President Obama promised the most transparent administration in U.S. presidential history.
Why not, then, show us those pictures of that ill-advised fly-over in New York City?
Most of us know the story: The Boeing 747 used as Air Force One flew low over NYC for some picture-taking. The White House, the Pentagon or someone wanted to take pictures of the airplane flying over the city’s impressive skyline. In this post 9/11 world, of course, the event stirred up intense anxiety in New York.
The president said he was angry about it.
But now we learn that the fly-over cost about 300 grand — of public money. But the White House says it won’t release the pictures taken during the ridiculous demonstration.
Why not? It’s our money. We deserve to see the pictures.
It is true that in the grand scheme of things, this isn’t all that big a deal. But the president has relied heavily on symbols, first during his winning campaign and in the first months of his administration.
His refusal to release the pictures is, well, symbolic of the same old secrecy that plagued his immediate predecessor’s presidency.
OK, I did it.
I voted early today for the Amarillo City Commission. The election judges at City Hall were just as nice as those who work on Election Day. I went through the drill, again just as I do on the actual voting day.
But I’m still holding my breath, more or less, with my choices for mayor and city commissioner. The reason I like voting on the final day of balloting is because I don’t want any unpleasant surprises to erupt prior to Election Day.
At least I have a good reason. I’ll be unavailable to vote this Saturday. I had to do it early because I want my voice heard on this critical election. City Hall, of course, is where officials make decisions that have a direct, tangible impact on our lives.
But I’ll monitor the election results from afar this upcoming weekend — and hope that my candidates don’t make me regret casting my vote for them.
I just have returned from Midland, where I discovered yet another major West Texas city that has a highway loop that serves as, well, a loop.
It’s Loop 250 and it circles Midland across Interstate 20.
Lubbock has an honest-to-goodness loop, too. It’s Loop 289 and it circles the Hub City across Interstate 27.
How did those cities accomplish this bit of highway engineering, while Amarillo’s so-called “loop” serves as just another busy street, particularly along its western stretch, from I-40 to Hollywood Road? But, by golly, we hung the Loop 335 label on our so-called “loop” — even though it doesn’t serve as a loop the way it ostensibly was designed to do.
It will be years, if ever, before Loop 335 becomes an actual controlled-access thoroughfare that encircles Amarillo. Transportation officials, last I heard, are trying to figure out a way to extend the loop farther west. More private property will need to be purchased, or condemned.
Of course, there’s been next to zero public discussion on the rest of the 43 miles of Loop 335 that could be developed much as Soncy Road has been developed. Try getting across Soncy around 5:30 in the afternoon. You’ll grow old waiting for a break in the traffic.
Meanwhile, the potential extention of Loop 335 farther west of town looms.
Just one request here: Don’t mess with Cadillac Ranch.
A colleague, Cheryl Berzanskis, reminded me this morning that I have to vote early for the May 9 municipal election. Why? I’ll be unavailable on Election Day. I’m finishing my preparation for an adventure that could change my life. I’ll have much more to say about that later.
But this adventure — which begins May 9 — will get in the way of my being able to vote on Election Day, which is my preferred method of ballot-casting.
Why do I prefer to vote on the final day of balloting? Well, it’s a matter of hedging my bets.
I know for whom I’ll vote for mayor and city commissioner. My fear is that I’ll vote early and then one or more of my candidates will mess up. I cannot take my vote back. It’s like trying to unhonk a horn. Once it’s cast, it’s cast forever.
I prefer instead to wait until the very last day, thus reducing dramatically — but not eliminating — the chance of casting of my vote for the wrong candidate. Yes, they still could mess up between the end of voting and the day they take the oath of office. But that’s a chance I’m willing to take.
Voting early, which the state allows to make the process more convenient for Texans, gives me the nervous jerks.
I don’t know yet if I’ll go to City Hall or to the Randall County Annex to vote early. I have to decide soon.
Then I’ll vote — and hold my breath.
Don’t you dare mess up, City Hall hopefuls.
Why no debate? Why haven’t the four of them worked with anyone to stage an honest-to-goodness debate among them?
I’ve had the pleasure of meeting all the candidates during this election cycle. They all have some interesting — and provocative — things to say about how they would govern the city. Their ideas won’t be exposed in a broad public forum for all the residents to hear, to digest and to determine for whom to vote — if they decide to vote at all.
This is a shortcoming in the city’s political infrastructure. We seem to lack an organized, non-partisan framework to facilitate these kinds of activities. The League of Women Voters plays host to a candidate forum every other year in Amarillo. This year, the Potter-Randall Democratic Club also is lending its support to a forum for all city commission and mayoral candidates.
But I’m up for a knock-down debate (in a figurative sense, of course) in which the candidates question each other, put their feet to the fire and make them explain how they would govern. We’ve had plenty of controversy at City Hall since the latest election: red-light cameras, a downtown tax-revenue reinvestment policy, the simmering feelings about the at-large voting plan for the commission, the on-going controversy over whether to ban smoking indoors and maybe some other things I can’t think of right at this moment.
Isn’t it time we had a debate that drew the attention of a sleepy voting public? Maybe one or more of the candidates would say something silly, downright stupid, or come up with the most brilliant idea anyone’s ever heard.
Alas, it won’t happen this year. Maybe in 2011.
The other day, I received a submission from an occasional contributor to the Opinion page. She lives in Amarillo. Her submission wasn’t very good. She wanted me to give her space for a guest column. I declined, and suggested she condense it to a letter-length submission (around 200 words).
Then I received this response from her: “Other conservatives told me you would not print it, as it is contrary to your viewpoint, so I am not surprised.”
I responded with this note: “Your friends are wrong … If you would just read the letters and columns we do run, you wouldn’t say such a thing. Nor would they. We present all points of view. We present many … conservative columnists: Krauthammer, Goldberg, Williams, O’Reilly, Malkin, Parker every single week. I would be derelict in my duty if I limited … commentary to just those with which I agree.”
And, of course, I didn’t mention the conservative local contributors who take time to write letters to the editor.
I wear at least a couple of hats here. I get to write opinions; some are published over my own name, while most appear as editorials that speak for the newspaper. I also am a gatekeeper of all the other opinions that fly in over the transom each day. I strive daily to provide a balance of opinion — from the left and the right. My lefty friends say I’m descended from Attila the Hun; my righty friends call me a Commie Pinko. I figure, given the breadth of criticism, that I’m doing my job.
It’s in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. It’s called Tuol Sleng, or S-21. The Khmer Rouge used this former school as a place to torture people into giving them information. Once they tortured them, they killed them and buried them in killing fields scattered throughout the country. I’ve been to one of those killing fields twice (in 1989 and 2004), at Choeng Ek, on the outskirts of Cambodia’s capital city.
One of the more commonly used torture methods was a then little-known tactic called “waterboarding.” The Khmer Rouge goons would drench the captives’ heads in water, giving them a sense of drowning — and then stop. Then they would do it again. And again.
The Cambodians all called the technique torture. A tribunal right now is trying one of the late Pol Pot’s henchmen for crimes against humanity. One of the crimes was the use of waterboarding as a torture technique against helpless Cambodians.
And yet …
Many in this country consider waterboarding an acceptable method collecting information from “enemy combatants.” Then-President Bush declared that “this country does not torture.” But it did waterboard people in U.S. custody.
From what I’ve seen at that torture chamber on the other side of the world, waterboarding is a torture device. It is a hideous, ghastly method of interrogation that goes far beyond your run-of-the-mill sleep deprivation and smoke-filled room with a swinging light bulb hanging from a ceiling.
This country is better than that.
I’m still steamed over Gov. Perry’s implied threat of secession.
He spoke to that Tax Day “tea party” rally in Austin and all but said that Texans could secede from the United States if they get angry enough over our government’s tax policies. Had he asked me, though, here’s what I would have had him say:
Thank you, my fellow Texans, for turning out on this glorious day to rally against the government’s free-spending ways.
I see some signs out there saying things like “Secede Now.” You might think you want to pull out of the greatest nation on the planet. But remember, we did that once and look what happened. The nation fell into a Civil War, the bloodiest conflict in American history.
Look, folks, I know you’re upset with the president’s policies. Same with Congress. You’re angry at the bailouts. But secession creates many more problems for us than it solves. We need to stand together, one nation united, to change the policies we deem to be inappropriate. I plan to call President Obama right after this rally and express my concern — and my support for him and his efforts to right our ship of state. That’s what good Americans ought to do. Unlike some of the blowhards in my party, I don’t want the president to fail, for that would have dire consequences for the nation.
Secede from the greatest nation on Earth? You gotta be kidding!
No, the answer lies in working with the federal government, not against it.
But our governor said nothing like that. Instead, he tossed out all that red meat to the crowd.
And to those who think he misspoke: That was no gaffe. A tough re-election campaign is coming up over the horizon and the governor is energizing his base.
Gov. Rick Perry has said something out loud that has shaken the rafters of the nation’s political establishment.
He suggested, hinted, implied — but never really said outright — that Texans might be justified if they wanted to secede from the United States of America. He was talking the other day at Austin’s “Tax Day” rally, the one ginned up by conservative critics of the Democratic-controlled Congress and the White House, which is now occupied by a Democratic president.
Here is what is being lost in all the hoopla over Perry’s ill-considered remarks: The governor is a conservative Republican. Hasn’t it been Republicans — particularly the conservative folks — who have been calling liberal Democrats “unpatriotic”? Yet this governor has suggested in a none-too-subtle fashion that if Texans get riled up enough over federal tax policies that they might commit a treasonous act by pulling out of the United States.
To be fair, the governor is not endorsing such an act — he said.
But fomenting such feelings among his constituents smacks of being, well, rather un-American.