Posted on

Mr. Trump grow some hide

Much ado about nothing has been made concerning the Donald Trump-N.Y. Times dust-up over the latter’s weekend article painting the presumptive GOP presidential candidate in a misogynistic light. How on earth would the average reader think such a thought, especially since his public feud with Fox News host Megyn Kelly?

I have to say that the two latest stories about Trump, one the story in the Times on his relations with women and the other where Trump presumably calls a reporter claiming to be The Donald’s publicist, are pretty weak as important journalism is concerned.

What these stories and his reactions to these articles do express — again and again — is that Trump has to be the most thin-skinned politician ever. I thought George W. Bush would hold that title for a while, at least in recent times. But no, Trump has Bush Junior beat all to hell.

It is Trump speaking about how he would open up liable laws that should make a Republican think deeply as to how much of the elephant brand Trump rides upon?

Aren’t the folks like the Koch Brothers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the latter which publishes several newspapers across the nation — including one in my neighborhood — supposedly the right’s last bastion for tort reform?

Well those aforementioned entities do not like so-called frivolous lawsuits. Although, it has yet to be determined whether the Koch boys will join behind Mr. Trump in his foolish presidential exercise.

Donald Trump has not been exactly silent over his use of the court system to help his business  — be that bankruptcy courts or varied civil lawsuits.

Now surely a self-respecting Republican, considering there is such a creature, would not open themselves to charges of being a hypocrite. But the moniker does not seem to bother GOP members at all.

One charge I do not lodge against our local U.S. Chamber of Commerce tort-reform rags is its journalistic ethics. The paper makes its position known in editorials. But it is usually “just the facts ma’am” when it comes to giving details of lawsuits. When I covered civil suits as a reporter for a “real” newspaper, I did not often stray from what was charged and what was replied in the charging document.

As one who was sued in a fairly well-known story that, luckily, my company at the time paid for and the suit being tossed by a federal judge, I realize how frivolous suits are a pain in the ass and are potentially harmful. Still, lawsuits are part of justice. I feel such cases are an extra level of care for our society.

If we are so unfortunate to elect a meathead like Donald Trump, and yes, if he can call people names then so may I call hi names as well, we must hope that future new justices of our highest courts do not reverse New York Times v. Sullivan nor other important media legal precedents. We ask for such not because people should be called names or have hurtful allegations made against them which are not true. We should ask for such a helpful case so those with no power may defend themselves against the Trumps of the world

Posted on

Does coffee fuel the separatist Texas nut movement? I hope not.

Today might be a slow news day for Time.com. The website for the long-running news magazine reports today that a screwball amendment for screwy right-wingers who say Texas should secede from the United States is up for a vote in a state GOP convention.

Texas Republicans will vote on the secession measure Friday during  the state GOP convention taking place at the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center in Dallas. How appropriate is it that the Texas Republicans are convening in the former Dallas Convention Center? The center was renamed after the former GOP U.S. senator from Texas, who was also state treasurer and legislator as well as a television legal correspondent in Houston and a University of Texas cheerleader.

I didn’t always agree with Hutchison — I did let her use my office bathroom on a RV stop to my little East Texas newspaper during her treasurer candidacy — but I don’t remember hearing really off-the-wall ideas from her like her fellow Texas U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn.

"Big Sam" Houston towers over Interstate 45 south of Huntsville, Texas. One can see her a tall Texan who loved America, not like those who want to destroy both.
“Big Sam” Houston towers over Interstate 45 south of Huntsville, Texas. One can see here a tall Texan who loved America, not like those who want to destroy both the great state and union.

The idea of Texas succeeding from the union is nothing new in the Lone Star State. I suppose one act by Texas military hero, former president of the Republic of Texas and later governor of the state, Sam Houston, which makes him an American patriot as well as a Texas hero was his opposition to Texas leaving the Union during the Civil War. Houston was removed from office and refused a Union army offer to put down the rebellion then quietly retired to his home in Huntsville, Texas. If you happen to pass on the southern outskirts of Huntsville on Interstate 45, either in day or night, you will see the 67-foot-tall statue of this larger than life hero.

Since the United States put the kibosh on states taking off on their very on — with a heavy price to both the Union and the southern confederacy — talks of secession have been just talk.

Most of the recent talk has been fueled by one man, a Daniel Miller who lives about 15 minutes away from me in the city of Nederland, Texas, and someone who does make great use of the internet. But the Texas Nationalist Movement, or TMN, claims to have had a 400 percent jump in membership since the 2012 elections.

Among the reasons why the TMN seek a separate nation in Texas is a government wholly in the state,  and “an end to the siphoning of Texans’ hard-earned money by D.C. bureaucrats.” The movement also says that: “Independence is what the people of Texas want.” Well, I suppose I can’t argue with that although the independence is the one that many have sought in coming to the United States.

More than 125,000 people have signed the Change.org petition asking the White House to grant Texas independence. Only 25,000 signatures are needed to elicit a response from the office of the U.S. chief executive.

Jon Carson, director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, responded to the 2012 petition. He said that debate is healthy in our nation of  300 million people and can get noisy, but it shouldn’t tear our nation apart. Carson said the founding fathers created within the Constitution a right to change our nation through the power of the ballot. It didn’t create a right for a portion of the country to walk away from that union.

 “Although the founders established a perpetual union, they also provided for a government that is, as President Lincoln would later describe it, “of the people, by the people, and for the people” — all of the people,” Carson wrote. “Participation in, and engagement with, government is the cornerstone of our democracy. And because every American who wants to participate deserves a government that is accessible and responsive, the Obama Administration has created a host of new tools and channels to connect concerned citizens with White House. In fact, one of the most exciting aspects of the We the People platform is a chance to engage directly with our most outspoken critics.”

It is difficult to imagine what makes people seriously believe that life in the United States is so horrible that they would want to set off what would surely be a battle with the federal government, no matter how many “Texas Nationalists” there really are.

I served in my nation’s armed forces during the Vietnam era and the Cold War. By the time I served it wasn’t at all a really “hot” war. Still, the specter of terrorism was lurking around even back then in the mid 1970s. Three Navy Seabee officers were killed by Philippine terrorists while inspecting a road about three months before I enlisted in 1974. Three years later I would spend quite a bit of time near that same site in the Philippines on a ship. Some of that time included petty officer of the watch duty, armed with a .45-caliber pistol at my side. Knowing what had happened and what could happen would give me a scary edge, no matter that it was “peace time.”

Maybe the kind of strong coffee one gets down here in Southeast Texas, itself considered Cajun country, has something to do with the wild ideas like those who seek a separate nation in Texas. I note that the TMN website listed locally manufactured Seaport Coffee, a family owned and operated company in Beaumont, as it the “official fuel of the Texas Nationalist Movement.” Whether Texas Coffee Co., which makes Seaport as well as many different wonderful kinds of spices, knows of its TMN distinction I do not know. What I do know is that the nationalist movement does not speak for Texas nor Texans. A separate Texas nation is just a dream, a joke, and a dream.

Posted on

Trump arrest petitioners don’t get what they want

Some liberals really get my goat. Those who know me say, “Huh what? You, who are to the left of Uncle Joe Stalin?”  Well, maybe my ire is misdirected. Perhaps it was not only far left types who posted the proposition on the White House “We The People” site, that said Donald Trump should be arrested for inciting violence. A report by NBCnews.com reports that more than 100,000 people signed the petition. The number was sufficient for a response from the White House, but the Obama administration said, in effect, “Nice try.”

“We decline to comment on the specific request raised in the petition, which falls outside the scope of the We the People Terms of Participation,” the We the People Team says. “You can read https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/how-why/terms-participation to get a better sense of why We the People is designed the way it is, and to learn more about its guidelines for use.

 “We encourage you to use the We the People platform to petition the Administration to take action on the policy issues you care about. If a petition gets enough support, White House staff will review it, ensure that it’s sent to the appropriate policy experts for their review, and issue an official response.”

The people who petitioned We the People, whomever any of they are, used a 1969 Supreme Court case, Brandenburg v. Ohio, as a precedent. The First Amendment case centered around the appeal of a Ku Klux Klan leader arrested under a criminal syndication law.

