Palin now 'seriously' considering a WH run

Sarah Palin has gone from “considering” a campaign for the presidency to “seriously considering” it in 2016.

Oh, boy. This is getting fun.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/27/palin_hits_quasi-conservative_fox_on_fox_dings_oreilly_for_calling_potential_candidacy_reality_show.html

Palin dinged Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly for having the temerity to refer to a possible Palin campaign as a “reality show.” She went after who she calls “quasi-conservatives,” who, I guess, aren’t like her, which I suppose is a “true conservative.”

Truth be told, I no longer recognize the modern version of conservatism as I’ve always understood its political meaning.

A part of me laughs off a possible Palin candidacy. It cannot possibly be serious. Indeed, in the book “Game Change,” a chronicle of the 2008 presidential campaign, key advisers to Republican nominee Sen. John McCain acknowledged not vetting Palin after her name emerged as a possible pick to join McCain on the Republican ticket. McCain’s senior political adviser Steve Schmidt acknowledges now that it was a huge mistake to select Palin to run with McCain.

Yet, another part of me would welcome a Palin campaign, perhaps for the same reason I’m cheering for Mitt Romney to run again. Mitt made some goofs while running for president in 2012. Palin has written the book on gaffes, blunders and foul-ups since her 2008 campaign for VP. So, maybe this is her chance at redemption.

Sounds good, yes? Sure, except that Mitt is a serious politician, while Sarah Barracuda is not.

Mitt can redeem his reputation. Palin is a lost cause.

 

David Wallace: All hat and no cattle?

David Wallace talked a good game when he came to visit us at the newspaper.

I think it was around 2011. He was a partner in this high-dollar development company. He brought his game to Amarillo and pitched it to local civic, government and business leaders. He and his partner, Costa Bajjali, would be the “lead developers” in the city’s effort to rebuild, revive, renovate and resuscitate downtown Amarillo.

He persuaded many of us that he had the goods. He could make it happen. I recall quite vividly the crux of his statement — which I cannot quote verbatim today — that Wallace Bajjali was not in the business of failure. He didn’t make all that money, Wallace implied, by putting the screws to communities that hired him and his company.

Well, guess what? Wallace Bajjali is now history. The firm’s relationship with the city has gone kaput. The Local Government Corporation has declared the firm to be in default. Wallace and Bajjali have had a serious falling out. Wallace has disappeared. So has Bajjali. The city is left holding the bag, so to speak, on a parking garage it still intends to build — despite the absence of Wallace Bajjali as the can’t-miss master developer.

I read in the paper today that Richard Brown, the current president of the LGC, said everyone — including the media should have done a better job of vetting Wallace Bajjali. I guess Brown is trying to shed some of the responsibility for this mess-up by suggesting the media deserve some of the blame for getting entangled with this company.

But the city did lay out some dough. I understand it totals about $1 million. For that kind of money, I think the public deserves an explanation on what in the world happened to this one-time supposedly fail-safe partnership.

I know we can’t force Wallace or Bajjali to spill the beans on each other. But as a taxpayer and as a one-time member of the media who was sold a bogus bill of goods, I’d like some answers to what went so terribly wrong.

You go, Mme. First Lady!

Social media are chattering about first lady Michelle Obama.

No, she didn’t say anything worth noting. All she did was get off a plane in Saudi Arabia sans a scarf covering her hair, which is customary in the Sunni Muslim country.

Some, but not all, of her hosts were offended by the first lady. My own reaction? You go, Mrs. Obama!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/27/michelle-obama-forgoes-a-headscarf-and-sparks-a-backlash-in-saudi-arabia/?tid=sm_fb

The president and first lady stopped briefly in Saudi Arabia to pay their respects after the death of King Abdullah. Saudi custom dictates that women cover their heads; many Saudi women wear niqabs.

But here’s the deal. Saudi women do so to honor their Islamic faith. The Obamas aren’t Muslim. They are practicing Christians. Indeed, although the custom is followed generally in Saudi Arabia, it’s not a requirement, particularly if women are seen only in, shall we say, secular surroundings. Were she to enter a mosque? Yes, I can understand the requirement to cover her hair as required by Islamic teaching.

And as the Washington Post reported: “Exceptions are made for foreigners, however, and Michelle – who did wear loose clothing that fully covered her arms – appears to have been one of them. In photographs from the official events, other foreign female guests are also shown not wearing headscarves.”

That hasn’t stopped Saudi social media from chattering all over creation about the supposed “insult” perpetrated by the American first lady.

Let’s just get over it, shall we?

City cuts ties with developer, then marches on

So many questions, so few answers — at least not yet.

Amarillo’s Local Government Council, which is overseeing the city’s effort to breathe new life into the downtown business district, today cut its ties with an outfit it had hired to be the “master developer” for this project.

Wallace Bajjali, based out of Sugar Land, apparently has gone dark. It closed its office in Joplin, Mo., where it had another redevelopment arrangement. Its phone line in Sugar Land is disconnected. The company is gone, or so it appears.

The LGC met this morning in closed session, then reconvened in open session to vote unanimously to put Wallace Bajjali in “default.”

What gives? Where does the city’s downtown plan stand at this moment?

Well, LGC chairman Richard Brown said the parking garage that Wallace Bajjali was supposed to manage is proceeding anyhow. It’s fair to ask: How does it proceed without a managing developer?

Oh, and what about the ballpark and the downtown hotel? Those projects were assigned to new developers and they, too, will proceed, Brown said.

The private financing for all this work reportedly has been collected — or is about to be collected. No worries. The work will get done.

Wallace Bajjali has been paid more than $1 million in public money for work it has completed for the city, so there won’t be any recovery of funds. So, what does “default” mean in that context?

I recall meeting some years ago with David Wallace — the “Wallace” in this former partnership — and was taken aback by the absolute confidence he expressed in his company’s ability to do this project on time and on budget. Wallace, who resigned from the company effective immediately, told us at the Amarillo Globe-News about all the successes his development company had achieved.

He said something about how his company wouldn’t be in business today if it had racked up a string of failures.

Well, the company that Amarillo has come to know no longer exists.

That leads me to yet another question: What in the world happened between the partners — Wallace and Costas Bajjali — that blew this self-described “success story” apart?

Given the public investment already laid out, the public deserves some answers.

 

Auschwitz liberation turns 70

This still-new year has just welcomed the first of many 70-year anniversaries, most of which are related to the Second World War.

It was 70 years ago this week that the Red Army, which was storming across eastern Europe on its way to Berlin, liberated the Auschwitz death camp, where the Nazi monsters exterminated thousands of prisoners, mostly Jews, while pursuing what Adolf Hitler called “the final solution.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/11368740/Holocaust-Memorial-Day-remembering-horror-of-Auschwitz-70-years-on.html

Other death camps would be liberated by the Soviets — and by American, British and Allied forces rolling toward Berlin from the west. They would uncover horrors never imagined.

The world will spend a good bit of time this year looking back on the final chapter of the world’s most destructive conflict.

Seventy years ago this year:

* Hitler died, taking his own life to avoid being captured by the Soviet army. Good riddance to that hideous monster.

* Franklin D. Roosevelt died. For many Americans alive at the time, he was the only president they knew. He helped rescue the nation from the depths of depression and then led it into battle against tyranny.

* The Manhattan Project brought us the atomic bomb, which FDR’s successor, President Truman, ordered dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We’ll have much more to say about that at a later time.

* The Allies declared Victory in Europe, and the world celebrated VE Day, as Nazi Germany surrendered.

* The Japanese surrendered later and General of the Army Douglas MacArthur accepted their surrender aboard the USS Missouri.

* The United Nations was founded in San Francisco.

Nineteen forty-five was a monumental year, yes?

World War II ended and the world began picking up the pieces of its shattered existence.

Campus-carry gun bills are reloaded

Yeah, that’s the ticket.

College and university campuses have been victimized for decades by gun violence, so what do some Texas legislators want to do? They want to allow folks to pack heat onto those campuses.

That’s the way to solve the issue of gun violence. Bring in more guns.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/01/texas-lawmakers-reload-campus-carry-bills/

Texas Senate Bill 11 has 19 co-sponsors, which under the new rules of the Senate makes it eligible for vote in the full Senate. SB 11 won’t allow guns into campus hospitals, nor will it allow guns in elementary schools. I guess that’s a small victory for common sense.

When I read a blog posted by the Houston Chronicle about the bill’s status with the University of Texas System, well, I got a bit confused. The blog states: “Similar legislation has been proposed in previous years but failed after heavy opposition, especially from campus leaders. University of Texas Chancellor William McRaven recently came out against the effort.”

I can’t tell by reading this post whether McRaven — a retired Navy admiral and one-time SEAL — opposes the legislation or opposes the effort to derail it.

Whatever the case, the notion of allowing more guns onto higher education campuses makes this Texan — that would be me — quite nervous.

 

 

Amarillo has just been decked

Something tells me that Amarillo has a budding crisis of confidence on its hands.

Wallace Bajjali, the developer hired by downtown business and civic interests to ramrod the development of the downtown business district, has vaporized — or so it appears.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/27943700/development-group-hired-to-renovate-downtown-amarillo-has-closed-offices

The company, based in Sugar Land, was supposed to spearhead the effort to collect enough private investors to build (a) a downtown hotel, (b) a multi-story parking garage and (c) an athletic field, aka “multipurpose event venue,” or MPEV for short.

As of today, or perhaps as of some undisclosed time prior to today, the company has closed up shop. Its office in Joplin, Mo., has been shuttered. Its headquarters phone number is Sugar Land has been disconnected. David Wallace, one of the principal owners of the firm, has quit.

Many of us throughout the city are likely wondering: What the hell has just happened?

Someone will need to explain this thoroughly and in language we all can understand.

I’m all ears.

 

Welcome aboard the GOP 'clown van'

Roger Simon isn’t some left-wing, squishy liberal pundit who genuflects at the sound of Barack Obama’s name.

But he’s written an essay that sums up what many are beginning to sense already: The race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination well could provide as many laughs as the 2012 campaign did.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-clown-car-runs-into-ditch-114565.html?hp=c1_3

Simon’s commentary ticks off the dog-and-pony show that was known as the Iowa Freedom Summit, hosted by U.S. Rep. Steve “Cantaloupe Thighs” King. You’ll remember this goof, saying a couple of years ago that illegal immigrants are able to smuggle heavy loads of drugs across the border because they’ve got “thighs the size of cantaloupes.”

Sheesh, already!

It shouldn’t be this way. Most of the serious Republicans who might be running for president stayed away from the King-hosted circus. One of the serious guys, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, got criticized from the TEA party crowd because he threw his arms around Barack Obama, who ventured to the Jersey Shore in October 2012 to assess the damage done by Super Storm/Hurricane Sandy and vowed to provide federal help to New Jersey as it sought to recover from the destruction.

There were plenty of clownish moments at the Freedom Summit, as Simon revealed in his column.

A friend of mine, satirist and political commentator Rick Horowitz, noted that Republicans want to be considered thoughtful and capable of governing … then they trot out Donald Trump and Sarah Palin at this event.

The Republican Party is full of thoughtful and reasonable men and women. Why, though, do we keep focusing our attention on this collection of clowns?

I’m waiting to hear more from the grownups.

 

That darn TelePrompter

Maybe you’ve heard some of the criticism of President Obama from those on the right. They’ve chortled at his reliance on TelePrompters to deliver his soaring rhetoric.

Well, all politicians use the device. It doesn’t matter which party to which they belong. The TelePrompter has been a staple of stump speeches, State of the Union speeches, address to international audiences, hey, perhaps even at county fairs.

Well, Sarah Palin — who I’m quite sure has jabbed and poked at the president for his use of the device over the years — had a little trouble of her own at Rep. Steve King’s Iowa Freedom Summit.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2925162/Palin-s-meltdown-GOP-firebrand-rambles-stutters-teleprompter-error-leave-crowd-baffled-just-saying-s-seriously-interested-2016-run.html

The former half-term governor of Alaska had the darn thing freeze up on her while she delivered her remarks to her fans at the Iowa meeting. She turned out to be, well, not quite so quick on her feet. She started rambling and got a bit confused as she was forced, due to technical difficulties, to improvise on the spot.

Hey, stuff happens. Right?

Just maybe now we can put an end to the pointless criticism — by politicians — who make fun of other politicians’ reliance on a machine that makes ’em sound good.

 

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 cowards 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 man 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.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience