Abolish ICE?

Democrats, led by their newly elected New York rep Ocasio-Cortez, are calling to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  
Plan A:  replace the current ICE with a newly raised border control force.  This plan just costs money, it won't change anything much
Plan B:  Abolish ICE, lay off all their personnel, sell all their vehicles, office equipment and buildings.  Don't replace them with anything.  Create open borders, anyone can enter the US, bringing in anything they please, drugs, weapons, bombs, cute young sex slaves for sale,  nuclear material, anything.  Everyone all over the world would love to live in the United States, we have made it a very attractive, pleasant, prosperous, comfortable, free place to live. After we have built it, they will come.  En masse.  Will our country remain the United States we know and love after 50 million foreigners move in, settle down, take jobs, and vote in our elections? 

College didn't used to be so darned expensive

Way back in 1968 I got out of the Air Force and went to University of Delaware.  I got an electrical engineering degree that served me well for forty years.  At the time, my veteran's benefits were enough to pay all my tuition.  Tuition was so cheap that some semesters I paid more for textbooks than I did for tuition.  They hadn't invented student loans back then. And Delaware was a good school.  I never had an employer sniff at my Delaware degree over my forty years in the workforce.  
   Now a days I wound up paying $13K a year to put youngest son thru Pratt Institute in Brooklyn.  I hear that any decent public university wants $8K a year.  This is about ten times what it cost me to get thru Delaware fifty years ago.  
   I think the drastic inflation of college costs was caused by student loans.  If there is plenty of loan money to be had, the students will sign up for anything, even being deep in debt for twenty years after graduation.  All the extra money has gone into really nice college buildings, and lots of college administrators, who don't teach, they just draw their pay.

Looking after their own, NEA

Word seems to get around.  I have been a candidate for NH Senate for a little more than a week.  Today I got a letter from the National Education Association (NEA), asking me where I stand on a number of issues.  Of the five questions on their questionaire, three of them concerned teachers pay and benefits, rights to unionize, and how I felt about charter schools, a long time teacher's union bete noire. 
   Clearly NEA doesn't care about teaching children, they only care about teacher's union rights, teacher's union dues and teacher pay and benefits. 
   After working out a decent answer, I consulted with an experienced friend.  The friend suggested I just not answer the NEA questionaire, since NEA is nothing but Democrats, who will twist anything I might write to use against a Republican candidate like me.

Strict Construction versus the living Constitution

The late Supreme Court Justice Scalia was famous for his belief that cases should be decided upon the original intent of the founders.   Since the founding occurred way back in 1789, it requires some research, some history, to understand the intent of men who lived better than 200 years ago.  There have been changes in the language over that much time, but the founders intent is discoverable with only a modest effort.
   Strict constructionists feel the duty of the courts is to judge cases according to existing law, not to make new law from the bench.  If new laws are needed it is the duty of the elected legislature to vote them in, not for single judges, or small groups of judges to make up new law out of whole cloth.
   Living Constitution people say that things have changed since 1789 (true enough) which requires changes in the way we interpret the Constitution to bring it up to date.  And these changes should be made by the courts.  This view is popular with people who have not been able to muster the votes to get their changes passed by the legislature[s].  It is also popular with judges, since it puts them in the driver's seat.  And it is popular with law schools and legal pundits because it makes legal history more interesting.  In modern times it has been easier to sell new ideas to the nine justices of the Supreme Court than to sell new ideas to the general public or  to the elected legislatures.
   I hope President Trump nominates a strict constructionist to fill retiring Justice Kennedy's seat on the Supreme Court.   I don't want to live under a dictatorship of the bench.

Representative Government

The ancient Greeks invented democracy.  In those days all the citizens of the city state would meet and vote on public issues.  This was clumsy, did not scale well, (what works for a city-state, won't work for the entire Roman empire), and led to some really disastrous decisions (the Athenian Syracuse expedition for example). 
   The solution was representative democracy, pioneered by the British parliament and championed by the United States.   Individuals are selected as representatives of their district and they meet to pass laws.  This works, as long as the representatives remember that they are supposed to represent.  In today's US Congress we have a horrific example of representatives failing to vote as their district wants and getting totally wrapped up in petty feuds and back stabbing.  At the rate the Congresscritters are going, I doubt that they will be able pass anything for the next 10 years.  They will draw their pay however.
   Look at today.  Polls show that 70% of Americans want us to do something for the "DACA" people, immigrants brought to the US illegally as small children and who grew up in America.  The third try to pass a DACA bill failed a few hours ago.  In short, all the Congresscritters are failing to pass a law that 70% of the population want passed.  That ain't representative democracy.
   We voters do have a remedy coming up in November.  We could vote all the current Congresscritters out.  

Chevy Equinox

I had to leave the Buick at the dealer for some heavy duty and super expensive repair work.  The dealer loaned me a brand new (2018 1880 miles) Chevy Equinox.  It's quite a car.  Actually I would call it a minivan but I dare say Chevy calls it an SUV, or a crossover (car industry jargon for small SUV).  Minivan is too closely associated with soccer moms to be a good name for a product these days.  SUV  sounds much cooler.  And the Equinox has four regular car doors rather than the one big side sliding door that was the mark of Dodge and Plymouth minivans.  It only seats two in front and two more in back.  The Dodge and Plymouth minivans would seat two in front and five in back.  
   It's got plenty of power.  It charged right up three mile hill without pausing for breath.  It's lost the ignition key.  You have a clever radio gizmo in your pocket, and if the car detects the gizmo, then the "Start" button works.  Press it to crank and run.  Press it again to turn the engine off.  It doesn't have AM_FM radio, it has satellite radio.  Which is cool, but last time I checked you have to pay the satellite company cash money to keep the satellite radio working.  This satellite radio only picked up half a dozen channels.  It lost the parking brake.  Either I could not find it, or it is all automatic.  It's got rear view mirrors AND a snappy color rear view TV camera that comes on when you put the tranny in reverse.
   The owner's manual was not in the glove compartment, so I could not figure out how a lot of stuff works.  Chevy must figure owners are illiterate.  All the dash board controls have cute little pictograms instead of real English language labels.  Lot of the pictograms meant nothing to me.  
   Any how all this fanciness makes my 2003 Buick feel like a Model A.  Only $36K.  Back when I was driving minivans, (80's and 90's)  I got them new for $12K.  If you got kids, then each kid can have his/her own seat, a blessing on long trips  I didn't measure to be sure, but it looks like it would take 4 by 8 sheet goods, or modest sized furniture in the wayback.
  Further update.  The Equinox does have a parking brake, it's a tiny shiny ring on the transmission shifter housing. It's a power operated parking brake.  It also has radio controls hidden underneath the steering wheel.  You can change channels and work the volume without taking your hands off the wheel.   The windshield wiper control acts oddly, but it does work after you figure it out. 

A newsie writes about engineering history

Saturday's Wall St Journal had book review of Richard Rhodes "Energy a Human History".  The reviewer was Charles R. Morris.  Reading Morris's review made it clear to me that Mr. Morris is one of those "cannot change a light bulb" newsies.  For instance, Morris is describing early steam engine operation.  Morris says " Steam was pumped into the piston".  Not so.  The piston is a round metal part that moves back and forth. No where for steam to go into.  The piston moves inside the cylinder, into which steam can go.  Any motor head, like me, knows the difference between pistons and cylinders. Apparently Mr. Morris does not.  Plus, you don't pump steam into anything.  Just open the intake valve and steam under boiler pressure will flow in freely.  No pump required.
   Then Mr Morris writes "Franklin's famous wet-kite experiment demonstrated that ordinary static electricity and the same stuff as lightening by capturing its charges in Leyden jars, primitive batteries."  Not so.  The Leyden jar was an early version of a capacitor, not a battery.  Improved versions of the Leyden jar were called condensers up until the 1950's when the name capacitor was introduced.  All your electronics, TV, stereo, smart phone, desktop, whatever, contain lots and lots of capacitors. 
   And then we read "DC systems drew their power from low-voltage battery storage."  "DC was dependent on battery charging, it had limited range, only a half mile or so."   Not so.  Both DC and AC systems obtained their power from steam driven DC generators or AC alternators.  Edison's first commercial power station at Pearl St in New York city  had a generator.  So did all the later power stations, both AC and DC.  It isn't right to say that DC has limited range.  The right thing to say is that there was/is  no way to change the voltage of DC.  For transmission over distance, you want to set the voltage as high as you dare, thousands of volts, to reduce line losses.  Once the electricity gets to where is was going, you want to reduce the voltage.  Nobody wants thousands of volts in their lamp sockets and wall outlets.  A hundred volts or so is plenty running around your house.  With AC, transformers can change the voltage up for transmission and and then down again for use.  Transformers only work on AC.  Which accounts for the universal use of AC by today's electric companies. 
  "the disgraceful story of leaded gas-its toxicity especially on the brains of children."  Not the problem with leaded gas.  When we got serious about cleaning up the smog problem we put catalytic converters on all our cars.  Leaded gas poisoned the catalyst rendering the converters inoperative.  So the industry switched over to unleaded gas some time in the late 60's to early 70's.  They put smaller fill pipes on cars requiring unleaded so the standard leaded gas nozzles would not fit, and put smaller nozzles on the unleaded gas pumps. 
   I was surprised that the usually dependable Wall St Journal would publish a piece with so many glaring errors.

Smartphone required for parking meters in Cambridge MA

So I find a legal street parking space in Harvard Square.  I park, get out, and face up to the parking meter.  The meter has a plaque on it directing me to download a "Pay Cambridge Parking Meters" app.  I guess the city fathers of Cambridge figure that all their citizens, or at least all Harvard students have smartphones.  I'm behind the times, I just have a dumbphone.  I finally wind up in a public parking garage that charges $16 an hour. 

Farewell Charles Krauthammer

The cancer got him yesterday.  He will be missed.  His commentary on current events was inspired, intelligent, and at times very witty.  The Fox people have been eulogizing him since last night.  NPR hasn't even mentioned his death.  They don't call it National Progressive Radio for nothing. 

United States Space Force (USSF)

President Trump is now pushing this.  As an old Air Force veteran I am luke warm to the idea.  I assume he is talking about creating a Department of the Space Force, with a separate Congressionally approved budget, and moving all the Air Force people and facilities working on space projects over to the new service, creating a new uniform, titles of rank, and regulations for the Space Force, in short setting it up like they did the Air Force back in 1947.  
   One objection to the idea.  The existing armed services actually engage in real combat, the kind where people get killed.  I don't see the Space Force mission as involving combat.  Launching missiles from an underground command center is pretty risk free.  Much of the morale that makes the current armed services so effective comes from membership in an elite fighting force.   In my Air Force units the enlisted men never fired a shot in anger or flew into enemy airspace, but they took great pride in keeping their fighter planes in the air, and combat ready.  Plus, the enlisted men bore the title of "Airman", until they made sergeant.  How would the Space Force enlisted men feel about bearing the title of "Spaceman"?
   The United States presently relies upon a whole lot of satellites, recon sats, comm sats, GPS sats, and others.  These satellites are not that far up, and in wartime the enemy could shoot them down, or jam their transmissions.  It would be nice to defend them somehow.  But I don't really see how this might be done.  All the enemy needs to do is lob something, with a little maneuvering fuel and an IR sensor, up as high as the target.  The target satellite is moving at 18,000 mph, and when it runs anything at that speed it is blown into dust.  Bright flash, easily seen from the ground.  Short of equipping all the satellites with a battery of anti-missiles, or nuking the enemy launch sites, I don't see any way to stop it. 
   If the independent Space Force could be freed of the existing Department of Defense (DoD) procurement regulations, it could achieve faster, cheaper, and better procurement, especially of expensive, custom built flight hardware.  Current procurement regulations slow everything down, jack up cost, and deliver inferior flaky hardware.  Getting out from under them would be a big improvement.  But, since the new Department of the Space Force would be under DoD, I don't see this as very likely. 

I'm running for Senate!

The phone rang the other day.  It was Bruce Perlo of the NH Republican Party asking if I would stand for election to the NH senate.  I was flattered, and honored, and so I said “yes”.  Filing for the September primary closed last Friday and since no one had filed, the party is entitled to submit a name.  My name came up. 

   It’s the NH first senate district.  The district is Coos and Grafton counties.  It starts at the Canadian border and reaches down a bit south of Franconia Notch. The current incumbent is Jeff Woodburn, a democrat.  It’s the biggest NH senate district, at least in land area.  It’s thinly populated, but that doesn’t make driving around the district any easier. 

   I got down to the Secretary of State’s office in Concord yesterday and filed the necessary paperwork.  It was $10 to file, I had the cash on me, and I got a receipt.  Chuck Morse, Senate President wanted to meet me.  We had a nice talk.  I should have worn coat and tie, but Jeanie Forester had assured me that it wasn’t necessary. 

   What can you do to help me run?  First, just tell everyone you know that I am running, and I am a good guy.  I’m not a household name up here, especially in Coos County.  Next time you have a party or a cookout, invite me.  I don’t eat much, and I am a fairly entertaining speaker.  I’ll say “Please vote for me” and give reasons, and tell a few war stories.

Combined arms operations. Test of the officer corps

The German army in WWII showed the world the power of combined arms, infantry, with artillery support, tank support, air support.  It was potent enough to crush the French, largest army in Europe in 1940, an army that had stood off German attacks for four years just twenty years earlier.  The Anglo Americans needed a year of combat experience in North Africa to learn how to do it. 
   Doing combined arms operations is complicated.  To order a single infantry or tank unit into action is simple, give them the objective, and the time and date.  Then it's up to the unit commander to bring his men into action.  Not too hard. 
   Now consider doing an operation with artillery support.  You want the guns to shell  enemy positions until your men reach them.  Then you want to "lift" the barrage to strike enemy rear areas while your men assault the front line positions.  You have to order the artillery units into position, and make arrangements to get tons and tons of shells up to the guns.  You have to coordinate with the artillery, make sure that both artillery and infantry are using the same maps of the action.  You have to make sure that both the artillery and the infantry know just where the attack is going in, and especially when the attack goes in.  Before the introduction of walkie talkies in WWII, the timing was the Achilles heel.  The attack usually was late, for any one of a number of reasons, and there was no way for the artillery to know this.  So they would lift the barrage as scheduled, even if the infantry was hours from making contact with the enemy.  Once the infantry had walkie talkies to control the artillery things got a lot better. 
   Tank support was not as complicated as artillery.  Order the tank unit[s] to attack at the same time as the infantry.   Make sure the infantry is knows the tanks are friendly tanks, lest they start pot shotting them with bazookas. 
   Air support can be tricky.  The aviators, especially single seat fighters, are never all the sure where they are.  It's real easy to get confused and bomb your own forces.  This happened repeatedly.  The best of coordination, aerial photos of the target area, special marking on friendly vehicles, and forward air controllers will improve things. 
   Getting all this stuff right is what you have officers for.  If they don't get it right, they are apt to loose the battle. A division commander who could put all this together and get it right was a rare asset. 

That FBI Inspector General Report

The report includes numerous emails and text messages showing ridiculous amounts of anti Trump bias on the part of FBI personnel, but the report writers claim that this appalling attitude did not affect their actions.
   I say that is Bulls**t.  People displaying that sort attitude, in writing no less, will do whatever they can to tip the election their way. Leaking of uncomplimentary material, spying, politically motivated prosecution, intimidation, and more. 
   Surely Comey's work in the Hilary Clinton email scandal, first declaring it to be un prosecutable, then declaring that the Anthony Weiner laptop information required re opening the case is heavy duty interfering the in the 2016 election.  Fortunately it damaged Hilary's chances more than it hurt Trump's chances.  Comey was never a very smart guy, he thought he was helping Hilary when in actual fact he was damaging her.  

Courts are OK with AT&T - Time Warner Merger

The courts may be OK with it but I am not.  Both companies are huge, revenues in tens and hundreds of billions a year.  Both are plenty large enough to prosper on their own.  Both are so big that they won't get any economies of scale by merging. 
   Both companies are in the same line of work, namely providing cable TV.  Merge them and they will find it easier to hike my cable fees.  Just by example Time Warner managed to chisel my cable bill up to $62 this month from $35 a few years ago.  They just hike my cable bill a few dollars here and a few dollars there.  And Time Warner (now calling itself "Spectrum") is the only game in town up here.  It's pay what ever they ask or do without broadband and Fox News Channel. 
   The Wall St Journal was all in favor of the merger.  They did a lot of fancy explaining that this was a vertical merger, and that both companies were really in different businesses.  This I do not believe.  They are both TV cable companies.
   If the anti trust people were doing their jobs, we would not need "too big to fail" protection in things like Dodd-Frank.  If it's too big to fail, then it ought to be broken up as a monopoly.  

They have given up advertising cars on TV

It's been years since I saw a TV ad for Chevrolet, or Ford, or even Prius.  I do see ads for Jaguar and Range Rover and Lexus, and the car dealers still run ads now and then, but the big three US makers have pretty much given up on TV ads.  For GM and Chrysler, this was forced on them when they declared bankruptcy during Great Depression 2.0.  They just didn't have the money.  Ford was better managed, and didn't have to declare bankruptcy, but money was tight at Ford too.
   Things are better in Detroit now a days, compared to say 2009, but the big three car companies still don't advertise on TV.  Could it be that they have decided that TV ads cost more than they are worth? 

Thoughts for new College Freshmen

College is expensive, thanks to plentiful government loan money.  You can go into hock for as much as $200,000 for four years of college.  That's new house money.  And you are stuck with it forever, bankruptcy won't get you  out of it.  To pay it off in 10 years, you have to come up with better than $20,000 a year, for ten years. 
    And all that money only pays off for you if you finish college and graduate.  If you give up or flunk out, you still owe all the money but  it won't get you a job.
    So, think real hard.  Do you have the stick-to-itness to get thru college and graduate?  Do you like academic work, writing papers, doing research,  listening to lectures, doing homework?  A lotta people do, and a lotta people don't.  Where do you stand?  Your odds of graduating are much better if you like academic work.  If you don't like academic work, you may not make it.  
   If you have some doubts about academic work, think about doing something besides going to school for a while.  Join the armed services, take a job, travel, do a winter ski bumming, hike the Appalachian trail, anything.  You been sitting in classrooms since kindergarten, and you may be just plain tired of school by now.  A year or two doing something else will do wonders for your attitude. 
   Do you like working with your hands more than you like paper pushing?   A lot of skilled trades jobs pay as well as the average white collar job, don't require college, get you out of doors, and can be very satisfying.  Think about getting into welding, electronics, heavy equipment operator, lineman, machinist, construction, truck driver, logger, fish and game warden, fireman, lots of other things. 
   When you start college, you really need to know what you want to do to make a living after graduation.  And pick your college major to make you employable in your chosen field.  This is a big decision, but you have to make it, by Christmas time freshman year at the latest.  Talk to friends, family, anyone you trust, do some reading about the field.  Then pick your major with an eye to making yourself employable.  Colleges offer all sorts of interesting majors, many of which are totally worthless when it comes to finding a job.  Gender studies, Ethnic Studies, anything with "Studies" in its name, sociology, anthropology, art history, under water basket weaving, all are worthless unless you are independently wealthy and don't need a job after you graduate. 
                                 

So how lucky were we in Singapore?

Hard to say.  The NORKs made vague promises to denuclearize.  No specifics, no deadlines.  We gave Kim a nice worldwide propaganda platform and promised not to run any more joint South Korean-US military exercises.  We only do that once a year, and we just finished up this year's joint exercise a few weeks ago, and the next one wasn't scheduled until next year.  If the NORKs prove uncooperative, we can easily reschedule a joint exercise for 2019.
   Denuclearization will take some time, months at least, even with the best of good will from the NORKs.  With just a tiny touch of bad will, it will take years.   With a large dose of bad will it will take forever.  The key issue is admission of American inspectors to North Korea, with no-knock authority,  ability to go anywhere, inspect anything, with no advance notice given.  The NORKs aren't gonna like that.  It will take time to get that going, months, or worse.  Until we get the NORK working bombs handed over to us, and our inspectors working in the North, we don't have much.  It will take a long time to make this happen.  Until it does, we cannot really say whether Trump's mission to Singapore was a success or not.  We have a bunch of Lefty-Democrats on TV right now claiming Singapore was a failure, but it is really too early to tell.  
   For good things to happen, Kim whats-his-face needs to feel secure.  If he and/or his regime loose power for any reason, he will loose his life, and he knows this.  So distasteful as it may be, we will have to prop up the NORK regime.  
  

I wish President Trump all the luck in the world for Singapore Mtg

It's gonna be tough.  Kim feels his nukes are his security blanket.  But it might work.  I hope it does.  Best of luck to our side. 

Game of Thrones, Season 7 is out on Netflix

So I added all the disks to my Netflix Queue.  Then I decided to refresh the series in my mind by watching season 6 over again.  I've just finished watching the first three episodes and they are bad.  Black out camera man gives us pure solid black scenes with maybe just a single faint white face showing out of blackness.  Rest of the actor, costumes, sets, completely invisible, lost in the darkness.  No character every addresses any other character by name, leaving us audience wondering who they all are.  They start to magic John Snow back to life in episode 1 and it isn't til episode 3 that they get the job done.  
   Let us hope season 7 is better.

D-Day. Sixth of June

It was really before my time.  I was only one year old back in June of 1944.   D-Day was the first time the Anglo American forces were strong enough to fight the main German army on the German's home turf.  Previous combat in North Africa and Italy were against small detachments like Rommel's Africa Corps, or bloody but small scale combat against limited German forces, fighting a defensive battle in very defensible Italian terrain. 
   Humongous forces were poured into D-Day.  The operation looked all kinds of dangerous.  Eisenhower, supreme commander, the man with the best view of the situation, found it so dicey that he prepared a press release, to be issued in case the landing was defeated.  Had he needed to use it, the setback  to Anglo American arms would have been staggering.  1942 and 1943, two whole years of war production and training, went into marshaling the D-Day forces.  Had the Germans won, much of this vast investment in infantry, tanks, artillery, warships, and warplanes would have been lost.  It would have taken at least another year, probably two, to build up to launching a second invasion.  Give Hitler another year or two and there is no telling what might have happened.  The Germans might have perfected nuclear weapons.  The V-weapon program would have had another year or two to rain destruction upon London.  Time to bring a radical new U-boat, the type 21, into operation.  Lots of things could have given Hitler victory.
   Anglo American victory was possible by defeating the U-boats in the Atlantic in 1943.  We could not have moved our troops, let alone the vast quantity of supplies needed to support our forces, and keep England fed and producing,  had the U-boats kept sinking ships at the rate they had in 1942.  Second, USAAF and the RAF had pretty much blown the Luftwaffe out of the air by 1944.  This guaranteed that the Germans couldn't sink the D-Day armada in mid channel, or render close air support to advancing Panzer divisions.  Finally, the Germans did not know where the Anglo American invasion would come.  The entire coast of France, including the Riviera, and the low countries, was possible.  The Germans had to spread their troops  up and down the European coastline, whereas the Anglo Americans could concentrate all their forces on the invasion beaches, giving a solid superiority in numbers at the crucial spot. 
   As it was, it was a tough fight.  A lot of bravery, and sacrifice carried the day, just barely.  And, once ashore, the Anglo American armies could beat the German army in a standup fight. 

So who should we believe?

We have President Trump, saying that the entire Mueller investigation is phony.  We have the MSM claiming that President Trump is saying mean things about them, and about Mueller.   The MSM claim that Mueller will show that Trump did something illegal and bad during the campaign back in 2016. 
   So far Mueller hasn't shown any evidence of anything much.  You would think that by now he would have something, if there was anything there to find.  He has frightened a few Trump people into confessing to minor sins that don't have much to do with the campaign or the Russians.
   President Trump has indeed laid into the MSM with an ax.  On the other hand, who can blame him?  The media hates Trump and has been doing their damndest  to discredit him and his administration.  The media are never going let up, they want Trump's scalp just so they can enter the Woodward and Burnstein  Hall of Fame.  Trump's best strategy is to discredit them, and he has been fairly effective in doing so.
   So for the time being, I am going to believe that Trump got elected fairly and squarely, and the Russians had little or nothing to do about it.  Should Mueller come forward with some solid evidence, a creditable witness say, or some real documents (the paper kind with signatures)  I could change my mind.   

If the Democrats win Congress this fall

They will immediately start to impeach President Trump.  All they need is a simple majority in the House to impeach.  They need a 2/3rds majority in the Senate to convict, which they probably won't have.  So about a year will go by with only impeachment proceedings, testimony, votes, and procedural maneuvering.  The newsies will eat it up and cover nothing else.  In short, the federal government will be paralyzed for a year or more.  Nothing else will get done in DC.  In the bitter end, the Democrats won't have the Senate votes to convict, and  so the whole exercise will be in vain.
   So, unless you are a deep dyed yellow dog Democrat, you ought to vote Republican this fall, just to permit the federal government to operate at all.  Votes for Democrats are votes to stop all government activity. 
   Despite what you may think of Trump, you gotta admit that GNP growth is up from Obama's miserable 1.5% to nearly 3%.  Unemployment is way down, 3.8%.  Stock market is up.  Wages are up. Taxes are down.  These are all good things. 

Baking a cake for a Gay wedding

This case has been stumbling along for 6 years now.  Generating billable hours for lawyers.  Got all the way to the Supremes yesterday to little good.  The Supremes did hold that the Colorado people had been mean to the baker, and displayed hostility to religion, and the baker should be let off oin this one case.  For all this legal mickey motion, sucking up 6 years and countless legal bills, no new broad principle of law came out of it.  We can expect more years of profitable lawyering, at tax payer expense, on this issue.
    What I would like to see is a law that says caterers, contractors, the self employed, people rendering custom services, cakes, photographs, music,  hair care, flowers, don't have to serve customers they don't want to serve.  They are different from retailers, restaurants, hotels, motels, gas stations, railroads, airlines, and bus companies, who are rightly obligated to serve everyone who walks in their door.  These people are rendering custom services which makes them into supporters of the customer served.   The baker felt that by baking a custom cake for a gay couple, he was supporting gay marriage.  Which is understandable on the bakers part. 

Victory At Sea

Shortly after World War II, NBC television created the Victory at Sea documentary, and aired it in the very early 1950's.  I can remember watching episodes of it from a 14 inch portable TV on rabbit ears.  NBC got Richard Rogers, of the famous Rogers and Hammerstein Broadway show business, to do the musical score.  Back in the day you could buy LP records of just the score.  The documentary makers picked the best of thousands of feet of news reel film,  added Roger's score and some narration.  They made better than 30 episodes. 
  I ran across a DVD set of the whole series in the $5 a DVD bin at Wallymart.  Been playing it on evenings when I lack a new Netflix to watch.  It's all black and white of course.  Color film and just been invented but was so slow ( insensitive to light) that everybody shot the faster black and white film.  And even the black and white film wasn't all that good.  Lot of shots have the sunlit topsides of things over exposed (burned out white) and the shadows pure black.  A fair amount of the footage is enemy footage captured during or after the war.
   If you have children or grandchildren Victory at Sea is a good thing to show them.  It moves right along, all the footage is genuine WWII footage, and there is plenty of action to keep a kid's interest.  From what I hear, schools have pretty much giving up teaching history.  WWII is the formative event of  the 20th century.  Watching this show, even just a few episodes of it will give the children an idea of the vastness of the war.  Although this show emphasizes the Navy side of the war, it gives a fair showing to the land side of the conflict.  

Irreversible. Wonder how that works? Really.

That's one of the American demands upon the NORKs.  We want denuclearization that is irreversible.   Just just how do we prevent the NORKs from deciding to scrap whatever deal they make and start up their nuclear program again?   Even if we insist on daily no knock inspection of their nuclear sites, they can just create new secret sites, keep 'em secret, and go merrily on enriching uranium, making plutonium, and building bombs. 

Wants the Yankees to pick up his motel bill

Little Rocket Man doesn't have the cash to pay his own motel bill in Singapore?  Wow.  Talk about cheap cheap cheap.  He wants us to pick up his tab.  So far all he has managed is to convince all the Americans that he is broke, cheap, and a shameless panhandler. 
    The NORKs are a nation state.  They can afford a nuclear program, a million man army, a ballistic missile program but they cannot afford their own motel bills?  Come on. 

All the News that fits we print

Fox News did a short peace on a new air vehicle, looked like an air car.  Talked about it's use evacuating the wounded from the battlefield, and speeding civilian auto accident victims to the hospital.  Mentioned that getting the wounded/victims to the hospital within one hour would greatly improve survival rates.  Probably true. 
  They failed to give any useful information about the vehicle.  They failed to give the name of this wonderful machine, or the name of the Israeli company developing it, or the name of the US company that might produce it.  They didn't tell us the range of the vehicle.  They didn't state the engine horsepower it uses to get airborne.  They didn't state the payload.  To be useful it has to be able to get off the ground with a single patient, and the pilot. 
   The thing might be a success if it had a 50 mile range, and could land and get airborne again with a 200 pound patient and and 200 pound pilot aboard.  No indication of the capability of the flying prototype shown in the TV piece.  The prototype might not have the range and payload to be a success, but if we knew how close it was to successful performance, we could form an idea of how far it has to go to make the grade and be a successful product.  I assume the flying prototype they showed was a full scale prototype.  But they didn't tell us that.  It could have been a small scale model, a drone, no way I could tell watching TV.  And the TV people didn't tell us what we were watching, full scale working prototype, or tiny model drone. 

Logan 2017

I missed it in theaters back in 2017.  I got it on DVD thru Netflix.  Not impressed.  Although we have Hugh Jackman playing Logan, not much else is right.  Logan has gone to seed, drinks too much and uses stuff.  Drives an airport stretch limo, nicely washed and polished, but still a stretch limo.  You would never catch me behind the wheel such an under powered, ungainly, hard to parallel park tank.  Logan spends a fair bit of his time taking care of Charles Xavier, played by Patrick Stewart.  Like Logan,  Charles Xavier has gone to seed too.  He no longer sees the whole of mankind's future, nor can he do anything about it.  The plot, if any, never became clear to me, the movie just kinda rambled along, and never getting anywhere.  If Logan or Charles Xavier was trying to accomplish anything, I never figured out what it might be. 
   Not the best X-man spinoff movie.