Prayer still allowed in school

I am being overwhelmed with the need to dispel a lie that has grown wings and legs over the course of many decades.

It is that the U.S. Supreme Court “took prayer out of our public schools.” It did not do anything of the sort.

What the court ruled was that organized prayer sanctioned by an arm of government is an unconstitutional act.

The court made its ruling in 1962 in the Engel v. Vitale case. “One of the greatest dangers to the freedom of the individual to worship in his own way,” Justice Hugo Black wrote for the Court, “lay in the Government’s placing its official stamp of approval upon one particular kind of prayer or one particular form of religious services.”

The First Amendment to our Constitution states quite clearly that the government “shall make no law” that sanctions a particular religion.

So … what does that mean? The amendment doesn’t not limit government just to Congress, or just to county courthouses, or city halls. Any government entity, and that includes public school systems, must avoid ordering citizens to be indoctrinated into any specific religion.

I want to say as well that the amendment also declares that the government must not “prohibit the free exercise thereof” a religion. What I assume from that? I presume that citizens — and that includes public school students — are free to pray whenever and wherever they please.

I’ve heard it quipped over many years that “for as long as schools present final exams, students will be praying in school.”

So, let the students pray on their own without being forced to pray to a specific deity. I say this as a man of faith who believes with all my heart that religion should be taught at home and in our houses of worship … not in our public schools!

Gaetz is gone; good riddance!

Matt Gaetz spared himself the embarrassment of being denied a seat in the Trump administration Cabinet by pulling his name out of consideration to be the next attorney general.

I would offer a word of praise to Gaetz … except he doesn’t deserve any good word from me.

Gaetz had no business being considered for a post that demands extreme moral rectitude from the individual who occupies it. Gaetz had been investigated for sex trafficking, for having sex with an underage girl and for use of illicit drugs. The House ethics committee compiled a report that allegedly contains a ton of sordid details.

Now, he wasn’t ever charged with a crime. The report is still out there. House Republicans have blocked its release so far. Gaetz’s decision to back out of the AG search likely will diminish the public’s chances of seeing the report.

I will argue that the public still needs to see what it contains. To what end? To determine the nature of the character of an individual that the incoming president would nominate to become attorney general of the United States.

It appears to me that learning about the former AG candidate’s (lack of) character would speak volumes as well about the guy who selected him.

Matt Gaetz is gone … but we still have Donald Trump.

Trump loses majority vote? Pffftt!

The media are making some noise about Donald Trump losing a majority of the popular vote victory he earned with his Nov. 5 presidential election victory.

His popular vote margin has slipped from about 3% on Election Day to around 1.6% as of today. He has earned about 49.8% of the total vote. It is far from the “mandate” he keeps suggesting he won.

But here’s the deal. He was elected legitimately by earning 312 Electoral College votes; he needed 270 of them to secure victory. The Constitution says candidates need to win a majority of Electoral College votes.

I get it. Begrudgingly … but I get it.

What’s more, earlier presidents also have failed to win popular vote majorities. The most recent example was George W. Bush, who in 2000 finished second to Al Gore, but won just barely enough Electoral College votes, thanks to the infamous 5-4 Supreme Court ruling that stopped the recount of ballots in Florida.

Bill Clinton won election and re-election with fewer than 50% of the popular vote. So did John F. Kennedy in 1960. Same for Harry Truman in 1948.

You get the picture, I am sure.

The media need not spend so much effort wondering about the “mandate” that doesn’t exist for Trump. A mandate occurs when presidents score landslide victories, a la Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Trump’s victory, while significant, doesn’t fall into the category of sweeping mandate for wholesale change.

When they count all the votes and Kamala Harris ends up with more actual votes than Trump, well … then we can talk some more.

Trump fills out clown show cast

Donald J. Trump continues to fill out his cast of Cabinet-level goofballs, fruitcakes and assorted loyalists … just as he promised he would prior to the 2024 presidential election.

The latest cast member to sign on is Linda McMahon, the former exec with the World Wrestling and Entertainment outfit run by her husband, Vince McMahon. Linda McMahon has been nominated to be our nation’s education secretary.

Her education credentials? The silence you hear is evidence that she doesn’t have anything in her background. No administration experience. Nothing, man!

But … she is a Trump loyalist along with attorney general nominee and one-time DOJ investigative target Matt Gaetz, Fox News blowhard and defense nominee Pete Hegseth, Kennedy political scion and anti-vaxxer health and human services boss RFK Jr., and Russian agent and director of national intelligence nominee Tulsi Gabbard.

I mean, good grief! What the hell is the POTUS-elect seeking to do here?

The only good news I can find is that there appear to be enough Republican senators who are finding their long-squishy backbone to block many of the nuttiest of the nut jobs Trump has gathered around him.

A word about Sabol

Readers of this blog have been patient and receptive to my tales about Toby the Puppy, the pooch who was a key family member for nine years.

I lost him to cancer on Dec. 1, 2023, an event that continues to fill me with sadness.

However, upon returning from vacation September, I had the good fortune to meet another Chihuahua mix puppy named Sabol. We fell in love with each other immediately. She joined the family and — as God is my witness — she has exhibited many of the traits that endeared me to Toby.

Sabol is smart. She is so very affectionate. She is a road warrior in the pickup. When it’s bedtime, she responds to the words “It’s bedtime” by running straight to her bed. 

Whereas Toby never got overweight, Sabol joined us with a pudgy midriff. I have put her on a strict meal regimen: A half-cup of kibble and half a Milk Bone in the morning; another half-cup of food and the other Milk Bone half in the afternoon. The result of her eating plan is quite encouraging: she has lost four pounds since September. Sabol has a way to go but she is making exceptional progress. What’s more she has developed a lively spring in her step.

That’s the latest about my new pooch. I will close with this declaration: I must be the luckiest puppy parent imaginable, having hit home runs with two puppies in a row.

Putin threatens to go MAD

Vladimir Putin needs no explanation of what used to pass as a nuclear deterrence policy followed by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

The Russian dictator reportedly is angry that President Biden has given Ukraine permission to use long-range missiles to strike deeply into Russia as it seeks to defend itself against Putin’s immoral and illegal invasion of its sovereign neighbor.

What is the Russian goon/thug/madman/tyrant/despot threatening to do? He is threatening to use “tactical nuclear weapons” against Ukrainian forces.

Let’s see. How do I say this tactfully? Oh, hell. I can’t.

It would be a mistake of catastrophic proportions!

You see, U.S. and Soviet nuclear deterrence was based on a policy of “mutually assured destruction.” Putin, who once led the Soviet system of spooks, knows the policy as well as any Russian alive today.

Using tactical nukes in the largest ground war in Europe since World War II well could produce a response from NATO — and the United States — that could destroy Russia.

Therefore, I am hesitant to buy fully into the notion that Vladimir Putin has gone MAD.

Then again, Putin did invade Ukraine … and his forces are getting their butts kicked in the field of battle.

Mika and Joe make nice with Trump?

Someone will have to explain to me why the liberal establishment has its shorts in a wad over an interview that two MSNBC hosts had with the next president of the United States.

Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough, co-hosts of “Morning Joe,” went to Mar-a-Lago to interview Donald Trump. They said they remain opposed fundamentally to what he intends to do when he becomes president. They said they want to “restart” the dialogue they once had with the future POTUS.

Someone please explain to me why that is a big … deal among those who continue to loathe the future president. You may count me as a “never Trumper” who wouldn’t vote for Trump if he were the last man standing. However, if I was a practicing daily journalist, I would really embrace the chance to talk frankly with him, trying to pin him down on what he intends to do in office.

Brzezinski and Scarborough are real-life wife and husband. I am utterly certain they talked through many nights trying to decide whether this was the right call, given the angry rhetoric they exchanged with Trump in recent years.

Who knows? This effort to restart communication between them and the next POTUS might backfire. If it does, then the critics can bellow “We told you so!” If not, then they are able to do their jobs as journalists and try to plum what passes for a brain in the skull of the next president.

Speaker excels in lame excuses

Stand tall, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, for you have just coined the lamest excuse I’ve ever heard into why a former member of your governing body shouldn’t have to be held to account for allegations of severe misconduct.

Former Republican U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz has been nominated by Donald Trump to be the next attorney general. He quit the House and, thus, delivered Johnson the ammo he fired off to earn the title of King of Lame Excuses.

Republicans and Democrats alike believe the House ethics committee needs to release findings of an investigation into whether Gaetz had sex with an underage girl and used illegal drugs.

Johnson said the panel should keep it secret because — drum roll — Gaetz “is no longer a member of the House.”

So, there you have it. A nimrod whom the incoming president wants to become the nation’s next chief law enforcement official should skate simply because he’s no longer in Congress?

The public has a compelling need to know whether someone who could become AG is a child molester and/or someone who engages in rampant drug abuse.

Maybe I am getting too worked up over what well might not occur, as I hear a growing number of Gaetz’s fellow Republicans in Congress believe he is unfit for the office he seeks.

Loser showed grace; the winner showed … up

It was a little thing, but the gestures spoke volumes about the man who won the 2024 presidential election and the woman who lost it.

Vice President Kamala Harris conceded the election the day after they declared  Donald Trump the winner. In her speech, she told the crowd that she had phoned the president-elect to congratulate him on his victory. The response from her supporters gathered before her was understandably muted. But she made the gesture and acknowledged it publicly with grace and class.

How did Trump respond to his stunning victory? He stood before his rally goers … and didn’t say a single word about Kamala Harris.

To be candid, I found his snubbing of his opponent to be worthy of scorn.

I’ve listened to many winning candidates over many years watching elections and listened to the voice they used to accept victory. To a man, they have always recognized the concession call that came from the loser. To varying degrees, they also managed to speak well of the candidate’s losing effort. You’ve heard it, too: “I want to thank my opponent for the tough campaign and for accepting defeat with grace and dignity.”

We didn’t get that kind of magnanimous gesture from Trump. Nope. He chose to refuse to recognize the history that Harris made as the first woman of color ever nominated to run for the presidency. He also refused to recognize the spirited and, yes, hard-charging campaign she ran.

Am I dismayed at Trump’s lack of class in declaring victory? Yes. Am I surprised? Not one single bit!

Move over, Paul Revere!

A supporter of this blog has informed many of my critics that I am now traipsing through some mighty tall cotton.

I need offer a quick-and-clean thank you to this fellow, who I have known for nearly 30 years, dating to when I arrived in the Texas Panhandle to take over as editorial page editor of the Amarillo Globe-News.

My friend, a former Randall County judge, has been chiding a critic over the tone he takes in chastising my arguments opposing Donald J. Trump’s choices to join his newly elected administration. He told the critic that “John Kanelis is a modern-day Paul Revere,” while berating him as a “disgrace to our country as you aid and abet the unhinged fool known as Donald Trump.”

See what I mean about the tall cotton reference?

I am not going to accept the Paul Revere reference. That is my friend’s opinion, to which he — and my critic — are entitled. However, my friend is a lawyer, which means he knows the language quite well. He’s a smart guy. I do not know my critic beyond what he says frequently while commenting on my blog; I just know him as an ardent Trump supporter … meanwhile, I am not.

There you go. Step aside, Paul Revere. You have company … I suppose.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience