national news

Let us honor Watergate

Fifty-four years ago today, Washington, D.C. police caught some burglars breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters building. They were rifling through DNC files looking for dirt on the party that opposed President Nixon’s re-election effort that was shaping up that year.

It was 1972. Nixon would win re-election to the presidency in historic fashion, winning 49 of 50 states and rolling up a 23-point popular vote majority over Democratic nominee Sen. George McGovern.

It begged the question: Why would a politician who was guaranteed such a stunning victory squander it on a break-in that produced far less benefit than the consequence that eventually would topple the president? They’ll debate that one forever.

It gave rise to a suffix that has attached itself to scandals big and small ever since. It happened at the Watergate Hotel. Thus the term “gate” lives on in the names of various misdeeds. This one was different. It showed how much damage can occur when politicians seek to cover up their misdeeds.

President Nixon sought to fend off the media, and law enforcement. The fundamental difference between then and now is that the Republican Party comprised people of principle. When it became clear that Nixon’s coverup would lead to his certain impeachment, several GOP senators went to the White House to tell Nixon the truth. He would lose a Senate trial and would be removed from office. Nixon heard that and on Aug. 9, 1974, he turned his office over to Vice President Gerald Ford, who then told us our “long national nightmare is over” and that “our Constitution works.”

I am relying on President Ford’s statement about the Constitution as my hope that we’ll get through what we’re enduring today. The Constitution is as strong today as it was during that earlier time.

national news, Uncategorized

Enough is far more than enough

OK, where do I start with this brief blog comment on a racist, vile, evil, heinous, despicable epithet spit from the slobbering puss of a UFC fighter from the front lawn of the White House?

I have run out of ways to condemn such statements … which I won’t call “free political speech.” The dipshit won his cage match, grabbed a microphone and questioned the gender of former first lady Michelle Obama.

I suppose I could bellow that “Enough is enough!” Except we crossed that line years ago with some ghastly comment from Donald J. Trump. It’s way beyond “enough is enough” territory.

Why, I cannot even summon strong enough language to condemn Trump’s absence of anger at the hideous blathering of the UFC numbnuts. Maybe I have become numb to these blatherings.

I have no need to explain to you what you already know or believe about the former first lady. She served in an office she never sought with dignity, grace and class. Her response to the moron who desecrated the people’s house with his idiocy only illustrates what we know about her.

As for the shit for brains who said what he said, I’ll let him slither into the dung heap from which he emerged.

International news

Wait for the boasts from POTUS 47

Wait for it, ladies and gents, because I am fairly certain they will fly out of the mouth of POTUS 47.

That would be … what?

Donald Trump is likely to declare he is the greatest negotiator in human history by ending the Iran war … which he began some weeks ago with missile strikes and aerial bombardments.

What Trump will be hard pressed to answer is this: What did we get out of this ill-advised war. My guess? Not a damn thing.

It appears that we now are just about where we were when Trump took office and tore up the agreement that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry worked out to deny Iran the nuclear weaponry it had sought for decades.

Trump did manage to all but destroy the world economy by sending the price of oil into outer space, causing inflation across the board to skyrocket and inflicting pain on U.S. families. Oh, wait … he said he wasn’t thinking about that.

Trump is a master at seeking to spin any argument to make him look better. The astonishing aspect of that skill is how he gets so many Americans to believe it. That’s what he will do with the pending end of the Iran war. He will seek to cast the end of the war as a product of his negotiating skills.

I will shake my head out of sheer astonishment.

military news

War will end … but why did we fight it?

Few things in this world would make me happier than to heap unqualified praise on Donald J. Trump for negotiating a possible end to the Iran war … except that isn’t possible.

You see, I am still baffled beyond belief over why he and the Israeli Defense Fund began bombing the stuffing out of Iranian military targets. Was it to change regimes? Was it to end Iranian designs on developing an A-bmb? Was it to quell terrorists who continue to operate out of Iran?

Was it all of the above? Or none of the above?

Trump appears set to announce a deal to end the Iran war. So are the Iranian mullahs.

The price of oil might plummet. The Strait of Hormuz might reopen soon, giving the Iranian oil a place to go to markets overseas.

Our casualties were light. Still, they were tragic for the dozen or so American families who lost someone in the bombing campaign.

Here’s the question of the moment: Are we any safer now than we were when the bombs and missiles started flying into Iran? Trump said the Iranian nukes have been “obliterated,” but he said the same thing when we bombed ’em earlier. The Obama administration, led by Secretary of State John Kerry, had worked out a comprehensive plan to rid Iran of nucllear weapons.

OK, Wall Street likely will jump with news of a pending deal to end the war. I appreciate what that will do to our retirement account. Who gets credit for it? Donald Trump. That’s OK with me. I had deep concerns when the bombs and missiles started flying. Those concerns will prevent me from suggesting it was OK to go to war in the first place.

military news

Hegseth = smarmy

I looked this word up in search of a term to describe Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The word was “smarmy,” and here is what I found. It is an adjective that describes someone who is “excessively or annoyingly flattering, suave or polite in a way that feels insincere, phony or self-important.”

I believe the term captures Hegseth’s personality. Do you agree with me? No need to answer, although I welcome comments.

Most defense secretaries bring a sense of seriousness to their job. Guys like Bob Gates, William Perry, Chuck Hagel, Lloyd Austin, Richard Cheney, Leon Panetta, James Mattis … all are men of high standing earned over years in public service and military heroism.

Then we get Donald Trump for a second term as POTUS and he reaches into the entertainment scrap heap and delivers Pete Hegseth to us. He found Hegseth on the Fox propaganda channel’s “Fox and Friends Weekend” gab show. I haven’t watched a minute of that program, but from what I understand, Hegseth took part in the fomenting the many lies about Democratic administrations, which is standard fare for Fox channel talking heads.

Then the dipshit takes office at the Pentagon, fires leading military officers, many of whom happen to be Black or women. Then he talks Trump into changing the name of the department into the “Department of War,” which seeks to elevate the standing of the nimrod in charge. It’s delusionary, not to mention it is an illegal act, given that Congress voted on the name change to “Defense” after World War II.

Hegseth has no knowledge or understanding of his role, so he resorts to smarmy behavior. When talking about the brave men and women in battle, he sounds to me like he’s cheering on a high school football team. Then, when given a chance to honor the sacrifice of Americans who have died in battle, he delivers speeches that sound cheap and political.

I’ll do my best to set Hegseth’s empty rhetoric aside and rely instead on what we all hear about the bravery demonstrated in the field by the finest young people in the world.

national news

They talk and yell over each other

I am going to express one of the many frustrations that have erupted in this Age of Trump in Washington, D.C.

Have you spent any time watching Cabinet officials testifying before a panel of House members or senators? Until I started a boycott of the national news, I admit to spending time trying to learn something from congressional questioners and officials sitting before them.

The frustration with the hearing process has driven me away.

I am going to blame congressional Democrats along with the Trumpkins they have summoned to testify for the confusion and chaos that too damn often dominates these so-called hearings.

Here’s how it goes. The Donald Trump acolyte takes an oath to tell the truth, sits down and begins fielding questions from members of Congress. The acolyte often seeks to preface his or her answer to an explanation. The Democratic questioner has none of it. The member of Congress interrupts. “I don’t need a filibuster,” the questioner might say. “It’s a simple question, requiring a yes or no answer.”

The bickering often escalates into name-calling. In one exchange, a Republican senator actually challenged a Democratic witness to a fistfight. Man, that was a treat!

But I have to tell you that Democratic congressional questioners seem to enter these hearings with little if any patience with the witnesses they summon for testimony. As for the Trumpkins who get the summons, they ought to refrain from speechmaking and stick solely to answering the questions they get. And if the questioner says up front that the question requires only a yes or no answer, well … they ought to stick to the script.

The frustration cuts to the heart of the value of these hearings. They ought to be of immense value. They instead have become sh**shows … and a monumental waste of time and money.

media news

Democracy needs dissent

While it is true that journalism and democracy are mutually inclusive, democracy also need another vital tenet if it is to thrive … that tenet is dissent.

The fired “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley spoke eloquently the other day about the need for journalism to function without interference in a democratic society. I want to chip in with the notion that the 18th century founders of this great democratic republic all acted out of a need to dissent from the mandates of the King George III. The Declaration of Independence, let us remember, contains a long list of grievances that the founders laid at His Majesty’s feet, telling him that he could not operate in a world in which he denied his subjects the right to dissent.

Dissent is essential, therefore, for a democracy to thrive. Our nation owes its very foundation to the principle that dissent must happen. It is guaranteed in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Among the rights that grant us freedom to worship — or not worship, to speak our minds freely, a free press, it also allows us to petition the government for a “redress of grievances.”

And yet we continue to hear reckless, feckless and dangerous talk from the center of power in our government, that a free press and the right to dissent make those who believe in them “the enemy of the people.”

There can be little more unpatriotic or sinister than to label dissenters the “enemy” of our nation.

The founders knew what they were doing. Today’s MAGA morons are the traitors to what our founders created.

economic news, local news

Data centers deserve close look

Well … the swirling controversy over data centers has entered my North Texas city of Princeton, where the city council is laying the groundwork to begin a series of regulatory measures to ensure the protection of the commnity.

It was a matter of time before we got caught up in the debate that has swallowed up a lot of cities’ attention.

Data centers are those projects that manufacture chips and other electronic power devices. I have read about how they demand lots of energy to produce and lots — and even more — water. I’m still unclear about the need for water, but I do know that this region of Texas is beginning to discuss openly the need to protect its source of fresh water to accommodate the population explosion that is still underway.

I live in a city that continues to grow in giant leaps. Princeton is now home to more than 40,000 people. That number is going to keep growing for the foreseeable future. Princeton’s council met this week in a marathon session; it took no action on any data center proposal, but it did agree to begin applying new rules to welcoming these projects here.

According to the Princeton Herald, the city decided to “move forward with non-zoning amendments and debated how quickly the city could begin the public hearing process.”

The centers have created concerns about noise pollution, visual impact, construction traffic, utlity demands and limited job creation.

The idea of looking strategically ahead seems to be new to Princeton, which didn’t seem to think too much about community impact when it allowed residential and apartment construction to run ahead of the city’s ability to provide service to the new residents. The city imposed a months-long moratorium on new residential development with the hope of allowing infrastructure to catch up.

I am glad to see the city looking ahead to study the impact of data centers. What I’ve read is that the produce a mixed-up of positive and negative impacts. Let’s keep our eyes and ears wide open as we move ahead.

political news

Waiting for bipartisan good wishes

I know we’ll have to wait for Donald Trump to exit the White House for this to occur, but a major part of me wants a return to what used to be a bipartisan custom among those elected to the nation’s highest office.

No matter the party of the outgoing president, they traditionally have extended congratultions and. expressions of good luck and will to their successor who often comes from the opposing party.

President George W. Bush famously invited all the living for presidents to the White House to welcome his successor, President-elect Barack Obama in early 2009. He told the new president that “no matter our party, we want you to succeed.” President Lyndon Johnson did the same thing when he turned the keys to the Oval Office over to President-elect Richard Nixon. Presidents Ford and Carter, who waged a ferocious campaign in 1976, became best friends for life after that campaign and Ford was more than gracious when he wished Carter well as he surrendered the office.

Donald Trump has brought an entirely different outlook to the White House. When he lost the 2020 election to President Biden, he never extended the hand publicly to the victor. Oh, no. Instead, he decided to launch an insurrection, a violent assault on the Capitol Building and a horrifying episode that could have gone wildly wrong had the rioters succeeded in their ghastly mission.

We’re still living with the consequences of that disgraceful display. I want a return to bipartisan good will.

International news

Ceasefire? Uhhh, where?

I am acutely aware that at times I can be painfully slow on the uptake, that things happen long before I realize it.

However, I know a ceasefire when I hear about one. Two sides are exchanging fire, killing each other, then they say “Stop the shooting!” Then it stops, giving the sides time to talk to each other to settle the issues that resulted in the shooting and bombing in the first place.

Some weeks ago, they declared a ceasefire in the Iran war, launched by Donald Trump for reasons that remain a mystery. It’s a three-way battle. The United States has teamed with Israel to bomb the daylights out of Iran. The ceasefire seems to involve only American and Iranian forces, or at least it did.

Israel has started firing missiles at Iran, which has returned fire to Israel. So has the United States returned to the bombing campaign. But wait! The media keep referring to the “ceasefire” which they report is still in effect.

C’mon, man! The ceasefire has vanished under the hail of missiles launched by both sides!

Those of us watching from a distance are growing increasingly frustrated by the messages being conveyed from Washington, Jerusalem and Tehran. Israel keeps talking tough. U.S. rhetoric is tough, but is laced with hopeful language from the POTUS that the end of fighting is in sight. Iranians keep blustering about their intense anger at the United States, which started this war.

I want an end to this damn war!

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience