Category Archives: Uncategorized

Davis showing some guts

Wendy Davis is playing the odds, I am guessing, with her declaration that she isn’t backing away from her support of President Obama.

The Democratic nominee for Texas governor is doing the opposite of what a lot of Democrats running for office in Republican-leaning states are doing. She’s embracing the president’s policies.

However, the odds are pretty strong that Barack Obama isn’t likely to show up at a Davis campaign rally in the Lone Star State prior to Election Day.

And that gives state Sen. Davis some cover to make her declaration.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2014/10/davis-ive-never-backed-away-from-president-obama/

Still, I have to admire her for standing tall on her principles, her party’s principles and her support for a president who has been elected twice by significant majorities of American voters.

It is quite true, of course, that the president isn’t very popular in Texas, where Republicans rule the roost across the board statewide. Davis is a distinct underdog in her campaign to defeat GOP attorney general Greg Abbott in the race for governor.

Davis, though, made it clear that she welcomes the president’s support.

According to the San Antonio Express-News: “‘I would be thrilled if he or the Clintons — anyone — wanted to come and help,’ Davis told reporters. ‘I’m very pleased that Michelle Obama was willing to record a radio ad for me, and I’m very honored to have their support and the support of so many prominent Democrats across the country.’”

The high negative ratings for the president, I believe, are a result of Republicans’ ability to control the debate. They’ve outshouted Democrats. The result has been to bring fear to Democratic candidates.

Given that I am wrong far more than I am right, I won’t take this to the bank just yet. I am pretty sure Davis is right that Obama has more pressing issues that will keep him away from Texas.

But if the president shows up, I am hopeful Davis will be true to her word and stands with him.

Simple questions need simple answers

Greg Abbott apparently fielded a question that didn’t require a lot of verbal nimbleness.

However, the Republican nominee for Texas governor tried to get cute with his response and in the process had some folks scratching their heads over what he really meant.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/10/does-anyone-really-believe-that-greg-abbott-opposes-interracial-marriage.html/

The question came from the San Antonio Express-News editorial board, according to Dallas Morning News blogger Jim Mitchell: Would the state attorney general have defended a state ban against interracial marriage?

Abbott has said that as AG, it is his duty to defend state laws, such as the law that bans same-sex marriage. So the Express-News sought to broaden the context just a little by posing a hypothetical question about interracial marriage.

Abbott fluffed the answer, according to Mitchell. Here’s how Mitchell reported it: “Rather than say ‘no I would not defend a ban on interracial marriage,’  he slipped into an accurate, but weak response: ‘And all I can do is deal with the issues that are before me… the job of attorney general is to represent and defend in court the laws of their client, which is  the state Legislature, unless and until, a court strikes it down.’”

The result, said Mitchell, was to create questions about whether Abbott somehow believes such a ban is worth defending, that he’s might actual favor such a prohibition.

Abbott’s arguments against same-sex marriage also pose some problems for the GOP nominee. He said something recently about marriage needing to produce children. Obviously, two people of the same gender cannot do such a thing. Here’s Mitchell’s take: “I’ve taken Abbott to task for his defense of the same-sex ban and the prime reason cited in court filings — the supposed state interest in procreation. Regardless of his personal thoughts, the procreation argument is just amazingly weak.”

Come on, Mr. Attorney General. When you get asked a straightforward question, respond with a straightforward answer.

Keep it simple.

Perry is MIA when Ebola hits two Texans

Honest to goodness, I am not going to beat up on Texas Gov. Rick Perry over this situation.

Politico reports that Perry, seeking to burnish his foreign-policy credentials, was out of the state when Ebola turned up in two health care workers who’ve been quarantined.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/rick-perry-ebola-112004.html

He rushed back from Europe seeking to take charge of the situation, but now he’s been, well, sort of caught flat-footed.

Democrats (imagine that!) have been critical of Perry for trying to “look presidential” while a medical emergency was unfolding here at home. Yes, Democrats are trying to make political hay out of this so-called “crisis,” just as Republicans are trying to taint a Democrat, the president of the United States, in much the same way.

Do you think politicians of both parties need to mindful every waking minute of every day to be sure their every move passes the “smell test”?

Gov. Perry is a likely candidate for president in 2016. He tried it once already, but fell on his face before the campaign ever got off the ground. He wants to assure Americans that he’s now immune from future “oops” moments and wants to look like a man in charge.

If that’s the image he wants to project, he’d better be sure he’s in charge of every single issue — large and/or small — right here … in Texas.

My advice to Perry? Stay close to home at least for a little while, governor. The presidential campaign will be there when this Ebola thing passes.

Hoping retirement is this agreeable

Here is another in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on impending retirement.

The closer I get to retirement, the more I hope that status is as agreeable to me as it is with others I encounter almost daily.

The other day, someone from my professional past crossed my path at the part-time job where I work.

She took my breath away … but not in the way you might be thinking right about now.

Rebecca King served as 47th district attorney for Potter and Armstrong counties until 2004. Then she retired. I hadn’t seen her in the decade since she left public office — and all but disappeared from public view.

She came into the auto dealership where I worked to get her vehicle serviced. I saw her, caught my breath, extended my hand and we exchanged pleasantries.

There’s really only one way to say this: Retirement has been very kind to Mme. Prosecutor.

Her hair is now as white as snow. She looked happy, fit and so very relaxed. It was great catching up with her.

What’s she doing these days? She says he’s a full-time rancher. “Do you still practice law?” I asked. She laughed. “Oh no. When you’re a career criminal prosecutor, there’s nothing else I can do,” she said.

Folks like Rebecca King set the bar high for those who are coming along right behind them.

Here’s hoping I can hold up as well as she has.

He was a great man

Men achieve greatness many ways. Some seek it. Occasionally it falls on others. Still others become great simply by being who they are, by playing by the rules, and living good lives.

I want to introduce you to a great man I once knew.

His name was Ioannis Panayotis Kanellopoulos. The English translation is John Peter Kanelis. He was my grandfather. We called him “Papou,” which is the Greek term for grandpa.

He was born 129 years ago, on Oct. 12, 1885, in a tiny village on the southern peninsula of Greece, the Peloponnese. He would marry my grandmother, who lived in a nearby village, in 1919.

They had moved to America by the time they married. They brought seven children into the world, starting with my father, Peter; then, in order, came Tom, Eileen, Alice, Elizabeth, Constantino and Sophia. All the children became successes. They all had some heartache and grief along the way, but they have done well.

They owe it to their upbringing.

Papou wasn’t an educated man. He never learned how to drive a car. He toiled as a laborer in a Pittsburgh, Pa., steel mill. Then the Depression hit. He then sought to manage a hotel in Bellows Fall, Vt. That endeavor didn’t work out.

My father — as the eldest child — then helped herd the entire family across the vast country, to Portland, Ore., in the late 1930s.

Papou then operated a shoe-shine stand in the basement of a major downtown Portland department store. That’s what he did for the rest of his working life. He shined shoes. He snapped the buffing rag so smartly it sounded almost like music.

I’ll acknowledge that my grandfather didn’t do a lot of grandfatherly things with me or, as near as I can remember, with any of his grandkids. We didn’t go on outings with him and my grandmother; neither of them drove. I recall a couple of memorable all-inclusive family outings on the Oregon coast that included a whole host of aunts, uncles, cousins and, yes, my grandparents.

My grandmother died in September 1968. My grandparents were married for 49 years. Papou would live until 1981, when he passed away at the age of 95 — which is not bad for a man who smoked stogies daily for nearly his entire adult life.

I want to remember him today as a great American because of the simple dignity with which he lived. He didn’t achieve outward, look-at-me greatness. He didn’t call attention to himself. He simply achieved greatness by being who he was.

He came to the United States of America in search of a better life than the one he left behind in that tiny Greek village. By God, he found it.

Happy birthday, Papou.

Political discourse needs cleansing

This is what has become of honest-to-goodness political discourse in this country.

Or so it appears.

A Fox News talk-show host has compared liberalism to a “disease,” such as Ebola.

That’s the spirit, Eric Bolling, of the so-called “big tent” philosophy preached by your pals on the right and extreme right wing of the political spectrum.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/06/foxs-bolling-calls-liberalism-a-dangerous-virus/201037

This kind of rhetoric is beneath contempt. Sadly, it seems to illustrate what has become of the state of political discourse in the United States. It’s “our way or the highway.”

Before you accuse me of being a liberal shill who’s taking on the righties of our great country, I want to toss a haymaker at the lefties as well. Listen to the tone of their commentary regarding those on the right. It is equally painful to hear. It suggests that conservatives are out to starve the very young and the very old, take away Granny’s retirement income and send our young men and women off to war with no clear purpose.

There once was a time in this country when conservatives and liberals could argue about ideas without trashing the other side. They were patriots of the first order. They loved their country. They merely argued over the best way to make lives better for all Americans.

***

All of this reminds me of an interview I witnessed on what was then called the “MacNeill-Lehrer News Hour” on PBS.

Jim Lehrer was interviewing two genuine war heroes: liberal Democratic former U.S. Sen. George McGovern and conservative Republican former U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater. They were commenting on the nastiness of the 1988 presidential campaign and wondered aloud to each other why liberals and conservatives no longer got along when they were off the clock.

These two political giants had earned their spurs the hard way. They both were aviators during World War II and had served heroically while fighting tyranny. They were friends and political adversaries. They shared a bond forged by fierce combat.

Goldwater became the father of the modern conservative movement in America, while McGovern became a champion for social justice and along the way became a hero to progressive all across the land.

It was at the end of the interview that Goldwater pitched an idea to McGovern: “Why don’t we run together, as a ticket, George. You and me.” McGovern and Goldwater then laughed out loud at the seeming preposterousness of the idea.

More than a quarter-century later, I wish it could have come to pass.

Davis might be making a race of it?

Paul Burka is a smart pundit.

He writes for Texas Monthly and has been around the state’s political pea patch far longer than I have.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/home-stretch-0

But he might have stars in his eyes when he predicts that Democratic gubernatorial nominee Wendy Davis is going to make a serious run at Republican foe Greg Abbott in the race for governor.

Then again, Burka is a smart guy who knows the lay of the land.

The Davis-Abbott race is tightening some, according to a recent Texas Lyceum poll, which seems to make Burka happy.

I join him in that happiness — if Davis can sustain whatever momentum she might have gained from a strong debate performance against Abbott.

Will she win? Not likely. However, I’ve long wanted a tight race for the top of the ballot if only to keep Texas Republicans somewhat honest and humble. I’ve never been a big fan of one-party dominance, no matter which party is the top dog. Democrats and Republicans have ways of getting cocky, arrogant and too self-assured when governing. They forget that their state — wherever it is — comprises residents of the “other” persuasion.

I’m still hoping Davis can make Abbott work for this victory if that’s where the stars are aligning.

Poll standing aside, I am not yet confident it’s going to be a close race to the finish. I hope I’m wrong.

U.S. not alone in this fight

Barack Obama wants it known that the United States is not fighting the Islamic State one-on-one, nation vs. cult.

The president of the United States said on “60 Minutes” that the country he leads is just a leader in the fight that comprises an international coalition of nations battling a despicable terrorist organization.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/barack-obama-isil-111395.html?hp=l2

I get that.

The harder sell will be to Americans who are likely to perceive that since we’re “leading” the air strikes against ISIL in Syria and Iraq that it, indeed, is our fight to win.

I’m willing to welcome the rest of the world to join us in this war against this clearly defined evil force.

There must be no illusions about how long this conflict will persist. As we’ve learned so painfully, the death of one key terrorist leader such as Osama bin Laden does not by itself necessarily weaken an organization he would lead. Al-Qaeda received a serious blow to its command and control when the SEAL and CIA commando team smoked bin Laden in May 2011. Others have surfaced to take his place.

As the world has learned, ISIL has emerged as a serious world threat.

Thus, the world must fight this menace. That is what the president seeks to do, build a worldwide coalition of nations willing and able to fight ISIL to the death.

It is not our battle to wage on our own.

Time for a declaration of war?

The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to believe it is time for Congress to step up to the plate in this “war on terror.”

As in really step up. As in it should perhaps do its constitutional duty and declare war. Formally. In writing. After a thorough and comprehensive debate.

I have been vacillating on this war vs. counter-terrorism business. Now, though, I am thinking it’s time to take the gloves off with the monsters who claim to be acting on behalf of some religious tenet.

***

The 9/11 attacks signaled a new era in warfare. President Bush committed troops to battle after the terror attacks on New York and Washington. He then took us to war in Iraq by invading a sovereign country after selling us essentially a bill of goods about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and its bogus nuclear weapons development program.

Saddam Hussein was an evil man, but he didn’t pose an imminent threat to the United States. We went to war anyway.

So, we fought that war and then pulled out. Our war in Afghanistan, where we began fighting right after 9/11, is about to wind down.

Now the terrorist group calling itself the Islamic State has decided, in effect, to declare war on the United States.

What should be our response?

It’s time for Congress to get in the game — all the way.

***

Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution lays out the powers of Congress. It says flatly that our legislative branch — and only the legislative branch — can “declare War, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Capture on Land and Water.”

Not since Dec. 8, 1941 has Congress declared war on anyone the way it did on the Empire of Japan after “the date which will live in infamy.” We’ve no shortage of armed combat, though, since the end of World War II. Indeed, we’ve lost more than 100,000 American lives in undeclared wars ever since — with vast majority of those deaths occurring in Korea and Vietnam.

Presidents have gone to Congress to seek permission to fight these conflicts. They’ve also exercised their role as commander in chief when the need has arisen.

This time, as we prosecute this war against terrorists all around the world, it is time for Congress to declare its intention. Does it want to declare war or not?

If we’re going to take this fight to the evil forces around the world, then it ought to be time for the government to commit itself fully to that effort.

Does a war declaration mean necessarily that we commit ground troops to battle? Not at all. It merely states that the United States means business as it seeks to destroy the forces intending to us harm.

Mr. President, get that request written and send it to Capitol Hill. Members of Congress, put up … or shut the hell up.

Rove calls Holder a 'hack'

That’s the spirit, Karl Rove.

When Eric Holder, the attorney general of the United States steps down after nearly six years of service to the country, “Bush’s Brain” Rove calls him a “partisan hack.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/eric-holder-resign-karl-rove-react-111345.html?hp=l11

Therein lies a big part of the problem with today’s political debate. You have differences with an administration and then as the nation’s top lawyer steps down you inflame those differences with a statement that is stunning in its lack of self-awareness.

It’s been part and parcel of the right’s reaction to Holder’s impending departure. An editorial in my local newspaper, the Amarillo Globe-News, spent a good deal of space condemning him for various perceived and alleged errors while on the job. It made no mention of his sincere commitment to voting rights for all Americans.

As for Rove, the godfather of partisan hacks everywhere, it galls me to no end that he would hang that label on someone else.

The big picture at times is just too complete and puts too much context on someone’s public service to suit some of us.