Wednesday, August 31, 2016
OBAMA-AAA!!!!!
This is absolutely disgraceful. "No political will" to even listen to serious recommendations by the military. It is dereliction of duty by the commander in chief.
Former U.S. Commanders Take Increasingly Dim View of War on ISIS
The U.S. is beating ISIS handily, judging by Vietnam’s body-count metric.The total number of ISIS battlefield deaths claimed by U.S. officials has jumped, from 6,000 in January 2015 to 45,000 last month—a bloodbath for an enemy force estimated to number about 30,000. Three U.S. troops have died. That’s an eye-watering U.S.-to-ISIS “kill ratio” of 15,000-to-1. “We’ve got good momentum going,” General Joseph Votel, chief of U.S. Central Command...
...some of his predecessors disagree. James Mattis, a retired Marine general who commanded Central Command from 2010 to 2013, says the war on ISIS is “unguided by a sustained policy or sound strategy [and is] replete with half-measures.” Anthony Zinni, a retired Marine four-star who held the same post from 1997 to 2000, says he doesn’t think he could do so today. “I don’t want to be part of a strategy that in my heart of hearts I know is going to fail,” he says. “It’s a bad strategy, it’s the wrong strategy, and maybe I would tell the President that he would be better served to find somebody who believes in it, whoever that idiot may be.”
...
“Employing an anemic application of force relative to previous air campaigns has yielded the Islamic State time to export their message, garner followers, and spread their message,” says David Deptula, a retired Air Force lieutenant general who planned the 1991 bombing campaign that all-but-drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait. “A comprehensive strategy to rapidly decompose the Islamic State is still lacking.”
...
“I’ve talked to some U.S. generals who are really frustrated—they could be in Raqqa in a week,” Zinni says. The U.S. is “losing credibility and they’re actually encouraging the enemy because they’re able to hold the ground for years now.”
...
“There is no political will in the White House to even listen to serious recommendations from military commands,” says Derek Harvey, a retired Army military-intelligence colonel who spent much of his career in Iraq. “The original strategy explained by the President was barely adequate and even that was not resourced or executed well.”
...
“Doing nothing would be far preferable to this mess,” says Daniel Bolger, a retired Army three-star who commanded troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq...
Dilma Rousseff, Brazil's President, Impeached, Removed from Office
Ms. Rousseff was convicted in Brazil's Senate of manipulating the budget to conceal the country's econonomic problems.
Re-Done
Whoa. And Sammy Nasri to Sevilla and Wilfried Bony to 365bet.
What about Yaya? HAPPY BIRTHDAY YAYA! Now leave.
What about Yaya? HAPPY BIRTHDAY YAYA! Now leave.
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
What's His Story?
Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio was elected to a six-year term as a United States Senator from the Asshole-of-America, Florida.
In April, 2015 Marco Rubio announced his candidacy for president, stated repeatedly that he would not seek reelection to the Senate in 2016 and let his actions speak louder than his words by abandoning his senate duties.
Marco Rubio did not of course receive the nomination of the Party of Doom for president, that honor going to one Fatface von Clownstick.
Marco Rubio then announced that he would seek reelection to the Senate after all.
Today, Marco Rubio advised that he would not, indeed could not, guarantee that he was going to serve out the new six-year term if reelected to the Senate. "No one can make that commitment," stated Marco Rubio. To which his likely Party of God opponent, Patrick Murphy, responded, "I can."
Marco Rubio is a cynical asshole who of course, since this is the Asshole of America, leads Murphy by six percentage points.
What a punk!
In April, 2015 Marco Rubio announced his candidacy for president, stated repeatedly that he would not seek reelection to the Senate in 2016 and let his actions speak louder than his words by abandoning his senate duties.
Marco Rubio did not of course receive the nomination of the Party of Doom for president, that honor going to one Fatface von Clownstick.
Marco Rubio then announced that he would seek reelection to the Senate after all.
Today, Marco Rubio advised that he would not, indeed could not, guarantee that he was going to serve out the new six-year term if reelected to the Senate. "No one can make that commitment," stated Marco Rubio. To which his likely Party of God opponent, Patrick Murphy, responded, "I can."
Marco Rubio is a cynical asshole who of course, since this is the Asshole of America, leads Murphy by six percentage points.
What a punk!
Comey, Reid Warn of Russian Election Tampering
I am surprised at this. The Russians are really trying to throw the election to Trump, even after having gotten caught. They are continuing.
The FBI has responded to recent concerns about U.S. voting systems' being targeted for cyberattacks as the presidential elections approach, saying it takes the threat "very, very seriously" and is working to "equip the rest of our government with options."
FBI Director James Comey addressed the issue while speaking to government and private-industry experts attending the Symantec Government Symposium in Washington, D.C.
"We take very seriously any effort by any actor," he said, "to influence the conduct of affairs in our country, whether that's an election or something else."
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sent a letter to Comey [on August 27], expressing concern that "the threat of the Russian government tampering in our presidential election is more extensive than widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results."SwineRooskis
The FBI has responded to recent concerns about U.S. voting systems' being targeted for cyberattacks as the presidential elections approach, saying it takes the threat "very, very seriously" and is working to "equip the rest of our government with options."
FBI Director James Comey addressed the issue while speaking to government and private-industry experts attending the Symantec Government Symposium in Washington, D.C.
"We take very seriously any effort by any actor," he said, "to influence the conduct of affairs in our country, whether that's an election or something else."
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sent a letter to Comey [on August 27], expressing concern that "the threat of the Russian government tampering in our presidential election is more extensive than widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results."SwineRooskis
Monday, August 29, 2016
The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman, and those are the areas they are working with Mrs. Clinton to target. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/30/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-debate.html
How interesting. I never would have placed IQ at the top, assuming that that is a rank-ordering, or even on the list; net worth is a twist I wouldn't have shouted for on his taxes, and, now let's read this carefully, "his image as a successful businessman." So, not "his success as a businessman," his "image."
Intelligence: "I went to all the best schools," he said in Iowa; "I guarantee you I am smarter than he is," he said of Jon Stewart upon being skewered as Fuckface von Clownstick; Marco Rubio really got under Trump's skin by joking about Trump's misspelled Tweets, which Trump corrected, as he did to his misspelling of Dwyane Wade's name; "They used to laugh at me." Drumpf: so close to dumb, or dummkopf.
"If Trump hadn't inherited his money he would be selling watches on a Manhattan street." That was another Marco Rubio sizzler that went directly to Trump's "image as a successful businessman," as did Mitt Romney's speculation that Trump's tax returns would show a man comparatively net worthless, a double whammy blow to his "image."
The aim of this psychological profiling is not to contrast Hillary Clinton as smarter, worth more, or a more successful businessperson, read carefully: Those are what Trump is "most insecure" about and the aim is to needle Trump into going Full Trump in the first debate.
Very interesting stuff.
