Time’s ‘Person of the Year’ is a no-brainer

trump

Here it comes: a good word about Donald J. Trump.

Time magazine’s Person of the Year is the 45th president of the United States. When the magazine’s editor in chief, Nancy Gibbs, was asked this morning whether this was a difficult choice, she said that it wasn’t. It was an easy choice, given how Trump managed to win the presidency by breaking virtually every known rule of conventional political wisdom.

I happen to agree with this choice.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/07/504662237/time-magazine-names-donald-trump-person-of-the-year?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social

I’m not going to get into the discussion about how the magazine has named some pretty despicable characters as its Person of the Year. They include, say, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin (twice).

It’s fairly customary for the magazine to honor newly elected presidents for this honor. So it’s no surprise that the newest elected president would get the nod as Person of the Year.

Look long and hard at virtually every aspect of Trump’s winning campaign: his lack of “ground game,” his insults, his bizarre behavior, his apparent complete ignorance of the principles of governance, the fact that the presidency is the first office he’s ever sought.

It’s good to examine what so many so-called “experts” said about his chances of being nominated, let alone being elected. He was dismissed as a joke, a circus act, a carnival barker, a huckster.

Here he now stands, ready to assume the role of commander in chief and head of state of the greatest nation on Earth.

All of that, by itself, qualifies this guy as Person of the Year.

Gibbs was right to say this was an easy call.

Now we’ll await this man’s ascension to the highest office in the land and we’ll see whether he has learned anything about the job he is about to do.

EPA has become GOP goat

epa-preview

Richard Nixon wasn’t known as a tree-hugging environmentalist who was known to eat twigs and pine cones.

Yet the 37th president of the United States,Ā a Republican,Ā had the good sense to do something thatĀ today’s Republicans apparently now regret. He formed the Environmental Protection Agency.

What has happened to the EPA since 1970, when President Nixon created this agency? It has become the bogeyman for Republicans. The GOP hates the agency. Republicans say the EPA has been too tough on businesses, has enacted too many regulations that businesses must follow — or else.

And to what end? To make the air and water cleaner and to protect our Earth from humankind’s more destructive impulses.

Donald J. Trump is forming his new government and has nominated Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt to be the new head of the EPA.

Pruitt, to put it mildly, is no friend of the agency. He’sĀ a “drill baby drill” kind of guy. He’s a devoted friend of the fossil fuel industry. He doesn’t accept the notion that climate change is real and that its main culprit is humankind.

Pruitt actually has sued the EPA over its insistence that climate change is manmade.

This is the guy Trump wants now to lead the agency?

This is another head-scratcher.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/07/trump-names-scott-pruitt-oklahoma-attorney-general-suing-epa-on-climate-change-to-head-the-epa/?utm_term=.a41646dbf927

Indeed, the Washington Post reports that Pruitt’s appointment follows a curious pattern set by the president-elect: “He is the third of Trumpā€™s appointees who have key philosophical differences with the missions of the agencies they have been tapped to run. Ben Carson, named to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development, has expressed a deep aversion to the social safety net programs and fair housing initiatives that have been central to that agencyā€™s activities. Betsy DeVos, named education secretary, has a passion for private school vouchers that critics say undercut the public school systems at the core of the governmentā€™s mission.”

Now, there’s Pruitt.

I’m still puzzled, though, at how Republicans have morphed into this anti-EPA political party, given how one of the GOP lions — Richard Nixon — breathed life into the agency.

It’s a new day. It’s a new Republican Party, although many old-time GOP hands aren’t yet sure what the new party is going to look like.

The new president, elected as a Republican, has declared war on the EPA. The agency’s new boss appears ready to start lobbing the grenades.

Trump surrounded by ‘know-nothing’ generals?

kelly

First it was Michael Flynn.

Then came James Mattis.

Now we hear that John Kelly is joining the Donald J. Trump administration. What do these men have in common?

They’re all retired generals.Ā Flynn is a soldier; Mattis and Kelly are Marines. Among them they have 11 stars on their epaulets. Army Lt. Gen. Flynn will be the national security adviser; Marine Gen. Mattis will be defense secretary; Marine Gen. Kelly is slated to be nominated to lead the homeland security department.

Hey, didn’t Trump say he knows “more than the generals, believe me” about ISIS?

It might be that perhaps he’s rethinking that bold — and reckless — boast. If so, then he ought to acknowledge as much.

But here’s another fascinating aspect of these men: They’re all blunt talkers. They speak their mind. They are take-no-prisoners kinds of men when it comes to policy discussion and debate.

The Flynn-Mattis relationship might be particularly fascinating to watch, given the traditional tension that exists between the national security chief and the defense boss.

Moreover, will these men’s penchant for candor and frankness work well with a president known to be, um, less than receptive to other people’s points of view, let alone these so-called truth-tellers?

This could be dramatic in the extreme.

They fought for ‘the duration’

origin11

Seventy-five years ago today, Japanese navy pilots swooped in over Pearl Harbor, Hawaii and — perhaps without knowing it at the moment — changed the world forever.

That act dragged the United States of America into the greatest global conflict the world has ever witnessed.

The young men who answered the call from that day forward did so under terms that no longer apply in this day.

Many of them volunteered to get into the fight; others of them were drafted by the government. They all took an oath to defend the nation. Then they signed a paper that committed them to fighting for their nation for as long as it took to finish the fight.

They signed up for “the duration” of the conflict. The war would end in August 1945, but no one who signed up for that battle had a clue as to how long it would last.

Think about that for a moment. As the smoke billowed from the wreckage in Hawaii, did anyone know how long this war would last? It could last for a year, two, three. It could go on for decades.

The young Americans who donned their country’s uniform did so without knowing how long they would be ordered to sacrifice.

My father was one of those young men. He was 20 years and seven months old when we entered World War II. He waited just a few weeks before deciding one day to go to the federal courthouse in downtown Portland, Ore., and enlist in the armed services. His first choice was the Marine Corps. The office was closed. He then walked across the hall and enlisted in the Navy.

He didn’t know when he’d be finished. He didn’t know if he’d ever come home. Dad wanted to fight the enemy.

And he did.

We don’t ask such things of our young men and women these days. We send them off to war for a length of time. They serve and return. Of late — since 9/11 to be exact — we’ve been sending them back into harm’s way repeatedly. That, too, is creating tremendous emotional stress on our young warriors and I wouldn’t for a moment wish to be wearing their boots.

Many of us today, though, will recall the sacrifice made by the young Americans who answered their nation’s call to arms against tyranny.

When we do, think of how they might have felt knowing theyĀ might beĀ going into a battle with no end.

That’s what I call “sacrifice.”

‘Ready for Joe!’ in 2020?

Vice President Joe Biden addresses the Human Rights Campaign Spring Equity Convention in Washington, Friday, March 6, 2015. Biden said the same human rights that African Americans fought for in Selma, Alabama, are at stake for gay rights activists today. Biden is drawing parallels between the civil rights and gay rights movements in a speech to the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

Joe Biden said “farewell” today to the U.S. Senate, where he served for 36 years before becoming vice president of the United States in 2009.

Then he joked that he might not be going anywhere after all.

Or … was he joking?

The vice president said he won’t rule out a run for the presidency in 2020. He’s not saying he will, mind you. He’s just not saying “no.”

Here we go with the speculation.

It’s how it goes these days. We get through one presidential election and the guessing begins for the next one. The VP hasĀ leavened the discussion just a bit.

There was this from NBCNews.com: “I doubt that there is any member of the caucus that would say if you’re making alist of the top three people he’s just about at the top of that list,” said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.

Hoyer was talking about Biden, of course.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/farewell-visits-capitol-hill-joe-biden-teases-2020-run-n692626

I’m not going to get into the guessing game here. Let’s just note the obvious, which is that the vice president will be 78 years of age in 2020. Who was the oldest man to seek the presidency? That would be Sen. Bob Dole, who was 73 when he lost to President Clinton in 1996.

I wanted Biden to run this year. Four years from now?

I’m going to wait before getting too worked up.

City needs to rid itself of ‘dysfunctional’ perception

12485338_g

It’s been said that perception often becomes reality.

That’s occasionally a harsh truth no matter how unrealistic the perception might be in the minds of many.

Amarillo’s former interim city manager, Terry Childers, went out with a bang. No, make it a boom! He muttered a seriously profane epithet in mid-November at a constituent into a hot mic and then quit the next day. He cleared out his office and drove back to Oklahoma City.

But he had scolded the City Council about what he called the “dysfunction” within City Hall’s government apparatus and he laid the blame for that perception at the council’s feet.

Was he wrong? Was he way off the mark? Was the interim manager looking for scapegoats?

Who knows? Who should care? The perception is likely out there in the community that comprises career government administrators.

It’s a perception that the City Council must address directly, head on and candidly as it continues its search for a permanent city manager.

Whether it’s true or it’s all a figment of the former interim city manager’s mind doesn’t matter. Some potential administrative candidate might look at what Childers said and determine, “You know, I don’t want any part of that.” How many other top-drawer administrators might draw that conclusion based on the perception that’s been tossed out there by the guy who left City Hall in a huff?

Indeed, the council might want to examine precisely why the interim manager couldn’t restrain himself that fateful day when he said what he did to one of his bosses, a constituent whose property taxes helps foot the Amarillo government bill.

Therein might lie the perception that the council needs to cleanse from its public image.

Obama critics won’t stop name-calling, either

93464f48-0602-480f-afbc-a574e0c27869-large16x9_trump_leak

It’s going to be a difficult transition for many millions of Americans from the Obama presidency to the Trump presidency.

I totally am in that camp. I’m one of those Americans who’s going to have a tough time making that switch.

Yes, some critics of this blog — and some acquaintances of mine — have questioned why I keep commenting negatively about Donald J. Trump. “Move on,” they say. “Get over it,” they admonish me.

Well, OK. I will get over it. I will move on … eventually.

Perhaps I should offer a deal for those critics to ponder. How about many of them stop hurling epithets at the current president?

I don’t associate with those who’ve been amazingly harsh toward Barack Obama, his lovely wife Michelle — and even those precious and beautiful daughters of theirs, Malia and Sasha.

You no doubt have heard some of the hate that has spewed forth against the first family. Much of it is based on the president’s policies. Much of it also is based on more visceral feelings.

Let’s not pussyfoot around here. There has been a racial component to the criticism against the first family. No, I am not pointing the accusatory finger at all the critics. Those who’ve said things publicly through social media, though, have conducted a shameful smear campaign againstĀ  the president and his family.

Will I be able eventually to accept fully the election of Donald J. Trump as president of the United States? I am going to make every effort possible to do so.

But I won’t be badgered, pestered or browbeaten into doing so by those who have kept yammering negatively against the current president over matters that transcend public policy.

It’s not that I intend to deliberately return what others have flung at the man Trump is succeeding as president. Those who have said many ugly and hurtful things, though, need to understand that some of these wounds will take time to heal.

So, if some of us continue to complain out loud — and vociferously — about the policies being proposed by the current president, I’ll offer this response: Get over it!

Get rid of Flynn as national security adviser

flynn

President George W. Bush was quite adamant when we went to war in 2001 against radical Islamic terrorists that we were not going to war against Islam.

President Barack Obama has echoed that mantra ever since.

So, who does the president-elect bring in as national security adviser, the guy who’ll advise him on how to fight groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State? A retired Army three-star general who calls Islam a “cancer” and says Americans’ fear of Islam is “rational.”

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, moreover, apparently has ties with multiple foreign governments.

Flynn is now the target of groups asking Donald J. Trump to rescind Flynn’s appointment as national security adviser. They cite concerns over Flynn’s statements about Islam, Iran and whether his views would jeopardize a hoped-for peaceful settlement of the ongoing dispute between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michael-flynn-trump-appointment-advocacy-groups-232208

I don’t expect the president-elect to heed their call.

Indeed, Flynn is a noted hothead. He’s a brilliant military tactician. He also has the kind of personality that would clash immediately and often with the likes of retired Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, who is Trump’s pick to be the secretary of defense; I will add that Gen. Mattis is a well-chronicled hothead himself, someone known to speak his mind freely.

The issue, though, is Flynn and whether he’s a good fit to become national security adviser.

The advocacy groups asking Trump to rethink his appointment believe he is a terrible fit.

I happen to agree.

The national security adviser is a staff position and, thus, is not subject to Senate confirmation. Gen. Flynn’s status rests solely with the president he would serve.

Get rid of him, Mr. President-elect.

No apology coming for Pearl Harbor attack? It should

abe-obama

That settles that issue, I guess.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is coming to the United States late this month for a state visit with President Obama.

He won’t apologize for what his forebears did on Dec. 7, 1941. You see, Abe will be at the place where the United States was drawn into World War II. He’ll visit Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. He’ll likely tour the USS Arizona Memorial. He’ll get to hear about the suffering brought to the men who are entombed in the shattered remains of the ship that still rest at the bottom of the harbor.

As the Associated Press reported: Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said that ‘the purpose of the upcoming visit is to pay respects for the war dead and not to offer an apology.'”

Frankly, I wish he would at least offer an expression of regret.

We’ll learn in due course whether he changes his mind.

President Obama visited Hiroshima, Japan earlier this year. He didn’t apologize, either, for the atomic bomb that President Truman ordered dropped on that city. Then again, I don’t believe an apology — in that instance — was warranted. The Japanese started the fight with the sneak attack on our forces at Pearl Harbor; we finished it with the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and, three days later, on Nagasaki.

Abe’s circumstance, of course, is much different. He represents a government that in an earlier era talked to American diplomats about seeking peace while plotting an act of war.

He need not grovel. He need not beg for forgiveness. Indeed, U.S.-Japan relations are stronger than ever at this moment seven decades afterĀ the two nations’ forces fought each other to the death throughout the Pacific Theater of Operations.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/japanese-leader-abe-wont-apologize-at-pearl-harbor/ar-AAl9oyg?li=BBnbfcL

He’ll emphasize the “reconciliation” that has occurred. That’s fine. We all know that it is strong.

The act of war that precipitated the era of good feelings that followed, however, ought to require a statement of contrition from the leader of the government that caused all that senseless carnage in the first place.

Trump trashes Carson, then selects him for HUD post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbxWRavwvhA

Take a look at this video.

It’s from a November 2015 campaign rally in Iowa. Donald J. Trump is talking about the man he’s just picked to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson.

I’ll let the video speak for itself.

You are welcome to draw your own conclusions about why the president-elect would choose someone he said has an incurable “pathological disorder” to help run a major federal agency.

Go figure.