The Rich Candidate

 THE RICH CANDIDATE

The rich people, I mean the really rich people are responsible for a huge share of political donations - - the money that elects our politicians.  When a person donates huge sums of money to get you elected, you pick up the phone when they call.  Rich people have access.  I don't have Senator Grassley's phone number and even if I did he wouldn't answer a call from me.

Our elected officials really don't care about us; one can not dispute this looking at the legislation they pass.  They don't care about the price of gasoline or hamburger; they don't care if there is public transport or you have a car that gets you to work; they don't care if you have access to health care, or need dental work you can't afford, or an optometrist for a decent pair of bi-focals.  They don't care and why should they; they have everything they need many times over.  

It is becoming easier to believe that many of the rich in this country are really rich and many more are becoming semi-really rich.  The semi-really rich imitate the really rich - - they don't care either?  Take a peek sometime at the Wallstreet Journal and the houses they feature everyday.  This will be enough to convince you that there are a whole lot of really rich people in this country who want to get even more rich and buy more real estate from 2,000 acre ranches in Montana to ocean side villas in Florida.  In the meantime they give and give and give to our elected officials and you know, they don't even live in the districts to which they donate.  To them political donations are investments; they expect a return on those investments and they get it.

One does not need a college degree to understand this - - those who work at a job are not rich.  Those working at a job worry about the cost of gasoline and hamburger.  Those working at a job worry that they won't qualify for a needed medical procedure or have the money for a cap on a bad tooth or find the funds necessary for prescription glasses or have the ability to pay for prescribed medication.

I have a solution:  vote for the politician who takes the least money from rich donors.  Don't listen to the TV ads; don't decide based on what party the politician represents.  Very simple.  One issue voting - - clear and concise.  Determine who is donating scads of money to whom.  Normally there are reports throughout the campaign season of who has the most money and from whence it came. 

Our voting decision can be simplified drastically.  Find out which candidates have the most money from big donors and vote for the other guy.  One issue.  How simple is that?  And if we begin to elect the people who are not beholden to really rich people or even the semi-really rich people, just maybe the officials we do elect might pay attention to us, the people who go to work every day and are always worrying about how to pay for what we need; and most importantly, those of us who vote for them.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Presidential Toys

PRESIDENTIAL TOYS

We have a president who views things like aircraft carriers and fighter jets as presidential toys - - just toys to play with, for amusement and conversation, and boasting for sure.  Hey look, I've got an aircraft carrier and you don't - - ha ha ha!  And the missiles I have - - hang on and I will just show you - - boom boom!   I can blow up a bunch of stuff and always get more - - I'm the president. 

Today I'm going to blow up a bunch of ships in Hormuz that belong to Iran (I think) and tomorrow I'll have our military intelligence find some other fun targets to immersate (this is word I just heard in a meeting so I think I'll use it even if I'm not sure what it means).  You know, I'm president. and I can do this for a long time.  Just think for how long we have been spending gads of money that we don't have on building ships and planes and tanks and bombs and such.  I have so many toys, I am actually overwhelmed and some days don't even know where to start.

Now, don't think that I'm simply being silly here.  Presidential amusement is necessary to maintain equilibrium in a most tiring and boring job and this is especially so in a person of uncertain mental capacity and maturity.  One does wonder which would be the critical factor here, if not a combination of the two, but this is for another time.  After all, one can only post so much nonsense and graft so much money that after a while other amusements become necessary just to fill the waking hours.

I could pardon some more rich felons and other miscreants who in turn will help me along the road to untold wealth.  You know, I've always wanted to be a billionaire and finally got there by being president.  I could have told you as much.  With as much power as the American president has, thanks to Congress, untold wealth is a given - - just put your mind to it.  

But, I did get beside-the-point.  I started out with toys, presidential toys, and as usual, got sidetracked.  As the president, I found it quite depressing that the servicemen on that aircraft carrier over there somewhere were bitching about how long they had been at sea.  How can a bunch of sailors tell me, the president, how to operate his toys?  We can't have that; it qualifies as a mutiny and those complaining must be punished.  I need a list of names; it's unacceptable to interfere with presidential recreation.

And it is recreational, you know.  I get all kinds of information from military intelligence about what we blow up and bodies everywhere lying about.  It can't be helped - - the bodies I mean.  If they weren't where the bombs land, they wouldn't get blown up.  It's their own fault being at legitimate targets.

So folks, give me a break here.  Everyone needs a little time off and recreational pursuits are necessary to help with the more demanding aspects of the job.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

A War? Reallly??

 A WAR?  REALLY?

A war is when both people get shot at.  Where only one person is shooting, it's called an assault.  Assaults have victims; they are the people being shot at.  One should be able to look at something and realize what it is.  If one can not do that, one needs assistance in either seeing or understanding what one is seeing.

The war with Iran is not a war; it is an assault.  We are bombing and killing Iranians.  Now I am not a fan of Iran.  I would not want to live there and I do not condone how they treat their women. But the fact that I am not a fan of Iran and I do not like the way they treat their women does not affect either my eyesight or my understanding of what we are doing there.  We are assaulting them and in so doing killing many.

Our national media, our local media, our media everywhere I turn is calling our current situation with the Iranians a war.  It is not.  We Americans are not in harm's way.  We Americans are going about our business as usual every day unencumbered by Iranian missiles or bombs or other destructive devices making our lives inconvenient.  We are not bothered by such things as lack of gas, or rubble where our work place was yesterday, or other such nuisances.

We are once again subject to a failure of understanding because we have a failure of language.  Nothing illustrates our lack of understanding better than the use of our language to describe what is happening in Iran.  We are killing Iranians.  We  are also killing people in boats in the Pacific Ocean, not interdicting drug dealers.  We killed people in Venezuela when we kidnapped its president.  The government of the United States is going around the world killing people.  What is it about this that we are missing?  Is it that we misunderstand because of the way these things are being described or do we simply not care.   I do not like to think of it as not caring.   For if we do not care, we as a country, lose any moral standing we may have had anywhere.

We are not engaged in war, we are committing assaults, some deadly.  And to add to this, we are treating the people we find in this country working, raising families, paying taxes horribly by simply disappearing them and by so doing, leaving families, jobs, friends, homes they have established over years of living here peacefully and productively.  One day they are simply gone.

One can not dispute the fact that our government, the government of the United States, is assaulting, killing, and disappearing people and it is our government, not someone else's government, but ours - yours and mine.   It would seem to me that this should be of some concern; it certainly is to me. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

A New Frenzy

 A NEW FRENZY

The Wall Street Journal, Saturday 21 August 2026, reports a new frenzy - vintage graphic tees.  In other words, t-shirts.  It is reported that the t-shirt you are wearing will have the ability to "convey personality and authenticity".  Another facet of this new "frenzy" will be the ability of those having such items, to sell them for more than what was paid originally to purchase them; always a plus to the publisher of the Wall Street Journal.

What particularly struck me was the view a "vintage graphic tee" "would convey personality and authenticity".  Unfortunately, this is the acknowledgement that most of us don't have "personality and authenticity" and we need an outward, viewable, method of obtaining some.  All one can say about this, is that if you think wearing a "vintage graphic tee" will make you interesting, or entertaining, or just worth knowing, get over it, it won't.

But your visual aspect has always functioned thus.  From war paint to haircuts, your visual aspect has carried meaning and significance.  After all, you don't need a large vocabulary to tell someone you are a general if it clearly shows you are a general on your uniform, or that you are wealthy and sporty if you drive a Bugatti, or you are young and male driving a muscle car that makes a loud noise.

These things, whether we like it or not, are not substitutes for the genuine.  They are an attempt to make up for what you lack - - a personality - someone interesting enough to have a conversation with.  When you take a look at your friends and acquaintances for the purpose of deciding if you want to spend any time with them, you don't decide the matter on what kind of car they drive, what their t-shirt says, or the color of their war paint.  You decide depending on the purpose of your visit.  If for business, whether the other person is interesting may add to the meeting, but it is not necessary.  If you are to spend an enjoyable lunch or dinner with someone, it is important if that person can engage in a conversation, has something interesting to talk about, or otherwise can hold your attention.  Relating the current status of one's children, or what wonderful pictures were taken on the last vacation, or how your favorite football team won or lost,  doesn't do it.

I'm sorry, but the t-shirt you are wearing, or the car you are driving, or the house you are living in doesn't make you interesting or worth knowing.  And back to the Wall Street Journal which shows you daily the houses, condos, and apartments of the wealthy and their tremendous costs.  Never does it appear visually or otherwise that the proprietors of these dwellings are worth knowing - - it is presumed apparently.

Having an interesting friend makes life easier, having a vintage t-shirt does not.  Driving a Bugatti or a muscle car will certainly allow for the gaze of others, but I, for one, never thought that the person driving such a vehicle was worth knowing simply for owning and driving such a vehicle.  In fact, it is one sure sign, as are "vintage graphic tees", that those driving such cars and wearing such t-shirts are simply trying to make up for the fact that they are really boring, probably annoying, and not worth spending much time with. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo 

Collective Ignorance

COLLECTIVE IGNORANCE

Upon any reflection whatsoever, it is clear that the collective ignorance of the Iowa legislature is only surpassed by its unconcern.  They pass laws willy-nilly, the advisability of any particular statute sufficient if it should randomly come to mind of a legislator or some influential donor calls in with a suggestion.

Considering I am a criminal defense attorney, I pay particular attention to the new laws affecting my clients.  The last legislative session there  passed three statutes that deserve mention.  They are the doubling the mandatory sentence for people convicted of a third felony, the restriction of pretrial release, and the banning of warrant resolution clinics.  The last first - -  warrant resolution clinics.  Polk County established a method whereby people with outstanding warrants can appear at a location outside of the courthouse, to address their warrants which could be for such things as a traffic offense or some other minor infraction.  Our legislature forbids this practice insisting those with a warrant be arrested. 

Secondly, the ability of a judge to determine what is appropriate bond, if any, for a newly charged defendant has been significantly curtailed with the apparent presumption that judges can not adequately determine bond. The person who actually has knowledge of the person being arrested and the facts of the circumstances is deemed not sufficient to make such a decision.

Third, for those convicted of a third felony, the sentence will be 20 years with 7 of that mandatory.  Now it is 15 years and 3 years mandatory.  

Those within the criminal system realize that these new statutes will require two new prisons and a significant increase in local jail facilities. Money for incarceration has become the American way.  We don't need proper health care or housing, but we do need more jails and prisons.  

The justification for these increases in incarceration as stated by our governor are several:  1.  standing with the victims, 2. continued criminal behavior demands accountability, and 3. there needs to be real consequences.

What occurs immediately to mind is that  these legislative enactments are grossly nasty with a  total unconcern for the people being charged with a crime.  If one were to reflect on the number of new felonies that our elected representatives enact each year along with the continued prosecution of a vast number of Iowa residents who use marjuana, meth, cocaine, fentanyl, etc., it is obvious that our legislative bodies are clueless or worse cruel.  They profess concern for the citizens of this state, but if you don't do what you are told to do or not do what you are told not to do you are not worthy of that concern - - prison for you.  

Having intimate knowledge of the use of illegal substances in Iowa, it is clear to me that if all who have two previous drug convictions and a little bit of meth on their person for use to maintain their concentration at work and then being pulled over for a traffic offense are prosecuted with a third felony, there will be no possible place to put them all.

A vast number of people who live and work in Iowa use illegal drugs every day.  This can not be disputed by anyone involved in the criminal justice system.  We need to acknowledge this and not by putting more people in jail and prison, but by realizing this is the way it is and accept it.  It is a fact and will continue to be regardless of what our legislature does.  Let's put fewer people in prison rather than more.  Putting people in prison is treating people very poorly and makes for really hard feelings rather than conscientious citizens.  

Richard E. H. Phelps II

Mingo

 

Our Best and Brightest

  OUR BEST AND BRIGHTEST

A recent post compared President Trump with the prime minister of Canada, Mark Carney, who has a bachelor's degree in economics from Harvard and  a Ph.D. from Oxford and the president of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum  who has a Ph.D in energy engineering from the National Autonomous University of

Mexico.   Trump refuses to have his undergraduate, University of Pennsylvania records released.

I'm sorry, but I find this disturbing.  I find it disturbing we have a president clearly uneducated and even more clearly, knows nothing.  We have a president who simply decides one day we will kill people in boats at sea, on another day we will kidnap the president of Venezuela, and yet on another day we will bomb Iran.  You tell me:  what have we become and how are these decisions being made?

I really don't want to be a part of this, but I am, because I am an American and if I go to another country, I am an American, and we kill people on boats at sea and we kidnap presidents, and we bomb other countries.  We are saddened when we lose a dozen service men; but not contrite nor sorry nor apologetic when one of our bombs lands on a girls school in Iran or destroys whole blocks and factories killing unknown numbers of Iranians.

Folks, things are askew and we are to blame for allowing it to be such.  Am I unamerican that I don't support whatever it is that we have done, or are doing, or will do in the future?  I think not.  It seems we are spiraling out of control; it is happening right in front of us and we don't recognize it for what it is and we need to pay attention.

The first paragraph here was to emphasize our, meaning American, pathological fear of education and knowledge of the world and what is happening in it.  We simply can't afford to have ignorant boobs leading our country in this modern age when weaponry, AI, algorithms, quantum computing, instant communication, finance have reached levels of achievability that can destroy us and everything we value.  Contrary to current thought, education is important - knowing things is important not only for people who make the decisions but for all of us.

We. as a people, seem to have given up on this idea, of being educated, and it is on the advent of becoming permanent with AI.  Having an uneducated president, a president who doesn't know anything, and who clearly doesn't want to know anything is perfectly consistent with our prevailing attitude.  It fits with a public who doesn't pay attention nor have the ability to determine whether what is being done should be done.  And folks, it signifies an end that will not be pleasant.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison clearly understood that an ignorant public can not stand.  They said as much and they were correct.

Richard E. H. Phelps II

Mingo

Whose History?

 WHOSE HISTORY?

A major conflict these days is the question of whose history are we going with today.  History moves around a lot.  It consists of one set of historical facts in one group and another set of historical facts in other groups.  An interesting example of this is currently occurring in Wisconsin where Francesca Hong seems to be a front runner in the Democratic Party governor's race.

She has been heard to say that Thanksgiving is a colonizer's holiday and Valentine's Day is a day "capitalism tells you how to show love".  Now you will have to admit that Thanksgiving is a holiday enjoyed by most of us.  But I do say "most of us" purposefully.  I have met several Native Americans that really don't have the joy that most of us do when we sit down to our Turkey dinner.

And let us not forget July 4th.  You really can't expect a black person to celebrate July 4th, now can you?  These different perspectives are what are now being attacked as unamerican and not proper subjects of education.  Iowa's government has caught the current tide of one America and only one America meaning the proper historical notions of what and who we are.

As much as our current administrations would like us to forget these various perspectives and join in their insistence that white, european people are the only people who belong here, it is untenable whether we like it or not.  This country is operated to a large extent by immigrants and if you don't think so, you are fooling yourself - go through a check-out line in your local grocery store or try to have a conversation with one of the guys roofing your house.

Our white American ancestors brought the black people to America.  Our white American ancestors brought the Chinese here to build the railroads.  These people were brought to this country to do things white people wouldn't do for either of two reasons:  There were not enough of us to do the work required or we didn't want to do the dawn to dusk work necessary.  Us white people are the reason that there are black and Asian people here; and, by the way, very few Native Americans.

And let us not forget the Hispanics (those speaking Spanish).  If one were to actually study a little history, one would quickly realize that the hispanics were here first.  Santa Fe predates Plymouth but you certainly wouldn't know it would you.  It was established as the capital of Nuevo Mèxico in 1610.  The pilgrims landed in 1620.  Who are we to tell them they shouldn't be here.

So I suggest we get over ourselves.  We live in a world that doesn't always fit our view and we need to understand that.  We are seeing a resurgence of our worst selves and we need to realize it now and acknowledge it.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo