Giving it another try
Numerous legislative efforts through the years have failed to put much of a dent in the number of uninsured drivers in Oklahoma. This evergreen topic blooms again with a bill by Rep. Steve Martin, R-Bartlesville. Martin wants suspicion of driving while uninsured to be considered probable cause to make a traffic stop. That suspicion could be piqued through use of the state’s online verification system, which lets police know whether a vehicle they have pulled over is insured. Uninsured vehicles can be impounded after traffic stops — but driving an uninsured vehicle is not probable cause to make a stop. If Martin’s bill were to become law, he said, more vehicles could be cited or towed “without the need for the driver to break other laws at the same time.” It’s worth a try, at least until the next attempt comes down the pike.
Puppet court
Corruption trial puppets in cross-examination (AP Photo)
It’s “Sesame Street” meets the unseemly side of politics. With cameras barred from a high-profile corruption trial, a Cleveland, Ohio, television station has puppets acting out the steamy testimony about hookers, gambling and sexually transmitted diseases. In one scene, a furry hand stuffs cash down the shirt of a puppet prostitute. WOIO news director Dan Salamone brought up the idea of using the puppets to lampoon the trial and give a glimpse of what’s happening in the federal courtroom. Because cameras aren’t allowed, other stations have relied on artist sketches of the proceedings and videos of longtime Democratic power broker Jimmy Dimora walking into court. The puppets are in addition to the station’s regular coverage of Dimora’s trial. Although some people have criticized the station for blurring the lines between news and entertainment, Salamone defended the segments, saying it’s no different from when newscasts end with a lighter, humorous story. Oklahoma has its own share of trials that easily could be lampooned similarly.
Hammer (gets) time
At the risk of sounding too clever, how about this observation in the case of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom Delay of Texas, who was sentenced to three years in prison on money laundering and conspiracy convictions this week: It looks like “The Hammer” now knows what it’s like to be the nail.
OK, stop the groaning. Delay is a classic how-the-mighty-have-fallen story. At his apex he was one of the most powerful men in Washington, leading the Republicans in the House and raising millions of dollars for GOP candidates with a style that earned him that descriptive nickname.
Delay claims he was railroaded in Travis County, one of the most Democratic counties in otherwise mostly Republican Texas. But a jury was convinced he maneuvered to illegally channel corporate donations to state House candidates in 2002. “Everything I did was covered by accountants and lawyers telling me what I had to do to stay within the law,” said Delay, who served in Congress from 1984 to 2006. “I can’t be remorseful for something I don’t think I did.” Remorseful or not, Delay appears headed for another house, the Big House. He is appealing.
Coming on too strong
No walk-back, yet, by Tucker Carlson from his broadcast remark that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Michael Vick should have been executed after being convicted of torturing and killing dogs. The editor in chief of The Daily Caller, an online news outlet, Carlson made the comment Tuesday while guest-hosting Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News. “Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did in a heartless and cruel way, and I think personally he should have been executed for that,” Carlson said.
Yeah, that’s strong — too strong! But here’s some context: In addition to his work as a conservative pundit, Carlson is an animal rights defender. Earlier this year he recorded a public service spot for the Washington Animal Rescue League. He was talking about Vick in connection with President Obama’s phone call to Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie, reportedly thanking Lurie for signing Vick in 2009 after the player served 21 months in federal prison for his involvement in an illegal dog-fighting ring. Carlson said Obama’s support for “someone who murdered dogs” was “kind of beyond the pale.” He’s got a point about Obama but not about Vick and the death penalty. Tucker Carlson is a thoughtful, interesting commentator, but that one got away from him.
Issue of conscience
If Congress repeals the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that effectively bars gays from serving openly in the armed forces, no one will be more affected than the military’s chaplains. The Pentagon’s report on the potential effects of repealing the policy notes that some chaplains “condemn in the strongest possible terms homosexuality as a sin and an abomination, and inform us that they would refuse to in any way support, comfort, or assist someone they knew to be homosexual.” Not all chaplains feel that way, of course, but clearly a policy change would have ramifications for the spiritual role chaplains play. Among those most opposed to lifting the policy are Catholic chaplains, ministering to service members who comprise about 20 percent of the armed forces, according to The Washington Post.
It’s hard to predict what will happen if the policy is changed. Most likely, some chaplains will welcome the change, others will adjust and still others will leave the service rather than do anything they would consider a faith compromise. “If there’s no protection for the chaplain to be able to speak according to his faith group, that might affect the number of chaplains we recruit or our ability to do our duty for the troops,” the Rev. Douglas Lee, a retired Presbyterian Air Force chaplain and brigadier general, told The Post.
Hello, Anita?
OK, so here’s a follow-up question to reports Virginia Thomas, wife of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, left a voice message on the office phone of Anita Hill, urging Hill to apologize for accusing the justice of sexual harassment during his 1991 Senate confirmation hearing: Did Mrs. Thomas staff that one by Justice Thomas?
The story almost certainly will generate a buzz for at least a few days, mostly because it’s just so bizarre — the kind of publicity the quite-private justice could do without. He’s been on the court nearly 20 years and probably wishes the Anita Hill controversy had stayed in the rear-view mirror. So, what possessed his wife to call Hill, now a professor at Brandeis University in Boston, and assert that Hill should “consider an apology” and a “full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband”? Mrs. Thomas’ message (which she confirms leaving) said Hill should prayerfully consider apologizing and concluded with a sunny, “OK, have a nice day.”
Hill, born in Oklahoma and a former University of Oklahoma law professor, thought the message was a prank at first and then turned the recording over to campus police. She said she has nothing to apologize for and said that while Mrs. Thomas claims she meant no offense, she considers the call offensive and accusatory. Lots of people probably figured they’d heard the last of the Hill-Thomas controversy. Obviously not.
Going to pot
Democrats running for governor and U.S. Senate in California might get a boost from a ballot initiative that would make possessing and growing marijuana legal. Politico reports experts believe Proposition 19 will drive younger-voter turnout, which should help Barbara Boxer, running for Senate re-election, and Jerry Brown, running for governor. The state’s Democratic Party is neutral on the “Just Say Now” measure, and Brown, Boxer and fellow U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein oppose it. Still, analysts believe it will help Brown and Boxer because recent polling shows the under-40 demographic supports pot legalization 59 percent to 33 percent. Of course, that assumes pot enthusiasts actually get to the polls to vote.
Dialing for dollars
Revealing: Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s voting delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives, is captured on a lobbyist’s voice mail asking for campaign cash. No big deal; members solicit contributions all the time. The remarkable aspect is in actually hearing a member of Congress grovel for cash. It’s also interesting the way Norton brandishes her subcommittee chairmanship trying to get dollars from a lobbyist who apparently has given to other members but not her. (Insert cat fight audio.) Norton’s office says there’s nothing untoward in the phone call because it was made from her campaign headquarters, skirting a ban on members soliciting cash from federal property. Dicier is whether the call dodged ethics rules that prevent members from seeking cash in connection with their official capacities, such as subcommittee chairmanships. We’ll see.
The side story to the story is the way it was being handled — or not handled — by different news organizations. As of Thursday afternoon neither The Washington Post nor The New York Times had generated their own report on Norton’s activities, though the audio had been linked from Matt Drudge’s site all day and had been picked up by other online publications. By the way, Norton, 73, was nominated for a 10th House term with 90 percent of the vote in this week’s D.C. Democratic primary, tantamount to election in the heavily Democratic district.
Who are these people?
Well, that’s embarrassing! No other way to look at separate polls indicating sizable numbers of Americans think President Obama is a Muslim. A Pew poll found 18 percent think that; a Time magazine poll put the number at an amazing 24 percent — nearly one-quarter of the population! “The president is obviously a Christian,” White House spokesman Bill Burton says. “He prays every day.” It’s likely that mistaken views on Obama’s faith stem from the ground zero Islamic center controversy, with Obama’s defense of the constitutional right of the mosque backers to proceed with their project being conflated with the president’s religious beliefs by some. Let’s hope this red herring doesn’t develop the shelf life of another specious belief — that Obama isn’t a U.S. citizen.
Looking the other way
The columnist’s lead was an attention-grabber: “Charlie Rangel is no crook.” Amid the swirl of denunciations of Rangel, the Democratic congressman from New York accused of breaking House rules — even President Obama strongly indicated he thinks Rangel done wrong and should go — The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson came to the defense.
Robinson writes the charges against Rangel range from “the technical all the way to the trivial” and that the congressman didn’t gain monetarily from any of his alleged transgressions. That’s certainly debatable. Rangel allegedly failed to declare rental income from vacation property in the Caribbean — the kind of omission that lands regular people in jail. No big deal, Robinson writes, because Rangel paid back what he owed in taxes, penalties and interest. As for allegedly using his official House letterhead to raise money for a college program bearing his name, Rangel is guilty only of padding his ego, not his pocket, Robinson writes. Move along, nothing to see here, seems to be the columnist’s attitude. Really?
So much for the crusading columnist, actively comforting the afflicted/afflicting the comforted, eh? Never mind the symptoms of entitlement and privilege wafting from Rangel’s ethics file. Hard to imagine Robinson, paid to propound liberal positions in The Post, giving such a wide berth to any of Rangel’s conservative colleagues.
