Trying to grasp the college admission scandal

With all the other news stories that are crashing around us, I am having a bit of trouble wrapping my arms around what ought to be the biggest story of the year.

The college admission scandal! It involves wealthy Americans — including at least two prominent TV and film entertainers — shelling out big money to get their children admitted to prestigious universities.

I keep returning to this thought . . .

Suppose you’re a student who has applied to a university and you are denied admission. Your grades are good enough. Your SAT and ACT scores measure up. But the university has a cap on the number of incoming freshmen it can accept; that’s the case in several of Texas’s top public universities.

Then you hear that some son or daughter of a big-time donor gets admitted. You wonder immediately whether that new freshman got in totally on merit or was he or she able to slide in via deep-pocketed Mom and Dad’s connection with the school.

This scandal speaks to a whole array of matters that need careful examination. Privilege appears to be at the top of the heap. How many of our colleges and universities are involved in this horrible story? Are worthy high school graduates being denied admission because someone else has greased the palm of some university president, chancellor or regent?

The entertainers in question — Lori Laughlin and Felicity Huffman — have posted hefty bonds to be released from jail. Their troubles are just beginning.

So, too, should college and universities administrators squirm as this story continues to gather pace.

I hope we don’t lose interest in this matter.

Not a ‘small group,’ Mr. President

“I think it’s a small group of people that have very, very serious problems.” 

So said Donald Trump today in response to a reporter’s question about white nationalism and whether it’s a worldwide problem.

Mr. President, it is not merely a “small group” of people. It is a growing crisis around the world. The New Zealand massacre at the two mosques in Christchurch presents a symptom of what we’re witnessing.

White supremacists are getting bolder in Europe. We see more of it in Latin America. Make no mistake, there has been a serious increase of white nationalist attacks in the United States of America.

I won’t belabor the reason for the increase in this country. We’ve trod down that path before in this forum and elsewhere. I just have to challenge the president’s assertion that it is not a “rising problem,” that the surge in such terror attacks are the work of a “small group of people” with “serious problems.”

Trump is correct to call it a “terrible thing, a terrible thing.”

Yes it is, Mr. President.

The crisis, though, is worse than you would have us believe. As the leader of the United States, the president needs to step up and lead the chorus against the scourge of race- and faith-based hatred.

Happy Trails, Part 150: ‘Alexa’ joins the family

I guess you could say that our family has gained a new member.

Its — or perhaps I should say “her” — name is Alexa. This being doesn’t exist in human form. My wife and I spend time during our day telling “Alexa” to do certain things, perform certain tasks that we used to do all by ourselves.

Turn off the ceiling light in the living room? Alexa takes care of it. The floor lamp next to our couches? Alexa is on the job. The bedroom lamps? Same deal. How about locking and unlocking the front door? There’s Alexa again.

Here’s my favorite so far: Alexa now turns our furnace on and off for us. We issue the instruction, our “wish” is Alexa’s “command.” When we get into air-conditioning weather, Alexa will be there, too, to cool our house down.

Yep, we now are the proud owners of a “smart” home. We already have a smart puppy, Toby, whose vocabulary is increasing regularly. My wife and I are having to come up with different terminology to avoid getting our puppy overly excited for no reason.

I digress.

Having this being in our midst named “Alexa” is like having a third person in our house.

My wife and I are pinching ourselves, if not each other, while we try to visualize what we might have been thinking about when we started our life together nearly 48 years ago.

I know one thing that never crossed our minds: That we would be living with a ghost that obeys every instruction we toss out.

I am waiting now for Alexa to start talking back to us.

I’m also thinking of “HAL” the computer that takes over the space ship in “2001: A Space Odyssey.”

Trump throws out prospect of violence?

Did I understand the president of the United States correctly?

I think I heard that he made some remark to Breitbart News about how “tough” his supporters are, or can get, if criticism of him doesn’t let up.

Here is a quote from the Breitbart interview as posted by USA Today: “I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”

Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC had a lengthy commentary on Donald Trump’s interview, suggesting that the 45th president of the United States is suggesting there might be a coup if events don’t go according to the way Trump wants them to go.

Wow, man!

I am wondering what Trump means by “a certain point.” I am left to believe that he presumes his “tough” supporters might be inclined to rise up and strike at those who are critical of the president. Does anyone else share that presumption.

O’Donnell also sought to make the point that not all bikers are for Trump; nor are all police officers; or nor are all military personnel.

Then came the president’s spinmeister in chief, Kellyanne Conway, to tell CNN’s Chris Cuomo that the president actually was describing how “gentle” his supporters are and that there is no explicit or implied threat of violence in the Breitbart News interview.

Oyyy!

Well, I understand today that Trump took down a Twitter message he posted about the Breitbart interview. Great! That’s nice, Mr. President . . . except that the damage is done.

I’m just sayin’, this guy is frightening in the extreme.

That’s why they’re called ‘terrorists’

To be terrorized means that acts of blind hatred can strike anyone, anywhere and in any context.

Such horror has erupted again in what I consider to be a most terribly ironic location.

Gunmen believed to be white supremacists opened fire in two mosques, killing 49 Muslims, in — get ready for it! — Christchurch, New Zealand.

Forty-nine people are dead. Why? Because the people who killed them hate immigrants. They despise non-Christians. They took their vengeance out on people in their houses of worship. Three suspects — two men and a woman — are in custody.

What in the world does one make of this latest spasm of utterly senseless violence? I am shaking my head in mourning and grief this morning as I seek to make sense of something that makes no sense at all.

Expressions of sorrow are pouring into the country from around the world. Donald Trump extended his sympathy and support for New Zealand as it seeks answers to what its leaders call the worst such event in the nation’s history.

The president spoke for his country. Indeed, it is impossible to grasp fully the mayhem that has exploded in a country long believed to among the most peaceful places on Earth.

Terrorists and the acts they commit against unsuspecting victims are, by definition, cowards of the first order.

The world’s heart is broken today.

House turns up the heat on AG Barr

The vote is not legally binding, but it represents the growing pressure from both sides of the aisle on the Justice Department to disclose as much of the report as possible.

So it was reported by National Public Radio on a stunning vote taken by the House of Representatives. The House voted 420 to zero demanding that Attorney General William Barr release for public review the report he soon will get from special counsel Robert Mueller on the issue of conspiracy and collusion (allegedly) by the Donald Trump campaign and Russian operatives.

Barr is under no legal obligation to follow the House lead, which NPR has acknowledged. However, William Barr is a seasoned Washington hand. He served as AG during the George H.W. Bush administration. He’s no novice. Barr knows all about the power inherent in Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which lays out congressional authority line by line.

Mueller’s report must be made public. The House is demanding it of the Department of Justice, which appointed Mueller to the special counsel post in the first place.

The president has derided the Mueller investigation as a “witch hunt.” He calls the collusion matter a “hoax” and a product of “fake news.”

The public needs to see for itself whether the president is correct or if he is seeking to undermine a legitimate investigation into the attack on our electoral system by a foreign hostile power.

Let the public see it.

Trump’s boasts return to the headlines

Donald J. Trump Jr. had the bad sense to pop off about the college enrollment scandal that has swallowed up the careers of at least two prominent Hollywood TV and film stars.

Junior’s remarks brought out Twitter responses throughout the social media universe discussing how Don Jr. was able to parlay his father’s deep pockets into enrolling at a prestigious school.

And that brought back all those sound bites of Donald J. Trump Sr. bragging about his brilliance.

Which brings me to my point.

I’ve known a lot of wealthy and smart individuals over the course of my 69 years on this Earth. I have made the acquaintance of one billionaire and have become friendly with a number of individuals who are worth millions. I’ve known West Point, Naval Academy and Air Force Academy graduates. I have developed good relationships with many men and women with high-powered degrees from some of the top universities in the United States.

I cannot recall ever hearing a single one of them — be they wealthy or uber-smart — telling me how rich and smart they are. I always knew about their wealth and their intelligence. There was no need for any of them rub it in my face.

Thus, I always wonder when I hear the president of the United States tell us how he went to the “finest schools,” and has built a “world-class company” whether he really is as smart and as wealthy as he claims to be.

I think I can answer the first part of that query. Trump isn’t as smart as he proclaims. I believe that via the nature of the hideous way he communicates via Twitter; I also listen to his spoken syntax as he lies his way through public life.

As for the other part, his wealth, well . . . no one can say for certain if he is as filthy rich as he claims to be. He won’t show us his tax returns.

Therefore, many of us are left to wonder: Is he really that rich? I tend to think not.

Veto would inflame already red-hot tensions

Donald Trump had a one-word, four-letter response to the U.S. Senate vote rejecting his declaration of a national emergency on our nation’s southern border.

“VETO!” he wrote via Twitter.

OK, so the president has thrown down on both chambers of Congress.

The House and the Senate both have rejected Trump’s view that a national emergency exists on our border. They contend that no such emergency exists. A majority of both legislative chambers has stood up against the president.

This is what divided government brings to the table.

Trump has the constitutional authority to veto the legislation that rejects his national emergency declaration. Congress also has the authority to override a presidential veto. It cannot do so with a simple majority. The override sets the bar higher than a vote to enact a law in the first place.

Should the president carry out his veto threat? Does he risk sticking in the eye of a co-equal government branch that has spoken ostensibly for the constituents who elected its members?

Trump’s national emergency declaration is as phony as it gets.

Astonishingly, the president himself has admitted that the declaration is unnecessary. “I didn’t need to do it,” he said immediately after declaration the emergency. The move is meant to empower the president to reallocate money approved by Congress for specific projects; he wants to redirect the funds to build The Wall he says would stem the flow of criminals pouring into the country.

Twelve Senate Republicans joined their Democratic colleagues in rejecting Trump’s emergency declaration. The rest of the Senate GOP caucus, interestingly, stood behind the president of their own party after chiding his predecessor — Democrat Barack Obama — for the alleged “lawlessness” of his own executive procedures.

To my way of thinking, Trump’s serious overreach in reaction to a phony immigration crisis is far more “lawless” than anything that Obama ever did.

But that’s just me.

The president is empowered to veto the rejection that is heading for his desk. He’ll likely carry through with the threat. It won’t solve any of the political problems that are piling up around him.

So the battle rages on.

And on and on.

Beto has one distinct advantage over rest of huge field

As I ponder the impact of Beto O’Rourke’s entry into the burgeoning Democratic Party presidential primary field, I keep thinking of a distinct advantage he holds over most of the rest of the thundering herd.

He doesn’t have a job at the moment.

Beto once served in Congress. He represented El Paso in Congress for three terms. Then O’Rourke decided to give up his House seat. He ran for the U.S. Senate against Republican incumbent Ted Cruz. O’Rourke ignited the Texas Democratic Party, which had been in a state of slumber, er . . . stupor for the past three decades.

O’Rourke almost won!

Now he wants to take the fight to an even higher level. He wants to become president of the United States.

He is running against a lot of U.S. senators, some governors and others who are gainfully employed. Beto doesn’t have a job.

One of the points he sought to make while losing narrowly to Cruz was that the junior senator from Texas spent too much time running for president and too little time casting votes in the Senate.

The many folks who are running against him for president in next year’s Democratic primary will be unable to slather him with mud from that particular pit. He’s jobless at the moment and can devote his waking moments full time to the task of running for POTUS.

He’ll be able to parlay that advantage at least for a little while.

Then he well might have to cope with another high-powered politician with no gainful employment.

Joe Biden? Are you out there?

Officially spooked by this latest crash

It takes quite a lot to spook me about air travel. I don’t usually get the heebie-jeebies when incidents occur aboard aircraft.

However, I am officially spooked by the crash of that Boeing 737 MAX 8 in Ethiopia.

Furthermore, I am glad that the president of the United States ordered the planes out of the sky. Donald Trump has been criticized for being a bit late issuing the order in the wake of the crash that killed 157 people, including eight Americans. I won’t join that criticism. He acted and I support the grounding of the aircraft.

What’s so terribly troubling is the nature of the crash and the reports that the plane somehow — all by itself — pitched nose-first into the ground. The pilot was not at fault. Indeed, I understand that Ethiopian Airlines is a first-rate air carrier.

I am grateful that I won’t be traveling by air anytime soon. I also am glad to avoid having to order myself and my family off one of those MAX 8 jetliners were the need to arise.

Yes, it is troubling that the aircraft built by a proud American company now has been deemed suspect in the cause of this tragedy. National pride, though, doesn’t matter when the overarching issue is the safety of human beings.

In fact, I am so spooked that I might never book a flight aboard one of those MAX aircraft — even if the smart folks fix what ails it.