Graham writes strategy for GOP failure

Lindsey Graham is saying things his fellow Republicans don’t want to hear.

But they should.

That is why the U.S. senator from South Carolina’s expected bid to become the next president of the United States is likely going to fail. He will be unable to persuade the fire-breathing GOP base that he’s tell them a harsh truth: You can’t govern if you’re angry.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/lindsey-graham-2016-ted-cruz-116372.html?hp=lc1_4

As Politico reports, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas vows to “repeal ‘every word’ of Obamacare and Common Core if he becomes president. He would ‘abolish’ the IRS, flatten the Tax Code so Americans can fill out their taxes on a postcard, and ‘finally, finally, finally’ secure the border.”

Graham is trying to talk some sense into his fellow Republicans by reminding them that governing is a shared responsibility. They need to work with Democrats, not against them, if they expect to get anything done.

My hunch is that his message is falling on mostly deaf ears.

Republicans are mad at Democrats for what they perceive has been a shutting-them-out of the governing process. The GOP response now that it has control of both legislative houses? Payback, man.

Graham said it won’t work.

Here’s how Politico profiles Graham: “Graham, who has served in Congress since 1995 and is an attorney in the Air Force Reserve, is not without a wide range of votes that add to his baggage headed into 2016. He voted for both of President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominees. He backs Loretta Lynch to be attorney general. He believes climate change is real and that the federal government should do something about it. He’s open to a Simpson-Bowles-type approach to rein in big deficits, something that would raise tax revenues. And he was an architect of the comprehensive immigration bill, something the right wing of his party despises.”

What in the world is so unreasonable about Graham’s approach to governing?

Everything, apparently, according to the far right wing of the Republican Party. Too bad.

 

Sgt. Bergdahl's life is getting complicated

U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s life got mighty complicated the day he disappeared from his post in Afghanistan and was held by Taliban terrorists.

He was repatriated in 2014 amid cheers to those who were glad we were able to recover one of our fighting men.

Now the young man’s life is getting decidedly more complicated. This story might not end well for Sgt. Bergdahl.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-military-bergdahl-may-face-life-in-prison-if-convicted/ar-AA9ZMmM

The Army has accused him of desertion and with misbehavior before the enemy. The desertion charge carries a five-year prison sentence if he’s convicted; the misbehavior charge comes with a life sentence if he is found guilty.

All of sudden, just like that, the man once considered a near-hero must prove to the military that he didn’t join the enemy willingly and deserted his post, abandoned his comrades and in effect shirked the duty he took an oath to perform.

The Army is going to send this case to an Article 32 hearing, which is equivalent roughly to a grand jury proceeding. There it will be determined Bergdahl’s case goes to court martial.

I would hate for Bergdahl to be convicted of either charge. If he is, then, well … the young man needs to be punished.

His life, no matter if he spends it behind bars or is acquitted, has become far more complicated than he ever imagined.

Young woman owes her life to ballplayer

MESA, Ariz. — I’m in a baseball frame of mind today, having attended a spring training blowout game between the Oakland A’s and the Chicago Cubs.

My brother-in-law brought this video (attached to this link) to our attention tonight. It shows Evan Longoria saving the life of a young reporter who was interviewing him along the first base line.

Seemingly on instinct, Longoria reached out to grab the baseball that flew off a hitter’s bat and was heading straight for her head.

I want to share this to illustrate that miracles do happen. It’s pretty astonishing to say the very least.

What’s more, it is my sincere hope the young reporter sends Longoria flowers for his birthday, for Christmas, Easter … and any holiday under the sun.

 

Why no 'E' for these goofs?

MESA, Ariz. — Sitting through a spring training exhibition baseball that gets out of hand early gives you time to let your mind wander.

Today’s game between the Oakland A’s and the Chicago Cubs was a blowout when we decided to leave at the end of the seventh inning. The A’s were leading 15-2 and the Cubs looked as though they wanted the game to be over immediately.

So, where did my mind wander?

I was wondering why a wild pitch or a passed ball — mistakes committed by pitchers and catchers, respectively — aren’t scored as an “error” in the box score.

Baseball is a game of statistics. You can find a stat for anything, any activity, any good deed or misdeed committed on the field.

The Cubs’ right fielder today was dinged for two errors on the same play as he booted the ball twice while trying to pick it up deep in the right-field corner. The A’s hitter was credited with a double, but he ended up on third base as the ball finally got thrown into the infield.

We saw three passed balls today. Yes, the errors were logged in the scorebook as “passed balls,” but not as errors. Why not?

The catcher erred in letting the ball get by him, allowing runners to advance; had the ball gotten past the catcher with no one on base, there wouldn’t be a record of it in the scorebook.

I pose these questions as a way to make pitchers and catchers even more, um, accountable for the mistakes they make on the field. A pitcher goes wild, that’s his mistake; a catcher lets a catchable pitch slip past him, that his error.

They ought to show up — on the record — in the book of baseball records.

 

Cruz: I'm no Barack Obama

Of course Ted Cruz is dismissing comparisons to Barack Obama.

Both men served part of their first terms in the U.S. Senate before declaring their presidential candidacies.

That’s where the comparison ends, according to Cruz.

Cruz: Obama was a ‘backbencher’ in Senate

Obama was a “backbencher” in the Senate, according to the Texas Republican. Cruz said he’s been out front during his brief time on Capitol Hill, fighting for “conservative causes.”

Man, he sure has been out front. I’ll concede that point.

I’ll just disagree with his granting himself high marks for effectiveness.

Acknowledging my own bias against Cruz, I choose to describe him as a Senate loudmouth. Obama’s Senate experience didn’t produce much in the way of legislation, but at least he managed to be a lot more mannerly in the way he conduct himself in public.

Let’s not forget that Cruz dismisses the president’s prior experience as a community organizer. That role was meaningless, according to Cruz, who served as Texas solicitor general — arguing cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Sure, that’s a big deal. How about acknowledging the importance of getting community groups to unite for common causes? There’s nothing shameful about that work.

Sen. Cruz is a masterful self-promoter, as is President Obama.

I’ll be interested as the weeks and months go by to see how loud Cruz gets in promoting himself. He’s going to be one of many GOP candidates seeking their party’s nomination. They all likely to employ the same strategy: Run hard to the right to appeal to the party’s base.

It’s going to get loud out there on the Republican campaign trail. Listen carefully and you’ll hear Ted Cruz’s voice above the crowd.

I’ll also concede another point he’s sure to make: No, Sen. Cruz, you aren’t Barack Obama.

 

The Donald remakes birther argument

Donald Trump is at it again.

The hotel/casino mogul who keeps insisting that Barack Obama is not qualified to hold the office of the presidency now suggests that Ted Cruz is ineligible to become president.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-ted-cruz-birther-233710183.html

Trump keeps yammering that Obama was born abroad, even though it is has been known for decades he was born in Hawaii. Actually, The Donald is misinterpreting the U.S. Constitution with the birther argument against Obama.

He’s also now doing the same thing with Ted Cruz, the Republican U.S. senator from Texas who today announced his campaign for the presidency.

Cruz was born in Canada. His mother is American; his father is Cuban. Cruz’s U.S. citizenship was established the moment he was born because of Mom’s U.S. citizenship.

End of argument.

Not so, with The Donald, who’s considering a run for the GOP presidential nomination himself.

The Donald does not know of which he speaks when he yammers about constitutional qualifications relating to President Obama and Sen. Cruz.

That won’t shut him up. Too bad for that.

 

Let's define 'Southern heritage'

The Sons of the Confederate Veterans are going to have a steep hill to climb in defending a flag that one time symbolized an act of treason.

Many of us out here will be all ears.

At issue is an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court over Texas’s refusal to allow the display of the Confederate flag on motor vehicle license plates. The state says the design is offensive to millions of Texans, as it reminds them of the Confederacy’s declaration of war against the United States of America. And, yes, slavery was one of the issues that brought about the Civil War.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans say the flag merely depicts “Southern heritage.”

Really?

Does that “heritage” include the Confederate States of America going to war with the United States? Does it mean we should honor the effort of a collection of Southern states that sought to split the United States apart? Do we honor the war that killed roughly 600,000 Americans — Southerners and Northerners — on battlefields throughout the nation?

And do we honor “Southern heritage” by displaying a flag that symbolizes modern-day hate groups who’ve committed horrifying acts of barbarism and cruelty against African-Americans?

I want the Supreme Court justices to ask the Sons of Confederate Veterans legal team questions that deal with some of these issues.

 

Cruz has some explaining to do

Now that Ted Cruz has declared his candidacy for president of the United States, I think it’s fair to commence the questioning about one aspect of his public service record.

It goes something like this:

The U.S. senator from Texas is in the middle of his first term. He’s a tenacious Republican lawmaker who fancies himself as the savior of the modern conservative movement. His Senate experience mirrors that of the man he hopes to succeed in the White House, Barack Obama, who was elected in 2008 while he was part of the way through his first term in the U.S. Senate.

President Obama’s critics have made a great deal of noise ever since he took office that he lacked “experience” to become the Leader of the Free World. And with the world going to hell all over the place, they continue to harp on the idea that Obama’s lack of experience has somehow contributed to what they call a “feckless” foreign policy.

The Cruz Missile, thus, is going to have to explain to his critics whether he possesses the requisite experience to become the next commander in chief.

Indeed, at least Obama had served in the Illinois Senate before being elected to the U.S. Senate, but that hasn’t quieted his critics who keep referring to his role as a “community organizer,” as if to denigrate such work and seeking to diminish the importance of pulling community groups together to work for the common good.

So, Sen. Cruz, how do you have the government experience it takes to do the most difficult job in the world? Well, do you?

 

Sullivan threw out the bait; I took it

Michael Quinn Sullivan runs an outfit called Empower Texans. He sent out a mailer to Texas Senate District 31 residents which contained a bit of red meat of which I took a bite.

It implied that state Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, opposes a Senate bill that would provide $4.6 billion in tax relief for Texans. Dumb me. I fell for it.

Seliger called this morning to remind me that he voted for Senate Bill 1, but simply declined to sign on as a sponsor of the bill.

The antipathy between Seliger and Sullivan is as strong as ever. Indeed, I happen to stand with Seliger in his distaste and distrust of Sullivan, who sees himself as a kingmaker, seeking to elect legislators and statewide officials who agree with his brand of ultraconservatism.

I also happen to agree with those who believe the state should hold off on tax cuts until it takes care of some essential needs, such as infrastructure improvement and restoring money to public education.

Lesson learned: Read everything that Michael Quinn Sullivan sends out — carefully.

 

Smart phone is smarter than I thought

ON THE HIGHWAY BETWEEN HOLBROOK AND PAYSON, Ariz. — You’ve heard already about my addiction to my cell phone.

I’m about to tell you about another discovery my wife and I have made about this annoying device.

It has a Global Positioning System, which is good.

My wife programmed the GPS to guide us to our destination in Mesa, Ariz. Her cell phone, which is identical to mine, charted a route to our destination. It gave us the road directions and posted an estimated time of arrival, just like the other GPS devices we own.

Then it started beeping at us — or, more to the point, at me.

Why the beeping noise? The phone knew how fast I was driving and was beeping at me, the driver, to remind me that I was exceeding the speed limit. Not by a lot, mind you. If the speed limit on the highway was 65 mph, and I was traveling at 66 mph, four loud beeps went off.

This phone not only is smart, it’s damn smart. So smart, in fact, that it’s smartness annoyed the daylights out of me as we made our way through some gorgeous mountainous Arizona countryside.

I’ve noted already that I haven’t yet gotten acquainted with all the “apps” available for use on my cell phone. My wife, who keeps insisting she isn’t very tech-savvy, actually understates her expertise with these devices. She’s much better at finding various uses for the cell phone than I do.

I appreciated her finding the GPS in her cell phone. I do not appreciate the smart-alecky device reminding me with all those beeps that it’s watching me like a hawk.

 

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience