local news

Allred’s calm vs. Cruz’s fire

Colin Allred knows he has a steep hill to climb if he hopes to knock Ted Cruz off his U.S. Senate perch. If he continues to acknowledge that Texas remains a solidly Republican state, he will have to go after the Republicans who cannot stomach Cruz’s bellicosity and his self-serving aggrandizement.

Allred is a Dallas-area congressman who recently announced his intention to battle Cruz in 2024. Cruz, meanwhile, has said he intends to seek re-election, although he hasn’t yet made it official.

If Allred is the Democratic nominee for the Senate, I am going to do all I can from my North Texas venue to assist him. I might even donate some money. Hey, I can do that now I am no longer employed by a media organization.

The Texas Tribune has published a story comparing Allred’s measured, calm, across-the-aisle approach to governing to Cruz’s fire-breathing partisan rants. Allred doesn’t yell at witnesses during committee hearings, unlike Cruz, who seems to delight in seeking to shame and embarrass those who testify before the committees on which he sits.

The Tribune reported: “Knowing how to work with everyone, knowing how to listen to people, how to engage, how to come up with solutions, and really, how to bring people together — that’s what leadership is,” said U.S. Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, a Houston Democrat whose friendship with Allred grew after both flipped Republican-held seats in 2018. “And frankly, that’s the leadership we need in our state right now.”

Can you imagine anyone saying something like about the Cruz Missile? Well … I cannot.

Democrat Colin Allred brings contrasting style to race against Ted Cruz | The Texas Tribune

I can’t even begin to predict that Texans will endorse Rep. Fletcher’s view of the leadership that Allred would bring to the Senate. I am left only to hope that Texans have grown weary of Cruz’s bombast … and his utter lack of accomplishment of anything constructive during his time in the Senate.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

economic news

Constitution lays it out there

Section 4 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, speaks with crystal clarity about how our government must treat the debt it owes.

Here is what it says: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

Wow, man. “Shall not be questioned,” the amendment states.

You know what this means? It means that the Republican dodge in demanding spending cuts before approving an increase in the debt ceiling is, um, an unconstitutional tactic.

President Biden is in the middle of talks with congressional leaders of both parties. He met with them in the Oval Office the other day. They’re planning another meeting on Friday. He said he is “considering” invoking the 14th Amendment if he and the GOP cannot reach an agreement on the debt ceiling.

I am not a constitutional scholar, but I certainly know a declarative statement when I see one.

Section 4 of the 14the Amendment is as declarative statement as anything I can find in the Constitution.

Joe Biden is as fluent in constitutional language as any man who’s ever held the office of president. Mr. President, you need to remind your congressional colleagues of what the nation’s governing document tells them.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Trump: accountable

I have been trying to process the guilty verdict handed down in that trial involving E. Jeanne Carroll and Donald J. Trump.

Carroll had sued Trump alleging he raped her in the 1990s. She didn’t get the rape conviction she sought, but she got damn near everything else.

So, with a jury deciding in less than four hours after an eight-day trial, we now can call Trump a sexual abuser and a slanderer. He sexually abused Carroll and defamed her character.

The jury decided Carroll should get $5 million in damages.

Trump said he plans to appeal. Here’s the best part: Trump is accusing the presiding judge of being a “Trump hater.”

Hmm. Well, consider this: The judge gave Trump every opportunity to change his mind and testify in his own defense. He didn’t.

The judge went far beyond what is normal by giving Trump ample avenues to defend himself. That isn’t the action of a “Trump hater.”

I am glad for Carroll. She didn’t deserve to be treated in a defamatory manner by Donald Trump. And Trump doesn’t deserve to be considered the frontrunner for the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nomination.

But if the GOP is going to nominate a twice-impeached, once-indicted (for now) and convicted sexual abuser for president, then the party is in far worse condition than any of us ever imagined.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Why worry about Santos?

For the life of me I cannot fathom easily why I should give a damn about a freshman Republican congressman from New York.

But I kinda do give a damn! Here’s why.

George Santos has been indicted by the Department of Justice on a number of charges related the bucketload of lies Santos told while getting elected to Congress in 2022. They relate to mail fraud and campaign expenses.

Santos has pleaded not guilty to the federal charges.

Whatever … here’s the deal about this serial liar.

He has become a top target of Democratic Party strategists looking to flip the House district back to their corner after Santos’s surprise victory in 2022.

Santos probably ought to just resign his seat and concentrate on defending himself in court. Were he to do that, it would reduce the GOP’s razor thin House majority even more, giving Speaker Kevin McCarthy even more reason to complain about sleepless nights.

Let me remind you, too, that McCarthy had to make a whole lot of concessions to the MAGA wing of his GOP caucus just to win election as speaker … on the 15th ballot.

Thus, it becomes important that George Santos be held accountable for (a) the lies he told to get elected and (b) the allegations that he misspent campaign money given to him by those who swallowed the baloney he served them.

I suppose I should mention, too, that even his Republican colleagues cannot stand him. Do you recall seeing anyone standing with this liar defending him for the deceitful campaign he waged?

I suppose one of the lessons all voters should take from this loser’s saga is to remain vigilant when someone talks about family members surviving the Holocaust or 9/11. Santos’s lies on those tragedies helped open the door to all the lies he told to win voters’ trust.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

economic news

They must avoid debacle

The debt-ceiling debacle that might befall the nation is an event that no sane politician anywhere should want to occur.

Republicans for the first time in the nation’s history are threatening to withhold the votes to raise the debt ceiling because they want cuts in spending to which they have contributed along with their Democratic colleagues.

Now that a Democrat is in the White House, though, Republicans are insisting on massive spending cuts to offset what historically — since the beginning of the republic — has been a pro forma vote to increase the debt ceiling. Where was the GOP outrage over spending when Republicans were in the White House?

Failure to do so would put the nation in default for the first time ever. The consequence of that? Well, every economist on Earth says the nation would spiral into economic catastrophe.

Millions of jobs would be lost; interest rates would skyrocket, making home- and auto-buying impossible; the stock market would collapse; retirement accounts would vaporize; and — this is where it really hits home for me — Social Security payments would be suspended.

I am on a fixed income. I rely on my Social Security income to pay my own bills. What’s more, if my retirement account goes poof!, then I won’t have that money on which could pay those bills.

How can I say this clearly? Do not allow any of this happen, GOP members of Congress! You will pay dearly for it at the next election.

That ain’t a threat. It’s a lead-pipe promise!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

local news

Journey gains some light

Well, everyone, my journey through the darkness has brightened up with the arrival this week of my elder son.

My wife’s passing from cancer in February has presented all of us with a mighty struggle to be sure. My sons, my daughter-in-law and my granddaughter all miss Kathy Anne terribly … as I do. The sadness I continue to feel without her won’t go away any time soon. Of that I am certain.

My son’s arrival after he sold his house in Amarillo, though, has brightened both of our spirits. It’s the “new era” I mentioned in an earlier blog post.

It will be a temporary arrangement. He needs to find a job, even though he is officially “retired” from the state of Texas, where he worked for 20-plus years as an adult probation officer.

After that, then the search will commence on a new place to hang his hat. However, I am delighted beyond words to have human companionship in my house, which had grown so very quiet since early February.

He brought his two cats with him. As of this moment, there have been no issues with Toby the Puppy, who continues to dominate his house. I don’t expect any trouble with the kitties. At least that is my fond hope.

This arrangement produces a whole array of “new normal” activities for both my son and me.

The journey continues.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

education news

Princeton ISD voters speak out, however …

I want to offer a tepid endorsement of the decision rendered this past weekend by voters who live in the Princeton Independent School District.

Those who bothered to vote have endorsed a $797 million bond issue to build several new campuses over the next decade. The amount of the bond issue is gigantic, but it is needed in light of the explosive growth that is occurring — and will continue — within the Princeton ISD.

That’s the good news, and it is very good news, indeed.

However, let’s examine something else. The final unofficial vote totals are, to put it simply, abysmal. Princeton ISD officials said that 597 votes were cast in support of the bond issue, compared to 302 votes cast against it. That’s a 66.4% to 33.6% difference. Not even close!

What drives me to the edge of nuttiness, though, is that local elections do not seem to gin up any interest. I don’t have any hard data on the eligible rolls of voters within the school district. The population of the school district is something a bit north of 20,000 residents. Of that total, my rule of thumb puts the number of eligible voters at about half.

So, if that estimate holds up, that puts the percentage of turnout at less than 9%.

I am compelled to ask whether, therefore, the 597 votes in favor of this bond issue constitute a “mandate.” It most assuredly doesn’t come close to a mandate.

What we have here is a case of a few people making decisions for others.

I long have been a champion for greater voter turnout as a way to spread the power throughout a large base. The turnout for Saturday’s critical bond issue invests far too much power in far too few Princeton ISD constituents.

Our democratic process works better when more of us take part.

Don’t misconstrue me on this point. I am delighted that the bond issue received the endorsement it got. The school system was transparent in developing the proposal. It made its recommendation in full public view.

I only wish more of us would have responded at the ballot box.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

local news

House boots Slaton

OK, it was a symbolic vote, given that a disgraced Texas legislator had resigned his office a day earlier, but it is a welcome signal that the Texas Legislature won’t stand for the kind of conduct on which it was voting.

The state House voted 147 to zero to boot former Rep. Bryan Slaton, a Royse City Republican from its ranks. The House needed a two-thirds vote to expel one of its members. Boy howdy, it got what it needed!

Slaton had sex with an underage staffer in his Austin apartment, getting the young woman too drunk to fend off any advances. The House Government Investigations Committee recommended expulsion for the second-term lawmaker.

Well, he’s gone now. I’m glad of it, given his extreme hypocrisy in boasting that he is a “family values, Christian conservative” politician.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

 

local news

Quick solution? By all means!

“People want a quick solution. The long-term solution here is to address the mental health issue.”

So said Texas Gov. Greg Abbott when a Fox Propaganda Network interviewer asked him about public opinion surveys indicating widespread support for legislative action in the wake of the Allen mall massacre that killed eight victims.

Yes, we want a “quick solution.” We are entitled to demand quick action. As for the mental health matter, which Abbott favors, we can work on that too.

So, here’s an idea: How about instituting a ban on AR-15 rifle purchases while working forthrightly on the mental health issues that drive madmen such as the Allen mall lunatic to kill innocent victims?

There must be a “quick solution” provided by government. Will it prevent all future acts of insanity from occurring? Probably not, but the public is demanding our government to take decisive action.

This is what we elect our leaders to do!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

It’s time for politics

The massacre at the Allen Premium Outlet Mall has produced the usual mantra from politicians and others who want to ignore the issue of “gun regulation.”

They are telling us that “this is no time for politics.” Excuse me? It is past time for politics.

They purport to be speaking for grieving families in shock over the assault on their lives by a lunatic who opened fire with an AR-15 rifle. It was the 199th mass shooting in the country this year … on the 128th day of the year!

At issue is how to control the purchase of firearms and keeping them out of the hands of loons such as the moron who opened fire in Allen. That is purely a political solution.

It starts with enacting legislation that is faithful to the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. Is there a solution out there? I believe there is. Does a ban on weapons designed to kill people on the battlefield violate the amendment’s guarantee that we can “keep and bear arms”? No, it does nothing of the sort!

What about universal background checks that could flag individuals with histories of mental instability? The Allen mall shooter was discharged from the Army in 2008 because of “mental issues.” Yet he still owned an AR-15. Is it OK to wonder if a background check could have kept the gun out of his hands were he to seek to purchase it? What’s more, how does that violate the rights of anyone with zero such issues? It doesn’t!

I am weary of the refrain in the wake of these tragedies that “this is no time for politics.” These solutions reside in the halls of government, where politicians roam and where they — if they ever grow a spine — could enact laws that make us safer.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience