Issue of race creeps into 911 discussion

demerson

An ugly element might be seeping into the Amarillo community discussion over the interim city manager’s handling of a 911 telephone call.

I pray it doesn’t go any further. I also hope the community is prepared to deal with it head-on if it reaches a full boil.

The element is race.

Terry Childers’ phone call on Feb. 14 to the city’s 911 dispatch center has become the source of plenty of talk around town. He didn’t handle himself well when he called the center after misplacing his briefcase at a local hotel. He became agitated with the dispatcher. He wanted to shut down the hotel to search for the missing item.

In short, Childers seemed to blow a fuse. Over a briefcase!

He has apologized to the call center staff. He’s expressed “regret” in a public statement at a City Council meeting. He has vowed it won’t happen again.

Some of the social media chatter — and criticism — about the incident has included some derogatory language.

Childers is African-American.

The potentially troubling element might have revealed itself this week when two city councilmen — one white and one black — offered differing perspectives on whether race has become a talking point.

Councilman Elisha Demerson told Panhandle PBS’s Karen Welch that some of the comments have been racial in nature. Demerson is African-American. He said he’s heard of critics using the “n-word” when referring to Childers.

Watch the “Live Here” segment here.

http://www.panhandlepbs.org/panhandle-local/live-here/

Councilman Brian Eades, who’s white, said he hasn’t heard it. He hasn’t heard about it, either.

Who’s hearing it correctly?

It’s quite clear that people of different racial backgrounds hear things differently. I am not going to presume to know whether one man is correct and the other is wrong.

I’ll offer this personal note: I had heard about the alleged racist remarks, although I personally haven’t heard them directly with my own ears or read them with my own eyes.

Does that mean the racially tinged comments are not out there? Hardly.

The community discussion about the interim city manager’s conduct regarding a botched telephone exchange with emergency dispatchers is worthwhile and should be constructive.

But oh, man, it must not become poisoned by what one elected city official has said he has heard.

However, if it does …

 

What took so long to go after Trump?

Cruz_Detroit2_jpg_800x1000_q100

The 11th version of the Republican Party presidential debate circus provided one more frontal assault tonight by the three remaining viable challengers to frontrunner Donald J. Trump.

I’m going to join others around the country in asking: What took these guys so long to muster up the guts to go after this guy?

Mitt Romney this morning unleashed a blistering critique of Trump. He challenged his temperament, judgment, his business acumen, his ethics, his morals, his shallowness … have I left anything out?

Then tonight Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich continued their assault on Trump.

This comes after months of seeking to “stay on the high road.” They were cowed by Trump’s lambasting of others who dared criticize him. Trump pointed gleefully at how others who would take shots at him would see their own campaigns evaporate.

Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, Lindsey Graham? All gone.

Jeb Bush? Toast.

The rest of them? See you later.

Cruz wants to be the last man standing in the anti-Trump brigade, according to the Texas Tribune. But another strategy is beginning to develop: It is to keep the field crowded and denying Trump the ability to gather enough delegates to win the GOP nomination outright on the first ballot at the party convention this summer in Cleveland.

Trump’s incredible crassness has been ripe for criticism all along.

His foes, such as they’ve been to date, have chickened out.

I’ll give former Texas Gov. Perry credit, though, for sticking it to Trump early — only to see his own presidential campaign fizzle out.

Were the other guys afraid that would happen to them as well?

 

 

No mea culpa from Mitt, but still pretty powerful

mitt

Mitt Romney didn’t take my advice.

He didn’t acknowledge his mistake in seeking Donald J. Trump’s endorsement for president in 2012. Still, despite what I had hoped he would say, the immediate past Republican Party presidential nominee did a fine job this morning of eviscerating the frontrunner for the party’s next presidential nomination.

Not that it’s sure to resonate with the legions of Trumpsters who’ve glommed on to the reality TV celebrity’s shtick, which is virtually what Romney has called the candidate’s political circus act.

The man is as phony as they come. He’s not one of us, the GOP elder said; he’s not even as astute a businessman as he portrays himself, Romney added. His domestic and tax policies would created a “prolonged recession,” and his foreign policy ideas would put the nation into grave danger around the world.

Trump lacks the temperament and the judgment to be the Leader of the Free World, said Romney.

There’s so much more to add. I won’t. just take a look at the link I’ve just attached to this blog.

At a couple of levels, the speech today was most extraordinary. Some pundits this morning called it “unprecedented” for a major party’s most recent presidential nominee to openly rebuke the presumed favorite to carry the party banner further.

Romney all but endorsed the idea of a deadlocked GOP convention this summer in Cleveland to enable the party to turn to someone other than Trump. Romney said voters in Florida should back Marco Rubio and those in Ohio should vote for John Kasich.

All of this begs another question: Would the party frontrunner chuck the whole thing if he can’t corral enough delegates to guarantee a first-ballot nomination?

Look at this way: He might think that since the party isn’t treating him nicely, he could decide to forgo the floor fight and then launch some kind of rogue independent bid in an effort to stick it to the party honchos who are working overtime to deny him the nomination.

It isn’t likely to happen. But you know … if this campaign has demonstrated anything it has shown us that not a single scenario is beyond the possible.

I am one who never would have thought — not in a bazillion years — that we’d have reached this point in a campaign for the presidency of the United States of America.

 

Wondering if Romney will express regret over endorsement

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gestures and declares "You're fired!" at a rally in Manchester, New Hampshire, June 17, 2015. REUTERS/Dominick Reuter TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY - RTX1GZCO

Mitt Romney is going to weigh in shortly on Donald J. Trump.

He’s going to call him a few choice names. I’ve heard “fraud” and “phony” kicked around. There no doubt will be more.

I’m not sure why the 2012 Republican Party presidential nominee wants to engage in this boiling intraparty debate over Trump’s ascendancy to become the party’s next nominee. Romney has said he’s not going to run for president again and I believe him. Perhaps he wants to become the gray eminence of the GOP establishment that is now seeking to derail the Trump Express.

Of all the things he can say today when he makes that speech in Utah, I’ll be waiting to hear if he’s going to express any regret over seeking and embracing Trump’s endorsement four years ago when Romney was running against President Obama.

I know that circumstances change in politics.

Trump, though, has always been the showman. He’s never exhibited any philosophical grounding. He’s never offered a constructive and reasonable solution to any problem facing the nation

Build a wall to keep illegal immigrants out and force Mexico — a sovereign nation — to pay for it?

Impose an unconstitutional ban on people entering this country because of their religious beliefs?

Use the power of the presidency to ensure that retail business owners wish customers a “Merry Christmas”?

Is this guy for real? I know the answer to that question.

He’s what he’s always been.

I am looking forward to hearing from Mitt Romney who today is looking a whole lot better as an alternative to Donald Trump than he might have looked — to me, at least — four years ago.

I remain hopeful he’ll admit he goofed back in 2012 in accepting this clown’s endorsement for president of the United States.

 

SBOE tranquility might be about to end

texas-education-hat

The 15-member Texas State Board of Education has been alternately a raucous body and one that seems to get along relatively well.

My strong sense is that if a runoff election way over yonder in the Piney Woods of deep East Texas turns out the way some folks fear it might, the era of raucousness might be about to make an unwelcome return to the SBOE.

This runoff is worth watching.

Mary Lou Bruner, a retired teacher — yes, that’s right — is in a runoff election along with fellow Republican Keven Ellis for a seat on the board that sets public education policy for the state’s 6 million students.

Bruner, shall we say, is a serious piece of work. She’s the individual who declared on social media that President Obama was at one time a gay prostitute.

She is a “social conservative.” Bruner is likely to fit in with other such conservatives on the SBOE who’ve battled with more moderate board members about curriculum issues, textbooks selection, investment of public money.

Bruner finished first in the three-person race for the SBOE seat and the word out of the Piney Woods is that she’s in good shape to actually win the runoff against Ellis. Why ? Well, her base of support is quite dedicated and those folks are more likely to return to the polls in the next few weeks to nominate her.

And, yes, she’ll become the prohibitive favorite against the Democratic nominee, Amanda Rudolph.

Candidates such as Bruner make me wonder why Texans decided years ago to return to an elected state education board. Texas experimented for a time with an appointed SBOE, but then amended the Texas Constitution to return to an elected body.

Thus, the majority decided it was better to entrust public education to politicians rather than to academicians.

We’ve elected some serious doozies as a result. There have been serious disputes among board members over whether we should teach Biblical teachings of Earth’s creation in science class.

Much of that argument has settled down in recent years. My fear is that it’s going to return to the front burner if East Texans elect a fire-breather such as Bruner to the state education board.

Hey, if she’s capable of making absurd assertions about the president of the United States, one only can imagine how she might engage in debates over the fate of public education.

 

Manager’s 911 tempest might not be quite over

New-Image

It turns out that Amarillo interim City Manager Terry Childers’ expression of “regret” hasn’t quite buttoned up the controversy surrounding his ill-fated phone call to the Amarillo Emergency Communication Center.

Childers offered his “sincere” regrets Tuesday at a City Council meeting over the way he acted during a 911 call he made to report a missing briefcase at a local hotel. He was brusque with a dispatcher who was doing her job. To be candid, he bullied her over the phone while demanding that she send police officers to the hotel to find the briefcase. He said he wanted the hotel “shut down” while the cops looked for the missing item.

The briefcase was recovered shortly after Childers made the call.

His call has prompted a lot of conversation around the city.

So has his expression of “regret,” which technically falls a bit short of an apology.

Panhandle PBS is going to broadcast a “Live Here” segment Thursday to examine the potential fallout from the event. The public TV station is going to visit with Mayor Paul Harpole and councilmen Elisha Demerson and Brian Eades to discuss what happens next.

See the promo here

Oh, but there’s a good bit more to this episode.

Terry Bavousett, the former head of the AECC, has issued a lengthy public statement about his views of what happened. He has announced his retirement effective next week.

But the statement goes into considerable detail about what Bavousett said happened when Childers made the call and how the dispatcher handled it.

It’s not a flattering portrait of Childers, to say the least.

Where does this matter go from here? That depends on the City Council, which hired Childers as the interim manager after Jarrett Atkinson resigned — under apparent pressure from some council members.

If I were on the council, I would be inclined to accept Childers’ mea culpa at face value. He vowed never to do it again. Take the man at his word, OK? But make damn sure he remains faithful to his pledge to treat city staffers with the respect they deserve as professional public servants.

Then I would be inclined to get moving rapidly on finding a permanent replacement. I’m not privy to the expressions of interest the city has received regarding the city manager’s position. Maybe it has a lot of qualified people interested in coming to work here; maybe it has only a few. Whatever the circumstance, the city should accelerate the search.

Childers well might want to return to Oklahoma City to resume the life he had before coming here. He might want to retire and move back home to Abilene. Or, he just might want to go fishin’.

The city is embarking on an ambitious downtown revitalization effort as well as equally ambitious street and highway infrastructure improvements being done by the state; it needs a permanent chief administrator on hand to take charge.

Incidents such as this have this way of taking on lives of their own. That appears to be the case with the city manager’s phone call to a 911 dispatcher who was doing the job she was trained to do.

Maybe we’ll get an idea of what the immediate future holds for Terry Childers when the three council members talk to Panhandle PBS. More importantly, though, is what’s in store for the city as it continues to move forward.

This fallout from this unfortunate event will recede eventually. My hope is that it does so sooner rather than too much later.

It’s your move, City Council.

Two years later, that big ol’ jet is still missing

BBqfyup

This story continues to intrigue me.

A Boeing 777 with 239 people on board vaporized while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. Malaysian Air Flight 370 disappeared nearly two years ago.

Not a trace of the jet or its human cargo has been found. Nothing.

How in the name of modern, state-of-the-art technology does that happen?

Mystery remains unsolved

Now they’ve found a piece of debris that some folks think might have come from MH 370. They pulled a piece of something off a sand bar in Mozambique, on the other side of the Indian Ocean where the plane is believed to have gone down.

Try to put yourself into the hearts of those who’ve been waiting since March 8, 2014 for some closure. They don’t have it. They’re clinging to some minuscule thread of hope that their loved ones are somewhere, anywhere, perhaps alive. They know intellectually that’s not the case, but their hearts keep tugging, keep nagging at them.

The Malaysian government says the passengers and crew are dead. The Australians, who led the search initially, have said the same thing.

Meanwhile, the wildest conspiracy theories imaginable have been kicked around. The plane was hijacked and flown to some remote place; someone shot it down, perhaps by mistake, and are covering it up; my favorite came from a CNN anchor who wondered on the air whether the plane was swallowed by a “black hole.”

Let’s assume the plane crashed into the ocean. An airplane does not hit the water at high speed and remain fully intact. What is truly astonishing is that no trace of a large commercial jetliner has been found. No trace of any of the crash victims has been spotted.

We get these singular pieces of debris, such as what they found in Mozambique.

And the mystery continues.

Can’t the authorities find the damn airplane and give those desperate loved ones the closure they deserve?

 

Trump confounds foes on all sides

trump and carson

Just how wacky is this presidential campaign?

I cannot identify any single source, but it seems as though we can find some element of that wackiness in this scenario.

Donald J. Trump is getting pounded by foes on both ends of the spectrum as he continues to lead the way among the Republican Party presidential candidates.

Consider this, for instance.

Intellectual conservatives say Trump isn’t one of them. They point to his statements in favor of a woman’s right to choose an abortion; they take note of his stance in favor of universal health care; they question why he has said President Bush “lied” the nation into fighting the Iraq War.

He’s not a true Republican, let alone a conservative Republican, which is where the party establishment has been leaning for the past decade or two.

The party establishment cannot stomach the idea of Trump being the party nominee. They fear what that would mean for the party’s control of the U.S. Senate and in the many statewide races across the country. Trump cannot possibly lead the Republican slate of candidates, they say.

Then we have those on the other end. I’m one of those folks.

Trump’s public presence is a ghastly reminder of how ignorant he is about government. He doesn’t understand the limits of the presidency. Trump’s stated intention is to do all manner of things by himself, or so one could be led to assume.

Many of us are horrified at the insults he has hurled: at a TV news anchor, at disabled people, at a U.S. senator’s distinguished military service, at voters of Iowa, at all of his political foes, at Hispanics.

He recently actually threatened the speaker of the House of Representatives, fellow Republican Paul Ryan, by saying he could pay a price if he and Trump don’t get along.

And, oh yes, there’s that feigned ignorance of who ex-Klansman David Duke is and what the organization to which he once belonged stands for.

Those on the right and those on the left cannot stand this guy.

But he’s leading the race for the Republican Party presidential nomination. Who’s voting for him?

Evangelical voters are giving him a pass for his acknowledged extramarital affairs. Hard-core Republicans are backing him because he “tells it like it is.”

They’re fed up with “politics as usual.”

Well, what they’re likely to get with Donald Trump is a brand new kind of politics never before seen.

You want wackiness? This guy is delivering it.

 

Expression of ‘regret’ is good enough, Mr. Manager

childers

Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole said it quite well last night.

Interim City Manager Terry Childers’ expression of “regret” over the way he handled a 911 call is sufficient. It’s time to “move on,” Harpole said.

Public weighs in

For those who might not know what happened, here it is:

Childers called the Amarillo emergency call center to report a “stolen” briefcase. He became agitated when the dispatcher — acting in accordance with established protocol — began asking a series of questions. Childers wanted the cops to arrive at the hotel. He threatened to “shut down” the hotel and search for the briefcase.

He also bullied the dispatcher, telling her she didn’t know who she was “dealing with.” Actually, she knew that Childers is the city manager, as he told her so when he placed the call.

Well, Childers ended up misplacing the briefcase. It was recovered. Childers said the tone he used with the dispatcher “was not consistent” with the standards he sets for himself and those who work at City Hall.

The recording of at least three phone calls, though, went viral through the city, prompting a lot of questions about the way Childers treats other public employees.

This has been an embarrassment for the city.

I have commented on this matter in this forum, but I am more than willing now to move on, as the mayor has suggested.

The city made some changes effective immediately at the call center as a result of the call. I am not going to comment on whether the changes are justified. I only wish that the city emergency services hierarchy had let it be known before now about alleged problems with the call center operation.

As for the interim manager and his relationship with the folks who hired him — the five men who serve on the City Council — let’s hope they work this out among themselves. They do, after all, work for the rest of us.

Let us also hope that the city proceeds with all deliberate speed in finding a permanent manager.

Now, Mr. Manager, get back to work.

 

Trump now challenges the speaker of the House

donald-trump-1a64c2eda04ee51d

House Speaker Paul Ryan today laid out an interesting challenge to the Republican Party’s leading presidential candidate.

He said Donald J. Trump needs to condemn the politics and policies of the Ku Klux Klan, which Trump has failed to do with anything resembling clarity. The Republican Party, said the GOP speaker, does not stand for bigotry, hatred and racism.

Trump’s response?

He said he doesn’t know the speaker but expects to get along with him once the two men get acquainted. If they don’t, said Trump, then Ryan could have some trouble.

Whoa!

Let’s hold on.

As MSNBC commentator Lawrence O’Donnell noted this evening, the speaker of the House of Representatives has far more power than the president of the United States. Thus, the GOP frontrunner needs to take care if he’s going to “threaten” the Man of the House.

Why? The House generates all tax legislation. Plus, as O’Donnell noted, speakers of the House have the ability to make life quite uncomfortable for presidents. Think of what the House did to President Nixon during the Watergate scandal; think also of what the House did to President Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. Nixon nearly got impeached; Clinton actually was impeached.

Donald Trump needs to learn to make nice. Then again, if he had any understanding of how government actually works, he would know better than to threaten the man who runs one half of a co-equal branch of government.