Update from the
Heartland
No.747
4.4.16 – 11.4.16
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
Another
short Update this week!
Granddaughter Shalee joined Jeanne and me for a long weekend trip to
Austin, Texas, to visit Middle Son Tyson and his family (Melissa, Judson and
Avalon). As is always the case, it
seems, these trips pass far too quickly, but they are always enjoyable and
rewarding for the moments they provide.
The central focus on this occasion was Grandson Judson’s baseball
tournament, complete with thunderstorm delays of the first game – fortunately,
no heavy rain at the tournament site.
Judson and his team played two games on Saturday, and then he played
three games in the championship bracket on Sunday, with the championship game
finishing at 20:00 [S] CDT. To say
the least, it was amazing watching eight-year-old (almost nine years old, in
Judson’s case) boys play the game.
They grow up so fast. They
played hard, were bone numbing exhausted Sunday evening, and they came in
second of all the teams. Thank you
so much for a great weekend – Melissa, Tyson, Judson and Avalon.
As
a consequence of our long weekend, I extended this week’s Update and shorten
next week’s Update by one (1) day, not that it really matters to anyone, yet in
the interest of full disclosure and accounting. And so it goes.
The follow-up news items:
-- As expected and forecast, the USG could not leave well
enough alone. After facing
legitimate opposition from Apple, Inc., the Justice Department withdrew its
legal action [745] to compel Apple
to bypass the security measures built into its iPhone smart telephone [736, 740-1]. Apparently,
the third party entity the government claims enabled them to get past the
iPhone 5 security provisions cannot use the same technique on newer
iPhones. The Wall Street Journal reported on a new court filing by the USG to
compel Apple to breakdown the security measures, this time is in support of a
New York drug investigation. Where
will this stop? Yesterday,
terrorism; today, drug enforcement; tomorrow, private morality or thought? The USG action this week is PRECISELY
why I have and continue to advocate against the government’s actions in the San
Bernardino terrorist attack [729]. We simply cannot trust those flawed men
in government who are making these decisions, period. Full stop!
The diminished Supremes issued what may well become a
landmark ruling this week in the case of Evenwel v. Abbott [578 U. S. ____
(2016); No. 14–940] – a case dealing with representation – voting in elections,
apportionment of congressional representation, and a number of consequent
effects. I hope to get this one read
in the coming days, so stay tuned, if my opinion matters to you on such topics.
A long time friend and colleague asked me to comment on the
following article:
“16 Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change
Disbelievers’”
by Hans von Spakovsky and Cole Wintheiser.
The Patriot Post
Published: Apr. 5, 2016
I offered my opinion:
First,
I have no corroborating information to validate the title action. For the sake of this exchange, let us
assume it is accurate and true.
Like
so many topics, loose language gets us in trouble. The principal political issue is not climate change per se;
it is the root cause(s) of climate change. The reality and fact is, the Earth’s climate changes
constantly . . . always has, always will.
The physical evidence of the current warming cycle is indisputable, in
my humble opinion, e.g., far too many glaciers retreating, ice pack decreasing,
et cetera.
It
is the notion that human activity is the direct, root cause that seems the most
tenuous to me, and my understanding of the science. Then, to use that particular hypothesis as rationale and
justification to radically alter our world’s economies and way of life is
simply a bridge too far . . . for me.
Then,
as I have stated previously, regardless of the political notion, we simply must
wean ourselves off of fossil fuels before the economic impact reaches crisis
proportions. We need petroleum for
myriad reasons, yet there are alternatives without carbon-based fuels that seem
comparatively, low-hanging fruit.
Back
to the original premise, the idea of commercial companies “lying” about climate
change is a very dangerous, threatening proposition for the State to be
enforcing speech constraints. The
17 state attorneys general are all lawyers, presumably grounded in the
law. For them to even suggest
prosecution for free speech is quite an anathema.
P.S.: Just a comment on history, The Inquisition goes back a
long way before 1478, to 1184 to my knowledge. The Inquisition was encouraged, supported, and sustained by
popes, cardinals and Catholic clerics from 1184 to 1834 – that is a long time
under the oppression, persecution and tyranny of one religious sect.
In
an interesting punctuation to the current silly season in U.S. political
transition, the German new magazine Der Spiegel offered a poignant
observation all of us should read.
“America's Election Shame”
by Markus Feldenkirchen
Der Spiegel
Published: April 06, 2016 – 04:57 PM
Feldenkirchen opened his assessment with:
“America
wasn't the world's first democracy, but for a long time, it was its proudest.
No other country spoke as passionately or confidently about its system of
government. If things continue as they have in this primary election, those
days will be numbered.
“The United States' political culture
served as a model for others, one that was worthy of emulation and exported
worldwide. Today, however, U.S. diplomats look ridiculous when giving lessons
in democracy to others.”
I do believe he captured my apprehension, misgivings,
concerns and disgust in what is happening in this Grand Republic. Although the Republican front-runner is
by no means the sole practitioner of insult politics, vacuous yammering devoid
of substantive rhetoric and rampant narcissism, he is the most prominent agent
in the current silly season.
Feldenkirchen is quite correct.
Americans have reason to be embarrassed by the conduct of the Republican
front-runner. As I have stated
previously, if he is elected to the presidency, I shall do my best to respect
his position and I will humbly apologize for his disgraceful conduct. Like the black sheep of every family,
we may not like what he does, but we love him, nonetheless. Yet, if it is possible to say the
stranger aspect of all this, the GOP front-runner is whining . . . whining a
lot . . . because he did not understand the rules of the game or feels any need
to abide the rules. I am quite
reluctant to say this, we must congratulate TrusTED for his foundation
organization and ground game in the primary season. I am no fan of TrusTED or his political positions, yet the
efforts of the GOP front-runner to stomp his feet, pout, and throw his tantrums
as he prepares to burn the house down around him that is even more disgusting.
News from the economic
front:
-- The Wall Street
Journal reported that the median pay for the chief executives of nearly 300
of the biggest, publicly traded companies declined 3.8% to US$10.8M last year,
from US$11.2M in 2014 – the worst showing for S&P 500 chiefs since the 2008
crisis – due to weaker corporate performance that slowed cash bonuses and
accounting rules that pared back pension growth. It must be so difficult taking a pay cut like that, but I am
still staggered by the amounts involved.
Comments and contributions from Update no.746:
Comment to the Blog:
“At this point, any attempt by party-line Republicans to respond
to any issue must involve condemning President Obama. I still find it bizarre
that Governor Kasich has managed to appear so much saner and more mature than
his competitors. If he could survive the primary and/or convention battles, he
would be a far more viable candidate, even with his Ohio record.
“The current GOP front runner, I suspect, started with little
interest in becoming President. That would explain his essentially random party
affiliations and issue statements, his running despite his prior
business/personal/political relationship with the Clintons, and the statement
attributed to his former communication director that he originally planned to
achieve second place in the GOP primary in order to increase his prestige and
name recognition.
“I still believe favorable versus unfavorable perceptions of the
candidate by the general electorate will decide the general election. That
would favor Bernie Sanders if current trends hold. He is the only candidate of
either party with net favorable perception, and that has held from the
beginning. Hillary Clinton’s high unfavorable rating would overcome any amount
of messaging, but might leave her as the ‘lesser of two evils’ to a Cruz or
Trump.
“The hideous laws permitting discrimination in the name of
religious freedom surely will not withstand judicial scrutiny. In an
interesting side note, the Supreme Court has handed down a couple of decisions
favoring progressives in the absence of Scalia or a replacement. It appears the
GOP Senate’s refusal to consider a nominee could be backfiring. My first guess:
maybe Scalia was the persuasive conservative voice or knew ‘where the bodies
were buried.’
“You provide a masterful defense against your ‘Christian nation’
troll. I would, however, dispute your item #7. ‘There is no question that the
majority of Founders, like the population of the American Colonies they
represented, were Protestant Christians, who fled Europe to escape persecution
for their religious beliefs.’ Many Founders were not first-generation
Americans, including Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson. They had not fled
Europe. Washington and Jefferson were Virginia gentry, not persecuted at all.
Franklin was born in Boston and fled from there to Philadelphia because of
poverty, not religious persecution and also to suit his personal ambition. Some
of the Founders were not considered Christians by the other Christians of the
time, including the Quakers so important to Pennsylvania history. Others cannot
be called conservative Christians by any standard. Many, including Franklin per his autobiography, attended
church for business and/or political reasons, just like modern political and
business leaders. Many were
influenced in college by the late, lamented Age of Reason. For a fuller discussion, here’s a Britannica
reference: http://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Founding-Fathers-Deism-and-Christianity-1272214.
“One of your other commenters responded to your linked article on
Trump by changing the subject to President Obama and Secretary Clinton. You
took the bait on that one. I would like to point out something in that
discourse, though. The two of you went around on Benghazi, but I don’t see that
as worthy of discussion. The good discussion is about how we came to be in
Libya.
“I am as reluctant as Senator Sanders to take the accusations
about Secretary Clinton’s email server seriously. However, I’m seeing a few
signs that she may have ignored legitimate policy about security, and that
arrogance of power issue bothers me. This is also, unavoidably, an election
issue. Had Secretary Clinton settled this shortly after it arose, this would be
over with little lasting damage to her. Now I’m reading rumors she will be
interrogated by the FBI. If this blows up, we will see those ‘super-delegates’
run like rabbits from her to the last Democrat standing, Bernie Sanders.”
Comment to the Blog:
Re:
bizarre. Well said. Agreed.
Re:
GOP front-runner. Again, quite so. Everything about his conduct says he
did not and does not take the process seriously or with respect. I suspect you may well be spot on
correct regarding his root motivation.
Re:
general election perceptions. I
resist conjecture as the party nominees are still too uncertain, and we probably
will not have clear candidates until July.
Re:
religious freedom. I would like to
think that judicial scrutiny would strike down such discriminatory laws. Yet, after the Supremes’ decision in Burwell
v. Hobby Lobby Stores [573 U.S. ___ (2014); 30.6.2014] [655, 675], I am not optimistic.
Yes, recent cases have been split decisions, and thus, they are default
affirmations of Appeals Court rulings.
Re:
“Christian nation.” OK, let’s
debate item no.7. By my statement,
I implied ALL immigrants to the Colonies were fleeing persecution. I apologize for my over-statement; that
was not my intention. Some
immigrated for new opportunities, or adventure, or just ambitious motives. I should have been more precise. The Pilgrims, Puritans, Quakers,
Huguenots, and other Protestant sects fled. Or, to be even more precise, my paternal ancestors fled
France to survive religious persecution and literally save their lives. [Side note: I would not be here, if
they had not fled.] The original
colonial charters emphasized religious faith, e.g., Mayflower Compact
[11.11.1620] – “Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and advancements of
the Christian faith and honor of our King and Country.” Christian religion was a dominant force
in Colonial America.
Re:
Libya. OK, I’ll take your
bait. Why wouldn’t or shouldn’t we
be in Libya? After the Arab Spring
and the removal of Gaddafi, we should have been in Libya if for no other reason
than to observe and monitor events, and if we had been even remotely lucky,
influence evolving events. All
gambles do not pay off.
Re:
Hillary’s private server. As I
have repeatedly stated, the issue was not her decision of use of a private
personal server. It was her
handling of classified material. Worse,
her claim that she never transmitted classified material is just patently
misleading at best and outright deceitful at worst. She generated classified material, labeled or not; further,
such labels are usually, if not exclusively, applied later. Her very words are classified by
definition. I do agree with you;
if she had stood up to the real issue, she probably would be passed this by
now.
. . . follow-up
comment:
“I had the impression the discussion was about the Founders
themselves rather than the
colonists more generally. The Founders were
primarily upper class planters or businessmen and not themselves immigrants. To
give a parallel, my name-line ancestors apparently also fled religious strife
in Europe, but that was in 1688. By 1776, their descendant, who was prominent
in Pennsylvania Colony, the Revolution, and the new State of Pennsylvania,
could not be considered either an immigrant or the subject of religious
persecution. Similar statements apply to many of the Founders. My other point
was that religious convictions cannot be determined from attendance at church
services. That goes double for anyone in politics.
“The real problem about Libya for Hillary Clinton's campaign is
not what happened in Benghazi but the fact that she was pretty much the strongest
advocate for intervention in Libya. That does not sit well with progressives,
but many of them do not remember. Should she become the nominee, I'm sure they
will be reminded. The server issue will not go away, either, especially if the
FBI insists on ‘interviewing’ her.”
. . . my follow-up response:
Re:
religion & Founders. Again, my
apologies for the over-generalization.
I do agree with your observations of that time in history. My paternal ancestor, nine generations
back, arrived in New York City at age 17yo (1686), with his Mother and younger
Brother. I do believe religion
played a major role in the lives of the Founders & Framers (even if
indirectly in a few cases), and perhaps more so in the lives of their
forefathers, and cannot be ignored in our understanding of the genesis of this
Grand Republic. Yet, the original
point was, despite the importance of religion in the lives of some, if not
most, of the Founders, they specifically separated religion from the secular
governance, and for that reason alone, the claim that this is a “Christian
nation” is simply wrong by the history.
Re:
Libya. The GOP congressional
members (and others) have not made that case, and I believe, erroneously,
focused on the Benghazi event and aftermath.
Re:
server issue. Quite so.
My
very best wishes to all. Take care
of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment