local news

Sure thing, we ‘hold ’em up’

This blog post is taking an unusual turn. It’s something I haven’t done before, but I’ll give it a shot today.

I wrote a letter to the director of commentary at the Amarillo Globe-News, in response to an earlier letter the paper published. I don’t know if the paper is going to publish my response. So … I’ll give you a preview of what I wrote.

It’s worthy of a response because it seems to cast in a negative light something quite positive that occurs in Amarillo every summer, during the run of the outdoor musical “Texas.”

The gentleman who wrote the letter has written to the paper many times. He did so while I served as editorial page editor, before they changed the job title to what it is now and “restructured” me out of my post.

He sought to compare Amarillo to Corpus Christi. He thinks Corpus Christi does a good job promoting itself and said the Coastal Bend city doesn’t need to “kidnap” motorists to “get them to slow down.” I took respectful umbrage at that statement, because I think it miscasts what actually happens. Here’s how I explain it in my responding letter:

“Floyd Galegar’s letter to the editor (Feb. 26) seeks to point out that Amarillo isn’t Corpus Christi. Despite the obvious differences between the communities that everyone gets, Galegar inferred something in his letter that needs clarification. 

“He stated that Corpus Christi doesn’t need to ‘kidnap tourists to stay in their city.’ He refers to a program I’ve been involved in for many years as a member of the Rotary Club of Amarillo. 

“Yes, the Rotary Club ‘kidnaps’ motorists traveling through the city on I-40 every spring and summer; we call it our “Hold-Up Program,” and we’ve doing it for decades. We do so as a public relations campaign to promote the city’s friendliness.

“We work with the Amarillo Police Department at the Texas Travel Information Building on the east side of the city. We identify a couple driving a vehicle with out-of-state plates. With the officer on hand, we extend an invitation. It goes like this: Would you like to spend the night in Amarillo free of charge at one of our hotels, enjoy a nice dinner at one of our restaurants – also free – and then spend an evening in Palo Duro Canyon’s Pioneer Amphitheater to watch a performance of an acclaimed outdoor musical, ‘Texas’?

“Visitors often need to be persuaded that this is no gimmick. Once we persuade them, our guests are treated to an evening of fellowship with a Rotary Club member and his or her spouse.

“We ask only thing of our guests: When you get home, say something nice about your visit to Amarillo. Having participated in several of these “hold-ups,” I can tell you our guests are more than happy to oblige. They tell us repeatedly their Amarillo experience is something they never will forget and they appreciate the hospitality more than they can express.

“That, as they say, is the rest of the story.”

I still hope the paper publishes my letter. If not, well, here it is. If it does, you read it here first.

national news, political news

WSJ gives congressional GOP a swift kick

When the men and women who run Capitol Hill — the Republicans — lose The Wall Street Journal, then they’ve lost their most critical media ally.

I’m not suggesting the WSJ has abandoned the GOP majority, but the paper’s conservative editorial page — one of the best opinion pages in the country — turns on you, then you’d better pay attention.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/homeland-security-shutdown-cliff-republicans-wall-street-journal-115651.html?hp=b2_l1

I’ve long admired the WSJ editorial writers for the way they express themselves. I disagree with the paper’s editorial policy, but few editorial pages say it better than the Wall Street Journal.

The WSJ editors are angry at what they’re calling the GOP “Cliff Marchers,” the faction of Republicans who are intent on making some political point than in any actually governing.

As Politico reports about the WSJ’s scolding: “House Republicans refuse to fund (Department of Homeland Security) without forcing the president to dismantle the changes (in Barack Obama’s executive order on immigration), while Senate Republicans do not believe they can win the standoff. The Senate voted last week to fund the department through the end of the fiscal year without altering the president’s immigration orders, but the House has not yet agreed to take up the bill.”

The WSJ writes: “Republicans need to do some soul searching about the purpose of a Congressional majority, including whether they even want it.”

The Journal argues that Congress should go fund DHS and move on to bigger issues, such as the budget. The paper believes the president’s immigration order — in which he delays deportation of millions of undocumented residents — will be settled by the courts.

It’s good advice. Are you listening, GOP members of Congress? Get busy and start governing.

 

International news

ISIL making a stand in Saddam's hometown

Iraqi forces are launching a major offensive to take Tikrit away from the Islamic State.

Do we see the symbolism here?

http://news.yahoo.com/major-offensive-under-way-retake-iraqs-tikrit-army-081036649.html

Tikrit is the hometown of the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

ISIL is a Sunni Muslim cult that seeks to take Iraq away from the Shiites who now govern the country.

Hussein was a Sunni Muslim.

I would like to think of the battle for Tikrit to be some sort of ISIL’s Last Stand, if you’ll pardon the reference to a 19th-century American military officer.

Sadly, it won’t be a last stand. There will be other stands, other battles to fight, other cities to liberate from these monstrous terrorists.

But the Tikrit battle that is unfolding with a reported 30,000 Iraqi army troops taking part could give us a good indication of just how battle-ready the Iraqi armed forces are for the fight that lies ahead.

If the Iraqis succeed in recapturing Tikrit, they can turn their forces toward where it really and truly matters.

As the news agency AFP reports: “Commanders voiced hope the operation would be a step towards the recapture of Mosul, the jihadists’ main hub in Iraq.”

This is the Iraqis’ fight to win or lose. Their benefactors — the United States of America — need to know they’re up to the task.

 

International news

Netanyahu plans no 'disrespect' of Obama

Benjamin Netanyahu has laid it out carefully: His speech Tuesday before Congress is not intended to “disrespect” President Obama or the office he holds.

The Israeli prime minister made that point today in a preliminary event at the American Israel Public Affair Committee speech. He said the U.S.-Israel alliance is stronger than ever, but that the two friends have differences on how to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The main event occurs Tuesday when the prime minister speaks before a joint session of Congress.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/netanyahu-says-congress-speech-is-not-intended-to-show-any-disrespect-to-president-obama/ar-BBi9ajY

Actually, if any disrespect has occurred, it came from the man who invited the prime minister to speak to Congress. That would be House Speaker John Boehner, who broke with diplomatic protocol by extending the invitation without consulting with the White House — or with the president.

Netanyahu contributed to showing up Obama by accepting the invitation.

But the speech he has planned to deliver Tuesday will seek to drive home the friendship that the two countries maintain in spite of differences over specific strategies and tactics.

“Israel and the United States agree that Iran should not have nuclear weapons. But we disagree on the best way to prevent Iran from developing those weapons,” he told the AIPAC audience. “Disagreements among allies are only natural from time to time, even among the closest of allies.”

He added: “We’re like a family. Disagreements in the family are always uncomfortable.”

The prime minister will no doubt get an earful from the president’s domestic critics about why they think Obama is wrong on Iran. He’ll agree with them clearly.

Let’s not look for any sign of a breakup between two of the world’s tightest allies. From where I sit, the United States and Israel remain the best of friends.

 

religious news, State news

Oh … the hypocrisy of it all

You hear it from time to time in the debate over whether people should be allowed to marry someone of the same gender.

“Why, allowing same-sex marriage is going to destroy the institution of traditional marriage,” the narrative goes.

That’s what makes this little item so patently hilarious, except I’m not laughing.

Texas state Rep. Tony Tinderholt has filed a complaint against a state judge who ruled that two women could get married legally in Texas. Tinderholt, a Republican from the Fort Worth area, disputes the judge’s legal standing.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/01/texas-republican-whines-about-states-first-gay-marriage-has-been-married-five-times/

But here’s where it gets weird. Tinderholt is currently married to his fifth wife. He’s been divorced four times. I haven’t a clue as to whether Tinderholt has argued against gay marriage because of the destruction it allegedly brings to traditional marriage, but rest assured that plenty of others on his side of the debate have argued it.

While I remain a bit uneasy about the term “marriage” to describe a same-sex union, I understand fully the constitutional argument that no citizen should be denied basic human rights, such as those spelled in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; they guarantee every citizen “equal protection” under state and federal law.

I shall stipulate, though, that no time ever have my wife of more than 43 years and I have felt “threatened” by laws that allow same-sex couples to be married legally. Our marriage is as strong as it’s ever been and I have supreme confidence that we’re going to remain wedded for the duration.

I also am quite certain that millions of other traditional couples feel the same way as we do.

So, to see someone such as Rep. Tinderholt — lugging around his personal history of marital failure — argue against someone else’s rights under the law simply makes his argument laughable on its face.

 

International news

Let's hear Bibi make his point

1 Comment

Allow me to call him “Bibi,” OK?

He is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, aka Bibi. He’s going to speak Tuesday to a joint session of Congress. I am opposed to the way he was asked to speak — invited by Speaker John Boehner without giving the White House a heads up, thus violating a longstanding rule of diplomacy.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/benjamin-netanyahu-address-to-congress-115640.html?hp=r2_3#.VPPabVJ0yt8

But now that he’s coming, let’s hear what he has to say.

A key Republican congressman, Mike Rogers of Michigan, and Michael Doran, a policy wonk at the Hudson Institute, have written an essay laying out the reasons for hearing the prime minister’s remarks.

The chief reason, according to Rogers and Doran, is that Bibi’s speech will spark an important debate about how to deal with Iran and its desire to develop a nuclear program — and virtually everyone agrees means a nuclear weapons program.

Rogers and Doran are incorrect in asserting that President Barack Obama is indifferent about fighting the bad guys of this world. They are correct, though, in suggesting that Bibi is making a courageous stand against his country’s arch-enemy, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

My main problem with his speech is its timing, given that the United States is in the middle of negotiations with Iran to end is nuclear program development.

Still, the prime minister is a key world leader with a vested interest in a permanent Middle East peace.

It cannot happen if Iran develops a nuclear bomb. Let’s hear what Bibi has to say.

 

military news

Talk about actual troops, not just 'boots'

1 Comment

Critics of President Obama have taken to challenging his use of language, such as his declining to use the term “Islamic terrorist” to refer to the enemy with whom we are at war.

Allow me to turn that semantic debate on its head. Why don’t the media, politicians and peanut-gallery observers stop using the term “boots on the ground” to describe what they really desire in prosecuting this war against terrorists.

US boots needed to defeat ISIS, Boehner says

House Speaker John Boehner today used the “boots” terminology to suggest he wants to send young Americans back onto the battlefield in Iraq and to deploy them to Syria.

“Somebody’s boots have to be on the ground,” Boehner said in a live interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “We have some 3,000 boots on the ground today. Let’s not suggest that we don’t.”

The media have fallen into that trap as well, preferring to sanitize what’s really at stake. We aren’t talking about footwear, folks; we’re talking instead about the human feet that will fill it.

It reminds me a bit of how the media — and I’ll include the newspaper where I used to work, the Amarillo Globe-News — use the term “harvest” to describe the killing of wild animal by hunters.

If we’re going to suggest that we send young Americans back into battle, then say it: It is time to redeploy American men and women, return them to the fight, put these young Americans in harm’s way.

Boots on the ground? Give me a break.

 

national news, political news

What became of a strong House speaker?

1 Comment

John Boehner seems like a decent enough fellow. I’ve long thought of him as someone whose instincts lead him toward working with Democrats, not against them.

But the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives has this problem: It is that some of his fellow Republicans don’t like working with the other party. There seems to be enough of those types to make governing quite difficult for the once-affable speaker.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/boehner-house-congress-rambunctious-115634.html?hp=c1_3

Boehner today said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that the House is a rambunctious place. It’s full of members with competing ideas on how to get things done. He said “I think” I can lead the House.

Interesting, yes? Well, yes.

The speaker was handed a big defeat this past week when the House defeated his plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security for three weeks. The “rambunctious caucus” of the House, aka the TEA party wing, bolted from his idea, along with a number of Democrats. Some last-minute scrambling enabled the House to approve a DHS funding bill that expires at the end of this week. Then we get to do this all over again.

I’m trying to imagine how past speakers would handle all this rambunctiousness. Would Speaker Sam Rayburn of Texas allow it? How about Speaker Tip O’Neill of Massachusetts? Hey, do you think Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia would stand still for this foolishness?

These three gentlemen — two Democrats and a Republican — were among the stronger-willed men to run the House. They all governed with considerable effectiveness. Their secret? My belief is that they all knew how to work with members of the “other party.” They also worked well with presidents of the other party, working overtime to search for common ground.

Speaker Boehner is being whipsawed by his own caucus. It’s not a pretty sight.

By definition, Speaker Boehner is the Man of the Entire House, not just of his or her political party. The partisan roles are filled by the majority leader and the majority whip of the party in charge. The speaker, though, is supposed to look after the interests of all House members.

Boehner has to figure out a way — in a big hurry — to get the rowdy bunch in line.

I have an idea: Pick up the phone, call Newt Gingrich and ask him: “Newt, how in the world can I corral these clowns?”

national news, political news

Perry questions HRC's 'loyalty'

Rick Perry thinks Hillary Clinton’s acceptance of foreign money to the Clinton Foundation — all of which went to earthquake relief in Haiti — gives Americans reason to question her “loyalty.”

To whom? To which country? Well, the former Texas governor — and probable Republican candidate for president in 2016 — isn’t providing any suggestions.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/rick-perry-questions-hillary-clinton-loyalty

Perry was among a thundering herd of potential GOP candidates to rake Hillary Clinton over the coals at the just-concluded Conservative Political Action Conference.

The Clinton Foundation accepted $500,000 from Algeria right after an earthquake devastated Haiti. The foundation has raised tens of millions of dollars to aid the Haitians. The Algerian contribution went directly to relieve the victims of the quake.

Perry, though, wonders if that kind of foreign cash makes her more, um, loyal to the giver of the funds than — hmm — to her own country?

MSNBC.com reported: “The foundation acknowledged they should have alerted officials about the donation from the country.

“’As the Clinton Foundation did with all donations it received for earthquake relief, the entire amount of Algeria’s contribution was distributed as aid in Haiti,’ the statement said. ‘This donation was disclosed publicly on the Clinton Foundation website, however, the State Department should have also been formally informed.’

“But Perry said Americans will question this.

“’I’m really concerned that – not just going forward — but what has been received at the Clinton Foundation over the course of the years and how that affects this individual’s judgment,’ Perry said.”

I’m trying to connect those dots, but I’m trouble here.

Money given for disaster relief and is administered through an independent non-profit foundation somehow is supposed to cast doubt on the judgment of a presidential candidate? That’s how it goes?

As Denzel Washington said in the film “Philadelphia”: Explain that one to me as if I’m a 5-year-old.

 

medical news

That's it, flush the cancer from your body

Here’s an item that requires you to suspend your disbelief, so get ready for it.

Nevada state Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, a Republican, thinks you can flush cancer from your body using baking soda. She wants to change state law to allow more treatments that aren’t approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Hey, it gets better.

Fiore runs a health care company, apparently licensed by the state.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/02/24/3626567/nevada-assemblywoman-cancer-fungus/

Fiore also has a radio talk show, in which she told her listeners:  “If you have cancer, which I believe is a fungus, and we can put a pic line into your body and we’re flushing, let’s say, salt water, sodium cardonate [sic], through that line, and flushing out the fungus… These are some procedures that are not FDA-approved in America that are very inexpensive, cost-effective.”

That’s it. Cancer is a “fungus,” kind of like, oh, the stuff that makes your toenails ugly.

What in the name of medical malpractice is this individual suggesting?

Read my lips, Michele: Cancer ain’t a fungus. You can’t treat it with salt water. My mother went through two bouts of cancer in her life; an aunt and two uncles fought it like crazy, although the disease took my aunt and one of my uncles. A cousin of mine was stricken with it as a teenager.

This isn’t the kind of disease you treat in the manner she suggests.

Assemblywoman Fiore needs a serious reality check. Furthermore, someone ought to take a look at what kind of health care she’s providing at that company she owns.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience