Update from the Sunland
No.923
16.9.19 – 22.9.19
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
Apocalypse Endeavor
In a different offering of late from my historical novel series, my latest book was released by Saint Gaudens Press, Inc., while I was attending the Reno Air Races [922]. So, my announcement is a week later, but better late than never.
[file: AE_cover_small.jpg
see attached]
see attached]
This book was 20 years in the making and bloomed from an actual nightmare I had. Imagine, if you will, being on an annual, pre-Christmas, ski holiday with your family, including your eight-month pregnant daughter, and everything electronic or electrical failed in an instant—no automobiles, no radio, no telephones, no computers, no heat, no water, nothing needing electrical power. Apocalypse Endeavor weaves an engaging story around that premise—what must the family do to survive winter in the high Rocky Mountains.
Apocalypse Endeavor is now available in print and all digital formats. I have update my website should you wish to tell your friends of my new book. As always, I hope you enjoy the book. If you don’t, please tell me. If you do, I encourage you to tell your family and friends.
The follow-up news items:
-- The day after the conclusion of the Reno Air Races [922], one of the static display aircraft crashed on takeoff in high crosswind conditions that persisted from the previous day. The highly modified, Polish Państwowe Zakłady Lotnicze {State Aviation Works) PZL-104 Wilga (golden oriole), Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) aircraft known as “Draco” (dragon), did not complete its takeoff. Many changes were made to Draco, but the most significant was the replacement of the six-cylinder, Lycoming O-540 reciprocating engine (300 shp) with a Pratt & Whitney PT6A-28 (680 shp) turbine engine. The creator, owner and pilot of Draco Mike Patey made the following video clip immediately after the crash.
Please note in the crash sequence portion of the video that the right wing is already lower in the crosswind with the aircraft in a position & hold state on the runway. He clearly understood the difficulty of the crosswind condition and considered better takeoff conditions, but ultimately he exceeded his and the aircraft’s capabilities—full counter aileron and rudder could not stop the lifting of the left wing. Fortunately, no one was injured, but it was still a very costly error in judgment.
-- In the wake of the coordinated, precision, missile attack on Saudi oil refining facilities [922], the disinformation campaign is in full swing—a near perfect setup for the conspiracy theorists to convulse with excitement. And, worse, we have a president and a government we cannot trust to tell the truth. The available public evidence, so far, tends to point to the IRI as the culprit, but then again, that is the whole purpose of a false-flag operation. The one fact that tends to tell me it was the IRI is the rapid claim of responsibility by the Yemeni Houthis tribe—tells us a great deal, actually. Fortunately, the Saudis worked overtime to repair the damage done and recover their oil production effort.
-- In the latest executive action by tweet, the BIC revoked California’s federal waiver for setting its own automobile emissions standards [921]. I am devoid of appropriate public words for what he is doing. In a distant sort of manner, I can understand the federal government’s reluctance to impose broad general standards, but why on God’s little green Earth would they resist stricter standards? The only conclusion I can see at the moment is the typical BIC retributive response, i.e., California did not vote for me, therefore anything California wants to do, he is against it, very much like his anything-Obama is bad approach to everything.
-- The Federal Reserve joined the European Central Bank [922] in cutting interest rates by a quarter-percentage point for the second time in as many months as yet another sign of the global economic slowdown amplified by the U.S.-PRC trade war [802]. Of course, the BIC will blame everyone else except himself for any economic downturn.
-- The tragedy of the opioid crisis [805] continues to play out before us. The Purdue Pharma contribution to the crisis may well become the textbook example of what damage can be done by corporate greed.
-- Nearly a year has passed since the Lion Air crash and the first of two Boeing 737 MAX accidents [878, 889]. Indonesian investigators have determined that design and oversight lapses played a central role in the fatal crash of a jet in October 2018. The draft conclusions also point to a string of pilot errors and maintenance mistakes as causal factors in the accident. I have substantial mixed feelings and opinions in all this. To me and my understanding of the facts so far, Boeing bears the bulk of culpability in that they knew better. There is zero doubt in my mind that Boeing engineers knew that offering a single source opinion for their flight control augmentation system (MCAS) was wrong and risky. If we ever learn the truth, we will most likely find that Boeing management overruled or coerced the engineers to accept the single source option (as a cost savings). However, the mishandling of the event by the pilots cannot and should not be ignored. Pressing the climb out and acceleration at the first hint of a flight control problem was wrong, full stop, drop the mic. Boeing is still not out of the woods. The B-737 MAX recertification is still not done. Let us not forget the lesson to all pilots—if any flight control anomaly occurs, do not continue to accelerate; speed is not your friend in those situations.
A week ago Thursday (12.9.2019), the ABC News Democratic Candidates Debate was held and broadcast from Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas. The top ten candidates among 20 existing candidates, as determined by the Democratic National Committee, appeared on stage for the debate.
First and foremost, I am frankly becoming progressively more irritated by the interruptions of cheers, applause and protests from the audience. There is a time and a place for everything. I want and need to listen to the candidates, not the audience. Perhaps it is time to exclude an audience for these debates; that way, people can cheer or boo all they wish in their homes, some pub or bar, or another viewing venue.
In an exchange between Biden and Castro, the latter accused the former vice president of forgetting what he said two minutes earlier. It was difficult to sort out, but I do believe Castro generalized and excluded the qualifiers Biden offered to his statement.
The most prominent statement of the night came from O’Rourke, who calmly and emphatically proclaimed, “Hell yes! We are going to take your AR-15 and your AK-47. We are not going to allow them to be used against fellow Americans anymore.” As has been noted by numerous talking heads, that video clip will be used repeatedly for months to come against not only O’Rourke, but also every Democratic candidate beyond just the presidential campaign. What will inevitably be missing from the expected epithets is his impassioned preface about the use of weapons of war against innocent citizens. Regrettably, there were no qualifiers added to his statement. This one issue illuminates the problem with so many relevant topics; we relegate vital public matters to sound bites. I want to know how they are going to get things done and I categorically reject Warren’s advocacy for elimination of the filibuster in the Senate to jam through gun reform laws.
I did not like the responses of the Democratic candidates regarding immigration reform. I certainly applaud their criticism of the BIC’s ham-handedness of enforcing current immigration law and his staunch resistance to proper immigration reform. However, the BIC’s silly and irresponsible anything-Obama-is-bad approach is not justification for Castro’s unqualified all immigrants who seek freedom and prosperity should come to this country. We simply cannot tolerate open doors to the world or even to Central Americans; there must be controls, tracking and enforcement of immigration law for non-citizens. I would feel better about the liberal position of the Democratic candidates if they argued for proper immigration reform and a defense in depth to deal with the borders, but more importantly, with those who are in this country by whatever means by which they arrived.
I am disturbed by the incessant spend-spend-spend chants of too many of the Democratic candidates without one hint of how they propose to pay for the programs they espouse. In accordance with the Constitution, no president spends the public treasury on what s/he wants; he is charged with executing the spending established by Congress under the law. I really am not particularly interested in what one candidate or another wants to spend the People’s money on; I need to know that they will work with Congress to pass in law for the common good.
Just a side note to American politics, far too many politicians use the first-person, singular pronoun erroneously and excessively. Presidents have become reliant upon executive orders; the BIC being one of the most egregious. I want to hear how any president is going to work with a divided Congress to accomplish the peoples’ business. Biden tried to express that premise and got slapped down. I want to hear more of the plural pronoun. Congress is and shall remain an equal, concurrent branch of government. I am tired of these damnable unilateral actions. I understand it is hard to find compromise, but that is our system of governance. This Grand Republic was not based on strong-arming the opposition or stonewalling change. The really successful presidents have all been accomplished negotiators to find compromise for the common good.
I considered whether to comment on this whole ONI Inspector-General whistleblower complaint. My opinion: we do not know enough to develop an informed opinion. This latest sordid affair is simply not ripe enough, as yet. However, I am once again intrigued by the BIC’s twisted logic. He says (repeatedly), “Someone should investigate this.” What is odd, he is the leader of one of the most comprehensive investigation agencies in the world. Further, the U.S. Senate is frozen with inaction without the BIC’s explicit direction and consent, so he has simply to direct the Senate to investigate anything he wishes. The distraction and subterfuge of the BIC is mind-boggling to comprehend. The twisted logic aside, we wait for more evidence to become public and subject to examination.
One more contemporary observation, watching the degeneration of Rudy Giuliani in public at the behest of his principal client is truly sad. Such is life!
Comments and contributions from Update no.922:
Comment to the Blog:
“My Monday was stressful enough that I for once didn’t notice your absence. It all works out.
“If we’re really going to claim that corporations are people, we ought to apply criminal law to them. Let’s start with Purdue Pharmaceutical. Meanwhile, the Sacklers actually are people. If their behavior isn’t criminal, what is?
“I favor more, not less, environmental regulation. The specific clean water issue holding my attention at the moment is the algae blooms in the Great Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico and other bodies of water. The most recent rollback is designed to aggravate those.
“I suddenly realize we are in agreement on sex work. Advocacy continues.
“The Chump’s brain cells, however lacking, recognize Saudi Arabia as an ally and Iran as a target. That’s not my method of analysis. I follow the money. The Chump’s sponsors include the USA’s oil and gas industry, which has become the largest exporter of its products in the world. For however long the Saudi exports are down, prices rise and buyers seek new resources. Hence, stalling for time serves Chump’s clients in the petroleum industry. With any luck, the war will fizzle out.
“I’m glad you enjoyed the air show and had a great reunion with your old friends. The weather sounds great (for attending) and the mention of Uber is useful.”
My response to the Blog:
Good point; I’m in favor of that. The Sacklers are acting criminal.
In general, I would agree; however, there must be a balance. The power to regulate (tax) is the power to destroy. I do not see existing regulation as out of balance, thus my objection to the actions of the BIC’s EPA. BTW, they should change the name from EPA to CPA = Corporation Protection Agency, because the BIC’s EPA is certainly not protecting the environment.
Yes, I do believe we are in agreement regarding sex work.
Follow the money is absolutely the path to take. Further, I do believe we are witness to the paucity of substance to the BIC’s bluster & chest-beating; he is all bluff and no punch.
Yeah, it was great to be immersed in flying, aviation and pilot stuff for a few days.
. . . Round two:
“At this point, environmental regulation has been knocked out of balance and (prior) existing regulation failed in some respects. The Obama administration had made progress, but even if we address neither climate change nor the Chump's destruction, massive issues remain. Algae blooms, extinctions including creatures of great use to man, and various other threats need to be met. Corporations that support both parties object to the solutions to the two specific items I mentioned.
“I have no idea why you equate regulation with taxation. That's a false equivalence.”
. . . my response to round two:
Exactly, that was my point. The BIC and his cronies have unilaterally induced considerable imbalance. They are NOT protecting the environment. Oddly, the EPA and its charter grew from the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) [PL 91-190; 83 Stat. 852], signed into law by President Nixon and was actually created by Executive Order 11472 also signed by President Nixon. I suppose one positive element is the BIC is consistent—a one man wrecking ball to established law and order.
Algae blooms are commonly the consequence of the excessive use of fertilizers in agriculture. There are a variety of forces who resist another Nixon law—the Endangered Species Act of 1973 [PL 93-205; 87 Stat. 884], not least of which are manufacturing, real estate development, agriculture, and myriad other counter-forces. There are solutions, if people would only stop and think.
First, the original thought was regarding taxation. Second, in a general sense, regulation is a form of taxation, i.e., regulation costs someone. Third, excessive regulation can destroy; thus, the use of Chief Justice Marshall’s observation in McCulloch v. Maryland [17 U.S. {4 Wheat.} 316 (1819)]. I believe the statement is appropriate.
. . . Round three:
“One quibble. The solutions require committed action. People already think about this stuff, but the oligarchs think they don't want to risk profits.”
. . . my response to round three:
No argument . . . although I might quibble with your use of the term oligarchs in this instance, but I won’t.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
-->
Cap :-)
2 comments:
With respect to the Saudi oilfield bombing, the Saudis are one of the best customers of the defense industry, but they compete with our petroleum producers. That’s what I see as relevant. The Saudi oil industry took a little hit, to the benefit of our oil producers. US defense contractors will sell the Saudis another immensely profitable armory.
As far as the Chump lowering California’s fuel standards, it’s about the petroleum industry.
It appears the economic slowdown will come soon enough to undercut the Chump’s re-election. That’s good because the management of the Democratic Party has not changed the funding model.
Boeing can behave irresponsibly because they are no longer regulated. Moral values aside (as they usually are), expecting any motivation but profitability from top management of a corporation is unrealistic. I’ll note that one goal in Boeing’s process was avoiding additional pilot training.
In that debate, O’Rourke could/should have offered a buyback, pretty much in the format of, “No, we’re going to buy your assault weapons from you. We know you need money in Trump’s economy.”
I’m not a Democrat; I’m a Green. I’d pay for new and expanded social and infrastructure programs by halving the military budget, which could be done without reducing readiness, and by requiring the wealthy to pay at least the same bottom-line tax rate as the median income earner. That would involve taxing capital gains and large estates appropriately and getting rid of many corporate tax breaks. (If corporations are people, let’s tax them like people.)
You want the President to work with a divided Congress. I want both houses of Congress.
We need to see the contents of the whistle-blower complaint about the Chump. I’m inclined to believe he does criminal acts. If not in this instance, we need to know that. The act(s) might be anything from one more count of emoluments to literal treason.
The Wikipedia article on impeachment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States#History_of_federal_constitutional_impeachment) is worth studying, including the Founders’ discussion of the reasons for it. The House part of the process is long overdue. Both prior impeachments of Presidents resulted in acquittals, but that doesn’t mean they had no effect. We can count Nixon’s resignation as another result of the process, although that one ended short of actual impeachment for his lesser crimes.
Good afternoon to you, Calvin,
As always, thank you very much for your contributions.
So, are you implying that the attack on the Saudi oil refineries was indeed a false-flag operation carried out by the U.S. oil and defense industry to spark a war for their profits?
I hope California challenges the BIC in court. What the BIC did was wrong, period, full stop, end of story.
I am not hoping for an economic slowdown to defeat the BIC, but the signs suggest to me that such a slowdown is nearly inevitable. I have no expectation that a slowdown will hurt the BIC’s reelection campaign.
Yes, Boeing sought to avoid additional pilot training as it is a cost to customers, and especially avoid a separate type rating for the B737-MAX. I have sympathy for the engineers, so I am not yet willing to condemn all of Boeing; only management who forced these foolish changes, so far.
LOL. Interesting supposition in the O’Rourke “take your guns” remark.
I am none of the political parties and all of the political parties. There is good in each political party. I am just finding less and less so in the Republican Party—not yet zero, but approaching that threshold.
Well, how about that! We are in agreement on taxes. While my (our) tax burden is reduced by various federal laws, the vast preponderance of tax breaks ONLY benefit the wealthy, so yes, I am all in for the wealthy to pay tax at an effective tax rate as you and me. Corporations, like the wealthy, employ an army of accountants and lawyers to exploit every possible loophole in tax law. Congress must reform tax law.
I do not advocate for any party to dominate government, period, full stop. The PPACA was a valiant attempt to improve health care in this Grand Republic, but it was doomed when the Democrats jammed it through without one Republican vote. We need debate, negotiation, and compromise to find reasonable solutions. One party dictating to the other on anything—laws, judges, enforcement, anything—is a recipe and encouragement for the tribalism we face today. We must find the path to get passed this tribalism. Frankly, I think retirement of the Senate Majority Leader is almost more important than the presidency.
I am hearing voices suggesting the whistleblower should take his complaint directly to Congress, since he tried the proper, legal path for reporting potential wrongdoing and has been stonewalled by the aforementioned tribalism. If I was him, I doubt I would be able to trust the FBI, given the compromise of the Justice Department—a very sad state of affairs in the history of this Grand Republic. I am rapidly approaching my threshold of tolerance and may soon join you in advocating for impeachment regardless of the Senate Republican obstruction—make them go on record and vote. The criminal conduct of the BIC simply cannot continue, and he is truly undisturbed by the mounting evidence against him.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment