I saw ‘woke’ before I ever heard the word

Hey, something just occurred to me that I want to share with this post. It made me chuckle when the thought entered my pointed head.

You’ve heard the term “woke,” right. I take it to be a sort of put-down on those with progressive/liberal leanings. Here’s a quick story that I want to share.

I was working at the Amarillo Globe-News in the early 2000s when the publisher decided to move our opinion page operation into the newsroom; it had been next to the publisher’s office in an adjacent building.

So, we made the move. My two staffers and I set up shop in a corner of the AGN newsroom. I dug into my box of mementos and found a bumper sticker that one of my sons’ high school teachers had given him … to give to me! It said: I don’t believe the liberal media.

Maybe you’ve seen stickers like it. I taped it to a window on my new office.

It didn’t take 24 hours for a colleague at the newspaper to tell me how she was “offended” by it and that others in the newsroom were offended, too. She told me to take it down or else she would take it up with the management of the newspaper.

Like the dumbass I was in the moment, I reacted two ways. My jaw dropped because I couldn’t believe I was hearing such nonsense. I told my colleague that the sign is a “joke on me. It is intended as a barb that someone was leveling at me because of my political leanings.” She wasn’t convinced.

Well, I took the sign down. I put it away. I kept it hidden from view during the time we were stationed in the AGN newsroom. We didn’t want to offend anyone … you know?

Talk about an “I wish I woulda said this” moment. I should have dared her to take it up with human resources, or even the publisher. I should have shooed her away and told her to take it up with the executive editor at the time. But … I didn’t.

Now I understand better what “woke” means. It reared its ugliness in front of me before I knew what “woke” meant.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Constitution Boot Camp? Yes!

Liz Cheney is a busy woman these days, serving as a Republican member of Congress who is critical of Donald Trump and suggesting that all new members of Congress take a remedial course on the U.S. Constitution.

Yes, we are electing constitutional nitwits to the very body that writes laws we all are required to obey. The Dallas Morning News editorial today took note of two individuals who clearly need a refresher course on the document they took an oath to protect and defend.

Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, according to the DMN, couldn’t identify the three branches of government, said that World War II was fought against European socialists and promised to use his Senate resources to campaign for Republicans, which the newspaper noted is illegal.

One more: Rep. John Yarmouth, a Kentucky Democrat, said the government “cannot go bankrupt because we have the power to create as much money as we need to spend,” the DMN said. Umm, wrong!

Liz Cheney wants to require freshmen members of the House and Senate to take a Constitution Boot Camp course to acquaint them with the document that serves as the governmental framework for our nation.

That’s a hell of a notion, right? These people swear on a holy book that they will protect the Constitution to the best of their ability but don’t know the basics of the document that our framers cobbled together to send this nation on its way to greatness.

As I survey the field of congressional candidates seeking to win their respective races in 2022, I shudder in fear that voters, indeed, are going to elect MAGA numbskulls. These people will be voting on measures that affect every single American. I don’t want them writing laws that affect me so directly.

The Morning News notes Cheney’s overflowing plate of issues and concerns, but adds, “When she gets done protecting our founding documents on the Jan. 6 House panel, we encourage her to implement the Congressional Boot Camp.”

We shouldn’t ever send dummies to Congress, but we continue to send these dipsh**s to Washington to vote on laws — and order us to obey them! — then make the new ones take a course on the Constitution.

The Constitution requires these folks to swear an oath to be loyal to the document. Shouldn’t they be required to know something about the document they will protect?

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Cheney standing tall

It’s getting harder by the day for me to dislike U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, the conservative Wyoming lawmaker who is distinguishing herself by being one of the few Republicans in Congress who is willing to speak the unvarnished truth about Donald J. Trump.

She calls him — in no particular order — an existential threat to our democracy, a danger to the nation, a pathological liar, someone who has “no business being anywhere near the White House.”

There’s some other stuff, too, but you get my drift.

I once despised Liz Cheney. I didn’t like it when she declared her candidacy for Wyoming’s only House seat; I said at the time that she was a carpetbagger who spent hardly any time in the state her dad, Dick Cheney, represented during his House tour.

She’s also a bit too right wing for my taste.

Then along comes The Donald, who torches the Constitution and all but disavows the sacred oath he took to defend it. Cheney said, “That’s enough.”

She has said time and again that the sacred oath must stand over any fealty to a politician. Cheney also said that her work on the House select committee examining the 1/6 insurrection fills her with pride in the duty she is performing in seeking the truth behind the attack that Trump incited.

Win or lose in her August GOP primary in Wyoming, Cheney said she will remain committed to the task before her. “The sun will come up the next morning,” she said, and she will keep pursuing her effort for the truth behind the attack.

Normally, a politician who vows to do his or her job isn’t worthy of extraordinary praise. The context of this time, though, makes it different. That context compels me to offer the highest praise I can to a politician who is showing exemplary courage.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Milestone ahead!

I am approaching a milestone date and I want to forewarn you of the event. I have written about it before, starting with some bitter feelings toward my former employer and the circumstances leading up to my departure from a career that brought me great joy, a bit of success and a whole lot of fun.

It was Aug. 30, 2012 when I got called into the office of a new hire at the Amarillo Globe-News. The newly installed “vice president for audience” told me, “There is no easy way to say this, but we have decided to offer your job to someone else, and he accepted.”

Hmm. I knew who the “someone else” was, but I asked if it was him. My colleague said yes.

We exchanged a few words, I rose from my chair, went to my office, called my wife and said, “I’m out.” I called my sons to tell them the same thing. I collected my thoughts and went home, but not before visiting with the publisher of the newspaper on my way to the car. We had a tense conversation. He asked me to come back the next day to “think about” my next move. I didn’t need to think about it. I quit.

I came back the next morning, cleared out my office … and was gone.

The publisher had implemented a strategy that sought to reorganize the newsroom at the AGN. He told us all our job descriptions had been rewritten. We could apply for any job we wanted. I chose to seek the one I had done there for nearly 18 years. He had something — and someone — else in mind for me and my AGN career. So, he acted.

The years since my departure from full-time print journalism have been a joyous ride. Some of it has been a bit uncertain. However, I have not only survived, I consider myself fortunate to have been spared the misery that has befallen daily newspapers in the decade since and the unique misery that afflicted the Texas Panhandle’s premier newspaper.

This blog has been a lifesaver for me. I get to keep pontificating about issues of the day. As I have told you already, I have a couple of fun freelance gigs that keep me busy near the North Texas home my wife and I purchased a few years ago.

As they say, time flies when you’re having fun. Thus, it has been a rapid 10 years since my life changed.

***

A couple of quick post-scripts …

The VP for audience and I have become friends and we stay in touch. He moved on not long after he gave me the news I didn’t want to hear. I reached out to him not long ago to reconcile and to inform him I harbored no hard feelings toward him.

The publisher? He “stepped down” from his post a while ago after the paper was purchased by another company. He and I never forged any kind of relationship during the years we worked together. We don’t speak now. That’s fine with me, too.

Life is so good.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Cheney as a Democratic VP candidate? Seriously?

I want to stipulate that I have tremendous admiration for retired U.S. Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a former combat officer who also commanded hundreds of thousands of American military personnel.

There. Having said that, I now want to say that he is wrong to suggest that Rep. Liz Cheney should run as a Democratic vice-presidential nominee in 2024.

Gen. McCaffrey wrote this today via Twitter: Cong Cheney is a principled public servant of great courage. An example of devotion to the Constitution. A great VP nomination for the Democratic ticket in 2024. A bipartisan ticket. Will give many disgusted Republicans a banner to rally behind.

I, too, admire Liz Cheney’s role in the 1/6 insurrection probe. She is a staunch, stellar and strong conservative member of Congress. Putting Rep. Cheney on a Democratic ticket would likely demand that she forgo all for which she has been a champion.

She is a strong right-to-life politician; she is a strong pro-gun rights pol; Cheney is fervently against tax increases; Cheney is no fan of the Affordable Care Act.

How in the world does this politician comport with a Democratic Party platform that would seek to yank her far away from the positions for which she has stood strong?

It won’t happen. Therefore, Gen. McCaffrey — as much as I admire this man’s service to the nation — is reaching way beyond his grasp.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Be careful, Democrats

“It’s not illegal but it sure is stupid. Be careful what you wish for. You may select somebody who actually wins and then you hurt the country as well as your own party.”

Who said that? None other than U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney, a Utah Republican and one of the few GOP senators to (a) declare that Donald Trump is a “phony” and a “fraud” and (b) congratulate Joe Biden on his election as president in 2020.

Here we are, two years later, and the chatter is all over the place about Democrats reportedly boosting Trumpkin candidates’ chances for nomination in their respective state primaries. Why? Because they suspect that general-election voters will reject them.

Not … necessarily, as Mitt is warning Democrats.

Mitt Romney says Democratic efforts to boost Trump-allied GOP election deniers is a ‘stupid’ approach: ‘Be careful what you wish for’ (msn.com)

I can recall similar stories of electoral tomfoolery occurring in 1980 when Republicans were deciding whether to nominate a far-right former California governor for president. Democrats crossed over to vote for Ronald Reagan in GOP primaries, believing he would be the weakest candidate to run against Democratic President Jimmy Carter.

It, um, didn’t work out.

Reagan won the presidency in a historic landslide in November 1980.

I don’t know how one should stop the MAGA crowd/Trump cultist/far-right-wing nut cases. It seems the more negativity that comes out against their guru — the former president — the more energized they become.

These individuals are nuttier than a Snickers Bar.

I believe primary voters in these remaining states should take Mitt Romney’s advice to heart. Texans no longer should worry about that counsel, as our primary is over and, yep, Republicans here nominated their share of Trump Cult kooks.

We long ago entered a sort of electoral twilight zone with the entry of Donald J. Trump into the world of politics.

I believe Democrats should take Sen. Romney’s advice seriously.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Police chief just can’t stay

They were supposed to meet today in Uvalde, Texas, to decide whether to fire an embattled chief of police. The chief’s lawyer asked for a delay on “due process” concerns.

No one yet knows when the Uvalde public school board will meet to consider the fate of its police chief, Pete Arredondo.

I’ll just weigh in now with what I believe is patently obvious.

Arredondo did not do his job when a gunman opened fire at Robb Elementary School in May, killing19 fourth graders and two teachers who sought to save them from the slaughter.

The chief choked. He didn’t know he was in charge. Actually, in my view, he should have seized command and ordered an assault on the gunman.

The community is grieving. When it is isn’t crying, it is full of rage. At the chief. At many of the officers under his command. At city cops. At Department of Public Safety officers and at the U.S. Border Patrol. All told, 376 officers responded to the carnage. They waited 77 interminable minutes before killing the gunman.

Arredondo — who has been place on unpaid administrative leave — has been at the center of the community’s grief and anger. From my perspective, there can be no way in the world he stays on the job. What’s more, I happen to believe his career as a law enforcement officer is over as well.

Uvalde school board postpones meeting to discuss Chief Pete Arredondo’s fate | The Texas Tribune

This man will be scarred for the rest of his life by the tragedy that unfolded in Uvalde. Talk about being a “distraction.”

When the school board finishes processing its “due process,” its task is clear. Fire the chief and look for a new school district top cop who will pledge to take command in a future emergency.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Bannon bellows utter bullsh**

Steven Bannon strode before some microphones outside the courthouse where today he was convicted of two counts of contempt of Congress and then bellowed one of the more ridiculous pronouncements I ever have heard.

“I stand with Donald Trump,” Bannon yelled, “and with the Constitution.”

Roll that one around, OK?

Has there been a president of the U.S.A. who understands less of the Constitution than Donald J. Trump?

The testimony we have heard from the 1/6 House select committee tells me that Donald Trump shattered the oath he took to be loyal to the Constitution and to democracy.

Well, suffice to say only that Donald Trump and Steven Bannon deserve each other.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Verdict scores victory for Congress

Steve Bannon’s conviction today in a federal courtroom on two counts of contempt of Congress gives the lie to the notion that Congress lacks any way to enforce charges it brings against those who break the law.

The House select 1/6 committee had cited Bannon — a former key adviser to Donald Trump — for contempt of Congress when Bannon refused to answer a subpoena issued by the panel. Congress sent the matter to the Department of Justice, which then indicted Bannon.

The federal trial ended after just a few days and then delivered the goods to Bannon: Guilty on both counts!

Bannon the blowhard now faces two years — max! — in federal prison.

This is an important victory for the rule of law in this country. Steve Bannon sought to defy that rule by giving the House panel the finger in his refusal to testify about what he knew about the 1/6 insurrection.

The House panel, chaired by Democrat Bennie Thompson, instead turned to the DOJ, which is solely responsible for bringing criminal charges against those accused of federal crimes.

It had been fashionable to scoff at Congress’s efforts to make witnesses follow the rules. Important men and women have too often thumbed their noses at congressional committees, thinking that they don’t have to do what Congress orders them to do.

Today, the pendulum swung back in Congress’s favor.

I’m glad to see the verdict that delivered justice to someone who thought he was bigger than the law.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

GOP might rescue Democrats

There can be no greater political irony imaginable than to think that Democrats’ greatest ally in the midterm competition against Republicans might be … Republicans!

The GOP was poised to grab control of both congressional chambers once we count the ballots of the midterm election. Then something odd happened: the godfather of current GOP, Donald Trump, began endorsing certifiable nut jobs for high office.

A.B. Stoddard, writing for RealClearPolitics, reports: Republicans are now panicked that what was once a dream election year could end up a nightmare. A recent report in Axios described GOP anxiety this way: “Top Republicans, once confident about winning control of the Senate in the midterms, fear they’ll blow it after nominating several deeply flawed candidates in winnable states, according to conversations with GOP strategists, pollsters and other officials.” The Senate candidates they are most worried about are Dr. Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, Herschel Walker in Georgia, J.D. Vance in Ohio, Blake Masters in Arizona, and Eric Greitens in Missouri.

Oz, Vance, Greitens and Masters are seeking to keep Senate seats in Republican control. They all are trailing their Democratic foes. Walker is challenging a Democratic incumbent in Georgia and he, too, is trailing Sen. Raphael Warnock.

Trump’s recommendations haven’t exactly helped most of his endorsees. Many of the MAGA-friendly candidates are downright frightening. Herschel Walker comes to mind.

Will Trump and MAGA Candidates Slow the Red Wave? | RealClearPolitics

The so-called Red Wave well might swamp the House of Representatives. The Senate is looking like there might be an altogether different outcome than what many of us had expected.

If the GOP falls short, I believe they should look inward and ask: Can we do better than line up behind the lawlessness promoted by a twice-impeached POTUS?

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience