Update no.1228

Update from the Heartland

No.1228

21.7.25 – 27.7.25

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

 

To all,

 

This once grand republic’s (perhaps the world’s) chief con-man, bully-in-chief, and felon-in-chief in the persona of [the person who shall no longer be named, AKA no name] decided he needed a holiday at his golf resort in Scotland. More than a few Scots demonstrated their displeasure with his presence in their country.

I figured I would take a break as well. I am very tired of writing about his insanity. No court cases to review. No legislation to argue. No events to assess. Further, the tumult of our relocation from Arizona back to Kansas has finally begun to diminish, although we are not yet within the comfortable embrace of our normal daily routine. We are making good progress, just not there yet. So, I thought the occasion would be a good opportunity to update everyone on my ‘other’ writing.

 

With deep and profound sadness, Cap records the rapid and untimely passing of Kevin Earl Ready, Sr., Managing Editor and Publisher at Saint Gaudens Press, Inc. [19.November.2024]. Cap offers his deepest condolences to Kevin’s Widow, Olga, and their children and grandchildren. Kevin’s passing is a devastating loss to many.

The loss has virtually stopped editing and publishing operations at Saint Gaudens Press, Inc. Cap continues his search for another path to publication.

Last summer, Cap submitted the manuscript for his 24^th book, the 3^rd book in his Anod series of science fiction novels—Anod’s Glory. The preparation for publication was well underway when Kevin’s illness took a swift turn for the worse. The publication package for the printing company was not released.

[Provisional Title]

Anod’s Glory follows her efforts to stabilize her people on Murtauri Four, and then, after receiving a personal invitation, Anod makes the journey back to Earth, her first visit to the home planet. She learns more about the history of her species and concludes the negotiations for a treaty of alliance with The Society on Earth for the Murtaurians. Anod returns home the hero she is.

Cap has also completed the writing of his 25^th book—Die Teufelshunde.

[Provisional Title]

The title, Die Teufelshunde, is German for The Devil Dogs, a moniker given to the Marines of the 4^th Marine Brigade for their aggressive fighting style during the epic Battle of Belleau Wood, a pivotal engagement of the Great War. The U.S. Marine Corps has proudly retained the title since given, thus Cap’s appropriate choice for the title of the book. The skeleton of the story is the preserved letters that Cap’s Great-Uncle Charles Newton Parlier wrote home during his service prior to, during, and after his combat service on the Western Front.

Beyond the search for a new publisher, Cap is working on the next book of his To So Few series of historical fiction novels, the 12^th book of the series and what should be Cap’s 26^th book once published.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1227:

Comment to the Blog:

“The Supremes goofed again. In no way is freedom of religion the same as freedom from reality. The decision is one more attack on public education.

“We have discussed the Executive Branch’s accumulation of power for itself. The Supreme Court granting permission to ruin the Department of Education is a new low.

“The Epstein mess isn’t a conspiracy theory as commonly understood, but the mainstream media ignores that. This event has court convictions, known victims by the dozen (there’s a compensation fund), and reams of evidence. We need that evidence to be released, unredacted, in order to get the names of the wealthy and powerful abusers.”

My response to the Blog:

They sure did, and unfortunately, that seems to be the norm these days. Exactly how I interpreted the Mahmoud decision. I naively thought we settled this matter in 1925.

A new low indeed . . . and with no rationale whatsoever. The McMahon decision also indirectly validates the president’s dictatorial inclinations. Government is not a business. He does not own it. He is an employee, period. But, the majority ignored all that.

I have not seen the evidence, but I suspect the government was faced with a paucity of facts connecting criminal activity with specific perps. Conviction requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. I also suspect powerful men acted to ensure Epstein would never face the detailed scrutiny of trial, denying the victims justice.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“We have facts in the Epstein case. That’s what makes it different from conspiracy theories. A compensation fund has paid out in nine figures to dozens of victims. Epstein’s conviction in 2008 was a sweetheart deal, but the evidence for that is somewhere, and so is the evidence against Ghislaine Maxwell. A woman named Katie Johnson told police of being violently raped by the Felon in Manhattan at the age of 13, but withdrew from prosecution in fear for her life. Whatever’s going on, it’s not lack of evidence. People, including clergy and police, are being convicted of sexual assaults much more often than in the past. The most powerful still get away with it.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

From my perspective, we have the general story, but I have not seen the evidence tested in court. I watched a goodly portion of the O.J. trial and saw the physical evidence collected and tested. That was a state murder trial in California. Federal courts rarely allow live video streaming, which means we are dependent upon the Press to absorb and pass along essential news. I understand the prosecution of Epstein and Maxwell. What I do not understand is the failure or reluctance to prosecute those powerful men who perpetrated those crimes. If the Felon raped a 13-year-old girl, why wasn’t he prosecuted for his crime? Thanks to the Supremes, the Felon cannot be prosecuted at present because we elected him to be president, giving him essential immunity from prosecution. If we had a strong majority in the House, and a 60+ majority in the Senate, we could and should impeach and convict him for his crimes, which might break the sense of invulnerability of the con-man.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-) 

Update no.1227

 Update from the Heartland

No.1227

14.7.25 – 20.7.25

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

 

To all,

 

In Mahmoud v. Taylor [606 U. S. ____ (2025); No. 24–297], the Supremes decided that parental religious beliefs override facts and the common good. Associate Justice Alito, writing for the 6-3 majority, offered a number of real-world examples of parents objecting to a course of instruction for their children on religious grounds. He is emphatically wrong! This is a public domain public good matter, not a private religious faith issue. In the dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Sotomayor wrote, “[Public schools] offer to children of all faiths and backgrounds an education and an opportunity to practice living in our multicultural society. That experience is critical to our Nation’s civic vitality. Yet it will become a mere memory if children must be insulated from exposure to ideas and concepts that may conflict with their parents’ religious beliefs.” She went on to recognize, “[N]ever, in the context of public schools or elsewhere, has this Court held that mere exposure to concepts inconsistent with one’s religious beliefs could give rise to a First Amendment claim.”

Opt-out provisions seem like a reasonable compromise, but I see it in an entirely different light. I see opting out as a forced rejection of facts that can never be good for the general public good. No one wishes to deny anyone’s religious beliefs. But, facts are facts.

It is certainly no surprise that the conservatives on the Supreme Court have inflicted their biased views on all American citizens. The inevitable questions arise. Where is the limit? When do the religious predilections of the lowest common denominator among us become the threshold of public acceptance? If some particular religious faction decides the Earth is flat, or the Sun revolves around the Earth, are we all to constrain our children’s education to the lowest common denominator? The State has a responsibility, if not an obligation, to teach our children the facts. Parents have every right to teach their children as they wish. They can and do teach their children hatred, racism, sexism, white supremacy, creationism, geocentrism, et al ad infinitum ad nauseum. They can and should be held accountable if their teachings cause harm to others. The questions continue. How far does the State’s obligation to protect the common good reach? When do facts exceed religious ideology? I continue to be reminded of the penchant of more than a few who seek ignorance over knowledge . . . religious beliefs over facts.

I fully and completely acknowledge the parental rights to teach their children as they choose what and how they teach their children regarding religious beliefs. They do not have a right to deny facts. If their religious beliefs require them to disregard facts that is their choice, but they cannot impose their beliefs on others. Teaching the facts are not in any way infringement upon anyone’s freedom of religion. What is unreasonable, is any expectation that someone’s religious beliefs can impose upon the facts.

Freedom of choice has to be more resilient to contrarian views, perspectives, and beliefs. However, tolerance is a two-way street. They want us to respect their beliefs. We have every right to expect them to respect our beliefs.

Are religious beliefs that fragile that they can be adversely affected by a child’s storybook?

 

Not even so much as a how’da’ya do, the Supremes decided to validate this president’s dictatorial inclinations in McMahon v. New York [606 U. S. ____ (2025); No. 24A1203]. After being rejected in its request for a temporary stay of a district court injunction against the secretary’s unilateral directive of 25.March.2025 and the president’s Executive Order No. 14242, the government made another emergency request for a ruling from the Supremes, Once again, the 6-3 conservative majority declared the president through his secretary of Education may gut the Department of Education, effectively ending any practical usefulness of the cabinet-level department. The majority offered no rationale, no analysis, and no justification. Sotomayor was spot on correct when she wrote for the dissent, “The Executive has seized for itself the power to repeal federal law by way of mass terminations, in direct contravention of the Take Care Clause and our Constitution’s separation of powers.. However, the president can refuse to spend funds, release all the department’s employees, and leave the department as a mere shell of what it was.” Congress created the Department of Education. Only Congress has the authority to terminate the department. Once again, the conservative majority was dead wrong in their action.

 

After stoking conspiracy theories for years, the chickens have come home to roost for [the person who shall no longer be named; AKA no name]. There are far too many pix and vids of [no name] chumming it up with Jeffrey Epstein to be ignored. The existence of those pix and vids, clearly over many years, suggest that a serious cover-up is afoot, which is most probably why Attorney General Bondi did that speed-of-light flip-flip from “the list is on my desk” to “there is no list”; case closed. If I was a gambling man, I would bet a dollar to donuts that [no name] appears more than a few times in the investigative documents and perhaps even participated in the Epstein sponsored events potentially involving underage young women. This whole sordid affair stinks to high heaven, made worse by [no name] and his bodyguard of lies.

By the end of the week, the con-man extraordinaire threatened to file another US$20B lawsuit, this time against the Wall Street Journal, accusing newspaper of liable in a report about a salacious letter [no name] reportedly sent to his buddy Jeffery Epstein for the man’s 50^th birthday. His intimidation and extortion of the news media continues unabated.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1226:

Comment to the Blog:

“The issues with the Supreme Court go back at least to the Thomas hearings. Too many Justices have been appointed based on loyalty to a political view, not for their legal insights.

“I’ll note that in-groups like the current Resident’s often fail due to their clashes with any handy target and their lack of critical or conflicting input.

“I almost understand the comment on applied research and development, but I assume the Felon’s clique know less than nothing about engineering processes. No capable intellects work in that Cabinet, and educating the public would harm their agenda.”

My response to the Blog:

At least that far. I could argue it goes back to Bjork or even the Roe ruling itself. Republicans have been so narrowly focused on overturning Roe that they were blinded to everything else. They achieved their objective [24.6.2022]. As a consequence, the Supreme Court may have been irreparably compromised.

So noted and agreed.

Quite so. I think that clown show has repeatedly demonstrated their ignorance . . . and worse, they do not care. I cannot see intellect in that bunch of clowns either. As I have also repeatedly stated, the MAGAts prefer ignorance over knowledge. They believe what they believe and could not care less about facts.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1226

 Update from the Heartland

No.1226

7.7.25 – 13.7.25

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

 

To all,

 

Next up on my list of end-of-session Supreme Court cases was Medina v. Planned Parenthood [606 U. S. ____ (2025)], a South Carolina case dealing with Medicaid processes. In the subject instance, the governor of South Carolina declared that all medical services facilities that perform abortions were “unqualified” to receive Medicaid funds, which in turn denied some Medicaid patients from choosing their preferred medical services provider as guaranteed by the law—Social Security Amendments Act of 1965 [PL 89-097; 79 Stat. 286]. The conservative 6-3 majority dramatically narrowed the use of a challenge provision of 42 USC §1983—Civil Rights Act of 1871 [PL 42-I-022; 17 Stat. 13]. The Court reversed both the district and appeals courts’ judicial conclusions and rejected the explicit and precise direction of Congress. Associate Justice Gorsuch wrote for the majority, and made it clear, they were not interested in the central issue at hand, only in reducing the number of §1983 challenges. Associate Justice Thomas sought to go farther in his concurring opinion to reinforce his personal judicial penchant for regression, i.e., the only valid interpretation and application of law is isolated to the context in which it was originally enacted. In her dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Jackson stated, “The dispute in this case arises from South Carolina’s failure to comply with [the ‘free-choice-of-provider’] provision. In 2018, the State’s Governor issued an executive order deeming all ‘abortion clinics’ unqualified to provide healthcare services and directing the State’s Department of Health and Human Services to terminate them from the State’s Medicaid program. That executive order would have forced two clinics operated by Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (PPSAT)—one in Charleston and one in Columbia—to stop serving any patients who rely on Medicaid.”

The federal law states that a citizen receiving Medicaid funding has the right to the Medicaid Act’s free-choice-of-provider provision. The State of South Carolina defied the federal law and decertified Planned Parenthood medical services. Both district and appeals courts determined that South Carolina had violated federal law. Yet, the conservative majority conveniently ignores that finding of fact and the law to devote their judicial attention on the §1983 provision of the law, allowing individuals and organizations to challenge governmental actions that violate their rights. I agree emphatically with Justice Jackson’s analysis of both the free-choice-of-provider provision of the Medicaid Act and her assessment of §1983 provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1871. The current makeup of the Court is indicative and reflective of the inhumanity of the current federal administration. These are the times in which we live.

 

In what appears to be a developing trend, the current conservative majority sitting on the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court prefers to hide behind long held biases and grudges to impose their regressive interpretation of the law. The latest example in my review pile is Trump v. CASA [606 U. S. ____ (2025); No. 24A884], a case dealing with the weighty constitutional topic of birthright citizenship. What does the conservative majority do to settle the matter? They concentrate their judicial attention on the growing district court use of “universal injunctions” to slow executive action not approved or sanctioned by Congress. The matter before the Court is Executive Order No. 14160, titled: “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” Three separate district courts and three separate appeals courts found that Executive Order 14160 likely violated the Constitution, and as such, they granted a “universal injunction,” meaning they stopped the enforcement of a likely unconstitutional executive order for all potentially affected newborn children. The lower courts appropriately noted the explicit provisions of the Constitution’s 14^th Amendment. Justice Barrett, writing for the majority, noted that the frequency of judicial “universal injunctions” has increased. What she refuses to acknowledge is the reason for “universal injunctions” was the increased frequency of executive orders stretching or exceeding the law and in some cases the Constitution. Yet, the conservative majority refuses to address the unconstitutionality of the president’s unilateral actions to concentrate their majority capacity on interpretative nuances in the application of the law. Once again, Associate Justice Sotomayor writes an exceptional dissenting opinion that excoriates the misguided and myopic majority as they oh so conveniently ignore the elephant in the room to focus their collective attention on a scurrying ant in the corner.

The various aspects of this ruling are perhaps the best illustration yet of the tension that the conservative majority imposed on the Court, on the Judiciary, and every citizen of the United States of America. I am also amazed, staggered, disappointed, and angry at the gross injustice perpetrated by Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky [13.2.2016]. His betrayal of the American People started this whole clown show. Because of the prevailing political intransigence, the current chief executive has chosen to ignore the Constitution, Congress, and history to take his unilateral action. Undeterred by the Constitution, the law, and history, the president issued EO 14160. I do not know whether [no name] actually believes in what he has done, or is he blindly listening to the hairbrained white supremacist, Christian nationalist advisors surrounding him?

 

Early on, I thought the Russian destruction of civilian targets was a product of war and inaccurate targeting. Long ago, I was dispelled from that foolish notion. Putin and his conservative faction are not interested in fighting an immoral war; they are only interested in punishing the independent-minded Ukrainian people, to raze the free nation to dust and rubble. It is our choice to stand around watching the destruction of Ukraine, which seems quite like those who witnessed the murder of Kitty Genovese [13.3.1964] . . . and did nothing!

 

Then, just two weeks after the Supremes issued their Trump v. CASA [606 U. S. ____ (2025)] ruling, federal Judge Joseph LaPlante for the United States District Court District of New Hampshire joined the party in the birthright citizenship question—Barbara v. Trump [Civil No. 25-cv-244-JL-AJ (2025)]. He certified a class action and issued a class-wide injunction against Executive Order 14160, to circumvent and satisfy the Supreme Court’s CASA ruling. Like the other judges before him, LaPlante notes the likelihood of the complainants prevailing under the law. Too bad the conservative majority refuses to acknowledge reality.

 

Once again, Robert Reich hits the nail square and sinks it in one stroke.

“Trump's Magnet of Malevolence – Why Miller, Vought, Bondi, Patel, Noem, Vance, Kennedy Jr., Rubio, and Hegseth are amplifying his cruelty”

by Robert Reich

Published: Jul 11 [2025]

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/trumps-magnet-of-malevolence

That is exactly as I see the state of [no name]’s second term as our employee. He has chosen to surround himself with sycophant, like-minded (at least prima facia), yes-women and men, who simply amplify der Lieber Anführermalevolence and disrespect for humanity in general. All I can say to the rest of the world is, that man does NOT represent the United States of America. We are much better than this. This too shall pass.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1225:

“Couple of items, Have been involved with continuum dynamic a CFD And R&D company in Princeton, NJ mainly SBIR type contracts and proposals with NASA and the military services.

“Was hot on a distributed instrumentation system for ONR and use on fixed wing and rotorcraft. Money got scrubbed in some of these cuts on R&D. consensus from CDI, Princeton University and other companies, doing R&D is little fingers administration does not understand the need for Applied R&D for future capability in all segments of the military and civil aerospace.

“Are you now in Wichita or Salina.”

My reply:

I certainly share your concern for the myopic perspective of the current administration. They seem to have no disquiet about adverse consequences on long term research and development objectives. [No name]’s direct assault on universities is tragic in so many ways. Thank goodness that Harvard is standing up to his idiocy. The long-range impact of Little Finger’s foolish crusade is incalculable and likely to have profound effect on engineering evolutionary improvements for a long time. We must remain hopeful—This too shall pass.

We came to rest in a small community on the northeast edge of Wichita—Bel Aire. So far, we like it . . . although there are irritants. We are still unpacking boxes, so I would not claim we are settled. Yet, things are beginning to settle, just so many things to do before we can claim to be settle. I need my routine—close but no cigar.

 

Comment to the Blog:

“Paramount Global paid off the Felon, but didn’t make any admission of wrongdoing.

“The One Big Ugly Bill is the law. The effect on ‘us’ depends on who you count as ‘us.’ Lower-income people including my family will pay more in taxes. Almost all services to society as a whole have been cut by this or prior actions, including the National Weather Service, NOAA, and FEMA. Medicare and Medicaid, both of which I receive, will be decimated. And I claim kinship to all humans; the ICE budget has been multiplied by 20. The concentration camps will cause major harm. The immigration case will aggravate that, and the deportation of US citizens threatens all of us.

“Elon Muskrat is threatening to create a new political party. His odds would typically be better than most due to the effect of big money on ballot access. His cognitive skills are higher than most. He also has stolen most government data, presumably including the Epstein files. However, his personal image (‘brand’) is in the toilet, and his sanity and drug issues will probably bring him down.”

My response to the Blog:

It is far worse than a simple pay off. [No name] criminally extorted US$16M from Paramount Global under the cover of his presidential executive authority. His suit was meritless and simply an ego-trip. Paramount had very few options. They traded CBS’s intellectual independence for the financial gain of their merger with Skydance Productions.

I thought my use of the plural pronoun ‘us’ was self-evident. Apparently not. So, for clarification, my use of ‘us’ was personal, not general. I recognize quite well that the “One, Big, Ugly” law will have dramatic impact on those least able to deal with the consequences. The law is tragic in epic proportions and will likely become the banner example of the inhumanity of the former Republican Party, and now the Bully-In-Chief Party (BICP). Yes, indeed, the deportation (or even de-naturalization) of U.S. citizens threatens us all. We must vote.

AG Bondi caved to the Felon-in-Chief by closing the Epstein case and file. Thank you for your observations regarding Musk. We shall see.

 . . . Round two:

“I agree that the Paramount suit and settlement were morally/ethically heinous. I wanted to point out that not admitting wrongdoing gives CBS some legal freedom.

“It’s part of my moral values that my ‘us’ in a political or social context usually includes the general public. I’m specific when I mean more limited groups.

“There’s a question whether free and fair elections will happen. That’s one of my complaints about the DNC Democrats. They’re complacent.

“Epstein is dead, but the outcomes of his actions live on.”

 . . . my response to round two:

True . . . but small distinction in the greater scheme of things.

Understood. Good point actually. Precise language is important.

I have faith in the election system. The vast majority are good, decent workers who strive to achieve free and fair elections. Unfortunately, there are always exceptions.

And, those consequences will likely live on for a long time.

 . . . Round three:

“‘The election system’ needs some clarity. I trust most poll workers and local officials, but they don’t make the larger decisions. Our State Secretary of State and legislature do, and they’ve made it harder to vote this year. Gerrymandering continues unabated, despite being overturned by the State Supreme Court several times. And the Federal government has authority it can wield. ‘Free and fair’ elections are not to be counted on.”

 . . . my response to round three:

You are, of course, quite correct. As with virtually all things and principles in a democracy, they are fragile. Republican legislatures are making it far more difficult to vote in the name of security. It is just another form of contemporary Jim Crow—Jim Crow v.2.0. Once again, their persistent efforts hurt the least able among us—another sign of the Republican inhumanity in our society.

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)

Update no.1225

 Update from the Heartland

No.1225

30.6.25 – 6.7.25

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

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- As predicted by numerous sources [1220], Paramount Global, the corporate parent of CBS, has reportedly settled the lawsuit filed by [the person who shall no longer be named; AKA no name]. Paramount will pay [no name] US$16M to settle the suit—Trump v. CBS [Case 2:24-cv-00236-Z (2024)] [1214]. Paramount Global co-CEO George Cheeks informed shareholders that there was a motivation to settle the lawsuit, even though CBS had long argued that the litigation was meritless. In this instance, I do believe we can connect the dots. Paramount’s merger with Skydance Productions has been under scrutiny by the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for more than a year. The subtle part of the governmental review is [no name] does not have to say a word about the merger review. The threat is implied. This is extortion by the president of the United States of America. This is the president we have today. I suppose we can chalk this episode to corporate priorities outweighing journalistic principles, which does not reflect well on the independence of the Press.

-- At the behest of [no name], Congress jumped through hoops and contorted themselves to pass H.R.1 - One Big Beautiful Bill Act [1219]. The House passed the bill on 22.May.2025 [House: 215-214-1-2(3)]. The Senate contemplated the legislation, made numerous amendments, and passed a modified bill [Senate: 50-50-0-0-(0) with Vice President Vance casting the tie breaking vote to approve the bill]. After significant arm-twisting and primary threats, the House affirmed the Senate version [House: 218-214-0-0(3)]. The president signed the bill into law on 4.July.2025. I cannot see any effect on us. However, this bill will have a profound effect on those citizens who most need our help. The cynicism and mercilessness of this law are incalculable. Let us not forget this for next year’s mid-term elections. Every citizen has a duty to vote.

 

The next of the end-of-session Supreme Court cases in my review list was an immigration deportation procedural case—Riley v. Bondi [606 U. S. ____ (2025)].  I read the whole ruling, but I will not waste your time going through the minutiae of the convoluted immigration deportation appeal procedures. Let it suffice to say, the majority narrowed the available appeal process for noncitizens facing deportation. They remanded the case to the Fourth Circuit for further proceedings, so the case is not yet closed, but it seems Pierre Riley is headed back to his native Jamaica, and he is claiming he is faced with certain death upon his arrival.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1224:

Comment to the Blog:

“One place I’d exclude government is in medical decisions. Also, the notion that transgender issues aren’t sex issues doesn’t follow in logic.

“We have a Constitutional mechanism for firing that errant employee.

“We don’t have a Federal government ‘with heart and concern for disadvantaged citizens’ right now. It’s up to engaged citizens to change that.

“I’m permanently tired due to my medical conditions. I find patience with myself and I spend money to avoid work.

“My explanation for the regression in rocket science is that it has devolved into an ego trip for the very wealthy. The likes of Elon Musk don’t really understand engineering, but they do understand milking the government.

“I largely agree with the commenter on Israel and Iran. I’ll add that religion excuses many horrors. Your response relies too much on public statements. Remember ‘lock her up!’?”

My response to the Blog:

Oh my, YES! Medical treatment decisions are private, arguably the most private. Unfortunately, the strict constructionists like Thomas & Alito point to the fact that the U.S. Constitution mentions not one word about privacy and private. They do not recognize the concept. Thus, we see them dictating acceptable medical treatments. It is outrageous. Also, indeed, the convoluted reasoning that gender dysphoria does not involve sex simply to justify using rational-basis rather than intermediate scrutiny is equally outrageous. But, these are the times in which we live.

Yes, we do, but that mechanism does not work when the accused threatens those in his party that might convict him. The Founders/Framers tried very hard to check absolute power, but despite their best efforts, they were not perfect. We can hope for a better tomorrow, but I suspect we will not see that better tomorrow as long as the orange one remains in control.

Spot on! 

Ah, yes, the challenges of aging.

Thank you for your opinion. I do not share your perspective. Yes, SpaceX is taking a different approach to development than NASA. The engineering achievements of SpaceX are indisputable from my perspective. Although there have been dramatic and demonstrable failures, there have also been extraordinary accomplishments. I remain confident the SpaceX engineers will solve the current problems.

OK. That’s fair. Noted!

 

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

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)