Update from the Sunland
No.1129
28.8.23 – 3.9.23
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin [1119, 1128] flew too close to the flame, and . . .
No matter how big or how powerful an oligarch may be, Prigozhin learned the hard way how dictators handle and deal with dissenters. He is not the first and will not be the last.
-- Well, we finally have at least one official opinion regarding disqualification by §3, Amendment XIV, U.S. Constitution. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has publicly stated that he has no authority to disqualify any candidate, and thus he cannot refuse to list [the person who shall no longer be named] if he becomes the Republican candidate.
“Can Trump be barred from Ariz. ballot? Secretary of State Fontes says it's open question”
by Mary Jo Pitzl
Arizona Republic
Published: 6:02 a.m. MT Aug. 30, 2023 | Updated 2:05 p.m. Aug. 30, 2023
Fontes cites his understanding of a recent court ruling. The en banc Arizona Supreme Court decision in the case of Hansen v. Finchem [AZ SC No. CV-22-0099-AP/EL (2022)] declared that U.S. Representatives Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs along with State Representative Mark Finchem could not be disqualified by §3 because the authority to do so was vested solely in Congress by §5 of Amendment XIV. Fontes points to the Hansen ruling for his position regarding the potential disqualification of [the person who shall no longer be named] for the 2024 presidential election. Of course, Congress has failed to act. Former POTUS45 has brought us to the point where Congress must pass a law to establish the due process for disqualification of potential candidates, especially under §3. Such a law must also include disqualification of candidates convicted in a court of law on any felony or sentenced to prison for any amount of time. Logic, reason, and common sense are no longer satisfactory for accomplishing such filtration. I believe the defendant representatives in the Hansen case plus all of those who supported and engaged in the January 6th insurrection should be disqualified from holding any governmental office at any level. They have proven themselves to be incapable of defending the Constitution, abiding by its strictures, and remaining within the spirit of the law. Like former Governor Christie so accurately stated, their conduct is unacceptable . . . period, full stop, drop the mic.
Can someone, anyone, explain to me why the Republicans, the MAGA bunch, and the evangelical Christian right-wing are so intent upon denying medical treatment to LGBTQ children and denying the same rights as every other citizen enjoys to LGBTQ citizens? It is truly puzzling to me. How has their proper medical treatment affected anyone or anything in the public domain? I truly do not understand or comprehend what compels some citizens to interfere in the “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” of other citizens. Sincerely, please explain . . . someone . . . anyone.
A friend and occasional contributor to this humble forum sent along the following article and link:
“Air Force secretary says US not ready for China war — he's right”
by Tom Rogan, National Security Writer & Online Editor
Washington Examiner
Published: September 01, 2023; 04:33 PM
To which I responded:
Absolutely correct. General warfare with any large nation or combination of nations would require broad mobilization and transformation of the economy to a war footing. Heck, the War on Terrorism 20 years ago needed mobilization, but President Bush failed to do so, and tried to fight war on the cheap, and the decision got a lot of people killed for a destiny of failure. Russia is a shell of what the Soviet Union used to be, but it is still lethal. The PRC is far stronger. Even the nuisance DPRK would require general mobilization. The failure to mobilize for warfighting began back in the Truman era (Korea), and presidents since then have failed at that vital measure of war-fighting. The military is just the pointy end of the spear.
To which I will add:
As I use the term ‘mobilization,’ I mean the transformation of the society and economy to the warfighting task, which includes but is not limited to informing the population to an extent that they broadly support the necessity for and objectives of the warfighting. That process includes conscription, service, sacrifice of common goods and services needed for warfighting, et cetera ad infinitum. We had large scale protests against the U.S. participation in the Vietnam War because President Johnson failed to be honest with the American people and especially to convince them of the necessity for the war in Southeast Asia. As a consequence, a significant portion of our population did not support the war, were not willing to make any sacrifices to support the war effort, which in turn the enemy exploited quite effectively. It takes the whole nation to fight a war properly—the military without shackles and the economy behind them completely.
So, are we ready to fight a war with the PRC if necessary? No, we are absolutely not ready. The military is a mere fraction of the body required, and the nation is in a peacetime lethargy occupied by internal political squabbling. We are not ready to fight a war and barely ready to fight a brief battle. We have a very capable military, but they need to be much more to fight a war.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
I do not recall much, if anything, I agree with coming out of Texas politically these days, but a recent bill signed by the governor became law. Texas House Bill 393, also known as Bentley's Law, went into effect on Friday, 1.September.2023. The new law requires a vehicle driver who is convicted of intoxicated manslaughter of a parent must pay child support for each surviving child until 18 years of age or graduation from high school, whichever occurs later. I am impressed with the precision and focus of the law. The next question will be whether prosecutors use the new law to extract appropriate compensation for children who have lost a parent to a drunk driver. It is about freakin’ time! Well done, Texas!
Comments and contributions from Update no.1128:
Comment to the Blog:
“Logical defenses don’t exist in the Georgia election RICO case. Expect nonsense and loopholes.
“Both MAGA and anti-MAGA are marketing merch with that mug shot. It began on my side of politics within a couple of hours. I believe that’s one of the most villainous mug shots I’ve ever seen.
“I study history, and I often see it as the study of consequences. Ford’s pardon of Nixon began a series of ‘let’s not dwell on that’ responses to increasingly horrific national scandals leading to our current mess. Let’s take a full inventory of this mess and demand appropriate amends. That’s the only path to healing.
“Tiny could become the next Republican nominee for President. It’s shameful that there’s no obvious better choice from another party. The ‘No Labels’ thing showed up on my local news this morning not looking viable.”
My response to the Blog:
Perhaps so, but that is not going to stop them from making every attempt. Fani Willis and other prosecutors in other cases will likely need to be re-elected or maintain their appointments in the next election. A new prosecutor could simply drop the case. We, the People, must do our part. Yes, we will see every defense tool utilized in these cases, e.g., delay trial start to April 2026 and transfer to federal court. Despite all the legal wrangling, I just want the perpetrators to feel the full weight of justice for their crimes. Yet, every time we face this situation, I am reminded of the O.J. Simpson murder jury [3.10.1995].
I thought his NEVER SURRENDER rendition was first . . . at least the first I was aware of. Yes, my thoughts exactly. Contrition is not a word in his vocabulary, so let him suffer the consequences of his transgressions.
I study history as well. I agree with your assessment. Ford’s pardon may have been an expedient of his day, but it was a tragic action for history and the debacle we face today. I see no indication Tiny has even a modicum of understanding or appreciation of history. To him, he is everything; there is nothing else—malignant narcissism. I agree these prosecutions will not be easy or without more pain, but we must push through to full justice, and amends as you say.
Yes, and as I underestimated in 2016, he may well become president, again. It will be interesting to see if any states disqualify him by §3 from appearing on their state ballot. That could materially affect the outcome. “No Labels” is not looking good here either, but it would not take much to affect the result. It is going to get much crazier.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
2 comments:
Happy Labor Day, Cap,
We shall see how the disqualification process plays out. I don’t expect logic and reason to have a major role.
All the controversies regarding sexual/gender health (abortion and birth control as well as LGBTQ issues) boil down to the MAGAts and radical Christians having serious control issues. Their “leaders” make the most of that.
Those who send others to war know the benefits to themselves and ignore the cost to everyone else. Your example of Vietnam is apt. The reason LBJ couldn’t convince us of the necessity of that war is that it was unnecessary. The bulk of our history in the USA is exactly like that. Also, remember that no conquered nation rests comfortably. Indigenous Americans are only one example of that.
No punishment for drunkenness has yet decreased drunkenness. Good luck with that.
Enjoy your day,
Calvin
Good morning to you, Calvin,
Yes, it will be interesting to witness. The initiative in Arizona last year was the only bona fide effort I am aware of, so far. It was a state action. To my knowledge, the federal government has never tried to pass an enforcement law for §3. I am not sure how Congress would be able to enforcement the provisions of §3, since responsibility for conducting elections rests with the states, not the federal government. What if the federal government disqualifies a candidate under §3 with the authority granted by §5, and a state, oh say Alabama as an example, decides to list his name on the ballot anyway? Does the FBI arrest the Alabama secretary of state? How do they enforce the law? This whole situation is likely to get much uglier and messier before any clarification can occur.
Perhaps so. While the GOP’s waning control is certainly a factor, I think the answer may well be far more complex. Why would anyone believe they have a right to dictate how another person can conduct their lives? How does such intervention square with “Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness”?
Well, I have a slightly different take on Vietnam. I think LBJ tried, but he built his argument on lies—a foundation of falsehood. Even GWB built his argument on wishful thinking rather than hard evidence. JFK was in the process of seeing the light, but he was assassinated and never transformed those suspicions into actions. GHWB was the only one that mobilized properly for the task presented; he had three times the number of troops for a tenth of the task as his son chose to do. FDR was the last president to carry out a proper full-scale mobilization for the situation at hand, even he fell short when the Japanese decided to attack. In this whole present discussion, I have not yet discerned what the neo-cons expect when they say such things as the military is not prepared for war with the PRC? In WW2, we had more than a hundred active combat divisions; we have only 10 today. They do not say what they want to happen.
True. But, I am not advocating to change drunkenness, only drunkenness that endangers the lives of other people. You want to get drunk, stay home. You want to get drunk at a bar, have someone drive you home. Local jurisdictions are far too lenient with DUI incidents. I see the Texas law as a small step on a long journey.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Have a great day. Take care and enjoy.
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment