28 May 2012

Update no.545


Update from the Heartland
No.545
21.5.12 – 27.5.12
Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,

Let us all remember and praise those who sacrificed so much for our freedom.  Memorial Day is a time of remembrance.

The follow-up news items:
-- On Monday, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) [414] issued its recommendations regarding prostate cancer screening [512], concluding that “for men younger than age 75 years, the benefits of screening for prostate cancer are uncertain and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined,” and that for men 75 years or older, “there is moderate or high certainty that the service has no net benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits.”  For the life of me (literally), I do not understand their logic or reasoning.  I understand their words and concerns, but I believe their focus is way off the mark.  Prostate cancer screening involves a Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) by a skilled physician and a vial of blood tested by a qualified laboratory for the level of the Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA).  To my knowledge, there is zero risk from either the DRE or PSA.  The conclusions of the USPSTF appear to be far more an indictment of the U.S. medical establishment than the screening process, i.e., inappropriate treatment recommendations based on less than conclusive PSA results.  The USPSTF risk concern centers upon the treatment.  Their analysis and conclusions would have been far more effective if they had focused on prostate cancer treatment, rather than prostate cancer screening – the treatment embodies the risk, not the screening.  The implication of the USPSTF finding seems to be an ostrich syndrome, i.e., what you don’t see can’t hurt you.  Who are these folks anyway?  Short answer: 16 medical professionals.  The USPSTF was first convened by the U.S. Public Health Service in 1984, and codified in its present form by §915 (a) [113 Stat. 1653, 1659] of the Healthcare Research and Quality Act of 1999 [PL 106-129; 113 Stat. 1653; 6.December.1999].  Regardless of the considered opinion of the USPSTF, they are wrong.  I remain the poster-child for annual prostate screening.  I have had a DRE every year since I was 17 years old, and a PSA every year since the early 1990’s, shortly after the PSA was introduced.  It is not any individual reading, but rather the trend over many tests that offer a better clue.  I was thoroughly counseled by both my urologist and oncologist regarding my options.  For my age and indicators, both doctors said my options were: vigilant surveillance, radiation, or surgery.  I absorbed their counsel and did my own assessment with on-line resources as well as several prostate support groups.  The collective told me what I needed to make a confident decision.  I made the best decision for me, and I am enormously grateful for my conscientious General Practitioner doctor, who detected my prostatic adenocarcinoma early and the specialists who helped me make the correct decision.  Bottom line: the risk is not the screening tests; the risk is in the treatment, i.e., what you do with the information.  I was unwilling to roll the dice that my cancer was slow growing and not threatening.  Knowledge is power.
Four agents challenge Secret Service over Cartagena dismissals
Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:52:30 PM
Four Secret Service employees have decided to fight their dismissals for engaging in inappropriate conduct in Colombia last month, a development that could unravel what has been a swift and tidy resolution to an embarrassing scandal over agents’ hiring of prostitutes.

The agents are arguing the agency is scapegoating them for behavior that the Secret Service has long tolerated, a charge Director Mark Sullivan may have to address when he appears before a Senate committee Wednesday. He has not yet spoken in public about the controversy, but according to his prepared testimony, he plans to tell Congress there was no breach of operational security.

Read more at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/secret-service-sex-scandal-several-say-they-didnt-break-the-rules/2012/05/22/gIQAXrX8iU_story.html
-- Four Secret Service employees have decided to fight their dismissals for engaging in inappropriate conduct in Cartagena, Colombia last month [539/41], alleging they are scapegoats for behavior that the Secret Service has long tolerated.  The legal action threatens to unravel the efforts of Director Mark J. Sullivan to swiftly move past the embarrassing scandal over agents’ hiring of prostitutes.  I have mixed feelings regarding this whole affair – I’m surprised agents engaged in such bonehead activities while on a mission, and conversely, I want them to be treated fairly and appropriately.

I urge all freedom-loving people around the world to not forget Shakil Afridi, the Pakistani physician who ran a vaccination program for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in Abbottabad, to collect DNA samples in an effort to verify the presence of Usama bin Laden at a compound in the city.  A Pakistani court convicted him of high treason and sentenced him to 33 years in prison.  I do not want to go too far advocating for support of Doctor Afridi, as we will face the inevitable comparison to Jonathan Jay Pollard [21.November.1985].

“A Way Out of the Same-Sex Marriage Mess”
by Mae Kuykendall (Op-Ed Contributor)
New York Times
Published: May 23, 2012
Mae does offer an interesting path out of the Mess, as she calls it.  Yet, I am struck by the ease with which we can dismiss individual liberties.  I am certain she believes in the approach she suggested.  She proclaims her support for equal rights for all citizens under the Equal Protection Clause; however, her proposal still leaves non-heterosexual or non-traditional citizens with a taint of inferiority.  I am also struck by her play to the reality that the Supremes display considerable deference to the Federal government and secondarily to the states.  Regrettably, Mae’s proposition places the State over the individual.  Perhaps, the courts’ acknowledgment of the primacy of We, the People, is just lip service to placate the masses.  Those who espouse the disenfranchisement and segregation of citizens who do not fit within The Box of normalcy and conformity have yet to demonstrate the rationale and justification for the imposition of their will upon all citizens and the denial their “pursuit of Happiness” for those who do not bow to the majority.  This debate is about equal rights and every citizen’s fundamental right to choose their path for “Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness.”  The Supremes cannot find otherwise.

“Protecting our Catholic conscience in the public square”
by Donald Wuerl (Cardinal, archbishop for the District of Columbia)
Washington Post
Updated: Wednesday, May 23, 2012; 10:27 AM
The Catholic Church [538] has filed 12 different federal lawsuits, claiming the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) violated the First Amendment protection of religious freedom when it issued a mandate in February, regarding employee medical insurance coverage of birth control services.  Church leaders in the United States took the unusual legal action representing 43 Catholic dioceses and organizations ranging from local Catholic Charities to parish schools, hospitals, and colleges.  The proponents love to cast this political question in the context of a war on religion as with so many of the social issues – binary, black or white, y’re either for us or a’gin us.  I truly appreciate the desire of Church leaders to impose their will upon whomever will submit, whether believers or not.  In this instance, the Church appears rather desperate to retain some semblance of the dictatorial practice employed for centuries to maintain control over individuals.  I respectfully submit that if the Church’s argument against birth control services was sufficiently strong, it would not matter what the secular law said, i.e., just because an insurance plan offers certain coverage, there is no requirement for or ability to force individual members to avail themselves of that particular service.  If heroin was offered legally at the corner convenience store, most of us would not be a purchaser or consumer – we would exercise our freedom of choice, not to partake.  It is in this context that I see the Church’s actions as a rather desperate and unenlightened effort, based on an antiquated methodology and a lack of belief in the strength of their position as well as a desire to demonstrate their power within a secular, free society.  The Church appears to be deathly fearful of our fundamental right to freedom of choice, or in the ability of an individual to make a proper informed decision.  Let us stop trying to bludgeon one another into submission and return to the abundant energy of public debate to find mutually acceptable solutions.

I am intrigued by the juxtaposition between the Church’s actions noted above and their acquiescence when Executive Order 13199, titled: “Establishment of White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives” [290] was issued by President George W. Bush {29.January.2001}, along with the associated Supreme Court non-decision – Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation [551 U.S. 587 (2007); no. 06-157] {27.June.2007} [271, 290].  The Church has no problem “getting involved” with the government when things go their way, but whoa be it when issues are not exactly to their liking. 

“Nuclear weapons just don’t make sense”
by Walter Pincus
Washington Post
Published: May 23, 2012
I shall respectfully disagree.  I still believe Hiroshima and Nagasaki were warranted and appropriate applications of the weapon.  To my knowledge, no human being, regardless of intellect, experience, wisdom or ideology, can predict the future.  I would agree the likelihood of use is remote, but I respectfully contend the probability is NOT zero.  I can envision a variety of scenarios that could instigate the use of such a dreadful weapon.  Let us not be blind to the potential.

Space Exploration Technologies (AKA SpaceX) launched its own unmanned, resupply, Dragon capsule to the International Space Station (ISS), making it the first private company to dock a spacecraft with the ISS.  The vehicle reportedly carried half a ton of non-essential supplies for the test run.  Congratulations!

“Greeks facing 'payback time' for tax-dodging, IMF chief Christine Lagarde says -- The Greeks have had years of having fun and shirking taxes, but now it is payback time, Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund has warned.”
by Katherine Rushton
The Telegraph [of London]
Published: 26 May 2012; 11:53AM BST
The title and subtitle fairly well say it all.  Unfortunately, I suspect the Greek People are not up to their responsibility and accountability.

Comments and contributions from Update no.544:
Comment to the Blog:
“Compromise and moderation have become such spiteful words in the American political lexicon because the culture of greed demands no less than everything. Thus, ‘compromise’ in that context comes to mean ‘give me what I want and shut up about it.’
“I think of myself as a student of history and I was likewise unaware of the Dorr Rebellion. However, I have enough study behind me to be dubious when someone asserts that they can do something because ‘it’s a free country.’ Catch-22 came along long before that book named it and remains alive and well.
“You mentioned the market in your discussion of JP Morgan Chase. As others have pointed out (Baseline Scenario, for example), the markets do not regulate banks the size of JP Morgan Chase. Other lenders and investors remain aware that the tab for their mistakes will be paid by taxpayers; market forces might apply to smaller banks, but not to them.”
My response to the Blog:
Calvin,
            Re: compromise.  Both poles are comparably intransigent.  Your observation is certainly validated by the public statements of Richard Mourdock [543].  However, the unwillingness to compromise is much larger than greed.  Too many of contemporary politicians use the phrase, “I cannot compromise my principles,” as if they have sworn a blood oath to God.  Solutions are found in compromise, not in bludgeoning the other group to death.
            Re: free country.  Well said.  We are free to choose our path to Happiness . . . along as that path exists within acceptable or tolerable boundaries.  We are NOT free to cause injury to other people or property; we are generally not free to threaten other citizens, e.g., exceed the speed limit in residential areas, or distribute deficient products.
            Re: Catch-22.  Again, we said – 1961 was quite a bit later than 1842; but, as you say, the paradox has been around for millennia.
            Re: market.  I do not think JPMorganChase is bigger than the marketplace; they are experiencing the consequences of their actions as we speak.  I will agree big banks are more buffered from the market than small banks.
 . . . follow-up comments:
“Those politicians have not sworn a blood oath to anyone's God, but they've earned their campaign contributions.
“JP Morgan Chase and the other ‘too big to fail’ banks--unlike their smaller competitors--are not subject to market forces so long as taxpayers bail them out. That is the crux of the argument against ‘too big to fail.’ JP Morgan Chase can absorb a loss of $2 billion. They're bigger than that. That's the scary thing.”
 . . . my follow-up response:
            Re: blood oath.  Some of them sure act like it, though.  Spot on!  The ultimate corruption of money.  One of many reasons I hope the NC jury convicts John Edwards – send another message.
            Re: JPMorganChase.  Indeed!  I am still of the opinion that the big banks should be broken up for the same reasons the USG broke up Standard Oil, American Tobacco, and AT&T.
Cheers,
Cap

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

21 May 2012

Update no.544

Update from the Heartland
No.544
14.5.12 – 20.5.12
Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,


Question of this century:
Why have compromise and moderation become such spiteful words in the American political lexicon?

Two relevant quotations from history, provided by the conservative Blog Patriot Post:
            “There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
--James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788
            “Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.”
--Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1801

“Five myths about gay marriage”
conversation with Jonathan Rauch
Washington Post
Published: May 14, 2012

I thought I had a fairly decent education in American History.  Occasionally, I am reminded that neither my childhood instruction nor my subsequent novice curiosity and interest were as comprehensive as I believed.  I suspect many of us had an incomplete course of instruction, or perhaps, it is just me?  My latest journey of discovery began via the Supreme Court’s “political question” doctrine application in Zivotofsky v Clinton [565 U.S. ___ (2011); no. 10-699] [538] that led to the reapportionment case in Baker v. Carr [369 U.S. 186 (1962); no. 6] [539], which in turn ended up with this week’s reading – Luther v. Borden {48 U.S. [7 How.] 1 (1849); 12 L. Ed. 581 [1849]}.  The Luther case first articulated the “political question” doctrine, which admonishes the Judiciary to avoid decisions regarding political questions that are the rightful domain of the political branches – Executive & Legislative.  The object of the Luther case was the Dorr Rebellion of 1842.  If the American History curriculum of my youth covered the Dorr Rebellion, I must have slept through the class; however, I believe it was never mentioned.  We learned about Shay’s Rebellion in Massachusetts (1787) and the Western (or Whiskey) Rebellion in Pennsylvania (1791), but not even a whisper about the Dorr Rebellion.  So, what was the Dorr Rebellion?  Our story begins on 24.November.1663, when an assembly of the People of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations accepted the Royal Charter of 1663 issued by King Charles II.  They retained the charter government through statehood.  The subject crisis grew from the fact that the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations chose not to establish a constitutional state government when their representatives signed the Declaration of Independence (1776), ratified the Articles of Confederation (1777) and the U.S. Constitution (1790). The Charter entitled freeholders to vote on presented issues and for representatives, and a freeholder was defined as a male state resident who owns local property for a specified length of time.  A popular movement to broaden the right to vote began to coalesce in 1835.  The disenfranchised sought redress each session of the legislature . . . to no avail.  The issue came to a head in 1841, when a large group of residents gathered in Providence to write a new constitution to replace the Charter.  The so-called “People’s Constitution” [AKA Freeman’s Constitution] was proclaimed and promulgated on 13.January.1842, and granted all white, 21-year-old males the right to vote, which did not impress freemen with dark skin pigmentation.  The People held an election in April to ratify the new constitution and elect Thomas Wilson Dorr as their new governor.  Dorr tried to form a government on 3/4.May.1842, and led armed citizens in an attempt to take possession of the state militia arsenal on 18.May.1842.  The assault failed.  On 25.June.1842, the charter General Assembly of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations enacted and declared martial law.  Four days later, John T. Child led troops from the 4th Regiment, 1st Brigade, Rhode Island Militia, and forcibly entered the residence of Martin Luther, a citizen of the State of Massachusetts, to arrest citizens alleged to be conspirators in the rebellion.  The President and Congress chose not to interfere in the Rhode Island political crisis.  Martin and Rachel Luther filed suit claiming their 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure had been violated.  Interestingly, for the Luther case before the Supremes, Associate Justices Catron, Daniel, and McKinley were absent on account of ill health when this case was argued.  Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote for the Court and noted, “Suffrage is a delegation of political power to some individual.  Hence the right must be guarded and protected against force or fraud.”  He went on to conclude, “No one, we believe, has ever doubted the proposition, that, according to the institutions of this country, the sovereignty in every State resides in the people of the State, and that they may alter and change their form of government at their own pleasure. But whether they have changed it or not by abolishing an old government, and establishing a new one in its place, is a question to be settled by the political power. And when that power has decided, the courts are bound to take notice of its decision, and to follow it.”  In essence, the Supremes dodged the bullet.  Associate Justice Levi Woodbury dissented, based largely on his contention that Rhode Island exceeded its authority in declaring martial law to suppress the rebellion.  Fifty years after the states ratified the Constitution, American citizens and residents of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations faced a classic Catch-22 – the People can reform government but only through the government, and the government, in turn, seeks to preserve itself and thus rejects the reformation.  The entire episode was about a citizen’s right to vote for his choice of republican representatives.  Sadly, universal suffrage would not be realized until 1965.  The Dorr Rebellion gives a not-so-pleasant look into our history and offers another uncomfortable example of how we have not always lived up to the ideals we espouse.  Let us not forget the Dorr Rebellion.

Comments and contributions from Update no.543:
Comment to the Blog:
Subject: [Update from the Heartland] New comment on Update no.543.
From: "Calvin R"
Date: Mon, May 14, 2012 10:34 am
To: cap@parlier.com
Calvin R has left a new comment on your post "Update no.543":
“Your health news sounds very good. I hope your employment situation clarifies just as well.
“The only obvious mistake in the article you linked is where the writer says the speaker is ‘not a godless heathen.’ That contains an oxymoron. The young speaker is indeed not a heathen, but heathens have plenty of gods, just not Christian ones. Beyond that, I would like to point out that Christianity (or any religion) is not a legitimate basis for public policy in the United States. In any case, per Wikipedia Christianity is in a long decline in the developed world. Christians’ attempts to cling to political influence just hasten that decline. The North Carolina results will change eventually, when North Carolina wants or is compelled to move into the current century
“The tea baggers have won some of the Republican primaries, thus harming the Republican Party. We need to remember amidst all the hype, hoopla, and hogwash of the political season that most American voters have not lost their minds. Just because a candidate can attract 51% of Republican primary voters by using a lot of extreme rhetoric does not mean that a majority of voters will buy the same stuff. What I think will make this season more interesting is that both of the major-party candidates for President have issues with their own bases. Romney is a Mormon and has much too moderate a record for many Republicans. Obama’s claims of ‘war powers’ sit very poorly with Democrats who also see him as giving way to Republican minorities on too many issues. This will be another election where people must hold their noses to vote.
“The current JPMorgan fiasco gives still more support to our mutual position that ‘too big to fail’ is simply too big.”
My response to the Blog:
Calvin,
            Re: health.  Yes indeed! 
            Re: employment.  Jury is still out; the dust storm still blows.  Time shall tell.
            Re: religion in public policy.  In the main, I would agree . . . thus, Jefferson’s admonition to keep church and State separate.  History is replete with examples to validate Jefferson’s observation.  On the contrary, religion has also tried to order society, to diminish bad traits or actions, and encourage respect for others.  There is much good in religion in contrast to the often parochial interpretations by flawed men to incite the believers to violence in the name of God – in defiance of those teachings.
            Re: voters.  I sure hope you are correct.  Extreme political rhetoric in any direction is not productive, helpful or consistent with the founding principles.  Interesting observations regarding this silly season.
            Re: “too big to fail.”  Spot on!  Yet, JP Morgan Chase is hardly close to failure or even jeopardy, just a little less profit and perhaps dividends for stockholders.  The bank happens to have a shareholder’s meeting this week, which should be quite incendiary.  To me, the far more injurious aspect of this event is seismic trauma to our fragile faith in our financial institutions and system.  The market impact inflates the lack of confidence.  Whatever responsible bankers there may be out there, they will soon suffer for Chase’s mistakes.
Cheers,
Cap
 . . . round two:
Tue, May 15, 2012 8:47 pm
Cap,
“There is some degree of good in almost any religion but a great deal of conflict among them, particularly if one considers religions as different as mine versus conservative Christianity or Islam. Society ought never to kowtow to any given form of religion, particularly as none of them shows any respect for the large, growing, and often admirably moral population of atheists. If I had an either/or choice, which could easily happen here, I would vote for an atheist over any believer in any religion who saw his or her religion as an appropriate guide for the larger society.
“I do not understand why you would see ‘faith’ in our poorly regulated financial institutions as a good thing. I used to have faith in those who regulated them, but that day has passed, perhaps to return if government can free itself from the bonds of campaign contributions. Responsible bankers need not fear regulation, but the likes of JP Morgan Chase are not responsible bankers.”
Calvin
 . . . my response to round two:
Calvin,
            Re: religion.  Well said!  Religion is a private matter – a means of individual strength, comfort and guidance.  Religion has no place in public life or political debate.  From my perspective, any religion that cannot accept and tolerate another, different religion, including atheism, also has no place in a free society.
            Re: regulation.  We have reason to be dissatisfied with the effectivity of regulation on a variety of topics that are important to the People.  We are not yet to the point withdrawing our funds and stuffing them in a mattress or coffee can buried in the backyard.  Banks give us reason to doubt.  Let us not forget our contribution to this crisis.  We expect constant, perpetual, property value increases, and ever increasing profits on investments, driving bankers to search for ways to satisfy that demand.  Perhaps, we should blame capitalism.  Perhaps, we should all just embrace communism as the inevitable ultimate equilibrium.  Yes, the banks deserve our condemnation.  Yes, the regulators deserve our contempt and our reformation.  Let us also look at ourselves and our unreasonable expectations.  Let us not focus our ire on one element or the other.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Cheers,
Cap
 . . . round three:
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Update from the Heartland] New comment on Update no.543.]
From: "Calvin R"
Date: Wed, May 16, 2012 7:37 am
To: "cap"
Cap,
“I suspect the economy, as with other issues, could be simpler than it looks. Follow the money and solve the mystery. Blaming the middle-class people who believed intense marketing by realtors and bankers presented without resistance by the media over several decades is disingenuous at best. That conflicts with the idea in your original posting that ‘faith’ in banking institutions is a good thing. Either we believe what we're told by experts or we're basically on our own in a very complex field.
“I assume you meant your capitalism versus communism statement as sarcasm. We both know that any given government will not choose either ‘pure’ communism or totally unregulated capitalism, or at least not for long. The discussion concerns the appropriate level and type of regulation. JP Morgan Chase has given us another bit of evidence for that discussion.”
 . . . my response to round three:
Calvin,
            Re: middle class.  It is not my nature to blame anyone, but I try to do the best I can to understand the broad perspective.  Sure we can focus on the banks; they are logical, appropriate contributors.  The warning caveat emptor (buyer beware) has been true at least since the heyday of the Roman Empire.  Let us make sure we look at the whole equation.  I suspect we are in violent agreement.
            Re: communism.  Yes, sarcasm! 
            Re: regulation.  I believe I noted in my original opinion [543] that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act [PL 111-203; 124 Stat. 1376; 21.July.2010] so-called Volcker Rule [Title VI, § 619 et al] had been successfully watered down by banking lobbyists.  Again, I believe we are in agreement.  From what we know so far, it appears JPMorganChase may have violated portions of Dodd-Frank, and if so, they should and hopefully will be prosecuted.  We shall see.
Cheers,
Cap


Another contribution:
“Re the Greek situation- the country had been courting this for decades…They don’t pay taxes there, tax evasion is almost a national sport, and the government has not cracked down.  In addition, for years, they were providing the EU fudged financial reports, until a minister decided that he would not continue the practice. Then things really started going downhill.”
My reply:
Jan,
            Re: health.  Thx mate.  Very encouraging but a long way to go still.
            Re: Greek situation.  Spot on!  And, apparently, the Greeks feel no compulsion or inclination to pay the price for living beyond their means.  They choose to evade their tax liability or enforce their tax code.  They chose to live as they do.  They will pay the price one way or another.  As I used to tell our kids, we can do this the easy way or the hard way, your choice.  For the Greeks, it is the hard way or the harder way.  Disintegration from the EU will not be easy, but that appears to be the way they are headed.  Whatever they are going to do, they need to make the move and be done with it.  The markets have to stabilize, and the Greeks left to their fate.  We are paying the price for their largesse.
   That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it.
Cheers,
Cap

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

14 May 2012

Update no.543


Update from the Heartland
No.543
7.5.12 – 13.5.12
Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,

I had my six-month check-up with my surgeon – continued good news.  My six-month, post-op, PSA was recorded as < 0.1.  My hydraulic issue reported earlier has largely been resolved.  Recovery continues.  I was also informed about a Sloan-Kettering survival calculator – URL: http://nomograms.mskcc.org/Prostate/PostRadicalProstatectomy.aspx.  According to my input details, my 10-year survival probability is 91% -- pretty good, I would say.  Next follow-up = six months, my one year mark.  My urological surgeon said, “We consider you cured.”  It was an encouraging statement, but contrary to my understanding of cancer treatment, which tells me such statements are usually not made until attaining the asymptomatic, five-year mark.  Nonetheless, the test results are a good sign.

News from the employment situation is hard to interpret as we have only that information the powers that be choose to share.   Rumors run rampant!  Fact, fiction and posturing are not so easy to sort out this early in the process.  We are being tasked with all sorts of what-if generation to assist the decision-making process.  I will share information, as I am able.  So far, the only additional lay-offs or furloughs have been Operations, assembly-line personnel.

“Wichitan gave eye-opening speech”
by Leonard Pitts (Miami Herald)
Wichita Eagle
Published: Monday, May 7, 2012, at 12 a.m.
His opinion speaks for itself.  I have nothing to add.  We can all learn from his wisdom.

Primary election news this week seemed to be rather disturbing. Six-term, Republican Senator Richard Green Lugar of Indiana was defeated by state treasurer Richard E. Mourdock.  In a televised interviewed the following day, Mourdock said, “I don't think there's going to be a lot of successful compromise.  I hope to build a conservative majority in the U.S. Senate so bipartisanship becomes Democrats joining Republicans to roll back the size of government.”  Mourdock is not alone in his idealistic intransigence.  We can only hope he is defeated in the fall election.  In addition, North Carolina voters passed Amendment 1 to the state’s constitution, very narrowly defining the only state recognized marital relationship as a state sanctioned marriage between one man and one woman.  This process never ceases to amaze me and disappoint me that so many Americans feel compelled to pass laws to impose their beliefs on all other citizens.  I imagine not one of those North Carolinians who vote for the constitutional amendment how they would feel when a different majority imposes their beliefs on them.  On the same day, President Obama took the bold step of publicly stating his support for equal civil rights for all citizens, while we have others claiming the marriage question is not a civil rights issue.  I would like to understand why laws imposing upon private conduct are not a civil rights concern?  This is going to be a crazy silly season.

Yet, despite the primary election news, the media seemed to be dominated by the 21.May.2012, TIME magazine cover.  I believe everyone knows the image, so I do not need to insert it here.  The controversial image comes on the tail of the video released by Actress Alicia Silverstone of her premasticating food and feeding her son.  A wide variety of talking-heads, commentators, experts and other opinionators use words like disgusting, weird, strange, immoral, upsetting, and despicable for both images simply because they do not conform to the boundaries of The Box – the definition of acceptable conduct in American society.  I offer no judgment.  I only ask one question: where is the injury or harm that justifies legal action or even public condemnation?

News from the economic front:
-- Germany, Finland and others euro-zone countries doubt the commitment of Greece to meet the bailout conditions after the public statements by Greek politicians as a consequence of last Sunday's elections calling for the bailout to be renegotiated.  The International Monetary Fund and euro-zone lender nations are considering delaying the next payment of €5.2B of €130B in bailout aid to the beleaguered country due to concerns over political turmoil following last weekend’s elections.  Greece needs the money mainly to repay €3.3B in bonds maturing 18.May that are held by the European Central Bank and national euro-zone central banks.
-- J.P. Morgan Chase Chief Executive Officer James S. “Jamie” Dimon announced US$2B in trading losses in the past six weeks and the potential to another US$1B or more in 2Q2012 losses.  Apparently, the bank’s derivative traders were told several months ago to make “bets” aimed at shielding the bank from the market fallout of Europe's deepening debt crisis.  Their complicated gambling backfired into losses of as much as US$200M a day in late April and early May.  U.S. and U.K. regulators opened investigations into the bank’s actions, what went wrong, who is responsible and whether crimes have been committed.  As we begin to absorb what happened, we learn the bank lobbyists successfully watered down the Volcker Rule to place some constraints on derivative trading in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act [PL 111-203; 124 Stat. 1376; 21.July.2010] – supposedly the necessary banking reform as we struggle with recovery from the Great Recession.  The thought that comes to mind . . . “It’s like déjà vu, all over again.”  Here we are four years after the collapse of the big banks and we face more of the same ol’ crap!  How much more proof do we need before we recognize that bankers are flawed men like all the rest of us and cannot be trusted.

Comments and contributions from Update no.542:
Subject: Re: Update no.542
From: "John DeThomas"
Date: Mon, May 7, 2012 10:44 am
To: "cap"
Hi Cap,
“Good luck with BH.  Hopefully they can continue as a strong company with great products and a long famous history.
“Excellent discussion on USMC women edict and also with the Kansas alcohol issue.  Hell, you'll end up a Libertarian at some time after all.”
My reply:
JV,
   Thx for yr kind words. These last 4 years have been the worst I’ve seen in the industry.  From everything I’ve seen and that I am aware of, this move should substantially strengthen HBC’s competitive position.  The fact that the lenders supported Chap.11 rather than forcing us into Chap.7, speaks volumes, it seems to me.
Truth be told, I am probably closer to a Libertarian than I am a Republican or a Democrat; however, none of them fit my politics, or rather I do not fit into the party positions for any of them.  I continue to claim I am a non-partisan independent.
   Hope all is well with y’all.  Give your main squeeze a hug & kiss for me.  Take care, fly safe, and enjoy.
Cheers,
Cap

Another contribution:
Subject: What's Happening at Work?
From: "Richard, John L"
Date: Mon, May 7, 2012 11:21 am
To: "cap"
Cap,
“I came across some discouraging news this morning regarding Hawker Beechcraft.  What’s going on?  Will you be safe?”
John
John L. Richard
Maintenance & Egress Trainers
Boeing Training Systems & Government Services (TSGS)
480-891-5109
My response:
John,
            I got a rejection on the Update this morning for you and other Boeing employee subscribers.  It seems the company has changed to Trend Micro for security.  Usually, on things like this, the firewall rejects the msg since you are BCC’d for security.  I don’t know if you can alter your settings.  Let me know if you need me to send an individual copy each week.
            I addressed the HBC situation briefly in the Update.  HBC has had a rough four years.  The market has been comatose much longer than anyone expected or forecast, and it proved to be a bridge too far given our gargantuan debt load.  Chap.11 should strengthen the company significantly.  One is never safe these days, but I think we have weathered the worst of the storm; now, it is all about recovery.  I should be good until retirement in 2-6 years.
   Hope all is well with you.  BTW, have you seen the IMax movie Air Racers?  Take care and enjoy.
Cheers,
Cap

Comment to the Blog:
“I fail to see how illegal and/or violent behavior by male students at the Naval Academy could be construed as a reason to exclude women from the school. This is an appropriate matter for military or civilian law enforcement, whichever applies to not-yet-commissioned future officers.
“Teenage use of alcohol and other drugs is indeed an important subject, but public service announcements aimed at parents of teens just demonstrate how little society knows about this disease. By the time people reach their teens, their attitudes are formed and the parents have no say in whether those attitudes (combined with genetics and other factors) will result in drinking, using or going on to addiction. That’s another example of throwing good tax dollars after bad. Certainly the fear-mongering makes that worse because it keeps people from talking sanely to their children or parents about the subject.
“The people in France and Greece most likely have seen fit to spare ordinary people rather than bankers. The bankers will no doubt make them pay, but perhaps not as much as the politicians they evicted would have done.”
My response to the Blog:
Calvin,
            Re: women in military.  Herein lies a good example of the consequence of using truncated reasoning for brevity.  I agree, the alleged crimes at USNA should be prosecuted; although I must add, I suspect there is much more to the story than reported in the Press, as I surmise from my experience as a university campus chancellor.  The point I was attempting to make was events like the USNA situation are often utilized as justification by those who resist the integration of women, non-heterosexuals, or anyone else not like them.  The crime was not caused by integration or the presence of women, but rather by the individual failings of flawed young men.  Our societal focus should be on performance, not on genitalia or sexual attraction.
            Re: teenage drinking.  As I read your words and perceived your meaning, I believe you are agreeing with my premise, i.e., education is far better than the ignorance of abstinence.  I will also freely admit that I am one of those failed parents too afraid of the law to teach our children properly about alcohol, drugs and such.  We were lucky; other families were not.  The carnage of ignorance is too great a societal price to tolerate the myopia of the social conservative faction.
            Re: France & Greece.  The bottom line: there is no free lunch.  Sooner or later, the bill comes due.  While the bankers carry some culpability, it is the unrealistic expectations of the People that are the bona fide culprit.  They were quite happy to accept and demand the largesse of government in the good times, but cannot face the consequences in the hard times.  That is a recipe for failure, anarchy and disintegration.
   “That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Cheers,
Cap

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

07 May 2012

Update no.542


Update from the Heartland
No.542
30.4.12 – 6.5.12
To all,

I endeavor to keep my employment and my personal opinions separate – never the twain shall meet.  There are exceptions to every never, which sustains the old adage. 

Events this week raised the most recent exception.  I recognize that friends, former colleagues, and informed, concerned citizens may harbor some degree of apprehension.  Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (HBC) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as the company reorganizes its debt.  In 2007, Raytheon sold its aircraft company to Goldman Sachs Capital Partners and Onex Partners, who in turn saddled the company with US$2.5B in debt, gambling the cost reduction efforts would yield ample return for minimal capital investment.  Unfortunately, the Great Recession began in 2008.  As the government struggled to arrest the rapid economic contraction, the President and many in Congress chose to malign our industry as a luxury as the market softened into weakness.  The leadership took aggressive actions to reduce cost and production.  The duration of depressed aircraft sales exceeded the remaining capacity of the company to service its debt.  The company’s leadership has negotiated a pre-arranged reorganization plan that must now be presented to and approved by the court.  The majority of lenders have agreed to transform the debt instruments into ownership of the company.  The process will also allow the company to renegotiate onerous, inflexible, burdensome contracts.  The bankruptcy process should position the company for prosperity and profit when the market recovers, as it inevitably will.  It is only a matter of time, and time shall tell the tale.

“Lawsuit, Interviews Allege Culture Of Gender Intimidation At Naval Academy – ‘You don't expect that to happen in a ‘family’”
by Tina Reed, Staff writer
Annapolis Capital
Published: April 29, 2012; Pg. 1
Events portrayed in such articles can be viewed from many perspectives.  It is an easy step for those so inclined to see such behavior as vindication for their resistance of female integration.  There was a day when I was among that lot.
Not so today.  On the heels of homosexual integration, we add the order of Commandant of the Marine Corps General James Amos to admit volunteer female officers into the Infantry Officer Course (IOC) on a trial basis.  If male midshipmen did as they are accused of doing, then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for their crimes; but, these crimes are not rationale to reject gender or homosexual integration.  I failed to fully articulate the essence of such questions.  The sole criterion should be performance – shooting, battlefield skills, endurance, leadership, et al.  In my humble opinion, the thing that will make it not work is dual standards – one for women, another for men.  We must focus on the essentials and abandon our social pre-conceptions.

Kansas had statewide prohibition from 1881 to 1948, longer than any other state, and continued to prohibit on-premises liquor sales until 1987. As of 2012 Kansas has 19 dry counties, where on-premises liquor sales are prohibited, but the sale of 3.2% beer is permitted, though Kansas still has not ratified the 21st Amendment, which ended nationwide prohibition in 1933.
In response to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, which reduced by 10% the federal highway funding of any state which did not have a minimum drinking age of 21, the Kansas Legislature raised the drinking age from 18 to 21, effective January 1, 1985
H.R.4616
Latest Title: A bill to amend the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 to require States to use at least eight percent of their highway safety apportionments for developing and implementing comprehensive programs concerning the use of child restraint systems in motor vehicles, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Anderson, Glenn M. [CA-32] (introduced 1/24/1984)      Cosponsors (12)
Latest Major Action: 7/17/1984 Became Public Law No: 98-363.
17.7.1984    An Act to amend the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 [PL 98-363; H.R.4616 Senate: unanimous consent; House: voice vote; 98 Stat. 435]
» §6 (a) – Chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: “§158. National minimum drinking age . . . twenty-one years of age” (AKA National Minimum Drinking Age Act) [98 Stat. 437; 23 USC 158]      [U-542]
Over the last month or so, when the weather forecast kept me off the Harley for my workday commute, similar “public service” messages, sponsored by the Kingman County (KS) Substance Abuse Group and the Harper County (KS) Prevention of Underage Drinking Group, were broadcast.  The radio spots that attempt to shame and put fear in parents to not expose underage children to alcohol with the implication they will be prosecuted or their children will become alcoholic abusers.  The messages strike me as terribly shallow and not particularly insightful, innovative or constructive.  I eventually took some notes and found some time for research.  First and foremost, I want to be on record that teenage alcohol abuse is an important, relevant and necessary topic of public debate and efficient solutions.  But first, a few illuminating facts might be helpful.  Kansas had statewide alcohol prohibition from 1881 to 1948, well beyond national prohibition (1920 to 1933).  To this day, 19 of 105 Kansas counties are still considered dry for residents of any age as well as any citizen passing through those counties.  In 1984, Congress passed and the President signed the so-called National Minimum Drinking Age Act [actually, §6, PL 98-363; 98 Stat. 435, 437; 17.July.1984], which established a carrot-and-stick inducement for states to make the minimum alcohol consumption age at least 21 years.  Kansas eagerly complied.  Now, for a little perspective, on 1.July.1971, the states ratified the 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that set the voting age at 18 years.  The age of consent for sexual relations or to enlist in the military is also 18 years.  Even abstinence-only ceases to be relevant after our children reach 18 years of age.  What is wrong with this picture?  When I served as the chancellor of a university campus, I was the final adjudicator for violations of the student code of conduct, and there were too many truly sad cases of young adults ill-prepared to deal with responsible and accountable decision-making.  There is no doubt in my little pea brain that prohibition, abstinence, denial and ignorance are NOT wise, productive or proper tools to teach our children life skills to sustain them in adult life.  Those prohibition radio spots anger me every time I hear them.  I could just switch channels, but I naively hope to hear a more informed, supportive and progressive messages to parents and children.  Once again, prohibition laws will never work in a free society – only comprehensive education can ensure proper public conduct.  Private behavior is not our domain.  Yet, we have naively proven time and again that we persist in dictating behavior by some Quixotic optimism that we shall eventually achieve a different outcome.  Simply put: ain’t gonna happen . . . unless we are prepared to or blindly abdicate our freedom to the tyranny of the majority or even a willful minority.  Freedom is freedom and cannot be parsed.

“A war that’s bigger than Afghanistan”
by William Kristol
Washington Post
Published: May 2, 2012
Bill called it as it is.  President Obama withdrew direct combat troops from Iraq in 2011 [522] and intends to withdraw direct combat forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2014; however, we entered a multi-generational war decades prior to 9/11, as we strive to accept and embrace our Islamic brethren while we neutralize the radical practitioners of the Islamic faith who seek to oppress everyone, including believers who do not share their radical, fundamentalist view of the Islamic faith.  Whether we call it the war on terrorism or the War on Islamic Fascism, Bill Kristol is correct – the war will be a long way from won with the closure of U.S./Allied combat operations in Afghanistan.

Just when I thought things might be settling down just a little, our situation gets curious’er and curious’er.  The People of the Republic of France elected Socialist candidate François Gérard Georges Hollande as their new President, defeating incumbent Nicolas Paul Stéphane Sarközy de Nagy-Bocsa in a runoff election.  The change in political leadership throws into question the economic recovery measures within the European Union agreed to earlier this year.  France may be moving more toward Greece than Germany, which will not be good for anyone.

Americans like to think we have always enjoyed those unalienable rights, endowed by our Creator.  Even the most rudimentary familiarity with history tells us such notions are not true.  Sure, they were mostly correct, if you were male, with light skin pigmentation, Anglo-Saxon facial features, and heritage, and you owned property.  If you happened to be of any other configuration or circumstance, well then, that just your lot in life and you lived at the mercy of those men who qualified.  The ensuing two plus centuries have brought us through trial and trauma, yet we still do not enjoy universal suffrage.  My latest reading from the Supremes was the Civil Rights Cases [109 U.S. 3 (1883)].  The U.S. Constitution was ratified 21.June.1788, including Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3, which reads: “No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.”  The clause was superseded by the ratification of the 13th Amendment.  After the trauma of the Civil War, the Federal government persistently worked to liberate the oppressed of the day.
·      Emancipation Proclamation (22.September.1862)
·      13th Amendment (6.December.1865)
·      Civil Rights Act of 1866 (9.April.1866) [448, 535]
·      Freedmen's Bureau Act (16.July.1866) [448]
·      14th Amendment (9.July.1868)
·      15th Amendment (3.February.1870)
·      Enforcement Act of 1870 (31.May.1870) [448]
·      Civil Rights Act of 1871 {AKA Ku Klux Klan Act} (20.April.1871) [539]
·      Civil Rights Act of 1875 (1.March.1875) [542]
Associate Justice Joseph Philo Bradley wrote for the Court as they declared the 1875 law unconstitutional.  Further, the capacity of the Supremes of the day to overcome the sheer weight of the law speaks volumes to the persistence of racial bias and discrimination.  In his solo dissenting opinion, Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan offered a convincing and impassioned assessment of the expansive envelope of the 13th and 14th Amendments.  He said, “I am of opinion that such discrimination is a badge of servitude, the imposition of which congress may prevent under its power, through appropriate legislation, to enforce the thirteenth amendment; and consequently, without reference to its enlarged power under the fourteenth amendment, the act of March 1, 1875, is not, in my judgment, repugnant to the constitution.”  Justice Harlan recognized reality.  Despite the Herculean efforts of Congress to rectify the previous wrongs, it took another century to realize broad respect for citizenship and the vast social diversity of this Grand Republic.  Many would argue we have not yet attained universal acceptance, even with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [PL 88-352; 78 Stat. 241; 2.July.1964] and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 [PL 89-110; 79 Stat. 437; 6.August.1965] [528].  Freedom demands a relentless and persistent vigil.

News from the economic front:
-- The U.S. Labor Department reported the nation’s employers added 115,000 positions, fewer than economists had been predicting.  The unemployment rate decreased to 8.1% in April, from 8.2% in March.  Wall Street was not impressed.

No comments or contributions from Update no.541.

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