Monthly Archives: September 2014

International news

Arab states must join the fight agains ISIL

A 10-nation coalition of nations is forming to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

One key element is missing, however, from that “core” group of nations: Arab states.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/08/world/meast/isis-mideast-nations/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Indeed, among the nations listed in that roster of allies, Turkey — which borders Syria, and is a member of NATO — is the only nation with skin in the game.

President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel now need to enlist Arab states, particularly Sunni Muslim Arab states, to join this fight.

The president is going to lay out his strategy for fighting ISIL in a speech to the nation Wednesday night. He still has time before he issues the “Good evening, my fellow Americans” greeting to bring some key Arab allies into this fight.

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates and Yemen are just six states that need to bring their own intelligence and military assets to bear against ISIL.

Of course, don’t think for a moment that the United States isn’t asking its most dependable Middle East ally — Israel — to lend its own immense intelligence capability to hunt down and destroy ISIL fighters wherever we can find them.

I’m going to await with interest to hear what the president will say Wednesday. One of my hopes will be that we can rally behind the commander in chief and dispense with the second-guessing, carping and partisan posturing that undermines the effort that needs to take place to destroy these monsters.

 

 

Uncategorized

Perry needs to settle this indictment thing quickly

Rick Perry will be out of a job in January.

It’s becoming clear he wants to keep working. In the White House. As president of the United States.

First things first for the lame-duck Texas Republican governor. He’s got this indictment thing hanging over his head. As Politico reports, time is not his friend as he prepares — possibly? — to run for president in 2016.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/rick-perry-indictment-110651.html?hp=t1_3

A Travis County grand jury has indicted him on two counts of abuse of power and coercion of a public official, who happens to be a Democratic district attorney who runs the public integrity unit and who, by the way, got busted for drunk driving. Perry demanded her resignation, threatened to veto money for her office. She didn’t quit and Perry carried out his threat.

The grand jury said he tried to coerce the DA into quitting and bullied her with his public demands for her resignation.

Politico reports that Perry has been buoyed by conservative support for him since the indictment. And that’s a surprise?

There’s also been bipartisan skepticism about the indictment, which also has lifted the governor’s spirits. That’s a real surprise.

Perry’s lawyers have filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit. Good luck with that.

Absent a summary dismissal, this case could drag on for a bit, perhaps into the early-onset of the 2016 presidential primary campaign.

Would a leading politician under indictment be the kind of individual you’d want to lead your presidential ticket?

I think not.

national news, Sports news

Rice caught on camera; cut by Ravens, suspended by NFL

Ray Rice doesn’t think so, but it’s a good thing an elevator camera didn’t blink.

It happened to catch the former Baltimore Ravens running back in the act of cold-cocking his then-fiancée — who’s now his wife — in a hotel elevator.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11489134/baltimore-ravens-cut-ray-rice-new-video-surfaces

TMZ released copies of the video. The National Football League expressed appropriate outrage. The Ravens released Rice and the league has slapped him with an “indefinite” suspension.

This all comes after the league announced a tough new policy regarding domestic violence and after NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell — in an extraordinary mea culpa — disclosed that he “got it wrong” when he imposed a two-game suspension on Rice for allegedly beating the woman unconscious.

The camera now has revealed that there’s no “allegedly” about it. He did the deed and has been kicked out of the league presumably for the foreseeable future.

In July, Rice said this about what he did: “I know that’s not who I am as a man. That’s not who my mom raised me to be. If anybody knows me, they know I was raised by a single parent, and that was my mother. I let her down, I let my wife down, I let my daughter down. I let my wife’s parents down. I let the whole Baltimore community down. I let my teammates down. I let so many people down because of 30 seconds of my life that I know I can’t take back.”

That’s not who he is as a man? Well, I will differ with him on that. The video reveals something quite different.

Yes, he let a lot of people down. Still, he must face the punishment he’s been given.

The Ravens and the NFL have made exactly the right call.

 

International news, national news, political news

President gets it … finally: 'Optics' matter

It took a little while, but President Obama has acknowledged something many of us out here knew already.

Visual images — the “optics,” if you please — matter to those who are watching the commander in chief’s every move.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/07/politics/obama-golfing-optics/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Obama said on Meet the Press this past Sunday that he should anticipated how the image would look as he headed for the golf course immediately after making a heartfelt statement condemning the gruesome assassination of an American journalist by Syrian terrorists.

The White House defended the juxtaposition of those events as it happened. It turns out the president has had some second thoughts about the sequence of events and their proximity to each other.

Obama told Meet the Press host Chuck Todd that James Foley’s murder moved nearly to tears as he spoke with the young man’s family. I believe him when he acknowledges how these events affect him emotionally. “I think everybody who knows me — including, I suspect, the press — understands that … you take this stuff in. And it’s serious business. And you care about it deeply,” he said.

He added that he understands that “optics” is important. “It matters. And I’m mindful of that.”

As a matter of substance, these things ought not to matter. However, the cliché about “perception becoming reality” in the eyes of those who see things also is important. His teeing off immediately after delivering such a statement offered the perception of a president who doesn’t care. He said that’s untrue and likely unfair.

Perhaps this brief tempest will have delivered a lesson to a president who’s trying right now to manage several international crises. Be mindful, Mr. President, of how your every move is being watched by the public — for whom you work.

 

 

 

national news, Sports news

Racist rant brings right response

1 Comment

Donald Sterling, the former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers professional basketball team, was caught saying some hideous things about African-Americans. His response? He fought tooth and nail to keep control of his team. He failed in that effort.

Bruce Levenson, owner of the NBA’s Atlanta Hawks, has admitted to sending out racist emails two years ago. His response? He announced his intention to sell his majority interest in the Hawks, he has apologized to NBA fans everywhere and is vowing to bow out quietly.

Which man did the honorable thing?

Of course you know the answer: Bruce Levenson.

http://time.com/3292250/atlanta-hawks-selling/

Levenson’s email reportedly said some derogatory things about African-American fans. “I’m truly embarrassed by my words in that email and I apologize to the Hawks family and all of our fans,” Levenson said in a statement. Levenson said he had “trivialized our fans by making clichéd assumptions about their interests” based on their race and ethnicity.

The NBA, which has demonstrated its zero-tolerance policy on racial matters, was quick to commend Levenson for thinking first about the NBA, the Hawks and “the Atlanta community.”

That, folks, is how you respond to an incident in which you have shamed yourself.

 

 

national news, political news, State news

Mitt falls far short of saying 'no' to 2016 run

Don’t believe Mitt Romney’s non-denial about whether he wants to run for president one more time.

The 2012 Republican presidential nominee told Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace that “I am not running. I have no plans to run.”

OK, Mitt. That ain’t one of those Shermanesque statements, you know, where you’re supposed to say “If nominated I won’t run; if elected, I won’t serve.”

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2014/09/romney-195006.html?hp=r6

Mitt says he’d be a better president than Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democrats’ presumed frontrunner for the 2016 nomination. He also says he’d do better than the man who beat him in ’12, President Barack Obama.

Mitt told Wallace that his time had “come and gone.”

Hey, doggone it, he still hasn’t said he won’t run under any circumstances.

These non-statements about political futures are so frustrating. Politicians keep saying they “have no plans” to do something, then turn around and do what they said they have no plans to do.

The problem with that non-statement is the verb “have.” It’s a present-tense verb that doesn’t rule anything out, say, for tomorrow. Or the next day, or the day after that.

I remember in 1988 I asked the late Sen. Lloyd Bentsen if he would consider running as Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis’s running mate on the Democratic Party presidential ticket. Sen. Bentsen said his plate was full serving as Texas’s senior U.S. senator. He never actually answered directly: yes or no. Turned out he was dodging. Dukakis selected him to run with him for the White House.

Bentsen had an out. He was able to run successfully for re-election to the Senate that year.

Is Mitt Romney really and truly not going to run for president in two years?

I’ve heard nothing from him that says “not just no, but hell no.”

 

 

national news, political news

Kansas turning blue? Maybe

Albert Hunt probably wants this to happen, given his political leanings.

The veteran political journalist is suggesting that Kansas — one of the country’s most dependably Republican states — might elect its first Democratic U.S. senator since 1932.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-04/will-kansas-go-blue

And you know what? It’s more than just remotely possible.

Pat Roberts is a veteran Republican senator who now is in the fight of his life. The Democrat who had been slated to run against him dropped out of the race. His name will remain on the Kansas ballot, for now; the decision is under appeal.

Roberts now faces a well-funded, popular independent, Greg Orman, a businessman who says he voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and for Mitt Romney in 2012.

As Hunt notes in his article for Bloomberg View, Roberts was beaten up badly in a Republican primary by an opponent who made Roberts’s residency an issue. Roberts didn’t help himself during the primary campaign when he let slip that “home” is Washington, D.C., and not Kansas.

Some polls suggest Orman is leading the two-man race for the Senate.

Even though Orman is a registered independent, he’s getting plenty of help from Democrats who want him to caucus with them if he gets elected.

What does this mean for an expected Republican takeover of the Senate? It means if Kansas, of all places, elects someone other than a Republican, then a GOP takeover might not be nearly as inevitable as a lot of folks are predicting.

 

International news, national news, political news

When did ISIL become such a threat?

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant dominated the Sunday talk shows.

Why not? ISIL has been on everyone’s mind these days.

Whether it’s ISIL or ISIS — po-tay -to, po-tah-to … whatever — the group has burst into our national consciousness in a way not seen since, oh, al-Qaeda did on Sept. 11, 2001.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/216871-obama-to-detail-nation-on-isis-threat

I’m left with this question: How does a terror organization operate under our noses and under our radar for as long as ISIL apparently has without there being some kind of forewarning?

I am quite sure I’m missing something here, but I pose the question because ISIL now has become the stuff of presidential addresses to the nation.

President Obama is going to speak to us Wednesday night and will detail a strategy for how he intends to destroy the terror organization. In a Meet the Press interview broadcast today, the president also said he will offer details on the specific threat he believes ISIL poses to Americans.

We’ve been operating in an ISIL-free environment ever since the war on terror began immediately after the 9/11 attacks. How can that have happened.

ISIL didn’t just emerge from a genie bottle overnight. It’s well-funded, well-organized, media-savvy and dedicated to the proposition that it intends to bring harm to Americans. No group just pops up from under the rocks without anyone knowing of its existence.

The same might be said of al-Qaeda. Yes, U.S. intelligence officials reportedly knew about that group before the 9/11 attacks. Al-Qaeda was responsible for the suicide attack on the USS Cole in 2000. It was known to have been involved in a bombing at the World Trade Center in 1993. President Clinton sought to kill Osama bin Laden but failed.

Did John Q. Public know about al-Qaeda then?

No. It took that horrific attack on New York and Washington to make us aware of who these monsters are what they are capable of doing.

Now it’s ISIL, the latest national threat. It’s good that ISIL is on our radar. It’s even better that it’s on the commander in chief’s radar.

I hope now that at his next news conference, someone in the White House press corps will ask: Mr. President, when did we know about ISIL and why are we only now getting revved up to fight this monstrous mob of murderers?

 

Sports news

Powerhouses vs. Cupcakes

I truly get that upsets can and do happen on college football fields.

Still, it was a bit shocking to read early Saturday that Lamar University was going to take the field against Texas A&M University in a game played at Kyle Field, home of the Twelfth Man.

Why the shock?

Well, for starters, Lamar is just three years into a return to college football. It shelved the program in the 1980s over lack of money, enthusiasm and ability to win games. I was in Beaumont at the time and I remember the demise of the program.

http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/2014/09/five-thoughts-from-texas-ams-big-73-3-win-over-lamar.html/

So, to get a revenue boost for its athletic department, Lamar University scheduled the Aggies, one of the better teams in the country and the school that produced last year’s Heisman Trophy winner, Johnny “Football” Manziel.

I do not understand why schools need to overmatch themselves in this fashion. The Aggies put a serious beat-down on the Cardinals, winning 73-3.

What does a beating like that do to a college athlete’s emotional structure? I’ve never heard that issue discussed. Perhaps there ought to be some conversation about it.

I get why they play the game at the powerhouse’s home field. The visiting team gets a cut of the revenue generated and they take the money back supposedly to invest in the future. The money pays for better equipment, scholarships, those kinds of things.

I also know that — on occasion, but it’s very rare — the visiting Cupcake surprises the dickens out of the host Powerhouse. Do you recall when Appalachian State went to Ann Arbor, Mich., a couple of years ago and upset the mighty Wolverines in The Big House? It’s a rare event. To be sure, Lamar wasn’t the only college football to get hammered into the turf Saturday.  

Sure, upsets do occur. It’s also possible — although not likely — that the sun could rise in the west.

The kind of score that we saw run up against Lamar by the Aggies, however, doesn’t do much good for anyone.

 

 

International news, national news, political news

Obama seeks to thread dangerous needle

Talk about a much-anticipated speech.

President Obama is going to speak Wednesday about his planned strategy for “degrading, defeating and destroying” the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

In that speech, the president is going to lay out a plan that will preclude American “boots on the ground.” What he will need to explain — and he’ll need to use his tremendous rhetorical skill to do so — is how this nation is going to defeat ISIL’s efforts to overthrow the government in Syria without aligning ourselves with the government that we also hate.

The president offered a hint of that strategy this morning in an interview broadcast on Meet the Press. He talked to new MTP moderator Chuck Todd about working with “moderate opposition forces” that also are fighting the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. ISIL is the new enemy on the battlefield in Syria, he said, and the United States will deploy its enormous air power to hit ISIL’s whenever and wherever we find it.

This, I submit, is where the equation gets very tricky.

Assad’s regime is as hated as any in the Middle East. He, too, is a monster who needs to go. ISIL, though, is an even worse monster. Do we take sides in this struggle, wishing for one enemy force to defeat another enemy force?

Obama said the aim ought to be to help those so-called moderates in Syria — with help from other Sunni Arab states in the region. He mentioned Saudi Arabia and Jordan, two nations that have received significant U.S. military support over the years.

It’s time, Obama said, for those nations to deploy the assets we’ve provided for them in the fight against ISIL.

The president took a lot of heat when he said recently that “we don’t have a strategy yet” in dealing with ISIL. The critics who pounded Obama over that statement forget the “yet” part of that statement.

It appears a strategy is forthcoming. I’ll wait with interest for what the president has to say.

I will be particularly interested in hearing how he plans to keep fighting Bashar al-Assad while destroying the dictator’s No. 1 enemy.