Yes, there's intelligent discussion out there

Public television, as well as public radio, get vilified by those who object to a so-called “liberal bias” in both media.

I don’t see it. Then again, perhaps my own bias clouds my vision.

A recent discussion by two noted pundits — one liberal and one conservative — points out, though, that common ground can exist and that two ideological foes can actually agree.

David Brooks, the conservative, writes a column for The New York Times; Mark Shields, the liberal, writes a syndicated column distributed by newspapers around the country.

They took up the issue of President Obama’s speech this past week at the National Prayer Breakfast. Speaking on the PBS NewsHour on Friday, I was struck by Brooks’s comments in particular.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/shields-brooks-politics-vaccination-using-religion-justify-evil-acts/

The president said Christians shouldn’t be too quick to cast stones at Islamic terrorists because Christianity has been used by radicals to do bad things “in the name of Christ.” Obama cited the Crusades and the Inquisition as examples.

Obama’s remarks have drawn considerable fire from the right. Brooks, however, takes a different view:

“I think, if the president had come as an atheist to attack religion and to attack Christianity, the Republicans would have a point. That’s not what a president should be doing.

“But that’s not how he came. He has used that prayer breakfast year after year to talk about his own faith, his own faith journey, his own struggles. He’s used it — he has come as a Christian. And the things he said were things — I have never met a Christian who disagreed with what he issued, that the religion has been perverted, that we have to walk humbly before the face of the lord, that God’s purposes are mysterious to us.

“This is not like some tangential, weird belief. This is at the core of every Christian’s faith and every Jew’s faith. And so what he said was utterly normal and admirable and a recognition of historical fact and an urge towards some humility. And so I thought the protests were manufactured and falsely manufactured.”

This kind of view illustrates, in my opinion, what makes public television so valuable. You do not hear the screamers — on the left or the right — trying to outshout the other side. Oh sure, you have the McLaughlin Group, but even those discussions are mild compared to what one hears on MSNBC or Fox.

As for Brooks and Shields, these two men are known for their agreeable disagreements.

I’ll take that level of civility over the scream fests any day of the week.

 

Vets get long-needed help from government

It can be stated clearly: Tom Coburn’s greatest public service accomplishment occurred the day he retired from the U.S. Senate.

The Oklahoma Republican — for reasons that remain a mystery to many observers — continually blocked legislation aimed at helping returning veterans cope with post-traumatic stress disorder that tragically led to suicide.

Coburn is gone from the Senate. So, what did his former colleagues do? They approved a bill — in a 99-0 vote! — that seeks to improve suicide prevention efforts at the Department of Veterans Affairs. It was a stunning display of bipartisan cooperation on an issue that clearly should transcend partisan differences.

As the New York Times noted in an editorial: “The bill calls for regular independent evaluations of the V.A.’s suicide prevention and mental health programs to ensure the most effective approaches are used in its hospitals and clinics. Other provisions include a pilot program to match returning veterans with colleagues whom they can confide in about mental health concerns, and a website to make it easier for veterans and their families to find help. Another provision would help psychiatrists who work for the V.A. repay medical school debt, which could ease the chronic shortage of mental health professionals.”

And yet … Sen. Coburn — using the Senate’s procedural trickery that allows a single senator to block legislation at will — kept this legislation from getting a vote on the floor of the upper congressional chamber.

What’s more, Tom Coburn’s other profession — besides blocking legislation in the Senate — is as a physician. It’s astonishing, therefore, that he would take such an obstructionist view on this issue.

The Senate has turned an important corner and America’s veterans are better served as a result.

 

Did the work horse become a show horse?

I can’t help myself.

Whenever I see pictures of NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams covering the Big Story — in the flak jacket, or the hip waders — I keep thinking of terms other than “journalist.”

I keep thinking of terms like “show horse,” “entertainer,” “grandstander,” “show off.”

OK, I know it’s likely unfair at this point of the Williams “Chopper-gate” controversy to pass final judgment, but it’s beginning to look strange and weird as I gander at these pictures of Williams on the job, reporting the news to his faithful viewers. (See the link attached.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/09/questioning-the-ritz-carlton-gangs-that-brian-williams-said-terrorized-him-during-katrina/?tid=hp_mm

The link here, from the Washington Post, talks about another story emanating from Hurricane Katrina. It’s about gangs that reportedly terrorized the Ritz-Carlton Hotel where Williams was billeted during his coverage of the tragic storm.

This all began, of course, with the helicopter story that Williams now admits to “misremembering.” Others are saying he fabricated the story of being shot down in Iraq in 2003. The shoot-down didn’t happen. Williams wrapped his on-air apology in the flag, saying how he “bungled” an effort to pay tribute to the brave men and women who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And the reports of other questionable stories keep coming forward, casting even more doubt on the credibility of a man whose employer, NBC News, had been promoting on air as a man who had earned viewers’ “trust.”

Surely I’m not the only viewer whose faith in a veteran broadcast journalist has been shaken.

Oh, how I want to be wrong, but I cannot help thinking this isn’t going to end well for Brian Williams’ career.

 

Texas turns 'crazy'

It’s one thing to be called “crazy” by a Florida congressman, who in a previous life was a federal judge who got impeached and then tossed out of office by the U.S. Senate.

Alcee Hastings’ description of Texas didn’t sit well with some Texans. One of them is fellow U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess of, yes, Texas, who demanded an apology from Hastings.

It kind of reminds me of a family that fights among its members and an outsider joins the fight. You dare not join that family squabble. Make no mistake, some Texans actually might agree with Rep. Hastings. Others, though, disagree — vehemently. But that’s best left for Texans to argue among themselves.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/08/inside-texas-politics-crazy-state/

Actually, our state has taken some strange turns over many years. I’ll concede that the current political climate here isn’t to my liking. I believe more than three decades living in Texas entitles me to chime in.

So, I will.

During our time in Texas, my family and I have watched the state turn from moderately Democratic to overwhelmingly Republican. Prior to our arrival in Texas in 1984, the state was much more heavily Democratic. Why, there once was a time when Democrats occupied every statewide office and all but one seat in the 31-member Texas Senate.

I’m betting Republicans around the country were calling us “crazy” in those days, too.

Now that we’ve turned all-GOP all the time, it’s Democrats who are hanging the crazy label on our politics and policy.

There some evidence that we’ve gone a little but loony in the Lone Star State. Texans keep electing some, um, interesting politicians to high office.

U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert of Tyler just won’t accept that the president of the United States is constitutionally qualified to hold his office; our most recent former governor, Rick Perry, once came very close to suggesting that Texas might secede from the Union if the federal government didn’t stop taxing us so much; we have elected an attorney general, Ken Paxton, who’s been scolded by the state for soliciting clients improperly; our Legislature is likely to enact a law that allows folks to carry weapons in the open and it might approve a bill that gives folks permission to carry weapons onto college campuses; Texas still allows for partisan election of judges, which always results in superior candidates losing simply because they are affiliated with the “wrong” political party.

That’s just for starters.

One-party domination breeds craziness born of arrogance. Democrats wielded great influence in this state almost since its joining the Union in 1845 until the late 1970s. Our state Supreme Court — comprising all Democrats — became so friendly to the plaintiff’s bar that it became the subject of a “60 Minutes” probe into whether the justices were on the take. Then the state became a two-party battleground. For the past two decades, Texas has been a Republican playground.

And just as Democrats produced their own brand of craziness in the old days, Republicans have earned the right to be called crazy.

I’d rather we reserve the name-calling, though, for those of us who live with the craziness.

So, Rep. Hastings? Butt out!

***

OK, having said all that, here’s a link written by a columnist in Roanoke, Va. It was sent to me by a dear friend who lives there, but who grew up in West Texas. He knows Texas better than most folks I know.

Enjoy this bit of crazy talk.

http://www.roanoke.com/news/columns_and_blogs/columns/dan_casey/casey-happy-th-birthday-texas-tavern/article_c1c4c1ed-bbe7-5c60-96e0-17a05dcaee8d.html

 

 

Puppy tales, Part 11

What a glorious mid-winter day on the Texas Tundra.

Indeed, days like this occasionally make me forget we’re still in the grip of winter. After all, didn’t The Groundhog tell us a few days ago we were in for six more weeks of it? Not around here, Phil.

So, with that my wife and I spent the morning trimming perennials, raking leaves that fell several months ago, clearing out the back yard as we prepare for spring.

We also listened to a canine cacophony from next door and across the alley that separates us from our neighbors to the south.

What does this have to do with Toby the Dog, our little bundle of excitement?

He didn’t make a sound while the three neighbor dogs yipped and yapped incessantly at my wife and me — and at Toby as he traipsed along the fence; I’m thinking he was baiting the neighbor pooches. Nor did he make a sound while we all listened to the much bigger dogs across the alley. For the record, we have another dog living on the other side of us, but she’s a very well-behaved mid-sized pooch.

No, the only sound Toby made this morning was to yip just a little bit at a neighbor kitty that’s a frequent visitor to our yard; once in a while she ventures into our home, apparently when Toby and Mittens (our very territorial cat) are looking the other way.

I know some of you out there own small dogs. Ours is a little one. However, take it from me: When he decides to bark — which isn’t very often — it usually is for a reason, such as when the UPS guy or the Fed Ex guy delivers something at the front door. And when Toby does let loose, he sounds a lot larger — and meaner — than he actually is.

Today? Virtually nothing came from him while the chorus was erupting all around us.

Good job, Toby.

 

 

Note to Dems: Don't boycott Bibi's speech

The upcoming speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a joint session of Congress is taking an interesting — and unfortunate — turn.

Some leading Democratic lawmakers say they’re going to stay away from the March 3 speech. They won’t hear what Bibi has to say to them, including whether to impose stricter sanctions on Iran while the U.S. is leading a negotiating effort to end Iran’s nuclear program.

Vice President Biden won’t attend; his office said the VP will be traveling abroad when Netanyahu speaks to the joint session. I can’t help but wonder: Did the vice president schedule the overseas trip before or after Netanyahu’s speech was scheduled?

Don’t go there, Democrats.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/232065-dems-lining-up-to-skip-netanyahu-speech

Yes, Netanyahu is wrong to have accepted the invitation from Republican House Speaker John Boehner — who also was wrong to invite him without advising the White House. What’s more, Netanyahu is wrong to pressure Congress to act over the objections of the White House, which believes increasing sanctions now would undermine its efforts to disarm the Islamic Republic of Iran.

But is staying away from the speech the right approach to protesting? I’m inclined to think Democrats ought to hear — in person — what the prime minister has to say. They don’t have to stand and cheer when he delivers an applause line; Republicans undoubtedly will do enough cheering to fill the House chamber.

Come on, Netanyahu is the head of government of a leading U.S. ally, after all, and he deserves an audience — even if the invitation he accepted was not in keeping with American diplomatic and political tradition.

 

'Every believing Christian' offended? I think not

Jim Gilmore, a former Virginia governor, and a possible Republican presidential candidate next year, is trying to put words into my mouth.

Of the remarks made this week by President Obama about the Crusades and how Christianity has produced acts of violence in the name of its religion, Gilmore said that Obama has “offended every believing Christian” with his statement.

Um, governor? As a “believing Christian,” sir, I am categorically not offended by those remarks.

So, there.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232027-white-house-defends-prayer-breakfast-remarks

If you listen to the president’s remarks in their totality, he said at the prayer breakfast that Islam isn’t the only religion that’s been perverted by cultists who are performing terrible deeds in the name of their religion. Christians launched the Crusades a millennium ago and, yes, did some terrible things to non-believers who stood in their path as they marched through the Middle East.

“Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

The president is holding the United States up to a higher standard than all that he cited.

Deputy White House press aide Eric Schultz said: “The president believes that America is the greatest country on earth, not only because of our military or economic prowess or because we serve in a unique leadership role amongst the international community.”

That hasn’t stopped right-wing critics from slamming the president. Erick Erickson, author of RedState.com, said Obama isn’t even a “meaningful” Christian, whatever in the world that means. Good grief, young man. The president has proclaimed his faith repeatedly whenever he’s given the chance.

But I digress …

Barack Obama understands history as well as any American, and as well as any practicing Christian. He knows Christians have committed barbaric acts. He merely was seeking to put this whole discussion of present-day terrorism being carried out by Islamic radicals in some historical context.

And I’m fully confident the remains fully dedicated to fighting those radical Islamists to the death.

So, let’s chill out here. I’m not offended by what the president said. I am more interested in ensuring that we continue to fight the war against international terrorism.

Williams's story — and reputation — are unraveling

Think of the Brian Williams story in terms of a sports referee.

A journalist shouldn’t ever become the story any more than, say, a football referee should determine the outcome of an athletic event. The Super Bowl played in Glendale, Ariz., the game won by the New England Patriots? Does anyone remember the officials in that game? No. They weren’t part of the story.

Williams, though, has become a story onto himself in light of the “Choppergate” controversy. He has told a tall tale for a dozen years about being shot down in Iraq in 2003. Then it came out he wasn’t shot down. Now we’re learning that his apology might not even add up.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/brian-williams-is-in-serious-trouble-202226.html?hp=l1_3_b2

The latest now is that the NBC Nightly News anchor is stepping aside “for a few days” to sort things out.

The media being what they are and with public curiosity crystallizing by the hour over this matter, it is appearing increasingly unlikely that the one-time solid broadcast journalist is going to regain his footing.

I consider myself a serious consumer of news. I get it from several places — online, print, broadcast TV and cable TV. I receive lots of punditry, commentary, editorializing throughout the political and philosophical universe.

I’m trying right at this moment to imagine ever listening to Brian Williams tell me what’s happening in the world without wondering: Is he giving it to me straight?

These men and women trade almost exclusively on the trust they build with their viewers. That trust is constructed with a commodity that is rock solid, but only if it doesn’t suffer damage. Then it becomes highly fragile.

That commodity is the truth, the slightest fudging of which renders the message being delivered meaningless. It appears to me that Brian Williams has done more than “misremember” a wartime event.

He has become The Story.

 

What have you done for us lately, legislators?

Texas Panhandle Days is coming up.

An entourage of Texas Panhandle residents is going to travel to the state’s capital city, Austin, sit down with legislators and tell them what’s on their minds. They’re going to tell them what kind of legislation they want passed and they’ll inform our elected representatives of the results they expect to get from their efforts.

http://www.amarillo-chamber.org/wcevents/eventdetail.aspx?eventid=2539

The Amarillo Chamber of Commerce puts it on. The link kinda/sorta talks about Panhandle Days’ mission.

I’ve never attended one of these events. The only way I’d ever be invited would be as a journalist covering it for my employer. I’m out of the full-time journalism game now.

So I’ll pose a two-sided question: What really and truly gets accomplished at these events and how the folks who organize measure their success?

I’ve known many individuals — from business and industry, from government, civic leaders, professional do-gooders — who’ve attended these Panhandle Days functions in Austin. They all come back and say what a “great time” they had. By “great time,” I suppose that means fellowship, consuming adult beverages and nice meals — all of that kind of thing.

But they’re not the only regional group that goes to Austin to receive the royal treatment. The Metroplex sends a delegation, as does San Antonio; Houston sends its posse to Austin; same for the Piney Woods and the Golden Triangle (where I formerly lived and worked); Coastal Bend sends a team, along with El Paso and the Permian Basin.

They all get their “days” in Austin, their time to slap a few backs, tell each other proud they are of what they’re doing and schmooze a bit with key state government movers and shakers.

They all have specific needs and interests. They’re all competing for the same pool of money to hand out. They’re all trying to get their legislators to pull strings for their interests.

Who are the big winners — and the big losers?

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience