Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for May 29, 2011

The electrical outlet was “installed” upside down

Time to visit the Wall folk.Or at least lay flowers at the grave of a vet of a more popular war.God bless each and every vet.

The disconnect is on purpose. It’s enabled by the media, the government and the military itself. The segregation is based on bogus ideals like “national security” and “OPSEC/COMSEC”. It’s why women being victimized in 1985 by the Keesler base commander who went AWOL to Washington DC to report the wrongdoing to their Congressmen had to travel in a group of six in order to be taken seriously. It’s why military suicides are skyrocketing and rape is so systemic that laws have had to be enacted to deal with the result. It’s why there are abominations like SPN codes and MK ULTRA. If more of America actually knew how the 2% of our population who sign up to place themselves in harm’s way for the other 98% actually get treated, the outrage might just cause an American summer.

The sad part is, those who join the military – we will assume all for honorable rather than self-serving purposes – serve at the whim of many whose purposes are not honorable. Thus, they may find themselves invading a people who have never threatened us nor have any means to harm us. I’m thinking earlier than Iraq, by the way. How about Hawaii? Or any number of small island nations we took over in the days when the only way to have a world power was to have naval bases around the world.

If you are reading this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.

The outlet is not upside down. Installing with the ground leg up, was a recommedation in the 1996 code book. But it is not a requirement. Some inspectors make an issue of it, some don’t even know about it.

“A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing [ i.e. professional ] armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and be governed by, the civil power.” — Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776. Once upon a time in America, we were supposed to have a citizen army, which did not mean a force of professionals who make their living in the military, but a trained and disciplined citizen body who could rise up to defend the country if attacked. From 1776 until 1890s, the Congress always tried to keep the army as small as practicable, a tiny force of poorly-paid soldiers, mostly foreign-born, led by a small cadre of officers who themselves could not hope live well, or ever retire, unless they had independent means. There were no pensions to speak of, no retirements, and officers served into their 70s and 80s. Nobody thought much of the “regulars” our there is isolated posts dealing with the Indians, so poorly equipped that they little resembled the blue-uniformed and smart “horse soldiers” living in stockaded forts that Hollywood has given us. They were never expected to be able to handle business outside our borders. A foreign war, whether with Mexico or Spain, called for the raising of masses of civilian volunteers who never expected to make the military their career. The Progressive era and Theodore Roosevelt (who witnessed the snafus of the Spanish War) gave us military build-up, and a larger navy. WWI still caught us terribly unprepared, thought we had 1914-1917 to get ready. We still saw the military severely cut back in the 1920s, and only under FDR did we begin to build up again, especially after 1938. Again, it was the (isolationist) conservatives who opposed this additional spending. We have been on a war footing ever since, with hardly a break between the “Cold War” and the “GWT”. And it was the liberal desire to eliminate the draft, as well as the military’s desire to get rid of independently-minded civilian draftees in the services, that produced, after Viet Nam, the present situation, so far from the conception of our Founding Fathers. Ron Paul actually gets this, and tells us that “you can have an empire or you can have a republic, but you can’t have both.” Notice that in the Declaration of Rights, quoted above, their is no mention of a right to bear arms. Not the point at all. The point is that the Founding Fathers envisioned a society in which there was little or no division between the civilian and the military, where wars would have to be necessary and popular, or they could not be fought: for the people at large were going to have to fight them. We can call our service people patriots and heroes if we like, and in many cases those terms are appropriate, but between purely mercenary private contractors and a military now largely professional, “we the people” are no longer fighting our own wars. We now pay others to do it for us, and are mainly concerned with what it will cost us in dollars rather than what it will cost them. The British officer corps in WWI were largely the sons of the upper classes who died in droves on the Western Front. University graduates joined in large numbers in this country in the Civil War, WWI, and WWII. There’s been a new study showing how much important leadership was provided by Harvard graduates in the Civil War. How many Ivy League graduates today volunteer after graduation? (Some may volunteer before, in order to get college money: not the same thing.) So the sons and daughters of America’s elite stay out of uniform, and the veterans working in our businesses and officers are invisible. And long and bloody wars can be fought without the country being too much disturbed or inconvenienced. We even do it all on borrowed money so we don’t have to see rationing or rising taxes at home. (Put our military spending on a par with China or Russia, and we would have no deficit.) Once upon a time in America, it was not so:

“A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing [ i.e. professional ] armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and be governed by, the civil power.”

Trudeau hits the nail on the head as usual.

It is sad to see that the very thoughtful and intelligent comments of Sandfan and Doughfoot are brushed aside in favor of a discussion about the plugs being drawn upside down or not. The important point of the strip is the disconnect between the public and the war. This reminds me of that Star Trek episode where two planets were making war in remote control, and the public did not care about it as they were not implicated. But the public is implicated, in term of money, the defense budget is astronomical and a sacred cow, with the budget costs cutting being done on the back of the same people, who for good or evil, are the same guys going into the armed forces, thus ensuring a steady supply of fresh recruits. The Heroes are these boys and girls the evil doers are the generals and the politicians that send them into wars in order to maintain the status quo!

BD is old enough to remember that we treated vets the same way during ‘Nam—when the airhead protesters didn’t call them “baby killers.” When you’re in a losing war it’s easier to just forget.

There shall be wars and rumors of wars even unto the end.

Support the troops by bringing them home. Support them even more by guaranteeing that they get the services we promised. Support them even more by guaranteeing everyone the same medical services—as should be done in a humane society. And support them—and all of us—by refusing to join the military and refusing to fight in unjust or unnecessary wars.On Memorial Day, remember the brave men & women who refused to fight, who refused to be cannon-fodder for plutocrats who wouldn’t do their own fighting, and who worked to serve this nation and the world. On Memorial Day, remember the teachers, the social workers, the Peace Corps volunteers, and all those who dedicated their lives to service.

Excuse my ignorance, but do you really have to charge prosthetic limbs? It makes sense and all, but it would really suck if you forgot to plug it in. Never had to think about it before, for which I am very thankful.

Actually, this ‘Nam vet, with many friends who are amputees, and a son whose last day in the Navy was yesterday (after 13 years service and disability retirement), and who’s right foot is so messed up he’d be “better off” in some ways if it was a prosthetic, gets a kick out of the punch line!! Thanks G.T.!

Now if zipper didn’t represent most ADULT American’s analysis of our disabled vets, as toy figures or comic book heros (one day per year only please!). Folks don’t understand war, or warriors, or those impacted, because we haven’t seen it at home since 1865.

Just finished, and highly recommend “The Cellist of Sarajevo” by Steven Galloway— for a picture of how these “little wars” affect people, not just “soldiers”. Sarajevo is one place my son spent time, but it reflects the impacts on “civilians” in ALL wars.

I did not realize the how huge the disconnect was between civilians and the military until I retired after 24 years in the Army, and moved miles away from the nearest military post. I may as well have been a pirate or a cyborg. Vets that served one or two enlistments tend to become invisible. It’s harder ignoring decades. Ten years later and some people at work still describe me as “that military guy,” although nothing I do at work has any service related connection. Most people can’t relate to that time in my life, and many presume my opinions and my character based on the caricature of a retired soldier they have in their heads.

I generally think Doughfoot is right. When I was in the military, I opposed the draft because I didn’t want to work with people who weren’t there willingly. Now I support the idea of a draft because once every family is liable to have their loved ones called to war, I believe there will be less support for military adventurism and less tolerance of wars that go on for years. I realize that the wealthy will usually find a way out of the draft, but even in Vietnam the bulk of those who served were at least in the middle class (in spite of what some would have you believe). Randgirthr was accurate in writing that 2% of the population volunteers for service. They are mostly from the southern states and mostly from families where fathers, brothers and uncles (not to mention sisters, mothers and aunts) have previously served. These are the families that bear the burden of war in our name.

For pure prophecy, read “Stand on Zanziber” by John Brunner. I am in awe at the memory of his writings. So relevant to now. Makes you think he was a time traveler.

For a moving and true representation of what war is really like, read the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, by Erich Maria Remarque, about WWI. To give you one chapter that is forever burned into my mind: The soldier goes home on leave, and finds that there is no communication possible between him and his family. He walks down the street, and cannot get used to the fact that nobody is trying to kill him.The novel is set in Germany, so to us, it’s about Every Soldier, because the details are different from what we know.

RinaFarina, in addition to All Quiet, I suggest you read “The Road Back” by the same author, Erich Maria Remarch. It starts off where All Quiet ends, with all the German soldiers comming home, and the problems they encounter. It’s a book that could have been written for many other times in many other nations.

Doughfoot, allow me to chime in on what you’ve said:

Actually, I think incidents of the British attempting to confiscate guns and powder from militias in Williamsburg and Concord in 1775 were probably in the fresh in the framer’s minds when the second amendment was written. So, while I agree that the founding fathers were not worried about denying the individual frontiersman his right to self-defense, I think they were concerned about the government becoming a tyranny and preventing the people from rising up against that tyranny, as they had risen up against Britain. Whether or not that concern – or the solution – remains valid in this century is another matter.

As you point out, Weapons like the Thompson Submachinegun lead to restrictions, specifically the National Firearms Act of 1934. Sawed off shotguns also fell under these restrictions, and the first constitutional challenge involved a shotgun rather than a machinegun. In 1939, the Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment referred to a militia; therefore, since a shotgun was not normally the equipment of a militia, it could be regulated. This ruling set up a weird situation, since it tied the militia clause to firearms ownership, affirmed that some arms could be regulated, did not address the issue of individual vs. collective rights, and seemed to imply that military style weapons were protected under the second amendment.

Of course, rulings by the Supreme Court in the last couple years identify gun ownership for the purpose of self-defense as an individual right, but somehow I don’t think that lays the matter to rest.

Thank you Doughfoot.

The discussion of the electric socket is relevant because if you get killed by 117 VAC you’re just as dead as if you stepped on a land mine. And from this discussion I learned something – putting the safety ground on top is a good idea. So thanks.Putting a socket in the same plate with a light switch is a BAD idea. People reach in the dark groping for the switch and the plug isn’t quite in all the way and zzzzt – it hurts in the heartAlso, look carefully at the other part – the plug. GT’s got the safety ground pin shorter than the others. Nuh uh… ya want that connected before the others are, and disconnected only after the others are. Has to be the longest pin.

Doughfoot, Like you, I believe there should be reasonable limits on firearms ownership. I also think that in a rational world, regulating guns in a similar fashion to how we regulate automobiles would make sense. Unfortunately, I’m fairly certain there isn’t enough trust in government for gun owners to go along with such a scheme. The NRA certainly encourages such mentality, but distrust in government seems to extend beyond the gun issue. Some would even say it was part of American culture. I do think guns are a part of our American cultural myth, first perpetuated by dime novels, then later by television and the movies. When I look at our murder rate, compared to other countries where gun ownership is allowed, I have to believe that the problem is more than simply the availability of firearms. -—————————————————————————————————————-I’m glad you mentioned that we don’t even enforce the gun laws we have, and I wonder if attempts to even successfully regulate guns are enforceable. Our Canadian neighbors have a gun registry, and in spite of a reputation as an orderly and law abiding nation, they have had to extend an amnesty twice due to the extent of non-compliance. Perhaps some of our Canadian posters could update us on how that’s going, as I haven’t heard anything about it recently. -—————————————————————————————————————-At the risk of sounding like a crackpot, I’d say the millions of guns in circulation in the US could support an uprising, although not a stand-up fight against the government. The Afghans and Iraqis have managed to hold out in spite of our drones and hellfire missiles. Some Libyans are currently using WWII era bolt action rifles in their uprising. No, I don’t think that sort of Hollywood post-apocalyptic scenario is in our future, and I’m not stocking up on food and ammo in my basement. At the same time, I’ve never forgotten an old Haitian saying: “The constitution is paper, bayonets are steel.”

Speaking as a Canadian, but one who only sloppily keeps track of what’s going on, I would say that originally the gun registry was started because of the approval of (1) the police departments across Canada (2) a movement inspired by a man who, in Dec. 1990, assassinated 20 students, all women, because he hated women and blamed them for his problems. (Yes, I’m pretty sure one was a mere secretary who got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, but bear in mind I am not reliable when it comes to details). As to (2), it was very unusual for Canada – very shocking. In fact, I saw it on the news, bodies being carried out one after another, and I assumed it must be in the US.I think they wanted to cancel the gun registry, but I’m not sure which government was in power at the time, left-wing or right-wing. At present we have a right-wing government in power. They promise to be tough on crime, a phrase that makes me want to choke the speaker. I forget how many millions (or billions?) they want to spend on building new prisons across the land, when the crime rate has been dropping steadily, and when it is know that there are better ways to deal with criminals than put them in jail. In fact, putting someone in jail increases the likelihood that the person will be back.

So. We are no longer allowed to edit our comments, but must get them perfect the first time?Somehow, I dread June 1st. I fear that something I like about the way the comics are available now will be lost.

I can’t find an example of that sort of outlet anywhere, unless you count the one that looks like it on Wikipedia, but that one is from Thailand.

What I did find was an ADA page showing a three prong outlet mounted sideways. The plug to the top is the flat neutral slot. This makes as much sense as mounting the ground pin up.

So you get a couple benefits. Easier to plug things in, safer from dropping a conductor on the live slot, easy to buy since it’s just a normal plug turned on its side.

I think the artist either saw a rare example or got it only mostly right on the plug thing.