Category Archives: political news

local news, national news, political news

Don’t mess with Texas polling places

screen_shot_russian_consulate_in_houston_jpg_800x1000_q100

A motto designed to call attention to littering in Texas long ago took on new life as a macho mantra: Don’t mess with Texas.

Well, I guess I ought toĀ apply the pervertedĀ definition of that motto here.

Don’t mess with Texas polling officials and places. This warning goes to the Russian government, which has declared its desire to “monitor” the U.S. presidential election that will occur on Nov. 8.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/10/21/texas-russian-official-dont-tread-our-polling-plac/

The state’s top elections official, Secretary of State Carlos Cascos, has declined the Russian request to place observers at polling places in Texas.

Good call, Mr. Secretary.

As the Texas Tribune reported: ā€œPlease note that only persons authorized by law may be inside of a polling location during voting. All other persons are not authorized and would be committing a class C misdemeanor crime by entering,ā€ Cascos wrote last month in a letter to Alexander K. Zakharov, the Russian consul general in Houston. ā€œWe are unable to accommodate your request to visit a polling station.”

Frankly, I consider the Russian request to be the height — or perhaps the depth — of hubris.

Has the Kremlin bought into Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s allegation that theĀ vote-counting will be “rigged” to produce Hillary Rodham Clinton’s election as the next president?

Indeed, U.S. intelligence officials across the board have stated their belief that Russia has been orchestrating the WikiLeaks barrage of e-mails that have sought to damage Clinton’s campaign.

So, they want to take a peek at our electoral process?

Give me a break, man!

The Russians should tend to their own issues. What’s more, imagine the Kremlin’s response if American officials soughtĀ permission to look over the Russians’ shoulders.

media news, national news, political news

Government has no say over media ‘power structure’

aajgybt

Donald J. Trump has made yet another — can you believe it? — dubious and dangerous proposal that threatens to undermine one of the foundations of our free society.

The Republican presidential nominee says he will seek to weaken the media “power structure” if he’s elected president of the United States.

Ponder that for a moment. That’s all it’ll take.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says — among other things — that government must not interfere in the functions of a “free press.”

I interpret that to mean that the government should not exert any influence on how the media conduct themselves. Trump, though, in his on-going — and ridiculous — campaign asserting a widespreadĀ media conspiracy to prevent his election, is declaring his intention to “weaken” the media’s influence.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-vows-to-weaken-us-media-power-structure-if-elected/ar-AAjharJ?li=BBnb7Kz

I do believe thatĀ Trump’s notionĀ would violate the Constitution.

Government shouldn’t throw its massive weight around to control the media’s message, which sounds for all the world to me as being Trump’s intent. He vows to block media companies from merging with other media companies, complaining about the concentration of power.

Is that his real concern, or is he seeking to use theĀ federal government’s immenseĀ power to weaken the media — and to exert control over the message?

national news, political news

What about those menfolk, Rep. Babin?

U.S. Rep. Brian Babin, an East Texas Republican, told Alan Colmes that sometimes “a lady needs to be told” if she’s being nasty.

That was Babin’s way of defending fellow Republican Donald Trump’s comment that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is a “nasty woman.”

I didn’t hear the entire interview. But my question is a simple one:

“Uh, Rep. Babin, do you have the same view of men who get nasty?”

920x920

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/election/article/Sometimes-a-lady-needs-to-be-told-when-she-s-10027627.php

national news, political news

Trump treads on dangerous ground

rs_1024x759-160725193248-1024-michelle-obama-mv-72516

Donald J. Trump is daring to go where no politician should go.

He is now taking aim at the first lady of the United States. Yes, that lady. Michelle Obama, the one who has been skewering the Republican presidential nominee — without ever mentioning his name.

I normally might issue a word of caution to Trump. I won’t do so here … although perhaps you might think I just did.

Since I do not want Trump to win this election, then I might be inclined to say, “You go, Donald!”

Trump criticizes the first lady at considerable peril to his already-seemingly doomed presidential campaign. He’s managed to self-immolate himself with hideous remarks about women, about Hispanics, handicapped individuals, a notable Vietnam War prisoner/hero … you name ’em, Trump has denigrated ’em.

The campaign — thank almighty God in heaven! — is winding down. My sense is that Trump is going out in a blaze of non-glory. Attacking the first lady of the United States, who has emerged as Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s most effective surrogate, is sounding for all the world likeĀ the last gasp of a miserable presidential campaign.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-goes-after-michelle-obama-all-she-wants-to-do-is-campaign/ar-AAjeQsC?li=BBnb7Kz

 

national news, political news

Declaring war on the democratic process

democracy

It’s rare in the extreme to see and hear a candidate for high public office do what Donald J. Trump has done.

The Republican nominee for president of the United States not only is campaigning against his Democratic foe, Hillary Rodham Clinton, he’s also declaring war against the political system that is likely to elect her to the highest office in the land.

As many of us have noted so often during this election year, in any other election cycle, such a preposterous campaign tactic would be an immediate disqualifier.

Not with Trump, the huckster extraordinaire.

This clown in chief has managed to cast aspersions on the very system of electing people to high public office. I do not believe he’ll be able to win the election. However, he has fired up the base of his once-great party to the point that nearly half of his fellow Republicans believe that a Clinton victory will be the result of a “rigged” election.

This is scary stuff, folks.

Some of them are talking about open rebellion if/when Clinton wins. What’s worse is that Trump is fueling that hideous narrative by suggesting he won’t honor the results if/when Clinton gets elected.

The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank writes that Clinton’s strategy now is to not only defeat Trump, but to “humiliate” him by pressing hard in normally GOP states such as Utah, Arizona and, yes, Texas.

Historians are going to think long and hard when they write about the implications of this election. Clinton and Trump both describe it as the mostĀ  consequential election in generations. I agree with that, but perhaps not for the stated reasons they believe.

The consequence quite likely may lie in what it means moving past Election Day — and whether Donald Trump’s declaration of war against democracy itself will result in a further undermining of our electoral system.

national news, political news

Charity event proves candidates’ mutual loathing

You need not look any further to determineĀ  whether the two major-party candidates for president of the United States — Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump — truly detest each other.

They showed it Thursday night at the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner in New York City.

It’s an event aimed at raising money for work done by the Catholic Church. The headliners are the two candidates for president. History holds that they poke good-natured fun at each other and at themselves.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-clinton-trade-biting-jokes-at-al-smith-dinner-after-fiery-debate/ar-AAjcEG4?li=BBnb7Kz

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney did it beautifully four years ago, as did Obama and John McCain four years before that. YouTube is full of hilarious comedic riffs from both events.

Last night was a different story — entirely.

For the first time in anyone’s memory, Trump actually got booed for some of the things he said about Clinton. Did anyone actually think he would exhibit a hint of self-deprecation, that he would turn the tables on himself? You know the answer to that one.

Clinton was little better during her time at the mic. She did manage to jab at herself … but seriously?

There was true loathing on display.

What I believe we have witnessed in this campaign has been a ratcheting up of what’s been called the “politics of personal destruction.”

It’s gotten so bitter, so angry, so vindictive that the major-party nominees for the presidency cannot set aside — even for a couple of hours — their seeming hatred for each other.

The Smith dinner is supposed to demonstrate one of the rare qualities of American political life, about how politicians can set aside their differences if only for an evening. Instead, it showed us just how angry we have become.

It saddens me.

 

 

 

national news, political news

‘Such a nasty woman’

aajcgbc

I guess that’s how you summarize Donald J. Trump’s view of the candidate who’s about to defeat him in one of the most miserable presidential campaigns in most folks’ memory.

“Such a nasty woman,” he said while Hillary Rodham Clinton was explaining her proposed tax policy.

It was a revealing moment in a debate full of them.

Trump had just said that “no one has more respect for women” than he does, eliciting laughter from some in the audience attending the third presidential debate.

Then came the “nasty woman” rejoinder.

Sigh …

Trump said he’ll accept the results of the election “if I win.” Then he took some of that back, saying he would accept the result — no matter who wins — barring any questionable returns.

My strong hunch, though,Ā is that a lot of women heard what he said out loud to the first female major-party presidential nominee and will not like it.

I sense that a landslide may be in the making.

medical news, national news, political news

Abortion enters the presidential debate

Chalkboard - Abortion

Of all the ridiculous assertions Donald J. Trump has made during his time as the Republican presidential nominee, perhaps the most ghoulish came out of his mouth during his final debate with Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

He asserted that Clinton would favor allowing a woman to terminate a pregnancy literally on the eve of giving birth to her child.

Trump sought to label Clinton some who could support a doctor “ripping the baby out” of the womb two or three days before birth.

Clinton’s response was to challenge the manner in which Trump described what occurs when a woman decides to end a pregnancy, referring to it as a scare tactic.

Frankly, IĀ also was horrified at how Trump described it.

I get that abortion is one of those topics no one likes talking about. It lies at the heart of the “most painful decision” a woman has to make, as Clinton answered.

She continued to hold to her view that government should not force a woman to do something that could jeopardize her own health, such as deliver a child.

However, I do not ever recall Clinton asserting anything of the sort that Trump described during his anti-abortion rant.

A discussion on this subject does require, it seems to me, an element of civility. Yes, I know that many people consider abortion to be among the most uncivilized acts that human beings commit.

For the purposes of a political discussion? Let’s dispense with the demagoguery.

national news, political news

There’s class … and then there’s Trump

Donald J. Trump keeps exhibiting a profound lack of class and grace as he stumbles his way toward a losing bid to become president of the United States.

bush-and-clinton

He needs to take a lesson from the gentleman on the right in this picture. That would be President George H. W. Bush. The other fellow in this photo is the man who defeated him in 1992, President Bill Clinton.

It’s a tradition for presidents to leave notes for their successor in the Oval Office. President Bush did so when he vacated the presidency on Jan. 20, 1993.

letter

It’s attached in the link I’ve added to this blog. Take a look at it.

It overflows with the kind of class one should expect in a losing candidate for the presidency. This note also is quite riveting, given that George H.W. Bush wrote it to the man who defeated him in a tough, aggressive and often negative presidential campaign.

What are we getting from the current Republican nominee as this campaign staggers toward the finish line? Bluster and threats.

 

national news, political news

Trump tears at the American democratic fabric

alice_gore

Donald J. Trump’s refusal to agree to accept the results of the election in the event he loses — which now seems more probable than ever — raises historic concerns about where we might be headed once all the ballots are counted.

The Republican presidential nominee would not commit to accepting the outcome while responding to a question from debate moderator Chris Wallace. He’ll “look at it” when the moment comes, Trump said.

Trump is now on the cusp of losing the presidency to Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton. We’ve had a long and well-established — and wisely admired — tradition in this country of losing presidential candidates accepting these results with grace and class.

Peaceful transition of presidential power begins right there.

Trump won’t promise to do that.

Oh, I can hear my friends on the right now griping about the “precedent” set in 2000 when Democratic nominee Al Gore refused to concede the election to Texas Gov. George W. Bush.

The immediate aftermath of that vote count was swathed in tension and controversy. The results from Florida weren’t yet known. That state’s electoral votes would be decisive in determining the next president. Gore conceded, then took it back once it became evident that another authority needed to step in; that would be the U.S. Supreme Court.

Well, the court ruled 5-4 that the Florida ballot recount should stop and that Bush would finish with 537 more votes in that state than Gore. Bush won the state — and was elected president.

What did Gore do? He conceded again — for the final time — and in the process brought some humor into the event by agreeing that “this time” he wouldn’t take it back.

He offered his full support to the new president.

So, let’s get off this idiotic notion that Al Gore did what Trump might do on Election Night.

Donald Trump is hinting that he might not accept the results no matter how wide the margin. In the process, Trump is feeding a dangerous — and demonstrably false — narrative about “rigged” and “phony” election results.