Category Archives: political news

Texas Democrats … wherefore art thou?

AUSTIN, TX -  FEBRUARY 18:  Texas Governor Greg Abbott (2nd L) speaks alongside U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) (L), Attorney General Ken Paxton (2nd R), Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (R) hold a joint press conference February 18, 2015 in Austin, Texas.  The press conference addressed the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas' decision on the lawsuit filed by a Texas-led coalition of 26 states challenging President Obama's executive action on immigration.  (Photo by Erich Schlegel/Getty Images)

Ross Ramsey is as smart a Texas political analyst as they come.

Thus, his analysis of the moribund state of the Texas Democratic Party is worth your time to read.

Democrats nowhere to be found.

The Texas Tribune editor hits out of the park.

His thesis basically is this: If Texas had a viable two-party political system, the big mistakes being made by two statewide Republican officials would become immediate fodder for the opposing party.

He references Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller.

Paxton’s been indicted for securities fraud by a grand jury in his home county … that would be Collin County.

Miller — who Ramsey refers to as “Yosemite Sid” — has come out for cupcakes in classrooms and said he want to return deep fryers to public school kitchens. Ramsey also reports: “His campaign Facebook page shared a post featuring a picture of an atomic bomb blast and the words ‘Japan has been at peace with the US since August 9, 1945. It’s time we made peace with the Muslim world.’ His political staff removed it, said one of his workers had posted it and stopped short of an apology.”

What’s been the fallout of all this? Nothing. As Ramsey reports: “You can argue about what Democratic voters might think about Paxton and Miller. But those Democratic sentiments, whatever they are, apparently don’t matter to the Republicans. If they were worried about the reaction from the other party’s voters — or concerned that GOP officeholders were creating opportunities for candidates from the other side, they’d be doing something about it.”

When you’re the king of the mountain, by golly, you can say and do almost anything in a one-party state.

 

Let’s wall off entire U.S. … not!

First bricks of new house. Brick wall foundation isolated 3l illustration

The wall that Donald Trump keeps yapping about might get a bit longer.

The Republican presidential primary front runner wants to build a “beautiful” wall along our southern border. He says he can do it because he’s “good at building things.” It’ll run 1,900 or so miles.

Now comes Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, one of the thundering herd of challengers seeking to catch Trump. He wants to out-Trump The Donald. How? He says he’s “open to the idea” of building a wall across our northern border, the one that separates the United States from Canada. It’s been the longest unsecured border in the world since, oh I guess maybe forever.

He said this on “Meet the Press”: “Some people have asked us about that in New Hampshire. They raised some very legitimate concerns, including some law enforcement folks that brought that up to me at one of our town hall meetings about a week and a half ago … I think we need to secure borders in general.”

Here’s more from Walker

While we’re at it, let’s build underwater obstructions along the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coasts. You know, the kind of things the Nazis erected along Normandy as they sought to fight off the D-Day invaders in June 1944?

We’d need to keep shipping lanes open, of course. But if we’re going to “secure our borders in general,” as Walker suggested, then by golly, let’s go all in.

The last thing we ought to do is sand blast that inscription from the base of the Statue of Liberty, which says to other nations they are welcome to “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free … ”

 

Why not debate … in Amarillo?

APTOPIX_Presidential_Debate-0bf0c-7089

I’ve noted before in previous election cycles that the major political parties need to think beyond the norm when planning for debates between their presidential nominees.

The norm in the past has been to select cities with large media markets. Sometimes the parties put these debates in cities and states where the race is competitive.

Here’s a revolutionary thought: Why not stage one of these events right here, in little ol’ Amarillo, Texas?

Hey, I know it’s a long shot. A pipe dream. I know it won’t happen. Then again, in this strange, goofy, unpredictable, topsy-turvy primary campaign — which on the Republican side is being driven by Donald J. Trump — well, anything seems possible.

Look at it this way, Amarillo is a significant city in a significant state. One of Amarillo’s state lawmakers, Republican Four Price, said the other day that Texas’s economy all by itself is the 12th largest in the world. That by itself makes us a player.

What might be the theme of a debate held in Amarillo? Energy policy ought to be front and center. I doubt, of course, that debate planners would build a two-hour televised event around energy policy by itself.

But it does tie into the nation’s economy. How about foreign policy, given that we’re weaning ourselves of foreign oil? We’re becoming something of a trend-setter in the development of wind energy, one of those alternatives that gets some of the credit for the plunging oil prices around the world.

We’ve got venues for such an event. The Civic Center is one. The performing arts center across the street is another. Why not look at the West Texas A&M University event center in Canyon?

Is such a thing possible?

Consider this: No one ever thought that Donald Trump would be setting the pace in the race for the Republican Party presidential nomination.

I’m just saying that this election is wild and crazy enough for Amarillo to get a serious look if the political parties here want to put together a formal request.

 

 

Now it’s on to the ‘perv’ and ‘sleazebag’

Anthony-Weiner

You must hand it to Donald Trump.

He hits every hot button there is to hit. And he doesn’t miss very often.

His latest target if Huma Abedin, aka Mrs. Anthony Weiner.

Abedin is a close adviser and confidante to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who’s being rocked by these e-mail revelations relating to the time she served as secretary of state.

But it wasn’t so much Abedin who took the brunt of Trump’s latest trash-talking tirade, delivered Friday in Massachusetts. It was Abedin’s husband.

Former U.S. Rep. “Carlos Danger” Weiner, you’ll recall, was outed for sending pictures of his manhood through the Internet to women who aren’t his wife. He quit his congressional seat. He then ran for New York City mayor and lost badly.

He’s out of the public eye. Or at least he was out of it … until now, thanks to Donald Trump. “So now — think of it — Huma is getting classified secrets. She is married to Anthony Weiner, who is a perv,” Trump said. “Now these are confidential documents and guess what happens to Anthony Weiner. A month ago he went to work for a public relations firm. ”

Weiner returns to public spotlight.

Actually, Trump is overstating Weiner’s place in recent political history. He called the ex-lawmaker “one of the great sleazebags of our time.”

I don’t think so. He’s a chump who got his thrills sending dirty pictures to women.

Do not fret, though. Trump has energized a segment of the Republican Party that eats this stuff up.

I’m still having trouble wrapping my head around the words “President Trump.”

 

‘Boxcars’ no more acceptable than ‘ovens’

hillary

Admission time.

I’ve been goaded into saying something about Hillary Rodham Clinton’s remark concerning Donald Trump’s “immigration reform” idea, which is to round up 11 million or so undocumented immigrants and ship back to where they came from.

She said recently that Trump and other Republican candidates intend to ship immigrants back to their homeland in “boxcars.” The remark drew understandable rebuke from those on the right who said the Democratic presidential front runner is invoking images of the Holocaust with that kind of analogy.

Clinton’s campaign has denied any connection.

You decide.

The campaign flacks are mistaken if they do not believe many Americans understood the juxtaposition of “boxcars” and “Holocaust.”

These presidential candidates need to understand that gravity of making such highly offensive comparisons.

Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, you’ll recall, criticized the Iran nuclear deal by declaring President Obama would march Israel to the “oven door” if the deal is approved by the Congress. That remark also drew expected — and deserved — criticism from those on the left.

A critic of this blog reminded me that I had been silent about Clinton’s nasty reference to boxcars. I took the criticism as a challenge to be as vigilant on both sides of the political divide about comments that deserve rebuke.

Clinton, Huckabee and the whole crowd of presidential candidates should declare a moratorium on comparing anything that occurs presently to what happened between 1939 and 1945.

World War II — and all its ghastly consequences — stands alone.

 

 

Some self-awareness, Mr. Vice President

cheney

Dick Cheney’s utter lack of self-awareness is an astounding thing to behold.

The former vice president and his daughter, Liz, have co-written a book, “Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America.” In an extended excerpt published in the Wall Street Journal, Cheney writes that President Obama has made “false” statements about the Iran nuclear deal.

False statements? Yes, the man who orchestrated — along with the rest of the George W. Bush national security team — this nation’s invasion of Iraq on a whole array of falsehoods has now laid the charge on the man who succeeded President Bush in the White House.

He has joined the GOP amen chorus in blaming Obama for the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, contending that the United States has “abandoned” Iraq and is “on course” to do the same thing in Afghanistan.

I don’t disagree with the title of the Cheneys’ book. The world does need a “powerful America.” I will simply add my own view that the world still has a powerful America in its midst.

We remain the world’s pre-eminent military power — by a long shot. Our economy is still the envy of the world. People are aching to gain entry into the United States. Yes, many of them come here illegally, but many more come here legally and in accordance with federal immigration law.

Let us stop denigrating our current role in the world — as many of the GOP presidential candidates have done — by suggesting we’ve lost our place at the top of the geopolitical food chain.

As for the former vice president, he needs to take time for some serious introspection before he accuses others of stating foreign-policy falsehoods.

Read more on this link.

Refugees or criminals? Which is it?

immigration-9

One of my very best friends in the whole, wide world is a lawyer who lives in California.

I’ve known Tim Lundell since I was in high school. He was my best man and we’ve shared a lot of emotions over many years.

Tim posted this comment today on Facebook.

“Isn’t it funny? In Europe they have ‘desperate migrants, embarking on a perilous journey in search of a better life.’ Here, according to certain politicians, we have ‘illegal immigrants who rape and murder.’ I guess it’s just a matter of humanitarian perspective.”

The target of Tim’s barb, I’m certain, is Donald Trump, who’s gained considerable mileage over his rants about illegal immigrants who come to the United States from points south … meaning Mexico and beyond. Republican primary voters are eating this stuff up, giving Trump a tremendous boost in the current public opinion polling

I do not dispute the notion that some of those who come into this country without the proper documentation come here to do harm, just as Trump has said.

But many others do come here to seek a better life, just as those who are fleeing the Middle East and heading for places such as Greece, Italy, France and Germany are doing.

I’ll also acknowledge that the influx of immigrants into Europe has spawned a considerable backlash from right-wing extremists, who contend that the refugees present a considerable danger to the European way of life.

However, as we keep debating the issue of whether to deport all 11 million illegal immigrants from the United States, shouldn’t we keep in mind that many of them are here for the right reasons and are not here to commit crimes?

The blanket condemnation of illegal immigrants does not square with the reality of why many of them are here in the first place. They are here to make a better life for their families.

I am not suggesting they all should be granted amnesty, or that they shouldn’t be required to start the process of obtaining legal immigrant status.

Let us just try to understand that people come here for a lot of reasons — and many of them have no intention of committing crimes against the country they want to call home.

 

 

 

Name-calling becomes a hit

insult

Republicans are becoming the party of name-callers.

Let’s run a little tabulation.

Sen. Lindsey Graham called Donald Trump a “jackass.”

Trump has called Graham, former Govs. Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney “losers.”

Trump also has said that every official in the U.S. government is “stupid.”

House Speaker John Boehner has chimed in with a “jackass” epithet hurled at Sen. Ted Cruz.

I know I’ve missed some, maybe a lot. But these come to mind immediately.

What’s up here? Are the candidates for the presidency getting under each other’s skin?

I’ve lost count of the bad names Sen. John McCain has tossed at folks who disagree with him. Then again, he’s not running for president this time around.

I’ll give the current GOP bunch this much credit: At least they aren’t tossing out f-bombs, at least not publicly.

It was then-Vice President Dick Cheney’s dubious honor to reveal his potty mouth when, during a Senate floor debate years ago, he told Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy to go f*** himself.

Hey, just think: The presidential campaign is just getting warmed up.

 

Read your oath of office, Mme. Clerk

same-sex-marriage

Kim Davis took an oath when she became a county clerk in Kentucky to uphold the constitutions of her state and her nation.

The oath, I’m quite willing to suggest, didn’t include any exemptions for her religious faith.

Thus, it becomes imperative that she fulfill all the terms of the oath she took.

But she’s refusing to do that.

Instead, she’s refusing to grant marriage certificates to gay couples. She cites her religious belief opposing gay marriage and the U.S. Constitution’s protection of religious liberty.

I get that Kim Davis’s Christian faith is important to her. Mine is important to me as well.

But she took an oath to uphold the law. What’s more, the U.S. Supreme Court this year has ruled that gay marriage is legal in all 50 states. That includes Kentucky.

To their credit, Potter County Clerk Julie Smith and Randall County Clerk Renee Calhoun declared they would issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples who request them. I also would have applauded either or both of them had they resigned if their religious faith interfered with their public oath.

Davis should resign from her office, as some county clerks have done around the country. She cannot serve in an elected public office without carrying out all the duties that the office requires.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/kim-davis-kentucky-clerk-again-denies-license?utm_content=buffercaf60&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

 

Stop the presses! Cantor endorses Bush

cantor

I feel like dealing with two unrelated subjects in this blog post.

Except that they both deal with Jeb Bush.

First, the former Republican Florida governor today earned the endorsement of Eric Cantor.

You remember Eric Cantor. He is the former U.S. House of Representatives majority leader who, in the Republican primary of 2014, lost to TEA Party favorite David Brat.

What was the knock on Cantor in Virginia, which he represented in the House? It was that he was too wedded to being part of the GOP congressional power structure and that he cared too little about the home folks’ concerns. He was an out-of-touch Washington pol.

So, his congressional district primary voters turned on him, tossed him out of office.

I believe his endorsement of Gov. Bush will mean, well, not a thing.

***

Second, I am considering referring to Jeb Bush in the future by putting his first name in all capital leaders, just as I have done with the TEA Party.

Why? Well, “TEA” as in TEA Party is an acronym, meaning “Taxed Enough Already.” So, I’ve declared it appropriate to refer to this wing of the GOP with an all-cap reference.

The same principle applies to Jeb Bush. His first name also is an acronym. “Jeb” stands for “John Ellis Bush.”

Should I refer to him as “JEB” Bush, the way Confederate Gen. James Ewell Brown (aka J.E.B.) Stuart is identified?