Tag Archives: POTUS

Keep blathering, ex-POTUS

POTUS No. 45 continues to exhibit loudly and clearly why he is so horribly unfit for public office.

He launched a tirade against Republican U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., because Cassidy cast a vote to convict the former POTUS of inciting an insurrection on 1/6. He called him the “worst senator in the United States.” He labeled him a “lamebrain.”

Bear in mind that the former Moron in Chief endorsed Cassidy’s re-election in 2020.

Trump rages against Louisiana Republican: ‘One of the worst Senators in the United States’ (msn.com)

Cassidy was one of seven Senate Republicans to vote to convict the ex-Liar in Chief on the impeachment filed against him by the House.

All of this just goes to show the astonishing petulance and petty boorishness that resides in what passes for the heart of the former POTUS.

Keep this in mind, too: After the Senate acquitted President Clinton of impeachment charges leveled against him in 1999, the president got to work — with Republicans in Congress — on a budget compromise that produced the first balanced federal budget in decades. That is how you govern. You take your lumps, then after that fight, you get back to work.

Does anyone with half a brain believe that is possible with this idiot?

No need to ID this guy by name

Everyone on Earth now likely knows the name of the next Republican Party presidential nominee, as he has captured the party nomination for the past three election cycles.

Thus, you won’t need to read his name on High Plains Blogger. I made a command decision some weeks ago to boycott the idiot’s name, to keep it off my blog posts … to the extent that I can.

There might be an occasion where I quote another politician who has to use his name. I am going to seek ways to write around it.

Why do this? It’s purely selfish. I am sick and fu**ing tired of seeing his name in print and hearing his name mentioned on broadcast media. The very sound of his name makes me feel like puking.

The sight of his overfed, over made-up face causes the same sort of revulsion.

I am wondering whether I should invoke a private drinking game tonight as President Biden delivers his State of the Union speech. Every time the president mentions his 2024 general election foe by name, I am thinking about taking a swig from a small bottle of ouzo I received the other day from a friend of mine.

If I do, I am likely to be wasted by the end of the evening.

President Biden clearly is preparing for a rematch against the former moron in chief he defeated in 2020. He mentions his name liberally whenever he speaks these days in public. That’s fine. It’s good to remind voters specifically who drove the economy into the tank with his feckless, reckless and careless response to the COVID crisis.

That’s a topic for another day.

Meantime, I will watch our president declare that the health of our union is strong and is getting stronger. I just hope my flask of ouzo will last the entire speech.


You know already that I have offered a bit of a mea culpa for some harsh terms I applied to the MAGA cultists who follow the preachings of the former POTUS who’s running to get his office back.

I also have declared my intention to never mention the MAGA Daddy’s name in this blog.

I have settled on an alternate name for the ex-POTUS. It’s pretty tame, but it does have a nice ring off the old tongue. Thus, I simply will refer to him as The Former Guy, or TFG.

So, those who cheer, whoop, holler and snort at the idiocy that comes from TFG’s pie hole, will thenceforth be called TFG’s followers.

I have received some negative response to my decision to take a relatively high road regarding the TFG cult. Michelle Obama once said, “When they go low, we go high.” I get it, Mme. Former First Lady.

It doesn’t really matter whether this little ol’ North Texas blogger takes the high road or goes into the gutter. I am just going to offer my comments without denigrating the intelligence of those who endorse and embrace the rants of TFG.

I offer all of this understanding what we all know to be true. It is that TFG never has — and likely never will — apologize for the defamatory epithets he has hurled at his foes since the moment he became a politician.

Therefore, I believe I am entitled to say I am a better man than TFG.

GOP rewrites rules of conduct

Here, apparently, is where we stand with what passes for a once-great American political party.

Republicans who once impeached a president of the U.S.A. for lying to a grand jury about an affair he had with a White House intern is now giving a pass to one of their own who has been convicted of sexual assault on a female author.

The GOP used to stand behind what they called “family values,” and their definition of “character.” No more. One of their guys has actually boasted about grabbing women by their genitals, acknowledged cheating on his wives, said he has never sought forgiveness for his sins.

None of that matters to contemporary Republicans. It damn sure mattered in the late 1990s when a special prosecutor — hired to examine a real estate deal called Whitewater — stumbled upon a relationship between a Democratic president and a young White House intern.

He summoned the POTUS to testify to a grand jury and when he was asked about the affair, he lied. That did it! We cannot have a president who breaks the law, perjures himself. So, they impeached him. The POTUS was acquitted in a Senate trial.

This time? A president has admitted to being a scumbag. He has admitted to philandering. He has admitted to violating his supposedly sacred oath of marriage.

No sweat, man. It doesn’t matter, because the most recently former POTUS is a conservative, or so he says. He appoints judges who will do the right wing’s bidding.

A politician’s character no longer matters. It no longer factors into whether a pol is fit for office.

Our sense of value has been upended completely. It’s all been turned upside-down.

It’s all so very sad … and disgraceful beyond description.

Playing mind game with ex-POTUS

There might come a time when I’ll reverse course, but I hope it is no time soon.

The “course” to which I refer deals with my refusal to mention the name of the 45th president of the U.S. I am sick of him, sick of hearing his name, sick of reading his name, sick of his presence on the public stage.

For the foreseeable future you won’t see his name in print on High Plains Blogger. Hey, it’s my blog and I manage it anyway I see fit.

He was elected POTUS in 2016, at which time I declared my intention never to put the word “President” in front of his name. I recall one time doing so, but I was quoting another source to make a point about this fellow.

To be clear, I accepted his election in 2016 as being legally viable. I simply couldn’t — or wouldn’t — deliver him any measure of respect by attaching his name directly next to the term “President.” OK, it might have been small-minded of me. Some of my critics have said as much.

But you know what? I don’t give a rat’s rear end!

I am taking my visceral opposition to this guy to the next level. You won’t read his name on my blog. OK. I feel better now that I have explained myself.

Cynicism takes over

Far too many of my former journalism colleagues have conflated two terms in describing their reasons for becoming reporters.

They have told me they are “cynical” by nature and their “cynicism” makes them fit for the craft they pursued. I prefer another term in describing why we pursue that line of work.

That term is “skeptic,” or “skeptical,” or “skepticism.”

It’s easy to become cynical, particularly these days, when covering politics or reporting on policy decisions. I want to point y’all to the words and actions of the immediate past POTUS.

Skeptical reporters no doubt have grown cynical over the way the e-POTUS lies and is able to get away with it. Their task when covering this guy is to prevent their cynicism from infecting the tone of their coverage of his coming and going.

I offer the notion that it’s OK to look at what he says and the actions he takes with a huge dose of skepticism. It’s what good journalists always should do. Take it from me also that the world of journalism contains a many solid reporters who take seriously their pledge to cover their subjects fairly.

Even as they look with intense — but healthy — skepticism at what these pols are saying.

Talk to us, Mr. POTUS!

President Biden doesn’t need or want unsolicited advice from a North Texas blogger … but he’s going to get it anyway.

Mr. President, you say you don’t follow the polls, that they are meaningless this far out from an election. However, they are not trending in your favor.

Here’s what I believe you ought to do: talk to us, as in stand in front of the nation and tell us — in detail — what in the world you are doing to resolve the myriad problems facing this nation.

Do not rely so heavily on your Cabinet members, or on the vice president, to explain the administration’s policies.

Mr. President, you need first and foremost to call the immigration matter along on our southern border what it is: a crisis! You, sir, need to tell us in no uncertain terms that we are facing a crisis with thousands of undocumented immigrants seeking entry into the United States.

Do not let Secretary or State Antony Blinken spell out your policy; do it yourself. Don’t rely on Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas speak on the issue, either. He’s damaged goods among many Americans who believe he has turned his back on securing the border.

Same is true for the war in Ukraine, and with Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza. Mr. President, your relative silence on these matters is giving grist to the phony narrative that you have slipped a step or two.

Women’s reproductive rights also require the president’s voice. I admire Vice President Harris, but she’s No. 2 in the executive branch of government; we need to hear from No. 1 … that would be you!

Mr. President, I offer this advice as someone who voted for you in 2020 and who wants to see you re-elected next year. I am troubled by the lying that comes from those who suggest you don’t have the snap to talk to us intelligently about these issues. I believe you are fully capable of handling the job to which we elected you.

I just want you to hear more from you and less from those who speak for you.

How about it, Mr. President? Talk to us!

Mrs. Carter walked rare path

Much has been stated and written in recent days about how Rosalynn Carter “redefined” the role of first lady.

How she offered policy advice to her husband, President Jimmy Carter. How she kept an active office in the East Wing of the White House. How she was never afraid to tell the president where he messed up.

Was her role unprecedented? Not really.

Plenty of first ladies who followed her into the White House have demonstrated the same level of political moxie. Nancy Reagan and Hillary Clinton come to mind. Remember how Mrs. Clinton went immediately from being first lady to the U.S. Senate, where she served from 2001 until Barack Obama tapped her to become secretary of state in 2009.

Prior to Rosalynn Carter, though, two first ladies stand out as being more than just White House window dressing.

Eleanor Roosevelt is one. She sat at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s right hand during his three terms in office; yes, FDR was elected four times as POTUS, but he died only a month into his fourth term. She clearly offered policy advice and later would become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in the Kennedy administration.

Another first lady? Edith Wilson. She married President Woodrow Wilson in 1915 after his first wife died. In 1919, President Wilson suffered a severe stroke that left him partially paralyzed and unable to perform his presidential duties. Edith Wilson took over many of his responsibilities, screening his visitors, correspondence, and documents.

Mrs. Wilson served as a shadow president, conducting matters of statecraft even though her husband remained alive, but unable to do his job.

I don’t recall a time during the Carter administration, which ran from 1977 until 1981, when Mrs. Carter’s policies actually were seen as dominant. Media reporting on her role as a key adviser, if memory serves, was fairly discreet, although it clearly was reported to the public that Rosalynn Carter played a role in shaping many of her husband’s policy decisions.

Of course, that role bent some D.C. noses out of shape. Some “traditionalists” seemed to believe that first ladies needed only to plan White House meals and organize events such as the annual Easter egg hunt.

The way I saw it then was: Any president needs an adviser who can tell him the unvarnished truth and speak candidly when he messes up. That President Carter was married to that individual only made her role more effective.

Rosalynn Carter was an extraordinary woman who carved out a special place in our nation’s glorious presidential history.

She is at peace now. God bless her.

Sticking with Biden

Just so you know, I am standing firmly behind President Biden’s effort to win re-election to a second term in office.

Yes, I have read the polling data. I have heard the talking heads worrying their little noggins out over the polls that show the president trailing his Republican opponents. I have heard the concerns about his age.

I acknowledge fully the age issue is a serious one to be sure. He is about to turn 81. Life can go south in a hurry at that age. Believe me when I say that I have felt the crushing pain of watching a loved gone o from healthy to seriously unhealthy virtually overnight … and she was in her early 70s when we lost her.

However, I am not going to accept any arguments about mental acuity or loss of intellectual capacity in the president.

Joe Biden is fit for the job. I want him to stay at his post.

Politics turns ugly in times of need

Don’t you just hate the gamesmanship that develops among politicians when disaster strikes communities, and even entire states? I do. It drives me batty.

For example …

President Biden traveled to Florida to examine he wreckage brought by Hurricane Idalia. Biden is running for re-election. One of the candidates wishing to succeed him is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, one of a thundering herd of Republicans seeking his party’s nomination.

Biden says the federal government “will take care of Florida.” He added that “I don’t know” what the governor’s plans are during his brief visit to the “hurricane state.”

This kind of crap seemingly occurs all the time. Politicians seeking high public office just don’t dare be seen on camera cozying up to other politicians against whom they might be running.

Do you recall the time in 2012 when Superstorm Sandy devastated New Jersey? Democratic President Barack Obama went to the Jersey Shore to see the damage. Republican Gov. Chris Christie greeted him and was photographed — get ready for it — with his arm around the president’s shoulder. 

The response from Republicans was astonishing, to say the least. How in the world could a GOP governor be so damn friendly to a Democratic president who was just doing his job as the nation’s consoler in chief? 

How about the time Republican President Bush embraced then-Democratic U.S. Senate leader Tom Daschle after delivering his speech to Congress after the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Or when he sought to console New York’s Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer by cupping Schumer’s face in his hands on the floor of Congress?

It’s common knowledge, of course, that we have only president at a time and that individual is on call 24/7 to respond to emergencies when they occur. One of the occurred this past week in Florida and Joe Biden is answering that call. Why does it matter one damn bit whether the governor of that state is running for the office that Joe Biden now occupies?

It shouldn’t matter!