Uncategorized

Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion

2 Comments

I’ve just finished reading a blistering series of social media responses to state Sen. Wendy Davis’s visit to the Texas Panhandle.

The Fort Worth Democrat — her party’s nominee to be the next governor of Texas — became an instant political celebrity at the end of the 2013 Legislature when she filibustered a bill that would restrict abortions in Texas. The bill became law after a subsequent special legislative session, but Davis made her mark by filibustering the bill to death in an earlier session.

She’s become the No. 1 target of “social conservatives” who will not forgive her — not ever — for taking the position she took. She opposed the law making abortion illegal after the 20th week of pregnancy. Indeed, she opposes government telling a woman that she must complete a pregnancy. She believes that choice belongs to the woman, her physician, her partner and God.

The tirades I’ve read about Davis seem to harp on a single point, which is that Davis condones abortion, that she’s a “baby killer.”

I know this is not going to go over well with some of the more conservative readers of this blog, but I feel the need to make this point.

A pro-choice policy on abortion does not equal being pro-abortion.

A pregnant woman always has the choice on whether to give birth. If she is unable to rear a child, the law enables her to terminate the pregnancy. She also has the choice of delivering that child and allowing someone else to adopt the child. The woman also has the choice of delivering the child and rearing the child herself, or with her husband or partner, or with her parents or some other family member or close friend.

These are choices the woman makes. To suggest that a pro-choice policy on abortion equates to being pro-abortion takes demagoguery to a new level.

My hope is that the campaign for Texas governor will avoid that kind of rhetoric in the months to come. My fear, based on what I’ve seen just today, is that it won’t.

Uncategorized

Sen. Davis ventures into lion's den

Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis today is venturing into places where few Democrats dare to go.

She’s in the Texas Panhandle, the virtual birthplace of the modern Texas conservative political movement, the place that according to lore voted overwhelmingly for Barry Goldwater over Texan Lyndon Johnson in 1964. (In truth, only eight of 26 Panhandle counties voted for Sen. Goldwater, but I digress.)

Davis was in Dumas today to speak to the Panhandle Press Association and is set to appear at an Amarillo restaurant, Fernando’s, for another public appearance set for around 5 p.m.

This is a notable campaign stop for a key reason: It might demonstrate that the Democratic nominee for Texas governor is going to wage a 254-county campaign for the state’s top office, although I doubt she’ll actually show up in every one of the state’s counties; for that matter, I doubt Republican nominee Greg Abbott will, either.

I’m glad she’s here. I hope she returns. You can bet that Abbott will be here, although his own time might be spent better in more populated and perhaps less reliably Republican regions of the state.

As for Davis, the Fort Worth Democrat, she has a chance to woo potentially skeptical audiences here with a solid message centering on bolstering public education and seeking income equality for all Texans — which was the theme of her message today in Dumas. These are serious topics that require serious consideration by all Texans, not just those who are wedded to one political party or the other.

A friend of mine who attended the Dumas event is one of those reliable Republicans. He wanted to hear Davis’s message and he tells me he came away impressed by her demeanor, her seriousness and her ability to articulate her message clearly. He says he’s keeping an open mind during this campaign — although it would shock the daylights out of me if he actually votes for her this fall.

I’ve long been advocate for a strong two-party system in Texas. Back in the days when Democrats ran everything, they proved to be just as arrogant and unforgiving as Republicans have turned out to be once they claimed supremacy over every statewide political office. A vibrant two-party system means both parties need to stay accountable for their beliefs.

Davis’s hope, I am presuming perhaps at my own peril, is that her message will not fall on deaf ears in the part of Texas that helped lead the way for a Republican takeover of the state’s political apparatus. Will she carry the day this November in this part of the state? I strongly doubt it.

Davis at least can hope — at this stage of the still-developing campaign — to make the race competitive. If she can pique the interest of at least one Panhandle Republican who vows to keep an open mind, Davis is sure to find others who are equally interested in listening to what she plans to do if she’s elected governor.

It’s a long slog, senator. Hurry back, OK?

Uncategorized

Daniel Murphy: role model for dads

The hubbub all over social media involving Daniel Murphy’s absence for two New York Mets major league baseball games continues.

I’ve said already my piece on the second baseman’s decision to skip those two games to be at his wife’s side as she gave birth to their first child. To sum up that earlier post: You go, boy!

But I have thought for a bit about how he can parlay his status now as every red-blooded American father’s role model into something constructive. Well, I think he just did. He has shown that at least one high-priced professional athlete — and I know there are many others — can place family above the sport he plays for lots of money.

Professional basketball hall of famer Charles Barkley once declared (in)famously, “I am not a role model.” Perhaps he didn’t see himself in that light, but others did, given his remarkable talent on the basketball court. He’s since backed off a bit from that comment made many years ago.

The late baseball hall of famer Mickey Mantle once said as he was dying of cancer that he considered himself a sort of role model, despite all the bad behavior — the drinking and carousing — that many believe resulted in the liver cancer that would kill him. “Don’t be like me,” he told young Americans as he was bidding farewell to this world.

The world cries out for fathers to do the right thing. It cries out for them to take pride in bringing children into this world. Too many of them — sadly, many of them are professional athletes — don’t do that. They produce children, all right, but those acts of conception too often are the result of one-night stands or “hookups” with young women. The kids are born and these men are nowhere to be seen or heard.

Daniel Murphy’s story is quite the opposite. So what if he missed a couple of games? He gets paid enough money to keep food on the table. He was there for his wife and he was there for his first-born child, a son.

Every father in the country ought to look to this young athlete as someone who has set a refreshing standard for all men to follow.

Uncategorized

Why hassle a guy for paternity leave?

Someone will have to explain why a professional baseball player is getting grief because he wanted to be present for the birth of his child.

New York Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy has been pounded by radio talk show hosts and, presumably, some fans because he chose to be with his family rather than playing a couple of early-season baseball games.

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/10721495/daniel-murphy-new-york-mets-deflects-criticism-taking-paternity-leave

This criticism bothers me on a couple of levels.

First, professional athletes have families and to me it is the height of arrogance to suggest that someone is letting his team down because he wants to sit out a couple of games while his wife is giving birth — to the couple’s first child, by the way.

Second, baseball is a team sport, meaning that it comprises quite a number of capable athletes who can fill in while a starting infielder is taking time away from the game. If the Mets are depending solely on Daniel Murphy’s presence in the lineup, then the team has some major problems with which it must contend.

What’s more, the season is 162 games long. It’s a long season.

My take on this? Get off the guy’s back. Salute him for putting family first.

Uncategorized

Dewhurst is a goner?

Paul Burka thinks Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is dead meat, politically.

The Texas Monthly blogger and editor is reporting that at least two key Dewhurst staffers have jumped ship on the eve of the Texas Republican runoff for lieutenant governor. Dewhurst is facing state Sen. Dan Patrick, who finished first in the GOP primary on March 4, but didn’t get the 50 percent majority he needed for an outright primary victory.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/dewhurst-resignations

Burka said Dewhurst is having trouble connecting with voters. He can’t energize them, speak from his heart.

I know a bit about that. I’ve known Dewhurst since he broke on the Texas political scene by winning the race for land commissioner back in 1998.

You can say what you will about the guy, he is detail-oriented — in the extreme.

I recall interviewing him one time and asking a general question about some legislation under consideration. He launched into the most excruciatingly detailed explanation possible about every little tidbit known to humankind relating to that bill. I suspect that’s how he’s talking to Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Texan out there as he seeks to hold on to his office.

I do hate seeing his career end on such a downer, if that’s what is going to happen in the May 27 runoff. Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, sad to say, is looking like a goner.

Uncategorized

Still waiting for some breaking of ground

Downtown Amarillo’s renovation is proceeding at a snail’s pace.

A couple of things have happened in recent days that give me hope that something might be about to move the city forward.

The Amarillo Economic Development Corporation signed off on the relocation of the Coca-Cola distributing plant from downtown to the business park near Rick Husband Amarillo International Airport. That move had been stymied when it was learned that the place where the Coca-Cola center would relocate was structurally deficient. The repairs have been made and the deal is done.

Then came news this week that West Texas A&M University’s downtown “campus” is moving from the Chase Tower to the Commerce Building two blocks south on Tyler Street. WT will vacate two floors in the 31-story tower, which I’m sure will be gobbled up by someone seeking some prime office space downtown.

I don’t mean to sound impatient, though. I keep wondering when the big stuff is going to start taking shape. I’m talking about the planned parking garage, construction of a new downtown hotel and the building of that sports/activities venue, aka the baseball park.

Friends and acquaintances closely associated with the project tell me the city is being extra-careful, ensuring that all the hoops are cleared adequately and that no legal hurdles will stand in the way of the projects getting done.

Yes, the city has seen progress. The Potter County Courthouse complex is done, and the square looks fabulous. The city has rebuilt some pedestrian crossings, making them a lot more attractive. Some new businesses have opened up downtown. The district has a business hotel in the historic Fisk Building. All of that is positive news. However, the Barfield Building continues to rot, as does the location across the street from the Santa Fe Building, not to mention the Herring Hotel site.

The development firm the city hired to ramrod the project says private investment money will foot the entire bill of the first phase. No tax money is involved, which should please the anti-tax activists who had said they opposed any public funds being spent on what they consider to be a boondoggle.

Some of the rest of us, though, are waiting for something significant to start happening now that the fanfare has subsided.

Patience is important. It’s also a finite resource.

Well?

Uncategorized

Is it me or is the air getting dirtier?

My memory is pretty good on a number of levels. I remember phone numbers, physical addresses, people’s names (most of the time) and usually trivial numbers, such as family members’ Social Security numbers, my wife’s driver’s license number and, of course, my U.S. Army service ID number issued to me in August 1968.

I also am able to remember weather conditions over the long term.

Today’s latest wind/dirt storm that blew in over Amarillo reminded me of something: I do not remember in my more than 19 years living in the Texas Panhandle a spring that was so windy, dusty and downright unpleasant.

Am I imagining this or is it for real?

I’ll plead for help on this one.

Today was the third significant wind/dirt storm in the past three or four weeks. I was having lunch today on the 31st floor of the Chase Tower in downtown Amarillo when I looked out the window and saw the brown cloud rolling in. I looked away and then peeked back out the window a moment or two later; the view of the city was hidden by the dirt cloud.

My memory isn’t of the steel-trap variety, but it seems to be reliable almost all the time. I just don’t remember springs quite like this one. We’ve lived here since early 1995 and we’ve seen all kinds of weather: 20-inch snow deposit in a 24-hour span, 111-degree heat in the summer, frog-strangling downpours, sleet, heavy wind … you name it.

Is the climate changing on the High Plains, as it is reportedly doing in so many other parts of the world? OK, I won’t get into the cause of it here. Suffice to say that, to my eyes, it seems as if we’re windier than usual. We’re darn sure dustier than usual, which no doubt is the result of that crippling drought from which we have yet to emerge. A lot more moisture would dampen the dirt enough to prevent it from flying in the wind.

The local TV weather folks are telling us the precipitation forecast for the weekend is looking more promising all the time. I’ll believe it when I see it. When I do, I’m likely to strip off my shirt and stand out there, arms spread, a la Tim Robbins in “Shawshank Redemption.”

Enough of the wind … and the dirt. OK?

Uncategorized

Perry: We don't need your stinkin' rules

Texas Gov. Rick Perry takes great pleasure in sticking in the eyes of federal officials.

Take his latest rant against a rule handed down by the U.S. Department of Justice. Perry has informed Attorney General Eric Holder he has no intention of enforcing federal rules designed to prevent rape in prisons.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/01/rick-perry-orders-texas-prisons-not-to-follow-federal-rape-prevention-law/#.Uzv9lfNOU2M.facebook

President George W. Bush signed the Prison Rape Elimination Act in 2003. The rules apparently prevent “cross-gender viewing” of inmates. Gov. Perry said in his letter that the rule is impossible to enforce since 40 percent of all Texas Department of Criminal Justice security officers are female. How would the state prevent those officers from observing male inmates? Good question.

He goes on to say that the federal rules infringe on states’ responsibility to set their own security standards. What’s more, according to rawstory.com, “The governor also complained that the law ‘infringes on Texas’ right to establish the state’s own age of criminal responsibility’ by mandating that inmates 17 years old and younger be separated from adults. And he said ‘specific staffing ratios for juvenile detention facilities’ were unreasonably high.”

I’m not quite sure how to interpret the governor’s objection to the federal rule requiring children to be separated from adult prisoners. Haven’t the feds set a reasonable standard?

This is another of those state-vs.-the-feds arguments that crops up so often, especially where it regards Republican governors bucking mandates handed down by Democratic federal officials.

PREA’s creation came over the signature of a Republican president. However, this really isn’t — or should be — a political issue. It’s related instead to protecting prisoners who are brutalized by other prisoners. Since states take it upon themselves to incarcerate these individuals, they also take on the responsibility of protecting them against others who would harm them.

Isn’t it part of governing that enables federal authorities to enact rules aimed at encouraging states to do what’s right? Protecting prison inmates from rape is the right thing to do.

Uncategorized

Cruz asks trick question on ACA

Ted Cruz is a smart Texas lawyer and a U.S. senator who ought to know this basic tenet about the legal profession: Never ask a question without knowing the answer you’ll get.

Well, the junior Republican lawmaker from Texas posed this question March 24 on Facebook: “Quick poll: Obamacare was signed into law four years ago yesterday. Are you better off now than you were then? Comment with YES or NO!.”

The question received more than 55,000 responses and the respondents were — are you ready for this one? — quite positive in their comments on the Affordable Care Act.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/ted-cruz-obamacare-facebook-poll-105306.html?ml=tb

You’ll recall that Sen. Cruz staged that fake filibuster on the Senate floor as he sought to persuade his colleagues to join him in killing the ACA. It didn’t work.

Also, you might recall that the Cruz Missile said he’d do “whatever it takes” to eliminate the law, to wipe off the books a law that an earlier Congress approved and the president signed.

One of his tactics, apparently, was to gin up support on Facebook for his effort. That didn’t work out too well, either.

As Politico.com reports, of the 100 most recent comments on Cruz’s Facebook page, only two of them were negative. The rest of them were testimonials on how the ACA has helped people’s lives, provided them with affordable health insurance and actually reformed the nation’s health care system.

Cruz staff says the results were cooked up by liberal websites that had rallied their followers for responses among those who favor the law. The senator’s staff insists the law is wildly unpopular with Americans.

OK, if that’s the case, then where were their responses to this, um, survey?

Uncategorized

Now it might be Clinton vs. Bush 2.0

Get ready for another Clinton-Bush slugfest for the White House.

Or … maybe not.

Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida and brother and son of two former presidents, has emerged as the Republican candidate of the moment. The Clinton in this matchup is Hillary Rodham Clinton, the wife of the former president sandwiched between the Bushes as well as a former U.S. senator and secretary of state.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/03/jeb_bush_2016_presidential_run_why_it_would_be_hard_on_the_gop.html

Ask yourself: Is the nation really up for a presidential campaign featuring these two political heirs?

I’m not yet convinced.

Clinton likely is going to run for the presidency. The smart money says she’s a sure-fire lock for the Democratic nomination, Vice President Joe Biden’s interest notwithstanding.

As for Bush, well, the GOP’s establishment candidate du jour once was New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — before he got caught up in that bridge lane-closing matter. The lane-closing calamity well might blow over eventually. Christie’s brand as a hands-on, no-nonsense administrator may be damaged beyond repair — and that’s if he escapes the hounds looking for some culpability in the lane-closure or in its aftermath. If he’s dirty, he’s toast.

The GOP has a number of tea party types jockeying for our attention: Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Bobby Jindal all are among the tea party favorites being bandied about.

Jeb’s mother, the always-candid Barbara, once said she hoped her son wouldn’t run. The country is “tired” of the Bush name in politics, Mama Bush said famously.

And as John Dickerson notes in the link attached to this blog, the Bush brand itself might be poison to many elements within the Republican Party. Do you ever hear any of the supposedly potential candidates for 2016 sing George W.’s praises, calling for a return to the good old days of warfare and cataclysmic recession? What’s more, the right wing never will forgive George H.W.’s decision to renege on his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge that in reality was the smart thing to do.

As for Clinton, she brings her own baggage. After all, she is married to the second president ever impeached and as irrelevant as that sordid saga is to her own public service record, the Republicans are sure to remind us that electing Hillary means Bill returns to the White House, where he did those naughty things with that young intern.

Just think: The next presidential election is still more than two years out. We’ve got plenty of time to get sick of it all.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience