Update from the Sunland
No.1143
4.12.23 – 10.12.23
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
Go Navy, Beat Army!
United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor passed away on Friday, 1.December.2023, at 93 years of age. She lived a good and bountiful life. Tributes have poured in for the trailblazing pioneer woman who grew up on a cattle ranch in Arizona. One of those tributes was a top of the fold, front page headline that caught my attention.
“Sandra Day O'Connor's abortion rights rulings still reverberate in Arizona, nation”
by Ronald J. Hansen
Arizona Republic
Published 5:04 a.m. MT Dec. 3, 2023 | Updated 5:04 a.m. MT Dec. 3, 2023
The fallacy in the headline was, Justice O’Connor was so much more than that issue. Plus, the medical procedure was never the question. Contrary to notion offered in the Press, as noted above, and popular opinion, Justice O’Connor stood for the civil rights of ALL American citizens, not just a chosen few or some willfully minority. That issue was never about abortion; it was always about every citizen’s fundamental right to privacy in making very personal, private, medical decisions. Quite a number of rulings in Justice O’Connor’s portfolio dealt with every citizen’s civil rights in various forms. She defied the strict constructionist conservative justices on the court bench at the time. Thanks to the Good Lord above for the time we had Justice O’Connor with us.
During a broadcast interview with Univision’s Enrique Acevedo on Thursday, 9.November.2023, [the person who shall no longer be named] plainly stated, “If I happen to be president, and I see somebody who is doing well and beating me very badly, I’ll say, ‘go down and indict them.’” This statement is quite akin to his “shoot somebody” proclamation {23.1.2016 [1112]}. In the same interview, [the person who shall no longer be named] also boldly declared that he could very well embark on a revenge tour against his political enemies. He has gone far beyond Nixon’s paranoia and enemies list. The man has repeatedly referred to the insurrectionist who invaded the Capitol Building in an attempt to disrupt the constitutional election process as the “J6 hostages”—hostages! His choice of words give us a direct, solid clue as to what is in store for us should he be elected to a second term. Seven years ago, as a candidate, [the person who shall no longer be named] declared, “I am your voice.” Today, he says, “I am your retribution.” As Maya Angelou so elegantly and succinctly observe, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Too many of us failed to do so the first time, and here we are again.
In a different interview, when Sean Hannity asked, “You’re not going to be a dictator, are you?” [The person who shall no longer be named] answered, “No, no, no. Other than Day One. We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.” Dictator for a day or for life is still a dictator, period, full stop.
Just a teeny-weeny historical reminder . . . in 1787, Lord Woodhouselee, born Alexander Fraser Tytler, gave a lecture on a study he had performed. In that report, he observed that democracies only last 200 years as governance transition through the cycle that became known at the Tytler Cycle, which is:
From Bondage to spiritual faith,
From spiritual faith to great courage,
From courage to liberty,
From liberty to abundance,
From abundance to complacency,
From complacency to apathy,
From apathy to dependence,
From dependence back into bondage.”
Let us never forget. Only We, the People, can break the Tytler Cycle and defend this once grand republic against those who seek to break down democracy and return us to bondage under their dicta.
[The person who shall no longer be named] is telling us boldly and loudly what he will do with a second term should he become president again, just as Hitler told the world what he would do when his dicta manifesto Mein Kampfthat was published in 1925. Very few outside of Germany seemed to have read it . . . except for one marginalized Conservative Party member of Parliament in the United Kingdom by name of Winston Churchill. A mere eight years later, Hitler was duly elected and became chancellor of Germany by their constitutional process. Just three months after becoming chancellor, Hitler was Der Führer – The Leader, i.e., dictator for life. Shortly after that, the Germans got the Gestapo, the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), the Schutzstaffel (SS), and the other security instruments of the Party (NSDAP)—the Party was the State. No other political parties were allowed. Oppression of dissent became a religious passion vigorously pursued by the instruments of State; dissent of any magnitude or any source was not tolerated.
I will note here and in history, Churchill tried desperately to warn His Majesty’s Government (HMG), the British people, and freedom-loving citizens of the world of the rapidly evolving danger in 1930s Germany. For his Herculean efforts, he was ostracized, condemn, sidelined, accused of being a warmonger, along with myriad other derogatory epithets. The party leaders and elite laughed at him until events in and around Germany began happening exactly as Churchill had warned and as Hitler laid out in his plan. History is repeating itself and millions of American citizens are so bloody desperate to hold onto what they perceive as their dominant position as a minority. They refuse to adapt, to evolve, to advance, and to mature. They would rather abandon democracy and embrace a dictator as long as he is their dictator . . . quite like 1933 Germany.
Like any addiction, the MAGAts are addicted to the snake-oil elixir [the person who shall no longer be named] is peddling. Also like all other forms of dependence, the addict will only change his addictive behavior when he convinces himself that he must change. Until that point arrives, there is absolutely nothing the rest of us can do to break the grip of dependency. There is always hope until there isn’t.
I am learning! If we take what [the person who shall no longer be named] says as he accuses the Democrats of doing, that is exactly what the fBICP, MAGAts, and their myriad legislators and sycophants are doing today. It is true for virtually everything. We can take what he and others say in their accusations against Democrats as precisely what they are doing themselves, e.g., election suppression, weaponization of the Justice Department, destroying democracy, et al ad infinitum ad nauseum.
Let us also never forget, [the person who shall no longer be named] is NOT being persecuted as he likes to claim. The Justice Department and two states’ attorneys general have followed the law to four grand jury indictments totaling 91 counts. He is being prosecuted as a common citizen who broke the law in many forms. So far, he has used every legal tool available to his money to thwart the trials and charges. If he had not broken the law (many times over) he would not find himself in court as a defendant. He has only himself to blame—no one else. He deserves the maximum punishment prescribed for his crimes, and I trust justice will prevail.
A friend and occasional contributor to this humble forum sent along an article indicating that Elon Musk had reinstated the ‘X’ [formerly Twitter] account of rabble-rouser Alex Jones.
. . . to which I replied:
Freedom of speech has boundaries, and Elon Musk (and others) have repeatedly crossed those boundaries.
. . . and the contributor responded:
“You may feel free to share this in your Weekly Update. I am one for as much freedom of speech as possible, to let individuals have their opinions.
“Who sets the boundaries, and why (agenda??), for what purpose are boundaries restricted? National security? Greater good? Group safety and security? Public health?
“I learned, as so many, during the COVID lockdowns and mandatory experimental vaccines, that the concept of Free Speech was trampled on, by an elite, powers-that-be, people in high places, FEDERAL agencies that pressured social tech-platforms, into blatant CENSORSHIP. [author’s emphasis]
“This is a slippery slope Cap. One from which we may never recover. [author’s emphasis]
“When a president, like Trump, is silenced on the social platforms, for me, whether I agree or disagree with Trump, the message for [the contrbutor] was ‘you too will be, and can be, silenced!’ [redaction mine]
“Perhaps the blowback we see now represented as support for Trump, is partly caused by the opinion many have, that the Deep State is against the average Joe Sixpack, who is not a criminal or treasonous, as the mainstream media may try to have too many believe.
“Just because I did not agree with the mask mandates, or agree in mass firings of good people who refused the experimental VAX-JAB, did not, does not, and should not make me a criminal or marginalized so I cannot have my opinion in Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or Gmail, etc., etc.. My opinions, of personal nature, posted in my private accounts, should not keep me from employment, which it is doing to millions of good Americans daily!”
. . . along with my thoughts:
Thank you for allowing me to add this exchange to this week’s Update. This is a very important and contemporary topic.
There is a monumental difference between you & me, and [the person who shall no longer be named] & the likes of Alex Jones. To my knowledge, neither you nor I have incited anyone to violence. We debate and disagree on a wide variety of topics without causing others to damage property, or injure or threaten anyone. That is the boundary. Far too many people are threatening judges, election officials, and other public individuals because of the words of the former president, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, and many others. Threatening people is not tolerable behavior. Those threats are meant to intimidate individuals the perpetrators do not agree with or act out on accusations by prominent leaders. Allowing such conduct will corrode and breakdown societal structure. If you and I threaten other people or urge others to violence, we should have our speech restricted because we could not control ourselves in civil society. At the bottom line, I do not agree that such restriction is censorship. The speech of [the person who shall no longer be named] was restricted, not censored, because his BIG LIE was fraudulent. He, nor anyone else, is entitled to free speech that incites others to violence or illegal conduct; such speech is WRONG and not acceptable in civilized society.
I will acknowledge a conundrum question. Hitler employed thugs, brown shirts, i.e., SA, before 1933, and black shirts, i.e., SS, after 1933, to suppress anyone, including the German state, from restricting his speech. Which was worse? Are we to allow speech to the point of dictatorship that removes speech for most and unboundedly protects speech for the rulers?
I still do not agree with the reinstatement of speech that advocates for anyone to “take action.” We are trying to be a civilized society, not a cesspool.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Comments and contributions from Update no.1142:
“Good day young man..thanks for the update. A lot of reading there but worth the effort. I fear the worse for the subsequent national outcomes of the impending court cases against he who shall not be named.”
My reply:
Yes, indeed . . . a lot of reading, and I just scratched the surface.
Fear not, my friend. Have faith in the process of governance. Like President James Madison noted in Federalist no.51, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” We are dealing with some distinctly bad men, but they will be dealt with in due process. Remember, there is always hope, until there isn’t.” Tiny is a slick character, well practiced in the art of grifting. I have confidence he shall eventually feel the weight of the law.
Comment to the Blog:
“Tiny fares poorly in environments focused on reason. That’s no surprise.
“I’m this ‘peace and love’ hippie. I’d like to stop people from killing people, especially noncombatants. Israel has killed far more of them than anyone in recent history.
“In the light of history, I’m less sanguine about the military than you are. Any number of examples give me doubts.
“You have a real point about medical care. I support a national right to reproductive healthcare. However, I’ll point out that in states where people have voted on referendums, even when improperly worded they usually pass. That’s making the Right sweat.
“Good riddance to Henry Kissinger. I share Robert Reich’s view of his career, and it’s not limited to the evil in Chile. Except for the opening to China, every move he made caused mass casualties.”
My response to the Blog:
To your first sentence, I must add that I used to be concerned, perplexed, and disturbed by ignorance. Far too many citizens did not know the most basic facts about our history, our form of governance, and the instruments of state. Such ignorance made them susceptible to demagogues, charlatans, and grifters like Tiny. Today, in the era of Tiny, we are not dealing with just ignorant citizens, some in portion certainly, but many are well educated people who have made a conscious decision to embrace a grifter snake-oil salesman who has led them to abandon history, the U.S. Constitution, and reason itself. I suppose that degree of illogical abandon is a metric of how fearful they are of the evolving majority. That bunch are embracing ignorance to further their conservatism.
I am all for peace and love, but I cannot embrace the hippie. Like you, I would prefer a world in Rodney King’s image, “C-c-c-can’t we all just get along!” Unfortunately, there are bad men set upon criminal conduct in any one of myriad forms from Tiny’s grifting to outright mass murder. All too often, violence is required to deal with bad men. We must not hesitate when necessary. There is plenty to criticize Israel for with the various forms of their heavy-handed-ness induced by the hard right in their midst. The moderates have come close to genuine peace so many times, only to have it unraveled by the hard right. We see a similar phenomenon at work in this once grand republic.
To be clear, my comment was generalized; there are bad men within the military as well . . . and yes, any number of examples.
Quite so. Yet, I fear the popular referendum process having the potential to go too far left or right. I think the U.S. Supreme Court got it precisely correct in Roe v. Wade [410 U.S. 113 (1973)] [319]. Freedom of choice, our fundamental right to privacy, and other rights, like speech and assembly, are not unbounded. The Supremes of the day saw that boundary in the abortion question as quickening, i.e., when the fetus was survivable outside the womb. That boundary has existed since 1973, until Dobbs v. Jackson [597 U. S. ____ (2022)] [1068].
OK. That’s the beauty of freedom. We can respectfully disagree.
. . . follow-up comment:
“There’s that ‘bad men’ statement, again used to excuse society from any and all responsibility.”
. . . along with my follow-up response:
Yep, the term keeps coming up and into our public dialogue and debate. Yes, as a society, we will get what we deserve, and We, the People, bear responsibility for what is to come. Many people have said, “We are in great danger.” “Democracy is in great danger” in this once grand republic. Bad men, like all criminals, do things to suit their whims whether the motivation is money, notoriety, and aggrandizement. That grifter cannot get to the White House unless he gains 270 electoral votes, full stop!
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
2 comments:
Happy Monday, Cap,
Thanks for recognizing Justice O’Connor’s contributions.
One benefit of having survived dangers is learning to recognize them. I and others knew who Tiny was on first sight. For numerous reasons, no dictator gives up power after one day.
I support freedom of speech with the limitations that have long been in place concerning libel/slander, insurrection, and causing panic. My puzzle is how to enforce those limits when, in less than a lifetime, the number of public voices has increased by several orders of magnitude. We cannot separate fact from opinion or fiction, and we are unable to suppress even the clearly insane and the seditious, to say nothing of the libels and threats promulgated against nearly everyone in public life.
Have a good day,
Calvin
Good morning to you, Calvin,
You are most welcome, my friend. I have always been a fan of Justice O’Connor. I enjoyed her writing and appreciated her constitutional reasoning.
Quite so! We have lived our share of years, and we are not done yet. Like you, I have seen the personality traits repeatedly and consistently displayed by [the person who shall no longer be named] too many times in my life. I did not need, nor did I seek yet another demonstration of the consequences of those traits. The effects are all too common, although in case of Tiny, the consequences of those effects are far more corrosive, divisive, and destructive to society, culture, and our community. His personality traits should have disqualified him from any public office, and especially from the presidency with its incumbent instruments of State. Unfortunately, we have a very desperate minority all too willing to abandon democracy, the Constitution, and embrace a dictator. These are the times in which we live; we must deal with it.
FYI: I am not aware of any dictator in history peacefully and willfully giving up power they have attained. We are flirting with that abysmal history.
The thin, misty line between freedom and security has been and always will be a difficult boundary to enforce and defend. One person’s freedom is another person’s offense or injury. To me, incitement of others to commit crimes is crossing that line. Threatening a judge is such an incitement regardless of the intent of the instigator’s intentions. I think taking the megaphone away from Tiny, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, et al, was appropriate and justified. Access to social media is a privilege, not a constitutional right. That bunch can stand on their soapbox at Debater’s Corner like all the rest of us; they have no right to the platforms they have been allowed to use. Of course, the judicial system is always a method by which to seek restitution for libel and other such crimes of speech.
Have a great day. Take care and enjoy.
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment