Look for a load of unflattering photos

Donald-Trump-Bad-Hair-Photo-1

Political campaigns of all stripes employ a universal tactic when seeking to put the opposition in a negative frame of reference.

They find the most unflattering pictures of the “other guy” and plaster them on TV ads or billboards. You know what I’m talking about.

I get the feeling the presidential campaign of 2016 is going to feature a trove of negative images.

I’ll now get to the point: Donald J. Trump has taken us to a new level of disgusting references to people’s physical appearance.

He’s referred to women as “fat pigs.” He once chided former fellow Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina by asking, “Would anyone vote for that face?” Oh, and then he stood on a campaign podium and mocked a reporter who has a severe physical disability.

The Trump campaign already is looking for pictures of Hillary Rodham Clinton that it will plaster on campaign literature and/or TV ads. Rest assured, too, that the Clinton team is doing precisely the same thing as it prepares its onslaught against Trump.

I generally dislike referencing public figures’ physical appearance, but since Trump already has opened that door …

It seems quite certain to me that this individual’s rather, um, expressive face is going to provide his political foes with plenty of grist to use as they campaign against him.

donald-trump-gag-big

The world is full of such pictures of every politician who’s ever entered the public arena.

However, hold on this year for a seriously rough ride through what figures to be the meanest campaign in anyone’s memory.

The pictures are going to tell a major part of the story.

 

Senator wanted simply to say he is sorry

bobbennett_606af7bda32915fc21b748ce42baedc2.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000

The media today are reporting an extraordinary event involving a dying former U.S. senator.

Robert Bennett was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. As he lay in his hospital bed, knowing he was going to die, the former Utah Republican senator wanted to issue an apology.

To whom did he want to apologize?

He wanted to say how sorry was to any Muslim hospital staffer who was working in the facility where he was a patient. Bennett’s son, Jim, has talked today on MSNBC about how his father had asked him if there were any Muslims employed there.

Sen. Bennett — who died on May 4 — said he wanted to apologize on behalf of the Republican Party because of the hateful anti-Muslim views expressed by presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump.

Bennett was among the first senators targeted by the TEA Party wing of the GOP. He was defeated in the 2010 Utah Republican Party primary by Mike Lee, who would go on to win election to the U.S. Senate.

It’s not that Sen. Bennett wasn’t a conservative politician. His record as a senator from one of the most conservative states in the nation is certifiably conservative. According to TEA Party activists, though, he wasn’t conservative enough.

So now the media are reporting that Bennett felt compelled to apologize to a group of fellow Americans who happen to worship as devoted Muslims.

It was an amazing deathbed gesture in response to an equally amazing — and disgraceful — public posture against people of a certain religious faith.

Time for careful analysis, not fear

trump

A jetliner has crashed into the Mediterranean Sea.

Aviation experts and some defense brass have speculated that it’s likely to be the result of a terrorist attack. However, what do we know with absolute certainty? Only that the plane crashed. That’s it.

The White House is staying mum for the moment. The FBI is sending its experts to the eastern Med to look for answers.

What, though, is the presumptive Republican Party presidential nominee saying? It’s a terror attack, said Donald J. Trump. No question. “When will we become vigilant?” he asked in a tweet.

EgyptAir Flight 804 went into the sea just east of the Greek island of Crete. It was en route from Paris to Cairo. It veered sharply in one direction, then into another and plunged from 37,000 feet into the sea.

Yes, it doesn’t appear to have been a “mechanical failure.” But this is no time for rush judgments or declarations from the presidential campaign trail from candidates.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-reacts-to-egyptair-calls-it-a-terrorist-attack/

American voters need to listen up. They need to assess the quality of comments that major-party candidates for the highest office in America make as the experts try to sort through the confusion caused by such a tragic event.

Sixty-six people now are missing. They likely will be declared “presumed dead” in very short order. Reports indicate the discovery of debris from this flight, even though those reports have been disputed by Greek aviation officials.

So, how about standing down rash comments about what some of us think might have occurred until we know more — if not all — the facts?

 

 

 

It’s over, Sen. Sanders

Bernie_Sanders_by_Gage_Skidmore

Democrats and Republicans seem to operate under differing rules of political combat … in this presidential election cycle, at least.

Republicans opened the presidential primary campaign with 17 individuals seeking their party’s nomination. One of them remains. He is likely the most improbable candidate you ever could imagine.

Donald J. Trump is a man with zero public service record, a scatter-shot approach to what passes as foreign and/or domestic “policy” and a checkered personal history.

He’s the last man standing among all those Republicans.

Democrats opened their season with just five candidates. Three of them are now off the grid. Two are left: U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton’s all but got her party’s nomination in the bag. Sanders is hanging on, cheered on by those big rallies.

So, here’s what I believe should happen: Sanders needs to call it a campaign. He’s made his point — repeatedly — about income inequality and Wall Street corruption. He’s not going to be nominated president.

It’s time for him to clear the field for Clinton to run against Trump — head to head.

Democratic gurus are growing a bit restive. They see these polls that show Clinton and Trump in a close race. They fear that the longer Sanders continues his sniping at Clinton, the more damage he inflicts on her chances to become the nation’s 45th president.

My own view is that this contest shouldn’t even be close.

Trump is patently — at virtually every level one can name — unfit to become president. Yet he continues to win cheers from those who think he “tells is it like it is.” They rally to his calls against what he calls “political correctness.” The man is a buffoon … yes, a wealthy one, but a buffoon nonetheless.

Clinton is far from the perfect candidate. But she’s been examined up close and personal for more than two decades. Her career — as first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state — has been dissected more carefully than a laboratory frog.

She continues to fend off the challenge from the remaining other Democrat in this contest.

The primary season is over, Sen. Sanders. You lost. Hillary Clinton won.

It’s time for Sen. Sanders to “suspend” his campaign and then start writing the fiery speech he plans to give at the Democratic Party’s presidential nominating convention this summer in Philadelphia.

As for Trump … well, uh, keep doing what you’re doing.

‘Benghazi’ chairman admits what was thought all along

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reacts as she is introduced to speak at the Massachusetts Conference for Women in Boston, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2014. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)

This item is making the rounds throughout social media.

To wit:

In the most outlandish version of this story, President Obama or Hillary Clinton ordered the military to “stand down” rather than come to the aid of the Americans who were under attack.

Earlier this week, a letter from two House Democrats to Rep. Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina Republican who is chairing the select committee investigating the Benghazi attack, revealed that the GOP’s own chief investigator acknowledged during the investigation that nothing “could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi.”

…In an interview on Fox News today, Gowdy responded to this newly released information by acknowledging, “Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don’t think there is any issue with respect to that — they couldn’t.”

Chairman Gowdy, thus, has acknowledged that the four brave Americans who died in the firefight at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, were doomed from the start.

Terrorists attacked the compound. They set it afire. They exchanged fire with security personnel. Four individuals — including Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, died.

Ever since that tragic event, congressional Republicans have sought to deliver the goods on then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. They’ve accused her of lying, of covering up the events.

Her response to many of these allegations has been at times clumsy and inarticulate. There have been confusing answers regarding a video that allegedly sparked the riot at the consulate.

This entire tragedy has taken on a life of its own.

The central question, though, has been whether U.S. officials did enough to stave off the deaths of those who were killed.

Chairman Gowdy now seems to have answered that question.

They did all they could do.

 

This politician shouldn’t be elected to SBOE

bruner

Texans decided to take a gamble when they decided some years ago to amend the state  constitution allowing politicians to run for seats on the State Board of Education.

I use the term “politician” in its strictest sense; the term describes anyone who seeks votes to an elected position.

Thus, the gamble occurs when politicians of varying stripes seek these offices.

I bring you one Mary Lou Bruner, a politician who’s running for a seat on the Texas State Board of Education.

She is among the strangest individuals imaginable seeking a highly critical state job, which is to help set public education policy for the state’s 5 million or so public school students.

Bruner’s statements are wacky … in the extreme.

Here’s the punch line: She is in position to win a Republican Party runoff next week and, with that victory, is a virtual cinch to be elected to the 15-member board.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/mary-lou-bruner/

District 9 comprises a section of East Texas. Yes, it’s a long way from the Texas Panhandle, which is represented on the SBOE board by Amarillo lawyer and former clergyman Marty Rowley.

Bruner’s runoff opponent is Lufkin chiropractor Keven Ellis. According to Texas Monthly, early voting trends seem to suggest Bruner’s in the driver’s seat.

Why is she so unsuitable? Check out the link I’ve attached to this blog and you get the idea.

She has said some stunningly ignorant things. And yet this individual is a retired kindergarten teacher.

Bruner has said President Obama spent part of his younger days as a male prostitute; she said Islam is not a religion; she said dinosaurs went extinct because they were babies and couldn’t fend for themselves after the ark landed on Mount Ararat; she said House Speaker Paul Ryan “looks like a terrorist” after he grew a beard.

The record is full of loony statements.

To think, therefore, that this individual stands an excellent chance at this moment of helping set public education policy in Texas.

I cannot vote against her in this upcoming runoff. However, I can put this short message out there and hope that it gets to enough individuals over in the Piney Woods to deny this individual the chance to affect the education of future Texas leaders.

Check out the link. It’ll make you cringe.

 

Trump’s wealth becomes issue of interest

donald

Does it really matter how much wealth Donald J. Trump has acquired?

Should voters really care? Should we concern ourselves with all of this?

Under normal circumstances, probably not. But here’s the thing: The presumptive Republican Party presidential nominee has been making his wealth an issue all along the primary campaign trail.

He brags about his “world-class business.” He boasts about how he built his company from scratch … although that’s not true. He shows off his opulent mansions.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/how-much-is-trump-worth-223329

We’re hearing now that Trump’s net worth is around $10 billion. No one has ever believed he has that kind of dough laying around. Trump filed a 104-page financial disclosure form — and he even bragged about that, calling it the largest such disclosure form in history.

As Politico reports: “Many of his assets and liabilities are simply too large — reaching far above the top disclosure threshold on the filing — for their value to be captured in the report. Trump, for instance, reported at least $315 million in liabilities on the form, many of which are loans and mortgages on his properties. The forms cover Trump’s last 17 months of financial activity.”

Where is all this going? I am not entirely clear, but ultimately it’s going to end up with discussion and debate about Trump’s tax returns, which he still has yet to release.

You see, this is what happens when the candidate makes a big deal of his material holdings. It mushrooms into realms that under normal circumstances wouldn’t necessarily be of voters’ concerns.

Voters knew that the Kennedy family was wealthy. The Kennedy men who ran for the nation’s highest public office — John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Ted Kennedy — didn’t make it an issue. Nelson Rockefeller’s family had acquired immense wealth as well. Rocky didn’t dwell on it, either.

Trump, though, makes his wealth an issue all … the … time.

I’m more interested in debating Trump’s views on the whole array of issues that should be front and center.

 

‘Catalysts’ doing their job for Amarillo

ballpark

They are called “catalyst projects” for a reason.

You build certain structures, provide certain amenities in the downtown district, then other positive events would follow. That’s the plan, right?

OK, then. So now we hear that Amarillo’s catalyst projects — namely the construction of the downtown convention hotel and a parking garage — seem to have enticed the owners of a minor-league baseball franchise into talking actively with the city about moving here.

Oh, yes. We also have that ballpark that’s on the drawing board.

Amarillo’s Local Government Corporation has confirmed that it is negotiating with the San Antonio Missions to move that franchise from South Texas to right here, in ol’ Amarillo.

It’s far from a done deal.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/32009762/amarillo-negotiating-with-san-antonio-missions

The San Antonio Missions have made their intentions clear down yonder. The Class Double-A Missions are hoping to clear out for San Antonio to welcome a Class Triple-A club. The Missions — which are affiliated with the San Diego Padres of the National League — say they want to relocate to Amarillo.

The LGC has laid down its marker: It wants the Missions to come here.

“Amarillo is in a position in terms of having our project already under way, of having the MPEV or the baseball stadium already in progress,” said John Lutz, a member of the LGC. “The way that I think it’s working with the hotel and the parking garage, retail, obviously the Xcel building, have really built a strong package that I think was very, very attractive [to the Missions].”

Isn’t that the definition of “catalyst”?

Work on the MPEV hasn’t yet begun. The LGC has been tasked with coming up with designs and financing feasibility plans. The City Council has given the LGC a deadline to finish the job and so far the LGC has been faithful to the task it has been given.

If the rest of it comes together, we’ll get the MPEV/ballpark, we’ll get a serious minor-league baseball franchise here, the convention hotel will be open for business, the parking garage will be storing vehicles and doing business in the retail shops planned for the structure.

I am among those who is hopeful that a letter of intent from the San Antonio Missions will be in hand … maybe soon.

That, too, is a catalyst of its own.

 

More evidence of Texas Democrats’ demolition

17swartzWeb-master675

Mimi Swartz’s essay in the New York Times lends support to something I wrote just the other day.https://highplainsblogger.com/2016/05/texas-democrats-already-are-demolished/

It involves the pitiful state of the Texas Democratic Party.

My friend Tom Mechler was just re-elected chairman of the state Republican Party and then called for the demolition of the state’s Democrats. My response was that the Democratic Party already has been “demolished” in Texas.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2016/05/texas-democrats-already-are-demolished/

Now comes Swartz, writing for the NY Times saying that Texas is so reliably Republican that we won’t be “relevant” in the upcoming presidential election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/opinion/texas-red-but-not-relevant.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

She mentioned how it used to be in Washington, with Texans of both parties commanding actual respect among their congressional colleagues. Lyndon Johnson and Sam Rayburn? How about Dick Armey? Swartz said, correctly, that they “got things done.”

I’m glad she didn’t mentioned the looniest of the looney birds now representing Texas in Congress — Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, the conveyer of lies about President Obama’s birth and assorted other nutty pronouncements.

My favorite paragraph in her essay talks about what has become of the state’s former pull in D.C.:

“That kind of gravitas has quit the scene. Texas boasts legions of engineers, architects, doctors, lawyers, artists and energy executives who enjoy global reputations, but back home pridefully ignorant pygmies run the political show. One example: When our senior senator, John Cornyn, was running for re-election in 2014, the Houston Chronicle’s editorial board asked him for his view of a huge coastal storm-surge-protection project in the Houston-Galveston area known as the Ike Dike. His answer: ‘I don’t even know what that is.’”

That’s pretty bad, yes?

What’s worse is that the Texas Democratic Party remains clueless on how to reshape the state’s political landscape.

 

Cruz’s omission spoke volumes at GOP gathering

tedcruz_0

Texas Republicans gathering at their state convention in Dallas over the weekend waited to hear from one of their golden boys.

He went to the podium and delivered a typically fiery speech about how the Texas GOP should stand firm behind its “conservative principles.”

The message came from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, who until just about three weeks ago, had contended that he would be the party’s presidential nominee.

He won’t make it.

That prize is now left for Donald J. Trump to grasp.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/ted-cruz-chooses/

So, the question becomes: Will the vanquished junior senator from Texas endorse the presumptive GOP nominee for president?

Excuse me while I laugh … out loud.

As Erica Grieder writes for Texas Monthly, it ain’t gonna happen.

Cruz’s speech to the convention delegates contained a lot of references to those conservative principles. He didn’t mention Trump’s name a single, solitary time.

No mention of the nominee, the guy who’s going to hoist the party banner and traipse across the land proclaiming himself to be the party messenger.

Are you as not surprised as I am that Cruz wouldn’t mention Trump?

I ran into Randall County Judge Ernie Houdashell just before he shoved off for the GOP convention. He and I exchanged a few friendly words in the supermarket parking lot. He mentioned Cruz’s name in passing. The judge — as reliable and devoted a Republican as you’ll ever see — made no mention of Trump.

I’ll have to ask Houdashell the next time I see him to ask him straight away: Are you going to “support” the party nominee? I’ll try to avoid asking whether he’d vote for Trump this fall, given that he’s entitled to cast whatever vote he wants in private.

Sure, Trump is gathering his share of public endorsements in Texas. Gov. Greg Abbott is on board, as is former Gov. Rick Perry.

I haven’t heard much from Sen. John Cornyn or from former Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison on whether they’re going to back Trump.

Cruz, of course, has been gored terribly by his party’s nominee. Trump’s “Lyin’ Ted” label surely hurt the senator, as did Trump’s hideous reference to Heidi Cruz, the wife of his former GOP presidential foe.

So, he didn’t mention Trump’s name at the GOP convention podium. Cruz’s silence spoke volumes.

As Grieder writes in her blog about Cruz: “He recognized Trump’s political appeal earlier on, in other words, and responded with an eye toward his strategic goals rather than his values or principles. He deserves criticism for that. But so too do many of his critics in the Republican Party — all too many of whom are now, after nine more months of this lurid spectacle, making an even more cynical bargain, and one that Cruz, clearly enough, is unwilling to accept. It’s like he said. You learn a lot about a candidate over the course of a campaign.”

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience