Monthly Archives: November 2019

national news

Count me as one who is ‘satisfied’ with Democratic field

No one has asked for my opinion on this matter, but I’m going to offer it anyway.

You may count me as one American voter who is satisfied with the quality of the Democratic field competing for the chance to run against Donald J. Trump in the 2020 presidential election.

So, with that I should declare that Michael Bloomberg’s relatively late entry into the contest strikes me as more than just a tad presumptuous on the part of the former three-term New York City mayor.

He once was a Republican. Then he became an independent. Now he wants to run as a Democrat. Make up your mind, Mr. Mayor! Who are you and what, precisely, do you believe? Yes, I have stated my preference for a moderate candidate to emerge from the large field, but this guy is nearly impossible to peg.

Bloomberg, who once said he wouldn’t run for president, says he fears the current field lacks the heft needed to knock off the Republican president. I beg to differ.

The Democratic herd of candidates is full of talent, full of ideas, full of executive government experience and full of integrity needed to compete against the carnival barker masquerading as our president.

I am struck by the notion that Bloomberg plans to skip the early primary and caucus states and hit the trail in time for the big super Tuesday event later in the spring.

He’s worth about 50 billion bucks — give or take a billion or three — and is saying (a) he won’t take any political contributions from anyone and (b) won’t accept the chump-change presidential salary if he’s elected in 2020; the office pays a measly $400,000 annually, but hey, the office provides the best public transportation possible, not to mention 24/7 security.

I get that Bloomberg is a smart guy. Well-educated and all of that. He did a good job running the nation’s largest city. He’s richer than God and can add some considerable gravitas to the campaign.

However, I want to arc back to my initial point: Does the Democratic Party field need this guy to give it the oomph Bloomberg thinks it needs to kick Donald Trump out of the Oval Office? I do not believe that’s the case.

International news

The Russians did it … dammit!

Republicans who have circled the wagons around Donald J. Trump keep repeating yet another lie about Russia and the goons who attacked our election in 2016.

I am about to scream at the top of the lungs!

They keep trying to implicate Ukraine as at minimum a co-conspirator in the attack on our electoral system that aimed to help elect Donald Trump.

Wait a second!

The CIA has said the Russians, all by themselves, did it. The Director of National Intelligence said the same thing. So has the FBI. And the National Security Agency. Same for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The Russians did it! The Russians are fomenting the Ukraine lie and the GOP — led by Donald Trump — is parroting the rhetoric being spit out by the Russian propaganda machine.

I cannot stand listening to this lie. When will the leadership of the once-Grand Old Party listen to the truth?

International news

A Thanksgiving to remember for the ages

I cherish the memories of many Thanksgiving holidays over the years. I will do so again this year. Our sons, our daughter-in-law and our granddaughter will join us for dinner. We will laugh and enjoy fellowship that only families can enjoy.

However, the most unique Thanksgiving of my life will be in the back of my mind. It occurred 30 years ago today. I was traveling in a faraway land, away from my wife and my sons. As I look back on it, I realize more clearly than ever the symbolism that Thanksgiving had in that time, in that place.

I was traveling through Southeast Asia with a group of editorial writers and editors. We traveled there to examine the issues of the day and to take a firsthand look at the ravages that war had brought to that region. We started our tour in Thailand. Then we flew to Vietnam, which to many of the Vietnam War veterans among our group filled us with another sort of emotion.

Then we flew to Cambodia, which in 1989 was a shattered hulk of a country. The Vietnamese occupiers who invaded the country in 1978 had just vacated. They left behind a nation in ruins brought to it by the horrifying Khmer Rouge regime led by Pol Pot.

We departed Cambodia by bus caravan back to Saigon. It would take us all day to get from Phnom Penh to the city now known officially as Ho Chi Minh City; except that the civilians still call it Saigon.

After a harrowing trip that included crossing the Mekong River on a rickety raft that served as a “ferry,” we arrived in Saigon. We checked in to the Majestic Hotel. Then we went to dinner as a group, tired but ready to enjoy some good chow and each other’s company.

Our Vietnamese hosts knew that it was Thanksgiving Day, a uniquely American holiday. They went out of their way to make us feel “at home.” They served us a wonderful meal in the dining room of roast duck, mashed potatoes, peas and apple pie.

Was it the most scrumptious meal I’ve ever eaten? Not even close. One of my friends among the journalists gathered there called the main course “road kill duck.” But, our hosts’ hearts were clearly geared toward showing us some supreme hospitality. They succeeded far beyond measure.

As I look back on that Thanksgiving dinner three decades later, I realize now how thankful I was at the time — and I am today — at the bounty we enjoy in this country. Furthermore, as I recall the lingering misery we encountered in Cambodia, I am reminded of just how grateful we must remain in this country, where we hope we never experience what those brave and glorious people had to endure.

That dinner gave me a special understanding of what this holiday means to all of us. May we never take what we have for granted.

national news

Next SCOTUS vacancy could cause a major eruption

Photograph by Fred Schilling, Supreme Court Curator’s Office.

I will not pussyfoot around this issue.

If Donald J. Trump is handed another opportunity to nominate someone to the U.S. Supreme Court, particularly if the nominee would succeed one of the court’s liberal justices, all the battles we saw during his two prior confirmation efforts will pale in comparison.

Justice Neil Gorsuch was Trump’s first appointment. He succeeded a conservative icon on the court, the late Antonin Scalia. Justice Brett Kavanaugh was Trump pick No. 2. Kavanaugh succeeded Anthony Kennedy, who retired. Scalia leaned hard right; Kennedy was also a conservative, but voted on occasion with the liberal wing of the court.

The current court comprises a 5-4 conservative majority, which appears to more solidly conservative with Justice Kavanaugh sitting in place of Justice Kennedy.

The latest justice to come into public view has been Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has been battling health issues lately. She has suffered from cancer; she has fallen at home; she recently was hospitalized for chills and fever. Justice Ginsburg is back home and will be back at work at the court soon.

Ginsburg vows to stay on the job. I pray that she is able to outlast the presidency of Donald Trump.

If not, though, then we had best settle in for the proverbially bloodiest political battle we will have witnessed since, oh, 1991 when President Bush nominated archconservative Clarence Thomas to replace ultraliberal Thurgood Marshall on the highest court in America.

You can rest assured that Donald Trump will do nothing to enrage the hard-right base that clings to its support of the president. He will select someone who adheres to that far-right philosophy, thus cementing the court’s conservative majority possibly for generations.

The framers established a lifetime appointment process for the federal judiciary ostensibly to remove politics from the judicial branch of government. Sadly, that notion has not held up over the centuries since the founding of our republic.

If the current president is handed another opportunity to select a justice to the Supreme Court, you will see what I mean.

I guarantee it.

military news

Trump messes up his commander in chief role

Leave it Donald J. Trump to muddy up his role as commander of chief of the U.S. armed forces. He did it big time in a mess involving a Navy SEAL and those who serve in the high military command.

Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher was convicted of a crime involving his posing in Iraq with the corpse of a fighter killed in battle. He had been acquitted of far more serious accusations that were considered “war crimes.”

The Navy Department, led by Secretary Richard Spencer, wanted to stop Gallagher of his Trident badge emblematic of his SEAL service.

Gallagher, who is on active duty at this moment, has taken his case to the public.

Then in walked Trump, the commander in chief, to order that Gallagher retain his SEAL status. Richard Spencer couldn’t comply. He enraged the president, who then ordered Defense Secretary Mark Esper to override the Navy boss. Esper also ordered Spencer to submit his resignation, which Spencer did.

Spencer’s letter of resignation — which he addressed to the president — is a thing of beauty. He thanked the president for allowing him to serve. He then said he couldn’t comply with the president’s policies because they aren’t in keeping with military order and discipline. Read the letter here.

I get that the president’s status as commander in chief allows him to do whatever he wishes regarding the military. I mean, he’s the boss of all the men and women in uniform. However, it is highly irregular, odd and unusual for the commander in chief to insert himself into the middle of command decisions that belong to those who serve under him.

Commanders in chief usually set broad military policy or, in some cases they order daring raids such as the Army Delta Force raid that killed the Islamic State leader or the SEAL raid that eliminated Osama bin Laden in May 2011. But for them to involve themselves in disputes such as what involved a particular SEAL operator is, well, way out of the ordinary.

Just because the president can act in the manner that Trump has acted regarding Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher doesn’t mean it’s right. In this instance, I believe the commander in chief meddled where even the commander in chief doesn’t belong.

national news

Trump was ‘chosen’? By whom and for what purpose?

There can be little if any doubt that Energy Secretary Rick Perry has swilled the Donald J. Trump Kool-Aid, the elixir that turns Trump foes into slobbering sycophants.

The lame duck energy boss, who’s leaving office at the end of this week, has declared that the president is the “chosen one” who got elected in 2016.

Really? I could swear I heard the former Texas governor declare that Trump was a “cancer on conservatism.” He said that during the 2016 presidential campaign when Perry was one of a large group of Republicans challenging Trump for the party nomination.

Perry told Fox News that Trump was “sent by God to do great things.” I am resisting the urge to upchuck my breakfast.

I will not delineate the areas where I believe Trump has fallen flat on his face as president, other than to say that Perry’s phony-sounding fealty to Trump has the sound to my ears of a cult follower.

“God’s used imperfect people all through history. King David wasn’t perfect. Saul wasn’t perfect. Solomon wasn’t perfect,” Perry said in the interview, which aired this past Sunday.

Oh … my.

You may go now, Mr. Secretary.

Sports news

Has the outcry subsided at Amarillo ISD?

It occurs to me that it was nearly a year ago when a heralded coach of a heralded high school athletic program tendered her resignation.

Kori Clements was the first-year coach of the Amarillo High girls volleyball team, a perennial Texas high school athletic powerhouse. Clements quit the job she wanted since she was a player for the Sandies after a single season. She blamed the school board, the administration and implicated a now former school trustee for bullying her over playing time given to the trustee’s daughters.

Then came a coalition of parents forming a group to demand transparency. The school trustee quit the board, which had accepted the coach’s resignation without comment. The community reportedly was fired up over the tumult. The Parents for Transparency Coalition was asking the right questions about the school district administration.

Oh, and then two more trustees resigned. They had an election. Yet another trustee just recently quit. The board has essentially turned completely over.

I am now wondering: What happened to all that rough stuff? Has the school district established a more “transparent” policy regarding its treatment of educators? Has there been any accounting for the circumstances surrounding Clements’ resignation, which I learned over time was actually forced upon her by administrators who weren’t going to renew her contract as the Sandies volleyball coach?

So, a resignation turned out to be something else. The board, to my knowledge, hasn’t yet offered any public explanation for any of the circumstances that preceded the departure of this young coach.

Transparency? Is it there? Hello?

national news

Why do they deny hearing what the witnesses have said?

The much-anticipated public hearing on the impeachment inquiry being conducted by the House Intelligence Committee produced a serious exercise in frustration and futility.

At least for me it did.

The Intel Committee took into the public domain what it had heard in private about whether Donald Trump sought a “favor” from Ukrainian government officials who could dig up some dirt on Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. The term of art has become “quid pro quo,” the Latin phrase that translates to “something for something,” or “this for that.”

It is the basis for the pending impeachment of the president of the United States.

White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney acknowledged in the press briefing room that there was a quid pro quo, and then he told us to “get over it.”

Then came the testimony before the House panel from Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, who said that “yes,” the president sought a quid pro quo. He heard him seek it in real time and told the committee what he heard from the president. He said everyone was “in the loop” regarding the quid pro quo.

The memo of Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president even mentions the “favor, though.”

Why, then, do Republicans on the House committee and others on Capitol Hill keep saying there was “no quid pro quo”? What are they not hearing? Did they cover their ears when Sondland testified to that knowledge at the House hearings? Did they not hear Mick Mulvaney’s assertion of a favor and his scolding us to “Get over it”?

I know these are rhetorical questions. They won’t produce any answers. They simply serve to symbolize the futility and frustration that this impeachment inquiry has produced … so far.

national news

No need to wait for more witnesses; proceed with impeachment

The U.S. House Intelligence Committee has done its job. It has produced evidence to persuade millions of Americans — including me — that Donald Trump deserves to be the third president to be impeached by the House of Representatives.

So, with that I believe it is time for the House Judiciary Committee to begin drafting articles of impeachment. Then then panel needs to air it out in public, take a vote and if most of panel members agree with the articles to submit them to the full House for a vote.

Donald Trump has sullied the presidency, has committed violations of his oath, has committed impeachable acts … in my view! I know, there are others who think differently, which gets me to why I believe the time has arrived to get this matter settled.

After all we heard, the Republican resistance to impeachment seemingly has stiffened. If the GOP members of the House aren’t persuaded now to impeach this criminally negligent president, then they won’t be persuaded by anyone else who could come forward.

Almost anyone who has paid attention to this matter understands that it likely will be a partisan vote to impeach Trump in the House; there might be one or two Democrats who’ll vote “no.”

There might be a House vote completed by Christmas. Then it goes to the Senate, where the GOP resistance to doing the right thing is just as fierce as it is in the House.

Trump isn’t likely to be convicted in the Senate trial. Let’s put these individuals, all 535 of them in both legislative chambers, on the record. Do they endorse impeachment or do they oppose it? Put another way, do they stand for the Constitution or do they stand for the man who occupies the office of president, who in my mind has violated his oath to defend and protect it?

We must not have this Senate trial collide with the presidential election campaign. Several members of the Senate are running for president. They need to devote their energy to their effort to win their party’s nomination. Sure, they have a duty to administer justice in an impeachment trial. Let them do that duty and then release them to the campaign trail.

When should all this be completed? Hey, let’s try for, say, Easter.

We need not drag this process out any longer.

Let’s get on with it. Then let’s have that presidential — and congressional — election.

national news

Graham exhibits remarkable duplicity once more

Lindsey Graham may run out of ways to pi** me off, although it’s looking like he has a bottomless supply of duplicitous positions he can exploit.

The South Carolina Republican U.S. senator once said that Donald Trump was unfit for the presidency, that he is a shameless liar and that he was everything this side of being the Son of Satan. Now he is one of the president’s — yep, the same Donald Trump — most ardent Senate boosters.

He also said in 2016 that Joe Biden is the “nicest man God ever created.” He said that if you can’t admire Biden that “you’ve got a problem.” Biden, he said, “is the nicest man I’ve ever met in politics.”

What’s he saying now about the former vice president, who might challenge Donald Trump in 2020? Graham wants the Senate Judiciary Committee that he now chairs to examine whether Biden committed any crimes in Ukraine, or whether his son, Hunter, broke any laws while being paid by a natural gas company in Ukraine.

So, Graham wants to find dirt on the “nicest man” in the known universe? Is that what I understand?

The Bidens — father and son — have become the chief diversionary targets of Republicans seeking to shift the attention away from the president’s soliciting political favors from Ukraine; Trump asked Ukraine to look into the Bidens in exchange for the release of weapons the Ukrainians purchased to help in their fight against rebels backed by Russia. Ukrainian prosecutors, incidentally, have said the Bidens have done nothing illegal.

Can you say “quid pro quo,” which is fancy term for, oh, bribery or extortion?

I am left now to wonder which Graham view of Biden is the truth. The version he talked about in 2016 or the one he is tossing out there in defense of the individual he once derided as unfit for office?

I’ll go with the latter view, which confirms what I suspect about Sen. Graham, which is that he is utterly lacking in principle.