Category Archives: Uncategorized

Rule of Law v. Law of Rulers

Posted on by
Reply

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 3rd section of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment appears as unambiguous today as when it was written:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Look carefully and reread the first (very long) sentence.

It makes no hint or mention that any elected official who has sworn to protect the Constitution of the United States must be criminally convicted of insurrection. Rather, the words state that those who “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof …”

Nonetheless, therein lies the crux of debate about what this means today.

Constitutional scholars – both academic and judicial – have researched and studied this clause dutifully, especially in recent years.

A law review article claiming that Donald Trump is automatically disqualified from holding elected office is getting attention in large part because it was written by two conservative, originalist law professors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen, who argue that Trump should be excluded from ballots for giving aid to an “insurrection or rebellion” in violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

The Washington Post questioned the validity of the scholars’ thesis: “… although Baude and Paulsen’s originalism is honest and conscientious, originalists outside of academia typically won’t apply their originalism if it leads to a result at odds with their conservatism. Second, there is precedent that contradicts their argument — precedent the scholars dismiss because they say it contradicts the original meaning of Section 3.”

When the 14th Amendment was drafted after the Civil War, the original meaning of Section 3 was that anyone who previously held public office and then rebelled against the US government should be automatically barred from office unless two-thirds of Congress made an exception. This constitutional provision is law and requires no further action by Congress to implement it, the article says. Courts can and should apply it, but we don’t need to wait for them to do so. Any government official, state or federal, whose duty it is to apply the Constitution must obey Section 3. It follows, the authors say, that the state officials who set the ballots for the primaries and general elections should exclude Trump. If he wants to fight that in court, he can. But there’s no need for the officials to await a judicial determination.

“To state this argument is to see why it won’t be followed by state officials,” argued the Washington Post in an opinion piece published on August 20, 2023. “Was the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol an ‘insurrection’? Did Trump participate or give aid and comfort to the ‘enemies’ of the Constitution under Section 3? These are contentious questions of constitutional interpretation.”

From Trump’s second impeachment to his fourth criminal indictment and his very own words, I believe the answers to the Post’s questions are irrefutable:

Apart from the evidence, the case against Donald Trump engaging in insurrection is clear even by his own words.

According to CNN, Trump called for the termination of the Constitution to overturn the 2020 election and reinstate him to power in a continuation of his election denialism and pushing of fringe conspiracy theories:

“Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” Trump blasted in a post on his Truth Social network and accused “Big Tech” of working closely with Democrats. “Our great ‘Founders’ did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”

Trump falsely cited election fraud as a reason to terminate the Constitution, after Elon Musk released information about Twitter’s role in limiting access to a story about Hunter Biden, says Axios.

The irony, huh?

White House spokesman Andrew Bates said that Trump’s remarks are “anathema to the soul of our nation and should be universally condemned.”

“You cannot only love America when you win,” Bates declared. “The American Constitution is a sacrosanct document that for over 200 years has guaranteed that freedom and the rule of law prevail in our great country. The Constitution brings the American people together – regardless of party – and elected leaders swear to uphold it. It’s the ultimate monument to all of the Americans who have given their lives to defeat self-serving despots that abused their power and trampled on fundamental rights.”

Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, an outspoken Trump critic, denounced the former president’s Truth Social statement. Cheney, who served as vice chair of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, tweeted that, “Donald Trump believes we should terminate ‘all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution’ to overturn the 2020 election. That was his view on 1/6 and remains his view today. No honest person can now deny that Trump is an enemy of the Constitution.”

Trump expressed support for the rioters behind the deadly January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, saying in a video played during a fundraiser that, “People have been treated unconstitutionally in my opinion and very, very unfairly, and we’re going to get to the bottom of it.” Further, in a September 2022 interview, Trump said he was “financially supporting” some January 6 defendants and promised he would issue pardons and a government apology to those being prosecuted if he were re-elected.

In the aftermath of the events of January 6, 2021, in and around the U.S. Capitol, there have been calls for accountability for those who participated, as well as for those who may have helped instigate it. The breach of the Capitol resulted in numerous injuries, multiple deaths, and significant property damage. It also delayed Congress’s constitutional duty of certifying electoral votes for President-elect Joseph Biden and caused Capitol Police and other law enforcement personnel to evacuate the Vice President and Members of Congress from the House and Senate floors to safer locations. Some observers, historians, and other commentators are wondering whether the Disqualification Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment might provide a mechanism to disqualify individuals who participated in or encouraged the siege, including former and sitting government officials, from holding office.

“Invocation of the Disqualification Clause raises a number of novel legal questions involving the activities that could trigger disqualification, the offices to which disqualification might apply, and the mechanisms to enforce disqualification,” reports the Congressional Research Service. “The clause has been seldom used, and the few times it has been used in the past mainly arose out of the Civil War—a very different context from the events of January 6. It is therefore unclear to what extent historical precedents provide useful guidance for its application to the events of January 6. This Legal Sidebar describes the Disqualification Clause, explains to whom it might apply and what activities could incur a bar on holding office, and discusses possible mechanisms to implement it.”

The same Congressional Research Service report states, “Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not expressly require a criminal conviction, and historically, one was not necessary” and indicates that, “Section 3 does not expressly provide a procedure for its implementation other than Section 5’s general authority of Congress “to enforce [the Fourteenth Amendment] by appropriate legislation.”

There might be multiple ways Congress could enforce the Disqualification Clause, including relying on federal criminal prosecution for insurrection and treason, allowing private civil enforcement through writs of quo warranto or other procedures, enacting legislation establishing general procedures for adjudicating disqualification under Section 3, or for identifying specific disqualified individuals, or measures by the House or Senate to exclude or expel individuals from their respective houses.

In the June 7, 2022 issue of Lawfare, Roger Parloff, a Washington, DC-based journalist who was the main legal correspondent at Fortune magazine for 12 years, writes: “It’s extremely likely that at least one of those election officials will find Trump disqualified under Section 3.” Parloff continues, “There is actually a disquietingly strong case at this point that Trump should be disqualified under Section 3 as a factual matter. I say ‘disquietingly’ because the prospect of seeing his name blocked from the ballot in at least some states — though certainly not in others — gives pause in terms of both the violence it might unleash among his followers and the chaos it could bring to the 2024 presidential election. Still, the prospect of his returning to power, notwithstanding all the evidence of his having incited the Capitol insurrection, is even more disquieting.

“The decisions about whether Trump’s name can appear on the presidential ballot will be made, in the first instance, by 51 different secretaries of state. It’s extremely likely that at least one of those election officials — perhaps quite a few — will find Trump disqualified under Section 3. And that will usher in a truly unprecedented and volatile situation,” concludes Parloff.

Mechanisms to implement Section 3 of the 14th Amendment purportedly involve the secretaries of state in each of the 50 states and “territories” where people vote in the USA. The secretaries of state must approve all candidates who appear on the ballot. A single “nay” can – and will – trigger a constitutional crisis, as the election cannot proceed without the approval of all eligible voters.

The case will immediately be presented to the U.S. Supreme Court for adjudication. With three Trump-appointed associate justices, SCOTUS is heavily conservative (6 to 3).

Unfortunately, the media – mainstream and “(un)social” – have paid but mere and passing attention to Article 3 of the 14th Amendment, preferring, instead, to cover the ever-widening web of intrigue surrounding Donald Trump and his supporters from before the 2020 election to today and beyond. In effect, it’s been a case of the spider (Trump) to the flies (the media).

Back in 1964, Canadian communication theorist Marshall McLuhan coined the “Medium is the message” phrase, contending that a message could be construed by any of three ways: (1) The content of the message, per se, could be construed as the message—i.e., it is what it is and says what it means; (2) The messenger, himself or herself, can personify the message incarnate—witness such charismatic personalities as Oprah Winfrey, Michelle and Barack Obama, Hitler, Winston Churchill, John F. Kennedy, and Donald Trump. What they’re saying is secondary to the people, themselves, who are saying it; and (3) The medium is the message in that what’s most important to a message being received and re/acted upon isn’t what’s being said or by whom, but where—on Fox News or MSNBC, on Rachel Madow or Tucker Carlson, in the New York Times or New York Post, on Facebook or Truth Social.

For Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to become the message even before the general election, it’s up to us to use all the media at our disposal: posts on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and others … letters written to the editors of the New York Times, Boston Globe, USA Today, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and our local newspapers … emails, faxes, and telephone messages sent to our legislators and justices … feedback and questions sent via the websites of cable news shows and anchors, streaming services, and radio speakers.

There’s a lot of rage in this country at a lot of things, so much so that newscaster Howard Beale’s cry in the 1976 film Network, “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!” has become a kind of national mantra.  

The Dow goes up. The Dow goes down. Today it’s up. Everybody is smiling. Everybody is happy. Great. Maybe I’m wrong. I don’t think I am, but maybe I am. I think people understand that with all of the spending and the uncertainty from government, we are far from standing on solid ground. But the media seem to be painting a picture of anyone who is worried enough to prepare for the future as crazy. Call them crazy. I’m crazy. You’re crazy. We’re all crazy together.

Bruce Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

A “Single Market” European Union?

Posted on by
2

Not with All These Trade Barriers!

The European Union aims to enable EU citizens – and legal residents – to study, live, shop, work, and retire in any EU country while enjoying products from all over Europe. To accomplish this, it ensures the free movement of goods, services, capital, and persons in a single EU internal market.

Sounds like a great idea!

By removing technical, legal, and bureaucratic barriers, the EU also allows people to trade and do business freely in this “single market.”

That’s all well and good. But moving beyond principles to practice, let’s see if and how this market actually works. To simplify matters, we’ll consider just two EU members – Portugal and Spain – and one item to be traded: vehicles.

According to the EU’s Competition Commissioner Mario Monti:

“More competition in car distribution leads to lower prices. By finally tearing down remaining obstacles to cross-border vehicle purchases, consumers will make use of the full potential of the single market for car purchases.”

The above quote referred to new EU laws effective October 2003 that would make car sales more competitive throughout member nations.

Even before then, no dealers could be prevented from supplying cars to consumers from abroad, allowing them to make cross-border purchases.

The Commission’s twice-yearly car price report consistently revealed major differences in car prices between EU Member States. A study published for the Commission concluded that the differences couldn’t be totally explained by differences in tax levels.

So, why can’t I buy a car in Spain and register it in Portugal?

Theoretically, I should be able to …

But it just doesn’t work that way.

Let’s begin with buying the car. I’m a legal and fiscal resident of Portugal who wants to buy a car in Spain because there’s a much larger pool of competitive vehicles to choose from there and – bottom line – the prices are substantially lower for cars new and used in Spain than in Portugal.

What does Spain require of people to buy cars in its country? Can I really buy a car in Spain if I’m a non-resident foreigner? The good news is that non-residents can indeed purchase a car in Spain, regardless of their nationality.

Spanish law allows “foreigners” to own a car in Spain. You don’t need to be a resident in Spain to buy a car a Spain, whether new or second-hand, but you will be required to provide proof of address, even if this address is for less than six months of the year. Foreigners who don’t hold Spanish residency cards must present an identity document from their country of origin, if they are citizens of member states of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) … or a passport or certificate of nationality if they are citizens of third-party countries. It also stipulates that they must provide proof of address in Spain by any of the following documents: empadronamiento (certificate of residency from the municipality where you live full-time or on vacation), or house deeds, or a lease contract. Also required is a Tax Identification Number (NIE).

For those who own property in Spain, this shouldn’t be a problem as an NIE is prerequisite to making any major purchase—i.e., cars and homes. Nonetheless, unless you claim Spain as your fiscal and legal residency, you shouldn’t register as a padrón at your local town hall in Spain because doing so can subject you to Spanish taxes that you shouldn’t be paying!

Do I need a padrón certificate to purchase a vehicle?

“This is a question that continually crops up on our Facebook group page, owning to misinformation from personnel at many vehicle dealerships,” reports Citizens Advice Bureau Spain, a registered charity and Spanish Non-Profit/NPO/ONG organization (Registration nº 11253). “Nonresidents should not be registered on the padrón (unless habitual residents of a town in Spain). Nonresidents, many who own holiday homes here, are entitled to purchase a car … and many do. They are not registered on the padrón. What is needed to purchase a vehicle is your ID—such as passport or ID card and an NIE number. The padrón is a census and could have tax implications for those registering. By being inscribed on the register, you are stating that you reside in Spain.”

Maybe so. But reread the words above carefully: what’s referred to here is buying a car in Spain … not registering it in Spain. Yes, we can buy cars in Spain, but the country won’t let us register, drive, and maintain them there with Spanish plates unless we have Spanish residency. Otherwise, we can buy a car in Spain but register it in our country of residence. In Portugal, for instance, that takes lots of money (especially if the car is less than 15-years-old and you need to pay 23% IVA), time, and patience with the bureaucracy.

Okay, let’s take all this pomp and circumstance and see how or if it works.

I already checked the market for second-hand cars in Portugal online. I found one in Spain that matches what I’m looking for, Virtually the same car – make, model, mileage, year, condition, options, etc. – costs twice the price in Portugal than Spain. So, I send the dealer an email from Portugal saying I want to buy the car. Included as attachments are copies of my passport, NIE, deed to my house in Spain, utility bills, and my Portuguese residency.

The dealer in Spain, however, balks … insisting that I must provide a copy of my padrón from Olvera, the town where our getaway home in Spain is located. I send him a link to the Citizens Advice Bureau declaration, which I translate to Spanish. He refuses to budge, continuing to insist that I must send him a padrón I don’t have. We engage in emails back and forth as I research and report on the issue using Google with Spanish prompts.

Meanwhile, I am engaged in another herculean endeavor: trying to secure insurance for the car so I can drive it. I first contact the insurance agency in Portugal that’s issued insurance on our other car, health, and houses. “We’re sorry, Bruce,” says my agent. “We cannot insure cars that aren’t registered in Portugal. You must obtain Spanish insurance until your car is inspected and registered in Portugal.”

Okay, I think. No problem. I’ll contact the Spanish agency that insures our little pied a terre in Spain. I email our agent, explaining the situation, and attaching a copy of our original insurance policy issued more than five years ago when we bought our first car in Portugal. I also attach copies of the last two year’s renewal bills. Considering that we pay €400 per year in Portugal for comprehensive coverage of a new 2022 Dacia Duster, I’m blown away when our agent in Spain replies with an insurance proposal of €1,263 (per year!) on a 2008 car that would be driven only occasionally. This, from an agency that saved us almost €300 per year on our home and property insurance. The agent tells me that she will contact her superiors and try to do better. She comes back with several offers, all way too much.

Next, I use Google to search for “Seguros baratos para coches en España”–cheap vehicle insurance in Spain. Up pops a list of more than a dozen companies, all with websites and all with online premium simulators after answering a few simple questions. One by one, I visit the companies online and complete their questionnaires. I’m amazed at the results returned, ranging from €240 to about €500 per year. I breathe a sigh of relief: I can get insurance at a reasonable price in Spain to cover my car until I can get it registered in Portugal.

Except, I can’t …

Although the rates look great in their proposals, when I try to purchase the insurance, a few other questions appear: Approximately how many kms. do I estimate putting on the car each year? Will the car be used for business or pleasure? Will I be using it to commute back and forth to work? Is there anyone in my household under the age of 26 who will be driving the car? How long have I had vehicle insurance in effect—from less than one year to more than four? And, finally, what are the last five (5) digits of my current insurance policy?

Diligently, I answer the questions. But suddenly, a new rate is proposed … double or triple the original cost! Six different companies offered me reasonable rates. I went back to my saved proposals and tried to buy insurance from each. Same set of questions to answer, same result from each. Why, I wondered? What’s the problem here?

Turns out the culprit is those last five digits entered from my current insurance policy: They’re from Portugal and aren’t recognized in Spain.

One of the European Union’s comprehensive single market ambitions is what it says about insurance, specifically addressed in DIRECTIVE 2009/138/EC:

(2) “In order to facilitate the taking-up and pursuit of the activities of insurance and reinsurance, it is necessary to eliminate the most serious differences between the laws of the Member States as regards the rules to which insurance and reinsurance undertakings are subject. A legal framework should therefore be provided for insurance and reinsurance undertakings to conduct insurance business throughout the internal market, thus making it easier for insurance and reinsurance undertakings with head offices in the Community to cover risks and commitments situated therein.”

(11) “Since this Directive constitutes an essential instrument for the achievement of the internal market, insurance and reinsurance undertakings authorised in their home Member States should be allowed to pursue, throughout the Community, any or all of their activities by establishing branches or by providing services. It is therefore appropriate to bring about such harmonisation as is necessary and sufficient to achieve the mutual recognition of authorisations and supervisory systems, and thus a single authorisation which is valid throughout the Community and which allows the supervision of an undertaking to be carried out by the home Member State.”

(16) “The main objective of insurance and reinsurance regulation and supervision is the adequate protection of policy holders and beneficiaries. The term beneficiary is intended to cover any natural or legal person who is entitled to a right under an insurance contract. Financial stability and fair and stable markets are other objectives of insurance and reinsurance regulation and supervision which should also be taken into account but should not undermine the main objective.”

In other words, to benefit consumers, insurance companies in member states should cooperate with each other (and their respective states) to facilitate insurance transactions between one member state and another.

Quite a noble objective!

But this 2009 directive isn’t operating 14 years later (2023).

Meanwhile, the car dealership steadfastly refuses to sell me the car without a padrón. Even if I can find a comparable car from a more compliant seller, I still face the challenge of insuring it. To be honest, I now have in hand a document from my Portuguese insurance agency stating that I have had vehicle insurance with them for more than five years, and that I have had no accidents or claims during this time. Hopefully, this document will override the disconnect between the last five numbers of my Portuguese insurance in Spain.

Yet, assuming I could buy a car and have it insured in Spain, that doesn’t account for all I must do to register the car in Portugal.

First, I must have the car inspected by an authorized Portuguese vehicle inspection center. Cost: about €75. Second, I need to go to a customs agency and explain – perhaps in Portuguese – that I want to register my car in Portugal. They will give me a vehicle customs declaration (DAV) form to fill it out and then wait for a response, which usually takes the form of a vehicle tax (ISV), as well as Portugal’s 23% IVA. Cost for my €5,000 car: about €1,250. (In Portugal, the tax value depends on various factors like the level of CO2 emissions produced or the age of the car. I may be exempted from paying IVA only if the car has been in my name for at least six months prior to moving to Portugal; and I must have lived in the country the car is from for at least six months.) I must order a “Certificate of Compliance” from the car manufacturer’s licensed agent to document that the car meets Portugal’s (EU) standards. Cost: about €300. Within 60 days of being issued the Vehicle Customs Declaration, I need to go to an IMT counter with all the supporting paperwork and ask for Single Vehicle Documentation, kind of an identity card for my vehicle. I will also have to bring it to yet another institution, the automobile registry office, to complete the registration process after paying all the fees and taxes. But, first, IMT will need to have my Certificate of Compliance (COC) “homologated,” meaning that my car and its technical characteristics really match the technical characteristics stated in the COC. Supposedly, I will get the homologation after “some days” and, equally amazing, the process is free of charge!

I’m here to tell you that it just ain’t happening …

The European Union operates with the best of intentions. But let’s not forget that the road to perdition is paved with good intentions.

Ultimately, I spent about €3,000 more to buy my second-hand car in Portugal, where it already was registered. There were no taxes to pay, just a form to fill out and about €50 in IMT fees.

Bruce H. Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Purge the Evil

Posted on by
Reply

If you’re like me, you’ve been seeing increasing media coverage of the climate crisis – including pollution – resulting in death and devastation among creation. How many species have succumbed and died—some by natural evolution, others killed by our wanton ways?

I remember a Bible verse from the Psalms (24:1-2), “The earth is the Lord′s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; for he founded it upon the seas and established it upon the waters.”

Yesterday, the camera chronicled the sudden demise of coral which, in the circle and interconnections of life, protects fish, algae, and our shorelines from the ravages of weather. Coral cannot live in heated waters which recently have risen by more than 1.5 degrees and register 92.5F degrees currently around the Florida Keys.

As often happens, my mind wandered … until stopping at the story of Noah’s Ark.

I could be wrong (especially if we take into account the water turning into blood and the hail, among the ten plagues of Egypt, and the parting of the Red Sea), but I suspect that in the chronicle of Noah’s Ark, we find the first example of climate change and crisis. Remember? According to the story, it suddenly rained 40 days and 40 nights. Noah, his family, and animals entered the Ark on the day flooding began. It lasted 40 days and nights. The waters rose and all creatures, except those aboard, were destroyed.

In this account, Noah labored faithfully to build an Ark, ultimately saving not only his own family, but humanity itself and all land animals from extinction during the flood which God supposedly created after regretting that the world was full of sin.

After 40 days (and nights), the Creator was appeased. Noah sent out a dove, which returned with an olive branch indicating the presence, again, of land. And the Holy One made a promise – a covenant – in which he resets and renews the blessings of creation, reaffirming God’s image in humanity and the work of dominion. “Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth. I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth,” we are told by the author of Genesis 9:11 and 13.

Let’s not miss a vital point here …

Why are we told the Creator caused the flood?

Allegedly, because the world was full of sin.

This seems to be a theme in both books of the Bible, starting with Deuteronomy, whose core is the covenant that binds Yahweh and Israel by oaths of fidelity and obedience: God will give Israel blessings of land, fertility, and prosperity so long as it is faithful to God’s teaching; disobedience will lead to curses and punishment.

Remember: these blessings and curses are specific to Israel.

In Deuteronomy we’re told, “You must purge the evil from among you” (17:7). Several verses later (19:15-20), we are warned again: “Thus you shall purge the evil from among you. The rest will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such an evil thing among you (19). Thus you shall not show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot (20-21).

Despite its Hebrew reference to Israel, the idea of purging evil reportedly continues in the Greek testament with Paul the Apostle – aka Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee – reiterating, “God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked person from among you” (5:13).

Throughout all his presumed writings, however, Paul’s focus is purging what he saw as the “evils” inside of us, our “sinful” nature … although his Christianity ultimately led to the Inquisition, Crusades, and evangelical bullying. In the Hebrew scriptures, it’s the “other” and outsiders – peoples who worship foreign gods and idols – whom a jealous and zealous god used the Israelites to avenge.

Today, purging evil is paramount in subduing and saving ourselves from the climate crisis which threatens to destroy our world and ourselves. We must deal with the effects of a poisoned environment of our own making.

According to the United Nations, results of our changing environment already include intense droughts, water scarcity, severe fires, rising sea levels, tragic flooding, polar ice melting, catastrophic storms, volcanic eruptions and emissions, seismic earthquakes, shifts in plant blooming times, and declining biodiversity. The heat is getting more intolerable; floods and mudslides are destroying people and property; hurricanes and typhoons are coming at us faster and more furiously; air quality indices show how difficult it is to breathe; winter and summer seasons are starting earlier and lasting longer.

Our beliefs will have little to sustain us if we don’t purge these evils from among us.

Pastor Bruce is with People of Faith Online Congregation and publishes Portugal Living Magazine.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Happy July 4th …

Posted on by
Reply

What Independence Means to Me

Those who have followed my musings about the national elections which, already, have left the starting gate may recall that I was toying with the idea of third-party candidates.

I am well aware of the bleak history of those running against the Democrats and Republicans … especially in the cases of Gore v. Bush (2000) and Clinton v. Trump (2016). Without third-party contenders, election victories would easily have gone to Hilary Clinton and Al Gore.

For all the talk about why Donald Trump was elected president while losing the popular vote and how he could win again, one of the least discussed results of the 2016 election offers valuable lessons for Democrats.

An astounding 7.8 million voters cast their presidential ballots for someone other than Trump or Hillary Clinton. The two biggest third-party vote-getters were Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson (almost 4.5 million votes) and the Green Party’s Jill Stein (1.5 million voters). But others received almost another 1.9 million votes as well.

Their strong showing was due to the unpopularity of the two major-party nominees.

New?

If anything, lack of enthusiasm for both party candidates is even stronger today. People will be voting against rather than for: A vote for Biden will likely be a vote against Trump … and vice-versa.

Please, don’t misunderstand: When push comes to shove, the bottom line is simple: Joe Biden is a good man. Donald Trump is not. He’s a very, very bad man. But both are politicians playing to their bases, with difficulty attracting independent voters and suburban women who will probably decide the winners. And if push comes to shove, with Biden as the Democrats’ nominee v.Trump or any other Republican, I will vote for Joe Biden.

However …

Our electorate historically has had 40% voting for Democrats, 40% voting for Republicans, and 20% being unaffiliated, issues-based voters.  But today, the situation has significantly worsened for the two major parties as both have shed support from center-oriented voters who perceive both the right and the left as increasingly pandering to activists and the extremes of each party.

Recent polling data indicates a new split: 35% leaning Democrat, 35% leaning Republican, and a full 30% who are unaffiliated, issues-based voters.  Yes, close to a third of voters today are issue-driven voters looking for solutions to the nation’s problems. These voters may well determine the winner in 2024. What’s more, in another recent poll, close to half of American voters say they would consider backing a third-party candidate if President Biden and former President Trump head toward a rematch in 2024.

Nonetheless, I have changed my mind about supporting third-party candidates in the 2024 presidential election.

Why?

Because I think there’s a better option:

For the greater good of the USA and democracy, per se, I believe President Biden needs to complete his term, step aside, and defer to another candidate.

Not because of his age or health, which concerns many voters, and is a very legitimate concern. But because Americans need to shed these years of divisiveness – of which Joe Biden is part – and move on.

Last summer, after a reporter cited poll numbers suggesting just 26 percent of Democrats wanted him to be the nominee, the president rejected the idea that a large majority of his own party’s voters don’t want him on the ballot in 2024. “Read the polls, Jack!” Biden said. “You guys are all the same. That poll showed that 92 percent of Democrats, if I ran, would vote for me.” This statement, however, was somewhat misleading: Ninety-two percent of Democrats said they would vote for Biden in a general election rematch with Trump, not that they wanted him to run. In fact, 2022 exit polls showed that two-thirds of USA voters don’t want him to run for reelection.  

Nevertheless, Joe Biden launched his re-election campaign with a video in which he says the country faces a pivotal moment in the 2024 vote.

The Democratic Party, however, still needs convincing that he is the best candidate they have. Polls show about half of Democrats want the party to nominate someone else – although many of those have said they will still vote for him. Because of Trump … not because of Biden’s record.

Joe Biden has made it clear he intends to stand for re-election in 2024, but despite his fighting spirit, Biden’s intention may not necessarily hold up.

Within the Democratic party, concerns have grown over the president’s age (he’ll be 82 shortly after the 2024 election), his low approval ratings (he’s mired in the low 40s in job approval), and ongoing political struggles … and you get this: a series of stories examining whether Biden runs again and, if not, who might take his place.

Recent news of classified documents found in his Delaware home have certainly not helped in soothing these concerns. Nor did the dogged plea deals arranged with his son, Hunter.

If Biden does not run, the 2024 Democratic primaries would become a much more open contest. And there are several potential candidates:

• Kamala D. Harris would be the presumptive nominee. Biden’s announcement may raise some doubts that Harris will be his running mate again in 2024. According to The Washington Post, “There have been questions about how voters might feel about that, given that her ascension to the top job is a more real prospect with Biden in his 80s, and she’s generally less popular than both Biden and recent vice presidents. Polls suggest she’s the nominal front-runner in a Biden-less race, but without anything approaching a convincing margin.

• Gretchen Whitmer Democrats have shown they’re more interested in pragmatism, including by nominating Biden in 2020. And it’s hard to see them doing worse than the well-regarded and liked female governor of a swing state (Michigan) who has won two campaigns there by about 10 points. Whitmer has said she wouldn’t run even in a Biden-less race, but it’s not difficult to see a huge recruiting effort emerging. Plenty will believe she is the answer.

• Amy Klobuchar The Minnesota senator is among those seen as quietly doing the things one would do to remain a part of the conversation in a post-Biden race. She makes sense as a stand-in for Biden and his more pragmatic brand of politics, but she might have competition for that lane with others.

• Pete Buttigieg The transportation secretary is seemingly aiming higher — whether in 2024 or 2028 — after passing on running for an open Senate seat in his adoptive home state of Michigan. While he finished fifth in pledged delegates in 2020, it’s worth recalling that he just about won both of the first two states, Iowa and New Hampshire. His lack of appeal to minority voters is a major obstacle that must be dealt with—especially given his open sexual orientation. But he’s also the most established and capable national messenger on this list. And perhaps more people would give him a look now that he’s no longer just a 30-something mayor of a medium-size city. If elected, Buttigieg would be the youngest ever president and the first openly gay man to become president.

• Gavin Newsom Despite his protestations, the California governor is widely viewed as being among the most likely candidates to run if Biden falters. He’s gone to great lengths to build his national profile in recent months, while pushing his party toward a more in-your-face approach to taking on Republicans. It’s easy to see how that message might play well. Newsom is less disliked than Biden and Harris, but is still polling in the single digits. But this may be explained by his slightly lower name recognition among voters. Data from the January Granite State Poll in New Hampshire shows that some voters felt they do not know enough about him to form an opinion yet. If Newsom enters the race for the Democratic nomination, his early campaign strategies would need to be focused on raising his public profile across the nation.

No sitting president in modern American history has been primaried successfully, although intraparty challenges usually end up hurting the incumbent in the general election. If something happens to change Biden’s mind or circumstances in the long months before the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, however, “then it’s open season,” Tampa-area Democrat Doris Carroll told The Wall Street Journal. 

Whether vice president or wild card favorite, no Democrat except Biden has formally declared an intention to run. The ball is in the president’s court. But if he decides not to run amid increased calls for him to step aside, the Democratic party certainly has options, and the primaries could shape up to become a highly competitive contest.

As they should be.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Shame on You, Portugal!

Posted on by
Reply

The post was published in one of the Facebook groups for towns and villages surrounding Penamacor in Central Portugal. But it’s only exemplary—it could (probably has been!) posted anywhere and everywhere across Portugal or, for that matter, Spain.

It began with a heart-wrenching photo of a dog.

“Does anyone recognize this dog by any chance?” were the words below it. “Poor boy is skeletal and covered in ticks. We’ve managed to get him in our car and are going to take him to the vet. He’s very scared and also friendly. I’m hoping he’s just lost.”

An update quickly followed: “No chip. The vet gave him a tick tablet. That’s all the vet can do for now, so we desperately need help. Can anybody, please, house him until we are able to sort either a home or sanctuary for him? We’re happy to pay for his dog food, etc.”

A second update was posted: “’Arnie’ slept through the night really well. He didn’t whimper or cry once, nor did he leave any mess. He is now flea- and tick-free and is showing signs of trust. Surprisingly, he hasn’t shown any aggression towards our cat, Bob. Now he has the chance to get healthy and find a family, as he deserves.”

Comments came fast and furious.

“Hundreds of dogs are abandoned here every day,” exclaimed an angry Miguel. “The kennels are full and there are no mechanisms for dealing with these issues.”

The author of the original post replied, “I know, it’s really sad. My partner has been in the kennel life over here, so we are very aware. We are trying to prevent Arnie from going to the Canil, as it’s no life for a dog. Not sure what we are going to do. For now, we will keep him at home, bathe him, and keep our dogs away until we can find somewhere to place him.”

Miguel quickly replied: “There are over 30 dogs in the farm next to mine that are extremely poorly treated. No vaccines, no treatments, no anything. They have so many insects, it looks like a horror movie when you’re close. I’ve contacted every government agency and animal advocacy group in Portugal. No one will do anything.”

He continued, “They keep having puppies and, when they’re older, they abandon them. They barely feed them; so, at night, they get into all the trash in the village and city in order to eat. They’re not neutered, so there’s constantly more. We find dead puppies all the time.”

I cringed when reading this. We, too, had found litters of day-old puppies trashed in the bins of our small village outside Castelo Branco. The first time, only one survived. We brought him home, stopping enroute to buy puppy formula, a couple of light blankets, a hot water bottle, and a toy. We shared responsibilities with Olga, another animal advocate in our village. We kept and cared for him during the days while she was at work. She picked him up on her way home from work and dropped him off with us the next morning. Both of us had other dogs of our own. No matter, this was an imperative. We nursed the baby until he was three weeks old, and his darling eyes had opened. A lovely British family living in a caravan then took him and kept him, ensuring he was properly treated and trained. Not even a month later, Olga knocked on our door. In her hand was a towel covering two tiny puppies her mother had found in another bin in the village. “Can you take him for me, just until I get home from work?” she asked. “We can do what we did last time, until someone who’ll adopt them can be found.” There was no question. Incredibly, the same Brits who adopted our first foundling took both of the babies and fostered them, sharing photos with us as they grew and finally found forever homes with others.

“The government needs to do more,” Tonii, the original poster, replied to Miguel. “This is a serious problem, poor souls. I will never be able to understand and wish I could do more to help!”

“Call the IRA (Intervenção e Resgate Animal),” suggested Jenny, who had joined the conversation. The IRA’s mission is to rescue animals that are victims of mistreatment, negligence, or when their welfare conditions provided for by law are not guaranteed.

Miguel replied, “The IRA told me they won’t respond so far outside of Lisbon and to call the local police. Police won’t do anything. The municipal vet says the kennel is full. That I should build fences. The government doesn’t do anything.”

Condolences and words of support from others began to appear in the comments.

“Thank you for what you are doing for this poor animal. Hope you will find a good home for him; he deserves a better life,” began Kristine.

“Thank you for helping!” echoed Sonja. “Poor thing, that could be the reason why I can’t really live in Portugal. I couldn’t stand the suffering. I would like to support, but I already did for a dog, 200 Euros, then he got hit by a car! I support every month a friend in Morocco. She saves donkeys, horses, dogs, cats. It’s amazing! Wish you all the best with this. Love from Belgium!”

“It is hard, at first it was a big culture shock, and I guess still is,” Tonii told Sonja. “But after living here three years, I know that not every dog you see on the street is a stray. A lot of Portuguese allow their dogs to roam freely here. But when they are in this state, you know they aren’t just roaming … they’re abandoned. It is hard, but please be careful what you say. The other day I was called xenophobic and racist for saying that Portugal needs to get with the times (i.e., education and help from government for poorer communities that can’t afford to neuter their animals). We have brought him home for now. He’s had a bath, some food, and is now resting in the other room. If we had the space (and fewer dogs), I’d keep him in a heartbeat. He’s so gentle.”

“Maybe he’s a lost hunting dog?” Hélia interjected. “The way he is, so skinny, shows that he’s probably been abandoned for a long time.” Jennifer agreed: “Probably a hunting dog left behind. They starve them for months, at least that’s what they do on this island.”

“Hunting dogs are usually chipped as they are worth a fair bit to the owners,” stated Caroline. Arnie wasn’t chipped, though.

“It’s heartbreaking, every time I see a new abandoned dog I want to help; but already having five, it isn’t possible,” shared Julie and several others. 

“Julie, this is how we ended up with 20 … not through choice but found on the streets in terrible condition,” Diane told her. “I know what you mean,” replied Julie, but sometimes you have to draw a line and give the best life to the rescues you already have.”

Portugal and Spain both have laws about mistreating and abandoning animals. As shown here, however, that doesn’t mean they can – or will – enforce them. And woe to the foreigners who intercede on behalf of these misbegotten critters. We’re called out, ridiculed, and told to go back where we came from if this devil-may-care attitude irritates us so much.

After all, it is their culture.

Bruce H. Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine
www.facebook.com/PortugalLivingMagazine

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Remembrances of Things Past

Posted on by
Reply

Lately — for several months now — the church bells in our town and village have been off, ringing randomly, incessantly, and pealing the wrong hours.

What is happening to these bucolic timepieces for which we’ve abandoned wearing watches?

“The bellringer has died and there’s no one to take his place,” we’ve been told. Even the automated, mechanical gongs must be precisely set and adjusted manually. Again, it’s a dying art form–few and far between are the people with the know-how to do it.

Yesterday, as we were walking down one of the town’s shopping streets, my eyes came to rest upon a shoemaker, also known as a cobbler or cordwainer. For fifty years, this professional man now in his seventies has had his shop in the same spot where he fixed and repaired shoes, sandals, slippers, and boots along with a litany of their parts: heels, hooks, eyelets, buckles, and laces. Twice, I had brought the same pair of my favorite shoes to him for new soles. And, hoping he’s still working, I’ll bring them back to him again for a third set. This makes me happy … to enjoy my favorite footwear for many, many years. But, how long can and will he be around? Is there anyone qualified to replace him? More importantly, with the abundance of low-cost, disposable, throw-away foot coverings, do we still need these craftspeople?

It got me thinking about a plethora of things I remember but no longer are around … at least where we live. Undoubtedly, some will disagree and point to these memories which continue to exist where they live (or not far), while others will nod in remembrance but shrug them off as antiquities which have withered in the chain of evolution … survival of the fittest.

In no particular order other than stream of consciousness, here are some of my memories that have faded along with cobblers and church bells:

• Small businesses — mom and pop shops — instead of multinational corporations, tech start-ups, and ubiquitous franchises. Amazon and its ilk have made many obsolete.

• Calligraphy, the art of handwriting, along with classes teaching cursive letters. Who needs them anymore, with the proliferation of word processed fonts?

• Half-hour newscasts rather than round-the-clock commentary and news dumps. In my humble opinion, the obsession with knowing every detail and being up to the minute with constant streams of speculation and (mis)information has contributed significantly to our sense of stress, anxiety, madness, and troublesome vicissitudes.

• Corner candy stores where, unlike today’s sanitized, mass produced, and covered delicacies, the chocolates were handmade and penny candies unfettered.

• Luncheonettes with jukeboxes that have morphed into snack bars and “cafés,” especially here in Spain and Portugal.

• Thrift shops, both old and new. Walmart, Target, E LeClerc, Carrefour, and Todo €1 will never rekindle the charm and romance of Woolworth, McCrory’s, or Ben Franklin stores. In the USA, “upscale resale” businesses are exploding … but here in Spain and Portugal, the natives disdain “used, old things,” unless they’re family heirlooms handed down through generations. Finding genuine thrift and “antique” shops requires both Google Maps and at an hour or two drive.

• The seltzer man. Perhaps local to my New York City upbringing, Louis Arment came weekly to our Queens house, bringing a wooden case filled with a dozen glass seltzer bottles with triggers and a kick. Today, these bottles and boxes fetch a pretty penny at antiques shops. Somehow, today’s “club sodas” can’t replace the fizz of seltzer water.

• Italian-style restaurants, rather than the pizzerias that, as afterthoughts, might serve lasagna, cannelloni, and similar pastas. Yes, I know they’re not “real” (i.e., authentic) Italian, but I hanker for meatballs and spaghetti, antipasto, and chicken parmesan … even if covered with mozzarella cheese not parmesan.

• Soft drinks and milk in glass bottles. We’re drowning in plastics, so why not bring back those beverages in glass bottles? How many youngsters earned extra money beyond their “allowances” by collecting and returning the glass bottles to stores where they received a nickel for each one returned? That was real recycling and well behind its time!

• Telegrams. Reminiscent of World War II, Western Union brought good news, as well as bad. With today’s email, instant and private messages, who needs telegrams anymore? Today, we’re all the messengers who are bound to be shot.

Standing the test of time, vinyl records are making a popular comeback as are comic books, retro style furnishings and clothing, avant-garde architecture, eyeglasses, and keepsakes.

Maybe we’re yearning for simpler times in nostalgia, when neighbors were friends, civics and penmanship were taught in our schools, and history wasn’t engulfing us and passing us by. When artificial intelligence meant using CliffsNotes rather than reading the books.

If you haven’t seen Pleasantville, go have a look.

Bruce H. Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine, the thoughtful daily online periodical for people everywhere with Portugal on their minds.
www.facebook.com/PortugalLivingMagazine

Olvera’s Pride

Posted on by
Reply

Olvera, our getaway home in southern Spain for the past 18 years, has plenty to be proud about … not the least is its designation – honored by a Spanish postage stamp – as Spain’s “Best Rural Destination” in 2022. The town of 8,500 straddles the intersection of Cádiz, Sevilla, and Málaga provinces.

Outside its town hall fly the flags of Olvera, Cádiz, Spain … and a rainbow flag.

Now, I just learned another reason for Olvera to be proud: On June 23rd, it will be hosting a Gay Pride event for its residents and guests.

Spain is said to be the first European country and the second in the world with more LGBT+ people, according to a study by Ipsos, which holds a 4.2 out of 5-star rating on Trustpilot with over 45,695 customer reviews. Spain is designated as the third country in the world that most supports the right to equal marriage. And, like Portugal, Spain protects LGBT rights and validates the “diversity of the collective.” The survey also corroborates that Spain is a country in which there is majority support for proposed measures to improve the integration of trans people, a country that embraces “diversity, freedom, and LGBT+ pride … that advances by leaps and bounds without (a) brake.”

According to the survey, “Spain is where respondents are most likely to say they are gay or lesbian (6%), while Brazil and the Netherlands are where they are most likely to say they are bisexual (both 7%). Japan is the country they are least likely to identify as either gay or lesbian (less than 1%) and as bisexual (1%).”

The Iberian nations of Spain and Portugal are known for their inclusiveness.

Like Lisbon and Porto, Madrid and Barcelona have huge Gay Pride celebrations and marches each year. Events honoring LGBTQI+ people take place in other major Spanish cities, too: Sevilla, Córdoba, and Torremolinos … as well as such gay-renown destinations as Ibiza, Sitges, and Benidorm.

But Olvera?

One of the “pueblos blancos” in the province of Cádiz, Andalucía, Olvera has much to commend—including its positive attitude toward sexual minorities that are marginalized and condemned elsewhere.

Of late, think Uganda. In fact, 64 countries (nearly half in Africa, including Nigeria) have laws that criminalize homosexuality. In the USA, the political right is bound and determined to introduce legislation that eliminates or rescinds LGBT social and constitutional rights gained only after centuries of exclusion and damnation.

So, it behooves “queer” people to call attention to their history of cruelty, mistreatment, and entrapment, along with its contributions to civilization at large in countries like Spain and Portugal where gay rights are endorsed and supported.

We learned about the June 23rd event over lunch from two female friends, a kitchen designer and her retired spouse. They knew the date and location it was to take place – in a public square on the main street of town, directly opposite the Iglesia de la Victoria, one of Olvera’s pristine churches – but not the time.

I thought about the LGBT people we are acquainted with in Olvera who might be there:

> The beautiful young man with sometimes pink dyed hair who owns an upscale furniture shop and has won multiple awards for his interior designs—commercial, residential, and dressing the windows of local shops;

> The male couple who live down the block of our former house who enjoy a long-distance relationship, spending time together in Olvera, Australia, and elsewhere;

> The respected and educated man of magnificent color who lives, for now, in Olvera but spends each month working in London;

> The adorable waiter at our favorite restaurant who I’ve been innocently teasing and playfully flirting with for several years;

> The reclusive couple living two doors from ours but won’t speak to us, for whatever their reasons;

> The tall, dark, and steamy recent arrival from Venezuela whose eyes locked with mine momentarily;

> The lady in red who – rumor has it – enjoys her bread buttered on both sides;

> The British couple who lived here for several years, opening and closing a few businesses before returning to England … but continue to visit time and again;

> The colorful youngsters with ink covering their bodies and piercings from lip to nose. Maybe they are the “Q’s” in the increasingly complex jargon of LGBT syntax.

We Americans tend to be more priggish when it comes to carnal matters than the Mediterranean peoples. Sex is sex to them, nothing more and nothing less … without getting into issues of gender identity or sexual branding. They’re much more comfortable with themselves and their bodies. It’s not unusual for men to have slept with other men or women with women. Passion isn’t scrutinized or sanitized to subvert the prurient interest. The heat of the moment doesn’t result in being branded with a homophobic scarlet letter. Lust and sex between consenting adults are considered normal. It is what it is.

Pride, however, is all about identity … about standing tall in society without apologizing or denying who we are. If it’s a moment to be silly, too, so be it.

Gay Pride also satisfies something we seriously miss when living abroad: a sense of community … of people like us that transcends individuals and friendships, regardless of where we are on Kinsey’s scale and spectrum.

It’s also an occasion for friends and allies to stand together with us.

If we’ve learned anything from the Trump years and thereafter, it’s as Streisand sang: “People who need people are the luckiest people in the world. We’re children, needing other children. And yet letting a grown-up pride hide all the need inside, acting more like children than children.”

You bet we’ll be there at Olvera’s Gay Pride!

Bruce Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine. Follow the magazine daily at www.facebook.com/PortugalLivingMagazine. It’s free!

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

So Be It …

Posted on by
Reply

It is without shame, guilt, regret, or apologies that I acknowledge:

• I will never be Portuguese, no matter what I do or how hard I try.

• I will always be a foreigner living in Portugal. Even with permanent residency and Portuguese citizenship, I will still be an outsider who has been allowed in.

• Belonging, however, is different. After five years, I really do feel a sense of belonging here–that I have adapted to my habitat and that it has adopted me.

• Whether I like it or not, I cannot help but interpret what’s happening around me through the lens of my personal upbringing and cultural heritage. This may or may not be a good thing.

• Things are done differently here. I need to take deep breaths and exercise my patience when I do everything correctly but the “system” malfunctions or the bureaucracy balks.

• I am an immigrant residing in Portugal with no intention of moving “back home” (or anywhere else). Others who live here for a time and/or a reason, but plan to move on, are the only real expats.

• I will never speak Portuguese as the natives do. But I can strive to communicate with others in myriad situations and to do my best to understand the people’s language.

• Out of respect and interest, I participate in Portuguese holidays, ferias, other events and rituals; but I’m engaged without being able to fully feel, appreciate, or identify with the spirit and soul — the “why” — behind some cultural customs and traditions.

• It is because of my homeland that I can live as I do in Portugal.

• Although I have left my homeland to live abroad in Portugal, I can never cut the umbilical cord that ties me to whence I came. I vote from abroad here and care what happens there.

• While I live in the midst of Portuguese people, my lifestyle is probably different from theirs. I can afford big and little luxuries — air conditioning, a modern kitchen, extra bedrooms, a new car — that many of them can’t. It behooves me to be sensitive to this difference.

• Whenever possible, I try to buy locally … without disrupting, depriving, or displacing the Portuguese people or their land.

• Because I benefit from residing in Portugal — health care, education, elder care, etc. — I contribute to the country’s Social Security … even though, because of my age and limited years of contributions, I’ll never qualify for even the most minimal of pensions.

• I am but a guest here, yet I do have a right to abhor malevolent practices–from abandonment, abuse, or neglect of domestic animals to charging different prices for foreigners and native locals.

• For whatever their reasons, some people decide that Portugal is not for them and leave the country. It is incumbent upon me to be empathetic and understanding, not snide or sarcastic, about the life they choose to pursue elsewhere–whatever and wherever it may be.

Bruce H. Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Justice League of America

Posted on by
Reply

Article III, Section 1:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

The U.S. Constitution provides for a Judicial Branch including one supreme Court. It also appears to assume that the Supreme Court will include a Chief Justice, stipulating that the Chief Justice shall preside over any Presidential impeachment trial in the Senate. However, the Constitution is silent on other matters, such as the size and composition of the Supreme Court, the time and place for sitting, and the Court’s internal organization … leaving those questions to Congress.

In addition to setting the size of the Supreme Court, Congress also has determined the time and place of the Court’s sessions, as well as the salaries of its justices. Supreme Court decisions establish that the Exceptions Clause grants Congress broad power to regulate the Court’s appellate jurisdiction.

Annual pay per justice as of January 1, 2023, is $274,200 … except for the chief justice, who receives $286,700.By no means paltry sums.

The Supreme Court currently comprises nine justices: the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices. The justices are nominated by the president and confirmed with the “advice and consent” of the United States Senate, per Article II of the United States Constitution.

Congress also has significant authority to determine what cases the Court has jurisdiction to hear. The Constitution only grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over the relatively narrow categories of Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” In all the other Cases subject to federal jurisdiction, Article III grants the Court appellate Jurisdiction … with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as Congress shall make.

According to the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, “Like all Federal judges, Supreme Court Justices serve lifetime appointments on the Court, in accordance with Article III of the United States Constitution.”

Show me, please, where it says that in the Constitution.

As with guns, words – i.e., “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” – have been taken out of their original (and implied) context and prostituted to assume other, subsequent meanings.

Take corruption, for instance.

Corruption may involve many activities including bribery, influence peddling and embezzlement. Political corruption occurs when an officeholder or other governmental employee acts with an official capacity for personal gain.

Which brings us to where we find ourselves today.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is facing more questions about his finances, with a new report about thousands of dollars of income he’s reporting from a real estate firm with ties to his wife, Ginni Thomas. On his financial disclosure forms, Thomas reported rental income totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars from a firm called Ginger, Ltd., Partnership, The Washington Post reported.

That Nebraska firm no longer exists, having been closed 17 years ago.

The latest revelation about problems with Thomas’s legally-required financial disclosure forms raises questions about how seriously he took his obligation to disclosure his finances to the public. Public officials are required to fill out such forms to show if they have any conflict of interests between their personal finances and public duties.

Thomas is facing calls for an investigation and his resignation.

The supreme court justice claims he was advised that he did not have to disclose luxury trips paid for by GOP megadonor Harlan Crow because Crow and his wife are “personal friends,” said Thomas in his first statement on the matter.

Before then, conservative activist Ginni Thomas has “no memory” of what she discussed with her husband during the heat of the battle to overturn the 2020 presidential election, according to congressional testimony.

Ginni Thomas recalled “an emotional time” in which her mood was lifted by her husband and Mark Meadows, then Donald Trump’s chief of staff, a transcript of her deposition with the congressional committee investigating the January 6 attack on the US Capitol shows. Thomas has been a prominent backer of Trump’s lies that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

At 74, her husband is the oldest and most conservative member of America’s highest court, which has played a crucial part in settling disputed elections.

Speaking of wives of the supreme court justices, two years after John Roberts‘s confirmation as the Supreme Court’s chief justice in 2005, his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, made a pivot: After a long and distinguished career as a lawyer, she refashioned herself as a legal recruiter, a matchmaker who pairs job-hunting lawyers up with corporations and firms.

Roberts told a friend that the change was motivated by a desire to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest, given that her husband was the highest-ranking judge in the country. “There are many paths to the good life,” she said. “There are so many things to do if you’re open to change and opportunity.”

And life was indeed good for the Robertses, at least between 2007 and 2014.

During that eight-year stretch, according to internal records from her employer, Jane Roberts generated $10.3 million in commissions paid out by corporations and law firms for placing high-dollar lawyers with them.

That eye-popping figure comes from records in a whistle-blower complaint filed by a disgruntled former colleague of Roberts, who says that, as the spouse of the most powerful judge in the United States, the income she earns from law firms that practice before the Court should be subject to public scrutiny.

Brett Kavanaugh’s 2018 confirmation to the Supreme Court was embroiled in controversy when multiple women accused him of sexual assault. One of them, Christine Blasey Ford, testified before Congress about the alleged attempted rape she suffered at his hands in high school. The 2023 film Justice is a horrifying and infuriating inquiry into those claims, told largely by friends of Ford, lawyers and medical experts, and another of Kavanaugh’s alleged victims: Deborah Ramirez, a classmate of his at Yale.

Most damning of all, it features a never-heard-before audio recording made by one of Kavanaugh’s Yale colleagues—Partnership for Public Service president and CEO Max Stier—that not only corroborates Ramirez’s charges but suggests that Kavanaugh violated another unnamed woman as well.

As Democrats remember with still smouldering fury, when Mitch McConnell was majority leader, he refused to grant Merrick Garland–now Attorney General of the United States–even a token hearing after he was nominated to the Supreme Court by Barack Obama in March 2016 to fill the late Antonin Scalia’s seat. The day Garland was tapped, McConnell declared, “It is a president’s constitutional right to nominate a Supreme Court justice, and it is the Senate’s constitutional right to act as a check on a president and withhold its consent.”

Garland was never granted a hearing, a slap in the face to democracy and to America’s first black president.

Another supreme court justice, Samuel Alito said the decision he wrote removing the federal right to abortion made him and other US supreme court justices “targets of assassination” but denied claims he was responsible for its leak in draft form.

Alito wrote the ruling in Dobbs v Jackson, the Mississippi case that overturned Roe v Wade, which established the right to abortion in 1973. His draft ruling was leaked to Politico on 2 May last year, to uproar and protest nationwide. The final ruling was issued on 24 June.

A nearly $2 million sale of property co-owned by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch to a prominent law firm executive in 2017 is raising new questions about the lax ethics reporting requirements for Supreme Court justices.

Property records from Grand County, Colorado, show that the Walden Group LLC–a limited-liability company in which Gorsuch was a partner–sold a 40-acre property on the Colorado River to Brian Duffy, chief executive officer of the prominent law firm Greenberg Traurig. Duffy and his wife, Kari Duffy, paid $1.8 million for the property on May 12, 2017–just one month after Gorsuch was sworn in as an associate justice of the Supreme Court.

The financial disclosure report filed by Gorsuch for calendar year 2017 lists a sale by the Walden Group LLC for a profit of between $250,000 and $500,000. However, the section where a buyer should be listed is blank. It’s unclear if that’s a violation of ethics rules.

And, so, these questions and doubts beg to be settled by Justice League overseers.

The Justice League is an all-star ensemble cast of established superhero characters from DC Comics’ portfolio. Although these superheroes usually operate independently, they assemble as a team to tackle especially formidable villains.

The cast of the Justice League usually features a few highly popular characters who have their own solo books, such as Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, alongside a number of lesser-known characters who benefit from the exposure. The Justice League was created to boost the profiles and sales of its characters through cross-promotion and helped to develop the DC Universe as a shared universe, as it is through teams like the Justice League that the characters regularly interact.

Beyond comic books, the Justice League has been adapted to several television shows, films, and video games included.

More recently, it has been shadowing the United States Supreme Court.

MEO & Me

Posted on by
1

There are some bureaucracies that frustrate me.

Others annoy and make me angry.

MEO – the largest telecommunications provider in Portugal – belongs to the latter.

So, when I read that MEO has been hit with a €2.46 million fine imposed by Portuguese media regulator Anacom, which found that MEO had violated rules applicable to the termination of contracts on the initiative of subscribers … nor had it confirmed complaints about contracts submitted by customers … and also provided incomplete information on the means and contacts available for submitting termination requests, I cheered.

Because my household and I are among MEO’s most recent victims.

Did you know that once your “loyalty period” (fidelização) – usually 24 months – is over, you are free to change companies and/or plans. Whichever offers you the most for the least.

At the time, our bills for both houses were totaling 140-150€ per month.

We trekked over to the large MEO store in the Forum shopping center, only to learn that its function is only to sell MEO packages and products. We couldn’t discuss the better terms we had seen advertised, nor could we cancel, change, or remove a second móvel which we no longer used, from our account. That would have to be done by phone, the salesman informed us, asking for a good time to have a customer service representative contact us. We could negotiate a better deal during the call.

“Will whoever calls speak English?” I asked. My faltering Portuguese was substantial to engage in conversations, ask and answer questions, and talk to my doctor and pharmacist face-to-face. But over the phone? No way.

“No,” replied the salesman. “But you can ask to speak to someone who does speak English. Can you do that—ask to speak to someone who speaks English?”

I nodded and agreed to receive a call from MEO at 4:00 pm that afternoon.

“Be certain to answer the call,” the salesman warned, “you will only receive that one call from MEO.”

Sure enough, at 4:30 (Portuguese time), the call came from MEO.

“Posso falar com um empregado que fale inglês?” I asked.

“Sim senhor. Mas ela precisará ligar de volta para você. Está ocupada falando com outro cliente no momento.”

I agreed. After all, what other choice did I have.

Twenty minutes later, an English speaking MEO customer service rep rang me up. We spoke for about 20 minutes, and she seemed to understand exactly what I wanted. Now, how much would the two plans – we had one for each house – cost? She asked if she could put me on hold while plugging all the data into her system to determine the monthly charges. “Only if you don’t disconnect me,” I replied, having experienced the agony of being cut off, of being disconnected, and trying to reach that same person again. “No worries,” she assured me. “If anything should happen, I will call you right back.”

She called back within a few minutes and ran through the numbers with me. Bottom line: For the two plans with the services we wanted, the total cost amounted to €104. A substantial savings over what we had been paying. She told me that, within an hour, I would receive the contracts for both properties in my email. All I needed to do was to click on the “Validate” button to create new contracts and cancel my former ones.

The contracts came, albeit with slight discrepancies from what we had discussed. The one for our second house at €29.99 was fine … but the bigger, main package linked to our principal residence was eleven euros more than she told me, bringing the total monthly cost to €111—not that great a savings.

Frustrated, I Googled “Portugal Internet Plans” and discovered NOWO, a company being bought by Vodafone that currently lags behind MEO, NOS, and Vodafone. Based on its advertising, NOWO appeared to be the best value in terms of our needs: For 90€ per month, NOWO would provide us with 1 Gbps with 360° coverage, a TV package including all the channels we watched (or wanted to), four TV boxes, 5,000 minutes or SMS on our móvel, a fixed telephone line with 9,000 minutes nationally and 1,000 minutes internationally at our two locations.

That would amount to a savings of at least fifty euros (50€) per month.

The next morning, we headed over to the one (and only) NOWO store in Castelo Branco. The lone salesperson was lovely—friendly, outgoing, helpful, and alternating her English with my Portuguese. Unfortunately, NOWO wouldn’t work for us; it had no broadband (fiber) service available at our home in the Alentejo and the best it could do for us in Alcains was to provide half the speed we currently have. She was as disappointed as we were.

“Before you go,” she asked, “would you mind if I take a look at the contracts that MEO proposed?”

Seeing no reason not to, I handed them to her. She looked at the first contract—the €29.99 monthly service to our second property, in Alentejo. “This looks fair and reasonable,” she nodded. “Let me take a look at the other one,” the bigger bill assigned to our primary residence in Castelo Branco.

“€81.89 per month,” she questioned, shaking her head negatively. “That’s way too much. You shouldn’t be paying more than 60€ or so for this package.”

“Do you have any suggestions?” I asked.

“Yes. Go to the MEO store a few doors down and show them this contract. Tell them that there must be a mistake to pay so much … “

That’s what we did.

The gal behind the counter took one look at the €81.89 contract proposal and made a series of faces ranging from curiosity to incredibility. She hit a key on her computer which, in turn, caused something to print out. It was a flyer and she handed it to me. Evidently a major mistake had been made by someone.

Except for a second MEO TV box (€2.99/month), everything included in that €81.89 was also included in her offer for €56.99!

Between the two houses, our monthly MEO bill would be 50€ less than we’d be paying. Exactly what we were hoping for. Yes, ma’am, we’ll take it.

If only life with MEO were so simple.

We had two choices: Either cancel our current contract and sign up for this plan under my partner’s name (MEO wouldn’t allow it to be put in my name). Or receive another call from MEO’s negotiating team and renegotiate.

Discretion being the better part of valor, we decided to renegotiate.

Again, the MEO store employee made all the arrangements for an English-speaking negotiation agent to contact us at a given time with all of our particulars. Including the mistakes made by the previous agent. She was quite pleasant and accessed our previously proposed contract. “You spoke with Carmen, is that correct?” she asked. That was correct, as were all the other details she had about us, our dealings with MEO, and even information about our discussions with the latest salespeople we had spoken with at the MEO store.

“And you want to renegotiate your contract?” she confirmed. “Exactly,” I replied. “We want the €56.99 package MEO is offering.”

“Let me see what I can do,” she said.

Over the next ten minutes, she came back several times, thanking me for my patience and saying she needed just a few more minutes. Finally, she came back on the line prepared with an offer: “I cannot give you that €56.99 package. The best I can do is to give you the same package for 66€.”

“I don’t understand,” I said. “Why can’t you give me the same package for the same package that the MEO store can give.”

“I’m sorry,” she said. “It’s not in my script. I cannot offer that price to you.”

“MEO is giving me no choice but to cancel my contract and write a new one under my partner’s name at the MEO store,” I argued.

“You certainly can do that,” she agreed. “But then, you would lose all of the MEO points you have earned—18,444 so far.”

MEO points? I’d never heard of them before. What were they?

“For each euro you pay to MEO, we give you one MEO point. You can use these points to purchase many items … from telemóvels to small and large appliances and many other valuable items.  Just look at everything you can choose from on the MEO website. For a difference of nine euros each month, is it worth giving up all your MEO points? They’re non-transferrable. If you accept my offer, the points will stay with you and be transferred with your new contract. If you cancel your current contract and go with the one offered at the MEO store, you will lose all your points.”

“Let me think about it,” I said. “I’ll take a look at what’s available on your website.”

“No problem,” she said. “But before we can do anything in either case, we will need to remove your second móvel, which you no longer use or want, from your account before we can proceed.”

“Is that something I can do now with you?” I asked.

“No,” she answered. “We have a separate department that handles removals of specific services contained in your contract. If you hold on briefly, I will transfer you to that department. I will also send them all the details we’ve discussed.”

“Will the person you transfer me to speak English?” I continued.

“I cannot say for sure,” she said. “But you can ask to talk with someone who speaks English in that department.”

“Okay, go ahead and transfer me.”

The person on the other end spoke rapid-speed Portuguese, but no English. I understood what she was telling me, though: The English speaker in this MEO department was currently engaged with another customer. But she would call me back within the hour. I confirmed that she had all my correct contact and account information. She did, repeating my name, phone number, and contract ID to me in Portuguese. Yes, all the information was correct.

While waiting for the call back, I meandered through MEO’s website “store.” There really wasn’t anything we needed … but, who knows, we could have taken advantage of our points and redeemed them for products. Discovering how the point system worked was another exercise in futility. While we earned one MEO point for each euro we paid MEO, it didn’t work that way with purchases using points. Much like my Travel Rewards credit card, each point earned didn’t equal one euro to spend. One hundred points earned equaled one euro to spend. So, my 18,444 MEO points were worth €184.44. Sure, nothing to sneeze at. But was it worth it? Especially given all the grief MEO already had put me through?

The straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back was that the designated English speaker from MEO’s service “removals” department never called back. We waited three days. No calls from MEO, nor even a new contract in my email.

Despite my annoyance, this whole round-and-round-we-go had become a matter of principle for me by now. My partner and I agreed that the MEO points be damned. We would cancel our contract and sign up for a new one under his name. Doing so would achieve our overall goal: to reduce our monthly MEO bills substantially. We’d be saving over fifty euros each month, even if we had to go through the motions and inconvenience of bringing our routers and MEO boxes into the store to cancel our account and having MEO’s technicians schedule a time to come and bring us other ones. No installation work was needed … just bringing us a new router and two MEO TV boxes.

“That doesn’t make sense,” I told the gal at the MEO store. “We already have the router and boxes in place, working fine. Why not let us keep them instead of playing this ‘musical MEO’ with our time and equipment?”

She shrugged. I guess she didn’t get the reference to American “musical chairs.”

But I was reminded of that quintessential refrain: “Once, shame on you; twice, shame on me.”

P.S. Despite the machinations involved in dealing with MEO—and, I suspect, its brothers in arms—one of the customer service reps I spoke to gave me a good piece of advice: Once your “loyalty” period has ended, check the offers MEO (or NOS, Vodafone, NOWO) are offering, which change every month. You could end up saving a bushel and a peck!

Bruce Joffe is publisher and creative director of Portugal Living Magazine.

By clicking submit, you agree to share your email address with the site owner and Mailchimp to receive marketing, updates, and other emails from the site owner. Use the unsubscribe link in those emails to opt out at any time.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.