Amarillo Matters taking shots … but, why?

Election Day came and went across Texas this past weekend. In Amarillo, the returns were fruitful for those who like the direction City Hall has taken the past couple of years.

Among those who are gratified is a group called Amarillo Matters. The political action committee endorsed all five City Council incumbents; they all won re-election.

But as usual, I am hearing some bitching/griping/sour graping from afar, way over yonder in Collin County, where my wife and I now live.

Some folks think Amarillo has forked over enough money to get the City Council to do its bidding. They are unhappy about it.

OK, let’s take a look briefly at Amarillo Matters. Shall we?

It’s mission statement is simple. It states: Amarillo Matters will work to identify, articulate and facilitate positive opportunities for Amarillo and the surrounding area.

Sounds sinister, right?

Oh, then there’s this from its vision statement, which declares in part: Amarillo Matters will seek out and support leaders of the highest integrity. We will look for leaders who know what makes us great and have the desire and knowledge to make us better.

Nefarious, don’t you think?

Look, I no longer have a dog in that fight. We sold our home in March 2018. We have moved away. We have set up a new life in Collin County. However, I do take a great interest in the city where we lived for more than two decades. It is a city in which I was charged with the task of commenting on its direction during my nearly 18 years as editorial page editor of the Amarillo Globe-News. Thus, it is hard for me to let go.

Amarillo Matters was right to get involved when it was founded in 2016. A group of leading civic and business leaders didn’t like what it saw when a new majority took control of the City Council in 2015. I shared their concern as I watched it during my final years in the city.

The city has made tremendous progress since the 2017 election, when voters elected a brand new City Council. Is it wrong for Amarillo Matters to want a council that will lead the city toward a future that remains largely unknown, but which is taking shape in real time?

Amarillo appears to be moving forward. How is that a bad thing?

Trump presents Medal of Freedom to Tiger, but … wait!

This is what happens when a president of the United States refuses to divest himself of his vast business interests prior to taking the nation’s most exalted public office.

Donald Trump presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Tiger Woods, honoring the greatest golfer of his generation — and perhaps of all time — for winning his fifth Masters Tournament and his 15th major professional golf championship.

Woods becomes the fourth pro golfer to be awarded in this fashion. President George W. Bush presented Presidential Medals of Freedom to a pair of golf legends, Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus; President Obama awarded one to Charlie Sifford.

No one questioned those presidents’ motives. Trump brings another element to this ceremony.

He and Woods have a business relationship. Woods has been a highly visible promoter of golf at Trump Organization properties. Some have wondered about the president’s motive in honoring Woods. Is he doing so in an altruistic fashion or is he seeking to promote his own business in association with Tiger Woods? That’s the question of the moment.

Donald Trump declined to divest himself of his business interests upon becoming president. He remains associated with the Trump Organization, although he reportedly turned over day-to-day operations to his sons, Don Jr. and Eric.

I don’t know what motivates Donald Trump, although I have my suspicions and my beliefs. I merely am left to wonder and to echo the questions that have come from many quarters about whether the president occupies his high office for the right reasons.

Now he might be sullying the reputation of a pro golfer, Tiger Woods, who deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his immense contribution to our national culture.

If only the president who awarded it wasn’t so, um, compromised.

370 former prosecutors all say it: Trump committed crimes

Three hundred-seventy former federal prosecutors can’t all be wrong . . . can they?

They all have declared, according to Politico, that Donald Trump would have been indicted for obstruction of justice if he were just an ordinary citizen — and not the president of the United States.

Hmm. You know what that means? It means that when special counsel appears before congressional judiciary committees — in both the House and Senate — he should be asked this set of questions:

Did the president commit a crime of obstruction of justice? If yes, why — specifically — did you decide not to file a criminal complaint? If the answer is no, then show us the evidence that led you to that conclusion?

Mueller is a cautious, careful and highly skilled professional prosecutor. He won’t fly off the handle.

However, the former prosecutors who have signed on to the notion that Trump would have been indicted had he not held the highest office in the land must not be discredited, dismissed, or disparaged.

Which is what Trump surely will do as he seeks to ridicule them.

Nothing PC about this disqualification, Mr. POTUS

Donald J. “Horse Racing Expert in Chief” Trump has tweeted his displeasure over this past weekend’s result in the Kentucky Derby.

It seems the president of the United States is unhappy that Maximum Security was disqualified for blocking a couple of his competitors as the horses came down the home stretch in the famed horse race.

The president, though, said the decision was a bow to what he called “political correctness.” To which I scratch my noggin in astonishment.

There was nothing I could see that was PC about the stewards’ decision to DQ Maximum Security and give the victory to the second-place finisher, Country House.

I saw the video of the infraction. Maximum Security violated the rules. Country House, one of the longer shots in the field, was granted the victory according to the rules of the race.

So, Mr. President, stop blaming a form of “political correctness” where none exists. Stick to tweeting about things about which you know something.

Oh, wait! That would be nothing at all.

If Empower Texans favors it, Sen. Seliger opposes it!

I am going to stand with my friend, Texas state Sen. Kel Seliger, the Amarillo Republican who has become a top-tier target of a far-right political action group known as Empower Texans.

Empower Texans is crowing about the passage in the Texas Senate of a property tax overhaul that garnered the support of every legislative Republican except one: Seliger, who, according to Empower Texans, sided with Texas Democratic legislators in opposing the bill.

I’ll save my comment on the legislation, Senate Bill 2, for a later blog post.

Today, though, I want to note briefly that Empower Texans sought to oust Seliger from his Senate District 31 seat in 2018, but failed when Seliger got through the GOP primary against two ultra-conservatives and was effectively re-elected without a runoff in his heavily Republican Senate district.

Seliger has made no effort to disguise his disgust with Michael Quinn Sullivan, the founding guru of Empower Texans, who believes that all Texas officeholders must adhere to his far-right agenda.

For example, Empower Texans favor vouchers for parents who want to pull their kids out of public education; Seliger, long a champion of public ed, opposes it.

With that, Empower Texans has sided with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick — who also opposes much of what Seliger favors — in pushing for this property tax overhaul.

It boils down to a simple notion. If Empower Texans favors an initiative, it will do so without the support of Sen. Seliger, a man who has represented his sprawling West Texas district with distinction since 2004.

Sen. Seliger is unafraid to tout his own conservative credentials. The only “sin” he commits is that he isn’t conservative enough to suit Michael Quinn Sullivan and his cabal of right-wing ideologues.

Why block Mueller if there’s nothing to hide?

I admit readily at times to being a little slow on the uptake.

That said, I am left to wonder: If the president of the United States has been “totally exonerated” of any criminal activity, if he is as pure as fresh snow, if he has been the victim of the worst “witch hunt” since the Salem Witch Trials, why is he suggesting that Robert Mueller “should not testify” before congressional committees?

Robert Mueller is the special counsel who filed that 448-page report that cleared Donald Trump of conspiracy to collude with Russians who attacked our electoral system in 2016. However, he took a pass on whether the president obstructed justice. Mueller did not clear Trump of obstructing, but lacked sufficient evidence, he said, to file a criminal complaint.

Is that “exoneration”? Nope. It isn’t. Mueller said so in his report.

But the president keeps saying he’s in the clear. He keeps yapping about the witch hunt. He now endorses the notion that his term should be extended two years to make up for the time “stolen” by Mueller’s probe into The Russia Thing.

Why not let the former FBI director and a man of impeccable integrity tell Congress what he knows? Hey, the president says he’s in the clear. Let’s allow Mueller to affirm what the president has said.

Oh, wait! Except that he won’t do anything of the sort.

OK, that’s why Trump is digging in against Mueller talking to Congress. I get it.

Extend your term, Mr. President? Are you f***ing nuts?

I don’t know whether to laugh, scream, pull my hair out by the roots or jump onto a fire ant mound.

Donald John “Stable Genius” Trump has just retweeted something that on its face is beyond the unbelievable but is something that one can totally expect from the goofball who happens to be president of the United States of America.

He believes his term as president should be “extended” by two years. Why? Because, in Trump’s own words, special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Russian attack on our election in 2016 has “stollen” two years of Trump’s presidency.

Can you believe this man would make the moronic suggestion?

Yeah, me too.

The U.S. Constitution — the document with which Trump has no familiarity — limits the president to two elected terms that shall last no longer than eight years.

So this clown wants to extend his term by two years? To a six-year term? Is this guy out of his ever-lovin’ mind? No need to answer that.

The idea comes initially from the “Rev.” Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University and an unabashed admirer of the president. I use the term “Rev.” guardedly because I do not consider Falwell to any more a man of God than his late father.

The very idea that Jerry Jr. would pitch such a ridiculous notion is preposterous on its face. It’s not so weird that Trump would latch onto it, given that I believe he is hurtling out of control.

I think I might start looking at any moment for that fire ant mound.

Redefining the term ‘cutthroat’

John and Dathel Georges are trying to redefine the term “cutthroat” as it applies to describing media purchases.

The couple that owns the New Orleans Advocate has just purchased the once-might New Orleans Times-Picayune — and has laid off the entire Times-Picayune staff! All of ’em are gone, or will be gone soon.

This is the way it has become, it seems, in the world of print media.

The Times-Picayune once was the newspaper of record for The Big Easy. It became a media powerhouse, reporting on the ravages brought by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

Then social media, the Internet and cable news began taking its toll. The T-P reduced its publication schedule to three days a week. Its circulation plummeted. As did its ad revenue.

The Advocate continued on. It became the scrappy alternative the Newhouse family’s once-formidable media presence.

Now the Advocate — owned by Mr. and Mrs. Georges — has taken over the T-P. It will restore its seven-day-a-week publishing schedule.

The T-P staff, though, won’t be part of the story.

Oh, my, this story hurts.

Sadly, though, it is just yet another example of how media companies operate. I once worked for a company, Morris Communications, that made a ton of bad business decisions at the top of the chain of command. When the company’s initiatives failed to bear sufficient fruit, the execs at the top decided to “punish” the staff by invoking pay cuts across the board and eliminating the company match toward staffers’ retirement accounts.

I also worked for another media group, the Hearst Corporation, that around 1988 decided to settle a major newspaper war in San Antonio. Hearst owned the San Antonio Light, which was battling with the Rupert Murdoch-owned Express-News. Hearst then purchased the Express-News.

However, Hearst then extended its “thanks” and expressions of gratitude for the battle fought by its Light staff by closing the Light and laying off its employees.

What’s about to happen in New Orleans, therefore, is not a newly contrived event. It’s happened many times before in the media business. It doesn’t make it any less disgraceful or dispiriting.

Working in the media world these days is tough, man!

I am so glad, delighted and relieved, to be free of that pressure.

Good call, Amarillo voters, in re-electing City Council

To my former neighbors in Amarillo, I want to offer a bouquet and a word of praise for the wisdom they demonstrated Saturday in re-electing the five individuals who serve on their all-volunteer City Council.

They were returned for another two years in the saddle with healthy majorities, including the mayor, Ginger Nelson, who faced multiple challengers in her bid for a second term.

I say all this, of course, without casting a vote in the election. We don’t live there any longer, but I have been pleased with the progress the city has made in the two years since Nelson and her council colleagues took their seats.

Downtown’s redevelopment is continuing at a brisk pace. The Amarillo Sod Poodles are playing minor-league baseball in front of healthy crowds at Hodgetown. Yes, the city needs to fill some storefront space at the parking garage built across the street from the ballpark; I am not giving up on that venture.

What’s more, the city has thrown all in on the Texas Tech University School of Veterinary Medicine planned for its Health Sciences Center campus on the west end of the city.

Nelson, along with council members Howard Smith, Elaine Hays, Freda Powell and Eddie Sauer have sought to steady the municipal “ship of state” after a sometimes-rocky ride during the previous two years before they were elected the first time in 2017. From my vantage point, they appear to have done so.

Let us never forget: These folks get paid a “hefty” sum of $10 per public meeting, plus a reimbursement when they incur expenses while conducting city business.

They ain’t in it for the money.

My wife and I don’t get back to Amarillo — where we lived for more than two decades — very often these days. When we do, though, we enjoy seeing the change that occurs while we are away.

It looks damn good to my eyes.

Amarillo school voters sending a message to district?

I awoke this morning in Collin County not knowing what to expect when I searched for results from Saturday’s vote results way up yonder in Amarillo.

Then I saw it: Two Amarillo school trustee incumbents lost their bids for re-election, which I hope means a potential change is in the works for the way the school board might clean up a mess it has on its hands.

Jim Austin and John Betancourt are out. Three newbies are joining the Amarillo Independent School District board of trustees: Dick Ford, Kimberly Anderson and Alonzo Everhart. I don’t know the new folks. Of the two incumbents who lost, I have met only one of them, Austin.

So, what gives?

The AISD election occurred in the midst of a mess created when an Amarillo High School girls volleyball coach, Kori Clements, resigned. She said a parent hassled her over playing time she was giving the parent’s daughters. Clements is an AHS grad, a product of the vaunted high school volleyball program. She quit after a single season. She also said the school board and the administration didn’t give her the backing she believes she deserved.

The school board hasn’t handled this situation well . . . at all! An AISD constituent filed a complaint with the Texas Education Association; a group of parents has formed to call for an “independent investigation” into one of the specific complaints filed by the constituent, that the offending parent is a member of the AISD school board.

The board has been silent on all of this.

Voters had their say Saturday night. They gave two incumbents the boot. I don’t know what was in the minds of voters who cast their ballots. I hope they were speaking on behalf of those observers who want more transparency and accountability from the school board and administration over this and other matters.

Here’s what I do know: The AISD board would do well to look inward and decide if it has handled this Kori Clements in the most up-front manner possible. If not, then it ought to change its ways. If it fails to do so, then another election cycle likely will continue the job of housecleaning that began this weekend.