Tag Archives: 2016 campaign

Abuse of power allegation may spell trouble

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is looking and sounding more and more like a candidate for president in 2016.

That is, unless he gets indicted by a Travis County grand jury for abusing the power of his office.

If he faces criminal charges, all bets are off for the lame-duck governor.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/25998425/grand-jury-decides-if-perry-abused-power

The panel is expected to decide soon whether Perry abused his power when he vetoed money for the Travis County district attorney’s office after DA Rosemary Lehmberg pleaded guilty to drunken driving. Perry demanded her resignation, which was justified, given that the DA lost her moral authority to prosecute drunken drivers.

Then he allegedly went a step too far by threatening to veto $7.5 million that was earmarked for the Travis County DA’s public integrity unit, which is charged with investigating charges of ethical lapses by state officials.

Oh, did I mention that Lehmberg is a Democrat and Perry is a Republican? That distinction seems to matter.

Lehmberg refused to quit and Perry pulled the money.

Now he’s being investigated for abusing his power.

So, what does this mean for his budding presidential campaign? Plenty. He cannot possibly campaign as a Mr. Clean Governor if he’s about to stand trial for a felony offense related to the performance of the office he’s occupied since The Flood.

Then again, if the grand jury no-bills the governor — which of course is a possibility — then he’s back in the presidential sweepstakes once again.

But if the indictment arrives, well, if you’ll pardon the expression: Oops.

Perry on the hot seat

Gov. Rick Perry’s backside just might catch fire if a Travis County grand jury finds wrongdoing in the governor’s office.

At issue is whether Perry acted improperly by allegedly offering to restore money to the Travis County District Attorney’s Office if the DA resigned.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/04/22/perry-offered-restore-vetoed-funding-if-da-would-r/

The DA is a Democrat, Rosemary Lehmberg, who was arrested on a drunken driving charge. Lehmberg also runs the public integrity office, which investigates other public officials’ conduct.

In comes the governor to supposedly promise to restore money for the office if Lehmberg resigned her office in the wake of the DUI charge. Perry had vetoed money for her office after her April 2013 arrest, but he’d make it all better if she just out of the way.

I will not predict what the grand jury will do. It is looking into whether Perry threw his weight around improperly by meddling in the affairs of the Travis County prosecutor’s office. Was it right for him to promise to restore money in that manner?

According to some observers, Perry’s tactics smack of the kind of behavior alleged against fellow Republican Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey. Christie is still in hot water over allegations his office closed the George Washington Bridge and created traffic mayhem as payback for refusal by the mayor of Fort Lee, N.J., also a Democrat, to endorse Christie’s re-election effort.

Both men are now considered possible presidential candidates in 2016. Christie’s brand already has been damaged. Perry is in the middle of a makeover attempt to try to recover from his disastrous run for the GOP nomination in 2012.

If the grand jury indicts Perry, he’s going to suffer far more than another “oops” moment.

Chairman Ryan must avoid code words

When you mention people who live in what’s called the “inner city,” you’re generally referring to Americans of African descent.

That’s a given in today’s political culture.

And when you suggest that the “inner city culture” doesn’t honor work, you’re insulting a whole race of Americans.

That’s what U.S. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan was told after he made some, um, intemperate remarks on talk-show host Bill Bennett’s radio show.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/paul-ryan-confronted-over-inner-cities-remark-tense-exchange-n57636

And one of Ryan’s Wisconsin constituents called him out on it at a town hall meeting this week in Janesville, Wisc.

Ryan said on Bennett’s show that there is a “tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning to value the culture of work.”

An African-American man, Alfonso Gardner, challenged Ryan for that remark, saying he was using code words to describe black citizens. Ryan’s response? “There was nothing whatsoever about race in my comments at all, it had nothing to do with race.”

Actually, Mr. Chairman, it had everything to do with race, even if you didn’t say it overtly.

That’s the point Gardner is making and it is something the possible 2016 Republican presidential candidate may need to clear up if he jumps into the next national presidential campaign.

Ryan already has more or less apologized for using what he described as “inarticulate” verbiage when talking to Bennett. Indeed, as the link attached here notes, Ryan has become an advocate for immigration reform while many of his GOP House colleagues have balked at the notion. He told the town hall crowd he is entirely sensitive to the plight of minorities.

Code words can be perceived as hurtful if they’re put in the kind of context Ryan was addressing in his radio interview. One of the young congressman’s constituents construed it that way. It doesn’t matter what he intended to say or meant to imply.

Words have consequences, Rep. Ryan.

Smoking a disqualifier for presidential candidates

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner is nothing if not candid.

He told Jay Leno this week that he likes smoking cigarettes too much to be president of the United States. He won’t quit the nasty habit. So there, he said. He ain’t going to run for president.

John Boehner Likes Smoking Too Much to Be President

I’m glad that smoking is now seen as a deal-breaker for anyone who wants to run for the highest office in the land. Think of it. The president has a Presidential Council on Fitness; he names a director to run the organization. Smoking is a key component in the message the office delivers, which is to say that children shouldn’t smoke, because the habit can kill you.

The current president used to smoke but has quit — he says. No one has yet confirmed it independently, at least I’m not aware of any confirmation. Even so, no one ever would see Barack Obama lighting up.

It didn’t used to be this way. President Franklin Roosevelt famously smoked cigarettes with that cigarette holder cocked in that famously “jaunty” angle. President John Kennedy was known to light up a stogie in the Oval Office while pondering the issues of the day. President Richard Nixon didn’t smoke, but first lady Pat Nixon did — although no one ever saw her in public; same thing was said of Jackie Kennedy, come to think of it.

President Bill Clinton? Hmmm. How do we handle this one? I guess he smoked cigars, but as we learned to our national disgrace, he did other things with them that didn’t require them to be lit.

Speaker Boehner declaration takes one national politician out of the hunt for the presidency in 2016. Other issues may derail potential candidates. I’ll give the speaker credit, though, for his forthrightness on a disgusting habit that in this day and time has no place in the Oval Office.

Biden or Clinton in ’16? Obama stays mum

President Obama faced a number of pointed questions this week in an interview with Chris Matthews on MSNBC’s “Hardball.”

The most pointed query was one he wouldn’t dare answer. Who’d make the better president: Joe Biden or Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Obama begged off.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/192274-biden-or-clinton-not-a-chance-i-am-going-there-says-obama

You’d better get used to it, Mr. President. The media are going to try to get you to answer a question you say you won’t touch with mile-long pole.

The president surely anticipated the question from Matthews. He seemed ready.

They both would bring strength to the White House, Obama said. He said Vice President Biden has been at his side for every key decision. The president said Clinton has earned her place among the top secretaries of state in the nation’s history.

Yes, the president has some hurdles to clear before he starts planning his exit and deliberates over how — or whether — he should campaign for his successor.

I’m not expecting the national media to let up, though, in pursuing angles looking for clues on whom the president prefers: Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton.

The constant hectoring over that issue might drive the president even nuttier than his dealings with congressional Republicans.

Soon-to-be-ex-Gov. Perry reintroduces himself

Here he comes again, the man formerly known as Gov. Goodhair is returning to the national stage.

Rick Perry is about one year away from the end of his interminable tenure as Texas governor. He is not about to disappear. He won’t be heading back to Paint Creek to write poetry or learn how to paint. He’s coming back to the national stage … or so it seems.

Texas Tribune’s Ross Ramsey has written a fabulous analysis of Perry’s latest effort to rebrand himself, possibly setting himself up for another run for the Republican nomination for president in 2016.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/18/and-now-reintroducing-governor-texas/

Ramsey cautions skeptics — such as myself — to avoid dismissing Perry’s effort at rebranding. Ramsey writes: “Joke all you want, but watch: The governor is pretty good at this sort of maneuver. He was a Democrat who loaned his time to Al Goreā€™s 1988 presidential campaign, when the Republican nominee was a Texan named George H.W. Bush. Two years later, as a Republican, Perry ambushed the stateā€™s popular agriculture commissioner, Jim Hightower, a Democrat, in a statewide race that set him on his current political trajectory.”

Ramsey is a smart fellow who’s covered Texas politics like a blanket perhaps since The Flood. He knows Perry better than most journalists.

I still have trouble buying into the notion, though, that the governor who flamed out so miserably before the 2012 GOP presidential primary campaign really go started can re-tool himself sufficiently to make voters forget all the gaffes, goofs and guffaws he produced.

His “oops” moment will go down in history as a classic. Perry’s loose talk of secession in 2009 won’t play well in Yankee territory, which as a national candidate for president he will need. Remember when he accused of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke of committing a “treasonous act” by printing all that money?

This is just a sample of the kinds of issues his foes — even those within his own Republican Party — will be more than happy to throw back at him.

I’ve long thought of Perry as more than a guy with good hair. He has tremendous instincts when it comes to Texas politics. He knows his native state well and knows the people who live here.

Still, the late columnist Molly Ivins’s apt Gov. Goodhair moniker does seem to fit, which explains, according to Ross Ramsey, why Perry has donned black-framed eyeglasses in recent public appearances.

Get ready, America. You’re about to get a lot more of Rick Perry than ever before.

I’ll paraphrase comments I heard during Perry’s first run for president in 2012 that came from devoted Texas Panhandle Republicans. They were pulling for Perry to win the White House “just to get him out of Texas.”

RNC marginalizes itself with boycott vote

The Republican National Committee has just voted to marginalize its standing with the broad swath of Americans who will have a say in electing the next president of the United States.

The RNC voted to exclude CNN and NBC News from any 2016 presidential primary debates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/16/rnc-to-consider-excluding-cnn-nbc-from-2016-presidential-debates/

I’m a bit unsure as to how that will work. I suppose if either CNN and NBC proposes to host a debate, none of the candidates will show up. Perhaps the RNC will set up a debate and invite the other networks — CBS, ABC and Fox — to take part.

Whatever the case, the RNC has failed to grasp the difference between news and entertainment.

At issue are a couple of proposed projects involving Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible Democratic candidate for president in 2016. CNN is planning to air a film on the former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state; NBC is hoping to produce a four-part miniseries on HRC. The GOP says the networks are trying to influence voters by portraying Clinton allegedly in a positive light.

Well, no one knows yet how the networks are going to portray her. Nor has anyone grasped publicly the difference — in NBC’s case — the difference between the news operation and the network’s entertainment division. NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd has tried to explain that the entertainment is independent from news and neither has any say in what the other does.

That doesn’t matter, according to the RNC. I suppose the GOP would be just fine with all of this if the networks were planning to broadcast hatchet jobs on Hillary. A “fair and balanced” portrayal of a major American public figure, though, isn’t good enough.

Is Cruz qualified to run for POTUS?

National political media are starting to probe the issue of a possible presidential candidate’s constitutional qualifications.

The target this time is junior U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas.

http://us.cnn.com/2013/08/13/politics/natural-born-president/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook

Let’s flash back to 2008 when another candidate came under amazing scrutiny. He was then-junior U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois. Some folks on the right said he couldn’t run for president because, they alleged, he was born in Kenya, homeland of his late father. Obama’s late mother, however, was an American citizen. Sen. Obama had said all along he was born in Hawaii, the 50th state of the U.S., in August 1961. That wasn’t good enough for the critics, who kept harping on his birth.

Eventually, Obama settled it by producing his birth certificate. He was re-elected in November 2012 and the yammering — save for a few crackpots on the far right — has stopped.

Now we have Cruz. The senator indeed was born in Canada. His father is Cuban. His mother is American. Cruz acknowledges he was born north of our border. And that has some folks questioning whether Cruz — who might run for president in 2016 — is qualified under the Constitution.

Article II stipulates that only a “natural born citizen or a “citizen of the United States … shall be eligible for the office of president.” Scholars have interpreted that to mean that Cruz could serve as president, given that his constitutional qualifications were earned at birth by virtue of his mother’s citizenship.

I tend to believe Cruz is qualified under the Constitution to serve as president, which means Obama would have been qualified to serve as well — had he been born in a foreign country, which he wasn’t.

Let’s wait to see how this Cruz story plays out. My bet, as I’ve noted already, is that the left won’t make Cruz’s birthplace nearly the issue that those on the right sought to do with Barack Obama.

The Donald is back in the political arena

He’s baaaack.

Donald Trump showed up this weekend on the ABC-TV news show “This Week,” and yep, started talking like someone who wants to run for president in 2016.

http://thehill.com/video/campaign/316533-trump-would-spend-whatever-it-takes-to-win-gop-nomination-in-2016

I almost cannot add to the video attached to this blog.

It’s hard to understand why a serious news show would interview someone who is likely to do exactly what he did in 2012: sound like someone who wants to run for the White House but who couldn’t give up his lucrative TV gig, “The Apprentice.”

The Donald is a lot of things: showman, successful businessman, egomaniac … to name just three.

A serious public policy expert he is not.

He said in the interview with ABC that the Republicans have to nominate “the right candidate” to be someone such as Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2016.

The Donald is not — and never will be — that candidate.

Oops not a big deal, for now

Gov. Rick Perry had another one of those ā€œoopsā€ moments this week.

He said he was glad to be in Florida, when in fact he was speaking in New Orleans, the city in, um, Louisiana.

Heā€™s been drawing some of the expected barbs. The lame-duck Republican Texas governor deserves most of the jabs that get tossed his way. This one counts.

http://blog.chron.com/texaspolitics/2013/08/another-rick-perry-oops-moment-on-video/

The problem here is that Perryā€™s campaign for the presidency ā€“ if heā€™s planning another one in 2016 ā€“ hasnā€™t yet gotten off the ground. He hasnā€™t yet officially declared his candidacy. This was a one-stop appearance. It would be different if he were in the midst of a whirlwind campaign, stumping from state to state.

I can recall the 1968 Democratic presidential primary campaign. U.S. Sen. Robert Kennedy launched his campaign in March of that year and began a frenetic 80-day run for the party nomination. He covered a lot of territory in a very short period of time.

An assassin ended that effort, tragically, on June 6.

But I recall one campaign appearance in which he mistakenly said he was in Nevada when he actually was speaking in Nebraska ā€¦ or maybe it was the other way around. Whatever, he got his states mixed up. The crowd corrected him on the spot and he laughed it off with typical RFK good humor.

Rick Perry will need to keep his compass dialed in if heā€™s going to seek the big prize in three years. This first little hiccup doesnā€™t bode for well for what might lie ahead.