Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Texas]]>

Dan Crenshaw Responds to Tucker Carlson After 'Eye-Patch McCain' Jab

by Leave a Comment

If there’s one thing you can say about Tucker Carlson, it’s that he simply doesn’t care about going after people classified as being on his side. He’s got a long history of slamming Republicans he disagrees with, whether they agree to come on his show or not. That happened again recently when Carlson took a jab at Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), calling him “eye-patch McCain.”

Crenshaw, an outspoken supporter of the recent $40 billion Ukraine aid package, has criticized those who are against the bill by insinuating they support Russia. Here’s the exchange between him and Marjorie Taylor Greene that seemed to kick all this off.

Yeah, because investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea. You should feel the same,” Crenshaw wrote.

Greene chimed in, saying Crenshaw is funding a “proxy war with Russia.”

“So you think we are funding a proxy war with Russia? You speak as if Ukrainian lives should be thrown away, as if they have no value. Just used and thrown away,” Greene wrote. “For your proxy war? How does that help Americans? How does any of this help?”

“Still going after that slot on Russia Today huh?” Crenshaw fired back.

The exchange shows the small but impactful divide in the Republican Party, where a minority of lawmakers have stood in opposition to multiple bills targeting Russia and supporting Ukraine.

Crenshaw and Greene have had beef in the past, so it’s not surprising they’d clash again. Carlson seemed to take note of his commentary, though, as well as later comments made on Fox News with Trey Gowdy in which Crenshaw dismissed concerns about the baby formula shortage in relation to the Ukraine spending bill.

This per The Daily Wire:

“Do you know how much baby formula $40 billion can buy? None,” Crenshaw told Fox News guest host and former Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Here’s the video of Carlson’s insult that followed.

Personally, agree or disagree with Crenshaw, I’m not a fan of this new moniker. When a man gives his eye in defense of the country, it shouldn’t be mock-worthy, and Carlson himself thought that four years ago when he vehemently defended Crenshaw from a Saturday Night Live skit making fun of the Texas congressman’s injury.

On the other hand, I understand that politics isn’t a pillow fight, and Crenshaw (again, agree or disagree with him) has been pretty aggressive in going after those who think the $40 billion Ukraine aid package is a mistake, including pushing the idea that its opponents support Russia.

I find myself on the other side of that issue from Crenshaw. While I’ve expressed my support for Ukraine and sending some aid, I also believe the $40 billion expenditure is a bad way to handle the matter due to the overblown top-line amount and the clear lack of oversight. I can assure everyone reading this that I nor Chip Roy, who recently went viral decrying the process, support Vladimir Putin.

For his part, Crenshaw was asked about Tucker Carlson and any supposed culpability regarding the Buffalo shooting. In response, he actually defended the Fox News host, but also let loose his personal feelings toward him.

“Like, I hate Tucker Carlson. I despise him. But he didn’t cause this, right?” Crenshaw told The Hill. “Like, I think he’s a gross human being. Doesn’t mean that his rhetoric caused it. This was caused by a legitimately crazy person.”

Putting aside the obvious fact that Crenshaw is right about Carlson not being responsible for a mass shooter who called Fox News a Jewish conspiracy, I wish figures on the right would do their best to abstain from these kinds of slap fights. The country is currently in crisis. There’s a baby formula shortage, inflation is through the roof, gas prices are $5 a gallon, the stock market is crashing, and to Crenshaw’s point, Russia continues to invade a European nation.

People are getting crushed right now. This isn’t the time for those on the right to air their grievances about one another. Republicans have a major election to win in November, and that should be the focus. Not accusing people of being supporters of Putin nor making jokes about a guy’s war injury. I know, that conclusion probably won’t make anyone on either side happy, but I don’t see the value in any of these fights. Let it go, move on, and get back to what matters.

WATCH: Congresswoman Claims There Are Two Sexes, Graduating Class Blasts Her With Boos

by Leave a Comment

The culture has rapidly changed, and that’s nowhere more evident than among college students.

Case in point: A commencement speaker was recently booed during an address at the University of Wyoming.

Republican congresswoman Cynthia Lummis was orating at the school’s graduation when she stepped into treacherous territory.

The state’s first female U.S. senator almost escaped unscathed…

But right at the end — amid a heralding of America — she went boldly biological:

“And lastly, you woke up this morning with more individual freedom in the most creative, divinely-inspired nation on Earth. The transformations and disruptions I have alluded to are testing those very freedoms. … [T]here are those in government who believe, not that the Creator endowed us with inalienable rights as the founders of our nation acknowledged in the Declaration of Independence, but that government created those rights. And that government should redefine those rights — including our rights to freedom of speech, religion, property, assembly, and to keep and bear arms. Even fundamental scientific truths — such as the existence of two sexes, male and female — are subject to challenge these days.”

As for being subject to challenge, the crowd confirmed her claim.

Boos rang loudly.

And then: more boos.

Following that: additional boos.

Cynthia attempted to save herself:

“You know, I, uh, and I challenge those of you — I’m not making a comment on the fact that there are people who transition between sexes.”

It was ugly, indeed.

Putting the crowd’s rejection behind, she pummeled the pandemic to a resurfacing of applause.

“I personally question how, under our Constitution, we could forbid in-person worship services during a pandemic while labeling liquor stores as essential and keeping them open (clapping recommences). And how the creation of a government disinformation board is not an affront to free speech. (mild handclaps are heard).”

As you’re surely aware, the sexual binary has substantially fallen out of favor:

Harvard Professor Insists There Are Two Sexes, Colleague Is ‘Appalled’

Professor Gets Kicked out of Neuroscience Group After Suggesting There Are Two Sexes

High School Biology Class Tells Kids Biological Sex Is a Social Construct

Report: Three Middle Schoolers Have Been Charged With Sexual Harassment for Not Using ‘They/Them’ Pronouns

Back to Senator Cynthia, it seems her heckling reveals a change among young people in two ways.

For one, of course, past audiences would’ve agreed there are only males and females. But furthermore, contemporary adolescents have been taught to shout down dissent.

In the 1980s, for example, had a commencement speaker stated there were five sexes, students would likely have just looked at one another and shrugged. In fact, I’m not sure what comment from the podium could’ve possibly engendered boos amid past generations of twenty-somethings.

But these days, it’s an extra tough crowd.

Either way, as Texas Democratic State Representative James Talarico has made clear, the claim of five sexes would’ve been as wrong as Cynthia’s touting of two:

-ALEX

See more content from me:

Disney Launches Its ‘Pride Collection’ Product Line

Report: Three Middle Schoolers Have Been Charged With Sexual Harassment for Not Using ‘They/Them’ Pronouns

Profess Your Privilege: Southern University Launches ‘White Student Accountability Group’

Find all my RedState work here.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.

Border City Mayor Explains Why Ending Title 42 Is Potentially Dangerous for Public Safety

by Leave a Comment

The mayor of McAllen, Texas, explained in a recent interview with Border Report that the Biden administration’s decision to end Title 42 will pose both public safety and health risks, and he’s right.

“My position would be, ‘Do not lift Title 42 until I know that our community is 100% safe,’” Republican Mayor Javier Villalobos told the outlet on Monday.

He noted that while coronavirus is a much lesser issue in the United States than it was months ago, having a large influx of people from another country could throw a wrench in that progress.

“If they do lift Title 42 look at what’s going on in different areas of the country,” Villalobos added.

“COVID still exists. A lot of people think just because we’re doing well it can stay that way but we are concerned about it.”

Notably, Villalobos said that the expected massive increase in people can put a greater strain on local charities as well as the federal government, which is already overwhelmed due to the administration’s poor handling of the crisis. The Department of Homeland Security estimates that 18,000 people could be encountered by officials each day at the southern border once the public health order is gone, ABC News reported.

“My concern is if they lift (Title) 42 the numbers will be incredible. I don’t know whether Catholic Charities (of the Rio Grande Valley), with the assistance of McAllen or anybody else, is going to be able to take care of business,” he said, according to the outlet.

While the mayor does not take an official position about the legal status of the people coming to the U.S., it’s clear that having even more people show up at McAllen’s doorstep is problematic. Plenty of border communities like McAllen are fairly safe, as Villalobos mentioned, and this tarnishes their reputation domestically for people looking to relocate their families or businesses to the area.

“We take no position as to whether they are legal or illegal, whether they are entitled to immigration or asylum, or not. So our position is public safety and that’s what we do and we’ll keep on doing it as much as we can,” he continued.

Title 42, which expels people from the country because of public health concerns, is slated to end on May 23. However, a federal judge is poised to decide this week whether or not that move will go forward, according to The New York Post.

Texas school district takes step to prevent mass shooting

by Leave a Comment

Mass shootings aren’t as big of a problem as many try to project, but even one is too many. The idea of someone taking a gun and trying to kill as many people as humanly possible is something few of us can begin to wrap our heads around.

And if you can, you may want to seek help.

As a result, though, there’s always some kind of discussion on how to prevent them, particularly school shootings. In Texas, one independent school district is taking some definitive steps to prevent them in their schools.

The La Vernia ISD voted on Monday to allow authorized staff members to carry firearms.

That means that if anyone tries to commit a mass shooting there, it’s not likely they’ll get very far before being met with armed resistance. Since we know that such resistance tends to put an end to such shootings, the sooner that force can be brought to bear, the better.

Undoubtedly, some are less than thrilled by this happening, but they need to get over it.

After all, these are often the same people who think teachers should be treated as heroes, allowed to do as they wish in their classrooms with regard to what is being taught, and are otherwise above reproach. If all that is true, then why is it somehow wrong for them to have the means to defend not just their own life, but the lives of their students?

Such arguments have never made any sense to me.

We know that mass shootings happen and that while they can the thwarted well before it gets to the shooting stage, once that happens there’s usually not much you can do except either resist or die. It’s harsh, but it’s the truth.

That won’t happen in La Vernia ISD now.

See, those that would target a school are likely going to look elsewhere. They want body counts. That means they’re unlikely to take the risk that someone might put an end to their atrocity before it can even get going. They’ll find a softer target.

And that’s really all a gun-free zone is, a softer target.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not thrilled with the idea that only certain staff members will be able to carry. The Second Amendment is still the Second Amendment after all.

However, I’m not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and this is a good step for the district. In fact, it needs to be the norm in every school district.

Some teachers may not like it, but since it doesn’t require anyone to carry a firearm, they can just get over it. Don’t want guns? Don’t carry one.

Of course, they’ll get to benefit from someone else carrying a gun should there be an attempted mass shooting, but don’t expect them to admit their mistake.

Truthfully, La Vernia ISD has taken a huge step forward to combat mass shootings and protect its students and staff. I applaud them for it.

Attorney calls for investigation after Texas police department refuses to return seized guns

by Leave a Comment

China Grove, Texas is probably best known for being the “sleepy little town down around San Antone” immortalized by the Doobie Brothers in the 1970s, but the south Texas burg of about 1,200 people is making local headlines for the wrong reasons these days. According to one woman, the China Grove police improperly seized several firearms belonging to her and her husband almost four years ago, and despite the fact that no charges have ever been filed against the couple, they’ve been unable to get their property returned to them.

KABB-TV in San Antonio recently highlighted Brandy Napier’s struggle to get answers from local officials, but ran into a few roadblocks of their own in reporting on the gun seizures.

Brandy Napier lives in Seguin, but she and her husband have family they visit in China Grove.

That’s where her husband Franklin was pulled over by a China Grove officer in August 2018 for reportedly running stop signs.

Brandy says he had just left the gun range and had three guns in the car.

The officer confiscated them, but made no arrest.

No formal report was ever given to the Napier’s, just a burglary inventory sheet typically used to document items stolen in robberies.

“She stated that she didn’t have the proper documentation to give him, so that’s why she put it on that and she let him go,” says Brandy.

Brandy showed us receipts for two of the guns listed in her name and Franklin’s along with the serial numbers listed.

The third gun she says was bought at an auction.

She’s made several attempts to retrieve those guns since, making trips to the City of China Grove office.

Every time she says she’s been told the case is pending in the District Attorney’s office and that the guns couldn’t be returned without documentation from their office.

Brandy made a last ditch effort to retrieve the guns last month.

“He said, ‘I don’t have the documentation from the District Attorney’.”

KABB contacted the local police to get a copy of that burglary inventory sheet, but were told they had to talk to the District Attorney. So, the station filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the D.A.’s office, only to hear back from the office that media requests have to go through the state Attorney General’s office (something that doesn’t make a lick of sense to me, by the way).

Napier’s attorney, meanwhile, says he’s checked with the D.A.’s office and can’t find any case involving Franklin Napier.

“If they haven’t filed a criminal case against the person by now, the statute of limitations has run,” says attorney Patrick Hancock. “A lot more than two years has gone by, so I don’t think the DA can file anything against him and I don’t believe there’s a case sitting in the DA’s office by China Grove on this matter.”

Nearly four years later, no arrest or charges have been filed, a red flag for this attorney.

“If they can’t produce the guns that were taken, the personal property of the individual that was taken and they can’t produce a public police report to even verify that a China Grove officer stopped them and took an individual’s property, then they need to be investigated by the Texas Rangers,” says Hancock.

This is such a bizarre story that I’d love to see the Texas Rangers get involved. Based on what Brandy Napier and her attorney have said, there was no cause for Franklin Napier to have any of his guns seized during the traffic stop, and the fact that neither the China Grove police nor the Bexar County District Attorney’s office can or will say anything about what happened to the firearms in the years since is simply unacceptable. Are they hidden away in an evidence room somewhere, did they end up in the hands of a China Grove police officer, or have they simply gone missing? Brandy Napier can’t get any answers. Her attorney hasn’t been able to find out. Local media have been stymied. Yeah, I’d say it’s time for the state to get involved and find out what happened to the Napier’s firearms. Who knows, maybe the D.A. can end up filing charges… not against the Napier’s, but whoever ended up with their property.