Category Archives: political news

Statement causes chills

A declaration by a member of Congress didn’t receive nearly the attention it deserves; therefore, I will try to rectify it with this brief blog post.

U.S. Rep. What’s Her Name — aka Marjorie Taylor Greene — the Republican from Georgia, recently pronounced herself to be a “Christian nationalist.” I can’t recall the context of her comment or the venue in which she uttered it. All I can recall is her saying, “If you want to call me a Christian nationalist, then that’s what I am.”

That is a frightening thing to hear from a member of Congress.

I shall remind you once again that these individuals take an oath to “defend and protect the U.S. Constitution.” Indeed, I took such an oath in August 1968 when I was inducted into the U.S. Army, so I have some exposure to its meaning. I took it to mean, and I do so to this day, that I protect what the Constitution sets forth in its governing policy.

Rep. What’s Her Name needs to understand, too, what it means … but she ignores the obvious tenet of our nation’s government framework. It is that the Constitution establishes a secular government. It says in plain English in Article VI that there shall be “no religious test” required of anyone seeking public office.

The word “Christianity” is nowhere to be found in that document.

I know I have whipped this critter bloody already, but I will keep doing so until it sinks in. Christian nationalism seeks to turn the United States into a “Christian nation.” It isn’t. We are a nation with a population that comprises a strong majority of Christians as citizens. Our government was founded on Judeo-Christian principles and I am totally fine with that.

I am not fine with the notion that our Constitution somehow contains language that mandates our laws be faithful to New Testament scripture. So, for dipsh**s like Rep. What’s Her Name to suggest that it does reveals a remarkable level of ignorance about the very oath she took to uphold.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Say it ain’t so, Ronny J!

Someone might have to pass some smelling salts to help revive me if what I read actually comes true.

It is that Rep. Ronny Jackson, the Amarillo Republican who’s curried favor with the Donald Trump cabal of kooks, might run for the U.S. Senate in 2026. Yep, the one-time White House doc might challenge U.S. Sen. John Cornyn in four years presuming Cornyn decides to seek re-election.

That means if Jackson actually wins in 2026 then the whole state will have to endure his tweets, his ongoing assault against those who disagree with his MAGA-loving demagoguery.

The guy is a carpetbagging clown show barker who moved into the 13th Congressional District specifically to run for Congress from the Texas Panhandle.

Ronny Jackson, prominent Trump ally, weighing U.S. Senate run in 2026 | The Texas Tribune

Jackson is a Trumpkin through and through. He doesn’t deserve re-election to his House seat, let alone election to a seat in what once was known as “the world’s greatest deliberative body.”

Keep the salts handy.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

If I were King of the World …

First, I need to stipulate that I never have aspired to be King of the World, but if somehow were it to happen, there are a few things I would change about the current political climate.

For starters:

  • I would limit the U.S. president to a single six-year term, kind of like what they do in Mexico. Presidents there run for a single term and then they’re gone.

What is the advantage here? The president doesn’t campaign for re-election, for starters, and he or she then gets to concentrate solely on legislative agendas.

Too often presidents take office at the start of their first term and begin making speeches aimed appealing to voting blocs that would favor them in a run for their second term. It’s a fairly bipartisan affliction, so my friends on the left can accuse me all they want of offering a “both sides do it” escape clause. Too bad. I just happen to believe it’s true.

I offer this change while reminding readers of this blog that I oppose term limits already. I subscribe to the notion that elections serve as “term limits” if voters believe the officeholder doesn’t deserve to be re-elected.

  • Furthermore, I would like to see terms of House members extended from two years to three or maybe four years. That, too, removes the need for House members to begin their re-election quest immediately upon taking office.

A congressman once told me that he had to dedicate a certain number of hours every week to campaign fundraising, which took time away from research and legislating. It was an unwritten rule, he said, but one that a congressman or woman dare not ignore if he or she wanted to serve beyond that single term.

I wouldn’t trifle with the length of U.S. Senate terms. No need to extend them beyond the six years to which we elect them. Besides, doing so might fill a senator with a notion that since he or she is elected to serve longer than the president that he or she is more important than the commander in chief. We’ve got too many senatorial grandstanders already.

None of this is likely to happen. I am just venting over what I see is serious damage to the political fabric.

Of course, none of this answers the need to stop elected certifiable dumbasses to high public office. We’ll have to deal seriously with that matter later.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Hey, Biden says ‘I intend’ to run

(AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

President Biden made some news tonight during his interview with CBS News’ Scott Pelley on “60 Minutes.”

The president kinda walked back his earlier statement in which he declared he would run for a second term in 2024. In the broadcast tonight, he said he “intends” to seek re-election but that a final decision hasn’t been made.

Hmm. Well, what does one say about that?

It tells me that Joe Biden is keeping his options as open as possible, given the topic that Pelley was discussing with the president.

His age. Biden is the oldest man ever to hold the office of POTUS. The president expressed supreme confidence in his ability to do the job. “Watch me,” he urged Pelley.

OK, I get it, Mr. President. I don’t have a personal issue with Biden walking back a bit his earlier declaration of a re-election effort. I think it’s smart for the president to say only what he intends to do.

A lot of things can happen. They do and this president, who’s been victimized by fate and tragedy in unimaginable ways, at this moment is no longer a declared candidate for president in 2024.

At least not yet.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

It’s in the timing

Amarillo city officials are going on trial very soon in which they will have to defend the legitimacy of a multimillion-dollar effort to deliver a new municipal complex of offices and convention space.

The lawsuit comes from businessman Alex Fairly. The trial will be in a Potter County district court. Fairly believes the city acted illegally in issuing $260 million in “anticipation notes.”

I am not going to assess whether the city’s actions broke the law. I am, though, in a position to comment on the timing of the issuance.

You see, voters already had spoken decisively in November 2020 when they rejected a $275 million general obligation bond issue to — that’s right — revamp the Civic Center and relocate City Hall. The City Council didn’t seem to care about what voters decided.

So, it acted without voters’ approval by issuing those anticipation notes. The debt load carried by the notes is virtually identical to the load that voters rejected.

I hate saying this, because for years I was a staunch supporter of City Council initiatives, but the decision to supersede voters’ rejection smacks too much of municipal arrogance.

It’s the timing of the issuance juxtaposed with the rejection of the bond issue that ought to rankle residents. Fairly has intimated, further, that the issuance of the debt notes was done without adequate public notice, giving residents a chance to comment publicly on what they thought about the project.

To be sure, if I still lived in Amarillo and had a chance to vote on the bond issue in November 2020 I likely would have voted “yes” on the city request. I can argue all day and into the night about the need for the city to upgrade its Civic Center and find a new site for City Hall. Most voters, though, said “no” to the proposal.

For the city to then come back and issue the anticipation notes — which do not require voter approval — well, plays right into the righteous anger that fuels a lot of voters’ interest in government.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Why are we waiting to indict?

Donald Trump’s legal difficulties should not be seen as some sort of uniquely American experience.

Other nations’ former presidents have been arrested, tried, convicted and sent to prison for their crimes. How is it that Donald Trump so far has avoided being read his Miranda rights, forced to don the cuffs and marched off to the slammer?

I think it’s because we ourselves as a nation that treats defendants with dignity. We don’t rush to arrest someone formerly in power. We are an “indispensable nation” that values the “rule of law.”

It’s fair to ask whether Donald Trump would treat other defendants with dignity. Or would he lead campaign rally cheers to “lock him up”?

We all know the answer.

Still, I get the feeling that time is not necessarily Donald Trump’s friend.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Democrats playing with fire

I remain concerned, but not yet frightened, over the prospect of Democrats working overtly to help nominate MAGA-loving, election-denying, fruitcake Republicans to high public office.

It’s going on all across the country, with Democrats contributing actual cash money and casting actual votes for Republicans believing that nominating the weakest candidates guarantees a victory for Democrats this fall.

Not so fast, folks.

This is a game fraught with peril.

What in the world is going to happen if voters actually elect these election deniers to, say, governorships? There are individuals on some state ballots who promise to overturn the results of the 2024 presidential election if the “wrong” candidate wins. These are the folks Democrats are helping win their party’s nomination. Holy cow!

This kind of electoral tomfoolery can work. It also can backfire.

It’s the kind of act that makes me nervous.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Election deniers win now .. but rejection is in order

All those wacky Republican election deniers appear to be winning their primary election battles, setting them up for contests against serious political candidates in the fall.

The task now falls on responsible voters in states such as Pennsylvania, Florida, Arizona, Nevada and the Dakotas to toss them out on their ear and elect individuals who haven’t swilled The Big Lie concoction being offered by Donald J. Trump and his cabal of cultists.

I am going to endorse the notion — admittedly with an abundance of caution — the idea that the election deniers’ presence on the fall midterm election ballot is tailor-made for Democrats wishing to put the Big Liars in their place.

My caution isn’t because I dispute their notion. It is because I am not sure that American voters necessarily are smart enough to rise up against these threats to our democratic process.

Think of what might happen. A GOP candidate for Pennsylvania governor could appoint a secretary of state and have that individual actually reject the outcome of the 2024 election if it happens to go in Democrats’ favor. Same thing could happen in Arizona.

The task now is for voters in several key states to deny them the power to enact such craven policies. I won’t surrender to their political idiocy. Neither should anyone else.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

House panel faces deadline

The select committee that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to investigate the 1/6 assault on the U.S. Capitol is facing a deadline.

It needs to finish its work and present its findings prior to the start of the next Congress. Or else … the Republican leaders who might assume control of the chamber could pull the plug on the whole enterprise.

I say “might assume control” because a GOP takeover of the House isn’t as much of a lead-pipe cinch as it was, oh, six months ago.

However, Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson cannot even begin to presume that Democrats are going to maintain control of the House of Representatives. If I were the chairman, I would be making damn sure the panel’s work gets done a whole lot sooner than later.

Thompson has indicated that the committee is going to resume taking public testimony on Sept. 28. There is a damn near certainty to be more fireworks ignited in the hearing room after the chairman gavels the proceedings to order.

But looking forward it will be imperative for the committee to present its complete findings prior to the new Congress taking its seat. It then can submit those findings to the Justice Department — which already is conducting its independent probe.

What causes me great alarm is the revenge rhetoric coming from the likes of House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, who has made no secret of his desire to protect Donald Trump’s ample rear end if given the chance.

Make no mistake that McCarthy has been a profile in cowardice as it relates to the insurrection that Trump incited that day on The Ellipse. McCarthy once said the right thing in blaming Trump for causing the attack, only to take it all back and resume his role as legislative suck-up to the 45th POTUS.

I hope Chairman Thompson is on the same page cited in this blog post. He needs to get the work done and then hope Democrats can hold on to reins of power in the House.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Believing now that indictment is coming

From virtually the moment that he skulked out of town prior to the ceremony celebrating the guy who defeated in the 2020 presidential election, I have resisted the notion that Donald J. Trump would be indicted on charges of criminal behavior.

Today, though, my thoughts have changed … dramatically, I must add.

I believe that Attorney General Merrick Garland is going to indict the former president of the United States, making a huge bit of history in the process. The charges that Garland might level against Trump, though, remain an open question.

They include the most serious, say, obstruction of justice or conspiracy to commit sedition. Those are felonies that carry enormous prison terms if someone is convicted of the allegation.

There might be misdemeanor charges leveled, dealing with the handling of those classified documents that Trump squirreled away in his glitzy Florida estate.

Friends of mine who live in faraway lands have speculated that Trump would be hauled off in leg irons and handcuffs. Other friends of mine — those who are loyal to Trump — have said quite the opposite. They don’t defend the individual’s character, saying he “never would do” the things that have been alleged already. Instead, they challenge the motives of the federal investigation.

I believe Merrick Garland is as fine a public servant as we can find. His career as a federal judge was marked by universal praise — from the left and the right — for his judicial scholarship and the meticulous nature of his court rulings. Even when the Senate GOP leadership blocked his nomination to the Supreme Court in early 2016, they didn’t question his qualifications or the quality of the man; they were motivated by pure politics.

I am unaware of the particulars of the AG’s investigation. All I have to assess it is my belief in the character of the man leading it.

He has said that “no one is above the law.” By “no one,” he means, well … no one!

Therefore, I believe he has compiled enough evidence to cobble together a prosecutorial complaint against Donald John Trump.

Then we shall watch the full-scale implosion of a man deluded with notions of grandeur. It cannot happen to a more deserving individual.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com