Is it time to revisit free speech?

Billboard near Benton, Tennessee

Just when you think politics can’t sink any lower, along comes a candidate who breaks through and lowers the bar even further. This time with a billboard which reads “Make America White Again”.

Rick Tyler, an independent candidate for the 3rd Congressional District in Tennessee is the person responsible for the messages (see below). According to a story from WSMV-TV, Tyler said the sign’s message is that America should go back to a “1960’s, Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver time when there were no break-ins; no violent crime; no mass immigration.”

He went on to add that he has no hatred in his heart for “people of color”, although one does wonder what he wants done to them. Maybe he can get them to leave voluntarily (who could blame them).

Tyler told a local ABC News affiliate that the sign was taken down on Tuesday evening after the story went viral. His restaurant, Whitewater Grille in Ocoee, is also facing calls for a boycott.

We need to remind ourselves that there will always be people who are extremists and are looking for a way to get noticed (can you say Westboro Baptist Church) and everyone has a right to their opinion, but there comes a time when somebody needs to say enough is enough.

Maybe we need to revisit freedom of speech along with the right to bear arms.

Another billboard for Rick Tyler for Congress.

The blind squirrel finds the nut

Mary Lou Bruner, 69, Candidate for State Board of Education, District 9. A Tea Party group dropped its support of Mary Lou Bruner on Tuesday, May 24.It’s not always easy living in Texas. The state has a lot of great things going for it, but like other states there are times when one has to shake their head in bewilderment.

Take for example the recent run-off election for a seat on the Texas State Board of Education. Mary Lou Bruner was a candidate who received 48 percent of the vote in a three-way primary, just two percentage points of winning, and since Texas is a red state, becoming the presumptive candidate to join the board.

The 69-year-old candidate, who looks like someone from the SNL Church Lady sketch, ran on a platform of keeping gay “subliminal messages” out of text books. Now you would think most conservative Republican voters would support that position, but then a funny thing happened; somebody started looking at her Facebook page and found these pearls of wisdom:

  • The United Nations launched a plot to depopulate the planet.
  • President Obama is a former gay prostitute.
  • Democrats secretly assassinated JFK because he was conservative.
  • House Speaker Paul Ryan’s beard made him look like “a terrorist.”
  • Dinosaurs and people lived at the same time.
  • The climate crisis was Karl Marx’s idea.

In a released statement, Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller said, “Texas escaped an education train wreck tonight. If Bruner had ultimately won election to the board, she would have instantly become the most embarrassingly uninformed and divisive member on a board that already too often puts politics ahead of making sure our kids get a sound education.”

In the end, the voters decided that Keven Ellis, Lufkin school board president might be better suited for the position proving that even a blind squirrel can find the nuts, even if they look like a church lady. Blind-Squirrel-Finds-a-Nut-small

In the public interest?

Scrooge would be proud

Something interesting is taking place in the world of journalism. The world is buzzing about the release of the Panama Papers which reveled prominent world leaders hiding millions of dollars in offshore accounts and avoiding paying taxes.

(It was also hard to believe there was gambling going on at Rick’s Place in Casablanca).

The fallout has already begun with Iceland’s Prime Minister resigning after the leaked documents showed his wife owned an offshore company with big claims on collapsed Icelandic banks. More resignations are expected as the U.S.-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) reveal more names from the more than 11.5 million documents leaked from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca.

This poses an interesting question for ICIJ and other journalists. Is it ethical to use stolen materials to publish a story, even if it is in the public’s interest to do so?

Back in 1971, Daniel Ellsberg released the Pentagon Papers which showed how the Johnson administration systematically lied, not only to the public, but to congress as well about the Vietnam War.

Ellsberg was initially charged with conspiracy, espionage and theft of government property, but the charges were later dropped after prosecutors investigating the Watergate Scandal learned that the staff members in the Nixon White House had ordered the so-called White House Plumbers to engage in unlawful efforts to discredit Ellsberg.

Much like the Panama Papers, Ellsberg took the papers and released them to the N.Y. Times. At the time, Ellsberg said:

I felt that as an American citizen, as a responsible citizen, I could no longer cooperate in concealing this information from the American public. I did this clearly at my own jeopardy and I am prepared to answer to all the consequences of this decision.

The Times v. United States is generally thought of as a victory for an extensive reading of the First Amendment, but as the Supreme Court ruled on whether the government had made a successful case for prior restraint. Its decision did not void the Espionage Act or give the press unlimited freedom to publish classified documents.

There is big difference between classified documents and documents from a business, but the point ends up being the same; should the press use material that was stolen and not authorized?

The press faced a similar question when former CIA employee Eric Snowden leaked classified information from the National Security Agency to journalists with stories appearing in The Guardian and The Washington Post. Snowden has been called a hero, whistleblower, patriot and traitor.

I am all for outing the bad guys, but do two wrongs make it right? I guess that, once again is determined by what side of the fence you are sitting on.

Sucking the oxygen out of the room

Mad MagazineLike many Americans, I am watching the primary season with great fascination. After months of campaigning, candidates taking swings at each other (and in some instances, their wives) and generally looking very tired (I still have a hard time understanding why anyone would want to be president) the road to the White House continues.

It seems that the one constant is reporters asking the candidates, ‘what do you think of what Donald Trump said/did’? I understand why they ask the question. Talking about The Donald pumps up the ratings. Viewers/readers/listeners are drawn to anything related the TV reality star like the proverbial moth to a flame. I get that.

What I don’t get is why the other candidates (especially Cruz and Kasich) answer the questions. If I was offering advice, I would have them respond with something like, ‘thank you for your question, here is my plan to fix/improve (insert topic here).

The conversation is being dominated by what Trump says, what Trump does and what Trump wants, which is great for Trump, but not so great for the others. They need to tell us why their ideas are right for America.

Reporters and editors might not like this, and you do run the risk of getting less airtime and coverage, but how much value do you think they are currently getting talking about an opponent. It makes sense when your opponent attacks you and mentions you by name, but I would otherwise steer clear.

I am reminded of Mitt Romney during a debate at the last presidential election. The reporter chided Romney for not answering his question. Romney’s reply?  ‘You can ask the question any way you like and I can answer it any way I like’.

Say that again?

Just when you think you’ve heard it all, along comes someone to prove you wrong. Meet Robert Morrow, the recently elected chair of the Republican Party for Travis County (home to the city of Austin and the fifth largest county in Texas).

Morrow beat his opponent James Dickey by more than 6,000 votes, finishing with 56.44 percent of the total votes counted in the race. So what’s the problem?

Seems Morrow has been known to be a little edgy in his opinions. In some of his recent tweets, he said:

  • Marco Rubio of Florida is “very likely a gay man who got married”
  • The Republican National Committee was just a “gay foam party”
  • “Would Hillary Clinton swallow all of your cum or would it be more of a Lorena Bobbitt situation”

For years, Morrow has alleged that Rick Perry is secretly bisexual; in 2010, he referred to him as “Gov. Skank Daddy” in an email.

Precinct chairman Edwin Mallory told the Texas Tribune “Just because Robert Morrow is whacked out a little bit, you have to look at the other side of the book — those poor bastards are so afraid of losing power, they will say or do anything to hold onto it. They know Robert Morrow won’t play ball with them.”

Other members of the Travis County Republican Party are trying to figure out a way to remove Morrow from office. Murrow’s response? “Tell them they can go fuck themselves.”

If it bleeds…it leads

275px-KTRK_open Yesterday was a big news day here in Houston. There was Super Tuesday where many candidates were vying for their parties nomination.

Another big story was astronaut Scott Kelly returning to Houston after spending a record 340 days in outer space.

So when I woke up this morning, I was excited to catch up on all the news until I turned to ABC-13. Their 5:30 a.m. newscast began, not with the election coverage and not with Scott Kelly’s triumphant return. No, they decided the #1 story was regarding a chuck wagon race driver being thrown from his wagon during last night’s Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo.

Being the respected Houston’s News Leader, the station did warn us the video was very graphic and might be disturbing to some views, but we’re going to show it anyways. I am not trying to make fun of the accident. I realize someone was hurt badly and I trust they will make a full recovery, but this is the lead story?

Did no one in the newsroom say, “Hey wait a minute. Wasn’t there some kind of election last night?”

Maybe the unfortunate rodeo mishap allowed the station to have a reporter do a live shot from the scene (I’m sure all the fun at the Red Neck Country Club was over by then), but as ESPN (who is owned by the same company as ABC-13) would say; “Come On Man!’

Taking a leap of faith

Today is Feleap-year-waste-time-february-somewhat-topical-ecards-someecardsb. 29 which means we are in a Leap Year, or as smart people call it; a bissextile year. Most people know we add an extra day to account for the fact that a standard solar calendar is 365 days, 48 minutes, 45 seconds or roughly 365 ¼ days.

What you may not know is our Gregorian calendar (instituted by Pope Gregory) requires losing 3 days every 400 years which means years ending in 00 don’t have a leap day, expect every 400 years when they do (got all this?).

I find it funny to note that the very first Playboy Club featuring waitresses in bunny outfits opened in Chicago on this date in 1960. Today is also Rare Disease Day, in honor (I’m guessing here) of today being a rare day.

Other famous happenings on this date happened back in 1504 when Christopher Columbus used a lunar eclipse to his advantage over the indigenous people of Jamaica and trick them into giving him food. Not to be outdone, the first warrants of the Salem witch trials were issued in 1692.

Ironically, Hattie McDaniel became the first African-American to win an Oscar back in 1940 for her role in Gone with the Wind (not to be confused with Gone in 60 Seconds).

download

Not so fast my friend

Thankfully, we have made a lot of progress with African-Americans being nominated since then.

Be careful what you wish for

The nomination for the Republican Party presidential candidate has been interesting to say the least. Much like Ted Cruz’s successful election when he ran for the Senate, the goal it seems is to “out conservatize” the other.

While many pundits have long predicted Trump imploding, he continues to defy the odds and befuddle the establishment of the party by continuing to win states. I don’t think many republicans thought he would be able wear the conservative label and even attract the coveted evangelical vote, yet as of today, he remains the front-runner.

The race grew even more personal in South Carolina. I always assumed the palmetto state was gentile and respectfully southern until I remembered that Francis Underwood, the fictional president in the smash hit “House of Cards” is also from there.house-of-cards-20237-1920x1080

Watching all this reminds me of that famous scene from the movie “The Hunt for the Red October” when a Russian sub is blown up due to the arrogance of its commander. It seems the Grand Old Party could be headed down the same path.

And the winner is…

caucus

The Iowa caucuses are almost here (thank goodness) and the political pundits continue to weave their opinions and best guess scenarios on who will emerge victorious, but why? When it comes to Republican candidates, the good people of Iowa have a spotty record of selecting who will win the party nomination.

In 2012, Rick Santorum received 25 percent of the vote along with Mitt Romney. Ron Paul garnered 21 percent with Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann and Jon Huntsman rounding out the field. In 2008, Mike Huckabee got 34 percent of the vote, Romney with 25 percent John McCain, the eventual nominee getting only 13 percent.

The 2012 Republican caucuses also had some drama associated it. Initial results showed Romney beat Santorum by just 8 votes, but when the final results came out two weeks later Santorum secured the victory over Romney by a margin of 34 votes with Paul in a strong 3rd. Results were certified by the Caucus but not by the Republican party who declared it a split decision due to missing reports from 8 precincts, however they later certified the caucus as a win for Santorum. The caucus winner changed yet again when the Iowa delegate totals were finally determined giving Paul the win along with several other states that same weekend.

So again, why is Iowa so important? Sure it’s nice to have momentum and winning is always better than losing, but the Iowa caucuses reminds me a lot of pre-season football games. It’s a chance for the candidates to practice and get in shape for the real game; Super Tuesday.

What’s there to fear?

fear-cropped-proto-custom_28“We have nothing to fear, but fear itself” – FDR

Fear is an incredibly powerful motivator. Fear can influence the decisions we make, even if it makes little sense.

Fear is also a powerful tool in politics. Take two recent examples; Campus Carry and the city of Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance.

When Campus Carry was being debated in the hallowed halls of the Texas legislature, both sides brought fear into the equation. Those in favor of Campus Carry pointed out that allowing CHL holders to bring a gun into a classroom would make it safer by discouraging anyone from going “postal” while opponents warned it would spark violence during an heated open discourse when opposing views were being discussed.

In reality, neither argument really carries much weight. If someone is set on doing harm, they are not going to worry about a law, or that there may be a person who would be able to stop them. These types of killers seem to relish going out in a blaze of glory. If another student/teacher were to have a concealed handgun, they might be in a position to reduce the carnage, but it also opens up a slew of other questions such as are they trained to react in that type of situation and how will police officers know the difference between the good guys and the bad guys.

Which leads us to equal rights ordinance. Opponents have started running a television ad showing a little girl entering a bathroom stall and about to be attacked by a male. He is presumably in the women’s bathroom thanks to the ordinance. One cannot imagine a more frightening scenario, but how likely would that be?

Do we think this will open the door (sorry) to males having an easier access to assaulting women? Similar ordinances have been passed in Dallas, El Paso and San Antonio with no reported problems. Are we afraid Houston would be different?

And is this just about bathrooms? What about the pregnant women, the disabled, minorities, military veterans and others in this community who may be victims of discrimination? Do we want to have a conversation about that, or is that not scary enough.

I do find it interesting no one seems concerned about a women using a men’s bathroom. I remember during a recent visit to Sienna, Italy, I went to use a public restroom (and yes, it was the men’s room). In many European cities, women act as washroom attendants, making sure the facility is kept clean which in my view is much appreciated. There is usually a plate of coins by the door to tip them for their service.

Some other American tourists came in to the men’s room and were taken back by the fact there was a lady in there. One even commented he had “performance anxiety” and couldn’t go. I hope he still had the decency to tip her.

Here is my fear with this bathroom issue. When I’m at sporting events and other large venues, the line to the women’s room is always ten times longer than the men’s room. I’m afraid women are going to start “identifying” themselves as men just to take advantage of the shorter line and make me wait longer.