Update no.462

Update from the Heartland

No.462

18.10.10 – 24.10.10

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

To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- The roller-coaster ride of civil rights continues relentlessly as a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay of Judge Phillips’ permanent injunction in the case of Log Cabin Republicans v. United States [USDC CA(CD) case no. cv-04-08425-VAP (2010)] [456/7, 461], to allow the court to hear arguments from both sides. Then, Secretary of Defense Gates issued a memorandum restricting authority to discharge a service member, to only the respective service secretaries – a positive step in a murky situation. Equality for some of our citizens must wait a little longer.
-- WikiLeaks struck again. Back in July, the self-anointed media organization that brings important news and information to the public released 92,000 classified documents [450] relating to the Battle for Afghanistan. On Thursday, WikiLeaks released 400,000 more documents regarding the Battle for Iraq. Julian Assange stands by his established position . . . “The public has a right to know.” Indeed, we do, Julian; I agree. Where I emphatically disagree with Julian and condemn his foolish idealistic endeavor rests in the timing. Yet, I reserve my wrath not for Assange and WikiLeaks, rather for the traitor(s) who collected and turned over those documents to Assange or his agents.
-- The public cogitation and rumination over the relationship between the military and the citizenry they protect continues to percolate [459]. The latest opinion:
“Gap Growing Between Military And Civilians – In Stevens, the Supreme Court lost its last veteran”
by R. Tyson Smith
Philadelphia Inquirer
Posted Tuesday, October 19, 2010
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20101019_Gap_growing_between_military_and_civilians.html
Using Web jargon, IMHO FWIW . . . any discontinuity between the contemporary military and the population it serves pales in comparison to the enormous rift that existed in the 60’s & 70’s of my generation of service as represented by Jimmy Carter’s SecDef Harold “Let ‘em vote with their feet” Brown. Yes, Smith does have a valid point; the thinning ranks of politicos with military service are troubling.

A thought-provoking observation that we should all consider:
“Germany and the Failure of Multiculturalism”
by George Friedman
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
Published: October 19, 2010 | 0855 GMT
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20101018_germany_and_failure_multiculturalism?utm_source=GWeekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=101019&utm_content=readmore&elq=da8d1d5eca0d4442970ab12e9bf7a1a8
The United States is not quite in the same position as Germany, but that is only because Germany is farther along the road than the United States. We face similar challenges. Intellectually, I applaud preservation and acknowledgment of our cultural heritage and diversity. However, the strength and viability of any society that embraces immigrants as we do in the United States depends directly and precisely upon assimilation and integration of immigrants. In fact, I respectfully submit that one of many factors for immigration and citizenship should be an individual’s willingness to assimilate, to learn the language, to respect the laws, and to join the society. The so-called political correctness of multiculturalism is a corrosive acid that will breakdown any society as we bear witness in Germany.

The Washington Post reported on their review of government documents and interviews stemming from a troubling incident in Philadelphia on 4.November.2008 – election day. A man dressed in all-black paramilitary garb paced outside the entrance of a downtown polling station, thumping a truncheon in his hand as he selectively confronted voters trying to enter the building; that man was Maruse Heath, the leader of the Philadelphia branch of the New Black Panther Party. The Justice Department investigated the alleged voter intimidation and chose not to prosecute Heath. The investigation illuminated deep divisions within the Executive over whether the agency should focus on protecting historically oppressed minorities or enforce laws without regard to race. To be frank, I expected far more from Barack Obama and Eric Holder. To realize the significance, we have but to imagine the consequence of a neo-Nazi, white supremacist thug doing exactly the same thing. The failure of the Justice Department is not an affirmation but rather a blight upon their enforcement of civil rights of all citizens, not just the chosen few. Oppression generations ago is no longer a satisfactory rationale or excuse.

I think all of us believe (and some of us know) the Federal government has the authority and responsibility to deny an entry visa to any alien it deems unworthy of entry into this Grand Republic. Now, what if a group of citizens who happen to be professors at various prestigious universities disagrees with the government’s visa decision and claims that the government is violating their 1st Amendment freedom of speech? Can those professors compel the government to allow the alien’s entry based on their right to hear the alien speak and debate ideological principles? That is precisely the question presented to the Supremes in the case of Kleindienst v. Mandel [408 U.S. 753 (1972); no. 71-16]. The person at the center of the controversy was Belgian journalist and prominent, self-avowed, Marxist scholar Dr. Ernest E. Mandel. As Associate Justice Harold Andrew “Harry” Blackmun observed for the majority, “The case, therefore, comes down to the narrow issue whether the First Amendment confers upon the appellee professors, because they wish to hear, speak, and debate with Mandel in person, the ability to determine that Mandel should be permitted to enter the country or, in other words, to compel the Attorney General to allow Mandel's admission.” The Court affirmed that the State’s authority over alien entry exceeded the perceived extended freedom of speech of a group of professors. Three justices dissented – Douglas, Marshall and Brennan – and focused rightly on the idealism of the 1st Amendment without facing the larger immigration control responsibility. Bill Douglas noted, “Thought control is not within the competence of any branch of government.” Indeed! However, the threshold of tolerance must be drawn somewhere. The dissenters in essence claimed a citizen’s freedom of speech trumped the Federal government’s authority to control entry to this Grand Republic. Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution establishes the Federal authority over immigration and naturalization, and by a long series of laws, dating back to 1790, Congress conferred authority and discretion to execute those laws upon the Executive. As always, it comes down to balance. Either position taken to the extreme is destructive; thus, we quibble with where that threshold should lay. In this instance, the Supremes found the proper balance.

News from the economic front:
-- People's Bank of China (PBC) announced it will raise its benchmark deposit and lending rates by 0.25% for the first time since December 2007 – an indication the PRC is backing away from its monetary policy stimulus introduced during the global financial crisis.
-- The debacle and tragedy that is the residential housing market continues to convulse as the Washington Post reported Federal law enforcement officials are examining whether financial firms may have violated the law when they filed improper foreclosure documents with courts. The uncertainty and paucity of confidence makes housing sector recovery appear beyond the horizon somewhere.
-- The PRC’s GDP rose 9.6% in the third quarter, slowing from 10.3% growth in the second quarter, but still quite healthy compared to other major economies, which in turn substantiates the PBC’s rate increase reported above.
-- The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) indicated the Federal bailout for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could more than double in the next three years. The FHFA estimates that the federally controlled mortgage giants will likely need another US$73B to perhaps as much as US$215B from the Treasury to meet their financial obligations. I wonder how all those senators and representatives who advocated for home ownership via the sub-prime mortgage program feel now; they must be so proud.

Comments and contributions from Update no.461:
“Wow.
“And all this tine I thought CSA stood for the Confederate States of America, as emblazoned on thousands of belt buckles in museums and dusty drawers and the soft turfs of history...”
My response:
LOL Of course . . . CSA = Confederate States of America . . . as the soldier’s belt bucket displayed . . . that is why I defined Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

Comments and contributions from Update no.460:
“A theory on the left lane, or inside lane, if you will. Cruise control. That's right, I believe in many cases the cruise control feature is at fault. It empowers disrespectful drivers to set their speed at some predetermined mile power hour setting. Once set, cruise control then empowers disrespectful drivers to become oblivious of other drivers who may also be trying to share the road. As an example, the oblivions, with cruise control set at 57 mph move over into the left lane to pass slower 55 mph traffic ahead of them. This causes the resultant log jam behind them. Once past the slower moving traffic the oblivions, if cognizant of where they are, may amble back over into the right lane. But by this time the accordion effect has severely impacted the flow of traffic, all due to the blatant disrespect many drivers in this country have for their fellow motorists.”
My response:
Ouilla! I think you broke the code.

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