We Need a Draft

 WE NEED A DRAFT

Clearly, we need something more than just sending a few highway patrolmen and national guardsmen to the border with Mexico to solve this crisis of refugees who hope to come to the United States, the land of the free and the brave.  We simply have to do something.

What I suggest is we institute a state draft.  Drafting people into the military has a long and illustrious history.  Clearly it is something that would be acceptable to anyone not drafted, i.e. a majority of the people of the State of Iowa.  

It is good to know that we have a crisis on our hands and it's being dealt with.  I personally wasn't aware of it nor affected by it, but if our governor says there's a crisis, there must be one somewhere.  After all, by simply saying there is a crisis there is obviously a crisis.   I can't believe our governor would just make something up like that.

So since we have declared a crisis, we must find a method by which to deal with it.  Sending highway patrolmen and national guard personnel to the border is one way of helping.  Since I am personally unaffected by the crisis - - after all I don't know any refugees, nor what they do when they get here, nor where they live when they get here - - I will take the governor's word for it: THAT WE ARE IN A CRISIS!

Personal experience does have some weight.  I was drafted - - way back in the Vietnam conflict.  We are disposed to call it a conflict rather than a war these days since we don't want to admit we got our butts kicked.  Personally, I spent four wonderful years on board a ship sitting in the harbor at Norfolk.  It was a tender and for part of those four years the ship was the U. S. Vulcan, the oldest, active ship in the U. S. Navy which was eventually sold to Iran.  It's probably still floating around in the Persian Gulf full of Muslims who don't like Americans even though they are in, afterall, an American made ship.

So, I'm in favor of a draft to solve this proclaimed crisis.  It shouldn't be that hard to do with a legislature that will do whatever the governor wants them to do.  We can always find the money to fix crises, such as shortening once again the time available for unemployment benefits, getting rid of the last remaining unions.  There are all sorts of ways we can find the money to support a draft.  Who needs a state auditor when we have a crisis:  not necessary and besides he's a democrat.  Get rid of the position entirely.

So, just some thoughts, folks, on how to solve one more proclaimed crisis.  As usual, we just need some critical thinking, some innovation.  These are things we are good at, right?  So, let's do it.     

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo     

Schizophrenia

 SCHIZOPHRENIA

Did it ever occur to you that those with Schizophrenia are the ones who have the best understanding of the world we live in?  It very well may be.  Having been a criminal defense attorney for more years than I want to admit, I will say that I have had a long and varied career with those so afflicted.  

Most live in a world we so-called normal people don't understand; a world of their own creation.  Unfortunately, a world that is often incompatible with our own - - a world of us normal people who go about our business daily without thought of the world we live in other than we are in it and need to comply with its requirements.  We accept our lot and attempt to deal with it as it is.  Not so our schizophrenic friends.

Our schizophrenic denizens do not accept the world we live in as we do.  This is considered abnormal and we incarcerate, medicate, and otherwise attempt to alter the understanding of those so suffering.  We find schizophrenia extremely troubling.  It is not those with schizophrenia that find it troubling, it is us, the normal people who find it troubling.

The requirement, long standing and inviolate, is that we all should be "normal" - - that is, like everybody else.  This is not specifically addressed in our constitutions, but simply assumed.  If you are not normal, i.e. schizophrenic, you are a problem.  We have defined it as a problem by the simple fact of it being different, thinking differently, and really, in engaging in an alternate reality that is substantially different from our own.

The schizophrenic person doesn't read the works of other schizophrenics; there is no standard schizophrenia.  Each schizophrenic is a universe unto his or herself, a unique person in every sense.  This again, is something that can not be tolerated.  Difference is troubling and we make serious efforts in reducing it.  There are various ways in dealing with these differences which includes medication and incarceration both of which we use regularly.  

Incarceration is used when medication fails.  Our jails are full of people with schizophrenia.  Since we have come to the conclusion that we can not tolerate those so suffering, we incarcerate them once they elude medication.  I know very few schizophrenics who much care for the meds they are required to take and sooner or later once again quit them and reject the world as we see it and create their own - - one to their own liking, and one they can understand.

I'm inclined to think that the number of our citizens who subscribe to schizophrenia will continue to increase as our world becomes more and more difficult to comprehend and to contend with.  If you can't cope with the world as is, make your own.  

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Let's Do Air Marshals

 LET'S DO AIR MARSHALS

I think we need to entertain the idea of training and supplying air marshalls for all airplanes that fly into, over, and out of Iowa airspace.  Why should we throw people in jail traveling over our interstates because they have some  personal use marijuana in their car and not do the same for the people flying through our airspace on airplanes.  Isn't our airspace Iowa just like our interstates, part of Iowa?

We are also not stopping and searching people riding the buses or Amtrak.  We need to set up some sort of stations at the entrances to our state where we require all passengers to disembark and be searched for illegal substances, i.e. substances deemed to be illegal by our legislature so we can arrest them.  After all, they might actually want to use such a substance while in Iowa or maybe they even intend on sharing an illegal substance with an Iowa citizen.  This should not be tolerated.

We have such a stellar reputation with people from other states.  A car gets stopped for speeding - - oh, I smell marijuana!  Off to jail you go with bond to be posted, your car to get out of impound, and an attorney to find.  Just another day for our local law enforcement.  It's no wonder when someone mentions Iowa to a person from another state, the reaction is less than encouraging.  Vacation in Iowa - - not.

But consistency is important.  We should not allow people to fly through our air space with marijuana in their backpack unimpeded and flippantly flipping us off when if they were in a car they would be hauled off to jail and totally inconvenienced because they forgot to take what little weed they had in their glove box out before they drove cross country.  We don't even have the courtesy to tell them by a big sign at the entrances to Iowa: "WARNING:  YOU WILL BE ARRESTED FOR MARIJUANA"

So, I say, "Let's be consistent".  If we are going to arrest some resident of Illinois or Missouri or Minnesota for having some pot in their car, we darn well should do the same for anyone flying over us in an airplane or on the train or in a bus.  It's time to address this inequity legislatively.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Senate File 2325

 SENATE FILE 2325

One of the more salient features of our world is that the average citizen has no clue what our legislature is up to until it's done.  This should not be the case since our legislature is there to serve the people of Iowa and we should all have some awareness of how they are accomplishing this.  And for this purpose I am citing a portion of a new Senate File currently under consideration.

The Iowa Senate has introduced Senate File 2325 which will amend Chapter 400 of the Iowa Code.  The new subsection 18 is worth stating:

"A city with a civil service commission established under Chapter 400 shall not adopt, enforce, or otherwise administer an ordinance, motion, resolution, or amendment, or use any other means, to establish a board or other entity for the purpose of citizen review of the conduct of police officers."

And rightly so, I might add.  We certainly don't want the local citizens to have the ability to complain about local law enforcement.  Just think what that would lead to - - chaos.  Newton's population fluctuates around 15,000 so the statute as proposed would prohibit the citizens of Newton from exercising  oversight of the behavior of local law enforcement.  Just think if people of a given community would be able to complain about the behavior of individual police officers, there would be no end of complaints and this is not something that can be tolerated.  Our police are here to serve and protect.

For instance, what would happen if a given community decided that possession of marijuana should not be prosecuted as a crime.  After all, Illinois, Missouri, and Minnesota have all legalized marijuana.  We simply can't have a bunch of citizens filing complaints about the enforcement of a law they don't much care for.  After all, and once again, the laws are meant to serve the citizens and if they don't see the wisdom of certain laws, they should obtain some counseling or some such thing so they would have a better understanding of the purpose and intent of the laws that are passed.

The last thing we need are police officers afraid to give a speeding ticket for fear that some citizen will make a complaint to some citizen oversight board - - probably made up of a bunch of left-wingers who don't like the police anyway.  This is not something that can be tolerated.  After all, just because you are a citizen doesn't mean you should have any say in what laws are passed or how they are enforced.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Let's Make Makebelieve

 LET'S MAKE MAKEBELIEVE

One of the more interesting phenomena of our current time here in the great midwest is the contrast between what life is really like and what our legislature thinks it ought to be like.  At the risk of beating a dead horse, our legislature can not help itself.  It must act in a manner that defies the real.

If you were to read novels; and, I mean serious novels - - novels that reflect the world we live in, which is something novels attempt to do, your understanding of the world has improved and you, as a person, are hopefully better able to cope than you were previously.  Obviously, some do it better than others, but the purpose of a novel is to show us ourselves and the people around us.  A novel should, if a serious effort, give us a better understanding of  the world we live in.

These are the books that our book banners want banned.  They are the serious novels that reflect us and the people we live with.  It is called fiction not because it is not factual - - it is not factual in the sense the earth is round. But a good novel is a reflection of the world from which it came and if you read a novel that so reflects the world we live in, your understanding of your own life and those of the others around you  is improved.

To ban a novel, especially one of critical acclaim (which they all are by the way), is simply to deny a reality which a good book presents.  I have come to the conclusion that I don't my kid to understand the world he or she lives in; I would rather have them live in some makebelieve world of my own creation.  My child is better off ignorant than knowledgeable; better off not knowing there are people in their community and city and state and country that are not like them and have no intention of becoming like them.  They simply don't need to know what is happening around them.

Our legislature has made it its goal to limit what we know.  This is not a proper function of our legislature as it appears to be in Russia and China and other places such as Iran.  To say that my kid does not have access to a particular book or that my kid doesn't have access to the internet or that my kid doesn't need to know anything more than what they want him or her to know is not for our legislature to determine.  Unfortunately, the people we currently have in our legislature believe they have the right to think so and it is unfortunate.

I am not advocating for a certain party nor am I advocating for a certain person; I am advocating for some restraint in our elected officials.  We have a functioning society without their interference and guidance.  We can do it without their impositions.  They need to give it a rest and let us go about our business as we see fit.  

Richard E. H. Phelps II

Mingo