A Trifling Matter

 A TRIFLING MATTER

Well, it appears that the Supreme Court and the President don't see eye-to-eye, or in other words, disagree.  This is on tariffs of all things.  Who would have thought that there could be such a disagreement on such a thing.  After all, most of us don't even know what a tariff is.  

The current level of constitutional knowledge in this country is pretty much limited to the idea that we all have a right to have a gun - - the constitution says so.  If you were to ask around, this would be the extent of what many of our fellow citizens would consider constitutionally allowed - - the right to bear arms.

Just as a matter of clarification, this "right" is contained in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which applies to all fifty states by the way.  However, once we get past this particular  excerpt of knowledge, our understanding becomes somewhat clouded.  Yes, we have a President, and yes we have a Congress, and yes we have a Supreme Court; but what they can do and what they can't do is a mystery to most of us.  If we learned anything in high school's civics class, it didn't stay with us much longer than the final exam.

The matter of tariffs was just discussed by the Supreme Court in Learning Resources, Inc. et al. v. Trump decided on 20 February 2026.  One suggestion I would make is to read the decision.  I have heard the decision mentioned numerous times since the 20th by those who agree and by those who don't.  It is my understanding that not one of the people who were discussing it with me had read the Court's decision or even knew that it was available to read.  Folks, this is why we have Google!  In addition, one might actually peruse the Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 7, a somewhat pertinent document when it comes to taxes.  These two items will explain why the President does not have the authority to create a tariff.  A tariff is a tax.

Some of us apparently think that the President can do whatever he wants. Our current President must think this.  After all he's the President and we elected him.  I know this is somewhat unusual, that I would suggest actually determining what he can and can not do  rather than simply ingesting what appears while scrolling on your iPhone; and hence, obtaining an  opinion  with no basis in fact. 

Folks, the President can not levy a tariff, only Congress can.  A tariff is a tax; only Congress can tax you.  A President can't simply decide one day that you have to pay an additional tax, but he did anyway.  Your Senators and Representatives know this, or they should, as should you.

Richard E H Phelps II
Mingo

Ah! It's the Books Again

 AH! IT'S THE BOOKS AGAIN

Books are on their mind.  It usually is this time of year when the legislature is nearing midterm finalizing various legislative proposals.  I will give credit when credit is due.  We once again are making renewed efforts to keep books from minors.  

Long ago our legislature understood the serious nature of minors knowing anything.  This is allegedly a  matter of sexual knowledge.  Unfortunately sex is necessary if you want to consider the continuation of the species.  And what's more, every life form on the planet engages in it - - or they wouldn't be here.

One can conclude from this that sex is the foundation of life as we know it.  However, our legislature is determined that children, their children and my children presumably, need not know about it; that there is such a thing; that such a thing is necessary for life; that they will one day engage in it in one form or another.  The idea is that if we talk about sex rather than what is really the issue, which are books, the public will support their efforts.

The main culprit in the dissemination of information regarding sex is the library - - any and all libraries i. e., books.   Libraries are the problem; libraries provide knowledge and knowledge is not required or desired.  We must limit the knowledge that our children possess - - knowledge just isn't good for them and without books, it would be so much better in keeping it from them.  Children  should not be reading books!  Our legislature does not approve.  

Since every child in America, which includes Iowa, has access to the internet, the idea that a library poses a special danger to sexual knowledge is ludicrous.  Consequently, what one must gather from the renewed efforts of the Iowa legislature is their distaste for books not their obsession with sex.  They must think about it all the time; probably nightmares and sleepless afternoons wondering what literature their children might come across at the library.

But again, it really isn't sex that is the issue. I can't imagine our legislators don't like sex since presumably they engage in it;  so it must be the books they don't care for. Clearly, they don't like books and don't approve of anyone who would read one. Sex is just the excuse to get rid of the books.  One can only assume that the public who elect these people are in agreement - - books are bad and the less access to them children have the better.  Banning books is as old as the first book; not only banning but burning and sometimes the author along with it. Knowing stuff is not good for you and clearly this should be addressed through legislative action.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Ayatollah Comes to Iowa

 THE AYATOLLAH COMES TO IOWA

And it is about time I would say; a theocracy is long over due.  It's time religion replaces parties - - parties have always been insufficient to demand obedience to certain beliefs.  And it's about time to jettison the nonsense in the constitution relegating religion to a subordinate position in the scheme of things.  

Iran has been in the news and gives us a good understanding on the benefits of a theocracy:  when your citizens protest and run amok in the streets, you don't coddle them like we do here, you shoot them.  Religions in charge have always done such.  A few history lessons would be enough for a correct understanding of how theocratic governments work.  If you don't kill them en masse, you do things such as burning them at the stake, or disemboweling them, or breaking them on the wheel - - those activities certainly get the public's  attention.

We're getting there slowly though.  We have got legislation now in the works to get rid of such things as discussing or identifying oneself as LGBTQ.  No one has the right to be anything other than male or female and access to books saying otherwise should be  deemed unacceptable and banned.  It has always amused me how fearful some people are that their children might learn something different.  The idea that a child of religious parents gets an idea that maybe the parents are missing something is not to be tolerated.  Public libraries will be next and should be.  After all, someone's kid might accidentally wander into a public library and pick up some reading material that does not comply with a parent's religious beliefs somehow  involving  self-identity.

Legislation is also being pushed forward eliminating the mandate for school vaccination. Clearly there are many people who continue to believe that your child's vaccination should be a parental decision.  You know, it's about freedom and such.  A person should be free to risk not only their own children but all other children they come in contact with.  It's a free country and nobody should be able to tell me to do the intelligent thing and get  vaccinated.  One caveat though, we need to exempt the failure to vaccinate from the child endangerment criminal statutes.  We can't have parents being prosecuted if their kids die of the flu or become disfigured by polio. You have to realize that there is a difference between driving while intoxicated with your kids in the car and not allowing your kids to be vaccinated for protection from diseases that will kill or maim them.  The risk is about the same, but that is irrelevant.  

Freedom, after all, is simply personal choice.  If I can't choose between vaccines and no vaccines my personal freedom has been reduced and that is not acceptable; this is America afterall.  And, when it comes to books, freedom to read what I want, when I want, about what I want doesn't apply to personal choice.  I can insist that  my kid doesn't read anything I don't want him or her to and I can also insist that your kid can't either.  Books are the same as vaccines in one respect:  there are way too many of them and they are not necessary.

So let's applaud the Iowa legislature and give them our support.  Once passed, such legislation is sure to be signed by the governor and it will ignite further efforts to return to theocracy - - long over due.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Put'tem in Prison!

 PUT'TEM IN PRISON!

I'm so excited, as a criminal defense attorney, that our Iowa legislature is once again thinking: 'incarceration'.  As they well know, incarcerating people solves all kinds of things.  The down side, and there is always a down side, is that with the current payment schedule for us criminal defense attorneys here in Iowa, few are interested in this new business model.  The local repairman gets paid far more than a court appointed attorney so the more criminals we produce the better.  We'll make up for it in quantity what we lose in quality.

I see from the Des Moines Register that the new idea, you would think it had never been thought of before, is to make a 20 year mandatory sentence for those who persist in not doing what they are told or otherwise persistently not behaving themselves.  From what one would gather listening to our legislators, the two most pressing issues for us Iowans are criminal behavior and property taxes.  Apparently, there is too much of both.

And, as I said at the top, being a criminal defense attorney, I can't argue with either notion.  What more can you ask than an increase in business opportunity and less expense while doing it. I can only applaud our legislature in their continued effort to make life better for those in my profession.  We might even have to build a new prison.  I'm sure numerous communities will vie for its location in or near their local area - - a great economic opportunity for their unemployed.

We have learned, I presume correctly without further analysis, that leading the world in incarceration, us, the U.S., is of tremendous benefit. Not only does it take so many unproductive people from the streets and ghettos of our cities, it alleviates many nuisances and improvident behavior from our smaller towns and communities throughout Iowa.  After all, who wants continued pilfering from places such as Walmart or HyVee or the wandering homeless when a solution is immediately available - - prison!

Being the sociologists they are, our legislators read up on all of our county attorney and law enforcement annual proposals on how to make us safer and immediately get to work.  Safety is the concern - - as it should be.  One needs to be able to do whatever one wants whenever one wants without hindrance from those who don't have the means to do whatever they want whenever they want.  Pretty simple really.

So, I must applaud any new effort to make more criminals and for keeping them locked up longer.  Who needs such people wandering around making life less idyllic than it should be.  Not necessary.  It's especially a win - win for those in my profession - - more business at less cost; and as for the general public, they can relax more comfortably in their beds at night knowing that there are fewer people stealing  tools from the garage while they slumber or the Amazon delivery off the porch that shows up whenever.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

We'll Wait and See

 WE'LL WAIT AND SEE

The words of our long time senator, Charles Grassley:  "I'll wait to see what the FBI investigation shows".  This is, if one were not aware, the statement that our senator made upon inquiry of his opinion, or view, or thoughts of, the shooting of the woman in Minneapolis.  The only response possible to such a statement is "Watch the video!"

We must remember that Senator Grassley is part of the congressional body that funded ICE.  Iowa's entire congressional body voted for the vast funding of ICE and its hiring of innumerable men who were then given guns and called police:   All for the purpose of grabbing people from their jobs, their schools, their cars, putting them in cells with hundreds, if not thousands, of others, and sending them away to parts unknown.

I recently read an analogy that immediately caught my attention.  It was looking back at the Holocaust which killed six million jews, unnumbered Roma, and others,  which benefited no one.  It killed, tortured and otherwise made life miserable for millions without any benefit to those remaining.  Our current efforts have the same lack of effect.  Rounding up and deporting thousands of people here in the United States, most of whom work, buy things, pay into social security, and otherwise add to the economic viability of this country benefits no one.

Of course, being deported is better than being shot in the face in front of your three children.  For our elected representatives to not act or respond in outrage is outrageous.  Here we have people who are purportedly elected to represent us, presumably to make our lives better if possible, who spend their time and energy either verbally or silently supporting this national effort to make life miserable for thousands without any thought whatsoever of the possible benefit to either the country or to the people in it.  It really is shameful.  Are we afraid to disagree; are we afraid to say stop!

We are made aware of this administration using the office of the attorney general to investigate and/or charge those who disagree with it and are capable of expressing that disagreement.  Is this what happened in the 30's - - as long as it doesn't affect us, we don't care enough to do anything about it.  But then, it does affect us and those who are left don't care about us!  Are our elected representatives afraid they will be next?

We must care what happens to us and others if we are to maintain a civilized society where we can all prosper and live without fear.  Let us hope that the current attitudes and actions of our government and of the people currently in charge fade quickly and we return to some form of normalcy which does not terrorize us.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Parable of the Sower

                      PARABLE OF THE SOWER

Octavia Butler

Books for Bigots

Now here is a book for just about any Bigot.  The end of civilization, the search for a new Jerusalem, violence, mayhem, rape, cannablism, simple survival in a society gone berserk.  One major difficulty may be, though, that our narrator, leader, and guiding prophet is an eighteen year old - - black, and female. The realization is not immediate however, possibly giving the reader enough time to get involved in the story that it can be read through without too much disgruntlement.

Lauren Olamina, unfortunately, has a name that is obviously not Anglo-Saxon. Germanic, or Nordic in origin which I know will be off-putting to many Bigots.  Lauren has created Earthseed:  The Book of the Living.  One caption pretty well captures the sense of the book:  "In order to rise from the ashes, a Phoenix must first burn".  America, in this book, is definitely burning and clearly gone with no semblance of current, everyday life, as we know it.

It is difficult to give a good sense of the book in 500 words.  It is a book that sticks with you after you have finished it.  It makes an impression; you remember events and characters, landscape and the events.  It's not Pamela.  Civilization, as we know it, for most of the population is over.  If you can't steal or salvage you starve.  If you have anything of value, you are killed for it.  It is a survival story with most not surviving.

Another issue with which a reading Bigot will face is Lauen's view of God.  To her, God is Change - - that is all, that's it.  This is a somewhat odd view of the deity, if one can call 'change' a deity.  One's first impression is that the author,  Ms. Butler, has a rather unorthodox view of what might be considered a deity.  Although if one thinks about it, which most Bigots will not, the idea is not far from what we consider to be God anyway. 

If you are of the opinion that God is the cause of everything - - the creator whether currently actively engaged or simply the entity that set everything in motion, you are, in effect, of the opinion that all change is the result of God's actions, and is, therefore, his embodiment.  God is the creator of the world and everything in it and it keeps operating according to his plan and will presumably continue to do so.  It really is not a very long leap to say that "God is Change" then.

I will have to conclude however, that most Bigots do not have the inclination nor the ability to analyze what they read in any meaningful way.  The PARABLE OF THE SOWER, would more than likely keep the attention of the average BIGOT and could be read to the end simply to find out what happens to the characters picked up on the trek to a new life, at a place called Acorn.  It's a pretty good story and one that a reader including BIGOTS can get involved in.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Crusading We Shall Go!

 CRUSADING WE SHALL GO!

I'm for it - - a Crusade.  We haven't had a real crusade since 1271-1272, nearly a thousand years ago when once again Christian Europe decided to take back the Holy Land from a guy named Baibars and the Muslims.  Now I know that Nigeria isn't the holy land, not even close actually, but we have the scent of a new holy war - - once again Christians vs. Muslims.  What can be better than that?

I'm aware that Hindus and Muslims get into it occasionally by slaughtering each other, but nothing like the Christians and Muslims used to do.  Not only do we have the Holy Land to learn from, but Spain as well.  History is replete with religious conflict and it is time to add to it.  

Trump has decided that maybe this isn't such a bad idea.  Our opening salvo was bombing Muslims in Nigeria.  Bombing really doesn't have the cachet that actual killing each other in person has - -  like a thousand years ago in the Holy Land.  What we really  need are troops on the ground.  It is unlikely that Trump himself will lead them as Edward did in 1271-1272, but maybe he could send our Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to lead them.  That should placate those who demand royalty for authentication.

From what I understand, Edward didn't accomplish much but we need to give him an "A" for effort.  Unfortunately, he had to get back to England to handle matters there.  Apparently there were people taking advantage of his absence.  Of course, this would be the same reason that Trump wouldn't lead the troops himself - - things could get out of hand at home.

Now I know that most of you who are reading this will think this idea of a new crusade absurd, but we do have a resurgence here in the States of new religious intolerance that needs an outlet and what better place for it than in Nigeria.  I personally would rather see it there than here.  There is nothing better than pitting one intolerant group against another intolerant group and those guys in Nigeria who purport to be Muslims are a fitting opponent.  So let's go get them and slaughter them in style, not from some airplane or helicopter where you can't even see the bodies.  

This gives our people a proper outlet for their aggression and surely would also bring to fruition the aspirations of those guys in Nigeria who are now kidnapping school girls.  Kidnapping school girls doesn't seem to be much of an accomplishment.  But if we could send over a regiment or two of devout Christians determined to liquidate them and make the world safe for Christianity again, such a battle would be something to brag to their grandchildren about.

Pete Hegseth is just the guy to do it too.  He absolutely relishes being in charge and able to fire generals at will.  He would be perfect - - get him a helmet, some camouflage, and a rifle with a retinue of photographers in tow and we have the perfect scenario for a modern holy war and Nigeria would be the perfect place for it - - several thousands of miles from here. 

So let's have at it.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo