Update from the Heartland
No.442
31.5.10 – 6.6.10
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,Amid the clamorous kerfuffle for President Obama to cry, or stomp his feet, or smack Dr Anthony Bryan “Tony” Hayward, PhD, upside the head to demonstrate his rage, the favorite game of the American Public, Press and politicians jumped to a higher, more precipitous level this week when Attorney General Eric Holder publicly announced the opening of a criminal investigation into the Deepwater Horizon, oil rig disaster. Somehow, in our drive for immediate gratification, we cherish the blame game . . . after all, in every bad event at a personal or national level, someone else must be at fault and criminally liable. Unfortunately, as an engineer, I am far more interested in root cause analysis, i.e., find out exactly what happened. Once the disaster has passed and the recovery is well underway, there will be plenty of time for recriminations and criminal prosecution, given prosecutable offense(s) and sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, unless the USG is up against some unknown statute of limitations (which I doubt), prosecution should be considered only after the problem has been resolved and root cause has been determined – be it negligence, sabotage or whatever. Such prosecutorial grandstanding for political purposes in the middle of a disaster is more often than not counter-productive and at best distracting. The folks involved are induced to self-protective concern rather than closure. We face this challenge with every aircraft accident.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced that federal workers can start applying for long-term health-care insurance for their same-sex partners. President Obama signed a memorandum last June extending some benefits for non-heterosexual federal workers, including access to the government's Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program. On Tuesday, OPM essentially broadened the definition of relatives eligible for the program to include same-sex domestic partners of eligible federal workers, U.S. Postal Service workers and federal retirees. Long journeys are accomplished with small steps.
Not hearing any rational defense of Israel amid the cacophony of wailing regarding the pre-dawn boarding of a flotilla of ships from a Turkish NGO, attempting to run the Israeli blockade of Gaza has been nay onto impossible, I feel compelled to offer a solo voice of reason. The whole episode, from the resistance on-board those ships to the street protests in Western cities, has carried the stench of a purposeful, antagonistic, staged event intended to provoke Israel, and embarrass Europe and the United States. This type of provocation bears the earmarks of Hezbollah and Hamas as well as their patron – the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). The restraint of Israeli naval commandos resulted in more injury for them, but ultimately they enforced the blockade of Gaza. When a warrior warns you that you will be shot if you resist, do not be surprised or complain when you are shot for doing so. The blockade is there for a justifiable reason. Israel has every right to enforce that blockade with force if necessary. The solution is quite simple . . . embrace peace and renounce threats to Israel. Regrettably, the IRI does not want peace, and they will not allow it. They are quite content using the hapless Palestinians as their pawns in the global gamesmanship of Middle Eastern politics. So, the blockade continues.
President Obama nominated Lieutenant General James R. Clapper Jr., USAF (Ret.), to fill the recently vacated post as Director of National Intelligence.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced that federal workers can start applying for long-term health-care insurance for their same-sex partners. President Obama signed a memorandum last June extending some benefits for non-heterosexual federal workers, including access to the government's Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program. On Tuesday, OPM essentially broadened the definition of relatives eligible for the program to include same-sex domestic partners of eligible federal workers, U.S. Postal Service workers and federal retirees. Long journeys are accomplished with small steps.
Not hearing any rational defense of Israel amid the cacophony of wailing regarding the pre-dawn boarding of a flotilla of ships from a Turkish NGO, attempting to run the Israeli blockade of Gaza has been nay onto impossible, I feel compelled to offer a solo voice of reason. The whole episode, from the resistance on-board those ships to the street protests in Western cities, has carried the stench of a purposeful, antagonistic, staged event intended to provoke Israel, and embarrass Europe and the United States. This type of provocation bears the earmarks of Hezbollah and Hamas as well as their patron – the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). The restraint of Israeli naval commandos resulted in more injury for them, but ultimately they enforced the blockade of Gaza. When a warrior warns you that you will be shot if you resist, do not be surprised or complain when you are shot for doing so. The blockade is there for a justifiable reason. Israel has every right to enforce that blockade with force if necessary. The solution is quite simple . . . embrace peace and renounce threats to Israel. Regrettably, the IRI does not want peace, and they will not allow it. They are quite content using the hapless Palestinians as their pawns in the global gamesmanship of Middle Eastern politics. So, the blockade continues.
President Obama nominated Lieutenant General James R. Clapper Jr., USAF (Ret.), to fill the recently vacated post as Director of National Intelligence.
The Supremes heard arguments last Fall on two related cases from Florida, involving sentencing of minors (i.e., less than 18 years old) to life in prison without parole for non-homicidal crimes, against the Eighth Amendment’s “Cruel and Unusual” Punishment Clause. They summarily dismissed the appeal of the companion case – Sullivan v. Florida (08-7621) – with a simple, terse statement – “The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.” The other case in the dual was the appeal of Terrance Jamar Graham for the same reason – Graham v. Florida [560 U.S. ___ (2010); no. 08-7412]. Writing for the Court, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy observed, “Because Florida has abolished its parole system, see Fla. Stat. §921.002(1)(e) (2003), a life sentence gives a defendant no possibility of release unless he is granted executive clemency.” He went on to conclude, “The Eighth Amendment does not foreclose the possibility that persons convicted of nonhomicide crimes committed before adulthood will remain behind bars for life. It does forbid States from making the judgment at the outset that those offenders never will be fit to reenter society.” As is so often the case, the Constitution intentionally leaves the words vague . . . open for interpretation by future generations. Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, as a self-professed traditionalist, correctly states that the Constitution offers no guidance regarding penal limitations, and thus leaves such judgments to the states. Consequently, given Clarence’s logic and reasoning, the states may decide to utilize life-without-parole as an appropriate punishment for armed burglary, or presumably expectorating on public sidewalks, or even masturbation in private. Interesting logic! At the time of the ratification of the Constitution and the Eighth Amendment, the punishment of being hanged, drawn and quartered remained valid in England (it was not prohibited until the Treason Act of 1814 [54 Geo. III c. 146]). The Framers definition of “cruel and unusual” must be bound in that context. To my knowledge, the brutal form of capital punishment was never used in the Colonies or the United States of America, but certainly the Framers were aware of that standard of punishment and sought to distance the new republic from the brutality of the past. Further, they intentionally chose the ambiguous language to allow subsequent citizens to decide. Does “cruel and unusual” have any meaning? If so, then how are we to decide? Do the rights of a citizen have any meaning if a state can choose to impose life without parole for public flatulence? Life without parole means the crime was not serious enough for capital punishment and the judge or jury does not trust a future parole board to decide on the rehabilitative progress of a particular convict. Florida eliminated its parole system with the consequent product being removal of any hope of redemption given a life sentence. The traditionalists, or fundamentalists, or strict constructionists, or whatever term suits their fancy, see the Constitution is pure Federalist terms, i.e., the document solely defines the authority of the Federal government and inversely by reflection the authority of the states. What the so-called traditionalist fail to acknowledge is the Preamble [“We, the People”], the Bill of Rights [guaranteed protections for citizens against the power of the State (Federal, state and local governments)], and specifically the Ninth Amendment [“. . . others retained by the people”]. In debates with the traditionalists, I find it intellectually attractive that they can interpret the Commerce Clause so liberally, expanding the power and reach of the Federal government, and then in the next decision see the Bill of Rights in progressively narrowing terms. In the majority, the Supremes are staunch Federalists with flashes of protecting the freedom of citizens. I am not defending the terribly disrespectful conduct of Terrance Jamar Graham, but I am lauding the small step toward the rights of citizens in Graham. Beyond the law and as you can well guess I cannot miss the opportunity, the Graham case represents a clear demonstration of our failure as a society – to hold parents accountable for the destruction they wrought upon communities by their abuse, neglect and/or indifference to the children they produce. Terrance Graham was at best a neglected child, and probably abused in many ways; recognition does not lessen the seriousness of his crimes against society, but it does get us closer to the root cause of such behavior. If a company or individual poisoned a well, contaminated the environment, or intentionally unleashed a plague on the Earth, would we seek to hold that person accountable and punish them for what they have done to other citizens, property and the environment? Why should we not hold parents who create children who grow to cause comparable destruction upon humanity, accountable for the product of their actions?
As a timely and appropriate punctuation in our examination of the judicial “traditionalists,” I illuminated this Op-Ed column:
“David Souter vs. the Antonin Scalias”
by E.J. Dionne Jr.
Washington Post
Published: Thursday, June 3, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203496.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions
News from the economic front:
-- The U.K.'s Financial Services Authority imposed the largest fine in the market regulator's history – against J.P. Morgan Chase – £33M (US$49M) – for failing to separate client money from the firm's money. In essence, the international bank was gambling with other people’s money without the consent of the investors.
-- The Labor Department reported the U.S. economy added 431,000 jobs in May, however 411,000 were temporary employees for the 2010 Census and inflated the increase. The private sector created just 41,000 jobs after adding 218,000 jobs in April. The unemployment rate, which is calculated using a separate household survey, decreased to 9.7% in May from 9.9% the previous month.
“David Souter vs. the Antonin Scalias”
by E.J. Dionne Jr.
Washington Post
Published: Thursday, June 3, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203496.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions
News from the economic front:
-- The U.K.'s Financial Services Authority imposed the largest fine in the market regulator's history – against J.P. Morgan Chase – £33M (US$49M) – for failing to separate client money from the firm's money. In essence, the international bank was gambling with other people’s money without the consent of the investors.
-- The Labor Department reported the U.S. economy added 431,000 jobs in May, however 411,000 were temporary employees for the 2010 Census and inflated the increase. The private sector created just 41,000 jobs after adding 218,000 jobs in April. The unemployment rate, which is calculated using a separate household survey, decreased to 9.7% in May from 9.9% the previous month.
Comments and contributions from Update no.441:
Comment to the Blog:
“We may hope that ‘Don't Ask, Don't Tell’ will be repealed soon. One would think that with an unending and unpopular war, the Defense Department would do what it could for recruiting.
“I have little expertise in aviation, but I will note that if political people caused the disaster by overruling their own experts, that would be business as usual.
“I think the President is at least addressing the public part of the concern with immigration. The long-term issues will probably not receive attention soon. Ironically enough, all the public players are descended from immigrants, many from people who came here before immigration laws screened out the criminals and the mentally ill. Indeed, many of the ‘first families’ of this country came here to avoid prosecution. Most people, though, came to the US to escape the poverty at home. Now they want to shut the door.
“Indefinite detention of anyone in the USA scares me. You and I have discussed in other places how very easy it is to acquire the label ‘sex offender’ in arbitrary fear-based proceedings. Beyond that, if they can detain someone indefinitely, they can find a way to detain anyone indefinitely. This is common in the countries we (the US government) call ‘dictatorships.’
“Seizure of BP's assets is beginning to make sense. One of my sources has pointed out that the usual corporate procedure in the face of serious debt is to reorganize or sell the company to another corporation and skip out on the debt--but not on management pay and bonuses. Unless something prevents it, we can look forward to that with BP.”
My response to the Blog:
Yes, we do hope the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is repealed. The active duty military leadership is thinking about recruitment, but from the negative perspective, i.e., some citizens will not volunteer because of . . . . I suspect they estimate the negative impact will exceed the positive. I also think they are far more consumed with the potential impact on morale and operational efficiency, i.e., soldiers might be more worried about being groped than taking a bullet from the enemy. I think it is a false worry, but not entirely without merit – some will be so consumed . . . out of fear of the unknown.
Visitors in the cockpit are not uncommon in private, corporate or even charter aircraft. Most pilots handle such distractions appropriately. We do not yet know if direct pressure was applied to the Polish pilot, and even if it was, he should have been experienced enough to ignore it. Pilots also elect to attempt an approach at a destination below minimums with a hope to catch a favorable break. What is truly unusual and unexplainable is why he was so far off the nominal approach line? There are still many aspects of that accident that are quite strange.
Immigration reform is long overdue. I imagine the President & congressional leadership set their agenda – health care reform, financial reform, immigration reform, and maybe political reform. Given the challenges of health care reform, I suspect immigration reform is a bridge too far with the mid-term elections only five months away. I do not think I would give the President even that much credit for his immigration effort to date, but the effort has only just begun. Immigration has been an essential element of this Grand Republic from the days of the Huguenots and Puritans. The issue is NOT immigration, rather it is illegal violators whether visa extenders or border crossers. We cannot ignore the illegal aliens already established in this country. Also, we cannot be the salvation for all the impoverished peoples of the world. We have a long way to go.
That was precisely my worry as I read the Comstock ruling . . . not indefinite detention in toto or in general per se, but rather the application so freely to a “crime” that upsets a politically influential group. In essence, the Supremes opened up indefinite detention to a wide variety of “crimes” and to the whims of the moral projectionists. Indefinite detention has its place – prisoners of war, mentally ill, et cetera – but possession of child pornography? What are they doing? And worse, how far will they go? Will the next target be drug use, abortion, teen sex . . . or the political opposition? You are spot on!
We are a long way from seizure of assets. BP continues to do far more than “required by law,” but there will come a point when the company’s survival may come into view, and that will be when we see push back and the need to consider seizure of assets. We are a long way from that point.
. . . follow-up comment:
“The only follow-up I will do is to the statement, ‘Also, we cannot be the salvation for all the impoverished peoples of the world.’ Historical record goes the other way around. The impoverished peoples of the world have come here and built the railroads, worked the mines and done many other jobs those already present could not or would not do. They continue to perform agricultural jobs, child care, restaurant work, low-end construction and many other jobs that Americans will not take. Whether the wages are illegally low is not a point for them or for their employers. The foreigners of whom I am aware of taking safe, high-paying jobs come here from India (and Russia and a few other places) and work in information technology jobs.”
. . . my follow-up response:
Interesting perspective. So, let us take this discussion to the other extreme.
Why don’t we open our borders to anyone who can find a way into the country? They will gladly take all the entry-level jobs because they pay 10 or more times what they were earning in the little village of their birth. Where is the limit? How many do we welcome into the Grand Republic? 10 million? 100 million? 1 billion? 10 billion? Where is the limit? Is everyone welcome? Workers? Criminals? Freeloaders? Everyone? If there are limits, how do we define them? How do we enforce them?
I’m just askin’?
. . . round two:
[“Interesting question. I favor screening out the criminals and the mentally ill, despite the examples of some of the founders. Beyond that, I don't favor extremes in general. Taking any given discussion to ‘the other extreme’ usually results in two equally ridiculous positions. I'd just like to avoid a serious labor shortage that would result of the attempts to keep out all indigent immigrants were to succeed. The way to build an economy or a company is not by cutting back on resources.”
. . . my round two response:
OK then, I think we agree that completely open or completely closed borders are not tolerable or sustainable conditions, and we must have some controlled filter process for simple visitor entry to full immigration. Like you, I am in favor of worker permits. I think citizens from other countries should be able to come to this country, to work, abide the law, send their income home, or earn the right to become a citizen. If so, then we must have a solid, definitive method to identify and track those who are guests in this country, just like most other countries on the planet do as well. Further, this means preventing uncontrolled access and allowing only purposeful, responsible entry, as well as enforcement of limitations and controls for those who enter illegally or overstay their welcome. Lastly, we must have a humane method of dealing with those already in the country who have not entered properly, to include the fraction of illegal aliens who are persona non grata, i.e., no country wants them. Comprehensive immigration reform must address all elements of the issue.
. . . an Anonymous comment to the Blog on the original post:
“Calvin I agree with about everything you have said but i myself would have worded one issue somewhat stronger then dictatorship.
“The United States is one of the first countries to accuse other countries of being a dictator ship or subjecting the populations to human rights abuses...but look back in history at our past....you are right the Salem witch hunts were one of the events that has happen that bring shame to this once great land...then we have the illegal detention of the Japanese Americans during the war....I also see how what this country is doing to a segment of it population with this Adam Walsh Act is nothing less then what the Nazi's did to the Jews....It truly is scary when a Government can lock a person way for life because they may commit a crime....we just lost another basic constitutional right....innocent till proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
. . . my response to the Anonymous Blog contribution:
Salem witch trials (1692) . . . that’s a stretch at best.
The internment of Americans of Japanese descent [by Executive Order 9066] (1942-1944) . . . OK that one is appropriate in this context.
Comment to the Blog:
“We may hope that ‘Don't Ask, Don't Tell’ will be repealed soon. One would think that with an unending and unpopular war, the Defense Department would do what it could for recruiting.
“I have little expertise in aviation, but I will note that if political people caused the disaster by overruling their own experts, that would be business as usual.
“I think the President is at least addressing the public part of the concern with immigration. The long-term issues will probably not receive attention soon. Ironically enough, all the public players are descended from immigrants, many from people who came here before immigration laws screened out the criminals and the mentally ill. Indeed, many of the ‘first families’ of this country came here to avoid prosecution. Most people, though, came to the US to escape the poverty at home. Now they want to shut the door.
“Indefinite detention of anyone in the USA scares me. You and I have discussed in other places how very easy it is to acquire the label ‘sex offender’ in arbitrary fear-based proceedings. Beyond that, if they can detain someone indefinitely, they can find a way to detain anyone indefinitely. This is common in the countries we (the US government) call ‘dictatorships.’
“Seizure of BP's assets is beginning to make sense. One of my sources has pointed out that the usual corporate procedure in the face of serious debt is to reorganize or sell the company to another corporation and skip out on the debt--but not on management pay and bonuses. Unless something prevents it, we can look forward to that with BP.”
My response to the Blog:
Yes, we do hope the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is repealed. The active duty military leadership is thinking about recruitment, but from the negative perspective, i.e., some citizens will not volunteer because of . . . . I suspect they estimate the negative impact will exceed the positive. I also think they are far more consumed with the potential impact on morale and operational efficiency, i.e., soldiers might be more worried about being groped than taking a bullet from the enemy. I think it is a false worry, but not entirely without merit – some will be so consumed . . . out of fear of the unknown.
Visitors in the cockpit are not uncommon in private, corporate or even charter aircraft. Most pilots handle such distractions appropriately. We do not yet know if direct pressure was applied to the Polish pilot, and even if it was, he should have been experienced enough to ignore it. Pilots also elect to attempt an approach at a destination below minimums with a hope to catch a favorable break. What is truly unusual and unexplainable is why he was so far off the nominal approach line? There are still many aspects of that accident that are quite strange.
Immigration reform is long overdue. I imagine the President & congressional leadership set their agenda – health care reform, financial reform, immigration reform, and maybe political reform. Given the challenges of health care reform, I suspect immigration reform is a bridge too far with the mid-term elections only five months away. I do not think I would give the President even that much credit for his immigration effort to date, but the effort has only just begun. Immigration has been an essential element of this Grand Republic from the days of the Huguenots and Puritans. The issue is NOT immigration, rather it is illegal violators whether visa extenders or border crossers. We cannot ignore the illegal aliens already established in this country. Also, we cannot be the salvation for all the impoverished peoples of the world. We have a long way to go.
That was precisely my worry as I read the Comstock ruling . . . not indefinite detention in toto or in general per se, but rather the application so freely to a “crime” that upsets a politically influential group. In essence, the Supremes opened up indefinite detention to a wide variety of “crimes” and to the whims of the moral projectionists. Indefinite detention has its place – prisoners of war, mentally ill, et cetera – but possession of child pornography? What are they doing? And worse, how far will they go? Will the next target be drug use, abortion, teen sex . . . or the political opposition? You are spot on!
We are a long way from seizure of assets. BP continues to do far more than “required by law,” but there will come a point when the company’s survival may come into view, and that will be when we see push back and the need to consider seizure of assets. We are a long way from that point.
. . . follow-up comment:
“The only follow-up I will do is to the statement, ‘Also, we cannot be the salvation for all the impoverished peoples of the world.’ Historical record goes the other way around. The impoverished peoples of the world have come here and built the railroads, worked the mines and done many other jobs those already present could not or would not do. They continue to perform agricultural jobs, child care, restaurant work, low-end construction and many other jobs that Americans will not take. Whether the wages are illegally low is not a point for them or for their employers. The foreigners of whom I am aware of taking safe, high-paying jobs come here from India (and Russia and a few other places) and work in information technology jobs.”
. . . my follow-up response:
Interesting perspective. So, let us take this discussion to the other extreme.
Why don’t we open our borders to anyone who can find a way into the country? They will gladly take all the entry-level jobs because they pay 10 or more times what they were earning in the little village of their birth. Where is the limit? How many do we welcome into the Grand Republic? 10 million? 100 million? 1 billion? 10 billion? Where is the limit? Is everyone welcome? Workers? Criminals? Freeloaders? Everyone? If there are limits, how do we define them? How do we enforce them?
I’m just askin’?
. . . round two:
[“Interesting question. I favor screening out the criminals and the mentally ill, despite the examples of some of the founders. Beyond that, I don't favor extremes in general. Taking any given discussion to ‘the other extreme’ usually results in two equally ridiculous positions. I'd just like to avoid a serious labor shortage that would result of the attempts to keep out all indigent immigrants were to succeed. The way to build an economy or a company is not by cutting back on resources.”
. . . my round two response:
OK then, I think we agree that completely open or completely closed borders are not tolerable or sustainable conditions, and we must have some controlled filter process for simple visitor entry to full immigration. Like you, I am in favor of worker permits. I think citizens from other countries should be able to come to this country, to work, abide the law, send their income home, or earn the right to become a citizen. If so, then we must have a solid, definitive method to identify and track those who are guests in this country, just like most other countries on the planet do as well. Further, this means preventing uncontrolled access and allowing only purposeful, responsible entry, as well as enforcement of limitations and controls for those who enter illegally or overstay their welcome. Lastly, we must have a humane method of dealing with those already in the country who have not entered properly, to include the fraction of illegal aliens who are persona non grata, i.e., no country wants them. Comprehensive immigration reform must address all elements of the issue.
. . . an Anonymous comment to the Blog on the original post:
“Calvin I agree with about everything you have said but i myself would have worded one issue somewhat stronger then dictatorship.
“The United States is one of the first countries to accuse other countries of being a dictator ship or subjecting the populations to human rights abuses...but look back in history at our past....you are right the Salem witch hunts were one of the events that has happen that bring shame to this once great land...then we have the illegal detention of the Japanese Americans during the war....I also see how what this country is doing to a segment of it population with this Adam Walsh Act is nothing less then what the Nazi's did to the Jews....It truly is scary when a Government can lock a person way for life because they may commit a crime....we just lost another basic constitutional right....innocent till proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
. . . my response to the Anonymous Blog contribution:
Salem witch trials (1692) . . . that’s a stretch at best.
The internment of Americans of Japanese descent [by Executive Order 9066] (1942-1944) . . . OK that one is appropriate in this context.
We could add in the Massacre at Wounded Knee [1890] or a myriad of other unjust acts perpetrated by or in the name of the United States of America.
However, come now, as much as I believe the Adam Walsh Act [PL 109-248] has gone too far and the Supreme Court’s Comstock [560 U.S. ___ (2010)] ruling failed to recognize that opinion, comparisons to the Nürnberg Laws [1935] or Endlösung der Judenfrage [1942] are wholly unjustified and otherwise without merit. Since indefinite incarceration for sexual “crimes” as validated by Comstock appears to be the topic at hand, the Adam Walsh Act does have some commonality with the Heritage Laws (1933). Perhaps I am quibbling. Nonetheless, we have again crossed over the line in our endless effort to legitimize our moral beliefs. I’m afraid we shall have to wait for a long time before we regain the freedom we have lost.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
. . . a follow-up comment back to the Blog:
“I will come back in for one comment about the Salem witch trials and witch hunts in general. Many, perhaps most, of the people killed as witches over a couple of centuries were not in fact witches. And that is one of the central issues in our current prosecution/persecution of people accused of sex crimes. They might not even be guilty of the crimes in question. The fact that Comstock admittedly committed the crime is his case protects none of the people who may follow him.”
. . . along with my follow-up response to the Blog:
First, I did not see the Salem witch trials as the Inquisition in the main; however, in the context of moral projectionist destruction of other citizens, then yes, that sorry episode destroyed more than a few innocent lives of citizens who dared to be free and not conform.
Second, unfortunately, Graydon Comstock was guilty of the crime, but the real question, was whether his “crime” was really a crime, or just an offense upon another group’s sensibilities? Who was injured? How was the public good damaged? The salient questions were not before the Supremes and were thus out of bounds.
Third, ultimately, you are spot on. Comstock’s admission of guilt, his “crime” or the Court’s ruling protects none of us. As you suggest, the reality is quite the opposite. The ruling demonstrates how fragile and susceptible “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” are . . . at the hands of a willful and powerful segment of this Grand Republic. The Roberts Court has most commonly sided with the government over the citizen, and more specifically with Federalism over all else . . . not a comforting observation.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
However, come now, as much as I believe the Adam Walsh Act [PL 109-248] has gone too far and the Supreme Court’s Comstock [560 U.S. ___ (2010)] ruling failed to recognize that opinion, comparisons to the Nürnberg Laws [1935] or Endlösung der Judenfrage [1942] are wholly unjustified and otherwise without merit. Since indefinite incarceration for sexual “crimes” as validated by Comstock appears to be the topic at hand, the Adam Walsh Act does have some commonality with the Heritage Laws (1933). Perhaps I am quibbling. Nonetheless, we have again crossed over the line in our endless effort to legitimize our moral beliefs. I’m afraid we shall have to wait for a long time before we regain the freedom we have lost.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
. . . a follow-up comment back to the Blog:
“I will come back in for one comment about the Salem witch trials and witch hunts in general. Many, perhaps most, of the people killed as witches over a couple of centuries were not in fact witches. And that is one of the central issues in our current prosecution/persecution of people accused of sex crimes. They might not even be guilty of the crimes in question. The fact that Comstock admittedly committed the crime is his case protects none of the people who may follow him.”
. . . along with my follow-up response to the Blog:
First, I did not see the Salem witch trials as the Inquisition in the main; however, in the context of moral projectionist destruction of other citizens, then yes, that sorry episode destroyed more than a few innocent lives of citizens who dared to be free and not conform.
Second, unfortunately, Graydon Comstock was guilty of the crime, but the real question, was whether his “crime” was really a crime, or just an offense upon another group’s sensibilities? Who was injured? How was the public good damaged? The salient questions were not before the Supremes and were thus out of bounds.
Third, ultimately, you are spot on. Comstock’s admission of guilt, his “crime” or the Court’s ruling protects none of us. As you suggest, the reality is quite the opposite. The ruling demonstrates how fragile and susceptible “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” are . . . at the hands of a willful and powerful segment of this Grand Republic. The Roberts Court has most commonly sided with the government over the citizen, and more specifically with Federalism over all else . . . not a comforting observation.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
2 comments:
I will disagree with your complaint on the timing of the criminal investigation. In order to recover evidence and get good eyewitness testimony, investigations must begin as soon as possible. This applies all the more in a high-profile situation, where the culprits can plainly see their interest in concealing the facts. Besides that, justice should be reasonably swift. The Bhopal tragedy took place the night of December 2-3, 1984. Today, June 7, 2010, seven men were finally convicted in that incident. I have no wish for a similar wait in the Deepwater Horizon case. I see this as a very different situation than an air crash; there are too many aggrieved parties and too many potential VIP malefactors for the comparison to hold up. I hope, however, that those responsible for regulating BP and Deepwater Horizon will be included in the scope of the investigation. Investigating Halliburton is probably too much to hope for and, as much as I dislike and mistrust Dick Chaney, Halliburton probably does not bear primary responsibility for this one.
I have no sympathy to waste on the government of Israel. The world has generously given them a "homeland" and they demonstrate their lack of gratitude by attacking their neighbors for the ensuing sixty years and counting. Helen Thomas's idea of sending them back where they came from is impractical, but let's not make heroes of these people.
I have often wondered when the Supreme Court will decide that something constitutes "cruel and unusual" punishment. The waiting continues.
Calvin,
I use my experience with aircraft investigations as the foundation of my opinion regarding the criminal prosecutorial process while we are trying to determine the root cause. As with all events, we start from a blank slate, collect facts, inquire to develop details and fill in blanks, and then hopefully construct a clear image of the root cause of any failure or event. I cannot tell you how many times we have folks refuse to cooperate or tell us false information. When we do come across a pilot or mechanic who tells us the truth, we are impressed by the rarity. The last thing I want to hear is invocation of 5th Amendment rights. I am far more interested in finding out why something happened, so we can improve the engineering and hopefully prevent future occurrences. Prosecution interferes with and delays progress and improvement. Accidents happen. I am far more interested in permanently plugging all the leaks and getting the blowout preventor back to the surface, so it can be carefully analyzed. We can do far more for the future of mankind by finding out what went wrong and preventing future events. Whether we like it or not, the Deepwater Horizon event may well have been a dreadful accident. Pilots make mistakes. Drill rig operators make mistakes.
We have discussed Israel many times. I think we understand and appreciate each others opinions. We can certainly take the Helen Thomas approach, after all Israel did not exist until 1948. If so, how far back do we go? How far back do we go in this country? How about Europe, Africa, Asia . . . where do we stop? Virtually all of Israel’s neighbors threatened to drive all Jews back into the sea at one time or another; a few still do – Hamas, Hezbollah and the IRI among those. Who has Israel threatened? Who has Israel vowed to obliterate? Security is one of the most basic primal needs. We are not going to undo history. Our task today is finding the compromises necessary to live in peace and prosper.
Well, in Graham, the Supreme decided that life without parole is “cruel and unusual” punishment for a non-homicidal, youthful offender (<18yo). They are moving toward deciding capital punishment is such punishment.
As always, “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment