HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » TexasTowelie » Journal

TexasTowelie

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Texas
Home country: United States
Current location: Red Hell Texas
Member since: Sun Aug 14, 2011, 03:57 AM
Number of posts: 65,037

About Me

Middle-aged white guy who believes in justice and equality for all. Math and computer analyst with additional 21st century jack-of-all-trades skills. I'm a stud, not a dud!

Journal Archives

New Texas law aims at ‘junk’ auto insurance policies covering only certain drivers

AUSTIN — More than a million Texas drivers with limited auto insurance coverage face increased scrutiny under a new state law that aims to shine a light on policies that cover just one driver, not an entire vehicle.

The rest of the story is behind the paywall at http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130905-new-texas-law-aims-at-junk-auto-insurance-policies-covering-only-certain-drivers.ece .

[font color=green]This story is of personal interest since I was involved in an incident a couple of weeks ago while riding my bicycle in a hit-and-run accident. The investigation is leading to a minor driver that was excluded by endorsement on the auto policy. My chances of any type of insurance settlement are nil and other than filing a claim against the parents in small claims court, it is unlikely that I will obtain any type of recovery. The most likely repercussions are that the parents auto policy will be cancelled for allowing her to drive the vehicle without coverage.[/font]
Posted by TexasTowelie | Fri Sep 6, 2013, 12:40 AM (1 replies)

Shell to pay $1.1 million in fines to settle with EPA over Arctic drilling

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Thursday night said that Shell agreed to pay more than a $1 million in fines to settle claims that it violated air permits while exploring for oil and gas in the Arctic last year.

The agency said in a statement that Shell violated its Clean Air Act permits while drilling for two months in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, off the North Slope of Alaska.

The EPA said that it documented “numerous” violations for Shell’s Discoverer and Kulluk drill ship fleets.

Under the settlements, Shell agreed to pay a $710,000 penalty for violations related to the Discoverer’s air permit and a $390,000 penalty for violations related to the Kulluk.

More at http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/09/05/shell-to-pay-1-million-in-fines-to-settle-with-epa-over-arctic-drilling/?cmpid=hpbn .
Posted by TexasTowelie | Fri Sep 6, 2013, 12:29 AM (1 replies)

Elected (Texas) Supreme Court Justice Criticizes Judicial Elections -- This is Good News

Texas has chosen the worst possible way to select the state's judiciary: partisan judicial elections. It has resulted in a Court of Criminal Appeals (the state's highest appeals court for criminal appeals) that is stacked with ex-prosecutors who rarely, if ever, meet a conviction they can't find some way to uphold and a Texas Supreme Court that is heavily pro-business. For example, one UT professor found that from 1998-2005, Wal-Mart batted 1.000 in front of the Texas Supreme Court--it only won 56% of its cases nationwide.

So when the left-leaning American Constitution Society (ACS) released a report showing just how bad it looks when state judges vote the way their campaign donors would like (of course, the judges could already be ideologically predisposed to vote that way), a writer for the Atlantic reached out to Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett to get his thoughts. Justice Willett's thoughts, set forth in an email response, are eloquent and worth quoting at length:

My website only accepts contributions during campaign season. My last day to fund raise was March 6, 2013, and thankfully I can't raise another penny until summer 2017, when the 2018 reelection campaign begins. State law restricts judicial candidates in terms of when they can fund raise, from whom they can fund raise, and how much they can fund raise.

The ACS study raises difficult and consequential questions, familiar questions that frankly can't be raised enough. A former Texas Governor, Sull Ross, once said, "The loss of public confidence in the judiciary is the greatest curse that can ever befall a nation." I don't disagree. The Texas Constitution, however, mandates a judiciary elected on a partisan ballot. Calling this system "imperfect" is a G-rated description, and I'm intimately acquainted with the myriad drawbacks, and they are plentiful.

On the one hand, Texans insist on their right to elect their judges (though they can't name any of us). On the other hand, they harbor suspicions about the role of money that ACS chronicles. I've long favored smart judicial-selection reform -- every member of my court does -- and every legislative session, reform measures are filed ... and then they fail. Both major parties and lots of activist groups in Texas oppose changing the current partisan elected system. Interestingly, the business lobby and tort-reform groups all favor scrapping our current judicial-selection system.

In other words, those who allegedly benefit from the current system aggressively favor replacing it. But the status quo is deeply entrenched, and legislatively, the wheels always come off.

I haven't studied the ACS reports findings or methodology, but I understand 100% the suspicion that donations drive decisions. That skepticism siphons public confidence, and that's toxic to the idea of an impartial, independent judiciary. I can only speak for myself and say that it flatly doesn't happen.

It's also important to underscore that the laws we interpret are enacted by a very business-friendly legislature. My court doesn't put a finger on the scale to ensure that preferred groups or causes win, but the Legislature certainly does. Lawmakers are fond of lawmaking, and the business lobby exerts significant influence on state policymaking. Then those laws come to the courts for interpretation. If the legal playing field is tilted in favor of business, that's chiefly due to legislative choices, not judicial ones. And when those choices go too far and collide with constitutional guarantees, I've voted to strike them down.

No doubt contributions play a huge role in determining political victors and victims, in judicial races no less than in other branches. My name ID hovers between slim and none, and voters know far more about their American Idol judges than their Supreme Court judges. The crass bottom line is that you spend 99 percent of your time raising a colossal fortune that you then use to bombard voters in hopes of branding your name onto a tiny crevice in their short-term memory for a few fleeting moments.

I'd be shocked if people didn't look askance at such a flawed system. I do, too, having had close-up experience spanning several contested statewide races. Nothing would please me, or my wife, more than if my last election were my last election, and between now and 2018, Texans would opt for a smarter system. Hopeful? Yep. Optimistic? Nope.


More at http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2013/09/elected_supreme_court_justice.php .
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 01:30 PM (1 replies)

UT Dallas is Home to America's First Muslim Fraternity



Alif Laam Meem -- or, for those who prefer fraternities to go by a Greek acronym, Alpha Lambda Mu -- first blipped across the national radar this past spring when they attended Mayor Mike Rawlings anti-domestic violence rally outside City Hall. A photo the group posted to Facebook showing members holding a sign reading "Muslims say NO to domestic violence!" went semi-viral as the Internet applauded them for battling the stereotype that Islam is inherently misogynistic.

"We wanted to clarify the misconception that any kind of domestic violence is allowed in our religion," ALM founder Ali Mahmoud told ABC News. "And it may seem apparent through the media that it's allowed, but that's majorly a cultural phenomenon and not an actual teaching of our religion."

The group was brand new at the time, having been founded the previous month. Now that it's a bit better established, it's enjoying a second burst of media attention, this time focussed not on any specific issue but on the mere existence of a fraternity whose members foreswear alcohol and pre-marital sex.

On Tuesday, Britain's The Independent ran a profile of the America's "first all-Muslim frat.".

"The idea of a Muslim fraternity seemed heretical," says Ali. However, as they worked on the idea they realised that many Muslim men at university felt that they either had to compromise their social life in order to live by the values of Islam, or compromise the values of Islam in order to have a social life. Ali believed a balance was achievable, and that was the path the establishment of Alpha Lambda Mu was trying to pave.

They created the fraternity, based on the principles of Islam - mercy, compassion, justice, integrity, honesty, unity, love, and sincerity - in order to prove that a modern Muslim college student could live as a dignified, respectable man and still have an organic college experience. They hope that in their fraternity, their members - 'young, self-actualised Muslim men' - will be servants to their families and every aspect of their greater community.


More at http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2013/09/ut_dallas_americas_first_musli.php .
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 01:28 PM (2 replies)

Sequester Cuts Over 4,000 Kids From Head Start in Texas

Do you remember the sequester? The massive across-the-board spending cuts that were never supposed to go into effect, but then did when Congressional Republicans couldn't compromise with Democrats on a solution. It was big news in March when the cuts went into effect, but since then the sequester has slowly faded from public consciousness as the news media has found newer, flashier stories to report on.

As attention on the sequester has waned, we've also largely turned our attention away from the lives of people affected by the sequester. The fact that most of these people are low-income doesn't help--poverty isn't the media's favorite subject to begin with, and sequestration is now six months old. But the sequester briefly made the headlines again last month, when it was reported that 57,000 children will be cut from Head Start this year as a result of the sequester.

Texas is one of the states hardest hit by the Head Start cuts. Sequestration means 4,410 Texas kids won't be part of Head Start this year. They don't have the funding because House and Senate Republicans (including the Texas delegation) voted to keep the sequester, instead of compromising with Democrats on a more balanced budget. Because of our lawmakers' refusal to cooperate, over 4,000 of Texas's poorest children won't have access to Head Start this fall.

-snip-

Cuts to Head Start will remove 57,000 children from programs nationwide this year (51,000 from Head Start and 6,000 from Early Head Start). But even those kids who will remain in Head Start will see services drastically reduced. According to HHS, budget cuts will force Head Start to "cut 1.3 million days of service, provide 18,000 fewer hours of service through shortened school days, [and] terminate or reduce salaries of 18,000 employees." These have already had an effect in Texas. Head Start of Greater Dallas had to close two of its 46 locations in the spring, causing 360 children to lose access to services. Since the cuts are going to be phased in, the situation is only going to get worse over time.

More at http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/14032/sequester-cuts-over-4000-kids-from-head-start-in-texas .
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 01:25 PM (1 replies)

Aggie Highway approved by Texas Transportation Commission (SH 249)

COLLEGE STATION, Texas – John Sharp, chancellor of The Texas A&M University System, today announced that the Texas Transportation Commission has approved part of the Unified Transportation Plan for 2014 that will enable work to begin on Highway 249 extensions from Houston to Navasota. The highway will reduce the travel time from College Station to Houston Intercontinental Airport to just over one hour. Once complete, the freeway will provide the nation’s highest concentration of Texas A&M Former Students housed in Houston a quick route to their alma mater in College Station, prompting the project to be known as the Aggie Highway.

“I applaud the hard work of our governor, TxDOT, the Texas Transportation Commission and our legislative and community constituents who have worked for years to make this a reality. Transportation is no less important today than it ever has been in this state and this unique solution to better managing traffic is a great example of the “can do” spirit of this state,” said Sharp.

The Aggie Highway is a freeway that would connect the suburbs of Houston to Highway 6 in Navasota. It would specifically extend State Highway 249 in Harris County and connect it to Highway 6 in Grimes County. The TTC authorized $293 million for project development and construction, bringing the total commitment from the state to over $300 million.

TxDOT began conducting working group meetings on this project in March 2013 and will continue public outreach activities through the fall.

More at http://news.tamus.edu/2013/09/05/aggie-highway-approved-by-texas-transportation-commission/ .
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 01:17 PM (0 replies)

New Texas A&M T-shirt takes aim at ESPN

A spokesman for Aggieland Outfitters said customers have had enough of the spin.

So, in response to complaints about media coverage of Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel, the Aggie retailer designed "BTHO ESPiN" T-shirts, available in stores and online.

Manziel, who was suspended for the first half of Texas A&M's 52-31 win over Rice on Saturday after an "inadvertent violation" of NCAA autograph rules, came under more media scrutiny after he was benched in the fourth quarter after receiving an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for taunting Rice players.

"We've been thinking about doing this shirt for a while," said Dallas Shipp, director of marketing and communications for Aggieland Outfitters. "We went back and forth whether or not to do it, but the longer the coverage dragged on, the more our customers grew tired with the reporting. Everyone was getting fed up, so we decided we wanted to do it. It's one of those shirts that sends a statement: The national media and our friends in Bristol have created this narrative of who they think Johnny Manziel is and for a lot of people it's not an accurate or fair representation of Johnny."

More at http://www.theeagle.com/news/local/article_cf9e3e3f-2eef-501b-9ef9-81e5181e8638.html .

[font color=maroon]Okay, I must admit my ignorance about acronyms--BTHO stands for "Beat The Hell Outta."[/font]
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 12:54 PM (3 replies)

The Affordable Care Act Part III: Fixing a Broken System

By Dr. Brian Carr
President, Behavioral Health Associates, Lubbock, Texas, 1991-Present
Chairman, City of Lubbock Board of Health, 2013
Submitted on September 5, 2013 - 7:10am


Having spent 27 years operating a private practice in healthcare I am well aware of how the current system is broken. On the one hand we see a massive overutilization of services that increase health costs while at the same time the number of our citizens who are lacking any form of healthcare coverage is exploding. As discussed in an article on The Washington Post prices are greatly varied and consumers are blind to actual cost…or any competition. The one goal of reducing the number of uninsured Americans is critical at this time

The number of uninsured Americans has grown at an alarming rate in recent years. In 2000 about 38 million Americans were uninsured. With the recent economic downturn that number has spited to 50 million by 2010-a 32% increase compared to a decade ago.

While bringing anger and disdain to the discussion the individual mandate is a central component of the ACA. This forced participation is necessary to make the reforms possible.

In states that have attempted universal coverage the program failed because people were free to opt out. When Mitt Romney established an individual mandate for health insurance in Massachusetts it worked like a charm, increasing the number of insured in that state to 97% , the highest level of any state in the country.

By adding as many as 30 million of the uninsured into the healthcare system, the nation’s insurance “risk pool” is dramatically strengthened. A large influx of healthy Americans (The group with the lowest risk) creates a much more balanced system than the current one. The goal is to spread risk across a large pool of citizens so that costs are shared.

The individual mandate is unquestionably a coercive stick but there are also a perks. These perks come in the form of assistance from the federal government to help low-income Americans obtain health insurance and tax credits that give small businesses a financial incentive to offer health insurance to their employees.

An equalization of shared risk means that we move from a model where each states sets its own income level for qualification for Medicaid to one that is standardized across the country. Millions of Americans will qualify for Medicaid because the income threshold to qualify will be raised in 2014 to 133% of the federal poverty line ($29,327 for a family of four in 2010) in most states in the country

For those citizens whose earning level is above that needed to qualify for Medicaid they will be eligible for federal assistance in order to pay for health coverage. The threshold for this assistance is targeted to those who fail to qualify for Medicaid and who earn below 400 percent of the federal poverty line ($88,200 for a family of four in 2010). The health exchanges under the ACA will begin operating in 2014. The subsidized exchanges are projected to decrease the number of uninsured by 16 million people by 2019.

Those with an income up to 133 percent of the federal poverty line (or $29,327 for a family of four in 2010) will be eligible for Medicaid. Those with an income between 133 percent and 400 percent of the poverty line ($88,200 for a family of four in 2010) will be able to get financial assistance from the government to buy healthcare coverage on their state’s exchange. Those with an income above 400 percent of the poverty line will still be able to buy coverage through their state’s exchange, but they’ll be ineligible for government financial assistance. For this group the exchanges will provide an opportunity to obtain insurance that may not have been possible before due to pre-existing conditions or other exclusions.

Although it seems unprecedented for the government to force Americans to buy a particular service or product, there are many examples of government compelling its citizens to behave in certain ways for their own health and safety. The law requiring drivers to wear seat belts is just one example.

If you’re worried about being criminally prosecuted and put in jail for not getting health insurance under the ACA, don’t be.

If you do not obtain health insurance you will pay a fine. The amount of the fee will depend on the year it’s incurred. The individual mandate takes effect in 2014 and you will have to pay either a flat fee of $95 or 1 percent of your income up to a maximum of $285. You will have to pay whichever amount is higher in your case.

After this launch the penalty will grow until it reaches a ceiling in 2016-a flat fee of $695 or 2.5 percent of your income up to a maximum of $2085. As in previous years, you will have to pay whichever amount is higher for you.

Keep in mind that only a small fraction of Americans will have to worry about the individual mandate and the penalty that comes with it. If you already have health insurance (that’s 84 out of every 100 of us) you won’t have to pay any penalty since your existing coverage means that you comply with the law.

Of the 37 million who are uninsured in 2010 (not counting 13 million illegal aliens), about 14 million will be able to obtain healthcare coverage without paying anything out of their own pocket by enrolling in Medicaid after its expansion. Another 14 million currently uninsured Americans will be able to receive government financial assistance when they buy coverage through their state’s exchange. The remaining group of uninsured (about 9 million Americans or 3 percent of the population in 2010) will also be able to buy coverage through the exchanges, but they will have to do so without a subsidy.

Under the ACA, the confusing, inconsistent, and arguably unfair mishmash of Medicaid income eligibility levels across the nation disappears and is replaced by a single standard, at least for those states that agree to participate in the planned expansion of the program.

A working parent in Alabama had to make less than $5,515 (25 percent of the poverty level) to qualify for Medicaid. When expanded in 2014, the same working parent could make as much as $29,327 (133 percent of the poverty line for a family of four) and still get in.

In the first three years of the ACA, the federal government will pay for 100 percent of all the “newly eligible” people in Medicaid, with the level reduced to 90 percent by 2020.

The future of the ACA will depend very much on the exchanges.

Tomorrow: The ACA Part IV: Understanding the Health Exchanges

TAGS:

LubbockOnline Blog
Affordcare Care Act
Brother can you spare a dime
exchanges
Football weekend
Go get vaccinated
Lubbock
minimum wage should not mean less than zero life
ObamaCare
Our credit card bill has come in
Texas
Uninsured are not lazy

http://lubbockonline.com/interact/blog-post/dr-brian-carr/2013-09-05/affordable-care-act-part-iii-fixing-broken-system

Cross-posted in Good Reads forum.
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 12:31 PM (0 replies)

The Affordable Care Act Part III: Fixing a Broken System

By Dr. Brian Carr
President, Behavioral Health Associates, Lubbock, Texas, 1991-Present
Chairman, City of Lubbock Board of Health, 2013
Submitted on September 5, 2013 - 7:10am


Having spent 27 years operating a private practice in healthcare I am well aware of how the current system is broken. On the one hand we see a massive overutilization of services that increase health costs while at the same time the number of our citizens who are lacking any form of healthcare coverage is exploding. As discussed in an article on The Washington Post prices are greatly varied and consumers are blind to actual cost…or any competition. The one goal of reducing the number of uninsured Americans is critical at this time

The number of uninsured Americans has grown at an alarming rate in recent years. In 2000 about 38 million Americans were uninsured. With the recent economic downturn that number has spited to 50 million by 2010-a 32% increase compared to a decade ago.

While bringing anger and disdain to the discussion the individual mandate is a central component of the ACA. This forced participation is necessary to make the reforms possible.

In states that have attempted universal coverage the program failed because people were free to opt out. When Mitt Romney established an individual mandate for health insurance in Massachusetts it worked like a charm, increasing the number of insured in that state to 97% , the highest level of any state in the country.

By adding as many as 30 million of the uninsured into the healthcare system, the nation’s insurance “risk pool” is dramatically strengthened. A large influx of healthy Americans (The group with the lowest risk) creates a much more balanced system than the current one. The goal is to spread risk across a large pool of citizens so that costs are shared.

The individual mandate is unquestionably a coercive stick but there are also a perks. These perks come in the form of assistance from the federal government to help low-income Americans obtain health insurance and tax credits that give small businesses a financial incentive to offer health insurance to their employees.

An equalization of shared risk means that we move from a model where each states sets its own income level for qualification for Medicaid to one that is standardized across the country. Millions of Americans will qualify for Medicaid because the income threshold to qualify will be raised in 2014 to 133% of the federal poverty line ($29,327 for a family of four in 2010) in most states in the country

For those citizens whose earning level is above that needed to qualify for Medicaid they will be eligible for federal assistance in order to pay for health coverage. The threshold for this assistance is targeted to those who fail to qualify for Medicaid and who earn below 400 percent of the federal poverty line ($88,200 for a family of four in 2010). The health exchanges under the ACA will begin operating in 2014. The subsidized exchanges are projected to decrease the number of uninsured by 16 million people by 2019.

Those with an income up to 133 percent of the federal poverty line (or $29,327 for a family of four in 2010) will be eligible for Medicaid. Those with an income between 133 percent and 400 percent of the poverty line ($88,200 for a family of four in 2010) will be able to get financial assistance from the government to buy healthcare coverage on their state’s exchange. Those with an income above 400 percent of the poverty line will still be able to buy coverage through their state’s exchange, but they’ll be ineligible for government financial assistance. For this group the exchanges will provide an opportunity to obtain insurance that may not have been possible before due to pre-existing conditions or other exclusions.

Although it seems unprecedented for the government to force Americans to buy a particular service or product, there are many examples of government compelling its citizens to behave in certain ways for their own health and safety. The law requiring drivers to wear seat belts is just one example.

If you’re worried about being criminally prosecuted and put in jail for not getting health insurance under the ACA, don’t be.

If you do not obtain health insurance you will pay a fine. The amount of the fee will depend on the year it’s incurred. The individual mandate takes effect in 2014 and you will have to pay either a flat fee of $95 or 1 percent of your income up to a maximum of $285. You will have to pay whichever amount is higher in your case.

After this launch the penalty will grow until it reaches a ceiling in 2016-a flat fee of $695 or 2.5 percent of your income up to a maximum of $2085. As in previous years, you will have to pay whichever amount is higher for you.

Keep in mind that only a small fraction of Americans will have to worry about the individual mandate and the penalty that comes with it. If you already have health insurance (that’s 84 out of every 100 of us) you won’t have to pay any penalty since your existing coverage means that you comply with the law.

Of the 37 million who are uninsured in 2010 (not counting 13 million illegal aliens), about 14 million will be able to obtain healthcare coverage without paying anything out of their own pocket by enrolling in Medicaid after its expansion. Another 14 million currently uninsured Americans will be able to receive government financial assistance when they buy coverage through their state’s exchange. The remaining group of uninsured (about 9 million Americans or 3 percent of the population in 2010) will also be able to buy coverage through the exchanges, but they will have to do so without a subsidy.

Under the ACA, the confusing, inconsistent, and arguably unfair mishmash of Medicaid income eligibility levels across the nation disappears and is replaced by a single standard, at least for those states that agree to participate in the planned expansion of the program.

A working parent in Alabama had to make less than $5,515 (25 percent of the poverty level) to qualify for Medicaid. When expanded in 2014, the same working parent could make as much as $29,327 (133 percent of the poverty line for a family of four) and still get in.

In the first three years of the ACA, the federal government will pay for 100 percent of all the “newly eligible” people in Medicaid, with the level reduced to 90 percent by 2020.

The future of the ACA will depend very much on the exchanges.

Tomorrow: The ACA Part IV: Understanding the Health Exchanges

TAGS:

LubbockOnline Blog
Affordcare Care Act
Brother can you spare a dime
exchanges
Football weekend
Go get vaccinated
Lubbock
minimum wage should not mean less than zero life
ObamaCare
Our credit card bill has come in
Texas
Uninsured are not lazy

http://lubbockonline.com/interact/blog-post/dr-brian-carr/2013-09-05/affordable-care-act-part-iii-fixing-broken-system

Cross-posted in Texas Group.
Posted by TexasTowelie | Thu Sep 5, 2013, 12:31 PM (0 replies)

Who exactly are those people on the Blue Bell ice cream boxes?

If you are a fan of Blue Bell Ice Cream, you have no doubt found yourself wondering just who the people on their snack boxes are. The grinning construction worker, the girl-child in her mother’s makeup, the farmer that looks like John Denver, the Problem Child greedily holding four Pop’N Fudge bars, and the way-too-cheerful mail lady have all greeted us as we open those glass doors in the grocery store’s ice cream aisle.

For someone eating an ice cream sandwich, that postal worker’s teeth were much too clean. Same goes for the construction worker with his Krunch Bar, who has a Jim Croce/Joel Osteen thing going on. Why was that Olivia Munn-looking brunette wearing heavy-duty rain gear holding the Mini Rainbows?

Jim Hayhurst is retiring from Blue Bell after spending the past two decades as the advertising manager from the ice cream company out in Brenham, which means he’s one of the last people who know a lick of anything about these characters.

“Some of those cartons have now been around for over 20 years,” he says. “Twenty years ago we weren’t even sold in all of Texas.”

More at http://blog.chron.com/thetexican/2013/09/who-exactly-are-those-people-on-the-blue-bell-ice-cream-boxes/?cmpid=hpfc#15510-16 .

[font color=green]As the residing DUer where the creamery is located, I will point out that almost every face on the boxes in the slide show indicates that Blue Bell believes that only white people eat frozen confections (the one black girl had an extremely light complexion). That may also explain why nearly all of Blue Bell's political donations go the Republican Party.

FWIW, if you never see another post from me it means that the sheriff's posse sent me packing from town (or worse).[/font]