmakers reconsider, the commission would begin a one-year wind down, and cease to exist by Sept. 1, 2014.

Apparently some of the conservative reps believe that the lottery is a tax on the poor.  Seems to me that if the lottery is really a tax it;s the fairest tax of them all, After all its the only tax that is purely voluntary.

Seems though they couldn’t figure out how to make up the 1.04 billion dollar shortfall they created in the budget. So they went and undid the damage they created.

After Sanford’s effort initially succeeded, lawmakers quickly questioned the fiscal impact of the move. After adjourning and meeting individually, House members voted two and a half hours later to reconsider and ultimately renew the commission. Afterward, Anchia said lawmakers were faced with a choice.

“We could eliminate the lottery, and then simply raise taxes or cut public schools by another $2.2 billion on top of the $5.4 billion cut from last session, or we could keep the lottery,” said Anchia. “And ultimately that’s what happened on the final vote.”

What were they thinking when they voted down the commision the first time.?

In Boston the Mayor Menino is positioning himself as the arbitor of political correctness and thought.  If one dares to believe differently or independently of proper leftist dogma, Menino has declared it proper and right to deny permits and and licences to do business within his  city. Chick-Fil-A’s crime is that they have spoken out against gay marriage.    While I can understand while some might find offence with some of  company president Dan Cathy’s remarks, there has not been any charges that he or his company have been discriminatory. As reported in the Boston Herald

… the company released a statement yesterday saying it has a history of applying “biblically-based principles” to managing its business, such as closing on Sundays, and it insisted it does not discriminate.

“The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender,” the statement read. “Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

This isn’t about discriminating policy or practices, and is solely about a Chick-Fil-A and Cathys belief systems and things they have said.  What is treally ironic and strange are some of Meninos statements.

“It doesn’t send the right message to the country,” Menino said. “We’re a leader when it comes to social justice and opportunities for all.”

I guess the social justice and opportunities for all are for those who don’t utilize their 1st amendment rights, and don’t offend the Mayors delicate sensibilities.  I wonder if the Catholic Hospitals are in any danger of Menino’s retribution.

Its truly a shame that the historic Freedom Trail is where the right to freedom of speech is taking such a beating.

It looks like Chicago might be following in Boston’s footsteps.

A Chicago alderman wants to kill Chick-fil-A’s plans to build a restaurant in his increasingly trendy Northwest Side ward because the fast-food chain’s top executive vocally opposes gay marriage.

This morning the Supreme Court announced that Obamacare  is found to be constitutional.  Most observers were surprised to find that it was not Kennedy but Roberts that was the swing vote.  Libertarian and right thinking folks are outraged.

What happened? Is Roberts a traitor to the constitution and  its intention?

Conservatives gathering now for a low-tech lynching of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. need to take a quick breath of air and think about what he managed to accomplish by upholding President Obama’s highly unpopular, signature piece of legislation.

Though he shocked many by joining the left plank on the high court,Justice Roberts. pretty much did what he was supposed to do. He finally put a boundary on how much freedom the federal government can gobble up from states and individuals under the “commerce clause” — that most specious scheme for so much federal thievery.

Charles Hurt suggests that there are bigger more important issues at stake. While it seems as though Government takeover of the nations healthcare system is a pretty major issue. Some have claimed that there Roberts was handing over the battle to win the war.

Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals preciselybecause they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congress’s power to “regulate Commerce.”

The business about “new and potentially vast” authority is a fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress’ regulatory powers, and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society. In 2005, Sen. Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts’ nomination, saying he did not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as “whether the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce.” Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted he would do.