Monthly Archives: January 2015

International news, local news, political news

Politics determines ambassador picks

CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta wanted to know whether a campaign “bundler” for President Obama is the best person to represent the United States at its embassy in Paris.

Well, what difference does it make? Ambassadorships are political prizes. Always have been. Republican presidents dole out these gifts and so do Democratic presidents.

Acosta’s question came while wondering whether U.S. Ambassador to France Jane Hartley questioned the White House about the “optics” that might occur if we didn’t send a high-ranking emissary to the unity rally.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/13/cnns_acosta_asks_earnest_about_campaign_bundler_ambassador_to_france_is_she_the_best_weve_got.html

Then came the query about Hartley’s role as someone who gathered up campaign cash from contributors to the Obama campaign; she and her husband had hosted a high-dollar campaign dinner at their New York home for conributors, which apparently earned her an ambassadorial appointment to Paris.

With few exceptions, ambassadorships go to political allies and those who have contributed tangibly to the winning presidential candidate’s political effort.

Take the time George W. Bush appointed the late Teel Bivins to be our ambassador to Sweden. Was the state senator from Amarillo an expert on Sweden? Did he have keen insight into the geopolitical relationship between the nations? No on both counts.

He was a longtime friend of the Bush family and he worked tirelessly to get President Bush elected in 2000.

Thus, he got himself a ticket to Stockholm.

I wish it weren’t that way. Jane Hartley is no different than the vast majority of ambassadors representing this country at overseas posts.

This issue, though, does make me wonder: What does someone have to do to get an ambassadorial appointment to a hellhole of a country?

 

national news, political news, Uncategorized

Mitt now aims to fight poverty

Chris Matthews is loud, abrasive and occasionally rude on his TV talk show.

He’s also smart, shrewd and insightful when he delivers political commentary.

Matthews cannot believe that Mitt Romney can run for president a third time as an advocate for poor Americans, noting that in 2012 Romney was a champion for the “1 percent” of richest Americans while saying that the 47 percent, the poor folks, “are takers.”

http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/romney-to-focus-on-fighting-poverty-383924291861?CID=SM_FB

He wonders how Mitt can change his tune so dramatically and rapidly from his previous presidential campaign and get away with it. Will it sell to voters who remember the self-deportation talk, the spontaneous offer to wager a $10,000 bet with Rick Perry, references to “the illegals”?

I’ve got a name for Matthews to ponder: George H.W. Bush.

Let’s flash back to 1980. Former Gov. Ronald Reagan had sewn up the Republican presidential nomination. He began looking around for a running mate. He toyed with the idea of picking former President Ford to be on his ticket; the former president said “no.” Then he turned to George Bush, who ran against Reagan in the GOP primaries.

One little problem, though. Bush was a noted supporter of organizations such as Planned Parenthood. He voted routinely, while a member of Congress in the 1960s, for legislation that funded contraception and other family planning programs. His nickname in the House of Representatives was “Rubbers.”

But the GOP nominee in 1980 needed to run on a strong pro-life platform. Would “Rubbers” agree to switch his view on abortion if he ran? You bet he would. And he did.

George Bush took the phone call from Ronald Reagan. He got the offer to run. He said “yes,” and transformed immediately — as in right then and there — from a pro-choice Republican to a pro-life Republican.

The Reagan-Bush ticket won in a historic landslide.

Can Mitt make a similar switcheroo? Absolutely.

 

International news, political news

A mistake, yes; a disgrace, no

Ron Fournier of the National Journal has managed to put the kerfuffle over the White House’s error in not sending a high-profile marcher to the Paris “unity rally” in its proper perspective.

President Obama and the White House senior staff made a mistake, he writes, but there was no “disgrace,” as some of the president’s critics on the right have called it.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/obama-s-mistake-is-no-disgrace-20150112

I’ve stated already that the White House needed to have sent a high-level emissary to march in the rally that commemorated Western resolve in the face of terrorism in the wake of that horrifying massacre at the Charlie Hebdo magazine offices.

The error of omission, though, did not signal a lack of resolve or a lack of support for France of other nations victimized by these hideous monsters.

Fournier notes that the U.S. ambassador to France did attend the rally. But then he adds: “Personally, I’ve got no problem with the U.S. ambassador representing my country in Paris. If it was my call to make, I would have put (Vice President Joe) Biden on a plane. But did Obama let the world down? Take a breath. After all this country has done for Europe in the last century, let’s not confuse a mistake with something more meaningful.”

Let’s understand, though, that we’re about to embark on another presidential election campaign. I’m virtually certain that Republicans running for the White House are going to ensure that this episode doesn’t fade away.

For all any of us know, they’re likely to blame Hillary Rodham Clinton — the presumptive Democratic frontrunner — for all of it.

 

political news, State news

Farewell, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst

David Dewhurst has bid the Texas Senate farewell after serving 12 years as lieutenant governor and presiding officer of the 31-member legislative chamber.

It was an emotional good bye.

I’m glad the Senate approved the resolution honoring him for his service. Dewhurst did serve the state well.

That is until he got outflanked on his right by Ted Cruz in their campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2012. Then the lieutenant governor became someone that many of us no longer recognized. He got outflanked once more this past year as he lost the Republican primary to Dan Patrick.

The cause of good government has lost a one-time champion.

***

I recall when Dewhurst splashed onto the state political scene in 1998 when he ran for land commissioner. I’d never heard of this wealthy guy from Houston. He’d been a political insider downstate and was well-connected.

But he became land commissioner and did a great job expanding veterans home loan benefits, which is one of the office’s key duties.

Dewhurst was an occasional visitor to the Panhandle while serving in that office and later as lieutenant governor. He always seemed quite appreciative of the time we spent visiting about the issues of the day. And I think we forged a nice professional relationship over the years.

Dewhurst could talk forever about the tiniest details of legislation, which he did often either on the phone or in person. Indeed, I often heard from my sources in Austin that Dewhurst might have been the hardest-working state official in Texas.

He was elected lieutenant governor in 2002, succeeding Bill Ratliff who was appointed by the Senate to fill the term vacated when Rick Perry became governor — after George W. Bush was elected president.

Dewhurst ran the Senate the way most of his predecessors did, with a flair for bipartisan cooperation. He was unafraid to appoint Democratic senator as committee chairs, sharing the power with senators from the other party.

I always appreciated his adherence to Senate tradition.

Then came his failed bid to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Ted Cruz battered him for being too moderate. Dewhurst fought back — uncomfortably, it appeared to me — by saying in effect, “I’m no moderate. I’m as conservative as you are, Mr. Cruz.”

He didn’t wear the TEA party label well. Cruz beat him in the 2012 GOP primary.

Then came Patrick in 2014 to do the same thing to Dewhurst: painting him as some sort of squishy moderate Republican In Name Only. There’s nothing worse in the Texas GOP than to be called a RINO.

They fought through the primary. Patrick defeated Dewhurst in the runoff.

Now the new guy is set to take over. The Senate won’t be the same. Dewhurst has said farewell.

I am glad to have gotten to know Lt. Gov. Dewhurst. I wish him well in whatever future awaits him.

 

military news, national news, political news

Apology accepted, congressman; now promise: never again

Congressman Randy Weber has done the right thing by apologizing for a hideous reference to Adolf Hitler while criticizing President Obama’s absence from the unity rally in Paris.

The Republican who represents Southeast Texas in the House of Representatives had sent out a tweet that noted Hitler had gone to Paris in 1940 “for the wrong reasons” but Obama couldn’t go this past week “for the right reasons.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/congressman-randy-weber-apologizes-tweet-comparing-president-obama/story?id=28200320

It was a ghastly reference that has no bearing on anything other than to morph the president of the United States into some kind of comparison with the 20th century’s most despicable despot.

Oh, but Weber said that wasn’t his intention. He intended only to use the Hitler reference to illustrate the evil that lurks in today’s world.

OK, whatever.

I’m glad Weber apologized to “all those offended by my tweet.” Yep. That would be me, among many others.

His explanation of what he intended, though, seems a bit dubious.

It’s my hope that he and others who are inclined to toss Adolf Hitler’s name around to make some political points will cease doing so … forever.

political news, State news

Let's quit the Hitler references

Randy Weber is making a strong case for the title of looniest Texas member of Congress.

The right-wing Republican who represents Southeast Texas — where I used to live — has gone overboard in criticizing President Obama for his absence from the massive Paris “unity rally” the other day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/13/randy-weber-obama-hitler-parsi_n_6460280.html

The GOP nimrod posted on Twitter that Adolph Hitler bothered to go to Paris for the wrong reasons, while the president didn’t go “for the right reason.”

Good bleeping grief, dude.

Hitler went to Paris in 1940 to declare victory over the French during World War II. And this episode has reached some sort of moral equivalency? Give me a break.

I’ve criticized the president for failing to attend, or for the absence of a high-level, high-profile American official at the event; the U.S. ambassador to France did attend. And the White House did offer an unusual admission that it erred by not sending, say, the secretary of state to the enormous rally.

To compare the president of the United States to the 20th century’s most hideous dictator?

Keep your mouth shut, congressman.

 

Sports news

That's how you pick a football champ

There can be zero doubt about a couple of things relating to Monday night’s football game to determine the national collegiate champion.

* First, the “wrong” team won the game. I am a native of Oregon and I was pulling mightily for the Oregon Ducks to beat the other guys and take a national championship back to the Pacific Northwest. They had me going after the first two possessions of the game. A quick score and then forcing the other guys to punt the ball away. Woe is me and the rest of us who comprise the Duck faithful.

* Second, Ohio State’s Buckeyes deserve the honor of being called the national champions of intercollegiate football. Let there also be zero doubt about the Buckeyes’ place in this four-team playoff, the first of its kind established by the NCAA to determine the best football team in the country. My hat — if I were wearing one at the moment — would be off in tribute to the Buckeyes. Man, they played a great football game!

The playoff system worked.

Four great teams were selected for this two-round playoff system. Granted, Ohio State was not my pick for the fourth seed; I preferred Baylor or perhaps Texas Christian University for that spot.

But as it turned out — much to the dismay of Alabama and now Oregon faithful — the Buckeyes turned out to be more than merely worthy of the honor of participating in the playoff system.

The Bowl Championship Series system is history. The bowl games, while important to the schools participating in them, no longer will determine the national champion. The BCS system of selecting the champs was too prone to second-guessing — not that this system didn’t have its share of doubters.

However, as we saw last night in Arlington, Texas, the new playoff system allows for the title to be decided by the coaches and athletes.

The NCAA football playoff system gurus got it right. Well done.

 

State news

Patrick set to dispense with Senate 'tradition'

The next Texas lieutenant governor said he likely would do away with a rule that’s governed the flow of legislation.

Lt. Gov.-elect Dan Patrick appears set to make good on it.

Let’s all say “so long” to the two-thirds rule of the Texas Senate.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/10/primer-endangered-two-thirds-rule/

The two-thirds rule had been favored by lieutenant governors of both parties as a way to build a semblance of bipartisan support for legislation. It requires that at least 21 senators out of 31 total support a bill before it goes to a vote.

Many Republican senators have supported the rule. One of them is Kel Seliger of Amarillo. But then again, Seliger is no fan of Patrick.

As the Texas Tribune notes in the essay attached to this blog post, Patrick — who tried as a freshman in 2007 to get rid of the rule — now appears to have the votes to scrap it.

As the Tribune reports: “The rule has the practical effect of forcing Republicans to earn the support of one or two Democrats to get a bill through the chamber — and of shielding moderates in both parties from difficult votes. It also can protect minority interests in situations where the divide is not partisan, such as on issues where regional rather than political allegiances come into play.”

The Tribune notes that the Senate retains the power to vote on changing the rule. The lieutenant governor, though, as the presiding officer of the body has the power to make committee assignments. He can pay back those who cross him with those appointments, as the Tribune reported.

This is the influence of the Texas TEA party wing of the GOP. It’s less bound by tradition than other Republicans. What’s more, the TEA party crowd now has one of their own sitting at the front of the Senate chamber.

It’s going to be a new day in Austin when the next Legislature convenes.

Some of the new folks will enjoy it. A number of the seasoned hands, who’ve enjoyed working in a legislative body that sought bipartisan collegiality, will not.

 

national news, political news

Mitt is turning 'mushy,' according to Cruz

Mitt Romney hasn’t even said he’s running for president a third time in 2016 and already he’s taking barbs from his right flank.

The slinger is Sen. Ted Cruz, who says the Republican Party shouldn’t nominate someone from the “mushy middle.” The party needs someone who is, well, a stark conservative like … oh, let me think, Cruz?

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/ted-cruz-mitt-romney-2016-elections-114194.html?hp=l2_3

But didn’t Mitt say he governed Massachusetts as a “severe conservative” while he was running for president two years ago? Didn’t Mitt try to establish his conservative credentials with the base of his party?

OK, he lost the election in 2012 to President Obama.

I’m still pulling for him to run. I’m also pulling for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to run for president.

Mitt says he’s interested in running; Jeb has formed an exploratory committee and has resigned from every non-profit board on which he’s served.

Mitt vs. Jeb would set up an interesting battle, don’t you think?

Jeb has been critical of Mitt’s myriad business interests. Mitt has been critical of Jeb’s moderate stance on immigration.

Meanwhile, the righties in the party are standing by. Cruz of Texas, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, former Gov. Rick Perry of Texas could make an interesting two-state scramble for the GOP nomination, given that all four of those TEA party favorites hail from either Texas or Florida.

Oh boy! This upcoming Republican campaign looks like a doozy.

I can’t wait to watch it unfold.

 

national news, political news

Is Ted Cruz anti-NASA?

Ted Cruz worked tirelessly in 2013 to shut the federal government down, shuttering agencies throughout the vast federal bureaucracy for 16 days.

One of them was the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Well, talk about bad karma.

The freshman Texas Republican senator is going to chair a subcommittee with oversight of NASA.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/12/ted-cruz-nasa_n_6456270.html?

This will be fun to watch. It might be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s way of placating the TEA party wing of the GOP, of which The Cruz Missile is one of the team co-captains.

Cruz will chair the subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness. The chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will be Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.

It’s going to be a new day in the Senate for the next two years, maybe longer.

Cruz isn’t known to be friendly to science, let alone to NASA. His insistence on shutting the government down to make some kind of political point likely didn’t go over well with the dedicated employees at the space agency.

He’s also shown a bit of nerve in blaming the Obama administration for cutting funds for NASA, suggesting that the president is de-emphasizing space travel.

I’m going to reserve judgment on the young senator’s stewardship of this panel. I’ll need to await some actual legislation that passes before his eyes for review.

Suffice to say that I am not hopeful for a good result.