State news

Panetti deserves to be executed? No way!

Some time back, I declared my opposition to capital punishment.

Scott Louis Panetti offers a textbook example of why the punishment as applied in Texas is barbaric.

Panetti committed an awful crime in the early 1990s. He shot his in-laws to death. His guilt is beyond doubt.

But it gets a whole lot trickier from there.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/texas-prepares-to-execute-schizophrenic-inmate-despite-call-for-clemency/ar-BBfAHvI

He represented himself during his 1995 trial and during testimony he sought to call — get ready for this — John F. Kennedy and Jesus Christ as witnesses.

Panetti, you see, is a lunatic. He suffers from acute schizophrenia. He’s nuts. Panetti doesn’t deserve to die for this crime because he quite likely didn’t know what on God’s Earth he was doing when he killed his mother- and father-in-law.

He’s set to die in Dec. 3 in the death chamber in Livingston, Texas.

Some officials, including former Gov. Mark White, have written a letter asking for clemency. “We are deeply troubled that a capital sentence was the result of a trial where a man with schizophrenia represented himself, dressed in a costume,” the letter stated. “We come together from across the partisan and ideological divide and are united in our belief that, irrespective of whether we support or oppose the death penalty, this is not an appropriate case for execution.”

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, however, isn’t known for exhibiting compassion regarding capital punishment cases. My guess is that the court will dismiss the request, perhaps suggesting that Panetti was faking his lunacy.

Panetti’s craziness appears real to me. He shouldn’t die for the crime he committed.

 

 

military news, national news, political news

Hagel bids awkward adieu at Defense

Talk about an awkward moment.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel resigned today amid media reports that he was forced out by the White House that reportedly was unhappy with the way he communicated foreign policy strategy. Then, in an extraordinary attempt at trying to look happy about his departure, he stood with President Obama and Vice President Biden, both of whom heaped praise on their “friend.”

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/24/politics/defense-secretary-hagel-to-step-down/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

This is how you play the game in Washington, or I suppose in any government power center.

Hagel will stay on until the next defense secretary gets confirmed by the Senate.

And here is where it will get real interesting.

A cadre of bomb-throwing Republicans are vowing to block future presidential appointments in retaliation for Obama’s executive order on immigration this past week. The bomb thrower in chief, of course, is the Texas loudmouth Sen. Ted Cruz, who did qualify his threat by saying he wouldn’t object to key national security appointments.

Well, someone must tell me if there is a more important national security post than that of defense secretary. I can’t think of one.

I have zero confidence that Cruz will step aside and let this next appointment get the kind of “fair and thorough” confirmation hearing he or she will deserve.

But let’s hope for the best.

As for Hagel, I’m sorry to see him go. I rather liked the fact that an enlisted Vietnam War combat veteran was picked to lead the Pentagon. I also appreciated that Obama reached across the aisle to select a Republican former senator for this key post. I thought Hagel acquitted himself well under extreme pressure when the chips were down. He was at the helm during a time of enormous change at the Pentagon.

Our military force is still the strongest in the history of the world. I am quite certain we will maintain or position as the world’s pre-eminent military power.

Now, let’s find a successor and get the new person confirmed.

business news, International news

Ancestral homeland climbs back

Greece is the land of my ancestors … all of them.

My mother’s parents emigrated to the United States from Turkey, but they were Greeks through and through. My father’s lineage goes back to the southern peninsula of Greece.

So, when news of Greece is bad, I ache a little bit more than I would if the news were about, say, Sweden or Poland. The Greek economy has been in the news a lot lately. And when the news is good, such as when Greece played host to the spectacular 2004 Summer Olympics, my pride swells.

My heart is gladdened just a bit with news from Reuters News Agency that the Greek economy — you’ll remember, when much of Europe was trying to bail them out with cash — has come back.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/14/eurozone-economy-greece-idUSL6N0T42OV20141114

Reuters reports: “Seasonally adjusted figures showed the euro zone weakling posted three consecutive quarters of growth this year, even though it had only been expected to exit what the government has
called Greece’s ‘Great Depression’ in the third quarter.”

What has pulled the Greek economy out of the ditch? Some economists have suggested tourism has given Greece its heft. The country has discounted lodging prices and the country continues to be a magnet for tourists looking for a little culture, sunshine, beautiful landscapes and a walk through some of the grandest antiquities on the planet.

I’ve had the pleasure of visiting my ancestral homeland three times and I plan to return. My wife, who’s made the trip with me said, “Of all the places we’ve been, this is the one place I want to see again and again.” That, folks, is high praise.

So I’m glad to read about the good news about Greece that has gone largely unreported. The media were certainly quick to tell us about the gloom and doom.

According to Reuters: “The news is a boost for Greece’s government, which has been promising austerity-weary Greeks better times ahead.”

I hope to read more about those “better times” when they arrive.

 

 

State news

Let the 'pole tax' stand in Texas

The Texas Legislature has gotten a bit goofy in recent years as the state keeps shifting farther and farther to the right.

However, the 2007 Legislature got it correct when it enacted the so-called $5 per-person “pole tax” levied against patrons of strip clubs. I’m glad that the state Supreme Court sees fit to let the tax stand.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/11/21/supreme-court-declines-peek-pole-tax/

The court declined to review a Third Court of Appeals ruling that declared the tax didn’t violate the Texas Constitution. The entertainment industry lobby had contended the fee is an “occupation tax,” which is prohibited by the Constitution.

Not so, says the Supreme Court.

I happen to think this is a fairly creative way to generate revenue for the state. Opponents of the fee say the state should designate a portion of it to public education. The lower court had ruled that the fee, which is an excise tax, can go to whatever program the Legislature designates.

Whatever, it’s a money-maker for the state. The so-called “gentlemen” who partake of this form of entertainment need to keep an extra five bucks in their wallet.

Hey, it’s better spent that way than when you tuck into someone’s undergarment … correct?

 

 

State news

But … what about your constituents?

The selection of a new general counsel for the Texas Department of Agriculture brings to mind a question I trust the appointee has considered: Is it fair for a state legislator, who has just won re-election, to abandon his constituents who just placed their trust in him to look after their affairs in Austin?

Agriculture Commissioner-elect Sid Miller picked a former state House colleague, Rep. Tim Kleindschmidt, R-Lexington, to be the new general counsel for TDA.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/11/21/rep-kleinschmidt-takes-general-counsel-job-ag-depa/

I don’t know Kleindschmidt. I presume he’s a good lawyer and has represented his constituents diligently during his time in the Legislature. But he just been re-elected to serve along with the 149 other state representatives who faced the voters in the Nov. 4 general election. I’m going to creep out on that limb just a bit to presume Kleindschmidt made some pledges to voters along the way that he’ll serve their interests for the next two years.

Now he’s out. He’s headed for a key job in an important state government executive office.

My question to Miller is: With a state as large as ours, and with as many competent “ag lawyers” available, did you really and truly need to hire a legislator who’s made a promise to serve his constituents?

 

State news

Whether to carry openly or not

Texas Gov.-elect Greg Abbott says he would sign an “open-carry” bill if it arrives on his desk.

You might ask, “Open-carry what?” Umm, that would be guns.

Six-shooters. Semi-auto Glocks. Perhaps even a pea-shooter Derringer.

The folks who brought us concealed handgun carry laws now want us to be able to walk around with ’em strapped to our hips. Wow! This is amazing.

OK, I’ll stipulate right up front that I initially opposed concealed-carry legislation. I feared — wrongly, it has turned out — that fender-benders would turn into shootouts when drivers packing heat under their jackets would pull them out and start blazing away on street corners.

It hasn’t happened and my opposition to concealed-carry has softened. Considerably.

The notion, though, of allowing folks to walk into public places — such as government buildings — with the guns on their hips really does make me nervous. Businesses that prohibit firearms would be allowed to do so under most of the proposed legislation I’ve heard about. That’s fine with me.

It’s most interesting to me, though, that no one has mentioned this item from our past in the debate about whether to allow open-carry in Texas: Back in the day, when the Wild West was being settled, was it really safer when justice was being carried out by men toting guns — in the open?

I’m just asking what I think is a fair question.

Well? I’m all ears.

 

 

national news

Ferguson, Mo., waits … amid tension

Allow me to pose what I believe is a fair question: Are the media contributing to the tension that has gripped a small Missouri suburban community by the throat?

Much of the nation is awaiting a grand jury decision on whether to indict a white police officer who shot a black teenager to death in the St. Louis suburb.

At issue is whether the grand jury will indict Officer Darren Wilson for his role in the shooting of Michael Brown.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/22/us/ferguson-grand-jury-five-things/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Honest to goodness, I have no clue as to whether Wilson committed a crime, or whether the grand jury is going to indict him. The case has drawn considerable — and intense — attention from many Americans who live far from the town.

The case spawned disturbances in its aftermath. Now, the grand jury’s pending decision has folks on edge.

All the cable and broadcast news networks have staked out the place. They’re providing non-stop, 24/7 coverage of it. Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon has declared a state of emergency and has deployed the National Guard in case all hell breaks loose once the panel makes its decision public.

My concern here is that the media attention only feeds the unease and well could prompt a violent response if the grand jury, for example, returns a no-bill — meaning that Wilson would not be prosecuted for any crime.

Of course a violent demonstration would be a shameful response. Michael Brown’s father has called for calm and for that he is to be saluted. I would hope the community would heed the wise words of a grieving father.

I also wish the media would find a way to report these stories without such apparent breathlessness. I hope for the best, but fear the worst.

 

 

International news, national news

Off your duff, Congress, and move on immigration

If nothing else at all, President Obama’s decision to proceed with an executive order delaying the deportation of 5 million illegal immigrants has shamed Congress into doing something — anything! — constructive to engage in this debate.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/republicans-no-immigration-response-113091.html?hp=c2_3

There’s been a lot of accusatory talk from Republicans about the president defying “the will the people,” or “circumventing the Constitution,” or even acting “lawlessly.”

They have no plan.

The Senate did pass an immigration reform bill a year or so ago, but the House of Representatives sat on it. They dithered and dilly-dallied, stalled and stymied any move to enact some improvements in federal law that bottles up efforts by undocumented immigrants to attain legal status and work toward eventual citizenship.

So now Obama has taken action.

I keep looking at the order he signed and wonder: What is in it that angers the GOP so much?

It prioritizes the arrest and deportation of criminals; it seeks to put more federal security on our southern border; it enables children of illegal immigrants who were born in the United States to stay with their parents; it allows illegal immigrants to, as Obama said, “come out the shadow” and work openly and, yes, pay federal personal income taxes.

My main objection to the order was in its timing. I believe the president should have waited for the new Congress to take its seat. Oh well, he ignored the advice from a middle-of-the-country blogger. My feelings aren’t hurt, Mr. President.

Now it falls on Congress to get off its collective duff and approve a comprehensive immigration reform bill that helps restore the nation’s role as being the Land of Opportunity for all.

 

 

 

national news, political news

Thanks, Sen. Sessions, for taking impeachment away

U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., says the Senate won’t impeach President Obama over his use of executive authority.

That’s awfully big of the senator.

Except for one thing: Impeachment doesn’t originate in the Senate.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/gop-senator-doesnt-plan-to-impeach-obama/ar-BBf7jQk

Impeachment begins in the House of Representatives. If the loons in the House have their way, the Senate gets to put the president on trial for whatever charges the House decides to bring against the president.

The Huffington Post reported Sessions’s remarks this way: “No, we’re not going to impeach President Obama. Or have a move to impeach,’ Sessions said at a Heritage Foundation event and then added, ‘The president has certain powers and we truly believe — and I think it’s accurate to say that he abused those powers.'”

Clear as mud, yes?

Actually, the president didn’t “abuse” his power as chief executive of the federal government. He acted within his constitutional authority. He merely riled his Republican “friends” to the point of apoplexy — which isn’t all that surprising, given the political climate that hovers over the nation’s capital.

I hope the idiotic fringe element of the House of Reps — along with their allies in the conservative mainstream media — takes Sessions’s declaration seriously and ends this nonsensical talk about impeachment. The new majority in both houses of Congress needs to demonstrate an ability to govern.

Remember?

 

State news

Gov.-elect Abbott saying (far) right things

Texas Gov.-elect Greg Abbott, once upon a time, was considered a mainstream Republican. Reasoned, cautious, yet dedicated to basic conservative principles of smaller government and low taxes.

Then he got bit by the tea party bug.

The state’s next governor now declares he plans to sue President Obama over that executive order issued this week that delays deportation of 5 million illegal immigrants, more than 1 million of whom live in Texas.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/11/21/abbott-obamas-order-violates-constitutional-provis/

The Texas Tribune reports: “In a statement, Abbott said Obama’s order ‘circumvented Congress and deliberately bypassed the will of the American people. I am prepared to immediately challenge President Obama in court, securing our state’s sovereignty and guaranteeing the rule of law as it was intended under the Constitution,’ Abbott added.”

Well, consider this for just a moment. President George H.W. Bush in 1990 issued an executive order that did the very same thing for 1.5 million illegal immigrants. Bush, a Republican, did it for compassionate reasons. Didn’t the current president cite compassion for families in issuing his own order?

Where, dare I ask, were the calls of indignation when President Bush issued the executive order? It was done quietly, with little fanfare.

That was then. Today’s climate seems to require fanfare, blustering, posturing, finger-pointing, threats and challenges.

Therein perhaps lies the crux of what’s going on here.

Greg Abbott, the once reflective and deliberative man of the bench, has become just as shrill as the rest of what has become the “mainstream” Texas Republican Party.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience