Melder's Musings

Victoria Osteen wishes Christmas blessings for all people...unless you're a certain flight attendant. (KPRC photo)

As the Christmas season is now behind us, let's take a look at what some people have done in the name of Christ. It's part of an occasional series on this blog.

Victoria Osteen, wife of Joel Osteen, was recently kicked off an airplane as the family was set to leave for their Christmas vacation to Vail, Colorado. The Osteens say they left voluntarily. The FBI says they were asked to leave. People on the plane said it all had to do with water spilled on Mrs. Osteen's first class seat. She apparently was not satisfied with how that situation was handled. The words "abusive" and "altercation" have been used to describe Mrs. Osteen's behavior.

Mr. Osteen is the pastor of Houston's Lakewood Church, one of the area's so-called megachurches. It's such a megachurch that it recently bought the former Compaq Center in Houston (a really big building where some of the city's professional sports teams used to play). He and his "ministry" have made millions of dollars.

Meanwhile, another Houston-area megachurch has found a surefire way to fill the seats. They'll bribe potential worshipgoers. As reported by the Houston Chronicle, the Abundant Life Christian Center in LaMarque, Texas, is giving away a house. All you have to do is show up to morning services and enter your name into a random drawing. If you're lucky, you'll be chosen to participate in a game-show-style spectacle. If you're really lucky, the key you're handed during the spectacle will open a special door. Balloons will drop, buzzers will sound, and you'll receive one massive earthly blessing. Your spiritual health, on the other hand, is a whole other matter entirely.

A large swath of the country took off last Friday through yesterday. So did I. That's why there hasn't been anything posted since last Thursday.

There will be no Top Ten Conservative Idiots this week, or next, for that matter. The folks at Democratic Underground are taking a break until January 9.

Those housekeeping notes aside, I woke up to some amazing things on Christmas morning. I woke up to the gentle nudging of my beaming 4-year-old sister. I woke up to a beautifully decorated Christmas tree whose collection of decorations has grown and changed over the years as my family has. I woke up to an impressive bounty of gifts to be shared by the people I love most. It was one of the best Christmas mornings I've had in recent memory.

One thing I did not wake up to was the horrific war zone bemoaned by the talking heads at Fox News. There was no fire, no brimstone, and Central Texas Expressway was not flowing with the blood of the nonbelievers.

I celebrated Christmas as I have for as long as I can remember. In fact, and as I said earlier, it was probably one of the best Christmas celebrations I've enjoyed in some time. My religious views remain steadfast. The only thing I have to worry about is if e-mails and phone calls to friends and relatives were monitored, as it seems that secret presidential program is bigger than we first thought (and if MTV news takes notice, it must be huge). The War on Christmas, brought to you by Fox News, did not claim me or my family among its victims. The War on Terror might have, but it'll take more Congressional investigation to determine that.

As for that whole War on Christmas thing, let the facts speak for themselves. Ignore the facts as Bill O'Reilly spins them to you. Pay attention to the facts as they really are. It seems Mr. O'Reilly got it wrong not once, but twice, as he beat the drums of holy war. One of his errors got so much attention a Texas school district's attorneys intervened. Another has town officials in Michigan accusing him of making it up.

Lampasas County, Texas, will have at least one less Democrat serving her people in January. As reported by my hometown newspaper, District Clerk Terri Cox (for my Mississippi readers, that's the equivalent of the Circuit Clerk) is switching parties to run for her fourth term.

As quoted by the newspaper: "It was a difficult decision," Mrs. Cox said. "But I decided it would be in the best interest of the county and to provide continued service to the office of district clerk to file Republican."

As this it is my prerogative to speculate through this medium, I strongly suspect that Lampasas County Republican Party Chairman Skipper Wallace twisted Mrs. Cox's arm. Wallace has been very aggressive about encouraging party swapping and Mrs. Cox is one of three Democratic holdouts. Mrs. Cox faced a Republican challenger four years ago. That challenger came to the race with only basic experience in public record keeping but made some headway with the old Republican tactic of questioning the morals of all persons Democratic. What immorality had Mrs. Cox been accused of? Being a Democrat.

Wallace, in my estimation, likely threatened Mrs. Cox with another challenger. As she's one of only a few offices the party has to target, any opponent would be well funded and could drown out any discussion of real issues with more false cries of immorality. Mrs. Cox, being the true public servant she is, recognizes which way the wind is blowing and will put up with GOP nonsense so that her work can continue unimpeded. I truly respect Mrs. Cox and her work, so she may well be the third Republican I've ever voted for. Barring that, and some highly unlikely Democratic ubercandidate, I may well just not cast a ballot in that race at all.

As for the other Democratic holdouts, there are two. County Clerk Connie Hartman (the Chancery Clerk is Mississippi) has not officially indicated her plans, but any change would be a shock. Justice of the Peace for Precinct 1, Frances Porter, is not seeking another term. Three Republicans have filed for her seat.

A final Democratic contender (maybe) is Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cox, husband to District Clerk Terri Cox. In what may be a case of sloppy journalism, his decision to run for another term is already known, but his party affiliation is not. As my hometown paper has reported, Mr. Cox will seek a second term, but no one has filed for any office in the Democratic primary. Mr. Cox does not qualify as a Democratic holdout in my book, at least not yet, as he'll be running for his second term. His victory was a much needed positive outcome for the Democrats in 2002. A win in 2006 looks like it may be our only positive outcome.

A race to watch will be the one for County Judge. In Texas, the County Judge is basically the county's chief administrative officer. I have heard a lot of rumors regarding who will run and under which party's banner. There has even been some talk among the party faithful regarding my own possible candidacy. As of this writing, one Republican has filed.

All politics is local. Lampasas County politicians pick their party labels based on largely national happenings, but their actions often defy those labels. The current crop of county leaders, heavily Republican, has, literally and figuratively, done more to expand government than any of their predecessors. They've built a second county government building while spending millions of dollars to restore the first. They've helped create another elected board to run an arm of the bureaucracy. They've increased county employee salaries (most notably their own). I don't write that as criticism, but rather as a lesson that sometimes party labels don't really matter.

The 2006 election will be one to watch.

I'm going to bring back another long-neglected feature of this blog: the Crap Comment of the Day.

Today's Crap Comment comes from my junior senator, Republican John Cornyn.

"None of your civil liberties matter much after you're dead."”

Cornyn's statement is quoted in a December 20 article in The Hill, an allegedly nonpartisan and unbiased paper covering Capitol Hill.

Cornyn was, of course, referring to the fight in Congress over renewal of the USA Patriot Act. As you hopefully recall, that bill was rushed into law by a Chicken Little Congress immediately after September 11, 2001. Very few members actually read the legislation and it passed without even so much as a handful of opposition.

With the terrorist attacks four years behind us, Congress has had the opportunity to reconsider its haste. Many, even in the GOP, have come to realize the number of Patriot Act provisions that make America more like Russia...circa 1985. Still believing in some sense of civil liberties, a number of Republicans have joined Democrats in fighting to reform the Patriot Act. Hardline Republicans (you can't call them conservatives because true conservatives wouldn't give the government so much power) are in lockstep with the Bush administration in an effort to make the Patriot Act a permanent part of American jurisprudence.

All of this has led to a showdown in Congress and kept the members in D.C. much longer than is customary before their extended holiday recess. The week began with all indications that the Patriot Act would be allowed to sunset on December 31. The Bushies wanted all or nothing and Democrats were going to filibuster to keep that from happening.

In a surprise move last night, the Senate passed a six-month extension for the Act. Senators claim they'll use the extra time to work out compromises in the most Gestapo-friendly provisions. As this is written, the House has just passed a one-month extension. This comes after a threat by House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner (one of those lockstep Bushies) to kill altogetherher. Sensenbrenner and his ilk are in that all or nothing crowd.

Meanwhile, President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have been making dire predictions for the nation's security should they not get their way. They've expressed outrage and accused Democrats of trying to hurt the country (which, come to think of it, they do on almost every issue). Feeling the force of compromise, however, Bush has had to back off from his fiery rhetoric.

That fiery rhetoric bring us back to Mr. Cornyn. The problems with his statement should be obvious. In case you don't see it, perhaps some 200-year-old wisom will help. As Ben Franklin once said: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

This should be old news to most, but I'm putting this post together in an effort to share some of the various perspectives on the issue.

The old news: President Bush authorized the National Security Administration to monitor the telephone calls and e-mails of people within the United States. The New York Times reported this nearly a week ago. The President personally approved the eavesdropping at least three dozen times. Hundreds, and possibly thousands, of Americans have had their conversations listed to and their messages read by government agents.

Why this is news: President Bush may have broken the law. As the Washington Post reports, Bush signed an order in 2002 that could make a legal justification for the secret eavesdropping. That order, however, violates at least the spirit of a number of laws already on the books. One such law created the FISA courts, named for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that established them. Congress passed the FISA in 1978 to set rules for spying on Americans under the guise of national security. As the Los Angeles Times reported, Bush's action likely violates at least the FISA.

A civics lesson: the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the American people from this kind of activity. It requires the government to seek a warrant before conducting this kind of eavesdropping. The FISA court was set up to allow the executive branch to obtain such warrants without public court proceedings (which, in my opinion, is also illegal; but that's another blog post). The FISA court even allows the government to seek its warrants after the spying is underway. President Bush completely bypassed the FISA court. He sought no warrant. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, the Supreme Court has previously frowned on such activity.

The defense: the White House claims that Bush gets the power to continue the NSA eavesdropping from three sources: 1) the so-called war on terror grants him extraordinary wartime powers authorized by the Constitution; 2) the Congressional order authorizing the President to avenge the 9/11/2001 attacks ; and 3) since a handful Congressional leaders were alerted to the NSA's actions, they have Congressional approval.

The fallout: many members of Congress, of both houses and parties, are expressing outrage at the President's action. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, many are calling for full investigations into the matter. Some particularly vocal folks on the far left are beginning to call for Bush's impeachment (presuming, of course, that the spying was illegal). As this is written, Washington is reeling from the surprise resignation of a FISA court judge. As the Associated Press reports, that judge is resigning to protest Bush's action.

This is an issue that will not quickly fade. I will update the blog as I see fit.

It's been way too long...again. My employment situation has changed considerably and I've been on the road a lot lately. Still, that's no excuse for the neglect I've had toward this blog.

That said, look for updates on all the latest in Texas politics, and a few items from the national scene. It is one hell of a time to get back to blogging. With the 2006 ballot shoring up and the President facing censure for illegal spying, there should be plenty to discuss.

Let me start by doing what I should have been doing every week: this week's top ten conservative idiots. It's been 9 weeks since my last top ten update, but the folks at Democratic Underground have been plugging away all the while.