27 March 2023

Update no.1106

Update from the Sunland

No.1106

20.3.23 – 26.3.23

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

 

To all,

 

Surprise, surprise! Tuesday came and went. No arrest. No indictment. [The person who shall no longer be named] was wrong yet again. It seems he is wrong more often than he is correct. Let us be clear and honest with each other. The man is a grifter, a conman, a snake-oil salesman, who is setting the stage for the circus spectacle to come. Also let there be no doubt that he is bilking money from many donors ostensibly to defend himself in the multiple criminal and civil law cases of which he is the central subject. There should be no doubt either that he is lining his pockets. The grift continues unabated, and willing believers fall for his shtick and eagerly give him money. Let us call a spade a spade, folks.

 

Former Secretary of Labor Robert Bernard Reich gave us another poignant and accurate opinion article.

“What connects Trump’s likely arrest with the bank bailouts? – Answer: the anti-democracy movement”

by Robert Reich

Published: [06:38 [T] MST; 23.March.2023]

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/what-connects-trumps-call-to-protest?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=365422&post_id=109871279&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email

The “anti-democracy movement” indeed! That is exactly what the MAGA bunch is. There are a variety of phrases that summarize their effort. Get it their way or burn the house down. My way or no way. They are not interested in democracy. They are only concerned with dominating the political, social, and legal arenas. The United States is not alone in facing the abandonment of democracy and the push toward authoritarianism—bondage. They must be denied in order to preserve our rights and freedoms. The MAGA bunch and their supporters call their efforts patriotism, but in reality, they seek to move us all closer to Oceania. They want to be The Party and ihr Anführer to be Big Brother. That is the anti-democracy movement precisely. We must stop that progression.

 

Seeking to sustain and refresh his on-going grift, [the person who shall no longer be named] decided to give the pot another big stir and messaged the world.

Donald J. Trump

What kind of person can charge another person, in this case a former President of the United States, who got more votes than any sitting President in history, and leading candidate (by far!) for the Republican Party nomination, with a Crime, when it is known by all that NO Crime has been committed, & also known that potential death & destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our Country? Why & who would do such a thing? Only a degenerate psychopath that truely (sic) hates the USA!

2.68k ReTruths 9.88k Likes

Mar 24, 2023 at 1:08 AM

[emphasis mine]

To put things in perspective, I thought the following article sunk the nail squarely.

“Donald Trump’s Mafia Mind-Set - Listening to a legendary American mobster and hearing the president of the United States”

by Jeffrey Goldberg

The Atlantic

Published: AUGUST 23, 2018

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/trump-gravano-gotti-mafia/568273/

I would say, SPOT ON! And it has only gotten worse since 2018. That is exactly his mind-set, i.e., he is above the law, and the law does not apply to him. He thinks he is god on earth and can do whatever he wishes. To answer the BIC’s opening quasi-question, the kind of man who follows the law to prosecute a criminal. What is worse, just like his pre-January-6th “Be there. Will be wild” pronouncement, he is encouraging his believers to take action without direct ordering them to do so. Staying true to form, he accuses others to distract from the reality of what he is. He is the psychopath! It is just that simple. This message is Exhibit number umpteen thousand in the trove of public statements and documents in substantiation.

 

The House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing on Thursday, 23.March.2023. The committee members grilled Tik Tok Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Shou Zi Chew about their security concerns. I know it is hard to imagine how the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and specifically the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would or could use Tik Tok for nefarious purposes. Tik Tok, like other social media applications, appears to be an innocuous platform until you look beyond the façade. I shall offer a suggestion and my opinion.

I highly doubt the Chinese would be as crude and unsophisticated as the North Koreans. They would not likely use such information to simply make a few dollars more. What is more important to the CCP than money is power. They want to displace the United States of America and dominate the Western Pacific and Asia. Their currency is anything that will weaken the position of the United States. The CCP has aggressive efforts underway in Africa and the Middle East to gain support for its autocratic, near dictatorship, form of governance. Thus, from my perspective, they seek information that can be used in their propaganda campaigns to weaken the United States, to sow doubts, to exploit and expand divisions within the United States. To that end, Tik Tok gives the CCP a massive window and conduit into what America’s youth (the future) are concerned about and pre-occupied with. Used correctly, such insight can be a leveraging tool in planting seeds of division to enhance differences to the advantage of an adversary, e.g., PRC or Russia. Further, the CCP has consistently demonstrated that they have no respect for copyright or proprietary rights. They take what they want, and there is nothing inside the PRC to stop them. The CCP is the authority inside the PRC. We are having a hard enough time grappling with regulation of U.S. owned and based social media applications without the added sinister dimension of authoritarian exploitation. I see no choice here. We must break that link. We cannot help the CCP by our ignorance or complacency.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1105:

Comment to the Blog:

“I read George Orwell’s 1984 (in about 1974) in a high-school class. He foresaw 2021 better than he did 1984, although the state we’re in now began with the Reagan Administration.

“There’s always a segment of the population for whom personalities are more important than principles. We shall see whether they are still powerful when “tiny” (Stormy Daniels’s name for him) is busted.

“I know well what rubes are. I grew up among them. I’m not out there anymore, so I’ll wait and see if they’re learning when 45POTUS is arrested (see above).

“When I come across one of the rubes, I’ll ask what the opposite of “woke” is.

“Perhaps we’d attract different people to politics if we took the money out of the process.”

My response to the Blog:

I read Orwell’s magnum opus in my youth as well, and I believe I am overdue for re-reading the book. I do not imagine the title is important other than as a label. The book is also not prescriptive in terms of how authoritarian regimes evolve. However, it certainly gives us a view of how extreme authoritarian governance systems can become. Oh, I think the genesis of our contemporary struggle with the forces of authoritarianism go back beyond the Reagan administration. I would peg that turning point circa the Johnson administration.

Quite so! Tiny must be busted many times for his many crimes in multiple jurisdictions. We patiently await the day.

You are way ahead of me. I am just learning of the word and its meaning. I think the point was rubes may be not capable of learning; they just believe.

Excellent question to ask. Since DeSantis seems to be the most prominent user and loudest voice, I would love to ask him that very question. I am not sure he knows or understands the implication of his usage.

I think so since money is what drives criminals like Santos to seek public office. He is not the only one. Personally, I think that was the primary personal motive for Tiny’s entry into politics . . . he saw a limitless grift. We need . . . no, we must have different, better people in Congress and the government in the main.

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

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Orwell’s 1984 gives an excellent picture of propaganda in our current society, including the abuse of words such as ‘woke.’ While propaganda has always been with us, I see Reagan’s access to cable TV as the beginning of a major amplification and success in using that propaganda that continues today. However, the Internet presents an alternative information source that Orwell didn’t foresee.

“Tiny’s actual arrest will be a turning point; that may be within a few days.

“I survived my childhood in an Ohio village of 1,000 people and spent another 20 years in rural Ohio or Texas. Many of the people I knew then are exactly the kind of rubes tiny uses.

“Money both motivates and enables the likes of DeSantis and tiny. (The motivation is some mix of money and power/adulation.)”

 . . . along with my follow-up response:

Oh my, yes . . . propaganda on steroids. So many pronouncements by Tiny and his MAGA believers are contemporary examples of doublethink in action. From my perspective, the MAGA bunch are trying to take us measurably closer to the terrifying dystopia of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Yes, indeed, cable TV was a major milestone, but I will add that the general, broad use of the Internet was an even greater milestone on the timeline of exponential expansion of propaganda and doublethink. Correct, Orwell does not even suggest anything like the pervasiveness of the Internet. However, the omnipresence of the Party, Big Brother, and the Thought Police certainly implies the existence of some electronic means to accomplish that degree of prevalence. We have a good chunk of that surveillance network in operation today.

Yes, Tiny’s arrest will be yet another historical first. Tuesday came and went. He was wrong yet again. His indictment, arrest, and prosecution seem to be getting closer, but what matters is him in the dock. That man—a grifter, conman, and snake-oil salesman—is trying to set the stage for the chaotic circus spectacle he wants.

I would agree as a general observation of politicians. Tiny’s drive for money (the grift) and adulation (brand prominence, which also means money) is on massive dose steroids. His malignant narcissism drives him to seek the prominence (good or bad news . . . all good to him). He figured out years ago that he could take his grift to an order of magnitude greater level as president. Forty-two per centum of American voters gave him his grift, and he stayed true to form and exploited what those minority voters gave to him.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

20 March 2023

Update no.1105

Update from the Sunland

No.1105

13.3.23 – 19.3.23

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

 

To all,

 

I feel compelled to report my most recent book reading choice—Tom Ricks’ “Churchill and Orwell – The Fight for Freedom,” published in 2017. The thought came to me, with a title like that, who needs to read the book. Both men are well-known throughout the world. Far more has been written about Winston Churchill than George Orwell. A great many people have read Churchill’s books. Perhaps many more have read at least one of George Orwell’s books—one in particular, his magnum opus. Ricks offers us glimpses of the two men behind the historical facts of their times, the experiences that formed their world views. The book’s Afterword ties a neat bow about his historical treatise of the two men, and the last sentence of the Afterword summarizes the book. “It is the agreement that objective reality exists, that people of goodwill can perceive it, and that other people will change their views when presented with the facts of the matter.”

I highly recommend “Churchill and Orwell” to anyone who wishes to learn and see freedom in a more brilliant light. This book should be on every bookshelf.

 

Every once in a while, an artistic performance comes along that deserves illumination, notation, discussion, and attention. One such event came to me on Tuesday, 13.March.2023. Our local PBS television station broadcast a Great Performances program titled “Remember This!” The Public Broadcast System (PBS) aired the program on 17.February.2023, as Season 50, Episode 10. The renowned actor David Russell Strathairn gave us a solo performance of the true story of a Polish resistance fighter during the Nazi occupation of his country. Number one, Strathairn gives a rare, unique, incredible performance in his representation of the World War II experience of Jan Romuald Kozielewski (24 June 1914 – 13 July 2000)), better known as Jan Karski, a Polish resistance fighter, diplomat, and eventually a distinguished professor at Georgetown University. Secondly, Srathbairn’s acting tells the firsthand experience of Karski and his witness of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Holocaust. While there are myriad more detailed and direct, firsthand accounts of the Holocaust, Karski personally carried eyewitness message of the Polish Jews genocide and their murder at the hands of the Nazis to the British and the American governments. He did not achieve the results he had hoped. The official position of the Allies at the time beyond denial was the best way to help the Jews was to win the war. Roosevelt and Churchill were probably correct from their 30,000-foot level, but like that altitude, the policy lacks humanity. The Allied policy was devoid of benevolence. Strathairn’s rendition of Karski brings humanity to the dreadful, disgusting, horrific violence the Nazis perpetrated in his country and the world.

Every human being on the planet today and for ever more needs to watch and listen to “Remember This!” 

 

The follow-up news items:

-- After Tucker Carlson’s foolish, biased presentation of his opinion of the January 6th insurrection [1104], an opinion article by a local journalist offers an explanation of why the MAGA bunch listen to his drivel and swallow his hogwash.

“Tucker Carlson's Fox News flat earthers will never be convinced by the facts – Opinion: Note to my journalism colleagues: Don't bother. Facts will never lead Fox's faithful viewers to flush Carlson.”

by EJ Montini

Arizona Republic

Published: 6:33 a.m. MT March 14, 2023

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2023/03/14/tucker-carlson-fox-news-viewers-cannot-be-convinced-jan-6/70006262007/?utm_source=azcentral-OpinionsNewsNow&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=baseline&utm_term=list_article_thumb&utm_content=PPHX-1531AR-E-NLETTER39

I do believe Montini nailed the issue precisely and accurately. Facts are irrelevant to Carlson and his believers. They have faith. Clearly, from the Dominion disclosures [1101], we know Carlson does not believe his tripe, but he most certainly feeds his believers what they want to hear, to sustain and reinforce their beliefs. The far darker aspect of this reality is we are dealing with fanatics who ignore facts and reason. We can try to understand, but I suspect that is an impossible task. There is not much we can do, since they enjoy the same freedoms and rights we do. We can only be persistent and resolute in confronting them with the facts. And, when they break the law, as they did on January 6th, we must prosecute, convict, and punish them to the fullest extent of the law.

 

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, KG, OM, CH, DL, TD, famously observed and succinctly stated:

“Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time; but there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters.”

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
HC Deb 11 November 1947 vol 444 cc203-321

Democracy is ugly, messy, nasty, cumbersome, slow, noisy, chaotic, and otherwise very inefficient. Dictatorship, totalitarian, oligarchy, and other forms of authoritarian governance are far more efficient, agile, and effective. There is no question regarding the choice of form when your only concern is governance of a nation-state. Fortunately, the Founders/Framers had the experience and wisdom to establish a representative democracy, to give We, the People, a voice in our governance, and to protect the individual rights and freedoms of citizens against the power of the State. After the constitutional convention [1787], a concerned citizen asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?” Franklin’s response, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” Franklin’s response was more than just a succinct answer; it was a prophecy. Freedom demands a constant struggle against the natural forces of totalitarianism that seek the path of least resistance in governance. Democracy depends upon argument, discussion, debate, disagreement, and compromise. Authoritarians seek to use the instruments of state to suppress or eliminate a free press and quash dissent. George Orwell’s novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four” gave us a vision of what might be if we fail in the constant struggle to protect the republic. To me, it is not a question of ‘if.’ We must! We cannot give into the easy path and the Siren’s Song.

 

Governor Ronald Dion ‘Ron’ DeSantis of Florida, a likely presidential candidate, declared Ukraine is not in the interests of the United States. He told FoxNews (Tucker Carlson, of all people), "While the U.S. has many vital national interests — securing our borders, addressing the crisis of readiness within our military, achieving energy security and independence, and checking the economic, cultural, and military power of the Chinese Communist Party — becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them.” Russia’s unilateral invasion and occupation of Ukraine . . . a territorial dispute, he said. DeSantis’s short statement illuminates his ignorance and conservative isolationist mentality. Ukraine became an independent state with borders and sovereignty on 24.August.1991. The fact that Putin and his right-wing supporters disagreed with how or where those borders were set is irrelevant. The fact that there are ethnic Russians in Donbas, Crimea, and elsewhere in Ukraine is equally irrelevant. Putin had absolutely no right whatsoever to invade Ukraine and murder Ukrainian men, women and children. No, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a very long way from a territorial dispute; it is naked aggression against a neighboring state made worse by blatant war crimes and crimes against humanity. DeSantis is wrong in every possible way. I used to think he was at least more intelligent than the previous nincompoop, but now I know my impression was wrong. DeSantis has disqualified himself.

 

Another Arizona Republic journalist gave us an additional view of why the ultra-right do what they do.

“Maybe the rubes are catching on to Mark Finchem's election panhandling schtick – Opinion: Lately, I get the feeling that Mark Finchem's well-used tin cup has a hollow ring to it. That the 'patriots' may finally have awakened and realized they've been taken for a ride.”

by Laurie Roberts

Arizona Republic

Published: 1:05 p.m. MT March 14, 2023

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2023/03/14/mark-finchem-election-lawsuit-fundraising-hits-wall/70008972007/?utm_source=azcentral-OpinionsNewsNow&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=baseline&utm_term=list_article_thumb&utm_content=PPHX-1531AR-E-NLETTER39

I must confess that I did not know what the word ‘rube’ meant. At first, I thought it was a typographical error. But no! Merriam-Webster defines ‘rube’ as an “awkward unsophisticated person” or a “naive or inexperienced person.” Rube indeed! I could wax on extensively about this one, but I do believe Laurie Roberts opinion article speaks the truth in concise, accurate words. These guys like Finchem and so many others have found the motherload—free money. The snake-oil consumers and MAGA believers are the cash cow for nefarious men like Finchem. This nonsense is going to go on for a very long time as long as despicable men (and women) like Finchem can work this grift. The believers do not want the truth, and they will continue to give the grifters their money.

 

On Tuesday, 14.March.2023, a section of Russian Su-27 Flanker fighters intercepted and one collided with, damaged, and eventually resulted in the ditching of a U.S. Air Force General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper unmanned and armed aerial vehicle in international waters of the Black Sea. The drone was located in the middle of the Black Sea—international waters and airspace. The Russians immediately denied that they did anything other than intercept the drone. Then, the U.S. Government decided to release video clips from the drone itself of the encounter with the Russian fighters. I guess the Russians did not think live video was being uplinked real time. Judge for yourself. The video URL is:

https://youtu.be/9bafad8Gl2k

The fighters were dumping fuel on the drone in an attempt to stall or explode the drone’s engine, and at a minimum, blur the drone’s optics to minimize its capacity to collect intelligence. The Russians were not successful. Then, one of the fighters got too aggressive and too close, colliding with the drone and seriously damaging the vehicle’s propeller. The damage was sufficient to preclude continued flight and forced the drone to be ditched into the Black Sea. The operators took steps to scrub the memory and destroy the sensitive electronics.

From another related view . . . 

“Why the Black Sea is such a flashpoint between the U.S. and Russia – A U.S. drone's dramatic encounter with Russian fighter jets this week highlighted the importance of a body of water that has long been central to the rivalry between Moscow and the West.”

by Phil McCausland

NBC News

Published: March 17, 2023, 3:36 AM MST / Updated March 17, 2023, 3:39 AM MST

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/black-sea-us-russia-flashpoint-drone-ukraine-war-rcna75269

At the bottom line, we cannot tolerate hegemonic intimidation anywhere, not the South China Sea or the Black Sea. Russia has no right whatsoever to expect or demand exclusive operating rights over or on the Black Sea.

The Russians violated international law and freedom of navigation. Yes, they did not shoot down the reconnaissance drone, but they directly caused sufficient damage to crash the aerial vehicle. They are dreadfully close to war.

 

In the category of ‘its about time,’ the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague, Netherlands, issued a criminal arrest warrant for Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, the president (dictator) of Russia. Multiple international news sources reported the event. I offer two of those sources.

“ICC judges issue arrest warrant for Putin over war crimes in Ukraine”

Reporting by Bart Meijer; Editing by Andrew Cawthorne and Gareth Jones

Reuters

Published: March 17, 2023; 8:20 AM MST

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrant-against-putin-over-alleged-war-crimes-2023-03-17/

and

“International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine war crimes”

by Mike Corder and Raf Casert

Associated Press

Published: Mar 17, 2023 at 2:01 pm

https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-aud-nw-icc-putin-war-crimes-20230317-pnkdropuendvpc5ifya5mvmbra-story.html

The panel of ICC judges have charged Putin with war crimes, unlawful deportation of children, and unlawful transfer of people from the territory of Ukraine to the Russian Federation. The ICC further charges Russia's Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova with the same crimes against children. Whether Putin will ever be tried for his crimes against humanity is doubtful, but none of us can predict how the gears of justice will turn or when. In this instance, I shall remain guardedly optimistic that Putin will fell the full weight of justice for what he has done in Ukraine.

 

The right-wingers seem to favor using the word ‘woke’ and its derivatives as a spiked bludgeon to beat up on anyone and anything that does not conform to their view of society. What is this term “woke” than has become a broad sword in the culture wars created and sustained by the fBICP, MAGA, social conservatives, and other alt-right conservatives? Merriam-Webster defines ‘woke’ as “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice),” and used as a disapproving term, “politically liberal (as in matters of racial and social justice) especially in a way that is considered unreasonable or extreme.” Thus, for those of us who are socially progressive in seeking equality for all citizens regardless of any one or combination of the social factors, that bunch call us ‘woke,’ as if the label is some equivalent social slur akin to scumbag, lowlife, slime ball, and whatnot. When I hear Governor DeSantis publicly state, “Florida is where ‘woke’ goes to die,” I hear white supremacy dicta; I see the KKK in a suit. Yes, we have struggled with what “We, the People” actually means. To me, the meaning is clear and concise. The right-wingers in all their forms use woke as a cudgel against anyone who is not like them. Their use of the word further isolates them from the majority of humanity and American citizens. I reject, condemn, and curse the hatred-based notion of white supremacy; their use of ‘woke’ is just another form of that contemptible white supremacy. Lastly, I emphatically state that the right-wing use of ‘woke’ as an instrument of oppression is un-American, and using the logic of the ‘strict constructionists,’ white supremacy in any form does not appear anywhere in the Constitution and is thus unconstitutional. Caucasians are NOT the master race. Christianity is not the state-religion. Freedom to have knowledge is perhaps another unwritten right.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1104:

Comment to the Blog:

“I agree. People who do the kind of damage Mr. Finchem did to the Arizona election system ought to be deprived of the assets they’d need to do any further damage.

“I’ve seen a headline or two about CPAC losing its luster, and it’s reasonable to think 45POTUS’s base is eroding. McCarthy and Carlson are tools. They should be taken away from their operator(s) and locked up somewhere safe.”

My response to the Blog:

I am all for that. Kari Lake is bad enough, rather mindless from my perspective. But Finchem is downright offensive without even a modicum of substance. How he got as far as he did is baffling. Then again, with the likes of Gosar, Biggs, Lesko, et al, I suppose it should not be surprising. The thought of Finchem gaining supervisory responsibility for the conduct of elections is staggering to the imagination.

I have seen the same reports from a variety of different sources. We are seeing signs that the shine 45POTUS once enjoyed is tarnishing and fading. Yes, but they are very dangerous tools. They both sold their souls to the devil. Locked up seems appropriate. However, I have not seen Carlson break the law; he is morally vacuous, but that is not against the law. On the other hand, 45POTUS is quite the opposite; he violated multiple laws; the sooner he is indicted and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law the better.

 

Another contribution:

“Good day Cap. Thanks for your last update-managed to read it all while drinking my afternoon tea. The discomfort goes on will it ever cease?”

My reply:

You are most welcome, my friend.

I trust the most recent Update did not disrupt your pleasure of a nice afternoon tea.

Yes, indeed; I completely agree. The discomfort and disquiet induced by the social conservatives and their political brethren is exhausting. I believe and have faith that freedom will prevail; it will just take time and persistence, but we shall overcome.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Personally I don’t have a lot of time or enduring patience with politicians in general. I know I know-what would we replace them with? Well very high value considerate people with understanding. A lot of understanding of the multitude of problems that we all face across this blue planet. There are many ‘politicians’ who are clinging on to power for their own ineptitude. Do other former servicemen feel like I do? I would think so.”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

I am with you, my friend. We have more than a few despicable human beings who managed to fool their electorate and now “serve.” I am writing in this week’s Update about Sir Winston’s famous quote about democracy. Our form of governance is ugly, nasty, messy, and otherwise revolting. And yet, it is the only form of governance that even remotely protects the rights of individual citizens—We, the People. Unfortunately, we must remain ever vigilant to the insidious forces that seek to corrode democracy that invariably sprout from time to time in a free society. We bear direct witness to those terrible forces that seek to dominate, to preserve power, and to impose upon the whole.

While there have been and will be inept military leaders, the system has a process for minimizing the effects of their ineptitude and maximizing the positive leaders among us. There is no similar process for politicians. It takes an informed, curious, concerned electorate to cull the incompetent politicians. We see the failure of that process today.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-) 

13 March 2023

Update no.1104

Update from the Sunland

No.1104

6.3.23 – 12.3.23

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

 

To all,

 

Readers may recall the name Mark Finchem. For those who are not so familiar with Arizona politics, he is Mark William Finchem, a far-right (more like alt right) and former member of the Arizona House of Representatives. In the 2022 election, he ran for secretary of State. Finchem is a diehard election denier, conspiracist, and otherwise one of the minion mouthpieces for [the person who shall no longer be named]. He lost the election by a substantial margin, i.e., not even close. Like losing gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and ihr Anführer, Finchem filed a lawsuit without factual evidence or substantiation. The following opinion article illuminates the result.

“Sanctions Mark Finchem must pay for bogus lawsuit are good, but not enough – Opinion: It's difficult to put a price tag on the damage Mark Finchem and others did to Arizona elections. But it should be more than attorney fees.”

by EJ Montini

Arizona Republic

Published 6:24 a.m. MT March 7, 2023

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2023/03/07/mark-finchem-should-have-paid-more-bogus-election-lawsuit/69979226007/

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Melissa G. Iyer Julian dismissed the case and ordered Finchem to pay his opponents’ legal fees. 

I agree with Montini. Finchem and his kind should pay additional punitive damages for what they have done. Court costs and attorney fees are hardly sufficient for the damage Finchem and his buddies have perpetrated. As always, something is better than nothing.

 

On Monday, 20.February.2023, Speaker of the House Representative Kevin Owen McCarthy of California unilaterally granted sole access to entertainer Tucker Carlson to the 44,000 hours of surveillance video from the Capitol Building on 6.January.2021. Two weeks later, on 6.March.2023, the faux-news entertainment show—Tucker Carlson Tonight—broadcast Carlson’s opinion. I will not and cannot ascribe findings to what he has done for reasons noted below. Carlson opened his broadcast with the following commentary:

“On Janurary 6th two years ago, thousands of protesters walked from a Trump rally on the ellipse outside the White House to the U.S. Capitol where the certification of the U.S. presidential election was underwayThe protesters were angry. They believed that the election they had just voted in had been unfairly conducted. They were right. In retrospect, it is clear the 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy. Given the facts that have since emerged about that day, no honest person can deny it. Yet, the beneficiaries of that election continue to lie about what is now obvious. The real crime, they will tell you, again and again, is not about what happened on Election Day 2020. The real crime is what happened two months later on January 6th, when Donald Trump led an insurrection against the duly elected American government. To prove that claim and to divert attention from the details of the presidential election itselfDemocrats in Congress impaneled what they called the House Select Committee on the January 6th AttackThe point of that committee was to prevent Donald Trump from running for president againIn December of last year, committee members voted unanimously to refer Trump to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. Mission accomplished. But what they did not do was explain what happened inside the Capitol on January 6th. Three weeks ago, thanks to the new Republican speaker’s office, we gained access to thousands of hours of surveillance video that helped answer that questionThe January 6th Committee had access to this very same tape and watched much of it. But, as we are about to show you, committee members lied about what they saw and then hid the evidence from the public as well as January 6th criminal defendants and their lawyers. That is unforgiveable. Whatever you think of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, he rectified that crime, and we are grateful that he did it.
[NOTE: Emphasis mine: Annotation color codes assigned as blue = true; orange = erroneously misleading; and red = outright false, untrue. The same color codes are used below.]

After his introductory commentary to set the tone above, Carlson offered a few minutes (out of 44,000 hours) of his selected video clips and offered his crafted comments to fit his storyline—not the truth, just his opinion to paint the picture he wanted. Carlson annotated his selected clips as his rendition of the January 6th insurrection.

The first thing you notice when viewing the full video record of January 6th is just how many people entered the Capitol Building that day, hundreds and hundreds, possibly thousands over the course of about two hours. The crowd was enormous. A small percentage of them were hooligansThey committed vandalism. You’ve seen their pictures again and again. But the overwhelming majority weren’t.  They were peaceful, orderly, and neat. These were not insurrectionistsThey were sightseersFootage from inside the Capitol overturns the story you’ve heard about January 6thProtesters queue up in neat little lines. They give each other tours outside the Speaker’s office. They take cheerful selfies, and they smile. They are not destroying the Capitol. They obviously revere the Capitol. They are there because they believe the election was stolen from them. They believe in the system. Here is the man you’ve heard referred to as QAnon Shaman outside the Senate chamber. These are not rioters. These are people who wandered over from a political rally.

[45POTUS: We will not let them silence your voices.]

After the rally, they walked down Pennsylvania Avenue, where organizers had secured a federal permit to hold a legal rally on the grounds of the Capitol.

[45POTUS: I know that everyone here will be marching over to the Capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.]

Once at the Capitol Building, things began to get chaoticCapitol Police officers fired tear gas into the crowd. A few at the front of the herd broke windows. Someone opened the doors, and many hundreds of others just walked in. 

[PROTESTER: They’re going to make that the story.]

Of course, they did make it the story. And at the center of it, the single most famous person arrested that day was a Navy veteran from Arizona called Jacob Chansley, often referred to as the QAnon Shaman.

[Others repeating his moniker.]

Jacob Chansley became the face of January 6th. A dangerous conspiracy theorist dressed in outlandish costume, who led a violent insurrection to overthrow American democracy. For these crimes, Chansley was sentenced to four years in prison, far more time than many violent criminals now receive. What did Jacob Chansley do to receive this punishment? To this day, there is dispute about how Chansley got into the Capitol Building, but according to our review of the surveillance video, it was very clear what happened once he got inside. Virtually every moment of his time inside the Capitol was caught on tape. The tapes show that Capitol Police never stopped Jacob Chansley. They helped him. They acted as his tour guides. Here is video of Chansley in the Senate chamber. Capitol Police officers take him to multiple entrances and even try to open locked doors for him. We counted at least nine officers who were within touching distance of unarmed Jacob Chansley. Not one of even tried to slow him down. Chansley understood that Capitol Police were his allies. Video shows him giving thanks for them in a prayer for them on the floor of the Senate. Watch.

[CHANSLEY: Thank you heavenly father for taking the inspiration needed to these police officers to allow us into the building.]

Contrast the reality of what Jacob Chansley did in the Capitol Building on January 6th, the indisputable facts recorded on video, some of which has never before been seen, with the depiction of Jacob Chansley you’ve seen in the media for more than two years. He’s a terrorist, they said. He should be killed.

[UNCITED VIDEO of an unidentified man: Shoot him! Shoot him! (unintelligible) If he was dressed like bin Laden, would we have shot him?]

Shoot him! Shoot him! It makes you wonder who were the violent extremists here? Not Jacob Chansley, and the video proves that, but you never would have known that from the media coverage.

[SENATOR GRAHAM: The people sitting in the chairs need to be sitting in a jail cell.]

Chansley is sitting in a jail cell. He’s been there for months. If he was in fact committing such a grave crime, why didn’t the officers who were standing right next him place him under arrest? Until now, no one could even prove that happened, but it did.

Tucker Carlson was not testifying under oath. If he had been, he could be charged with perjury. No, Carlson was offering his opinion. He has a constitutionally protected right to speak freely, say what he chooses, and indeed to lie. He has no obligation to tell the truth . . . beyond the moral responsibility we all face to do so. The responsibility to determine the validity of his words rests upon us alone. If you believe, you believe. It is that simple.

If I had to boil this whole nonsense down to one sentence, I would choose Carlson’s grotesquely false, misleading, and destructive sentence from this whole sordid affair, I would say, “The 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy.” The sentence is a direct product of the BIG LIE. The public disclosures from Dominion v. Fox [DE SupCt Case No. N21C-11-082-EMD (2021)] [1101] provide the best metric to judge Carlson’s hogwash. Carlson says nothing, not a peep, about the violent breeches of the multiple police barricades outside, or the reality that just being inside the Capitol Building, peaceful or not, they violated the law. McCarthy-Carlson did a grave disservice to further breakdown this once grand republic.

Does anyone believe that Carlson reviewed all the available surveillance video in two weeks’ time? It would take roughly 400 knowledgeable reviewers to go through that much footage, not counting the organization and collation of their observations.

McCarthy’s action might have been a little more palatable if they had granted the same access to other news outlets—newspaper and television. He did not, which tainted his action from the outset.

Set aside the despicable conduct of Carlson and the outright fallaciousness of his rendition of the insurrection, the worst of this sordid affair is actually McCarthy, who sold his sole to the devil when he promised the far right of the fBICP (MAGA) that he would do what he did. As speaker of the House, he unilaterally directed the release of 44,000 hours of surveillance video from the Capitol Building and grounds to Tucker Carlson . . . and only Carlson . . . not FoxNews, not CNN, not ABC News, only Tucker Carlson, and no other news organizations. McCarthy knew precisely what was going to happen, and he was good with that consequence, but he is speaker. McCarthy deserves what it coming to him. 

This whole Tucker Carlson fiasco is nauseating in the extreme. I will not offer a URL; you can find it if you wish. I am not going to give it more oxygen than I have already. Instead, I shall call out his hypocrisy. Carlson is no different from Alex Jones, Sean Hannity, Steve Bannon. Laura Ingram, and all other alt-right talking heads who spew their bunkum on all of us on a daily basis. Yet, 30% of American citizens suck that gruel up like it was a luxurious delicacy, and worse, they believe. If you have swallowed the snake-oil, you will believe.

Fortunately, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has called out and condemned what Carlson did. Other prominent Republicans have joined McConnell in condemning Carlson’s worthless and destructive presentation.

At the bottom line, Tucker Carlson cannot be trusted to tell the truth. His portrayal of January 6th is outright fallacious, corrosive, and otherwise destructive. Any “honest person” will acknowledge that the best analysis of what happened on January 6th so far has come from the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (HSCJ6). Judge for yourself.

 

As a product of contemporary times, we have [the person who shall no longer be named] spewing his drivel everywhere as he searches for willing and enthusiastic consumers of his worthless snake-oil elixir. The latest incident came to us in the form of his keynote speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) held this year at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center in National Harbor, Prince George's County, Maryland. He stated:

“In 2016, I declared: I am your voice. Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution.”

Raw meat for the enthusiastic consumers of his worthless snake-oil elixir. Retribution—a word of specific meaning and importance to his body of believers. I say that only because I assume he knows what the word means and chose that word specifically. To be precise, retribution ≡ punishment inflicted on someone as vengeance for a wrong or criminal act. Any guess what ‘wrong or criminal act’ he is thinking of when he chose the word ‘retribution’?

Further, the man also declared that he would not withdraw his presidential campaign if he is indicted, which appears to be more likely by the day. I know this is not a news flash, but the man has no morality, no sense of propriety, no ethics. To him, the Constitution is for all of us mindless lemmings; it does not apply to him. That said, the Constitution does not and the Founders/Framers did not envision such a scenario—an indicted or convicted felon running for president. I suspect the man will be perfectly comfortable thrusting the nation into another constitutional crisis. I do not know but I strongly suspect the question will come down to who states allow to be placed on the ballot for the 2024 election. I do not believe any state prohibits an indictee or felon from meeting the other requirements to be on the ballot. More than a few consumers of his snake-oil elixir have publicly stated that they will write in the man if he is not listed on their ballot. Write-in candidates take even longer to tally because handwriting must be interpreted  . . . kind of like ‘hanging chads’ in the 2000 election in Florida.

The bottom line of this persistent cockup is we are not done with him yet. His loyal believers would likely write him in on their ballots even if he was convicted and in prison. Such is the nature of the beast we are dealing with today. We must have faith in our Republic, the Constitution, our body of laws, and the judges who must interpret and decide the law. I remain hopeful that saner minds will eventually prevail, and we will eventually be done with him, never to be heard from again.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1103:

“Thanks Cap-quite an edition! You must spend many hours putting this all together.”

My reply:

The reading and research take more time than the writing. I jot down thoughts as I go. Sunday is my Update-day, when most of the writing is done. The Update does take some time to collect, research, and write, but the process keeps me current on political and society questions.

 

Comment to the Blog:

“People often accuse others of whatever they feel guilty about. With all I’ve been hearing MAGAts say about grooming and about cancel culture, that’s highly relevant. Voter fraud is very convenient for MAGAts to claim, but it would be wise to look closely at those officials making that claim.

“The January 6 insurrection occurred during 45POTUS’s term, but not as part of his official duties.

“Most of our current troubles come back to the Founders’ failure to address money in politics or to create a one-voter, one-vote system.

“That definition of ‘adult cabaret performance’ goes far beyond drag shows. It will cause as much trouble as other similar laws.”

My response to the Blog:

Quite so! “MAGAts” . . . I like it. This whole “woke” and “cancel culture” nonsense is conservative whining about their resistance to change and progress. When DeSantis drivels out his “Florida is where ‘woke’ goes to die” garbage, I hear white supremacy vitriol. The whole thing from book banning, laws against teaching the truth, parental rights, ad infinitum, is just conservatives trying to hang onto the past. Those conservatives are just another obstacle to be overcome in the march of progress. They will not relegate us to the past. We must learn. Our children must learn.

Indeed! As I understand the law, 45POTUS has no claim of even qualified immunity as the instigator of the insurrection; no form of immunity shields criminal conduct. The case law appears quite clear to me. Yet, Special Counsel Smith has not indicted the man. Regardless, as a citizen, he is entitled to challenge an indictment, and we must grind through those inevitable legal challenges, postponing those challenges is not helpful.

Yes, absolutely. The Great Compromise defied the founding principles and created fertile ground for the contemporary turmoil we must deal with. However, it is the conservatives (and their supporters) we must overcome today. The more we trudge through the quagmire of this conservative nonsense, the more I see it as white supremacy offensive no different from the 1920s KKK resurgence. As much as we need viable opposition part(ies), the former GOP continues their descent into oblivion.

Spot on! It is a common trait of those damnable social conservative morality laws. The TN SB0009 law is the antithesis of freedom of choice. It is wrong in every possible way. Further, I will argue that law absolutely does NOT protect children, that damnable law hurts children; it condemns children to the darkness of ignorance. We must be rid of these damn conservatives.

 . . . Round two:

“My reference to ‘cancel culture’ came in the context of accusing others of what you’re doing yourself. What DeSantis and his kind are doing to minorities and LGBTQ+ people is canceling them. Also, it’s an interesting exercise to ask those MAGAts to say what they mean by ‘woke.’

“In the case of 45POTUS, justice delayed is justice denied.

“The MAGAts want to re-create an antebellum nation. The privilege they would then expect only came to very few people at the time, but the MAGAts are ignorant people.

“Morality laws have a terrible history. Think vice squads and the Comstock Act (which is being used today in an attempt to limit abortion medication).”

 . . . my response to round two:

Understood. Exactly! Spot on! The right-wing embrace of white supremacy in all its forms (no matter how subtle they strive to make it) will ultimately seal their fate . . . perhaps not in my lifetime, but eventually.

Exactly, again! While I want Special Counsel Smith to do his job precisely and to the full extent possible, the sooner we get that man into the dock and his prosecution underway the better from my perspective. [The person who shall no longer be named] has done far more damage to this once grand Republic than any bank robber (or murderer for that matter). He deserves the full weight of the law.

Exactly, once again. That is completely what they want to do, which is also why I distill their actions down to white supremacy. They can paint lipstick on a pig to make it pretty, but it is still a pig. And yes, they prefer ignorance over knowledge, which is clearly discernible in virtually all their actions. Thus, if my choice boils down to the darkness of DeSantis or the enlightenment of a brighter vision, I will take the warmth of the “sunlit uplands.”

My, my, 100% on this one. Yes, they do . . . a terrible history. Morality laws, in the main, are a lame attempt of a willful minority to impose their will, their choices, their beliefs, their values on everyone in a foolish effort to validate their choices. Morality laws deny freedom of choice to all citizens. In essence, they say freedom of choice is acceptable as long as the list of choices is only the ones they approve of. We must get the conservatives out of the private lives and the private choices of all citizens including those who they do not agree with.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

06 March 2023

Update no.1103

 Update from the Sunland

No.1103

27.2.23 – 5.3.23

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

 

To all,

 

Here is an observation that might be useful, if anyone wishes to know what the former GOP, fBICP, MAGA bunch, Nescientia super scientia (Ignorance over knowledge!) Party is doing . . . simply put, we have but to look at what they are accusing everyone else of doing. That is exactly what they are doing. The BIG LIE is a fallacious accusation leveled at others (without a shred of evidence), and the BIG LIE is the truth about their conduct, behavior, and actions.

 

45potus has dragged us back into a constitutional debate on a variety of topics, not least of which is the validity of presidential immunity to shield his criminal conduct. At the center of the U.S. Supreme Court’s jurisprudence regarding presidential immunity are a trio of cases involving the criminal conduct of past presidents.

United States v. Nixon [418 U.S. 683 (1974)]           [870]

Nixon v. Fitzgerald [457 U.S. 731 (1982)]                [970]

Clinton v. Jones [520 U.S. 681 (1997)]                     [1103]

As noted, I finally got around to reading the last of the three—Clinton v. Jones [520 U.S. 681 (1997); No. 95–1853; 27.5.1997]. The Clinton case revolved around a civil damages claim by Paula Corbin Jones, then an employee of the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission, for sexual harassment against then Governor William Jefferson ‘Bill’ Clinton of Arkansas. The constitutional issue at hand was whether a sitting president could face a civil suit while in office. In Clinton, the Court decided that he could as long as the object of the suit did not involve the president’s official duties. In this instance, since the incident in question occurred before Clinton became president, it did not involve official duties and should proceed. Further legal wrangling eventually led to a fine and suspension of Clinton’s law license.

We have a mounting number of examples of why should not elect criminals to political offices of responsibility, especially the ultimate office—President of the United States of America. At the time of the Clinton ruling, only two prior presidents have been involved in civil litigation involving their conduct prior to becoming president—Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman. In both those cases, the suits were dismissed prior to their inauguration and affirmed after inauguration. Richard Nixon would have been on that list for felonious criminal charges and quite likely convicted and sent to prison for his crimes, if it had not been for President Ford’s preemptive pardon. Nixon deserved prison for what he did. Yet, Nixon was bad enough, but 45POTUS has taken us to an order of magnitude greater depth in this chasm, and it is going to take us a very long time to climb out of this dark place.

What happens when a nefarious conman criminal dupes a sufficient number of innocent citizens to get elected as President of the United States of America? We bear witness today, and we are still in the middle of that quagmire morass. I have confidence we will eventually come out the other side, but I must acknowledge that I may not live long enough to see that day. By the time this whole sordid affair is said and done, we will quite likely have a body of law that is evolving to deal with just such a scenario. We may have made it through 229 years of history without such a necessity, but that string of success was broken in 2016. Somehow, we must learn and mature from that despicable man who caused all this trauma and turmoil.

At its most basic level, presidential immunity creates a de facto temporary sovereign, i.e., the sovereign can do no wrong. The Constitution invests enormous power in the president. For that reason alone, the integrity of our republic demands that man be held accountable, although we failed to do so in the case of Nixon.

One of the greatest mortal flaws of our representative democratic form of governance is our fundamental assumption that our tortuous process of selection will yield a decent person being elected president. Clearly in the cases of Nixon and 45POTUS (and arguably Clinton), our system failed. We have yet to reconcile the malfeasance of 45POTUS.

 

Another case from my judicial reading list was Google v. Oracle [593 U.S. ___ (2021); No. 18–956; 5.4.2021]—a computer programming code versus copyright law case. Google outright and admittedly copied 11,500 among several million lines of code copyrighted by Sun Microsystems, which was purchased and absorbed by Oracle. The code was an essential element of Google’s Android operating system. The Supremes decided the case by 6-2 (Barrett did not participate). Justice Breyer wrote for the majority with Thomas and Alito dissenting. The decision hung upon their interpretation of the fair use doctrine, and the majority decided in Google’s favor based on their assessment of the fair use doctrine. Thomas, writing for the dissent, made a compelling case against Google, but the argument ultimately did not prevail.

I confess to mixed feelings about this case. As the holder of numerous copyrights, I admit to serious concerns about the protection of my original work. I understand and appreciate the arguments on both sides of this one, but I must ultimately trust the wisdom of the Court’s majority.

 

Then, we have Tennessee Senate Bill 0009 that was signed into law by Governor Lee on Thursday. The new law criminalizes drag shows on public property or in locations where such performances could be viewed by any person who is not an adult. Before I offer my observations and opinion, I think it is imperative to this discussion to read the words of the bill directly and in their entirety. TN SB0009 reads exactly:

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 7, Chapter 51, Part 14, relative to adult-oriented performances. 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: 
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1401, is amended by adding the following language as a new subdivision:

"Adult cabaret performance" means a performance in a location other than an adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration; 
SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1407, is amended by adding the following language as a new subsection: (c) 

(1) It is an offense for a person to engage in an adult cabaret performance: 

(A) On public property; or 

(B) In a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.

(2) Notwithstanding § 7-51-1406, this subsection (c) expressly: 

(A) Preempts an ordinance, regulation, restriction, or license that was lawfully adopted or issued by a political subdivision prior to the effective date of this act that is in conflict with this subsection (c); and 

(B) Prevents or preempts a political subdivision from enacting and enforcing in the future other ordinances, regulations, restrictions, or licenses that are in conflict with this subsection (c).

(3) A first offense for a violation of subdivision (c)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor, and a second or subsequent such offense is a Class E felony. 

SECTION 3. This act takes effect July 1, 2023, the public welfare requiring it, and applies to prohibited conduct occurring on or after that date.

For reference purposes, a Class E felony in Tennessee is punishable by up to six (6) years in prison.

I have considered many things I could and should say about this bill. At the root, this is the social conservatives doing what they love to do, impose their will on the entire population. They believe they are right, and everyone else is wrong. They love to use children to justify and validate their least-common-denominator rationale. They refuse to teach their children properly, and they want everyone else not like them to suffer. They refuse to acknowledge that other people may be different from them and make diverse choices. TN SB0009 is not what it pretends to be. This is bigotry in the law. Citizens who wish to dress up in flamboyant women’s clothing harm no one—not children; no one. I recognize, understand, appreciate, and acknowledge that other citizens do not want to wear flashy clothing, but I respect the choices of others. And, if my children, grandchildren, or eventually great-grandchildren have questions about why some citizens wish to dress as they choose, I will do my absolute best to explain those choices to them. Six years in prison because one citizen has different choices than the social conservatives is wrong in every possible way. Dressing up in draq is NOT an offense; it is diversity. I condemn the fBICP and what they have done in Tennessee.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1102:

Comment to the Blog:

“The US. Constitution was written in 1787 and the Bill of Rights in 1789, which created the first problems with ‘strict construction.’ Both language and society have changed so much that some level of interpretation is entirely necessary. For example, the radicals on the Court have chosen to ignore the first clause of the Second Amendment. So much for ‘the Constitution as it is written.’

“The response to the East Palestine (Ohio) train wreck is its own train wreck. Ohio’s state government keeps claiming there’s nothing wrong with the air or water there even while emergency responses continue. Much of the air and water sampling is done by a company hired by Norfolk Southern (oops). The disposal of contaminated soil and water is another entire controversy. They tried to sneak some of that into Texas, but the local people caught on and stopped it. Good for them. Good luck to the people around East Palestine and all those downstream.”

My response to the Blog:

While I disagree with the strict constructionists on a variety of levels, that bunch on the bench are political conservatives, i.e., they seek to keep things the way they were. They claim the Framers provided no guidance on interpretation or progression of the Constitution, therefore, they must stick to the words as the Framers used them 236 years ago to define intent. I reject that notion outright with the inverse of their argument, i.e., there is no evidence they intended future judges to remain anchored in the distant past. I believe the Framers were far more progressive than the strict constructionists give them credit for. I genuinely believe they expected judges (actually all of us) to interpret the Constitution in the context of contemporary society and culture, and not change it with every new invention. From their perspective, interpret by the greater purpose of their words rather than the 1787 definition of the words. We can continue our debate of the 2nd Amendment, but I do not have anything new to add.

I am not close enough to the accident to discuss those details. I have gone as far as I can go until the NTSB report is released for public scrutiny. I have no problem with Norfolk-Southern testing water, soil, and air, but the USG must do independent testing (and send the bill to the railway).

 . . . Round two:

“I find it simpler to just admit some interpretation of the Constitution is literally necessary and point out that the radicals have done so freely when it suits them. The 2nd Amendment is only one example.

“The Norfolk Southern train wreck adds to a long list of problems. The enormous amounts of at least one hazardous material and the dimwit response are bringing headlines, but the underlying Wall Street ownership of both the railroads and the politicians leads to many other incidents as well. At this point, I await reports from activists, not government sources.”

 . . . my response to round two:

Agreed. I must add that substantive due process appears to be the paramount salient for the strict constructionists and the progressives on the Court. As we read in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization [597 U. S. ____ (2022); 24.6.2022] [10671068], the strict constructionists, especially Thomas & Alito, reject everything decided with substantive due process, e.g. civil rights, voting rights, unspecified freedoms and rights, everything. Thomas was quite direct and frank in his stated position. Yet, the reality is, everything requires interpretation, even specified freedoms like freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Where are the limits, the boundaries? Those limits are not defined in the Constitution. So, when the strict constructionists make up limits, they have violated their own guiding principles. The bottom line is virtually everything requires interpretation. It is only a question of where they draw the line, and now, the strict constructionists have the numbers to decide, and we must suffer the consequences.

I will quibble with one aspect of your opinion. Norfolk-Southern is not owned by Wall Street, which is simply a stock exchange. For public companies, shareholders own the company. Unfortunately, we cannot trust the activists either; they have their own agenda. We must resolve all sources and make our own judgments. There are slants to every source.

 . . . Round three:

“Your first paragraph is so hifalutin that I entirely miss the point.

“The second comes down on me for using a generalization. There is a point to that generalization. The railroads and other capital-intensive industries are owned by investors whose life's work is making money, not doing a good job producing whatever product or service they're investing in.”

 . . . my response to round three:

Wow! Highfalutin . . . that’s quite the accusation. My apologies, I think of my effort as precision rather than pretentious. Nonetheless, I was only adding my comment that the strict constructionists use selective reasoning to impose their will.

I did not intend to “come down on” you. Making money is not a sin. I will argue that it is necessary. I could ruminate about the neutrality of money or wealth, but I do not want to bore you.

 . . . Round four:

“Now I understand that first paragraph. Yep.

“You ‘came down’ on me for saying ‘Wall Street’ rather than specifying which villains own Norfolk Southern. (My perceptions, of course.) The high-finance industry owns all the railroads in the USA. Making money is not a sin in its own right, but society needs guardrails to defend the rest of us.”

 . . . my response to round four:

OK. Glad to help.

No exactly. I objected because Wall Street does not own anything; it is an exchange . . . a medium for stockholders to buy and sell their stock in companies. Villains is a bit steep for me, but your choice.

I agree with Robert Reich’s opinion essay—“Greed need guardrails!” However, his premise is missing one key word—balance. We have proven over and over (and yet again in East Palestine, Ohio) that for profit companies (most) cannot be trusted with self-policing. For them, risk is simply a gamble, and as Reich states, risk realized is simply another cost of doing business. But, as I stated previously, regulation is quite akin to taxation – it is the power to destroy. We must have balance. Too much regulation is just as bad as not enough regulation. From what I have seen and learned of the East Palestine accident, the scale has been biased too far to the “not enough” side of the equation. Yes, greed needs guardrails.

 . . . Round five:

“‘Wall Street does not own anything’ is too literal even for me. Does figurative language have no place at all?

“Mr. Reich and I don’t pretend to be neutral. Does he propose anything that goes too far? Not that I can see.”

 . . . my response to round five:

Au Contraire, mon ami. I have been known to use figurative phrases from time to time. You may have noticed that I tend to react to generalities and figurative phrases when I see them as painting an erroneous picture. You have called me out for doing exactly the same thing. Yet, I try to avoid such circumstances. Figurative phrases are perfectly acceptable.

Well, my friend, he has not proposed anything. I agree with his premise, but what does he propose to do about it. I was taught many moons ago to never criticize without offering a solution. It is one thing to criticize a system or process; it is all together another thing to offer a solution. Reich is more than capable of offering a solution, and I, for one, would like to hear what he proposes. Concomitantly, I strongly objected to what 45POTUS and his followers in Congress passed with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act [PL 115-097; 131 Stat. 2054; 22.12.2017] [834838]. President Biden has yet to undo that travesty; he offers a lot of yammering but little to no perceptible action.

 

Another contribution:

“Not quite sure what is going on with the Evenwel/Abbott business-not to worry though.”

My reply:

In Evenwel, we see some of the inner-workings and hidden mechanisms of the U.S. representative democracy with a heavy coating of desperation by a political party that chose to paint themselves in a corner, and now, they sense their own demise. The efforts to suppress the voting of We, the People, is wide-spread, vast, and pervasive, e.g., restricting polling stations and hours of operations, restricting or prohibiting voting by mail, among many other efforts like gerrymandering. We are a long way from out of the woods on this one, so I will quite likely bore you more with my rants against that faction that pushes the BIG LIE and voter suppression. Hang in there, my friend.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Thanks Cap-and good day to yourself. What is the meaning of Evenwel?”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

Evenwel refers to the plaintiff in the case—Sue Evenwel, a political operative in Texas. Evenwel filed suit against the governor of Texas to force the state to use a metric other than total population to define voting districts. She claimed the use of total population dilutes her vote, thus violating “one person, one vote”—the Court’s standard for voting rights since 1964. As I tried to point out, Evenwel’s argument is fallacious. The Court decided this one correctly. I highlighted the case because the Republican effort to suppress the voting of all other groups other than Republicans. The case is yet one example of how desperate Republicans are to hold onto power.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)