Dan Radmacher is a blogger in Roanoke, Va., with whom I am acquainted. I cannot profess to know him well, but we have many mutual friends and professional associations.

His latest blog continues an ongoing battle of wits he’s been waging with Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto, this time over the depth of the recent scandals that have spit up all over President Obama.

Here’s the link to his latest post. It’s worth a careful look:

http://bloggingdan.com/

I want to congratulate Dan for saying something that needs saying time and again. It is that while the conservative media are fond of accusing the liberal media of bias, those on the right do so without the slightest understanding of what they’re saying – about themselves. Taranto seems to think the media are in the tank for Barack Obama and have gone far too softly on the president.

Radmacher wrote this in response:

“Taranto moves onto the ‘liberal’ media, accusing the media of being more in cahoots with Obama than it’s ever been with any other president or political party. This ideological and political alignment, Taranto warns with no hint of irony or self-awareness, has led the media to abdicate ‘their guiding principles of impartiality, objectivity and sometimes even accuracy.’ The man works for a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch, and he wants to lecture others about abdicating impartiality, objectivity and accuracy? Never mind that the conservative media that he is part of is far guiltier of abandoning impartiality and objectivity, and has never cared much about accuracy. But how could Taranto miss that the biggest mainstream media blunder in recent weeks — ABC’s reporting on Republican fabrications of those recently released emails as if they had seen the originals — worked against Obama, not in his favor?”

I couldn’t have said it better myself, Dan.

I’ve long noted that a cable news network, such as the one owned by Rupert Murdoch, that must proclaim – over and over – that it is “fair and balanced” usually is neither.

I’m just guessing this one out loud, but my hunch is that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott knows something the rest of us don’t know about Gov. Rick Perry’s political plans.

He might know that Perry won’t run for re-election to an umpteenth term as Texas governor.

That is why he’s plowing ahead with his own run for governor, or so it seems.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/05/23/abbott-not-waiting-perry-build-his-campaign/

It always had been understood that no one would challenge Perry if the governor sought another term. That wasn’t the case in 2010, certainly, when then-U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison ran against Perry in the Republican primary, only to get trounced by the governor.

Perry has this strange appeal to Texas voters that – to be totally candid – astounds me. I’ve been in Texas long enough to have acquired a pretty good feel for the state’s political pulse. Gov. Perry seems to be unbeatable at a state level. After thumping Hutchison in the 2010 GOP primary, he went on to hammer Democratic nominee Bill White, an astute business-minded former Houston mayor.

Is there any reason to believe Perry would be vulnerable in 2014? The major event that harmed his brand was that disastrous 2012 GOP presidential primary run that came crashing to Earth before if ever got started. I don’t hear much grumbling about that effort now as the statewide election season begins to crank up.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that the attorney general knows something. The same can be said for former Texas Republican Party chairman Tom Pauken – a longtime friendly acquaintance of mine – who also is planning to run for governor in 2014. Pauken was appointed head of the Texas Workforce Commission by, that’s right, Gov. Perry. So one would think those two guys would be big-time political pals. Pauken, though, wants Perry’s job.

The Perry Era may be coming to an end, yes?

I’m suffering from conflicting principles.

I consider myself to be a civil libertarian, in that I cherish the liberties granted to me by the U.S. Constitution. I also consider myself to be loyal to my flag and to our national security interests; accordingly, I detest those who forsake those interests in an effort to bring harm to my fellow citizens.

Thus, the conflict is erupting now as President Obama acknowledges that unmanned drone aircraft have killed at least four Americans in the ongoing war against international terrorism.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/despite-obama-speech-drone-role-to-only-increase-91837.html?hp=t1

Should we be launching these drones over suspected terrorists in U.S. airspace? No. That goes too far. However, we’ve deployed these weapons on the battlefield in Afghanistan and in other hot spots where terrorists lurk. Americans, sadly, are among those who seek to kill their fellow Americans. Are these people enemies of the state? I consider them to be precisely that.

They become fair game, so to speak, when they take up arms against American military personnel. They have betrayed their citizenship and in my view no longer qualify as “loyal” Americans.

The Constitution, though, grants all Americans the right of due process. Killing these so-called Americans in a military operation circumvents that due process. However, I keep coming back to whether these individuals have virtually surrendered their rights as citizens when they take up arms against their nation.

I’m going to need some time to think all this through. I haven’t made up my mind. I’m open to some thoughts on the subject.

Houston’s civic and municipal brass is going to decide soon the fate of the Houston Astrodome.

The Dome came into being in 1965 billed as the Eighth Wonder of the World. It was the first sports structure of its kind in the world. It had a roof, meaning that you could use all year round. When it opened it was a marvelous thing to behold.

It is likely to be demolished, maybe soon. I hope it stays up. I hope the city finds some use for it, if only to turn it into a gigantic museum.

I’ve heard all the arguments for tearing it down: It costs too much to maintain; there’s not enough practical use for it to make it cost-effective; the city can use the space for other money-making endeavors; Reliant Stadium is next door and it serves quite nicely as the Houston Texans’ professional football home.

Blah, blah, blah …

I get all that.

I’m a sentimentalist at heart. The Astrodome ought to stand as a reminder that we can build great things and keep them standing, much like they do in, oh, Europe and Asia.

We Americans, though, live in a throwaway society. Something inside me simply wants the Dome to stand as a reminder that we aren’t always so dedicated to the belief that we can just throw something away when it no longer serves our purpose.

I don’t have a lot of Astrodome memories, even though my family and I lived for nearly 11 years just east of Houston, in Beaumont. This plea isn’t about me. It’s about historical preservation.

I know I’m engaging in wishful thinking. I just had to get this off my chest.

Marco Rubio has it right on immigration.

Ted Cruz has it wrong.

Cruz is the freshman U.S. Republican senator from Texas whose parents are immigrants to this nation. Rubio is another freshman Republican, from Florida, whose parents also are immigrants.

Cruz says giving immigrants, even those who are illegally, a path to citizenship is wrong. Rubio says deporting the illegal immigrants is not possible, given that there’s about 11 million of them. So Rubio is willing to allow them a chance to become citizens.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/21/rubio-cruz-immigration-citizenship/2162423/

Rubio is taking the more compassionate course. Cruz is more hardnosed about it.

Frankly, Cruz ought to consult with two other Texans from his party about immigration. One of them served two terms as president of the United States, George W. Bush. The other one is the state’s longest-serving governor, Rick Perry. They, too, have a more compassionate view of immigration reform.

But Cruz instead is listening to the hardliners within his party who believe it’s all right to deport even those who were brought here illegally as children and who now call the United States “home.” Both Bush and Perry see this issue through Rubio’s prism.

Indeed, the Senate Judiciary Committee – over Sen. Cruz’s objection – has been sent the immigration reform bill to the full Senate where it stands a good chance of being enacted.

I’m hoping more compassionate thinkers will override Ted Cruz’s hard-headedness.

I have a nominee for the Most Miserable Job on Planet Earth.

It might be White House press secretary. And this job’s misery crosses the political divide. Press flacks for Democratic and Republican presidents share a common bond: The media by and large detest them.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/jay-carney-white-house-91717.html?hp=l2

Jay Carney is the current White House press spokesman and he’s been getting a snootful from his the media types who fill the briefing room every day. Seems that Carney’s been questioning the motives behind some of the grilling. He’s been showing open disdain for youthful reporters – even though he looks like a kid himself.

U.S. history is full of beleaguered White House press secretaries. They’ve run afoul of the media when the going got tough in the White House. Carney is really no different in that regard.

What makes Carney’s current plight interesting to me is that the conservative media seem to think the so-called “mainstream media” have given President Obama a free ride during his time in office. Carney and his predecessor, Robert Gibbs, would argue that nothing of the sort has happened. Indeed, the media have been pretty tough on Obama as he has struggled to get Congress to enact legislation. Carney now is finding out just how tough the media can get when controversy erupts inside the West Wing.

At the risk of looking like a name-dropper, I’ll bring up the name of one gentleman who came from a little different mold than many other WH press flacks. The late George Christian served as press secretary for President Johnson from 1966 until 1969 and later opened a public relations firm in Austin. My understanding many years after his service in the White House is that the press genuinely liked and respected Christian, even as he tried to speak for a president bedeviled by a war in Vietnam that was going quite badly.

I developed a long-distance relationship with him starting in the late 1980s, not long after I moved to Texas. On occasion, I would call his Austin office to talk about Texas politics and trends. He always took the time to answer every question I posed. He was a true gentleman. I regret I never shook his hand, but I did consider him a valuable source whenever I needed some unvarnished information on anything happening within Texas government. The man knew his way around the state capitol building.

I cannot imagine George Christian getting into the kind of tussles that are plaguing Jay Carney. What’s more, if he were in the job today, I might look elsewhere to find the Most Miserable Job on Planet Earth.

No one at Amarillo City Hall has yet imposed any mandatory water-use restrictions on those of us who need to use it.

Maybe the time is coming sooner than many of us think.

The Texas Tribune is reporting a significant drop in the water levels of the Ogallala Aquifer that flows under our feet.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/05/22/ogallala-aquifer-texas-panhandle-suffers-big-drop/

The Tribune noted this: “The vast majority of Texas is enduring a drought, but the Panhandle has been especially hard hit, causing farmers to pump more water to make up for the lack of rain. That depletes the amount of water stored in the aquifer over the long term, which means future generations will find less water to pump to grow crops.”

Irrigated agriculture accounts for more than 90 percent of all water consumed in the Panhandle, so perhaps the target of these conservation measures ought to be someone other than city folks who like to keep their lawns green and their cars clean.

Amarillo has been investing heavily in purchasing water rights. The city figures it has enough water for the next, oh, century or two. But given that we don’t tend to think strategically beyond the next generation, the outlook seems satisfactory.

The findings suggest “thick” bands of water, such as between Plainview and Clovis, N.M., where farmers can keep irrigating. Other areas reveal thinner bands of water that might force irrigated farmland to become dry. The nature of the drought that has plagued the region in recent years, well, that may spell doom for many food producers.

I’m no water planner and I depend on a lot of folks with intimate knowledge of this issue to keep me informed.

Something tells me, though, that when the water level registers as significant a drop in the past year as it has under the Panhandle, someone ought to start drawing up mandatory measures to slow it down.

Here it comes again … the debate over whether the federal government should rush to the aid of stricken Americans without cutting costs in other areas to pay for it.

I cannot believe we’re having this argument.

Moore, Okla., has been torn to pieces by an F5 tornado. The cost in human lives and property is still being calculated from the storm that ripped through Moore on Monday. The suffering has been beyond anything I can imagine. The folks there need Americans’ help.

But now we’re hearing talk that some in Congress might not approve emergency expenditures until lawmakers can offset the cost of the aid with budget cuts. Astoundingly, I understand that Oklahoma’s two Republican U.S. senators, Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe, might be among those who will insist on cuts before allocating the funds for their stricken constituents.

We’ve traveled this road quite a lot in recent times. Hurricane Sandy relief for New York and New Jersey residents was held up for months over this kind of debate. Aid to Joplin, Mo., residents also got delayed in 2011 after a tornado tore through that community.

Fiscal tightwads do make the point that the nation must watch its expenses. I get that. What I fail to grasp, though, is the lack of urgency to help those in dire need.

I’ve always thought Americans were wired to set aside politics when disaster strikes. The tragedy that leveled huge sections of Moore, Okla., in my view, qualifies as one of those events.

Gov. Mary Fallin, R-Okla., has made a vow all elected executives must make in the face of unspeakable tragedy.

Her state will rebuild the community smashed to pieces by Mother Nature’s immense wrath.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/05/21/oklahoma-tornadoes/2344923/

Somehow, I have to believe Fallin will make good on her pledge.

This is the kind of event that makes governors – not to mention presidents – earn their salary. In Fallin’s case, it’s $128,000 annually. She will deserve every penny if she does her job correctly, and I’m quite sure she will.

The massive twister that tore Moore, Okla., apart on Monday is being called one of Planet Earth’s epic tragedies. The death toll is 24 at the moment and it likely will climb once the debris starts getting cleared out. There well might be some miracles to occur, with survivors climbing out of the ruins. Let us hope that is the case.

But as these disasters keep mounting, I cannot help but be moved by the presence of mind these government chief execs show in times of extreme heartache. Most of the time these events are caused by forces beyond our control. Occasionally, human beings bring intense suffering.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie continues to serve as a champion for his constituents still recovering from the October 2012 superstorm called Sandy that ravaged his state. Texas Gov. Rick Perry stood tall when the fertilizer plant exploded in West. Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick became the face and voice of his state as law enforcement authorities hunted down those responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15. I was proud as well of the strength that President Bush demonstrated while standing on the debris pile at Ground Zero the week of 9/11 when – with his arm draped around the New York City firefighter – told a crowd of first responders that “the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.”

These events transcend partisan politics and somehow make the political bickering between the parties seem even more petty than they at times can become.

Gov. Fallin didn’t run for office expecting this kind of tragedy. Indeed, no elected official anticipates ever having to rally his or her constituents when they endure the grief that has struck the good folks of Moore.

However, this is why they serve. Good luck, Gov. Fallin, as you navigate your way through this horrifying crisis.

You know …

I subscribe to the time-and-place theory of keeping one’s mouth shut. That is, I dislike intensely those who toss spit wads from the cheap seats whenever horrific tragedy strikes and they start laying blame for its cause.

Two cases come to mind.

One of them involves lefties who are saying that the Moore, Okla., tornado is the result of manmade global warming. The air is so full of carbon emissions that the storms emanating from weather systems have grown in intensity and, thus, we see events such as the one that devastated Moore on Monday.

Maybe, maybe not.

The other comes from the other side of the spectrum, specifically from a pulpit used by a well-known TV preacher who – and this one is just stunning – said on the 700 Club that the Moore twister occurred because the good folks there didn’t pray enough. Pat Robertson has just uttered only the latest in a string of ridiculous utterances involving perceived consequences brought to those who don’t, in his mind, pay enough attention to God.

Here’s a link to the idiocy that came out of Robertson’s mouth.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/video-pat-robertson-blames-tornado-victims-not-praying

There might be a time to assess responsibility for what has devastated many thousands of lives and destroyed people’s property. President Obama said today that the folks in Moore will have “grief to absorb” before they begin the mind-numbing task of rebuilding their community.

Why not just let these folks grieve, mourn, weep, comfort each other and begin the long journey back from their misery? There will be a time to ponder all the rest of it. Now is not that time.