Once in a generation or two, athletes come along who break certain molds.

David “Deacon” Jones broke one of them when he emerged as a member of the Los Angeles Rams’s “Fearsome Foursome” defensive line. Jones, who has died at age 74, wasn’t just a great football player. He almost always had something interesting to say.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/david-deacon-jones-dies-age-74-football-hall-of-famer-060313

He didn’t speak to us in football cliches. He was entertaining, occasionally provocative and insightful in whatever topic was on his mind.

Deacon was one-fourth of a line that featured the likes of Roosevelt Grier, Merlin Olsen and Lamar Lundy. He wasn’t overly huge, not by today’s standards. Then again, none of those guys really measured up to today’s monstrous proportions. But they were smart, savvy and agile defensive performers. Rosey Grier is the last one still living.

I saw a link today about how Twitter is full of comments on Jones’s death. The tweets are full of sadness. I’m sad, too, but not because his death marked some kind of tragedy. He lived a full life and while Deacon was among us, he delivered plenty of smiles and joy.

Well done, Deacon Jones.

Robert Gibbs has it exactly right in demanding that U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa say he’s sorry to Jay Carney, the fellow who succeeded Gibbs as White House press secretary.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/robert-gibbs-darrell-issa-jay-carney-92134.html?hp=l4

Issa, the California Republican who chairs the House Government Oversight Committee, called Carney a “paid liar” the other day, suggesting something quite nefarious in the way Carney has been answering questions about the Internal Revenue Service controversy that still swirls around the White House.

Recently, one of Issa’s GOP colleagues – Sen. Mike Lee of Utah – suggested that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should apologize to Sen. Ted Cruz for calling him a “schoolyard bully.” For my money, calling someone a liar is a good bit more defamatory than labeling someone a “bully.”

Carney’s been on the hot seat for sure trying to explain the mess that’s developed over the IRS’s screening of conservative non-profit groups seeking tax-exempt status. He’s doing what press secretaries of both parties always have done – and continue to do. He’s looking out for the best interests of his boss.

That’s precisely what Chairman Issa’s own press flack does on his behalf.

Issa has not conducted himself – or allowed his committee to conduct itself – with much dignity in the hunt for something, indeed anything, they can find to hang on the White House and on President Obama.

Yes, an apology is in order, Mr. Chairman.

I hate it when politicians toss derogatory terms at others without a hint of self-awareness.

U.S. House Government Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is just the latest to commit such an offense.

Issa this weekend called White House press spokesman Jay Carney a “paid liar” because of Carney’s responses to questions about the Internal Revenue Service controversy and whether the tax agency bullied conservative non-profit groups unfairly.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2013/06/issa-carney-is-a-paid-liar-165187.html?hp=l2

Who does this clown, Issa, think he’s kidding with such talk? Does he believe his own spokesperson or the individual who speaks for his committee, or any flack who’s hired to spin answers to suit his or her employer don’t use the same slippery tactics that he accuses Carney?

Indeed, Issa needs to take great care when talking so badly about others. He’s been sitting tall on some high horse trying to find answers to the Benghazi tragedy that resulted in the deaths of four U.S. foreign service officers. Meanwhile, the nation has learned that Republicans on his committee – may have been Issa himself, for all we know – edited email communications coming out of the State Department to make people in the Obama administration look bad.

Is that fair? Is that honest? Is that, shall we say, the conduct of individuals who themselves aren’t “paid liars’?

Issa needs to tone it down. Granted, the IRS matter needs to be resolved … but without the name-calling.

This week will mark the 69th anniversary of the greatest land invasion in world history and it also ought to allow us to take note of a leader’s willingness to take full responsibility were it to fail.

On June 6, 1944, thousands of ships and smaller craft set sail from England across a channel of water toward the Normandy coast of France. From those ships spilled thousands of American, British and Canadian troops who launched the attack that would liberate western Europe from German occupation during World War II.

The leader of that huge force was U.S. Army Gen. Dwight David Eisenhower. The weather for days prior to the launch was stormy. Eisenhower actually delayed the invasion launch. Then a break came on June 6 and he issued the order: “OK, we’ll go.”

But what if the mission had failed. Ike was prepared for that eventuality. He penned a note that took responsibility for its failure. It was dated July 5, 1944.

http://kjmmyblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/02/eisenhower-wrote-in-case-of-failure-message-before-d-day/

Happily, Ike never had to make that speech to the world. Instead, at D-Day plus 35, the Allies had stormed their way off the beach and had begun the advance toward the French-German border.

Gen. Eisenhower, with that note, demonstrated how leaders are supposed to lead. They don’t hog the credit for the success, preferring instead to share the plaudits with others – particularly those who implemented the grand strategy. But in the case of failure, Ike was ready to fall on his proverbial sword.

That leadership skill endeared him to those who served under his command and eventually would enable him to win two landslide elections to the U.S. presidency.

The man who followed him into the White House, John F. Kennedy, once noted that “Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.” That would not have been entirely true in Ike’s case. Why? Because the man knew how to lead.

We live close to Oklahoma, which borders the Texas Panhandle on two sides – the north and the east.

So when I read about all these tornados that keep tearing through the Sooner State, I start to take this stuff rather personally. It’s frightening in the extreme.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/01/18648500-storm-battered-oklahoma-a-war-zone-after-deadly-twisters-strike?lite

Five more folks died in the latest rash of twisters that ripped though the Oklahoma City area. This comes on top of the 24 people killed in the Moore, Okla,, twister just a few days ago.

Scientists are now debating whether these storms are a harbinger of more tragedy to come. They’re debating whether global warming is the culprit. At this stage of the struggle to reclaim what’s left of their communities, I keep thinking this debate is a bit premature.

I’m more concerned with recovering what residents can from the rubble and the restoration of their lives to some semblance of what it was before disaster struck – without warning.

I rather wish we could save the discussion of why, how and what to do to prevent it for a later time. Let’s not wait too long, but let’s wait nevertheless.

Too many folks in Oklahoma are hurting at the moment to give a rip about why it all happened. They’re our neighbors. Let’s lend a hand.

Politico has it right: The 2014 mid-term elections could be framed by an economy in ways we haven’t foreseen. Good economic news is going to make non-incumbents scramble for issues on which to run.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/2014-election-economy-92053.html?hp=t1_3

Who knew?

The deficit is shrinking. People are going back to work. The Gross Domestic Product is increasing at a quicker clip. Manufacturing is up. Home sales are rebounding. Financial institutions are lending money.

I’ll stop there.

Still, we keep hearing these pollsters tell us that most Americans think the economy is in the tank. I have to consider the source of some of these polls, given that so many of them these days are partisan polls that lean one way or the other. The national mood still isn’t very good, but I’m beginning to think the negativity could be overrated and overblown.

It well might be a product of the social media that keep filling our eyes and ears with complaints about problems that might not exist.

I keep looking, though, at the hard data concerning jobs and deficits. They tell quite a different story.

Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee is turning from red to blue, meaning he’s switching political parties.

The one-time Republican is becoming a Democrat and he’s offering a serious message to the party he’s leaving in his wake. The Republican Party, he says, no longer is friendly to moderates – such as himself. Thus, he is becoming a Democrat to follow his own conscience.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/chafee-moderates-taken-out-of-party-92050.html?hp=r2

The message also predicts that his former party is going to lose more members if it continues to follow a hardline course in so many issues, including the social issues that are driving so much of the debate these days.

Chafee actually switched from independent to Democrat, but he’s still remembered as the moderate Republican he was when he served in the U.S. Senate, following the footsteps laid down by his late father, Sen. John Chafee.

The elder Chafee’s moderate views also got him trouble while he served in the Senate. He lost his leadership post in the Senate Republican caucus to Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi.

The larger issue that Lincoln Chafee is trying to deliver is that the Republican Party needs to seek to broaden its base, not shrink it. Other notable Republicans, such as former Sen. Bob Dole and current Sen. John McCain continue to offer stern warnings to their party.

Dole even said recently that former Republican presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan might not be welcome in today’s GOP. Imagine that.

Gov. Chafee’s defection only underscores the intra-party conflict that well might be reshaping the nation’s political landscape. Is anyone within the GOP willing to listen?

This one needs some explanation. So far, I haven’t heard one that makes sense.

Gov. Rick Perry vetoed a bill approved by the Texas Legislature in an overwhelming bipartisan fashion. It’s called the “Buy American Bill.” It passed the state Senate 23-7 and – are you ready for this one? – sailed through the state House by a 145-0 margin.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Perry-Vetoes-Buy-American-Bill-209533671.html

Perry, though, put the veto stamp on it, contending that state law already requires government agencies to favor American-made products when making purchases and that the bill doesn’t change existing law.

Texas labor leaders called the bill “patriotic” and have urged the Legislature to override the governor’s veto. I have to concur with them on this one.

But here’s what has me scratching my head. Perry’s veto message said the following: “While I support and encourage our agencies to buy goods from Texas businesses, this bill simply does not change current law.”

Let’s apply that logic to, let’s say, a piece of social legislation the state approved some years back. This was an amendment to the Texas Constitution that banned same-sex marriage. Voters approved the amendment. But the state already had a law on the books that said it didn’t recognize the marriage between people of the same gender. The constitutional amendment did “not change current law,” correct?

Perry, though, supported that amendment on the grounds that he wanted to make extra-darn certain that the state wouldn’t allow same-sex marriage to occur … ever.

In the case involving a Buy American bill, he gets a heavily bipartisan piece of legislation and vetoes it? Go figure.

Susan Combs announcement that she’s leaving public office serves to illustrate one of the consequences of electing all of Texas’s statewide constitutional officeholders at the same time.

Combs said she won’t seek re-election as Texas comptroller of public accounts. She had planned to run for lieutenant governor – another of those constitutional offices – in 2014, but had those hopes dashed when the guy who holds the office, David Dewhurst, said he plans to seeks re-election.

Thus, Combs has decided she’s had enough of being the state’s bean counter in chief.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/05/29/susan-combs-wont-seek-re-election-tentative/

I can’t blame her, although I actually enjoyed talking to her during the time I was working in daily journalism. She’s smart, clever, personable, well-educated and well-versed on public policy.

She also ought to consider taking her act on the road when she’s all done in January 2015.

But this idea of electing everyone at once does bring into play the waiting game that occurs every four years. When one of those folks decides either to retire or seek another office, that usually sets in motion a chain reaction. Other statewide officeholders start jockeying to run for the office that’s being vacated. An incumbent staying put tends to freeze the competition in place.

This coming year might be different. Republican Gov. Rick Perry hasn’t yet announced whether he’s running for re-election. Meanwhile, Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott has all but announced his candidacy for governor. I’m still thinking he might know something about the governor’s plans – which likely mean he won’t seek another term in 2014.

All this drama does create a strange and somewhat exciting – for the participants, at least – game of Musical Chairs.

Cue the music.

Eric Holder’s time is up at the Justice Department.

It’s not that he’s done a bad job, or that he’s a bad lawyer, or that he’s corrupt – that he’s committed an actual crime.

It is, however, time for him to go in the face of a growing controversy involving the procuring of phone record from reporters.

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/302471-holder-on-the-ropes

President Obama’s got a tough call to make. He and the attorney general are good friends. Holder is a historic AG, the first African-American to hold that job. Holder, though, is facing a nearly impossible task of extricating himself from the controversy while clinging to his job. It will dog him for as long as he stands at his post.

When that happens, all else gets pushed into the background.

Holder’s Justice Department in May 2012 got hold of phone records of Associated Press reporters and editors after the news agency reported on the foiling of a botched terror attack. It was thought that the attack was meant to commemorate the first anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden by a Navy SEAL team in Pakistan. The Justice Department seems to think some classified information was used to report on the story, so it seized the phone records to look for evidence of a national security breach.

It’s understandable that DOJ would be concerned. But it has this little problem called the First Amendment to the Constitution which says quite clearly that the government cannot interfere with a free press.

AP news executives have been quite alarmed at what they call an “unprecedented” search for phone logs.

This has happened on Eric Holder’s watch at the Justice Department.

The media are outraged, as are politicians of both parties. They want answers. So far, the AG hasn’t given them.

It’s time for him to leave. It’s also time for the president to get involved actively in assembling a new leadership team at the Justice Department.