Update from the Sunland
No.847
19.3.18 – 25.3.18
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To
all,
We
have seen the Uber Technologies-Volvo automobiles with autonomous driving
capability operating in Tempe, Arizona.
They are always operated with a human driver supervising the
automation. Circa 22:00 Sunday,
18.March.2018, an Uber automated automobile struck a woman. She died early the next day. As a consequence of the accident, Uber
suspended use of the automated vehicles in four test cities— Tempe, San
Francisco, Pittsburgh and Toronto—pending the outcome of the
investigation. A few days later,
the police released the car video of the incident. The woman was walking her bicycle across the darkened
street, not in a crosswalk, apparently texting on her phone, and she never
looked up from her phone.
Likewise, the driver, who was tasked with monitoring the vehicles
operations, had his head down in the seconds before the impact.
Several
elements strike me as particularly odd.
First and foremost, what the hell was that woman thinking crossing a
street at night on foot pushing her bicycle, texting on her phone, never
looking up at the approaching headlights? I certainly wonder if this was a death-by-car suicide. Or, was she playing some kind of
how-many-negatives-can-I-accumulate?
That said, something went dreadfully wrong with the software in that particular
car. The scanner on the roof
should have easily picked up (regardless of lighting) an object (her)
approaching the lane of traffic and the closure rate (constant bearing decreasing
range) indicated a collision was imminent. According to police, there were no indications the car or
the driver attempted to brake, which that fact alone is testament to the
failure of the system and the associated distraction of the driver.
A
thorough investigation is warranted.
I sure hope they identify the flaws and fix them quickly. The technology is too important for a
host of reasons and I would truly hate to see the deployment of the technology
stopped because of this accident.
Based on what I saw on those video clips, the accident would have had a
high likelihood of occurrence without the automation in play. However, we must not lose sight of the
fact the woman’s conduct was certainly contributory to the accident; she was
not innocent. There are very real
reasons for laws against jaywalking.
For
those who might have even a remote curiosity about why the Russian meddling
investigation is so freakin’ important, I strongly urge and recommend you watch
Season 7 of the HBO series “Homeland.” You may not fully appreciate the back-story of the principal
characters since the previous seasons would be missing (and starting from
Season 1 is not necessary); however, the timeliness, applicability and
relevance of the storyline could not be better or more applicable to the
contemporary topic. The characters
are dealing with information (and related) warfare in contemporary political activity,
and more importantly, we see how counter-operations are evolving. While it is a fictional
characterization (of what might or could happen), the program certainly offers
a graphic demonstration of the consequences and difficulties in waging
information warfare. For those who
may already be watching the series, we would all appreciate your perspective
and opinions.
More
turmoil from never-never-land surrounding the BIC, AKA the fellow in the Oval
Office! This is becoming a regular
feature of his tenure in the office.
I
have long touted and tried to conduct my professional affairs by a simple
phrase articulated by Admiral Grace Hopper—“Manage things, Lead people”—wise
words. I have witnessed in life and
history the conduct of more than a few ‘leaders’ / managers. More than a few of those have
encouraged chaos and conflict.
Many in that category were dictators seeking to strengthen their
positions and grip on power. I
have never seen and have no recollection of anyone fostering this degree of
chaos, conflict and uncertainty.
I
know many of his supporters and believers have pointed to his “breaking the
mold” and “doing things differently.”
Well, they got what they sought.
He is like none other than I have witnessed, know about, or have even
remotely heard about even in rumor.
The
one persistent question that flashes back to me multiple times a day remains: where
is the threshold of tolerance for the BIC’s most loyal followers &
believers? Even Himmler and Göring
abandoned Hitler as the noose tightened and their fearless leader’s erratic and
destructive behavior worsened.
Many (not all) hardened fanatical SchutzSaffel members abandoned
The Leader eventually. So, where
is the limit for each individual?
Perhaps we shall find out in time.
I am not looking forward to that discovery beyond a morbid curiosity.
Better
late than never! Congress finally
passed an FY2018 appropriation bill—Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 [PL 115-xxx; HR 1625; Senate: 65-32-0-3(0);
House: 256-167-0-7(5): 131 Stat. xxxx]—and promptly left town on recess. With less than a day to yet another
government shutdown, the BIC tweeted:
“I am considering a VETO of the Omnibus Spending
Bill based on the fact that the 800,000 plus DACA recipients have been totally
abandoned by the Democrats (not even mentioned in Bill) and the BORDER WALL,
which is desperately needed for our National Defense, is not fully funded.”
5:55
AM - Mar 23, 2018
Then, hours later, a public statement: “As a matter of
national security, I’ve signed this omnibus budget bill.” He went on to add, “I will never sign
another bill like this again.”
Apparently, his parents did not teach him about using absolutes like
‘never’ when none of us can predict the future. Nonetheless, the BIC did what he had to do. I share his revulsion of what Congress
did. The omnibus spending bill was
not just an appropriations bill.
There were 51 other acts attached to the spending bill, and the BIC was
correct—it did not include any DACA remedy provision. Where I depart with his portrayal comes when he blames
Democrats for the failure to include the DACA remedy; that’s really rich. He sells his snake oil claiming the
inevitable cure-all; the border wall will solve the illegal immigration problem
and chooses to hold the DACA kids hostage to get US$25B from the Treasury for
his border wall—not from Mexico, rather from We, the People. Republicans, Democrats . . . there is
no difference; they all love to spend money they do not have.
The
BIC reversed himself, again at least in part, on Friday and decided to allow
currently serving transgender people to remain in the armed forces, but he
banned the future recruitment of most individuals who are considered
transgender. Last summer, he said
he would no longer allow transgender individuals to serve in the military. I guess a regression in part is a good
thing. However, to me, it is like
taking one step forward after taking 10 steps backward. The transgender issue is no different
from the matter of females serving in the combat arms years ago. Homosexuality used to be a cause for
revocation of a security clearance or dismissal from service, because sexual
orientation represented a threat, i.e., a foreign agent might blackmail a
homosexual person into illegal compliance to avoid exposure. Anatomy or sexual orientation, actually
none of the social factors is an element affecting performance. Military service should be based solely
on performance. Either you can do
the job, or you should do something else within your particular skill set. I recall taking a series of flight aptitude
tests in my younger days; none of those tests had anything to do with my gender
or my sexual orientation; they only focused on factors involved with
performance as a pilot. I give him
limited credit for backing off his ban, but respectfully, any ban in any form
is wrong. Transgender citizens are
citizens, and if they can perform the skills involved with any particular
military occupational specialty, then they should be allowed to serve at full status.
Congress
passed yet another morality law that takes a blunderbuss to matter of swatting
a fly—significant collateral damage to accomplish a noble objective. I have been against these foolish and
intrusive morality laws for most of my lifetime, and this law is just another
example of social conservatives going too far. The bill in this instance is the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex
Trafficking Act of 2017 [PL 115-xxx;
HR.1865; Senate: 97-2-0-1(0); House: 388-25-0-17(5): 131 Stat. xxxx] they finally passed with an overwhelming
majority, which in itself is disappointing. The president is expected to sign the bill into law. As a consequence and in anticipation of
the bill becoming law, Craig’s List terminated the personal section of its
website, ostensibly because they see legal risk beyond any subscriber
benefit. The offense of human
trafficking for sexual purposes is a legitimate public law objective, but this
law will eliminate communications that do not even remotely verge on that
criminal conduct; therein lies my objection and condemnation of this law (and
others). Further, as with
virtually all morality laws, all of us are exposed to the whims of some overzealous
prosecutor in private affairs that should be beyond the authority of the
State. This law is wrong, far too
broad, and an exceedance of congressional authority. The best we can hope for is a constitutional challenge to
remedy this transgression.
Comments and contributions from Update no.846:
Comment to the Blog:
“If the House ‘Intelligence’ Committee found no signs of
collusion, it’s because they didn’t look for any. Nevertheless, obstruction of justice is a crime, and an
excellent organized-crime prosecutor is studying Trump’s back trail and
bringing charges against his associates.
“The rants coming from the occupant of the White House seem
more like desperation than anything else to me. The bluster and bullshit that served him (to a degree) as an
executive and a reality TV star are not working as well in his current arena. As with many people, he is increasing
the volume and intensity of an approach that once worked for him. If he has a direct role model, it’s less
Hitler and more Putin. You and I
could potentially suffer dire outcomes from our level of opposition, but we’re
both pretty far down the list of people opposed to Trump.
“I agree with your analysis of Putin’s poison gas action. I’ll note that getting rid of people has
worked for Putin in the past, but he rarely gets this level of public notice
with it. If a doctor and nurse who
knew how to handle the situation just happened to be in the area, it’s the work
of either a Higher Power or British Intelligence.
“The Tillerson firing was a serious misstep, but completely
in character. That will cost the U.S. still more in world standing, which we
can ill afford. McCabe’s
vindictive dismissal could be expensive indeed. He will be believed by the Mueller investigation before
Trump, of course. McCabe may well
have information that will nail down one or more charges. I’m not certain how the legal procedure
will work, but it ends with Trump a ‘former’ President well before the end of
the term.”
My response to the
Blog:
I
would not go that far, but I will not argue the point, either. Yeah, the BIC has virtually built an
obstruction of justice case against himself, all by himself and handed it to
the special prosecutor on a silver platter. Obstruction may well get him removed from office, but I
suspect it will be money laundering, corruption or some other combination of
felonious business activity that might send him to prison. Yes, I strongly suspect there will be
more indictments as the noose gets tighter and tighter.
Indeed! The BIC’s rants do come across as
desperate, which in turn suggests the investigation is getting demonstrably
closer and making him decidedly uncomfortable . . . perhaps in fatalistic
anticipation for what he perceives is to come. I think he admires all dictators, although I suspect you are
correct . . . he is closer to the Putin model than the Hitler version, although
to my knowledge the BIC has not assassinated anyone as Putin has done. Although Hitler favored conflict among
his lieutenants more than I have observed in Putin, the BIC is closer to the
Hitler model in that sense.
Coincidence
is always hard to accept. As I
said, I think Putin selected the means of assassination for very precise and
specific reasons, just as he did in the assassination of Alexander Valterovich
Litvinenko (1.11.2006) with rare polonium-210-poisoning. He could have selected a myriad of less
obvious means, but he did not, which makes the choice quite intentional.
I
suspect we shall bear witness to the procedures the BIC will face. No matter how much I may feel the
process is warranted and appropriate, I still find it extraordinarily sad that
We, the People, and this Grand Republic must suffer such witness. These affairs are never good, no matter
how necessary they may be; unfortunately, they must be endured.
. . . Round two:
“We, the People will witness proceedings brought on by the willing
gullibility of too many voters, exacerbated by the electoral college and by our
general awareness that our political system offered no worthwhile major-party
candidates and generally doesn't. It's a personal opinion whether sadness is a more appropriate
response than anger.”
. . . my response to round two:
Well,
I am in the sadness category. The
BIC represents a societal stress within this Grand Republic, not particularly
unlike slavery did two centuries ago.
I fear the same outcome, although the division among any political
territorial entity does not portend the same conflagration, but it could be
similar. The situation unfolding
in Austin has troubling implications; I fear the bombings may be loosely and
pervertedly linked.
Oh
my, you just could not resist taking another shot at the Electoral College, now
could you? The Electoral College
has absolutely nothing to do with this situation.
What
we are missing in this on-going discussion is the root cause(s), the underlying
causal factors. While some of the
people who voted for and support the BIC did so simply because they always vote
for Republicans regardless of who the candidate is; there is nothing we can do
about that segment of citizens—they vote for a label, not the person. It is the thinking / informed segment
of the BIC voter / supporter population that attracts my attention. The BIC has tapped into broad
dissatisfaction that is so strong that people would abandon moral standards,
personal conduct, or just about any other metric to support a man they
perceived as anti-establishment.
There are very real reasons so many people see him as their political
messiah. Unfortunately, their
desperation blinds them to the consequences of his serious personality flaws
and the implications to the fabric of this Grand Republic.
. . . Round three:
“The Electoral College has everything to do with our
situation. Have you forgotten that Trump got a few million fewer votes than Clinton?
“There is no ‘thinking, informed’ Trump voter. Thinking, informed people do not vote
for a businessman with multiple bankruptcies, otherwise poor business history,
and an unsavory personal record. The
only thing Trump does well is self-promotion. Unfortunately, he does that well. Broad dissatisfaction with the status
quo did indeed fuel voting, but that does not make Trump voters informed or
thoughtful. Trump was the only
(very slender) hope for real change once the Democratic National Committee
eliminated Bernie Sanders as their candidate. Remember how many of us either didn't vote or voted for
smaller parties? That's what
happened. We were informed and
thinking. Trump's handlers (probably with support from Russians) made the most
of that, and he personally understood that factor far better than any
Establishment power broker.”
. . . my response to round three:
I
truly appreciate the fact that you (and many others) do not like the
constitutionally mandated Electoral College. There is no requirement for you to like it. Hillary chose to rest on the polls and
her perception of the popular vote, and certainly appears in hindsight to have
not cared much about the Electoral College, which was her choice entirely. Her failure to mind the rules that have
governed presidential elections in this Grand Republic for more than two
centuries cost her the election and foisted the BIC on all of us. That was not the fault of the Electoral
College; that blame rest solely with Hillary Clinton . . . not the Electoral
College.
I
shall not join your statement: “There is no "thinking, informed"
Trump voter.” Such rejection
seriously underestimates a significant portion of the citizenry of this Grand
Republic. While I share your disgust
of the BIC, I urge you not to discount or diminish those who voted for and
support the BIC. Our task is to
understand those citizens and work to overcome the issues they raise, i.e.,
what attracts them to seriously flawed men like the BIC.
Re:
“Remember how many of us either didn't vote or voted for smaller parties?” Oh, I am keenly aware of that segment
as well, which is an entirely separate but related matter for the next and
future elections.
Re:
“with support from Russians” There
is little doubt in my little pea-brain that Russian information warfare agents
used social media to support the BIC.
None of that indicates collusion on the part of anyone in this country
including the BIC & his minions.
Putin undoubtedly sees the BIC as more malleable to their purposes, or
at the very least, keep him neutral, as he has dutifully been for the last
year. They would not have had that
condition with any of the other candidates including Hillary. They chose well. They also invested well in cultivating
their “business” relationships with the BIC & his organization.
The
combination of all these factors was like a perfect storm that got the most
unlikely candidate a major party nomination and elected to the highest office
in the land. As I have stated
previously, we have only ourselves to blame. Hopefully and collectively, we have been taught a very
valuable lesson; and, we learned from this mistake and will not make even a
remotely similar mistake in the future.
Time
shall tell the tale.
Another contribution:
“I would like to request you take me ‘off’ your mailing list for
your Updates. I don't care to read
the constant ‘barrage of comments’ you have for our President. I'll just give you a couple of examples
that bother me. You constantly
refer to him as ‘that fellow’ in the office. I feel this is very disrespectful to call a sitting
President because of the way you feel about him & his policies. No one ever called President Obama (or any
other President), ‘that fellow’ that I know of. I don't care who is in the Oval Office, I feel there should
be some level of respect for that office no matter who's the President at the
time. I know you understand ‘respect,’
you learned it in the Military & the Corporate World. I'm sure you never called your
superiors ‘that fellow,’ or you probably would've been fired!
“Truthfully, I don't care much for President Trump (personally),
or some of his tweets, but I get why he does it. But what I do love about the President is what he's done for
our Country in a little over a year.
The economy is booming, thousands of new jobs are being created &
old ones coming back, looking out for our trade deals, getting the average
worker bonuses and pay raises (oh, I forgot, they're ‘crumbs’ according to
Nancy Pelosi (I'm a Master Legislator) by his policies (so companies are giving
them out), the stock market has been great overall, etc. But he doesn't get any credit for what
he's doing right. The news outlets
(w/ the exception of Fox News!), left, far left, deep state, & Hollywood,
all perpetuate this crap day in & day out. They just keep recycling the same old s*** every day, and
frankly, I think it's disgusting how he's being treated compared to President
Obama & President Clinton.
They weren't the most ‘moral of Presidents’ w/stand out records. Obama was the worst President ever, but
they don't talk about how he got the U.S. into the most debt ever by the time
he left office! And all the crap
about his ‘sex life/marriage,’ who's he's slept with or not, is ridiculous. I really don't care about that I want to
know what he's actually doing for our Country to help ‘us, the average citizen!’
And I believe he truly does care
about helping us, that's what's great about him being a successful businessman,
he knows how to make great deals! And ‘he’ wants the United States to succeed! But that's all you hear about (his ‘sex
life/marriage,’ etc.) because they don't want to say anything good about our
economy right now. Remember all
the ‘left people’ in Hollywood & news/business people that got ‘caught’ w/sexual
harassment complaints, charges, etc? Boy, did they ‘shut down’ that talk as soon as they could! Remember President Clinton and Monica
Lewinsky? How come he's not the ‘scum
of the earth’ for doing that! And
Obama wasn't a ‘white knight’ either, in fact, probably most Presidents
weren't! I'm sure he's not the
first or last to ever be disloyal to a spouse (how many people can say that,
even on your mailing list)? What's
that saying about ‘not throwing stones’? Wow, it amazes me of the hypocrisy going around since he's been
our President!
“I'm so proud that he's a huge supporter of our Military and our
Law Enforcement (because the left is not & they show it). And when it comes to Law Enforcement,
I'm a HUGE advocate for them as you know! And before you give me a lecture on what I don't know, I know
this: my son is a sergeant w/ the County Sheriff's Dept. & he almost lost
his life protecting the lives of the public! He was shot in the line of duty on 09/26/05, when he was
just 24 years old! He was shot by
a convicted drug felon (an illegal alien) who had just got out of prison. And it was a ‘domestic’ police call he
got called out to, which are the ‘worst calls to ever go on’! There were a total of four officers on
that call, w/ him being the lead one since he was there first and he was facing
the felon head on, giving him the commands to put down his weapon! And we know how that turned out; he
didn't & shot my son, while all four officers shot him DEAD! THANK GOD! By the Grace of God, he had a surgeon in [his town] that was a
"combat surgeon" that was considered one of the best, thank God! He saved his life & legs! He had (4) surgeries; was told he
probably wouldn't walk for a year (did it in a month & a half); &
wouldn't be able to go back to work probably for 18 months (did it in 3
months)! He had steel rods in his
right hip to knee, and left knee to ankle. He had both legs broke! And he still has to deal w/ the pain he gets in his legs if
he sits too long or stands too long. He's a ‘walking miracle’! But he still serves the public, trying
to protect all of us! I couldn't
be more proud of him for what he has been through and continues to persevere! So I'm a MOM who has seen a son go
through the worst thing in his life & still wants to protect the innocent
people! He's serving his Country
in this way. That's what Law Enforcement
people of all kinds do: they put their lives on the line EVERY DAY they're out
there! And to hear how the people
in Government (the left, etc.) talk about Law Enforcement & their followers
and people that vote for them, is disgusting to me! I bet Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Shummer, Maxine Waters (all she's
smart enough is to say ‘Impeach 45’!), Hollywood, etc...wouldn't give up their ‘protection
people’ in a second! No, they'd
want them to protect them, but they sure like to put down the Law Enforcement
men and women that risk their lives protecting them! It's disgusting to say the least! So unless ‘anyone’ who hasn't gone through something like
this w/ their child, I'd say they need to start ‘supporting our Law Enforcement’
and shut the hell up about ‘what they think they know about them’! I know there are some ‘bad Law
Enforcement’ out there, but on the whole, I think they're pretty great and
should get the recognition & pay they deserve, but don't! Yes, I'm very passionate about this
subject because I'm a mom who almost ‘lost her only child’ to a criminal (just
like the ‘illegal criminals’ committing crime after crime) & being ‘protected’
by these sanctuary cities! So I
have ‘no sympathy’ for these people that protect these ‘illegal criminals’ that
commit crimes (killing, raping, etc.). I would love to know how they'd feel if one of ‘their loved
ones’ got shot, raped, or killed by one of these illegals!!! This topic pisses me off when they don't
know what they're talking about or haven't gone through something as horrific
as that!
"The last thing that bothers me the most is personal: you liken ‘Trump's
typical supporter as an uneducated, redneck moonshiner in the backwoods of the
Appalachia’ is so disrespectful, disgraceful, disgusting and wrong! THIS IS ‘hateful rhetoric,’ and ‘hateful
rhetoric is hateful rhetoric’! Just because I ‘don't have a college degree’ doesn't mean I'm
stupid or anyone else who doesn't! I know you said your ‘apologies’ to the one that brought it
to your attention, but I think you really need to ‘apologize to everyone’ who
are President Trump supporters, especially those in your family! And maybe not make those kind of ‘general
comments’ in the future? There's
not only me & my husband (who by the way, has a college degree & is
pretty smart too), but my son (he's smart, he went through college to become a
cop, but doesn't have a 4 year degree), his father, my sister [sister &
brother-in-law] (they're both extremely smart as well), and many more of my
family! You shouldn't generalize
everyone that supports President Trump as this kind of person! It's just plain wrong and shameful
(especially because a lot of your family do)! We have a right to support who we want, just as you &
Jeanne do! This is just my own
opinion...”
My reply:
You
are entitled to your opinion(s).
Facts are facts, and there are only those facts. All of us have the right to express our
opinions on those facts, but we do not get to make up pseudo-facts.
For
the record, I did not begin referring to him as the fellow in the Oval Office
until 3.October.2017 [823]—9 months
into his presidency. You may have
noticed, I have abandoned that earlier reference to my current reference form—the
BIC (Bully-in-Chief) on 18.March.2018 [846]. The labels are appropriate for the
disrespect and denigration he persistently makes to the Office of the
President.
Re:
“I
feel this is very disrespectful to call a sitting President.” You are correct, of course, and not the
first to call me out on my “fellow” reference. Perhaps you missed my consistent explanation. He has grievously disrespected the
Office of the President of the United States of America, vastly more so than
any president in the history of this Grand Republic. I will give him the respect due his elected office when he
respects the Office that is far bigger than him. My respect and loyalty are not blind or unilateral. He is only the current caretaker.
Many
years ago, I took an oath of office that in part states: “. . . I
will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same . . .” That oath
says nothing about loyalty to the President other than as reflected in Article
II of the Constitution, which I volunteered to risk my life to defend. The President is not my superior. He works for us, all of us, me included. He is an employee of We, the
People. When he does the things he
does, he is disrespecting me and many other citizens. He does not deserve the respect due to the Office.
I
praise [your son]’s
service, as I do our son’s service to the community. We prayed for [your
son] when he was wounded. Yet,
your son’s service does not justify your demeaning or defiling those you
disagree with. Democratic
politicians are no different from Republican politicians; they all spend more
money than they have; they just spend money on different things. I know of no politician that “puts
down” law enforcement. They call
out the bad agents among law enforcement, and there are indeed bad
officers. Similarly, the actions
of one illegal alien does not condemn them all for the actions of a few, just
as we should not condemn all law enforcement for the bad decisions of a few bad
officers. There are reasons people
come to this country. We must deal
with root causes, not symptoms.
I
do not care a hoot in hell who he has sex with. I care a little where he executes his dalliances, part of my
condemnation of Bill Clinton. I do
very much care who he abuses, to feed his ego or for any other reason. He may lust after and worship his
daughter more than any other human being other than himself, but that is his
problem—not ours.
Re:
“hateful
rhetoric.” Perhaps you
missed my whole statement in Update no.844. I will reprint for this exchange.
“I often laud frankness and plain speaking. However, there is a huge difference
between fellows like me and an uneducated, redneck moonshiner in the backwoods
of Appalachia, and the President of the United States of America. His choice of words, as demonstrated
this week alone, represents a rather undignified and actually disrespectful
conduct with respect to the history of the Office of the President. No matter what the fellow’s background
is, he chose to run for and was elected to the office; he does not get a pass.”
I included myself in that spectrum of our citizenry. Further, I doubt there are many (if
any) moonshiners left; it was a caricature. I point to no one in particular. My point was, the President of the United States is held to
a much higher standard and rightfully so, because he represents all of us, not
just the chosen, or those who support him. There was no hatred or animosity toward anyone and nothing
about college degrees in my statement.
I try very hard to choose my words carefully, although I confess I am
not always successful; and, unlike the fellow in the Oval Office, I readily
apologize when I make mistakes, as I often do. Please do not selectively edit or read anything into my
words.
When
I served in the Marines and worked for various corporations, I recognized,
acknowledged and respected the reality that my freedom of speech was
constrained. I wore a uniform that
represented my service and the country I served; therefore, anything I said or
did reflected upon the Marine Corps and this Grand Republic. His tweets, outrageous speech, and his
public conduct offend me the most . . . well, beyond his serious personality
flaws. That is one of the primary
reasons I feel he disrespects the office he occupies. So much of his speech is his thoughts, his feelings, his
opinions and do not represent We, the People, or this Grand Republic, or our
illustrious history. He is not a
king or even a dictator (although he desperately wants to be); he does not
enjoy the divine right of kings or royal prerogative.
. . . follow-up comment:
“I appreciate that you answered me. And I'm not going to waste anymore of my time trying to
‘debate’ you over each & every thing you ‘know is wrong’ w/ my answers. That's why I find it ironic that it's a ‘forum
to have vigorous debates’? You say
that, but your actions, words & attitude go against everything you state! We know you're smart, we get it, we've
all heard it from you & Jeanne over the years! And I'm not as smart as you, but that's okay. So no, I don't feel it's a place where
you can honestly debate one another. And to be honest, I haven't read all of your ‘Updates,’ because
they're somewhat difficult to read & understand because you don't write for
the ‘masses’ in your writing style.
I get it, that's your style and it's fine, but I like to read different
styles, those that I can understand better or look things up when I don't
(which I have done w/ your stuff too), or ask my husband to explain to me. Each to their own, right? I'm
happy you're so successful.
“The only thing I will take issue with is regarding my son. He's not the ‘first one’ to ever be injured or killed by an
illegal alien (you stated the ‘actions of one illegal alien does not condemn
them all for the actions of a few’ and ‘you know of no politician that puts
down law enforcement’)! Are you
kidding me, it's not ‘one person’ that was injured or killed by these people,
it's SO MANY PEOPLE that have been injured, raped or lost their lives! It's on the news, maybe you don't hear
about it because all the news stations don't want to report on an illegal alien
killing, raping, injuring others (or it's a few seconds of coverage), then they
bury it! Remember Kate Steinle? There are so many others that are being
affected by these bad illegal aliens (that should be deported and in prison)
and they're not because of the ‘sanctuary cities’ hiding them, supporting them,
putting them first over their own ‘legal residents’! I know there are many good illegals out there too, but
please don't tell me it's only been ‘one person’ affected by the bad ones! If you haven't heard the democrat
politicians ‘put down’ law enforcement (i.e. Obama, Holder, etc.), then I don't
know where you've been? Most of
them have, they play it on Fox News (I know, not all the rest! Maybe that's why you haven't heard it)? What about the ‘black lives matter,’
etc., all that crap that happened under President Obama (helping to fabricate
the Ferguson talking points for CNN)? How many ‘good officers’ lost their lives by people going up
to their patrol cars & shooting them in the head, killing many of
them? And the government could only come out & say ‘we support all
the people that were protesting law enforcement,’ ‘we are behind their anger at
law enforcement’ at the time! They
constantly complain about law enforcement when something goes wrong and ‘the
few bad officers’ have killed someone. I get it, I do, but to not be on the side of the people that
are protecting their asses, day in day out, risking their lives, is shameful to
say the least! Maybe those
politicians can hire the illegal aliens to ‘protect them’ instead of our loyal,
hard working, law enforcement & give them a job? And maybe all the millionaire politicians that want to
protect all the ‘bad illegal aliens’ can have them ‘move in & live w/ them
in one their mansions’? And I
never ‘defiled anyone’ (yes, I looked it up & [my husband] read it & said that's not the right
word that would apply here). So I
have EVERY RIGHT to feel the way I do regarding what happened to my son! And shame on you for trying to ‘minimize’ it by what you
said. I sure hope you ‘never’ have
to go through that hell! I'm a mom
who's experienced this upfront, so please don't tell me ‘I'm wrong’ on how I
feel! You may be smart
intellectually, but ‘I'm a protective mom’ who definitely shouldn't ever be
told that I'm wrong from someone who hasn't gone though what I have!”
. . . my follow-up reply:
To
my recollection, I have never told you or anyone else you (they) are
wrong. I may disagree with but I
respect your opinion(s) (and those of others). Disagreement does not mean wrong.
You
are correct. I “don't
write for the ‘masses.’” I
write what I believe based on the facts as I know them. I am confident enough to present my
opinion(s) for public debate . . . not that my opinions are correct; they are
only my opinions. I readily
recognize and acknowledge that I could be wrong; and, I am always open to being
educated about facts I was not previously aware of. However, a vigorous debate is that contrast of
interpretation of facts. Opinions
not based on facts are of less consequence to me, but I try to never reject
opinions regardless of the basis for those opinions.
Holy
moly! [m]y
“one” comment was a generalization, not a literal statement. Like you, I can cite numerous felonious
crimes by illegal aliens in this country.
So, please allow me to more accurately state, we must not condemn the
whole for the actions of a few of that number. Conversely, it appears you are over-generalizing to the
other extreme . . . as the BIC so often does. The BIC publicly stated, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re
bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
[16.June.2015] The pronoun ‘they’
means all, unless otherwise qualified, which in this instance it was not
qualified. They are not all
druggies, criminals, rapists and such.
Respectfully, most are law-abiding people who try very hard to comply with
our laws. I am not a fan of the
sanctuary cities phenomenon in this country, but I appreciate the conundrum
those cities face. To them, crime
is more important than failed border security. The situation regarding the lack of immigration reform is worsening,
and I denounce Congress for not finding a solution. Like you, I demand a solution. I simply urge us all not to condemn all illegal aliens for
the actions of a few.
Re:
Democrat politicians putting down law enforcement. I believe, once again, you are over-generalizing criticism
of excessive force law enforcement actions. I have long been troubled by the resistance to law
enforcement by some individuals; resistance is a form of threat. I believe we can all point to excessive
force events by law enforcement.
Just as I reject general condemnation of Democrat politicians of calling
out inappropriate law enforcement actions, likewise I reject broad tolerance of
excessive force by law enforcement.
FYI:
I take a very hard line regarding resistance to law enforcement. If an individual believes he is being
wrongfully targeted, he should file a complaint and/or civil charges. As mentioned above, resistance to law
enforcement is a form of threat, and there should be no surprise law
enforcement officers seek to neutralize the threat. Far too many of these videos clearly show resistance rather
than compliance. Most (not all)
show appropriate law enforcement response. In fact, in some instances, I think law enforcement officers
were dangerously reserved in their response, and that concerns me deeply.
My
very best wishes to all. Take care
of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
