Tag Archives: George W. Bush

International news, national news, political news

War or counter-terrorism effort?

We’re beginning now to parse the meaning of the word “war” and whether our effort to destroy the Islamic State means we’ve entered yet another armed conflict.

Secretary of State John Kerry disputed that terminology, declaring that the United States is embarking on a comprehensive “counter-terrorism” campaign to eradicate the hideous terrorists.

It doesn’t matter one damn bit to me what we call it.

All of this harkens back to when we declared “war” on international terrorism. President Bush reacted to the 9/11 attacks by tossing out the Taliban in Afghanistan. In doing so, he said the nation would be waging a multi-front war against terrorists, hunting them down wherever they lurked or hid.

Indeed, the 9/11 attacks on Washington and New York served — if you’ll pardon the use of this term — the Mother of All Wakeup Calls to this country. We’ve known about terrorists. We’ve understood intellectually they can do us harm. However, the 9/11 attacks were so brilliantly conceived and executed — and it pains me terribly to say it that way — that we were forced to ratchet up our vigilance to unprecedented levels.

So the war goes on.

Our campaign now to eradicate the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant can be called a war, or it can be called a counter-terrorism offensive.

I don’t care what they call it. The strategy just announced by President Obama is a continuation of what we’ve been doing ever since the terrorists committed their heinous act 13 years ago.

It’s a new kind of conflict with a new kind of enemy. I’m still hoping to learn how in the world we’ll ever be able to declare victory.

political news, State news

Texas abortion fight takes key turn

A federal judge has ruled that a critical part of the Texas anti-abortion violates the U.S. Constitution.

Good for him.

The judge is Lee Yeakel, who presides over the U.S. District Court’s Western District of Texas. His ruling declares that a provision in the law that requires abortion clinics to meet the same standards as hospitals puts an unfair restriction on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion if she chooses.

Judge strikes down Texas abortion restrictions

Thus, the fight will continue. The state is certain to appeal this ruling. The leading candidate for governor, Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott, is a strong supporter of the law; his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Wendy Davis, rocketed to national political fame when she led a filibuster in 2013 to “kill” temporarily the bill that would become state law.

Yeakel ruled that the intent of the law was to close only existing licensed abortion clinics. The law, he said, goes too far in establishing the stricter standards on par with ambulatory surgical centers.

So, why the curious turn here?

Yeakel was appointed to the federal bench by Republican President George W. Bush, another strong anti-abortion politician.

I’m as certain as I’m sitting here that we’re going to hear comments from critics of the ruling declare their disgust with “unelected” federal judges overreaching and “writing laws from the bench.”

Again, this is the beauty — not the bane — of the federal judicial system. Judges aren’t beholden to their political benefactors, the politicians who select them for these lifetime jobs.

Abbott says he’ll appeal the ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans, where he thinks he’ll get it overturned.

Would those judges be overreaching and writing laws from the bench?

 

 

Uncategorized

'One plane ticket away'

U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers made what he presumed to be a profound point about the threat posed by Islamic extremists in Syria and Iraq.

ISIS is “one plane ticket away” from striking the United States of America, Rogers said on Meet the Press this past Sunday.

I heard him say that and wondered: That’s news … now?

I get that Rogers is seeking to underscore the threat that ISIS poses. These are truly evil men who, it’s been said by Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey, have an “apocalyptic, end-of-the-world” view.

The hard truth, though, is that all terror groups are “one plane ticket away” from entering the United States and doing terrible harm against Americans.

They were one ticket away on Sept. 11, 2001, yes? Nineteen terrorists boarded three commercial aircraft that day in the eastern United States, hijacked them and flew two of them into buildings in New York and Washington, D.C.; the third jet crashed into that Pennsylvania field after passengers fought heroically with the hijackers to keep them from crashing it into another target. 

I also believe we’ve done better at protecting the United States since that horrific day. The measures imposed during the Bush administration have made commercial air travel less fun for passengers around the world, but it has made it demonstrably safer.

The same can be said now, despite the critics’ claim that the Obama administration is doing too little to protect U.S. citizens against terrorist threat. To that I ask: We’ve had how many attacks on our shores since 9/11?

Yes, ISIS and other despicable terrorists are “one plane ticket away” from committing mayhem here. That’s as it’s always been and likely always will be.

The question remains: Are we going to remain vigilant and alert?

 

International news, national news, political news

Rand Paul has become a peacenik

Wow! What in the world has Sen. Rand Paul been putting in his Wheaties?

The Kentucky Republican is now accusing former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton of being a “war hawk” and is staking out some interesting turf as he prepares to launch a possible 2016 presidential campaign.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/rand-paul-calls-hillary-clinton-war-hawk?cid=sm_m_main_1_20140825_30412376

The young man is sounding downright dovish in his approach to foreign policy.

Go figure.

Paul long has been considered a darling of the tea party movement within the Republican Party. As I have watched the tea party wing of the GOP, I’ve been struck by how hawkish many of its members have sounded regarding the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. What’s more, the tea party folks have pulled many of the so-called “establishment wing” GOP members over to their side.

Have you heard the griping from veteran U.S. Senate and House Republicans calling for more “robust” responses in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan to the terrorists who are creating so much havoc?

Meanwhile, Rand Paul is saying quite the opposite, He said on Meet the Press this past weekend: “Were I to run, there’s going to be a lot of independents, and even some Democrats, who say you know what? We are tired of war. We’re worried that Hillary Clinton will get us involved in another Middle Eastern war, because she’s so gung-ho.”

Yes, then-Sen. Clinton voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq ordered by President Bush. She’s since walked back from that vote, declaring she believes now that was a mistake.

Is she “gung-ho” these days? I don’t sense what Sen. Paul is sensing in a possible — if not probable — Hillary Clinton presidential candidacy.

Maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised. Paul, after all, did declare his desire to see “all aid” to Israel suspended. He’s tried to take that statement back. However, as my late friend and colleague Claude Duncan once told me about politicians who try to retract regrettable statements: You can’t unhonk the horn.

 

Uncategorized

Obama vacations … so what?

Here we go again.

The media are trying to assess the meaning of President Obama’s vacation.

This is a farce.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-s-vacations-and-golf-outings–by-the-numbers-211532262.html

The worst part of it from my standpoint comes from the critics who lampoon the president for daring to take a vacation while the world is exploding all over creation.

Give me a bleeping break.

As the link attached here notes, presidents always have taken vacations. They need time away from the Oval Office. It compares the number and length of vacations taken by Obama and his immediate predecessor, George W. Bush.

Bush comes out on top in both categories. Yes, he had his liberal critics who dinged him for vacationing while he was prosecuting a war in Iraq. The president didn’t help himself much with that (in)famous quote inviting reporters to “now watch my drive” while commenting on a crisis as he was playing a round of golf.

But hey, all is forgiven.

For my money, I’d prefer the president — whoever he is — take time away. Get refreshed. Clear your head. Hug the wife and kids. Exchange in a little banter with friends.

And oh yes. Receive those daily national security and domestic policy briefings — which every president always gets, even while he is on “vacation.”

So let’s stop this petty second-guessing. Let the president of the United States enjoy some time with his family.

Remember, too, he ain’t off the clock. Not ever.

Uncategorized

Bush the Elder under the scope

I’ve been saying for years that in my humble view, George H.W. Bush arguably was the most qualified man ever to serve as president of the United States.

The man’s resume is astounding: naval aviator in World War II who was shot down and rescued from the Pacific Ocean; business executive; member of Congress from Texas; envoy to China; director of the CIA; United Nationals ambassador; chairman of the Republican National Committee; two terms as vice president of the United States.

President Bush served a single term in the White House. He lost re-election largely because conservatives turned on him because he felt it necessary to renege on his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge made at the 1998 GOP convention in New Orleans.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/george-w-bush-book-109621.html?hp=t1

Now come a flurry of books on the 41st president. One of them is by his very own son, the 43rd president, George W. Bush. Another one, by journalist Jon Meacham, is in the works.

We shouldn’t expect W’s book to be an objective analysis. He’s writing about his father and as such he looks at Poppy with understandably affectionate eyes.

It’s worth reading, though, according to early reviews because George W. examines the complicated — but intensely loving — relationship between father and son.

President Bush 41 didn’t write a presidential memoir. He did publish a collection of letters and diary entries that tell the world a great deal about him. Some of which is his modesty and shyness.

That’s OK. Those of us who’ve followed his career know what he was able to accomplish in his long and distinguished life.

As the link attached to this blog notes, though, W’s book about his beloved father well might complicate the Republican presidential campaign lineup for 2016, correct, Jeb Bush? As Politico reports: “The timing of the book won’t be ideal for another Bush: former Florida Gov. Bush, who will have to decide around the release date whether to try to become the third Bush president. He’d be competing for attention with his brother’s book about his dad, and the whole setup might spark yet another round of speculation about the brothers’ rivalries.”

Whatever. I’m glad to see a good man honored by his son’s loving memory.

Uncategorized

Split the power in Texas government

An acquaintance asked me the other day about my thoughts regarding the upcoming election for Texas governor.

“Does Wendy Davis have a chance?” he asked. I had to think about it for a moment. “Well, she has a chance, but not much of one,” I answered. The Democratic nominee for governor is likely to lose to Republican nominee Greg Abbott — if the election were held today.

My concern about Davis is that she doesn’t yet have a message that resonates with voters. For that matter, Abbott hasn’t yet found a theme, either, other than he’s a Republican running in a heavily Republican state.

Then the talk turned to the lieutenant governor’s campaign between Republican Dan Patrick and Democrat Leticia Van de Putte. “That race,” I suggested, “presents the Democrats a better chance.” Why? my acquaintance asked. “Because Patrick is more likely to self-destruct than Abbott,” I replied.

Will the fiery GOP candidate for lieutenant governor implode? Beats me.

But the effect of two-party control of the top of the state government would do the state well. It might produce some pretty good governance, as it did during the time when Republican George W. Bush was governor and Democrat Bob Bullock served as lieutenant governor.

Democrats still controlled the Legislature and Bush developed good working relationships with Bullock and House Speaker Pete Laney of Hale Center. There was no running over the other party the way we’ve seen in recent years — and when Democrats held all the power in the state prior to the state’s shift to GOP control.

I’m intrigued by the notion of a Democrat presiding over the Senate and a Republican serving as governor, although a Lt. Gov. Van de Putte would have limited influence over a body that is likely to comprise mostly Republicans after the November election.

Well, I guess we can look at the election in a certain way: A week is a lifetime in politics and since we’re still about three months away from the next election, anything can happen.

In Texas, “anything” has been known to occur.

Uncategorized

Do we ignore our guys’ missteps?

A friend of mine passed on a bit of wisdom this morning at the Amarillo Town Club that I’d like to share here.

All this give-and-take on social media — particularly Facebook — he says, makes him think about whether he is looking critically enough at his “guys'” missteps, mistakes, goofs and blunders.

He was speaking about some of the Facebook threads that have developed among people of differing political points of view. I’m happy to report that some of the threads to which he refers is in response to posts that appear on this blog.

I’ve given some thought to what he said and his wisdom makes sense.

We all have our own bias. I tilt to the left and I recognize my bias there. Many of my friends in the Texas Panhandle tilt the other way — no surprise there, right? I like sharing ideas with them, even though I recognize they’re always wrong and I’m always right.

OK, back to the seriousness. My pal, a well-educated man who works in the public sector, takes note of the need to assess whether we’re being as analytical as we can be when assessing some of these issues.

Some of the social media posts do twist off in irrational directions. Barack Obama is seen by many on the right and far right as a traitor who intentionally seeks to degrade America’s ability to defend itself. I try to restrain myself when I see that kind of opinion tossed into cyberspace. My friends on the left and far left are equally perverse, suggesting for example that George W. Bush actually sanctioned the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to get us into a war with the Taliban and al-Qaeda. I also restrain myself on that nonsense as well.

The vast middle ground between those extremes is where we need to focus our attention.

I’m willing to talk sensibly with anyone. I’m also willing to acknowledge that I tend to look differently when my guys mess up than when the guys on the other side mess up. I’m not going to apologize for that. It’s my bias and I’m entitled to wear it on my sleeve, just as the other side is entitled to display its own bias.

My friend’s point about taking care to look critically at my side, though, holds up.

I hereby pledge to seek to do so — even if it produces the same response.

Uncategorized

Obama might be able to fix border crisis

What? You mean the president of the United States has the executive authority to tinker with an immigration law and can start sending some of the children back to their home countries?

And he can do it without fighting with Congress?

Do it, Mr. President.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-may-hold-fix-flood-immigrant-kids-172132339–politics.html

Two key lawmakers, one Republican and one Democrat, think President Obama has it within his power to act. Republican House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said the president needs to “re-engage” this effort. “We can safely get them home,” Rogers said on “Meet the Press.” He said, “And that’s where the president needs to start. So he needs to re-engage, get folks who are doing administrative work on the border. They need to make sure they send a very clear signal.”

But would he get sued for acting on his own? Let’s hope not. Congressional critics have been complaining that the president hasn’t acted forcefully enough on a whole host of issues, the immigration crisis being the latest. The children and young adults are political refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Sending them back willy nilly could expose them to mortal danger.

A 2008 law signed by President Bush was implemented to help prevent human trafficking. It supposedly makes it more difficult to send children back when they’ve entered the country illegally. As they say, no good deed goes unpunished. Smugglers have taken that 2008 and sent these young people here to take advantage of that law. And for that the president has been pounded?

Democratic Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein said the law allows for administration action in the event of “exceptional circumstances.” She should know; Feinstein helped write the 2008 legislation.

If the president is facing a protracted fight with Congress over the emergency spending bill he has requested, then he should just take the action he has authority to take.

Uncategorized

The Texas/Mexico border awaits, Mr. President

One more thought about the president’s upcoming visit to Texas … and then I hope to move on.

The White House says President Obama has no plans to visit the southern Texas border when he comes to the state today to raise money for Democratic candidates.

White House staffers believe it wouldn’t produce anything positive for the president. They are wrong.

Recall the time Obama went to New Jersey near the end of the 2012 campaign to view the damage brought by Hurricane/Super Storm Sandy. He won high praise from Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie for showing up.

Also, recall what happened when President George W. Bush was photographed flying over New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. He was pilloried for failing to put his own boots on the soggy ground to view the damage.

Was Obama more caring about New Jersey than Bush was about New Orleans? No.

There is value, however, in seeing these crises up close.

The Texas border is being inundated with illegal immigrants coming into this country from Central America. Most of them appear to be unaccompanied children sent here by those notorious “coyotes” who prey on illegal immigrants. We have a refugee crisis on the border.

The president needs to see what’s happening so he can assess better how to deal directly with it.

He’ll meet with Gov. Rick Perry. The two men likely will have a “frank” discussion — which, in diplomatic language means they might cuss at each other. That’s fine. The meeting is a good idea, too.

The visit to Texas will be complete, though, with a tour of the crisis on our state’s southern border. Take a look, Mr. President.