national news

Trump’s unfitness for office on full display

I am not usually one to say “I told you so,” but I want to make an exception right here and now.

I told you that Donald J. Trump’s entire adult life was geared toward one selfish end: to further his own ambition. That history in my view disqualified him from seeking — let alone achieving — election as president of the United States.

He took an oath more than three years ago to protect Americans, to defend the Constitution and to provide for the general welfare of the nation he was elected to govern.

He has failed! Miserably, I should.

The coronavirus is just one more despicable example of this man’s unfitness for public office.

His hideous tap-dance messaging on the coronavirus outbreak illustrates that this individual’s primary objective is not to protect Americans against potentially fatal illness. It is to further his re-election effort.

He didn’t want that cruise ship to dock in Oakland, Calif., because he was afraid it would boost the number of Americans infected by the Covid-19 strain of the virus. He has sought to downplay the danger. He has contradicted the medical experts almost daily. He has boasted (falsely) about his “knowledge” of medical issues, while wearing a Keep America Great campaign gimme cap at the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention office in Atlanta.

Jennifer Senior, writing an essay in the New York Times, summed up nicely why that CDC press conference was so damning: That news conference was … the most frightening moment of the Trump presidency. His preening narcissism, his compulsive lying, his vindictiveness, his terror of germs and his terrifying inability to grasp basic science — all of it eclipsed his primary responsibilities to us as Americans, which was to provide urgent care, namely in the form of leadership.

Donald Trump cannot lead a nation of frightened citizens. He is incapable of exhibiting an ounce of the qualities we seek in our president at times like these.

Many of us saw it coming the moment he rode down that escalator in that shiny skyscraper to announce he would seek the presidency of the United States.

I told you so.

political news

Time to ‘re-defeat’ Donald Trump?

2 Comments

A late friend of mine in Amarillo, William H. “Buddy” Seewald, once told me during the 2004 presidential election season that he was working to “re-defeat” President George W. Bush.

Seewald was appalled at the manner in which Bush was elected in 2000, losing the actual vote by roughly 500,000 ballots but winning the presidency in the Electoral College by a vote of 271-266; and that vote came after the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to stop recounting the ballots cast in Florida, giving Bush a 537-vote margin out of more than 5 million ballots cast in that state.

Well, Bush won the 2004 election by a relatively comfortable margin.

Now comes the 2020 election and there well might be a revival of the “re-defeat” mantra, this time against Donald John Trump, the current president.

You see, Trump actually lost the vote to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who collected just short of 3 million more ballots than did the guy who “won” the election. Trump won the Electoral College by a 306-232 count; when the electors cast their ballots in December 2016, the final tally ended up at 304-227, with some electors voting for other candidates rather than the two major-party contestants.

What has gotten lost in all the hubbub surrounding that election is that Clinton actually finished where almost all the public opinion polls said she would. She finished with 48.02 percent of the vote, compared to Trump, who collected 45.93 percent.

All the pre-election polling pegged Clinton ahead by about the margin where she finished ahead of Trump. The difference came when Trump narrowly picked off those three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — that Barack Obama had won in 2008 and2012; those stated provide Trump with the Electoral College majority he needed to win the election.

I don’t dispute that Trump was elected according to the U.S. Constitution. Nor do I dispute the notion to which I subscribe that he needs to be “re-defeated” in 2020.

Wherever he is, I am certain my friend Buddy Seewald would agree.

International news, medical news, national news

It ain’t the flu; let’s treat this outbreak with seriousness

(Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

Donald J. Trump keeps downplaying the severity of the health crisis that threatens to turn into a global pandemic.

He keeps telling us the flu kills thousands of Americans annually and that the Covid-19 virus has taken only a fraction of that amount.

What’s the problem? he wonders.

Here is the problem as I see it, Mr. President: The strain of coronavirus that is causing near panic in many countries has the potential of being far worse than influenza. It is being transmitted by casual contact, what medical/science experts refer to as “community transmission.”

We need to treat this matter with all due seriousness, not pass it off as some sort of “Democrat hoax,” which Trump has called it. We have to establish clear, concise and coherent lines of communication; the White House cannot tolerate any more contradictions from the president of the medical experts who keep telling us the truth about the threat we face.

I continue to believe Wall Street’s reaction to this crisis is partly a result of the clumsy, stumblebum response we keep hearing from the White House and from the president. Yes, there’s also that oil-price fight being waged by Saudi Arabia and Russia, which has sent the price of petroleum plummeting; it’s good for you and me at the fuel pump, but it’s playing hell with the fossil fuel industry, which — for better or worse — still is a key economic driver in this country.

So, let’s stop with the flu comparisons, shall we? The Covid-19 outbreak has turned into a crisis that needs to be treated as a matter that well could put billions of human beings in dire peril.

local news

R.I.P., ardent, avid blog critic

1 Comment

The picture you see with this blog post is of a man who was an ardent, avid — occasionally ferocious — critic of High Plains Blogger.

His name? Andrew Ryan. He and I worked together for several years at the Amarillo Globe-News in Texas. We parted company years ago. We once were friendly to each other.

Andy died this morning, reportedly of a massive stroke. I learned of his dire peril this past weekend from a mutual former colleague. I want to honor his memory with a brief remembrance of his frequent criticism of this blog. You see, I long have welcomed criticism because it often kept me humble. Andy’s rejoinders often were of that quality.

He almost without fail would respond to items I published that were critical of Donald J. Trump. I once asked Andy why he supported the president. He responded only with a scathing response on the quality of the opposition that sought to face him; I guess he felt Trump deserved re-election by default, that no one lining up to run against measured up to the incumbent.

Andy and I got into a beef some years ago over something I wrote on High Plains Blogger. We once were “friends” on Facebook. That relationship ended. He accused me of severing it; I don’t recall precisely how it happened, but I accepted Andy’s version of it, given that his memory was much sharper than mine.

Accordingly, we maintained a relationship only when he would blast my thoughts to smithereens. I grew to accept his responses as “going with the territory” of publishing this blog.

But as I noted already, Andy Ryan’s criticism often made valid points. He would call me out and in a style reminiscent of the late journalist Tim Russert, he would remind me of what I had said in earlier blog posts, which to his way of thinking contradicted by latest assertions.

Thus, news of his passing today fills me with conflicting emotions. Although we weren’t friends as I define the term, I still mourn his death. Andy’s time on Earth is over at a most unexpected time and in an equally unexpected fashion.

May he rest in eternal piece. My task going forward is to wonder when I write the next criticism of the current president: How would Andy respond?

national news

‘No’ on the revolution; ‘yes’ on defeating Donald Trump

I once was a wild-eyed liberal who bought into the urgency of launching a political revolt to topple a president.

The cause du jour was the Vietnam War. I had participated in that conflict, came home, and then got politically involved. In 1972, I wanted Sen. George McGovern to become the next president because he promised to end the war, bring our troops home and rebuild the nation’s tattered and shattered emotional psyche.

He didn’t make it to the White House.

Here we are today, 48 years later and the nation is flirting with another “revolution.” This one is being led by an independent senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, who keeps hammering at income inequality. He wants to de-fang the nation’s uber-rich, who he says are corrupting the political process.

Sanders also wants to topple the current president. He is running as a Democrat, even though he isn’t really a Democrat.

Sanders can count me out. I am past the revolutionary period of my life. I am settling instead on the “establishment” that Sanders is vilifying. To that end, I am all in with Joseph Biden Jr., the former vice president and former senator.

Biden and Sanders do share a common desire, to defeat Donald Trump. The question now becomes: Who between them is equipped to do what millions of us want? I believe firmly that Biden holds the answers.

Biden knows how to govern. His record as VP is full of accomplishment: He helped enact the Affordable Care Act; he helped push through legislation that protected women against violence; he has once reached across to Republicans and helped avert a government shutdown during one of those face-offs during Obama years in the White House.

Over his many years in the Senate, Biden chaired the Senate Foreign Relations and Judiciary committees. His colleagues respected him in the Senate and worked with him when he ascended to the vice presidency.

Bernie Sanders would, in my view, bring us more conflict of the type we have endured during the Trump years.

I am weary of the chaos. Of the conflict. Of the confusion. In my dotage, therefore, I am seeking a return to an air of normal behavior in the White House. Joe Biden can provide it.

Biden the seasoned pol is more electable than Sanders the angry revolutionary. When I was much younger, I might have attached myself to Sanders’ ideological hay wagon. That was then.

The here and now makes me yearn for a comforting presence in the White House.

medical news

Who’s to blame for the stock market free fall? Hmm, let’s see …

The Dow Jones Industrial Average is still in free-fall and of course, Donald John Trump wants to weigh in with his notion of who or what is to blame for our retirement funds being flushed away in front of our eyes.

In a series of Twitter messages today, POTUS posits notions that place the blame on the media and on Saudi Arabia and Russia bitching at each other over the price of oil.

The media? Yep. Of course The Donald would blame the media, which he has taken to suggesting is part of the “Deep State” conspiracy aimed at destroying the presidency while he occupies the office.

That, of course — to borrow a phrase from The Donald — is pure “bullsh**.”

Here’s another thought about what might be driving the markets nuts. It well might have something to do with confused messaging from the White House over the Covid-19 outbreak.

Trump’s health team offers dire warnings about a pandemic, they seek to quarantine cruise ship passengers, they warn against international travel, they are sounding alarms left and right.

Meanwhile, the president says it’s overblown, that he has “no worries” about the virus invading Washington, D.C., that the United States is the best prepared nation on Earth to handle the outbreak, even though health organizations tell us we’re still woefully short of testing kits to examine folks for possible contamination.

The World Health Organization places the mortality rate of those infected at 3.4 percent, but Trump says he has a “hunch” that it’s much lower. What a dipsh**!

Hmm. Well … If I am an investor I might be panicking over the confusion, the lack of steady leadership, the ignorant pronouncements coming from the current president.

Will the president own any of this? Pardon me while I bust out laughing in disgust.

national news

Grifter in Chief offers a weird challenge

1 Comment

Donald John Trump Jr. long ago became a serious pain in the backside for millions of Americans.

He continues to pop off on behalf of his embattled father, the current president of the United States. He fights and fusses against the media, ripping a page out of Daddy Trump’s playbook.

Now Don Jr. wants to debate Hunter Biden, the son of the Democratic Party’s front runner (yet again) for the 2020 presidential nomination. The Don Jr.-Hunter debate would be — as the younger Trump has proposed — over who between them has profited more from their father’s position.

Don Jr. thinks Hunter Biden has profited more. So he wants to debate him over it.

This is preposterous on its face.

Hunter Biden has become a political sideshow because Republicans — such as the president — want to use his business dealings to undermine the candidacy of his father, the former vice president of the United States.

You know how this has gone. Hunter Biden served on the board of a Ukraine natural gas company. He raked in some serious dough. GOP operatives say he got the gig because his father pulled some strings. Oh, but wait! Ukraine prosecutors have said neither Biden did anything illegal. That hasn’t stopped the GOP smear machine from kicking in.

Now we hear from Don Trump Jr., who wants to interject himself into the fray. For what purpose remains unclear, other than the son is as much in love with himself as Dad is with himself. 

One final point. Don Jr. has done not a single thing in his life that is worthy of any sort of honor. Nothing.

My advice to Don Jr.? Shut … up. Go … away.

medical news

Prepare for the worst while hoping for the best

My family and I live in two locations in Texas. My wife and I live just a few minutes from our son and his family in North Texas, while our other son lives in the Texas Panhandle, about 360 miles northwest of us.

We’re all acutely aware of what is happening around the world with the Covid-19 outbreak. We all know what we’re supposed to do to avoid being struck by the virus.

However, speaking only for myself I must admit to a bit of confusion, although it’s probably unwarranted.

Our president seeks to downplay the significance of the outbreak, relying on a “hunch” that the mortality rate isn’t as great as it is being reported by those chumps at the World Health Organization.

Meanwhile, health experts tell us to avoid cruises; airlines are slashing flight itineraries; the United States has imposed travel bans to places in Asia and Europe; athletic events are occurring on fields and indoors with no fans in the stands.

Is the coronavirus serious? Well, I am believing that it is. It is far more serious than Donald John Trump seems to suggest it is.

Our family members aren’t overreacting to it. They aren’t closeting themselves indoors. They are going about their lives. So are my we in our house. My wife and I are not going to hunker down unnecessarily.

The cruise ship advisory is just fine with us, as we weren’t planning a cruise any time soon … or later, for that matter. Air travel? We are staying away from airports.

The good news for us is that we’re all blessed with relatively good health. However, we aren’t going to nap at the switch while so many others are being struck down by the virus that can kill people — and has done so already!

As for the confusion, I will set aside what comes from the president and rely instead on the health experts who know better than a politician whose primary interest is in protecting his backside.

national news

It is time to judge women and men with the same measuring stick

Elizabeth Warren’s departure from the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary contest has prompted a slew of questions.

Many of them center on this fundamental point: Do we judge women differently than men who seek public office?

My own answer is, regrettably, yes. We do. It needs to stop. How do we cross that line? I haven’t a clue.

Sen. Warren had a boatload of ideas and solutions to problems. She is an excellent campaign debater, as former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg learned to his extreme anguish; she peeled the bark off of Bloomberg and then he dropped out after face-planting in the Super Tuesday cascade of primary elections.

She was far from the only fine female candidate for president. None of them made the grade. Not Kamala Harris, or Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar or Tulsi Gabbard (who’s still in the race for reasons no on can seem to figure out). They all come from significant backgrounds; they’re all women of accomplishment.

The media tend to attach different-sounding labels to female candidates than they do to men. A male who’s loud and brash is seen as “aggressive”; a female is described as, oh, let’s see, “brassy.” A male who is tough on campaign staff is called “demanding”; a female is called “overbearing” or “domineering.”

Do you get my drift?

The media and the public need to apply identical standards to women and men. They need to accept the notion that candidates of both genders are equally fit to do the tough jobs required of them in the public office they seek.

Are we going to cross that threshold in my lifetime? Well, I am not so sure, given my advancing age. My sons and my granddaughter stand a much better chance of seeing it happen.

I want desperately to see that day arrive before I check out.

medical news

POTUS is the ‘snake’

(AP Photo/Jeffrey Phelps)

Vice President Mike Pence traveled this week to Washington state to see where the coronavirus has killed more than a dozen residents. After all, he supposedly has taken the point in managing the federal response to the virus.

He met with Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat. He spoke supportively of Inslee’s efforts to combat the coronavirus.

Donald Trump’s response? He went to the Centers for Disease Control and called Inslee a “snake” a “bad governor” and someone who would criticize the federal response to the coronavirus crisis. He said Pence can say nice things about Inslee, but he won’t.

Good … grief!

The president’s petulant, childish, ignorant and boorish reaction to the trouble facing one of our nation’s governors tells me that Trump is the snake.

Trump lies without shame. He enrages me every single day.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience