Category Archives: political news

national news, political news, State news

Ready to be VP? Not just yet, probably

7C2A7036_jpg_800x1000_q100

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been saying what presidential nominees — and presumed nominees — always say when asked about who to select as a vice-presidential running mate.

She wants someone who is prepared from Day One to become president. That’s what they all say, right? Sure it is.

That brings us to a young man who’s apparently on Clinton’s short list of candidates. Stand up and take a bow, Julian Castro.

Now he’d better sit back down.

Castro in many ways would make an attractive candidate for vice president. He’s young; he’s “telegenic,” meaning he’s handsome; he’s a Latino American with a compelling life story; he’s a former mayor of a major American city; he hails from Texas.

But he’s got less than two years of experience in the federal government. Castro is serving as housing secretary.

Castro once appealed to me greatly as a potential running mate for whoever would be the Democratic presidential nominee. Not so much now.

As the Texas Tribune reports, he is woefully short on the experience and seasoning needed to assume the presidency if necessity demanded it.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/24/julian-castro-experienced-enough-be-vp/

As the Tribune reported: “Fiercely protective of his legacy, Castro’s supporters chafe at the suggestion he is not qualified to be vice president. They acknowledge the obvious — he has little to no foreign policy experience — but argue he is the living, breathing embodiment of an American Dream that transcends mere lines on a resume.”

Another Texan, John Nance Garner, once said the vice presidency isn’t “worth a bucket of warm p***.” He was one of President Roosevelt’s vice presidents. Let it be said that he earned the nickname of “Cactus Jack.”

Well, the vice presidency has changed dramatically since the era when the VP’s main job was to attend funerals abroad. Many of them dating back to, oh, the days of Walter Mondale (1977-1981), have become major policy partners standing shoulder to shoulder with the president.

Julian Castro is a fine young man. Is he ready just yet to stand in the on-deck circle in the next president’s administration.

Umm. I don’t think so. Not just yet.

business news, International news, national news, political news

Brits please conservatives on this side of The Pond

Brexit

Great Britain has voted to leave the European Union.

The reaction in the former British colony — now known as the United States of America — has been sharply divided.

Conservatives are hailing the decision; progressives are bemoaning it. Donald J. Trump, the upcoming Republican nominee for president, said he’s glad the Brits have voted to end their EU membership; his foe this fall, Hillary Clinton, is decidedly not glad.

Me? Well, I align more with the progressives. I don’t have a particular feeling about the Brits’ decision to bail out of the EU. I’m more concerned with the money I lost today from my retirement account. It’s that “enlightened self-interest” thing that drives me these days.

However, I am alarmed at the tone of the cheers I’m hearing from this side of the Atlantic. There’s an element of fear in it.

They’re hailing the Brits’ escape from the EU because of what they say are concerns about who’s coming into Europe from, say, the Middle East. You might have heard Trump say that the fear of many in this country mirrors the sentiment that was expressed by the “Brexit” vote in Britain.

Therein lies where Trump might seek to gain some political advantage over Clinton.

Fear and loathing.

The economic implications of the British exit from the EU are yet to be determined. Some economists believe this vote might trigger more national movements in other EU countries, that the Brits are the first of many EU members to bolt.

More economic mayhem is sure to follow if that’s the case.

Someone will have to explain to me: Why is that a good thing?

business news, International news, national news, political news

Brits to leave EU … and it will hit us hard

brexit

I might remember this day for a while.

I woke up, turned on my computer to catch up with the overnight news and learned that Great Britain voted to leave the European Union, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced his intention to resign, Wall Street took a dive … and a leading American politician who advocated all this mayhem might benefit politically in the United States.

Holy retirement fund, Batman!

The Brits decided they’d had enough of their economic marriage with the rest of Europe. So they bailed. Cameron staked his political reputation on the vote; it went badly for him and so he’s moving out of 10 Downing Street.

My retirement account is going to shed a lot of value today and perhaps for the next good while. Sheesh!

But here’s the element of this story that might underscore perfectly the weirdness of the American presidential election season.

Republican candidate Donald J. Trump — who at this very moment is touring a golf course resort he owns in Scotland — said he wanted the Brits to leave the EU. His Democratic opponent Hillary Rodham Clinton — along with President Obama — pitched for the Brits to stay in. Trump argued for nationalism in Britain; Clinton and Obama argued for economic stability.

Who might gain from this chaos? Trump.

“They’re angry over borders. They’re angry over people coming into the country and taking over, and nobody even knows who they are,” Trump told reporters after his helicopter landed in Turnberry, Scotland. “They’re angry about many, many things.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/british-voters-just-unleashed-an-economic-and-political-tsunami-224755#ixzz4CVe9JjLF

Why does that matter here? It matters, according to Trump, because he says he’s angry about the same things. How he connects the EU situation with U.S. domestic policy, though, remains a mystery to me.

He also said that Clinton “misread” the mood of the British, which I guess in Trump’s view is another strike against the Democratic nominee-to-be.

It’s going to take some time for all this sink in. The markets will go wild and retirement accounts — just like those my wife and I are hoping to live on while we enjoy our “Golden Years” — will bleed heavily as investors push every panic button they can find.

Then we’ll get to listen to a major-party presidential candidate take “credit” for being on the winning side of a losing argument.

Crazy, man. Simply crazy.

legal news, national news, political news

Tie goes to the GOP with SCOTUS decision

immigration

The U.S. Supreme Court’s non-decision on President Obama’s executive order regarding illegal immigrants just demonstrates the need to get that ninth seat on the court filled.

OK, the president lost this one. The court came down 4 to 4 to uphold a lower court ruling that had set aside the president’s executive order that granted temporary amnesty to around 5 million undocumented immigrants.

His order would have spared millions of families from the fear of deportation, particularly those families with children who were born in the United States and, thus, were American citizens.

Now, their future is a quite a bit more uncertain.

Everyone knows that the court would have ruled 5-4 had Justice Antonin Scalia had been present to decide. He wasn’t. He’s now deceased. The president has nominated a moderate jurist to replace him. Senate Republicans won’t give Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote because they want the next president to make the selection.

So, the tie vote means the Republicans win this round.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said, “I think the Constitution was upheld and this idea that there is a separation of powers — that no one person gets to make up law — was upheld,” Paxton said. “That’s a great thing for America.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/supreme-court-deadlocks-thwarting-obamas-immigration-actions-224720#ixzz4CS8xrwhm

But is it? Is it a great thing for those families that have come here to carve out a new life and for their children who were born here and who have considered themselves Americans for their entire life?

We can’t change the court’s non-decision now that it has acted — although I remain a bit dubious about how a tie vote actually settles anything. It reminds me a little bit of how court cases are decided on “technicalities.”

Obama and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton both say the permanent answer must rest with Congress. Clinton vowed to seek congressional action if she’s elected president this fall.

Do I — as a layman — like how the court “decided” this case? Not in the least.

But you play the hand you’re dealt.

It does show quite brightly, though, why it’s important to fill that ninth seat on the Supreme Court — and why Merrick Garland deserves a hearing and a vote of the Senate.

national news, political news

Sit-in reminds us of the old days

untitled

Democrats are still protesting on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Republicans, meanwhile, have recessed the chamber and have gone home for the next couple of weeks.

What happens now?

I’ve managed to take away a few thoughts from this extraordinary event.

First, we’ve never seen anything like it in Congress, so we have nothing with which to compare it. Democrats decided to put their collective feet down and demand a vote on gun legislation.

They are led by one of the more iconic figures of this country’s civil-rights movement, U.S. Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, who knows a thing or three about sit-ins, civil disobedience and seeking redress of his grievances against the government.

He also knows a thing or three about getting beaten to within an inch of his life by ham-handed cops intent on putting down these protests.

It’s good that nothing like that has happened on the floor of the House. In some government chambers, such a dispute might result in fists and furniture flying. Have you ever seen how, for example, it has gone in Taipei, where the Taiwanese parliament meets?

Also, House Speaker Paul Ryan shouldn’t have shut down the House while the demonstration was occurring. He ordered the cameras turned off, creating a situation where someone on the House floor violated the rules of the body by photographing the protest through ill-gotten means.

It has prompted some in the media to wonder what might be frightening to the speaker, forcing him to seek to silence the debate. Check this out from the Boston Globe:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2016/06/22/paul-ryan-what-are-you-afraid/E5U98g15gZJ21ma03MfzMN/story.html

Lewis and his fellow demonstrators want a vote on whether to enact gun legislation in the wake of the Orlando, Fla., slaughter of 49 people.

They are demanding a vote! Up or down!

House Republicans — failing to follow the lead of their Senate brethren — are refusing to allow a vote.

From where I sit, the seriously outnumbered Democratic congressional minority is making a reasonable request.

Let’s get that vote — and then carry the debate over gun legislation forward!

International news, military news, national news, political news

Another key GOP thinker dumps Trump

brent

Brent Scowcroft isn’t a Republican In Name Only.

He’s been a solid GOP wise man for decades. He also served with distinction in the U.S. Air Force, earning three stars and retiring as a lieutenant general.

Scowcroft today endorsed Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the next president of the United States.

If you place much value in these endorsements, this is a big deal.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/brent-scowcroft-endorses-hillary-clinton-224677

Scowcroft served as national security adviser to two Republican presidents: Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush. He knows war and he understands the value of international alliances.

That’s why he’s backing Clinton over her presumptive Republican rival, Donald J. Trump.

“Secretary Clinton shares my belief that America must remain the world’s indispensable leader,” Scowcroft said in a statement, touting her experience as secretary of state. “She understands that our leadership and engagement beyond our borders makes the world, and therefore the United States, more secure and prosperous. She appreciates that it is essential to maintain our strong military advantage, but that force must only be used as a last resort.”

Trump doesn’t get it.

He wants to build walls. He wants to remove the United States from its most important military/political alliance — the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. He wants to ban Muslims from entering the United States.

That doesn’t make the world safe, let alone “secure and prosperous.”

I can hear some of my Republican/Trump supporter friends now. They’ll blow off Scowcroft’s endorsement as being “irrelevant.” They’ll laugh it off. Scowcroft’s a has-been, they’ll say.

No. He’s a distinguished American patriot.

 

legal news, national news, political news

Oh, and then there’s Merrick Garland

garlandmerrick_031716hj3

Merrick Garland has kind of slipped off the media radar.

You’ll recall this fellow. He is the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals who’s been nominated to a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. President Obama selected him to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

I’ve got an idea for the probable next president of the United States to consider: In case the U.S. Senate continues to obstruct Garland’s appointment, don’t toss his nomination over once you take the oath of office.

I’m talking to you, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Garland’s nomination ran into a buzzsaw when Obama selected him. Senate Republicans, led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, declared within hours of Scalia’s death that no Obama appointment would get confirmed. They wanted to wait for the next president to take office.

They accused the president — and this just slays me — of “playing politics” with the appointment by demanding a Senate hearing and a vote on Garland’s nomination.

Kettle, meet pot.

Garland is an eminently qualified jurist. He’s been left — to borrow a phrase — to “twist in the wind” while the Senate dawdles and blocks the president from fulfilling his constitutional duties.

I’m going to suggest that Clinton will win the presidency when the votes are tallied this fall.

If that’s the case, then the Senate GOP leadership might yell “Uncle!” and have the hearing and vote it should have had all along.

But if not, then it would seem appropriate for the president-elect to carry this nomination forward. By everyone’s reckoning, Garland is a judicial moderate, a thoughtful man who was confirmed to the lower court with overwhelming Republican support.

Sure, the next president has the chance to pick someone of her choosing.

But if the Democratic candidate for the highest office is going to talk about fair and humane treatment of people, it would seem quite fair and humane to move Merrick Garland’s nomination forward for the next Senate to consider.

national news, political news

Bernie’s out … but not entirely

SandersSecurity0011466195770.wdp

Bernie Sanders’ campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is over.

He won’t be nominated at the party convention in Philadelphia. Hillary Rodham Clinton will get the nod and will march off to campaign against Republican nominee, who at this moment appears to be Donald J. Trump.

But …

Why does Sen. Sanders still have all those Secret Service agents shadowing him as he returns to work in the U.S. Senate?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-expensive-reminder-that-sanders-still-hasnt-dropped-out-his-secret-service-detail/2016/06/19/a3f717c6-3555-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html

I get that the Secret Service protection won’t break the federal bank. It does seem a bit “lavish,” though, for him to continue to have the protection.

Sure, he’s entitled to it. President Lyndon Johnson issued an executive order back in 1968 that provides this protection for presidential candidates. He acted in the wake of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy’s murder in Los Angeles on the night he won the California Democratic primary.

Sanders has sought to portray himself as a common man, someone who eschews big-money speaking fees.

But the presence of the Secret Service and all the bells and whistles the protection brings tells a bit of a different story.

According to the Washington Post: “There’s no denying that some of the accoutrements that come with campaigns can be intoxicating,” said Jim Manley, a longtime Democratic operative who is supporting Clinton.

Sanders won’t “suspend” his campaign because he still wants to have a say at the party convention this summer. I understand the reason for his staying in … even though his candidacy has been reduced to symbolism.

Does he still need the Secret Service protection? Really?

I think not.

It’s over, Sen. Sanders.

national news, political news, religious news

Trump crosses yet another line

3 Comments

No-religious-test-of-office-320x1241

I cannot let this one go with just a single post on this blog.

Here I go again. Donald J. Trump has crossed yet another in an endless array of lines one mustn’t cross as he campaigns for president of the United States.

The presumed Republican presidential nominee questioned the faith of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

How in the name of all that is holy does this man have the gall/stones/hubris/guts to question anyone’s religious faith?

This is beyond every possible example of good taste imaginable. Then again, it’s Donald Trump saying it, which makes it OK to those who have glommed on to his candidacy. They, too, question whether Hillary Clinton is an actual Methodist, which she’s been saying for years — decades, actually — was how she was raised.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/284281-trump-questions-clintons-religion

How does this clown profess to know what’s in another person’s heart? How does he get away with this kind of out-and-out pandering?

He spoke today to a gathering of religious conservatives, evangelical Christians who are trying to size this guy up.

Trump took advantage of the forum to question whether Clinton’s faith is authentic.

Unbelievable.

I won’t predict this will be the latest “fatal mistake” of this man’s presidential campaign. He’s made countless other such errors already, only to emerge stronger than before he committed them.

However, so help me, this guy just keeps demonstrating how unfit he is to become president of the United States of America.

national news, political news, religious news

Hillary: Proud of her Christian heritage

clinton trump

Donald J. Trump said the following today to a group of evangelical Christian leaders. Pay attention. It’s a doozy.

“She’s been in the public eye for years and years, and yet there’s no, nothing out there. There’s like nothing out there. It’s going to be an extension of Obama, but it’s going to be worse, because with Obama you had to have your guard up. With Hillary you don’t and it’s going to be worse.”

“Hillary” is Hillary Rodham Clinton, Trump’s foe in this year’s presidential campaign.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-religion_us_57697ac2e4b099a77b6e6710

I want to focus briefly on two critical points here.

One is that Hillary Clinton’s political history is well-known. Her entire life has been exposed to the public. It’s an open book. She has spoken repeatedly about her Methodist upbringing. Her husband, the 42nd president, Bill Clinton, has told us about his Baptist background.

“Nothing out there”? There most certainly is.

The second point is a constitutional one.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution spells it out: “… but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office o public Trust under the United States.”

That tells me that a candidate’s religious faith is irrelevant; it has no bearing on the candidate’s qualifications to serve in a public office.

That’s not the reality, quite clearly. Voters care about these things.

Trump, though, has become the latest incarnation of how the late U.S. Sen. Paul Tsongas once described Bill Clinton as they fought for the 1992 Democratic Party presidential nomination.

He’s become a “pander bear.”