International news

GOP = Iranian anti-U.S. chants? Please, Mr. President

Just as Adolf Hitler’s name shouldn’t be uttered aloud in discussions about contemporary U.S. policy, how about declaring a similar moratorium on using “death to America” chants by Iranian protesters?

President Obama made a startling comparison this week in a speech at American University in which he said that those who yell “Death to America” have “common cause with Republicans” who oppose the nuclear deal that seeks to block Iran from developing an atomic bomb.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/08/05/obama_iranians_who_yell_death_to_america_have_common_cause_with_republicans.html

I get that the president feels frustrated because the “loyal opposition” keeps resisting all of his policies — both foreign and domestic.

However, the “death to America” chants we hear from street demonstrations in Tehran have no bearing on domestic opposition to the issue at hand. Obama said the Iranians who oppose the nuclear deal are those who utter the frightening chant.

The president drew a lot of laughs from the crowd that heard his crack about GOP kinship with the anti-American demonstrators.

Please, Mr. President, spare us the laugh lines and stay away from the demagoguery.

local news

Quite an evening at City Hall … wouldn’t you agree?

3 Comments

Amarillo City Council — the formerly unified governing board — has voted 3-2 to put a multipurpose event venue project up for a vote this November.

The three newest members of the council — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — cast the majority votes. Councilman Brian Eades and Mayor Paul Harpole, the two veterans, said “no” to the vote.

I do not believe Harpole and Eades are going to climb aboard the “Vote on MPEV” bandwagon.

The MPEV is a critical part of the city’s effort to remake its downtown district. If it fails at the ballot box, well, we can likely kiss the downtown project package goodbye for at least the foreseeable future.

What’s my takeaway from the events of Tuesday night?

  • For starters, Bill Gilliland and Laura Street — two players in the fundraising effort to pay for the Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts, are taking some hits on social media because they fell a bit short in their fundraising effort. They raised about $30 million from private funds to build the center; the city kicked in about $1.8 million to finish the job. Gilliland and Street sought to delay the vote to give more time to raise money for the MPEV; their request failed.

I’m wondering about the criticism. I look at their prior fundraising effort this way: The city ended up paying a tiny fraction of a $30-plus million entertainment complex. The city’s contribution was minimal and it got a first-class venue in the process for virtually nothing.

  • Second, the City Council once prided itself on its unity. Yes, such single-mindedness has its pluses and minuses. The plus side is evident, in that the council speaks with one voice on important matters. This downtown deal is quite important. But the council now speaks with two competing voices. One side wants the project — the MPEV, downtown hotel and parking garage — to proceed as planned. The other side opposes the MPEV and possibly the hotel and garage.

I’m smelling a serious community conflict brewing.

  • Third, given the opposition that the two sides are planning to mount against each other, it’s fair to caution them about what state law allows and prohibits about how far they can go in stating their case. The law does not allow folks associated with the city to argue for or against a ballot measure using city resources. They are not even allowed to argue their points on city time.

Be verrry careful, gentlemen, about how you state your case.

I will continue to use this forum to state my case that the MPEV is a worthy project and it shouldn’t be defeated by the voters this fall.

I’m looking at this upcoming vote with a bit of cautious optimism. If nothing else, a citywide vote on a major project designed to boost our city’s economic health well could jar the city’s voting public out of its chronic lethargy.

political news

Perry misses out on GOP main debate event

It was just four years ago, but it seems like a dozen lifetimes.

Rick Perry was the high-flying Texas governor seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He entered the primary field and rocketed to the top of the heap as an early front runner for the chance to run against President Barack Obama.

Then came the “oops” moment when he couldn’t name the third federal agency he’d eliminate if he was elected president.

Perry dropped out.

Four years later, Perry is no longer Texas governor, but he boned up on the issues. He got plenty of rest. His bad back is healed. He’s running for the GOP nomination once again.

Then he gets punched in the gut. Fox News, which is playing host to the first televised GOP debate this Thursday, relegated TEA Party favorite Rick Perry to what’s been called the “kids’ table.” He’ll be one of seven candidates participating in an earlier debate, but he didn’t make the cut for the main event.

The top 10 GOP hopefuls are there, including fellow Texan, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/04/perry-doesnt-make-cut-first-gop-presidential-debat/

Fox said only the top candidates in the polls would be on the prime-time event. CNN, which is sponsoring the second debate, laid down the same ground rules.

This is not the way to run a presidential debate series. I’m sure that’s what Perry and his team believe.

I’m still pulling for him to make the grade in subsequent debates.

All he has to do — in this media and political climate — is say something so outrageous that he gets everyone talking about him.

local news

Council puts MPEV to a vote; let’s get ready to rumble

Amarillo MPEV

This just in: The Amarillo City Council has voted to send a multipurpose event venue proposal to the ballot this November.

It’s going to let the city’s voters decide whether to proceed with a project that has become the central issue in the city’s grand plan to renovate and revive its downtown district.

OK. I now will say right up front: I believe this was the wrong decision.

The council voted 3-2 to send the issue to the voters in a non-binding referendum. The “yes” votes came from the Three Amigos, the new guys: Councilman Mark Nair, Randy Burkett and Elisha Demerson. The experienced hands, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, voted “no.”

Does this surprise anyone? Not me.

Harpole and Eades have been working on the nuts and bolts of this project since the beginning. They have a stake in its success. They want it to move forward. Do not expect Harpole and Eades to roll over on this issue.

The new councilmen? Well, they came into office professing to push for change. Well, they’ve made good initially on their pledge. The change they’ve just approved now puts in jeopardy a major element in the city’s effort to move forward with its downtown future.

They believe, I’m going to surmise, that voters don’t want to build the MPEV. They’re hoping the MPEV dies at the hands of voters, whose decision will be allowed to stand because the council wouldn’t dare refuse to ratify whatever result comes from the election. The referendum isn’t legally binding, but it certainly is binding politically.

I do not want to see the MPEV defeated. I want it built. I believe it is going to produce benefit for the downtown district, which will ripple throughout the city. I believe creative marketing strategies can make the MPEV an attractive venue for entertainment and sports activities. I believe the hotel-motel tax revenue is a viable money stream. I believe the city has negotiated this project in good faith.

And I believe the naysayers — led by the three new council members — are making a huge mistake in trying to blow this project up.

Now, let’s debate this project openly, intelligently — and without demagoguery.

political news

GOP voters showing their fickle side

5 Comments

ballcap trump

The average Republican Party voter must be the most fickle human beings imaginable.

Consider this little item, which came tonight from MSNBC talk show host Alex Wagner.

She was wondering aloud how Donald Trump is resonating so loudly with GOP voters while wearing a “trucker’s hat” with the phrase “Make America Great Again.”

Why did she ask that question?

Wagner recalled how first lady Michelle Obama was “excoriated” by the right wing for saying “for the first time” she was “proud of my country.”

Huh?

So, Wagner wondered, the first lady makes a statement about being proud of her country “for the first time” and gets pounded. Meanwhile, Trump says the country has gone to hell, it’s become weak and he vows to restore the nation’s greatness.

But, but, but …

Aren’t we still a great nation? Don’t we still possess the world’s greatest military force? Isn’t our economy still the envy of the world?

How in the world does Donald Trump, Wagner asked, get away with condemning the nation while Michelle Obama gets pounded by her (and her husband’s) foes for declaring her pride in her country?

Yes. I see some fickle behavior out there among Republicans.

local news

Are cameras spying on us … everywhere?

This is one of the weirder stories I’ve heard in more than 20 years living in Amarillo.

The police department has discovered a camera hidden in an aerosol spray dispenser in a business’s restroom.

What the … ?

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29699788/camera-found-in-public-restroom-causing-concern

Police are investigating to determine who put the camera in the restroom, whether it was an inside job or done by someone who, just for giggles and grins, decided to take pictures of people doing whatever it is folks do in restrooms.

Amarillo Police Sgt. Brent Barbee said the camera apparently didn’t have remote control capability. He said that the contents of whatever — or whoever — was photographed by the device remain in police custody.

I surely hope this doesn’t introduce a whole new realm of spying in our culture. Cell phones with cameras are bad enough, given the ubiquitous nature of the devices and their ever-present prying eyes.

Now this? Oh, brother … as in Big Brother.

political news

VP’s ego might keep him out of race

My desire to see Vice President Joe Biden join the Democratic Party presidential primary race remains intact.

I want him to run and I want him to provide a serious challenge to presumed frontrunner Hillary Rodham Clinton.

However, I haven’t been around Washington, D.C., the way the writer of an attached blog — Carl Leubsdorf — has been, so I respect his notion that the vice president has some serious hurdles to clear in deciding whether to run.

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20150803-carl-p.-leubsdorf-8-problems-that-await-a-biden-candidacy.ece

Hurdle no. 3 jumps out at me. It’s Biden’s presidential campaign track record.

Does he want to be known as someone who’s tried three times to get his party’s nomination, only to fall flat on his face? I doubt it. His ego won’t allow it.

I mention his ego because of something the late Sen. George McGovern — for whom I cast my first vote for president in 1972 — once wrote. He said the first thing a successful politician needs is a massive ego. That’s where it starts, he said.

I am betting Joe Biden’s ego doesn’t take a back seat to anyone else’s.

He once sought the 1988 Democratic nomination, but got derailed before the primaries began when it was revealed that he had lifted huge portions of his stump speech from a British pol, Neil Kinnock. Americans laughed at the then-senator from Delaware as a copy-cat.

He ran again in 2008, but got swamped by Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama then rewarded his former foe by picking him to run for vice president — and then after the election he turned to the other rival, Clinton, and appointed her secretary of state.

Hillary Clinton has enlisted an enormous political army to assist her. Biden is facing a serious challenge in getting up to speed relatively late in the primary game.

The ego thing well might prevent him taking the leap a third time.

Unless … something happens to Clinton’s presumed invincibility. As Leubsdorf writes:

“But a more realistic path for him to become the Democratic nominee might be to avoid a divisive fight, back Clinton and, if any of several ticking time bombs sinks her candidacy, step in then to save the Democratic day.”

That, indeed, would provide plenty of balm for the vice president’s ego.

local news

City Hall set for a big day

Amarillo City Council is going to have a lot of eyes on it.

Some of those eyes will belong to those who want the council to send a multipurpose event venue to a vote of the residents.

Other sets of eyes will belong to individuals who think the council needs to take a breath and not act rashly.

The MPEV is going to be on the council’s agenda Tuesday. At issue is whether it should be referred to voters in a non-binding referendum. It’s non-binding because the city has no legal obligation to do the voters’ bidding — but it surely has a political obligation.

A number of Amarillo residents dislike the idea of an MPEV. They think the city’s downtown revival strategy should include expansion of the Civic Center. They do not believe the MPEV will bring the kind of activity that will breathe new life into the downtown district.

I am one who believes in the MPEV. I also hope the council decides against sending this matter to the voters.

It’s going to be paid with private investment money. City planners call it part of a “catalyst” project that will spur construction of a downtown convention hotel nearby.

I hope that’s the case. I believe it is doable.

I have it on good authority that Mayor Paul Harpole will oppose any motion to put the issue to a vote. He’s already invested a lot of energy and sweat equity into the MPEV and related projects. My sense is that Councilman Brian Eades will join the mayor in opposing a send-it-to-voters motion. That leaves the three new guys — councilmen Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — to decide how they’ll vote. Will they vote as a bloc? Or will one, maybe two of them, rethink this idea.

If it goes to a vote and residents say “no” to the MPEV, well, the deal is dead. Downtown revival momentum will be ditched.

Is that what we want to happen? I do not.

Yes, Tuesday is going to be a big day at City Hall.

State news

“Wipe that smirk off your face … “

This handout photo provided by Collin County, Texas shows Texas Attorney General Kenneth Paxton, who was booked into the county jail Monday, Aug. 3, 2015, in McKinney, Texas. A grand jury last week indicted Paxton on felony securities fraud charges. (AP Photo/Collin County via AP)

Look at this picture.

It is Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton posing for his jail-booking mug shot.

Does that smirk bother you? It bothers me. It makes me wonder why politicians feel compelled to smirk like that when they’re being booked into a lockup, a place with sturdy iron bars meant to keep prisoners inside.

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry smirked like that when he was booked after being indicted more than a year ago.

Paxton’s mug shot illustrates, I guess, a certain smugness that politicians have when the criminal justice system tags them with an allegation that they’ve committed a crime.

In this case, a Collin County grand jury has accused Paxton of securities fraud. It’s a big deal. The man could lose his political career if a jury convicts him of the felony accusations.

This mug shot reminds me of my dear, late mother.

I had this bad habit of smirking like that when Mom scolded me when I was a kid. I took the habit with me into the U.S. Army in 1968; our drill sergeants would get in our faces for this or that during our basic training and my reaction would be to, um, smirk. It drove these combat-tested soldiers crazy … and it damn near got me into some serious trouble.

Mom would get so angry she’d order me to “wipe that smirk off your face or I’ll wipe it off for you.”

Attorney General Paxton’s smirk will disappear if a jury hangs the “felon” label on him.

legal news, State news

Texas garners another dubious ‘honor’

First, it was a sitting Texas governor who got indicted by a grand jury.

The governor, Rick Perry, has since left office and is now pursuing the Republican presidential nomination.

Now we have a sitting attorney general who’s been indicted by another grand jury.

Welcome to The Club, Ken Paxton.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/03/paxton-set-surrender-securities-fraud-indictment/

Are they similar? Not by a long shot.

Perry’s indictment occurred in Travis County, where a grand jury has accused him of abuse of power and coercion of a public servant in connection with his veto of funds for the Public Integrity Unit. Perry and his allies have argued that the Travis County indictment was politically motivated; Travis County remains a Democratic bastion, while Perry is a Republican. Get it? Pure politics.

Not so with Paxton. He was indicted by a grand jury in his home county, which is Collin County. Paxton is a Republican attorney general; prior to that he represented Collin County in the Texas House of Representatives. I’m thinking it’s a real good bet that some — perhaps most — of the grand jurors voted for him when he ran for AG in 2014.

Paxton is indicted on two felony counts of securities fraud and another count of failing to register as an investment counselor.

This is serious stuff. Paxton is the state’s top law enforcer. He’s supposed to be clear of this kind of thing. He’s actually admitted to the investment advice matter.

Good grief! Can’t we do better than this in Texas?

OK, should he quit? No. He is still innocent until — or if — a court proves his guilt. Paxton plans to plead not guilty and will seek a trial by jury. Fine. That’s his right.

These indictments, though, of leading Texas politicians is getting worrisome.

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience