political news, State news

Battleground Texas: They're back … or are they?

Battleground Texas — remember that outfit? — says it’s back in the game.

And the game is its goal of turning Texas from a reliably Red Republican state to a Blue Democratic one.

From my perch here in the heart of the most Republican region of this most Republican state, well, Battleground Texas has some work to do. Lots of work, as a matter of fact.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/21/battleground-texas-optimistic-it-licks-its-wounds/

Battleground Texas seriously oversold its impact on the 2014 midterm election in Texas. As one BT official noted rather pithily, “We got the s*** kicked out of us.”

Yeah. Do ya think? Democrats came nowhere close to winning any of the race they hoped would be competitive. The races for governor and lieutenant governor? They each went Republican by more than 20 percentage points. The Legislature’s GOP majority became even more GOP after the ballots were counted.

Democrats keep saying the demographic trends in Texas are working in their favor, with Hispanics comprising an increasing portion of the state’s population. And, yes, Hispanic voters are much kinder to Democrats than they are to Republicans. The problem, though, is that Hispanic voters, um, don’t turn out in numbers that enable Democrats to turn back the Republican tide.

I’m one who is pulling for Battleground Texas to get its act together. I’ve long wanted Texas to become more competitive. I know what you’re thinking: Sure he does, as he’s one of those lefty types who just cannot stand Republican control over all things political in Texas. Perhaps there’s some truth there.

A more competitive environment builds a bit more honesty, though, in both political parties. It deters the kind of arrogance of power one finds when one party holds such dominance over the other one. What’s more, such deterrence is more conducive to the kind of “good government” that should flourish.

That, I submit, is the result when the parties learn to work together rather than have one party trample the other one in the halls of government, which is exactly what I fear is going to happen with the current session of the Texas Legislature.

So, go for it, Battleground Texas. Here’s a word of advice: Be humble as you seek to rebuild and don’t over-promise what you can’t deliver.

 

International news, national news

Vigilance required … even right here

If the 9/11 attacks more than a dozen years ago taught Americans anything it all, they should teach us to be on high alert no matter where we live and what we’re doing.

Thus, warnings to mall shoppers have gone out across the country in the wake of a threat made against The Mall of America by an al-Qaeda affiliate, Al-Shabaab.

Yes, that means Westgate Mall in little ol’ Amarillo, Texas.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/21/us/al-shabaab-calls-for-mall-attacks/index.html

Al-Shabaab has threatened to strike malls in three western countries. Department of Homeland Security officials take the threat seriously. The Mall of America is in Minneapolis, which is home to a large Somali immigrant population. The Twin Cities region also reportedly has produced many recruits who’ve signed up to fight with Islamic State and other terrorist organizations.

Make no mistake, these threats go right to the heart of where we need to be alert. Malls represent — to many people around the world — some elements of American excess. Americans, of course, do not see it that way, nor should we. Do we stop doing business at these places just because a terrorist group has leveled a threat? Of course not.

But these monstrous organizations have shown how seriously the world must take their threats.

The 9/11 assault should stand as proof that these organizations mean business.

 

entertainment news

Here's a vote for Bradley Cooper

Five men are competing for an acting award tonight that is going to draw more than the usual amount of attention.

I’ve got my favorite and I’ll declare right here: I want Bradley Cooper to win the Oscar for Best Actor.

Am I an expert on films? Hardly. Do I know enough about acting techniques to make an educated assessment of who should win? Not even close.

I haven’t even seen all the performances. But I’ve seen “American Sniper,” the film that stars Cooper as the late Chris Kyle, the Navy SEAL sniper credited with 160 “kills” while serving four tours in Iraq.

OK, so my wish for Cooper to win the Oscar isn’t even as educated as it should be. But I have heard the debate about the film and have come to my own conclusion about it: To my way of thinking, “American Sniper” does not glorify war; it does not endorse a war policy, nor does it condemn it. The film tells a gripping story about a young man who signed up to fight for his country, did his duty and struggled with the terrible — but lawful — orders he was required to carry out.

“American Sniper” is an important film that has drawn considerable comment from those on the left and the right.

This weekend, I had a conversation with a retired Amarillo police officer who’s also seen the film. He was highly critical of the “far left wackos” who’ve criticized the movie. My friend tilts to the right; I tilt to the left, although I don’t consider myself to be a far left wacko. I tried to calm my friend down a bit by reminding him that the wackos to whom he refers don’t necessarily represent mainstream progressive thinkers.

Indeed, I’ve been critical of some of those critics — such as filmmaker Michael Moore, who labeled snipers as “cowards.”

My former cop friend thinks the left-leaning motion picture academy will be highly reluctant to support Cooper for Best Actor Oscar because of the content of the film.

I remain cautiously optimistic that my friend has it wrong.

Would I think differently if I had seen all the actors’ performances under consideration? That’s a hypothetical question, so I cannot answer it.

I’ll just stand by my hope that Bradley Cooper tonight wins the Oscar.

 

national news, State news

When did we realize these bans were illegal?

A question comes to mind regarding the recent spate of court rulings against statewide bans on same-sex marriage.

The 14th Amendment, which includes the “equal protection clause,” was ratified in 1868. Why has it taken until just the recent past to realize that equal protection means all citizens are guaranteed such protection under the law?

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/02/texas-judge-rules-same-sex-marriage-ban-unconstitutional/

A Travis County probate judge recently ruled that the Texas ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Judge Guy Herman “ruled the state’s ban violated the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment,” according to the San Antonio Express-News.

The amendment has been on the books for 147 years! Only now has the issue come up as a reason to ban same-sex marriage.

It is true that gay couples have been largely hidden from public view for most of the history of the Republic. We didn’t have “gay pride rallies” at the turn of the 20th century, let alone in the middle of the 19th century. Same-sex couples lived in the shadows. They didn’t get married. They simply lived together, which was their right to do — except in some states, such as Texas, where it was actually illegal for same-sex couples (notably men) to be intimate; our state enforced something called an “anti-sodomy law” until it, too, was ruled unconstitutional.

So here we are now. Courts are ruling left and right that states cannot violate a civil right written into the U.S. Constitution just three years after the end of the Civil War.

It took us awhile to get to this point. But we’ve arrived. Finally.

 

national news

O'Reilly, Williams put media under the scope

Yes, there’s actually a lot of good that can come from the controversies surrounding two prominent broadcast journalists.

It is that the media — both print and broadcast — have been put on high alert to be sure they’re telling the truth and leave no doubt to their readers, viewers and listeners.

The world is watching. Carefully.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/oreilly-kill-zone-just-a-slang-expression-202887.html?hp=b2_l1

* Brian Williams of NBC News has suspended without pay for six months. His transgression? “Misremembering,” which is what he calls it, an event in which he reported being shot down by a rocket in Iraq in 2003. It didn’t happen that way, despite Williams’s telling of the tale. His credibility is in tatters and likely is damaged beyond repair.

* Now comes a blistering report that Fox News host Bill O’Reilly allegedly misrepresented his reporting from the 1982 Falklands War fought between Britain and Argentina. O’Reilly has said repeatedly he reported from the remote island battlefields. Mother Jones magazine has challenged O’Reilly’s assertion, to which O’Reilly — as is his style — responded by calling the writer David Corn a “guttersnipe” and a liar. A former colleague at CBS, where O’Reilly was working at the time, also has challenged Bill O’s account of where he was during that brief war. This one isn’t over.

Throughout all of this has been an interesting analysis of how the media do their job.

The U.S. Constitution protects the media from government interference, so there cannot be a government policing arm established to ensure the media tell the truth. That has to come from within the industry. And within all broadcast and cable news networks, as well as all print organizations, there must be some serious in-house discussions taking place to ensure that everyone who reports the news does so with impeccably.

There can be no doubt about the truth of what’s being reported.

The good that comes from all this tempest and tumult must be that journalists of all stripes are put on notice that the world is watching them with keen eyes and is tuning in with ears that hear everything.

***

Williams is unlikely to return to his anchor desk at NBC. As for O’Reilly and his career at Fox, well, stay tuned for that one. O’Reilly is always — always! — ready to unload against his accusers. He’ll just have to answer one question: Can you prove you were in the middle of the fight? If so, then let’s see the proof.

 

national news

Listen to Texas lawmakers on DHS funding

Dear Members of Congress:

Your Texas colleagues are speaking wisdom that you need to hear.

Do not play politics with funding the Department of Homeland Security. Doing so, according to Rep. Michael McCaul, puts the nation at a serious national security risk.

Do you understand that? Do you understand what it means to use DHS funding as a political football?

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/20/lawmakers-toying-dhs-funding-dangerous-game/

Let’s all understand something. Some of you are angry with President Obama’s decision to grant temporary amnesty for several million illegal immigrants. Others of you support the president’s decision.

Those of you who oppose Obama’s executive action, however, are signaling a serious breach in our national security network if you cut money out of DHS just because you’re mad at the president.

McCaul, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee in the House, said it well: “The terrorists are watching and the drug cartels are watching, and anytime we play politics with funding a national security agency, it’s a dangerous game to play,” McCaul told the Texas Tribune. “It’s a sign of weakness in our government.”

I get that McCaul, a Republican, is fingering Senate Democrats for this standoff. Both sides are to blame here.

Republicans have added amendments to the DHS funding bill that takes aim at Obama’s executive order. Democrats oppose it and the Senate has held up the funding because of that opposition.

So, who’s playing politics with our national security? I’m casting a plague on both political parties.

A lot of border-state lawmakers are concerned enough to send up warning signals.

Congress must not defund a national security agency because of petulance over a presidential order.

Don’t endanger the nation by cutting off money for the agency whose mission is to protect “the homeland.”

 

national news, political news

Rudy talks himself out of relevance

Two of the smarter pundits — one a liberal, the other a conservative — have found common ground on the remarks delivered recently by former New York City Mayor Rudy Guiliani.

Mark Shields and David Brooks agree that Guiliani’s assertion that President Obama doesn’t “love America” are unacceptable and the Republican Party to which Guiliani belongs needs to call him out.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/21/david_brooks_giulianis_comments_unacceptable_incumbent_upon_republicans_to_police_the_party.html

What “America’s Mayor” seems to be doing — if the GOP follows through on the advice — is talking himself out of becoming a relevant voice in the nation’s political discourse.

Brooks, who writes a right-leaning column for the New York Times, told the PBS NewsHour that Guiliani’s remarks are “self-destructive” and are just plain wrong.

Guiliani spouted off during a political event honoring Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. It took place in New York City. He prefaced his remarks by acknowledging it was difficult to say, but then he said the president doesn’t love the country he governs.

This is a shameful act of demagoguery.

Shields, whose column tilts to the left, brought up a fascinating element to Guiliani’s doubts about Obama’s patriotism. It was that Guiliani received six draft deferments to get out of serving in the Vietnam War and persuaded a judge to get him reclassified to 2A specifically to keep him from going to war. Are those the actions of a patriot? Shields asked.

Shields also noted: “I go back to John McCain, who in 2008, when this was a hot issue, had the courage to confront a Republican audience in Lakeville, Minnesota, when they made this charge and said, no, that is untrue. President Obama is an American. He cares about this country. He loves this family, and I like him, but I disagree with him on the issues.”

If the mayor is setting the tone for the upcoming GOP presidential primary campaign, then the developing field of candidates talking about entering the race need to switch to a new song sheet.

NewsHour moderator Judy Woodruff did note that several Republican officials denounced Guiliani’s remarks. They were correct to do so.

Brooks responded: “It’s incumbent on Republicans to do that, just to police the party.”

 

Sports news

Conspiracy theory at Super Bowl? Aw, come on!

It’s official: Conspiracy theories can exist in any context, any endeavor, any environment.

This might be my favorite conspiracy theory of all time.

Seattle Seahawks head football coach Pete Carroll called a pass play at the end of the Super Bowl to enable quarterback Russell Wilson a chance to win the game’s most valuable player award instead of handing the ball to Marshawn “Beast Mode” Lynch, who could lay claim to the MVP honor if he scored the winning touchdown.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/seahawks-discussed-conspiracy-theory-about-end-of-super-bowl-xlix/ar-BBhOCFx

Do you follow me?

Wilson is a fine young man, a good guy in the locker room, a great teammate, a role model for youngsters all across the nation.

Lynch? Umm, he’s … uh … shall we say, few of those things. He’s a bit of a dramatist. He gets fined for not talking to the media. He’s known as something — gosh, I hate to say this, but I will anyway — of a thug.

As most sports fans anywhere know, the Super Bowl didn’t end the way Carroll and his team wanted it to end. Wilson’s pass at the goal line was intercepted by New England Patriots defensive back Malcolm Butler. The game ended with the Patriots winning 28-24.

The recriminations have been furious.

Carroll took ownership of the goal-line call. So did Wilson.

As for the conspiracy theory, we’ll never know.

My prediction: This one will grow arms and legs like all the myriad other conspiracy theories out there.

As MSN.com.sports noted: “Who in their right mind would ever fess up to this?”

national news

Rudy wraps himself in 9/11 tragedy

Rudy Guiliani is becoming more shameless by the hour.

After saying that President Barack Obama doesn’t love America, the former New York City mayor has essentially doubled down on that criticism by telling right-wing talk show host Sean Hannity that Obama “didn’t live through 9/11; I did.”

http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/02/19/rudy-giuliani-invokes-911-to-reinforce-his-clai/202583

So, what is the former mayor suggesting? It might be that he’s glorifying his involvement in a crisis that was thrust upon him by those terrorists who flew the planes into the World Trade Center.

No one with any memory of that terrible day would begrudge the mayor for the role he played in rallying his city and, thus, the country in the wake of horrifying tragedy. I certainly get it. His Honor stood tall, along with President Bush.

But why bring that up now as he criticizes President Obama — wrongly, in my view?

He’s suggesting the president doesn’t take international terrorism seriously enough. He posited the ridiculous notion that Obama doesn’t love the country.

Now he says he’s justified in criticizing the president because he was mayor of New York on the morning that the terrorists stunned the world with their brazen attack on the United States of America.

No, Mr. Mayor. You were in the wrong place at the right time. That’s all. Yes, you responded heroically — but your actions — by themselves — don’t give you the right to question the president’s love of country.

 

Sports news

Domestic violence has scarred NASCAR

The National Football League has cracked down on athletes involved in domestic violence incidents.

Now it’s NASCAR’s turn to do the same.

The auto racing association today suspended one of its top stars, Kurt Busch, indefinitely because of allegations involving his former girlfriend.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/motorsports/nascar-suspends-kurt-busch-after-domestic-violence-details/ar-BBhO9OK

NASCAR’s action comes on the eve of the inaugural event of the new racing season, the Daytona 500, known to racing fans as the Super Bowl of the sport.

Busch is the first NASCAR driver to be suspended. Chevrolet has ended its relationship with the driver known as The Outlaw. His case is being investigated. Busch’s lawyer vows to appeal and NASCAR says it will expedite the process.

This is a big deal in one of the country’s most lucrative sports. It speaks to the level of interest that domestic violence has gotten in the wake of the many cases involving NFL stars.

This suspension must send a message around the nation that this kind of activity cannot be tolerated at any level.

Busch has been accused of choking and beating former girlfriend Patricia Driscoll, who this morning told “Good Morning America” about the incident in which she felt her life was threatened.

Yes, Busch deserves a presumption of innocence. However, NASCAR cannot let this matter fester and boil over. Accordingly, NASCAR has acted with amazing speed on this case, perhaps taking a lesson from the NFL’s initially tepid response to the Ray Rice case in which the league suspended the star running back for two games, then rethought its light punishment and then suspended him indefinitely.

Rice was reinstated on appeal, but the case demonstrated a need to crack down on these savage acts of violence.

NASCAR has taken the hint.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience