Tag Archives: Tea party

Uncategorized

Rep. Radel becomes latest face of hypocrisy

Trey Radel has become the latest face of congressional hypocrisy.

The freshman Republican from Florida was caught purchasing cocaine in a federal drug sting. It’s a misdemeanor offense, which means he’ll get off with a slap on the wrist, a fine, probation and maybe some community service.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/190862-report-radel-caught-buying-cocaine-in-federal-sting-operation

Why is he a hypocrite?

Radel, who was elected to the House of Representatives in 2012, has advocated drug testing for Americans seeking government assistance. It’s a popular cause among tea party Republicans seeking to build in some form of accountability for those seeking help from the government. They contend that recipient of government aid must behave themselves if they’re going to ask their fellow Americans to subsidize their standard of living.

Now the guy gets caught buying some blow in a drug sting.

Do as I say, not as I do … correct, congressman?

I’m glad he’s so contrite. He said he’s battling alcoholism and that he succumbed to temptation. Radel is vowing to get counseling and treatment. I wish him and his family well.

He’s not the first lawmaker to get caught in an act of hypocrisy. He won’t be the last. My advice to the young man, though, would be to pick his public policy battles more carefully.

He will have a hard time as it is shaking the hypocrite label.

Uncategorized

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 Gore’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 state’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.”

Uncategorized

Sen. Cornyn touts GOP ‘family’

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn has launched his re-election campaign with a pledge to seek unity within the Republican Party “family.”

Good luck with that one, senator.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/15/cornyn-touts-big-tent-gop-perry/

Cornyn’s bid for another term in the Senate is likely to succeed next fall. It well might occur with some bumps and bruises along the way.

He spoke at a campaign rally this week of his disagreement with fellow Republican Sen. Ted Cruz over Cruz’s effort to derail the Affordable Care Act; that effort, which included the fake filibuster on the Senate floor, helped produce the 16-day partial government shutdown.

“We had a minor disagreement in the family” over the government shutdown debate, Cornyn said. But, by golly, he intends to work to ensure that Texas doesn’t elect a “Nancy Pelosi clone” as governor, meaning Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis.

Cornyn and other Republicans, though, keep talking about the so-called “big tent” philosophy they say describes the Republican Party. The big tent, they say, has produced the disagreements within the party. The tea party wing of the GOP, however, hardly seems inclusive of folks Republicans will need to win national elections in the future. I refer, of course, to immigrants, racial minorities, gays, pro-choice women and those who rely on government assistance to help them put food on their tables and clothes on their children’s backs.

Having said all these negative things about Cornyn’s party, allow me to say that I happen to like the senator. I’ve met with him many times over many years, dating back to when he ran for the Texas Supreme Court, state attorney general and then during his time as U.S. senator. We always got along well.

I fear, though, that he’s going to tack too far to the right to protect his flank against those might attack him from the extreme fringes of his party. They’re out there, waiting for the chance to draw blood.

All this unity talk, therefore, is just that. Talk.

Uncategorized

Two elections should send GOP a clear warning

Two gubernatorial elections occurred Tuesday that ought to serve as a serious wakeup call to the fractious Republican Party.

One GOP candidate won big; another one lost a nail-biter to a Democrat.

The big winner, Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey, won huge in a Democratic-leaning state. The loser, Ken Cuccinelli, lost in Virginia, which has been leaning a bit Democratic in recent years. Christie — despite his claim of being a conservative — has governed as more of a centrist, mainstream Republican. Cuccinelli, the state attorney general in Virginia, is a tea party favorite who campaigned as a far-right conservative.

Christie’s win and Cuccinelli’s loss should tell the Republicans they’d be better served in 2016 if they nominate a candidate who can appeal to voters other than those who adhere to the right-wing fringe elements who comprise the party base.

Yes, Cuccinelli lost a narrower-than-expected race to Democrat Terry McAuliffe. He’d been down as much a 12 points, but ended up losing by just 2 percentage points. But … he still lost.

Christie, on the other hand, cruised to victory by a landslide margin in a state President Obama has won twice by impressive margins.

The GOP is fighting among itself. The tea party fringe is seeking to wrest control of the party from the so-called “establishment wing.” However, the establishment types have shown time and again they’re ability to work with Democrats to legislate effectively. The tea party wing has demonstrated equally well that it doesn’t care about working with Democrats or anyone else.

The lesson now for the Republicans is staring them in the face as they ponder the 2016 campaign for the White House. Will they nominate a candidate who represent all Republicans or will they march in lockstep behind someone who follows the narrow dictates of the dedicated zealots?

The clock is now ticking on the next presidential campaign.

Uncategorized

Gov. Christie faces key election challenge

Republicans love Chris Christie, by and large.

The New Jersey governor is expected to cruise Tuesday to an easy victory in a state that’s twice voted overwhelmingly for Democratic President Barack Obama. He’s done a good job running the state. Christie has been outspoken at times, to the point of being perhaps overly blunt with constituents. But that seems to be part of his tough-guy charm.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/04/21278657-centrist-or-a-conservative-christie-faces-fork-in-the-road-for-2016?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

He’s also been willing — unlike many of his GOP colleagues in Congress and in statehouses around the country, such as the one in Texas — to work with the president when the need arises. Hurricane Sandy, which ravaged New Jersey on the eve of the 2012 presidential election, offers a case in point. Christie’s glowing comments about the federal response to the storm relief angered many on the right.

So now the New Jersey governor is considering whether to run for president in 2016. His good pal, Obama, won’t be on the Democratic ticket, given that he’s term-limited out by the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment. The field, therefore, is wide open.

Does the governor tack to the right or stay on course down the center?

He ought to follow the late Richard Nixon’s advice, which is good for candidates of either party: Run to the fringe of your party in the primary and then steer toward the center during the general election.

I’m supposing that Christie knows about President Nixon’s advice and he’ll follow it. His particular concern at this moment in time, though, will be whether the tea party fringe followers of his party will forgive him if he moves toward the center and plays up his across-the-aisle working relationships.

Heck, they might not be able to forgive him for saying all those kind things about Barack Obama a year ago.

Oh, the joys of running for office in this highly polarized climate.

Uncategorized

Stay in the Senate, John McCain

The idea that John McCain might not run next year for another term as a U.S. senator leaves me with decidedly mixed feelings.

The Arizona Republican is one of the few GOP wise men left in that august body. My sense is that the Senate needs him to slap some sense into the upstarts who have taken over much of the agenda on Capitol Hill.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/31/john-mccain-spying_n_4184036.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037

He says the government shutdown was a huge mistake, although he sounds as though he means it as a partisan strategy. No kidding, senator. He doesn’t think much of at least one of the tea party firebrands in the Senate, fellow Republican Ted Cruz of Texas, whom he’s dressed down already for questioning the ethics and integrity of another Republican, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

My concern isn’t about the future of the Republican Party. I am rather concerned about whether government can keep working the way it’s supposed to work. Whether the GOP is heading down some sort of path of self-destruction really doesn’t matter to me, although I would prefer to see a healthy — and reasonable — Republican Party perform its role in crafting meaningful legislation.

If John McCain is able to try to talk some sense into his party and continue working with colleagues who call themselves Democrats, then he ought to stay.

Yes, he ticks off many on the far right who consider him one of those dreaded RINOs — Republican In Name Only. He’s no such thing. His voting record is solidly conservative and has consistent with historic GOP values for many years.

He just happens to be willing and able to talk sense to those who need to hear it.

Pay attention.

Uncategorized

Letter displays astonishing degree of ignorance

I am astounded at the level of ignorance and narrow-mindedness that exists in some people.

Yes, I know it’s not an uncommon trait. Ignorance has existed since the beginning of time. It becomes everyone’s business, though, when the media distribute people’s alleged “thoughts” for the rest of us to read.

I present to you one Eddie McMurray, an Amarillo resident and occasional contributor to the local newspaper in Amarillo. I’ve had a casual acquaintance with McMurray for many years, during my time as editorial page editor of the paper.

The newspaper published this letter today:

http://amarillo.com/opinion/letters-editor/2013-10-27/letter-columnist-should-stay-dc

Where do I start? McMurray disputes a column from Washington Post columnist Colbert King, whose column ran in the paper on Oct. 19. Seems that McMurray doesn’t much like Colbert’s liberal thinking. Then he hangs an exceedingly nasty label on him. “King is either a traitor or influenced by ignorance of this country,” McMurray writes. “I vote both.”

There, he did it. He hurled the traitor accusation at someone who simply has a different world view than his own.

This, I submit, is precisely what is wrong with the nature of what used to be called political debate in this country. Our fellow Americans on the far right fringe have taken to challenging the patriotism of those who disagree with them.

It is reprehensible on its face.

McMurray wonders why the paper is seeking “to find liberal media in an attempt to change thinking in the Panhandle. I would not trade the ground in my tomato garden for any liberal state in the country.”

Good for him. He is entitled to stand by what passes for his principles. But the media don’t seek to “change thinking” of a region. It’s not true of conservative media nestled in liberal bastions. It surely isn’t true of liberal media doing business in conservative enclaves.

What responsible media always should do is search for wide-ranging opinion to share with its readers. Let the readers be the judge. Readers can determine for themselves whether someone from the “other side” has a reasonable argument in defense of his or her position. Then we can argue the point intelligently — and with a civil tongue.

Calling someone a traitor merely because he or she is one of them stinkin’ liberals nullifies whatever point the name-caller is trying to make.

Uncategorized

Prop 6 looks like a water winner for state

Texas’ Legislature was kind to voters this election year by giving us “only” nine amendments to the Texas Constitution to consider.

One of them is of huge importance to the Panhandle. It’s Proposition 6, the “water amendment.”

I plan to vote for it.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/22/guest-column-vote-yes-prop-6-we-need-water/

Gov. Rick Perry’s column attached here tells us that the amendment would allow the state to tap into its Rainy Day Fund — which is a rather ironic twist, if you think about it — to develop water resources for the state.

Perry writes: “Our booming economy, rapidly growing population and the drought that has plagued most of the state for years are combining to stress our ability to meet our water demands. If we do nothing to address these needs, we place at risk the health and well-being of future generations.”

The Rainy Day Fund, Perry and other supporters note, won’t be imperiled. There will remain plenty of money left in the fund to use for other “emergencies.” By my way of thinking, I believe the state’s water shortage constitutes an emergency, particularly in regions of the state that have so little of it. That means the Panhandle.

Perry adds, “Because of our economic strength, the Rainy Day Fund has reached historic highs. Even with a one-time transfer of funds to address our water needs, we’ll still have an estimated $8.3 billion in reserve.”

Debra Medina, the tea party darling who ran for governor in 2010, opposes it. Her essay is attached here:

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/22/guest-column-vote-no-prop-6/

Of the two, Perry’s makes more sense. Proposition 6 is a reasonable approach to spending money the state has on hand to fend off actual emergencies.

A world without water? That constitutes a dire circumstance.

Uncategorized

Self-awareness has gone AWOL in Senate

The Huffington Post has taken note of a patently hilarious reaction to the deal struck by the Senate to end the government shutdown, which also increases the national debt limit.

It is that the U.S. Senate comprises 100 individuals who have next to zero self-awareness.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/16/senate-budget-crisis_n_4112253.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

There they were, applauding themselves for all the hard they did in getting the deal done. The applause seems to ignore the reality of what brought us to the brink of fiscal calamity — which was the senators’ role, along with the House of Representatives, in creating the problem in the first place.

Indeed, watching Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell pat each other — and themselves — on the back for all that work will present late-night comedians plenty of grist for the foreseeable future.

None of this needed to happen. None of the federal employees who were furloughed without pay needed to suffer. The nation did not need to endure this drama. Americans did not need to wonder whether their retirement accounts were going to evaporate because Congress and the White House couldn’t reach a deal sooner.

The deal struck, let us remember, provides only a short-term relief. More drama is just around the corner.

And for this the Senate is congratulating itself?

Give me a break.

Uncategorized

Attention now turns to budget panels

Let us now focus our attention on some members of Congress — from both political parties — who have been given the task of working out a long-term federal budget agreement that prevents charades such as the one that just ended.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/17/politics/shutdown-over-main/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan — who chair the Senate and House budget committees, respectively — are going to begin talking between themselves. They’re both serious politicians (no irony intended, honest) but their task is monumental, given the institutional refusal of both legislative chambers to adopt any kind of strategic approach to these problems.

We came within a few hours this week of defaulting on our nation’s debt obligations. The two-week-long government shutdown sucked an estimated $24 billion from the nation’s economy. It turns out we’ll pay our bills and the government has reopened fully.

President Obama signed the bills into law late Wednesday and said the end of this budget battle removes the “cloud of unease” that had been hovering over the financial world.

I beg to differ, Mr. President.

The unease has just taken a brief respite. It’ll likely return in January and again in February. The money to run the government runs out in January; our borrowing limit expires in February. Many of us out here believe we’ll be right back at it again when those deadlines approach.

Of the two budget panel chairs, Ryan has the more difficult task, given the role the tea party wing of the GOP — of which he is a member — played in prolonging the ridiculous drama that unfolded. The House Republican caucus will continue to fight to eradicate the Affordable Care Act, which only just now has been implemented. They don’t like it and predict all kinds of catastrophe will befall the nation if it is allowed to live on.

Ryan is considered to be a serious and thoughtful young man. I’m withholding my final judgment on him. I’m not sure he’ll be able to resist the enormous pressure he’ll feel from the extreme right wing of his party, although I retain some faith he’ll be able to work constructively with Democrats on his committee and with the likes of Chairwoman Murray in the Senate.

Here’s a bit of advice from out here in the Heartland. Work until you get a deal. You have no need to take extended recesses between now and Christmas. You have much to do and the public — into whose faces you spit when you closed much of the federal government — pay you folks a pretty fair wage to solve these problems.

Finally, Democrats and Republicans can learn from the memories of two presidents — Lyndon Johnson and Ronald Reagan. Both men knew how to work the system. They perfected the art of principled compromise.

Now … let’s get busy.