Data vs. Dialog

   I pretty much watch MSNBC for my data input.  I believe it is reasonably accurate.  I also listen to their dialog, which I take with a “grain of salt.”  MSNBC primarily presents the Democratic Party’s philosophy.  It is nice, but has a liberal centrist slant.  In my experience their data has proven to be fairly accurate, when checked against primary sources.  It still doesn’t hurt to check them.  As the wisest man I know once said, “See what is plain to see.  Doubt what is not.”

   So, what is a reasonable interpretation of the US backing of our ally Ukraine in their present war with Russia?  Well, our annual military budget for our own military, presently at peace, is $768.2 billion (recently passed by 85% of our Senate).  Our current financial support for Ukraine is $650 Million.  We invest about 1,182 times as many dollars in our peacetime military as we do in support of allies fighting a war.  They are fighting a war that we and NATO may be fighting in the very near future.  What do you think?  Is a little more support in order?

  Courtney Kube reported on MSNBC this morning about some confusion at The Pentagon about why Ukraine or we haven’t hacked into the Russian military command, stopping their effective military co-ordination.  Without this communication the Russian military would be bouncing around Ukraine like a pin ball.  There would be a lot of confusion and collateral damage.  The advantage would shift to the home team, with local coordination of troops.  The answer to this proposition is a proven military truth: “What you do to your enemy, they will soon do to you.”  That is why our nation no longer nukes other nations and why other nations do not nuke us.  Don’t count on Jesus for the obvious answers.  Hacking can be accomplished by any nation of any size in our present world.  Its use tends to spread its general application and the hacking, shutting down of utilities around the planet could lead to the extinction of the human species.  It may not be such a bad thing from the point of view of other living things.

Cheers, Old Buz      2/24/2022     iambloggerbuz.blogspot.com

“Born an agnostic and with the help of GOD will remain one.”

$ 73,000,000 Settlement

 

   Seventy-three million dollars is the settlement awarded to nine families, some of the 27 victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012.  The amount was charged to the manufacturer and distributer of the Bushmaster AR-15 style assault rifle supplier, Remington.  Good news?  Be careful what you wish for.  None of the executives of the company that supplies this weapon are going to Heaven, but they supply a legal product in a legal manner to the American public.  There is no legal justification of their punishment.  They are not the bad guys.  The folks that approve the distribution of this human killing device to the general public are your elected representatives.  Not the judicial branch of government.  Their job is simply to determine if a law has been broken.  The mother of the lunatic that committed the mass murder acquired the murder weapon legally.  Remington broke no laws.  Sorry lovers of justice.

   In the long run, subverting the law is not a good decision.  Think of the recent act of Republican senators not willing to hear witnesses or view documents in an impeachment trial.  The Constitution (the law) called for them to be unbiased jurors.   One could not be an unbiased judge of anything without hearing witness testimony or viewing relevant documents.  So, the thinking, but with little or no moral rudder, Republican senators were saying, “We know he is a lunatic and a liar, but he is our lunatic and liar.”  You see they were wishing for a “good” outcome for their party, not to properly implement the law.  The law is not always right, but it should be the deciding factor in a court of law.

   So, what is the “proper application of an assault weapon?”  A battle field is the obvious answer.  Swat teams often experience “collateral damage” with their use.  Citizens often use them for mass murder.  What is the basic requirement of an assault weapon?  Rapid fire and it is a bonus for the imaginary killers if it looks mean.  So, a single shot weapon, even if it looked mean, would be relatively harmless.  It would be effective for suicide (40% of civilian gun deaths), because a well-executed suicide rarely requires a second shot.  Collectors don’t require rapid fire.  Target shooters don’t require rapid fire and hunters would be more skillful in tracking and shooting with only one shot.  With only one shot the home defender will kill less friends and relatives.  (This paragraph was obviously a plug for my “one shot” solution to mass murders.  It requires intelligent legislation.  We don’t see enough of that.  Legislation is primarily dollar driven.)

   We need not hope for bad judicial decisions to bring about desirable outcomes.  We need to demand thoughtful and just legislation from our legislators.  Political bickering and corporate bribery often get in the way of just legislation.  Can we build a truly great nation with political bickering and corporate bribery?  It has been hard.

Cheers, Old Buz     2/19/2022

Iambloggerbuz.blogspot.com