The Supreme opinion used a test that included (1) speech can be prohibited if it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and (2) it is “likely to incite or produce such action.”

Such a test was the legal argument used in the failed petition.

Trump has been using music at his rallies by various performers, including the Rolling Stones, who say the candidate used the music without permission. Those songs include the Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.” That seems an appropriate song for those hundred thousand or so who filed the petition.

If Trump or any of the other batch in the GOP isn’t elected maybe then, “If you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need.”

 

 

Posted on

Does Trump really think he will win the presidency?

One of the more interesting stories I have read lately about Donald Trump and his quest for the Republican presidential nomination has not seen wide play. The story, which I first read on March 28, was on the online magazine Slate. It concerned a supposed high-ranking Trump Super Pac strategist who contends the boisterous candidate never intended to succeed in his campaign.

  Stephanie Cegielski wrote on the blog xojane.com that the Trump camp only sought the candidate getting “double-digit” support.

  “The Trump camp would have been satisfied to see him polling at 12% and taking second place to a candidate who might hold 50%, Cegielski said. “His candidacy was a protest candidacy.”

But the momentum shifted in favor of Trump because of the “angry” American voters. As The Donald passed far beyond what the candidate allegedly hoped for, the narcissistic Trump changed his expectations much like his quick change of issues. Cegielski said that was too scary.

  “He certainly was never prepared or equipped to go all the way to the White House, but his ego has now taken over the driver’s seat, and nothing else matters,” she said. “The Donald does not fail. The Donald does not have any weakness. The Donald is his own biggest enemy.”

Not surprisingly, the main Trump-ette pushed back on the letter and its writer. Hope Hicks, the campaign spokeswoman, responded:

“This person was never employed by the Trump campaign. Evidently she worked for a Super PAC which Mr. Trump disavowed and requested the closure of via the FEC. She knows nothing about Mr. Trump or the campaign and her disingenuous and factually inaccurate statements in no way resemble any shred of truth. This is yet another desperate person looking for their fifteen minutes.”

The rumor-rebuking site, Snopes.com, pointed out some claims as to the position Cegielski held in the “Make America Great Again” Super PAC were hyperbolized.

Having spent some of my years as a firefighter and  and later as journalist has given me some wisdom as to what most would call a cliche, that where there’s smoke there is fire. Well, at least where there is smoke means that there is a good chance of a fire. Arguably, human actions can be a bit more complex than the fire tetrahedron — the combination of  fuel, heat, air and chemical reaction. Such thinking may lead to stereotypes but that is not what I am saying here.

The thought that Trump has an ulterior motive for a presidential bid is likely a more difficult scenario to knock down. From the time that the businessman Trump decided to run as a Republican, I fully expected him to reach a certain point saying that he quits because everything is just as he intended.

That there are exaggerations in Cegielski’s resume does not seem far-fetched for anyone at any level of a political campaign. Or perhaps that may be said in most instances in which a resume is used. Well, maybe that is not so good if you are in some portion of the theological field. But even there …

Whether the essay written by Cegielski has truths, half-truths or even next-to-no truths, there is no doubt that Donald Trump in his latest attention-grabbing stunt — although a huge one —  is capable of doing or saying anything. That is a consummate action of a flake, and I sometimes adore flakes, though certainly not this flake and not this time.

Posted on

Guns, guns everywhere but where are the well-regulated militias?

Today seems to be another one of those days that is all about guns.

Capitol police shot and injured a man, who was described by Capitol Police Chief Matthew R. Verderosa as an individual “known by Capitol Police” who had been to the complex on an unspecified number of times. Verderosa told reporters the man was attempting to enter the Capitol Visitors Center when a magnetometer used for detecting metal went off. The suspect withdrew his weapon and he was immediately shot by an officer. Other details are not yet available as the shooting happened about 1:30 p.m. my time (Central DST.) The Daily Beast has a story naming the alleged suspect, as well as a linked story about that individual’s capture after an incident in October 2015 in which the man yelled that he was a “prophet of God” from the U.S. House balcony. The report indicates the man was charged with “unlawful conduct” at the Capitol, as well as assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. The story does not say why the man is still out walking the streets.

Previous violent incidents have happened inside and outside the nation’s Capitol. Two Capitol police officers were killed in 1998 by a deranged man, two others and the suspect was shot. The suspect, Russell Eugene Weston Jr., 59, has never faced trial as he is believed to be too mentally ill. He remains indefinitely in a federal prison in North Carolina. A famous incident dating back to 1856 also happened inside the Capitol among two congressional members. U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks beat Sen. Charles Sumner with a walking cane, nearly killing the senator. The beating came after Sumner denounced the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which would have admitted Kansas as a free, or slavery-free, state, to the nation. Sumner attacked the bill and mocked the authors of the Act, Sens. Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Brooks was Butler’s cousin. Apparently, there was no walking cane lobby the size of the NRA in those antebellum days.

Down here in Texas, there is hardly a worry that anyone will be near-fatally caned at the Capitol in Austin. The Capitol is guarded by a special force of state troopers who take their jobs very seriously. Plus, one who is licensed to carry a firearm is admitted on an expedited basis. Members of the press, or just plain ol’ Texans wanting to visit the beautiful pink granite edifice, have to wait in another line.

The GNA, Gun Nuts of America, lost one battle over firearms, however. Actually, no group was identified but a person whose psudonym is the hypernationalist, enlisted folks to sign a petition on change.org to allow the open carry of firearms during the July Republican National Convention in Cleveland. More than 42,000 people have signed on despite the fact that federal law says that ain’t happening. A spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service told the Washington Post:

“Title 18 United States Code Sections 3056 and 1752 provides the Secret Service authority to preclude firearms from entering sites visited by our protectees, including those located in open-carry states,” Secret Service spokesman Robert K. Hoback said in a statement. “Only authorized law enforcement personnel working in conjunction with the Secret Service for a particular event may carry a firearm inside of the protected site.”

The hilarious, or maddening, however one cares to define it, GOP presidential candidates have tippy-toed all around the Secret Service laying down the law. The stock answer for Donald J. Trump is “I’d have to see the law first.” Well, Donald “The Donald” Trump, why don’t you go wearing six-guns on each hip on the stage and sees what happens?

I tried to find a non-partisan group with statistics on gun violence. While the Brady Bunch are well meaning altough the figures sometimes are not associated with a particular point in time. But I  presented a link anyway.

A site I found this afternoon presents some pretty near real-time evidence as to what is going on out there with people and guns. The Gun Violence Archives lets one see what is happening in a particular sector of gun violence. Let’s say for instance, children killed by guns. I have no idea how far the database goes back but it is over the last several years at least. The database gives the date, the state, city, address, the number killed and the number wounded. Each incident has a linking “source,” which is likely a newspaper story. There is also a link for the “incident” itself, which lists the names, ages of those killed and wounded and the reason for violent act.

Here's a thought!
Here’s a thought!

Here is a mass murder (which is classified by the database when more than four people are killed) that happened last August in a part of Houston that is less than 85 miles from where I reside. This incident took place Aug. 8, 2015 leaving dead six children ranging in age from six-to-13 years of age, and two adults. The 49-year-old shooter tied up all eight victims and shot them in the head. This is cast as a “family-involved” shooting. Here is just one of the stories with the very saddening details. This article from the Houston Chronicle also includes the three-page criminal complaint against the alleged shooter. The accused, charged with capital murder, turned himself into Harris County Sheriff’s deputies after a standoff.

Many Americans know the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by heart, even though somewhat less probably kn0w the First or the Fourth Amendments word-for-word. Gun nuts cite the 2nd Amendment but probably kn0w even less about the Supreme Court decisions that give gun owners and the “well-regulated militias” a little room to breathe. That is why groups like the NRA wants a pro-gun-nut as president and as members of Congress. The next president in January 2017 can, especially with a Democrat majority in the Senate, replace perhaps a couple or more aging justices of the Court who might arrive with all sorts of ideas — such as tinkering with that language on the “well-regulated justices.” Maybe that’ll happen. Maybe it will not happen. Just read some of those gun-violence cases. If nothing else, perhaps it will make one think about guns and how they are destroying families and friendships one bullet at a time.