Several years ago, Lubbock voters approved a bond proposal to construct an amphitheater at Mackenzie Park. After several missteps, the facility ultimately was completed–well over what the city had said it would cost.
Here’s the link to a story that was in the AJ in 2003 where a city official talks about all of the great events that are going to take place at the amphitheater: http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/102103/upd_075-1752.shtml
The truth is that if it were not for Moonlight Musicals, a program that didn’t even exist when the amphitheater was constructed, this multi-million facility would have sat vacant. Nothing has taken place that the city official said would occur.
Ask me if I will believe any city official when they ask me to approve a bond proposal.
For Texas Tech football fans, new head coach Tommy Tuberville is really sounding good.
Every coach Tech has had since I’ve been here has talked about winning football games and going to post-season bowl games.
Ousted Mike Leach went to more bowl games (10) than any previous head coach, and his teams won as many bowl games (six, including the Alamo Bowl just a couple of days after he was fired) during his tenure than the Red Raiders had won in school’s previous gridiron history.
Tuberville, who is returning to the sidelines after a one-year absence, is not talking about winning football games or going to bowl games. He’s talking about winning championships, for crying out loud.
Ever since his arrival on the South Plains in mid-January Tuberville has said that winning seven, eight or nine games a year isn’t good enough if the team is not playing for championships—something that Leach never was able to accomplish.
It’s refreshing to hear this sort of talk coming for a Tech coach. The proof will be in the game results, but, without a doubt, he has set the bar high. All Raider fans are hoping that he can walk the walk.
While editor of a fairly large daily Texas newspaper I had the opportunity to meet a lot of folks from different walks of life and with varying degrees of influence.
One of my favorite people to be around and to talk with during my many years in the business was long-time Lubbock City Councilman T. J. Patterson.
No matter what was going on in our community or his own life, T.J., who represented District 2 for more than two decades, always had a smile on his face and a passion for life.
It’s hard to forget one of his phrases that he would frequently use to rally support for a cause—”It’s about the children, y’all…It’s about the children!”
It had been almost five years since I had heard and seen T.J. in his element. Yesterday, though, when a group of more than 100 children and adults gathered to honor the Estacado High School boys basketball team for its state championship, T.J., who was serving as the master of ceremonies, was in top form.
He had people clapping and cheering and following his every instruction as the team was introduced and honored. It was a sight to see.
Avalanche-Journal Report Adam D. Young does a good job capturing the mood T.J. created in today’s newspaper, but you really had to be there to understand the magic of T.J.’s enthusiasm for life. Here’s the link: http://lubbockonline.com/stories/040810/loc_603324663.shtml
What a wonderful inspiration this gentleman is for our young people and our community!
Last week while attending a luncheon at the fairly new Overton Hotel, the speaker from the Lubbock Independent School District, Dr. Sam Ayers, mentioned almost in a casual manner that Estacado High School was in the bottom five percent of low-performing schools in the United States.
To anyone who has lived in Lubbock for any length of time, hearing that Estacado students do not do well on academic tests comes as no surprise. Our community and school administrators have been ignoring this predominately black student body for many years. There have been one or two attempts to try to improve it, but they never amounted to much.
About two weeks ago it was announced by the LISD administration that Ayers, who has a fairly good reputation in educational circles, would be leaving his position as assistant superintendent at Central Office to become the principal next year at Estacado.
Then, two days ago, the school district let it be known that all of the teachers at Estacado were going to have to reapply for their positions and that many probably would not be rehired at EHS. Some might be reassigned to other schools, some might retire, and some might be let go.
While I found it strange that teachers who weren’t accepted at EHS for rehire might be reassigned, at least I was beginning to think that maybe the school district was becoming serious about improving the educational experience at EHS.
In my favorite newspaper today, though, I learned that there is another motive for the actions being taken, and it has nothing to do with the students.
In a story headlined, “Changes in store for Estacado,” there is $388 million in federal grant money available to low-performing Texas schools if they will enact certain changes, including:
Replacing the principal;
Screening the staff and rehiring no more than half the current teachers; and
Improving the school through curriculum reform, professional development, extended learning time and other strategies.
As I read the story in the newspaper this morning I found myself wondering if there weren’t any federal dollars attached to improving the educational experience at the school would the LISD do anything?
I’d like to think that it would have a moral obligation to take these steps without the money, but my skepticism has me believing otherwise.
Today is the beginning of early voting for those few candidates who could not garner a majority in last month’s primary elections.
In Lubbock, we have two runoff races in the state House of Representatives, Districts 83 and 84, that will draw interest.
Both contests are fun to watch, but, because of where I live, I won’t be able to vote in the most competitive one—District 83 where neophyte Charles Perry, a co-founder of the local Tea Party movement, is taking on veteran legislator Delwin Jones. My district is 84, where Mark Griffin, who is not new to local politics, and John Frullo, another Tea Party guy, are battling to replace veteran House member Carl Isett, who is retiring.
Few would have given Perry and Frullo a chance to make a runoff, much less triumph, when they announced for the positions several weeks ago. Many folks, including Zach Brady and myself, didn’t realize the power of the Tea Party base. The Tea Party folks came out in enough numbers in March to keep Griffin from winning outright in his race and to force Jones into a runoff.
It’s interesting now to watch the followers and campaigns of Perry and Frullo flex their muscles. In some ways, they are even appearing to be bullies.
Last week, Perry’s campaign issued a press release that misinterpreted a bill concerning tuition rates for immigrants that Isett co-authored almost a decade ago and was supported by all but two people in the House of Representatives. The news release was intended to smear Jones by indicating that he’s in favor of illegal immigration.
A friend of mine who is involved in the Jones campaign told me that Perry called him a few weeks ago and threatened to slam Jones with a series of negative ads.
I’ve heard many people who say they voted for Perry the first time say that they are disappointed in his behavior in the runoff and will switch to Jones.
This morning I heard a negative ad by Frullo’s campaign that was critical of some Griffin’s friends and actions without much basis.
I voted for Frullo the first time because I believed he represented my conservative philosophy better than Griffin. Now, after hearing Frullo’s commercial, I don’t believe he represents my values, and I think I’ll be voting for Griffin.
Thursday, April 1, is something called National Census Day in the United States. This is the day that comes every 10 years in our country where every person who is living the United States, and some who don’t, is supposed to be counted, mainly for the purpose of determining the number of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives that each state will have.
Those who do research love to cull through the census figures in order to paint a “portrait” of our country. Genealogists would have a difficult time, too, finding out about their ancestors without the census data.
Additionally, the Federales apparently use census data to dole out our tax dollars.
The government has spent millions of dollars in an attempt to get us to return our census forms. I remember getting at least one letter telling me that my form was going to be mailed to me and another letter a few days after I got the form reminding me to return the form. There have been dozens upon dozens of advertisements, both electronic and print, encouraging me to participate.
Let me be clear about this—I don’t trust the government any more than the next sane person, but I sure don’t see what the problem is in answering the simple questions that are on the form.
I didn’t particularly feel like the government needed to know my ethnicity or my telephone number, but what the hell. The telephone book has my number in it, and my ethnicity is on so many official government documents that there is no way to hide it. What am I accomplishing by not putting it on the form?
The form doesn’t ask me to tell how many guns I have or don’t have; it doesn’t ask me if I have had or not had an abortion; it doesn’t ask for my physician’s name. In fact, answers to every one of the 10 questions can be found out by the government in some other manner, but why would I want to waste MY tax dollars by making it more difficult and expensive to collect the data?
Those nut cases that are radio talk show hosts or callers to radio stations that are so fearful of our government need to get a life and complain about something that matters.
Recently, I have become troubled by the political co-opting of the English language, although now I realize that it began decades ago.
Sometime in the 1970s or 1980s, those who supported the homosexual lifestyle latched on to the word “gay.” People who are in a male-male or female-female sexual relationship (and this includes friends and relatives of mine) are certainly entitled to live that way, but please don’t tell me you are “gay” when dictionaries published before the sexual revolution didn’t include that definition. If you must tell me your sexual orientation, please use the proper words.
To be honest, though, I’ve lost that battle and homosexuals will forever be known as “gay” and adults will forever snicker when singing that traditional Christmas song, “Deck the Halls,” when the time comes to sing “don our gay apparel.”
Now, though, I am bothered when the word “Progressives” is used in place of “Liberals.” Does this mean that “Conservatives” are not progressive in their thinking and should be called “Cavemen?” Certainly those with a Liberal political philosophy would like for us to think that.
If you want to be known as a liberal, moderate, or conservative, use those words to describe yourself. Be proud of your political leanings. Don’t call yourself “Progressive” in an attempt to make me think you are a deep thinker and moderates or conservatives aren’t.
(Editor’s Note: Damn, I wish he wasn’t so small-minded!)
Allow me to make a few points before I move on with this:
- I am a conservative
- I do not favor abortion
- I did not and do not support the health plan as adopted by Congress
- I did not and will not vote for President Barack Obama
- President Obama is the president of the United States and deserves to be treated with respect.
- Members of Congress, no matter their political leanings, are representatives of their constituents and should be treated with respect.
- All people should be treated with respect.
- Debate in the Halls of Congress should be respectful (I can yell at the television set, but the Members should button it).
Word is just now coming out that U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, who represents my district and is a friend whom I have supported ever since he was first elected to the Lubbock City Council, is the person who shouted those terribly ugly words, “Baby Killer,” during the raucous debate over the health plan last night in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Just as I believed U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson was out of line when he shouted, “You Lie,” at President Obama during an address to Congress, I also am very disappointed that anyone, much less my own Member, felt compelled to disparage another member by calling him a “Baby Killer.” Rep. Bart Stupak, who caved in to pressure from the President and his party to vote for the health bill, is no more a “baby killer” than the thousands of young men and women who were called that during the Vietnam War.
Rep. Neugebauer says he wasn’t shouting at Rep. Stupak, but any rational person would disagree.
Here is the statement issued by Rep. Neugebauer today in the aftermath of his out-of-character behavior:
“Last night was the climax of weeks and months of debate on a health care bill that my constituents fear and do not support. In the heat and emotion of the debate, I exclaimed the phrase ‘it’s a baby killer’ in reference to the agreement reached by the Democratic leadership. While I remain heartbroken over the passage of this bill and the tragic consequences it will have for the unborn, I deeply regret that my actions were mistakenly interpreted as a direct reference to Congressman Stupak himself.
“I have apologized to Mr. Stupak and also apologize to my colleagues for the manner in which I expressed my disappointment about the bill. The House Chamber is a place of decorum and respect. The timing and tone of my comment last night was inappropriate.”
At least he owned up to his mistake.
He’ll probably be given the opportunity to go on lots of television and radio talk shows today to talk about his exclamation. I hope he doesn’t do it and simply lets his statement speak for itself.
I’m extremely disappointed in Randy’s behavior, but I believe he has learned from it and will continue to be a strong, but polite, conservative voice in Congress.
It appears that our country now is going to provide health insurance of some sort for almost every American, and maybe even some who are not Americans. Personally, I wish it hadn’t happened, but I don’t think that it’s necessarily the end of the world…although it may be the end of capitalism in our country.
When I was involved in the hiring process at my favorite newspaper, some prospective employees were very interested in the company benefits, as they should have been. When it came to our company insurance program I would usually explain to them that I thought it was pretty good, but because insurance is a very complicated issue I couldn’t do more than give them a broad idea about our coverage.
Now that the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate have moved our nation further down the road of socialism with the passage of some sort of national health plan, it will be a while before anyone can weigh in on just exactly how good their insurance coverage is.
This action by our Congress is personally disappointing, but the Sun still came up this morning.
The good news that comes from the passage of the issue, if there is good news, is that now the Congress maybe will focus on improving our economy and getting Americans back to work so that we can begin to pay for all of their projects.
Lubbock’s unemployment rate, traditionally one of the lowest in the state and nation, is now topping 6 percent—the highest level in several years. Compared to the rest of the country, where in some areas the rate is more than 13 percent, Lubbock’s numbers look pretty good.
After spending a few minutes at one of the local dry goods stores (the one with a bull’s eye) Sunday, I found myself thinking that the folks that fall into the 6 percent unemployed must be close to the dregs of our society. (Ed’s note: He’s making a joke. He knows of at least one very qualified acquaintance who, for some reason, can’t find work. The joke’s not funny to that individual.)
Right after I walked into the store, which is really just a high-class Wal-Mart, I encountered an employee near the front door with a Mohawk haircut that was about six inches high and topped with raspberry(?)-colored tips. This guy is a really good representative of his company?
A few minutes later, I saw another employee whose pants were so low to the ground that it looked as if he might have pooped in his pants.
I left shaking my head and thinking that jobs must be pretty easy to find around here.
Not too long ago, I was at a neighborhood chain restaurant and was greeted and escorted to my table by a young man with enough piercings that he would whistle in a high wind. Another similar appearing person checked me out the other day at a large drugstore.
Let me make it clear. Because I ride a motorcycle, I hang out with folks who have tattoos, piercings and unusual hairstyles. In the environment where I encounter these people, I have no problem with that sort of lifestyle.
But would I want them making my company’s first impression?
I’m going to go out on a limb here and assert that most American consumers are reluctant to interact with someone who has numerous piercings and tattoos and a colorful Mohawk haircut.
There’s little doubt that the young people I have described are good workers. I have no problem if they want to portray their rebellious side outside the workplace. I just can’t phantom how their supervisor allows this type of appearance in a retail situation.
