I took Republican Congressman Joe Wilson of South Carolina to task for shouting out “You lie!” to President Obama during a presidential speech to a joint session of Congress. Wilson acted like the loser he is with his highly inappropriate remark.
I took Republican Congressman Joe Wilson of South Carolina to task for shouting out “You lie!” to President Obama during a presidential speech to a joint session of Congress. Wilson acted like the loser he is with his highly inappropriate remark.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=5111&click_code=3681c98344608825aee2a91d38f9e775.
Take a look at the above link. It’s from Paul Burka’s blog on Texas Monthly magazine.
It deals with this week’s death of former state Sen. Teel Bivins. What’s at least as fascinating as the notation from Burka about a man he knew well are the responses and comments from those who have read it.
Bivins made a huge mark on many folks throughout the state. His imprint was felt far beyond the Panhandle, where he grew up, came of age and returned to carry on his family’s lucrative business. Then he went a huge step farther by entering the world of partisan politics. He won the state Senate seat in 1988 and became a big-time player in state government.
Bivins no doubt stepped on some toes along the way. But it’s interesting that the reaction so far to the sad news of his passing, at least on one blog, is so positive and downright affectionate.
Another high-profile funeral is about to occur in Amarillo.
This one will be for former state Sen. Teel Bivins. It will be Thursday at St. Andrews’ Episcopal Church. The sanctuary no doubt will be packed. People will remember the impact that Bivins had on this region, first as the scion of a powerful family, then as a state senator who rose to considerable prominence in the Legislature during his 15 years representing the Panhandle in the Texas Senate.
Bivins died this afternoon of complications from a long and debilitating illness. He was 62.
The community he loved so deeply will miss him.
I didn’t make an ill-fated prediction, exactly; it was just wishful thinking.
In an earlier posting on this blog, I had expressed a hope that the LA Angels and the LA Dodgers would win their respective Major League Baseball championship series and then face each other in the World Series. Why? The weather in La La Land would be far better than in the Rust Belt cities their championship opponents call home.
Alas, it’s not to be. The NY Yankees and the Philadelphia Phillies won the right to play in the Series.
Bundle up, diehard Yanks and Phils fans. And be patient while you await the games delayed by rain — and possibly snow.
It seems as if everyone is commenting on the White House feud with Fox News.
Now it’s my turn.
Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, happens to be right about Fox. It isn’t “fair and balanced.” Its news presentation is no less biased than, say, the other networks who many folks say tilt the other way. Those who suggest that Fox presents the news without bias do not understand the meaning of the term “bias,” nor can they unhook themselves from their own political tether.
Fox has a huge following in the Panhandle. I understand the political leanings of this community. Our residents gravitate to news presented in a way that they find agreeable, just as those in Berkeley or Boston gravitate to news presented in a way that they find agreeable.
But the bigger issue is whether the White House should have singled out Fox in the first place. The answer is a resounding “no!” The White House has many bigger fish to fry than a cable television network. And Anita Dunn has picked a fight that she simply cannot win. Fox’s ratings are through the roof. She merely has enabled the network to make hay where none existed prior to her opening her mouth.
President Obama could end this matter on the spot by appearing on a Fox News talk show, joust with his interrogators (just as he jousted with George Stephanopoulos recently on “This Week”) shake their hands when the time is up and be done with it.
Word of mouth can be a brutally efficient method of conveying information. It also can be equally brutal in spreading falsehoods.
I heard it yet again today: On a cold, blustery morning in Amarillo, someone debunked the notion that the planet is warming up.
Texans are going to vote Nov. 3 on 11 proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution.
Well, at least they’re being asked to vote. Only a fraction of us will. And by “fraction,” I mean oh, maybe 10 percent of those who are registered to vote. The number plummets when you factor in those who are eligible to vote, but who don’t bother to register.
Which begs the question: What is the point?
State law requires Texans to vote on these amendments. But given that so few of us actually vote, the exercise is rendered virtually meaningless. Is a 60 percent majority on a measure that draws 10 percent of the electorate a mandate on anything? No.
I’m beginning to believe that Texans are suffering from a terminal case of election fatigue. We vote on everything, which is the way the state’s founders crafted our constitution. They didn’t want to give the Legislature or the governor too much power, so they said, in effect, “Let’s give the people the right to vote on this stuff. That way, no one in elected or appointed office has to take the hickey if the law turns out to be a clunker.”
I’m guessing they were a bit more elegant in their explanation back then, but you get the idea.
Here’s a thought. Let’s revamp the Constitution to have it look more like the federal document. Give our elected reps and our governor more authority, and then hold them accountable when they mess up.
But first, though, the state has to come up with an answer to this very real dilemma: Giving the Legislature some real authority means paying legislators some real money. As it is, they make $7,200 annually, plus a per diem allowance of $168 daily when the Legislature is in session. That isn’t enough to put beans on the table by itself, let alone putting additional power in lawmakers’ hands.
It certainly is preferable to watching a mere handful of Texans decide the fate of governance in a state of 24 million people.
The phone rang this past Thursday.
It was Tom Schieffer of Fort Worth, Democratic candidate for his party’s nomination for Texas governor.
He said, in effect, “I’m back.” Well, he had called to remind me that my column of July 12 was in error, when I expressed concern that he might not return to Amarillo after he made an earlier visit.
http://www.amarillo.com/stories/071209/opi_13913363.shtml
I laughed when he told me he was back in Amarillo. I then begged him for a moment while I “wipe the egg off my face.”
Schieffer was back in town for a fundraiser, which is what candidates do when they’re preparing for the big race. They never tell us how much money they raise. Democrats, of course, have a much steeper fundraising hill to climb (so to speak) in heavily Republican Amarillo than their GOP friends.
But I’ll stick with my notion that — as a rule — statewide Democratic candidates don’t spend much time, money or fuel campaigning in a region with so few payoff opportunities come Election Day. For that matter, statewide Republican candidates take this region for granted and, thus, don’t spend much time here, either.
Amarillo residents soon will have a much friendlier emergency service to call when they’re in trouble.
By “friendlier,” I mean simpler. One-stop calling will get you to your emergency responder, instead of the current system that requires the caller to be transferred to as many as three numbers before getting to the right responder. The person who is stressing out over a potentially life-threatening emergency doesn’t need to repeat himself or herself to different dispatchers.
The Amarillo Emergency Communications Center will be online soon at the old Atmos Energy office at 8th and Pierce. The city and the Potter-Randall 911 office are mighty proud of this new center, and with good reason. Officials unveiled the new call center this afternoon.
Mayor Debra McCartt and other officials noted time and again today that callers should see a dramatic reduction in the response time to their emergencies once the system becomes operational. Plans call for the system to go online the week of Oct. 26.
And for the individual in distress — whether they have a medical, police or fire emergency — that is the best news possible.