Trump keeps drawing me back

trump-hair

Donald Trump keeps reminding me that promises to consider ignoring him are hard to keep.

I said something earlier about whether I should consider imposing a moratorium on commenting on Trump’s blathering. Then I turn on the TV news talk shows I like watching and what do I see? Commentators, analysts, “strategists” from both parties and other so-called experts talking about Trump.

How can I remain silent? How can I ignore the things that have captured all these political junkies’ attention?

I cannot do it.

Trump called a press conference today, his first meeting with the media since the Fox News-sponsored joint appearance this past week.

Did he offer anything of substance? No.

Did Trump give a specific example of how he plans to create more jobs than any politician in history? No.

Did he offer any regret for the over-the-top statements he’s made about, oh, women? No.

He did, however, manage to poke fun at the U.S. ambassador to Japan, Caroline Kennedy. Interesting, yes? As Joan Walsh of Salon magazine noted in a tweet, he could have cited the political process associated with ambassadorships in general, but he chose to single out the late President Kennedy’s daughter.

But he said he adores women.

Trump said the polls are giving political cover and allowing him to keep shooting off his mouth in this careless manner.

Yes they are, Donald.

For now.

 

Get rid of the land line? Not just yet

landline-std-code

My cousin has just announced she’s pulling the plug on her telephone land line.

She and her husband are going totally cellular.

Oh, my. My wife and I have struggled with the idea of getting rid of our land line. Neither of us is ready to make the leap.

Our sons are both land line-less. They enjoy the mobility. They are among millions of Americans who no longer use a phone book. Need a number? Go to some app in the cell phone and look it up.

I admire them for the courage it took for them to cut the cord … so to speak.

Me? I am a bit spooked by the commercials by our telephone and Internet provider about the unreliability of cell phones if you have to make an emergency medical or police call. You’ve seen ads like them, with the little kid calling 9-1-1 on a cell phone, but the connection is breaking up. The dispatcher can’t understand what the kid is saying. The voice-over tells you that land lines are more reliable. Don’t give ’em up.

OK. I’m a believer.

My wife and I will reach that point in our lives when a land line is no longer applicable. That’ll be when we hit the road in our fifth wheel for points as-yet unknown. We plan to spend extended periods on the lam.

For now, though, we’re tethered to the land line. I’m a bit of an old-fashioned guy, so I’ll keep the home phone until we no longer need it — at all!

Good luck to my cousin who’s made the leap of faith.

 

Good for you, Megyn Kelly

megyn_kelly4

This isn’t a perfect world.

There. Having stipulated that, one element of a perfect world — would we ever achieve it — would be that journalists wouldn’t become part of the story they cover.

I prefer to think of journalists as, say, the football referee you never notice during the heat of the game. So it should be with those who cover the news.

Unfortunately, and this is more true about broadcast journalists than those who work in the print media, we see occasions when journalists become part of the story.

Stand up, Megyn Kelly. Take a bow.

Kelly had the temerity during this past week’s Republican presidential joint appearance, to ask Donald Trump about statements he’d made about women. He has referred to them in highly disparaging terms. Trump tried to slough it off by saying he referred only to Rosie O’Donnell. The crowd laughed.

Kelly, though, persisted with her question, which was a patently fair and pertinent question to the leading GOP presidential candidate.

Trump didn’t see it that way, saying the next day she had blood in her eyes and had “blood coming from her wherever.” The statement was reprehensible on its face. Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned the comment and demanded Trump’s apology to Kelly.

He then said Kelly, a Fox News anchor who was one of three network moderators at the Fox-sponsored joint appearance, should apologize to him for asking the question in the first place.

Kelly, though, said she won’t apologize for anything. She said she was employing “good journalism” in seeking an answer to a relevant question.

None of this should be about a journalist, whose job ought to be to stay out of the way. Megyn Kelly asked an appropriate question of a leading candidate for the presidency and got a proverbial pie in the face for doing her job.

 

So long, Rick Perry … already?

Texas Governor Rick Perry, a possible Republican candidate for the 2016 presidential race, answers a question about his indictment in Texas on two felony counts of abuse of power during an appearance at a business leaders luncheon in Portsmouth, New Hampshire August 22, 2014.   REUTERS/Brian Snyder  (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS CRIME LAW BUSINESS)

The money has dried up.

And in this day in American politics, you need money — I guess — to get your message out. So, with no money coming in, there’s no money to pay staffers at former Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s campaign operation.

They’ve become volunteers.

News of this development leaves strangely saddened. It’s not because I think Gov. Perry is the perfect Republican presidential candidate out there. Actually, I think I voted for him one time, when he ran for Texas agriculture commissioner — but that was in 1990 and I’ve slept some since then. The other times? For lieutenant governor and then governor? Not a chance.

My sadness comes in my desire to see him redeem himself from the disastrous 2012 GOP presidential campaign highlighted — or lowlighted, perhaps — by the infamous “oops” moment when he couldn’t name the third of three federal agencies he’d disband if he were elected president.

He came back to this campaign better prepared. But Republican hearts and minds belonged to other candidates.

“As the campaign moves along, tough decisions have to be made in respect to both monetary and time related resources,” Perry campaign manager Jeff Miller said. “Gov. Perry remains committed to competing in the early states and will continue to have a strong presence in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.”

The “strong presence” will be determined by how well Perry does in those early caucuses and primary elections. That success, of course, depends on how effective a candidate is in getting the message delivered to the voters.

No money, no message.

It doesn’t look good, no matter how you seek to spin it.

 

Constables: still unnecessary

Morice Jackson has quit his job as a Potter County constable and this week the county commissioners voted — in an interesting 3-2 decision — to replace him.

Why?

The county has had issues in the past with individuals holding these elected offices. Some of them haven’t done any work, yet they still get paid. Jackson, to his credit, wasn’t one of them.

Indeed, he dressed the part of a well-turned-out law enforcement officer.

But I remain dubious about the need for this extra arm of law enforcement. Still, counties retain them. Some constables are put to work. Others, well, don’t have enough work to keep them busy.

Their duties as prescribed by law involve serving civil papers and providing court security in justice of the peace courts. Some of them actually take part in traffic stops and issuing citations to motorists. Jackson would do all of that while on the job in Potter County.

The office, though, just isn’t worth the expense that counties pay to fund them. Constables’ duties could be done by sheriff’s departments, which also have duly qualified law enforcement officers on the job and also are run by elected officials.

Potter County Judge Nancy Tanner believes in the constable’s office. She cited the revenue the offices bring to the county. But do they really provide a valuable service that couldn’t be provided by another existing law enforcement agency?

I’ve always thought that less government meant more efficient government. As we’ve seen on occasion in Potter and Randall counties over the years, though, they occasionally present more trouble than they’re worth.

 

Perry seeks unity in primary? Good luck

Gov. Rick Perry gives a speech during the Texas GOP Convention in Fort Worth, Texas on Thursday, June, 5, 2014. In his address, the longest-serving governor in the state's history focused more on the future and national issues than his political legacy at home. (AP Photo/Rex C. Curry)

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry is seeking a noble goal among the thundering herd of Republicans seeking to become the 45th president of the United States.

Sadly, it cannot happen.

He told a crowd of conservative activists that fellow conservatives need to unite, to speak with one voice as they campaign against the Democrats.

That’s an interesting notion being put forth by the ex-governor.

But it’s impossible.

Sixteen men and one woman are running for the GOP nomination. They’re all trying to be more conservative than everyone else. It’s a fascinating spectacle. To position themselves to the right, they necessarily have to draw distinctions and differences between themselves and the rest of this still-large field of candidates.

At the RedState Gathering in Georgia, Perry said: “I don’t believe the answer to a Democratic divider is to have a Republican divider. It’s time for leadership that repairs the breach.”

That’s the kind of “leadership” that should present itself after the candidate has been nominated to face whomever the Democratic Party nominates.

However, first things first. Republicans have to spell out their differences among themselves, just as Democrats are likely to do during their primary campaign.

You can’t be singing off the same hymnal page if you’re trying to say that you’re the best candidate out there.

Netanyahu says it’s ‘not my job’ to dictate Iran vote

FILE - In this March 3, 2015, file photo, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gestures as  he speaks before a joint meeting of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington. House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, left, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, listen. Relations between President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans have hit a new low. There has been little direct communication between Obama and the GOP leadership on Capitol Hill since Republicans took full control of Congress in January. Obama has threatened to veto more than a dozen Republican-backed bills. And Boehner infuriated the White House by inviting Netanyahu to address Congress without consulting the administration first.  (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — I dare say — is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

He told a delegation of congressional Democrats visiting him in Israel this week that it’s “not my job” to tell them how to vote on the Iran nuclear deal hammered out by Secretary of State John Kerry and representatives of five other world powers.

However, that doesn’t quite square with what he did earlier this year when, at the invitation of Republican U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, Netanyahu stood before a joint congressional session and — yep — told them in effect how they should vote on a deal designed to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Lawmakers visiting Netanyahu said the prime minister was respectful and frank.

He doesn’t like the deal. In many ways, I understand Netanyahu’s reluctance to deal with the Iranians. Their regime has declared its intention to wipe Israel off the face of the planet. The Islamic Republic of Iran isn’t to be trusted at any level, according to Netanyahu.

But President Obama, Kerry and all the participants say the same thing about the deal: It blocks “every pathway” Iran has to obtain a nuclear weapon.

Congress is going to take up the issue next month. A resolution calling for defeat of the deal is likely to pass. It’s also likely to lack the votes to overturn an expected veto from the president.

Never mind, though, that the Israeli prime minister isn’t telling members of Congress how to vote.

Wink, wink.

Actually, yes he is.

 

How might Trump bow out?

donald-trump

This might require a bit of imagination, but I’ll pose the question anyway.

How do you suppose Donald Trump is going to end his futile campaign to be nominated by the Republican Party for president of the United States?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/donald-trump-the-cringe-worthy-crossroads?cid=sm_fb_maddow

Much of the chatter now is that Trump’s latest detestable insult — delivered to Fox News moderator Megyn Kelly — has put his campaign at a “crossroads.” Does he continue on or does he start looking for a possible way to bow out?

The latest polling information suggests he hasn’t been hurt by that hideous statement about Kelly having “blood coming out of her wherever.” Kelly had asked Trump to respond to contentions that he’s a sexist. That particular statement from Trump tells us all that Kelly’s question — which she posed during this past week’s joint appearance with the 10 leading GOP candidates — was spot on.

Candidates often merely suspend their campaigns when things go badly. In this social media age, one forum might be to just put out an Internet message, post it on Twitter, or Facebook, or on some website.

Then they’re gone.

Trump? He isn’t wired that way.

My guess is that once his support begins to crater — and I believe it will — that he’ll make some kind of big show about it, blaming everyone under the sun except himself for the amazingly stupid things he has said about fellow politicians, media representatives, other GOP candidates, the president of the United States … you name it, he’s hurled an insult in every direction possible.

I’ll be waiting with bated breath. Something tells me his withdrawal from the race might be worth the price of admission all by itself.

 

 

Is the city working well? I say ‘yes!’

The debate over the future of Amarillo’s downtown redevelopment effort has been underway for some time now.

I think I understand the divide in our city over whether the project that’s on the table is a good or bad thing for our city.

It runs between those who think the city is going to hell because of poor management and those who believe the city is functioning quite well.

Count me as one of the latter. I had faith in the city’s governing leadership prior to the May election. That faith was shaken when two incumbents got beat and a third one, Mayor Paul Harpole, was re-elected by a relatively narrow margin.

The city has proposed building the multipurpose event venue that’s been referred to the voters for their decision in a November election. The city also has agreed on a deal to build a convention hotel and a parking garage. If the MPEV goes down, does that mean the hotel goes away, too? Developers have pledged to finance the deal themselves. City officials pledge no increase in property taxes to pay for it.

Throughout much of this debate we’ve heard chatter about mismanagement, incompetence and the general overall well-being of the city. What about that?

Has the city been mismanaged? Are our leaders grossly incompetent? I do not believe either is the case.

Yes, there have been mistakes. The city has stumbled a bit on occasion. It also has corrected the mistakes that created the missteps.

Competence? I stand by my belief that the previous City Council comprised individuals who knew what they were doing as they were crafting — with considerable input and comment from the public — its downtown revival blueprint.

Mistakes? Sure. Wallace Bajjali — the one-time master developer that went belly-up without warning — is a big one. But was the city left holding the bag for money pledged for work that was undone? No. Wallace Bajjali had done what it had promised to do for the city before the two principal owners had their falling out and disbanded the company.

The downtown revival project remains sound in my mind and can work well for a community that continues to rock along economically.

Which brings me to the final point. As near as I can tell, Amarillo remains a city in good financial shape. Our tax rate is low; our bond rating is as good as it gets; our infrastructure is being improved constantly.

Can we do better? Sure. No city anywhere on the planet is being run to absolute perfection.

Someone on social media has declared that I have a “vendetta” against the three new council members — and maybe that individual is speaking for others who might share that view. My concern simply is that I didn’t harbor the ill will toward the former City Council that seems to have developed among quite a few of our city’s residents.

And yet at least one of the new council members has taken office with an apparent chip on his shoulder and he plans to bring immediate “change” to a city government that was being run to my satisfaction.

I will be waiting along with the rest of my fellow Amarillo residents to see the results of the change that has arrived at City Hall.

I’ll just say that my confidence in the new regime isn’t as solid as it was in the old one.

 

Cliché went missing this morning

This morning began like most Sunday mornings for my wife and me.

We awoke. Got cleaned up. Had some breakfast.

Then I turned on the TV to watch a news-talk show, ABC’s “This Week.”

The discussion was quite lively. George Stephanopoulos interviewed Donald Trump, Rick Perry and Mike Huckabee — all of whom are running for the Republican Party presidential nomination.

Then he went to the roundtable discussion, which included the usual eclectic blend of pundits on the left and the right. They all weighed in with their views of the week’s political news, which of course was dominated by the Republican joint appearance Thursday night and Trump’s rather ghastly reference to one of the moderators and the question she asked about Trump’s views regarding women.

But as the discussions ended after an hour on the air, I was struck by something I didn’t hear.

It was the sound of the world’s most annoying clichĂ©: “At the end of the day … ”

It’s become the clichĂ© du jour of talking heads and politicians.

My theory about the phrase is this: Public officials, usually politicians, like to say the phrase to set up what they think is the most profound statement they can deliver on a given subject.

“At the end of the day, George … the world is going to spin off its axis and is going to crash into the sun.”

But over the past few years — and it hasn’t been that many years since someone introduced it into our contemporary political vernacular — it’s become overused in the extreme. I’ve heard pols use it multiple times in a single run-on sentence.

This morning, though, the phrase was MIA.

May it never be found.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience