Pelosi finally speaks out on Filner

It took her a while — arguably too long — to speak out, but the U.S. House of Representatives’ top Democrat has given her former congressional colleague the heave ho.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says San Diego Mayor Bob Filner should leave office. Now. He should spare the residents of California’s second-largest city the pain of a recall election. Hit the road, Your Dishonor.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/nancy-pelosi-calls-san-diego-mayor-step-article-1.1428653

Filner once served with Pelosi in the House as a Democratic member. He then became mayor. In recent weeks, more than a dozen women have come forward with harrowing tales of sexual harassment bordering on abuse from the 70-year-old mayor. No need to detail what he reportedly said and did to these women. Filner has admitted to some disgraceful behavior.

Filner spent two weeks in “intensive” rehabilitation, came out and now plans to continue his career at City Hall.

Meanwhile, recall petitions have been circulating throughout the city. My guess is that they’ll far more than the required number of signatures to put his recall election on the ballot.

Pelosi wants none of that. She’s right to call for Filner’s resignation. If the mayor possessed any honor, he would heed the message from Pelosi and others to get out and rehab himself as a private citizen.

Rand Paul making sense? Wow!

Someone pinch me. Throw some cold water on my face. Give me a slap. Pass the smelling salts.

I think I just read something regarding Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., that actually made sense. Paul, the tea party golden boy and possible 2016 GOP presidential candidate, said a government shutdown to defund the Affordable Care Act is a bad idea.

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/317531-rand-paul-i-dont-think-shutting-down-the-government-is-a-good-idea

He told his pals at Fox News Sunday as much this morning.

I think I’ve just entered a parallel universe.

Paul, of course, is right about the shutdown. His views on “Obamacare” need work. He’s swallowed the argument that the Affordable Care Act is some sort of evil deed perpetrated by the federal government, even though data are showing that its initial impact on the nation actually is proving to be a net positive.

The shutdown notion being pushed by his tea party brethren, though, is what deserves attention. The idea of shutting down the government — and punishing tens of millions of Americans who depend on government to help them get through the day — is an outrageous overreach by zealous partisans who have no clue about what it all means.

I’m glad to see Sen. Paul understand the consequences of what these goofballs are proposing. At least on this issue he is joining the shrinking ranks of sensible Republicans who don’t see the government as their mortal enemy.

President takes wing

This speech is about a month old, but I just caught up with it … and am astounded by its ignorance.

U.S. Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., went on the floor of the House in mid-July to gripe about all the trips President Obama has taken aboard the jet called Air Force One.

http://thehill.com/video/house/311969-gop-lawmaker-obamas-using-air-force-one-as-personal-toy

Coble yapped about the cost per each flight and accused the first family of using the Boeing 747 Jumbo Jet as its “personal toy.” He was warned against using improper references to the president by the presiding officer.

If the president of the United States feels a need to fly Air Force One somewhere on behalf of the country he governs, then why is that such a huge deal to a back-bench member of Congress whose name few Americans even recognize? Coble’s complaints center on the cost of using the aircraft during difficult economic times. He says its use runs up the deficit and the debt, which the nation cannot afford.

The aircraft also supplies the president with all the communications he needs while he’s en route to his destination. The way I see it, those amenities are quite necessary for him to do his job. You know, things like telecommunications he can use while speaking with military and domestic policy advisers, phone hookups so he can be briefed on crises as they erupt. These are fairly essential items, don’t you think?

I’m not going to begrudge any president the right to use an airplane that enables him to be on call every minute of every day he occupies the most powerful office on the planet.

Area 51 report will feed frenzy

Is it true that some folks believe the declassification of information relating to Area 51 is actually going quell the intrigue?

You must be joking.

http://www.nbcnews.com/entertainment/area-51-report-wont-stop-hollywood-those-who-want-believe-6C10936776

It’s going to heighten it. It will foster more theories — all of them bogus — about what happened out there.

Area 51 long has been the subject of myth-making from those who think that in the late 1940s creatures from somewhere “out there” crashed to Earth. Go to Roswell, N.M., and experience the carnival atmosphere downtown with all the UFO gift shops.

I’ve never really gotten into the Area 51 stuff. I’ve read all the nonsense and the fun-loving jokes about whether extraterrestrials came a’callin’ at Area 51. I’ve never given it a serious thought … not for a single second.

Then again, I tend to dismiss most conspiracies. President Kennedy’s murder? A lone gunman, a loser, a rogue Marxist pulled the trigger that day in Dallas. Robert Kennedy’s assassination? A single Jordanian-American angry over RFK’s pro-Israel stance did the deed in that Los Angeles hotel kitchen. 9/11? That was what it was: a brilliantly conceived and executed terrorist attack by terrorists.

The CIA’s declassification of these Area 51 documents won’t put a damper on anything. Hate to say it, but we have too many Americans with too much time on their hands who’ll concoct even crazier schemes about Area 51 than we’ve heard already.

Davis a go for Texas governor?

The Texas political media are full of smart folks who know the ins and outs of the state’s raucous political world.

One of the smarter guys, Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News, thinks state Sen. Wendy Davis is likely to run for Texas governor in 2014.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/08/wendy-davis-all-signals-point-to-a-go-for-governor-of-texas.html/

I hope he’s right, if only because the Republicans Party establishment needs a serious challenge from the “other” major party.

Davis, the Fort Worth Democrat, who made such a splash with her spectacular legislative special session filibuster against an anti-abortion bill — which eventually became law during the second special session — is trying to decide whether to run for the state’s top job next year. The winds are hitting her square in the face, as Texas remains a heavily Republican state.

But man, she is charismatic and would enliven the contest like no other Democrat.

Republicans have their own gubernatorial fight brewing between state Attorney General Greg Abbott and Dallas lawyer/businessman and former state GOP chairman Tom Pauken. Abbott has to be considered the odds-on favorite in that primary — and in next fall’s general election.

Davis, though, would be an attention-getter were she to be nominated by Texas Democrats (duh!).

The state needs a white-hot campaign at the top of its political ballot. Wendy Davis would ignite it, no matter who she would face.

RNC marginalizes itself with boycott vote

The Republican National Committee has just voted to marginalize its standing with the broad swath of Americans who will have a say in electing the next president of the United States.

The RNC voted to exclude CNN and NBC News from any 2016 presidential primary debates.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/16/rnc-to-consider-excluding-cnn-nbc-from-2016-presidential-debates/

I’m a bit unsure as to how that will work. I suppose if either CNN and NBC proposes to host a debate, none of the candidates will show up. Perhaps the RNC will set up a debate and invite the other networks — CBS, ABC and Fox — to take part.

Whatever the case, the RNC has failed to grasp the difference between news and entertainment.

At issue are a couple of proposed projects involving Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible Democratic candidate for president in 2016. CNN is planning to air a film on the former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state; NBC is hoping to produce a four-part miniseries on HRC. The GOP says the networks are trying to influence voters by portraying Clinton allegedly in a positive light.

Well, no one knows yet how the networks are going to portray her. Nor has anyone grasped publicly the difference — in NBC’s case — the difference between the news operation and the network’s entertainment division. NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd has tried to explain that the entertainment is independent from news and neither has any say in what the other does.

That doesn’t matter, according to the RNC. I suppose the GOP would be just fine with all of this if the networks were planning to broadcast hatchet jobs on Hillary. A “fair and balanced” portrayal of a major American public figure, though, isn’t good enough.

Airline merger equals campaign issue

If I understand Tom Pauken correctly, the fact that the state’s attorney general actually supports the federal government’s decision to fight a proposed airline merger makes the AG’s position a non-starter.

Why? Because the AG has been fighting the feds for years and the state simply cannot possibly be on the same side as the enemy — no matter the merits of the case.

Ah … Texas politics. Nothing like it.

Pauken is running for the Republican nomination for Texas governor against AG Greg Abbott, who says he fears a proposed merger between American Airlines and US Airways would result in fare increases and reduced service to rural areas.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/08/15/pauken-attacks-abbott-opposing-airline-merger/

The feds say the same thing about the proposed merger. Thus, Abbott and the U.S. Justice Department are on the same page on this very specific issue. Abbott and/or his staff of lawyers presumably have analyzed the specifics of the case and determined that, by golly, maybe the feds have a point.

Isn’t that what lawyers do? Pauken, himself a lawyer as well as a former Texas Republican Party chairman, ought to understand that principle.

Instead, he seems to be suggesting that Abbott — who is fighting on behalf those who want to repeal the Affordable Care Act — simply must remain opposed to President Obama, Eric Holder and the federal government because they’re just so darn unpopular in Texas.

This is where every single policy statement becomes a campaign issue.

Ain’t Texas politics grand?

Why not visit Panhandle, Sen. Cruz?

It just occurred to me today, after commenting on Sen. Ted Cruz’s schedule of town hall meetings, that he’s not coming to the core of his support in Texas.

I’m talking about the Panhandle.

Cruz’s itinerary will keep him down state during his meet-and-greet tour. He’ll be talking to politically friendly audiences.

If that’s going to be his modus operandi during the congressional break, then he needs to come to where his support is really — as in really, really — strong. The Panhandle is known to be a hotbed of tea party support for any statewide candidate. Cruz has taken the next important step and actually won a statewide office.

As the junior Republican U.S. senator, he’s made a big name for himself talking tough about shutting down the government and questioning the commitment of real-life Vietnam War heroes, such as Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, to our national defense. I feel compelled to insert at this point that Cruz has never worn his country’s uniform, let alone in battle — as Kerry and Hagel have done.

So, what say you, Sen. Cruz? Can’t you find some time in your busy schedule to drop in on, say, Amarillo, for some flesh-pressing with those who just think you’re the bee’s knees?

If you come this way, I might even find time to attend your session and when you open the floor up to questions, I might even challenge you to explain why you believe shutting down the federal government is good for the country.

Barbara Bush the Younger ‘endorses’ HRC

Well, that’s a shocker.

Barbara Bush, one of former President George W. Bush’s twin daughters, has declared that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is “unbelievably qualified” to be president of the United States.

Who knew the Bush family had a closet Democrat in its midst?

http://www.today.com/news/bush-daughter-hillary-clinton-should-run-president-6C10928933

Barbara, 31, hopes Clinton runs for the White House in 2016. She did stop short of saying HRC would get her vote were she to take the plunge.

It’s interesting in the extreme, though, to hear the daughter of such a prominent Republican make a glowing statement about a prominent Democrat. That sets up the potential for an interesting tussle within the GOP, which already is turning on itself over disagreements on immigration reform, spending cuts, and a possible government shutdown as it relates to the future of “Obamacare.”

George W. Bush has stayed out of the fray. Good move, Mr. President. Now one of his daughters seems to be taking baby steps back into it with her comments about a possible Democratic presidential candidate who, without doubt, is one of the sworn enemies of the tea party movement within the GOP.

How will the tea party wing react to this virtual endorsement? Will it scold the former president for not “counseling” his daughter sufficiently enough? Might the tea party folks declare unofficial war on the Bush family for being so, so, so “establishment” in its Republican orthodoxy?

The big question might be, how will Democrats handle these glowing words if their party nominates Clinton to be their party’s standard-bearer in the summer of 2016?

My guess: very carefully.

Partisanship enters debate over crime

I got into an interesting rhetorical tug-of-war with a friend of mine this week.

It involved the sentencing of former U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. to 30 months in federal prison; Jackson’s wife got a one-year sentence in Club Fed. Jesse Jackson’s crime involved the theft of $750,000 from his campaign treasure chest.

My friend, a businessman in Amarillo — and a dedicated Republican — wanted to know if Democrats were still “proud” of their party now that one of their own had been sent up the proverbial river for committing a crime. I responded that the Republican Party has had its share of crooks; I cited former President Richard Nixon and former Vice President Spiro Agnew as examples. We went back and forth after that, but didn’t really settle anything.

He’s still an ardent Republican and I’m still an equally ardent Democrat. I believe we’re still friends; I’ll likely find out next time I visit his business establishment.

But the exchange brought to mind the cheapening of what’s happened to Jackson and other political leaders of either stripe — Democrat or Republican. It pains me when partisans try to hang the “all Democrats/Republicans are crooks” label on either party when someone gets convicted and sentenced for committing a crime.

I don’t give a damn about Jackson’s party affiliation, any more than I gave a damn that Nixon and Agnew were Republicans. Jackson was tried and convicted by the federal court. Nixon was nearly impeached by the House of Representatives and he quit to avoid a certain impeachment and conviction by the Senate; Agnew resigned after being indicted by the feds for taking bribes.

The system in all those cases worked irrespective of the political labels any of the principals wore at the time, and it usually works whenever any high-profile politician gets in trouble.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience