31 October 2022

Update no.1085

 Update from the Sunland

No.1085

24.10.22 – 30.10.22

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

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- As the BIG LIE [1002] continues to percolate throughout this once grand republic, sustained by [the person who shall no longer be named] and his MAGA minions, various criminal investigations continue inexorably to their conclusion. Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina has defied the Fulton County, Georgia, prosecutor investigating the election malfeasance of [the person who shall no longer be named] and his lieutenants. He gained a temporary reprieve in the form of a stay of a lower court order for him to testify under oath before the Fulton County special purpose grand jury. The stay was ordered by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas—Graham v. Fulton County [598 U.S. 22A337 (2022)]. The justice offered no rationale. Now, we are forced to wait while SCOTUS does whatever it is they intend to do, and Graham avoids the noose for a little longer.

-- The U.S. Supreme Court seems to be in the mood to issue stays of lower court orders compelling testimony before the United States House of Representatives Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol {HSCJ6} [1020]. In the continuing fallout from the 2020 election [982] and the BIG LIE of 45POTUS, Associate Justice Elena Kagan issued another stay—Ward v. Thompson [598 U.S. 22A350 (2022)]. Arizona fBICP (GOP) Chair Kelli Ward, née Kaznoski, and her husband Michael have been subpoenaed by the HSCJ6 to testify under oath about their part in the insurrection [991]. Both the Wards were alternate (illegal & unconstitutional) electors. They sought to subvert the 2020 election. In her stay, Justice Kagan provided no rationale for the stay, and like Thomas in the Georgia stay, offered no plan for what lays ahead. I suspect SCOTUS is going to decide some overarching case, but I cannot imagine why they would stay testimony in such important cases.

-- As a consequence of Liz Truss’s abrupt resignation after just six (6) weeks of her premiership [1078 & 1084], the Conservative Party chose Rishi Sunak to become their leader, and as such, he became prime minister on 25.October.2022, after his audience with King Charles III. Sunak is the youngest PM in modern times. He’s the first PM of Asian heritage. And he may well be the wealthiest PM in British history. Good luck to Prime Minister Sunak.

 

Another PBS Frontline program of note: Putin’s Attack on Ukraine: Documenting War Crimes (S40 Ep19), broadcast on 25.October.2022. The documentary is not pleasant to watch, just as it is not pleasant to see the films and photographs from the Holocaust, but it is essential to watch, lest we ever forget what Putin has done in Ukraine.

 

The title of a recent article in our local newspaper seemed to summarize our entire election situation here in Arizona.

“Arizona's election is all about selling snake oil. Take a good look, America – Opinion: Once again, the world is watching Arizona, and what an ugly picture we present. Take a good look, America. This is what two years of false cries that you cannot trust elections will get you.”

by Laurie Roberts

Arizona Republic

Published: 8:10 a.m. MT Oct. 26, 2022; Updated 10:43 a.m. MT Oct. 26, 2022

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2022/10/26/arizona-election-kari-lake-selling-snake-oil/10605167002/

The title alone speaks volumes and says it all, at least from my perspective. We have some ultimate BIG LIE supporters and election deniers. The worst of them all is actually running for Secretary of State—responsible for the conduct of elections. Our mid-term election day is a week from Tuesday. When the residents of Arizona can elect representatives like Paul Gosar [1070] and Andy Biggs [1070], I suppose any crazy, cockamamie thing can happen. We shall soon see.

 

On Tuesday, 25.October.2022, there was a break-in at Democratic Party gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs’ campaign headquarters in Phoenix. It is impossible to avoid returning to the Nixon (Republican) campaign break-in at the Watergate complex [28.5.1972 & 17.6.1972]. Police have arrested a suspect and at present they have not found any political motive.

 

A friend and frequent contributor to this humble forum sent along the following article.

The contributor said:

“Here's a relevant discussion of religion and politics.”

“How Much Power Do Christians Really Have? – The invisible divide that's shaping how Republicans and Democrats think about religion — and politics”

by Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux

FiveThirtyEight

Published: OCT. 27, 2022, AT 6:00 AM

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-power-do-christians-really-have/

 . . . to which I responded:

Oh my, yes, indeedie . . . relevant.

Like so many aspects of American society, labels can become distracting. ‘Christians’ is a very broad label, and to cast upon all Christians the beliefs and actions of the Christian Nationalist movement is an ever-reach. Yes, I see many elements of reality in the article’s perspective.

I have long held the opinion that the mixture of politics and religion is a volatile and destructive concoction. The tension between religion and politics has existed for centuries and millennia; we have myriad examples in history. One of the great promises of this Republic was best summarized by President Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists[1.1.1802]. Yet, the conservatives (who generally seek to preserve the status quo ante, i.e., white, Christian, male domination) have turned to any tool they can grab ahold of to perpetuate their conservative values, e.g., the flag, patriotism, religion, and Christianity itself. From my perspective, Christian Nationalism is just a more palatable moniker for white supremacy. I will add here that I see Dobbs v. Jackson [597 U. S. ____ (2022)] [10671068] and Citizens United v. FEC [558 U.S. 310 (2010)] [424] in exactly the same light, returning us all to the status quo ante. The only question to the conservatives is how far back do we go to achieve “before”? The conservatives have chosen to subvert Christianity for their purpose, and we must deal with it.

I will note here that religion has been used as a tool by dictators and autocrats to control the people within their sphere throughout history. We just see a different version of the same phenomenon today.

In the form of context, I see religion’s place in our lives, in our society, in the frame of Jefferson’s letter. Religion is an important if not vital part of civilization, but the domain of religion is the spirit and soul of the individual. Politics is the domain of the common good or the collective. Christianity began in persecution, but as the religion gained believers (strength), flawed men turned the religion of persecute others in order to enhance their position (their beliefs, their values, their choices), e.g., the Inquisition. Religious dogma of the day was the antithesis of freedom and liberty; religion demanded conformity, adherence, and submission. To me, the dicta of priests is no different from the dicta of dictators.

Religion should confine itself to the soul of individuals. The State must see to the security and well-being of the collective, and at least in this Republic, must protect the liberty and freedom of We, the People.

“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

 . . .the contributor added:

“Please note that the article is not written as a broad-brush criticism of Christians in general. Its central function is pointing out the conflict between those of the "conservative" Christians who use religion as a political force and all other Christians. The article points out that Christians who are either not political or not conservative are getting stressed because of those others. Some of those people leave denominational Christianity altogether or refuse the label, Christian. While I myself have no affinity for the Judeo-Christian religions, I know people in both camps. The political "Christians" aren't people I can count as friends except in one case, and our discussions about the topic are minimal.”

 . . . to which I responded:

Quite so and agreed.

I have no problem with social conservatives. They are entitled to believe what they wish to believe. Where some social conservatives get crosswise with me is when they decide to impose their values, their beliefs, and their opinions on everyone else, i.e., the moral projectionists. From my perspective, a smaller subset of social conservatives is the Christian Nationalists who believe the United States is a Christian nation; they are not just moral projectionists but they wish to dominate non-Christians and exclude those they do not approve of. The oddity in all this . . . the Christian Nationalists are against immigrants from the south who are Christians, because they have darker skin pigmentation and speak Spanish. So, their political stance in not just Christianity, but it also includes other social factors, which is precisely why I place Christian Nationalists in the same group as other white supremacy groups.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1084:

Comment to the Blog:

“Breaking news this morning is that Rishi Sunak will be the UK’s next Prime Minister. Good luck to him; he’ll need it.

“As a simple, practical matter, Steve Bannon should go ahead and do the jail time. I assume he has overwhelming (and mostly false) fears about that.

“I like the tag 45POTUS for the deplorable former Resident. It crystallizes the reason he’s a villain and includes a popular caliber of weapon. I knew American politics had changed in my lifetime, but confirmation came when the GOP nominated a person for that job who has had legal issues continuously since 1973, in 3,500 cases prior to his election. That far exceeds what’s typical in his industry, real estate.

“The Constitution was written, perhaps unintentionally, to keep white male property owners in charge. That’s backfiring.

“Would that the RNC had let 45POTUS go. We could use at least a third party in this nation. Only Lincoln is a success story with that one, though, and the Whigs were so weak by then that they vanished.

“It’s worth noting that Benjamin Franklin, as far as I know, was the only Founder who came from the common people.

“The quote you give describes the cycle of empires, which has been studied by political science.

“I experience the disease of addiction and have seen many other examples. There’s an entire academic field around that. Punishment doesn’t help. Some drugs of abuse can be used to treat other illnesses, for example, opiates, benzodiazapenes, and various other medications.

“I have completed my ballot, refusing to vote in several races. I didn’t vote for any evil that I could see, “lesser” or otherwise. The lesser evil enables the greater evil.”

My response to the Blog:

Quite so. Sunak meets with The King today to get his charge. He represents many firsts for the United Kingdom. And yes, he will need lots of luck and skill immediately, no honeymoon.

I doubt Bannon will opt for getting it done. I think will follow the playbook of sein Anführer and delay as long as possible by any means possible. Perhaps he imagines that if the fBICP takes control of the House and dissolves the HSCJ6 the genesis of his immediate troubles will be moot, or maybe he thinks he can get to 2025 and obtain another pardon. Who knows. Regardless, he belongs in prison for four months (and should be longer).

Oh my, you got that right in spades, my friend. I was truly gobsmacked when he won the primaries and the nomination. How could anyone vote for such a deeply flawed man and an obvious conman? He was selling a pig in a poke for long before his election. But, his believers did, and they voted.

I do not share your perspective of the Framers. One thing is very, graphically certain; the contemporary conservatives want to preserve the status quo ante when white, (most often old) male, Protestants controlled all the levers of power and dictated and enforced the law they created to maintain their power. They gurgle the idealistic words of liberty, freedom, melting pot, and equality, but they never believed or meant them. They maintain a façade of respectability, but the winds of change are blowing warm.

Yea verily! We would have a vastly different situation if McDaniel had called his bluff.

I have not studied the biographies of all the Founders, but I believe you are correct. Like all of us, Ben Franklin had his flaws, but I truly appreciate his wisdom and insight.

Yep, quite so. A few years ago (pre-45POTUS), I would have said the Tytler Cycle does not apply to the United States of America, but that conman has singularly thrust us to the conclusion. Democracy is that fragile and tenuous, and we dreadfully close to losing it all.

There are many aspects of the psychotropic substance issue, not least of which is the disease of addiction. My interest in the question has personal roots as well. However, it is the philosophical perspective that drives my thinking—are we free or are we not? I have seen the destruction of street drugs, i.e., contamination, impurity, and inconsistency. Alcohol has been legal for nearly a century, and we still have alcohol fatalities (direct and induced). Even if all the psychotropic (Schedule I) substances were fully regulated like alcohol, we will still have fatalities, but far less than we experience today. We must find a better way that respects every citizen’s fundamental right to privacy and freedom of choice. My most immediate objective is to minimize the collateral damage of prohibition.

I have completed the easy part of my ballot. I am still researching other elements, e.g., judges and a plethora of referenda for this election. I suspect this is part of the fBICP effort to saturate the electorate, kind of a version of the Rasputin Hypothesis.

 . . . with follow-up comment:

“In addiction, free will fails. Based on my experience, discussions with dozens of others, and many studies, at some point in the process, the addicted person loses free choice about using. Treatment works for that if the addict is ready. I favor regulating and treating such substances basically like alcohol, with attention to our success in reducing nicotine addiction over the past several generations.

“I mailed my ballot. Done.”

 . . . and my follow-up response:

I have long held and still do hold that addiction for any individual, regardless of the medium of addiction, e.g., psychotropic substances, porn, tobacco, pedophilia, sex, or any addiction for that matter, the only thing that can break it is when the individual decides he has had enough and must change. Others can help, but only if the addict wants help. There are many support systems, but they work only when the individual convinces himself he must change. Yes, I agree, some individuals never reach that point and never seek help and actively resist any attempts to help. Those so afflicted often maintain their addiction to a terminal end. I also agree that psychotropic substance addiction should be treated like other addictions, e.g., alcohol and tobacco. We have a very long way to go for a more enlightened tomorrow.

Congratulations. Thank you for voting. I am still doing my research; ballot is partially completed.

The earth continues to turn. Life goes on.

 

Another contribution:

“You have a strong urge to protect others from evil ? Please don’t make me laugh .. you who thinks Steve Bannon and Trump should be in prison but you blindly see no wrong doing in the Clinton, Obama or Biden families. Tulsi Gabbards recent withdrawal from the Democrat party and her very accurate statement of who they are should have made you see the light, but no .. you wear blinders because you hopelessly choose to wear them .”

My reply:

Respectfully, I think you have missed a few of the Updates. From the moment I became aware of Hillary Clinton’s unilateral decision to conduct official government business using her private eMail server, I voiced by condemnation of her actions. That was circa 2013, although the issue did not explode until she declared her candidacy in 2015 [706715]. From the public facts available, I was convinced that she had violated multiple laws [737]. She made exactly the same mistake that [the person who shall no longer be named] is  making today, official (professional) eMails, texts, messages, letters, or any form of communication are NOT personal property; they are the property of the U.S. Government and belong to We, the People. I saw more than enough factual evidence beyond the “probable cause” threshold that warranted her charging and prosecution. It still baffles me why she was not charged. The Justice Department never (to my knowledge) provided rationale for their decision not to prosecute. I might understand the paucity of prosecution under the 2nd  term of President Obama. But, given that, why didn’t the 45POTUS Justice Department (Sessions & Barr) charge and prosecute her. The only conclusion I could reach is, the USG had insufficient factual evidence to gain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. Regardless, her eMail server fiasco during her tenure as Secretary of State exceeded my threshold of tolerance; to me, her mistake disqualified her, and as a consequence, I could not vote for her.

I am not aware of any even remotely criminal conduct by either President Obama or President Biden. QAnon and snake-oil accusations are not factual or evidence. If you have factual evidence to indicate such criminal conduct, I will gladly listen and assess. Presidents Obama and Biden are just citizens; if they violated the law, they deserve to be charged, prosecuted, convicted, and punished. I appreciate and acknowledge that some folks do not like Presidents Obama or Biden simply because they are not of their tribe, but that is a very long way from “probable cause” and even farther away from “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Facts!

Back when Tulsi Gabbard was a candidate for president, I supported much of what she said, and I liked the way she said it. I have listened to more than a few of Tulsi Gabbard’s pronouncements in recent months. It is the content of her words that I reject and disagree with. For reasons I know not, she has turned to the dark side. So be it; her choice.

You are free to accuse me as you wish. You are also free to speak your mind. I simply do not agree.

 . . . with follow-up comment:

“Cap .. you do not believe Tulsi knows what she’s talking about and she is around those slimy Democrat politicians and left run medias every day .. you are not. She has not joined the dark side .. she has seen the light . You have no idea how dark the side you support really is. And it’s all because you hate Trump so much you don’t care to see it .  

“And they have never done anything to Clinton just like they have not investigated the Bidens .. this is not about Q .. this is about reality 

https://youtu.be/kYC_xJb0LmE

Judicial Watch sues for public information..”

 . . . and my follow-up reply:

I know you believe and espouse what you wish to believe, as do I and also Tulsi Gabbard. From my perspective, Gabbard has become a more refined and smoother version of Marjorie Taylor Greene.

‘Hate’ is a very powerful, emotional, and strong word. I do not use the word very often. I do not recall ever using that word with respect to [the person who shall no longer be named]. I do not hate him; I simply recognize him for what he is—a huckster, conman, snake-oil salesman. The fact that so many American citizens have been seduced by his Siren Song is sad, tragic, unfortunate, and regrettable, but that is life. I think we have a long history of you seeing the man in a far different light than me, which is the choice of each of us in a free society. I am truly sorry you and so many others cannot see him for what he is, but that is life. You believe what you wish to believe, as do I.

Like all successful conmen throughout history, [the person who shall no longer be named] has studied his prey and adapted well to that group. He has refined his ‘pitch’ to reinforce the beliefs of his target audience. His success in convincing so many American citizens to believe in his snake-oil is testament to his skill, which is exactly why the mythology of the Sirens grew into the historical record. What that man does is definitely not new; that conduct has been around for millennia.

I have studied enough right-wing sources to recognize them for what they are as well. I have listened to and researched the subjects of QAnon, Alex Jones, Tom Filton, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, et al ad infinitum ad nauseum. I do not need more evidence. The latest version as you noted is simply more of the same—accusations, no evidence.

There is an old, time-tested, political adage—perception is 90% of reality. It is the nature of life, especially in a free society. I do not and will not condemn your choices. They are yours, not mine. I have my own. I respect your right to choose, and I am truly grateful that you are willing to share your perspective on contemporary issues.

 

A different contribution:

“Had a look at the world news-damned alarming what is happening in Ukraine. Is Putin really gearing up for using nuclear weapons? It will be his biggest downfall of all. We’ve been this way before haven’t we,-an island in your neck of the woods. I would like to say more Cap but my previous experiences would tell me ‘NO’. I know you’ll understand.

My response:

I could attach a plethora of adjectives to the events in Ukraine, some of them quite profane. I try to understand the motives—why? Mein Kampf gave us a fairly clear view of Hitler’s motives, although far too many people chose not to heed the warning signs. We do not have a similar manifesto from Putin. I suspect he is being driven or pushed by the far right-wingers in the Duma and Russian society. The right-wingers attempted a coup d’état to impose their choices during the disintegration of the USSR. Putin has been their man from the beginning. They refuse to accept the disintegration, and thus, still believe Ukraine, like Georgia, Kazakhstan, et al, are still part of Russia, or the Russian Federation as they now call it. They refuse to recognize the independence of Ukraine. Despite their imaginings, Ukraine has been an independent, sovereign country recognized by the United Nations since 24.August.1991. Other parts of the former USSR have chosen independence, while others like Belarus have chosen to be vassal states of Russia. It is unfortunate that Putin and the right-wingers seek the status quo ante, but the Ukrainian people have made their choice, and they deserve their independence. Clearly, the Ukrainian people have seen themselves as independent from long before 1991. Then, we have Putin threatening the world with nuclear weapons to intimidate Ukraine and her supporters into submission to Russian will. Nine months ago, I would not have imagined Putin, or the right-wingers, would threaten anyone with their nuclear weapons, but the old adage, desperate times lead desperate people to do desperate things. applies. That said, to answer your question, I do not think they are foolish or suicidal enough to initiate a nuclear strike on the West, but I now believe he is desperate enough to detonate a dirty bomb in Russian territory that he would use as pretext to use tactical nuclear weapons inside Ukraine; Kherson being a likely target. The Russians have long used scorched earth as a tactic, i.e., if I can’t have it, no one will have it. We must remain attentive, observant, and suspicious, and most of all prepared. He is desperate, and the unthinkable is now in the category of possible.

I am compelled to publicly state that we see the exact same forces at play in the United States of America. A large portion of our right-wingers seek my way or no way. Add to that group the anarchist element that seeks no government, every man for himself, and we have a very odiferous admixture of destructive forces.

I was quite concerned about the health and well-being of the United States back in the 60s and 70s with the Vietnam war protests, civil rights movement, Watergate, and extremist groups sprouting up everywhere. But, those days pale in comparison to what we face today. I fear for the Republic.

“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

 . . . with follow-up comment:

“What is it in human nature that divides us all?. Why can’t we all live together in peace on this wonderful blue lump in space?

“One day couldn’t we all come together as a unilateral body? Just think what benefits all might secure from such a society or am I dreaming Cap.?

“What then is the answer?

“Clearly mankind needs quickly to see all of we the inhabitants as a single form of energy working together for the benefit of us and the other forms of life that we share this planet with. Will that ever happen Cap?”

 . . . and my follow-up response:

Very good question. I suppose there are many contributing factors.

To me, the international aspects (worldwide) are simply a much larger scale of what we face at the local level. Again to me, it seems the common thread is tribalism, or rather various versions of tribalism. We grow up with a given set of rules. Our sphere is initially our parents, and that sphere expands as we grow and learn. But, those rules are familiar, and perhaps even comfortable; we know them. Then, someone comes into our sphere and wants to change the rules, we tend to object and seek to exclude those change agents. As I look at U.S. history, this thread of tribalism goes back to the very first European settlers. My paternal ancestors fled France because of violent persecution simply because of their chosen religious beliefs; they were Huguenots in a Catholic country—Christian upon Christian. The oddity that does not track is, many fled Europe to escape persecution for their religion, and then as they grew in the American colonies, they turned around to persecute and exclude people not like them, Irish Catholics being an excellent example.

Intellectually, the ideals upon which this once grand Republic was founded still seem like the shining light of hope that one day we will overcome and abandon the tribalism that separates us.

Lastly, I do not see it changing other than new versions of the same thing until we learn to respect others not like us, to cherish diversity, and to embrace change.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

24 October 2022

Update no.1084

Update from the Sunland

No.1084

17.10.22 – 23.10.22

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

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- My oh my, that was a very swift collapse! Liz Truss resigned after just six weeks (44 days) as prime minister [1078]—the shortest serving prime minister in British history. The Conservative Party will once again try to elect a leader and replacement for Truss. She made an unusual number of mistakes and missteps during her short tenure.

-- Stephen Kevin Bannon [1032] was sentenced to four (4) months in prison and fined US$6.5K for his defiance of a congressional subpoena [1071]. His lawyers immediately appealed, and the court allowed him to remain free pending appeal. He belongs in prison, but the gears of justice must turn properly.

 

A friend and frequent contributor to this humble forum sent along the following query:

“I'd like your confirmation/opinion on the voting story under ‘More from Snopes.’”

With this URL:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/10/14/no-the-right-to-vote-isnt-in-the-us-constitution/?utm_campaign=Debunker%20101722%20%2801GFKA83J87JSJQZCGQEF69M81%29&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Snopes%20Debunker

“No, the Right to Vote Isn’t in the US Constitution – The framers of the Constitution never mentioned a right to vote. They didn’t forget. They intentionally left it out.”

by Morgan Marietta

The Conversation

Published 14 October 2022

My response:

Thank you for the query . . . interesting topic, especially given the bent of the current bench of the U.S. Supreme Court.

A simple search of the text of the U.S. Constitution validates the observations of the article. The word ‘vote’ is used explicitly with respect to the conduct of the Congress and the Electoral College process, not regarding a citizen’s right vote in general. The strict constructionists among us will argue that such absence of explicit definition of a citizen’s right to vote in the Constitution means or rather implies, the matter is an issue for the states.

Section 2, Amendment XIV states the denial of the right to vote, which implies that the inverse must exist, i.e., something cannot be denied that does not exist.

Section 1, Amendment XV involves the same argument; “denied or abridged” . . . “on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Something must exist to be denied. Amendment XIX added “sex,” but did not define sex, i.e., gender or action? That said, I think the simple recognition of “race” and “sex” implies the greater right of all citizens.

There are ample historical documents that validate the concerns of the framers for the fickleness of a popular vote. They sought insulation or a deliberative damper to intervene with wild, emotional, mob rule. The original criteria to vote was rather narrow and exclusive—adult, male, freehold property owners and in some states only Protestants.

While the Constitution deals primarily with the authority of the federal government, the framers felt the need to define the constitutional rights of citizens as represented in the Bill of Rights (Amendments I through X). Voting was not among those rights. Neither was a citizen’s fundamental right to privacy . . . among others. Dissimilar rights of citizens in states is an anathema to the definition of American.

The fundamental conflict between progressives and strict constructionists sitting on the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court has only just begun to play out. Voting will be one of those weathervane issues to watch. The Court has several voting matters on the agenda for this session. We shall see what this Court does. I suspect we will not be happy.

“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

. . . follow-up comment:

“I found the item interesting (and it's not Snopes' own research), so I thought I'd call on your scholarship. Our current situation highlights the Founders' flaws in choosing whom to trust.”

 . . . to which I replied:

A mere handful of years ago, I would have never considered questioning the validity of our right to vote. Yet, with the dawn of the 45POTUS era, we now question the most basic and foundational elements of representative democracy. The reconfigured U.S. Supreme Court as a direct consequence of 45POTUS has begun the process of altering long established law. The social conservatives do not care how immoral, outrageous, despicable, and disgusting ihr Anführer is as long as they can get their agenda codified in law. I do not think 45POTUS has any clue who the people were who he appointed to the Supreme Court; The Federalist Society decided and 45POTUS delivered. Given the Court’s recent performance, nothing is stable; nothing is decided. We have only seen the very beginning of a very tortuous road ahead. And now, even our fundamental right to vote is in doubt because it is not explicitly written in the Constitution. Tortuous road . . . indeed!

Who da thunk’it?

 

The PBS Frontline program titled: “Lies, Politics and Democracy” [S40 Ep17] broadcast on 9.June.2022, painted a very detailed, pointed picture of events that led to the Day of Insurrection. They documented each segment with a countdown “Until January 6, 2021” and “After January 6, 2021.” The first segment is titled: “Democracy is for Losers,” and the countdown clock in the upper right corner read:

February 1, 2016

4 Years, 11 Months, 5 Days

Until January 6, 2021

The event they marked was the results of the Iowa Caucuses in 2016. Ted Cruz won and [the person who shall no longer be named] lost. And what did the loser do? He accused the winner of stealing the election in some unspecified, undocumented, un-factual manner. From him, it was the only possible conclusion because he never loses . . . of course excluding his five bankruptcies, his countless failed business initiatives, and two failed marriages. The threats to democracy were there from the very beginning, long before the man became 45POTUS.

A fact I did not know until this program was [the person who shall no longer be named] made a telephone call from Air Force One to RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel as he retreated from Washington after refusing to participate in the transfer of power to and inauguration of President Biden. In that call, he threatened to leave the Republican Party and form his own fBICP formally separate from the Republican Party. That telephone call explains exactly why so many bloody Republican leaders did an instant reversal from publicly condemning 45POTUS on the floor of the House and Senate to staunchly defending him. They recognized that if [the person who shall no longer be named] left the party and took his MAGA supporters with him, the Republican Party would cease to be a nationally relevant political party.

Democracy is indeed fragile and thin, and far more easily lost than I ever imagined. So much of representative democracy rests upon good faith. That conman who was 45POTUS legitimized the dark forces that have existed in the shadows for centuries. I am continuously reminded of Benjamin Franklin’s prescient reply when asked after the constitutional convention [17.September.1787] whether we had a republic or a monarchy. Franklin answered swiftly and succinctly, “A republic, if you can keep it.” I cherish that answer for many reasons beyond the directness and brevity. We did indeed have a republic, a representative democracy. However, the punchline to me is “if you can keep it.” He chose 2nd person plural rather than 1st person plural, i.e., the framers created the republic, but it was up to all of us to defend and preserve the republic.

Regrettably, far too many citizens in this once grand republic have chosen to abandon the republic and seek an autocracy, or worse a dictatorship. That reality alone virtually validates the Tytler Cycle, named for Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee. In 1787, Lord Woodhouselee wrote and gave a lecture titled: “The Fall of The Athenian Republic.” He hypothesized and contended that democracies only last 200 years as governance transitions through the cycle

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.”

We have passed through apathy and are deep into dependence. Bondage is next. For those corroding the very foundations of the republic, I hope you are happy. I am not!

 

Another PBS Frontline program, this one titled: “Michael Flynn’s Holy War” [S40 Ep18] was broadcast on 18.October.2022. The program featured the post-insurrection activities of Lieutenant General Michael Thomas Flynn, USA (Ret.), the guilty and pardoned MAGA activist. In an interview with an Associated Press (AP) journalist, Flynn was asked, “A lot of people hear your rhetoric and wonder are you a Christian Nationalist. Are you?’ Flynn replied, “That was a stupid question.” Then, because of that question Flynn declared, he would never talk to AP again and stormed out. Reverend Doctor Jacqui Lewis, Middle Collegiate Church, NY, observed, “Mike Flynn is in a movement that is designed to impose a small minority ethics on the rest of the nation.”  She is spot on correct, and that is precisely the definition of moral projection. Flynn and his acolytes are deep into the BIG LIE and the whole MAGA nonsense.

Christian Nationalists believe it is their duty to take America back to Christian values (as they define them). From my perspective, Christian Nationalism is just another form of white supremacy, xenophobia, isolationism, and extreme moral projection—the antithesis of freedom and liberty. No thank you!

 

Election integrity as defined by the fBICP (remnants of the GOP) is only citizens who support them should be able to vote. To the fBICP, the will of the People is irrelevant. The only factor that matters is they win and continue to dictate to all of us as they see things in some distant past. We are about to see the consequences.

To me, election deniers and proponents of the BIG LIE are and should be disqualified from holding public office. Any such candidate cannot and will not get my vote.

 

A program that would have never been made just a few years ago, and we certainly would not have seen, was broadcast on 19.October.2022. The PBS Nova program titled: “Can Psychedelics Cure? [S49 Ep14] informed us of the scientific and medical uses of controlled substances to successfully treat addiction, depression, and PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder). The Schedule I substances at issue in this particular program were: LySergic acid Diethylamide (LSD), known by many other names, including Acid, Dots, and Mellow Yellow; Psilocybin, more commonly known by its street names, Magic mushrooms, Shrooms, Mushrooms; and 3,4-MethyleneDioxy-MethamphetAmine (MDMA), also known as Ecstasy, E, Eve, Adam, Beans, Clarity, Disco Biscuit, Go, Hug Drug, Lover’s Speed, Peace, STP, X, and XTC. As illuminated by the Nova program, what is different between the noted therapeutic uses and the common street usage is the pharmaceutical quality (purity, consistency, and uniform dosage) and therapeutic dosage to achieve a known response. To me, the program implicitly represents the insanity of Nixon’s “war on drugs” and exemplifies the reality of ignorance over knowledge.

One of these days, we will mature as a society and recognize every citizen’s fundamental right to privacy and our precious freedom of choice. The reality of life is, any substance can be abused to toxic levels, eventually essentials to life on this planet, e.g., water and oxygen, can be lethal if consumed to excess. In my life, I have been prescribed and taken powerful derivative and synthetic opiates. I have never been addicted and never felt the urge to consume more than the amount prescribed. They are valuable medicines. Yet, like all substances, if they are consumed to excessive amounts, they can be lethal. To me, drug use is not different from any other choice in life. If you like the thrill of jumping off a bridge, you accept the risk that one day you might jump from too great a height, or hit the water wrong, or hit some unseen object in the water. As free people, we make choices that matter to us every single day of our lives. There is risk in everything in life. We assess the risk in our choices, and we accept the risk. Psychotropic substances are no different from any other risk we accept in life.

When Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act (AKA CSA) [84 Stat. 1242; Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 [PL 91-513; 84 Stat. 1236; 27.October.1970], I was a 22-year-old Lieutenant of Marines who was well aware of the burgeoning drug culture growing from the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights movement, and the sexual revolution. At the time, I believed what the president and the government were telling us that drug abuse was “America’s public enemy number one.” As I aged and learned, I realized that Nixon had lied to us. He probably believed what he said. I am certain he disapproved of recreational use of all psychotropic substances . . . well, except alcohol. And clearly, the majority of Congress 50 years ago agreed with Nixon in that they passed the law by substantial majorities in both chambers. What was not discussed, and I was not knowledgeable enough to realize, was the extraordinary sacrifice of our most fundamental rights to enable the CSA. In the following decades, we witnessed the progressive erosion of our precious freedom of choice and the governmental abuses of our other constitutional rights. The moral projectionists of the day decided to impose their choices or rather limits on choices on all citizens. They knew better what was good for us.

Lastly, it is my opinion that the greatest majority of fatalities from street drug consumption is contamination and inconsistency. A drug user who is used to taking 10% cut heroin and is inadvertently or intentionally given 100% pure heroin dies by overdose—not his choice. Today, we see simple marijuana laced with the powerful synthetic opiate fentanyl, and people die from smoking a joint—not their choice. A century ago, our forefathers prohibited alcohol. People died from alcohol consumption for many reasons including contamination and inconsistency. They learned the fallacy of their attempted prohibition. Today, alcohol is legal and regulated. It is consistent and regulated in content. We still have deaths due to excessive alcohol consumption, but that excess is a personal choice of the individual. We must find the will and courage to do the same for all other psychotropic substances. Our latest attempt at prohibition and imposition upon private choice was wrong 50 years ago; it is even more wrong today. It is long overdue to choose knowledge over ignorance. We must find the means to respect every citizen’s fundamental right to privacy and return our precious freedom of choice.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1083:

“Goodness Cap-quite an astounding piece of work. If course I was expecting your comments and I’m utterly confident there are more to come.

“Your former person who’s name I’m not permitted to mention has figured quite extensible over this side in many front page headlines.

“Mind you we’re not without political disturbances of our own which I’m certain you’ll be aware of.

“Politicians-hell, the country should be governed differently. We need a new method of running the nation.”

My reply:

Thank you, mate. I try. In the main, I respond to contemporary stimulants—some weeks bounty, other weeks drought.

Yes, unfortunately, there will be more. I feel a very strong drive to confront evil, and we have the consummate evil in front of us. He is a huckster, conman, and snake oil salesman extraordinaire who has dupped millions of Americans into believing in his nonsense and worthless drivel. He is a grotesquely offensive human being by just about any metric we wish to use. I cannot turn away from the confrontation of our current evil persona, and I refuse to even mention his name, because to do so elicits a string of associated profanity. I am sorry that our principal Ugly American has infected your media. The best I can say is, this too shall pass.

I do not see the gory details, but PM Truss seems to have poked the hornet’s nest more so than her predecessor. Why are these politicians so bloody tone-deaf?

It seems we are in the same or similar boat. Perhaps our form of government has run its course. Further, it appears we are validating the Tytler Cycle in real time. Very sad!

 

Comment to the Blog:

“We have the beginnings of a defense of Planet Earth from asteroids. The likely dangers are already here.

“Remember that, in and of themselves, the Chump’s rantings are “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” (Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5) If powerful people didn’t help and support him, he might be institutionalized by now. The followers are the same as tyrants’ followers throughout history.

“The crux of the abortion debate is an unanswerable question; when does the spirit or separate consciousness enter the body? Humans can’t answer that, but we can argue about it forever.

“I disagree with your other correspondent’s statement that, “We must also vote even when none of the candidates are to our liking.” Nope. My mail-in ballot is here awaiting my research of whether several races have any candid ate that deserves my vote. Negative campaigning will do that.

“Knowledge—awareness of fact little slanted by teacher viewpoint—can lead to wisdom, but neither of our parties wants that from the masses.”

My response to the Blog:

Yes! We have plenty of dangers and threats. The earthly man-made threats are far more immediate than the astronomical versions. Yet, it is encouraging that at least a few scientists are keeping their eye on the horizon, as we say in aviator terms. The DART mission cost us roughly US$325M, but at least we have a tool for planetary defense.

Very appropriate application of Macbeth’s wisdom. He should have been imprisoned long ago for the multitudinous frauds he has perpetrated as a conman. Agreed!

I understand the ethical and moral debate. We can discuss how the threshold should be defined. Social conservative definition as the instant of conception is NOT and never will be scientifically supportable. To me, this debate of threshold is just another form of Victorian morality, paternalism, and moral projection trying to impose upon the sexual behavior and reproductive rights of free citizens. As I have written and will continue to write, the foundation issue is not a medical procedure or the threshold of life, but rather the fundamental rights of women as citizens with equal rights and protections under the law. The Supremes have thrust us all into imbalance, and we have only begun to feel the consequences.

You will vote as you choose, as you wish. I will do the same. But, we both will vote, and that is the objective. We must VOTE!

Your condemnation of both political parties seems rather cynical to me, and I cannot agree. From my perspective, one singular party seeks ignorance over knowledge. They attack knowledge at nearly every turn. I do not see a comparative drive for ignorance from the other party.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-) 

17 October 2022

Update no.1083

Update from the Sunland

No.1083

10.10.22 – 16.10.22

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

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) [10371081] did better than calculated, expected, and perhaps even hoped. NASA defined success as the impact shortening the orbital period of Dimorphos by 10 minutes (1%). Measurements since the event confirm that the impact shortened the orbital period by 32 minutes (4%). NASA declared the experiment a success. We finally have a demonstrable tool for planetary defense should the need ever arise.

-- On Wednesday, 12.October.2022, the UN General Assembly voted [143-5-35-10] {for-against-abstain-absent} on General Assembly Emergency Session Resolution ES-11/4, condemning Russia’s actions [1050] in Ukraine including their so-called referenda in the Russian-occupied Ukrainian oblasts of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia. The resolution also declared Russia’s subsequent attempted annexations of those provinces are invalid and illegal under international law. Resolution ES-11/4 calls upon all states to not recognize these territories to be part of Russia. Furthermore, it demands that Russia "immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw" from Ukraine as Russia is violating the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.

Not surprisingly, the five votes against Resolution ES-11/4 were Russia and her sympathetic friends: Belarus, DPRK, Nicaragua, and Syria.

The next step should be the amendment of the UN Charter to remove Russia as a permanent member of the Security Council. Putin has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Russia is not worthy of protecting world peace. Putin has unilaterally started the first land war in Europe since World War II and the formation of the United Nations. They do not deserve veto authority, and they should be relegated to the rotation of non-permanent regional members.

-- Also on Wednesday, a Connecticut jury ordered vociferous conspiracy theorist Alexander Emerick ‘Alex’ Jones to pay $965 million in compensatory and punitive damages to the families of eight Sandy Hook shooting victims and an FBI agent who responded to the attack for the suffering Jones caused them by spreading lies on his platforms about the 2012 massacre [574]. The defamation cases against Jones by especially the Sandy Hook families are not complete. There are more ahead. Jones has been gloating and boasting that the petitioners will not get a dime of his money. If he persists in that stance, he may well find himself a guest of the government where he can contemplate the error of his ways. The mindless audacity of the man is indescribable, but like all of the voices of the far-right and alt-right, reason, logic, facts and judgment do not and never have applied to their rhetoric.

-- United States House of Representatives Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol {HSCJ6} [1020] held what is reported to be its last public hearing on Thursday, 13.January.2022. They gathered the dominant evidence and painted a very damning picture of the former president’s culpability before, during, and after the insurrection on 6.January.2021 [991]. The HSCJ6 presented at the hearing a 45POTUS tweet I had not seen or heard of previously:

These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!

6:01PM January 6, 2021

Oh! We will remember . . . but not in the way you would like. The BIG LIE was quite mature and the insurrection spent by the time the man tweeted that message. As pointed out by the HSCJ6 chairman, the vast preponderance of testimony before the committee came from Republicans, former Republicans, presidential staff and White House staff members, and even his family members. Further, as members of the HSCJ6 repeatedly and accurately stated, “All roads lead to one place”—[the person who shall no longer be named]. In their closing action, the HSCJ6 decided to and voted unanimously (9-0) to subpoena the former president to testify under oath before the committee to explain his actions and inaction.

To tamp down the inevitable denials, objections, and doubters, seven (7) former and sitting presidents have come forward to testify before Congress in American history, two (2) of them by subpoena. There is ample precedent to compel presidential testimony before HSCJ6 or any other relevant congressional committee. History noted, I hold very little belief this fellow will testify.

Later that day, [the person who shall no longer be named] issued a letter response to the HSCJ6. He began:

THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 2020 WAS RIGGED AND STOLEN! [as-written]

He closed:

The people of this Country will not stand for unequal justice under the law, or Liberty and Justice for some. Election Day is coming. We demand answers on the Crime of the Century.

Once again, the man is correct. We demand equal justice, which means he should face justice like any other ordinary citizen for the crimes he has committed. Crime of the Century, indeed! History will record undoubtedly that his BIG LIE incited the first insurrection in the United States since the Civil War. 

-- In the continuing sordid saga of [the person who shall no longer be named] and his theft of the People’s documents, the U.S. Supreme Court added their weight to the government’s effort to enforce the law. The Court’s simple but direct decision in Trump, Donald J. v. United States [598 U.S. 22A283 (2022)] denied his appeal of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of DONALD J. TRUMP v. United States of America [11CCA Case: 22-13005 (2022)] [1080], which in turn was an appeal of 

of Judge Cannon’s order in DONALD J. TRUMP v. United States of America [USDC FL SD Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC (2022)] [1078]. The bottom line of all this judicial wrangling is the U.S. Government (USG) has full access and control of the marked classified documents that were discovered in the possession of [the person who shall no longer be named] and seized by the FBI at his Mar-a-Lago residence [1074]. Reportedly, the USG has filed the legal paperwork to stop the Special Master review of all the other documents; that ruling is pending. [redaction mine]

 

Why do so many good American citizens truly believe the BIG LIE? The answer: [The person who shall no longer be named] said so. They believe him and what he says without evidence or facts, only his wild accusations, because he said so. They believe! They refuse to recognize or acknowledge that he is a huckster, a conman, and an inveterate liar . . . they just believe!

During the campaign for the 2016 election, at a campaign stop at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa [23.January.2016], [the person who shall no longer be named] publicly stated: 

“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn’t lose any voters, okay?” He mimicked firing a gun with his fingers. “It’s, like, incredible.” 

FYI: murder is a capital crime, not just felonious. 

He won the Iowa Caucuses. He went on to win the Republican nomination for president and was duly elected to become the 45th President of the United States. What does this fact alone say about a large portion of American citizens?

To be fair, a friend, believer, and contributor to Update no.756 chastised me that I had taken the quote out of context. The relevant portion of his speech was:

“The people, my people, are so smart, and you know what else they say about my people . . . the polls, they say I have the most loyal people.  Did you ever see that?  Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters.  OK, it’s like incredible.”

The implication of the admonishment is “the polls” made the statement, not him. Interesting supposition. First, his sentence construction has an unclear antecedent, i.e., we do not know who made the statement, if anyone. [The person who shall no longer be named] could have made up the sentence based on his interpretation of some mystical poll (also of his imagination). I tried to find a poll, any poll, that made such an outrageous statement. And, surprise, surprise, I could not find any poll that even remotely suggested such a foolish and disgraceful statement. Regardless of what version you wish to believe or accept, the sentence quoted initially is morally reprehensible regardless of who said it, or made it up, but nonetheless repeated the statement. The statement may well be correct as an observation of his believers, but it remains a morally reprehensible set of words, full stop.

So far, he has been correct. He has gotten away with multitudinous felonious crimes, however the vice of justice is inexorably tightening around him in multitude venues. I trust that justice will be served, and his declarative statement will prove to be his death knell.

 

I have been understandably focused on [the person who shall no longer be named] because he has set the tone and standard for the former Republican Party and now former Bully In Chief Party (fBICP). His disciples and acolytes are active candidates for public office, and they are perpetuating the fallacious nonsense of ihr Anführer.

We have quite the crowd of his believers running for all levels of elected government. They advocate for, espouse, push, and expand the BIG LIE. [The person who shall no longer be named] created the BIG LIE. He sustained the BIG LIE despite overwhelming advice and counsel from his ministers, advisors, supporters, and lawyers. As a consequence, the BIG LIE fueled the insurrection on 6.January.2021. Law abiding citizens have lost their lives because of the BIG LIE. It would be one thing if [the person who shall no longer be named] had remained the only voice and advocate for the BIG LIE, but no, we have a crowd of political candidates who repeat these fact-less claims of election fraud. The worst of it is, the BIG LIE corrodes the confidence of everyone with the integrity of our elections. In Arizona, we have a candidate for Secretary of State who is demonstrably farther to the right than [the person who shall no longer be named], and we are going to vote in a couple of weeks. That candidate is the most radical Jim Crow v2.0 advocate I have yet seen, and if he wins, he will supervise future elections . . . just think of that potential.

The fBICP candidates openly and publicly accuse President Biden and all Democrat candidates of opening the southern border and encouraging undocumented immigrants to enter at will. Such accusations are ridiculous and utter nonsense. They are betting that most voters will not take the time to learn the truth. The Biden administration is trying to humanely filter through bona fide asylum seekers and refugees from the less worthy individuals showing up at the border. The current administration has chosen to take a less confrontational, adversarial stance with respect to immigrants. The reality is, as I have long advocated, comprehensive immigration reform has been desperately needed for decades across multiple administrations, both Republican and Democrat. Xenophobia is NOT an acceptable position for any true American citizen. I can support a barrier at the border as long as it is part of an in-depth system of immigration control and operation. Intransigence and ‘my way or the highway’ is NOT an acceptable state. The exaggerations of the fBICP are no longer tolerable either.

Both have missed the point when it comes to the individual, personal rights of women. The fBICP candidate for U.S. Senate in Arizona has publicly called abortion some demonic cult practice of fetal sacrifice. Such rhetoric is NOT helpful and colors the candidate more than anything else. Both sides appear to be incapable of recognizing the real, fundamental issue, and the fBICP specifically reject the fundamental rights of every woman to decide what happens with her body—NOT the State. The fBICP adherents have succumbed to the extreme political rhetoric rather than recognize the broader issue, and the Democrats have failed to take the higher road to a more informed position.

I could go on, and there are many more issues to discuss in this vein, but this must come to an end. We vote in three weeks’ time, or before if you vote by mail. Once again, I strongly urge every American citizen to vote. Complacency or indifference will only enable the radicals in our society to gain more control over our lives. VOTE!

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1082:

Comment to the Blog:

“Attorney General Garland’s excuse for not charging the Chump, the upcoming election, is spineless. The Chump isn’t a candidate and I see no excuse for restraining justice if he was.

“The Republicans get votes largely by arousing and appeasing the fears of conservative, religious white people. They often do this by passing laws about nonexistent events like graphic sex or critical race theory in K-12 schools or voter fraud. Those people are easily duped. The Republicans succeed only because the Democrats do even less for ordinary people.

“Biden’s pardon of a few people for simple possession of marijuana is a weak gesture. Ohio’s governor has already stated (in different words) that he will ignore it.”

My response to the Blog:

I think you should include the adverb ‘yet’ to your ‘not charging’ statement. The election only delays charges, not negate them. AG Garland is simply abiding custom and practice over multiple administrations of both colors. The risk in charging prominent political figures during the late stages of the silly season is the plausible accusation that charges are politically motivated. The Department of Justice has already gone too far down the political partisanship road under AG Barr. I reluctantly must support AG Garland in his efforts to restore the integrity and apolitical stance of the Justice Department.

Spot on! That reality is one of multitudinous reasons I cannot support or vote for any Republican. They have alienated me, and to this minute, they stand defiant and unrepentant in their embrace of the BIG LIE and the resultant insurrection—the first such attempt to negate the constitutional election process. Far worse, to this minute, across the country, they attack the very essence of democracy and a constitutional republic. Forgiveness will take a very long time (if ever). In many ways, I think what MAGA, fBICP, and Republicans without conscience have done is worse than the Civil War. Sure, they have not killed many people as occurred in the Civil War, but what they have done is corroded and destroyed the very foundation and structure of our once grand constitutional republic. Whether we can overcome, recover, and grow from what they have done is a very long work in progress.

How is Ohio’s passive-aggressive stance better than President Biden’s action to right a wrong. Implicit in the president’s pardon proclamation is the policy shift of no further federal prosecutions of simple marijuana possession. Long journeys begin with small steps.

 . . . Round two:

“Biden's pardoning of a few people for simple possession of marijuana isn't morally wrong, but it's small and fainthearted, just like most of the DNC's policy gestures.”

 . . . my response to round two:

As I have said many times and I believe, long journeys begin with small steps. Yes, absolutely, this is a very small gesture, a small step, but it is a positive step on a very long journey. At least President Biden had the chutzpah to take the step forward to correct a deeply wrong action invoked 50 years ago. Something is better than nothing.

 . . . Round three:

“I've been hearing that incremental stuff from Democrats since Clinton. The Republicans bulldoze whatever results they get. I'm sitting here waiting on my mail-in ballot. Rest assured that no candidate will get my vote unless I believe they'll take stronger actions than Biden's.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Good points. Compromise is life in a representative democracy. I do agree with you on Republican tactics. Example no.1: McConnell’s unilateral immoral obstruction of President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee NINE (9) MONTHS prior to the election. Just because Republicans and fBICP supporters are immoral does not mean the rest of us must jump into the gutter mud & muck with them. We get dirty; they love it.

 . . . Round four:

“So the Democrats just yield?”

 . . . my response to round four:

Good point, but no . . . that is not what I am suggesting. I agree, it is very hard to play a game when one side refuses to play and stands on the sidelines with their arms crossed on their chests. I have been sorely disappointed in Schumer, who has resoundingly failed to illuminate the obstruction of the fBICP by their intransigence. Bill Maher had a great monologue on the issue in last night’s program.

The last word on this thread:

“So maybe someone has to quit playing games and get real about the issues.”

 

Another contribution:

“Good solid points regarding mankind's snail pace progress toward at least mutual individual respect if not spiritual maturity based on love. As always, and perhaps like you, my astute friend, I react to such observations with "What can be done to accelerate positive change?" And as always, I conclude that classic education, internationally, is the only long range answer for our planet and that all forced controls of human nature are in vain. Unfortunately, in my country I see only rare effective positive efforts like College (and secondary School) of the Ozarks in southern Missouri and Hillsdale College in Michigan, both of which I support regularly, succeeding in adding thinking patriots rather than ignoramuses or ideologs to the young population in this country.

“I hope and suspect some other nations are doing somewhat better, but in most of our states and for sure here in beautiful Mississippi we apparently will continue to elect the same local leadership to maintain the sad status quo.

“What, specifically if possible, does your wise heart suggest, Cap?”

My reply:

Thank you for your generous words.

I absolutely agree with your education path. However, education in Mao’s form is not constructive. As I have written many times, I absolutely believe that knowledge is infinitely better than ignorance, which is precisely why I object to so many social conservative positions and vigorously object to moral projectionist attempts to dictate their choices on everyone else. Mutual respect is essential. Vigorous public debate is vital to any democracy. Yet, seeking and finding balance is the difficult part. If we teach communism only, then communism becomes the norm. If we teach white supremacy, then racism and xenophobia become the standard.

The difficulty today rests upon the reality that respect is a bilateral endeavor. If one side or the other refuses to respect opposition, social intercourse rapidly degenerates into tribalism. We see stark evidence today.

I will continue to encourage dissent and vigorous debate of important contemporary issues and history as it affects current debate. We must set the example. We must also vote even when none of the candidates are to our liking. And, we must confront those forces that seek to destroy the rest of this once grand republic. We were never perfect, and I believe we have fallen deeper into the Ugly American Syndrome. But, there is always hope for recovery with respect and vigorous debate.

 . . . Round two:

“But , again, what should we do about it?”

 . . . my reply to round two:

I thought I had answered your query. My apologies for my failure to do so. Please allow me to try again.

First, let me state the obvious, we can lead a horse to water, but we cannot make him drink. Education is the answer, but we cannot force people to learn. Some folks prefer ignorance, and they vote. The BIG LIE is ignorance in the extreme. Far too many American citizens do not know or understand the U.S. Constitution. If a citizen does not understand or appreciate how government works, how can they possibly know who to vote for? Politicians utilize the disinterest, paucity of curiosity, and outright ignorance to stoke fears, e.g., racism, xenophobia, sexism, and all the other popular -phobias and -isms to further their position, i.e., “I am the answer”; “I will save you.”

The difficulty in a free society is finding balance. We cannot and should not restrict information sources—communism to fascism; left to right; liberal to conservative, et al ad infinitum. Balance should be our constant search and never attainable objective.

The general overarching part of my answer is: knowledge over ignorance. Specifically, each of us must decide what we are capable of doing to that general end. I have been writing this weekly Blog for 20 years precisely to that end. I encourage vigorous public debate on contemporary topics. I try to seek facts, engage false information and confront those forces that I believe are destructive to the Republic [e.g., 45POTUS]. My efforts are miniscule, but my efforts are within my capacity in balance with other interests, e.g., writing books. Each of us must seek and find our path, our capacity, our capability to influence other voters. This includes encouraging citizens to learn and to vote intelligently.

I send my Blog opinions to my elected representatives in state and federal government. Some listen. Others do not. That reality goes into my calculations for who will gain my precious vote.

The bottom line: each of us must find our path to performing as a concerned and engaged citizen. There are many additional dimensions to that statement, e.g., assisting police in protecting our communities.

See what you think of this answer. Come back as you wish.

 . . . Round three:

“Thanks, Cap. Well said.

“What I am seeking, from those wiser than I, are specific public/private secondary school educational approaches to demand change from leaders whom I have an opportunity to address, so as to extract their meaningful promises or expose typical political avoidance rhetoric. With two corrupt political parties dominating our leadership selection processes, I am discouraged and tired of our electorate's propensity to endorse the failing status quo.

“Help!”

 . . . my reply to round three:

By your criterion, I am resoundingly unqualified to offer counsel.

I do have an opinion, however. We have put so much financial pressure on public education that our schools have had to eliminate music, art, shop, home economics, and other supportive contributory courses. Worst of all, some, if not most, schools have eliminated mandatory U.S. Government required for graduation. Some have eliminated U.S. History.

From the perspective of your query, I would encourage a course perhaps called “principles of governance.” The objective would be teaching every child the spectrum of governmental processes from pure communism to dictatorship and include constitutional republic, parliamentary, and autocracy. I would prefer a factual, unbiased, even-handed presentation of the pluses and minuses. Every citizen, to be properly informed to vote on weighty matters of any contemporary time, must understand their place in the chosen governmental system.

I will also say, in my humble opinion, far too many citizens have no freakin’ clue, and by their ignorance, they are highly susceptible to manipulation by a clever conman who plays on their fears and foibles.

The last word on this thread:

“You are exactly right, thank you, in my long held opinion: classic education focusing on constitutional law, practical civics, home and social functional skills, etc., similar to pre-1960s curricula but starting at second grade, is the long term answer.

“All elections should expose candidates beliefs about education and their commitment to act, not just talk, accordingly.”

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)