Trump once praised ‘universal health care,’ too

July 13, 2015 kanelis2012

Here’s a quick addendum to an earlier blog post.

I mentioned how Donald Trump had flipped-flopped on a number of positions.

I forgot to mention his views on universal health care.

‘Meet the Press’ tracks Trump’s flip-flops

He used to favor universal health care; now he opposes it, particularly in the form of the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

I get that pols occasionally change their minds. President Obama used to oppose gay marriage; he now supports it. Secretary of State John Kerry voted for authorization to go to war in Iraq before he opposed it.

But check out the link from today’s “Meet the Press” segment attached to this post about The Donald.

Pretty amazing … in my oh-so-humble view.

political news

Trump: flip-flopper extraordinaire

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012 1 Comment

Donald Trump’s true identity might be a little harder to determine than we thought.

“Meet the Press” today took note of some important changes in Trump’s political evolution.

* He used to be “pro-choice” on abortion. He said in 1999 that he detested abortion, but insisted that obtaining one should be the woman’s prerogative. Today? “I’m pro-life,” he says.

* Trump once said that he admires and likes Hillary Rodham Clinton; he also expressed affection for her husband, former President Bill Clinton. He now calls her the “worst secretary of state in the nation’s history.” He probably speaks differently of the former president as well.

* The Donald once said that Barack Obama was a man of considerable accomplishment. These days he says the president is feckless and has been a disaster.

Those are just three examples.

The Republican Party presidential candidate needs to explain himself. Trust me on this: His Republican opponents are going to be ready to pounce. If hell freezes over and he gets the GOP nomination next summer, well, just wait until the Democrats get him in their sights.

local news, media news

Sensing an odd disconnect

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012 2 Comments

I picked up the phone this weekend to call a good friend.

We worked together at the Amarillo Globe-News. Not long after I quit my job — after being “reorganized” out of the position I had occupied for nearly 18 years — he resigned to take another journalism job back east.

As we visited, he told me about this challenge and that challenge he was facing at the paper where he’s working.

Then it hit me like a bolt of lightning: I did not feel connected in any meaningful way with what my friend was telling me.

Wow! How weird is this?

It’s been a month shy of three years since I left daily print journalism. It defined me in the many people’s eyes for more than 36 years. I toiled at four newspapers: two in Oregon and two in Texas. My career didn’t take me to too many stops along the way. Several of my friends who are still practicing the craft have made many more stops along the way than I ever did.

Still, for 36-plus years that was what I did. I had some modest success over that time and I am so very proud of what I was able to do, the places I was able to see, the people — famous, infamous and just plain interesting — I was able to meet.

Oh, but the disconnected feeling I’m getting these days is sending me a clear message.

I am glad to be gone from my last stop along the way. I was an old-school reporter and editor when my employer informed me that he planned to make “radical changes” at the newspaper and that I didn’t fit into those plans. I’ll admit that it hurt hearing such a thing. And, yes, I went through some grieving as I sought to collect my thoughts and plot the rest of the journey my wife and I would take.

Three years is a long time. Then again, it does fly by quickly, especially when you’re occupying your time doing other things. I’ve managed to do that. I’m staying quite busy writing blogs for two local broadcast TV stations. So I haven’t been sent out to pasture entirely. I’m also helping a friend produce a weekly newspaper in eastern New Mexico.

The disconnect lies with the daily grind. I no longer have to worry about answering the bell every single day. I’ll leave that to others who are young and vigorous enough to overcome the obstacles that emerge constantly to bring added pressure to an already pressure-packed job.

I’m glad my friend still relishes the challenges that confront him every day. As for me, I’ve got other things to do.

national news, political news

Goldberg gets it about The Donald

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012

Donald Trump is taking fire not just from liberals but from conservatives.

Amazing, if you ask me.

OK, you didn’t ask, but I’ll offer my opinion anyway.

The latest broadside comes from Jonah Goldberg, who I consider to be one of the better, smarter conservative pundits around. I always enjoy reading his world view, even though I generally disagree with it.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421045/donald-trump-fraud

But where it regards The Donald, well, young Jonah is on point. You need to read his essay here. If you’re in the right frame of mind, as I happened to be when I read, you’ll laugh out loud. No kidding!

Here’s a tiny bit of what he wrote:

“… what I find so gaudy about Trump is his constant reference to the fact that he made a lot of money, and his expectation that it somehow makes him immune to criticism or means that he’s a better person than his GOP competitors, never mind yours truly.”

I’ve already taken note of Trump’s continual references to how rich he is. Some of my own critics have wondered if I’m envious of his wealth. No. I’m not.

His yammering about his wealth — which some have suggested isn’t nearly as immense as he says it is — simply drives me crazy. One more tidbit from Goldberg: “He’s a bore who overcompensates for his insecurities by talking about how awesome he is, often in the third person. Jonah can’t stand that.”

And yet, in this wacky world of ours, his boastfulness is getting traction by those who think it all translates into leadership.

Another key point in Goldberg’s essay is how thin-skinned Trump is, how he bristles at criticism. Trump has fired back at his critics, such as Goldberg, which puzzles the young columnist, who wondered why someone who considers himself to be “master of the Universe” would get upset anything anyone said about him.

We’ve clearly entered a new age, or perhaps been transported without our knowledge into a parallel political universe.

The behavior that The Donald is exhibiting is precisely the kind of thing that in another time would have resulted in his being laughed off the political stage. The prancing and preening he does would be grist for ridicule from serious politicians.

These days they’re taking this guy seriously.

And with good reason. The Donald is at or near the top of every public opinion poll of Republican voters.

I believe Jonah Goldberg has a point: The Donald’s fans need an intervention.

State news

Kids who skip school aren’t criminals

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott did right by Texas children and their parents when he signed a bill that decriminalizes truancy.

House Bill 2398 means that kids caught skipping school won’t be tossed into jail. And, as Abbott said when he signed the bill into law, “Criminalizing unauthorized absences at school unnecessarily jeopardizes the futures of our students.”

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/19/texas-decriminalize-truancy-after-abbott-signs-bil/

Critics of the previous practice had said it punishes poor and minority children unfairly. Too many of them come from home backgrounds where education simply doesn’t take the priority that it should. So, the kids skip school to hang out with friends or, sadly, do things they shouldn’t be doing. If they commit a crime while they’re out cavorting when they should be in school, then by all means, arrest them and treat them accordingly. Skipping school by itself shouldn’t be a reason to put a kid into juvenile detention.

The emphasis now falls on school districts to take measures designed to keep kids in school. Since truancy now will be handled as a civil matter, it becomes critical for districts to work with the Texas Education Agency to deal with habitual truants and seek ways to eliminate their impulse to skip school.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “HB 2398 offers preventative measures districts can take to curb unexcused absences and suggests rehabilitative programs for habitual offenders.”

This is a good — and in my view a surprising — move that the governor has taken. He developed a reputation as a “tough on crime” state attorney general. His statement relating to his bill signing suggests he understands that the state can lean too heavily on children who, after all, are just children.

They don’t need to tossed into the slammer because of unexcused absences from school.

political news

What? I’m sticking up for Ted Cruz?

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012

I’m feeling oddly out of sorts these days.

Why? Well, I’m feeling a bit of sympathy for a patently unsympathetic politician: U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

Readers of this blog know that I do not intend to vote for Sen. Cruz for president of the United States. But two things have happened in recent weeks that make me want to stand with him.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/ted-cruz-feud-new-york-times-119981.html?hp=t4_r

He’s now feuding with the New York Times over the paper’s refusal to include his new memoir, “A Time for Truth,” on its list of best-selling books. It’s selling like crazy, being scarfed up from book shelves by supporters who want to read the junior senator’s words of wisdom and how he intends to rescue the United States of America.

Cruz and his allies say the NYT snub is pure partisanship. The liberal publication won’t give this conservative pol the time of day, let alone list his memoir on its vaunted best-seller list.

Cruz’s feud is going win him more friends on the right. I won’t join his campaign, but it does seem a bit churlish on the Times’s part to exclude him from the best-seller list.

The second aspect involves The Donald, who’s bringing up the “birther” controversy all over again. Sen. Cruz is the target this time. Donald Trump said that because Cruz was born in Canada, he’s not qualified to serve as president. “Natural-born citizen,” in Trump’s mind, means he a candidate must be born in the U.S.; that’s how he interprets the Constitution.

Trump is wrong.

Cruz’s mother is an American citizen. That grants him U.S. citizenship by birth. Cruz could have been born on Mars — which is where I sometimes think is Trump’s place of birth — and he still would be qualified to run for and serve as president in the highly unlikely event he is elected next year.

Trump tried to pull the birther stunt on Barack Obama, even though the president actually was born in Hawaii. He’s at it once again with Cruz.

Hey, I’m just trying to be fair here. I might dislike Cruz’s philosophy and don’t want him elected president of the United States. However, I know mistreatment when I see it. Cruz is getting a bum deal from the New York Times.

As for the birther crap that comes from Donald Trump’s pie hole, well … enough said on that.

entertainment news

Trolls are lurking; they’re on the hunt

July 12, 2015 kanelis2012

It’s time for another admission.

I’ve developed something of an addiction to Facebook. I’m on it quite often, looking for things my actual friends and Facebook “friends” are doing and saying.

But a curious thing keeps happening and I want to share it with you here.

These “friend requests” keep showing up on my news feed. Individuals want to become “friends” on Facebook. I’m a bit reluctant to accept many of them. I look first to see who their current “friends” might be. If some of them already are included in my “friends” roster, I might accept the request. But not always.

These days I’m getting even more selective.

You see, I’ve accepted “friend” requests from individuals and they’ve turned out to be, well, pesky.

They pester me with responses to things I post on the social medium.

I use Facebook to distribute my blog, on which I write frequently. This post is an example, yes?

That platform goes out to my friends and I encourage them to distribute my posts along their network of friends. Same thing goes for Twitter, which also receives my blog.

However, when I get these “friend requests,” I have to weigh whether the person requesting the Facebook relationship is in it for the right reason — or wants to become known as a “troll.”

A couple of those so-called “trolls” have joined my Facebook “friends” roster.

Why do they annoy me? They take liberties responding to my blog. These are people I do not know. Yet they talk to me as if we’re longtime acquaintances.

I am at least acquainted with the vast majority of those with whom I have a Facebook relationship. And I know many of those individuals fairly well.

What’s more, the tiny handful of my very best friends in the world also are included in this group. They know who they are. Indeed, I’ve long held the view that one can usually count on the fingers of one hand his true friends.

These trolls, though, drive me a little nuts.

I actually unfriended one of those guys about a year ago because of the filthy language he was posting on my timeline. I didn’t want to subject other actual friends to the filth that was coming from this guy — who sought to join my roster of Facebook “friends.” I accepted his request, and then regretted it.

I’m not inclined to take that drastic route with the others who annoy me.

At least not yet.

national news

Most county clerks are going to follow the law

July 11, 2015 kanelis2012

Well, it turns out Texas’s county courthouses aren’t occupied by defiant rebels intent on ignoring state and federal law.

According to the Texas Tribune, most county clerks — and I presume that to mean more than 127 of them — are going to comply with a Supreme Court ruling that legalizes gay marriage across the nation.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/10/lawsuits-needed-holdout-counties-gay-marriage/?goal=0_141c96f7df-5c77452cb0-99785833&mc_cid=5c77452cb0&mc_eid=c01508274f

Those who don’t will face lawsuits from couples seeking marriage licenses.

I was intrigued by the story that included statements from way up yonder, in tiny Roberts County, that officials there will issue licenses to same-sex couples when they apply for them.

Randall and Potter clerks said from the outset of the ruling that they would issue the licenses, even though Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton decreed it was all right with him if counties declined to do so.

The Tribune reports: “Hartley County Clerk Melissa Mead said her office won’t issue same-sex marriage licenses until the clock runs out on the 25 days that parties in the Supreme Court case have to ask for a rehearing of the case.”

A handful of the state’s 254 counties are bucking the highest court in the land — not to mention ignoring the oath that county clerks take that require them to uphold federal law.

A handful of clerks in other states have declined to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples — and have resigned their public offices in protest. I’m OK with those who quit rather than flout their oath. Those who resign are far more principled, in my view, than those who simply refuse to do their duty based on religious principles. Their oaths don’t allow for that, as I read the oath they all must take.

A friend posted this portion of a New York Times editorial on the subject:

“Some same-sex marriage opponents argue that under state religious-freedom laws, a government employee’s beliefs should be accommodated so long as another official is available to carry out the task. But government employees do not have a constitutionally protected right to pick and choose which members of the public they will serve, no matter their religious beliefs. Not so long ago, of course, government officials invoked religious beliefs to justify all manner of racial segregation and discrimination, including laws banning interracial marriage. The Supreme Court struck down that marriage ban in 1967 in Loving v. Virginia. It is impossible to imagine any county clerk or judge now claiming a right not to marry an interracial couple based on religious beliefs. And yet, that would be analogous to what these public employees are doing in refusing to serve same-sex couples. The Constitution’s protection of religious freedom simply does not include the right to discriminate against others in the public sphere.”

As I see it, there you have it.

military news

Troop levels to drop; U.S. is still No. 1

July 11, 2015 kanelis2012

U.S. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry is worried about reductions in the number of men and women serving in the U.S. Army.

The Pentagon plans to cut the troop strength to 450,000 by September 2017. Thornberry suggested recently that the reduction is part of an on-going strategy to slash defense spending that’s been enacted since the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency.

He’s concerned about it. So, too, are some in the media, such as the Amarillo Globe-News, which opined on Friday that the troop reduction “is bad news.” It cited “ongoing issues related to Russia and Iran, to name but a couple.”

Then the paper decided to take a cheap shot by noting that “the federal government only spends more than $70 billion a year on food stamps.”

I think a broader question ought to be this: Are we still the world’s No. 1 military power? Yes … by a country mile.

Let us also ponder: Does a reduction in the troop levels make us less able to defend ourselves against terrorists? Given tremendous advances in technology, the use of drones (which this week killed another leading Islamic State officer), our immense intelligence capability and the tremendous skill that our troops employ in the field, we absolutely are able to defend ourselves.

Thornberry wrote: “I have consistently warned about the size and pace of reductions in both end strength and defense spending and the negative impact on our country’s national security.”

Does the presence of more men and women in uniform deter terrorists from striking at us? Do the Islamic State and al-Qaeda leaders really consider the United States defense establishment — taken in its entirety — to be less capable of defending the world’s strongest nation than it was, say, when the 9/11 attacks occurred more than a dozen years ago?

The United States remains by far the pre-eminent military power on the planet.

If we are going to seek some sort of fiscal responsibility, which Thornberry and others in Congress keep insisting we should, then we must look at all aspects of the federal budget.

The day we cannot strike hard at those who seek to do us harm is the day I’ll join the doomsday chorus that includes Chairman Thornberry. We aren’t at that point. Nor do I expect us to get there.

High Plains Blogger

Trump once praised ‘universal health care,’ too

Trump: flip-flopper extraordinaire

Sensing an odd disconnect

Goldberg gets it about The Donald

Kids who skip school aren’t criminals

What? I’m sticking up for Ted Cruz?

Most county clerks are going to follow the law

Troop levels to drop; U.S. is still No. 1

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience