We Get Letters

Barkman a prosecutor or defense attorney?

Dear Editor:

Patrick Barkman writes more like a prosecuting attorney with a weak case than a defense attorney.
Talk about “self-righteous blowhard Republicans and their moral implosions” and “lie down with dogs and get up with Republicans” makes me think that he is using only on ear and eye when making these judgment calls. I have trouble separating the actions of the two party memberships in personal behavior, but since he brought the subject up, let’s look at a few things.
Sen. Craig, of Republican Idaho, was apparently caught with some pants down and, if the allegations are true, should retire because of his activity, his misrepresentation of his character and for bringing shame on his office, his state, and his voting public. Although not considered criminal acts, how about immoral, or does that count these days? The Republican governor can, by law, appoint a replacement of his choice, but one shouldn’t compare any state’s politics to Louisiana’s.
The fact that the American public did have knowledge of Willie Clinton’s roving eye and cheating heart is what disillusions me about the American public’s reasoning in its choices. Not “splinters in neighbor’s eyes,” Patrick, but 2X4’s, which are hard to miss. I won’t even comment on Barney Franks [sic] other than to say he must get his voters what they want, and they do not worry about trysts of this nature.
To compare Kennedy to Lincoln is shocking, as their principle similarity was being president. Facts indicate that the three Kennedy boys left their morals with their priest. Ted, the noted “bridge deserter of Mary Jo Kopeckne,” must feed his flock of sheep lots of sugar to stay in office. As for Fred Thompson, he is smart enough to campaign with ideas that work and shouldn’t be predetermined guilty of ignoring and circumventing the constitution until proven guilty. Patrick is right about him not starring with a monkey as Reagan did nor as Hillary does!
It seems wrong for a defense lawyer to prejudge veteran Gen. Petraeus who has witnessed unimaginable patriotism, heroism and savage carnage while his troops are striving to protect us so that we can speak this freely, and I believe that he should be proven a toad before judgment and sentencing? [sic]
I feel very few Americans are in favor of the “General Betrayus” clown act, a ridiculous group. The so called “War Party” has a heck of a long way to go to catch up with the perpetrators of the Korean War and the Vietnam War, each of which claimed the lives of many, many thousands of Americans sent to die under the leadership of Truman, Kennedy and Johnson of “the Peace Party.”
Countless thousands of Koreans, Vietnamese and other Asians were also victims of our leaders’ whims in those unneeded and tragically conducted wars. God bless our veterans and all victims of past and present wars. Today, less raving and more troop appreciation by Congress would be classy.
It is sorrowful that so many people are so economically affected by the changed mortgage rates. People who live way above their means often get caught in terrible binds when it is too easy to borrow big bucks. However, potential voting power will nudge “big brudder” to bail them out. “Learning the hard way” is through a difficult curriculum, but will it stick?
I agree with Patrick that Gov. Rick Perry and President Bush have often been distracted from their job descriptions. No doubt, he has already selected who can and who will do better! President Bush has detractors now, but I feel that history will prove that he made some sincere and proper moves, thus saving the world from much of the grief it would otherwise have suffered.

Monte Swatzell
Cleburne

The Pot Calling the Kettle White

David Yeagley ("Comanche" "Patriot") takes umbrage at my post, saying:

Another complaint based on the contortion that I blamed the students of VA Tech for being shot.

Let's take another look at his article, shall we?

There were no heroic acts in the VA Tech incident, contrary to liberal media reports. Hiding behind a desk, or jumping out a window is not a heroic act!

You. Make. The. Call.

Rabble rousers at it again

Dear Editor:

The rabble rousers — the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson — have roused the rabble, and the roar has silenced the voice and killed the career of someone who said something of which they disapprove. Albeit what the man said was stupid, since it was said by a white man. If a black man had said it, it would have evoked a good laugh, but Sharpton and Jackson are determined to play the race cards. This is what keeps them in power. Now the Local Crank has mouthed off. He’s as empty headed as those other two. For a few lousy words, Don Ismus’ ranch for kids with cancer, operated at no cost to them, may have to close. The money his program raised for charity is no longer available. You idiots have your sympathies in the wrong place. Any harm done by Don Ismus is infinitesimal compared to that done by Sharpton and Jackson.Things said in normal speech do no harm. It is the Hitler-type haranguing of those two that cause problems. Any normal person would have said, “consider the source and forget it.”

Donald Henry

Speaker answers Barkman comments

Dear Editor:
Your paper recently published a column by Patrick Barkman titled "How not to fire US attorneys." The column's author falsely claimed that I "recently killed a provision to create a standing special prosecutor to investigate TYC (Texas Youth Commission) abuses." Three weeks ago, House Bill 472, a bill that would expand the jurisdiction of the special prosecution unit to include the prosecution of crimes committed in TYC facilities, was discovered to contain a technical error while being debated on the House floor. The bill was sent back to the House Corrections Committee, where is was amended and voted out again by the committee last week. it will likely be debated on the floor sometime later this month. Everyone realizes this is an important tool in addressing systemic problems at the TYC; however, it is equally important to insure that the legislation is drafted in a way that will provide the best outcome when prosecuting crimes that occur within the TYC. I anticipate House Bill 472 to pass the House. In light of the recent revelations of the abhorrent behavior at the Texas Youth Commission, it is my hope that this legislation will go toward helping to fix this broken agency.
Sincerely,
Tom Craddick
Speaker of the Texas House

UPDATE: Normally, I don't respond to fan mail, but this release from the Speaker's press-droid is so outrageously false that the very stones themselves cry out for an answer. During the debate in question, House Minority Leader Jim Dunnam offered an amendment to HB 472 that would've created a special prosecutor, not merely codified the ability of district and county attorneys to request one, as in the original language of the bill. The amendment was adopted 75-63 on a bipartisan vote. Rep. Larry Phillips (R-Sherman) then raised a technical objection to the analysis of the bill and one paragraph that accidentally dropped a word or two. The Speaker could have overruled this minor and irrelevant point, but chose instead to sustain it. Thus, a bill that would've gone into effect back in late March still hasn't passed. This delay (and if the bill dies before the session ends, the death of the bill) can be laid, like a flaming bag of dog crap, at the feet of Speaker Tom Craddick.

From Our Readers...

...this classic:

How many members of the Bush administration does it take to change a light bulb?
The answer is 10:

1. One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed;
2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs to be changed;
3. One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb;
4. One to tell the nations of the world that they either favor changing the light bulb or support darkness;
5. One to give a billion-dollar no-bid contract to Halliburton for the new light bulb;
6. One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a step-ladder under the banner "Light bulb Change Accomplished";
7. One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush was literally "in the dark";
8. One to viciously smear #7;
9. One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies on how George Bush has had a strong light bulb-changing policy all along;
10. And, finally, one to confuse Americans about the difference between screwing in a light bulb and screwing the country!

Cuddlier, Dammit!

A Reader kindly submitted this proposal for Anime Dick Cheney. I think he should be made the new blog mascot. Special thanks to Mister Quibble!

Letters From Our Readers...

Harry C. Kennemer, Jr. of Burleson writes:

"Dear Editor:

My condolences to the family, especially the children, of Patrick Barkman for his embarrassing and despicable remarks in the Times-Review on Nov. 26. For those who did not read the column, here is the exact language: 'I am thankful...That both of my kids know karate and can now beat up other parents' honor students.' Does he really advocate his sons beating up honor students? What does this remark imply about his sons? If this was meant to be funny it wreaks of a sick sense of humor. This man gives lawyers a bad name. What do the principals, teachers and parents of school children in Cleburne think of this type of despicable comment? There is enough violence in our society without this kind of attitude. Like most of you readers I have tolerated Barkman's ridiculous opinions and remarks. This is a free country and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, even if they are uninformed, misguided and dead wrong. But this type of remark in Barkman's column speaks to the character of a man who has repeatedly and maliciously maligned those who are far more honorable than he. I hope that responsible citizens would join me and urge the Times-Review to ban Barkman's column from future issues after he has published an apology to the readers. You have an obligation to your readers to not publish such callous remarks that essentially advocate violence in our schools and our community. Oh, and by the way, shame on you for publishing his remarks in the first place."

I Reckon They Showed Me

From the Cleburne Times-Review:

Dear Editor:
Guest columnist Patrick Barkman is flat wrong when he writes that Dr. Jim Leininger is “anti-public school.” Most school choice advocates, including Dr. Leininger, believe that competition will help inspire accelerated improvements in public schools, especially in the big cities where generations of children have already been lost. As for Mr. Barkman’s harsh criticism of Dr. Leininger’s politics, the truth is he became passionately involved in helping poor children escape the poverty cycle after having worked as an emergency room physician treating the gunshot wounds of too many children. Dr. Leininger went on to found a medical device company that made him a very successful businessman. He has since devoted a good share of his wealth to what has now become his life-long determination to help children. To date he has personally funded more than $50 million of scholarships to private schools for low-income children in San Antonio and other Texas cities. All but a few of those who have graduated have gone on to self-financed college educations.That Dr. Leininger believes Texas public policy should side with parents who don’t feel that they can wait for “eventual” improvements in public schools is less the political philosophy so clearly disdained by Mr. Barkman as it is simple human compassion and a willingness to stake part of his wealth — and his own reputation — on efforts to make the future better for the parents of promising children desperate to have at least some of the educational choices now only enjoyed by the wealthy.
Ken Hoagland
Houston

This is, one supposes, the same Ken Hoagland who is well-known as the "Mouth of Sauron," the official spokesperson for Leininger's Texans for School Choice, something he chose not to indicate in his boiler-plate press-release. Here's a quick question for you, Ken: if, as you say, Dr. Leininger is motivated solely by his love for poor children, how many scholarships to private schools could he have paid for with the funds he has lavished on his pet candidates over the years?