Showing posts with label Texas Panhandle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas Panhandle. Show all posts
Sunday, July 12, 2015
Amarillo To Have A Ridiculous "Rebel Flag" Rally
If there was any doubt that idiots and racists still exist in Amarillo, this should settle the matter. Today, there is to be a "Fly Your Flag" rally in the city -- and of course, the flag referred to is the Confederate battle flag (pictured above in a photo from Amarillo's Channel 10 News).
James Roberts, organizer for the event, said, "We're tired of the liberals trying to say our flag is hatred and racist . . . You know, 1860's we battled for our rights and now they're trying to take our rights away again".
Being a resident of Amarillo, I have a few things to say about this.
1. The removal of the Confederate flag from state property in South Carolina (and hopefully some other states) has nothing to do with taking rights from anyone. It simply removes a symbol (that many people are offended by) from flying on government property. State governments represent all citizens of the state, and the only flags that should fly (because they represent all citizens) are the state and U.S. flags. Any person who wants to fly the Confederate flag can still do so (or decorate their property or cars with that flag). The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees them that right -- no matter how offensive it may be to others.
2. There was only one right being defended by the Confederacy (and fought against by the United States) in the 1860's -- the right to continue to own slaves. No other "state right" was in question. And anyone who says otherwise is trying to rewrite history to fit their own bigoted ideas. If this flag represents any heritage, it is a heritage of slavery and white privilege.
3. The Confederate flag does not now, and has never represented, the heritage of the Panhandle of Texas. Note the map of 1866 Texas at the bottom of this page. At the time the Confederate flag was the flag of the South, the Texas Panhandle had no slavery, no plantations, and in fact, had not even been divided into counties. It was Indian country, and had very few (if any) settlers. The Panhandle has never had a "Southern" heritage -- it has a "Western" heritage, and even that didn't really start until after the Civil War (when the Confederacy was nothing but a bad memory). To think the Confederate flag celebrates Panhandle heritage is simply ludicrous.
(PERSONAL NOTE -- I was born and raised in Texas, and still live there. My mother's family came to Texas from Arkansas, and my father's family from Alabama. My Southern roots are strong -- and so is my dislike of this hateful flag.)
Monday, November 17, 2014
First Snow
The Texas Panhandle got its first snow of the year yesterday. These two pictures were taken standing in my front door. In our part of Amarillo we only got about 2" to 3", but that was enough to screw everything up -- because Texans, even those imported from the North, are stupid when it comes to driving on the snow (or ice).
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Drought In Texas Panhandle At Record Level
(This image of drought in the Texas Panhandle is from the website of News Channel 10 in Amarillo.)
The drought here in the Texas Panhandle has yet to end, but it now has been recognized as record-breaking. Texas State Climatologist John Nielson-Gammon says the previous three years of drought have been the driest three year period on record -- beating the previous record years of 1954-56 and 1933-35 (during the Dust Bowl years).
The current period hasn't lasted as long as the drought in the mid-1950's, but it has been more severe -- and it's not over yet (so it could capture the duration record before it's over). The area has only had about 34.5 inches of rain in the last three years. That's far short of the normal average of 61 inches, and the first year of this drought (2011) only had 7 inches of rain. Drought is becoming the normal thing here -- with the last drought ending in 2009 (only two years before this one started).
The hardest hit counties right now (the ones with extreme and exceptional drought) are Dallam, Hartley, Sherman, Moore, Oldham, Potter, Randall, Carson, and Deaf Smith. Amarillo (my home) straddles the county lines of Potter and Randall.
I know many right-wingers will deny it, but I am starting to believe this almost perpetual state of drought is a result of global climate change. While this climate change (brought on by human overuse of fossil fuels) has brought hurricanes, typhoons, flooding, tornados, and various other changes to many parts of the world, it is bringing drought to the Texas Panhandle -- and that is not good for this are because it depends on farming and ranching.
How much longer are we going to have to wait for government (actually all governments everywhere) to take action? Do we really want to leave our children and grandchildren a world worse than the one we inherited? Are we that poor a generation?
The drought here in the Texas Panhandle has yet to end, but it now has been recognized as record-breaking. Texas State Climatologist John Nielson-Gammon says the previous three years of drought have been the driest three year period on record -- beating the previous record years of 1954-56 and 1933-35 (during the Dust Bowl years).
The current period hasn't lasted as long as the drought in the mid-1950's, but it has been more severe -- and it's not over yet (so it could capture the duration record before it's over). The area has only had about 34.5 inches of rain in the last three years. That's far short of the normal average of 61 inches, and the first year of this drought (2011) only had 7 inches of rain. Drought is becoming the normal thing here -- with the last drought ending in 2009 (only two years before this one started).
The hardest hit counties right now (the ones with extreme and exceptional drought) are Dallam, Hartley, Sherman, Moore, Oldham, Potter, Randall, Carson, and Deaf Smith. Amarillo (my home) straddles the county lines of Potter and Randall.
I know many right-wingers will deny it, but I am starting to believe this almost perpetual state of drought is a result of global climate change. While this climate change (brought on by human overuse of fossil fuels) has brought hurricanes, typhoons, flooding, tornados, and various other changes to many parts of the world, it is bringing drought to the Texas Panhandle -- and that is not good for this are because it depends on farming and ranching.
How much longer are we going to have to wait for government (actually all governments everywhere) to take action? Do we really want to leave our children and grandchildren a world worse than the one we inherited? Are we that poor a generation?
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Panhandle Youth Is Stock Show Winner
I need to depart from politics for a few minutes today to congratulate a fellow Panhandle dweller on his remarkable achievement. The picture above shows sixth-grader Stock Martin of Hereford as he leads his European crossbred steer from the show ring at the Forth Worth Stock Show (the premier stock show in the state of Texas). Stock's steer is named "Lunchbox", and this year he was named the Grand Champion steer of the stock show.
The steer sold for $205,000 in the stock show auction. Martin says most of that money will go into his college fund, and the rest will be used to buy more cattle. Congratulations Stock! You have to beat the best of the best to win at the Fort Worth Stock Show -- and we here in the Panhandle are very proud of your accomplishment.
The steer sold for $205,000 in the stock show auction. Martin says most of that money will go into his college fund, and the rest will be used to buy more cattle. Congratulations Stock! You have to beat the best of the best to win at the Fort Worth Stock Show -- and we here in the Panhandle are very proud of your accomplishment.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
GOP Candidate Seeks Pardon From Perry
As I reported in an April 29th post on this blog, the Republican candidate, Fabian Tankesly (pictured above) for the Precinct 2 Commissioner's seat in Potter County is a convicted felon. In fact, he's been convicted of four different felony charges (one of which was for Unauthorized Use Of A Motor Vehicle and another was for Theft). He's also served a two year term in a State Jail facility for at least one of those convictions.
Tankesley is the only Republican who has filed for the seat, so unless he is officially removed from the ballot by the Republican Party of Potter County at least 30 days before the general election, he will be their candidate on the November ballot. So far, the county Republican Party has taken no action -- saying they are waiting for official records of Tankesly's criminal history to get back from Austin.
Even if Tankesly was allowed to remain on the ballot, and somehow was able to get elected in November, he could not serve as the county commissioner -- because Texas state law prevents any convicted felon from holding elective office unless that candidate has received an official pardon for all convictions. Evidently Tankesly either didn't know of the law or didn't think anyone would find out (since on his candidate application he signed a statement saying he had not been convicted of a felony).
Now most people would have been embarrassed by the tumult created by this already and withdrawn their candidacy. But we are dealing with a Republican here, and most Republican candidates don't seem to have a sense of shame (just look at the policies they support). Tankesly is no different. He says he has now hired an attorney and is trying to get pardoned for his four convictions (which he terms as "minor", even though they are felonies).
It will be interesting to see how the Republican leadership in Austin responds to the request for pardons. Texas does have a Republican governor (Rick Perry), and the Board of Pardons & Paroles (who would have to make a recommendation) are all Perry appointees. Normally, the chances of getting a pardon are very slim. In 2010, the Board received 430 pardon applications. They investigated 183 of them, and recommended approval of 33. Perry only pardoned 9 out of that 33 (about 2.09% of all applications submitted).
But none of those people were running for office as a Republican. Will Governor Perry make an exception for a fellow Republican candidate, and grant him an expedited pardon? We'll just have to wait and see. I wouldn't bet against it.
Tankesley is the only Republican who has filed for the seat, so unless he is officially removed from the ballot by the Republican Party of Potter County at least 30 days before the general election, he will be their candidate on the November ballot. So far, the county Republican Party has taken no action -- saying they are waiting for official records of Tankesly's criminal history to get back from Austin.
Even if Tankesly was allowed to remain on the ballot, and somehow was able to get elected in November, he could not serve as the county commissioner -- because Texas state law prevents any convicted felon from holding elective office unless that candidate has received an official pardon for all convictions. Evidently Tankesly either didn't know of the law or didn't think anyone would find out (since on his candidate application he signed a statement saying he had not been convicted of a felony).
Now most people would have been embarrassed by the tumult created by this already and withdrawn their candidacy. But we are dealing with a Republican here, and most Republican candidates don't seem to have a sense of shame (just look at the policies they support). Tankesly is no different. He says he has now hired an attorney and is trying to get pardoned for his four convictions (which he terms as "minor", even though they are felonies).
It will be interesting to see how the Republican leadership in Austin responds to the request for pardons. Texas does have a Republican governor (Rick Perry), and the Board of Pardons & Paroles (who would have to make a recommendation) are all Perry appointees. Normally, the chances of getting a pardon are very slim. In 2010, the Board received 430 pardon applications. They investigated 183 of them, and recommended approval of 33. Perry only pardoned 9 out of that 33 (about 2.09% of all applications submitted).
But none of those people were running for office as a Republican. Will Governor Perry make an exception for a fellow Republican candidate, and grant him an expedited pardon? We'll just have to wait and see. I wouldn't bet against it.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
GOP Candidate Is A Convicted Felon
The person pictured above is Fabian Tankesly, the lone Republican candidate for the Precinct 2 Potter County Commission seat in east Amarillo (the only seat on the County Commission generally considered to be a safe seat for Democrats). While Republicans were initially happy to have a candidate in the race, it now looks like Tankesly will not be on the November ballot.
That's because state law bars convicted felons from running for public office (unless they have been officially pardoned) -- and Tankesly is a convicted felon. And not just once -- he has been convicted of felonies four times, with the last being in 2002 (and at least two of those convictions were for Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle). The Republican county chair said he is investigating the matter, and will remove Tankesly from the ballot if he is a convicted felon who has not been pardoned.
Tankesly admits he is a convicted felon and has not received a pardon, but says he will continue to run for the seat until told by the county party he is ineligible. He says he was not trying to hide his past, although he submitted the necessary paperwork with his signature below the paragraph saying he was not a convicted and unpardoned felon.
He said he had turned in the paperwork on a form printed in Spanish (a language he is not fluent in) and didn't realize what the paragraph had said. That seems a little suspect, since the forms are readily available in both English and Spanish.
That's because state law bars convicted felons from running for public office (unless they have been officially pardoned) -- and Tankesly is a convicted felon. And not just once -- he has been convicted of felonies four times, with the last being in 2002 (and at least two of those convictions were for Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle). The Republican county chair said he is investigating the matter, and will remove Tankesly from the ballot if he is a convicted felon who has not been pardoned.
Tankesly admits he is a convicted felon and has not received a pardon, but says he will continue to run for the seat until told by the county party he is ineligible. He says he was not trying to hide his past, although he submitted the necessary paperwork with his signature below the paragraph saying he was not a convicted and unpardoned felon.
He said he had turned in the paperwork on a form printed in Spanish (a language he is not fluent in) and didn't realize what the paragraph had said. That seems a little suspect, since the forms are readily available in both English and Spanish.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Clinton Gets To The Heart Of America's Problem In Speech At West Texas A&M
On Tuesday night Bill Clinton made his second visit to the Texas Panhandle in the last four years (with his previous visit being to support his wife in the 2008 campaign). This time he spoke at West Texas A&M University as a guest of the school's Distinguished Lecture Series. And in his speech he made a point that makes a lot of sense -- one that every American should consider before voting in the next election.
The point was that there is a difference between political ideology and finding solutions to the problems that face this nation. Clinton said that debating politics does little to move the country forward, and compared political talk shows to "watching mud wrestling". He went on to say, "We can do lots of stuff to grow the economy, but if we spend most of our time making ideological arguments. . .we're not having the right debate. We're talking about whether to do something, instead of how to do it."
He is absolutely right. Instead of addressing our problems and how best to solve them, we have digressed into an argument over whether they should be solved at all. The Republicans have been especially bad at this. Instead of discussing how to design and initiate a job creation program to put millions of Americans back to work, they want to discuss whether it is ideologically-correct to have government help to create jobs (or help those who've lost their jobs).
Instead of debating how to ensure that all Americans (minorities, women, gays, etc.) can achieve equal rights, the Republicans want to argue over whether they should be equal at all. Instead of discussing how to provide decent medical care for all Americans, the Republicans want to argue about whether the poor and working classes even deserve to have decent medical care insured.
Instead of discussing how to make our tax system fair and equitable for all Americans, the Republicans want to insure that the rich and corporations won't have to pay their fair share of taxes. Instead of finding solutions to the problems Social Security and Medicare face (or will face in the future), the Republicans want to talk about whether they should exist at all.
I could go on and on, but you get the point. We have two political parties, but they are not both concerned with solving the country's problems. While Democrats are searching for solutions, the Republicans are concerned only with political ideology. This is probably because the Republicans have no solutions (or ideas on how to improve Democratic solutions). And the last refuge for any party without solutions is ideology (which like "mud wrestling" may be entertaining, but offers nothing substantial).
Think about this before you go to the polls in November -- and then vote for the party willing to search for solutions.
The point was that there is a difference between political ideology and finding solutions to the problems that face this nation. Clinton said that debating politics does little to move the country forward, and compared political talk shows to "watching mud wrestling". He went on to say, "We can do lots of stuff to grow the economy, but if we spend most of our time making ideological arguments. . .we're not having the right debate. We're talking about whether to do something, instead of how to do it."
He is absolutely right. Instead of addressing our problems and how best to solve them, we have digressed into an argument over whether they should be solved at all. The Republicans have been especially bad at this. Instead of discussing how to design and initiate a job creation program to put millions of Americans back to work, they want to discuss whether it is ideologically-correct to have government help to create jobs (or help those who've lost their jobs).
Instead of debating how to ensure that all Americans (minorities, women, gays, etc.) can achieve equal rights, the Republicans want to argue over whether they should be equal at all. Instead of discussing how to provide decent medical care for all Americans, the Republicans want to argue about whether the poor and working classes even deserve to have decent medical care insured.
Instead of discussing how to make our tax system fair and equitable for all Americans, the Republicans want to insure that the rich and corporations won't have to pay their fair share of taxes. Instead of finding solutions to the problems Social Security and Medicare face (or will face in the future), the Republicans want to talk about whether they should exist at all.
I could go on and on, but you get the point. We have two political parties, but they are not both concerned with solving the country's problems. While Democrats are searching for solutions, the Republicans are concerned only with political ideology. This is probably because the Republicans have no solutions (or ideas on how to improve Democratic solutions). And the last refuge for any party without solutions is ideology (which like "mud wrestling" may be entertaining, but offers nothing substantial).
Think about this before you go to the polls in November -- and then vote for the party willing to search for solutions.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Bus Driver In Amarillo Refuses To Transport OWS protesters
I have always thought the purpose of a bus was to transport passengers -- as long as they didn't cause trouble or pose a danger to other passengers. But an Amarillo bus driver named Donald Ainsworth seems to think he can make up his own rules for passengers -- and his rule is that he won't allow anyone who disagrees with him politically to ride on the Greyhound bus he drives.
There were 13 Occupy Wall Street protesters coming from San Diego (California) to participate in the upcoming "Occupy Congress" demonstrations. They had no problems with the bus company or any of its drivers -- until they reached Amarillo on Saturday. Driver Ainsworth became upset when he learned the 13 riders were OWS protesters. He yelled at them and told them they weren't wanted, and when they got on the bus, he refused to drive the bus.
The protesters and other passengers were locked on the bus for an hour while the driver ranted and tried to decide what he would do. He finally called the Amarillo police to the bus station. After a discussion with police, in which they tried to talk him into just driving the bus, the police finally removed the 13 San Diego OWS passengers -- and Ainsworth drove the bus away leaving them stranded in Amarillo (even though they had tickets and were causing no trouble).
After being forced to stay overnight in the bus station, the 13 were finally able to board a bus on Sunday and continue their journey to Washington, D.C. This should never have happened. As an Amarillo resident, I am shocked at the way these visitors were treated in our city. Ainsworth has the right to any political beliefs he wants to have, but he does not have the right to force his beliefs on others or demand they have a certain political philosophy before they can ride on the bus.
To my knowledge the bus company has not made any public statements regarding the driver's conduct. Personally, I believe he should be fired. He has shamed himself, this city, and the company he works for.
There were 13 Occupy Wall Street protesters coming from San Diego (California) to participate in the upcoming "Occupy Congress" demonstrations. They had no problems with the bus company or any of its drivers -- until they reached Amarillo on Saturday. Driver Ainsworth became upset when he learned the 13 riders were OWS protesters. He yelled at them and told them they weren't wanted, and when they got on the bus, he refused to drive the bus.
The protesters and other passengers were locked on the bus for an hour while the driver ranted and tried to decide what he would do. He finally called the Amarillo police to the bus station. After a discussion with police, in which they tried to talk him into just driving the bus, the police finally removed the 13 San Diego OWS passengers -- and Ainsworth drove the bus away leaving them stranded in Amarillo (even though they had tickets and were causing no trouble).
After being forced to stay overnight in the bus station, the 13 were finally able to board a bus on Sunday and continue their journey to Washington, D.C. This should never have happened. As an Amarillo resident, I am shocked at the way these visitors were treated in our city. Ainsworth has the right to any political beliefs he wants to have, but he does not have the right to force his beliefs on others or demand they have a certain political philosophy before they can ride on the bus.
To my knowledge the bus company has not made any public statements regarding the driver's conduct. Personally, I believe he should be fired. He has shamed himself, this city, and the company he works for.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Bosquez To Run For District 87 Seat
Progressives here in the Texas Panhandle got a bit of good news yesterday. Republican first-term representative, Walter Price, will have an opponent in the Texas House District 87 race in the 2012 election. Democrat Abel Bosquez (pictured above), who had been considering running against Price, announced that he will indeed be running for Price's seat.
Bosquez told the Amarillo Globe News that his issues would be education and jobs. He said, "I am going to start hammering at why the Republican Legislature cut the budget for schools and how the cuts are hurting the kids."
Bosquez knows he will be the underdog in the race. The Texas Panhandle is probably the reddest area in the state, and has elected nothing but Republicans for quite a while now (since it is a hotbed of fundamentalists and teabaggers). In fact, the Republicans have such an iron grip on the Panhandle that Democrats didn't even field candidates in most races in the 2010 election.
This will be the second time Bosquez has run for the House District 87 seat. He lost the election to Price in 2010, when he was the only Democrat running for a state House or Senate seat in the area. I hope not, but the possibility exists that he will be the only Democrat running again. He said, "I know other people are reluctant to run. I may be the only sacrificial lamb, but it's important to do it. Sooner or later we'll win."
He's absolutely right. The area may be solidly Republican right now (and Bosquez will be a definite underdog), but the changing demographics of the Panhandle show that will probably change in the future. It is just a question of how fast the change will happen. The White (and Republican) population in the area is aging, and a big percentage of younger Whites are moving out of the area for more lucrative opportunities elsewhere. Meanwhile, Hispanics are moving in to the area in substantial numbers.
Hispanics are already the majority in several small Panhandle counties, and eventually they will be the majority in all of the Panhandle counties. After that demographic change takes place, it is very unlikely that Republicans will be able to maintain their hold on the area (considering the racist and anti-immigrant policies they continue to support). While the present may be bleak, the future looks very bright for Panhandle Democrats.
But you can't win a race unless you have a candidate in that race. That's why it's very important for good people like Abel Bosquez (who is well-qualified for the office he is seeking) to run now. And more good Democratic candidates are needed. The people of the Panhandle need to know they have a choice in every election and every race. Running candidates now, even though they might be underdogs, will hasten the day when Democrats start to win in the Panhandle -- and that day will come.
Democrats and Panhandle progressives owe a debt of gratitude to brave candidates like Abel Bosquez -- who is willing to try to climb a very tall political mountain. He has my respect and my vote, and my undying gratitude for his political courage.
Bosquez told the Amarillo Globe News that his issues would be education and jobs. He said, "I am going to start hammering at why the Republican Legislature cut the budget for schools and how the cuts are hurting the kids."
Bosquez knows he will be the underdog in the race. The Texas Panhandle is probably the reddest area in the state, and has elected nothing but Republicans for quite a while now (since it is a hotbed of fundamentalists and teabaggers). In fact, the Republicans have such an iron grip on the Panhandle that Democrats didn't even field candidates in most races in the 2010 election.
This will be the second time Bosquez has run for the House District 87 seat. He lost the election to Price in 2010, when he was the only Democrat running for a state House or Senate seat in the area. I hope not, but the possibility exists that he will be the only Democrat running again. He said, "I know other people are reluctant to run. I may be the only sacrificial lamb, but it's important to do it. Sooner or later we'll win."
He's absolutely right. The area may be solidly Republican right now (and Bosquez will be a definite underdog), but the changing demographics of the Panhandle show that will probably change in the future. It is just a question of how fast the change will happen. The White (and Republican) population in the area is aging, and a big percentage of younger Whites are moving out of the area for more lucrative opportunities elsewhere. Meanwhile, Hispanics are moving in to the area in substantial numbers.
Hispanics are already the majority in several small Panhandle counties, and eventually they will be the majority in all of the Panhandle counties. After that demographic change takes place, it is very unlikely that Republicans will be able to maintain their hold on the area (considering the racist and anti-immigrant policies they continue to support). While the present may be bleak, the future looks very bright for Panhandle Democrats.
But you can't win a race unless you have a candidate in that race. That's why it's very important for good people like Abel Bosquez (who is well-qualified for the office he is seeking) to run now. And more good Democratic candidates are needed. The people of the Panhandle need to know they have a choice in every election and every race. Running candidates now, even though they might be underdogs, will hasten the day when Democrats start to win in the Panhandle -- and that day will come.
Democrats and Panhandle progressives owe a debt of gratitude to brave candidates like Abel Bosquez -- who is willing to try to climb a very tall political mountain. He has my respect and my vote, and my undying gratitude for his political courage.
Monday, November 07, 2011
Prehistoric "Pig" Found In Amarillo
Workers excavating for the construction of a new building at the Amarillo Pantex plant, the only facility in the United States for the assembly and disassembly of nuclear weapons, made a scientific discovery last week. They discovered bones from a prehistoric animal. To their credit, they temporarily stopped construction and notified the plant's historian, Monica Graham.
Ms. Graham contacted West Texas A&M geology professor Dr. Gerald Schultz. They then teamed with a wildlife biologist to excavate the bones -- which turned out to be the remains of a platygonus. The platygonus is an extinct cousin of modern peccaries (or javelinas). Dr. Schultz said the bones could be as late as 11,000 years old or as early as 23 million years ago.
I used the term "pig" in the title above, but in actuality peccaries and pigs are not really related. Pigs were brought to America by humans from Europe, and have a different ancestor than the platygonus (ancestor of peccaries). The peccary is actually, believe it or not, related closer to the hippopotamus than to Old World (European) pigs.
While the platygonus is an ancient species, having originated around 23 million years ago, I find it interesting that they survived long enough to have been around when North America had a human population (as it surely did 11,000 years ago). This ancient animal could have been hunted by early Americans.
Ms. Graham contacted West Texas A&M geology professor Dr. Gerald Schultz. They then teamed with a wildlife biologist to excavate the bones -- which turned out to be the remains of a platygonus. The platygonus is an extinct cousin of modern peccaries (or javelinas). Dr. Schultz said the bones could be as late as 11,000 years old or as early as 23 million years ago.
I used the term "pig" in the title above, but in actuality peccaries and pigs are not really related. Pigs were brought to America by humans from Europe, and have a different ancestor than the platygonus (ancestor of peccaries). The peccary is actually, believe it or not, related closer to the hippopotamus than to Old World (European) pigs.
While the platygonus is an ancient species, having originated around 23 million years ago, I find it interesting that they survived long enough to have been around when North America had a human population (as it surely did 11,000 years ago). This ancient animal could have been hunted by early Americans.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Thornberry Votes To Abolish Medicare
U.S. House District 13 sits at the top of Texas (represented in pink on the chart above). It is a large and mostly rural district that runs from east of Wichita Falls (pop. 100,000) to Amarillo (pop. nearly 200,000) and on to the northwest corner of the Panhandle (a distance of more than 300 miles). The district has been a very safe one for Republicans and is currently represented by Rep. Mac Thornberry.
But as safe as this district is for Republicans, I have a hard time believing the voters of District 13 will approve of Thornberry's latest vote in Congress. That's because Thornberry (along with all Texas Republicans except Ron Paul) has just voted to give the rich another tax cut and finance that by abolishing Medicare. Thornberry and his Republican cohorts have decided that voters will value passing the Ryan Budget Plan and cutting the deficit more than they value keeping the Medicare program.
Thornberry defended his vote by saying, "This budget represents some tough, but necessary, choices for our country and its citizens. If we do not take significant action, we may be the first generation of Americans that fails to leave the country in better shape than we found it. On the other hand, if we do take action, the economy can begin to grow again, jobs will be created, and living standards will improve. This budget gives us that chance."
What a load of horse manure! The Ryan plan is nothing more than taking the failed Reagan/Bush "trickle-down" economic policies to their logical conclusion -- that if rich people are given more and more money they will eventually share some of it with the rest of us. All that did in the last thirty years was depress wages for American workers and give the rich record profits -- creating the largest wealth and income gap since before the Great Depression and throwing the country into the current recession. There is no evidence this policy will "magically" do anything different now.
But what makes the Ryan plan even worse than the Bush/Reagan policies is that the Republicans now want to finance their tax cuts for the rich on the backs of the elderly. They want to abolish Medicare and replace it with a voucher system, that they say will allow the elderly to buy their own private insurance. But that government voucher will be only $8000, and that is not going to buy insurance for an elderly person. The young and middle-aged would be lucky to get a good private insurance policy for that amount.
That's because the insurance companies know that people over age 65 (those covered by Medicare now) are guaranteed to start having some health problems, and they would have to pay far more in payments for medical treatment for the elderly than for people lower in age. This means they would charge much more in premium fees for insurance to cover the elderly, and it will run a lot higher than the $8000 voucher -- probably twice that much or more. After all, the insurance companies are in business to make profits, not pay medical bills.
The result of the Republican plan would be that many of the elderly, especially those living on a fixed income (like Social Security), would not be able to purchase the expensive private insurance. They would be forced to go without medical care, and their lifespans would be severely and unnecessarily shortened.
I can't believe the aging population in District 13 really wants this to happen. I don't believe they elected Thornberry to abolish Medicare and use that money to give more tax cuts for the rich.
In the last election District 13 was considered so safe a district for Republicans that the Democrats didn't even field a candidate. Democrats need to change that in 2012 and put a good candidate in the race -- a candidate that will campaign vigorously on saving Medicare from Republicans like Mac Thornberry.
The Republicans have made a serious mistake by voting to abolish Medicare. The Democrats need to beat them over the head with that mean-spirited vote all the way to election day -- even in Republican districts like Texas District 13.
But as safe as this district is for Republicans, I have a hard time believing the voters of District 13 will approve of Thornberry's latest vote in Congress. That's because Thornberry (along with all Texas Republicans except Ron Paul) has just voted to give the rich another tax cut and finance that by abolishing Medicare. Thornberry and his Republican cohorts have decided that voters will value passing the Ryan Budget Plan and cutting the deficit more than they value keeping the Medicare program.
Thornberry defended his vote by saying, "This budget represents some tough, but necessary, choices for our country and its citizens. If we do not take significant action, we may be the first generation of Americans that fails to leave the country in better shape than we found it. On the other hand, if we do take action, the economy can begin to grow again, jobs will be created, and living standards will improve. This budget gives us that chance."
What a load of horse manure! The Ryan plan is nothing more than taking the failed Reagan/Bush "trickle-down" economic policies to their logical conclusion -- that if rich people are given more and more money they will eventually share some of it with the rest of us. All that did in the last thirty years was depress wages for American workers and give the rich record profits -- creating the largest wealth and income gap since before the Great Depression and throwing the country into the current recession. There is no evidence this policy will "magically" do anything different now.
But what makes the Ryan plan even worse than the Bush/Reagan policies is that the Republicans now want to finance their tax cuts for the rich on the backs of the elderly. They want to abolish Medicare and replace it with a voucher system, that they say will allow the elderly to buy their own private insurance. But that government voucher will be only $8000, and that is not going to buy insurance for an elderly person. The young and middle-aged would be lucky to get a good private insurance policy for that amount.
That's because the insurance companies know that people over age 65 (those covered by Medicare now) are guaranteed to start having some health problems, and they would have to pay far more in payments for medical treatment for the elderly than for people lower in age. This means they would charge much more in premium fees for insurance to cover the elderly, and it will run a lot higher than the $8000 voucher -- probably twice that much or more. After all, the insurance companies are in business to make profits, not pay medical bills.
The result of the Republican plan would be that many of the elderly, especially those living on a fixed income (like Social Security), would not be able to purchase the expensive private insurance. They would be forced to go without medical care, and their lifespans would be severely and unnecessarily shortened.
I can't believe the aging population in District 13 really wants this to happen. I don't believe they elected Thornberry to abolish Medicare and use that money to give more tax cuts for the rich.
In the last election District 13 was considered so safe a district for Republicans that the Democrats didn't even field a candidate. Democrats need to change that in 2012 and put a good candidate in the race -- a candidate that will campaign vigorously on saving Medicare from Republicans like Mac Thornberry.
The Republicans have made a serious mistake by voting to abolish Medicare. The Democrats need to beat them over the head with that mean-spirited vote all the way to election day -- even in Republican districts like Texas District 13.
Friday, November 12, 2010
First Snow Of The Year
This is the scene I woke up to this morning here in Amarillo. We got about 2 inches of snow -- our first snow of the year (and there will probably be several more to follow). Amarillo is in the Panhandle of Texas. It is both further north than other parts of Texas and rests at a higher elevation. Because of that, we had a rather mild summer while the rest of Texas was sweltering in 100 degree temps. But it looks like the good times are over, and now we begin to pay for that mild summer!
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Religious Nut Tries To Burn Quran In Amarillo

But the media exposed that lie. They learned the imam in New York had not even talked with Jones and was not moving anything. Now Jones says he is backing off the book-burning because he just wanted to make the point that "there is an element of islam that is very dangerous and very radical." That's a far cry from his original pronouncement that islam is a religion "of the devil". I guess he didn't like the public spanking that he received.
But fringe christian fundamentalists need not fear. Amarillo's own fringe religious fanatic, David Grisham, has stepped forward to continue the craziness. It seems there is no bit of religious bigotry too extreme for Grisham, who claims to be a preacher but actually earns his living as a security guard. Grisham is the head of the small but vocal religious group called Repent Amarillo, who have recently received some undeserved headlines for their opposition to "promiscuity, homosexuality and non-christian worship practices through confrontation and prayer."
Grisham told the Amarillo Globe News last Friday that he and a few friends would gather in an Amarillo park and burn a few Qurans. He said he is doing it "to show support for the Rev. Terry Jones." He claimed to have waited until Friday to announce his intentions "to avoid national media attention." That's a load of crap! Grisham has never avoided any publicity in the past -- and note that he contacted the media to inform them of his silly plans.
I think he didn't think of this little publicity stunt until Friday, and by then it was too late for any media to be interested except for the local media (and they probably would have ignored it if anything even remotely newsworthy was happening in Amarillo). Grisham would like to think of himself as a religious "mover and shaker" in the Texas Panhandle, but most people in Amarillo have difficulty stifling a yawn when he and his little group do anything.
I think David Grisham's (and Repent Amarillo's) 15 minutes of fame is about up -- and that's a good thing.
-------------------------
UPDATE -- It looks like Grisham is even more incompetent that I thought. He couldn't even burn a single book. He put a Quran on a barbeque grill at the park and squirted lighter fluid on it. But before he could light it on fire, a teenager snatched it up and ran off with it. Grisham gave up and went home like the pathetic loser that he is.
-------------------------
UPDATE II -- It has been learned that the person who grabbed the Quran was not a teenager after all. It was 23 year-old Jacob Isom. He gave the Quran to an Amarillo imam. The imam gave it to Amarillo police to keep Mr. Isom from being arrested for theft. However, Grisham remains a pathetic loser.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Pics From Amarillo Democratic Rally




These are pictures taken at the Democratic political rally held yesterday at Memorial Park in Amarillo, Texas. A couple of hundred people braved the heat to kick off this year's campaign.1. The dude in the cowboy hat is Toby Lankford, chairman of Potter County Democrats.
2. The lady in the center wearing white is Senate District 31's State Democratic Committeewoman Roberta Hicks. The lady on her left in the orange hat is Potter County Justice of the Peace Nancy Bosquez. Sorry, but I didn't get the names of the other two ladies.
3. The good folks in Hutchinson County sent a few people to enjoy the festivities.
4. Iman and Leslie Crawford and an unidentified fellow Democrat corral the escaped donkey.
5. Amarillo Democratic Headquarters put up a stand and handed out literature (and free cold drinks). The distinguished gentleman in the red shirt is Tony Raphael, head of the Amarillo Democrats.
More Pics From Amarillo Rally



1. Abel Bosquez, candidate for the Texas House District 87 seat, addresses the crowd.2. West Texas A & M University Democrats manned their own booth (but I don't know how he stood to wear that tie in the heat).
3. A group of Panhandle Democrats enjoy each other's company while waiting for the political speeches to begin.
4. Blue Dog Bill White addresses the local media.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Panhandle Dem Has A Hard Row To Hoe
If there is a redder area of Texas than the Panhandle, then I'm not aware of it. Every state representative and senator from the Panhandle is a Republican (and the U.S. Representative is also) and it has been that way for quite a while now. It has gotten so bad that the Democrats cannot even find a candidate to run in many of the races, and if a brave soul does come forward to run he/she will find that they are expected to run a campaign with no funds and little organization. Take for instance the three state representative districts in the Panhandle.
Two of the Republicans representing these districts, Rep. Chisum (District 88) and Rep. Smithee (District 86), don't have a Democratic opponent in the November election. They have virtually already been re-elected by default. The third, District 87, has a competent Democratic candidate who understands the issues and is willing to work hard for the ordinary citizens of Potter, Carson, Moore and Sherman counties. But that candidate seems to be getting very little support.
That candidate is Abel Bosquez. Bosquez is intelligent, knowledgeable, and very approachable to anyone who wants to discuss the issues or the needs of the Panhandle. But it will be very hard for him to get any votes outside of the Democratic Party. The reason for that is lack of money. He simply does not have the money to make himself known to independents and other undecided voters.
And it's just a fact of politics that voters will not vote for an unknown quantity. They will vote for someone they know but may not really like very much before they'll vote for someone they don't know. That may be harsh, but it's true. That's why candidates spend so much money to get their name and beliefs before the voters -- so those voters can feel somewhat comfortable voting for them.
But in District 87, at least so far, there is only one candidate having any success in raising campaign funds -- Republican Walter Price IV. Since the primary Price has raised $134,696 and still has $37,409 on hand. He will undoubtably raise even more as the campaign progresses. By November, the area's voters will see many billboards, newspaper ads and TV ads for Price.
By comparison, Democrat Abel Bosquez (pictured) has been able to raise only $1,725 from January 1st through June 30th, and currently has no cash on hand. Bosquez says, "The money is not coming as fast as I thought but we've got a couple of functions, one in August and the other in September, that I hope will bring money and create momentum for my campaign." He's also hoping for help from unions and the state party after Labor Day.
I hope the unions do come through with some money and decent money can be raised from the scheduled functions, but I doubt it will be enough to compete with the Republican candidate. As for the state party, I wouldn't hold my breath for help from them. They have written the Panhandle (and West Texas) off as lost causes, even though if they did offer some money and help with an organizing and registration effort they might be surprised as the results (because ongoing demographic changes in both areas could favor Democrats).
To make a long story short, Abel Bosquez is in bad need of campaign funds. We have left him flapping out in the wind for far too long and it is time to make things right. He is a good candidate, but he doesn't stand a chance if he can't get his name and issues in front of the voters. And it needs to start happening now -- not just before the election.
So I'm doing something I don't do very often on this blog. I'm asking you to donate to a political campaign. I'm not asking you to do anything I haven't done. Even though I live on a fixed income I've dug deep and sent Mr. Bosquez a small donation, and I plan to send more.
If you can help, this is the time to do it. It doesn't have to be much. Even $10 or $20 dollars will help, as a lot of small donations can really add up. If you want to help give a good Panhandle Democrat a chance to win, you can send contributions to:
Abel Bosquez Campaign
P.O. Box 527
Amarillo, Texas
79105
If you prefer to donate online, you can do so at his website bosquezfortexas.com.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Rep. Thornberry Gets Teabagger Opponent

Rep. Mac Thornberry represents the Texas Panhandle in the U.S. House of Representatives. He's not a leader and I doubt that most Americans have ever even heard of him. He keeps his head down, accepts his marching orders from the Republican leadership and never votes or deviates from the Republican Party line. He's the kind of Republican that party leaders love.
It was looking like Thornberry was going to have an easy time getting re-elected. The Panhandle is such a red area that the Democrats didn't even field a candidate against him in this election cycle. It looked for a while like his only opponent would be a Libertarian Party candidate, and even in the conservative Panhandle very few people vote for Libertarians. But things have changed.
While there may not be many Libertarians in the Panhandle, there are a lot of teabaggers. A few days ago the Texas Secretary of State notified Keith Dyer (pictured) that he will be on the November ballot as a candidate for the Panhandle's U.S. House seat against Thornberry. Dyer is a leader among Panhandle teabaggers.
This race just got interesting. While a Democrat or a Libertarian would not have much of a chance against Thornberry in this solidly Republican district, a teabagger like Dyer could get a lot of votes in this area. And they would all be Republican votes (since the Dems will either not vote in this race or vote for the Libertarian) -- votes that would have otherwise gone to Thornberry.
I expect Thornberry will still get re-elected but Dyer will probably siphon off a lot of the Republican vote in the district. Democrats have to be kicking themselves for not fielding a candidate now. With Thornberry and Dyer splitting the Republican vote, a Democrat would have stood a chance of winning for the first time in many years.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
T. Boone Takes His Ball And Goes Home

Last year at this time, T. Boone Pickens was bragging about building the world's largest wind farm here in the Texas Panhandle. Toward that effort, he ordered 600 wind turbines from General Electric. It looked like the Panhandle would finally be able to put one of it's natural wonders to good use -- an incessant wind.
It looks like that dream may now be dead. Pickens has cut the order for turbines in half. He now only wants 300 of the General Electric wind turbines, and NONE of them will be erected in the Texas Panhandle. He will be using them on smaller wind farms in Minnesota and Canada.
Pickens said he is doing this for two reasons. The drop in natural gas prices, making it cheap to run plants on gas and the lack of transmission lines in the Panhandle. That's a giant load of horse manure!
The truth is that gas prices rise and fall all the time. They may be cheap right now, but it won't be too long before they rise again. As for the transmission lines, they are in the final stages of being approved right now and would probably be well on the way to being finished before Pickens could start building his wind farms (delivery of the turbines is scheduled for 2011).
Let's look at the real reason he's fleeing the Panhandle. He wasn't just planning to build a wind farm. He wanted to use the same land and right-of-way to ship Panhandle water from the Ogallala aquifer to the Dallas-Fort Worth area. He was going to construct a 9 foot in diameter pipeline to ship thousands of gallons of precious Panhandle water every day.
Frankly, this scheme would have sucked all the water from the Panhandle in just a few years, making this semi-arid area a real desert, but he would have made a ton of money off of it (probably more than the wind farm would have provided). But Panhandle legislators got wind of his plans and acted to stop the theft of water from the Ogallala aquifer.
That's the real reason he's sending the wind farm somewhere else. If he can't suck the Panhandle dry of water, then he won't build his wind farm in the desert he would have created.
He's like the neighborhood kid who wasn't allowed to be the quarterback -- he's taken his ball and gone home. Good riddance!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
"Tex" Snubs PETA

Tex Randall (pictured above) is a statue. He weighs 7 tons and stands 47 feet tall, and he's stood by Highway 60 near Canyon in the Texas Panhandle since 1959. He has become sort of a beloved landmark for the people near Amarillo.
PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals) has decided now they want to put old Tex to work for them. They sent a letter to Tex's owner proposing to lease the weather-beaten statue. They want to put a sign on Tex reading "For Cow's Sake, Give Leather the Boot". PETA says it wants to make Tex into an emblem of "Texas' compassion".
Fortunately, that's not going to happen. Tex's owner, Danny Byrd, says he got PETA's letter and threw it in the trash. He says Tex is not for lease, and if it were, it would not be for such a purpose. Byrd says, "In this area, we kind of make our living on cattle and agriculture and that's part of our heritage."
I have to agree with Mr. Byrd. It would be a sacrilege to desecrate Tex with that kind of message here in the Texas Panhandle. It would also be like biting the hand that feeds you. Farming and ranching is the life-blood of the Panhandle area.
Besides, isn't there some kind of law here in Texas against making a pair of cowboy boots out of anything but leather?
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Palo Duro Grows Larger
The pride of the Texas Panhandle, Palo Duro Canyon State Park, has just grown about ten percent. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department just announced the purchase of the 2,900 acre Fortress Cliffs Ranch, which had bordered the canyon. The Parks and Wildlife Department joined with the Trust for Public Land and an anonymous donor to pay $5.2 million for the ranch.The land is on a highly visible bluff just above the canyon, and its purchase will help maintain the pristine beauty of the canyon area. Now the Parks and Wildlife Department can be assured the land won't be the sight of a housing addition or some other unsightly development.
Palo Duro Canyon State Park covers about 29,000 acres, and is the second largest canyon in the United States -- second only to the Grand Canyon in Arizona.
If you haven't seen Palo Duro Canyon, you're missing a real treat. It is a beautiful and awe-inspiring place that all Texans should be proud of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)













