They're Mushrooms

 THEY'RE MUSHROOMS

On a drive-about that included Altoona, Bondurant, and Ankeny I saw dozens if not a hundred new,  massive structures, empty - - waiting for stuff to arrive by trucks to then leave again by trucks, possibly to another of the massive buildings a few miles away.  It is like a form of fungal reproduction.

Now I know that mushrooms reproduce through spores that apparently are airborne as the mushroom breaks the service of the ground, but there must be some sort of pollination going on here that I am not aware of.  I can think of nothing more analogous to these giant structures than huge, cavernous fungi.  They seem to pop up overnight.  And then there is stuff moving from one part of the building to another, from one building to another, having at one time moved from the point of manufacture and will end finally at the place where it will be consumed.

We now call this process the supply chain.  This is a new term that  entered our vocabulary when we experienced deprivation with COVID.  Suddenly, there were items not found.  This was viewed with horror.  For instance, toilet paper became a very valuable item.  The stores couldn't keep what little they had in stock for the pursuit of toilet paper by the public was ravenous.  What would we do without toilet paper?

Of the 350,000,000 people that live in this county, if the "supply chain" suddenly disappeared, 349,000,000 would have no food.  That is a thought that should get one's attention.  The fact that someone is gay or transgender or some other variety of human, would seem to be irrelevant.  No one would have anything to eat.  I suppose that is when the guns come out.  Of course, if everyone has a gun, that's when the real shooting begins.

If you and your children are starving, you do what you have to do to eat.  Simple really.  I often wonder about the things that we complain about, or argue about, or get upset with.  So our legislature doesn't like that our teachers actually acknowledge there are gay and transgender people in their schools.  The horror!  Is this what they are elected to think about?  What possible benefit does it do to anyone to pick on people other than to show you are a bully.

Unfortunately, it would appear that our legislators and our governor are bullies.  They showed it during the protest of Black Lives Matter, they are showing it in their actions against teachers and librarians, they are preparing laws to enact that are nothing but  to bully people they don't like for whatever reason they don't like them. 

We have a government of bullies, smug ones, believing that that is why they were elected - - to bully people.  I can only hope that the people who voted for them are not themselves bullies.  I find most people, when approached, are friendly and not bullies, and in fact, don't much care for one person bullying another. But they have elected a legislature full of bullies.  Seems incongruous.  I wish it weren't so.  Maybe you could suggest to your legislator that he or she begin thinking about the things that matter - - not who can go to which bathroom.

If you wonder how I made the transition from cavernous warehouses to bullies so quickly; it's called a mind that wanders uncontrollably.

Richard E H Phelps

Mingo

Another War

 ANOTHER WAR

We need to encourage our legislators to create another war on something.  The war on drugs is totally passé and as we can all see, a total failure.  The only accomplishment being making life really miserable for those whose lives are already miserable.  The latest war has been the war on sex.  This war has, or will soon, reach its crescendo. It is accomplishing its goal of making a whole other category of people miserable by subjecting them to prison, social workers, sex offender registry, and therapists of various shades of credibility .

So, what we need is a new war.  Our Iowa legislature has as its goal to oversee a population of totally miserable and despondent people, except of course, those who contribute campaign funds.  They are exempt from misery having the resources to buy their way into Nirvana.  So, let's get with it!

Our legislators need to be looking for something they can use to make life more miserable for a whole new group of people.  Driving has always been part of the effort.  We spend a huge amount of time and money putting people in jail and extorting money from them for driving without a license.  These people, who don't have driver's licenses don't have driver's licenses for a reason:  They don't have any money.  And our legislature makes absolutely certain that these people without any money will be even more miserable than they already are.  Not only do you go to jail, but you also have to pay the State of Iowa various taxes.  These taxes are called fines, court costs, reinstatement fees, license fees, and I'm sure I'm missing some; and they are payable by people who don't have any money in the first place.

I'm open for suggestions.  Surely we have not utilized all the ways available to make people miserable.  There has to be more ways to do it.  Book banning doesn't do it because most people don't read books anyway.  Restricting who can play highschool sports doesn't do it except for the feeling of being picked on which may or may not increase misery.  We could always reduce unemployment benefits again or further restrict health care but these are the tried and true methods that have been used traditionally.  We need something new and exciting and horrible to think about.  

How about home canning? You might poison yourself.  And not only can home canning be dangerous, it is anti-capitalist.  One is not buying stuff they don't need if one is canning food at home.  It is un-American and needs to be completely banned.   A person who preserves food, and it could be just about anything, is not, and I repeat not, helping the GDP.  Home canning is not part of the statistical input of gross domestic product and should be discouraged and possibly made illegal with the rationale that it could be dangerous if done improperly (just like driving).  Just an idea folks, but we do need something new to have a war on.  If you have any good suggestions, contact your local representative.

Richard E H Phelps II

MIngo

Never Ending Adolescence

 NEVER ENDING ADOLESCENCE

It is moving to see an entire state of adult males reenacting adolescence; thinking to themselves that they are the good in The Good, Bad, and the Ugly: Clint Eastwood wannabes passing legislation.  Now that's what I voted for!

It's the wild west all over again:  fighting Indians and cattle rustlers and other ne'er-do-wells out here in the fields of corn and soybeans.  Vigilantes patrolling in their Jeeps with their AR-15s looking for something to shoot.  You simply can't have an AR-15 if you can't shoot it.  The same goes with any other firearm.  After all they cost money and the bullets are expensive as well.  If you have a gun, you need to shoot it once in a while to see if you can actually hit what you aim at.

This last issue is the most concerning.  It would appear, from what I see and read, that the vast majority of post-adolescents with guns can't hit the first thing they shoot at; nor the last for that matter.   Have you ever sat down in a restaurant for a nice relaxing meal and the table next to you looks like a posse comitatus convention.  Somewhat disconcerting.  Not only are you not convinced they can hit what they aim at, but you're uncertain what would cause them to start shooting in the first place.

This fascination with firearms really is an indication of the level of maturity of the adult male population in this state - - 13.  You can't say differently; there is no evidence to back up a different conclusion than age thirteen.  The world is apparently full of evil doers as one president mentioned and apparently Iowa has its share.  And since the only movies and books we see or read are about superheroes saving whole cities from mayhem, it's no wonder.  

Our adult male population, sadly of which I am one, has failed to advance from adolescence and is just stuck in some mirage of old westerns and cops and robbers movies which have no relation to current reality.  Bonnie and Clyde are dead; so is Geronimo.  Put the guns away!

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Self-Driving

 SELF-DRIVING

A rather stupid description of a motor vehicle that drives on its own, without human input, properly programmed to get its passengers safely to their destination.  Does a vehicle have a self?  But this is a question for another day.   My question now is:  If I'm in the driver's seat finishing my third scotch, am I guilty of driving while intoxicated.  Yes, I can re-establish control of my machine, but I haven't.  I didn't run that last red light either, my machine did that on its own.  Am I guilty of a traffic violation?

I say no.  How can I be guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence if I'm not operating a motor vehicle?  How can I be guilty of running a stop sign, if I'm not operating the vehicle?  Again I say no.  Not guilty.

Is anyone guilty of driving while drunk if the car is operating without guidance from any human?  Is anyone guilty of running a stop sign if no one is operating the vehicle?  Are you going to convict the vehicle of running the stop sign?  And if so, what is the punishment?  Interesting questions.  I'm sure our current legislatures will come up with something that makes no sense and, in addition, causes people grief unnecessarily.  Maybe they can take away its driving privilege for a specific period of time like they do with people.

What they will come up with is that you are required to be sober in a moving, self-driving vehicle in the event of an emergency.  Suddenly my vehicle doesn't see that three-year old standing in the street with a sucker.  Am I, the inebriated passenger of that vehicle, required to be paying attention?  Why do I need to pay attention if the car is driving itself,  it has the destination programmed in, and it will get me there without any involvement from me whatsoever?  The answer is clearly - - I don't.  So the car runs over the three-year old - - how is that my fault?  It's not.

So punish the car, not me.  After all, our legislative bodies find punishment necessary and beneficial.  They believe in punishment so now they can punish self-driving vehicles.  After all, you really can't say they are inanimate since they drive themselves.  Really, many times there is no reason for anyone to even be in the vehicle - - maybe it's running an errand.  Do I need to be in the car when it goes through the pick-up line at the grocery store or through the drive up liquor store to replenish my supply?  No, of course not.  So take the car's driver's license, not mine.  That will make our legislators feel better thinking they actually have accomplished something.

So the solution seems to be to require self-driving machines to have their own driver's licenses.  It will re-establish the idea that driving is a privilege and not a right and make it applicable to machines as well as humans.  Seems fair enough.  My self-driving machine should not have the right to drive when I only have the privilege.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

A Symbiotic Relationship

 A SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP

One definition of a symbiotic relationship is a close, prolonged association between two or more biological species.  The association can be either mutually advantageous or it can be parasitic where one party benefits and the other is harmed.  We have here in this country a powerful and long-standing symbiotic relationship between what we term the "drug task force" and the drug trade.  In this relationship, the "drug task force" owes its existence to the drug trade - - without the drug trade, no "drug task force"; it is a parasitic relationship - - it benefits the "drug task force" and harms those in the drug trade.

As one of the more memorable statements in the movie, The Outlaw Josey Wales, "There ain't no end in doin' right."  This should be, if it is not, the motto of the "drug task force".  The "drug task force" is "doin' right".  The last thing that the "drug task force" wants or desires is the end of the drug trade. Without it,  no "drug task force", no more "doin' right", no more symbiotic relationship.  Keep drugs illegal is the motto of the "Drug Task Force". 

Currently, the end of the illegality of marijuana is on the horizon.  This is a prospect that is extremely alarming to the drug task forces  of America.  Not only is marijuana so pervasive that it has given unlimited employment to the "drug task force", but methamphetamine can be found everywhere as well.  There is so much of both, that the "drug task force" doesn't know where to begin - - they are befuddled but gainfully employed; and if marijuana is made legal, it may be the end of the need for so much employment.  However, don't despond, our legislatures are attempting to fill the gap with the new incarceration statutes for fentanyl and other and newer substances our innovative chemists come up with so there is always hope.

One is invited to feel sorrow for the "drug task force", but let's not, ok?  The "drug task force" has as its number one function the making of life more miserable for people whose lives are already sufficiently miserable to want some release with substances which make them feel better, if only temporarily.  The second purpose of the "drug task force" is to felonize the public as much as possible; to deny as many people as possible the right to vote.  Once a felon, you can't vote which is the main purpose of creating felonies. The government has the right to decide who can vote and who can't and the fewer the people who can vote, the easier it is to control those who remain able; hence the "drug task force".  

As can be seen, the creation of the "drug task force" was a necessary tool of government control of the public. It has worked a miracle in that way.  The threat of lengthy incarceration for possession of a substance deemed "illegal", has the desired effect on those who really don't feel the necessity of being locked away behind bars and prison walls, true.  And it doesn't adversely affect those who really don't care much one way or the other - - their lives will not be much different incarcerated where we, as taxpayers can support them; they normally don't vote in any event.  But as we can plainly see, millions of people in this country use illegal substances, who will, if caught, lose their right to vote, do jail time, land on probation or parole and otherwise be tightly controlled by the government without the ability to decide who makes the rules.

The war on drugs was sold to the public as something necessary - - to keep us from falling into the pit of abuse, despondency, and unproductiveness.  It has so succeeded in selling this to the public that hardly a contrary word can be heard.  One always should remain suspicious when the organs of publicity are unanimous; there is usually something missing.  Therefore, explanations are usually beneficial and it is hoped that this somewhat limited treatment of symbiosis is helpful.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

A Missed Opportunity

 A MISSED OPPORTUNITY

We have missed a great opportunity and by we I mean Jasper County.  A very large metal cage has appeared in a back room on the third floor of the county courthouse.  It apparently has been built without much notice or publicity and it has simply appeared.  The opportunity that we have missed is its location.

There is no reason to hide the fact that we now have a cage to put our refractory citizens in when having to appear for some reason at the courthouse.  The cage is quite close to the large courtroom, so it is convenient; but again, we really have missed this opportunity to showcase our malefactors.

If I had known that such a thing was to be constructed, I would have lobbied for it to be placed in the center of the rotunda on the main floor so that we can properly showcase the people we have incarcerated.  Historically, punishment has been a very public affair:  we had stocks, we had branding, we had tar and feathers, we had cages hung on high in public places holding people until they fell apart - - all sorts of public displays of people determined to be criminals.  It is a historically valid point of view and one that should not be dismissed out of hand.

Now, apparently, we hide the fact that we have people in cages - - they are not on public display and I think that is simply unacceptable.  If we are going to put a person in a metal cage in the courthouse, I think it should be where everyone can view it.  I would suggest one possibility, if not in the rotunda,  near where people vote during elections, but I don't think there is quite enough room for it.  Possibly we could have two small cages rather than one big one.  The electorate should be fully aware of what happens to people who misbehave.

Apparently, the construction of this cage was not generally known so little public input was available.  I really do think that when any renovations are to be done at the courthouse, the general public should be informed so that there is some input on the decisions to be made.  After all, it is a public place and the public should have some say in what is done with it and, after all, they are the ones who may end up in the cage.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

A Good Idea

 A GOOD IDEA

 

I read where Trump is proposing that drug dealers be executed.  You have to give the guy credit for coming up with a good idea once in a while.  Now, I presume he doesn’t mean pharmacists or other health professionals although I don’t believe he specified.

 

If you give, sell, donate, or otherwise transfer possession of an illegal or legal drug, say, you are technically a drug dealer.  This would apply to illegal substances as well as legal medications.  If you, for instance, have some oxycodone in the medicine cabinet and give one to a member of the family, being in excruciating pain, on your own without a prescription from a licensed physician, you are by definition a drug dealer liable to prosecution.

 

So, the question is:  Who will be put to death and who will not be put to death?  The answer to this question has significant consequences to a whole lot of people.  After all, one does not want to be put to death needlessly or for lack of a proper definition.

 

This statement by Trump comes, unfortunately,  at the waning of the war on drugs.  We have been fighting this war for several decades now and it’s not time, necessarily, that we move on to other wars, such as the war against sex.  And if you ask what the war on drugs has accomplished, it has given employment to thousands of people who otherwise would be unemployable.  Unfortunately the use of the mantra “Drugs destroy lives” has slowly ebbed.  We decided, as a nation, that in order to properly destroy lives the best way is by putting drug dealers in prison for decades and sometimes for life.  So, it is not a matter of destroying lives, but on how it is to be done.  Executing them is simply one further step in a process.

 

Of course, if you are dead, your life is destroyed by definition.  What we are talking about here is not how not to destroy lives, but on how and who is to do it.  Let’s be clear about that.  It is much better to have your life destroyed by the government than by illegal drugs. At least, having your life destroyed by the government has a purpose, to convince other people not to use or deliver illegal substances and that they are in charge, not you.  What could be clearer than that?

 

So once again, we need to give credit where credit is due and to congratulate Trump on his pronouncement that drug dealers should be executed.

 

                                             Richard E. H. Phelps II

                                             Mingo