Getting ready for a pile of negativity

Clinton-and-Trump

I am steeling myself for what I know is coming.

The election of the next president of the United States is going to be an ugly, nasty affair.

It’s a function, I suppose, of anger among the electorate. I am having difficulty processing the reasons why folks are so angry.

My larger sense, though, is that the negativity will be fueled by quality of the two major-party nominees.

Republican Donald J. Trump will be nominated first. This coming week in Cleveland, delegates will gather to send this fellow off to do battle with the Democratic nominee.

Hillary Rodham Clinton will receive the Democrats’ nomination.

Both of these individuals will pack a large load of negative baggage onto the campaign trail. Trump’s unfavorable rating is the 70 percent range; Clinton’s is in the high 50s, low 60s.

So, with little to commend these folks’ positive attributes, they and their campaigns are likely to resort to extreme negativity to tell us all why the other candidate is so repugnant.

I came of age in the late 1960s. I remember a time when the nation was torn to shreds by political unrest. The Vietnam War was going badly. My first political hero, Robert F. Kennedy, was gunned down while he campaigned for the presidency … two months after an assassin killed Martin Luther King Jr. The year was 1968 and it will go down as the most tumultuous year of the final half of the 20th century.

RFK used to consider politics to be a “noble profession” and I bought into it. My belief in its nobility, though, has taken plenty of hits over the years. Money has corrupted the system. We keep seeing the same faces and hearing the same voices every four years.

And that brings us to this campaign.

Are the major-party candidates driven by their grand vision? Will they offer us chapter-and-verse dissertations on why they represent the very best of Americans?

I am not holding my breath.

If my fears prove to be true — that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will drive voters to stay home rather than having their voices heard at the ballot box — then we can lay a good chunk of the blame at the negativity we will have heard.

Let’s all get ready for what we know is coming.

Mike Pence: ‘attack dog’

pence

Commentators all over the country are saying essentially the same thing about Mike Pence, the Republican vice-presidential nominee-to-be.

He will assume the role of presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s “attack dog.”

That has me scratching my noggin.

Does that mean Trump actually needs someone now to take the fight to Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Democrats? Hasn’t the GOP candidate done a good job of that already, all by himself?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/mike-pence-radio-show-225661

Pence said all the right things this morning when Trump trotted him out and introduced him as his running mate. He cited two reasons for accepting this challenge, the second of which was that Hillary Rodham Clinton shouldn’t ever become president of the United States. With that he received the biggest applause he would get from the crowd assembled inside the meeting room.

Pence will be an attack dog, but my strong hunch is that his attacks are going to look mighty tame compared to what Trump has launched already throughout this campaign.

Look what Trump did to every one of his Republican rivals? He was able to hang labels on several of them. He pilloried some of them with insults. For good measure, he tossed out some innuendo — such as when he implied that Sen. Ted Cruz’s father might have been complicit in President Kennedy’s murder.

Did it bother his ardent fans? Oh, no. It endeared him to them.

Gov. Mike Pence’s attack dog role will represent a “doubling down” of a strategy that Donald Trump has employed already with astonishing success.

Trump talks about ‘Trump’ while introducing Gov. Pence

pence-and-trump1

I watched Donald J. Trump make his big announcement this morning.

He stood before a row of Old Glories to introduce Indiana Gov. Mike Pence as his Republican Party vice-presidential running mate.

I sat there, in front of my TV. I waited. And waited. And waited some more. I waited for Trump to stop talking about himself — often in the third person — and waited for him to say something good about the guy with whom he’ll run for the White House.

The presumptive GOP nominee prattled on and on for nearly 30 minutes, boasting about his primary victory over a huge field of candidates.

He railed against Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton. He talked about how free trade is bad for America, about how NAFTA has siphoned jobs from the United States to Mexico.

Then he got around to introducing Pence, who then delivered a fairly straightforward pasting of Clinton and the Democrats. He also said a few nice words about Trump, who he called a “good man.”

Pence, by the way, voted in favor of NAFTA and CAFTA while he served in the House of Representatives. The two candidates are going to have to come to an understanding on trade policy, yes?

Mike Pence’s big day turned out to be, oh, Donald Trump’s big day.

Is that a surprise? Heavens no!

The commentators who opined about the Pence roll-out noted something quite interesting: Sen. John McCain of Arizona spoke for 7 minutes while introducing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in 2008; former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney spoke for about 10 minutes before unveiling Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin in 2012.

McCain and Romney spent their entire time talking about their running mates. That moment was about them, not the men at the top of their tickets.

Trump didn’t do it that way.

Naturally!

Trump, Pence ignore a key element in ISIS’s creation

pence trump

Did I hear this correctly?

That Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are responsible for the horror that the Islamic State is bringing to the world? Did Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump assert such a thing today? And did I hear his vice-presidential running mate, Mike Pence, echo such rubbish?

I believe that’s the case.

So, I think it’s time to set the record straight. Wish me luck.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-pence-vp-225652

The responsibility for ISIS belongs primarily with former President George W. Bush, who in March 2003 decided to topple Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq. We invaded Iraq with phony “evidence” that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. We got him and his Sunni government tossed out.

Oh, and what happened then?

A whole lot of Sunni Muslims became angry with our invasion and decided to strike back at the Iraqi government.

The Islamic State then came into being.

For Trump and Pence and other vocal critics of President Obama and Hillary Clinton to suggest that their policies have given rise to ISIS is a malicious lie.

The president inherited the troubles brought about by the Iraq War. They didn’t create them.

What can we expect, though. A presidential campaign is going to produce vastly overheated rhetoric from both sides.

Trump, with his penchant for attaching epithets such as “Lyin’ Ted” on his foes, is sure to hurl far more than his fair share of lies at Hillary Clinton.

He and his running mate did so again today.

Pence announcement: not by the book

mike-pence

Donald J. Trump continues to toss aside political tradition as he awaits his nomination as the Republican Party’s presidential candidate.

His selection of Indiana Gov. Mike Pence to run with him as the VP nominee offers a glowing example of an unconventional selection process.

Trump went to Indiana to visit with Pence and his family.

He then apparently decided to select Pence.

He flew Pence to New York on his private plane to make an announcement, which was to occur Friday morning at 11 at Trump Tower.

Trump then “postponed” the announcement — during which he would “introduce” Pence to the political world — in the wake of the horrific terrorist attack in Nice, France. He would make that announcement the next day.

Then, at 11 a.m. Friday, Trump sent out a tweet announcing that — yep! — Pence is his guy. The tweet, therefore, did precisely what Trump said he was postponing out of deference to the horror in France.

Oh, and then it was reported that he didn’t inform New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — the two other finalists — that he had decided on Pence. Christie and Newt, thus, were left — to borrow a phrase — to twist in the wind.

It also has been reported that Trump wavered a bit once the word leaked that Pence would get the call, but that Trump didn’t want to upset members of his family who apparently talked him into selecting Pence.

Get ready, Republicans. You wanted unconventional when most of you voted for this guy.

What will Cruz tell Texas delegates?

tedcruz_0

Inquiring minds, it’s been said more than once, want to know.

They want to know just what U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz is going to tell Texas delegates to the Republican National Convention when he stands before them.

You see, the man dubbed “Lyin’ Ted” by the party’s presumptive presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump, is still stinging over his loss of the GOP primary battle. Trump hung that epithet on Cruz and also said some outrageous things about Cruz’s father — and his campaign also mistreated Cruz’s wife in a terribly cruel fashion.

Cruz won the Texas primary back in March.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/15/cruz-ryan-among-speakers-texas-delegates-cleveland/

I’m having difficulty imagining the junior U.S. senator telling those delegates it’s all right for them to back Trump now that their guy — Cruz — is out of the race.

Indeed, Cruz himself hasn’t endorsed Trump and I am doubting an endorsement will be forthcoming.

How does Cruz offer his unconditional support to someone who suggested that his own father might have been complicit in the murder of President John F. Kennedy? And how does he back the man whose campaign put that ghastly tweet out that showed Heidi Cruz, the senator’s wife, making some kind of sour-grapy face?

I am no political fan of Sen. Cruz. I don’t want him anywhere near the Oval Office any more than I want Trump to take a seat there.

A part of me wishes I could be the proverbial fly on the wall when Cruz stands before the Texas convention delegates to tell them what he thinks of the guy their party is about to nominate for president of the United States of America.

Hey, he might just tell them: Y’all are on your own.

World appears to have gone mad

turkey

My head is about to do a 360-spin.

The world has gone stark-raving bonkers.

A terrorist plows a truck into a Bastille Day crowd in Nice, France, and kills 84 innocent victims before French police killed him on the spot. The world is thrown into utter grief, shock, mourning and heartache over this latest spasm of terrorist violence.

We’d just experienced the tragedy in Dallas, where five police officers died when a gunman opened fire on a Black Lives Matter march through the city’s downtown.

Now, tonight, Turkey is undergoing what now looks like a failed coup attempt seeking to topple the government of President Recep Tayyp Erdogan.

The president had been out of the country, then he returned to Turkey — apparently being greeted by cheering crowds upon his arrival.

As one commentator noted this evening, the coup seems to have failed because the insurgents didn’t capture or kill the president, didn’t take control of the media.

Erdogan now appears to be reasserting his authority in Turkey.

This is a huge deal.

Turkey is a member of NATO. It borders Syria and Iraq, which puts it at ground zero in our war against the Islamic State. We occupy Turkish air space while we launch air strikes against ISIS targets. We also rely on Turkey to lend its own considerable military support in this effort.

Now we have word of this coup attempt.

Erdogan hasn’t been the most reliable ally of ours. The Turks, though, pose a significant military threat to anyone who happens to be on the opposing side in a fight.

I’m still trying to process the consequences of a failed coup attempt in Ankara and whether it means any kind of significant change — or potential improvement — in Turkey’s ability to wage war against our common enemy … the Islamic State.

I’m almost afraid to go to sleep tonight out of fear that I’m going to wake up in the morning to find something else has overtaken the world’s attention.

President makes point about his support of cops

2016-07-12T192851Z_1_LYNXNPEC6B1GH_RTROPTP_3_USA-POLICE_JPG_800x1000_q100

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick went to the White House to take part in a town hall meeting with President Barack Obama.

The subject: police relations with communities that might not always believe police officers are their friends.

Patrick stood up and asked Obama to express his support for the police in a way that conveys such support for the men and women who protect us.

I believe the president answered Patrick appropriately by telling him that he — Obama — has been “unequivocal” in his stated support of law enforcement.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/15/brief-july-15-2016/?mc_cid=398044d66b&mc_eid=c01508274f

Lt. Gov. Patrick did not distinguish himself — or the state — when he derided the Black Lives Matter marchers as “hypocrites” when they fled the gunfire that erupted in Dallas the other evening. They were marching to protest police activities in other communities but then sought protection when the gunman opened fire. Thus, according to Patrick, they behaved hypocritically.

As the Texas Tribune reported: “In response to Patrick’s question at the discussion on Thursday, Obama countered that he had ‘been unequivocal in condemning any rhetoric directed at police officers’ and offered to send Patrick examples of him expressing the sentiment ‘in case you missed it.’”

Indeed, I have heard our head of state say repeatedly that he condemns those who have struck out against police officers. I am not sure what Lt. Gov. Patrick actually wants the president to say that he hasn’t said already.

Perhaps it’s that President Obama has talked openly about the incidents in which the police at times have treated African-Americans and other racial minorities differently than they way they react to others.

Obama also said that “data shows there are disparities in how police treated people of different races, and that pointing out those disparities should not be viewed as anti-police.”

We all know the police have difficult and profoundly stressful jobs. Barack Obama knows it as well as does Dan Patrick.

The president said so — yet again! — at the White House town hall.

Open-carry law might need some tinkering

New_Hampshire_Open_Carry_2009

Did the Dallas shooting that killed five police officers and injured several others reveal a flaw in the Texas open-carry law?

Consider what transpired during the Black Lives Matter march that turned violent when the shooter opened fire on the cops.

Several individuals were seen at the march carrying weapons in the open, which they were entitled to do under the state’s open-carry law. One young man was arrested, handcuffed and detained for some time while police investigated whether he took part in the shooting. It turns out he didn’t.

Which brings to mind the question: How do police determine who are the heat-packing bystanders in the heat of an adrenaline-filled moment in which tensions run at fever pitches?

Here’s a thought put forward by others, but which seem to make sense: The Texas Legislature ought to consider tweaking the open-carry law when it convenes in January to give cities the option of banning people from carrying weapons in the open during political demonstrations.

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/opinions/editorials/article/EDITORIAL-Open-carry-doesn-t-mix-with-political-8353183.php

As the Beaumont Enterprise noted in an editorial, guns and political demonstrations just don’t mix.

I’ve been able to take part in simulated shooting demonstrations with the Amarillo Police Department. I can tell you from personal experience — and this involves use of weapons that did not carry live ammo — that the adrenaline that courses through one’s body in a shoot-don’t-shoot situation can cloud one’s judgment.

I cannot imagine the chaos that ensued in Dallas that evening when gunfire erupted. Police responded immediately to protect crowd members. Then some of them spotted spectators carrying weapons. What does a cop do — in an instant?

So, let’s fine-tune this law. If Texans are going to insist on the right to carry guns in the open, then there ought to be some reasonable restrictions on where they can pack them.

It seems quite reasonable to me to let cities decide whether to allow them at political rallies.

 

Big week looms for Republican Party

BN-NZ909_noonan_partyoftrump_20160512180839

I’m not yet sure how much of the Republican National Convention I’m going to watch.

Keynote speech? Sure. Except I don’t know who’s giving it.

Presidential nominee acceptance speech? Absolutely, if only to see if Donald J. Trump veers too wildly off script.

This I do know: The Party of Lincoln/Reagan is going to become the Party of Trump.

God help ’em.

I’m still trying to figure out how the Republican Party establishment plans to speak glowingly of the man they’re about to nominate for the presidency of the United States. He has spent the bulk of the primary season hurling insults in every direction, including at the Republican Party brass! Political memories often become surprisingly short, but they also have this way of retaining insults for an amazingly long time.

Which leads me to believe that the establishment types are going to have little time on the podium during the four-day event in Cleveland.

It’ll be left to the assorted celebrities who’ve lined up behind Trump’s insurgent candidacy. He’s been crowing all along how he doesn’t “need” the power brokers who run the GOP. We’re about to learn whether his boasting will come true.

Just suppose, too, that absent any public service record that the Trumpkins can tout, what will be left for them to say from the convention podium.

Oh! I think I know. They’re going to unsheathe the long knives and plunge them into the Democratic nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

She will be portrayed as the daughter of Satan. They’re plan — in the words of the late GOP chairman Lee Atwater — “peel the bark” off the Democrats’ presidential candidate.

Yes, indeed. Given that the Republicans are going first in this year’s political nominating convention cycle, they’ll get to set the tone for the campaign for the White House.

Rest assured, Democrats have their own burdens to bear with Clinton. So, they’ll be loaded to the teeth when they convene their convention in Philadelphia right after the Republicans adjourn their convention in Cleveland.

Get ready, folks, for a heck of a wild ride beginning next week.