14 May 2018

Update no.854

Update from the Sunland
No.854
7.5.18 – 13.5.18
Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            Tall,

            This particular edition is coming to you from the Heartland, once again, since we came back to Wichita for a long weekend and the celebration of our Grandson Jack’s graduation from high school. It was a very busy trip. Congratulations Jack!  Well done, Sherri and Taylor.  We return home this evening.

            The follow-up news items:
-- Connecticut joined 10 other states and the District of Columbia in passing laws to commit their electoral votes to the popular votes leader in presidential elections—CT HB 5421; Senate: 21-14; House: 77-73.  It is not clear whether Governor Daniel Malloy has signed the bill into law, yet, but he has indicated his intention to do so.  Maryland was the first state to abdicate its rights and autonomy [279; 10.4.2007].  So, these are all blue states and they total 170 electoral votes—not enough to decide an election.  This movement to circumvent the Constitution would not have altered any of the recent close elections; however, the popular vote movement is getting closer to the 270 vote threshold to affect the outcome.
-- The BIC announced that he will meet with DPRK dictator / strongman / killer Kim Jong Un on June 12thin Singapore [845].  I find myself facing mounting difficulty checking my optimism.  The release of three American citizens being held captive in the DPRK was yet another positive gesture by Kim in advance of the summit meeting.  I do not really care a hoot what puffs up the BIC’s chest.  I do care about world peace.  Even Bullies do good things and are successful on occasion.  This may well become one of those occasions. Unfortunately for the BIC, the proof of success, especially in the DPRK’s actions, will likely take many years to be realized and recognized.  Regardless, if there are positive achievements from the meeting, even the promise of stability, the BIC will get the credit he deserves.  The world will be watching.
-- The BIC typed out yet one more of his infamous tweets replete with multitudinous falsehood, misinformation and outright miserable statements.
The Fake News is working overtime. Just reported that, despite the tremendous success we are having with the economy & all things else, 91% of the Network News about me is negative (Fake). Why do we work so hard in working with the media when it is corrupt? Take away credentials?
4:38 AM - 9 May 2018
all things else” . . . really?
91% of the Network News about me is negative (Fake)”—about all I can think to say is: come on mister tough guy, put your big girl panties on!  I learned many years ago why significant digits are so important.  By his statement, he is implying some scientific study was done to establish 91% (fairly precise) of some unspecified sampling is negative because he does not like the reporting.  News flash, Donald: news is not fake because you don’t like what they say about you.  Perhaps you should listen to and accept just a mere sliver of Sir Winston’s wisdom.
Why do we work so hard in working with the media when it is corrupt? Where do I begin on this little gem?  You are not working hard because you say so.  In fact, I believe history will record you and your lackeys have done just about everything short of murder to antagonize, discredit and marginalize the Press.  Furthermore, it is one thing for John Q. Citizen to use a word like corrupt; it is altogether something completely different for POTUS to use that word, especially without due process and the paucity of any shred of evidence.
Take away credentials?  Really?  Juvenile behavior . . . how mature?  What makes you think you have that authority—morally or legally?  In a strange perhaps even obscene manner, I wish he would try, and then we would hope (expect) every journalist (of any persuasion) would cut him off from his lifeblood—publicity.  I truly wonder what he would do if everyone just ignored him.
            Given the news media coverage chart offered in:
I wonder what the exact same chart for President Obama would have looked like?  The BIC persists in thinking he is the president of those who believe in him, rather than We, the People—a fatal error for any president, it seems to me.
-- The BIC and First Lady were waiting at 02:56 [R] EDT, on Thursday night, when the Secretary of State’s aircraft touchdown at Joint Base Andrews, to welcome home three American citizens held captive in the DPRK.  The release was seen as a goodwill gesture by DPRK dictator Kim in advance of the pending summit conference [845].  As with all such events, the BIC must be given credit for the release.  I must say, he appeared rather awkward at the greeting, as he often does, but it was impressive that both he and Melania made the effort to be there at such an early hour for an occasion like that. Well done!
-- Tesla lost a number of engineering personnel, from the senior vice president of engineering on down, apparently over serious disagreements regarding the company’s rejection of cooperation with the NTSB investigations of recent accidents involving their vehicles [848].  I understand Elon Musk’s desire to control and protect his brand, however, public safety exceeds all of his desires for that control.  The loss of engineering is not fatal—happens all the time; yet, it is not a positive sign . . . makes him appear as tempestuous as the BIC.  He is not an omnipotent entity who can ignore or thwart the government’s interest and authority in the domain of public safety.

            Why have we lost respect for our fellow citizens?  We appear to have lost our capacity to disagree without being disagreeable.  I watch and listen to a growing number of government employees who are outright rude and belligerent to anyone who disagrees with them. As the BIC says, very sad!

            Just a random, extraneous thought:
As readers of this humble Blog are well aware, I have struggled for some time now to understand why citizens of good character would support or believe in a man with so many bloody character flaws, some of them particularly serious and ominous.  The single word image that has come to me, of late, is rebellion.  They seem to have turned to a bully who tries very hard to act like a tough guy (he is not and never will be, which makes him all the more dangerous—a wannabe).  We seem to be witness to a (so far) bloodless rebellion by those who seek desperately to hold onto the status quo ante.  I suppose the only debate is how far back do they want us to regress . . . 100 years, 157 years, what would satisfy the urge to return to a day gone by?

            With the stroke of his infamous pen (well, one of a billion pens, I suppose), the BIC unilaterally withdrew this Grand Republic from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) [709; 14.7.2015] despite the oversight and approval of Congress in accordance with the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 [PL 114-017; 129 Stat. 201] [700, 709; 22.5.2015].  Also, despite the direct intervention of other signatories to the JCPA, the BIC thumbed his nose at Europe and practically flipped the bird at them all.  I was not a fan of the JCPA, but given the circumstances, I felt the JCPA was something and much better than nothing.  In those days of negotiation leading to the JCPA, the options were narrowing rapidly to war and war.  What the BIC has done is further isolating the United States from our allies and taken us back to those days of narrowing options.  I certainly agree with the underlying premise a nuclear-armed Iran (IRI) is worse and more threatening than a nuclear-armed DPRK. This was a really foolish, tempestuous action that will not serve world peace well.

            thought-provoking article appeared in Tuesday’s Arizona Republic.
“Sex Ed – An age-old struggle of morality vs. reality enters a new era”
by Alia E. Dastagir
Arizona Republic– USA Today
Published: May 8, 2018
I know, recognize and acknowledge this topic is not high on the list of most folks for public debate or discourse; however, it is a worthy and important matter.  The teaching of morality is and should be the domain of families and religion.  Unfortunately, far too many families fail to teach morality to their children, which has pushed public schools to pick up the gauntlet.  Sex education is no different.  Again, unfortunately, Victorian morality regarding sex has dominated this Grand Republic for more than a century, so much so that parents are literally afraid to teach their children.  The schools are left between a rock and a hard spot—teaching children about life without offending parents who are offended by the mere mention of the word sex.
            Back in the day whenJohannes Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg of Mainz, Germany (1439), produced his printing press, the Catholic Church vigorously enforced a policy of ignorance.  Gutenberg was labeled a heretic for defying the Church and producing printed material other than religious documents sanctioned and approved by the Church.  Ignorance was a direct means of control and domination.  Only the leadership of the Church, i.e., the Pope, could dictate mortal thought.  The Inquisition reigned in Europe (1184-1834) to enforce Church dogma and dicta on all people—believers or not.  The Renaissance and the printing press brought an age of enlightenment (and diminishment of the Church’s influence on public life).
            It seems to me that socially conservative parents are trying to use ignorance as a means of enforcing their belief that sex is only for procreation and even at that narrow purpose must be confined to adult (>18yo), heterosexual, married, monogamous-for-life relationships.  They want their children to be ignorant of birth control, biology, responsible relationships, and most of all dimensions of sexuality beyond their very narrow, strict enforcement of ignorance.  And, as things often work out, they become the lowest common denominator for what is acceptable in public schools.  Back in the day, I would have been branded a heretic and burned at the stake.  Knowledge must exceed and overcome ignorance.

             California took a major step toward becoming the first U.S. state to require solar panels on nearly all, new, residential homes, when the California Energy Commission voted 5-0 to approve a mandatory requirement that residential buildings up to three stories high must be built with solar panels beginning in 2020.  In approving the requirement, the commission estimated that the directive would add $9,500 to the average cost of building a home in California.  This is yet another tax added to commercial activity in the state.  However, I must say, it is rather forward thinking and may well pay dividends in the not too distant future.  California has often led the United States in forward thinking mandatory requirements, e.g., emission control on automobiles.  Most folks may not remember the horrendous smog in the Los Angeles basin.  Today, thanks to the significantly reduced automobile emissions, smog is essentially gone and the air in that region is monumentally better.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.853:
Comment to the Blog:
“There is a difference between lasers and bullets, but it's a matter of physics (and, thus, operations) rather than status as weaponry.
“Trump's speech in Cleveland is another exercise in self-love (there's another term for that), but even the unemployment figure has strings attached.  It leaves out ‘discouraged’ workers who no longer seek work and the underemployed, many of whom are not making enough to live independently even as single people in substandard housing.
“On the argument about freedom of religion versus free speech, after two readings I agree with your reading of the article.  It's poorly written because it doesn't present its argument clearly at all and I want to know much more about the situations presented.  He also uses loaded, emotional terms, ‘Grandfather’ and ‘grandmother’ in particular, carry emotional weight and no relevance to the issue at hand.  I also noted that his central (first) case concerns marketing or some other speech rather than actual work production.  I want very much to know the circumstances of that case, and he gives nothing.  It's as if he's trying to make a point without actually stating his point.
“You are not as unrelentingly negative about Trump as I am (see the second paragraph), but I have begun to tire of him.  We have other important issues to discuss, especially oligarchy, election reform, and climate change.”
My response to the Blog:
            Yes, of course; I recognize and acknowledge the physics.  However, my point was, firing a LASER at aircraft is an offensive act intended to do harm . . . and potentially harm to everyone on board that aircraft.
            Self-love is what narcissists do; the BIC exhibits a severe version.  Yes, you are of course correct.  There is no perfect metric for the whole of the employment dynamics. The definitions we have are at least consistent and reflective, although not totally descriptive.
            In the sense of the Koski-Duka case, services are no different from physical products sold in the public domain as commerce.  I do not see sufficient difference to warrant a separate opinion from the pending Phillips case, which in turn means the Phillips ruling will probably apply to the Koski-Duka case.  Given recent past performance (post-Gorsuch), I suspect the Phillips ruling will be a narrow 5-4 decision, split along ideological lines.  We shall see.
            I have noticed my view of the BIC’s conduct is under-going a metamorphosis . . . tiring yes, as I continue to be disappointed; however, lately, I am more aware of the entertainment value, like watching sports events in the class of American football or ice hockey.  Yes, there are many other far more important topics than the BIC and his bad behavior, and part of me suspects that is precisely his intention . . . to divert our attention from the real issues.
 . . . a follow-up comment:
“According to the confusing article you posted, the Koski-Duka case is not about the services but the marketing of those services, and supposedly about personal speech as well. It's worth mentioning here that small business people I've known often have trouble separating business from personal conduct.”
 . . . my follow-up response:
            I do believe marketing is a service.
            It is a fine line between speech that offends and speech that injures, e.g., the proverbial shouting fire in a crowded theater.  Offensive speech brings us to political correctness, which is not a crime in any form.
            The moral projectionists among us have absolutely no qualms about crossing from the public to the private domain when they dictate private conduct that is acceptable to their sensitivities, beliefs, values and opinions.  Based on the very limited information in the Press regarding Koski-Duka, they appear to be in the moral projectionist category, i.e., they have no hesitation in passing judgment on any citizen who does not conform to their definition of acceptable behavior.  They disapprove of same-sex marriage and presumably homosexuality (or rather non-heterosexuality in any form, and probably any form of intimate relationship that does comply with their standard, i.e., adult, consensual, and monogamous-for-life), as if the individual at issue is trying to dictate how they must act in private; thus, the culture conflict we see play out before us.  Koski-Duka are entitled to believe and say what they wish; they are also entitled to discriminate against any individual in private, based on any one or combination of the social factors; that is the essence of freedom of choice.  I respectfully submit, and I hope SCOTUS will affirm, no citizen has a right to discriminate in public intercourse or commerce.  To me, this boils down to the demarcation between public and private.

            Mvery best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap                        :-)

2 comments:

Calvin R said...

Congratulations to Jack on his graduation!

We continue to differ on the “one voter, one vote” stance versus the Electoral College. The ultimate reason for the Electoral College was to support formally under-counting slaves as humans in the 18th Century United States. That undermines our stated ideal that “all men are created equal.”

Trump's self-sabotage continues. While the EU and Iran may be able to contain the direct fallout from the Donald withdrawing from the Iran deal, Kim Jong-un has surely noticed that Trump doesn't consider our national commitments to be final. Kim knows as well as we do that Iran has not violated that commitment and, thus, that Trump has simply decided to dishonor the U.S.A.'s agreement. That bodes ill for the Korea talks.

Elon Musk at Tesla seems to be exhibiting the “founder” mentality noted by students of entrepreneurial business. That exaggerated need to control every aspect of his business and fear of someone stealing his ideas fit that model. He seems not to realize either how business-friendly this administration is or that they are obligated to keep trade secrets. (If they were not, we would know the components of “fragrance,” which could lead to relief for asthma patients like me.)

We mostly agree about sex education, but I disagree with your blaming approach to families. They only have what they've been given by prior generations of their own families and by society at large. Between the Age of Reason and at least the 1970s, variations of Christianity sounded the only dominant voices on sex, sexuality, and sex education in our part of the world. The parents of each succeeding generation had no chance to understand those issues for themselves and were discouraged from discussing anything about sex even among themselves. Dissenting voices always found some small audiences, but not enough to overcome the moral thunder from Catholic and Protestant churches. We're not really over that yet.

[On a personal note, I'd like to ask a small favor. I am considering moving to the dry climate of the Southwest for the sake of my lungs, but I need to know how the monsoon affects climate. I'd like to get your informal personal experience of the difference between monsoon in your new area and summer in Kansas.]

Cap Parlier said...

Calvin,
You have been my most consistent contributor, and for that I remain enormously grateful. I owe you a personal notice and explanation. I will respond to your contribution, as I have done with all your contributions. I owe you the respect due your contributions. This is to say, this week’s Update will be the last. It will include our exchange, as it should, and a simple announcement that no.855 is the last edition of the Update. I stand accused of bullying other contributors, and that is not what I want. I have other things I would rather be writing. So, that said, please allow me to respond to your contribution. We can continue our exchanges for as long as you find any value in my opinions.

Thank you for your kind words to Jack.

We are home, now.

I respect your opinion regarding the Electoral College. I will only offer one last perspective. Our Founders / Framers feared many human frailties, which from my perspective, is one of many reasons they created a system of governance based on checks and balances that avoided simple majority rule. What the National Popular Vote states are doing is legal and proper, although I thought by now someone would challenge the constitutionality before the Supreme Court. I suppose the Neanderthals, like me, see the movement as an abdication of state’s rights and further erosion of those protections, and have not seen them as a serious threat. The Powers The Be may take a different view as the movement gets closer to the threshold 270 votes. I assume the movement will achieve that objectives in time, which then means the states will be rendered irrelevant with respect to presidential elections. Majority rule is a double-edged sword that cuts both ways.

You are spot one correct. Just today, Kim threatened to pull out of the summit because of continued U.S. military operations on the Korean peninsula. However, I suspect it is far more likely to be due to the BIC’s IRI action. Kim is neither stupid nor blind.

I share your opinion re: Elon Musk. It may well be his undoing.

I like your insight into the basis of this sensitive topic. I find myself in agreement. There are no simple reasons for parents to be so bloody afraid of teaching their children about the biology of sex, the pleasures of the flesh, and multi-dimensional elements of human sexuality. The dominance of ignorance is slowly and assuredly being eroded to allow the light in; we are part of the process of enlightenment.

Cheers,
Cap