International news, national news, political news

Why this fierce battle over a Cabinet pick?

donald-and-mitt

I’ll admit that I haven’t always watched closely the process a president-elect goes through to fill Cabinet picks.

Still, the growing tempest over Donald J. Trump’s vetting of secretary of state candidates has me wondering: Is this normal? Have previous presidents-elect faced this kind of outward and public tumult?

The Republican Party’s 2012 presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, is in the running to lead the State Department. A lot of Trumpkins don’t want him anywhere near the new president. Why? Mitt said some harsh things about their guy during the campaign. They want Mitt to apologize before Trump picks him. They also don’t believe Mitt will be loyal to the president.

I happen to believe Mitt was right when he called Trump a “fraud” and a “phony.” At one level, Mitt seems like the absolutely wrong choice to be the vicar of Trump’s foreign policy — whatever it is. Then again, selecting Mitt would verify what many of us have believed all along, which is that Trump has no policy and he’s looking for someone to help him build one from scratch; Mitt could do that for Trump.

Who’s other “favorite” for State? Rudy Giuliani, that’s who. The one-time “America’s mayor” would be a terrible choice. He has no foreign policy experience, other than the money he earned representing foreign governments — which presents a serious conflict of interest.

I keep hearing that former U.N. ambassador John Bolton is in the hunt, too, for the State Department post. He has called for the bombing of Iran, which surely works against any effort to develop “diplomatic initiatives” from the Trump administration. Don’t go there, either, Mr. President-elect.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/battle-over-secretary-of-state-opening-goes-public/ar-AAkP9nE?li=BBnb7Kz

Former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said she isn’t even sure Mitt voted for Trump in the election. My response? That’s no one’s business how someone votes; that’s why the ballots are cast in secret.

This melodrama is going to play out eventually, I reckon.

If only the president-elect had a deeper pool of applicants to consider for this post. He’s going to need plenty of help developing a foreign policy doctrine. Mitt could deliver it … if only he can get the Trumpkins on his side.

Hold on for a rough ride.

national news, political news

‘Millions voted illegally’ … seriously?

donald

Donald J. Trump has cemented his title as a provocative prevaricator.

The president-elect has launched a fascinating counterattack against those who want to recount the ballots cast in Wisconsin, and possibly in two other states.

Trump said he won the Electoral College in a landslide and would have won the popular vote as well if you take out the “millions” of votes that were cast “illegally.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-attacks-recount-effort-in-election-where-millions-voted-illegally/ar-AAkPasR?li=BBnb7Kz

Really, Mr. President-elect?

Here is what he wrote in one of his flurry of tweets: “In addition to winning the electoral college in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.”

Well now. A 306-232 electoral vote victory isn’t really a “landslide,” but I digress.

I guess Trump is presuming that most if not all the “illegal votes” were cast for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

He how does he know that? He doesn’t. Trump doesn’t know anything about the electoral process that’s been called into question.

However, he knows that “millions voted illegally.” I believe the president-elect is applying the same base of knowledge he used to declare — falsely — that “thousands of Muslims cheered” the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

military news, national news, political news

Trump damages due process

bergdahl

Donald J. Trump proved beyond anyone’s doubt that political candidates can — and do — say anything without regard to the consequences to certain cherished American principles … such as, oh, due process.

While running for president, Trump condemned a U.S. Army sergeant as a “rotten traitor.” The man in question is Bowe Bergdahl, who is set to be court-martialed in the spring on charges that he walked off his post in Afghanistan before he was captured by Taliban terrorists.

He was held captive for five years. Then he was released in a prisoner swap with U.S. officials.

I am not going to make an assertion about Bergdahl’s guilt or innocence. I wasn’t there. Neither was Trump. Or anyone other than the Taliban terrorists and Bergdahl. That didn’t prevent Trump from issuing a blanket campaign-stump conviction of the young man.

Moreover, as the New York Times wondered in an editorial published today, the rants of the future commander in chief likely have put Bergdahl’s right to a fair trail in extreme jeopardy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/opinion/sunday/the-soldier-donald-trump-called-a-traitor.html?ref=opinion

As the Times stated: “Sergeant Bergdahl is charged with desertion and misbehavior in front of the enemy; a guilty verdict could result in a sentence anywhere from no jail time to life. But how can he get a fair trial in the military justice system when the next commander in chief has proclaimed his guilt and accused him of treason?

“The short answer is he can’t.”

The Army has charged Bergdahl with desertion and he could be sentenced to prison for the rest of his life if he’s convicted.

Trump’s proclamation of guilt of one of the men who soon will be under his command speaks to his utter disregard for the rule of law and of the due process that is accorded to all criminal defendants.

The Times suggests that President Obama might grant Bergdahl a pardon to allow him to “rebuild his life” and avoid what it calls a “questionable” prosecution. The Times states that Bergdahl had a pre-existing mental condition when he enlisted in the Army, which granted him an enlistment waiver.

Given the poison that the next commander in chief has inserted into this pre-trial discussion, the current commander in chief ought to take a hard look at a pardon.

Trump’s rhetorical recklessness only demonstrates his unfitness for the job he is about to assume.

national news

Lack of election ‘acceptance’ bites Trump

A New York City election ballot shows the names of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2016. (AP Photo/Patrick Sison)

Jill Stein won’t accept the outcome of the results that produced the election of Donald J. Trump as the next president of the United States.

No, the Green Party presidential candidate won’t go there — just as Trump himself said he wouldn’t do if he lost the election.

Stein has asked Wisconsin officials to recount the ballots in the state Trump won. The president-elect has called the recount effort a “scam.”

Here’s the fascinating turn, though: Trump’s campaign staffers are just all aghast — aghast, I tell you — that Democrats and others just won’t accept the result.

I’m one of those who didn’t want the outcome we got, but who has accepted the result. That is why I remain dubious about this recount effort. It won’t change the outcome. Trump will be able to take the oath of office on Jan. 20. Stein, though, wants to ensure the ballot-counting was done correctly, which is why — she says — she is getting the ballots recounted.

I believe, though, that Trump and his team ought to keep their heads down over this recount business. Back when the media and so-called “experts” predicted that Hillary Clinton would win, Trump said precisely the same thing that Stein and others are saying now.

Winning and losing a bitter political campaign do have this way of changing perspective.

political news

Apology tour on tap for Trump? Hardly!

161124160848-trump-new-york-times-exlarge-169

Donald J. Trump might consider going on an apology tour as he prepares to become president of the United States.

He won’t, of course. Trump doesn’t apologize. He has no regrets. He doesn’t seek forgiveness. He said all that, correct?

I mention this because some of Trump’s supporters think Mitt Romney needs to say he’s sorry for those mean things he said about Trump. Mitt’s apology needs to be a precursor to him becoming secretary of state, they say; Trump is considering Mitt for the job at State.

CNN contributor Dean Obeidallah has it exactly right: Trump needs to do the apologizing, not Mitt.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/opinions/trump-should-apologize-not-romney-obeidallah/index.html

Trump cruised down the escalator at Trump Tower in the summer of 2015 to announce his presidential candidacy and launched into a tirade that insulted Mexicans, who he described as rapists, murderers, drug dealers.

Then it got worse. He insulted Muslims, a disabled New York Times reporter, a Gold Star family, Sen. (and former prisoner of war) John McCain, women … you name it he insulted ’em.

Trump trampled all over people’s sensibilities while winning the presidency. His performance on the campaign trail will remain — likely for decades, maybe forever — as one of the great mysteries of this campaign. Imagine for as long as you wish — take all the time you need — any other candidate saying what Trump said about any of those groups.

An apology tour would be a good thing for Trump to do. It would cleanse his soul.

Of course, the next president won’t do anything of the sort.

In Trump’s world, apologies are for losers.

national news

Try to imagine this happening … soon!

Not too many years ago, President and Mrs. Obama welcomed back to the White House their immediate predecessors, President and Mrs. Bush, to unveil the official portraits done of George W. and Laura Bush.

The portraits are hanging on the walls of the White House, along those of all who lived there before them.

This video illustrates the remarkable charm and grace — not to mention the remarkable comedic timing — not only of Barack Obama, but of George and Laura Bush.

I’m now trying to imagine how the next portrait unveiling will go when the next president invites his immediate predecessor and his wife back for a similar ceremony.

At this moment, I don’t feel very good about how that will go with Donald Trump playing host.

Oh, how I want to be wrong about that.

local news, political news

Is it time to look ahead to city election? Sure, let’s do it!

1 Comment

13861145

The presidential election has been decided … to the satisfaction of a minority of Americans who voted for the winner.

I won’t get into the ongoing discussion about the Electoral College.

Instead, let’s take a brief look at our own next election cycle, right here in Amarillo.

We’re going to elect our City Council next May. Our city charter puts all five seats up for election at the same time. We get to keep ’em all, toss ’em all out or decide on some variation in between.

The May 2015 election produced a pretty radical shakeup on the council. Voters elected three new guys: Randy Burkett, Mark Nair and Elisha Demerson. Voters re-elected two others, Mayor Paul Harpole and Brian Eades; then Eades quit and moved to Colorado and he’s been succeeded by Lisa Blake, who emerged as the frontrunner after a highly public interview process with four other finalists selected by the council.

To say we’ve had a rough time of it at City Hall since the May 2015 election would be the height (or depth) of understatement.

City Manager Jarrett Atkinson quit, along with a number of other senior city administrators.  Then the council hired Terry Childers as the interim city manager. That didn’t turn out too well, as Childers this past week quit his job one year to the day after being named the interim manager.

Childers messed up one time too many.

Now the council has to get busy and find someone who wants to take hold of the city’s administrative reins. This is the only hire the council makes directly. It whiffed with Childers. Are these folks capable of filling this critical job? We shall see.

The council has gotten involved in some disputes among its members. The mayor has been at odds openly with the three new fellows, and they have been with him. All this has occurred as the city has embarked on a major makeover of its downtown district. Holy cow, dudes!

So, the question of the moment is this: Will the three new council members face a serious challenge from someone — or from an organized group of residents — if and/or when they seek re-election?

They all promised “change” when they were elected to the council. They certainly have delivered on their promise. Collegiality has given way to chaos. Decorum has been replaced by dysfunction.

The issue that awaits voters, though, is whether the change has been worth the tumult that has boiled over at City Hall.

We’ll find out in due time.

International news, national news, political news

Castro created an unintended legacy

cuban_americans_in_orlando_celebrate_dea_0_2329637_ver1-0_640_360

The late Fidel Castro wanted to create a legacy in his island nation of Cuba.

He led what he called a “revolution” in the late 1950s. Castro promised to bring democracy to Cuba. He brought instead a reign of repression and terror.

In the process, though, El Comandante created another legacy. He helped form a lasting political movement in the United States of America. When thousands of Cubans wised up to the misery that was coming to their nation, they fled Cuba for the U.S. of A.

Most of them settled initially in south Florida. The Cuban expatriates then coalesced into a formidable political bloc. They were — and remain — fervently anti-communist to the core.

Their numbers continued to grow through the early and mid-1960s as more Cubans fled the island. Their families expanded in this country. The expats then taught their children and, later, their grandchildren about the hideous rule that Castro had brought to their homeland.

They became involved in U.S. politics. They got elected to high public office. A couple of Cuban descendants — U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas — sought the Republican Party presidential nomination.

Indeed, the bulk of the Cuban-American political community leans heavily to toward the GOP. Their influence has helped inform Republican Party policy toward Cuba for nearly six decades.

This bloc of voters also fought successfully — until recently — against efforts to restore diplomatic and economic relations between the United States and Cuba.

The Cuban commies who mourn Castro’s death likely won’t bring up this part of the tyrant’s legacy. I have just done so here.

national news, political news

Pollsters need a careful revamping of their methods

thbigcx2wm

If it sounds a bit familiar that public opinion pollsters are going back to the drawing boards after missing the call of the 2016 presidential election …

It’s because you’ve heard it before.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307111-pollsters-go-back-to-drawing-board

Virtually ever “reputable” poll had Hillary Rodham Clinton winning the presidency on Nov. 8. Some had her winning by a fairly comfortable margin. She, of course, didn’t. Donald J. Trump is now preparing to become the next president.

Why is this familiar?

I recall the 2004 election in which President Bush won a second term over Sen. John F. Kerry. The sticking point that year was in Ohio, where exit pollsters had Kerry carrying the Buckeye State. Then the votes started pouring in. Bush won Ohio. He was re-elected. Kerry and his team were stunned. They thought they had Ohio in the bag. Had they won, they would have had just enough electoral votes to defeat the president.

Those dismal exit poll results, along with other misfires around the nation, signaled the end of Voter News Service, the outfit that coordinated all the polling and vote tabulation around the country.

The screw-ups this time were much more severe. Even the once-highly regarded FiveThirtyEight.com poll done by Nate Silver missed by a mile. Silver’s analysis had Clinton with a 71 percent chance of winning on he eve of the election.

Of course, many of the pollsters are trying to cover their backsides. They say they predicted Clinton’s national popular vote percentage, more or less. They missed, though, in several key battleground states where Trump won: Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida — all states won by Barack Obama in 2008, who won all of them again except for North Carolina in 2012.

Polling has come a long way since the infamous “Dewey beats Truman” headline of 1948. However, as we witnessed during this election season, it still has some distance yet to travel.

national news, political news

Recount effort is far from a ‘scam’

recount1

My feelings about an effort to recount the votes in Wisconsin are evolving … but only a little.

I am not overly suspicious of the balloting that took place in Wisconsin that granted the state’s electoral votes to Donald J. Trump. Yet, Jill Stein — the Green Party presidential candidate — says there is sufficient reason to doubt the integrity of the system. She has gotten the state to agree to a recount.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has joined in. She wants to ensure the votes are tabulated accurately and the system is audited properly.

Trump’s view? He calls it a “scam.”

OK, Mr. President-elect. You’ve bitched and griped during the entire campaign about it being “rigged” against you. Why not, then, line up behind this effort to ensure that the ballots were counted properly?

Trump was elected president. A recount isn’t likely to produce any shocking surprises … at least nothing as shocking as Trump winning Wisconsin’s electoral votes in the first place.

If the winner felt compelled to accuse state and local election officials of seeking to rob him of victory, then he ought to stand squarely behind Stein’s effort to ensure that it was all above board.

While I disagree with Dr. Stein’s effort, I don’t see it as a “scam.” Neither should the president-elect.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience