24 October 2011

Update no.514

Update from the Heartland
No.514
17.10.11 – 23.10.11
To all,
For my health update, I lead with a paragraph Jeanne sent to family and friends.
“We saw [our] oncologist, [on Tuesday]. He had all the test results and notes from our family doctor and the urologist. He concurred with [our urologist]. Three options: wait & watch, surgery or radiation. Dad's numbers fall into the intermediate zone, so surgery was his recommendation. He also said statistically, the odds are that it is ‘contained.’”
For those into the data:
I’m 63yo, PSA = 5.4 (3.3 last year), Gleason = 3+4=7, and Stage T1c. Since I plan on living a lot longer (50 years would be good) and I have no other contradictory health issues, it looks like everyone is now agreed – surgery is the best option. I’m scheduled for a Robot-Assisted (DaVinci) Laparoscopic radical Prostatectomy (RALP) on 9.Nov. I’m ready. It is comforting to know there are further options, given the surgical pathology results and my recovery level. According to the Patin Table, given my facts, I’ve got a 63% probability of containment, which to me means success, i.e., longevity. I’m good with that.

On Tuesday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived in Tripoli, Libya, becoming the first cabinet-level U.S. official to visit the country since the dictator Qaddafi was driven from the capital nearly two months ago. She met with top officials of the transitional government, bringing encouragement and millions of dollars in new U.S. aid to assist the new government in consolidating its control over a country ravaged by dictatorship and civil war.

I note the demise of Libyan dictator Moammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Qaddafi, 69, [dictator since 16.January.1970, then 27] on Thursday, 20.October.2011. Reports of his final moments are rather sketchy, as is often the case in war. It appears an estimated 80-vehicle convoy carrying Qaddafi and his supporters and protectors tried to escape from the coastal community of Sirte. A combined attack by a U.S. Predator drone and a French fighter halted the convoy. The Misrata Military Council, the battalion of fighters that commanded the two-month siege of Sirte, overran the remnants of the convoy and found the wounded Qaddafi in a culvert under the roadway. Again, various reports suggest the deposed dictator was summarily executed by a young rebel fighter Mohamed el-Bibi, 20, who was credited with firing the fatal shot with Qaddafi’s own gold-plated pistol. Now, the really hard work begins, as the revolution must transform into a stable, peaceful country and rebuild the damaged nation.

In an easily overlooked announcement, Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA) [“Basque Homeland and Freedom” – the Basque militant group] renounced their use of violence and terrorism as a political instrument. ETA sought independence and recognition for the traditional Basque region of Northeast Spain and Southwest France, across the Pyrenees Mountains. ETA has a history of declaring unilateral ceasefires only to carry out another terrorist attack. Only time shall tell whether this is truly a decision for peace.

I like to think I am an informed, engaged citizen, and then I am reminded that I am a miniscule person of simple intellect and limited knowledge, in the grander scheme of things. Unbeknownst to me, on 9.April.1996, President Clinton signed into law the Line Item Veto Act (LIVA) [PL 104-130; 110 Stat. 1200; 2 USC §691]. The first challenge to the law failed as the Supreme Court remanded Raines v. Byrd [521 U.S. 811 (1997); no. 96-1671] to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Then, Congress passed two laws: the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 [PL 105-033; 111 Stat. 251] and the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 [PL 105-034; 111 Stat. 788]. President Clinton exercised his authority under LIVA and vetoed Sec. 4722(c) [111 Stat. 515] of Title IV, Subtitle H, Chapter 3, of PL 105-033; and Sec. 968 [111 Stat. 895] of Title IX, Subtitle G, of PL 105-034; before he signed the parent bill into law. The President’s action created an “injury” that satisfied the Article III jurisdictional requirements. Sec. 4722(c) provided a Medicare refund specifically to the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, while Sec. 968 provided tax relief that benefited the Snake River Potato Growers, Inc. The combined, companion cases reached the Supremes – Clinton v. City of New York [524 U.S. 417 (1998); no. 97-1374]. The Court decided LIVA exceeded the constitutional provisions of Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, of the U.S. Constitution – the Presentment Clause. Justice Stevens succinctly summarized the Court’s position, “Abdication of responsibility is not part of the constitutional design.” The Court believed LIVA compromised the implicit but essential Separation of Powers. Congress delegated, actually abdicated, its authority to the President, to make the Executive the “fall guy” for cancellation of spending they intended to placate constituents or special interest groups. The sponsors could claim they allocated the funding agreed and concomitantly claim the President was the bad guy for his line item veto. Conversely, the President could sign a bill he largely supported, while eliminating the spending he disapproved. The reality is, such negotiations should be accomplished within the Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 process, not outside it. Yet, the Supremes did not address composite bills, i.e., multiple “acts” wrapped into a cover bill. We have numerous omnibus spending bills in our history – bills that are vast composites of multiple spending initiatives, laws, resolutions and directives. To say that the deletion of one sentence or modification of one word alters the entire legislation defies logical reasoning. Interesting argument . . . the ruling states that the presidential veto of one line or one word alters the law, and thus violates the Presentment Clause. In a general sense, there is no rebuttal. The two items involved in this case are not integrated or essential to the purpose of the law. Yet, conversely, the debate over what is integrated and thus essential to the purpose of the law is a very slippery slope. Nonetheless, the Supremes decided LIVA was unconstitutional – it was all or nothing.

News from the economic front:
-- The People’s Republic of China’s National Bureau of Statistics reported the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose 9.1% in the third quarter from a year earlier, down from 9.5% in the second quarter and 9.7% in the first. The PRC’s economic growth slowed in the third quarter but remained at a relatively healthy pace, especially compared to the Western economies.

Comments and contributions from Update no.513:
“I did not read your update last week, so I am just receiving the news below.
“My thoughts are with you today and trust your course of action will be both well considered and inspired.
“We have often discussed the notion of living for today, for we know not what tomorrow will bring. Don't listen to any outside opinions on your riding - trust your heart (and counter steering . . .). I am sure flying an Apache in combat conditions might be a bit risky as well.
“I had to laugh at your comment about riding being close to flying. I had always wanted to get my ticket, but there always seemed to be things getting in the way - and I was telling someone about that this week-end. My closing comment was I truly feel the 100,000+ miles I have on my Harleys were probably as close to what I expect that feeling of freedom would be like if flying.”
My response:
Thx for yr kind words.
I take everything with a grain of salt. I had more than a few folks advising me not to join the Marines, not to go to flight school, not to go to test pilot school, not to jump out of perfectly good airplanes, and so it is with motorcycles. There is risk in life, and there is certainly no more risk than many of my other life experiences. The key is being mindful of the risks and managing our actions to mitigate those risks.
I’m coming up on 1,000 miles on this bike. I still have a way to go regarding smoothness, but at least I’m under control, conservative in action, and balanced.
What do you think about a trip out to Beaumont for breakfast on Saturday? My treat. Forecast looks like it might be amenable. I think I’ve got about 80 miles left before my 1,000-mile mandatory service, so I should be OK, if I don’t ride this week. BTW, the rookie is always the wingman.
[PS: We had a great ride on Saturday, to the Carriage Crossing in Yoder, Kansas, for a magnificent breakfast.]

Another contribution:
“Recently had 3 of my aviator buds from my flying days with the same affliction. They all opted for surgery and are doing great. If that is any indicator the 90% advice is solid.”

Comment to the Blog:
“I encourage you to seek the best available advice on your struggle with cancer. I myself have no useful knowledge to share, but I am concerned for you.
“I rejoice that your wife is beginning to share your love of the motorcycle. Enjoy it.
“I will repeat my assertion that a war on a concept cannot be won. ‘Terrorism’ is a concept embedded in the quote you shared, and it is as amorphous as ‘poverty’ or ‘drugs,’ two other concepts on which we continue lengthy ‘wars.’ This leaves the simple fact that the US government can choose to kill a US citizen without due process as my concern here. That fact overwhelms all other concerns about civil rights. While the Mann Act is a travesty in its own right, if ‘human traffickers’ can be seen as terrorists (and they can if manipulative people define terrorism), death or the threat of death supersedes all other attacks on their rights. That applies to anything else that powerful individuals dislike or see as obstacles to their own goals.
“I regret if it upsets you that judges have political opinions which occasionally show up in their writings. While I see other judicial politics as more upsetting, such as the current Supreme Court, pretty much any act can be seen as political in the broad sense that it endorses some positions and refutes others. For example, if a gay person chooses to remain in the closet, that choice essentially endorses the moral and political statement that homosexuality is wrong. Any number of other examples could illustrate the statement. Even one’s choices of food (organic or not, vegetarian or not, genetically modified or not, prioritized to price, nutrition or taste) express opinions and ideas about subjects regulated by the political system. In the last analysis, objectivity is relative. Judges’ opinions are bound to show up at some points.”
My reply to the Blog:
Thx for the encouragement. Good advice . . . taken with gratitude.
We plan to enjoy the bike as much as can safely and comfortably be done.
Once again, I do not think we are at war with a concept. We are at war with those who seek imposition of their ideology on everyone by violent means.
I think we all share your apprehension and concern about extrajudicial killing. The central element in the al-Awlaqi case was the cost of exercising a warrant in the instance of a man who publicly threatened the safety of innocent American citizens and incited others to carry out violent acts against American citizens. We do not know the process by which the government fights this war. One day we will know. Then, we can make our judgments. The risks of this practice are enormous, just as the consequences of losing the War on Islamic Fascism are enormous.
Judges having political opinions is only natural; after all, they are flawed human beings as we all are. It is rare that a judge’s political opinions are so blatantly expressed. Usually judges are more sophisticated and subtle. Not so in that case. Interesting logic, nonetheless. Well done.

Another contribution:
“I see you have been very busy during the week. Please keep me apprised of your visit tomorrow in Kansas City. I presume, should you decide to continue with this path, your surgery would take place in Kansas City? What is the recovery period for something like this? What are you looking at down the road?
“You have been in my thoughts every day.”
“Should you decide to have this surgery in Kansas City, do you know if they use a Da Vinci Surgical System for the prostate surgery?”
My response:
LIFO. Yes, the urologist/surgeon will use the DaVinci robotic system. The surgery will be accomplished in Wichita, rather than Kansas City. He used the machine for Jeanne’s surgery and far better than highest expectation; so, I am optimistic.
He said I should be up & around the next day, and should be 6-8 weeks before we have a clear view of results. Of course, a major concern is the pathology report; we should have a quick shot that day with full results in 3-4 days. The pathology of the removed tissue will determine further action.

A different contribution:
“Take care of yourself and get another opinion on the cancer, especially another biopsy, if possible. He sounds like an excellent surgeon but in the case of cancer, two opinions are usually more helpful than one.
“Since we are in full election campaign mode, I see little relief from the excessive political rhetoric we are subjected to on an hour by hour basis. I really would like to see term limits for all, and limited time for campaigning. Right now, it's who has the most money for later on that is determining the direction of the campaign.
“I think that Romney may have overplayed his hand on demanding investiture as ‘The Republican Candidate’ for President so early. I, for one, am not convinced he is the right man (or woman) as yet-he is only the most experienced debater and has the most money. I am upset that the Republican establishment is ready to anoint him and there are others that have as much or more support.
“The whole point of the above two paragraphs is I'm tired of campaigning already and there is a long ways to go.”
My reply:
I could not agree more. These two-year campaign marathons are debilitating, and they’re all about money . . . nothing more, nothing less. I’m with you brother.

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

2 comments:

Calvin R said...

I wish you well with your prospective surgery. Please keep us advised.

The life, death, and legacy of Gaddhafi (however spelled) is a large and complex subject that I have not studied in any depth. One facet of this that US media don't seem to share much is that he retained control of Libya's oilfields. We may reasonably expect an outside takeover now.

While I understand the importance of the line-item veto, I am not lawyer enough to follow your discussion. I tend to share the Surpreme Court's position that it is an abdication of power. I see responsibility as a very important issue; this allows Congress to avoid the responsibility for their pork barrel projects and radical notions. The line-item veto also gives the President disproportionate power. Let us remember that the Founders were acutely aware of the abuse of power by kings; they refused to invest great power in our leaders for that exact reason. I share that approach, partly because I remember Nixon's use and attempted use of the intelligence services for personal gain.
As far as the economy, I am still reading a book named 13 Bankers, writtten by Simon Johnson, the former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. It's very illuminating. He is the chief author of the economics blog I read. For a book about economics, it's an easy read as well.

Cap Parlier said...

Calvin,
As we old aviators often say, Wilco!, i.e., Will Comply. Two weeks to my cut day. You can depend upon the Updates as long as I am able.

I do not know about control of the Libyan oilfields, now that Qaddafi is gone. I certainly believe the National Transitional Council (NTC) is working hard to get oil production up & running – after all, oil is their primary revenue stream; I just don’t know how long that will take. Outside takeover; don’t know, suspect not.

Re: line item veto. You hit the point on line item veto precisely. For a long time, I advocated for such authority, thus my humility at the outset of my review. After reading Clinton and especially the dissenting opinions, I acknowledge my conflicted state. Someone in government has to have some semblance of fiscal prudence and accountability. Nonetheless, you are, of course, spot on and otherwise quite right – too much power in the hands of one man or one branch was precisely what the Framers sought to avoid. Nixon is the perfect example. Yet, conversely, we have proven ourselves incapable of demanding our representatives be fiscally responsible. Largesse and reelection are far too powerful counter-forces.

I look forward to your assessment of “13 Bankers.”

Thank you for your patience and continuing contributions.
Cheers,
Cap