Fascinating take on the latest act of hideousness.
‘Race-baiting’? Please
There’s no real need to say much more than what’s in this blog about the Charleston, S.C., carnage.
Jim Mitchell writes for the Dallas Morning News and he devoted the following post to answering someone who accused him of “race-baiting.”
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/another-failed-chat-about-race-in-america.html/
Mitchell is on-point in telling the letter writer that he/she is trying to deflect responsibility of what happened in Charleston by saying it was allegedly committed by a “deranged white man.”
Nine people are dead. They are victims of a mass murderer. He concludes: “Letās stop playing games of racial original sins, and recognize that racial tensions are denying this country of the opportunity to reach new heights for all Americans. Thatās not race-baiting. Thatās asking for justice and fairness, nothing more and nothing less.”
Now, let us continue to pray for our country and for the souls of those who were lost.
Suspect’s ‘character’ being revealed
Dylann Roof is a vicious young man.
He’s accused of killing nine people in a Bible study at a Charleston, S.C. church. The victims were black; Roof is white. Now we hear that he’d planned for months to carry out an attack like what occurred at the church.
He is angry that African-Americans are seeking to “take over the world,” said his roommate.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/charleston-shooting-suspect-dylann-roof-wanted-to-ignite-civil-war/ar-AAbOWk8
What on God’s Earth do we think of this fellow?
Just as important, what on Earth does this individual’s deep-seated hatred symbolize in the world at large?
I won’t for a moment believe he speaks for many others. He does, though, allegedly speak to some terrible, dark instincts that do exist. That one man has acted on them must suggest that he is not totally alone.
I happen to be frightened at what the shooter exhibited in that house of worship.
Now we ask: How does this individual face justice? Do the feds try him for committing a hate crime or do we let the state of South Carolina prosecute Roof for murder?
Whether he committed a hate crime reallyĀ doesn’t matter as much as some folks believe it does. The individual who did this horrible deed killed nine victims in a brutal attack. He will qualify for the death penalty if a jury — either state or federal — convicts him.
My hope at this moment isĀ to prayĀ for the men and women who died at the hands of one whose anger twisted out of control.
I’d say we should pray for the shooter as well … except that I can’t go there.Ā Maybe one day. Just not now.
UT to examine student-athletes’ record
It is entirely possible that a planned examination of alleged cheating by University of Texas student-athletes could mushroom into something much broader.
UT is looking into whether three basketball players cheated in the classroom. But officials say they intend to broaden the investigation, to look more deeply into the conduct of students — and their instructors.
http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/16/ut-launches-broad-inquiry-athletes-academics/
This ought to be a welcome development if we’re going to continue to refer to these young men and women as student-athletes, putting the word “student” first.
UT-Austin President Greg Fenves said “no improprieties” have been found … so far.
Let’s hope it stays that way.
If, however, the university determines that “improprieties” do exist in the classroom, there must be serious consequences delivered to all offending parties.
Some of us — me included — like the term “student-athlete” and all that it implies.
Chief among the implications is that the young men and women should be enrolled in our public universities to obtain an education, that they aren’t in school just to play whatever sport in which they excelled in high school, earning them a fully paid publicly fundedĀ post-secondary education.
I don’t want the UT brass to find widespread cheating. If they do, however, then I’m prepared to support some serious punishment.
Court says Texas can ban Confederate flag
Did hell freeze over when I wasn’t paying enough attention to what was happening down below?
I’m trying to figure out what happened today at the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that Texas indeed can prohibit people from displaying the Confederate flag on their motor vehicle license plates.
What’s more, one of the court’s more rigid conservatives, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined the majority in upholding the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles policy allowing the ban.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/245401-justice-thomas-sides-with-liberals-in-blocking-confederate-license
Great day in the morning!
The court has ruled correctly.
The Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans had brought the case to court after the DMV denied its request, with the backing of then-Gov. Rick Perry. The group contended it was a “free speech” issue, that it was allowed by the Constitution to make its statement of pride in the Confederacy.
Other Texans, though, objected mightily. Imagine that. The Confederate States of America seceded from the United States of America in 1861, declared war on the Union, launched the Civil War that killed 600,000 Americans. And why?
Because those states wanted the right to allow their residents to own slaves.
The Confederate flag in question has become a symbol for hate groups ever since. Go to a Klan rally and you’ll see the flag flying.
That is what drew the objection.
Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, who wrote the opinion, said issuance of specialty plates is a form of “government speech,” not individual speech. Thus, government reserves the right to reject requests such as the one that came from the Texas Sons of Confederate Veterans.
So, the state will get to keep making decisions on how folk can adorn their motor vehicle license plates. And if the DMV deems a particular symbol to be hateful in the eyes of Texans, then it won’t be found on our public streets and highways.
Guns soon will be going to college
It’s tough to write about this in the aftermath of that hideous shooting rampage in Charleston, S.C., but I’ll try anyway.
Campus carry legislation has become law in Texas, meaning that before long it’ll be all right for students to carry guns to public college and university classrooms.
I’m going to try my best to keep a wide open mind on this issue, even though I join University of Texas System Chancellor William McRaven in harboring serious concerns about it.
http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/16/new-law-campus-carry-debate-begins-anew/
The Charleston carnage will take time to sort out. Dylann Roof is in custody and it’s likely he’ll be charged with a hate crime, meaning the feds will try him. As hideous as that crime is and the pain it has brought to an entire nation, it shouldn’t reflect on what has transpired here in Texas.
Our sincerest hope is that nothing does happen in Texas’s public universities that can be traced directly to the campus-carry law that Gov. Greg Abbott signed.
Concealed-carry legislation brought many concerns to Texans. I was one of them. Our concern about concealed-carry did not materialize, meaning that it didn’t result in street-intersection shootouts caused by fender-bender accidents.
Only people with concealed-carry permits will be allowed to pack heat into the western civilization lecture halls, which means they’ll at least have some training on how to use a handgun.
The question remaining for McRaven and other university administrators is how they’re going to implement the law, allowing students and faculty members to bring guns onto campuses.
I wish them all well.
And yes, I truly am hoping for the best.
Tragedy redefines ‘unspeakable’
Nine people are dead in a Charleston, S.C., church, where they were engaged in a study of Scripture.
The gunman is loose. He’s been caught on camera entering the church.
How does this make any sense? How does one even begin to comprehend something so horrible?
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/the-latest-on-charleston-shooting-hate-crime-investigation/ar-AAbL8UE
I’m at a loss this morning to even offer anything other than words of utter sorrow over what has happened.
Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., Tucson, Ariz. — and other communities — comprise a list of places affected by spasms of gun violence. Now we can add Charleston.
The nation grieves for those people.
There’ll be plenty to say at the right time. For now, I think I’m just going to pray they find the gunman — and pray for the souls and the loved ones of those who died at this individual’s hand.
Brian Williams gone … but then he stays
There are a lot of things I don’t understand in this world.
One of them is how a high-priced broadcast celebrity journalist can stay employed by the network that hired after he violated one of the basic tenets of journalism: to tell the truth.
Brian Williams reportedly is out as anchor of NBC NIghtly News. He’s going to be given some sort of undefined “special assignment” slot on the network’s news team.
My strong hunch is that the one-time golden boy of NBC won’t like the demotion. He’ll likely quit to “pursue other interests.” But in order for him to make his exit cleanly and without too much fuss, the network will have to pay him a lot of money to fulfill the terms of his contract.
You know the story. Williams fibbed about being shot down while riding in a helicopter during the early months of the Iraq War in 2003. He embellished the story with each retelling of it in the years since. Then the network discovered at least 10 or so more incidents of embellishments — or non-truth-telling.
Where I come from, that’s reason to get canned, booted, tossed out on your ear.
Brian Williams violated Rule No. 1 of Journalism 101: tell the damn truth.
He didn’t do it.
He’s been reduced to a punch line at parties. Late-night comedians had a field day over his shame. The Internet is still bubbling with fake depictions of Williams storming ashore at Normandy on D-Day and walking on the moon before Neil Armstrong ever set foot on the place. Others are out there, too.
Whatever project he undertakes at NBC will be viewed, I’m quite sure, with plenty of skepticism from a public whose trust in this guy was shattered because heĀ couldn’t carry out the basic rule of good journalism.
Times have changed in public schools
I saw this front page today and was struck at a couple of levels by the picture of the 16 school administrators about whom the story is written.
The story is about the reassignment of school principals throughout the Amarillo Independent School District. The widespread shuffling appears to have caused some anxiety among parents, who want their children to continue at their schools led by the principals with whom the kids and their parents have grown accustomed.
AISD, though, is proceeding with the shuffling.
The other point is this: Look at the genders of the principals who are moving around. Of the 16 school administrators pictured, 15 of them are women.
I realize I’m old. I also realize that changing times bring changes at all levels of public institutions.
When I was a kid, the principal at Harvey W. Scott Elementary School in Portland, Ore., my hometown, was — to my eyes — a grouchy old man. I long thought that one of the requirements for principals was that they had to be grouchy.
I never saw a female principal at any level of public education back in the 1960s. I went on to junior high school. The principal? Another grouchy guy. On to high school. The principal there? An old man, but one who wasn’t so grumpy; in fact, he and my dad became friends … not that it made a difference in my relationship with the principal, Mr. Anderson.
But I am struck today by the large number of women who are leading this community’s public schools.
Yes, indeed. Times change.
Nixon could have squashed scandal … easily
Forty-three years ago today, President Nixon missed an opportunity to squash what had been termed a “third-rate burglary.” All he had to do was deliver a brief speech on national television that went something like this:
My fellow Americans. Good evening.
By now you’ve heard about the break-in at the Watergate office complex and hotel in Washington, D.C. Several burglars were apprehended by the D.C. police and arrested and charged with breaking and entering.Ā
You also have heard that the men apparently were working at the behest of the Committee to Re-Elect the President. They broke into the Democratic National Committee offices and allegedly rifled through some files, looking for papers relevant to the Democrats’ campaign they intend to launch against me this fall.
I called DNC Chairman Larry O’Brien and expressed my deepest regret for this intrusion into the Democratic Party’s office.
It doesn’t stop there. Today, I fired the head of the Committee to Re-Elect the President and his senior staff. I informed all of them that this kindĀ of chicanery will not be tolerated by me, my closest advisers, and anyone associated with my re-election campaign.
Accordingly, I have instructed the attorney general, the director of the FBI and have asked local police to do all they can to get to the bottom of this caper and to ensure that anyone caught is brought to justice as quickly as possible.
I want to apologize as well to the American people for this shameful criminal act.
Thank you and good night.
That event didn’t happen on June 17, 1972. What did happen is that President Nixon launched the Mother of All Cover-Ups. He instructed the FBI to stonewall the investigation into what happened. He told his senior White House staff to do all it could to block any and all inquiries.
He abused the office to which he had been elected and was about to be re-elected later that year in historic fashion.
Contemporary politicians today keep yapping about the “lawlessness” of the current administration. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is among those who toss around the “lawless” label a bit too carelessly.
Back when young Teddy was in diapers, the Nixon administration set the standard for lawlessness that hasn’t been met since. If he wants to see how an administration can flout federal law, he need look no further than what the Nixon administration did in the name of the man at the top.
So … there you have it.
The Watergate break-in occurred 43 years ago. It could have been put aside and relegated to the kind of story it was in the beginning: a minor cop story covered by the Metro desk of the Washington Post. Then two young reporters — Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward — began smelling a rat.
They found it — in the Oval Office.