Category Archives: national news

Techno-terrorists elevate threat to U.S., world

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson issues a stern warning.

International terrorists have become cyber-savvy and are posing a uniquely new threat to the world.

Are we on guard against these guys? And what in the world do we do to stop them?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-security-chief-warns-of-new-phase-in-terror-threat/ar-BBjy1fG

“We’re very definitely in a new environment, because of ISIL’s (IS’s) effective use of social media, the Internet, which has the ability to reach into the homeland and possibly inspire others,” Johnson said in a TV interview this morning.

The Islamic State reportedly is recruiting heavily through the Internet. It’s also posing serious threats to cyber infrastructure.

It’s no longer just madmen with bombs strapped their chests who pose threats to human life. This global war has turned into a battle of wits.

This new threat brings to mind something that congressional leaders sought to bring to national attention. I keep waiting to hear from the Texas Panhandle’s congressman, Republican Mac Thornberry, on how we’re defending ourselves against cyber warriors.

House Speaker John Boehner tasked Thornberry some years ago to lead a congressional committee that would devise strategies to fight Internet hackers and other enemies who would seek to do serious damage to our cyber infrastructure.

When these discussions bring the news to the front pages and gobble up air times on our news networks, I always seem to miss hearing from Rep. Thornberry, who I understand to be an expert on these issues.

I trust he’s working behind the scenes. He’s also become chairman of the House Armed Services panel, which is a huge responsibility all by itself.

Still, our Homeland Security secretary no doubt can use all the help he can muster in protecting “the homeland” against cyber attacks.

Let’s hope this fight transcends the political differences that seem to divide the White House and Capitol Hill … even when it involves national security.

 

Intraparty squabble good for political soul

President Obama says Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., “is wrong” to oppose him on a free trade proposal with a dozen Asian countries.

OK. So, the Democrats are now squabbling.

Meanwhile, Republican candidates for president are taking pot shots at each other over a wide range of issues, with tax policy and immigration leading the way.

There. Now the Republicans are fighting.

Is this bad? Do these intraparty squabbles harm our form of government?

Not in the least.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/why-obama-is-happy-to-fight-elizabeth-warren-on-118537612596.html

So far it’s been mostly a GOP fight. Democrats have been fairly quiet in assessing each other.

Until now.

Warren has emerged as the far left’s champion — oh, maybe co-champ, along with independent socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, who ‘s running for president as a Democrat. A lot of lefties want Warren to run. She’s said everything but the categorical refusal to run for president in 2016. She keeps couching her intentions in the present tense — “I am not running” or “I have no interest” in running. None of those responses eliminates the possibility of her changing her mind.

She disagrees with a free trade deal with Asian nations. The president stands by his insistence that freer trade with our Pacific partners is a good deal for the country.

So, let’s continue to debate this issue.

It strengths our political process to have these fights within our respective major parties.

It’s going to test the mettle of the parties’ nominees when they emerge from their party fracases.

And, yes, that includes you, too, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

Listen to one of your own, GOP, on 'Obamacare'

Brent Budowsky is singing Karl Rove’s praises.

And why not? Budowsky is an economist of some repute and is a former aide to the late, great U.S. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, D-Texas. He thinks Rove — aka “Bush’s Brain” — is spot on in telling his fellow Republicans to give their futile effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

It’s a loser. Any remote chance the GOP has of tossing the ACA aside is going to cost them dearly, especially when — in Budowsky’s eyes — the first person dies because he or she is denied affordable health insurance because Republicans have won their fight to repeal the ACA.

Karl Rove surrenders to ObamaCare

And why should the GOP high command listen to Rove?

Easy. The man’s a brilliant political strategist.

He helped engineer George W. Bush’s winning campaigns for Texas governor (in 1994) and two successful races for the presidency (in 2000 and 2004). The governor’s race should have been in the bag for the incumbent, the late Democrat Ann Richards. Rove came up with a strategy that held Bush to a tightly scripted line of specific issues and reforms he would enact if elected governor. He never veered off the script as he went on to defeat Richards.

The man knows a winning political cause and a losing cause as well as anyone.

As Budowsky writes in The Hill: “Rove’s surrender to ObamaCare, advising Republicans against pretending they would repeal ObamaCare, is politically very wise. Rove’s fear about what happens to Republicans if the court does overturn ObamaCare provisions and the world witnesses horror stories of Americans being hurt because of Republican anti-ObamaCare politics — without any Republican policy to undo the damage — is politically brilliant.

“Imagine daily stories on television about very ill Americans being stripped of healthcare, about children losing their insurance because they would no longer be covered by their parent’s policies, about Americans with preexisting conditions being thrown to the insurance wolves without ObamaCare, and about huge insurance premium increases that would punish many millions of Americans because of the Republican war against ObamaCare.”

Budowsky also predicts that the Supreme Court is going to uphold the ACA when it rules on its constitutionality before the end of the court’s current term.

Pay attention. Karl Rove might not be every American’s favorite operative/pundit/talking head. Howeve, he is wise to counsel his fellow Republicans to give up a fight they’re certain to lose.

 

Is this the same as yelling 'fire!'?

It’s been said many times about the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment that free speech is protected except when you yell “fire!” in a crowded movie theater.

Therefore, I’m wondering if it’s fair to ask if staging an event that you know could provoke a violent reaction from someone offended by is the same as yelling “fire!”

http://www.chron.com/news/texas/article/Activist-blogger-says-9-11-inspired-criticism-of-6249483.php

Pamela Geller told The Associated Press she has no regrets over playing host to a contest to draw the Muslim prophet Muhammad in Garland, near Dallas. The event resulted in gunfire by two Muslims who then were shot to death by a Garland police officer.

Free-speech advocates — and I’m one of them, to be sure — suggest that Geller was exercising her right of free speech as a leader of the American Freedom Defense Initiative. She stands by her constitutional right. Her organization is virulently anti-Muslim. The Southern Poverty Law Center calls it a hate group.

The Constitution’s right of free political expression is rock-solid. Everyone knows that.

However, is it responsible to engage in free speech when you can expect with some reasonable certainty that it’s going to result in violence?

This is a troubling question for me. I don’t have the answer. I’m looking for help.

I’m all ears.

Interview gives insight into a great teacher

The Texas Tribune says it’s all right to republish articles it produces, as long as you say it’s from the Texas Tribune and that you’re republishing it.

So there. I’ve just declared both things.

The link attached to this very brief post is of an interview the Tribune did with the National Teacher of the Year, Amarillo’s Shanna Peeples.

It gives you some tremendous insight into just why this individual was chosen among more than 300,000 Texas educators and 3 million educators nationally as being teacher of the year for 2015.

Take a few minutes to read the interview. It’s worth your time.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/05/08/shanna-peeples-tt-interview/#

 

Let's not quibble over use of 'thug'

Allow me this request.

How about stopping the quibbling and quarreling over the use of the term “thugs” to describe individuals who loot, pillage, burn and otherwise destroy other people’s property — not to mention injure or kill others — while rioting?

Dennis Prager, writing for RealClearPolitics.com, seems to think liberals have gotten thin-skinned about using the term. Liberals, according to Prager, seem to think it connotes someone’s race.

I consider myself a liberal thinker. I know other liberals, friends of mine. I’m unafraid to use the term. I mean nothing other than to describe the activity of the individual doing the misdeed. A thug is a thug. Period.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/05/why_the_left_wont_call_rioters_thugs_126496.html

It doesn’t. Honest. The term covers many aspects of misbehavior. If you mug someone on the street, you’re a thug. If you like to fight others just to prove your manhood, you’re a thug. When I was growing up, if you “TP’d” someone’s house with toilet paper, you were a thug; these days, such activity is considered a compliment if you’re a teenager.

This notion that the rioters who destroyed businesses in Baltimore and other communities of late were labeled “thugs” because of their race is ridiculous on its face.

A team wins the World Series or the Super Bowl or the NBA championship. Fans who live in the city of the winning team are so delirious they storm the streets, turn over cars, light them on fire. Last time I witnessed one of these events on TV, I noticed a lot of white folks among them. They’re thugs, too.

Thuggish behavior knows no racial boundary.

 

A word or two about a favorite teacher

There’s been a lot of talk lately about teachers.

Amarillo is home to the National Teacher of the Year, Shanna Peeples, who teaches English at Palo Duro High School. She makes her community proud. Indeed, her life likely has changed forever … and for the better.

Others have posted messages on social media about their favorite teacher.

I didn’t particularly enjoy school as a kid. I wasn’t a very good student. It’s hard now, so many decades later, to remember precisely why I struggled so much.

I won’t lay any blame on the teachers from whom I learned about readin’, writin’ and ‘rithmatic.

However, one teacher does stand out in my early years. He was my first male teacher at Harvey W. Scott Elementary School in Portland, Ore. Carl Hendrickson taught sixth-graders.

What do I remember about him? The first memory is that he was damn funny. He made sitting in a classroom enjoyable. He joked with the students, which I don’t recall any of my previous teachers at Harvey Scott school doing.

He had nicknames for his students. What did he call me? Well, he had a variation of my last name that he hung on me. He called me “Ka-knuckles.” He used the name when he called on me to speak to the class; he said it to me privately as he counseled me on my school work.

I took no offense to the name. I kind of considered it a badge of honor to have a goofy name attached to me by a teacher who, if memory serves, was quite popular with all the students who learned from him.

I left Harvey W. Scott school in the spring of 1962 when my parents moved us to a new school district in the suburbs. I was in the seventh grade and I made new friends and got accustomed to a new school system. The Parkrose School District had a junior high school system for seventh-, eighth- and ninth-graders and we got to move from class to class, just like the big kids do in high school.

In 1983, after I had started my journalism career, I got a phone call from my fifth-grade shop teacher, John Eide, who wanted me to speak to students at a career day at Harvey W. School Elementary School. I accepted the invitation, got reacquainted with Mr. Eide. We had lunch in the school cafeteria and I discovered that the lunch room smelled exactly the way I remembered it as a boy. I asked Mr. Eide if aany of the teachers who taught me back in the old days were still around.

Why yes, he said. He mentioned Mr. Hendrickson. I went to his classroom and by golly, there he was. His hair had turned snow white. He was near retirement, as I recall. We caught up on where our lives had taken us the past two decades.

And he called me Ka-knuckles.

Free speech does have its limits

Garland police officers responded as they should have when two gunmen opened fire at a “contest” to draw the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

They shot the men dead.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2015/05/be-thankful-innocent-people-didnt-die-but-dont-tell-me-the-garland-conference-was-about-free-speech.html/

Now the debate has ensued. Were the provocateurs — the folks who sponsored a contest they knew would provoke that kind of response from Muslims — merely exercising their rights of “free speech”?

My answer? No.

They knew that illustrating the prophet is offensive to Muslims. Indeed, the group that sponsored the “contest,” an outfit called the American Freedom Defense Initiative, has been identified as an extremist anti-Muslim group.

So, do you think these folks knew what to expect when they staged this event? My guess is that they knew.

The shooters were described as Islamists. One of them, Elton Simpson, allegedly wrote a good-bye note to his friends and family before he started shooting. He knew he’d meet his end in Garland.

As Jim Mitchell of the Dallas Morning News writes in his blog: “Islamic extremism is a global curse. Cartoon contests in Garland aren’t going make a bit of difference in combating it. But insensitive contests like the one yesterday will provoke lone wolves and insult an entire religion. And I ask, to what purpose? This wasn’t discourse; it was a opportunity to draw offensive cartoons for the sake of drawing offensive cartoons. My idea of defensible free expression has a higher and more noble purpose.”

It’s widely established and known around the world that Muslims don’t react well when Muhammad is depicted in cartoons or illustrated simply for the sake of producing a worldly image. Do non-Muslims agree with this religious tenet? No. But it’s not non-Muslims’ place to judge how those who worship a certain religion are supposed to believe.

We should be grateful that the FBI had tipped off the Garland Police Department.

Its officers responded correctly.

Where are the demonstrations for the cops?

Normally, I disagree with the New York Post’s editorial policy.

Not this time.

The Post has asked a legitimate question: Why won’t there be demonstrations supporting a young New York City police officer who has been put into a medically induced coma after being shot while on duty?

http://nypost.com/2015/05/03/another-nypd-officer-shot-and-no-one-will-march-to-protest/

An ex-con with a history of violent behavior is in custody for the shooting.

Since we’ve been focusing lately on the incidents involving white officers harming black suspects, it’s fair to note that the suspect in this incident is black and the officer is white.

Officer Brian Moore is the fifth New York City officer to be shot in the line of duty since December. The Post takes appropriate note of the risk that these officers face every single day they report for duty. Moore clings to life now because of someone’s callous disregard for civil order.

NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has expressed his support for Moore’s family and vows to be there for them as they pray for the young officer. He took some undeserved criticism by the police union in the wake of earlier tragedies involving officers and suspects in their custody; officers turned their backs on the mayor as he spoke at the funerals of two officers ambushed in Brooklyn. That should not have happened.

Brian Moore devotes his life to protecting others.

He and the other officers, as the Post states, “need the full, unqualified support of every New Yorker. Heaven knows they’ve earned it.”

 

Welcome aboard, Carly Fiorina

The Republican Party’s presidential field has grown by one — or maybe it’s two — candidate.

Carly Fiorina is running for president next year. She is citing her business experience as the reason for electing her.

She knows the ins and outs of the economy, she says.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republican-former-ceo-fiorina-enters-white-house-race/ar-BBj9cdO

I’m your woman, Fiorina notes.

Is she? Well, she served as CEO of Hewlett-Packard, the giant techno-firm. Then the company got into some financial trouble. It merged with Compaq and the HP board decided Fiorina was leading the company in the wrong direction, or something like that.

She was forced to resign.

Fiorina, though, portrays her tenure at HP as a success, although it’s a bit of a reach to come to that conclusion. The company jettisoned a lot of jobs. Still, the says the company’s stock value grew during her time in the HP driver’s seat.

Her political career? She was a key adviser to Sen. John McCain in 2008 during the GOP nominee’s losing bid for the presidency. Fiorina then ran for the U.S. Senate in 2010 … and lost that race too.

Oh, but she says she’s not a “professional politician.” Actually, she is, by virtue of her running now for elective office for the second time in five years. Hey, I’m not quibbling, just stating what I understand to be the definition of the term “politician.”

Fiorina’s personal story is gripping. She’s a cancer survivor and she has endured the tragedy of losing a stepdaughter to drug abuse. Those events surely have steeled her for the tough campaign that awaits.

I heard this morning that Ben Carson is about to join the Republican field, so he’s going to take a bit of the attention away from Fiorina, whose poll numbers are pretty low as it is.

I’m now going to wait for her Republican debate opponents to ask her to explain how her checkered business record commends her for the job of running a multitrillion-dollar enterprise called The Federal Government.