Justice Has Prevailed

If this is your first visit, be sure to read “Introduction”.

The death of Michael Brown is a tragedy.  There can be no argument about that.  There are signs that he was positioned to break out of the cycle of inner city poverty (I know Ferguson is technically a suburb, but it is, in reality, inner city) and move to a hopefully successful and prosperous life. He had somehow wrestled a high school diploma out of the abysmal education system foisted on the inner city poor, not to mention overcoming a subculture that denigrates striving for success,  and was accepted into college. I am sure his parents had high hopes that he would break free of the culture of hopelessness, poverty, crime and drugs that are features of the community in which he grew up.

Instead, he his dead.

We should all mourn.

But the tragedy did not begin in the 90 seconds prior to Darren Wilson pulling the trigger. The tragedy began that day when Michael decided to act in a criminally aggressive manner.

There is often a morbid, or sordid, inevitability to a chain of events.  We can watch the chain build knowing that if none of the links are broken, someone is going to get seriously, perhaps fatally, injured. Such is the case as one follows the events of Michael Brown's life on August 9, 2014, as illustrated by the evidence presented to the grand jury.

Michael Brown chose to engage in ever escalating aggression that day to the point where he attacked a police officer. The result is that both Darren Wilson and Michael Brown were hurt. Michael fatally.

Any one of the links in the chain could have been broken by Michael. He could have chosen not to shop lift. He could have chosen not to attack the store clerk, he (along with Dorian Johnson) could have chosen not to parade themselves in the middle of the street in an aggressive manner, he could have chosen to respond to Darren Wilson as instructed, he could have chosen not to attack a police officer. He could even have chosen to end the attack before it became deadly.

Instead, all of the links remained intact.

Michael Brown is dead.

The prosecuting attorney presented every shred of evidence available, damning and exculpatory, credible and fantastic, to the grand jury. That evidence clearly indicates that Darren Wilson's responses were not racially motivated criminal actions.  The decision of the grand jury not to return an indictment is fully supported by the evidence.

Those who had hoped for an indictment do so in a purely racist fashion. The evidence does not support an indictment.  The only reason to demand an indictment is that Darren Wilson is white. There is no other reason.

Based solely on racial hatred, the haters have rioted.

Black Silent Service

Black history in America is a very, very interesting subject. One of our points of shame has been that we are just beginning to recognize the contributions black Americans have made to our country, voluntarily and involuntarily.

My interest has been piqued because a black friend of mine occasionally posts items of black history on FB. There is some very interesting stuff there.

It is generally assumed that integration of the US military really didn't start until after WW2. For most of the military up to that time, any serving blacks were in all-black units, and typically not combat units.

While prepping for my medical procedure, I had nothing to do but sit and watch the TV. I broke out a documentary I have on the history of submarine warfare in WW2 that I haven't watched in quite awhile. There is lots of archived footage in the documentary. In that footage there are glimpses of blacks serving as crew members on various submarines in a variety of roles.

It is apparent, from the footage, that the submarine service in WW2 was integrated.  It is interesting what might happen when you are hungry for the very best.

Ferguson

If this is your first visit, please read "Introduction".

If the evidence supports Dorian Johnson's account of the event, then Darren Wilson should be indicted and face trial.

If the evidence support Darren Wilson's police report, then he should not be indicted.

It is the rule of law that provides best chance for justice to be served.

The legal system must not be swayed by threats of mob violence.

Justice is not served by those who would stir up racial hatred.

Immigration Reform

If this is your first visit, please read "Introduction".

I was going to continue my diatribe on food.  However, I find myself compelled to comment on the upcoming battle over immigration reform.

Because it appears that the battle is not going to be about immigration reform. It is going to be about the Constitutionally mandated separation of powers and the roles and authority granted each branch of government in the Constitution, and whether or not the current President is going to uphold the Constitution, or violate it.

There is a myth that the Constitution is terribly complex and can only be understood by highly educated experts. That is total horse feathers.  The Constitution was intentionally written to be understood by citizens with average intelligence and education.  I grant that the general level of education was higher in the 18th century than today. Imagine that, and public education was generally not available.

Laying commentary on the current state of education aside, anyone capable of finding and reading this blog is fully capable of reading and understanding the Constitution.  So I advise you to break out your copy and dig into it.  What? You don't have a copy? And you vote? PLEASE STOP!

Better yet, acquire a copy.  A .pdf version is available at http://www.usconstitution.net/const.pdf .
You can get multiple pocket Constitutions at the Heritage Foundation web site for free. It takes a few weeks. You can hand them out to your friends.

You don't like the Heritage Foundation? Well, I am sorry you do not value your freedom.

Upon examining the Constitution, you will find that the primary role of the President is to implement (execute) the legislation passed by the Legislative Branch (the Senate and the House of Representatives), which is why the presidency is called the Executive Branch.  The President does have the power and authority to veto legislation. In which case it is referred back to the Legislative Branch. The Legislative Branch may vote to override the veto, in which case the President is required to implement the legislation.  If the Legislative Branch does not vote to override, then the legislation is dead.

Note that the President may choose not to act on legislation through the use of the veto, unless the Legislative Branch overrides the veto.  There is no provision for the President to act unilaterally independent of the Legislative Branch. If there is something the President wishes to do, he, or someday she, must present the idea to the Legislative Branch. If the Legislative Branch chooses not to act on the request, the issue is dead.

Any attempt for the President to take action contrary to the decisions of the Legislative Branch is a violation of the President's oath of office to uphold and protect the Constitution. End of story.

We have a President who has decided that he is a power unto himself. He must be stopped. Not because of the merits, or lack of merits, of the particular issue, but because the survival of our constitutionally limited representative republic, and our individual liberty, depends on it.

Diet and GMO

DIET AND GMO

If this is your first visit, please skip down and read “Introduction”.

Food is a subject near and dear to my heart. I like to cook and I like to eat. There is a great deal of noise surrounding food, this group over here having opinion “A” and that group over there having opinion “B”, and lots of people running back and forth to try and keep up with the latest fad. I have given the issue a good deal of thought and I would like to discuss my thoughts on the subject.

I have strong feelings on basic diet. Fundamentally, I eat foods that I like. Some of the foods I eat may be very good for me, others may not. But the basic criteria I use in determining whether or not I am going to eat something is the question of taste. Do I like it? If yes, then I will eat it. I really can't see avoiding things I enjoy in order to extend my life. I wonder what the point of a long life might be if one cannot enjoy those things one likes. Besides, I have arrived at the conclusion that we, as a society, actually know very little about nutrition. So I am highly skeptical that we really understand what kind of diet will actually help us to live longer.

Besides. I might get hit by a logging truck on my way to work tomorrow. Tomorrow is not promised. We only have today.

The next section of this discussion is almost guaranteed to get just about everybody upset. I want to tackle the subject of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). This is a subject about which there is a great deal of yelling and finger pointing going on.

You cannot avoid GMO foods. Well, you can if you are a hunter-gatherer. But if, like most people in the U.S., you buy your food at the grocery store, everything you eat is genetically modified. Everything. Flora or fauna. The practice of genetic modification goes all the way back to the very dawn of intentional agriculture and animal husbandry. Organisms have been genetically modified throughout history (and much of pre-history) through the use of selective breeding. This is not what everybody is excited about, but it is very much genetic modification.

The excitement centers around genetic engineering, in which genetic material from one organism is linked to the genetic material of another to change the characteristics of the second organism. Or even the combination of genetic material from two organisms to produce a third distinct variety. This is what has some people very excited.

For the purposes of this discussion, we will define genetically modified organisms as those whose characteristics have been changed through selective breeding, and genetically engineered organisms as those that have been modified by fiddling directly with the genetic material.

The concerns of those opposed to the consumption of genetically engineered foods argue that the foods are deficient nutritionally, cannot reproduce, and are being foisted on us just so the evil corporations (Monsanto being the devil incarnate) can enjoy huge profits wrung from us consumers' life energy.

Well, not exactly. On all counts. Yes, there are some downsides to genetically engineered foods. There are downsides to everything. It doesn't really matter the subject under discussion. Even organically grown vegetables without a hint of genetic engineering are not perfect. If you are looking for perfection, you can move to Utopia. Which, by the way, is Greek for “no place”.

The first bubble to burst is that Monsanto is the only corporation involved in producing and marketing genetically engineered seeds. There are several, Dupont being another large corporation involved in the practice. They should be even more evil than Monsanto since they started out manufacturing ammunition and explosives. There are companies worldwide producing genetically engineered crops.

Please note the “worldwide” reference above. There is the claim that other countries have banned American genetically engineered crops and food. Not true. If there are some tariff barriers they are their to protect the domestic industry. Genetically engineered foods are produced, grown and consumed worldwide.

The really huge plus side of genetically engineered crops is the massive reduction in worldwide starvation. Just a generation ago we were continually subjected to photos of starving children. Much of sub-Saharan Africa was in an almost continual state of famine. While there still are pockets of famine, widespread starvation is no longer a worldwide reality. And genetically engineered crops are a major contributing factor to that reality. Not only does genetic engineering allow the U.S. to produce prodigious amount of food for distribution to every corner of the earth, but crops sufficient for local needs can now be grown in areas that were previously barren. So food sources can be grown closer to the consumers. There is a long list of third-world countries that have benefited from genetically engineered food.

A downside touted by the opponents is that genetically engineered plants cannot reproduce. This is viewed as a pernicious plot on the part of the evil corporations. The idea being that farmers have no choice but to purchase seed every year rather than hold part of the crop for planting the following year, thereby rendering the farmer financially beholden to the seed company. Another example of the hated corporations milking the proletariat in the interests of obscene profits. First, many of the genetically modified crops do not reproduce either. The reality of farmers having to buy seed every year goes back into the shadows of early history. Many small town banks were formed in the 18^th and 19^th centuries for no other purpose than to loan money to farmers to buy seed. Second, not all genetically engineered crops share the trait.

In terms of nutritional value, take your pick. Either the studies commissioned by the corporations are a pack of lies, or the studies conducted by the opponents are playing fast and loose with the truth. Having looked into the approaches of both groups, I have to come down on the side of the corporations. The studies commissioned by the corporations are often undertaken to determine means of improving nutritional value, while the studies done by the opponents begin with the conclusion that the corporations are evil and hungry only for profits. I distrust any study that begins with a conclusion. Second, the corporate studies are most often conducted by third parties with the methodology and raw data made public. While the opponents favor conducting their own studies with only the “results” published.

Besides, for many people in the world, food that may not be nutritionally perfect is better than no food at all.

My own conclusions? Genetically engineered organisms are here to stay. If for no other reason than elimination of them would result in massive starvation and hardship. I would like to see some labeling as to whether the food was genetically engineered, and, if so, what process was used (there are quite a few) so that I can decide whether to consume the product or not.

For me, it all comes down to taste.

Observations

Read the Introduction

It is amazing. Even though I have not really posted anything to this blog, there are 59 hits.  It is just proof that you can get an audience even if you have nothing to say.

There are a lot of things on my mind.  But this post is going to address some of this morning's news items.

So. The President has struck a deal with China on carbon emissions.  The reaction, by the President and those on the left, is that this deal is historic.  It is. But not in the way they think it is.

The essence of the deal is that the U.S. will drastically cut carbon emissions by 2030, I believe the figure is 26%.  And China will cut...no wait.  China will cut nothing.  According to the "deal" they can continue to increase carbon emissions at any pace they choose until 2030, at which time they will freeze carbon emissions at whatever level they have achieved by that date.

So the President got rolled.

It is worse than that.  There are many issues that need to be resolved between the U.S. and China. Not the least of which is China's continued raids on U.S. technology.  While the President was in China, the Chinese test flew their first stealth aircraft, made possible by technology stolen from the U.S.

So not only was the President rolled on his climate deal, he was made to look like a fool.

The picture I get is: you walk onto a car lot looking for a new car. The list price is $25,000, which you successfully negotiate down to $50,000. While looking at the cars on the lot, and negotiating your "deal", the dealer is happily washing your previous automobile in preparation for putting it up for sale.  Oh. And the dealer had stolen your car from your driveway the night before.

You return home bragging to your wife that you just made an historic deal on a new car. And, no, she has no say in the transaction.

The good news is that this "deal" will never pass the Senate.  Hold on.  That actually is not good news. The Senate will not pass it because the President has no intention of submitting the "deal" to the Senate.  He intends to implement the provisions through changes in EPA regulations.

Will someone point me to the provision in the Constitution that relieves the President from submitting agreements with foreign governments to the Senate for approval?

Fresh from his triumphant failures in China, the President returned home to announce that he intends to regulate the internet.  He has "requested" the head of the FCC to reclassify the internet such that it falls under the same regulations as telecommunication providers.

In other words, the government will be able to dictate rates and content to the internet providers. And, no, the President has no plans to seek legislative action on the idea.

It is going to be a long two years, folks.

Introduction

This is a blog about my views.

On what? You ask.

On any subject I choose.  The primary purpose is to give me a tool on which I can vent.  The subject may be politics, faith, religion, aviation, bad drivers, philosophy or commentary on current events, or anything else that catches my attention.

You are free to comment.  I may let your comments stand, or I may delete them.  It is my blog.

It should be noted that my social/political views tend to be conservative. If conservative views upset you, I suggest that you wander off elsewhere because I pull no punches and make no apologies for my views.

A characteristic of my writing, and my public speaking, is that I occasionally get distracted by related side issues.  I call these "Rabbit Trails".  When I include one in a piece it will be labeled a rabbit trail and will be in italics.

The name stems from one of my basic rules of life.  "If God is your copilot, change seats".