Uncategorized

Pentagon sucked into partisan battle

Of all the federal agencies charged with looking after our national interests, one would think the Pentagon — the military arm of our massive federal bureaucracy — would be immune from partisan political bickering.

Guess again.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, no doubt seeking to change the subject from his indictment back home over abuse of power and coercion, says Islamic terrorists might have slipped into the United States across our southern border.

How did that play in the Pentagon? Not well.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/215761-pentagon-no-evidence-of-isis-at-southern-border

“I’ve seen no indication that they are coming across the border with Mexico. We have no information that leads us to believe that,” Admiral John Kirby, press secretary for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on CNN’s “New Day.”

Kirby said the governor has no basis for making that suggestion, which he did in a speech to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

Perry is considering a run for president in 2016. He’ll have to dispose of the indictment handed down the other day in Travis County. Good luck with that, governor.

He’s going to be making more of these statements in the weeks and months to come, especially after he leaves the governor’s office in January.

It is troubling that politicians are able to make assertions without providing a scintilla of evidence.

ISIL — or ISIS, as it is also known — is a despicable terrorist organization that has taken credit for the beheading of American journalist James Foley in Syria. Have the monsters infiltrated our southern border? Kirby says the Pentagon has no evidence of that happening.

That won’t stop the Texas governor from making potentially reckless statements. He’s got a proven record of it already.

Uncategorized

What if DA was a Republican?

Politicians will tell you every time they dislike hypothetical questions or scenarios, especially when they present potential threats.

With that in mind, let’s pose this hypothetical question: Would the governor of Texas call for the Travis County district attorney to resign after her drunk driving conviction if she were a Republican?

I doubt seriously that would have happened.

You know the story, yes?

DA Rosemary Lehmberg, a Democrat, was caught driving drunk. She was booked into the jail and made quite a scene during her processing. She runs the public integrity unit out of her office, which has been investigating some high-profile Republicans, such as attorney general candidate Ken Paxton. Republican Gov. Rick Perry got wind of her drunk driving arrest and threatened to veto money appropriated for her office if she didn’t quit her job. He made quite show of it that threat, in fact.

I happen to agree with the governor on one point: Lehmberg should have resigned, as she lost her credibility as a prosecutor because she had done the very thing for which she sends others to jail. I said so at the time of her arrest.

A grand jury took up the case and indicted the governor on two felony counts of abuse of power and coercion.

Perry has responded defiantly, accusing the grand jury of gross politicization.

OK, then. Back to the question. Would the governor have said a word about the DA had she been a member of his own party?

My trick knee is throbbing as I ponder that and it’s telling me Gov. Perry would have kept quiet.

Has the governor, then, fallen victim to the white-hot politics of the moment?

Uncategorized

Judge to Perry: Nix that threat talk, governor

The Rick Perry Story has taken another strange twist.

A judge has warned that the Texas governor might be violating the law by threatening grand jurors who indicted him this past week on charges of abuse of power and coercion.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/judge-warns-against-perry-grand-jury-threats/ng6zb/

Judge Julie Kocurek of the 309th District Court, admonished the governor for saying this: “I am confident we will ultimately prevail, that this farce of a prosecution will be revealed for what it is, and that those responsible will be held to account.”

The grand jury indicted Perry on felony charges involving his veto of money for the public integrity unit run by Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg, who had been convicted of drunk driving. Perry demanded her resignation; she refused to quit; she served her time in jail; Perry vetoed the funds.

The Austin American-Statesman reports that the only people Perry could be threatening would be the grand jury, the judge and the prosecutor. Kocurek, a Democrat, says Perry’s statement could be construed as a violation of state law.

As the American-Statesman reports: “The Texas Penal Code that outlaws obstruction and retaliation says that anyone who ‘intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm’ a grand juror faces a second degree felony, which is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.”

I once served on a grand jury in Randall County. We all took an oath to do our job with due diligence and we promised to be faithful to state law and the state Constitution. Of course, we didn’t have any case that approached the level of interest and controversy as this one in Travis County.

Still, if I were a grand juror who did my job faithfully and diligently, I would take extreme exception to what the governor has threatened.

The grand jury would be “held to account”? For what, doing its job?

The governor ought to heed the judge’s warning … and keep his mouth shut.

Uncategorized

Iraq terrorists 'beyond anything we've seen'

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has laid it out there.

The monsters who killed journalist James Foley comprise a group that surpasses any terror organization Americans have seen since the war on terror began.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/chuck-hagel-isil-defense-james-foley-110241.html?hp=t1

We’re in for yet another fight for our lives. We’d better get ready.

This, I submit, is what we got when we declared war on international terrorism in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

“They’re beyond just a terrorist group,” Hagel said. “They marry ideology, sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess, they are tremendously well funded. This is beyond anything that we’ve seen. So we must prepare for everything. And the only way you do that is take a cold, steely, hard look at it and get ready.”

Hagel is referring to ISIL. They’re fighting in Syria against an enemy government and in Iraq against a friendly government. They’re vowing to bring the fight to the United States, which prompted Texas Gov. Rick Perry to suggest this week that the terror organization might already be lurking in this country.

I’m not going to suggest that we shouldn’t have declared war on terrorists after 9/11. They struck hard at us on that Tuesday morning in New York and Washington and we responded as we should have done.

Matters worsened when we invaded Iraq in March 2003 on the false premise that Iraqis possessed weapons of mass destruction that they would use against us and Israel.

What now? Do we re-enter the fight in Iraq with ground troops? Absolutely not. Do we invade Syria? Again, no.

President Barack Obama is deploying significant air power against the terror organization in Iraq. Reports indicate the strikes are working. Yes, the war must continue for as long as monsters keep killing innocent people.

Critics of the current strategy should recall the lessons of Vietnam. We fought tooth and nail there for nearly a decade. We left eventually and the communists took control of the country we fought to defend. We can commit ground troops in Iraq until hell freezes over, leave that country and the chaos we’re witnessing today will erupt.

What’s the solution?

Intense vigilance here at home against forces that seek to harm us. Yes, keep up the attacks on the Sunni extremists whom Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey describes as “an organization (that) has an apocalyptic, end-of-days strategic vision, and which will eventually have to be defeated.”

The question remains: How will we know — in this new age of open warfare — when our enemy is beaten?

Uncategorized

Perry dips into campaign coffer

This might be the only positive — or semi-positive — thing I’ll say about Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s effort to defend himself against prosecutors who’ve charged him with coercion and abuse of power.

He’s going to use campaign contributors’ money to pay for his defense.

Good going, Gov. Goodhair.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/08/20/questions-mount-about-perrys-legal-fees/

There. I’ve said it.

Perry says he doesn’t want to saddle taxpayers with the cost of mounting a defense. I’ll agree to that. I don’t want to pay for his defense. I’m guessing a few million other Texans don’t want to pay for it, either.

Texas campaign finance law allows candidates — or former candidates — to use surplus campaign cash any way they wish. Some of them actually pocket the dough when they leave office. Perry is going to use contributions from supporters for what he thinks is a righteous cause.

It’s fair to ask, though, whether someone who contributes to an officeholder’s campaign does so knowing the money could be spent for some reason other than helping the candidate get elected or re-elected. Then again, if you support that candidate, then it’s reasonable to believe one would support that candidate’s effort to mount a defense against charges brought against him or her.

Perry’s got a fight on his hands. A Travis County grand jury has indicted him on two felony charges relating to his veto of funds for the public integrity unit run by Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg, who pleaded guilty to drunk driving, served her time and then refused to resign after Perry demanded her to do so. The grand jury accused Perry of abusing the power of office by coercing Lehmberg to quit.

We’ll see how it plays out.

The good news for Texas taxpayers — such as yours truly — is that we aren’t paying for the governor’s hefty legal bill.

Uncategorized

Lawsuit to be put on hold … perhaps?

The thought occurs to me: If the speaker of the House of Representatives wants the president to concentrate on his job, might he and his Republican congressional colleagues want to delay their goofy lawsuit over Barack Obama’s alleged misuse of executive authority?

Let’s think about this.

The United States is up to its armpits in a variety of international crises: Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Hamas vs. Israel. They are taking up a lot of the president’s time, attention and energy.

The speaker has been critical of the president because, he says, the president has abused his executive authority by changing parts of the Affordable Care Act without congressional approval.

Obama has countered Boehner’s contention by encouraging him to “sue me.”

But now the nation is trying to resolve these crises. Does the president need to be “distracted” by the lawsuit? I don’t think so.

Indeed, with beheadings, rocket attacks, air strikes, Americans in physical danger in hostile places, the idea of going to court over domestic policy differences seems, well, rather irrelevant.

Don’t you think?

Uncategorized

Obama must stand strong against monsters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXQ-D7GD92o

Barack Obama likely never envisioned dealing with the monstrous behavior he and the rest of America have witnessed in recent days.

No, he took office as the nation was mired in a financial meltdown. The nation was at war with terrorists and had made progress in that effort. Osama bin Laden was still on the loose, but that crack SEAL team killed him in May 2011.

The president made another statement today about the death of a journalist in Syria at the hands of ISIL, the terrorists seeking to overthrow the Iraqi government while also fighting the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad. Can there be any more complicated relationship here, with the United States despises the terrorists fighting a government we support in Iraq while fighting a government we oppose in Syria?

These monsters took the life of an American journalist, James Foley. They’re demanding we stop the air strikes against them, or else they’ll kill others held hostage.

Plus, the world learned today that this summer, the United States launched an attempt to rescue Foley and others from ISIL, but couldn’t locate him or his captors.

The president today vowed to keep up the fight against the killers. He held Foley up as a courageous journalist, while calling ISIL a band of cowards.

He used strong language, as the video attached to this post will attest. Words, though, fail to persuade terrorists bent on destroying their enemies.

The president’s response to the terrorists’ demands was to step up the air attacks against targets in Iraq.

They must continue. Let us take caution, though, to avoid that slippery slope. This nation has plenty of air power assets to deploy against the monsters. Let us use them with maximum force and prejudice.

Uncategorized

Hey … about those Nigerian girls

3 Comments

World crises seems to cascade all around us so rapidly that they yank our attention from, um, previous world crises.

Well, several crises ago, the world was aghast at the kidnapping of 300 or so Nigerian girls by yet another terrorist organization, Boko Haram. Remember that story?

The girls were taken into the forest where they’re reportedly being held hostage. Boko Haram had been demanding some sort of ransom. U.S. intelligence and special operations forces had joined the Nigerians and other international organizations in the hunt for the girls.

What’s happened to that story? Where are the girls? What has become of the urgency that was being expressed from places like the United Nations, the Oval Office of the White House, from the State Department, from capitals around the world?

I shudder to think that we can handle only one crisis at a time. Syria once was the crisis du jour; then came Ukraine; next up was Gaza and the Hamas rocket attacks against Israeli neighborhoods. The world is now fixated on Iraq, ISIS and the attempted overthrow of a government that the United States helped install.

Meanwhile, those Nigerian girls are still being held somewhere, by someone, for some reason.

Please, someone tell me the world still cares about those girls.

Uncategorized

U.S. responds correctly to ISIS threat

The Sunni extremists seeking to overrun Iraq have executed an American journalist, released video of his gruesome death and threatened to do the same thing to others until the United States stops its air strikes against military targets in Iraq.

The U.S. response? More air strikes.

It is absolutely the correct response to this hideous threat.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/20/world/meast/iraq-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

James Foley had been held for two years by ISIS terrorists before reportedly being beheaded by his captors. Foley has been saluted and eulogized as a courage chronicler of events in the Middle East who’s paid the ultimate price for doing his duty as a journalist.

ISIS has been characterized by experts as an organization far worse than al-Qaeda — and Americans know first hand what kind of outfit al-Qaeda has become.

ISIS’s advance on Iraqi installations and its assault on people needs to stopped. That is why President Obama has ordered the air strikes that reportedly have done grave damage to the group’s military capabilities.

For as long as ISIS continues to threaten to do harm to Americans and innocent Iraqis — namely Christians — then the United States has an obligation to protect these interests. We have paid too much in our own blood and money to let ISIS run rampant in Iraq. Obama says our nation’s ground combat role in Iraq is over, but the aerial campaign — along with the humanitarian effort to aid Yazidis and Kurds — is worth pursuing in an effort to pound ISIS into oblivion.

If ISIS responds with another execution, well, then the attacks should increase in ferocity.

Uncategorized

Community vs. military policing

When Jerry Neal became chief of the Amarillo Police Department in 1981, he introduced a concept that was still fairly new in departments across the nation.

It is called “community policing.” It puts officers in close contact with residents. It encourages more person-to-person contact, seeking to make cops more like best pals rather than intimidating forces to be feared.

If given a choice between community police strategies and a military-style presence in our streets, I’ll stick with the former rather than the latter.

Now we hear that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has the authority to cease giving surplus military equipment to police departments. Mr. Secretary, stop the practice at least until the nation gets a clear and full understanding of what has gone so terribly wrong in Ferguson, Mo.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/215527-pentagon-hagel-has-authority-to-suspend-program-for-arming-cops

“The secretary has the authority to rescind and take back equipment that is transferred to local law enforcement agencies if he deems fit. He has that authority,” said Pentagon Rear Adm. John Kirby.

I believe Hagel should “deem fit” a suspension of the policy that provides police agencies the surplus equipment.

Police militarization has become one of the focal points of the Ferguson upheaval, after a young black man was shot to death by a white police officer in the suburb of St. Louis. The cops responded initially with officers donning body armor and weaponry befitting a Green Beret platoon or SEAL team. Let’s just say it didn’t play well in the community.

Emotions will have to settle down considerably in Ferguson for any meaningful change to take hold.

When it’s all over, I’d settle gladly for more community policing efforts in all departments.

Maybe someone ought to call Jerry Neal, who’s now retired, and ask him for some sage advice on how this principle works.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience