Category Archives: political news

national news, political news

Cruz the Hawk a no-show at Armed Services

You hear about this occasionally.

U.S. senators or House members take office and immediately become what’s known as “show horses,” not workhorses. A young Illinois Democratic senator, Barack Obama, demonstrated little interest in the nuts and bolts of legislating before launching his bid for the presidency. Flash back to the mid-1960s, and another young Democratic senator from New York, the late Robert Kennedy, showed equally little interest in these matters — unlike his kid brother, Ted, who became one of the Senate’s legislative giants.

So, what gives with Ted Cruz, the Republican from Texas, who’s also running for president?

He’s a serious hawk on defense, but he’s rung up the worst attendance record by far on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/ted-cruz-2016-armed-services-committee-attendance-116522.html?hp=lc2_4

While the young senator has been MIA at the panel’s hearings, many of his colleagues are settling in to do the people’s business. Several of them have perfect attendance. Others have been called away on other official business; Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., missed a key hearing because he was part of a U.S. delegation sent to Saudi Arabia to honor the late Saudi King Abdullah.

Back to the man I like to refer to as the Cruz Missile.

Sure, he’s running for president. These campaigns gobble up a lot of lawmakers’ time. However, just as it matters for all the individuals who’ve run for president before, it matters now for Sen. Cruz.

Is he going to do what he’s getting paid to do, which is study, debate and vote on key issues affecting his country and the state he represents? Or is he going to remain absent from his day job while pursuing another office down the street from the one he already occupies?

 

media news, national news, political news

Indy Star goes out front with 'Fix it' editorial

Newspaper editorials have their place: usually on a page marked clearly as “opinion,” or “comment,” or “editorial.”

Except when the management of a newspaper decides an issue is so critical, so important and so compelling that they take that editorial to the front page, where everyone who sees the paper can see what’s on the editors’ minds.

The Indianapolis Star has gone out front in today’s edition with an editorial demanding that Indiana legislators and Gov. Mike Pence “fix” the state’s religious freedom law.

Good for the Star.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/03/indy-star-fix-religious-freedom-law-now-204758.html?hp=b2_l3

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act has been seen by critics as a pretext to allow businesses to discriminate against citizens because of their sexual orientation. It protects them from lawsuits if they deny service to gay individuals. The LGBT community across the nation — and its allies — have unleashed a barrage of criticism against Indiana lawmakers and the governor for approving the bill and signing it into law.

The editorial’s headline screams “Fix This Now.” Pence is scheduled to have a news conference today to address the issue. It’s not clear whether he’ll seek to amend it, or whether he’s actually empowered to repeal it unilaterally.

The Star is asking for a new law to add to the religious freedom law that exempts LGBT residents from its provisions.

The bottom line here is the bottom line. The state is facing a serious economic impact if businesses pull out of Indiana. The NCAA men’s basketball Final Four tournament takes place next weekend in Indianapolis and the repercussions of this law can be significant.

The law looks to many folks — me included — like a pretext to sanction discrimination against a certain group of Americans. It shouldn’t stand as it is written.

http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/?tfp_show=100&tfp_page=2&tfp_id=IN_IS

 

local news, national news, political news, State news

Your vote really does count; honest, it does

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jJQeEQH6pc

Do me a favor.

Take a couple of minutes to watch this video. It’s an instructive lecture from the general manager of Panhandle PBS on why your vote matters, especially at the local level.

If you live in the Texas Panhandle or far away from this part of the United States of America, this message is for you.

Chris Hays put this video together to promote a public affairs program to be broadcast Thursday night on Panhandle PBS. The “Live Here” segment airs at 7 p.m. and it features a candidate forum for the 16 people running for all five seats on the Amarillo City Council.

The video, though, speaks to voters across the country. Many voters don’t take part in their local elections, thinking apparently that their vote doesn’t matter and that the people who run for these offices don’t really do anything to affect citizens’ lives.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

It’s the local elections that matter most to us. We ought to be voting on the people who set policies for our households, as well as for our children’s education.

Texas communities are conducting elections in early May. The turnout for most of them is expected to be paltry, dismal, shamefully low. Amarillo has had its share of tumult in recent months, so there might be a slight uptick in voter participation here.

What about where you live? Are you going to hand these critical decisions over to someone else, let your neighbor decide how much you pay in local property taxes?

Don’t do it. Your neighbor, or the folks across town can’t speak for you. Only you can speak for yourself.

One way to speak is to cast a vote for the candidate of your choice running for local office in your hometown.

Before you decide to sit this one out, take a peek at the video here. Maybe it’ll change your mind.

 

national news, political news

Birthers beware: Obama going to Kenya

1 Comment

This story is utterly hilarious and I cannot wait for President Obama to jaunt down the steps of Air Force One in Nairobi, the capital city of Kenya, of all places.

The president is visiting the African country and is likely to stick straight in the eyes — and ears — of the so-called “birthers” who keep yapping that he wasn’t born in the United States and that he is somehow not qualified to be president.

To which I say: So bleeping what?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/237384-former-nh-gov-obama-is-inciting-birthers-with-kenya-trip

Former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, a player in the Republican Party hierarchy, thinks the president’s trip is going to energize the birthers. These are the clowns, such as Donald Trump, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas and perhaps a majority of the Texas Legislature for all I know, who keep implying that if Obama was born in Africa that he’s somehow disqualified from holding the office to which he was elected twice.

I have a two-word response: Ted Cruz.

The junior senator from Texas and GOP presidential candidate was in fact born in Canada. His mother is American, his father is Cuban. He’s been declared a U.S. citizen by every constitutional scholar under the sun. President Obama’s mother was American, his father was Kenyan. However, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii — but that hasn’t stopped the crackpot wing of the Republican Party from continuing to raise this birth issue whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Gov. Sununu thinks it well might rise again when the president jets off to Kenya later this year. “I think his trip back to Kenya is going to create a lot of chatter and commentary amongst some of the hard right who still don’t see him as having been born in the U.S.,” he said on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom.”

The place of his birth doesn’t matter. He was born in Hawaii, U.S.A. Even if he wasn’t born in one of our 50 states, his mother’s citizenship makes this entire chatter moot.

The president’s upcoming Kenya trip only illustrates one thing: He’s got his mojo back.

Enjoy yourself, Mr. President.

 

national news, political news

O'Malley is right; pass him the 'crown'

Martin O’Malley wants to be president of the United States.

Look for the former Maryland governor to announce his candidacy soon for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. The man who once supported Hillary Clinton’s desire to be president now says the presidency isn’t some “crown” that should be passed between two families.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/29/martin-omalley-presidency_n_6964338.html

He refers, of course, to the Clintons and the Bushes.

Actually, O’Malley is getting way ahead of himself.

It seems likely that Clinton will run for president again; Jeb Bush is likely to seek the GOP nomination.

Are either of them locks for their parties’ nomination? Hardly.

Clinton once was a lock. She’s still the strongest Democrat out there, but her grip on the nomination has slipped bit since the email controversy broke a few weeks ago.

Bush hardly is a cinch for the GOP nomination. He’s got his own baggage, chief among it the memory of his brother’s recent presidency.

The burden now falls on folks such as O’Malley to prove why they deserve to be seen and heard. It’s not just about candidates with recognizable names.

As this “crown” business relates to the Clintons, it’s good to remember that Bill Clinton wasn’t exactly from a filthy rich family when he ran for president in 1992. He came from fairly humble beginnings, as did his wife.

Still, I’m willing to listen to candidates such as O’Malley make their case, as I am willing to listen to the thundering herd of Republicans getting ready to run for the White House.

Bring it on!

 

media news, national news, political news

How's this for demonization?

2 Comments

A new poll shows just how polarized and how angry some Americans have become toward the president of the United States of America.

Get a load of this: A Reuters/Ipsos survey suggests Republicans believe Barack Obama poses a greater threat to the nation than Russian strongman/president Vladimir Putin.

Pardon me while I catch my breath.

There.

I’m better now.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-see-obama-as-more-imminent-threat-than-putin-reuters-ipsos-poll/ar-AAabXVM

One-third of Republicans believe Obama poses an imminent threat to the United States, outpacing the fear of GOP respondents about Putin’s threat to the country.

Reuters reports: “Given the level of polarization in American politics the results are not that surprising, said Barry Glassner, a sociologist and author of ‘The Culture of Fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things.’

“‘There tends to be a lot of demonizing of the person who is in the office,’ Glassner said, adding that “fear mongering’ by the Republican and Democratic parties would be a mainstay of the U.S. 2016 presidential campaign. ‘The TV media here, and American politics, very much trade on fears,’ he said.”

I reckon so.

Another interesting aspect of the poll is that 27 of Republicans see Democrats as an “imminent threat,” while 22 percent of Democrats believe the same thing about Republicans. Pretty close call on that one. That, too, reflects the polarization that exists today.

Fear is everywhere. It’s a bipartisan affliction — and it’s unappealing no matter who’s expressing it.

political news

Wishing an end to 'at the end of the day'

Admit it. Some phrases drive you crazy.

Maybe it’s the one your mother always used. My mother used to say, as I smirked at her while she scolded me: “Wipe that smile off your face before I wipe it off for you.” My smirkiness got me in trouble occasionally years later when I was inducted into the Army and the drill sergeant would get in my face about something. I usually got punished for it — smirking the whole time.

A contemporary phrase is about to drive me insane. It’s the one politicians use far too often.

“At the end of the day …”

There it is. I’m on the verge of declaring all-out war against anyone using that within earshot of yours truly.

I might even establish it as a sort of litmus test for politicians seeking my vote. If any of them ever use the “at end of the day” lead-in to some obtuse answer to a direct question, I’m likely to disqualify that candidate from consideration to whatever office or she is seeking.

A colleague and friend of mine used to maintain a lengthy glossary of what she called “irksome phrases.” She’s changed that category to “nefarious phrases,” or NPs for short.

She, too, has declared war on the use of those phrases.

Hands down, without the slightest hint of doubt, my most irksome/nefarious phrase is “at the end … ” Good grief, I cannot even type it any longer.

The only theory that makes sense to me as to why it’s become so popular among politicians is that it makes them sound smarter than they really are. They say it as a prelude to whatever comes next out of their mouth, as if the next point after the word “day,” is so profound, so important, carries so much weight that you hear the irksome phrase and then you expect to be bowled over by the politician’s wisdom.

Well, politicians, I’m on to you.

I get what you’re doing. I won’t stand for it.

If you intend to win my vote, stay away from that hideous phrase. It’s driving me insane. I value my sanity more than you should value your trumped-up brilliance.

 

political news

Fiorina as next president?

Carly Fiorina says she’s highly likely to seek the Republican Party nomination for president of the United States next year.

She says “competence” is the core issue that needs to be discussed.

Interesting, if you think about it.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/%e2%80%98higher-than-90-percent%e2%80%99-chance-fiorina-will-run-for-president/ar-AAaaoPt

Fiorina touts her business acumen. Hmmm.

She once headed a giant company, Hewlett-Packard, managing a conglomerate with thousands of employees. Then things got a little dicey at HP. Stock value plummeted. Many of those employees were laid off.

Then the HP board decided the company wasn’t going in the direction it wanted, so it blamed the CEO. That would be Carly Fiorina. She was “forced to resign,” or terminated, or she just quit to “pursue other interests.” Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace brought that up. Her response: “We took Hewlett Packard from about $44 billion to $88 billion in six years. We quadrupled cash flow. We went from a market laggard to a market leader in every product category and every market segment.”

But, but, but … why did they let you go, Ms. Fiorina?

Fiorina is going to wait until April or May to make a probable announcement.

She’ll have to explain some of this competence stuff as she hits the trail.

Good luck with that.

 

national news, political news

Schumer headed for minority leader role

Harry Reid apparently has anointed Chuck Schumer as his successor as the leader of U.S. Senate Democrats.

Oh, that’s just great!

Reid, D-Nev., announced he won’t seek re-election next year. Schumer, D-N.Y., mounted a quick campaign to succeed Reid. It worked.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/chuck-schumer-minority-leader-116473.html?hp=rc1_4

It’s not that Schumer is going to be bad for Senate Democrats, or even bad for the country. It’s just that Schumer some years ago inherited a dubious distinction from another senator who decided to retire. The distinction is being identified as part of the “most dangerous place in the world.”

It used to be said of Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, that the “most dangerous place in the world is between Gramm and a television camera.” Gramm left the Senate and handed that unofficial title over to Schumer.

Harry Reid has been called a lot of things; some of them are kind, others are not, depending on who’s saying them. “Camera friendly” isn’t really one of them. He speaks quietly and isn’t known to be a media hog. One cannot say that about Schumer, who’s as garrulous as they come.

Once he becomes leader of the Senate Democrats in 2017 — either as minority leader or majority leader, depending on whether Democrats retake control of the Senate in 2016 — he’s going to be everywhere. Probably at once.

Former Republican U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough said on “Meet the Press” this morning that that he believes Schumer will be a far greater constructive force as Democratic leader than Reid. Scarborough is more of an expert on these matters than a lot of folks. I hope he’s right.

However, we’d better get ready to see a lot of Democratic leader Schumer on our TV screens in the years ahead.

 

legal news, national news, political news, religious news

State using religion to discriminate?

3 Comments

Indiana seems like a nice enough place, with nice people motivated to do nice things to and for others.

Why, then, does the state’s legislature send to Gov. Mike Pence a bill that allows people to possibly concoct a religious belief in order to discriminate against others?

Pence this past week signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which prevents someone from suing, say, a business owner from doing business with you based on the business owner’s religious beliefs.

Pay attention here: The bill is aimed squarely at gays and lesbian who could be denied service from those business owners.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/03/29/abcs-stephanopoulos-grills-gov-mike-pence-on-an/203077

Reaction to this law has been furious. Business owners across the nation have declared their intention to cease doing business in Indiana as long as the state sanctions discrimination against their employees. With the NCAA Men’s Basketball Final Four tournament set to be played in Indianapolis, there could be a serious backlash that inhibits the money the state hopes to earn.

This law looks for all the world — to me at least — as if the state is using “religious freedom” as a shield to protect those who wantonly discriminate against those who have a certain sexual orientation.

What we have here looks like a misuse of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, which guarantees the right of those to hold whatever religious belief they wish. The state is suggesting the First Amendment takes precedence over the 14th Amendment, which guarantees all citizens “equal protection” under the state and federal laws.

Imagine a couple wanting, say, to buy a home. Can a lender refuse to loan the couple the money to buy the home simply by pulling the “religious freedom” statute out of thin air — or out of some bodily orifice, for that matter? The law, as I understand it, prohibits the gay couple from suing the lender because the law protects the lender from being hassled over his or her religious beliefs.

The appearance of using religious liberty and freedom as a pretext to allow overt discrimination is a disgrace.