Tag Archives: GOP

Remember: Immigrants built this great nation

The Donald Trump Republican lies keep piling up.

Here is one of them: Immigrants are pouring into our country intent on harming innocent, defenseless Americans; they will steal our children and sell them into sex slavery; they will rape our women; they will peddle deadly drugs. We have to stop them now by sending thousands of heavily armed “patriotic” American fighting men and women to our southern borders.

What’s more, the lie continues, Republican opponents — Democrats, if you please — favor “open borders,” they believe we have “too much border security” and want to grant illegal immigrants “the right to vote.”

The lying is prevalent in border states, such as Texas, where a U.S. Senate campaign — Democrat Beto O’Rourke vs. Republican Ted Cruz — is heading into the home stretch.

Donald Trump is fomenting those lies with his reckless, feckless rhetoric on the stump. He whips his crowds into a frenzy with the blathering about how Democrats favor lawlessness and Republicans favor “safety and security.”

Look, this nation owes its greatness to immigrants. My sisters and I are the grandchildren of immigrants. Two of our grandparents came here from Turkey, which the president might define as a “sh**hole” country, given that it is a predominantly Muslim nation; the other two came from southern Greece. Yes, they got here legally, but they shared the same dream as others who are sneaking in illegally: They wanted to build a better life than the one they had back in the “old country.”

The same thing can be said of those who are fleeing oppression in Latin America. Yet the president seeks to lump them into a single category of “violent criminals.”

As for Democrats wanting to grant illegal immigrants the immediate “right to vote,” I am waiting to hear or read a single comment from any politician in this election cycle say such a thing. Beto O’Rourke hasn’t said it, nor has any other so-called squishy liberal/progressive politician.

What I hear them say is that they want to grant temporary reprieves from deportation for those who are here illegally; they want to ensure, through thorough background checks, that they want in for the right reasons, and they want to enable them to gain permanent resident status or — yes! — citizenship.

Once they become citizens, then they can vote! Not before! That’s what I am hearing.

I know the lying will continue, so my plea isn’t for the liars to cease. It is for the rest of us to stop swilling the poison.

Clinging to a hint of conventional wisdom

Donald John Trump’s election as president of the United States should have taught us all a valuable lesson.

It would to be toss conventional wisdom straight into the crapper.

A first-time candidate for any public office had no business defeating a former first lady, former U.S. senator and former secretary of state. But he did. He whipped Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not by a lot. But he won.

That all said, I am going to cling to a bit of conventional wisdom as the 2018 midterm election comes hurtling toward us. It is this: 29 million ballots were cast nationally in early voting, compared to 21 million early votes cast prior to Election Day 2014. The conventional wisdom holds that the bigger the turnout the better it is for Democratic Party candidates.

This could portend a good thing for the immediate future of our system of government.

I know what you’re thinking. Sure, you’d say that. You’re a Democratic partisan. You’re biased toward those weak-kneed, socialist-leaning Democrats. You’ve stated your bias against the president. You can’t get over the fact that he was elected president.

Actually, my bias rests with divided government. Yes, I am unhappy that Trump won. I wanted Hillary Clinton to be elected president and I would support again today if I had the chance.

I’ll continue to rail against the president for as long as he holds the office to which he was elected legitimately and according to the U.S. Constitution.

However, good government needs a better form of “checks and balance” to stem the tide that Trump is trying to ride. He has hijacked the Republican Party and has turned into the Party of Trump. It’s now a party that foments fear, incivility, prejudice. It speaks Trump’s language. By that I suggest that absent any serious dissent from within the GOP’s congressional ranks, Trump is virtually unfettered, given that the GOP controls both congressional chambers.

That well might change after the midterm election. The House of Representatives appears likely to swing into Democratic control. The Democrats will handle the committee gavels. Democrats will decide the flow of legislation. Democrats will call the shots in the People’s House.

Moreover, they will act as a careful check against the Republican stampede that Trump wants to trigger.

Tax cuts for the wealthy? Slashing Medicare and Medicaid? Appropriating money to build that damn wall across our southern border? If Trump and the GOP maintain control of Congress — both House and Senate — the game is over. If Democrats manage to wrest control of the chamber where tax matters originate, then we’ve got a chance that Trump will be taught a lesson in how divided government works.

Conventional wisdom might be an endangered species. It’s still alive and breathing. It well might rise again to help produce a federal government that actually works.

If you haven’t voted already, you have a big day awaiting you next Tuesday. Be sure your voice is heard.

This really is the most important midterm election … ever!

Politicians say it all the time. It doesn’t matter their partisan affiliation — Republican or Democrat — they sing it off the same song sheet.

“This is the most important election in our history!”

That’s what they say. They might mean it. Or they might be saying just to fire up their respective supporters.

Guess what. I think this election, the 2018 midterm, actually is the most important midterm election in U.S. history.

What’s at stake? Plenty, man!

Republicans control both chambers of Congress and the White House. The executive branch, the White House gang, is being led by a man, Donald J. Trump, who doesn’t know what he’s doing. He entered the presidency without a lick of public service experience, let alone any interest. He is a dangerous fellow who doesn’t grasp the limits of his power, or how the government is designed to function.

The House of Representatives presents the Democrats with their greatest opportunity to seize the gavel from their GOP colleagues. They need to do precisely that if for no other reason on Earth to act as a check on the runaway agenda being pushed by Donald Trump and endorsed by a GOP congressional majority that is scared spitless of the president.

I am among those who believe the Senate is likely to remain in Republican hands when the ballots are counted next Tuesday. Indeed, it appears to be entirely possible that the Senate’s GOP majority might actually increase by a seat or two; Republicans occupy 51 seats at this moment, with Democrats (and two independents who favor the Dems) occupying 49 seats.

The House, however, must flip. It must act as a check on Trump and on the GOP members of Congress who give this seriously flawed president a pass on so many issues. They excuse his hideous behavior; they refuse to call him out vigorously when he refuses to condemn haters — such as the KKK and neo-Nazis; they roll over when he pushes for repeal of the Affordable Care Act or enact tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans; they pledge to cut money for Medicare and Medicaid to help curb the spiraling annual federal budget deficit.

Divided government has worked in the past. Barack Obama had to work with a Congress led by the other party. So did George W. Bush. Same for Bill Clinton. Ditto for George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.

It lends a greater air of a need for compromise.

If the Democrats fall short on Tuesday, clearing the path for Trump and the GOP to run roughshod over the rest of us, well … we’re going to have hell to pay.

Yes, this is the most important midterm election in U.S. history.

Here it comes again: attempt to repeal ACA

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell spilled the beans recently.

Congressional Republicans are going to make another run at trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, after the midterm election.

Now, it well might be that Democrats will wrest control of the House of Representatives from Republicans, which likely means that McConnell and short-timer House Speaker Paul Ryan will convene a “lame-duck” congressional session to get rid of the ACA.

Hmm. What a load of horse dookey.

Republicans all over the country — even here in Texas — are campaigning on a pledge to retain insurance for people with “pre-existing conditions.” They actually have accused Democratic candidates of trying to get rid of that provision.

The stark reality is that when Barack Obama was president and Congress was wrestling with ways to repeal the ACA, they fought tooth and nail, hammer and tong to get rid of that provision. Now they want to save it?

As former President Obama noted the other day, “that is a lie.”

McConnell’s stated desire to repeal the ACA also simply goes against prevailing public opinion about President Obama’s signature domestic triumph. Polls have revealed significant public support for the ACA, given that it has provided millions of Americans with health insurance who couldn’t afford it.

Many of us agree that the ACA is far from perfect. But, why repeal it? Why not mend it, repair it, improve what needs improvement?

That kind of mending and repairing has been done. Medicare? Yep. Medicaid? Yes again. How did it happen when Congress enacted Medicare, for example, in 1965? It occurred when Democrats and Republicans sought common ground, worked toward compromise and — presto! — re-created a law that has been an indispensable part of Americans’ lives.

Compromise and common ground, though, has escaped the vocabularies of today’s politicians.

They need to look for them. Once they find them yet again, put those principles to good use.

Beto crawls back into the belly of the GOP beast

Democratic U.S. senatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke says he doesn’t have any pollsters on his campaign staff.

If that is true — and I don’t disbelieve him — then someone is telling the young man that it is in his political interests to spend so much time in Texas’s most Republican regions as he campaigns against GOP Sen. Ted Cruz.

O’Rourke had yet another campaign rally this morning in Amarillo, which many have labeled as a sort of Ground Zero of Texas Republican politics.

Public opinion polling puts Cruz up by a 5 to 7 points, depending on the polling outfit. I’ve noted already the view expressed by some around the state that O’Rourke’s strategy appears to be to cut his expected losses in GOP-friendly rural Texas while trying to shore up his expected majorities in the state’s urban centers in places like Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin.

O’Rourke certainly gins up energetic crowds wherever he goes. I have to hand it to the young congressman from El Paso for the guts he shows in venturing into the belly of the proverbial Republican beast.

He appeared recently on late-night talk show host Stephen Colbert’s show and told Colbert how he has visited every one of Texas’s 254 counties. He mentioned Muleshoe (in Bailey County) by name as one of the communities he has visited, prompting Colbert to wonder aloud that a “town with the name of Muleshoe must have great barbecue.”

Whatever. It also has great people who seem willing to listen to what this outlier Democrat has to say to them.

So it is with Amarillo residents and those who live in many rural communities throughout the state.

I don’t know whether O’Rourke’s strategy will work. The polling, if we are to believe it, tells us Cruz is leading.

Then again, the pollsters told us Hillary Clinton would be elected president in 2016 by a narrow margin. Might there be another surprise awaiting us this time around?

My hope continues to spring eternal.

‘This is war’? Um, no … it isn’t

I’m beginning to repeat myself and for that I apologize.

I don’t intend to apologize for the repetitive topic. It involves this notion that the current state of political debate necessarily must devolve into a rhetorical flame-throwing contest.

Such fiery rhetoric comes from many of my progressive/liberal social media friends and acquaintances. Some of them have scolded me for seeking to reduce the temperature.

“This is war,” a few of them have told me. No. It is not.

I’ve had a brief bit of exposure to war. Believe me when I say this: This is nothing close to the real thing.

Yes, it is a form of combat. Democrats are angry with Republicans for fomenting anger. They suggest that anger can — and does — manifest itself in acts such as what we witnessed the past few days: the mailing of pipe bombs to officials who disagree with Donald Trump, the nation’s 45th president.

So, to counter that anger, they propose to ratchet it up. Among the top proponents of the in-your-face policy of political debate is Michael Avenatti, the lawyer who has made a name for himself representing Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress who alleges taking a one-time tumble with the future 45th president.

Avenatti is considering whether to run for president in 2020. Imagine my surprise. He says Democrats need a gut fighter to take the battle straight to the president and his fellow Republicans.

Where does it go from there? Only heaven knows.

I am sick of hearing the “war” references to this political debate. Too many politicians I respect — the late Sen. John McCain, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, former Vice President Joe Biden, for example — have demonstrated how elected officials can argue and bicker over public policy without demonizing those on the other side.

Thus, I cannot accept the “this is war” mantra we hear from today’s active participants.

POTUS fails to deliver on unity pledge

Where do we stand at this moment?

Authorities are discovering bombs being sent to offices of Donald Trump’s critics. Two of those critics happen to be former presidents of the United States. The current president vows to seek “unity” and “peace” in a pledge to find whoever is responsible for these acts of terrorism.

What, then, does Donald Trump do? He fires off a tweet this morning that says the following: “A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”

I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound like a message of unity and, dare I say it, presidential leadership.

Donald Trump continues to be totally and utterly tone deaf to the role he has played in fomenting the anger that has manifested itself in this ongoing political crisis.

Federal and local authorities have now discovered 10 devices sent to addresses of presidential critics. They include former Presidents Obama and Clinton. They also include CNN, a former attorney general, a sitting U.S. congresswoman, a former vice president, a big Democratic political donor, an Oscar-winning actor … sigh!

There well could be more devices found, perhaps even before I finish writing this brief blog post.

The president, though, continues to blame others. He continues to lay it at the feet of his critics and, yes, the media.

What’s more, he stood before that campaign rally crowd in Wisconsin last night and began to poke fun — poke fun! — at what’s been happening. He boasted to laughter from the crowd that he was “trying to be nice” in his remarks, as if that suffices as a toning down of his inflammatory rhetoric.

Do you remember a year ago when Republican members of Congress were attacked on a ballfield as they practiced for a charity baseball game? One of them, House GOP whip Steve Scalise, was grievously wounded by gunfire. How did House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, react? She rallied to her colleague’s side, offering public prayers for his complete recovery.

Donald Trump cannot bring himself to respond in a way that reflects the danger of the threats being posed against his critics.

Shameful.

Is Texas pushing back against voter apathy?

I want to salute what I hope is happening in real time all across Texas.

Reports are pouring in that early-voting totals are smashing records in large counties and small counties. Harris County’s early-vote totals are more than three times than what they were in 2014, the year of the previous midterm election. Dallas County’s early-vote count is shattering records, too. I haven’t heard what’s happening in Collin County, where I live — but I’ll presume that my neighbors are turning out, too.

Keep the votes coming

Regardless of the outcome of the midterm election, this is a good sign for the state if the early voting results portend a huge spike in the actual total turnout.

I’m going to wait until Election Day to cast my ballot. So this isn’t about me. It’s about so many other Texans who seem intent on reversing the state’s dubious distinction of producing time and again one of the country’s worst vote-turnout totals.

Texans like to boast about the bigness of everything here. Yep, the state is huge. It covers roughly 268,000 square miles. It’s more than 800 miles from Orange to El Paso, and from Dalhart to McAllen. The state is home to about 27 million residents. Its economy is rated among the top 15 national economies in the world.

If only the state could produce large voter turnout totals that merit such boastfulness. It’s usually pitiful. This year’s midterm election? Maybe not.

I have hope that the turnout will be large and that the early turnout totals aren’t a sign of just more Texans voting early, leaving Election Day voting to the scant remainder of the rest of the voting public.

It’s the idealist in me.

Cruz displays phony ‘Texas tough’ profile

Ted Cruz calls himself “tough as Texas.” Why, then, did the Republican U.S. senator wrap his arms around Donald J. Trump, praise the man who once denigrated the senator’s wife and implied that his father had a hand in committing the crime of the 20th century, the assassination of President Kennedy?

All that took place Monday at the Toyota Center arena in Houston, where the president whipped up the cheering crowd and urged them to vote for Cruz, who is fighting for re-election against Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke.

I wanted to hurl when I saw it.

Cruz’s Texas toughness would have been more sincere had he told the president to stay the hell away, that he didn’t want or need his support and that he couldn’t forgive him for denigrating his wife and suggesting that his father — who Trump said was seen with Lee Harvey Oswald — might have been complicit in JFK’s murder.

No, instead Cruz put on the façade of phony fealty to Trump, who said he and Cruz had made up, that all was forgiven, that he really didn’t mean that Cruz was the biggest liar in the Senate — that the nickname “Lyin’ Ted” was being replaced by “Beautiful Ted” and “Texan Ted.”

Tough as Texas? Give me a break.

It turns out — at least the way I see it — that Cruz is every bit as much of the “sniveling coward” that he called Donald Trump when the men were competing for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.

You are free to disagree if you wish. I just view political toughness a whole lot differently than what was on display in Houston.

Lyin’ Ted becomes Texan Ted? Sure thing, Mr. POTUS

There once was a time when Donald Trump and Ted Cruz detested each other.

Trump called Cruz “Lyin’ Ted”; Cruz called Trump “amoral,” a “coward” and a “pathological liar.” As I recall the back-and-forth as the men fought for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, I remember some sincere anger in their voices, particularly in Ted Cruz’s voice.

It’s two years later. Trump is now the president. Cruz is fighting for re-election to his U.S. Senate seat from Texas. Trump is coming to Houston tonight to campaign for Cruz as he battles Democratic challenger U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke.

Now we hear Trump calling Cruz “Texan Ted” and saying he gets along so darn well with him, that he is willing to spend some political capital on his former foe’s behalf.

I do not believe for one instant that Trump now thinks highly of Cruz; nor do I believe that Cruz has forgotten the hideous innuendo and insults that Trump laid on him during the 2016 GOP campaign.

Trump posted that hideous video on Twitter that denigrated Heidi Cruz, the senator’s wife; and then he also suggested that Cruz’s father might have been complicit in President Kennedy’s murder, given that, according to Trump, the elder Cruz was seen in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald, the president’s murderer.

It was the video and the innuendo about Cruz’s dad that ignited the senator’s rage at Trump.

How in the name of letting bygones be bygones are we supposed to believe that the men have buried the hatchet — and not in each other’s skulls?

Meanwhile, we have O’Rourke fighting to regain the momentum that carried him to a position of having a puncher’s chance of upsetting Cruz.

He ought to dredge up the videos of Cruz and Trump talking trash to and about each other to help him make the case that the rally in Houston is a exhibition in political expediency.