I received a lesson the other day in generational differences as they relate to historic events.

It came from a young public television producer who wondered aloud whether people her age are going to “get” the significance of the upcoming 50th anniversary of President Kennedy’s murder in Dallas.

It was on Nov. 22, 1963 that a gunman killed the president as his motorcade moved slowly through downtown Dallas. The event shattered the nation, if not the world. We went into mourning. As a young teenager at the time, I was certain that the Soviet Union (you remember them, right?) was responsible and was going to invade the United States at any minute.

Those of us who were old enough to remember that event were stricken deeply. We’ll look forward to a time later this year when we’ll stop to remember, recall and honor the memory of President Kennedy. We’ll also look back on what we felt when we heard the news none of us at the time ever thought we’d hear: The president is dead.

But not all Americans have that awareness, my young friend noted the other morning. She wasn’t yet born when JFK died. Her only exposure to that event is through high school and college textbooks, which she said devoted relatively little space to that event. Her high school teachers weren’t that interested in telling the whole story of JFK’s brief presidency or in sharing the grief that struck the nation.

Her recollection was that her history teachers said that Kennedy was killed and, well, that was it.

The remembrances coming later this year will have to take the views of young Americans into account. Dallas is planning a dignified memorial to commemorate that tragic moment. City officials no doubt will face many questions from younger residents there who weren’t around to feel the pain that their parents and grandparents felt at that time. Why is this such a big deal? What did John Kennedy mean to the nation? And tell us again: What precisely was Camelot?

I’ll be awaiting those remembrances. Television programming will devote many hours to that event, rehashing perhaps the debate that’s raged for five decades over whether the gunman – who himself was shot to death two days later – acted alone or was part of some grand conspiracy.

My hope is that the remembrance becomes relevant and memorable even to those who weren’t around to feel the pain in the moment.

Tooling east along Seventh Avenue around noon today — between Georgia and Adams streets — a blocks-long Amarillo eyesore caught my attention.

It was the sight of the sidewalks along both sides of the street. They are in terrible shape.

Few intersections had “curb cuts” designed for wheelchair access. Long stretches of sidewalk are uneven, broken up, weed-infested.

As I approached the downtown district en route to making a right turn on Taylor Street, I noticed that the sidewalks didn’t improve the closer I got to Adams. They looked as shabby at Adams as they did farther west.

What does all this mean? Only that the city’s downtown refurbishing plan needs some work on the outskirts, those areas one sees when approaching downtown.

Most of that refurbishing needs to get started. I’ll concede as well that many areas in the heart of the downtown district are looking a lot better now than they were when we arrived here in early 1995. The Potter County Courthouse Square is beautiful. Polk Street is looking more spruced up. It’s encouraging to see after-hours activity downtown, although some of it admittedly results in some bad behavior at times.

I’m wondering today, though, when the city “parents” are going to start paying attention to at least one significant street coming into the downtown district.

I’ll be waiting — and watching — for some activity.

I kind of knew it would happen this way, that Gov. Rick Perry would make his announcement regarding any future political plans while the Texas Legislature is meeting in special session.

It appears he’s going to do so in San Antonio next Monday.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/02/first-on-cnn-perry-to-announce-political-future-on-monday/?hpt=hp_t2

I’m going way out on a limb here and will predict the governor will tell us he’s not going to run for another term as governor.

It would be his fourth term. He’s already served longer than anyone in Texas history. Attorney General Greg Abbott already is acting — and raising money — like the prohibitive frontrunner in the Republican primary, which is where Perry would run. Abbott and Perry are too close politically and maybe even personally for them to compete for the same job. I do not believe Abbott wants to be AG any longer and he aspires for something a little higher up on the political chain of command.

Perry also wants to run for president, or so some of us are being led to believe. Perhaps there’s something in him that wants to atone for the disastrous run for the GOP nomination in 2012. He wasn’t ready, as his debate performances illustrated so graphically.

By bowing out of the governor’s race now, he can spend the rest of his waking hours getting ready to run for president and hoping (at least he hopes) for a better showing than he did this past year.

The caveat I’ll offer for this prediction is this: I’m wrong more than I’m right and I once did swear off making political predictions.

I just can’t help myself.

The headline on NBC.com mentions that the war against al-Qaida will be at the forefront of a meeting Tuesday between the 43rd and 44th presidents of the United States.

George W. Bush and Barack Obama do share a common goal: to wipe the terrorist organization off the face of the planet.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/01/19236708-bush-obama-meeting-in-africa-highlights-continuity-in-war-on-terror?lite

President Bush’s remarks this morning on CNN suggest to me that he is far more willing to give his successor credit in that effort than many of Bush’s fellow Republicans. He talked of Obama’s handling of the Edward Snowden matter, and the leaks associated with the former National Security Agency contract employee. They relate directly and indirectly to the ongoing anti-terror war and whether the nation is protecting civil liberties in that endeavor.

Yes, al-Qaida does loom large over this meeting, which will occur in Tanzania, where Obama is concluding a three-nation tour of Africa and Bush is visiting on a humanitarian visit.

Although I have been an Obama cheerleader in the successful effort in May 2011 to kill Osama bin Laden – and give the president great credit in making that difficult call – I also must give great credit to the Bush national security team for the arduous work it did in gathering intelligence on bin Laden and then handing that knowledge over to the new team that took over in January 2009.

Did the Bush team conduct a flawless search? Well, no. It had bin Laden in its sights in Tora Bora, Afghanistan shortly after 9/11, but the terrorist got away. But it does no good to wonder what might have happened had some other administration been on call during that manhunt. The fact remains that the Bush administration was on duty and no amount of second-guessing would have changed the outcome.

And for his part, Barack Obama’s strategy of using drone strikes has drawn criticism from his left flank. That strategy, too, has produced some “collateral damage” in the form of civilian deaths. They also have killed many top al-Qaida leaders, decimating the top of the terrorist organization’s chain of command.

Bin Laden is dead. No matter what critics have said since then, al-Qaida’s effectiveness appears to have been diminished significantly since the nation went to war against that group of monsters.

These men – George Bush and Barack Obama – have a shared legacy that they will carry with them well past the time they both had to make the toughest calls imaginable.

Maybe one day, when they’re both a lot older, they’ll look back together and ruminate about all the things they’d have done differently.

I’d love to be a fly on the wall in the room when that conversation takes place.

Edward Snowden now has reportedly sought asylum in the former Evil Empire, the one-time communist menace, the enemy of the Free World … and of free expression.

He wants to live in Russia. The irony is getting even richer with this guy.

http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/308717-us-russia-look-for-solution-to-snowden-controversy

Russian President Vladmir Putin reportedly has agreed in principle to asylum for Snowden — the former National Security Agency contract worker who spilled the beans to the world about some sensitive information pertaining to our security. But Putin has put a caveat on it: Snowden can stay only if he ceases attempts to damage Russia’s new “partners” in the United States.

How do you like that?

I guess Snowden, who’s been on the lam since fleeing Hong Kong about two weeks ago, gave up on asylum in Ecuador, which also is no champion of free speech and expression.

Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, another Internet outfit that relishes releasing sensitive material, said the U.S. revocation of Snowden’s passport is a “disgrace.” No it’s not. It merely represents the U.S. effort to bring this guy into a courtroom, where he could be tried for espionage, which the federal government has charged.

It is amazing to me, though, that Snowden would seek asylum in a country that still punishes people far more severely than the United States does for doing what Snowden is alleged to have done.

This story has a long way to go before it plays itself out.

Stay tuned.

Nineteen heroes died Sunday in a wildfire near Prescott, Ariz.

These individuals are the real thing. Not the make-believe “heroes” we concoct out of sports figures or even out of film and TV characters.

They are the folks who put their lives on the line every time the bell goes off.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/free/20130701yarnell-hill-firefighters-die.html

The firefighters were members of an elite team called Hot Shots and were battling a wildfire in the town of Yarnell, near Prescott. Reports indicate that the fire swept out of control rapidly and overcame the firefighters in what’s been called the worst firefighting tragedy since 9/11.

It was during that horrific event nearly a dozen years ago when the world watched firefighters running into — not away from — the inferno at the Twin Towers. It was that event that cemented in our minds the meaning of the word “hero” and educated many of us never to hang that label on those who don’t deserve the honor.

The 19 firefighters who perished over the weekend in Arizona are heroes forever.

God bless them … and all of those public safety personnel who answer the call to duty on our behalf.

One of my Facebook “friends” recently posted a comment to a post I put out there calling for “term limits” in Texas.

Her response was to Gov. Rick Perry’s pending announcement on whether he’ll seek another term  in office. I should stipulate here that my Facebook “friend” is an ardent Democrat who lives in Donley County, Texas; Perry, of course, is an equally ardent Republican who’s served as governor since December 2000.

I’m guessing my Donley County pal’s insistence on term limits is based more than just a little bit on partisan preference.

I need to say it once more: We already have term limits for Texas governor, or for any other statewide office for that matter. We call ‘em “elections.”

I’ve never voted for Perry for any statewide office he’s ever sought and held. Not for agriculture commissioner, lieutenant governor or governor.

But since I live in a state where quite often my ballot gets counteracted by others who think differently from me, I accept the reality that majority-rule matters. And I’m totally on board with that.

The 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution established a two-term limit for president of the United States. The amendment was pushed through by a Republican-led Congress that had grown fearful of a potential “imperial presidency,” particularly one that featured a four-times-elected Democrat – Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR died only a few months after being elected in November 1944 to his fourth term and the amendment was ratified a couple of years after that.

Ronald Reagan once lamented publicly that he wished he could have run for a third term. So did Bill Clinton.

And even though I’ve never lived in a time when the 22nd Amendment wasn’t the law, I agree with them. The notion of term limits goes against the potential will of the public.

Do I think Rick Perry should be “governor for life”? Of course not. If I had my way, he’d never would have become governor in the first place. Democrat John Sharp – who lost narrowly to Perry in 1998 – would have ascended to the governor’s office after George W. Bush’s election as president in 2000 … if I had my way.

But we don’t need mandated term limits. If someone is doing a bad enough job in office, the voters will take care of him or her at the next election. Rick Perry has managed – and it’s a bit of a mystery to me – to keep enough Texans happy with the job he’s doing to enable him to keep doing it.

For those who have stars in their eyes over state Sen. Wendy Davis’s boffo filibuster performance in the Texas Legislature this past week, they need to read Ross Ramsey’s excellent analysis in the Texas Tribune.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/06/29/davis-opportunity-knocks-inopportune-time/

The bottom line, according to Ramsey, is that if Davis has thoughts of running next year for Texas governor, she needs to forget about it. She will lose.

Davis, the Fort Worth Democrat who stole the show at the end of the Legislature’s special session last week, made the talk-show circuit this morning. Everyone wants to know if she once more can filibuster the anti-abortion bill that drew such attention this past week. The media love her. And why not? She’s, um, “telegenic” – which is code for good-looking – smart (Harvard Law grad), articulate and she has a compelling life story. She’s quite qualified to discuss abortion rights, as she once was a single mother who chose to give birth to her child while she was unwed.

However, Davis is facing some fierce partisan headwinds if she has any thoughts of challenging whoever the Texas Republican Party nominates next year for governor. My hunch continues to be that Rick Perry will not seek re-election next year and that Attorney General Greg Abbott is a shoo-in for the GOP nomination.

Abbott is loaded with cash and he has something, Ramsey reports, that Davis wouldn’t have: a political party infrastructure equipped to run a winning statewide race. Despite all the brave talk among Democrats and their infatuation with Davis, the Texas Democratic Party is in sorry shape. The party hasn’t won a statewide race since 1994 and, near as I can tell, is still in the dumps over its inability to make any headway in this Republican state.

I’m wishing the best for Davis. I think she’s got a bright future in Texas politics. The one thing she has going for her is that she’s still young enough – at 50 – to make a name for herself, even as a Texas Democrat. She has to start, though, with rebuilding her party.

The Texas Panhandle has become a sort of testing ground for water conservation.
I consider that to be exciting news.
http://www.texastribune.org/2013/06/30/texas-push-show-farmers-how-save-water/
We’re in the third year of a crippling drought. Dryland farmers – those who depend on rainfall exclusively to irrigate their crops – are having the most difficulty of all. They can’t grow crops, earn income and then reinvest that income into next year’s crop.
Those who are irrigating their land are having to dig more deeply into the earth for groundwater. The news out of the Panhandle, though, is that scientists are experimenting with irrigation methods that enable farmers to irrigate their crops with less groundwater.
Time will tell, of course, whether these methods work. But the North Plains Groundwater Conservation District, which is overseeing the project, believes the time is now to start finding methods to conserve water.
I tip my hat to the North Plains folks for thinking proactively. I also should note they aren’t alone. Others throughout the Panhandle region have talked openly about searching for ways to save our water.
Farmers have to rely a good bit on faith that the Almighty will deliver more moisture eventually to the region. The reality, though, is that sometimes it’s best to get ahead of the issue in the hope that the rain comes. That’s what North Plains district officials are seeking to do with these experimental irrigation methods.
Sucking the aquifer dry is not an option.

This next week could produce some of the most exciting political news in Texas that we’ve seen in, oh, maybe two decades, about the time a political neophyte named George W. Bush challenged Ann Richards for the governorship.

Gov. Rick Perry is going to announce whether he’s running for re-election to his zillionth term. I’m betting he’s not.

The next special session of the Legislature convenes Monday with three items on its agenda: transportation funding, juvenile justice reform and, oh yes, abortion. My hunch is that abortion is going to swallow up about 99.8 percent of everyone’s attention.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has announced his intention to seek re-election, but he’s already gotten a challenger awaiting him in the 2014 Republican primary, fire-breathing state Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston. Dewhurst’s response to Patrick’s candidacy will be to tack even farther to the right, much as he tried to do unsuccessfully this past year in his losing bid to become a U.S. senator; he lost the GOP primary to another fire-breather, Ted Cruz.

Comptroller Susan Combs says she’s retiring from politics. Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson also is running for lieutenant governor, for now, as is Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples.

These all are Republicans, by the way.

With Perry bowing out of the governor’s race – and possibly running for president (God help us!) once again – that leaves the door wide open for Attorney General Greg Abbott, or so one might think, except for the sudden emergence of a Democrat as a possible gubernatorial contender. State Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth, the heroine of the abortion-bill filibuster, says she’s considering a run for statewide office. Hmmm.

And against this backdrop, we have the special session that is shaping up to be a huge donnybrook in Austin. Department of Public Safety and state officials are examining ways to control the mob that is sure to descend on the Big Pink State Capitol Building. Dewhurst vows to fight back against those who obstruct passage of the anti-abortion bill, which would criminalize an abortion after the 20th week of a pregnancy and shut down virtually every abortion clinic in the state.

I haven’t heard whether Davis is planning another filibuster. She might have run out of gas after the 11-hour gabfest she waged this past week. What’s more, Dewhurst likely will waive once again the Senate’s long-standing two-thirds rule requiring at least 21 votes for any bill to be brought to the floor, which all but ensures a filibuster – by Davis or anyone else willing to step into the limelight.

Let the fireworks begin.