Update from the Sunland
No.1149
15.1.24 – 21.1.24
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- Lawyers for [the person who shall no longer be named] filed their brief to the Supreme Court for his appeal of the Colorado disqualification ruling—Anderson v Griswold [2023 CO 63; Case No. 23SA300] [1145]. I understand and appreciate that attorneys for the petitioner must present their best arguments on behalf of their client, but they lost me in their opening summary paragraph when they stated, “The Court should put a swift and decisive end to these ballot-disqualification efforts, which threaten to disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans and which promise to unleash chaos and bedlam if other state courts and state officials follow Colorado’s lead and exclude the likely Republican presidential nominee from their ballots.” I underlined the offending words. Those words are precisely, word for word, the words used by [the person who shall no longer be named] in his political intimidation campaign. I imagine he insisted they include those words. The brief raises several important arguments, most of which seem to be driven by the petitioner’s paucity of respect for the law.
If the president is not an “officer of the United States,” what is s/he? If not, why would the framers of §3 exclude the president? Tiny’s lawyers (and others) stand on the fact that the president is not explicitly noted in the section as senators and representatives are. No one has yet explained why they contend that the president is excluded. Further, the lawyers claim Tiny never swore an oath before he became president. Here is another one! What on earth did he do on the dais at the Capitol on 20.January.2016? Just for reference purposes, the president’s oath of office that Tiny swore to uphold on that January day in 2016 states:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
I do not see anything ambiguous in those words. Further, there is no question whatsoever that Tiny failed (and failed in epic, miserable fashion) to uphold his oath of office. As a personal footnote, as a former Marine, I swore an oath multiple times throughout my military service, and even in retirement for nearly 30 years, I still feel compelled by the oath of office I repeatedly took willingly.
Did Jefferson Davis engage in insurrection? Heck, did Robert E. Lee engage in insurrection? Neither of the Confederacy leaders ever fired a shot in the rebellion. They were only the political and military leaders of the rebellion. The lawyers clearly argue that the dictionary is not sufficient to define the word. I would normally expect the Supreme Court to emphatically state that the dictionary definition of the word ‘insurrection’ is clear and unequivocal. However, with this conservative court, I do not enjoy such confidence. It will be interesting to see how this conservative Supreme Court weaves their way through this one.
Let us not forget that any qualified citizen can vote for whomever they wish. No one is denying any citizen’s right to vote for “whomever they please to govern them.” Whether their vote can be counted depends upon whether the candidate meets the qualifications for the office they seek.
What they all refuse to acknowledge or accept is that it can be argued that Tiny’s incessant rants of the BIG LIE (initiated and perpetrated months prior to the election and continued to this day) created the atmosphere that there was something to protest, when in fact, he had exhausted all constitutional and legal provisions to contest and election. Tiny’s BIG LIE was the instigating action. There is only one person responsible. He must be held accountable and suffer the consequences of his actions.
[The person who shall no longer be named] won the Iowa caucuses handily; 101,000 Iowa GOP primary voters braved the arctic cold to caucus Monday evening. With some results still outstanding, the insurrectionist and accused state & federal defendant in multiple on-going court cases otherwise known as [the person who shall no longer be named] won 51.0% of the votes, with DeSantis winning 21.2.% and Haley winning 19.1%. Tiny won 98 of 99 counties in Iowa. To be clear, 51,000 GOP voters in Iowa do not represent a nation of 330 million people or even the state of Iowa (3.2 million). Further, for perspective, there are 2,000,000 registered voters in Iowa; 719,000 registered Republican voters. What happened Monday evening was 14% of 34%, or just 5% of registered voters in Iowa decided the Caucuses. His believers turned out in the cold of night to vote; others did not. Let us all keep things in perspective no matter how the consummate liar conman chooses to spin the results.
Some talking heads proclaimed the 2024 Iowa Caucuses were a “massive win” or “landslide win” for [the person who shall no longer be named]. The facts do not support such outrageous statements. Yes, he won, but it was hardly massive or a landslide; how could it be with only 5% of the electorate voting. It was barely a blip, but yes, he did win.
In exit polling, GOP primary voters were asked if President Biden won the 2020 election? In a very telling response, 66% of the above tiny fraction said no. It should be no surprise anyone that Tiny won in the state without seriously campaigning. Those who responded ‘no’ have swallowed his worthless damn snake-oil, and they believe the BIG LIE . . . just because he said so, which is a consequence of that damnable snake-oil.
The candidates rapidly fled Iowa and are off to New Hampshire for the primary election next Tuesday . . . well, except for Tiny who went to yet another courtroom in New York City. If there is a lesson learned from this edition of the GOP Iowa Caucuses, it is the MAGAt minority vote. We can abdicate to them the outcome of the 2024 election, OR We, the People, can decide the 2024 general election. The choice is ours. The consumers of Tiny’s magic snake-oil elixir will not alter there vote no matter what happens in the various courtrooms this year. Please vote!
The whole kerfuffle evolving around the imbroglio instigated by Nikki Haley regarding slavery as the cause of the Civil War and the latest variation, “This has never been a racist country,” is getting out of hand. In the main, this is what happens when politicians do not know history or choose to whitewash history. Yes, true, apartheid was not codified in the early founding documents, but the hypocrisy was plainly evident. Thomas Jefferson who wrote the words in the Declaration that “All men are created equal” owned scores of slaves throughout his life. Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution was a compromise to achieve the Union out of the Confederation. A plethora of laws were passed by Congress and signed into law by various presidents that specifically discriminated against Asian immigrants based solely on their ethnicity. It is very hard to not apply more significance to racism in the history of the United States of America. Haley’s delicate dance to avoid offending the MAGA bunch and trying to find a bridge is simply making the discussion worse. Like the Nescientia super Scientia (Ignorance over Knowledge!) Party, they want us to turn our backs on history to further their MAGA supposition. History is history. It must not and cannot be denied. They like to malign ‘woke’ initiatives, when those efforts are simply to ensure we do not forget . . . no matter how uncomfortable history makes us. Our children must be taught history. They should be uncomfortable. Those were bad days. But, all that said, I laud Haley’s efforts to point to a higher ideal beyond the reality of our past. Point blank, we are still fighting racism to this very day; what does that say about this country? We have our ideals, but they are NOT reality. We are a work in progress and have a very long way to go to achieve our espoused ideals. We cannot say it so and wish it to existence as Haley is attempting to do.
On Sunday afternoon, two days before the New Hampshire primary election, Governor DeSantis of Florida announced that he was suspending his presidential campaign and his endorsement of [the person who shall no longer be named] as the Republican candidate. He had been on a fairly steady decline since he announced his candidacy. It is disappointing but certainly no surprise that he endorsed Tiny on his way out of the door. With only one of 50 state primaries complete and in the can, it appears the GOP has truly become the fBICP with an accused felon as ihr Anführer. They shall reap the whirlwind.
Comments and contributions from Update no.1148:
Comment to the Blog:
“Maybe there’s still a ‘dumb criminals’ show that could do an episode centered on Tiny. He insists on talking in public and is thus his own worst enemy.
“Rep. Stefanik is a minion typical of the historical agents of tyrants.
“I see no functional reason to watch the Republican debates. Debates in general give no relevant information, and it’s not as if I’d ever vote for those particular scumbags.
“It will be fascinating to see how nature affects the Iowa caucuses. As I type this, Dubuque’s temperature is 0 degrees Fahrenheit; wind chill minus 19.”
My response to the Blog:
Oh my, yes, absolutely. He qualifies in spades. Tiny presents himself as the messiah being persecuted by the Romans and sacrificing himself for the believers. Far too many good American citizens have bought that worthless drivel lock, stock, and barrel. The only way they can be overcome is voting them back to the margins of freedom-loving society.
Yes, precisely correct. That is exactly what she is . . . and it is revolting.
I watch and listen to stay somewhat attuned to what is happening in that group . . . as long as they stay out in the open . . . kinda like the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers (that’s a rich contradiction), and other extremist organizations predominantly on the right (but some on the left as well). The debates do give us a view of their public speaking skills, ability to handle pressure, command of some topics, and such. I do think they are worthwhile, even though the message is worthless.
It looks like the weather was a major factor. Barely 14% of a minority show up to vote. MAGAts were motivated and showed up; the MAGAts turned out. The same will likely be true next November, and hopefully, the weather will not be quite so severe.
. . . Round two:
“I continue to marvel at the MAGAts’ disinterest in reality.
“We shall see what happens by November. Any number of things could change. Perhaps the Democratic National Committee will let Biden retire and give us an honest primary season on their side. Also, I’ve seen another ‘mainstream’ news story on third parties.
“The New York Times Deal Book newsletter this morning features the Davos dealings. As always, the ‘unofficial’ meetings are where the action is. The Premier of China is a featured player this year. Middle Easterners and Jared Kushner are among the other villains. Each piece of that is more important than the Iowa caucus.
“Boeing may wind up needing another bailout over its latest equipment failure.”
. . . my response to round two:
Oh my, yes. The MAGAts are detached from and/or ignorant of reality. They apparently freely and willfully rendered themselves to that state, which is why I continue to use the analogy of Tiny’s snake-oil elixir; they consume and they believe.
Yes, indeed, we shall see in November . . . one way or another. They are running out of time to replace President Biden as the Democratic candidate. The third-party rumors persist. Time is getting short for any such effort.
Perhaps so. I find it difficult to attach much meaning to a vote of just 5% of registered voters in the state. The Democrat and Republican Parties are roughly the same size in Iowa; Independents are the largest group of registered voters in the state. But, no matter; what counts is who votes in November. We shall see, indeed.
I am not certain the Alaska Airlines plug failure was a design flaw. It looks more like a manufacturing mistake. We will eventually know the cause of this one. I hope it does not go as far as a bailout (for incompetence), but I cannot rule out the potential.
. . . Round three:
“We shall see what happens in November. The Green Party is pushing for more ballot access; other third parties probably are, too. I have a feeling not supported by specific facts that a surprise of some sort is in the works.
“The primary system doesn’t express the will of rank-and-file party members. You have a point that what counts is who votes in November, but ballot access limits their choices.
“Early reports on the Boeing Max 9 issue do seem to show a manufacturing issue. Never excuse quality control failures in that context.”
. . . my response to round three:
I cannot speak of all states. In Arizona, Greens, Libertarians, and others are on most ballots I can remember. Not sure what the problem is in other restrictive states. I know there are thresholds in every state to make it to the ballot. This is the primary season, so party focused.
Quite correct. The primary system is completely party focused. Part of qualifying for the general election ballot is achieving a minimum threshold to support; they seek to filter out the Mickey Mouse Party and such. Write-ins are available on every ballot; some still vote for Mickey Mouse.
Quality control is part of manufacturing. What Boeing did was they eliminated traditional quality control to reduce cost and emphasized a self-quality check systems. I thought it was bad when I first heard the term. Eliminating independent quality checks and then putting serious production timeline pressures on manufacturing (also for cost reduction) are a recipe for disaster. I suspect we may be seeing the consequences.
. . . Round four:
“Here in Ohio, Greens vanished from the ballot by or in 2020 with no notification. The poll worker where I voted was mystified by my mention of the Green Party. Ballot access remains a problem in many states. Per the Green Party, either of the major parties will change laws and rules to keep others off the ballot whenever they can.
“It still galls me that the Democratic National Committee can simply decide on a candidate and defend that in court. I’ll note that write-in candidates have standards to meet or votes for them don’t count.
“Spirit AeroSystems, the manufacturer of many parts of the Boeing Max, appears to have failed its quality control responsibility in a big way. I just sent you an article about that.”
. . . my response to round four:
Do you know why the Green Party disappeared from the ballot in Ohio? Could it be they did not meet the minimum threshold for qualification? In Arizona, in addition to the constitutional requirements, an independent candidate must meet state ballot access requirements. The law in Arizona states:
An independent presidential candidate must petition for placement on the general election ballot. The petition must contain signatures equaling at least 3 percent of all registered voters who are not affiliated with a qualified political party. The petition must include the name of a vice presidential candidate, as well as the names of presidential electors. The petition must be filed with the Arizona Secretary of State no earlier than 100 days and no later than 80 days before the general election.
The 3% threshold noted above is roughly 1,459,432 x 0.03 = 43,783 petition signatures in Arizona. The ballot requirement for a write-in vote to be counted are:
In Arizona, a write-in candidate for the presidency must file a nomination paper in order to have his or her votes tallied. This paper must include the names of a vice presidential candidate and of presidential electors. The requisite paperwork must be filed with the Arizona Secretary of State no later than 5:00 p.m. on the 40th day prior to the general election.
The requirements in Arizona for a write-in candidate are less stringent. The voter can vote for any write-in person whomever they wish. They are completely free to do as they wish. However, if the write-in candidate has not met the requirements, votes for them will not be counted. I have not studied the comparable requirements in all 50 states, but I imagine they are similar in other states. Also, I just checked the qualified political parties in Arizona, and the Green Party is currently not listed.
I certainly understand your irritation. However, the parties are political organizations that establish their own rules. I do not know those rules, and I do not much care about their selection rules. It is their right to decide who their candidate will be by whatever rules they have established. I am reminded of the 1944 nomination process. The rank & file liked the incumbent vice-president, Henry Wallace. The party leaders did not like him. The leaders orchestrated a change at the convention, largely behind closed doors; the result was the Democrats replaced Henry Wallace with Harry Truman, and Roosevelt accepted the will of the Party.
To my knowledge, we do not yet know that quality control failed. I suspect it was quality control but I do not know. To me, it is more likely a manufacturing error rather than a design issue . . . but I am an engineer, so I am biased.
. . . Round five:
“I didn’t bother studying the situation in Ohio. I’m aware that election rules change everywhere whenever one party is in power, but that doesn’t make newscasts. That applies to smaller parties, not only candidates. Write-in candidates have statewide rules that are less stringent. Local factors change, too; polling locations come, go, or move according to partisan considerations. In addition, any candidate or initiative not put forward by the Establishment will have many petition signatures disqualified no matter how much care they take gathering them. Our recent healthcare and marijuana initiatives both encountered that. None of the people supervising elections are dispassionate observers.
“The party central committees' ‘right’ to decide their candidates is a major reason why so many people don’t vote. Party hacks like Biden or Hillary Clinton don’t motivate voters.
“Boeing’s and Spirit AeroSpace’s histories strongly indicate quality control issues that have been brought up in prior airline crashes.”
. . . my response to round five:
Your observations are quite appropriate, it seems to me. Yet, no matter how hard we try, people still administer the system, and those people are prone to passions, emotions, and biases. Our systems are designed to filter out those factors via cross-checks, but where there is a will, there is a way. We continue to strive. It is of ancillary interest that the MAGA bunch push for hand counting, which reverses decades of efforts to use machines rather than humans to count.
That seems a bit harsh, but I understand and appreciate your assessment.
I do not know about ‘strongly indicate,’ but point taken. I put the likely blame farther down to the almost mindless drive for cost reduction. Unfortunately for Boeing, safety is more important than cost. Yet another lesson that will cost them far more than any original cost saving.
. . . Round six:
“You have a background in engineering and operations. The systems you worked in are designed to filter out ‘passions, emotions, and biases.’ Systems in marketing (my education), management (my work experience), and politics have little to no such design. They are made to take advantage of those passions, emotions, and biases, not to bypass them.
“I don’t see my assessment of politics as unduly harsh. Study actual results. Tiny managed to take over the RNC, and he then used voters’ emotions and biases to take over the Presidency. He has become the bogeyman, ‘he who must not be named,’ here. Tiny’s still a threat despite 91 felony counts. The DNC still controls their candidates and officeholders. They win some elections but never make the kinds of policies that would win over many of us voters. Due to systemic failures like those, voting has waned.
“Your assessment of Boeing and its outsourced process is accurate. We need to study it as part of a broader process that Robert Reich has been discussing in his blog/course.”
. . . my response to round six:
Good points all. No argument.
Yes, Tiny has taken over the GOP kinda like Hitler took over the NSDAP. My gosh, yes, Tiny is very much a threat and will remain so until he is removed from the public domain.
Yes, the impact of their internal processes on public safety are much game for study and public scrutiny, and rightly so.
Another contribution:
“Well not a surprising news headline this morning. I shall be very interested to see your comments. Caucus- not a word we are familiar with this side.
Trump wins Iowa caucus landslide as DeSantis pips Haley to second place (telegraph.co.uk)
“This has darkened my day Cap. Could you kindly explain how this person who’s name I shall not mention can even enter as a candidate into any election while carrying unresolved crimes on his spreadsheet.”
My reply:
Oh my, you are not alone, my friend. Last night’s event in Iowa was an embarrassment, plain and simple.
A caucus is a gathering of supporters or members of a political party. In this instance, the Iowa Republican party held their caucuses in each district in the state for the purpose of selecting delegates for particular candidates to attend the summer party convention that will select the Republican Party’s candidate for the fall general election. There was no Democratic Party caucuses; apparently, they have made their choice.
Because of the severe weather in Iowa yesterday and last night, only 14% of registered Republicans in Iowa showed up for their respective caucus. It was hardly some overwhelming mandate. But, it does demonstrate that the consumers of Tiny’s magic snake-oil elixir believe, and they vote come snow or rain or heat or gloom of night.
There is nothing in the Constitution or the law that prohibits anyone from voting for whomever they wish. Every election, there are always a few who write-in Mickey Mouse (a fictional rodent personality). Freedom is like that, very messy. But, like Sir Winston so accurately told us, democracy is the worth form of government except when compared to all the rest (I paraphrase). The MAGA bunch are a small minority of a minority. We can hold other more rational Americans will vote in November.
I will have more to say in this week’s Update.
. . . with follow-up comment:
E Jean Carroll trial: Judge threatens to remove Trump from court - BBC News
“Just thought that you would wish to see this from over here in the U/K.
“I have written several words on the situation being generated by the factions making their prerogatives verbally know. I have decided though that it really isn’t my right to say what I’m thinking. I’ll leave that to you my friend. Just move him away from politics.”
. . . and my follow-up reply:
Others may offer a more parochial response, but since this is my Blog, I say all opinions are welcome. Yours is as valid and welcome as anyone else’s. Like Sir Winston so eloquently observed, criticism is like pain in the human body, it brings attention to an otherwise unhealthy state of things. Fire away.
Tiny continues to demonstrate that he believes he is above the law, not subject to the laws that the rest of us lowly minnows must abide. We shall see how that mindset works in a court of law, or rather courts of law (plural). I suspect this time Tiny will face punitive damages beyond the civil judgment . . . and he continues to lie and defame Carroll.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
