Category Archives: political news

legal news, national news, political news

Are all rights absolute?

barack

Barack Obama made a number of interesting points today as he laid out his strategy to use his executive authority to reduce gun violence.

One of them dealt with the First Amendment and whether we should treat it as an absolute right. Yes, the president said, we have the right of free speech, but we cannot yell “fire!” in a crowded theater.

We also have the right to religious freedom, but the law prohibits human sacrifice.

The Second Amendment is seen by many in this country as being an absolute right. The men who wrote the constitutional amendment meant that all Americans had the right to “keep and bear arms.”

Sure thing. I, too, have read the amendment and I get it.

I keep asking, though: Aren’t there measures that we can take that regulate the sale of these weapons while protecting the integrity of the Second Amendment? Gun-owner-rights groups — namely the National Rifle Association — keep insisting that the two principles are mutually exclusive. You can’t regulate firearms in any manner without watering down the Second Amendment, they say.

I guess I’ll just have to disagree with such a notion.

President Obama isn’t seeking to “legislate” through executive order, as his critics suggest he’s seeking to do. He has a team of constitutional lawyers who are advising him on what he can do legally. He wants to make it tougher for criminals or mentally disturbed individuals to put their hands on firearms and said today he has no intention of stripping law-abiding Americans of their constitutional right to own a gun.

Doesn’t that goal protect the amendment while trying to make the nation safer from bad guys with guns?

 

national news, political news

Law-abiding gun owners can relax; your guns are safe

gun over american flag

I’m trying to wrap my mind around this notion.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right of Americans to “keep and bear arms.” It doesn’t say so explicitly, but my strong hunch is that the men who wrote that amendment intended for it to apply to law-abiding Americans.

Now we hear the president of the United States suggesting that we need to tighten laws in an effort to ensure greater gun safety.

He said clearly and unequivocally: We aren’t going to confiscate the guns of law-abiding citizens who have guns for the right reasons . . . to hunt or to shoot at targets.

The target — if you’ll pardon the intentional pun — are the criminals who are able to purchase guns through loopholes in current state and federal law.

Thus, President Obama has acted.

Measures outlined.

I’m certain I heard him say he believes in the Second Amendment. He noted that it’s written “on paper.” It’s on the record. His support of the amendment will stand forever.

He noted quite correctly that we register our cars. Why can’t we register our guns? he asked. If the law-abiding folks want to own guns, they are able to do so. No problem. No issue here.

Obama said he wants those who sell guns to go through extended background checks. He wants to hire more agents for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. He wants Congress to authorize more money for mental health care.

Does any of that suggest that the president is going to dispatch storm troopers across the land to take away the guns of those who own them, who use them properly, who want to defend themselves against those who would do them harm?

I do not believe that will happen.

Ever.

 

local news, media news, political news

Recognition for ‘Headliner’ well-earned

millennials

People say it all the time.

They don’t do things for the recognition. They have higher, loftier goals than that. It’s all fine to be honored for your work, but that’s not what it’s all about, they say.

Sure thing. Truth be told, though, we all like to be patted on the back for a job well done.

To that end, a young Amarillo woman has received a well-placed honor by the Amarillo Globe-News. Meghan Riddlespurger is a Globe-News Headliner of the Year.

She made headlines by helping spearhead a movement of fellow young Amarillo residents to get involved in a municipal election. The Amarillo Millennial Movement — named to honor those from the so-called “millennial generation” — was created to campaign in favor of a multipurpose event venue that was decided in a citywide election this past November.

Riddlespurger stepped up. It wasn’t always an easy path to notoriety. She became the target of some criticism from those who opposed the MPEV. Some of the criticism was angry to the point of being mean and cruel.

But the young woman stayed the course.

It’s not yet known whether the AMM will have staying power. Nor is it known whether the effort to energize young voters will gather even more steam. Such endeavors often need a specific goal to craft strategies and tactics to meet that goal.

It’s my hope, though, that AMM’s efforts will continue.

Many of us have long lamented a couple of sad realities about municipal elections in this city.

One is that the overall turnouts for these elections are pitiful in the extreme. The MPEV referendum produced a greater than normal turnout, but let’s face it: 20-plus percent voter participation still isn’t great.

The other is that Amarillo has suffered a “brain drain” among young residents, who graduate from high school, then head off to college somewhere far away, get their degree and then come home back only to see Mom, Dad, their siblings and a few of their best friends. They leave the city behind while they pursue their dreams elsewhere.

Riddlespurger’s effort seeks to reverse that trend. It seeks to keep young people at home to raise their own families and to build a better community.

It’s a noble effort.

I’m glad to see the recognition come her way.

Well done — and well-earned — Meghan.

Keep the faith.

 

 

 

legal news, national news, political news

Yes, impeachment was about sex

bumpers

Now that Donald Trump has dredged up the Bill Clinton impeachment travesty, it’s good to take a brief moment to remember someone who arguably had the best sound bite of all regarding that tawdry political episode.

Dale Bumpers was a former governor and U.S. senator from Arkansas, President Clinton’s home state. Bumpers died this week at the age of 90.

He once described himself as the “best lawyer in a one-lawyer town.” His self-deprecating wit would be welcome today in an era when too many politicians take themselves as seriously — if not more so — than their public service calling.

Well, it was Bumpers who offered up a fascinating quote regarding the president’s impeachment. You’ll remember that special counsel Kenneth Starr started looking at a real estate deal involving President and Mrs. Clinton. He expanded his probe to include a wide range of issues.

Lo and behold, he discovered that the president had improper relationship with a White House intern. A federal grand jury questioned Clinton about it; the president was less than truthful. Thus, came the ostensible grounds for impeachment.

Bumpers, though, told the truth about it.

“When they say this impeachment isn’t about sex,” Bumpers said, “it’s about sex.”

He was right.

The impeachment itself turned out to be a political travesty of the first order.

The House did its job by impeaching the president. The Senate — which included Bumpers — did its job as well by acquitting him.

 

national news, political news

The 2016 GOP presidential nominee will be . . .

Pelosi-Ryan-jpg

. . .  Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.

OK, I didn’t just make that up. I read about such a scenario in Roll Call, which has put together an analysis that makes a Ryan nomination a distinct possibility.

Ryan had to be dragged kicking and screaming — or so he would have us believe — into the race for House speaker after John Boehner quit abruptly this past autumn. Boehner had grown weary of fighting with the TEA Party insurgents within his House GOP caucus. So, he quit the top job and quit his congressional seat, too.

Ryan emerged as the speaker after laying down some rules for how he wanted to become the Man of the House. He stipulated that he wanted every Republican to want him to take the job.

So, how does this guy become the 2016 nominee?

Roll Call thinks the Republicans might get a brokered convention in Cleveland next summer. None of the candidates still running will have enough delegates to secure the nomination outright. A floor fight will ensue. Someone will come up with the idea that they need a unifying candidate.

Enter . . . Paul Ryan.

There’s one way to look at this: Ryan at one time wanted to be president. He was, after all, the 2012 GOP vice-presidential nominee on the ticket led by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. I’m going to presume that Ryan agreed that he could serve as president if by chance Romney got elected and something were to happen that would require Ryan to step into the top job.

It’s not beyond reason, thus, to believe Ryan still harbors latent presidential aspirations. Right? Right.

But apart from how Republican convention delegates settle this madhouse contest this summer, the very idea of a political convention actually being tossed into pandemonium intrigues the daylights out of me.

The closest a major-party nominating convention came to that level that I can remember was in 1976, when former California Gov. Ronald Reagan mounted a challenge to President Ford’s expected GOP nomination. The president prevailed, but only after some serious dickering on the convention floor.

Will this year’s Republican convention become the circus that the parties used to experience?

I hope so. It’s great political theater.

local news, national news, political news

Turn the former president loose

Close view of a collection of VOTE badges. 3D render with HDRI lighting and raytraced textures.

Bill Clinton has made his 2016 campaign debut on behalf of his wife.

The reports are that Donald Trump is casting a large shadow over the former president’s initial appearance. Never mind. It will not diminish President Clinton’s drawing power.

The ex-Democratic president is going to start stumping for his wife, the presumptive Democratic frontrunner. Take this to the bank: He’s going to be — to borrow a term from Trump — a “huuuuuge” asset.

How do I know this?

Well, let’s flash back to 2008. Hillary Clinton was in the midst of a heated primary campaign against a fellow U.S. senator, Barack H. Obama. The Texas primary was coming up and the race wasn’t yet decided.

Hillary decided to call on Bill to make a campaign appearance for her, of all places, in Amarillo.

The former president’s advance team did its usual stellar job of preparing for the event. Bill Clinton would speak at the Amarillo Civic Center.

He came here — into the belly of the proverbial beast. This is blood-red Republican territory. We are the reddest part of the reddest state in the country. Look far and wide and you’ll find hardly Democrats holding elective office in any of the 26 counties that comprise the Texas Panhandle.

Bill Clinton came to the Panhandle in the midst of the 2008 campaign and he was met by a standing-room-only crowd. The crowd packed the Civic Center Grand Plaza; it spilled out into the hallway.

People came from all over the region to hear the former president. I have knowledge of a good number of dedicated Republicans who attended the event because they wanted to hear what the former Democratic Leader of the Free World had to say on behalf of his wife.

Will he replicate his astonishing drawing power in the 2016 campaign?

Here’s a word to the wise: Do not bet against him.

 

 

national news, political news

Executive action on guns draws expected fire

1 Comment

gun over american flag

President Obama is considering some executive action he hopes will require gun dealers to go through increased background checks.

Does it mean that “law-abiding Americans” will be denied their right to “keep and bear arms” as provided by the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Obama says “no.” Republican presidential candidates say “yes.”

Who do you believe? I guess that depends on your political party, your philosophical persuasion, your own bias.

Me? I’m willing to let the president give it a try.

I am going to take the usual — and expected — criticism from readers of this blog who believe as GOP contender Chris Christie said that Obama is acting like a “dictator.”

I disagree with that characterization. The president has a team of constitutional lawyers surrounding him who’ll likely advise him that he’s acting totally within the law in issuing the orders to require the checks.

Congress won’t do it. Heck, Congress wouldn’t even approve legislation that would have restricted people placed on no-fly lists from owning firearms. Does the president expect Congress to follow his lead on his effort to curb gun violence? Not a chance.

So he’ll do what he needs to do on his own.

Do I feel threatened? Are the feds going to knock on my door and take my guns away from me? No and no.

However, the president’s apparent move toward executive action has prompted the apoplectic response from the GOP presidential field.

But what the heck. That’s politics.

 

national news, political news

Where is the outrage?

landscape-1451841523-oregon-standoff

The media have been reporting the arrest of Bill Cosby.

They’ve been talking about the horse race among the Republicans running for president.

They have been yammering about this and that.

Meanwhile, way out yonder in a place where few people live — or even have seen — a group of wacky “militiamen” have taken over a federal facility.

Is that an act of sedition?

Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon, is among the protestors who’ve taken over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters office in Burns, Ore. You remember Cliven Bundy, right? He’s the Nevada rancher who mounted a revolt of his own over federal land ownership issues and became something of a hero to the TEA Party wing of the Republican Party.

Well, now his kid has left his own footprint on the crazy movement.

Why aren’t the media taking note of this craziness?

If it were occurring in a major metro area, with, say, college students taking over a university, you’d think the world was about to come to an end. What might the media do if African-Americans commandeered a federal facility? Would that constitute an act of “domestic terrorism”?

The protestors took over the wildlife refuge headquarters to protest the arrest of two Harney County ranchers. They’re set to serve prison terms. I guess those who protested in Burns don’t think they deserve to go to federal prison. Their reaction? Take command of a government building.

This is a dangerous act that needs a lot of attention and it needs to be stopped immediately.

Meanwhile, I am awaiting the expressions of outrage.

 

 

national news, political news

Is a spouse’s conduct really fair game?

clinton

Maybe I’m a bit slow on the uptake, which wouldn’t be much of a shock, truth be told.

I’m having trouble connecting a few dots, though, between the behavior of a former president of the United States to the current campaign for the White House featuring the former president’s wife.

Bill Clinton messed around with a White House intern in the late 1990s and got impeached because of it. His wife, Hillary Clinton, wants the job Bill used to have.

So, what does she do? She challenges a potential Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump, for his attitudes toward women. She calls him a sexist.

Trump’s response? He said Clinton’s husband is among the most sexist men in recent history . . . because of his alleged extramarital affairs and, of course, the dalliance with the intern.

I’m finding myself asking: Why is that relevant to the job that Hillary Clinton might do as president? Why does it matter what Bill Clinton was alleged to have done? I used the term “alleged” relating to the previous accusations because I do not believe any of them has ever been proved.

Hillary Clinton’s assertions about Trump relate to the here and now. They speak to Trump’s statements — which are on the record — about women; they speak to the very issues that Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly brought up during that first Republican presidential debate and which garnered Trump all that notoriety.

Trump’s retort is to dredge up a relationship that resulted in a presidential impeachment that occurred more than 17 years ago; let us remember, too, that the U.S. Senate acquitted President Clinton of the charges brought by the House of Representatives.

Oh, my. This is going to be some kind of presidential campaign year.

Here we are on the third day of 2016 and I’m already wishing this year would be over.

 

International news, national news, political news

Trump shows up on terror video . . . who knew?

terrorism1

Here we go. Donald Trump has shown up on a terrorist recruitment video produced by Al-Shabaab.

Remember when Hillary Rodham Clinton lambasted Trump’s anti-Muslim rants as providing fodder for terrorist groups? Trump called her a liar. So did his supporters.

To be clear, Clinton’s contention did not include visual evidence of such a video at the time she made it during the latest Democratic presidential candidate debate.

But now there appears to be actual video out there purporting to show clips of Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric.

It makes me wonder, though: Did the publicity surrounding Clinton’s accusation give the terrorists the idea to include Trump in the recruitment video? Or was the video in production all along?

It’ll be tough to pin down cause-and-effect here. Suffice to say, though, that Trump’s fiery rhetoric — the words that spit in the face of what the Republican presidential frontrunner calls “political correctness” — may have produced a consequence we all are likely to regret.