Uncategorized

That settles it: Australia, here we come

This is another in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on the onset of retirement.

Honest to goodness, my wife and I declared some years ago that our first overseas trip after retirement would be to Australia.

A recent study listing the world’s most livable cities confirms our choice to be a wise one.

http://news.msn.com/world/melbourne-worlds-most-livable-city-damascus-least

The Economist Intelligence Unit cited Melbourne as the world’s most livable city. Also on the top 10 list of desirable cities were Sydney, Adeleide and Perth.

With that, I’m quite certain now that we’ll head way, way west and way, way south for our first trip abroad once we decide to quit working for a living.

It takes a good bit of time to get there by airplane. I hear it’s about a 24-hour journey all told, counting stops in, say, Los Angeles and perhaps Honolulu en route.

Even better news is that we have a friend who lives in Adelaide who I am hoping will extend some hospitality our way when the time comes. We used to be acquainted with a fellow in Perth — in Western Australia — but we’ve since lost touch with him. Too bad, I guess.

Our overseas travel plans also include a return to Israel, where we have several friends we want to see again; we hope to return to Greece, where we visited together twice in 2000 and 2001 — and where Kathy once described as one place on Planet Earth she could see again and again; we’ve also acquired friends in The Netherlands and Germany who already have extended invitations to us.

Australia, though, has been a Land of Mystery to me since I was a kid. I have wanted to see it up close since the time my father actually considered taking a job opportunity in a coastal city, Rockhampton. I was about 13 or 14 at the time and I read volumes of material about Australia thinking — no, hoping — Dad would take the job. He didn’t.

“We feel immensely proud that Australia’s fastest growing city has again been recognized as the most livable city in the world,” Agent-General for the Victorian Government in Britain Geoffrey Conaghan said in an emailed statement to MSN.com.

The Economist Intelligence Unit survey cited the city’s health care, infrastructure, culture and environment as factors contributing to its livability. That’s good enough for me.

The least livable cities in the world? How about Damascus, Tripoli and Cairo — all torn to shreds by civil war and bloodshed?

I will need no persuading to stay away from any of those hellholes. We do, after all, have our travel vehicle set to take us to view the splendor of our very own continent.

Uncategorized

March on DC event lacked bipartisan flavor

I watched a lot of the 50th anniversary celebration of the March on Washington event this week and came away with a single disappointment.

There was no sign of leading Republicans at the speaker’s podium.

Of course, leave it to the likes of Fox News loudmouth Bill O’Reilly to claim falsely that “no Republicans were invited” to speak.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/08/28/bill-oreilly-falsely-claims-republicans-barred/195656

Turns out there were invitations extended. Former Presidents George H.W. Bush and his son, George W. Bush, got invited but declined — understandably — for health reasons. House Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor were invited, but couldn’t attend because of “scheduling conflicts.” Same is true, I suppose, for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The scheduling conflict dodge does bother me. All of these individuals knew long ago that this event was on the calendar. If they wanted to attend this event, they certainly could have had their schedulers ensure they would be available to take part — don’t you think?

Absent their presence anywhere near the DC Mall this week, many of the speeches were tinged with a bit too much partisan rancor from those who argued against legislation to make voting more restrictive, which is a largely Republican initiative being pushed on Capitol Hill and in state capitol buildings throughout the South — and that includes Texas.

There once was a time, about 50 years ago, when Democrats and Republicans locked arms for a single cause, which was equality for all Americans. I was hoping the two parties could put aside their differences to mark the 50th anniversary of one of the great days of the American civil rights movement.

Maybe next time.

Uncategorized

Too bad Hasan got his wish

Nidal Hasan got his wish.

A military court has sentenced the Fort Hood mass murderer to death by lethal injection. The one-time U.S. Army major and Muslim extremist who killed 13 people in that horrific Fort Hood massacre in 2009, wants to go out as a martyr, which is what he perceives his faith entitles him.

Hasan acted as his own attorney during the trial. He didn’t question witnesses. He didn’t object to a single point the federal government made. He admitted to shooting those helpless victims because, as he said, he opposed U.S. war policy in Afghanistan — where the Army was about to send him before the shooting occurred.

Now, I guess he’ll get that chance if the Army ever carries out the sentence.

I wish the court had given him life in prison with zero possibility for parole.

It’s not that Hasan doesn’t deserve to die. It’s simply that the U.S. military has given Islamic extremists all over the world a reason to cheer the day the Army psychiatrist leaves this world for wherever he’s headed.

Now that the court has ruled, maybe the Pentagon brass can come up with a way to execute Hasan and then dispose of his remains in a manner that won’t create some kind of shrine that attracts religious perverts.

I keep thinking of the way the U.S. Navy took care of Osama bin Laden’s remains after the SEALs killed him in that daring May 2011 raid. They wrapped him up and threw him into the Indian Ocean. Isn’t there a similar option available for Nidal Hasan?

Uncategorized

Hilarious ‘punishment’ for Johnny Football

I laughed out loud a little while ago when I heard the news: Johnny “Football” Manziel will be suspended for the first half of Texas A&M’s game with Rice for breaking a rule prohibiting players from getting paid for autographs.

Why even have any punishment if that’s all he’s going to get?

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/johnny-manziel-texas-aggies-suspended-first-half-rice-082813

Manziel won the Heisman Trophy this past season as a freshman. He’s been a sensation at College Station. Manziel may be one of the exciting football players in the past half-century.

But then he got ahead of himself, apparently, when he signed autographs and reportedly got paid for his signature. The allegations have prompted debate over whether college athletes should be paid. My view? The free college education that blue-chip athletes get at these schools is payment enough, thank you very much.

My thought was that Johnny Football would get much more of a punishment than he got. Maybe half a season. But half a game?

The NCAA enforcers cannot possibly be serious.

Uncategorized

Syria should present unifying threat

Suppose the president of the United States orders aerial strikes against Syria.

And suppose those strikes involve manned aircraft, piloted by young American servicemen and women who are thrust into harm’s way by their commander in chief’s order.

What will be our national response? Are we going to rally behind our commander in chief or will we second-guess, armchair quarterback and be openly critical — if not hostile — toward those who issue the order?

I’m hoping for a unifying effect.

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20130827-editorial-time-for-consequences-in-syria.ece

President Obama is weighing his options carefully. He’s meeting with congressional leaders, the very folks who insist that the president consult with them before taking action. He’s calling allies around the world, enlisting others to join in a coalition to strike against Syria, which used chemical weapons against its own people. Secretary of State John Kerry called it a “moral outrage,” and no national leader anywhere with a conscience can — or should — condone such an act.

It’s not yet clear whether we’re going to become involved in an all-out shooting war in Syria. Obama’s stated mission would be to punish the Syrians for violating a widely accepted tenet of international behavior. The use of chemical weapons crosses that so-called “red line” the president said exists in that conflict.

The late U.S. Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, R-Mich., once said that partisan disagreements must stop “at the water’s edge.” Will we heed the wise man’s words?

Uncategorized

‘Regime change’ is hidden strategy

The columnist Charles Krauthammer says any attack on Syria would be a “pointless exercise” if it’s not about “regime change.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/27/krauthammer_pointless_exercise_if_attack_on_syria_isnt_about_regime_change.html

White House press guru Jay Carney says regime change isn’t on the agenda if U.S. forces attack Syrian military installations in retaliation for the chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians.

It’s all very interesting. Let me walk us back 20-plus years.

In August 1990, the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein sent troops into Kuwait to invade and occupy that country. He took Kuwait’s vast oil supply hostage, threatening to cut off supply lines to countries such as the United States.

President George H.W. Bush said immediately the invasion “will not stand.” So he put together a coalition of nations, obtained United Nations approval to strike back at Iraq, then got the Congress to go along with it. The president stated over and over that the aim of any planned response would be to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait and nothing more.

A force of more than 500,000 troops, commanded by U.S. Army Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, stood ready to attack.

Then came the first shot of the war, on Jan. 17, 1991. It was a Tomahawk cruise missile launched by the battleship USS Wisconsin. Where did this missile score a direct hit? On the presidential palace in Baghdad.

Had the missile strike killed Saddam Hussein, there would have been a regime change, correct?

No one should be surprised, therefore, if an attack on Syria doesn’t start with a similar targeting strategy.

Uncategorized

WT set for crucial season opener

Few times in the football history of West Texas A&M University has an opening game had as much significance as the game that’s coming up Sept. 12 at Cowboys Stadium in Arlington.

The Buffs will take the field against Chadron State. They will have to deal with the shadow of a man who’s no longer a part of the program. Former Coach Don Carthel got canned two weeks ago over an ethics violation.

The interim coach this year will be Mike Nesbitt, who I believe could be an early-season favorite for Division II national coach of the year if he holds his team together.

Carthel’s firing couldn’t have come at a worse time. The team was finishing its preparation for a season most observers believed — maybe they still do — would be full of glory for the Buffs. I’m still uncertain as to whether the violation rose to the level of punishment that WT’s athletic department levied against Carthel. The coach took players to a baseball game, received reimbursement from the athletes and then fibbed about the timing of the reimbursement.

Boom! Like that he was gone. What’s done is done.

Nesbitt has taken over. He’s saying all the right things to local media, about how his team is “focused” and is getting ready for the season — as if he’s going to say anything to the contrary. You never hear coaches talk of turmoil upsetting team chemistry or causing emotional heartache. The stated public view is always the same: We’re soldiering on.

So we’ll see in short order whether the Buffs are as focused and dedicated to the task at hand as their coaching staff is saying. Texas A&M-Commerce comes to Kimbrough Stadium on Sept. 21 to begin the Lone Star Conference season.

The WT brass still has some explaining to do regarding Carthel’s firing. I hope it comes clean. Meanwhile, the players and the coaches who remain deserve the support of a fan base that had returned to the Buffs’ side when Carthel’s teams began winning so many football games.

Uncategorized

Why doesn’t POTUS come here?

A headline in the National Journal online edition asks: Why won’t Obama visit North Dakota?

It’s a valid question, given the oil boom that’s changing North Dakota and beginning to change the nation’s energy strategy.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/why-won-t-obama-visit-north-dakota-20130825

But I can answer the question posed by the headline and the article written by the Journal’s Amy Harder. He won’t go there for the same reason he doesn’t come to West Texas. There’s no political advantage for the president.

What’s more, West Texas is resuming its own energy boom, in the Permian Basin, not to mention the growth of the wind-energy industry throughout the Panhandle.

Presidents, though, are the supreme political animals. Democratic presidents quite often don’t bother coming to regions of the country where they lack popular support. That would be, um, West Texas and North Dakota.

Conversely, do Republican presidents spend a lot of time visiting places such as, say, the Bay Area of California, or Boston, or the Pacific Northwest? Hardly.

Frankly, I think quite a few West Texans — not to mention North Dakotans — would appreciate a presidential visit to talk up the industries that are fueling our manufacturing might and keeping our vehicles on the road.

And I also believe a Democratic president could get a warm welcome here. Do you remember the reception another very high-profile Democrat — one William Jefferson Clinton — got when he came to Amarillo in 2008 to campaign for his wife, then-U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, as she sought the Democratic Party presidential nomination? The Civic Center’s Grand Plaza Ballroom was packed beyond capacity.

The nation’s energy future is, indeed, changing, as the National Journal article points out.

A presidential visit would be a welcome event to call attention to the hard work that’s under way out here in Flyover Country.

Uncategorized

Politics might keep Hasan alive

U.S. Army officials are pondering whether a military court should sentence Nidal Hasan to death or life in prison for the 2011 murder of 13 people in that horrific Fort Hood massacre.

I’ve declared already my desire to sentence Hasan to life. A death sentence would give the Army major his wish, to be martyred as a practicing Muslim.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/27/20204916-on-military-death-row-execution-is-anything-but-guaranteed?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2

The military hasn’t executed anyone since 1961, when it hanged an Army private first class for the rape and attempted murder of an 11-year-old girl. Seems the military has trouble carrying out death sentences because, as NBC reports, the high command gets cold feet.

Politics will play a big part in Hasan’s sentence. He killed those people at Fort Hood to protest U.S. war efforts in Afghanistan.

Think for a moment of what would happen if the U.S. executes Hasan.

Fellow Muslim extremists around the world would shout praises to Allah for his death. They would declare it as some sort of moral victory over the Great Satan. They would hail Hasan as a hero; he won’t hear the cheers, but they wouldn’t be for his ears.

I keep thinking back to when U.S. commandos killed Osama bin Laden in that daring May 2011 raid in Pakistan. They took his body quickly out of the compound, flew his corpse offshore to the Navy nuclear aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson. Then they conducted a brief ceremony and tossed bin Laden’s remains into the Indian Ocean. They had this plan all worked out in advance of the order to launch the raid and kill bin Laden.

Why did they do it? To prevent the creation of a shrine for Islamic extremists to worship their terrorist hero.

Keeping Nidal Hasan among the living would accomplish the same thing.

Uncategorized

No regime change? Yeah … right

White House press secretary Jay Carney says “regime change” would not be a goal if the United States were to launch a military strike against Bashar al Assad’s forces in Syria.

But if it happens, do you think the White House high command would mope over the outcome? Not for a minute.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/318989-white-house-were-not-after-regime-change-in-syria

The Obama administration is clearly outraged over Syria’s use of chemical weapons against its people in the bloody civil war that has killed more than 100,000 people. Secretary of State John Kerry calls it a moral outrage. President Obama says use of the weapons crosses a “bright line” that separates diplomacy from military action.

The administration is consulting with congressional leaders now to assure them of its plans. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said today the military is ready to go if and when the order comes from the commander in chief.

Syria needs to be punished badly for this vicious attack on its own citizens, including children. The videos of Syrian children writhing in agony is almost too difficult to watch.

But if a military response is strong enough to bring about Assad’s downfall, then so be it.

Then comes an even more dire concern: Who will replace him?

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience