Category Archives: political news

national news, political news

HRC doesn’t deserve a free ride

1 Comment

Omalley runs for pres

One of the recurring themes of my column, back when I worked as a daily print journalist, used to drive incumbent officeholders nuts.

I liked to write during election season that no incumbent — regardless of his or her record — deserved to run unopposed for public office.

Every so often, I’d write such an essay and I’d hear from an incumbent who’d gripe half-heartedly about my insistence that they draw an opponent.

“Too bad,” I’d say. “You shouldn’t get a free pass. You need to work for it.”

So it is with some joy that I welcome the entrance of another challenger to Hillary Rodham Clinton in the 2016 Democratic Party primary race for president of the United States.

Wait. Hillary’s not an incumbent? Oh, I almost forgot. But she’s such a prohibitive favorite to win her party’s nomination next that she might as well be one.

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has joined the field. I’m not sure precisely how he’s going to separate himself from Clinton. He wants wage equality; so does she. He wants to improve everyone economic future; same for Clinton. He calls himself a “liberal”; I’m betting Clinton will tack to the left as well.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/30/omalley_joins_2016_presidential_race_126796.html

He referred to Clinton as a “dinosaur,” and promises to bring fresh ideas. The “crowd” that greeted his campaign kickoff was, to say the least, modest in size — about 300 or so supporters; Clinton draws that many while she’s eating at a diner.

O’Malley’s in, along with Vermont U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a card-carrying socialist; it looks as though former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee — a one-time Republican — is going to run as a Democrat, too.

Good. The more the merrier.

Clinton remains the heavy favorite for the party’s nomination and is a favorite still to win the White House in November 2016.

But she’s going to get a test in her primary. The individuals who will challenge her will — and should — ask her about her coziness with big banks, overseas contributors, her work with the Clinton Foundation and whether she actually built a record as secretary of state and as a U.S. senator before that.

Competition is good for the process, not to mention for the candidates’ souls.

 

national news, political news

‘You need to read the Internet more’ Huh?

This conversation occurred this week.

It involved a friend of mine and yours truly. It went like this:

Friend: How’s it going?

Me: Great.

Friend: Hey, what’s your opinion of that Jade Helm thing? Isn’t that what they call it?

Me: Yeah, you mean that rumor about the president declaring martial law and wanting to invade Texas?

Friend: That’s the one. Do you think it’s crap?

Me: Absolutely! But what really galls me is that the governor (Greg Abbott) took the bait and called out the Texas State Guard to “monitor” the activities of the federal troops coming here for military exercises.

Friend: I’m OK with that.

Me: (laughing hysterically) You mean you actually think that Abbott responded the right way by policing the activities of the troops?

Friend: Yes. I don’t trust Obama. I think he wants to declare martial law so that he can weasel his way into serving a third term as president.

Me: I haven’t heard that one.

Friend: Well, you need to read the Internet more. It’s out there.

Me: (laughing even more hysterically) But, but 98 percent of the stuff on the Internet is pure crap!

Friend: Not if you look at the “news sources.”

Me: OK, well, I’ll do that. But I’m telling ya, most of that Internet stuff is not to be believed. I promise you that on Jan. 20, 2017, the new president will take the oath of office and Barack Obama will leave the White House with his wife and daughters and return to private life.

Friend: I sure hope so.

I’m happy to report that we’re still friends. He’s a good guy. What I didn’t have the stomach to tell him, though, is that while I was working in daily journalism, the funniest thing a reader ever said to me, when I questioned an assertion he made in a letter to the editor, likely was this: “It must be true, because I read it on the Internet.”

I laughed at him, too.

political news

This man needs an intervention

1 Comment

Bill Press is a Democratic Party operative. He’s as partisan as they come.

Thus, it is with keen interest that I share this Facebook post that Press put out there.

***

Bless me Father, for I have sinned. I have a man crush on Rand Paul.

Yes, it’s enough to drive me to confession: Every day I find myself agreeing more and more with the Libertarian from Kentucky. He may be running for president as a Republican, but he says some things that any liberal Democrat could support.

Who’s the leading champion to shut down NSA’s vast phone spying operation? Rand Paul!

Who blames Republican hawks, not Barack Obama, for the Iraq War and the eventual rise of ISIS? Rand Paul!

On the environment, Rand Paul says: “You’ll find I’m a tree hugger, literally…I compost.”

On Ferguson, Missouri, Rand Paul said: “The police department showed up in grear more fitting for Fallujah or Kandahar.”

And on the Republican Party, Rand Paul says: “Right now, the Republican brand sucks.”

No wonder I have such a man crush on Rand Paul. But I’d feel a lot less guilty – if he’d just run as a Democrat!

***

It’s rather weird, but I am feeling the same kind of “man crush” myself about Sen. Paul.

However, I’m not a paid partisan hack. I’m just a guy out here flapping my proverbial jaws about politics and other things.

Bill Press is finding himself being drawn into saying nice things about a Republican against his partisan loyalties, given that he works for Democrats, who pay him real American money to offer them political advice.

Therefore, I am thinking he needs an intervention.

Am I likely to vote for Paul should he obtain the GOP presidential nomination? Probably not.

Then again …

 

national news, political news

Duggar saga gets even more weird

1 Comment

The Duggar saga has taken a number of bizarre turns.

Get this tidbit as it relates to the scandal involving Josh Duggar, of the “19 Kids and Counting” reality show and his admitted molestation of young girls, including some of his sisters, while he was a teenager.

Josh’s father, Jim Bob, ran for the Republican Party nomination to the U.S. Senate in 2002. He lost to eventual GOP nominee Tim Hutchinson.

Jim Bob Duggar was asked what he thought should be the appropriate punishment for those who commit incest.

He responded: “Rape and incest represent heinous crimes and as such should be treated as capital crimes.”

http://defamer.gawker.com/duggar-dads-political-platform-incest-should-be-punish-1706929035

You know, of course, how society treats “capital criminals.” It executes them. Capital crimes deserve capital punishment. Isn’t that correct?

He said also, “If a woman is raped, the rapist should be executed instead of the innocent unborn baby.”

TLC, the network that broadcast “19 Kids,” has pulled the series off the air. It might return the reality show to the airwaves, but without Josh Duggar. He would be excluded from any future on-air face time.

As for Daddy Duggar’s view of how society should punish those who’ve committed the very crimes to which his own son has admitted, well … I’m betting his view on that has “evolved.”

 

political news

Only the ‘rich’ can serve in Congress?

Alcee Hastings must not be a wealthy man.

The Florida Democratic U.S. representatives wants a pay raise from the 174 grand he makes annually. He says “only rich people” are able to serve in Congress, given the paltry sum House members and senators earn each year.

Please. Stop.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/19/congressional-pay_n_7337282.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

Have members of Congress earned a pay raise? Consider a little bit of information here.

The latest average of polls compiled by RealClearPolitics.com puts congressional approval rating at about 15 percent. Fifteen percent of Americans think Congress is doing a good job. The polls don’t ask voters, more than likely, whether they think Congress deserves a raise.

As for Hastings’s assertion that only rich people can serve now, I want to add two quick points.

One, did he not know how much the office paid when he chose to run for Congress when he was impeached by Congress and tossed off the federal bench after being convicted of bribery and perjury by the Senate?

Two, there exist plenty of examples of members of Congress enriching themselves while serving on Capitol Hill. One example that comes to mind immediately is my former congressman, the late Jack Brooks, a Democrat from Beaumont, who used to cite how poor he was when he was elected to Congress in 1952, but who acquired tremendous wealth by virtue of his serving on a number of bank and other corporate boards.

The only possible positive I can see in Hastings’s demand for more money lies in the U.S. Constitution’s 27th Amendment, which says: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.”

 

 

national news, political news

Media turn 'bloodthirsty' over Duggar coverage?

Hey, let’s cool the hyperbole, former Mike Huckabee.

The ex-Arkansas governor and current Republican presidential candidate, says the media are “blood-thirsty in their coverage of the Josh Duggar scandal. Duggar, one of the “19 Kids and Counting” featured in the former TLC reality series, has admitted to molesting young girls, including some of his sisters, when he was a teenager.

Huckabee is a family friend, who’s received the Duggars’ endorsement in his run for the presidency.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/huckabee-slams-media-for-blood-thirsty-coverage-of-duggar-molestation-report/ar-BBk7Vps

Bloodthirsty?

Hmmm. Were the media bloodthirsty in its coverage of former U.S. Rep. Anthony “Carlos Danger” Weiner’s “selfies” of his private parts? I don’t recall the governor saying such a thing then. Do you?

How about the media’s treatment of former President Bill Clinton — Huckabee’s home boy from Hope, Ark. — and the president’s affair with the White House intern? Were the media piling on about that? I believe the governor was silent about that, too.

Did the media pile on then-U.S. Rep. Barney Frank when they reported his dealings with a male hooker? Come on.

Granted, Josh Duggar was just a dumb teenager when he did those things. But he’s grown up now. He’s become politically active, right along with Mom and Dad Duggar. He became involved with the Family Research Council, a highly political organization that promotes “traditional family values” and high morals. What’s more, Mom and Dad kept it all secret for several years before being outed by a magazine.

This outrage needs to be covered by the media. There’s no political blood lust involved.

political news

Why the fixation with The Donald?

Why, media? Why?

Why do you — and I guess, me — keep writing about Donald Trump in the context of a presidential campaign?

The Donald isn’t going to run for president of the United States. Not this time, not ever.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/21/megyn-kelly-donald-trump_n_7350412.html?ncid=edlinkushpmg00000078&utm_source=thinkprogress.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=pubexchange_facebook

How do I know this? Well, I don’t know it. I just feel it in my bones.

The man’s got that TV show that earns him lots of money. That’s what he appears to be about, anyhow. Money. He boasts about how much of it he has. He’s not shy about flaunting his wealth. For the life of me I don’t understand why some people don’t take extreme offense at his self-aggrandizing.

But he does.

He’s made a complete ass of himself during the entire Obama presidency questioning whether the president is constitutionally eligible to hold the office to which he was elected and re-elected. He continues to act the part of buffoon and clown.

But now he’s saying he’s going to announce his candidacy sometime in June? That’s what he told Megyn Kelly.

I will not hold my breath waiting for that announcement.

It’s not going to come.

Then again, if it does … well, the fun will really begin as the Republicans start searching for their 2016 presidential nominee.

 

political news

Fox, CNN get it right on debate format

The Republican Party’s presidential field figures to be a thundering herd by the time summer rolls around.

Accordingly, two cable news networks have decided on a format that is going to exclude some of this potentially huge field.

Good for them. The networks, that is.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/20/fox_cnn_set_criteria_for_gop_debates.html

Fox News Channel is going to play host to the first GOP primary debate on Aug. 6 in Cleveland. Its plan is to limit the participants to the top 10 candidates, based on their standing in the polls at that time. There well might be at least double that number of candidates seeking the party’s 2016 presidential nomination.

Fox says the candidates must be declared. Many observers are noting that the criteria are going to keep several high-powered candidates off the debate stage.

CNN is going to play host for the second debate, on Sept. 16, at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif. Its format is a bit more convoluted. CNN is planning a two-tiered event: The top candidates will share one stage; the also-rans will share another one.

I prefer the Fox approach, to be honest.

There is no possible way that having 20 — or maybe more — candidates on the same stage is going to do a bit of good for the voters who might be undecided on who would get their vote in a Republican primary. Fox has taken a simpler approach to determining which candidates should participate in the first of what looks like a long series of joint appearances.

My only hope for the debate formats as the series unfolds is that the networks somehow restrict audience cheering. The 2012 GOP debates were annoying in the extreme as the candidates paraded onto debate stages, waving to their cheering fans in the crowd. It was weird and in my view detracted from the importance of the event, which was to ask these candidates for their views on critical issues of the day.

But for starters, I’m glad to know Fox and CNN are going to cull the herd of hopefuls from a debate stage with limited space.

national news, political news

Fibs = lies? Sometimes

Someone asked me the other day if I could explain the difference between a “fib” and a “lie.”

My quick answer to him was that I “like the word ‘fib’ better.”

“Fib” has a less-damaging ring to it than “lie.”

I’ve given some further thought to the question, which actually is a pretty good one.

Here’s my more thoughtful answer: A fib is meant to describe a false statement that doesn’t carry as much consequence as a lie.

I used the term “fib” to describe, in this latest instance, what NBC reporter/news anchor Brian Williams had said about being shot down in Iraq. He fibbed about it. He wasn’t shot down. He was riding in a helicopter that accompanied the ship that actually was shot down.

Why is that a “fib” and not a “lie”? Because all it means is that one man’s career is likely ruined. The rest of us will carry on.

What, then, constitutes a lie?

Let’s try this one: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.” That came from President Bill Clinton as he wagged his finger at the American public and told a lie about what he did with the White House intern. All by itself, that shouldn’t constitute a lie. Except that the result of that untrue statement — which he also made to a federal grand jury — resulted in his impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives.

I suppose I could go on with more actual lies, such as when the Bush administration kept telling us about Saddam Hussein’s alleged complicity in the 9/11 attacks. We all know where those lies led us.

It’s one thing to fib about a personal experience and another thing to lie when it involves the future of the country.

Awww, what the heck. I still like the sound of the word “fib” better.

 

political news

Yes, polls do matter to pols

Politicians are known to stretch the truth, fib a little and, yes, even lie through their teeth.

One of the greatest lies politicians tell us is that “Polls don’t matter.”

Uh, yes they do.

Obama’s favorability rating ticks higher

The Gallup Organization has released some new polling data that show President Obama’s approval rating among voters is at 53 percent. That’s not great, but it’s a lot better than where it was, say, a year or two ago.

His overall poll standing — taking averages of all the major surveys — is around 46 percent. Still not great, but not bad, either, for a second-term president heading toward the finish line.

Politicians who say “Polls don’t matter” usually say those things when they’re trailing in a campaign against the other individual. They make those statements as if to dismiss the bad news they’re getting from their hired guns. The other candidate, the one who’s leading? Why he or she thinks polls are great. They use those numbers as affirmation of the job they’re doing trying to sell whatever snake oil they’re peddling.

I’ve long ago dismissed the notion of politicians saying they “pay no attention to polls” when they’re pondering key policy decisions. My definition, politicians who want to keep doing their public service jobs, rely on voters’ views on the job they’re doing.

So, that means they must take note of what the polling data are showing.

I wish I could be a fly on the wall of the White House right now, listening to what Barack Obama is saying about the polling data. Sure, he’ll tell us he’s doing “what’s right for the country.”

He’s also doing what’s right for his standing in those polls.