Back to the 'cowards' tweet, please

Michael Moore has been taking grief lately over a tweet he put out in which he called military snipers “cowards.”

I’ve commented on it here. Others have, too. Now, though, the filmmaker is fighting back, accusing his critics of “making sh*** up about me.”

I am beginning to think many on both sides of this argument are seeking to change the subject.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/michael-moore-defends-record-on-vets-telling-fox-news-quit-making-sht-up-about-me/

Moore’s tweet was in response to the film “American Sniper,” in which Bradley Cooper portrays the late Chris Kyle in a gripping story about Kyle’s emotional struggles while serving as a Navy SEAL sharpshooter in Iraq.

The criticism has been ferocious, mainly from conservative media outlets. For the record, I do not consider myself a fan or follower of most of the conservative media talking heads. I tilt the other direction. However, I found Moore’s comments about the so-called cowardice of snipers to be highly offensive.

Moore’s comment on snipers being cowardsĀ had nothing to do with the nation’s war policy in Iraq. Moore, though, is seeking to turn that argument back on his critics, some of whom have called him “un-American” for his opinions, I guess, about snipers and about his general world view.

I won’t go there. He’s entitled to express his opinion. My own notion is that he messed when he expressed this particular opinion about this particular manĀ doing with this particular duty.

As is often the case with these controversies, someone in the public eye puts something out there that others find offensive and then tries to cover his tracks by changing the subject, or trying to broaden the argument to include elements that really have no bearing on the misstatement made in the first place.

 

'Selma' lays racism bare

“Selma” may be one of the more important films of the past decade.

It tells the story of Martin Luther King Jr.’s efforts to rally a march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala. It’s gripping in the extreme.

But my wife and I took the same feeling away from the film as we drove home this evening from the theater. It was the presence of the Confederate flags being waved by counter protesters who did and said some nasty things aimed at the marchers.

Proud sons and daughters of the Confederacy keep saying — with all earnestness — that their pride rests in their heritage and that it has nothing to do with race. They contend, for example, that slavery was not the reason the Confederate State of America seceded from the Union.

But those Confederate flags waving at the Edmund Pettus Bridge and in Montgomery, where the marchers ended their trek tell a different story — at least to my wife and me.

This enduring symbol of the Confederacy often is displayed by those objecting to African-Americans’ calls for equality. Why is that? How is it that the Stars and Bars has become such a symbol of groups that remain dead set against equality for all Americans based solely on the color of their skin?

We watched the film tonight with our son and his girlfriend. Our son said the film is “tough to watch,” but said it is “worth the time.” We all liked the film very much.

For me, the toughest elements to watch in the movieĀ were the brutality inflicted by law enforcement on the marchers seeking to cross the bridge — and the sight of those Confederate flags waving amid the hideous insults being hurled at Americans who were demanding the right to vote.

Yes, indeed.Ā “Selma” is an important piece of moviemaking.

 

U.S., Israel are standing together

House Speaker John Boehner’s foolish effort to embarrass President Obama by inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress — without informing the White House in advance — has fueled equally foolish talk about supposed fractures in the U.S.-Israel relationship.

And, of course, it’s coming from the right wingers who are looking for ways to undermine the president’s efforts at some admittedly tricky diplomacy.

http://thehill.com/policy/international/230654-mcdonough-relationship-with-israel-most-important-in-world

White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said today the U.S.-Israeli partnership is the most important alliance in the world and affirmed — yet again — that the United States stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel.

Boehner, though, is seeking to undercut that relationship by pressuring the Obama administration into clamping new sanctions on Iran, which currently is negotiating with the United States and other nations on a way to disband its nuclear program. Obama opposes piling on more sanctions at this moment. Netanyahu wants the United States to add them. He’s hooking up with Boehner to make the case.

And all this is fueling ridiculous talk-show rhetoric about the “testy” relationship between Netanyahu and Obama.

I get Netanyahu’s perspective on Iran. The Iranians have zero secret of their desire to exterminate Israel. The Israelis are prepared to defend themselves at all costs.

But the Israeli prime minister has been careful in his public comments — his impending speech to Congress notwithstanding — to avoid insulting Barack Obama because, in my view, he knows that the United States will stand with Israel militarily if and when the need arises. Let’s all pray that it won’t.

The alliance between the nations is vital and the leaders of both governments know it.

 

Puppy tales, Part 10

Some timeĀ ago I promised I’d scale back the messages about our new dog, Toby.

A new development has occurred. It’s all good, and it’s worth sharing. Perhaps other dog owners out there can relate.

I’ve mentioned in a previous blog — or perhaps two —Ā that Toby is a pretty smart little guy.

It turns out heĀ understands English quite nicely. So, with that, my wife and I have been forced now to spell certain words out rather than just say them. You know, kind of like the way new parents do with their children — and just as we did with ours.

Toby know the words “walk,” “treat,” and “ride.”

If we blurt out “walk” within Toby’s earshot, he jumps up and starts running around the entry-way doorknob where we keep his leash. We get a similar response to the word “treat.” His ears perk up and he runs into the kitchen where we keep his bag of snacks. And, of course, the same thing goes for “ride.” Since he loves riding in either of our vehicles, he heads for the leash.

Yes, we have to spell these words out now if we say them in a context not relating to Toby’s activities.

My wife and I only thought our nest was empty when the younger of our two sons went off to college those many years ago.

I’m not going to bet against our dog learning more words that will keep us on our toes. For all we know, he might even learn to speak them.

 

Patrick fills the chairs; now let's watch

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is the Man of the Texas Senate and his first serious act as the No. 2 man in state government is complete: He’s filledĀ Senate committee chairs.

By the looks of it, he more or less made good on a campaign pledge by putting almost all Republicans in those chairs. Two of the chairmanships went to Democrats — John Whitmire at Criminal Justice and Eddie Lucio at Intergovernmental Affairs.

Patrick had suggested during the 2014 campaign he might go all-Republican if he was elected.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/23/larry-taylor-named-lead-senate-education-committee/

The tradition of past lieutenant governors has been to sprinkle chairmanships a bit more liberally — if you’ll pardon the expression — to senators from the opposing party. Patrick doesn’t much adhere to Senate tradition, though, as Texans soon will learn.

Patrick’s immediate predecessor, David Dewhurst, followed that lead, as did his immediate predecessor, Bill Ratliff, andĀ the man before him, Rick Perry, and the man who preceded Perry, the late Bob Bullock.

Lucio, I should add, got the chairmanship after voting withĀ Republicans to do away with another Senate tradition — the two-thirds rule that required at least 21 votes in the Senate to send any measure to a full vote. What the heck, you do what you gotta do, correct?

As for payback in reverse, longtime GOP Sen. Craig Estes was denied a chairmanship after he abstained on the same vote. Did one thing have to do with the other? Well, I’m just askin’.

***

Perhaps the most closely watched chairmanship selection focused on the Education Committee. Amarillo’s Republican Sen. Kel Seliger has wanted to chair that panel. He sought it actively. However, he and Patrick aren’t exactly close, so the Education gavel went to Larry Taylor of Friendswood. Seliger’s consolation prize was to retain his chairmanship at Higher Education.

I guess that will be enough to sustain Seliger’s interest as theĀ Senate slogs through its business.

But the place won’t be asĀ friendly as it has been for, oh, most of the past century.

 

Boehner, Bibi are dissing the White House

Isn’t it customary to allow the president of the United States conduct foreign policy? And isn’t it unwelcome when other American political leaders interfere directly with sensitive negotiations that are taking place?

Welcome to the new world of political brinkmanship.

House Speaker John Boehner has poked President Barack Obama in the eye by inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress — without consulting with the president.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/boehner-netanyahu-congress-invitation-Obama

Why is that a big deal?

Well, Boehner wants to impose further economic and political sanctions on Iran while the Islamic Republic is negotiating with the United States and other powers on a deal to disband its nuclear program. Netanyahu is on Boehner’s side, so he’s going to speak to Congress next month to make that case.

Bibi won’t visit the White House while he’s in-country, which is customary, given that he and his Likud Party are about to face parliamentary elections in Israel. Indeed, Netanyahu himself has decried the practice of using foreign visits to further political ends in his country — and yet, here is doing, what he once condemned.

The aggravation comes in large part because Boehner has inserted himself directly into this matter that is underway between the State Department and its counterpart in Iran. U.S., allied and Iranian negotiators are seeking a way to avoid Iran obtaining nuclear weapons, which virtually every civilized nation on Earth says is unacceptable.

Now we have the head of government of our most reliable Middle East ally coming here seeking to undercut that effort — with the blessing of the speaker of the House of Representatives.

It was leaked some time back that a White House aide referred to Netanyahu as a “chickens***.”

That term actually applies to Speaker Boehner.

 

Circus act convenes in Iowa

Call him the ringmaster. That would be Congressman Steve King of Iowa, the Republicans’ leading critic of immigration reform and the individual hosting something called the Iowa Freedom Summit.

It should be a showcase for what’s left of the Republican Party’s intellectual heft. There’s still plenty left, but the party’s center-stage attention has been hijacked by some seriously radical individuals — such as Rep. King.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/steve-king-iowa-summit-immigration-dreamers-114552.html?hp=c4_3

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is there, along with Donald Trump, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben CarsonĀ and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. But … all is not lost here. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie also is there and I count Christie among the grownups of the party, a guy prone to actually thinking rationally and reasonably.

He’s no doubt going to trot out his conservative credentials to the summit attendees because, well, he’s thinking of running for president next year and the starting point in the campaign is in Iowa, where those GOP caucuses are dominated by the evangelical Christian wing of the party.

The news out of the Iowa event has been twofold: Palin and Trump both have expressed “serious” interest in running for the White House in 2016. Seriously. They’re thinking about it.

Look, the more the merrier. That’s how I see it. Neither of them is a legitimate contender for the presidency of the world’s greatest nation. By my count, I see maybe two individuals at this summit who should be taken seriously: the aforementioned Christie and Scott Walker.

The other serious candidates-in-waiting — Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul — aren’t there. Why? Because they’ve all staked out moderate positions here and there that just don’t comport with the far right wing of the party.

The ringmaster, King, is playing this event beautifully — IĀ will acknowledge. He’s getting a lot of attention and, by golly, he’s getting that GOP base all fired up.

Let the fun continue.

'No-go zones' myth builds

Fox News got itself into some trouble recently when it reported something about European countries establishing “no-go zones” where Muslims reportedly don’t allow non-Muslims to enter.

The story turned out to be false. The media have piled on, chortling and laughing out loud at Fox for its insistence on these zones, particularly in Paris. The mayor of Paris threatened to sue Fox over its false reporting. Good luck with that, Mme. Mayor.

Fox News anchors apologized repeatedly for the mistake.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/paris-mayor-to-sue-fox-over-no-go-zone-comments/384656/

But some on the right have wondered out loud why Fox is getting hammered. The Amarillo Globe-News questioned in an Opinion page comment today whether other media would have been beaten up as badly as Fox has been. The commentary suggested much of the criticism is unfair, but noted that the criticism the network has received has been justified “to an extent.”

I have a possible answer as to why the piling on has occurred.

Fox News has done a very good job of demonizing other media outlets for transgressions real and sometimes imagined. Its talking heads quite often disparage other media’s coverage of issues on the basis of a perceived bias.

Listen to some of the network’s talk shows and you get the clear and distinct impression that their side is correct and the so-called “mainstream media” is wrong.

I must add that Fox News is as mainstream as other media, given its prominence amongĀ the broadcast and cable networks that are on the air these days.

The piling on over its mistaken reporting about the no-go zones and the coverage of its repeated on-air apology for messing up is a consequence of its own making.

Payback can be harsh.

Let's change the subject; enough 'Deflate-gate'

Will someone out there please put a cork on this football inflating matter?

Please, pretty please?

New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick held a press conference today. A young friend of mine here in Amarillo — a dedicated Pats fan — said he thinks the coach “put an end to it today” with his presser.

Man, I hope so.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bill-belichick-is-angry-he-spent-a-week-studying-balls/ar-AA8xVva

Belichick says the Patriots followed “every rule” with regard to the footballs, which have become the subject of ongoing controversy and commentary — yes, including here. Someone ratted out the Patriots after they smashed the Indy Colts in the AFC championship game, saying the balls were under-inflated, which reportedly made them easier to catch in the cold, rainy weather in Foxboro, Mass.

Whatever.

The story is growing more legs than a centipede. I’m waiting now for the conspiracy theories to start hatching. Bet on it, once they do and they start getting lives of their own, this story will never die. Ever.

My solution is a simple one. The National Football League should take responsibility for inflating the balls. Inflate them identically. Pay no attention whatever the quarterback wants. Tell eachĀ QB, “Here’s the ball, buster. Take it or leave it.” Give each team their allotment of footballs as they are taking the field for their pre-game drills. And do not let anyone other than the players — and officials, of course — touch ’em before, during or after the game.

Now, let’s get ready to play the Super Bowl.

 

What? Cities can't decide these things?

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has signed a law that bans cities from enacting municipal minimum-wage standards for businesses within the city.

That’s strange. I have thought Republicans, such as Fallin, were categorically opposed to what they call “government overreach,” that local control should trump bigger-government control whenever possible?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/oklahoma-minimum-wage_n_5152496.html

Oklahoma cities, like cities in all the other states, do have this thing called “home rule charter” form government. I believe that enables cities to set the rules inside their corporate limits. Do I have that wrong?

Gov. Fallin’s signature on the bill now disallows cities from making that call.

It reminds me a bit of the Texas statute that used to prohibit cities from deploying red-light cameras if city officials perceived a problem with people running red lights, causing accidents and putting local residents in danger. That law has been amended and some cities — such as Amarillo — are using the cameras to catch those who run through red lights.

Those who support the Oklahoma minimum-wage ban say it “levels the playing field” for all cities. A GOP state representative said, “An artificial raise in the minimum wage could derail local economies in a matter of months. This is a fair measure for consumers, workers and small business owners.”

Sure thing. But if business owners agree that the $7.25 hourly wage is too low and are willing to pay more, don’t they have the right to do so if the city where they operate grants them permission?

Local control, man. Local control.

I thought that was preferable to patronizing Big Government.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience