Big jobs numbers, but still no GOP applause

Critics of President Obama have been beating the drum for years about the economic recovery.

Yeah, nice jobs numbers, but those wages just aren’t increasing, they say, while lampooning the economic recovery as a sort of mirage.

Today’s news brought some serious good cheer to some of us, but not all.

The economy added 321,000 jobs in November. Wages increased 0.4 percent as well. The bottom line? The economy is finally beginning to be felt in people’s homes.

Will there be cheering among congressional critics of the president? Don’t hold your breath.

My hunch is that they’ll find a way to spread the joy among themselves without giving credit to a federal economic policy that’s been working for, oh, about the past five-plus years.

The stock market is heading into record territory — again. The trade deficit is down. The budget deficit is down. The national debt is slowing. Unemployment remains less than 6 percent. Investments are up. Spending is up. Real estate prices are up. Auto sales are up. Domestic energy production is up. Gasoline prices are plummeting.

Holy cow! I can’t stand all this good news!

I’ll just have to proclaim it from this forum yet again.

 

Will hearings solve anything?

House Speaker John Boehner says he’s open to having congressional hearings on the deaths of two black men at the hands of white police officers.

Good. It is fair to wonder, though, whether they’ll lead to anything of substance.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/226029-boehner-open-to-hearings-on-garner-brown

The men at issue are Michael Brown and Eric Garner, both of whom died in confrontations with police officers. The man who shot Brown to death in Ferguson, Mo., was no-billed by a grand jury; the officer who choked Garner to death in New York got the same pass from another grand jury.

Of the two cases, the one involving Garner is proving to be more troublesome. A video shows the officer clamping a chokehold on Garner, who was being arrested for selling “loose” cigarettes. The Brown case involves a lot of contradictions. The Garner case, to my mind — and the minds of millions of others — is much more clear cut: The grand jury blew it.

Congressional hearings will enable a more complete airing of the problems associated with these cases. Perhaps the question ought to be: Are these violent acts by police occurring with more frequency to black men than to white men, and if so, why is that?

Let’s advance this conversation through thoughtful congressional testimony, shall we, Mr. Speaker?

 

Less ice, more water, more danger

I keep wondering when the climate-change deniers are going to get the message: Earth’s climate is changing and the consequences of that change are potentially catastrophic.

A new report suggests that the ice in Antarctica not only is melting, but its rate of melt is accelerating. When the ice melts, it creates lots and lots of water. What happens, then, to the coastal communities that sit next to our oceans?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/12/03/global_warming_antarctica_is_losing_more_than_6_billion_tons_of_ice_annually.html

It’s science. It’s backed up with photographic evidence. It’s on the link attached to this blog post.

Yet some American politicians — egged on by extremists — keep suggesting that climate change is some kind of hoax. It’s a plot to “destroy the oil industry.” It’s a political gimmick.

Come on!

The debate shouldn’t be about whether Earth’s climate is changing. It should be about its cause.

I continue to believe that humankind has played a large role in the changing climate.

Those greenhouse gases do have an impact. The deforestation of much of the planet’s earth surface has an impact.

The effect of that activity can be seen through satellite pictures.

It’s science, man!

 

'Easy' confirmation ahead?

When a Republican curmudgeon like Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma says he would vote for a Democratic nominee for defense secretary, then you might expect the next nominee to have a relatively clear path toward confirmation.

Today, President Obama is going to nominate former deputy defense secretary Ashton Carter to run the Pentagon; he would replace outgoing Secretary Chuck Hagel. He’s been highly decorated and has been confirmed already by the Senate for his one-time post.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/05/politics/obama-ash-carter-defense-secretary/index.html

Carter is a well-known expert on weapons and their procurement. He knows the ropes inside the world’s largest office building and it appears he’s got support from at least one Republican senator who’ll get a chance to vote on his confirmation. Will there be more?

GOP lawmakers have been making a lot of noise lately about blocking Obama appointments as payback for his executive action on immigration. They’ve been careful to exclude national security posts from that petulant game.

Let’s hope they’re faithful to their pledge.

If there was a federal agency that needs leadership and cohesion in this troubled time, one would expect it to the be the Department of Defense.

Do not dilly-dally on this one, senators.

 

 

Jim Simms gets one more honor

The late Jim Simms now has his name on a public building.

It’s called the Jim Simms Municipal Building, named in his memory by the Amarillo City Council, which broke with tradition in honoring someone who gave so much of his time and energy to improving the city he loved.

The decision is prudent in another regard. Simms’s death the other day at age 73 means his legacy is now complete. There will be no chance of his messing it up with a big mistake.

Occasionally public entities make the mistake of honoring living individuals, only to have them embarrass themselves and the institution that honored them.

Universities are known to put themselves into that kind of bind on occasion. West Texas A&M University once honored T. Boone Pickens — who’s very much alive — by putting his name on a building at the College of Business, only to pull it down over a misunderstanding that involved a financial commitment Pickens had made to the university.

Amarillo’s building naming policy doesn’t allow for that kind of thing to happen.

As far as I know, the only other city-owned structure bearing an individual’s name is the international airport, which is known as Rick Husband Amarillo International Airport — named after the Amarillo native who commanded the shuttle Columbia on that tragic mission in early 2003. Husband and his six crewmates died when Columbia disintegrated upon re-entry.

I’m glad to see Simms’s memory honored in this manner.

He loved this city. Simms poured his soul into any project he undertook. The city has done right by honoring him in this fashion.

 

Let's go … Thunderheads?

Amarillo’s recent minor-league baseball experience has taken another interesting turn.

The team formerly known as the Sox is now going to be called the Thunderheads.

It’s been a strange ride over the years watching this team morph from one identity into another, and then another.

When I arrived in Amarillo in early 1995, the team that played at the dump once formerly known as the Dilla Villa was called the Amarillo Dillas.

I never learned exactly what a Dilla is. I guess it’s kind of a nickname for “armadillo,” which I’m told populate the countryside in this part of the world.

Whatever, the team then changed its name to the Sox and then adopted a team logo that almost got the team into a copyright problem, as the logo resembled a design used by the Minnesota Twins major league baseball team based in the Twin Cities. That little tempest subsided.

Now it’s the Thunderheads.

Will this name stick to the team for more than a few years, or will the team ownership grow weary of this name and change it … again?

In a way the name might be appropriate. A thunderhead describes a cloud formation that produces often-violent storms that boil up during the spring and summer.

How is it an appropriate name? The city is set to begin construction sometime next year, or perhaps the year after, on a downtown ballpark that will become the new home for the Amarillo Thunderheads. The ballpark isn’t being universally welcomed by all the city’s residents. I’m hearing some grumbling about it and whether it’s really and truly going to be built without any taxpayer money — as the city and developers have promised.

Then the team can abandon that rat hole venue at the Tri-State Fairgrounds.

However, there might be a storm brewing over the Thunderheads’ new venue.

 

One more time on 'War on Christmas'

I’ve already pontificated on how I think the so-called “War on Christmas” is a trumped-up phenomenon, courtesy of the conservative mainstream media.

Allow me this one more brief note on the issue. Then I’ll move on to something else.

Conservative talking heads lament the “happy holidays” greeting that some retailers insist their employees give to shoppers as evidence of the phony war. I say: So what?

I prefer to wish people a Merry Christmas when I encounter them. Why? Well, I celebrate the holiday right along with the rest of the Christian world. I understand its religious significance and I enjoy most of the trappings that come with the holiday.

But the “happy holidays” greeting isn’t meant to insult me. I take zero offense at hearing it from total strangers.

They don’t know a thing about me. They don’t know whether I’m a Christian, or whether I worship some other faith that doesn’t celebrate Christmas.

What in the name of God Almighty is wrong with someone wishing a total stranger a happy holiday?

The war on Christmas isn’t being waged by those who are trying to please those they meet during a busy shopping season. Last time I checked, I realized that the United States of America is a diverse country filled with 300 million or so individuals of vastly different faiths. I see them regularly during the course of most of my days at my part-time job.

Am I going to wish them a Merry Christmas when I know they don’t celebrate this holy holiday season? No.

Nor do I take offense when someone makes a good faith effort to wish me happiness during this holiday season.

There. I’ve had my say.

I’ll enjoy the rest of my Christmas season.

 

Greg Abbott: plaintiff's lawyer in chief

It’s 31 lawsuits — and counting — for Greg Abbott, the Texas attorney general who’s about to become the state’s next governor.

Abbott has sued President Obama over the president’s recent executive order that protects about 5 million illegal immigrants from immediate deportation. He made good on his campaign promise to sue Obama over this issue.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/12/03/greg-abbott-sues-over-executive-action-immigration/

I must pose some inquiries about this action.

First, how much are these lawsuits costing the state? It strikes me that Abbott — a self-proclaimed fiscally conservative Republican — is running up an incalculable legal tab as he challenges the president over immigration, health care reform and whatever else.

Second, as a Republican who has support tort reform efforts to rein in the cost of court settlements, he’s becoming one of those dreaded plaintiff’s lawyers Republican officeholders have loved to hate. We’ve all heard the mantra that Democrats are plaintiff-friendly, while Republicans look out for the interests of defendants in civil court proceedings. Texans seem to have sided with the GOP on that one, electing an all-Republican state Supreme Court, which rules fairly routinely in favor of business interests who’ve been sued by plaintiffs.

And third, does Abbott really have a case against the president or is he being pressured by the TEA party wing of the GOP to do something — dammit! — to stick it in Barack Obama’s ear? The Texas Tribune reports: “‘It’s ill advised. I don’t think he has standing. He gets the basic terminology wrong, and he protests too much when he says he’s not politicizing it, because all of it is simply about the politics of it,’ said Michael Olivas, an immigration lawyer and professor at the University of Houston. ‘He characterizes what the president did as an executive order — it is not an executive order. It’s executive action.'”

I didn’t used to consider Abbott to be a fiery conservative. I’ve long thought of him as a more thoughtful politician. He could be feeling the heat from the right wing of his party to carry through with his campaign pledge to sue the president one more time.

Well, he’s got 31 lawsuits in the can already. For my money, enough is enough.

 

 

'Stolen Valor' goes viral

Nothing is theft-proof. Not even valor, the kind one demonstrates on the battlefield.

People “steal” valor all the time, or so it appears. They deserve the shame that others heap on them.

A video has gone viral that shows an actual Army combat infantry veteran confronting a faux veteran at a Philadelphia shopping mall. The alleged imposter is taking advantage of the veteran discounts that many retailers offer customer.

I guess all you have to do is show up in a uniform and you get the discount.

Ryan Beck caught this guy in the act of faking his own military service.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/12/03/how-viral-videos-became-the-way-veterans-combat-stolen-valor/

Perhaps the most hilarious part of the video — which is included in the link attached to this post — is that the apparent imposter tells the real veteran, Beck, that he is an Army Ranger. Umm, take a look at the individual and you can tell right up front that he is not a member of the elite Army fighting unit.

The guy can’t explain why he’s wearing an improper Combat Infantryman Badge, or why the U.S. flag on his right sleeve is in the wrong location.

The Stolen Valor Act is meant to criminalize the act of impersonating a veteran. Indeed, it should be a crime, particularly when the imposters use their fake status to take money from businesses offering discounts in good faith to men and women who actually are serving in the military.

The manner in which Beck confronts this guy is classic. He isn’t rude. He isn’t bullying the guy. He’s asking legitimate questions that came to his mind the moment he saw this fellow at the mall in Philly.

Someone ought to give Beck another medal for “outing” this individual.

 

It appears nearly unanimous: grand jury blew it

The chatter all across the country — from the left and the right — appears to be saying the same thing about the death of Eric Garner at the hands of Staten Island, N.Y. police.

The grand jury blew it when it declined to indict a police officer for a crime when he choked Garner to death.

I finally saw the video last night showing Garner being questioned by cops over his alleged selling of “illegal cigarettes.” Garner pleaded with the police to leave him alone, that he wasn’t guilty of any crime. One of the cops then slapped a choke hold on Garner, wrestled him to the ground.

Garner was heard on the video telling the officers 11 times that “I can’t breathe.” He passed out and then died.

And the grand jury couldn’t find probable cause to accuse the officer of a crime?

What in the world has happened here?

The difference between this incident and the Ferguson Mo., case involving the shooting death of Michael Brown, a young black man, by Darren Wilson, a white former police officer, is crystal clear. The Ferguson case had too many conflicting accounts of what happened, whether Brown was surrendering or attacking Wilson. The Garner case is cut, dried and laid out there for everyone to see: The police officer — aided by several of his colleagues — slapped a killer chokehold on Garner.

Could he have lessened the pressure enough to allow Garner to breathe? I believe he could have done exactly that.

Whatever in the world the grand jury was thinking needs to be revealed. As Ricky told Lucy: You got some ‘splainin’ to do.