Category Archives: national news

national news, political news

Lynch deserves confirmation

Allow me to state once again my strong support of presidential prerogative in key appointments.

The current president, Barack Obama, has just nominated Loretta Lynch to become the nation’s next attorney general. The U.S. Senate will vote to confirm or reject the appointment. I join Republicans in wanting the next Senate, the one controlled by the GOP, to have a say in this vote.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/loretta-lynch-eric-holder-attorney-general-white-house-112705.html?ml=la

But I always shudder at the prospect of trumped-up reasons by the loyal opposition coming to the fore during these hearings.

They crop up from both sides of the aisle.

The Constitution gives the president the authority to nominate Cabinet officers. It also gives the Senate the power to “advise and consent” to the appointments. I get all of that. I understand fully the “co-equal” aspect of government, which empowers the legislative branch with as much power as the executive.

Now that I’ve laid down those cards, I want to declare that the president is elected by the entire nation. Yes, the Senate — as a body — is elected by the same voter base. But it’s the president’s call on who he wants to serve on the Cabinet.

This president has chosen a highly qualified individual. Lynch is seen by both Democrats and Republicans as a workhorse. She’s fair and dogged in her pursuit of justice.

Now we’re getting some rumblings from the far right wing of the Republican Party that at least two senators want Lynch to state whether she believes a potential executive order from the president on immigration is legal. Well, the president has made no such order, so the demand to know such a thing deals with an extreme hypothetical scenario.

I’ve never backed away from this prerogative issue. I stood behind President George H.W. Bush when he nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court for precisely the same reason I back the current president. He’s elected by Americans who were told what kind of individual would receive these appointments. Thomas was qualified to serve on the High Court when the president selected him, although the American Bar Association’s recommendation was less than sparkling. Still, he was qualified.

I have stood behind President George W. Bush’s appointments of Samuel Alito and John Roberts for all those reasons.

My belief in the Lynch appointment falls in line what I perceive as the president’s prerogative as the chief executive of the federal government.

My sincere hope is that the Senate gives Lynch a thorough but fair hearing.

national news, political news

Lynch for AG; let the new Senate decide

Loretta Lynch by all rights should be sworn in as the nation’s next attorney general.

President Obama made the announcement today nominating the New York U.S. attorney to the post.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/08/politics/attorney-general-nominee-loretta-lynch/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Of course, there are a couple of wrinkles attached to it. One of them is worth supporting, the other is utter nonsense.

Lynch would replace Eric Holder as AG. She’s already drawn the support of one key Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who says Lynch is “qualified.” Well, of course, she’s qualified. She’s been approved overwhelmingly twice by the Senate to U.S. attorney posts and there appears to be little reason to oppose her now as the nation’s next top lawyer.

Here come the wrinkles.

Republicans are insisting the new Senate, which will be run by the GOP, needs to confirm Lynch. That’s the correct call. Lame-duck Democrats who either are retiring or who lost their seats in the mid-term election need not vote on this appointment. Let’s have the new Senate make this call and let us also hope that Republicans who run the upper chamber will give Lynch a “fair hearing,” which the new majority leader, Mitch McConnell, has vowed.

The second wrinkle amounts to a litmus test.

It comes from two tea party Republican senators, Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah, who want Lynch to declare right now whether she believes any potential presidential executive action on immigration is “legal and constitutional.” If she doesn’t tip her hand, does that mean Cruz and Lee will oppose her outright? If she believes the president would be acting legally and constitutionally, does that doom her appointment?

These two men appear to be seeking the “right” answer to the question, which is a litmus test by any definition.

How about examining the scope and breadth of this lawyer’s distinguished career?

By my reckoning, she’s earned her spurs and should be confirmed.

military news, national news

SEALs breaking the code

A truly disgusting development has been brewing since a group of commandos killed Osama bin Laden.

The once-inviolate code that Navy SEALs followed to protect their secrecy and to foster unit cohesion apparently is being broken by publicity-seeking members of that elite fighting force.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-navy-seals-told-to-stop-spilling-secrets/ar-BBcTkbM

They’re blabbing to the media about who fired the shots that killed the world’s most wanted terrorist. Fox News is planning to air a documentary that reveals — supposedly — the shooter who took out bin Laden.

Another former member of the SEAL team has written a book and, yes, there have been disputes over who did what to whom.

This is utterly ridiculous and is an inexcusable breach of faith with the country they serve.

SEAL commander Rear Admiral Brian Losey has issued a strong rebuke of the blabbermouths among his corps of warriors. He issued a letter to the troops in his command.

“‘A critical tenet of our Ethos is ‘I do not advertise the nature of my work, nor seek recognition for my actions,'” Losey and the top enlisted sailor, Force Master Chief Michael Magaraci, wrote in the letter, obtained by AFP on Monday,” according to MSN. com.

MSN.com also reported: “The commander warned in the letter that ‘we will actively seek judicial consequence for members who wilfully violate the law’ by revealing classified information.”

The loose lips that have been flapping since the May 2011 mission that captivated the nation have brought dishonor to those who are revealing what the world really does not need to know.

Bin Laden is still dead. End of story.

national news, political news

Here's how you start a firestorm

Mention the n-word in the context of someone from a political party using against the president of the United States and you’re bound to start major-league hissy fit.

I did that today by posting something that was broadcast on C-SPAN.

Here it is:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/c-span-scrambles-n-word-article-1.2001484?utm_content=bufferfe0c3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=NYDN+Facebook

An idiot from San Diego, Calif., called in on the “Republican line,” and identified himself as a Republican. He then said “Republicans hate that (n-word) Obama.” Steve Scully, the C-SPAN host, cut the caller off immediately in a remarkable display of dispassion.

My tweet asked whether the moron spoke for “other Republicans.”

Then the fire started blazing on my Facebook news feed, where my tweet was posted automatically.

I have many conservative friends, and a few of them are quite active on Facebook. They took a lot of time suggesting that I labeled “all Republicans” as racists. I didn’t do that.

I asked what I believe is a straightforward, fair and legitimate question: Did the C-SPAN caller represent “other Republicans?”

This is what happens when we talk about race in America. We’re supposed to be living in what are calling a post-racial period. I don’t believe that’s the case. The election of Barack Obama as president has shown that racial politics is alive and well.

He’s made race an issue on occasion. When the topic comes up, his foes declare he’s a racist. When the president’s foes argue their point, the president’s allies declare that they are the racists.

And when people such as yours truly ask a simple question about a moronic caller who’s use of the n-word was broadcast on a national cable TV news program, then we see that race remains at or near the top of many Americans’ conscience.

I believe I’ll refrain from commenting any further on racial politics for the time being.

I’m a bit worn out from the battering I took today.

business news, national news, political news

Jobs report due; get ready for unfounded griping

The Labor Department reported today that claims for unemployment benefits fell to a 14-year low.

This comes on the eve of its monthly jobs report, due out Friday.

So, what will happen? Usually, when the jobless claims dip as they did this week, it means a glowing jobs report is sure to follow.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-jobless-claims-fall-to-14-year-low/ar-BBdiTRM

I’m not going to predict any numbers here, because I have no clue what they’ll be. I’m thinking, though, the job growth in the private sector will match the recent trend, which has been very good.

So, how will the Obama administration’s critics react to this latest bit of sparkling economic news?

They’ll say, “Oh well, the Christmas buying season is almost here and retailers are hiring temporary help to assist with the boost in business.” They’ll pooh-pooh the numbers as a seasonal aberration. Big deal. Where’s the beef? The economy is still in dire straits. Didn’t the mid-term elections just prove that Americans are uneasy about the economy and the direction the country is heading?

This goes to show what politics does to reality.

The reality is that the economy has come back. It’s getting even stronger.

I heard an oil-and-gas analyst today suggest that lower fuel prices are going to give consumers more disposable income to spend at shopping malls across the country, suggesting a booming holiday shopping season that commences with Black Friday the day after Thanksgiving.

Oh, but that’s all smoke and mirrors, the critics will say.

Fiddlesticks.

 

 

national news, political news

Here's a way to demonstrate diversity

New members of Congress proclaim a “new day” has dawned on Capitol Hill. You hear it after every election.

I get their enthusiasm and their interest in stirring the pot.

Here, though, is the surest way to actually prove a new day has arrived at the seat of federal government power.

The Congressional Black Caucus needs to invite two new members of Congress to its membership: U.S. Rep.-elect Mia Love of Utah and U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina.

They are Republicans.

Traditionally, the CBC has been all-Democrat organization. It goes back to its founding in 1969. The Senate at the time had a black member, Edward Brooke, R-Mass., who didn’t join.

Since then, its membership has comprised Democrats only.

I see nothing in the title of the organization that says its members must be from one party. The very term “Congressional Black Caucus” states quite clearly that all African-Americans who take the oath to serve in Congress are eligible to join.

So, with a brand new African-American Republican from Utah coming on board in January, and with another freshly elected Republican senator from South Carolina (Scott had been appointed to the seat by Gov. Nikki Haley) among its members, the CBC can demonstrate its belief in ideological diversity.

No political organization necessarily needs to be a mere echo chamber, with members parroting each others’ point of view. All political organization need to hear varying points of view. It’s good for the soul and the mind.

The Values Voter Summit earlier this year is an example of an organization that shuts out liberals because, by golly, liberals just don’t appreciate good ol’ American values the way conservatives do. That, of course, is utter horse manure.

Let’s turn this notion on its ear. The CBC is a traditionally progressive organization. How about throwing tradition out the window and insist that two new members of Congress — both Republicans and both clearly conservative — join the CBC and infuse that caucus with some fresh perspective?

You want diversity? There you would have it.

 

national news, political news

The sun still rose in the morning

Those on the left are crying the blues.

Their “friends” on the right are jumping with joy.

Lefties are mourning the loss of the U.S. Senate, which after Tuesday night’s mid-term election flipped from Democratic to Republican control come Tuesday.

Righties are utterly gleeful that Sen. Harry Reid will turn over his majority leader gavel — figuratively — to Sen. Mitch McConnell.

My take?

Well, the sun rose the next morning like it always does. President Obama said he wants to “work with” Republicans in both congressional houses. McConnell said he intends to work with the president whenever it’s possible. Obama said he’d like to enjoy a glass of Kentucky bourbon with ol’ Mitch; no word yet on whether McConnell is going to invite the president over for a belt.

We’re going to learn in due course just how well the two sides will get along. I am not worried about things “getting worse” in Washington. From my standpoint, and looking at it through my own admittedly biased prism, it couldn’t get much worse than it’s been since Barack Obama took office in January 2009.

Don’t misunderstand. I continue to believe the country is in much better shape today than it was when he took over. The pasting Democrats took on Tuesday is because their foes on the right outshouted them over the course of the Obama administration. They have persuaded a large number of Americans that the economy remains in dire peril and that the federal government is doing a lousy job of protecting them against foreign enemies.

It’s all baloney.

The country will rock along. The two sides will continue to fight, squabble, bitch at each other — just as it’s always been done.

I’m trying to look at the big picture. We’ve done all right for the past two-plus centuries.

I’ll accept the election results for what they are. Then I’ll just need to get ready for the next election cycle, which has just begun.

 

national news, political news

GOP readies for internal fight

One of the many forms of conventional wisdom in the wake of the 2014 mid-term election goes something like this: Republicans, flush with victory at taking over the Senate and expanding their hold in the House, now face a fight between the tea party extremists and the mainstream wing of their party.

Let’s go with that one for a moment, maybe two.

I relish the thought, to be brutally candid.

The likely Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, may be looking over his shoulder at one of the tea party upstarts within his Republican caucus, a fellow named Ted Cruz of Texas.

Cruz wants to lead the party to the extreme right. McConnell is more of a dealmaker, someone who’s been known to actually seek advice and counsel from his old friend and former colleague, Vice President Joe Biden. Cruz, who’s still green to the ways of Washington, wants to shake the place up, seeking to govern in a scorched-Earth kind of way. He wouldn’t mind shutting down the government again if the right issue arises. McConnell won’t have any of that.

So, will the battle commence soon after the next Congress takes over in 2015.

Lessons unlearned doom those who ignore them.

Republicans have been through this kind of intraparty strife before. In 1964, conservatives took control of the GOP after fighting with the establishment. The party nominated Sen. Barry Goldwater as its presidential candidate and then Goldwater got thumped like a drum by President Lyndon Johnson.

They did it again in 1976, with conservative former California Gov. Ronald Reagan challenging President Ford for his party’s nomination. Ford beat back the challenge, but then lost his bid for election to Jimmy Carter.

To be fair, Democrats have fallen victim to the same kind of political cannibalism.

In 1968 and again in 1972, Democrats fought with each over how, or whether, to end the Vietnam War. Sens. Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy challenged LBJ for the nomination in 1968. Johnson dropped out of the race, RFK was assassinated, McCarthy soldiered on to the convention, which erupted in violence and Democrats then nominated Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who then went on to lose to GOP nominee Richard Nixon.

Four years later, the Democratic insurgents nominated Sen. George McGovern after fighting with the party “hawks.” McGovern then lost to President Nixon in a landslide.

So, what’s the lesson?

History has shown — and it goes back a lot farther than just 1964 — that intraparty squabbles quite often don’t make for a stronger party, but a weaker one.

Bring it on, Republicans!

 

 

medical news, national news, political news

Two decades since Ronald Reagan said 'good bye'

This video is worth sharing today for a couple of reasons.

President Ronald Reagan spoke in his final major political appearance on Aug. 17, 1992 at the Republican National Convention in Houston’s Astrodome. I had the high honor to hear it while sitting in the press gallery.

Now, was I a huge fan of the former president? No. I never voted for him. But two decades-plus since this speech, I continue to marvel at how disarming he could be while calling down his political foes. He did so without the overt rancor we hear so much of today.

It’s instructive to listen to how he is able to make his points with strength and conviction, but without the open hostility his political heirs seems to delight in using — even while they invoke his name, as if it somehow legitimizes their vitriol.

The second reason I want to share this video is because precisely 20 years ago today President Reagan said farewell to a nation that elected him twice to the presidency. He did so in an open letter in which he proclaimed he had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease, a terminal brain disorder that robs people of their cognitive skill.

He would live another decade before dying of the disease. His letter is as poignant as any I’ve ever read. Its eloquence is simple but profound.

It touched me deeply when I read it for the first time, as my own family struggled with saying goodbye to one of our loved ones, my mother, who died a decade earlier of this killer disease.

The letters is attached here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/reagan-alzheimers/

My affection for Ronald Reagan has nothing to do with his policies. It does have to do with the courage he showed in telling the world of his affliction and, yes, the good humor he exhibited as he took his final bow on the national political stage.

I wish we had more of both — courage and self-deprecating humor — in today’s political world.

 

national news, political news

GOP scores sweep; now let's govern … actually

The deed is done.

Republicans got their “wave” to sweep them into control of the Senate, with an eight-, maybe nine-seat pickup in the U.S. Senate. What’s more, they picked up a dozen more seats in the House to cement control of that body.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-control-at-stake-in-todays-midterm-elections/2014/11/04/e882353e-642c-11e4-bb14-4cfea1e742d5_story.html

The only undecided race will be in Louisiana, which is going to a runoff. Democratic U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu appears to be in trouble there. Big surprise, huh?

What happens now?

Despite all the good economic news, there appears to be rampant discontent out there with a Democratic administration and its friends in Congress. So the voters spoke, tossing out Democratic incumbents and turning seats over where Democrats had retired.

Republicans say they want to work with the president where possible. I’m not yet ready to swill that drink.

Senate Majority Leader-in-waiting Mitch McConnell had declared his primary goal in 2009 was to make Barack Obama a one-term president. It didn’t work out that way. So now he wants to actually govern — he says.

We’ve got this immigration thing hanging over the Congress; that oil pipeline known as “Keystone” needs to be decided; the president has an attorney general appointment to make; and, oh yeah, the Affordable Care Act still is on the table, even though it’s working and insuring Americans.

How is Congress going to get past all those differences? And how is the White House going to reconcile itself with the change in power in the upper legislative chamber?

My friends on the right are crowing this morning that Democrat Harry Reid no longer will run the Senate. They now believe Hillary Clinton’s presidential “inevitability” in 2016 has been damaged by this shifting power base. They think the president has been made irrelevant as he finishes out his tenure in the White House.

I shall now remind my right-leaning friends of something critical.

The 2016 political roadmap looks a bit different than the 2014 map. Democrats will be positioned to take over some key Republican Senate seats in a presidential election year, which historically bodes quite well for Democrats.

This was the Republicans’ year and their time. Nice going, folks.

It’s time now to actually govern and to show that we can actually keep moving this country forward — which it has been doing for the past six years.