The Clinton campaign was the source for most of the information in this article. Why would they do that? To work on Trump, certainly. It is planted information; as such it may be disinformation. But it doesn't read as disinformation. It reads pretty as intelligent strategy. They don't give much away. Lot of ground in intelligence, net worth is precise if currently unknowable, image as successful businessman covers some ground, as well. So, they don't reveal campaign secrets.
However much it was intended to work on Trump, there is also another person it was intended to work on: the moderator. He or she seeks advice from colleagues on which topics to address, which questions to ask. This is an article published in America's quasi-official newspaper of record. The New York Times published this as a message to the moderator. It would take uncommon deftness on the candidate's part to push Trump's buttons to send his inner ghoul skyward. George H.W. Bush could not have asked Michael Dukakis the rape-and-murder-your-wife question that exposed Dukakis as an automaton. Moderator Bernard Shaw could and did. This article is multi-focused in its targets.
How interesting. I never would have placed IQ at the top, assuming that that is a rank-ordering, or even on the list; net worth is a twist I wouldn't have shouted for on his taxes, and, now let's read this carefully, "his image as a successful businessman." So, not "his success as a businessman," his "image."
Intelligence: "I went to all the best schools," he said in Iowa; "I guarantee you I am smarter than he is," he said of Jon Stewart upon being skewered as Fuckface von Clownstick; Marco Rubio really got under Trump's skin by joking about Trump's misspelled Tweets, which Trump corrected, as he did to his misspelling of Dwyane Wade's name; "They used to laugh at me." Drumpf: so close to dumb, or dummkopf.
"If Trump hadn't inherited his money he would be selling watches on a Manhattan street." That was another Marco Rubio sizzler that went directly to Trump's "image as a successful businessman," as did Mitt Romney's speculation that Trump's tax returns would show a man comparatively net worthless, a double whammy blow to his "image."
The aim of this psychological profiling is not to contrast Hillary Clinton as smarter, worth more, or a more successful businessperson, read carefully: Those are what Trump is "most insecure" about and the aim is to needle Trump into going Full Trump in the first debate.
Very interesting stuff.
The Clinton campaign was the source for most of the information in this article. Why would they do that? To work on Trump, certainly. It is planted information; as such it may be disinformation. But it doesn't read as disinformation. It reads pretty as intelligent strategy. They don't give much away. Lot of ground in intelligence, net worth is precise if currently unknowable, image as successful businessman covers some ground, as well. So, they don't reveal campaign secrets.
However much it was intended to work on Trump, there is also another person it was intended to work on: the moderator. He or she seeks advice from colleagues on which topics to address, which questions to ask. This is an article published in America's quasi-official newspaper of record. The New York Times published this as a message to the moderator. It would take uncommon deftness on the candidate's part to push Trump's buttons to send his inner ghoul skyward. George H.W. Bush could not have asked Michael Dukakis the rape-and-murder-your-wife question that exposed Dukakis as an automaton. Moderator Bernard Shaw could and did. This article is multi-focused in its targets.
Sunday, August 28, 2016
Whew! Ok, I didn't precipitate precipitously on Silver's head. This is as close as he comes to passing on the gist of the Politico report:
Last week, Politico reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was set to employ a “run out the clock” strategy, declining to respond to recurring controversies...
Last week, Politico reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was set to employ a “run out the clock” strategy, declining to respond to recurring controversies...
That is the lead half sentence in a sixteen-paragraph article. Those two words are Nate Silver's encapsulation of of Politico's run out the clock, i.e. ignore the email issue, story. "Recurring controversies," wtf? The bogus health rumors? Benghazi? "Recurring controversies" could mean anything, groundless or grounded, Politico's story dealt with only ONE recurring controversy, the emails. "Recurring controversies" SUCKS as encapsulation of Politico's story on EMAILS. That is SHIT, encapsulation-wise.
Silver, give the bong pipe a rest.
Oh hell
The Politico article says Hillary Clinton's campaign is running out the clock on the email controversy, not the entire campaign. God DAMN it, I should have read that thing before going postal on Hillary. Mrs. Clinton, pardon moi, mademoiselle, my humblest apologies, it was because of that swine Nate Silver! Silver, why didn't you make that clear, you punk ass?!
Not responding to the email controversy is wise, period, in real politick, not just in the "abstract." Clinton is NOT running out the clock on attacking Trump. Then why aren't you attacking Trump, for godssake Mrs. Clinton? That is why Silver's article made sense. Beat that rented jackass! Where is Elizabeth Warren? Get her out there. You should be on Trump like stink on shit. Where's the Daisy ad? Where are those ads of real women reading transcripts of Trump's insults of women? Where is that nerdy guy with the glasses ad, the one from Goldwater, the thoughtful Republican saying "Senator Goldwater is different." You've got thoughtful Republicans coming out your ass! Put Mike Hayden in front of a camera talking about Trump and national security. Put that other guy, fuck, the ex-CIA director, can't remember his name, you know who I mean, have him cut a nerdy guy ad. Meg, not Whitman, what the fuck is her name, the tech CEO, ran for governor of California, Republican, have her cut a spot for you. C'mon, man.
Silver, put down your bong when you're reading and writing, just give it a rest for 45 minutes.
Not responding to the email controversy is wise, period, in real politick, not just in the "abstract." Clinton is NOT running out the clock on attacking Trump. Then why aren't you attacking Trump, for godssake Mrs. Clinton? That is why Silver's article made sense. Beat that rented jackass! Where is Elizabeth Warren? Get her out there. You should be on Trump like stink on shit. Where's the Daisy ad? Where are those ads of real women reading transcripts of Trump's insults of women? Where is that nerdy guy with the glasses ad, the one from Goldwater, the thoughtful Republican saying "Senator Goldwater is different." You've got thoughtful Republicans coming out your ass! Put Mike Hayden in front of a camera talking about Trump and national security. Put that other guy, fuck, the ex-CIA director, can't remember his name, you know who I mean, have him cut a nerdy guy ad. Meg, not Whitman, what the fuck is her name, the tech CEO, ran for governor of California, Republican, have her cut a spot for you. C'mon, man.
Silver, put down your bong when you're reading and writing, just give it a rest for 45 minutes.
"It’s Too Soon For Clinton To Run Out The Clock"-538, Nate Silver
This was published at 4:08 pm today.
Last week, Politico reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was set to employ a “run out the clock” strategy,
Last week, Politico reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was set to employ a “run out the clock” strategy,
"A run out the clock strategy." So no pause until Labor Day or German-American Day or the debates, run out the clock. I didn't see the Politico report. I bet that is what Axelrod was referring to. That is just DUMB, D-U-M-B. This is one of those instances, thought went into this now, where sensory input entered Hillary Clinton's brain, was processed, and out came shit.
declining to respond to recurring controversies even at the risk of seeming nonresponsive. In the abstract, such a strategy could make sense.
What are you fucking talking about, Silver, "in the abstract, such a strategy could make sense"? In what "abstract" universe could it make sense to run out the clock with 10 weeks left? NONE!
Clinton has a fairly clear lead in the polls. There are only 10 weeks to go until the Nov. 8 election — and less than that until early voting, which begins in late September in some states.
"Only!" Listen to this guy! "Only 10 weeks to go"!
But Clinton shouldn’t get too complacent. After mixed evidence before, it’s become clearer, at least according to our forecast models, that Donald Trump has regained some ground on her.
But Clinton shouldn’t get too complacent. After mixed evidence before, it’s become clearer, at least according to our forecast models, that Donald Trump has regained some ground on her.
Clinton’s national lead in our polls-only forecast has gone from a peak of about 8.5 percentage points two weeks ago to 6.5 percentage points as of Sunday evening — that is, a 2-point gain for Trump over two weeks.
Which is what I wrote last night. Clinton really needs a Designated Strangler.
The Great Blue Wall of Manchester
Beloved City beat West Ham today at Etihad Stadium 3-1 on two goals from a reinvigorated Raheem Sterling. Blue is undefeated in all competitions so far this season.
A Great Wall
Consider the Allegheny Mountains as they presented to an early 19th century pioneer with a pack mule, a horse, and perhaps a wife and a child: he does not know from escarpments; he looks at the Front and sees a Wall. Considered as a Wall that is the biggest, most formidable Wall he or any other pedestrian had ever seen: 180 miles long, 790 feet high at its lowest point to 4,770 feet at its highest.
Very un-pedestrian mountains to a 19th century pedestrian. No "easy access."
Perspicacity Regained: Democracy in America, Tocqueville
One of the most famous and most-cited instances of Tocqueville's farsightedness was which of the world's peoples would come ultimately to dominate the world, and to clash in the contest for dominion. Here is the passage:
There are, at the present time, two great nations in the world which seem to tend towards the same end, although they started from different points: I allude to the Russians and the Americans.
...
All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and only to be charged with the maintenance of their power; but these are still in the act of growth; all the others are stopped, or continue to advance with extreme difficulty; these are proceeding with ease and with celerity along a path to which the human eye can assign no term. The American struggles against the natural obstacles which oppose him; the adversaries of the Russian are men; the former [i.e. the American] combats wilderness and savage life; the latter, [i.e. the Russian, confronts] civilization with all its weapons and its arts: the conquests of [the American] are therefore gained by the ploughshare; those of [the Russian] by the sword. (504)
There are, at the present time, two great nations in the world which seem to tend towards the same end, although they started from different points: I allude to the Russians and the Americans.
...
All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and only to be charged with the maintenance of their power; but these are still in the act of growth; all the others are stopped, or continue to advance with extreme difficulty; these are proceeding with ease and with celerity along a path to which the human eye can assign no term. The American struggles against the natural obstacles which oppose him; the adversaries of the Russian are men; the former [i.e. the American] combats wilderness and savage life; the latter, [i.e. the Russian, confronts] civilization with all its weapons and its arts: the conquests of [the American] are therefore gained by the ploughshare; those of [the Russian] by the sword. (504)
Democracy in America, Tocqueville
Tocqueville's perspicacity was incomplete on the Alleghenies and departed him completely on the South. In a footnote to the chapter "WHAT ARE THE CHANCES IN FAVOR OF THE DURATION OF THE AMERICAN UNION, AND WHAT DANGERS THREATEN IT" (sic) the translator writes,
This chapter is one of the most curious and interesting portions of the work...it must be confessed that the sagacity of the author is sometimes at fault in these speculations, and did not save him from considerable errors. (442)
The translator then lists several. The undersigned skips around in his reading and came upon the following departures from perspicacity before he read the translator's note,
...it is almost impossible to discover any sort of material interest which might at present tempt a portion of the Union to separate from the other States (452)
The South and the West, on their side, are still more directly interested [than the North] in the preservation of the Union, and the prosperity of the North. (454)
...slavery has not created interests in the South contrary to those of the North...
Q.E.D.
This chapter is one of the most curious and interesting portions of the work...it must be confessed that the sagacity of the author is sometimes at fault in these speculations, and did not save him from considerable errors. (442)
The translator then lists several. The undersigned skips around in his reading and came upon the following departures from perspicacity before he read the translator's note,
...it is almost impossible to discover any sort of material interest which might at present tempt a portion of the Union to separate from the other States (452)
The South and the West, on their side, are still more directly interested [than the North] in the preservation of the Union, and the prosperity of the North. (454)
Saturday, August 27, 2016
Family Name Changed From Drumpf to Trump
Adolf Hitler was the third son...of a minor Austrian customs official...who for the first thirty-nine years of his life bore his mother's name, Schicklgruber.
...
Had the eighty-four-year-old wandering miller not made his unexpected reappearance to recognize the paternity of his thirty-nine-year-old son nearly thirty years after the death of the mother, Adolf Hitler would have been born Adolf Schicklgruber.There may not be much or anything in a name, but I have heard Germans speculate whether Hitler could have become the master of Germany had he been known to the world as Schicklgruber. It has a slightly comic sound as it rolls off the tongue of a South German. Can one imagine the frenzied German masses acclaiming a Schicklgruber with their thunderous "Heils"? "Heil Schicklgruber!" Not only was "Heil Hitler!" used as a Wagnerian, pagans like chant by the multitude in the mystic pageantry of the massive Nazi rallies, but it became the obligatory form of greeting between Germans during the Third Reich, even on the telephone, where it replaced the conventional "Hello." "Heil Schicklgruber!"? It is a little difficult to imagine.
-The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William Shirer 6,8.
...
Had the eighty-four-year-old wandering miller not made his unexpected reappearance to recognize the paternity of his thirty-nine-year-old son nearly thirty years after the death of the mother, Adolf Hitler would have been born Adolf Schicklgruber.There may not be much or anything in a name, but I have heard Germans speculate whether Hitler could have become the master of Germany had he been known to the world as Schicklgruber. It has a slightly comic sound as it rolls off the tongue of a South German. Can one imagine the frenzied German masses acclaiming a Schicklgruber with their thunderous "Heils"? "Heil Schicklgruber!" Not only was "Heil Hitler!" used as a Wagnerian, pagans like chant by the multitude in the mystic pageantry of the massive Nazi rallies, but it became the obligatory form of greeting between Germans during the Third Reich, even on the telephone, where it replaced the conventional "Hello." "Heil Schicklgruber!"? It is a little difficult to imagine.
-The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, William Shirer 6,8.
I'm starting to think 25% of my supporters are criminals who couldn't pass a background check twitter.com/pewresearch/st
Hillary Clinton*
I would like to talk about Hillary Clinton.
I wish there were nothing to say about Hillary Clinton except to wonder what color drapes she plans on installing in the White House, but there is.
There is some fatality that occurs inside Hillary Clinton's brain to good ideas; her brain receives sensory input accurately but it gets all jumbled around and fucked up in there so when it comes out it's shit. Her brain doesn't work too good. I don't think she is highly intelligent. She seems to me a plodder, like half of us, who has achieved by hard work with no significant assistance from her brain.
What brought about these ruminations was an interview I read Friday night of David Axelrod, Obama's political strategist in 2012 and 2008 and, which I did not know, who was Hillary Clinton's strategist in her U.S. Senate race against Rick Lazio in 2000.
Axelrod mentioned a couple things in that interview that reinforced concerns: One, that Hillary hasn't handled the email server issue too good. She gave an interview to Chris Wallace in which she said FBI director James Comey had concluded that she told the "truth," when Comey concluded no such thing. Axelrod said something, the meaning of which was, "HOW CAN YOU NOT BE PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION COMPETENTLY AFTER ALL THIS TIME!"
Is she prepared for an email "October surprise?" How can she not be after all this time?
Two, Clinton has left Donald Trump off the hook in the last few weeks, and the gap between her and Trump noticeably and consistently has closed a little. What Axelrod said on that was that it is a truism in politics that when your opponent is crashing the train you get out of the way. But Clinton didn't do that, to her enormous credit; she cut up some of the track ahead of Trump's train. When Trump started going off the rails during and after the conventions the Clinton campaign attacked him from multiple angles. It may have doomed Trump. Or not! Because then she let up. She stopped cutting the rails and gave the Trump campaign time to begin repairing the track.
Why? I don't know. I am on record advocating ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK! I think, obviously I do not know, that Clinton was following her campaign's plan, set weeks or months ago, to go after Trump full throttle immediately after the conventions and then to take her foot off until Labor Day or some other pre-designated day. Nothing wrong with that plan! But it seemed to me even at the time, and to more advanced minds than mine, like David Axelrod's, that sensory input was received, Trump was running off the rails, but not processed, and she stuck to her plan regardless of the sensory input. My view, and that of Axelrod and surely others, is that Clinton did not adapt, that if she had kept ripping Trump and ripping up track, he would be a train-wreck beyond righting now. She could have put Trump away, is my thought, and she didn't. It seems to me this is another example of good stuff going into Clinton's brain and bad ideas coming out.
Three: Man, she took a long time to put away Bernie Sanders, didn't she? Mrs. Clinton, is there anything else we can do for you? We give you a socialist and a national socialist to run against.
*UPDATE. Trump has just stepped on his short stumpy dick again, he tweeted that "Dwayne" Wade's cousin got killed today so "Just what I have been saying." [??] "African-Americans will VOTE TRUMP! End quote. See, Hillary, even Trump is trying to get you elected. Doing everything he can.
This is the most important presidential election in American history. The country's democracy, its constitutional form of government, American sovereignty itself, all are threatened as at no time past. Hillary Clinton must win this election.
The whole private email server: when that first broke I thought immediately, and wrote, "That is so Hillary." She gave a lot of thought to that! Who would think that that would be a good idea? It's like she has no sense, or doesn't have the instinct, to recognize, "DANGER! ABORT! ABORT!"
"Fight, Talk, Build." These are just the thoughts I have had of other things that seem to me to be "so Hillary." So, you're Secretary of State and you're thinking a lot about what to do in Afghanistan and for some reason the thought comes to your head, "We need a slogan." Now we all get stupid ideas come into our head but most of us most of the time have a mechanism in our heads to seek out and destroy stupid ideas, just kill them dead, before they come out of our mouths. Hillary, she doesn't have that kill mechanism. What you need in that event is someone who will come over the table and begin strangling you. She evidently doesn't have that either. So we got "Fight, Talk, Build" until the president killed it.
The reset button. Again, some thought went into this, it's not that Clinton doesn't think.
Oh, aren't I clever. See, he likes it!
Oh, that's not the Russian word for "reset?" That's the Russian word for "overcharged?"
Okay! Someone on her staff didn't know Russian too good--the idea of a "reset" with Russia. Lavrov got along fine with Condoleezza Rice! Putin got along fine with George W. Bush! WHAT NEEDED TO BE RESET! “It was the invention of Hillary Clinton and Obama administration:” Sergey Lavrov.
I actually think Trump, uncharacteristically, seized upon the wrong epitaph for Clinton. There is nothing "crooked" about Hillary, that is input that goes in and doesn't register, but "Incompetent Clinton" does.
I actually think the Republicans missed their strongest attack on Benghazi, it is not that Clinton ignored safety concerns or didn't have enough security in place. It was that Benghazi was the result of PROTESTS THROUGHOUT THE ISLAMIC WORLD and Clinton and Obama LIED AND DENIED and blamed Ambassador Stevens' murder on "INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS!" Their ENTIRE WORLDVIEW OF ISLAM JUST WENT UP IN SMOKE in that compound and they blamed the whole thing on a film. They panicked. They, especially the State Department, saw, knew, that their whole approach to the Islamic world had just gone up in smoke and they feverishly put out the story that "Innocence of Muslims" was to blame. Had Susan Rice go on every fucking Sunday talk show and blame everything on "Innocence of Muslims." Cost Rice any chance of succeeding Clinton as Secretary of State. Clinton's brain doesn't work too good when you give it time to think and when you don't.
Why did she take so long to respond to the murders of the Baton Rouge police officers? Because she wanted to be seen as "thoughtful," "prepared;" not shoot from the lip. "I think nine hours sounds about right."
She got schooled by Putin over Syria. They met face-to-face and he out-maneuvered her and maneuvered Russia into Syria. That was not the desired outcome of that diplomatic mission. She prepared! Just didn't come out too good.
"I think so." Senator Clinton, was Barack Obama born in the United States. She tries to be clever, ends up too clever by half when she isn't half clever.
I wish there were nothing to say about Hillary Clinton except to wonder what color drapes she plans on installing in the White House, but there is.
There is some fatality that occurs inside Hillary Clinton's brain to good ideas; her brain receives sensory input accurately but it gets all jumbled around and fucked up in there so when it comes out it's shit. Her brain doesn't work too good. I don't think she is highly intelligent. She seems to me a plodder, like half of us, who has achieved by hard work with no significant assistance from her brain.
What brought about these ruminations was an interview I read Friday night of David Axelrod, Obama's political strategist in 2012 and 2008 and, which I did not know, who was Hillary Clinton's strategist in her U.S. Senate race against Rick Lazio in 2000.
Axelrod mentioned a couple things in that interview that reinforced concerns: One, that Hillary hasn't handled the email server issue too good. She gave an interview to Chris Wallace in which she said FBI director James Comey had concluded that she told the "truth," when Comey concluded no such thing. Axelrod said something, the meaning of which was, "HOW CAN YOU NOT BE PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION COMPETENTLY AFTER ALL THIS TIME!"
Is she prepared for an email "October surprise?" How can she not be after all this time?
Two, Clinton has left Donald Trump off the hook in the last few weeks, and the gap between her and Trump noticeably and consistently has closed a little. What Axelrod said on that was that it is a truism in politics that when your opponent is crashing the train you get out of the way. But Clinton didn't do that, to her enormous credit; she cut up some of the track ahead of Trump's train. When Trump started going off the rails during and after the conventions the Clinton campaign attacked him from multiple angles. It may have doomed Trump. Or not! Because then she let up. She stopped cutting the rails and gave the Trump campaign time to begin repairing the track.
Why? I don't know. I am on record advocating ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK! I think, obviously I do not know, that Clinton was following her campaign's plan, set weeks or months ago, to go after Trump full throttle immediately after the conventions and then to take her foot off until Labor Day or some other pre-designated day. Nothing wrong with that plan! But it seemed to me even at the time, and to more advanced minds than mine, like David Axelrod's, that sensory input was received, Trump was running off the rails, but not processed, and she stuck to her plan regardless of the sensory input. My view, and that of Axelrod and surely others, is that Clinton did not adapt, that if she had kept ripping Trump and ripping up track, he would be a train-wreck beyond righting now. She could have put Trump away, is my thought, and she didn't. It seems to me this is another example of good stuff going into Clinton's brain and bad ideas coming out.
Three: Man, she took a long time to put away Bernie Sanders, didn't she? Mrs. Clinton, is there anything else we can do for you? We give you a socialist and a national socialist to run against.
*UPDATE. Trump has just stepped on his short stumpy dick again, he tweeted that "Dwayne" Wade's cousin got killed today so "Just what I have been saying." [??] "African-Americans will VOTE TRUMP! End quote. See, Hillary, even Trump is trying to get you elected. Doing everything he can.
This is the most important presidential election in American history. The country's democracy, its constitutional form of government, American sovereignty itself, all are threatened as at no time past. Hillary Clinton must win this election.
The whole private email server: when that first broke I thought immediately, and wrote, "That is so Hillary." She gave a lot of thought to that! Who would think that that would be a good idea? It's like she has no sense, or doesn't have the instinct, to recognize, "DANGER! ABORT! ABORT!"
"Fight, Talk, Build." These are just the thoughts I have had of other things that seem to me to be "so Hillary." So, you're Secretary of State and you're thinking a lot about what to do in Afghanistan and for some reason the thought comes to your head, "We need a slogan." Now we all get stupid ideas come into our head but most of us most of the time have a mechanism in our heads to seek out and destroy stupid ideas, just kill them dead, before they come out of our mouths. Hillary, she doesn't have that kill mechanism. What you need in that event is someone who will come over the table and begin strangling you. She evidently doesn't have that either. So we got "Fight, Talk, Build" until the president killed it.
The reset button. Again, some thought went into this, it's not that Clinton doesn't think.
Oh, aren't I clever. See, he likes it!
Oh, that's not the Russian word for "reset?" That's the Russian word for "overcharged?"
Okay! Someone on her staff didn't know Russian too good--the idea of a "reset" with Russia. Lavrov got along fine with Condoleezza Rice! Putin got along fine with George W. Bush! WHAT NEEDED TO BE RESET! “It was the invention of Hillary Clinton and Obama administration:” Sergey Lavrov.
I actually think Trump, uncharacteristically, seized upon the wrong epitaph for Clinton. There is nothing "crooked" about Hillary, that is input that goes in and doesn't register, but "Incompetent Clinton" does.
Why did she take so long to respond to the murders of the Baton Rouge police officers? Because she wanted to be seen as "thoughtful," "prepared;" not shoot from the lip. "I think nine hours sounds about right."
She got schooled by Putin over Syria. They met face-to-face and he out-maneuvered her and maneuvered Russia into Syria. That was not the desired outcome of that diplomatic mission. She prepared! Just didn't come out too good.
"I think so." Senator Clinton, was Barack Obama born in the United States. She tries to be clever, ends up too clever by half when she isn't half clever.
Geography in America, Tocqueville
What I once described, from this topographic map, as an artist's last, angry brushstroke Tocqueville describes:
When we cast our eyes upon the map of the United States [with 24 states] we perceive the chain of the Alleghany Mountains, running from the northeast to the southwest...and we are led to imagine that the design of Providence was to raise between the valley of the Mississippi and the coast of the Atlantic Ocean one of those natural barriers which...form the necessary limits of different States. But the average height of the Alleghanies does not exceed 2,500 feet; their greatest elevation is not above 4,000 feet; their rounded summits, and the spacious valleys which they conceal within their passes are of easy access from several sides...No natural barrier exists in the regions which are now inhabited by the Anglo-Americans; the Alleghanies are so far from serving as a boundary...that they do not even serve as a frontier to the States. New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia comprise them within their borders, and they extend as much to the west as the east of the line.
Everything is true except "easy access from several sides." The Alleghenies were a bitch to get over.
Pennsylvanians tried going through them; they tried going down south and coming up around them that way; they tried canals;
they tried portages (Dickens described traversing the Alleghenies past Johnstown via portages); they corkscrewed the mountains with rail when steam locomotives made it practicable. Rail worked.
All of these efforts were hugely expensive and took decades. From Wikipedia:
The near west, in the fifty years before 1830 was but recently settled and steadily growing...The canal era began in Pennsylvania in 1797...Spurred by construction of the Erie Canal (construction between 1817 and 1825)...Pennsylvanians built hundreds of miles of canals during the early decades of the 19th century...By 1834, the Main Line of Public Works, a system of interlocking canals, railways, and inclined planes, was hauling passengers and freight up to 391 miles (629 km) between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Though not all in concurrent operation, the total length of the canals built in Pennsylvania eventually reached 1,243 miles (2,000 km).
The Allegheny Mountains did not mark the limit of the states of Pennsylvania and New York, Tocqueville is correct again but they did of Virginia. During the Civil War western Virginia broke off and the new state of West Virginia, loyal to the Union, was created and recognized. Mountains, even ancient ones with rounded summits, do that: they create a different people, a different culture. The undersigned does not know how it is in New York state but in Pennsylvania the Allegheny Mountains created a different, not separate, culturally, economically, climatically, even dialectically, distinct region denominated: Western Pennsylvania. Politically, according to James Carville, "Pennsylvania is Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between." Carville is partly, only partly, correct in that, which I include here only because it cracks me up.
Geography is not destiny, biology is not destiny, etc. But geography affects man's ability to work nature, and to control man, more so than does biology and thus effects a people's destiny more.
Alexis de Nostredame
Since the first settlement of the British colonies, the number of inhabitants has about doubled every twenty-two years. I perceive no causes which are likely to check this progressive increase of the Anglo-American population for the next hundred years; and before that space of time has elapsed, I believe...the United States will be covered by more than 100,000,000 of inhabitants and divided into forty states.-DiA 460-1.
One hundred years after publication, in 1935, the U.S. population stood at 127,000,000. "Before that," in 1915, it had hit 100,000,000. The fortieth state came much quicker than Tocqueville predicted, South Dakota in 1889.
I like Pepperidge Farm stuff. Anything they make, I like.
What else? I like City and Pitty, and my kiddies and my friendsies. Like blogger, reading. Work! I like work; like being a defense attorney.
Alright, that's good. I like a bunch of stuff. Everything else blows. France blows. Big-time blows. France is the king and queen of blows.
What else? I like City and Pitty, and my kiddies and my friendsies. Like blogger, reading. Work! I like work; like being a defense attorney.
Alright, that's good. I like a bunch of stuff. Everything else blows. France blows. Big-time blows. France is the king and queen of blows.
Friday, August 26, 2016
France, What the FUCK Is the Matter with You
Whoa-wa, whu-wa. Allahu Akbar.
So, the genius of France, not to say its BIGOTRY, banned the "burkini" from 24 beaches.
Oh. She looks so sweet.
Here, the gendarmes make a Muslim woman remove her top.
Poor thing. That is so humiliating, FUCK! I've got a fucking lump in my throat. France, you are just a disgrace, a fucking disgrace! (Mother, I apologize for my language.)
A crowd gathered. “I heard things I had never heard to my face,” said the woman, who gave her name only as Siam to the French magazine L’Obs. “Like, ‘Go back to where you came from,’ ‘Madame, the law is the law, we are fed up with this fuss,’ and ‘We are Catholic here.’ ”
...
When female relatives with her asked the police why they were not hunting down people with crosses, if outward shows of religious faith were the target of the new law, a policeman responded: “We are not going to hunt for crosses. Get going, madame. You are being told to leave the beach.”
Lionnel Luca responding to the ruling, said: "We need to decide if we want a smiley, friendly version of sharia law on our beaches or if we want the rules of the [French] Republic to be implemented."
FranceCanSuckMyDick
A French court, the Council of State, which is the oddest name for a court I've ever heard, overturned the ban in one town, Villeneuve-Loubet.
Lionnel Luca responding to the ruling, said: "We need to decide if we want a smiley, friendly version of sharia law on our beaches or if we want the rules of the [French] Republic to be implemented."
FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU, "My-Name-is-Luca"!
Prime Minister Manuel Valls described the burkini as "a political sign of religious proselytising." The French Republic was "not at war with Islam", he argued, but "protecting [Muslims] against discrimination".
MANNY, YOU ARE A LYING, WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT!
(France: "My-Name-is-Luca," pretty fast thinking on my part, non? Do you get it? How about the image on the header? No? FUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU.)
Oh bless you, dear readers. Today:
Posts
That was an important post in an important series. If I do say so myself. Somebody's doing some research is my guess. Too early for a term paper...I don't know, somebody, and an American, unusually high percentage of Americanoids here all week, somebody, is writing something is my guess.
Olympics Recap
The United States won the most medals and the most gold, including Ryan Lochte's gold medal in the Police Report Freestyle competition. Hope Solo won the Games' Miss Congeniality Award.
USA! USA! USA!
USA! USA! USA!
Thursday, August 25, 2016
"...with Leroy Sane, Ilkay Gundogan, Gabriel Jesus and imminent signing Claudio Bravo still to come into the picture...-Manchester Evening News.
WHO? Never heard of them. Bad Bad Leroy Sane, Ilkay Ilkay Ilkay Gundogan, Gabriel Baby Jesus, never heard of any of them. Had never heard of Nolito until his excellent performance in blackjack at 365bet. Now he's my homie.
Hmmm...Republican!
YES! How'd I guess? Presidential candidate, too!
Did I ever tell you that I have this theory about guys who do that?
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Italian Earthquake: 159 Dead
The earthquake struck at, from memory, about 2:30 a.m. local time. I saw the first news reports just before going to bed, thought about noting it, but there were no first reports of casualties and, well, if it doesn't bleed it doesn't lede. It was a 6.2 quake according to the United States Geological Service but other reporting agencies had vastly different numbers, which makes a difference: every point up on the Richter scale is ten times more powerful than the lower number. "Moderately severe?" I think that was ine unhelpful translation of the numbers into language. And then, I am embarrassed to say, this is the first time I checked the news all day. So in embarrassment, and guilt, I note it several lira short and a day late. 159 dead is nothing to ignore yet I did. May God keep our friends the Italians, heal the injured, and give God's grace to endure to the families of the deceased. God bless Italy.
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Mooney: City Have "Swagger" Back Under Pep
http://www.espnfc.us/club/manchester-city/382/blog/post/2935014/manchester-city-making-big-strides-under-pep-guardiola-already
Few football teams go to Stoke City's Bet365 Stadium and survive for 90 minutes without finding themselves under pressure.
It's been a long while since City felt like they had their opponents intimidated at kickoff.
Few football teams go to Stoke City's Bet365 Stadium and survive for 90 minutes without finding themselves under pressure.
Ha-Ha, toldja. Can lose your shirt at Bet365, you can.
It is a tough place to play and City rolled. Not many clubs roll into Bet365 and roll the "Gamblers" 4-1. So it was an impressive win.
Not willing to go along that City have their swagger back after two league matches though. The ilk of Mooney gave the title to City last season after they beat Chelsea early.
It does seem that City were missing swagger the last few years though. In their title-winning 2011-12 season City shocked and awed opponents with the ilk of Aguero, Balotelli, Tevez until Munich, and with Toure gamboling through midfield. You could see fear in the faces and in the body language of opposing players. 8-2, 6-1, 5-3, in any match it seemed one goal and le deluge. Balotelli and Tevez are long gone, Yaya has been sashaying more than gamboling and only Aguero remains.
Yes, it has.
That seems to have returned, big-time.
I hope. We'll see.
Monday, August 22, 2016
A Child Murdering Children
Twenty-two of the fifty-four dead in the Turkish suicide bombing--At a wedding--were under fourteen years of age.
I cannot remember as excruciating an attack.
I cannot remember as excruciating an attack.
Democracy in America, Tocqueville, in Unwitting Support of Public Occurrences, Harris on the Indians
From the moment when a European settlement is formed in the neighborhood of the territory occupied by the Indians, the beasts of chase take the alarm. Thousands of savages, wandering in the forests and destitute of any fixed dwelling, did not disturb them; but as soon as the continuous sounds of European labor are heard in their neighborhood, they begin to flee away, and retire to the West...
No "fixed dwelling": very fluid.
...
...this effect of the approach of the whites is often felt at two hundred leagues' distance...(392)
200 leagues on land is 600 miles. So if the average territory allegedly "possessed" by an Indian tribe at the time was 533.33 square miles "the continuous sounds of European labor," hammering, sawing, singing "Dancing Queen," were "heard," and both men and beasts were driven away. Which I totally get.
...when [the whites] have advanced about fifteen or twenty leagues...they begin to build habitations for civilized beings in the midst of the wilderness. This is done without difficulty, as the territory of a hunting nation is ill-defined...
...
A few European families, settled in different situations at a considerable distance from each other, soon drive away the wild animals...(393)
...
Of all nations, those submit to civilization with the most difficulty which habitually live by the chase...the dwelling of the hunter varies with that of the animals he pursues.
Several attempts have been made to diffuse knowledge amongst the Indians, without controlling their wandering propensities...Civilization began in the cabin, but it soon retired to expire in the woods. The great error of these legislators of the Indians was their not understanding that, in order to succeed in civilizing a people, it is first necessary to fix it; which cannot be done without inducing it to cultivate the soil; the Indians ought in the first place to have been accustomed to agriculture.. But...[the Indians are] destitute of this indispensable preliminary to civilization...Men who have once abandoned themselves to the restless and adventurous life of the hunter, feel an insurmountable disgust for the constant and regular labor which tillage requires...
Je Suis Indian.
Independently of this general difficulty, there is another, which applies peculiarly to the Indians; they consider labor not merely as an evil, but as a disgrace; so that their pride prevents them from becoming civilized, as much as their indolence. (397-8)
JE SUIS INDIAN!
The undersigned read one time that there is an inverse correlation between democracy and reliance upon oil exports for revenue. The above passages by Tocqueville reminded me of that for if you rely exclusively upon nature for your sustenance and subsistence why would you learn anything else? The forests of America were as inexhaustible for one and one-half million hunters as the Saudi oil fields were when they were discovered. Population increase increases demand and effects a double whammy upon those who "possess" the natural resources by exhausting them. Those dependent upon natural resources then have nothing to fall back upon. They just fall back.
Civilization requires direction; direction requires control; control requires centralized authority. You
have to "fix" the population, it has to settle down for there to be any direction and control by centralized authority. Civilization is highly correlated with cultivation. Cultivators are fixed to the land. If the center can make of its people wet-rice cultivators it has struck civilizational gold: Wet-rice cultivators are fixed; they are fixed to flatlands (hills and mountains contraindicated for control) and they must be fixed to flatland close to market to avoid spoilage. Voila! The padi-state, China: everybody compressed in or near big cities. See The Art of Not Being Governed, James C. Scott (2009)
The only itinerant people to have coexisted with civilizations are the Gypsies, and they just barely. The Gypsies had the wiles to adapt, they came up with the "Great Trick" and live simultaneously within and apart from civilization. (See, e.g. The Gypsies, Angus Fraser (1995)
The American Indians had none of this, none of the Gypsy craftiness, no experience in cultivating, and would have none of it, didn't want it, the cultivating life was a "disgrace," filled them with "disgust." To the Europeans, the Indians were "savages;" to the Indian the Europeans were
disgusting, "disgraceful." These two peoples are incompatible. A hunter people are incompatible with any other type. Too much land is required for their exclusive usage.
Something had to give when the civilized European cultivators came to "share" the Indian hunters land. Each had a "right" to settle the land according to their customs but both could not. Noone can share land with an exclusively hunter people. And so something had to give and that was the Indian and his land.
No "fixed dwelling": very fluid.
...
...this effect of the approach of the whites is often felt at two hundred leagues' distance...(392)
200 leagues on land is 600 miles. So if the average territory allegedly "possessed" by an Indian tribe at the time was 533.33 square miles "the continuous sounds of European labor," hammering, sawing, singing "Dancing Queen," were "heard," and both men and beasts were driven away. Which I totally get.
...when [the whites] have advanced about fifteen or twenty leagues...they begin to build habitations for civilized beings in the midst of the wilderness. This is done without difficulty, as the territory of a hunting nation is ill-defined...
...
A few European families, settled in different situations at a considerable distance from each other, soon drive away the wild animals...(393)
...
Of all nations, those submit to civilization with the most difficulty which habitually live by the chase...the dwelling of the hunter varies with that of the animals he pursues.
Several attempts have been made to diffuse knowledge amongst the Indians, without controlling their wandering propensities...Civilization began in the cabin, but it soon retired to expire in the woods. The great error of these legislators of the Indians was their not understanding that, in order to succeed in civilizing a people, it is first necessary to fix it; which cannot be done without inducing it to cultivate the soil; the Indians ought in the first place to have been accustomed to agriculture.. But...[the Indians are] destitute of this indispensable preliminary to civilization...Men who have once abandoned themselves to the restless and adventurous life of the hunter, feel an insurmountable disgust for the constant and regular labor which tillage requires...
Je Suis Indian.
Independently of this general difficulty, there is another, which applies peculiarly to the Indians; they consider labor not merely as an evil, but as a disgrace; so that their pride prevents them from becoming civilized, as much as their indolence. (397-8)
JE SUIS INDIAN!
The undersigned read one time that there is an inverse correlation between democracy and reliance upon oil exports for revenue. The above passages by Tocqueville reminded me of that for if you rely exclusively upon nature for your sustenance and subsistence why would you learn anything else? The forests of America were as inexhaustible for one and one-half million hunters as the Saudi oil fields were when they were discovered. Population increase increases demand and effects a double whammy upon those who "possess" the natural resources by exhausting them. Those dependent upon natural resources then have nothing to fall back upon. They just fall back.
Civilization requires direction; direction requires control; control requires centralized authority. You
have to "fix" the population, it has to settle down for there to be any direction and control by centralized authority. Civilization is highly correlated with cultivation. Cultivators are fixed to the land. If the center can make of its people wet-rice cultivators it has struck civilizational gold: Wet-rice cultivators are fixed; they are fixed to flatlands (hills and mountains contraindicated for control) and they must be fixed to flatland close to market to avoid spoilage. Voila! The padi-state, China: everybody compressed in or near big cities. See The Art of Not Being Governed, James C. Scott (2009)
The only itinerant people to have coexisted with civilizations are the Gypsies, and they just barely. The Gypsies had the wiles to adapt, they came up with the "Great Trick" and live simultaneously within and apart from civilization. (See, e.g. The Gypsies, Angus Fraser (1995)
The American Indians had none of this, none of the Gypsy craftiness, no experience in cultivating, and would have none of it, didn't want it, the cultivating life was a "disgrace," filled them with "disgust." To the Europeans, the Indians were "savages;" to the Indian the Europeans were
disgusting, "disgraceful." These two peoples are incompatible. A hunter people are incompatible with any other type. Too much land is required for their exclusive usage.
Something had to give when the civilized European cultivators came to "share" the Indian hunters land. Each had a "right" to settle the land according to their customs but both could not. Noone can share land with an exclusively hunter people. And so something had to give and that was the Indian and his land.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Public Occurrences, Harris. The Indians, II
By what right of God or Man did the Indians come to have American North America?
Possession is nine-tenths of the law.
Look you, don't you get smart with me quoting a legal aphorism. How did they come to be in "possession" of it?
Over the Bering Strait land bridge.
Of recent construction, the Bering land bridge? No, "Beringia" (I took penicillin once for beringia) existed from 45,000 BCE to 12,000 BCE. So: The American Indians were in the contiguous states of the U.S.A. for 26 CENTURIES before Columbus. That is a helluva long property title.
Where'd they come from? Asia. What gave Asians the right to "possess" all of the lower 48? They were first. Okay, so obviously there is no legal title, "they were first" is their claim. So "they were first" gives them title in perpetuity? No, that is not right. Neither by Man's nor by God's law is someone entitled to a piece of God's green earth FOREVER just because "they were first."
Okay, maybe not exclusive possession forever; other people, the Europeans, had as much right to come to the lower 48 by ship as the Asians by land bridge, but joint possession.
Possession: In what reasonable sense can 1,500,000 people in 600 different groups be said to "possess" 3,120,000 square miles? That's 0.48 Indian per square mile. That's 0.001875 Indian tribe per square mile. That is not "possession." In no "moral" sense can 1 person be said to possess two square miles of land. One person would need man-made law to possess practicably two square miles. In no moral sense can one group of people be said to possess 533.33 square miles of land. That group would need the law.
Okay, okay, why did the Europeans have to eject the Indians and put those on reservations they didn't kill?
The American Indians were hunters. They did not even cultivate the soil, primarily. They followed the herds of "beasts of chase." Each Indian tribe can be said to have "possessed" its hunting range, which was very fluid. The range was very fluid and the concept of possessing land which you traverse while stalking game drains meaning out of "possession." What happened when a tribe chased the beasts into land possessed in the same sense by another tribe?
You need a helluva lot of land for a tribe of bow-and-arrow hunters in America to subsist upon. How much land? On average, they had 533.33 square miles, however much they needed. What happens when a sedentary population comes? Drives the beasts of chase away. So, as hunters, the American Indians needed exclusive possession of their hunting range, those 533.33 square miles. They could not share it with other tribes, when one tribe's hunting range bled into another's range there was BLEEDING there was war! And when a group of pale-face couch potatoes came to grow potatoes that cultivation was done on some Indian tribe's happy hunting ground.
Hunters, sucks to be you.
Hunters cannot share land. They cannot share land even with a sedentary, cultivating people. The mere presence of other people causes game to flee and a sedentary, cultivating, and multiplying, people destroys ground cover and food source for the animals and thence the hunters hunting range.
Screw that and the horse you rode in on.
What were the European Americans to do? There is nothing they could have done but what they did: fight the Indians and relocate those they didn't kill. The two groups of Americans could not coexist.
Possession is nine-tenths of the law.
Look you, don't you get smart with me quoting a legal aphorism. How did they come to be in "possession" of it?
Over the Bering Strait land bridge.
Of recent construction, the Bering land bridge? No, "Beringia" (I took penicillin once for beringia) existed from 45,000 BCE to 12,000 BCE. So: The American Indians were in the contiguous states of the U.S.A. for 26 CENTURIES before Columbus. That is a helluva long property title.
Where'd they come from? Asia. What gave Asians the right to "possess" all of the lower 48? They were first. Okay, so obviously there is no legal title, "they were first" is their claim. So "they were first" gives them title in perpetuity? No, that is not right. Neither by Man's nor by God's law is someone entitled to a piece of God's green earth FOREVER just because "they were first."
Okay, maybe not exclusive possession forever; other people, the Europeans, had as much right to come to the lower 48 by ship as the Asians by land bridge, but joint possession.
Possession: In what reasonable sense can 1,500,000 people in 600 different groups be said to "possess" 3,120,000 square miles? That's 0.48 Indian per square mile. That's 0.001875 Indian tribe per square mile. That is not "possession." In no "moral" sense can 1 person be said to possess two square miles of land. One person would need man-made law to possess practicably two square miles. In no moral sense can one group of people be said to possess 533.33 square miles of land. That group would need the law.
Okay, okay, why did the Europeans have to eject the Indians and put those on reservations they didn't kill?
The American Indians were hunters. They did not even cultivate the soil, primarily. They followed the herds of "beasts of chase." Each Indian tribe can be said to have "possessed" its hunting range, which was very fluid. The range was very fluid and the concept of possessing land which you traverse while stalking game drains meaning out of "possession." What happened when a tribe chased the beasts into land possessed in the same sense by another tribe?
You need a helluva lot of land for a tribe of bow-and-arrow hunters in America to subsist upon. How much land? On average, they had 533.33 square miles, however much they needed. What happens when a sedentary population comes? Drives the beasts of chase away. So, as hunters, the American Indians needed exclusive possession of their hunting range, those 533.33 square miles. They could not share it with other tribes, when one tribe's hunting range bled into another's range there was BLEEDING there was war! And when a group of pale-face couch potatoes came to grow potatoes that cultivation was done on some Indian tribe's happy hunting ground.
Hunters, sucks to be you.
Hunters cannot share land. They cannot share land even with a sedentary, cultivating people. The mere presence of other people causes game to flee and a sedentary, cultivating, and multiplying, people destroys ground cover and food source for the animals and thence the hunters hunting range.
Screw that and the horse you rode in on.
What were the European Americans to do? There is nothing they could have done but what they did: fight the Indians and relocate those they didn't kill. The two groups of Americans could not coexist.
Democracy in America, Tocqueville. The Indians, V
Half convinced, and half compelled, they go to inhabit new deserts, where the importunate whites will not let them remain ten years in tranquillity. In this manner do the Americans obtain, at a very low price, whole provinces, which the richest sovereigns of Europe could not purchase. (h)
h. On May 19, 1830, Mr. Edward Everett affirmed before the House of Representatives, that the Americans had already acquired by treaty, to the east and west of the Mississippi, 230,000,000 of acres. In 1808 the Osages gave up 48,000,000 acres for an annual payment of $1,000. In 1818 the Quapaws yielded up 29,000,000 acres for $4,000. They reserved for themselves a territory of 1,000,000 acres for a hunting-ground. A solemn oath was taken that it should be respected: but before long it was invaded like the rest.
h. On May 19, 1830, Mr. Edward Everett affirmed before the House of Representatives, that the Americans had already acquired by treaty, to the east and west of the Mississippi, 230,000,000 of acres. In 1808 the Osages gave up 48,000,000 acres for an annual payment of $1,000. In 1818 the Quapaws yielded up 29,000,000 acres for $4,000. They reserved for themselves a territory of 1,000,000 acres for a hunting-ground. A solemn oath was taken that it should be respected: but before long it was invaded like the rest.
Democracy in America, Tocqueville. The Indians, III
The ejectment of the Indians very often takes place...in a regular, and, as it were, a legal manner...the government of the United States usually dispatches envoys to them, who assemble the Indians in a large plain, and having first eaten and drunk with them, accost them in the following manner: "What have you to do in the land of your fathers? Before long, you must dig up their bones in order to live. In what respect is the country you inhabit better than another? Are there no woods, marshes, or prairies, except where you dwell? And can you live nowhere but under your own sun? Beyond those mountains...there lie vast countries where beasts of chase are found in great abundance; sell your lands to us, and go to live happily in those solitudes." If...they still hesitate, it is insinuated that they have not the means of refusing their required consent, and that the government itself will not long have the power of protecting them in their rights."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
