Update no.821

Update from the Heartland

No.821

11.9.17 – 17.9.17

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            The follow-up news items:

-- The Trump administration released yet another revision to their controversial travel ban [790] in advance of the Supreme Court’s hearing of formal arguments and deciding the case.  The latest version – travel ban 3.0 – appears to be more reasonable and refined in adapting restrictions to the real objects rather than a general ban based on religious beliefs.  Regardless, we must give Trump credit; he is relentless.

-- With the latest Republican attempt to repeal and “replace” the PPACA [432, 512, 533, 553] pending on Tuesday or Wednesday next week, Senator John McCain of Arizona rejected the latest attempt, for one declared reason – unacceptable process.  He has repeatedly and consistently advocated for the fully legislative process, including public committee hearings, proper debate, appropriate compromise, and complete cost-benefit analysis.  I stand firmly and solidly with McCain – health care insurance (protection) is simply too important to accept less.  I urge everyone to contact their senators and representative and encourage them to vote no on the Graham-Cassidy proposal (it’s not even a proper bill).

            President Trump delivered an address at the opening of the current United Nations General Assembly.  On the whole, I thought he did a pretty good job . . . good message although awkwardly delivered. However, in specific, his “totally destroy North Korea” and “Rocket Man” drivel is unnecessary, unbecoming and otherwise a really bad move.  “Totally destroy” in the English language means the killing of 25 million people and the destruction of every building, roadway, dam, tunnel, bridge . . . everything.  Schoolyard hyperbole is simply and absolutely unacceptable in the arena of international diplomacy.  Just because the DPRK finds affinity with such rhetoric does not make those words acceptable.  What is done is done; now, we live with the consequences.  I have tried to understand why the President would be so foolish and cavalier with the lives of innocent people.  My conclusion: He is either ignorant of or chooses to reject the wisdom of Teddy Roosevelt.  Instead, he chose to speak loudly about the military power of the United States.  I have never been a fan of anyone who chooses braggadocio and bluster.  By his conduct, he is narrowing our options and moving us closer to war . . . not comforting behavior.  For all the good he tried to communicate, I am left with no choice but to condemn his speech before the United Nations.  He was simply wrong!  Full stop!

            Then, what happens?  The DPRK threatens to detonate a nuclear device above or in the Pacific Ocean.  Really?  Such an action would clearly and definitively be unacceptable.  Inappropriate bluffing sucked us into the Vietnam War.  We do not need another half-hearted war that gets a lot of people killed.  If he really intends to take us into war with the DPRK, then I would recommend he focus on mobilization of the nation rather than making foolish public statements like he did.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.820:

Comment to the Blog:

“Neither of us has much respect for Hillary Clinton, but that’s pretty much where the agreement ends this week.  I see the email server fiasco as evidence of the hubris that permeates the top level of our government these days, but not as worthy of extensive investigation or of prosecution.  I suspect most of the more powerful people in our government share that careless approach to functional decisions unless they fear losing elections or contributions over those decisions.

“The content of the various hacked emails interests me much more, and that content has not been disputed at any time. Indeed, the most interesting part, Democratic National Committee (DNC) manipulation of the primaries, became an open statement in a lawsuit that has been dismissed for now.  Those emails reveal the DNC’s (Clinton, Podesta, Wasserman-Schultz) central concerns to be electing Mrs. Clinton and collecting large donations, not anything to do with the nation’s well being or the best way for the party to win the election.  That influenced me to not vote for Mrs. Clinton despite my fear and mistrust of Trump.  Given the low turnout, I was not alone in that.

“The other major factor was research into Clinton’s actual record as Secretary of State and as a senator from New York.  She supported Wall Street over the general public and she did some nasty marketing for contributors (such as supporting baby formula over breastfeeding in impoverished African nations and petroleum over any other power source).  Even more importantly, she supported every military action under way or proposed.  Her advocacy at State probably pushed us into action in Libya.  I see Benghazi as one of those things that can happen in modern combat.  The real question is what we were doing there.

“We have discussed the Electoral College before. I favor one voter having one vote and see no reason to favor voters from one state over those from another.  That only adds to the factionalism the Founders feared.  Mrs. Clinton collected about 3 million more votes than Trump, but Trump won the election. What justifies that under the notion that ‘all men are created equal’?”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: “the hubris that permeates the top level of our government.”  Actually, there is plenty of evidence to support your claim.  It is the intoxication of power.  She certainly exhibited the traits.  And, there are many others who have succumbed to that intoxicant.  The wisdom of Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (519–430 BC) has been lost on contemporary politicians . . . for quite some time now.

            Re: “manipulation of the primaries.”  The DNC got caught.  The RNC did not.  The establishment in both parties attempted to manipulate the primaries to obtain a candidate they supported; the DNC succeeded; the RNC did not.  Personal opinion: The Russians hacked the DNC, turned over material that suited their purposes to WikiLeaks, and that information became public at a time calculated to do the most damage to Clinton’s campaign.  For all we know, they were able to accomplish the very same thing with the RNC, but chose not to release their acquired information.  I strongly suspect Mueller’s investigation results will be shocking and sobering in many aspects, once all the available data becomes public.

            Re: Benghazi, Libya.  I am not so sure.

            Re: Electoral College.  We will continue to disagree, and I hope we will continue to discuss the various aspects of the constitutional presidential election process.  I see it differently.  Although I remain disgusted by the outcome, I believe the Electoral College performed exactly as the Founders / Framers intended.  Clinton cast all her effort on the coasts and what I see as minimal effort in the Heartland.  Trump made a concerted and determined effort in more states and regions.  He tapped into a deep vein of dissatisfaction among the citizens of this Grand Republic.  The bottom line: he waged a far more effective constitutional campaign than did Clinton . . . although I am quite reticent to give him credit for understanding the Constitution.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“What the Republicans did or failed to do in their primaries has no bearing on what the Democrats did.  As stated, the authenticity of the leaked DNC emails is unquestioned.  That information demonstrates manipulation of the primaries.  That same collection includes evidence that the DNC supported making Trump the candidate on the assumption that even Hillary could beat him in the general election.  The best laid plans of mice and men gang aft agley.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Quite so!  I was only including the RNC to point out that manipulation of the primaries is NOT limited to the DNC.  Also, political parties seeking favorable opponents is certainly not a new phenomenon.  This reality is precisely why I am so opposed to open primaries.  The temptation of political parties to meddle or contaminate opposing party primaries for their political gain is simply too great.  I strongly suspect the DNC did just that and now we endure the consequences.  But, hey, that’s just me.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.820

Update from the Heartland

No.820

11.9.17 – 17.9.17

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            The planned fiery end of the Cassini mission occurred at 11:55 UT, Friday, 15.September.2017 – the 77^th Battle of Britain Day.  The Cassini spacecraft was nearing the end of its useful fuel supply and the team decided to order the vehicle to enter the atmosphere of Saturn and burn up on reentry.  The last signal was received from the spacecraft as it reentered the planet’s upper atmosphere at 70,000 miles per hour.  Cassini sent back to Earth 13 years worth of extraordinary images and new discoveries.  Congratulations to the Cassini team.  Well done!

            The Eichmann Show (2015) is a BBC film based on the true story about the trial of Adolf Eichmann (1961) as told through the eyes of two Americans – Producer Milton Fruchtman and Director Leo Hurwitz.  The movie is an incredibly well done mixture of actual trial footage with actors to bring out the story.  I was so impressed by the craftsmanship and story line that I recommend every human being on the planet should watch this movie and especially every high school student.  There are too many people who are Holocaust-deniers and we must never forget what happened.  It is not a pleasant topic, but it is a vital subject for our history and our collective memory.

            Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton returned to the public arena this week, as she hit the talk show circuit and offered interviews to promote her new book.

            Clinton repeatedly said, “[James Comey] has forever changed history.”  I am sure she truly believes Comey’s letter to Congress weeks before the election snuffed out her momentum and raised sufficient doubt in some voters just before the polling day.

            This simple statement is precisely and succinctly why I could not bring myself to vote for her in the presidential election.  She failed to illuminate the critical and essential fact that her solo actions virtually forced FBI Director Comey to issue that letter.  She blames Comey.  I blame her.  Let us not forget that it was the discovery of electronic messages with her that were discovered on Anthony Wiener’s computer during a criminal investigation that prompted the FBI subsequent review in the first place.  Comey was simply reacting in the only way he could to the facts.  If she had not done what she did with her private server, thumbing her nose at established governmental security procedures, and most critically, unilaterally deleting 30,000 electronic messages she alone deemed personal and private rather than subject to governmental protection of records laws, there would have been nothing – nothing I tell you – for Comey to investigate.  No, Comey did not lose the election for her.  SHE lost the election by her arrogant, self-centered, aloof choices and conduct.  No, Comey did not change the election; you did, Hillary.  If you had not done what you did, he would never have had to react to your bad behavior.

            Further, she also wants to abolish the Electoral College.  On that, we fundamentally disagree.  The Electoral College did not deny her the election, either.  Her inability to reach out to citizens beyond the coasts cost her the election.  The Electoral College has been an established, known entity for 227 years.  To every citizen with any understanding of the Constitution (especially Article II, Section 1, Clause 3), the presidential election process has been a known quantity.  I imagine she was so enthralled with her popular, pre-election, polling numbers that she did not feel the need to understand the middle of this Grand Republic.  Donald Trump worked the middle and won the constitutionally defined Electoral vote to become the 45^th President of the United States.

            No, Mrs. Clinton, you have only one person to blame for your election loss.  Look in the mirror and move on.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.819:

Comment to the Blog:

“We largely agree this week about Trump taking positive actions.  I want to add to the DACA discussion that more than morality is at stake here.  These DACA ‘dreamers’ have jobs by definition, and if we deport them, we will blow a hole in our economy.  Undocumented people in general contribute more to our economy than most people realize.  They also have money taken out of their paychecks for Social Security and other benefits they are not eligible to receive.  Trump acted appropriately in trying to force Congress to address the DACA issue, but I share your doubt about Congress being functional enough to respond.

“Trump, as you personally probably know, is a Republican in almost the same sense that Bernie Sanders is a Democrat. Trump has registered with the GOP, but has been a Democrat, an independent, and a member of a small party in the past.  He doesn’t have a history of working with Republicans as Sanders does with Democrats.  Trump’s willingness to work with the Democrats avoided a crisis the Republican Party probably would have caused.  That flexibility also signals potential for more achievements (good or bad).

“The worst of Hurricane Irma has apparently passed, as I type this. Let us remember that Puerto Rico is part of the United States. That is probably the part of our nation that has been damaged the most.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: DACA.  No argument.  Good observations.  There are others, but the moral aspect remains the predominant element for me.

            Re: Trump & Democrats.  Quite so.  I see Trump’s move as encouraging.  The combination of staunch Republican Trump supporters and Democrats would be a clear majority in both the House and Senate.  Perhaps they can achieve more compromise and get some proper tasks done beyond the Harvey relief supplemental funding bill.

            Re: Irma.  I did not intend or mean to imply Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands were not part of the U.S.  Yes, they saw worse damage due the higher winds (Cat 5) and less stringent construction codes.  Support is already there and will increase.  Just orders of magnitude more people involved in Florida.

 . . . a follow-up comment:

“I didn't mean my Puerto Rico comment directly for you. You have readers who may not be well informed.  I have noticed that people in the 50 States tend to think Puerto Rico is a foreign nation.  It's not, and neither is U.S. Virgin Islands, which also took massive damage.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Ahso!  They will be informed, now.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.819

Update from the Heartland

No.819

4.9.17 – 10.9.17

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            For all of the contributors and readers of this humble forum who have accused me of political bias against Donald Trump, the week has finally arrived – nothing but positive.  Shall we mark the chronology?  Will wonders ever cease?

            President Trump reportedly signed an executive order (not yet publicly available) rescinding a series of instructions issued by President Obama beginning in June 2012, creating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.  Republicans railed against President Obama’s action at the time, declaring it an unconstitutional usurpation of congressional authority.  The DACA program deferred immigration action (deportation) against people who entered this country illegally as children and grew up here, i.e., this is the only country they have ever really known.  Ahead of the government announcement, President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning, “Congress, get ready to do your job - DACA!”

            On this one, I share the President’s angst and position.  The responsibility and authority to act on immigration law rests clearly with Congress.  Yet, for years, nay decades, Congress has been unable to perform their constitutional responsibilities.  The political partisanship and intransigence within successive sessions of Congress have prevented the necessary compromise to achieve meaningful results.  Then, after all the brouhaha erupted, Trump tweeted, “Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do).  If they can’t, I will revisit this issue!”  Strangely, that is exactly what President Obama did, i.e., Congress would not act, so the President did.

            Deporting the so-called Dreamers is simply wrong on many levels.  It is quite akin to punishing the son for the sins of the father.  The President is correct in his efforts to force Congress to do the correct thing and fix the ambiguity in the law.  However, Congress really needs to update immigration law to account for all the changing immigration dynamics of contemporary society.  Hopefully, if Congress can bring themselves to do what must be done, rather than kicking the can down the road, they can find the path to dissuade the President from the foolish “Wall” notion and give him a face-saving way out with a virtual wall.  The failure of Congress to pass proper, comprehensive, immigration reform to seal our porous borders is a direct threat to national security.

            The bottom line in this whole immigration situation: I believe President Obama did the proper thing five years ago, and I think President Trump did the proper thing this week.  I also believe President Trump will again do the proper thing, if Congress continues to abdicate their responsibility and fails to do their job.  I am not optimistic Congress is capable of standing up to the mark.

            Well, I’ll be damned!  I must confess my true and genuine amazement.  President Trump agreed with congressional Democratic leaders and sufficient Republican members to raise the federal government's borrowing limit for just three months as part of supplemental appropriations to the Disaster Relief Fund, principally for Hurricane Harvey damage.  The President’s deal with Democratic leaders shocked congressional Republican leaders.  Just hours before the President’s deal, House Speaker Paul Ryan sharply criticized the plan.  Even more surprising, Congress passed H.R. 601 in a couple of days with predominant, bipartisan support and sent the bill to the President on Friday afternoon.  At the publication time for this week’s Update edition, I do not have confirmation that President Trump signed H.R. 601 into law; however, I cannot imagine him not signing the bill, since he received exactly what he agreed to with congressional Democratic leaders.  If this deal portends further efforts by Trump to seek compromise for the good of this Grand Republic, then his stature as president in my eyes will rise.  I choose to see the positive in this episode and hope for a better future.

            The most powerful category 5 tropical storm ever recorded in the Atlantic Ocean ravaged the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, Turks & Caicos Islands, Bahama Islands, Hispaniola, Cuba, and then this Grand Republic, making landfall at Cudjoe Key Sunday morning as a category 4 storm and a second landfall at Marco Island later in the day.  The storm racked the state on Sunday and into Monday.  We have yet to assess the damage to Florida.  Undoubtedly, the disaster relief supplemental funding mentioned above will have to be increase further in the next few weeks.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.818:

Comment to the Blog:

“I have finally decided the North Korean leaders are not as insane as they appear.  After this much time, insane leaders would have gone the way of Idi Amin.  I agree with a couple of articles I’ve read.  What the Parks are doing is trying to remain independent.  Having seen what happened to many other nations, they refuse to let their economy, and indirectly their government, be taken, over for the benefit of corporations in the ‘advanced’ nations.  Our next move, assuming we survive Trump, ought to be supporting their independent development by non-intrusive means.  How to do that remains in question.

“On the ‘political correctness’ topic, I support people’s right to say anything they want that’s not covered by such laws as inciting to riot or inducing panic, but not a right to dictate others’ responses to their words.  This is the USA, after all. Everyone has a right to be offended by bigoted, hateful, or aggressively stupid words and ideas.  We are entitled to act on that offense, too.  If I manage people, for example, it’s written into the employment agreement that certain behaviors are firing offenses.  People may say what they choose so long as they take responsibility for their consequences.

“I think you misstated Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s motivation.  He has no interest in outcomes as seen in the long term. He just wants to punish people.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: “Parks.”  Do you mean the Kim family?

            Re: insane.  I have never thought Kim Jung Un was insane in the clinical sense, nor his father or grandfather.  However, they definitely dance to a different tune – a tune that is hard for us to hear.

            Re: “ought to be supporting their independent development by non-intrusive means.”  What the heck does that mean?

            Re: “How to do that remains in question.”  That has been the question for the last 64 years and remains the central question.  The sad reality demonstrated by history remains that dictators need an enemy or adversary to retain the focus of their supporters and support systems.  Kim is no different.  Neither is Putin.

            Re: offensive language.  We need to be careful to separate freedom of speech as an individual citizen and as an employee representing a company, organization or group.  The First Amendment protects individual citizens, not employees or representatives of organizations.  “People may say what they choose so long as they take responsibility for their consequences.”  To that I would say, spot on!  Precisely!  Full stop!  Unfortunately, it seems most folks do not make it to that conclusion.  Part of our freedom is our right to decide whom we choose to associate with depending upon any one or combination of social factors or spoken words.

            Re: Arpaio.  Well, actually, that is his expected outcome.

 . . . Round two:

“What I mean by supporting North Korea's independent development is that, first and foremost, it's in our interest to basically preserve their economic and national sovereignty.  That's what they want and they are entitled to it.  North Korea has mineral wealth so great that they are unable to mine it all.  I have noticed that pretty much every time one of the powerful nations claims to ‘help’ another nation, the result is that the powerful one dominates the weaker one to the profit of the stronger nation's corporations or (in the case of Communists) government.  That's called ‘neocolonialism.’  No doubt the Kim’s have noticed that as well and that's the source of their behaviors.  As I have mentioned before (with reliable sources), they know as well as I do what happens if they accept help from Russia, the USA, the EU countries or (more) from China.

“Taking offense to people's language and ideas is not and should never be limited to employment situations. I guess I didn't make that clear.”

 . . . my response to round two:

            Re: DPRK.  Interesting perspective.  Resources do not often appear in discussions regarding the motivations of the DPRK leadership.  While I cannot disprove your hypothesis re: DPRK, I will say it seems rather cynical to me.  Yes, there are bountiful examples to validate your hypothesis; however, there are also exceptions, e.g., Saudi Arabia & the Gulf emirates.  That said, there are ways to protect sovereignty and exploit resources.  Oh, if it was only that simple to solve the DPRK problem.

            Re: freedom of speech.  Likewise, I did not intend to suggest limiting offense to employment situations or associations.  Freedom of speech works both ways.  Objection (offense) is the inverse and equally protected.  Where my objection to political correctness blooms is when we start limiting the speech of others.  If we disagree with someone’s speech, we should voice our objection – do not attempt to restrict the objectionable speech.  It is the preemptive aspects of political correctness that are so bloody wrong.

 . . . Round three:

“I still hold my opinion about North Korea's motivation. ‘Cynical’ or not, history bears out the money motivation.  Again and again, if we study history more deeply than what we are taught in K-12 schools, we find people of great wealth making more wealth by manipulating international affairs.  Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are stronger than North Korea, and so they get to control the wealth in partnership with other OPEC nations.  Even given that, the Saudis are not completely independent of the USA.  They depend on unending weapons from the USA.  The fact that we do not try to make them more democratic reflects the money flowing to the wealthy without democracy.  None of the people making the decisions is really interested in democracy.”

 . . . my response to round three:

            “I still hold my opinion.”  I would expect nothing less, my friend.

            “Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are stronger than North Korea.”  They were not so strong when oil was discovered and exploited by British and American companies in the early 20th Century.

            “The fact that we do not try to make them more democratic reflects the money flowing to the wealthy without democracy.”  Perhaps.  That is one plausible hypothesis.  There are others.  U.S. foreign policy is largely driven by commerce and thus money.  It’s been that way since the founding of this Grand Republic and I cannot imagine that reality changing in the foreseeable future.

            “None of the people making the decisions is really interested in democracy.”  I cannot go that far.  U.S. foreign policy is not devoid of that motive.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

Update no.818

Update from the Heartland

No.818

28.8.17 – 3.9.17

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            Erratum: I should have learned the lessen months ago.  Apparently, my eMail server does not appreciate imbedded images, which results in my messages with imbedded photographs appearing as blank messages to recipients on the distribution list.  Last week’s Update included my eclipse travelogue with imbedded images for those who may be interested in such things; please see Update no.817 (August 2017) listed under Blog Archive in the column to the left, under my book list.  My apologies for the hiccup.

            The follow-up news items:

-- It was a busy week for the DPRK with the U.S. seemingly preoccupied with the consequences of Hurricane Harvey.  The DPRK fired a Hwasong-12 ballistic missile over Hokkaido, Japan, into the Pacific Ocean.  Then, a 6.3 magnitude seismic event signaled a probable nuclear event.  The DPRK claimed they tested a hydrogen bomb underground.  Whatever it was, the event was several times larger than previous similar events [252, 389, 583, 733].  Whether it was a fusion weapon is not certain beyond the regime’s claim.  I am not certain that it really matters other than if true it suggests advancing technical capability in the hermit regime.

-- Hurricane Harvey [817] made first landfall near Rockport, Texas, and then stalled over the region.  The storm meandered a bit, made its way back into the Gulf of Mexico to gain some strength, and made a second landfall just west of Cameron, Louisiana.  For five straight days, the storm pumped mountains of water into the Texas Gulf Coast with one location (Cedar Bayou) recording 52 inches (132 centimeters) of rainfall in those five days – more than the average annual rainfall (49 inches).  The flooding in Houston and Beaumont overshadowed the devastating wind damage around Rockport.  Harvey may well become the most expensive storm in U.S. history, set all kinds of records, and will take years to recover from the effect.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.816:

From a third party contributor:

“Without using meaningless stereotype labels, just what the [expletive deleted] is a ‘white supremacist’ in the first place?”

Followed by comment from a frequent contributor:

“I find that a fair question .

“Let me leave us with a meaningful quotation:

"The mental infection known as political correctness is one of the most dangerous intellectual afflictions ever to attack mankind. It appeals to pseudo-intellectuals everywhere, since it evokes the strong streak of cowardice notable among those wielding academic authority nowadays. Any empty-headed student with a powerful voice can claim someone (never specified) will be hurt by a hitherto harmless term, object or activity and be reasonably assured that the dons and professors in charge will show a white feather and do as the student demands. To a great extent PC is the revenge of the resentful underdog."

--Paul Johnson

Take care all,

Darren

My reply:

            OK; I’ll bite.

            As I have written many times, I am no fan of political correctness, as we witness in practical application.  The arbitrary interpretation of words commonly referred to as political correctness is perhaps the greatest threat to freedom of speech we have yet seen or experienced.  I advocate for the bigots, racists, homophobes, all of them, to speak freely.  I want to see them and hear them.  I do not want them hiding in the shadows spewing their hatred.  I want them out in the open.  That said, Johnson’s rant is a bit harsh; not wrong, just harsh; yet, as noted above, I defend his right to say what he says.

            Re: “white supremacist” = a person who believes people without skin pigmentation, sometimes referred to as Caucasians or white folks, are superior in most, if not all, ways to citizens who were born with dark skin pigmentation.  There is no basis for such beliefs other than hereditary skin pigmentation; nothing else matters.

 . . . a follow-up comment:

“For the record, I believe God created all men equally, however some men from all colors mess that all up.”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            Yes, precisely.  The key word is created.  Unfortunately, some folks are taught from a very young age to hate, to distrust those not like them.  Such childhood teaching is the perfect incubator for racism and all other ‘–isms’ we suffer – “white supremacy” being one of those ‘–isms.’

            Comments and contributions from Update no.817:

Comment to the Blog:

“I enjoyed your writing on the eclipse, contrary to the TMI idea.  Giving the travel, weather forecast, etc., makes a clearer picture, and that works for me.  My only negative was that I didn’t understand the ‘contacts’ (first, second, third, fourth) that you mentioned.  As far as I know, I’ve never read or heard that term in reference to an eclipse.

“I base my religion on nature, and the spiritual meanings of the eclipse still enlighten me.  I watched it on TV, and the network I viewed showed a wonderful shot of totality.  The corona is a wondrous thing that can only be seen when the body of the sun is completely blocked.  I see that as a clear analogy for an alcoholic ‘bottom’ and several other life processes.  There’s more, too.

“I have seen a statement that the Navy works its sailors in shifts ‘that would be illegal in trucking.’  My family background makes me aware that most truck accidents result from fatigue, so that may be worth following up.  Firing people one holds to blame does not resolve systemic issues, and that is one.

“I have a friend who spent time in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s tent jail.  My friend is a devout Christian and does not wish Arpaio dead as so many others do, but he and I would see it as extremely appropriate if Arpaio had done time.

“I hope Houston gets all the help we can give in this disaster.  My heart goes out to all those affected by Hurricane/Tropical Storm Harvey.  This storm is unprecedented in its track and slow speed of travel, and the disaster is a level of magnitude beyond a typical landfall.  Let’s put real resources into helping those people.

“I lived several years off and on in the 1980s in the fringe of Harvey’s affected area and worked within it a couple of times.  (As I wrote, a tornado warning was issued for Morgan City, Louisiana, where I lived and worked several times for a few weeks each time.)  Around Houston, that terrain, the ‘development’ of former wetlands, and a thirty-year increase in flooding storms combine to make the Houston-Galveston metropolitan area dangerous.  The city, state, and nation need to take a long look at that area once recovery is well under way.  Diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment are in order.

“I have been considering our discussion of Confederate symbols and monuments to Confederate leaders, but that is a complex topic.  When my cognition makes enough progress, I will email you about it.”

My response:

            At least one person enjoyed my eclipse travelogue.  I should have explained the contact references; I thought they were common terms; my bad.

first contact = moon’s disc begins to obscure the sun
second contact = moon completely obscures the sun
third contact = sun first reappears after eclipse
fourth contact = moon no longer obscures the sun.

            I failed to capture a reasonable image of the corona during totality.  At least part of the corona was visible with the naked eye like a halo around the moon’s disc.  It was captivating just to watch it, to experience it.  I had to remind myself to keep attempting to find the proper camera setting.  No joy!

            Re: Arpaio.  As I said, in general, I liked his tough approach to incarceration; prison is not a holiday resort.  However, he crossed the line when he repeatedly and defiantly ignored a federal court order.  He should suffer the same punishment, as the rest of us would do, if we had done what he did.  I acknowledge that he disagreed with the district court judge; he chose the wrong path to deal with that disagreement.

            Re: Harvey.  Likewise.  Yes, the storm track was quite atypical to my knowledge.  Also unprecedented, they’ve received their average annual rainfall in a couple of days.  I don’t know any land region that could take that level of rainfall, i.e., annual rainfall in a couple of days.

            Re: Houston.  As I understand the non-storm situation, Houston has experienced extraordinary growth without the necessary planning and building code refinements to protect people and property.  They pave the land and wonder why they experience floods.

            I await your Confederate symbols ruminations.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Thank you for the explanation of ‘contact.’  Seeing the corona was a powerful experience for both of us.

“Sheriff Arpaio took the ‘tough’ approach far into cruel and unusual punishment, even without the racism.  Phoenix's combination of 100+ degree heat and temperature inversions endangers the physical and mental health of the people he confined in tents.  Beyond that, the ‘tough’ approach neither rehabilitates the individual nor deters others.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Re: “contact.”  Now you know.  My apologies for missing the explanation in my original post.

            Re: “Arpaio.”  I have never seen Sheriff ‘Joe’ as concerned a twit about rehabilitation . . . only punishment.  He has never shown any interest in contributing factors, only outcomes.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)