President offers disappointing budget plan

The upcoming hassles over the next federal budget have taken an unfortunate turn.

President Obama has decided against proposing a new method of increasing Social Security benefits for retired Americans.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/198815-obama-abandons-cut-to-social-security

The headlines have suggested the president has “abandoned cuts” to the program. Actually, the term “cuts” is a bit of a misnomer. The idea had been to link increases in SSI to the cost of living index. Thus, Social Security recipients wouldn’t have their incomes reduced — as in getting less money than they were getting the previous year. The increases would be tied to the Consumer Price Index.

Why is this disappointing? I am one who believes serious budget reform has to include changes in discretionary spending. Social Security is one of those programs that has been seen as sacrosanct. You’ve heard it called the “third rail” of American politics: You touch it and you die, politically of course.

The CPI indexing linkage isn’t an unreasonable alternative.

Now it appears that the president has challenged congressional Republicans to battle him straight up in the next budget fight. There will be no pretense of negotiating.

At one level, I appreciate Barack Obama’s frustration with GOP negotiators, who have made it their mission — it seems to me — to stymie virtually every initiative put forth by the White House. Perhaps the president has had enough of it.

I wish he would have stood his ground on another issue. Social Security shouldn’t be treated as the Holy Grail.

Illegal immigrants show up at wrong place

Here we go again.

A politician known for being tough on illegal immigrants apparently has been caught hiring them himself.

Tsk, tsk.

Texas state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, is one of four men seeking the Republican nomination for Texas lieutenant governor. He has talked about how tough he’d be on undocumented immigrants. He’d ship ’em out of Texas, by golly.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/02/19/brief/

It turns out he reportedly hired them to work at his Houston sports bar way back in the 1980s. The Dallas Morning News reported it, talking to one of them who allegedly worked for Patrick back then. Patrick calls it dirty politics and blames one of his rivals for the lieutenant governor’s office, Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, of playing dirty.

I know it’s an old story. Maybe the senator went through a change of heart since the days when perhaps he didn’t look as harshly at illegal immigrants as he does now.

Still, when you stake out a position as Patrick has done on illegal immigrants, you have to be sure you have nothing in your past you want to be kept secret.

Will these people ever learn?

You must define ‘outrage,’ Mr. President

President Obama said today he is “outraged” over the violence in Ukraine.

He vows “consequences” will occur if the Ukrainian government refuses to stop killing its people who are mounting what were supposed to be peaceful protests.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/europe/198803-obama-outraged-by-rising-ukraine-death-toll

Let’s understand, of course, that the president was “outraged” over the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons. He threatened a military strike, he sought permission from Congress — which it had demanded — to act and then, presto!, the Russians stepped in with a deal to rid the Syrian military of the chemicals it used on its citizens.

The Ukraine matter is different, to be sure.

The United States cannot launch a military strike against the former Soviet republic that sits right next to Russia. It can, and must, be firm in enacting economic sanctions — perhaps even imposing a trade embargo if the government doesn’t stop slaughtering its citizens.

Bear in mind that this is a big deal with huge implications around the world. Ukraine possesses a lot of the nuclear material used to build the Soviet arsenal during the Cold War. The Cold War ended a little more than two decades ago, but the material remains.

The Ukrainian government had announced a truce with those who were protesting, only to see the truce shattered overnight, prompting the rhetorical response from the White House.

And per normal these days, the usual suspects here at home are criticizing the White House and the president for perceived fecklessness in handling this crisis.

Let’s understand, the Russians aren’t about to let anyone — even the United States — get too involved singularly in this dispute.

There must be a concerted international effort involving the European Union, and the United States and Russia to bring huge pressure to bear on the Ukrainian government thugs.

Can our government play a role? Sure, but we need to make sure this remains a team game.

President Obama’s outrage must be tempered with reason and even a tad bit of patience.

You go for it, young man

You know, if I could vote for this guy, I think I would for simply one reason: his age.

Joe Newman is 101 years old and is running for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives from Sarasota, Fla.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/101-year-old-florida-man-running-for-congress/

Why this guy? Beats me. I don’t know a thing about him, other than what he says on the link attached here. According to CBS.com, “Touting his breadth of life experience, the centenarian has launched a campaign as a write-in candidate against four-term Republican Rep. Vern Buchanan. He told a local news station he wanted to run as a write-in candidate instead of seeking a major party nomination ‘because I want to feel free to criticize the Democrats and Republicans.’”

I’m reminded of one of the beauties of getting to such a distinguished age. You can say whatever you want and no one is going to be as dismissive if you were, say, half as old.

I also am reminded of a tribute that the late great broadcast journalist David Brinkley paid to U.S. Sen. Wayne Morse, D-Ore. Morse at one time represented my home state of Oregon and in 1974 was running to recapture the seat he lost six years earlier to young Republican upstart Bob Packwood. Morse died during the 1974 campaign.

Brinkley noted that Morse was one of two senators to vote against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964, the act that essentially gave President Lyndon Johnson permission to wage all-out war against North Vietnam.

Brinkley’s tribute noted that Morse was 64 at the time he cast the “no” vote. The other one came from 77-year-old Sen. Ernest Gruening of Alaska. He said both men “weren’t on the take or on the make,” meaning their age liberated them to vote their consciences.

I’m guessing Joe Newman is similarly liberated. I hope he wins.

‘Routine traffic stop’ is never routine

Critiquing local media isn’t among my favorite things to do — Lord knows I made my share of mistakes over 37 years in daily print journalism — but a local news anchor committed an error I cannot let pass.

The 10 p.m. newscast led with a story about a drug bust on Interstate 40. Texas Department of Public Safety troopers pulled a vehicle over and — lo and behold — found a load of dope. Who knew, right?

The news anchor then uttered that time-honored phrase that a lot of young journalists use unwittingly. He referred to the incident as a “routine traffic stop.”

I now will make three points.

First, the news anchor isn’t a fresh-faced youngster looking to make his mark here before moving to a “larger market.” NewsChannel 10’s Walt Howard has been doing his job for at least as long as I’ve been in Amarillo, which has passed the 19-year mark.

Second, I’d bet the farm that the traffic stop in question wasn’t a real traffic stop at all. DPS troopers had a pretty idea what they had found when they pulled the vehicle over. It ain’t a coincidence, kids, that they found the drugs in the car. They either were profiling the occupants of the vehicle or they had a tip that the vehicle was coming through the area.

Third, and this is the most critical point of all, every police officer who’s ever worn a badge will tell you, “There is no such thing as a routine traffic stop.” I made that mistake once while writing a news story for a small paper where I worked in Oregon City, Ore. I referred to a traffic stop as “routine.” I got a call the next day from the late Bill Brooks, who at the time was chief deputy for the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office. He scolded me about the use of the term “routine” and reminded me of this fact: Any traffic stop has the potential for erupting into something far more serious and potentially tragic.

He implored me never to use that description again when reporting incidents involving police stopping motorists.

Lesson learned, Bill.

No early voting this time, thank you

The November 2013 Texas constitutional amendment election came at a bad time for my wife and me.

We had to vote early because we were going to be away from home on Election Day.

We’ll be at home here in Amarillo on March 4 when the primary election rolls around and I’m returning to form and am going to wait until Election Day to cast my ballot. I’m guessing my wife will do the same, although that’s her call to make.

I’ve long had this big-time hang-up about early voting.

I hate the idea of voting early for someone and then finding out — to my dismay — that my candidate has done something terribly wrong.

Thus, I like waiting until the last possible moment to cast my ballot.

Yes, I know casting my vote on Election Day doesn’t eliminate my candidate from committing a dastardly deed before he or she takes office. Given that it’s the primary election and that in Randall County at least — where there are zero Democrats on the local ballot — the Republican Party primary is tantamount to election. Thus, we have the wait the entire rest of the year before our candidates take office. That means a lot can happen between now and the end of the year.

Of course, that will be a factor only if I decide to vote in the Republican primary. I might vote in the Democratic primary, which has some contested statewide races that have piqued my interest. I haven’t yet made that decision, either.

Traditionalist that I am, I’ll still wait it out.

I’ll let others troop to the early-voting stations and get their votes out of the way.

I also will hope that their candidates don’t get caught doing something they — and those who vote for them — will live to regret.

Good luck, y’all.

May I please talk to a human being?

It’s time for a rant. Here goes.

It involves telephone technology and the search for a living, breathing human being to help you resolve a problem you have with a credit card bill.

I received a notice in the mail yesterday from a department store with which we have a credit card. The department store didn’t receive an electronic payment we had sent in late January. I was mortified, I’m telling you!

After checking our personal records, I discovered we had sent the payment, but that the department store never got it. I then discovered an error I had made in logging in the account number. My bad.

So, with that information in hand, I telephoned the 24-hour “customer service” line to find out what happened to the money that was sent electronically from my checking account to the department store’s payment center.

I got a series of electronic prompts. None of the prompts would allow me to speak to a human being. I kept getting transferred to more robotic voices asking me the nature of my call. Bill payment? No. Lost credit card? No again. Change of billing address? Heck no! History of recent transactions? No, dammit! History of transactions since last bill? Bleep no!

All I want is to speak to a human being.

I pressed “0,” but the robot said “she” couldn’t understand my response.

I said “I want to speak to an operator.” Again, no can do.

Finally, after about 15 minutes of this foolishness, I got a prompt that I recognized as something that might allow me to speak to someone.

“All agents are assisting other customers. We’ll be with you in a moment,” came the response.

I waited another 15 minutes.

Then a human being answered. “May I help you?” I got my question answered, although not entirely to my satisfaction.

My advice to anyone else in a similar pickle: Unless you have lots of time on your hands and aren’t upset at issue you are trying to resolve … don’t bother calling. It just boosts your blood pressure.

I feel better now.

Will Greg and Ted stay together to the finish?

How long will it take — or should it take — for Republican Texas gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott to throw rocker Ted Nugent overboard?

Nugent’s appearances on behalf of Abbott have drawn considerable attention from those who oppose the loudmouth and those who endorse him. Count me, of course, as one of the former.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2014/02/18/bts-wolf-nugent-subhuman-mongrel-slater.cnn.html

Nugent — aptly nicknamed The Motor City Madman — is prone to say some highly disgusting things about his political foes. He has called President Obama a “subhuman mongrel” — and that’s just one of the things he’s uttered.

He was in Denton this week and introduced Abbott to a crowd as “my friend.” Friend? Really?

I’ve known and covered Abbott for a number of years. I have interviewed him in his capacity as a candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, as a sitting justice, candidate for attorney general and as the incumbent. I’ve always considered him to be a gentleman.

It utterly astounds me that he would align himself with the likes of Nugent, the flaming pro-gun rights advocate who seems to take great personal pride in offending as many people as he can with his horrendously hyperbolic hysteria.

Why the alliance? Political observers think Abbott is trying to energize his GOP “base,” as if it needs energizing these days, particularly from someone who’s reprehensible rhetoric drowns out whatever message he’s trying to deliver.

Texas politics has long been considered a contact sport. If the Madman is going to stay on the campaign trail with his good friend Greg Abbott, we’d all better put on plenty of armor.

Yes, stimulus did leave a ‘trace’

Charles Krauthammer’s latest rant against the Obama administration requires a brief response.

The good doctor, syndicated columnist and Fox News Channel contributor, has declared that President Obama’s stimulus left no “trace in the sand.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/02/17/krauthammer_on_stimulus_this_thing_as_predicted_has_not_left_a_trace_in_the_sand.html

I have to disagree with that one, Dr. Krauthammer.

He talks about a “jobless recovery” and says the president will leave no legacy when he departs on Jan. 20, 2017, unlike Ike who left us an interstate highway system or FDR, who built “a Hoover Dam.”

Well, let’s try this on for size.

The Obama team took the field with an economy in free fall. We were losing 700,000 jobs a month. Unemployment was rocketing toward 10 percent. Banks were failing. Automobile dealerships were closing. People were defaulting on mortgages they couldn’t afford. Wall Street was cratering, with billions of dollars in personal wealth flying out the window daily.

How did the new guys respond? They pumped money into the market. They enacted tough new lending requirements, placing some rules on lenders, telling them they couldn’t throw money at borrowers on request. They bailed out the auto industry, saving more than a million jobs.

How has the economy responded? Well, the nation’s debt has increased — and I am the first to acknowledge it must come down.

But …

Joblessness is now at 6.6 percent. Is it because everyone’s found work? No. I’ll concede many folks have quit looking for work. Those horrific monthly job losses have turned into modest gains each month. The nation’s budget deficit has been cut in half. The foreclosure rate on homes has slowed to trickle. The stock market has more than regained all the wealth it lost.

Are we in economic nirvana? Of course not. But to suggest, as Charles Krauthammer does routinely, that the economic stimulus and the policies that accompanied have had no positive impact is simply hold fast to the partisan denial that the other guys can do anything right.

Yes, we still have steep hills to climb before we get out of this mess. We’ve made progress — and that’s worth saluting.

Abbott invites ‘Madman’ onto campaign trail

Let’s call it “Greg and Ted’s Excellent Adventure.”

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, the shoo-in Republican nominee for governor, has invited Ted “Motor City Madman” Nugent to campaign for him across the Lone Star State.

I hardly can wait to hear what’s going to fly out of Nugent’s mouth once he hits the ground and campaigns on behalf of Abbott.

Actually, yes I can.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/greg-abbott-ted-nugent-texas-103597.html?hp=l7

This is an astonishing development in the budding campaign to see determine who will succeed Rick Perry in the governor’s office, a post Perry has held longer than anyone in state history.

Nugent is known these days for far more than his legendary guitar licks. He’s become an avid spokesman for political causes, ranging from gun-owners’ rights to anti-gay policy. He also is prone to utter some remarkably hateful things about those with whom he disagrees. Consider these remarks, which he spewed out a month ago:

“I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.”

This, I submit, is the kind of rhetoric that awaits likely Democratic nominee Wendy Davis as she campaigns against Abbott.

Honestly, I do not mind hearing people speak out intelligently on issues even when they disagree with my own world view. I do mind the frothing nonsense that proponents too often bellow forth.

Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilbert Hinojosa said it well: “Texans deserve better than a statewide office holder and candidate running for governor who welcomes Ted Nugent and his repugnant comments. I can’t help but recall the old saying, tell me who your friends are, and I’ll tell you who you are.”

Is this really you, Mr. Attorney General? Really?