Update no.1002

Update from the Sunland

No.1002

22.3.21 – 28.3.21

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

 

            To all,

 

            The follow-up news items:

-- Our flood [993] recovery & repairs are now complete and closed.  I must forthrightly state that the house is in better shape than before the flood.  We are glad to have this episode behind us and hopefully never to be repeated.  I eagerly convey my sincere gratitude to USAA insurance company for their expert and prompt service in the recovery and repair of damage from the flood.

-- We received our 2^nd dose of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine [998] on Thursday.  Jeanne and I have done our part to protect ourselves and our fellow citizens.  We will continue to observe the government pandemic guidelines until the CDC determines they are no longer necessary.  Now, if other citizens will do their part, we can get past this dreadful period in our history.  Perhaps this milestone is the beginning of the end of this terrible pandemic year.  Time shall soon tell the tale.

 

I chose not to illuminate or even acknowledge the outlandish and outrageous statements by some of the front lawyers for the [person who shall no longer be named]— Rudolph William Louis ‘Rudi’ Giuliani and Sidney Katherine Powell.  They aided and abetted the [person who shall no longer be named] in perpetuating the BIG LIE that the 2020 election was fraudulent, rigged against their client, and otherwise corrupted.  One of the companies that suffered from the defamation perpetrated by Powell filed suit against Powell—US DOMINION, INC., DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS, INC., and DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Plaintiffs, v. SIDNEY POWELL, SIDNEY POWELL, P.C., and DEFENDING THE REPUBLIC, INC., Defendants. [USDC DC Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-00040-CJN (2021)].  On Monday, Powell’s lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the suit that stated among other things, “Analyzed under these factors, and even assuming, arguendo, that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact.”  In essence, anyone listening to Powell’s words should have known what she was saying was false—the BIG LIE is just that, a BIG LIE.  Powell statement’s was in fact affirmation that Powell, Guilani, and the [person who shall no longer be named] depend directly upon the reality that the majority of people and especially their believers will not take the time to check the validity of their outrageous statements.  Unfortunately and regrettably, millions of American citizens believed, still believe, and will continue to believe shameful lies.  Frankly, I hope and expect a jury to award Dominion all of their claimed US$1.3B in damages and more frankly.  The message must be crystal clear.  Lawyers, politicians, wannabe dictators, and other persons of responsibility cannot spew lies and make false statements without consequences.

 

With the pandemic slowly coming under control, we suffered two more mass shootings—Atlanta (16.March.2021) and Boulder (22.March.2021).

First and foremost, my condolences and heartfelt prayers must go to the families, friends, and immortal souls of those who lost their lives in those two tragic events. Both perpetrators were captured alive and will stand trial for their crimes.  I hope and trust the criminal justice system will properly try, convict and punish them both to the fullest extent of the law.  They deserve nothing less.

Second, there is no debate, argument or question from me that we must treat the root causes of such senseless firearm violence.  As I have written too many times, I am not keen on treating symptoms.  We must go directly after the root cause(s).  In order to do so, we must meticulously study such events to determine the root causes.  Reacting to emotions and the kneejerk urges to enact feel-good actions that have no hope of solving the root cause(s) of the problem will never succeed.

As occurs after horrific events such as these, far too many people are yelling the chants for banning assault rifles.  To my knowledge, none of the weapons used in the subject events were assault rifles.  They look like assault rifles, but they are not assault rifles.  That is a very specific type of firearm, and they are and should remain illegal in the United States as established by the National Firearms Act of 1934 [PL 73-474; 48 Stat. 1236; 26.June.1934].  Automatic weapons have been and remain illegal in the United States.  One more time, a rifle, a pistol, a knife, and a baseball bat are all tools no different from a fork or a screwdriver.  They are inanimate tools.  They do absolutely nothing without a human being to employ them.  It is the human operators that perpetrate those crimes, not the tools.  The tools can do nothing without the humans who use them.  So, if we feel the urge to ban something, let us ban the humans.

I see these calls for banning assault rifles in an entirely different light.  To me, such demands are just another variation of moral projectionist prohibitions quite akin to alcohol, tobacco, psychotropic substances, gambling, prostitution, or anything they don’t like.  Sure, the conservatives have their lot as do the liberals.  Yet, they are all the same—ban anything they do not like.  All of them, regardless of what their political leanings or motivations, are intrusions upon our fundamental right to privacy and freedom of choice . . . like everything else.  The conservatives have their hot buttons and the liberals have theirs, but they are all the same.  Thus, once again, I must voice my objection to banning simple tools.

 

President Biden held his first press conference (presser) on Thursday.  OMG, what a refreshing change—a president who actually acts like a president.  Halleluiah!!  He is not the most eloquent or dynamic speaker, but he is monumentally better than what we were subjected to for the last four years.  He did not puff up his chest.  He did not ridicule the press or belittle anyone else.  He continues to reach out to whatever Republicans remain in government.  As some have written, he may be wasting his time.  That may well be, but I give him credit for the attempt.  Peace and stability.

 

A personal friend of many years who happens to be a staunch believer in the [person who shall no longer be named] sent posted the following meme.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is described as a “key partner” on Page 613 of the Democrat’s 628-page relief bill, which calls for a donation of “not less than $3,500,000,000” to the Global Fund to Combat AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.

Although it’s noble to raise money to help eradicate AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis around the world, it’s unclear why $3.5 billion in American taxpayer funds must be given to this charity right now.

To which, I replied:

I have no idea what "relief bill" this refers to in your post. The only relief bill signed into law by the Biden administration is PL 117-002.  First, it is 242 pages, not 628 pages. There is no page 613.  There is no mention of Gates (either one, or their foundation) in the entire document. There is no mention of AIDS (or HIV), tuberculosis or malaria.  This missive is totally false, i.e., there is not one scintilla of fact.  The people who create these false posts depend upon citizens not taking the time or effort to check the facts. This is flat-assed wrong!!

This meme represents the times in which we live, except most of the really good memes contain just enough fact to make them believable so that those so inclined accept the whole message as truth.

We must learn to filter out such erroneous information and especially the better memes that feed their hatred.  We must adapt to the times in which we live.

 

With all of the brouhaha over the outright BICP legal assault on voting rights, the Senate filibuster has come once again to center stage.  The filibuster is not a constitutional matter but rather a function of Senate rules.  The opponents like to point to the filibuster as an artifact of the original Jim Crow era (as opposed to the current, resurrected, Jim Crow version).  Segregation and slavery may have been the stimulant in the genesis of the filibuster (1806), but it was not the only purpose.  The Senate filibuster is and remains consistent with the founding documents as a bulwark against simple majority rule.  There are ample examples in the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and other founding documents that demonstrate effort to protect minority rights.  I suspect the BICP (former Republican) members recognize that they are rapidly moving farther into minority status, and they are desperate to stop the tide.  For decades, the filibuster required a senator to hold the floor in opposition to a particular bill as depicted in the movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939).  Circa the late 60s, or early 70s, the Senate eliminated the talking filibuster, essentially allowing a single anonymous senator to stop a bill from reaching the floor.  I am and remain in the middle on this one.  Protecting minority rights and inducing compromise are vital elements of our democracy.  Like the Electoral College and many other such protections, the filibuster is an important element of American democratic governance.  While the BICP (Republican) minority may see their power waning, I am not ready to write off the protections for the Republican minority.  We never know what tomorrow may hold.  Let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

            Comments and contributions from Update no.1001:

“Thanks young man..lovey dovey?  That’s a new one on me!!!  Like it.”

My reply:

Ah, yes, we live and learn.  I suppose it is a uniquely American term that seems to be quite descriptive of the conduct of the [person who shall no longer be named] with respect to the dictators—Putin, Xi, Kim, Erdoğan, Saud, et al.  Glad you like it.  Feel free to deploy it as you wish.

 

Comment to the Blog:

“Is nothing worthy of discussion other than the Presidency and the virus?  Perhaps we could talk about the spikes in virtually all mental health problems or the millions of pending evictions.  Or sedition.

“I accepted the vaccine in hopes of escaping some of the restrictions.  Given the ‘vaccine passports,’ that may yet come about.  However, the germophobes will have to admit that the risk posed by vaccinated people going about their lives is less than the hazards of the restrictions.”

My response to the Blog:

We can discuss anything you wish . . . just raise the topic, express your opinion or ask a question.  Mental health and sedition are two great topics.  What aspects would you like to discuss?

We were issued cards to document our first dose.  We get our 2^nd does on the day after tomorrow, and I expect our cards will be updated; then it will be another card we must carry.  We have not tried to travel or any other activity where a vaccine passport might be useful.  I suspect even with vaccination, we will still have to observe protection guidelines until fatalities, hospitalizations, and perhaps even infections decrease to manageable levels, mainly because the science has not caught up with the determination of transmissivity by inoculated individuals.  If the science establishes that vaccinated people cannot transmit the virus, the safeguards will be relieved earlier than otherwise.

BTW, what vaccine did you receive?

 . . . Round two:

“The mental health outcomes of the restrictions are evident but not getting the airtime of virus-related marketing by the government and many other sources.  Overdoses, suicides, and homicides stand out.  About ten days ago, a local news station here in Columbus, Ohio, reported that year-to-date homicides were twice as many as early 2020.  That seems to mean nothing to the governor, the President, or their minions.  I’ll give our Mayor, Andrew Ginther, credit for at least trying to address this.

“I received the 1-shot vaccine on March 5 but have yet to benefit from it (unless one has faith in the medical need and efficacy).  It raised my blood pressure for about two and a half weeks.  Also, oddly enough, I gained and lost about two pounds.”

 . . . my response to round two:

There is no question or debate that the pandemic has added considerable stress to our lives.  Mental health services and treatment is a difficult nut to crack.  Yes, we should have more comprehensive mental health services.  Yet, the burden does not rest entirely on the government, the profession, or business.  As the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.  Basic counseling services can help to relieve stress to some level, but underlying clinical illness makes the screening process far more complex.  From a societal perspective, we absolutely must de-stigmatize mental illness and mental treatment, like so many other personal, private matters, e.g., drug use, prostitution, gambling, sexuality, et al.  From my rather naïve and simplistic perspective, de-stigmatization is akin to expunging racism, sexism, and all the other forms to discrimination based on any one or combination of the social factors.  I come from a generation where many of those factors were disqualifying, which created a very powerful force to hide or deny those factors.  We will not be able to help so many ‘in need’ individuals until mental health is de-stigmatized.  The latest mass murderer appears to be yet another example of our failure to detect and treat mental illness.  He showed signs; the signs were seen by others; but, we failed to intervene.  Now, 10 innocent people are dead.

I am not sure how you expect to prove benefit from the vaccine; it is proving a negative.  Your side effect symptoms seem fairly minor to me.  I surmise you received the Johnson & Johnson single dose (since the AstraZeneca single dose does not yet have its EUA).  We get our second dose of Moderna tomorrow afternoon; we have blocked out the next three days (Fri-Sun) just in case.  Unfortunately, even our fully vaccinated card will not preclude the requirement for societal protections, until we know scientifically that vaccinated individuals cannot transmit the virus, or we achieve the herd immunity threshold (70%).

 . . . Round three:

“You ignore the connection between the restrictions and the spikes in mental health issues.  I don't.

“I'm not concerned with distinctions among the vaccines or even their efficacy.  I want the restrictions and the mask orders lifted ASAP.  They are costing us too much in mental health and economics.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Perhaps your choice of the word ‘ignore’ was chosen to garner reaction, or debate, or simply to be argumentative.  I have no idea why you chose that word, but nonetheless, my response is nothing of the kind.  I suppose I did not respond as you wished me to respond.  So, in the face of your antagonism, please allow me to emphatically state that I fully recognize and acknowledge the connection between pandemic restrictions and the spike in mental health issues.  I do not separate mental and physical health; they are both whole health.  The pandemic and the previous administration’s tepid, laissez-faire response have directly caused enormous costs in mental and physical health.  I wish there was a simple answer, but the grotesque unpreparedness of the government includes the paucity of mental health treatment facilities, professionals, and processes, which are whole society matters.

I share your desire to be rid of the pandemic response measures for all of the reasons noted plus many more.  However, until we have reduced the transmissivity of the virus in our society, those measures are required.  If every citizen had followed the guidelines a year ago, we might have gotten ahead of the virus and dramatically reduced the consequences.  We did not (thanks in large part to the defiance of the [person who shall no longer be named]); thus, we have what we have, and we must deal with the situation before us.  If every citizen had done the responsible thing despite the foolishness of the [person who shall no longer be named], we would not be in the state we are.

 

Another contribution (with permission and redacted for privacy):

“enjoyed 1001, even as abbreviated and as greatly lengthened by the exchange with the loyal Brit.

“Regarding Italy sentiments, I have only traveled there and Greece and Ephasis, Turkey, as part of tour groups greatly aided by excellent local guides, but for ten years in Federal Court represented an Italian partnership and Swedish corporation owned by a German expatriate who owned a villa near Palermo.

“Met his wife and some of their dozens of servants at ----’s funeral in his home city of Hamburg, where my 9-hour trans-Atlantic review of Deutsch was totally unnecessary, as were my many attempts to speak the language to him, since he spoke six languages fluently.”

My reply:

Thx for your observations; always appreciated.

I’m glad you enjoyed and found useful the 1001 Update.  I will strive to maintain that usefulness.  Yeah, he has been a regular contributor.  He has helped me with local research mostly applicable to my To So Few series of historical novels—a long term friendship.

Europe tends to be far more multilingual than other regions since so many cultures and languages are in close proximity.  I lived and worked in Northern Italy.  The farthest south I’ve gone so far is Napoli, or more precisely Pompeii.  We did pass through the Strait of Messina and by Mt. Etna on a Med cruise, but I’ve not yet set foot on Sicily.

I hope your experience representing a multinational concern was enjoyable and worthwhile.  Did you ever get to enjoy the villa in Palermo?

 . . . Round two:

“I could waste lots of your time on the subject of ----------- and his brother in Argentina and a niece ------ who spent time in our home as a teenager and his now deceased widow -------------------------, whose father had the patent on the unique container feature used in ----’s internationally popular Sicilia brand not-from-concentrate ‘fresh’ lemon and lime juices.  He gave ----------, a Jackson MS food broker with two spoiled sons, an exclusive contract to sell his juice in USA, but ------ soon tired of varying Swiss franc exchange rates and formed ten corporations for his boys to sell a cheaper clever look-alike product, Pompei (inferior reconstituted juice), instead of meeting contract goals for Sicilia, utilizing the patented plastic bottle nozzle design!  Bad greedy man!  ---- eschewed ungentlemanly litigation and instead sold to a Canadian, who began to sell Sicilia in USA.  ------ sued ----’s partnership and Swiss corporation for breach of contract in MS Chancery.

“Court expecting home cooking advantage, but we removed to Federal Court where in a long jury trial a former partner and I eventually defeated ------’ $11million claim and got a judgment for counterclaim.

“Meanwhile ---- sued for patent infringement in Dallas, but his NJ attorney lost surprisingly.  Long story!”

 . . . my response to round two:

Not a waste of my time, my friend.  My offer always remains valid—share what you wish.

The nature of your last missive compels me to ask whether you object to sharing with the Blog?  Your words seem rather personal, but I see value to the larger audience (anonymously of course; I can leave the names or block them as you think appropriate).  International relations and commerce are rarely simple.  I’m glad you could help ---- and his business.  Unfortunately, there are lots of greedy bad men out there, which is exactly why we need laws and regulation.

 . . . Round three:

“Yes, the interesting story poorly abbreviated in my response to your much more compelling Blog, does contain names that deserve the courtesy of privacy even after 30 years.  However, you my friend are welcome to make any appropriate use of my responses any time, modifying as you see fit for the above or any other considerations.

“In answer to your earlier question, I regret that I never was able to accept many invitations to ----’s villa and lemon orchard, despite many attempts to get Space-A to Italy and dreams of a luxurious visit for ----- before --- intervened with our lives, eventually taking hers.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Excellent.  Thank you.  I shall attempt a new form of redaction for this issue.  Regardless, I shall remove the names to respect their privacy.

Too bad; like you, I’m sure it would have been a glorious visit.  So much history in proximity to Palermo.

Life goes on.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)