Update from the Sunland
No.1212
31.3.25 – 6.4.25
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
In the latest distraction / deflection de jour, President [no name] has suggested that he might seek a third term as president and stated that there is a path for him to seek a third term. Once again, and one of so many times, [no name] has chosen to ignore the Constitution, the law, and traditional practice. Standing in the way are:
the 12t Amendment (last sentence):
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. [emphasis mine]
And the 22nd Amendment:
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. [emphasis mine]
One path (of perhaps several) to press the boundaries of constitutional law is the notion that [no name] might run as Vance’s vice president, and if they were elected, he would have Vance resign, and he would become president (again), but this time by ascension rather than outright election.
Is it possible? Yes, I suppose it is, if you ignore the spirit of the Constitution. If [no name] decides to create yet another constitutional crisis in pressing this issue, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide the proper interpretation of ‘elected’ and ‘ineligible’ in the context of the 22nd and 12th Amendments respectively. With the current Court in position to render such judgment, I am not confident in the outcome of that crisis. He may not be serious, but one fact remains. The Constitution did not bother him a twit on 6.January.2021. I highly doubt the Constitution will be an obstacle for him in 2028/9. Thus, that convicted felon con-man may not be serious, but I certainly take him seriously.
For all of those citizens who voted for the current president on the basis of his promise of lowering prices, reducing inflation, and stabilizing the economy on day one, how is this fellow workin’ out for ya?
[No name] has zero interest in debate, discussion, dissent, or compromise. His sole focus is his brand, his sctick, his expanse grift of the American people, and to that end, he demand subservient loyalty to his word—not the Constitution, not the law, not the United States of America. TO HIS WORD! To my knowledge, he has not yet used the term dictator (or any variant of the word) with respect to his actions, yet. However, his choices of political appointees to cabinet and agency positions are Exhibit no.1. His dismissal of all inspectors general, intended by Congress to be an independent crosscheck to the political positions, is Exhibit no.2. He is chaotically but purposefully removing any and all forms of dissent. He refuses to listen to anyone telling him ‘no.’
In a couple of snippets from history that stand in stark, brutally stark, contrast to the current president, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt offered model administrations and shared a common inclination of bringing political adversaries into the cabinet and governmental agencies. They relied upon their leadership skills. They encouraged dissent. The current fellow wants to quash dissent in any form, anywhere, at any time, for any reason. He is not interested in the truth. His word is the only word . . . as if he thinks of himself as the messiah. After all, he always tells the truth, and he never makes a mistake (I say with as much sarcasm as I can muster)
Senator Cory Anthony Booker of New Jersey rose to speak on the floor of the Senate chamber. He held the floor for 25 hours and 5 minutes, breaking the record for the longest floor speech in modern history. Booker was not contributing to the debate of any bill before the Senate. I suspect the effort was to demonstrate the willingness and ability of the minority party to resist regime actions. The parts of the speech that I listened to were quite good and appropriate.
I watched with considerable interest the PBS Frontline program titled: “The Rise and Fall of Terrorgram” [Season 2025: Episode 10]. The episode illuminated a contemporary terror network and dealt broadly with white supremacists, ultra-Christian nationalists, isolationists, and many other derivative neo-Nazi extremes who found affinity with like-minded individuals around the world. Two ProPublica journalists, A.C. Thompson and James Bandler, dug deeply into a series of apparent solo terror attacks—Christchurch, New Zealand [15.3.2019], San Diego, California [27.4.2019], and Bratislava, Slovakia [12.10.2022]. Each of the noted terror attacks was considered to be a lone wolf action by local law enforcement in that they were carried out by solo individuals rather than groups. Thompson and Bandler established the attacks were not isolated event and the common connection between the noted terror attacks was an Internet network—the Terrorgram Collective. They tracked the metamorphosis of the collective through various applications and pop-up networks—4Chan ® 8Chan ® Telegram ® Terror Telegram ® Terrorgram Collective. The noted terror attacks were not isolated solo events; they were connected. The stimulation, instruction, and encouragement spreads like a virulent and deadly virus among predominately white nationalist individuals.
Prior to the Internet, chatrooms, bulletin boards, and other forms of digital communication, extremist groups had no choice but to rely upon word-of-mouth, courier communications. Telephones could be tapped with a valid warrant. The Mail was too easily traced and tracked. But the internet is electrons and photons moving at the speed of light on wires and fiberoptics around the world in factions of a second. The program illuminates the ease with which radical elements within the population can connect and amplify their contagious and poisonous ideology as well as the difficulty faced by law enforcement to intercede before innocent people die. We have so much to learn about how extremist groups utilize the wonder of the Internet to propagate their hatred.
Tariffs are not a new phenomenon. They have existed for centuries. What is particularly informative regarding today’s version instigated by the current fellow is a set of tariffs imposed at the beginning of the Great Depression. In 1930, Congress passed, and President Hoover signed into law the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 [PL 71-361; 46 Stat. 590] [488]. The tariffs had a tragic effect on the already collapsing American economy and arguably contributed to Hoover’s defeat in the 1932 election, but far worse, the tariffs amplified the pain the American people endured during the Great Depression.
Now, there are distinct differences between 1930 and 2025. However, there are more similarities than differences. At the bottom line, tariffs rarely have a positive effect and most often inflict considerable damage. In the current instance, his choices for implementation add extraordinary chaos, uncertainty, and instability. The money markets are reacting adversely to the chaos he has created. Nonetheless, we shall see how this instance of tariffs turns out. History is not blind.
Then, as if we do not have enough craziness from the disgusting clown show in the White House, we have a contemporary, in-the-flesh Melisandre, the sorceress from the Game of Thrones. Her name is Laura Elizabeth Loomer, a right-wing conspiracy theorist and QAnon aficionada, who described herself as a ‘pro-white nationalist,’ which is a slightly less offensive form of white supremacist. Perhaps as a coincidence (and you know what I think about coincidences), Loomer visited the Oval Office and Lieber Anführer, and the director and deputy director of the National Security Agency (NSA) are fired. Loomer actually took credit for the firing of the two intelligence leaders.
Ok! The MAGAts persistent strive for ignorance has gone too far. By the direction of SecDef Hegseth, the U.S. Naval Academy was ordered to remove books from the university library that promote Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). Among the 381 books removed from the Nimitz Library at the U.S. Naval Academy were
No.54 Memorializing the Holocaust: Gender, Genocide and Collective Memory by Janet Jacobs.
No.55 Half American: the Epic Story of African Americans Fighting World War II at Home and Abroad by Matthew F. Delmont.
No.357 I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou.
If anyone cares to review the list of removed books, here is the list provided by the Department of Defense:
The motto of the U.S. Naval Academy is Ex Scientia Tridens—From Knowledge, Sea Power. The MAGAts are forcing the Naval Academy to turn away from knowledge and embrace ignorance. They want midshipmen to know only what they want them to know. They are hell-bent upon returning us to ignorance. They do not want knowledge. They seek to impose ignorance wherever they are able to do so. The challenge for the rest of us is not allowing them to be successful at attaining ignorance. It is one thing to ban books from an elementary school. It is monumentally more offensive to back books from a university library.
Children are taught by their parents racism, sexism, and all the other damnable -isms and phobias. School and education are the only bulwark We, the People, have against the perpetuation of hateful thought. The only conclusion I can derive from the MAGAt quest for ignorance is they endeavor to protect conditions that allow white supremacy, white dominance, racism, sexism, and all the other -isms and phobias. It is the MAGAt contract with the Devil.
The question that keeps coming into my little pea-brain is, are our beliefs that fragile that they cannot withstand reading about other beliefs and opinions? That just reading the Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,
is enough to corrupt the minds of anyone who succumbs to reading the pamphlet. Or, reading Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler is sufficient to turn a good citizen to white supremacy, fascism, antisemitism, and Nazism? As for me, I have more faith in our principles, beliefs, and faith. I am not afraid of knowledge. I seek knowledge. I condemn the MAGAts and their quest for ignorance. I have read some of these books and many others, they have only reinforced my belief in our principles of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” of freedom of choice, and in our precious fundamental right to privacy. The removed Naval Academy books must be return to the library. This ridiculous quest for ignorance has got to stop . . . to be stopped.
Comments and contributions from Update no.1211:
Comment to the Blog:
“I read Nineteen Eighty-Four for a high-school class, during Watergate. You have a real point there.
“The Felon’s plan for a third term would make Vance the ultimate turncoat. I doubt the Felon’s health will hold up that long, though.
“In regard to your comment from last week, ‘I doubt Blue Origin will quietly tolerate any malfeasance by anyone including Musk . . . ,’ please advise how they could resist.
“Your anti-trans commenter (‘mental disorder’) needs to study the genetics of that and several other related topics. ‘Either male or female’ is a serious oversimplification, and transgender people aren't ‘confused.’ That commenter’s phrasing, rhetorical questions, and insupportable arguments make me think he’s the opposite of woke, which is ‘hypnotized’ or a ‘zombie.’”
My response:
Thank you. Nineteen Eighty-Four should be read and discussed by every high school in the country. I would also add The Ugly American by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer. Both books should be mandatory reading.
I think Vance is already past that threshold. Perhaps so, but that is not a surety.
Blue Origin is not without political influence. The company’s principal shareholder has very deep pockets, and with those resources, they can take full advantage of the Judicial System.
I would say it is a grotesque oversimplification . . . serious, yes, but far worse from my perspective. To me, such foolish, verging upon ignorant, positions are dangerous and inhuman. I cannot and will not defend anyone else’s opinions. All I can say is, those are (his/her) opinions, which I fully support the expression thereof. Like homosexuality (or broader, non-heterosexuality), gender dysphoria and gender ambiguity are NOT mental or emotional disorders; they are a natural and normal occurrence within the human species. They are private matters and should never be subject to public (governmental) intrusion.
. . . Round two:
“I’ve never read The Ugly American, but I understand the concept as privilege.
“Blue Origin would have to outbid Muskrat, and Muskrat is already embedded in the Administration.
“Some people, including the other commenter, always operate in combat mode. What seems unnatural to me is attacking someone who poses no possible threat to the attacker. Others’ gender and orientation do me no harm, and we’re learning that those parts of a person are individual and partly biological. When someone attacks people the way he did, I always wonder if the attacker is avoiding questions about their own identity.”
. . . my response to round two:
The book is rather dated (1958), but the reflections of the false notion of American exceptionalism make the novel worth the read.
I must concede, the administration is certainly capable of subverting the established governmental acquisition process as he has done with his blatant loyalist appointments and especially with his dismissal of the inspectors general. Short of that destruction, the system protects against bias or political favor.
That is precisely the point. [No name], his MAGAts, and their various sycophant and acolyte factions vilify the LGBTQ+ community to placate the social conservatives and ultra-Christian nationalists, who feign offense that the minority even exists. This is moral projection at its worst. They are doing incalculable harm to a small minority that causes no harm, no injury, and no intrusion on anyone. They are just trying to live their private lives and enjoy their freedom of choice. But the conservatives simply do not care; they only seek the dominance of their beliefs.
Very good point . . . over-reaction to cover their behavior. It’s kind of like Doublespeak.
. . . Round three:
“Hoover was an excellent engineer who followed the once-and-future Republican approach to economics. As usual with the wealthy, he had no way of understanding the ‘human factor,’ which cost him the election and the nation a great deal of pain.”
. . . my response to round three:
A lot of things cost Hoover reelection. I cannot imagine the Great Depression if Hoover had been reelected. Hoover listened to the wrong people, kind of like the current fellow. We must endure. Hopefully, an FDR-like president will come along with a supportive Congress and get us out of this chaos, mess, and deep hole. He has really screwed the pooch on this one. And worse, he will never feel the pain he has caused.
Another contribution:
“God standards are far better than man's. No doubt. Standards that are time tested.”
. . . forwarded from a third party:
“Not sure who [no name] is. Could have been any president we've had in my 75 years.
“It's OK to teach transgender in schools because, ‘it's part of life?’ The Nazis, Communists, Fascists, etc, were also, ‘part of life.’ So if one is OK, why not all of 'em? The only answer that comes to my mind is that man's ideas de jour have become the standard for truth? To be more precise, it's the propaganda machine de jour ideas that have been mistaken for the truth.
“Someone may agree with the machine today, but who knows about tomorrow? The machine vacillates. Only God's truth stands firm, making it the only sure standard of truth.”
My reply:
We can feign ignorance at any time. Yet, to be clear, I have chosen to utilize the common contemporary practice of government, law enforcement, and the Press when referring to a criminal convicted felon. He is entitled to the title since he was duly and properly elected (hired) to be our current president. Beyond that reality, I refuse to use his name; he does not deserve common recognition. He is a felon. To my knowledge, there is only ONE convicted felon who has served as president of the United State of America; thus, my usage and reference.
Good point. Students should be (I would say must be . . .) taught about what the Nazis did. They should understand how the Germans got to a fascist dictatorial state. They should be taught about communist and the abomination of Stalin’s Soviet Union and Xi’s PRC. Just as they should be taught about what slavery did in the United States. Facts.
OK, I will bite. I sincerely would like to learn. To which “God’s truth” are we referring Leviticus or the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or some minister in Podunk, Iowa?
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
I am not interested in “Doublespeak.” Ignorance is NOT strength. It is in fact weakness, profound weakness. Scientia super Nescientia.
. . . Round two forwarded from the third party:
“Cap averred to sincerely want to learn about the source of truth, so I assume he is sincere. I wouldn't want him to just believe anything I might say (nor any minister from Podunk, Iowa 😁). Cap seems like an intelligent guy. I don't picture him as the kind of guy who wants to be spoon fed, so I'd suggest he go straight to the source. Open a concordance (Strong's Concordance) and look up every usage of the word ‘truth’ in the Bible. Between the words ‘truth’ and ‘true’ there are some 300 usages in the scriptures. Then he can draw his own conclusion.
“Should Cap decide to do that, I'd be interested in getting his take. At least at that point we could then have an informed discussion on the topic.”
. . . my reply to round two:
Whether I am intelligent or not is for others to judge. I am what I am.
I do not need to re-read the Bible, Torah, or Qu’ran.
To answer my own question, I do not see any value in the inhumanity of Leviticus. Jesus of Nazareth repeatedly taught followers (or anyone who would listen) to love our neighbors and to not judge. Those are good and valuable lessons. The burden to assess information from any source fall exclusively to each of us. It is not an easy task. I have been deeply disappointed by too many ministers preaching their form of bias rather than the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth; I do not need to listen to more such nonsense.
Please pardon my forgetfulness . . . I have lost track of what “truth” we are discussing. I would appreciate a clue to continue this threat.
. . . Round three:
“Jesus Christ did teach much of forgiving, even our enemies. Difficult process as we are stuck in with our sin, afflicted with the human condition.
“Since I've been in my 20's (not to be confused with the 1920's), I created my own acronym and attempt at a code for life, referred to as the 3F's for Forgive, Forget and go Forward. Not easy to do, and at this older age in life, I still fail on the 3F's. While embedded in the ‘human condition’ all we can do is understand our work-in-progress nature.
“Another important aspect in understanding and interpreting current conditions and history, to better have insights in possible future scenarios/trends, is not to stay within our own biases. We also must protect ourselves (think of stall or ice protection systems), from the bias of news media and what seems an agenda for programming, or what I often suggest might be psyops, which seemingly does more to distract, divide and polarize We the People. As such, I spent an evening Wednesday night watching some PBS Frontline episodes about Putin and the Ukraine War. You already are well aware of my opinion and how I weigh in on this disturbing geopolitical event(s). However, I went to bed Wednesday night asking myself a rather moral kind of question of WHAT IF? What if I am wrong about Putin, his ultimate goal(s), and where this war between the West and Russia, will take us. WHAT IF I am wrong with my assumptions? What if Putin plans to retake Europe or at least the USSR's former client-states? Like you, and most of us, we want to try and pick the right side of history for our legacy/record.
“I believe intelligence and emotional-equipoise, involve taking a look at each sphere of an issue and trying to find the truth or logic. I often will take a position (e.g. LEFT v. RIGHT) and hunker down just staying in my area of comfort for a fair dose of confirmation bias. It is important for me to get out of that realm. The Holy Bible is a fine enduring document(s) for me to ground myself with. For another, it may be their study of history, or some good norms of morality and ethics.”
. . . my reply to round three:
This thread has diverged from the original salient point. I sought to emphasize that the transgender matter is personal and private for those involved and thus should not be an issue for public intrusion as the current president and his minions have done. The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are quite applicable to the matter. Everyone, regardless of any one or combination of the social factors, should be respected and valued in our society. The current president is reversing years of progress to that end. Thus, my objection and resistance.
Putin’s motives are important to negotiations, but the fact remains, he chose to invade a sovereign country that had not threatened or disturbed Russia. It does not matter a twit that ethnic Russians are a majority in Eastern Ukraine any more than Sudetenland ethnic Germans justified Hitler’s dissection of Czechoslovakia. Facts are facts. Motives are irrelevant to the facts. If ethnic Russians want to live in Russia, move to Russia. Putin’s Russia should be expelled from all Ukrainian territory including Crimea.
All religious texts have value. I argue that those documents helped civilize humanity. It took a long time and was replete with mistakes, but we are here today in large measure because of those documents.
At the end of the day, I want people to stay out of the private lives of citizens and to respect their freedom of choice as they wish their freedoms to be respected. Transgender folks are not imposing upon anyone; they just want to live their lives as they choose. If they can do the job, let them serve. Full stop!
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
. . . Round four:
“I want what words I write to be clearly understood and very bold in understanding. In retort to your 2nd paragraph below. You are asserting that we the collective need to stay out of the private lives of transgenders. That might be acceptable however why do the transgender social justice warriors with all their wokeness, stay out of all our lives. The transgender mentally unstable segment of our population is very small, likely in single digit percentages. Why every time I turn on the news or what the Hollywood psyops (programming), have to hear again about transgenders, and how they are such a victimized group? Why has their army invaded corporations, workplaces and universities?
“Cap, something much bigger in the agenda of change agents is going on beyond Johnny with a penis, being confused and wanting to dress up as a little girl, or whatever s/he identifies with, the flavor of the day?”
. . . my reply to round four:
OK, I’ll bite. How does any transgender person intrude upon your privacy and freedom of choice? This ‘woke’ term has been bandied about far too much. Please explain to me how ‘woke’ (and all variations thereof) intrude upon your privacy and freedom of choice? If you do not like any public things (television, movies, news, whatnot) for any one or combination of the social factors, do not watch, listen, or associate with those folks that offend you. All I am saying is, respect others as you wish to be respected. Whether a male chooses to dress as a female injures no one and causes no damage to anything. It is that simple.
If we have spot offenders, let us deal with those offenses rather than penalize an entire faction. The problem seems to be the imagination of conservatives rather than any malfeasance by transgender individuals. Let us respect the freedom of choice of others regardless of the social factors.
. . . Round five forwarded from the third party:
“I can appreciate forgetting things! I was under the impression we were discussing how the word ‘truth’ is used in the Bible. I wasn't arguing that the Bible is true (although I'm convinced it is). I just suggested it would be easier to discuss how the Bible uses the word ‘truth’ after having actually seen how it's used there.
“I would also point out that Leviticus was written to an ancient people in far away land with a worldview vastly different than that of the modern West. If we read our culture into it, it is sure to skew the message in a big way. Sure, it takes a bit of work to understand the mindset of the people in the Ancient Near East, but, thanks to modern scholarship and the fairly recent discovery of tens of thousands of ancient documents, it is possible to learn, and if will paint an entirely different picture of all the Bible story. To benefit from such a study, one must be willing to lay aside preconceived ideas, be willing to learn new material. But that's a whole other topic, one that would require more effort that looking up a word in concordance. On the other hand, it's not that difficult to look up a word in a concordance and see how it's used in the scriptures.”
. . . my reply to round five:
This thread has gotten a little disjoint, but [the contributor] offers some good points and deserves a rebuttal.
I appreciate and recognize the use of the word ‘truth’ in the Old and New Testaments. If [the contributor] wishes to select one, or two, or a few instances, we can discuss specific elements. Generalized interpretations are not particularly useful. To me, truth is facts. The Earth rotates such that the Sun appears to rise above the eastern horizon every 24 hours. That is a fact. The religious texts for any denomination were written by human beings.
Just a reminder, Jesus of Nazareth lived two millennia ago. We refer to that span of time as ancient. And yet, His teachings remain valid to this very day. Yes, Leviticus was written a long time ago and reflected the beliefs of that day. We know today that most of those words were false; they were NOT truth. Yet, even though the words of Leviticus are not true, I still read and re-read those words. I always try to glean out truth and the applicable life lesson. Perhaps as a flaw on my part, I do not believe something just because someone says it or writes it.
A different contribution:
“Cap, if you'd just tone down your fixed-in hatred of Donald Trump, you might just get more readership and folks that don't see your obvious behavior.”
. . . forwarded from a different third party:
“After reading that garbage pile of commentary, all that comes to mind is, ‘Twist a pig's ear and watch him squeal!’”
My response:
Oh my, I am quite toned down compared to what my wife must listen to. I strive to keep these exchanges civil. Further, I am compelled to respect your (Craig’s or anyone’s) freedom of choice. Y’all are entitled to believe what you wish for whatever reason(s) you wish.
For the record, I do not hate [no name]. He is what he is and always has been. I have recognized him for what he is long before he first announced his candidacy. I simply call ‘em as I see ‘em. I also consider you a friend. We have been chatting for decades now. As a friend, I reply with concern. I see a friend who has been duped by an experienced and successful con-man. To me, it is no different from a swindler bilking you out of tens of thousands of dollars. I condemn the swindler. So it is with this con-man. Yet, as I noted above, your freedom of choice enables you to believe in the swindler con-man. Trust me, he is NOT the messiah. Believe what you wish, but do not expect me to stop confronting the swindler who bilked you. He is and always has been a snake-oil salesman--worthless.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
