Category Archives: Uncategorized

national news, political news, Uncategorized

Response to Trump … it’s about what we should expect

Donald J. Trump’s supporters are pushing back on the intense criticism coming from the portion of the country — most of which voted against him in 2016 — of the man’s presidency.

I feel the need to flash back for a moment to 2009.

Let’s remember what a leading Senate Republican said at the time about the previous president of the United States, Barack H. Obama.

Mitch McConnell then was the minority leader in the Senate and I presume he was speaking on behalf of the GOP Senate caucus when he made a straightforward and ominous declaration.

He said his “No. 1 priority” as the Senate GOP leader was to “make Barack Obama a one-term president.”

Yep. That’s what he said. He laid down his marker early in the Obama administration. He didn’t stress enactment of landmark legislation, or working with the president to rescue the economy — which was collapsing when Obama took office. He didn’t propose any reforms of his own or suggest ways Republicans and Democrats could find common ground.

He said he intended to make Obama a one-term president. That translated into “obstruct everything he intends to do.”

Hmmm. It didn’t quite work out that way. Obama got re-elected in 2012 and finished his time in the White House with soaring approval ratings in every single leading public opinion poll.

Is it right and proper for Democrats now to follow the Republicans’ lead? Mostly “no.”

I’ve noted here before that I don’t wish for the president to fail. A presidential failure means the country fails and we all pay the price for that.

However, as the new president seeks to form a government — and he still has quite a way to go — my hope is that Democrats can find some common ground with the Republican president whenever possible.

The problem, though, is that Donald Trump has begun harping about the media being the “enemy of the people” while continuing to boast about his Electoral College victory. Enough, already!

Some positive proposals ought to be formulated and presented for Congress to ponder.

Until then, my Republican friends ought to just swallow the swill they offered eight years ago when Barack Obama was elected … with, I feel compelled to note, a far more robust majority than his successor earned.

Uncategorized

‘Do you miss what you did?’ Yes … and no!

People who know me through the work I did for nearly four decades ask me the same question, albeit a bit differently, all the time.

“Do you miss it?” they ask. “It” is my career in print journalism. It was my craft for nearly 37 years. It was my identity in three communities where I worked: first in Oregon City, Ore., and then in Beaumont and Amarillo, both in Texas. People who said they “knew” me actually only knew my work. My picture appeared in newspapers alongside my columns; my name appeared on editorial page mastheads.

Did they “know” me? Not really.

But the craft I enjoyed so much is changing rapidly. Newspapers no longer distribute as many copies each day. Publishers say they’re committed to what they call “the print product,” but many of us believe differently.

The changing times have claimed many talented print journalists. One of them recently called it a career. He walked away from a job at a major metro daily newspaper to take a job with a public television station.

The bad news is that the newspaper has lost an astonishing talent. The good news is that this young man is going to continue a new form of journalism, which he will meld into TV production.

His story will end up well, no matter where his life’s journey takes him. He’s got a long way to go before it’s finished.

But as I grow older and am farther removed from the career I enjoyed for so many years, the less connected I feel toward those who still practice this noble craft. Sure, they remain friends. I have many of them scattered throughout the country.

However, as I count the number of people with whom I have shared this craft — and this includes men and women who are much younger than I am — the list of former print journalists is outpacing those who are still hard at it.

I remain proud of the career I pursued. I also am proud of those who continue to fight through the amazing change that is occurring within the craft.

They still are answering a noble calling, which is to report the news fairly and without bias. Whether they report for a newspaper, or for a public TV station, or for an online “publication,” they are performing a priceless public service to a public that still relies on them for information in its purest form.

Do I miss working in that environment? Yes — even though I spent the bulk of my career writing opinion. Do I miss the media tumult that broke out just a few years before my career came to its sudden end? Not in the least.

Those who are still hitting it hard have earned my respect and admiration.

Those who have gone on to — as they say on occasion — “pursue other interest” have my best wishes.

My own future lies with this blog.

military news, Uncategorized

President demotes Joint Chiefs chairman … elevates Bannon

“I know more about ISIS than the generals. Believe me.”

Donald J. Trump on the 2016 presidential campaign trail

The president must actually believe what he said while campaigning for the office way back when.

How else does one explain his decision to scale back the role of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — his top military officer — while elevating the role of senior policy adviser Steve Bannon on the National Security Council?

This is yet another mind-boggling, head-scratching move from the president as he settles into the only public service job he’s ever sought, let alone occupied.

The NSC is the panel of experts on which the president relies to give him all the details on national security threats. The Islamic State, along with the myriad other foes around the world, comprise a potential and potent threat to our security.

What’s more, the director of national intelligence also has seen his role diminished under the Trump administration’s new way of doing things.

You might be wondering — as I have been wondering — what kind of unique expertise does Bannon bring to the discussion? Well, he served in the Navy once. That must count for something.

He earned his political spurs, though, while running the right-wing website Breitbart.com — the organization that has spewed some white nationalist rhetoric.

The NSC comprises something called the “Principals Committee.” It will include the following individuals, according to CNN:

“Regular members of the Principals Committee will include the secretary of state, the treasury secretary, the defense secretary, the attorney general, the secretary of Homeland Security, the assistant to the President and chief of staff, the assistant to the President and chief strategist, the national security adviser and the Homeland Security adviser.”

Sen. John McCain calls the Joint Chiefs chairman the individual who is supposedly “indispensable” to the president on these national security issues.

Yes, one would think. Not the president.

Then you have Susan Rice, national security adviser during the Obama administration, who calls Trump’s decision “stone cold crazy.”

Oh, brother!

national news, political news, Uncategorized

Two men, same issue, different debate

I want to revisit — I hope for the final time — this issue of presidential citizenship and eligibility.

It has returned to the public discussion yet again. U.S. Rep. John Lewis questioned the “legitimacy” of Donald Trump’s presidency; Trump fired back a nasty response. Lewis’s friends and allies say he is justified to question Trump’s standing as a legitimate president because Trump made such an issue for so many years about whether Barack Obama’s presidency was legit.

The issue with the president’s legitimacy stemmed from bogus allegations that he was born outside the United States. His father was a black Kenyan; his mother was a white American. Trump demanded for years that the president produce a birth certificate to show he was born in Hawaii, as he has said all along. Still, Trump didn’t let up … until late in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Another prominent politician also faced questions from Trump. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas ran for the Republican presidential nomination this past year. Trump questioned whether he was eligible to run because Cruz, in fact, was born in Canada. His father is a Cuban native; his mother is an American.

Cruz’s answer to the equally bogus claim about his eligibility? He said his mother’s U.S. citizenship made him a U.S. citizen the moment he was born. U.S. law grants citizenship by birth status to anyone who’s born to U.S. citizens, no matter where the birth occurs. Cruz said his mother’s citizenship answers the question about whether he is a “natural born citizen,” as required under the U.S. Constitution for anyone seeking to run for president.

Problem solved. Yes? Not exactly.

I am puzzled about how it was that Cruz was able to settle this “birther” matter with an explanation that stuck while Obama’s assertion that he was born in Hawaii never was quite accepted by everyone.

Barack Obama and Ted Cruz both were born to American mothers. Both men were U.S. citizens the instant they came into this world. Why, then, would it even matter about Barack Obama’s place of birth if U.S. law grants him citizenship at the moment of his birth?

Would any of this disparity have anything at all to do with President Obama’s race? Hmmm?

International news, Uncategorized

POTUS planning to take final shot at Russians

obama_putin

Donald J. Trump doesn’t believe the findings of the CIA and other intelligence officials that Russia sought to influence the 2016 presidential election.

I’ll presume, therefore, that he won’t take any action against them.

But here’s the thing, dear reader: We have a president on duty who does believe the CIA analysis, who has expressed outrage at the idea of foreign intervention in our electoral process — and who has vowed that he will act “in our own time” to retaliate against the hacking nation.

President Obama is in office until Jan. 20. It is sounding increasingly likely that he’ll do something to punish the Russians for what the CIA and others have said they’ve done. The specifics of what they did remain unclear, but the president’s longtime adversary, Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, also appears complicit in what has transpired.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/obama-says-%E2%80%98we-will%E2%80%99-retaliate-against-russia-for-election-hacking/ar-AAlCY8m?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

My guess would be that Obama will act in ways that might be difficult to undo. Trade sanctions? Diplomatic pressure? Retaliatory hacking of Russian cyber activity?

Obama said on National Public Radio this morning that some of the options being considered would be public and would be reported; other options might be done in secret. That’s the beauty — if you want to call it such — of being in charge of a vast intelligence network that can do these things undercover, out of sight.

The Russians need to know that what they did cannot be tolerated by any government, let alone by the United States of America.

If the new president is going to dismiss the fact-based information gathered by the CIA, then it falls on the current president to act while he still has the stroke to do so.

Go for it, Mr. President!

political news, Uncategorized

The case for un-electing Donald Trump

trump

I’m such a fence-straddler on this one.

Our nation’s presidential electors are meeting Monday to choose the next president of the United States. Do they proceed with electing Donald J. Trump, who 306 electoral votes — 36 more than he needs — or do they deny him the votes and throw the election either to candidate he defeated or to the House of Representatives?

The Albany (N.Y.) Times-Union has declared in an editorial that the electors should deny Trump the presidency.

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Electors-reject-Mr-Trump-10796574.php

Oh, man. I’ve read the editorial twice; I’ll read it some more. The paper makes a strong argument for the electors to yank the presidency away from someone who is wholly unprepared, unqualified and unfit for the job.

Electors from most of the states, though, are bound by state rules that require them to remain faithful to the will of their states’ majority. Other state electors — such as those from Texas — aren’t bound by those rules.

The U.S. Constitution allows such a rebellion to occur. It doesn’t quite address the chaos that would ensue if electors were to deny the Electoral College winner the presidency.

It’s never happened in the history of the Republic, although the House has chosen a president: John Quincy Adams in 1824.

So help me, I cannot yet take that leap.

I agree with the Times-Union’s assessment of Trump’s ability to do the job. His campaign-style “thank you” rallies are troubling in the extreme; he should be spending his time learning about the details of governing a nation comprising more than 300 million citizens. He’s selecting a collection of individuals for his Cabinet who have limited experience dealing with the agencies they would lead and in some cases are openly hostile to the policies they are being asked to implement.

And we have this issue of alleged Russian tampering with our electoral process. Did the president-elect benefit directly from foreign interference?

It is true, as the editorial points out, that the founders set up the Electoral College to shield the nation against “foreign influence.”

The founders also set up a mechanism for Congress to act as a check against presidential overreach. It’s called impeachment. If a president crosses any one of the many boundaries set up to limit the power of the office, the House can intercede with articles of impeachment, followed by a trial in the Senate.

I’m going to give this some more thought. I might get to you later, before the Electoral College meets.

I’ve been watching the presidential electoral process closely for four decades and I’ve never seen questions like these raised prior to the transition of one presidency to another.

It’s beginning to stress me out.

legal news, Uncategorized

This conviction tests anti-death penalty resolve

aalbwfy

We can stop calling the shooter in that horrific massacre at a Charleston, S.C., church an “alleged” perpetrator.

A jury today convicted the young man accused of killing nine parishioners on June 17, 2015.

Jurors heard the killer confess to the massacre. They heard testimony from others about how the young man prayed with the parishioners, read from Scripture with them … and then shot them to death in cold blood.

The killer, who is white, is a known racist. He’s a hater. The victims were black. He wrote in his diary that he had intended to provoke a race war.

What now?

The killer’s lawyer is known to be good at avoiding death sentences for his clients. That will be the lawyer’s task now that the killer has been convicted of this hideous hate crime.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jurors-reach-verdict-in-dylann-roof-trial/ar-AAlBGcw?ocid=spartandhp

Some of us out here oppose the death penalty. I’m one of them. This case will test my resolve, much like the Timothy McVeigh execution over his bombing of the Oklahoma City federal courthouse did.

I will remain opposed to killing someone as punishment. But I recognize it’s hard, given what this hate-filled young man has done.

***

Just so you know, I am refusing to mention the shooter’s name. I did so early on when the case broke, but then decided “nope, I won’t give him any publicity.”

You know to whom I will refer.

May he rot in hell.

national news, Uncategorized

Presidency full of ‘smart’ people

donald_trump_lies

Donald J. Trump said he doesn’t need daily intelligence/military briefings because, “Like, I’m a smart person.”

Uh, Mr. President-elect, the office has been held by a lot of “smart” occupants, all of whom have accepted the National Security Council’s daily briefings.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-intelligence-briefings-smart-person-82553641164c#.yz1bqyygn

Trump told Fox News’s Chris Wallace that “my generals” get daily briefings, that the vice president-elect, Mike Pence, gets them, too.

Here’s part of what he told Wallace: Trump said he gets briefings “when I need it” because “I don’t have to be told — you know, I’m, like, a smart person. I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years — but eight years. I don’t need that.”

He’s going to concentrate fully on making America “great again.”

Oh … brother.

Uncategorized

EPA has become GOP goat

epa-preview

Richard Nixon wasn’t known as a tree-hugging environmentalist who was known to eat twigs and pine cones.

Yet the 37th president of the United States, a Republican, had the good sense to do something that today’s Republicans apparently now regret. He formed the Environmental Protection Agency.

What has happened to the EPA since 1970, when President Nixon created this agency? It has become the bogeyman for Republicans. The GOP hates the agency. Republicans say the EPA has been too tough on businesses, has enacted too many regulations that businesses must follow — or else.

And to what end? To make the air and water cleaner and to protect our Earth from humankind’s more destructive impulses.

Donald J. Trump is forming his new government and has nominated Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt to be the new head of the EPA.

Pruitt, to put it mildly, is no friend of the agency. He’s a “drill baby drill” kind of guy. He’s a devoted friend of the fossil fuel industry. He doesn’t accept the notion that climate change is real and that its main culprit is humankind.

Pruitt actually has sued the EPA over its insistence that climate change is manmade.

This is the guy Trump wants now to lead the agency?

This is another head-scratcher.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/07/trump-names-scott-pruitt-oklahoma-attorney-general-suing-epa-on-climate-change-to-head-the-epa/?utm_term=.a41646dbf927

Indeed, the Washington Post reports that Pruitt’s appointment follows a curious pattern set by the president-elect: “He is the third of Trump’s appointees who have key philosophical differences with the missions of the agencies they have been tapped to run. Ben Carson, named to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development, has expressed a deep aversion to the social safety net programs and fair housing initiatives that have been central to that agency’s activities. Betsy DeVos, named education secretary, has a passion for private school vouchers that critics say undercut the public school systems at the core of the government’s mission.”

Now, there’s Pruitt.

I’m still puzzled, though, at how Republicans have morphed into this anti-EPA political party, given how one of the GOP lions — Richard Nixon — breathed life into the agency.

It’s a new day. It’s a new Republican Party, although many old-time GOP hands aren’t yet sure what the new party is going to look like.

The new president, elected as a Republican, has declared war on the EPA. The agency’s new boss appears ready to start lobbing the grenades.

Uncategorized

Still relying on time pieces

watch

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on upcoming retirement.

Take a good look at the watch you see in this picture.

I’ll have more to say about that in a moment.

I’ve decided that I likely will be addicted to knowing what time it is even after I enter full retirement mode. My reasons are simple and quite justifiable.

For nearly 37 years — as I toiled in daily journalism — I performed under deadline pressure. As a reporter I had to get stories turned in by a certain time — or else face the editor’s wrath. As an editor, I had to oversee other reporters’ deadline performance. As an opinion page writer and editor, I always had to get my work done by a certain time every day.

I lived by the clock. I looked at my wrist constantly. Am I late? Do I have more time?

This morning, I awoke to discover that my battery-powered Citizen watch — a nice watch, but nothing gawdy — had quit overnight. The battery croaked. Oh my goodness! What to do?

I thought about it for all of about 5 seconds. Then I went to my drawer and pulled out the watch you see in this picture. It’s a very old Bulova. It’s one of those self-winders. I set the time, strap it onto my wrist, jiggle my wrist two or three times and off she goes — the watch, that is.

Mom gave it to me in 1980 after Dad died. That was more than 36 years ago, which makes the watch old just by that measure. Except that Dad wore the thing for as long as I can remember before that. He wasn’t wearing the watch when he died suddenly in a boating accident all those years ago.

Mom wanted me to have it. I accepted it with great gratitude — and I cried like a baby, too.

It still works. It keeps perfect time. I took it to a jeweler here in Amarillo to see about having it cleaned. He removed the back of the watch, took one look at it, and put it back together. Then he said the watch’s innards are too delicate, too old to mess with. “When it stops working, that’s it,” he said. “You’ll just have to retire it.” It’s been semi-retired ever since, sort of like me.

I don’t see myself going without a watch on my wrist. It’s who I am. Sure, I could tell time by pulling my fancy-shmancy I-phone out of its holster. I’d rather not do that.

I know a lot of retired folks who no longer wear watches. What’s the point? they ask. Why do I need to be anywhere? Members of my immediate family are like that. My sons don’t wear watches, either. They rely on their big-time telecommunications devices to keep them on schedule. My granddaughter — who’s all of 3 years of age! — already is becoming tech-savvy. Will she ever wear a watch? I, um, doubt it.

I’ll stick with the old way of telling time. It’s worked well for me for more than six decades. Why change now?