Category Archives: political news

political news

Welcome aboard the GOP 'clown van'

Roger Simon isn’t some left-wing, squishy liberal pundit who genuflects at the sound of Barack Obama’s name.

But he’s written an essay that sums up what many are beginning to sense already: The race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination well could provide as many laughs as the 2012 campaign did.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-clown-car-runs-into-ditch-114565.html?hp=c1_3

Simon’s commentary ticks off the dog-and-pony show that was known as the Iowa Freedom Summit, hosted by U.S. Rep. Steve “Cantaloupe Thighs” King. You’ll remember this goof, saying a couple of years ago that illegal immigrants are able to smuggle heavy loads of drugs across the border because they’ve got “thighs the size of cantaloupes.”

Sheesh, already!

It shouldn’t be this way. Most of the serious Republicans who might be running for president stayed away from the King-hosted circus. One of the serious guys, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, got criticized from the TEA party crowd because he threw his arms around Barack Obama, who ventured to the Jersey Shore in October 2012 to assess the damage done by Super Storm/Hurricane Sandy and vowed to provide federal help to New Jersey as it sought to recover from the destruction.

There were plenty of clownish moments at the Freedom Summit, as Simon revealed in his column.

A friend of mine, satirist and political commentator Rick Horowitz, noted that Republicans want to be considered thoughtful and capable of governing … then they trot out Donald Trump and Sarah Palin at this event.

The Republican Party is full of thoughtful and reasonable men and women. Why, though, do we keep focusing our attention on this collection of clowns?

I’m waiting to hear more from the grownups.

 

national news, political news

That darn TelePrompter

Maybe you’ve heard some of the criticism of President Obama from those on the right. They’ve chortled at his reliance on TelePrompters to deliver his soaring rhetoric.

Well, all politicians use the device. It doesn’t matter which party to which they belong. The TelePrompter has been a staple of stump speeches, State of the Union speeches, address to international audiences, hey, perhaps even at county fairs.

Well, Sarah Palin — who I’m quite sure has jabbed and poked at the president for his use of the device over the years — had a little trouble of her own at Rep. Steve King’s Iowa Freedom Summit.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2925162/Palin-s-meltdown-GOP-firebrand-rambles-stutters-teleprompter-error-leave-crowd-baffled-just-saying-s-seriously-interested-2016-run.html

The former half-term governor of Alaska had the darn thing freeze up on her while she delivered her remarks to her fans at the Iowa meeting. She turned out to be, well, not quite so quick on her feet. She started rambling and got a bit confused as she was forced, due to technical difficulties, to improvise on the spot.

Hey, stuff happens. Right?

Just maybe now we can put an end to the pointless criticism — by politicians — who make fun of other politicians’ reliance on a machine that makes ’em sound good.

 

national news, political news

Circus act convenes in Iowa

Call him the ringmaster. That would be Congressman Steve King of Iowa, the Republicans’ leading critic of immigration reform and the individual hosting something called the Iowa Freedom Summit.

It should be a showcase for what’s left of the Republican Party’s intellectual heft. There’s still plenty left, but the party’s center-stage attention has been hijacked by some seriously radical individuals — such as Rep. King.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/steve-king-iowa-summit-immigration-dreamers-114552.html?hp=c4_3

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is there, along with Donald Trump, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben Carson and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. But … all is not lost here. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie also is there and I count Christie among the grownups of the party, a guy prone to actually thinking rationally and reasonably.

He’s no doubt going to trot out his conservative credentials to the summit attendees because, well, he’s thinking of running for president next year and the starting point in the campaign is in Iowa, where those GOP caucuses are dominated by the evangelical Christian wing of the party.

The news out of the Iowa event has been twofold: Palin and Trump both have expressed “serious” interest in running for the White House in 2016. Seriously. They’re thinking about it.

Look, the more the merrier. That’s how I see it. Neither of them is a legitimate contender for the presidency of the world’s greatest nation. By my count, I see maybe two individuals at this summit who should be taken seriously: the aforementioned Christie and Scott Walker.

The other serious candidates-in-waiting — Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul — aren’t there. Why? Because they’ve all staked out moderate positions here and there that just don’t comport with the far right wing of the party.

The ringmaster, King, is playing this event beautifully — I will acknowledge. He’s getting a lot of attention and, by golly, he’s getting that GOP base all fired up.

Let the fun continue.

political news

Go for it, Sarah!

Sarah Palin says “of course” she’s interested in running for president of the United States in 2016.

I don’t know how many potential candidates have made such a declaration. I think I’ve lost count.

This one, though, is laughable on its face.

Yet here I am. Commenting, albeit briefly, on it.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/sarah-palin-possible-2016-run-114534.html?hp=r3_3

Palin is the former half-term governor of Alaska. She was the Republican nominee for vice president in 2008. Then she “went rogue,” and might have cost the ticket led by Sen. John McCain millions of votes the GOP otherwise might have gotten.

She won’t run for president. Not this year. Not ever.

Palin is, shall we say, damaged goods.

The reality TV show? The strange behavior of her family getting involved — allegedly — in a fight at an Anchorage house party? The absolute absence of any knowledge of anything beyond TEA party talking points?

Republicans are going to be blessed in 2016 with a relatively stellar field of potential candidates. It’ll be filled with heavyweights, individuals of actual accomplishment. Some of them are reasonable, rational, intelligent and articulate.

Sarah Palin? Not … a … chance.

Then again, why not? She’ll liven it up, yes? You betcha.

 

national news, political news

GOP men vs. GOP women on abortion

The men who run the Republican Party caucus on Capitol Hill are facing a determined foe.

They happen to be the women who comprise the rank and file of GOP legislators.

The battleground? It’s abortion. Men of the GOP? You’re in for a fight.

You go, ladies.

Abortion dissenters face backlash

Female Republican House members are rising up against anti-abortion legislation that would stop abortions at the 20-week mark of a pregnancy. The legislation contains language about rape and suggests that even women who become pregnant as a result of a savage sexual assault must carry the pregnancy to full term. The provision in the bill required that women who are raped had to report the incident to police to be exempted from the 20-week rule. Some Republican moderate women said as many as 70 percent of rapes go unreported by women.

This is what happens when men — who know not a single thing about some of these intensely personal issues — make laws affecting women.

Congress intended to pass this legislation out on the 42nd anniversary of the historic Roe vs. Wade decision in the Supreme Court that stated the Constitution protects a woman’s right to end a pregnancy.

Conservatives are angry over the GOP moderates’ torpedoing of the legislation. Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, said the women will be “held accountable.”

Baloney.

They’ve acted responsibly and their voices need to be heard on this issue that only they understand.

 

entertainment news, national news, political news

GOP offers a flood of SOTU responses

Jon Stewart is a comedian, an entertainer, a satirist of sorts.

He also has a way of bringing some harsh truths to light, such as when he poked fun at the multiple Republican Party responses to President Obama’s State of the Union speech.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/jon-stewart-destroys-gops-dueling-sotu-responses-how-many-fcking-people-are-at-this-tea-party/

The “official” response came from freshman U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa. That’s fine. Ernst is a rising Republican star, having taken over a seat held by longtime Democratic liberal Tom Harken, who retired from public life in 2014.

Then came — count ’em — three TEA party responses.

Rep. Curt Clawson of Florida weighed in for the TEA party wing of the GOP. But wait. There were more.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky had his version of the TEA party response. I guess Sen. Paul represented the isolationist/dove wing of the TEA party.

And then, of course, we had Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas with his TEA party response. Cruz represents, I reckon, the loudmouth wing of the TEA party. The young man hasn’t shut his mouth a single time since taking office in January 2013. He’s become the Republican version of, say, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Stewart asked a foul-mouthed question about “how many TEA party members are out there?”

The query speaks to a potential problem facing Republicans as they prepare for the 2016 campaign for the White House. Cruz and Paul and potential presidential candidates, along with former Texas Gov. Rick Perry (man, I love writing the word “former” in front of Perry’s title), Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio and maybe a dozen more individuals I can’t think of at the moment.

They all represent varying wings of the GOP. They all are going sling barbs and arrows at each other. They’re going to bloody each other up, seeking to court the “base” of the party — whatever it has become.

The multiple TEA party responses illustrates what’s both right and wrong about Republicans at the moment.

They’re right to welcome a lot of voices; diversity is a good thing. They’re wrong in trying to outshout each other.

 

local news, national news, political news

Obama goes 'Red' to tell his story

2 Comments

Hand it to President Obama. He delivered a State of the Union speech to a Congress now in full control of the opposing party and then he heads right into the center of the Red State base of the Republican Party.

He took his sales campaign today to Idaho. He is heading to Kansas on Thursday.

Idaho gave 64 percent of its vote in 2012 to GOP nominee Mitt Romney, while Kansas was casting nearly 60 percent of its vote for Mitt.

That doesn’t deter a lame-duck president who isn’t likely to call himself such as he pitches his middle-class tax cut to residents in states where he’s held in relatively low esteem.

“I still believe what I said back then,” Mr. Obama told a crowd at Boise State University. “I still believe that as Americans we have more in common than not.”

He’s surely entitled to believe that. Some of us out here in the Heartland aren’t so sure about the commonality. Still, I give the president props for taking the campaign into the heart of the loyal opposition’s territory.

Here’s a thought. How about coming here, Mr. President?

Texas isn’t friendly to you, either. But you did do nominally better in the Lone Star State than you did in Kansas, winning 42 percent of the 2012 vote against Mitt.

I even can make a pitch for Barack Obama to come to the Panhandle, where the 26 counties of this region only gave him 20 percent of the vote in 2012. But hey, he says we’re “not a Blue America or a Red America. We’re the United States of America.” He repeated that mantra Tuesday night at his State of the Union speech, recalling how he introduced it to the nation during his keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Look at it this way: If Bill Clinton can come here in 2008 and campaign on behalf of his wife, Hillary, and pack the Civic Center Grand Plaza Ballroom to overflowing, surely the Leader of the Free World can command a big audience to sell his vision for the country.

I know more than a few Republicans who’d attend.

 

business news, national news, political news

'Transfer of wealth' talk likely to surface

Can we now discuss one of President Obama’s key points in his State of the Union speech?

It’s about that tax cut for the middle class.

He took considerable pain Tuesday night to extol the virtues of middle-class Americans and the work they do to make our country strong economically. He wants to give middle classers — folks like my wife and me — a break on their taxes. To pay for it he wants to ask more of wealthy Americans. They need to pay more in taxes to finance the tax relief he’s planning for the rest of us.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-have-one-word-for-president%e2%80%99s-proposals-and-veto-threats-%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99/ar-AA8pnAq

Those on the right and far right have a term for it. We’ll hear it. It’s called “transfer of wealth.”

Let’s try to set the record straight.

As I understand the meaning of the term “transfer of wealth,” what would have to occur is that the federal government would have to actually take money earned by rich folks and give it to not-so-rich folks. Legend has it that Robin Hood did that in medieval England when he “took from the rich and gave to the poor.”

That’s wealth transfer.

What I heard the president propose Tuesday night was nothing of the kind.

A tax cut for the middle class wouldn’t deprive rich Americans of their wealth. They’d still be rich. They’ll get to keep their yachts, fancy cars, summer/winter homes and all their bling.

The middle class would get to pocket a little more disposable income to spend on things they want or need.

All this being said, I do understand GOP criticism of the president for proposing something he knows won’t ever be enacted into legislation he can sign into law. On that score, Barack Obama has proved his political deftness, as his proposal was met in the congressional chamber with applause from Democrats and silence from Republicans. How do you suppose that looks to millions of middle-class Americans watching who actually favor a tax break?

I don’t intend to tolerate any demagoguery about wealth transfer in describing what the president has pitched.

How about debating the proposal on its merits: Do the folks who control Congress favor a tax break for middle-class Americans or not?

 

national news, political news

Obama lays out his vision; GOP won't like it

2 Comments

 

This will surprise no one, I’m sure. I liked President Obama’s State of the Union speech.

The only problem with the speech, though, is that while he spoke of working with Republicans who control Congress and while he expressed a desire to find common ground, he staked out one key position that is sure to rankle the loyal opposition.

The president wants tax breaks for the middle class and wants to tax the wealthy more to pay for them.

Given that I am not rich and that ours is a middle-class household, how in the world can I not like what the president said tonight?

I won’t critique Obama’s speech point by point, but I’ll note that he threw down the gauntlet to Republicans. He’s feeling heady these days. His poll numbers are up. The economy is gaining enormous strength. He spoke on behalf of middle-class Americans and forced the Republicans to sit on their hands on national TV while their Democratic “friends” stood and cheered.

It’s the optics, man. They look good for one side of the aisle — and it’s not the Republican side.

It is difficult to imagine how Republicans are going handle their differences with the president. They don’t want to tax the wealthy any more. However, where else can Congress find the money to pay for those middle-class tax breaks?

Free community college for those who qualify? The response to that idea also split the chamber and likely split the parties.

The president’s tone was conciliatory — at times. The underlying theme throughout, though, suggests that talk of bipartisanship won’t bring the other side along.

I’d be standing and cheering if I had been in the room tonight. I’ll presume you knew that already.

Since I wasn’t in the room and since I’m just one American living out here in Flyover Country, I’ll just applaud from my home and hope — although I suspect it’ll be futile — that Democrats and Republicans can come together to help the vast middle class that deserves some reward for all the hard work it has done to bring the country back from the brink.

 

legal news, political news, State news

Where to put Public Integrity Unit

This one has tied me up in knots.

State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Spring, has pitched a proposed constitutional amendment that would remove the state’s Public Integrity Unit from the Travis County District Attorney’s Office and place it in the Texas Attorney General’s Office.

It’s a no-brainer, yes?

Not exactly.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/01/riddle-bill-would-move-public-integrity-unit-to-ags-office/

This has “political payback” written all over it.

The Public Integrity Unit became the source of intense controversy this past summer when a grand jury indicted former Texas Gov. Rick Perry on charges of abuse of power and coercion of a public official, DA Rosemary Lehmberg.

OK. Hang with me. Lehmberg is a Democrat. Perry is a Republican. Lehmberg pleaded guilty to drunken driving and should have quit her office; she didn’t. Perry then issued a public threat to veto money for the Public Integrity Unit if Lehmberg didn’t resign. She stayed in office and Perry made good on his threat.

The grand jury — guided by a special prosecutor — returned the indictment and Perry accused the panel of playing raw politics.

Now comes the Legislature controlled by Republicans, saying that the attorney general, Republican Ken Paxton, should manage the Public Integrity Unit.

The Public Integrity Unit’s major responsibility is to investigate complaints against officials who’ve been accused of misusing their authority. The office has investigated Democrats as well as Republicans. Has it been an inherently partisan political office, targeting Republican officeholders unfairly? I haven’t followed the PIU’s activities closely enough over the years to draw that conclusion.

Riddle’s legislation would amend the Texas Constitution to put the PIU under the attorney general’s purview. Can an agency run by a partisan Republican do a thorough, fair, unbiased and objective job of investigation complaints leveled against public officials?

I think so, just as I believe the Travis County DA’s office can do the very same thing.

Why change? Well, it seems that Riddle and other legislative Republicans are seeking to make good on a campaign promise. As the San Antonio Express-News notes in a blog about Riddle’s proposal: “Republicans prefer that model, in part because the current set-up gives power for investigating mostly GOP state leaders in the hands of a prosecutor elected by one of the most liberal parts of the state.”

Interesting.

Here’s a possible third option: How about creating an independent agency led by someone approved by a bipartisan panel of legislators?