All posts by kanelis2012

Uncategorized

Captain violates law of the water

Whatever happened to the idea that a ship’s captain “goes down with his ship,” or at least ensures everyone else is safe before he jumps off?

Lee Joon-seok was piloting a South Korean ferry this week when it tipped over and sank. He fled the ship mere minutes after sending out a distress call.

http://news.yahoo.com/deeply-ashamed-ferry-captain-among-first-abandon-ship-112032771–abc-news-topstories.html

He now says he is “deeply ashamed.” Imagine that.

Rescuers are working feverishly to search for possible survivors still trapped aboard the partially submerged ferry. They’re pumping air into the ship hoping to find folks holed up in sealed compartments. Several lives already are lost.

Meanwhile, the captain of the ferry has some serious explaining to do, not unlike the captain of the Italian cruise ship that ran aground in a shipwreck that killed several passengers off the coast of Italy. He, too, was one of those who fled aboard a life boat, leaving passengers and crew members stranded. That former captain has been banished from ever having a ship command.

Something tells me this isn’t going to end well, either, for Lee Joon-seok.

Uncategorized

Stopping illegal flow is a pipe dream

Texas lieutenant governor candidate Dan Patrick lives in a dream world.

He’s dreaming of a day when Texas can stop illegal immigrants from streaming across our southern border. As it is noted in the link attached here, that is an impossible goal. It can’t be met, short of erecting a wall along the entire length of that border and positioning armed guards every 500 yards.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/castro-v-patrick

Patrick is running in the Republican runoff against Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst for the job Dewhurst has held since 2003.

He recently debated the issue of immigration with San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro. The two men shook hands afterward and parted on friendly terms. However, Castro is right and Patrick is wrong on the best way to handle the issue of illegal immigration.

We cannot seal off our border; it’s too expensive and too difficult to maintain. We cannot deport every illegal immigrant who’s come to this country in search of a better life.

We must enact immigration reform that gives those who are here illegally some path toward citizenship if they want it. If they don’t, well, we can show them the door out of here.

Uncategorized

Deal struck in Ukraine?

Winston Churchill once said it was better to “jaw, jaw than to war, war.”

The great British statesman was right then, and he would be right now. Ukraine and Russian diplomats today announced a potential breakthrough in the standoff between the countries that well could have led to open warfare in eastern Europe.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/203788-kerry-says-deal-reached-on-ukraine-violence

The Hill reports, “Secretary of State John Kerry said the framework hashed out by foreign ministers meeting in Geneva would disarm separatist militants in eastern Ukraine and have them vacate the government buildings, streets and squares they have occupied. In return, the Ukrainian government has offered amnesty to all pro-Russian militants who lay down their arms, with the exception of those who committed capital crimes.”

The agreement comes after diplomats from the European Union, NATO, the United States, Russia and Ukraine haggled over a way out of the standoff that seemed to bring Russia and Ukraine to the brink of war.

Will it be implemented? Will the deal hold? Will both sides back off? Will there be an end to what’s been called the worst crisis since the end of the Cold War?

This is a potentially huge deal that strikes a blow for the power of diplomacy.

It remains to be determined what impact the economic sanctions may have played in bringing the Russians to the bargaining table.

The United States doesn’t want war. The Russians don’t want it. All that’s left is to talk to each other … and to keep talking until you get a deal done.

Uncategorized

Who's Putin calling meddlesome?

Russian President Vladmir Putin is exhibiting some major stones, brass, cajones … whatever.

He sends troops into Crimea, which used to be part of Ukraine, and takes over the region from another sovereign nation. He masses tens of thousands of troops on the Ukraine’s border with Russia, threatening further military action.

He then accuses Ukraine of acting irresponsibly by using its own military to put down pro-Russian demonstrators. Furthermore, he accuses the West — including the United States — of meddling in Ukraine’s affairs.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304626304579506741617026658?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304626304579506741617026658.html%3Fmod%3DWSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

Kettle, meet pot.

It’s quite astonishing to hear the leader of a large nation with a substantial military force lecture the rest of the world about such matters.

Russia has interfered in another sovereign nation’s internal affairs. Russian troops have entered Ukrainian territory. And Russia’s strongman president has the gall to lecture the United States and its allies about diplomatic decorum?

Unbelievable.

The European Union, NATO, the United States and other key allies are preparing to ratchet up further economic measures aimed at crippling the Russian economy. The first rounds of sanctions already are taking a big bite out of the Big Bear’s backside.

Putin’s stern language is not going to help quell the tension or ease the pain that is about to be inflicted on his nation.

Uncategorized

Phone call symbolizes enmity

A simple phone call, that’s all it was supposed to be.

But now, as Politico.com has noted, the two principals in that conversation cannot even agree on its nature.

President Obama blistered congressional Republicans over their refusal to enact comprehensive immigration reform; then he telephoned House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va. Did the two men talk about immigration reform or did they, as the White House said, exchange pleasantries as the president wished Cantor, who is Jewish, a happy Passover?

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/immigration-barack-obama-eric-cantor-105764.html?hp=f2

Cantor responded to Obama’s attack with one of his own.

To be honest, I’m wishing a plague on both sides of this matter.

I’m also believing Cantor is right that the president and his team still haven’t learned how to work with the very people they need to enact their agenda, namely the members of Congress who happen to be from the other party.

It’s fair, however, to wonder whether the president simply has run out of patience with the loyal opposition.

The testy exchange went like this, according to Politico.com:

“The president called me hours after he issued a partisan statement which attacked me and my fellow House Republicans and which indicated no sincere desire to work together,” Cantor said in a statement. “After five years, President Obama still has not learned how to effectively work with Congress to get things done. You do not attack the very people you hope to engage in a serious dialogue,” he continued.

The president had said this earlier:

“Unfortunately, Republicans in the House of Representatives have repeatedly failed to take action, seemingly preferring the status quo of a broken immigration system over meaningful reform. Instead of advancing common-sense reform and working to fix our immigration system, House Republicans have voted in favor of extreme measures like a punitive amendment to strip protections from ‘Dreamers.'”

Both sides keep talking past each other, even as they insist it’s time to start working together.

There isn’t a Lyndon Johnson or Everett Dirksen among any of them.

Uncategorized

Sir Paul coming to West Texas

My pal Chip Chandler explores an issue with an obvious answer.

Writing in the Amarillo Globe-News, Chip takes note of an appearance set for June 14 of one of the greatest popular music icons of the past century. Sir Paul McCartney will appear at Lubbock’s United Spirit Arena.

“Why don’t we get big concerts like that?” Chandler asks, knowing the answer fully.

http://amarillo.com/entertainment/get-out/2014-04-16/paul-mccartney-plays-lubbock-june

Amarillo doesn’t have a venue nearly suitable for the likes of Sir Paul. You remember the band in which he was a member, yes? The Beatles? The little band that included John Lennon, George Harrison and Ringo Starr.

Well, The Beatles gave it up as a group 40-plus years ago and McCartney has forged a pretty nice career on his own. His albums have been so-so of late, but he still puts on one hell of a concert.

A point of personal privilege: My wife and I saw Sir Paul at the Houston Astrodome one summer night in 1993 where we sang “Hey Jude” among other classics with Paul — along with 55,000 other fans crammed into the one-time Eighth Wonder of the World.

I rather envy Lubbock for having the United Spirit Arena. It was built in the late 1990s and opened with another pretty good act: Elton John, who sold out the place in a matter of minutes. I suspect Paul McCartney will do the same the moment the tickets go on sale.

The Cal Farley Coliseum ain’t nearly big enough, or stylish enough to play host to someone of McCartney’s stature, as Chandler notes.

Sigh. We’ll have to make do with reunion concerts, the occasional country star and over-the-hill pop bands that show up from time to time — although we did catch a pretty rockin’ Doobie Brothers concert at the Coliseum in 1997.

Sir Paul McCartney will get a wild welcome to West Texas when his band starts kickin’ it.

I, too, wish he’d come here.

Uncategorized

Is Seliger going to endorse?

The thought occurred to me recently that the Texas lieutenant governor Republican runoff has a direct impact on every one of the 31 men and women serving in the Texas Senate.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is running against state Sen. Dan Patrick in the GOP runoff set for May 27. The winner will face state Democratic state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte this fall.

So, here’s the question: Who will Sen. Kel Seliger of Amarillo endorse in the Republican runoff? Maybe there’s another question: Should the Republican endorse anyone?

Here’s what I know — or think I know — about the principals involved.

Dewhurst and Seliger work well together. Dewhurst, as the presiding officer of the Senate, has given Seliger a key committee chairmanship, Higher Education. Seliger would like to chair the Education Committee when the 2015 Legislature convenes. Dewhurst would seem willing to grant Seliger his wish — if he is re-elected this fall.

Seliger and Patrick have a so-so relationship. I don’t think they’re enemies, although I believe Patrick is being pushed along and counseled by individuals and groups who aren’t particularly friendly to Seliger. Patrick would do away with the two-thirds rule in the Senate that requires two-thirds of senators to support a bill before it goes to a full vote; Seliger has told me he supports the two-thirds rule as it helps build a semblance of bipartisanship in the Senate.

The situation gets sticky, though.

Patrick is now considered a near-prohibitive favorite to win the runoff. A lot of pols and political watchers are writing Dewhurst off. He’s toast, they say. Key staffers have left his office, many of whom have returned to the private sector. It’s getting harder to remember that Dewhurst once was considered a shoo-in to be elected to the U.S. Senate seat when Kay Bailey Hutchison announced her retirement; then along came Ted Cruz to burst that bubble.

To whom should Seliger throw his support? Does he back the guy with whom he’s worked in the Senate, but who now looks like the loser in this runoff? Does he swallow hard and back the other guy with whom he’s had an OK relationship?

Or does he just remain silent until the smoke clears on May 27 and endorse whoever finishes first?

I’m thinking Seliger is going to wait this one out.

Uncategorized

Treat Klan as terrorists

A Northeastern University professor has put forward a provocative notion: Perhaps the U.S. government should include the Ku Klux Klan as an enemy in its war against terrorism.

Why not, indeed.

Max Abrahms, a political science professor and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, took on the KKK-terrorist issue in a column on Politico.com. He writes:

“There is still no consensus over the definition, but terrorism usually denotes a nonstate actor attacking civilian targets to spread fear for some putative political goal. And here we had a 73-year-old lone wolf opening fire on a Jewish community center and retirement home on Passover eve yelling ‘Heil Hitler.’”

The “here” involved the killing of three people on Passover eve in Overland Park, Kan. Police arrested a known Klan leader and virulent anti-Semite. Granted, the suspect hasn’t been convicted of anything — at least not yet — but he seems to many observers to be acting like someone who is guilty of killing those three innocent victims.

Let’s suppose, though, the Klan leader-suspect had nothing to do with it, does the Klan’s violent history make it any less of a candidate as a terrorist organization? Hardly.

Back to Abrahms’s point …

“But what does it take for a hateful act to become a full-fledged terrorist attack? You might think the distinction hinges on lethality. A year ago this week, though, the Boston Marathon bombings killed the same number of bystanders, and Americans had little trouble fingering the incident as terrorism. And over the years, the Klan has killed many more Americans than has Al Qaeda, and the group has certainly fanned its share of fear,” he writes.

Do we launch drone strikes in the back woods of some remote region in the country where KKK members are known to plot their dirty deeds? Of course not. The Klan and other domestic hate groups, though, do “terrorize” citizens with their threats and their actions.

Why not call them what they are and then act as if we’re at war with them?

Abrahms’s full essay is here. Take a look.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/04/the-kkk-is-a-terrorist-organization-105717.html?hp=r2#.U05gB1JOWt8

Uncategorized

Terror group won't die

Al-Qaida is “stronger than ever,” says the Republican chairman of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee.

Interesting, eh?

The infamous terrorist group has been seen in a large gathering in Yemen, apparently getting past U.S. intelligence officials whose job is to ensure that these gatherings don’t occur.

Chairman Mike Rogers is alarmed, as he and all of us should be.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/mike-rogers-al-qaeda-105722.html?hp=r4

It never has been assumed that al-Qaida would wither and die the moment those U.S. Navy SEALs gunned down 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May 2011. You kill one leader, and others would surface to succeed him. That’s been the thought all along.

The troubling part of this is that al-Qaida seemingly is strong enough to appear to be plotting major attacks against the United States. The video of the Yemen meeting shows terrorist group leaders meeting in the open in plain view. Others’ faces are blurred, but the meeting is large and is occurring right under the nose of U.S. drone aircraft supposedly on the hunt for these very types of terror group gatherings.

The fight will go on, regardless of whether our troops are fighting in Afghanistan; that military engagement is scheduled to conclude at the end of the year.

However, our “war on terror” must continue vigorously — and with vengeance and extreme prejudice.

Uncategorized

ACA costs reduced? Maybe

The Affordable Care Act will cost the federal government less money than originally thought.

Good news, yes? Maybe.

http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/cbo-cuts-costs-obamacare-billions

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has reduced the estimated cost of the ACA to the government, which ought to bring cheer to those of us who support the ACA in principle. It also ought to be grim news to those who hate the law they refer to derisively as Obamacare.

I plan to wait to hear what the ACA haters have to say before I take this bit of news to the bank.

The 2014 costs were reduced by about $5 billion from the estimated $41 billion projected initially, according to the CBO. Longer-term costs, to 2024, have been cut by $104 billion, says the CBO.

I’ll conceded that $104 billion over the course of the next decade isn’t a lot of money in the grand scheme of things as it relates to the federal budget. It’s tough to call 104 bil mere “chump change,” but it kinda/sorta is, if you get my drift.

It’s still less money out of the public coffer, which ought to cheer the skeptics — given that CBO reports usually toe the non-partisan line.

No one should expect anyone who’s disposed to detest the law to cheer anything that resembles positive news relating to the ACA.

I’ll be waiting to hear how both sides spin this bit of information.