Monthly Archives: October 2016

The pictures we took of Cascade River falls…

It appears the Turkish military, once a deeply respected institution, is being systematically neutered. The latest move is to remove its military wing and make the civilian medical system responsible for war casualties. Metin Gurcan on AL Monitor describes the situation:

The Turkish government is following through on its radical decision to totally dismantle the military medical network of about 900 doctors and more than 4,000 military nurses and paramedical personnel.

Under the state-of-emergency decree issued July 31, two weeks after an attempted coup, the 125-year-old Gulhane Military Medical Academy (GATA) in Ankara and 33 other military hospitals in different parts of Turkey were transferred to the jurisdiction of the civilian Ministry of Health. The medical needs of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) will be handled by the civilian medical system.

The transfer inevitably created a battlefront of discord between the military high command and civilian politicians, generating angry debates in the public sphere and also between civilian and military elites.

The debate in the public sphere was triggered by reports that a specialist sergeant who had suffered serious burns Sept. 6 had died. The sergeant, part of the Euphrates Shield military intervention against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria, was said to have died because he was not evacuated from the Gaziantep Public Hospital to GATA’s highly specialized burn unit. Reports claiming the sergeant had died because of incompetence in the civilian medical system spread like wildfire on social media. The reports added that the civilian system has been experiencing serious problems in prioritizing TSK casualties from clashes with the Kurdistan Workers Party and IS, thus hurting TSK morale and motivation.

According to Minister of Health Recep Akdag, such reports are malicious fabrications.

And even if it’s a true report, would it matter? If public support for the government is as strong as it appears to be, the ideological requirements of Party over the well-being of citizens will over-rule humanitarian and efficiency requirements, until the Party is dispossessed of the government – and that would be a “necessary but not sufficient” requirement. Any replacement government might also be motivated by ideology (either political or religious) and continue to see micro-control as being a necessity.

Metin’s report later speaks of concerns about losing institutional knowledge concerning military-oriented specialties, but I wonder if they are losing institutional knowledge about the political system itself. I am not particularly knowledgeable about the Turkish political system, but I do know that for many years it had stood out for being a secular system that refused to let any particular religious sect take over – as enforced by the military coups. It now appears the military is being co-opted, and the state will fall under the sway of one of the sects. That will place institutions at the whim of ideological purity, and may result in the degradation of the governmental institutions that support society.

Will Turkey turn into Iraq over the next century, with strong-men as leaders and dissenters firing up bombs? The Kurds, who might be best considered as a conquered populace, have of course caused occasional havoc, but now I’m thinking of ethnic Turks who happen to be in religious sects not currently in power.

From a reader…

HOW TO SAVE THE PRINCESS IN 8 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES

You need to rescue the princess with code – but sometimes your code doesn’t work and the princess is a dragon and you’re a fish.

Welcome to programming

https://toggl.com/programming-princess

I particularly enjoyed the PHP critique.

Having read and watched the Libertarians struggle with 3rd party status for 20+ years, it’s not surprising that these struggles continue in the wake of the two major parties, even if both seemed to be straining at the seams this year, what with Sanders dragging the Democrats to the left, while the GOP has started hemorrhaging membership because of the erraticism of the Trump campaign. It sometimes has the scent of the eternal about it.

However, for those libertarians who have real ambition to be on the national stage, the recent performance of Presidential nominee Gary Johnson must be especially heart-breaking – because he seems to be promoting a simplistic, isolationist nonsense as a philosophy that will really tar the party & brand for years to come with the epithet of “know-nothings”. A few days ago Johnson drew a blank on the contested city of Aleppo, in Syria; shortly after he couldn’t think of a single foreign leader that he admired, despite prompting. Now consider this report from TPM:

“Five days after the interview Andrea, I still can’t think of a world leader that I respect,” Johnson said. “I mean, having never been involved in politics before, I will tell you I held a lot of people in this country on pedestals thinking that they were role models. I got to meet them up front and personal and found out that they were empty suits.”

“When it comes to talking about a foreign leader that you respect, that you admire, I have a hard time with that one,” he added. “That’s politics. That’s just who I am.”

When Mitchell pressed him further on the issue, reminding him that foreign policy was part of president’s portfolio, Johnson suggested that his lack of knowledge on the topic was actually an asset.

“You know what? The fact that somebody can dot the Is and cross the Ts on a foreign leader or a geographic location, that then allows them to put our military in harm’s way,” Johnson argued.

“We wonder why our men in service and women suffer from PTSD in the first place,” he continued. “We elect people who can dot the Is and cross the Ts on these names and geographic locations as opposed to the underlying philosophy which is, let’s stop getting involved in these regime changes.”

This is a profoundly unserious proposition for an era in which military weaponry can strike from so far away with so much power. Even when cross-bows were the epitome of military power, it was worthwhile for leaders to understand what was going on in the kingdom next door; today, ICBMs make it imperative that we understand what is going on across continents. Does he really reject monitoring the leadership of North Korea as they attempt to build nuclear weaponry that will reach the United States?

At its heart, this is a rejection of knowledge, and I can say with some confidence that this won’t sit at all well with most libertarians. Many software engineers are libertarians, and data, which we gather, shepherd, and interpret, is a close cousin to knowledge. More generally, libertarians rely on the economic research and knowledge of such economists as Hayek to bolster their ideological positions, and so they have to at least pay lip-service to knowledge. Suggesting that knowledge leads to doom should be considered a heretical notion by the rank & file – and I think it will strike many libertarians that way. I no longer monitor the “establishment” libertarians, and I don’t know how easily Johnson obtained the nomination – and if he remains as popular with the base. But I think this reprehensible statement may mark the end of the political career of Johnson, and possibly his running mate, William Weld, as well.

It’s one thing to suggest that perhaps we interfere with other countries too much – I’d even have some sympathy for that position, on a case by case basis – but to suggest ignorance is a virtue is well beyond the pale.

And if you’re still considering a vote for Mr. Johnson, rufe on The Daily Kos has taken the trouble to enumerate the Johnson/Weld ticket’s positions on some issues here. An example:

2. Civil Rights

• Gary Johnson supports the use and expansion of private prisons, which are rarely audited for compliance and create a financial incentive for incarceration

The positions strike me as little more than surface thinking.

Located on the northern shore of Lake Superior, this retired lighthouse is a popular tourist attraction which we visited during our recent vacation trip. The first few pictures are of the interior of the lighthouse itself.

Then a couple of pics of the grounds.

And, finally, a couple of dramatic pics of the lighthouse exterior.

Convinced you have a good grip on reality? Then try these illusions spotted on Discover’s D-brief blog:

With one Facebook post, Japanese psychology professor Akiyoshi Kitaoka has sent the internet into fits.

Look at the image above, and try to see all 12 black dots at once. Good luck. Honest, we aren’t playing tricks on you. Your eyes are literally deceiving you.

Kitaoka posted this image on Sunday, which has since been shared over 10,000 times, and got a further viral boost when video game developer Will Kerslake shared the image on his Twitter page, and it quickly appeared on Reddit. Now, we’re all hopelessly chasing black dots.

And while the point of D-brief and Professor Kitaoka is the inability to see what’s there, I draw a wider point – the problem of seeing reality. This may be where the fissure between scientists and believers begins, because believers often only want to believe what their senses convey to them, with the unspoken assumption that their sensory equipment is excellent and believable.

As this illusion demonstrates, this is simply not true. There are certain configurations of reality which are really difficult to sense, and then to understand. It may be due to our frail sensory apparatus, our weak eyes, our sad little noses, our dull ears. Or it can be simply that we don’t deal well with time, we don’t see hyperobjects because we’re just not constructed to operate on those scales.

Whatever it is, it pays to wonder about one’s perceptions from time to time.

The New York Times publishes a report on Trump’s fiduciary duty:

Simply put, a person who is a fiduciary must act in the best interests of another person, putting that person’s interests ahead of his or her own. But in the context of Mr. Trump’s personal tax returns, legal experts said, the argument that he has a fiduciary duty to others is, well, laughable.

“There is no such thing as a fiduciary duty as a businessman to oneself,” said Richard W. Painter, a professor of corporate law at the University of Minnesota and former chief ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush White House from early 2005 to mid-2007. “That’s called greed. And greed is not a component of the law of fiduciary duty anywhere.”

Then the report connects this to corporate inversions, wherein a company changes its official residence to another country in order to lower its tax rate:

These moves, known as corporate inversions, have become immensely popular in recent years. And when companies make them, their leaders often proclaim that they are doing so out of a responsibility to their shareholders because profits will rise as a result.

This, too, is questionable, and the Obama administration has been working to curtail this type of corporate behavior.

“I’ve never heard a court say that a corporate officer or director has a fiduciary duty to move operations out of the U.S. to reduce taxes for the publicly held company,” Mr. Painter said. “Companies that move overseas saying they had a fiduciary duty to shareholders to do it are just wrong.”

Seems to me that such a move is just one option in the strategy of business, and other components may have a higher priority, such as social stability and resource availability. Sounds to me like these officials are just trying to hide from the criticism which will come their way. It’s not so much a duty as an option for increasing profitability, but one which may bring its own host of problems.

And Trump having a fiduciary duty to himself? Ignorant.

The proposed law to permit suing foreign nations in American courts was, as reported by BloombergPolitics, passed by Congress, vetoed by the Administration, and the veto immediately overridden. And now it’s already in use:

A woman widowed when her husband was killed at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 sued the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia just two days after Congress enacted legislation allowing Americans to sue foreign governments for allegedly playing a role in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.

Stephanie Ross DeSimone alleged the kingdom provided material support to al Qaeda and its leader, Osama bin Laden, in a complaint filed Friday at a U.S. court in Washington. Her suit is also filed on behalf of the couple’s daughter. DeSimone was pregnant when Navy Commander Patrick Dunn was killed.

Fifteen of the 19 men who hijacked airliners used in the attack were Saudi nationals.

And, as BloombergPolitics reports in another article, now we have buyers’ remorse:

The two top Republicans in Congress said they’re prepared to rewrite legislation allowing victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia — less than 24 hours after Congress took the extraordinary step of overriding President Barack Obama’s veto of the measure to make it law.

Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences — including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments.

“I would like to think there’s a way we can fix so that our service members do not have legal problems overseas while still protecting the rights of the 9/11 victims,” Ryan told reporters Thursday, one day after his chamber voted 348-77 to override the veto.

BloombergPolitics further notes Congress had been warned by the President:

Before the vote, senior administration officials warned lawmakers of this exact problem — that weakening the concept of sovereign immunity could backfire if foreign countries tried to do the same for the U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter sent House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry of Texas a letter saying that could potentially expose Americans to lawsuits and “an intrusive discovery process” even if the U.S. is ultimately found not to be responsible for a particular event.But Republicans said the White House didn’t make a forceful case, putting themselves in the awkward position of blaming the president for a bill they enacted into law over Obama’s veto.

The GOP just looks like a pack of amateurs who act on their feelings – not their heads. They don’t like experts and don’t like being told what might occur. Now they may have put Armed Forces members at risk. And this time at least some of the Democrats may have been part of the mistake.

Remember when Pelosi ran a relatively placid House and Reid kept the Senate together, even in the face of GOP vociferousness? Current Senate leader McConnell carefully does what he’s told, while former Speaker Boehner resigned from the House for being too civilized. I actually miss him. Current Speaker Ryan runs a sloppy ship, from all appearances, and I doubt the GOP does much to help him.

Since neither of the VP candidates ran for the Presidential slot, I didn’t really pay much attention to them prior to tonight’s debate. In order to understand my biases (and to gather some knowledge for myself), here are outtakes and information from Wikipedia, Ballotpedia and On the Issues on both contenders.

Mike Pence

On the Issues graphical depiction of VP Candidate Mike Pence.

Governor Pence is a lawyer (Indiana University) who ran a private practice for a short while, followed by a stint as a talk-radio host (comparing himself to Rush Limbaugh), followed by 12 years in the House of Representatives (during which he was considered to be highly conservative), and then election to the Indiana governorship in 2012. He appears to be a far right conservative. The On The Issues graphical description should be on the right.

Looking through their Vote Quiz, I find very little in common with the guy, from expanding the military even further, invading Iran, to higher taxes on the wealthy; about the best I could say is that he and I might find common ground on “more enforcement of the right to vote”, although there is no elaboration on this point. Steve Benen on Maddowblog points out,

But on a substantive level, we’re talking about a politician whose claim to fame is an anti-LGBT law that did real harm to his state. Pence is a climate denier. He rejects the idea that cigarettes are deadly. He doesn’t believe in evolutionary biology, but he does support “conversation therapy.”

Long after it was obvious Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction, Pence was still insisting that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Soon after, when the Bush/Cheney administration pushed partial privatization of Social Security, the Indiana Republican was outraged – because he said the plan wasn’t nearly right-wing enough. In 2011, just a few months after the GOP took control of the U.S. House, Pence’s big idea, to the annoyance of his party leaders, was to shut down the federal government.

Pence also once accused Disney of hiding political propaganda in an animated film to convince people that women can serve in the military.

By most sensible standards, Mike Pence has earned a reputation as an extremist.

In his own words, he …

… has described himself as “a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order,” and as “a born-again, evangelical Catholic.”

Tim Kaine

On the Issues graphical depiction of VP Candidate Tim Kaine.

Senator Kaine of Virginia is a lawyer (Harvard Law School), worked for two private law firms over 17 years, taught as an adjunct professor at University of Richmond, and won election to the Richmond City Council on four occasions, twice as mayor. In 2001  he ran for and won the Lieutenant Governorship of Virginia; in 2005 he won the governorship. He was DNC chairman 2009-2011, and won his current position as Senator in the 2012 election. The On The Issues graphical description is on the left.

So he appears to be a mild liberal. Looking at the Vote Quiz, I can mostly live with this guy, although yet again there’s a militarist in the race – but at least he’s not interested in invading Iran. All that said, I still think he looks like a doofus. Sorry, Tim.

How important is this debate? With regard to Senator Kaine, I should like to get a sense of how well he’ll work with Clinton if they win the election, his anticipated responsibilities, and, in the unfortunate event of her death, how well he would perform as a President. The latter I do not believe is likely.

With regard to Governor Pence, his ability to perform as President is the question of the day, as if Trump wins the election, reports seem to indicate that he will have his VP responsible for far more than is traditional in Administrations. We can expect Pence will have more influence than Kaine with regard to policies, while Trump would remain as perhaps the face of the Administration – but not the brain. I also assign a higher possibility of Trump resigning (for either boredom, scandal, or other reasons) and Pence taking the Presidency than I do Clinton leaving the Presidency for any reason.

And now for the delayed live-blog.

[Note that time stamps will be approximate]

8:06 – Kaine leaps right to the campaign message. Can he tie it into the question about Kaine’s leadership? He’s giving it a try, giving an insight into how the Clinton Admin would work. “The thought of Donald Trump as the C-in-C scares us to death.” Has such a blunt assessment of the opposing team ever been voiced before?

8:09 – Pence is a better speaker than his boss.  “He’s a small-town boy” – but spent 12 years in Congress. How is he trying to portray himself? A lifetime of experience – but did he learn from the anti-LGBT experience?

8:13 – Kaine wants to portray Clinton as someone with a lifetime of experience “serving others” – is this an attempt to chisel off some evangelical voters with a phrase which should be very familiar to them? It doesn’t hurt that it seems to be a true description. Contrasts it to Trump’s behavior, then returns to the birther lie.

8:16 – Pence ignores the question and claims the Clinton campaign indulges in insults – does an insult have to be false to be an insult? Kaine should let Pence hang himself, though – suggesting Trump employs thousands of people while forgetting that Trump often stiffs them on pay, an un-American thing to do. Now it’s just each talking, impossible to understand except that Pence thinks Clinton should have “renegotiated” the Iraq treaty that had us leaving – but what if Iraq didn’t care to do so? Pinning leaving Iraq is critical to the meme that Obama/Clinton is responsible for ISIS, but that’s like nailing Jello to a wall – only a fool or a desperate man will try that.

8:18 – Kaine confirms that Iraq wants us out.

8:20 – Ah, Obama’s responsible for the budget. Come on, Pence, you know better. And governors are responsible for employment. Hmmmmm. “War on Coal” is a good thing, actually – AE points out that coal mining is a Virginia industry, so that’s why he’s making these idiotic remarks. Although since Pence doesn’t believe in climate change. But it’s tax reduction, tax reduction, tax reduction. That’s it. Kansas tried that and is now the saddest state in the Union.

8:23 – if you believe in detailed policy, you love Kaine for at least having one, whether or not you like it. Clean energy, infrastructure – common liberal priorities which, in my opinion, are necessities – fixing disasters is far more expensive than doing proper maintenance. BTW, I started a Federal petition asking for a ban on the export of coal. It got 15 signatures nation-wide 🙂

8:25 – off to tax returns. Pence wants to talk about the economy – “we’re in a ditch”, yet unemployment is below 5%. So back to the “disaster meme”. Now to tax returns, Pence says he was going through8 tough times – at a time when the economy was booming, he doesn’t mention. Pence is dancing a fine line. Trump has created thousands of jobs – but how is this experience, true or not, apply to government? It’s an achievement, but it’s not a government achievement. In my opinion, he saves money by stiffing the working guy – who Pence has tried to portray himself as. “Trump will release his tax returns!” Pence is adamant but not really believable.

8:29 – Social Security – Kaine jumps right in with “we’ll protect it”. He justifies it, waves at higher taxes, then refuses to privatize SS. Points out Pence and Trump both want to private SS. Pence “There they go again” – a Reagan reference, AE says. Pence refuses to actually respond it.

8:35 – Police responsibility – Kaine touts his experience reducing homicide rates, boosts community policing. Rejects militarization of the police – I like this. Kaine sounds prepared – close gun control loopholes, community policing, etc. Pence – uncle was a cop. Agrees about community policing, transitions to “law & order”, touts endorsement from police union. Pokes the police in a raw place and blames the people who criticize the police for doing so. So he may solidify some police support – but what about us who see the many, many police shootings and wonder why unarmed people are being shot? Now they talk about Castile, killed just down the street from where I live. Kaine wants to talk about the symptoms, while Pence thinks that’s beyond the pale. The more attention you pay to these shootings, the more you have to wonder if these are isolated bad cops or if it’s a more systemic problem. As Kaine says, you can’t just ignore it.

8:37 – Senator Scott is quoted and Pence asked to react; he skips it. He admits justice reform is necessary. Law enforcement needs more support at the national level? Really? This leaves an opening for Kaine to quote Trump in how he disrespects various elements of the justice system, McCain, and others – the wagon is dumped.

8:42 – Immigration – Pence claims Trump has a plan, but what is it? Build a fantasy wall? Turns into an attack on the Clinton plan. Nevermind illegal immigration is at historic low levels at the moment – a bit of a trumped up issue. Why don’t they talk about improving conditions in the countries which were the homes of these illegal immigrants? Our influence is greater than we think through our food export policies. Oh, dear, Pence is upset about insults again. Grow up, Mike, Trump started this during primary season. Sheesh, I don’t care about insults. What is the Clinton immigration plan? Reform, keep families together, focus on the violent, improve border patrol, path to citizenship. Terribly limited in my view, but I suspect I’m in a very small minority when it comes to placing blame for the poverty and violence south of the border.

8:46 – Pence touts another union endorsement. While Pence demonizes immigrants, I note Kaine looks calm and confident as Pence also demonizes the federal government, while Pence is calm but sometimes defensive. Pence is looking forward to reform, but Kaine wants to pin Trump’s extremist rhetoric on Pence.

8:50 – Terrorism – Kaine touts Obama accomplishments. Suggests only Clinton can continue to reduce terror. Presents a list of priorities. Now critiques Trump – claims he trash talks the military. Brings out the nuclear policy problems of Trump’s rhetoric. Pence is unhappy, but leaps right to scaring the electorate – a lack of leadership. Yet we’re so much better now. Ah, now we’re back to the ISIS scare, as if we had a choice about Iraq. Will the American public believe we should have ignored that treaty and engaged in illegality? And with ISIS in retreat, it’s a little hard to take Pence seriously. Pence hates the Iranian nuclear deal.

8:55 – Pence must defend extreme vetting of immigrants from terror nations. How many do we get, though? Our island status makes us a little safer than Europe. They clash over immigration, but “he’ll put safety first”, but that is not a plan, just a goal.

8:58 – Kaine is asked about intelligence surge, which he explains in a lucid, straightforward manner. Pivots to Trump’s trashing of NATO, then touts Clinton’s experience in alliances. Pence responds as if Donald understands cyberwarfare, then pivots to the Clinton mail server. Kaine notes the FBI disagrees with Pence’s analysis, and Pence doesn’t get to override that analysis. Pence is pissed off.

[Arts Editor exits as this point to “sluice the slime off”, commenting that Pence is more polished than Kaine (I think they’re comparable) and is quite charming and believable, “no matter how unbelievable what comes out of his mouth.” AE grew up in a fundamentalist Baptist family and is now fairly liberal as a consequence.]

9:00 – Syria – Pence thinks we should protect the citizens of Syria. Oh, my, Putin is the small and bullying leader of Russia – I guess this is how to break the Putin/Trump meme. Oh, GOD – smallest Navy since 1916? Are you FUCKING KIDDING? Put the entire 1916 fleet against ONE modern submarine and that sub wouldn’t suffer a scratch, while the fleet would be junk! This is populism at its worst, scaring the citizenry and treating them like children. Will anyone ask Pence how much it would cost to build all those “missing” ships? Enough to break this country is my guess. And how did we get here from Syria? Ah, safe zones. It’s a nice phrase. Now back to Russia, to be met with American strength. And then back to Syria. Confusing – on purpose?9:05

9:03 – Kaine says Clinton can easily stand up to Putin, and then the pivot to Trump’s connections to Putin, including campaign staff. Now back to Trump income taxes, comparing Clinton to Trump. But Syria is a hard question which he’s more or less avoiding. I wouldn’t care to answer it.

9:08 – The moderator wants to know about safe zones, but Pence doesn’t have any real answers, while blaming the Obama Administration for weakness, etc. This is, of course, without mentioning that the GOP has actively worked against our foreign policy – see the Iranian letter (which caused gales of laughter). Blames Obama for Putin aggressiveness. Kaine responds with Reagan’s quote on nuclear proliferation, which horrifies Pence – he projects moral horror at a reasonable question, and Pence doesn’t want to actually answer the question. Back to Iran, which is sort of close to Syria. And now he’s brought up the “ransom payment”, which is rank falsehood – that’s money we owed them for non-delivery of a weapons system.

9:12 – Russia invasion & Syria – Kaine: don’t praise Putin as a “great leader”, pissing off Pence. Says Clinton has gone “toe to toe”, sanctions, etc. Trump wasn’t even aware – said it on TV. Trump made to look ignorant. Pence interrupts and is not happy, although composed. Back to tax returns, as a way to see if he has more connections to Russia. Pence is upset and plays the victim. He must be careful because a lot of this is documented. Pence’s turn is to turn back to the Iranian deal and suggesting Iran and Russia are getting together. Pence is “astonished”, yet he’s back to the ransom note lie. This guy is so smooth – or he’s so taken in that he really believes it. But he’s a lawyer and doesn’t seem stupid. I wouldn’t buy lemonade from this guy.

9:14 – Why will Putin respect Trump? Because we’ll rebuild our military – sheesh. Pence once again puts Putin and Obama down. Kaine quotes Pence to his face, and then reiterates that leadership should not be confused with dictatorship.

9:16 -Kaine says the problem with Russia is Putin, now touts Clinton’s many accomplishments with Putin.

9:18 – North Korea’s nuclear capability – Pence remains convinced our military is in ruins. Wants to use allies to pressure NK to drop nuclear weapons. Hard question, really. But now we pivot to the Clinton Foundation, which has been repeatedly investigated and found to be clean as a whistle. “Foreign countries cannot participate in the American political process”? Bullshit. “Pay to play” is brought up. Kaine responds that CF is highly rated charity, does many good things; Clinton was investigated as Secretary and never did anything inappropriate. Now the Trump Foundation is brought up by Kaine, who notes the contrast – a recent fine – will he also mention the order by New York that TF stop soliciting funds as it lacks the appropriate license? Kaine portray CF as clean as a whistle while TF is shabby and engages in illegalities. Kaine may win this one. But what happened to the hard problem of NK? *Laughter from everyone* Kaine is correcting Pence on his “facts”.

9:23 – hard question on NK launch of nuclear missile – Kaine takes the question but dodges the specific pre-emptive strike question, pivots to China’s action on the Security Council and suggests the Chinese may be nervous about NK as well. Touts Clinton’s experience, then notes Trump owes Chinese banks money. Hey, Pence didn’t get to answer the question! Boo!

9:32 – religion and public policy – Kaine answers by reviewing his personal history, is devout in his personal life, but affirms the secular nature of the USA. Death penalty is his big conflict, being against it in a state with the death penalty. Good delivery and explanation, admits it’s hard to permit death penalties (as VA governor) and explains the traditional view of his is just one religion among many. Pence also reviews his personal history, and on to the sanctity of life – so he’s on the abortion issue. Claims Indiana is pro-adoption – I don’t know. Ah, a pivot to partial birth abortion, so a peaceful question goes nuclear. I do not doubt that both are stressed by abortion, but historically – over centuries, even millenia – abortion has been an option used by women who cannot care for a child. Kaine retorts concerning Trump and women who have abortion. Pence falls back on the assertion that Trump is not a polished politician – which is true in the conventional sense of politics, but false in this new age of speaking in code and rabble rousing – so I tend to think that if something is said, it’s meant. Even walking something back isn’t really valid, although I’ll allow for special circumstances, such as an honest misunderstanding of facts. Pence is off to the religious races – Kaine wants to know why Trump and Pence doesn’t trust women. Pence dodges, but neither really addresses the question of why most homicide is illegal, and then attempted to link that to abortion – or not. Homicide, the taking of human life by another human, induces societal instability because one’s future becomes very uncertain – and the same for one’s family – if it’s not illegal and discouraged. Abortion, the termination of a pregnancy of something that is not yet a part of society, does not appear to fall into that category; however, a treatment of the loss of the potential of such lives should have been part of the discussion (except a 2 minute argument would be a disservice). Without that discussion, anti-abortion arguments, as beautiful as they sound, and as strongly believed as they are by Governor Pence and many other Americans, are inevitably a faith-based argument, and as such should not be part of the American legal system. We are not a theocracy, thank goodness.

9:40 – final question – how to unify the country? Kaine – Clinton is about bringing the country together, Trump is not. Asserts Clinton has great respect across the aisle (but that was 8 years ago and many of those GOP politicians are probably gone or silenced). Kaine asserts both of them know how to work across the aisle. Pence: economy is foundering, scare the citizenry – so let’s change the government in D.C. Rebuild the military and we should be strong. Trump is all about “building”. For those who know, this is a weak answer. But the rest of us, will they realize?

Pence is smooth and knows how to use words to suggest we’re not as great as we were, without really offering a coherent approach to how to get there. The occasional plans we accidentally here from the Trump campaign tend to emphasize increased spending on the military (how do you rebuild, after all) while reducing taxes; they are depending on Laffer curve to save their asses. That’s what Brownback has done in Kansas, and now all of Kansas groans at their misfortune. Will we repeat that experiment in the hopes that it works at the national level?

Kaine has his own smoothness after so many years in politics, and for all that, his (forgive me) “doofus” appearance and even personality actually works for him. They’re both earnest, but Kaine’s is more believable because he speaks not about having plans, but he actually presents them, and like them or not, at least you have something to think about. Pence labors under the problem that Trump’s campaign doesn’t believe they need to produce plans, that voters would be bored by them – I’ve written about that elsewhere. That leaves him with a lot of blank time to cover with goals that lack plans. How to fund military spending? By cutting taxes? So he had to attack the Clinton campaign, and his smooth approach (no doubt developed from years of talk radio) served him well. Will viewers check the facts? My Arts Editor tells me that fact-checking is occurring – I hope viewers will try to do what I do, which is to discard the style of the speaker and hear the assertions, and then check them and the logic connecting them. I heard enough falsehoods from Pence to make me, if I knew nothing else, very suspicious; from Kaine, I hear a doofus with a record of success. How many lies did he tell? Honestly, I didn’t catch any, but what do I know?

OK, stopping now for the night. Further thoughts will be in other blog posts.

When your movie has Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and John Carradine, it should have been better. House of the Long Shadows (1983) had a plot that kept my Arts Editor and I baffled, and the acting from the four names was their usual creepy excellence, but after that, I am doomed to enumerate burdens. The acting of the lead, Desi Arnaz, Jr., was awful. The acting of Sheila Keith had my Arts Editor cheering on the bad guy to catch and kill her. Much of the dialog was awful. Much of the cinematograpy was awful. The audio ranged from mediocre to the classic “speak into this can, sonny!” awful.

The setting, an old English manor in poor upkeep, however, was rather good.

If you’re a fan of any of those four leads, then see this. Otherwise, it’s mostly … awful.

If you’re a fossil fan, this website may help sate your appetite: it’s all about the Burgess Shale.

Source: ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM

The Burgess shale is famous for its stunning soft-bodied fossils (mostly animals and algae) which offer a spectacular picture of marine life that populated our planet 500 million years ago. These fossils are of critical importance in understanding the origin of modern life on Earth. (For more information, visit the Science Section).

Using the latest web technology and high-resolution images you will be able to browse through hundreds of images of fossil specimens in the Main Gallery or use the Advanced Search tool, to filter particular types of information. Additionally, because the fossils are usually flattened within the rock layers, the latest in digital animation techniques brings many species to life.

Fascinating videos.

Shlomi Eldar reports on the ongoing violent dislike between groups in Jerusalem:

Jerusalem restaurant owners claim that members of the radical right group Lehava — the Hebrew acronym for Prevention of Assimilation in the Holy Land — are threatening them with violence if they employ Arabs. In addition to making threats, Lehava activists have also carried out a series of violent attacks in Jerusalem against Arab laborers, taxi drivers and passersby. The attacks began soon after three Israeli youths were kidnapped and murdered by Palestinians in the West Bank in June 2014, and according to city restaurateurs, there has been a dramatic rise in such incidents since then. They claim that dozens of Lehava thugs go “Arab hunting,” especially on Thursdays, when yeshiva students begin their break for Sabbath, and on Saturday evenings, when they head back to their seminaries.

“It has become routine,” the owner of one of Jerusalem’s better known restaurants told Al-Monitor, requesting anonymity. “Each one of us restaurant owners knows that Thursdays and Saturday nights are terrible days on which we declare an emergency alert.”

And so they want to drive out the Arabs.

I will not be live blogging this debate because of other plans, but I hope to record it and conduct a faux-live blog later that evening.

All of a sudden it’s Duterte news, and it’s not particularly good, but not surprising – nasty little bullies tend to gravitate towards big power centers as a natural part of life. With this in mind, Lawfare has this report:

For at least the past month, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has sharply critiqued United States military policy and suggested a cooler relationship with Washington, pivoting away from his predecessor’s closer relationship with the United States. At the same time, however, President Duterte has been ambiguous about to the extent to which he believes bilateral relations should change. A series of statements from the past week add to this uncertainty.

On Monday President Duterte said that he would “open alliance with China and . . . Medvedev,” though he recognized that it was not time to “really break ties” with the United States. He also claims to have told Prime Minister Medvedev that “I’m about to cross the Rubicon between me and the United States, at least for the 6 years” and that “I will need your help in everything – trade, commerce – and I will open up.” Asked to clarify these statements, Duterte expressed concern that the United States would not aid the Philippines if attacked. The President also explained that he intended to open economic, not military, alliances with China and Russia.

Given Duterte’s recent election, one must assume that a substantial portion of the Filipino electorate supports his distaste for the United States – which is unfortunate. A nation of 100 million is nothing to sneeze at.

Lloyd Alter on Treehugger.com discusses a life lesson:

I have learned this the hard way. When I built my first condo in Toronto, the penthouse had a balcony that was on top of a unit below. When the window washers threw their lines over the handrails on that balcony, it bent the handrails in, penetrating the membrane, letting in water to the unit below and costing me $16,000 to repair. One silly mistake and there you go. There is a reason that although I was a strict modernist, I have come to respect and admire traditional detailing and design; Through the course of history architects have learned how to cope with these kinds of issues. It’s why traditional buildings have roof overhangs and cornices; they are all there to keep water off the walls. They are there to provide multiple levels of protection and insurance so that it still keeps the water out even when caulks or membranes fail.

Balancing the new with the old.

On our recent vacation trip up the North Shore of Minnesota, we took to photographing mushrooms. We saw them in two places, the first being a small rest area on Congdon Blvd around 92nd Ave. The Wayside mushrooms have been uploaded to iNaturalist.org and tentatively identified as mostly gilled mushrooms; one has been identified as Fly Agaric, poisonous and psychoactive.

The location.

Possibly pre-stepped on.

Gilled Mushroom.

Just a mushroom so far.

Fly Agaric.

No comments so far.

The balance of the mushrooms were photographed in Cascade River State Park, Minnesota. They will be submitted to iNaturalist soon as I can get myself put together to do it.

Blurry, but just too cool to omit.

Ditto

In some activity for this long dormant thread, The New York Times publishes a report on some research on the performance differences between appointed and elected judges:

… any number of studies have found that elections can affect judicial behavior.

One released last week, for instance, found that elected judges are less likely to support gay rights than are appointed ones. The effect was most pronounced in cases decided by judges who ran in partisan elections.

That seemed the case on Friday, when Roy S. Moore, chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, was suspended for the rest of his term for ordering the state’s probate judges to defy federal court orders on same-sex marriage.

Appointed judges who must face retention elections also have reason to be sensitive to public opinion. In 2010, voters in Iowa removed three State Supreme Court justices who had joined a unanimous opinion allowing same-sex marriages.

Earlier studies have shown that judges facing re-election are more likely to impose harsh criminal sentences, including death sentences.

Further results for gay rights and the judicial system:

… the results lined up predictably: the more political the selection mechanism, the less support for gay rights. State Supreme Courts whose justices were elected in partisan elections supported gay rights 53 percent of the time. The number grew to 70 percent for nonpartisan elections, to 76 percent for retention elections and to 82 percent for appointed systems.

This motivates me to evolve my thinking on this issue since the last time I addressed it. In the blunt-force thinking of populism, it seems only natural that judges should be elected rather than appointed – thus permitting the correction of a system possibly prone to corruption by the appointing authority. But, as experience shows, an electoral process exposes the republic to a different set of befouling influences. Sometimes it’s difficult to remember that the vote is not given to the electorate because they are wise, but as a mechanism of buy-in: the disenfranchised citizen is more likely to riot than the voter who at least had the opportunity to join the discussion and select a leader, even if their favored candidate has lost.

A judge subjected to electoral pressures has, as a boss, not just the electorate, but even more importantly, those who are most strident: the ideologues who strive for some specific goal, whether it be adherence to a religious position, or defense of noxious industries, or some other goal repugnant to the Republic as a whole. Sometimes the electorate is even persuaded to elect those strident, wrong voices. And the citizenry may not be aware of the negative repercussions of such positions; indeed, as in the case of Alabama Supreme Court Chief Judge Moore, his predilection to place religion above state places the Republic at risk – even if he doesn’t think so, history is not on his side.

A judge who is appointed, and once appointed immune to dismissal without cause, must instead adhere to the judicial standards instituted by the judiciary. Of course, this can protect the awful seat-holder to an unseemly degree, but on balance, it seems likely that the greater good is served by the appointee better than the elected. Their independence from zealot and fad is greater, and they may ignore the licit influence of those who do not put the Republic ahead of themselves. (Neither is immune to illicit influences, whether they be the carrot or the stick.)

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court is elective in supposedly non-partisan elections. Mother Jones‘ Pema Levy reported in 2015 on how the court has transformed into a conservative bastion:

The Wisconsin Club for Growth and WMC [the Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce] are top players in a years-long undertaking by Walker and his allies to create a conservative majority on the Supreme Court that is friendly to conservative policies—an operation that has included spending millions on ads, ending public campaign financing for Supreme Court elections, rewriting the court’s ethics guidelines, and amending the state’s constitution. This effort has led to one of the most partisan and dysfunctional judicial bodies in the country, a court with liberal and conservative justices who won’t appear together in public. And it could well end up benefiting the conservative groups under investigation should the jurists they helped elect rule the probe should stop.

“This large amount of money and special interests has impacted the workings of the court, the reputation of the court, and how it’s interacting internally,” says former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske, who served on the court from 1993 to 1998.

The Wisconsin Club for Growth and WMC first began pouring millions into state Supreme Court elections in 2007, when the groups spent an estimated $2.9 million on ads backing conservative candidate Annette Ziegler for an open seat on the Supreme Court and attacking her opponent. Total spending on that election topped $5.8 million, four times the previous record for a Wisconsin Supreme Court race. The following year, the same groups spent more than $2.7 million on ads aimed at unseating sitting Justice Louis Butler, a liberal, and electing conservative candidate Michael Gableman. The election was so nasty that racially-tinged ads released by Gableman’s campaign were compared to the infamous Willie Horton spot from the 1988 presidential election.

Naturally, the thought of Governor Walker, a conservative icon and GOP Presidential candidate, whose tenure as governor has been marked by uproar and failed promises, appointing Supreme Court justices must bring one up short. However, as ideologues will often fail and be removed by disillusioned voters, so term-limited judges can also be removed, if only by time – and often, as in the case of Judge Moore, they can be removed for good reason. That is the thing about religious zealots and ideologues: they are so certain they are right, or so greedy for power, that they forget there are standards to be met, and punishments for not reaching them, that can be invoked upon them, even if they are convinced they are God’s gift to mankind.

I don’t normally talk about my job or my employer – a large engineering firm – but I thought the letter from the company’s President on the new fiscal year was very interesting for this paragraph:

Looking ahead, fiscal 2017 will not be any easier. This is not so much about us. We are doing fine, our customers like us, innovation and productivity are good. It’s more about what I would summarize as “geopolitical issues”: the rise of populism and nationalism, global migration, war and terror in some regions of the world, as well as uncertainties about what impact the Fourth Industrial Revolution will have. These developments do not help create an environment that encourages investment and expansion.

(My bold.)

Mr. Trump and President Duterte in the Philippines are consummate populists. It’s good to see at least one company willing to stand up and call them out for being disruptive and bad for the economy – because they’re bad for social stability – even if it’s only to their employees.

Keeping everyone up to date on our apple harvest…

Yep, there it is.

I just like the picture.

Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/

From CNN:

Saturday’s developments come less than a week after Trump appeared to indicate that he had not paid federal income tax over an unspecified period during a debate with Clinton. The Democratic nominee accused the billionaire of refusing to release his returns because he wanted to hide how little tax he had paid.

“That makes me smart,” Trump replied, and also said that any tax money he had paid would have been wasted by the federal government.

Isn’t this a cause and effect switcheroo? Saving money on taxes doesn’t make you smart, it just makes you slightly wealthier, if only momentarily – if he ran off to a casino and lost it on the slots, the result is insignificant.

But perhaps this is part of a mindset wherein we judge folks based on their actions – a meritocracy, if you will.

Look at me, I didn’t pay taxes, that must mean I’m smarter than the doofus down the street who paid.

Of course, he must make the assertion because, at some level, he must be aware there are alternative interpretations; but, as a businessman, through and through, who’s completely assimilated the ethics & morality of the private sector with, apparently, no regard for the public sector, it never occurs to him that government provides a number of services from which the Trump empire benefits: from the fact that we’re not someone’s colonial bitch, police services, judicial services (or is it too ironic to mention those in view of his various legal entanglements with those he’s screwed over?), even the much despised EPA, which helps lead the way in keeping the air breathable – indeed, at age 70, he should be thankful, since the haze we see over Beijing would have undoubtedly killed him if it were over New York City.

No, none of this occurs to him. He’s swallowed a right-wing fringe meme hook, line, and sinker.

It would be squandered too, believe me.

That’s all he can see on his own. He apparently has no clue that government is better than no government. He’s firmly a creature of the private sector, and without a clue as to why the public sector exists, its responsibilities and processes, he has little qualification for the position. He’ll just run it like a company, and that will end up being a disaster.

trona:

Trona (trisodium hydrogendicarbonate dihydrate also sodium sesquicarbonate dihydrate, Na₂CO₃•NaHCO₃•2H₂O is a non-marine evaporite mineral.^[3][4] It is mined as the primary source of sodium carbonate in the United States, where it has replaced the Solvay process used in most of the rest of the world for sodium carbonate production.

The word “trona” entered English by way of either Swedish (trona) or Spanish (trona), with both possible sources having the same meaning as in English. Both of these derive from the Arabic trōn, which in turn derives from the Arabic natron, and Hebrew נטרן(natruna), which comes from ancient Greek νιτρον (nitron), derived ultimately from ancient Egyptian ntry (or nitry). [Wikipedia]

And its use? Treehugger.com’s Katherine Martinko explains:

An article on Grist recently addressed this topic, explaining how baking soda is mined. It comes out of the ground in the form of minerals nahcolite and trona, which are refined into soda ash (a.k.a. calcium carbonate), then turned into baking soda (a.k.a. sodium bicarbonate), among other things.

(Bold mine.) Katherine goes on to note the environmental impacts of the mining and processing of trona, vs the positives of baking soda.

I was interested to see the Wikipedia’s entry on trona’s etymology:

The word “trona” entered English by way of either Swedish (trona) or Spanish (trona), with both possible sources having the same meaning as in English. Both of these derive from the Arabic trōn, which in turn derives from the Arabic natron, and Hebrew נטרן (natruna), which comes from ancient Greek νιτρον (nitron), derived ultimately from ancient Egyptian ntry (or nitry).

I’d run across natron as being used in ancient Egyptian mummification rituals – it helped with the drying process. So, in some sense, that baking soda you were using this morning happened to also be used in drying out human bodies millenia ago.

Miss Peeper, master fundraiser

As we picked tomatoes in the alley this morning, Peeper became despondent over our absence, came to the other side of the fence, and began fulfilling her name – peeping. She runs it up and down the upper scales, this despondent, I’ve been abandoned, tone to her voice that breaks your heart.

Deb observed that she’d be a perfect fund-raiser on the phone.

Morning fruits, night delights?

And here are some of the fruits of our morning’s labors.

I was peripherally aware of the goofiness in the Philippines, but somehow never commented on it for this thread. But let’s set the stage first: The Philippines is a nation consisting of roughly 7,641 islands in the Pacific Ocean, a population of 101 million, and a dominant religion of Roman Catholicism. With roughly 116,000 square miles available, density runs to 870 people / mile² – assuming all the area is livable. For comparison, world wide density is 35 / mile².

And their government? Formally, Constitutional Republic. Informal? Scary as hell.

Current President is Rodrigo Duterte, former mayor of Davao City. During his campaign for the Presidency, he pledged to fight crime, as noted by DW in an interview with Jasmine Lorch:

DW: Rodrigo Duterte promised a “bloody war” against criminals during his election campaign. Now that he has been elected, what concerns might human rights groups have with his promise to bring about justice?

Lorch: Duterte has not put forward a concrete plan to reduce poverty in the Philippines

Jasmin Lorch: National and international human rights groups have criticized Duterte’s approach to security and human rights since his time as mayor of Davao City. During Duterte’s tenure there as mayor, the city became home to notorious “dead squads” that indiscriminately targeted criminals, street children and critical activists.

During his presidential campaign, Duterte even boasted that he had personally killed criminals. Activist groups have rightly stressed that if human rights and due judicial process are ignored in the fight against crime, the justice system – and ultimately the Philippine’s democratic system – could be undermined.

And how is he implementing this? WaPo reports:

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte on Friday compared his campaign to kill criminals to the Holocaust, saying he would like to “slaughter” millions of addicts just like Adolf Hitler “massacred” millions of Jewish people.

“Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now, there are 3 million drug addicts. … I’d be happy to slaughter them,” he told reporters early Friday, according to GMA News.

“You know my victims, I would like to be, all criminals, to finish the problem of my country and save the next generation from perdition,” he said.

The comment was a response to critics who have likened him to Hitler. (Anestimated 6 million Jewish people were killed in the Holocaust.)

Since Duterte swept to power in July, more than 3,300 Filipinos have been killed, either gunned down by police in late-night drug operations or felled by assassins, often after being named by police.

Victims of the extra-judicial killing spree are drug suspects — or those misidentified as drug suspects —named on police lists and targeted before they are charged or given the chance to stand trial. Often their bodies are dumped by the roadside with signs that read “pusher.”

And I suppose his supporters love him for it, but it’s the art of the brute who knows no better. And what will his supporters do when he finds reason to apply the same methods to some group of them? Then they find reason to regret their support. But, as with Trump and others, it seems people are looking for their “strong leader” with little thought as to methods being applied to themselves.