Uncategorized

Creationism vs. Evolution: Where’s the conflict?

Three of the four Republicans running for lieutenant governor are tripping over each other in the rush to pander to the extreme right wing of their party.

The issue this time is creationism. Should it be taught in our state’s public schools? Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples and state Sen. Dan Patrick say “yes.” Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson stopped short of that declaration.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/12/texas-lt-gov-hopefuls-voice-support-creationism/

They traveled to Waco the other day to debate among themselves. By golly, three-fourths of them are creationists. They believe in the biblical version of Earth’s creation and they want it taught in public schools.

Me? I think creationism should be taught in Sunday school, in church where people worship their faith — where I worship my faith.

Even though Patterson didn’t jump on the creationism bandwagon directly in Waco, he said this: “Show me where that’s in the Constitution, because it’s not in the Constitution. I see nothing wrong with standing up at least for a moment of silence, let those who wish to pray pray in their own faith. I see nothing wrong with having a prayer before a high school football game.”

Well, I believe the First Amendment is pretty clear that Congress shall make no laws establishing a state religion. I do agree with him, however, that prayer before a high school football game doesn’t violate the Constitution, if someone other than a public school administration calls for it.

Creationism is a tenet of one’s faith. Evolution is science, backed up by mountains of empirical evidence. One should be taught in church, the other should be taught in publicly funded school classrooms.

Here’s where it gets sticky, in my view. I do not see any contradiction in the two notions.

Creationism, according to my reading of the Bible, does not stipulate that God created the Universe in six calendar days.

Therefore, I do not see the contradiction between what Scripture tells us and what scientists have uncovered relating to the evolution of the universe.

Am I less of a believer in God than my friends who interpret Scripture differently? I think not.

Amen.

Uncategorized

Mega Million jackpot is tempting me sorely

I won’t do it.

I will not succumb to the temptation to buy a ticket for a chance to win a half-billion bucks. That’s what the Mega Million lottery jackpot has reached.

I’ve long opposed the lottery. It’s a sucker’s bet. It preys on those who want to spend what little disposable income they have on the chance of winning the Big One.

It won’t happen, folks. CNN talked about a study in which someone calculated the odds of winning the whole prize at 150 million to one. You have a greater chance of being struck by lightning or being eaten by a shark than you have of winning the prize.

Texas voters approved a lottery back in 1991. I opposed it editorially at the paper where I worked at the time. The voters didn’t heed our advice and approved it overwhelmingly. I think the margin was something like 65-35 percent. It was supposed to bring a windfall to state government. It didn’t do it. Texans quit playing the game when they realized their chances of winning the big dough were next to nil. The state has tweaked the lottery a few times over the years to give players a little bitter chance of winning something.

Some folks said then-Gov. Ann Richards promised the money raised by the lottery would go exclusively toward education. Gov. Richards never made that promise, but somehow the accusation stuck.

Now the state has joined the Mega Million stampede. The jackpot is huge. It’s tempting to play.

I won’t go there.

I’ll rely on this bit of history. I played the Texas Lottery when it first came into being back in the early 1990s. I bought a ticket in Beaumont for $1. I won $3. I was $2 to the good. I spent a buck on the next drawing. I lost, didn’t win a nickel.

So, with that I’m a dollar ahead.

Knock yourselves out, everyone.

Uncategorized

President’s Christmas vacation draws barbs … again

I think I can hear the faint sounds of rhetorical sniper fire coming from the right yet again over President Obama’s 17-day Christmas vacation.

Some of it could be heard around Amarillo, from a couple of my social media friends who just cannot understand how the president can spend 17 whole days vacationing in Hawaii while the rest of the nation is hard at work. These are tough times, you know, and Barack Obama needs to keep his shoulder to the wheel, according to my friends.

I am quite certain some of the well-known right-wing radio and TV talk blowhards will weigh in soon enough on this.

I’ll remind them yet again of an obvious fact of political life.

It is that the president of the United States is never not the president. He’s never off the clock. He’s never out of touch. He’s never not in command. He gets his daily national security briefings on vacation as regularly as he gets them in the Situation Room at the White House, or on Air Force One, or whether he’s in some foreign capital visiting with a fellow head of state.

One of my pals here did have the good sense to remind the critics that even though he is no fan of the current president, “All presidents do this. Geez!”

Presidents George W. and George H.W. Bush took vacations. W was fond of going to his ranch in Crawford; Daddy Bush sped around off the Maine coast in his speedboat. President Reagan took extended vacations at his beloved Rancho Del Cielo in southern Californai. President Clinton would jet off to Cape Cod, Mass., to hob-knob with the beautiful people. President Carter retreated to his peanut plantation in Georgia, President Ford teed it up at Palm Springs, Calif., President Nixon high-tailed it to San Clemente, Calif., or Key Biscayne, Fla. President Johnson had his ranch in the Hill Country. President Kennedy had his family compound in Massachusetts. President Eisenhower played golf at Gettysburg, Pa.

And on and on it goes.

Enjoy your time with your family, Mr. President.

See you when you get back.

Uncategorized

Rep. Ryan makes sense on Meet the Press

I thought my ears were playing tricks on me today when I listened to the “Meet the Press” interview with Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray, co-chairs of the congressional committee that hammered out the two-year budget deal that passed overwhelmingly in the House the other day.

There was Ryan, a stalwart tea party Republican — and the GOP’s vice-presidential nominee in 2012 — sounding reasonable and accommodating. He noted that compromise requires both sides to give a little. He said it was good to sit down with the Democrat Murray to understand what she believes and where she stands on budget matters.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/12/15/sen_patty_murray_rep_paul_ryan_tout_budget_deal_in_joint_mtp_interview.html

Ryan also noted that the 2012 presidential election, which he and Mitt Romney lost to President Obama and Vice President Biden, served as a wakeup call to Republicans. The other side won and we lost, Ryan said.

Therefore, it was time to start working with those on the other side, not against them.

Therein lies the key to the budget deal that has enraged the right-wingers of the GOP and made more than a few left-wing Democrats unhappy. The message from Ryan and Murray? Live with it and let’s back to governing.

It’s nice to realize I wasn’t hearing things after all.

Uncategorized

Tea party faces big test in Texas next year

Ross Ramsey has put together another fascinating analysis for the Texas Tribune about the upcoming Republican Party primary race for the U.S. Senate in Texas.

It involves the incumbent, John Cornyn and a loudmouthed challenger, U.S Rep. Steve Stockman of Friendswood.

Stockman is a tea party favorite who’s decided to give up his House seat for a shot at Cornyn’s Senate seat. Good luck with that.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/13/senate-race-sound-and-fury-signifying-what/

Ramsey puts forth the view that Stockman’s candidacy may provide significant data on just how strong the tea party is in Texas. He notes that Ted Cruz knocked off Lt. David Dewhurst in 2012 to win the GOP nomination to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Stockman could do the same with Cornyn. I doubt it’s going to happen. At least I hope it doesn’t happen.

I’m trying to imagine Texas being represented by Ted Cruz and Steve Stockman in the same Senate chamber. Have mercy on us.

I didn’t have the honor of covering Stockman back in the mid-1990s when he was serving his first term in the House. He won that seat in 1994 by knocking off the legendary Democratic stalwart Jack Brooks of Beaumont. After watching the campaign from my post in Beaumont, I left the Gulf Coast for the Texas Panhandle in January 1995. My successor at the Beaumont Enterprise, Tom Taschinger, had the distinct pleasure of watching Stockman up close during his single term in Congress; he lost his seat in 1996 to Democrat Nick Lampson. My pal has written an equally interesting commentary detailing the folly of electing Stockman to the Senate.

Here it is:

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/opinions/columns/article/THOMAS-TASCHINGER-Stockman-faces-gigantic-odds-5063347.php

I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that Texas Republicans know better than to knock off a senior GOP senator with substantial conservative credibility in favor of a goofball who didn’t distinguish himself the first time he served in the House — and who has done even worse during this second tour of duty in Congress.

It is true that David Dewhurst got blindsided by Ted Cruz in 2012. I’m pretty sure John Cornyn will keep his eyes wide open as he hits the campaign trail against Steve Stockman.

Look for the mud to start flying soon.

Uncategorized

Aggies join the campus presidency tumult

Just when I thought that Texas A&M University had avoided the kind of administrative warfare that has dogged the folks at the University of Texas-Austin, there go the Aggies in getting mixed up in a tussle over who should be the next president of the system’s flagship campus.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/14/hussey-named-interim-president-texas-m-university/

The A&M System Board of Regents has unanimously named Mark Hussey to be the interim president of A&M-College Station, succeeding R. Bowen Loftin, who will leave soon to become chancellor of the University of Missouri.

It turns out Hussey was favored by Texas A&M Chancellor John Sharp. Another prominent Aggie, Gov. Rick Perry, wanted an old pal, Guy Dietrich, to get the interim president job.

Sharp’s guy won out. Too bad for the governor.

This kind of dispute is troublesome. We’ve been witnessing the hassles occurring at UT-Austin with President Bill Powers’s fight with some of the UT System regents. Gov. Perry has gotten mixed up in that kerfuffle as well. The regents keep meddling in Powers’s administrative duties. Perry, strangely enough, hasn’t done a thing to get them to back off, given that Powers was hired to do the heavy administrative lifting at the Austin campus.

I’m now officially concerned that Hussey could be undermined by Perry-Dietrich loyalists as he seeks to run the College Station campus during its transition from the Loftin era to whomever will get the permanent job.

It also might signal a rift between Sharp and Perry, one-time political rivals who have made peace in recent years. Sharp lost the lieutenant governor’s race to Perry in 1998 by a narrow margin. It was reported then that bad blood brewed between the two former Aggies dating back to when they served in the Legislature together.

I hope it’s all a mirage, that the two men are bigger than to let old hostility resurface.

The Texas A&M University System deserves better — as does the UT System — than to let politics get in the way of effective university administration.

Uncategorized

Mandela was no pork-barrel politician

They’re burying Nelson Mandela today in his hometown of Qunu, in a remote eastern region of South Africa.

Indeed, the remoteness of the great man’s home brings me to an interesting point. Listening to NPR on Friday, I heard something that caught me by surprise. A Qunu villager actually was critical of Mandela for — are you ready for this? — failing to bring more modernity and infrastructure to his hometown.

The news report detailed how much hassle it would be for Qunu to prepare for this event that is drawing worldwide attention. The village lacks many modern amenities. Roads are unpaved. There’s virtually no lodging available for visiting dignitaries. Qunu lacks much of the sewage and fresh water infrastructure that is needed to accommodate the visitors.

The individual being interviewed wondered why “Madiba,” as Mandela is called, would have neglected his hometown while basking in the glory of international acclaim and reverence.

Interesting, I thought.

I’ve tried to ponder the implications of that criticism.

Imagine, then, this scenario playing out. Suppose Barack Obama would steer road and bridge development to his south Chicago neighborhood, or perhaps to Hawaii, the state of birth. Imagine if you will George W. Bush directing federal money to Crawford, Texas, where he vacationed often while he was president and where he has a small ranch; Crawford could use some highway improvements, too. What if Bill Clinton had done the same for his hometown of Hope, Ark., or George H.W. Bush done so for Houston (which doesn’t need as much federal help as many small towns in America)? Hey, Ronald Reagan came from a small town in Illinois, Dixon. Couldn’t that town have used a little presidential push to build infrastructure? Same for Plains, Ga., Jimmy Carter’s hometown.

Any of those men would have been accused of promoting pork-barrel politics above the national interest.

Might that have been the case for Nelson Mandela, who presided for a single term — from 1994 to 1999 — over what’s been called a “developing country”? Its gross domestic product goes only so far and it well might have raised more than a few eyebrows if Qunu had received money that could have been spent in other struggling villages.

Mandela will be buried today. The town will erect a suitable monument to its iconic son.

My hunch is that Nelson Mandela eventually will bring much in the form of tourist money to Qunu now that he’s gone.

His greatness lives on.

Uncategorized

This race could determine Texas tea party power

Republican Texas state Rep. Joe Straus has been challenged for his San Antonio Texas House of Representatives seat by one Matt Beebe, who lost to Straus in the 2012 election.

Why does this matter to anyone outside The Alamo City? Straus also is speaker of the Texas House. Beebe is a tea party darling who lost to Straus in an ugly, name-calling campaign.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2013/12/house-speaker-straus-draws-familiar-primary-challenger/

So … what now?

By my reckoning, Straus has done a pretty good as speaker by trying to include everyone in the lower legislative chamber. That means Democrats. However, as has been the case whenever the tea party gets mentioned, the far right wing of the GOP just cannot stand it when Republicans work with Democrats to, oh you know, try to get legislation enacted. They try to make government actually work, make it function, try to get things to move forward.

I guess Beebe doesn’t see things that way. He says Straus isn’t conservative enough for the voters of House District 12. I beg to differ with him on that one, given that voters have re-elected him repeatedly. I would surmise from that electoral result that Straus’s conservatism fits his constituents just fine.

What I think Beebe really intends to say is that Straus isn’t conservative enough for, well, Matt Beebe.

Although it is true that Republicans hold a supermajority in the House of Representatives, the speaker is in charge of the entire body, not just the GOP wing of it. The speaker makes committee assignments involving Democrats, too. He must juggle multiple legislative balls in the air — and that means working with the other party when the need arises.

I believe Straus has managed to do that and it’s one reason why he deserves to be sent back for another term as state representative from San Antonio.

I’ll let the House members haggle among themselves over whether he should return as speaker.

Uncategorized

Boehner showing some spine … finally

I’ll admit that Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives John Boehner’s sudden display of steel is quite becoming.

It’s nice to have so many of your House colleagues on board with a plan so that you can say what you really think — at least I hope it’s what he really thinks — of the ultra-conservative interest groups that have taken your Republican caucus hostage for the past three years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/12/13/john-boehner-back-on-top/

The House approved this week by a 332-94 margin a budget deal brokered by a committee chaired by tea party darling Rep. Paul Ryan and his Democratic Senate colleague Patty Murray. A few hardliners held out against the deal, which heads off a government shutdown, strikes down much of the mandated budget cuts created by sequestration and cuts the deficit a little bit over the next decade.

One guy who I feared might vote “no,” my own congressman Mac Thornberry, R-Clarendon, actually voted in favor of the deal. His West Texas colleague, Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, stuck with his do-nothing approach to government and cast a negative vote. I am not surprised Neugebauer wouldn’t sign on; after all, he was the guy who scolded a National Park Service employee for doing her job — at Congress’s orders — when she refused to let tourists into the World War II Memorial in D.C. during the government shutdown in October.

Boehner now has taken the gloves off, more or less, in calling out folks like the Club for Growth and Heritage Action, who oppose any deal that results from compromising with Democrats. He says they’ve “lost credibility.”

I’m kind of hoping that Boehner, who I believe at heart is a decent guy with good-government instincts, finally is realizing that as the Man of the House he has the power to get things done and that he doesn’t need to buckle under to the pressure brought by factions within his party.

As the Washington Post notes, he has clawed his way back on top “for now.”

Uncategorized

Congress sees ‘spike’ in approval rating

What gives here?

Congress’s approval ratings, which had been languishing in the single digits for months on end, suddenly have taken a “spike” upward. According to the RealClearPolitics.com poll average — the one that takes in all the major polls’ findings and averages them out — shows congressional approval at 12.4 percent, as of Dec. 9.

I think we’re going to see even more improvement in the days and weeks ahead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html

On what do I base that bold prediction? It’s the budget deal hammered out by Democrats and Republicans, actually working together to avoid a government shutdown that has done the trick.

I’ve noted already that the deal announced by committee chairs Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray — a Republican and Democrat, respectively — is far from perfect. But the bigger point is that legislation rarely satisfies everyone. Good government almost always is the product of compromise, which by definition means both sides have to give a little to get something done.

If you track congressional approval ratings on the link attached to this blog back to when the government shut down in October, you’ll notice a decided tanking of public approval of Congress. Republicans leaders who run the House of Representatives took it on the chin the hardest from Americans fed up with the obstruction, the posturing and the do-nothing approach taken by the GOP.

It goes without saying — but I’ll say it anyway — that both chambers of Congress are populated by politicians … even those who say they “aren’t politicians.” Therefore, politicians depend on the people’s feelings about the job they’re doing if they want to stay in office.

All 535 members of the House and Senate should take heed at this “spike” in approval ratings. I think Americans are sending them a message: Do something — for a change.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience