local news

It’s the onset of spring, baby!

I’ve heard it a bazillion times: Oh, I love the fall season.

Not me, dear reader. My favorite season is about to arrive. The vernal equinox will occur in a little more than week and it will signal my favorite time of the year.

I noticed something quite welcoming Thursday while mowing my lawn: the Oklahoma redbud in our front yard is beginning to show its buds. Bring it, Okie tree!

I totally understand why many folks love the autumn in this part of the world. Our summers can get blistering on the Texas High Plains … although,  hey, it’s a dry heat. I also welcome the cooler temps that arrive about the time of the autumnal equinox.

The spring, though, presents an entirely different dynamic.

We turn quite barren around here in the winter months. Grass goes dormant, turning the fescue more brown than green. When you drive along the rural highways, you see even more of it; vast expanses of it, to be honest.

Rain? Sure, we get some. Snow? That, too. The cold, though, gets pretty damn bitter even without the precipitation.

My wife and I do appreciate the seasonal changes we get here. They are much more pronounced on the High Plains than where we used to live on the Texas Gulf Coast, in the Golden Triangle region of Southeast Texas.

We saw snow one day during our nearly 11 years in Beaumont; it was gone by noon that day, if memory serves. It wasn’t until after we left Beaumont for Amarillo more than two decades ago that our former city of residence got pounded by a serious winter storm of snow, ice and assorted weather-related miseries.

Here? That kind of winter pummeling is a much more regular occurrence. Which brings me to my point.

It is that our lengthy winters make me long for spring, the time for renewal. It signals an emergence from the cold, the dark.

I totally understand that Mama Nature doesn’t always respect the calendar, which tells me that spring arrives officially on March 20. We well could get another winter-type blast; that’s happened too over the years. Indeed, today the temperature is about 30 degrees cooler than it was Thursday.

The redbud in the front yard, though, tells me that spring is at hand.

I shall welcome its arrival with great glee.

national news

Meanwhile, there’s this Kellyanne Conway matter

Russia dominates the news. Then we get questions about Donald Trump’s tweets and reckless accusations.

The White House then decides to sweep away complaints about senior policy adviser Kellyanne Conway blurting out a free ad for one of Ivanka Trump’s line of clothing. She did so on TV a few weeks ago, prompting yet another tempest over whether the Trump administration is doing enough to separate itself from its myriad business interests around the world.

Conway well could have broken a federal law that prohibits government officials from promoting private business.

Isn’t that what senior policy adviser Conway did when she took up for Ivanka’s product line after a major department store chain decided to stop selling it?

And … um … isn’t that a violation of federal law?

The Office of Government Ethics reportedly is concerned that the White House has decided against doing anything about Conway’s free ad for Ivanka’s products.

Will that get the president’s attention? Will it prompt him — at the very least — take Conway to the proverbial “woodshed” and give her the scolding she deserves?

OGE director Walter Shaub, moreover, is concerned that the president seems to think White House employees are exempt from those laws.

Um, no Mr. President. Not true.

Someone, somehow, has to get it through the president’s thick skull that ethics rules apply to all government employees. White House staffers all work for you and me and as such they are subject to precisely the same rules as other federal employees.

International news, national news, political news

By all means, subpoena those FBI records

You go, U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham!

The South Carolina Republican has said that he is ready to demand records from the FBI for any warrant requests that would have been made to wiretap Donald John Trump’s offices in Trump Tower.

Graham, along with Rhode Island Democratic U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, have asked the FBI for any information regarding the outrageous claim that Trump made asserting that former President Obama wiretapped his offices.

One big problem exists regarding what Trump has alleged. He has offered not a shred of evidence to back up what he has said via Twitter. Nothing, man! No proof. No basis.

Graham and Whitehouse are as alarmed as millions of other Americans — such as yours truly — about what Trump has done. He has accused his predecessor as president of the United States of breaking the bleeping law!

It is that assertion for which Graham wants some documentation. Either the president can prove what he has alleged or he cannot. If he can prove his offices were bugged, then we have a scandal of major proportions. If he cannot prove it, well, then we have another scandal of major magnitude.

“We request that the Department of Justice provide us copies of any warrant applications and court orders — redacted as necessary to protect intelligence sources and methods that may be compromised by disclosure, and to protect any ongoing investigations — related to wiretaps of President Trump, the Trump Campaign, or Trump Tower,” Graham and Whitehouse wrote.

If the FBI doesn’t deliver the goods on request, Graham said he is ready to order those papers delivered to Capitol Hill.

education news, local news, State news

‘Plague’ in inappropriate student-teacher relationships?

Texas legislators are seeking to do something that, to be honest, I am surprised hasn’t been done already.

They want to make it illegal for school administrators to fail to report incidents of improper student-teacher relationships. Really? It’s not illegal already? I guess not.

State Sen. Paul Bettencourt has collected the support of all 30 of his Senate colleagues in proposing legislation that would make failure to report such hideous behavior a Class A misdemeanor. To be honest, the level of criminality seems light.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Bettencourt said that many of the teachers involved in such conduct are able to be rehired in other districts, a phenomenon known as ‘pass the trash,’ because districts fail to report them to the Texas Education Agency. The bill seeks to end that practice by slapping a Class A misdemeanor on administrators who fail to report such relationships, and if it is an intentional cover-up, administrators could be charged with a state jail felony.”

Has this circumstance reached “plague” status? I am not qualified to answer that question. Yes, we’ve read about such ghastly behavior in some of our Texas Panhandle school systems. Teachers have been fired; they have faced criminal charges. What isn’t generally reported here is whether administrators have kept their eyes closed to it, or if they have deliberately covered it up.

An administrator who purposely protects a teacher who has been romancing a student ought to lose his or her job and should be prosecuted and, if convicted, thrown in prison for contributing to the sexual abuse of children.

No more “passing the trash,” legislators.

International news, military news, national news, political news

Hey, what about Bannon and the NSC?

It’s almost impossible to keep up with all the stories that pass through the light of intense publicity only to disappear into the darkness … as it relates to Donald John Trump’s administration.

Remember the story about Steve Bannon, the former Breitbart.com executive, alleged white nationalist, political adviser becoming a member of the principals committee on the National Security Council?

Bannon is still on the NSC. He’s still getting the regular briefings, sitting in a chair that should be filled by the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman and the director of national intelligence. Trump demoted those two military and intelligence leaders in favor of partisan political animals such as Bannon.

He’s a political hack who serves on one of the most ostensibly non-political bodies in our massive federal government.

Why is this guy still there? Why is the new national security adviser, Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster sitting or standing still for this travesty?

Bannon doesn’t belong on the principals committee. He now serves as chief political adviser for the president. He fulfills an entirely different role, vastly separate from anything that the National Security Council does. The NSC’s role is to provide the president with keen, sharp and non-political analysis of national security threats. The national security adviser essentially is the chief administrative official of the NSC. From all that I’ve read and heard about Lt. Gen. McMaster, he appears to be a scholar with a superb military mind.

Bannon status as political hack in chief ought to disqualify him from such his posting as a member of the principals committee.

Yet this story stays hidden in the background.

What kind of advice does Bannon give the president when, say, a Middle East nation moves on another one? What kind of advice does he offer when North Korea lobs a missile into Seoul, South Korea? Or when Hamas starts firing ordnance from Gaza into neighborhoods in southern Israel?

Bannon offers no national security credibility. There he is, though. He’s perched among the other “principals” offering advice to the president of the United States.

This guy frightens the crap out of me.

State news

‘Yes’ to statewide cellphone-driving ban

1 Comment

I just got caught up a bit with some news out of the Texas Legislature.

It is considering a bill that would impose a statewide ban on the use of cellphones by drivers operating a motor vehicle.

How about approving this bill and sending it to the governor’s desk? And how about this governor, Greg Abbott, doing what his predecessor failed to do, which is sign it into law?

Former Gov. Rick Perry received a cellphone use while driving bill in 2011. He vetoed the bill, calling it a government intrusion. Let me count the ways that such a supposed “reason” doesn’t make sense, given all the ways that government “intrudes” into people’s lives with certain rules.

Speeding? Drinking while driving? Mandatory seat belts?

Don’t those laws “intrude” on Texans’ private lives? Oh, sure. They protect public safety. Well, so does a ban on cellphone use.

Even the Amarillo Globe-News has endorsed this bill, which is a bit of a surprise given the newspaper’s tendency to lean against so-called “government intrusion.” I’m glad to see the newspaper continuing the fight we used to wage against this kind idiocy by motorists back when I was working there.

I also ought to point out that a statewide ban — with signs posted at every border — would alert every motorists entering Texas that the ban covers even those vast expanses of rural highways that do not pass through incorporated cities and towns.

Amarillo has a cellphone ban for motorists to obey. So do many other cities. Not all of them have such ordinances on the books. A statewide ban gives consistency across the state and puts motorists on notice that they’d better be using a hands-free device while talking on someone as they sit behind a moving motor vehicle.

Pass the bill, legislators. Sign it into law, Gov. Abbott.

International news

‘Uh, no,’ majority leader says to wall-payment idea

“Uh, no.”

Two words, four letters altogether. That’s all it seemed to take for U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to put the kibosh on Donald Trump’s notion of getting another nation to pay for his “great, great wall” across our southern border.

Is that the end of it? Probably not.

McConnell’s terse response was to a question about whether Mexico would pay for the wall Trump wants to build. Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has insisted vocally, categorically and with maximum emphasis that Mexico wouldn’t spend a peso to build the wall.

Here’s how NBCNews.com reported the senator’s response: “‘Do you believe that Mexico will pay for it [the border wall]?,’ Politico Playbook’s Jake Sherman asked. McConnell, R-Ky., flatly responded, ‘Uh, no.’

“McConnell said he believes that there are certain areas along the border that don’t need a border wall to secure the area.

“The border wall, which is estimated will cost $21.6 billion dollars to build, has spurred a lot of controversy in the United States and Mexico.”

A lot of controversy? Do you think?

The president of the United States might think he can get another sovereign country to do his bidding. Except that the term “sovereign” explains precisely why he cannot.

Imagine for just a moment the Canadians demanding the same thing of this country should a tide of “illegal immigrants” decide to flee the United States for points north.

Is that a preposterous notion? Hmmm. Not … entirely.

media news

Getting ‘conversant’ in computer speak

This next blog post is going to sound perhaps a bit boastful.

If so … that’s just too damn bad.

High Plains Blogger crashed inexplicably this morning. I couldn’t open it up. I couldn’t post anything new. I was struck. Frozen. High-centered. I called one of my sons, who’s in the business of trouble-shooting people’s computers. He pointed me to the outfit that “hosts” this blog.

I called GoDaddy. Three clicks on the cell phone and I was speaking to a human being, a living, breathing young man.

He asked me about the nature of my call. I told him.

Then, as I was explaining the situation with my blog, how it crashed and how frustrated I was becoming at being unable to restore it, it occurred to me — in real time — that I was communicating effectively with a young man who is fluent in another language altogether.

Computer speak is a language that I do not to this very moment understand fully. It contains a lot of jargon that only computer techs/geeks understand. It’s almost like lawyers, doctors, engineers — for that matter, journalists — only understand. They speak in coded language designed to facilitate problem-solving.

I’ve had previous discussions with computer techs in which I’ve had serious trouble making my case. I have unable to state with any clarity the issue at hand. I’ve apologized more times than I can remember to these 20- or 30-somethings about my ignorance. Without fail, they chuckle and tell me, “That’s all right, sir. I understand. Take … your … time.”

So, I do.

However, today I was able to blurt it out with relative ease — with “relative” being the key word.”

I will make zero pretense at being fluent in this kind of language. I will consider myself to be minimally conversant.

Both of my sons are much better at this language than I am. I get it. That’s the way it is. And I expect my 4-year-old granddaughter to pick up on this language in due course. Indeed, she well might be learning the basics already.

However, today marked something of a milestone for this old timer as I got through two relatively painless phone conversations with young computer techs.

I don’t speak their language entirely. At least, though, I can declare myself to no longer be a total and utter doofus as it regards this computer lingo.

Don’t ask me, though, what “widget” means. I’ll need more time.

local news, Uncategorized

Getting ahead of ourselves in trip planning? Sure thing!

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on upcoming retirement.

It has come to this.

We haven’t even embarked on our next road trip pulling our fifth wheel and we’re already thinking ahead to the next trip, or the next two — or maybe three — excursions.

The next one is mapped out: the Texas Hill Country, then over to Ruidoso, N.M. to meet up with sis and her husband.

The one after that is a little less firm, but it’s taking shape: heading east to D.C., to see our niece and her husband, then to Roanoke to see good friends; after that it’s still up in the air. We’re awaiting to hear firm travel plans from some friends in Israel who are coming Stateside to attend a Rotary International conference.

The one after that one is even less set up: Metroplex to see family and then head for points south and east. Details will be worked out later.

That’s what it’s come to. We cannot avoid planning far beyond our next journey.

We plan much more of this as a change in our lives overtakes us. You’ll be kept apprised of that change as it occurs. Rest assured that it involves spending more time with our precious granddaughter.

More to come on that part of our lives, too.

 

national news, political news

Here comes the dreaded ‘I-word’

The “I-word” has entered the discussion of Donald J. Trump’s troubles involving the Russians, his use of Twitter and a scathing accusation he has made against his predecessor as president of the United States.

One of the nation’s foremost constitutional scholars, law professor Laurence Tribe, believes the president’s reckless use of Twitter to accuse Barack Obama of tapping his phones might be grounds for impeachment.

There you have it, correct? Not exactly.

Tribe, I shall stipulate, is a liberal-leaning fellow who more than likely didn’t vote for Trump during the 2016 presidential election.

But he’s no dummy as it regards the U.S. Constitution and what it allows or disallows.

Tribe’s thesis simply is that the president’s use of a social medium constitutes a reckless disregard for due process and that it implies a certain unfitness for the office he occupies.

Readers of this blog no doubt know what Trump did. This past weekend, he awoke at his Mar-a-Lago estate early one morning and blasted out a tweet that accused former President Obama of “ordering” spooks to tap Trump’s offices at Trump Tower while looking for proof that Trump was colluding with the Russians to swing the 2016 presidential election in Trump’s favor.

Nasty stuff, right? You bet it is.

It’s also unproven. You see, Trump didn’t offer a shred of proof to back up that ridiculous contention. He has accused President Obama of committing a felony, given that the president cannot “order” a wiretap, which must come from a federal judge, who must have “probable cause” to issue such an order.

The rule of law doesn’t enter into Trump’s tendency to engage in these Twitter tantrums. He just fires this crap into cyberspace. Consequences? Who cares about ’em?

Meanwhile, Republicans as well as Democrats in Congress are demanding Trump provide some basis for this ridiculous assertion. None has been forthcoming.

Spoiler alert: I don’t think we’ll ever see any such basis.

In the meantime, the I-word is out there.

I agree that the bar for impeachment must be kept high. President Clinton’s impeachment in 1998 was based on a sex scandal and his failure to adhere to his oath to be truthful to a federal grand jury that questioned him about it. I don’t believe those events met the standard for impeaching a president of the United States … but that’s just me.

This Trump story is far from being resolved. The president had better come up with something provable to back up his contention that President Obama broke the law.

Or else …

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience