The basic gist of it is that the town of Newtok, Alaska is the first North American settlement to move because of climate change. Ok, there are only 400 people who live there and they are Yup'ik, but this is not an isolated incident. South Pacific Islanders are seeing their countries since into the ocean.
So, if you don't trust the US government, in particular DoD and NOAA, maybe you might listen to a Yup'ik person tell you that climate change is real.
Particularly the ones that were bombed to shit during World War II. At least there was the Marshall plan for Europe. The US isn't as kind to its cities. One can come up with all sorts of glib reasons for why US cities are messed up, but I think Strong Towns pretty much has the problem figured out.
Still, the US hates its cities for some reason. They would prefer to see unprofitable development as opposed to having people live in population dense areas. Is this divide and conquer? Keep the people apart and alone so they are easier to manipulate?
Anyway, Urban3 is a consulting company that helps cities better understand the economic impact of development. They have worked with many American cities to better understand and visualize the costs of development, and uncover which properties are productive, and which are not. Some municipalities have been willing to share that information, and it has provided a fascinating glimpse into the financial problems caused by sprawling car-centric suburban development. https://www.urbanthree.com/
The bottom line is that the current US model of sprawl is not sustainable.
I was tempted to call this "Of Angels, Aliens, and Impeachment" since people are believing the existance of Aliens and UFOs with less of a factual basis than the evidence that Joe Biden was on the take.
For example, Hunter's Laptop, it's been authenticated. It's been verified by other people, Tony Bobulinski. Now, we have hints that a Burisma exec taped at least one Biden. It's pretty much accepted that:
The House Oversight committee subpoenaed four banks and received thousands of records, the memo said. Based on those records, the committee said Biden family members, associates and their companies received more than $10 million in payments from people or companies with foreign ties, during and after Biden’s vice presidency.
A selection of the released bank records show that, from 2015 to 2017, Biden family members received money from a foreign company connected to Gabriel Popoviciu, The New York Times reported. Popoviciu is a Romanian businessman who was convicted in Romania on criminal corruption charges.
I'm with Joe Rogan that if this were Trump, the media would be up his asshole with a microscope, but it's Biden and the equal before the law and rule of law shit evaporates for the people liked by the Oligarchy.
They might have a point if there was proof that these allegations were being investigated, but nothing has happened while Trump seems to be a litigation magnet. But Trump was cast as a distraction. He's not a real villain, he's the heel in the Kayfabe world of WWF.
On the other hand, Biden is real, but is he being given the scrutiny he deserves?
It's amusing that the one person who is not from Minnesota, and has only been there on a layover flight knows about Strong Towns. This organisation was started by a planning engineer from Minnesota.
The previous clip mentioning Strong Towns was posted by someone who is of the same opinion I am about the US and urban planning: Emmigrate. On the other hand, people need to think about the points made by Strong Towns.
But my my point in the posts about the I-95 Bridge collapse is that there does need to be more options and alternatives to driving on an "arterial" road for the reasons presented in this video. Arterial roads get congested. Not to mention there isn't an alternative to an arterial form of transit if it becomes unusable.
The current US lifestyle is not sustainable for the reasons presented by Strong Towns. I am going to post their New Member Orientation Video, even though I have been supporting this group for a while now.
Like Strong Towns, I want to be a delivery mechanism for ideas that should become viral, whether that is in regard to urban development, the environment, addressing the US gun issue, US politics in general, and so on.
But these are ideas which need to be out there and discussed. Unfortunately, I think the institutions will keep them from being as widely disseminated and discussed as they should be.
|
This means that the traffic following the detour will be on a very bad stretch of road.
Sure, SEPTA is talking about adding cars to the already over used regional rail, but that is not even a band aid on the wound. We are talking arterial bleeding in terms of what a disaster this one small bridge collapsing will cause.
I would be ecstatic if I were a terrorist and this sort of target had been taken out. In fact, there is another spot on I-95 which the results would have been far worse for traffic in this corridor than this had the accident happened there. That gives you an idea of how bad having an accident like this will effect transportation on the East Coast.
Unfortunately, the US is unprepared to deal with the problems caused by its failure to address the issues that this disaster has raised. I really wish that it would cut the partisan bullshit and start working on the problems the US is causing itself.
One interesting thing about US politics is that the concept of subsidies is well camouflaged. Taxpayers subsidise Wal-Mart because the employees need to resort to social services to live on the low wages. Likewise, the US subsidises the automobile by giving free parking, not fully funding highway maintenance, Land use laws that favour sprawl, and so on.
The major one is the cost of petrol since that would be the one place where adding a road tax would make sense: make the users pay for maintaining the roads they use. The other alternative would be to have more toll roads.
But the issue of making sure that transportation is somehow set up to handle varied modes of transportation so that the country doesn't shut down if the main forms are put out of commission due to poor maintenance or weather.
Also, transportation and the issues related to it need to be addressed, since those are yet another thing which is ignored due to distractions in the US political process.
Resources:
Streets Blog: How Driving is Encouraged and Subsidized — By Law
Stong Towns media articles
And a song!
The term is also kind of nonsensical since it comes from the British sitcom "Yes, Minister" episode "The Bed of Nails"(S3E5). On the other hand, the US has pretty much put its transportation into cars and highways along with air. Rail transportation is of the third world calibre I would expect for the world's most affluent third world nation.
Which is disappointing since the US was once a leader in rail transportation.
I tossed in canals for good measure since I like canals: the old fashioned jobbies with longboats and towpaths. You can bike or hike beside them, or take a small craft for a leisurely jaunt around the countryside. Which are yet another thing that has been trashed in the US.
But the reason for this is that I heard that a section of I-95 in Philadelphia has collapsed which is a major transportation fuck up. And appropriate that it happened in the city that doesn't work. Philadelphia is a totally messed up city with a road system which was designed for horse drawn vehicles trying to deal with 21 century traffic. It has the subway to nowhere and destroyed its tramways. This means that a good section of the US east coast has been fucked by failing to have alternative forms of transportation which are actually viable for commuters.
Remember that air traffic on the east coast was buggered for several days due to the Canadian wild fires. So, air traffic is also not the answer.
This means that the two main forms of transportation in the US, highways and air traffic, really don't do the job. And rail is pathetic where it exists. Sure, the above video is in French, but the point is that the French have kept their rail transport viable and up to date. They are even proposing to stop internal flights of 500km or less in favour of air travel.
I would hate to have to rely on US rail transport to address the traffic on the east coast at this point.
Additionally, the US is going to have to make the road users pay for the proper maintenance of the roads which is going to truly bugger that method of transport, because the US can't run its current level of traffic on dirt roads and goat paths. And the problems with infrastructure are getting painfully obvious.
The real bottom line is that the US has been dodging issues using hot button issues ("culture wars") and not addressing the real problems of society: like health care, transportation, energy, the environment, and so on.
It ain't the Russians who make me want to see a change in the US political system. It's the homegrown oligarchs.
But don't trust me, as the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration points out: NOAA Knows Climate. I would also point out that the Pentagon has made it clear that Climate Change is a national security threat. https://www.defense.gov/Spotlights/Tackling-the-Climate-Crisis/
Fox can call AOC and idiot, but it's hard to argue that NOAA and the US Department of Defence are ignorant on this issue.
On the other hand, "Kennedy" said something along the lines of if AOC is for clean power, she should be all in for Nuclear.
Who is calling whom an idiot? Does Kennedy know about Chernobyl? Fukushima? Does she understand why people were worried when the Russians occupied the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant? Three Mile Island? I'm sure there are more reasons that people who know anything about nuclear power would never make a comment like that.
Jesus.
Personally, I would trust NOAA and DoD long before I would trust most of the clowns on Fox.
But the idiots at Fox News will probably be wearing scuba gear to take the subway before they might admit climate change is real. This is because they are either too (1) stupid, (2) dishonest, or (3) both to admit that climate change is real.
Tucker Carlson may have been the best thing on Fox News, but he is now free from their editorial bullshit.
NOAA Link: https://www.noaa.gov/noaa-wildfire/wildfire-climate-connection
I find it interesting that to hear about Hunter Biden and his laptop one has to dig for that information in the US media. On the other hand, I was saying "WHOA!" when I heard about the Bidens and Ukraine. Lots of other things going on which have me wondering, but the silence is bothersome. Particularly from my co-bloggers.
There are lots of ways to rig an election, one of which is to control the information. It's one thing to call Fox News viewers misinformed. Especially if one doesn't get good information from their news source: and US media is terribly untrustworthy.
My first reaction to Fox News was to want to turn the Television to the window and take a walk the way Poles did during martial law in the 1980s. I feel that way toward US media as a whole now. Fortunately, I don't have to watch it, but I am curious as to how Joe Biden can manage to maintain power given his obvious flaws. There are too many questions, but one is labelled a conspiracy theorist if they mention them.
If I have any influence from the Soviet Bloc, it is to question the party line. Especially if that party line is left unchallenged. Add in that the people who question are persecuted for airing the opinions. It's nice that the internet allows for the publication of opposing viewpoints, but whether those viewpoints are seen is another matter.
The reality is that there may be another sham election where a weak candidate may end winning against a much stronger opposition. Where districts which should be impossible to win are won.
One doesn't need to be a conspiracy theorist to question that.
And definitely in the last month.
I often wonder how long it would have taken me to get up to speed linguistically if I had been allowed to join the international legion. I know I could drive a truck and free up a space, but I am too old. Anyway, I find I am talking to people in Ukraine and helping in the ways that I can. I don't feel too useful, which is incredibly frustrating for me.
I just had a conversation with someone in Lv'iv, which is in the west and "away" from the heavy fighting in the east. It's an area close to the Polish border. Still, they are having a hard time.
I wish this would end.
This is pretty good on the differences between the two languages.
Or Just because a language belongs to a particular family doesn't mean that they will sound alike since English is a Germanic language. It shares a lot of similarities with Dutch, but most English speakers can't understand spoken Dutch.
I'm reposting this here since Wordpress stinks for editing. There's a quote in here which it doesn't do. I also wanted to add a video. That said:
I made a comment about how people in Europe kill each other over what religion they practise or language they speak. Slavic languages have the added factor of varying alphabets, which is interesting when you deal with the pan-Slavic crowd. They sort of have a point in that the languages are similar enough that you can be understood about the way most Scandanavians can understand each other. Then you get to the Alphabets. The former Yugoslavia was torn apart by religion and differences in Alphabets. Likewise, Polish and Ukrainian are fairly similar until you get to the Alphabet.
This is the Polish alphabet.
The Ł is pronounced like Elmer Fudd saying the letter "W". So, Wrocław is pronounced like Vroswav. In my opinion, the German transliteration of Breslaw (with a German accent) works better for non-Poles. The alphabet is a romanised version of Ukrainian/cyrillic.
Ukrainian and Russian both use the Cyrillic alphabet, but slightly different versions. There are four letters in Ukrainian missing from Russian (ґ, є, і, ї), and four letters in Russian missing from Ukrainian (ё, ъ, ы, э). Also:
One frequently cited figure is that Ukrainian and Russian share about 62% of their vocabulary. This is about the same amount of shared vocabulary that English has with Dutch, according to the same calculations. If you expand your sample by scraping internet data to compare a broader range of words than just those 200 ancient “core” words, the proportion of shared words declines. One computational model suggests that Russian and Ukrainian share about 55% of their vocabulary.
Using that higher figure of 62%, though, a Russian with no knowledge of Ukrainian (or vice versa) would understand roughly five in eight words. To understand this, have a friend cross out three out of every eight words in a newspaper and see how much of the text you can follow.
from Ukrainian and Russian: how similar are the two languages? https://theconversation.com/ukrainian-and-russian-how-similar-are-the-two-languages-178456
Anyway, the Cyrillic alphabet also was a force which prevented Russians from invading a good part of Western Europe. I mean, can most people read Cyrillic? Now, turn it around to the Roman alphabet for the average Slavic language speaker. You don't need guns to prevent a Russian invasion--Road signs work quite well.
On the other hand, these nations have different enough cultures that it requires a certain amount of sensitivity toward that fact which gets into how one transliterates Kyiv (or pronounces it for that matter).More like Kew, or the "ł" in Polish, which I learned from my Ukrainian cousin.
My "slavic" heritage is more western (Ukraine, Poland, "Czechoslovakia"{1}, etc.) with my ancestors being definitely Austro-Hungarian. This is why I was musing on this topic: way more variation in Slavic languages outside of Russia.
Footnote:
{1} this saves listing a bunch of former and current countries due to European cartographical changes.
I used a picture of a costume Gendarme the last time I did this post on this subject. This time I am using actual material from the French Gendarmerie Nationale. Those who do not understand French can turn on autotranslated English subtitles.
The Maréchaussée, a precursor to the Gendarmerie Nationale dates back to the Middle Ages. Some historians tracing it back to the early 12th century around the commencement of the Hundred Years War.. The Current version of the Gendarmerie dates to when Maréchaussée was organised in 1536, or, formally, the Constabulary and Marshalcy of France (connétablie et maréchaussée de France). Gens d'Armes (men at arms) is a term used in even older sources. That's why I included "Second Amendment History" as a subject here. The Gendarmerie is a force of the nation for the protection and security of the people. It has been a military force since its inception. This is different from the Anglo-American sense of the police, and military, as being subordinate to the citizenry.
The National Gendarmerie is one of two national law enforcement forces of France, along with the National Police. The Gendarmerie is a branch of the French Armed Forces placed under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior, with additional duties from the Ministry of Armed Forces.
In short, it is an internal army, which is a no-no in Anglo-American, especially American, tradition.
The first video is a short video on the history of the Gendarmerie Nationale:
The next clip requires some explanation since there are two different branches of the Gendarmerie Nationale: the Gendarmerie Départementale and the Gendarmerie Mobile (OK, three if you count the Garde Républicaine). The next video has more than you ever wanted to know about the organisation of the Gendarmerie Nationale. It does a lot of things.
The Gendarmerie Départementale is best explained by comparing it to US state police forces. It is in charge of policing small towns and rural areas. The Departmental Gendarmerie carries out the general public order duties in municipalities with a population of up to 20,000 citizens. When that limit is exceeded, the jurisdiction over the municipality is turned over to the National Police.
The Gendarmerie Mobile is an internal military force organized into the seven regions of the Mobile Gendarmerie (one for each of the seven military regions of metropolitan France, called (Zones de Défense). It comprises 18 Groups (Groupements de Gendarmerie mobile) featuring 109 squadrons for a total of approximately 11,300 personnel. Its main responsibilities are:
Nearly 20% of the Mobile Gendarmerie squadrons are permanently deployed on a rotational basis in the French overseas territories. Other units deploy occasionally abroad alongside French troops engaged in military operations (OPEX or external operations).
The Mobile Gendarmerie includes GBGM (Groupement Blindé de la Gendarmerie Nationale), an armored grouping composed of seven squadrons equipped with VXB armoured personnel carriers, better known in the Gendarmerie as VBRG (Véhicule Blindé à Roues de la Gendarmerie, "Gendarmerie armoured wheeled vehicle"). It is based at Versailles-Satory. This unit also specializes in Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear defense (CBRN) defense.
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
The founders' intent was to have a civilian force, instead of a professional military one, to handle the tasks which are delegated to the Gendarmerie Mobile in France. This is due to a cultural difference where the Anglo-American tendency is to dislike large standing military forces. Or as the Virginia Constitution of 1776 states in its Bill of Rights:
Sec. 13. That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
I should add that modern police forces are a new thing in Anglo-American tradition dating back to the early to mid 19th Century. There were night watches and other non-professional forms of law enforcement early on. Modern policing only began to emerge in the U.S. in the mid-nineteenth century, influenced by the British model of policing established in 1829 based on the principles of Sir Robert Peel.
Sir Robert Peel created what is termed an ethical police force. The approach expressed in these principles is commonly known as policing by consent in the United Kingdom and other countries such as Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
In this model of policing, police officers are regarded as citizens in uniform. They exercise their powers to police their fellow citizens with the implicit consent of those fellow citizens. "Policing by consent" indicates that the legitimacy of policing in the eyes of the public is based upon a consensus of support that follows from transparency about their powers, their integrity in exercising those powers and their accountability for doing so.
The first organized, publicly-funded professional full-time police services were established in Boston in 1838, New York in 1844, and Philadelphia in 1854.
As I said, the difference in attitude is based upon cultural differences.
I found this article which pretty much confirms my suspicions: https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2016/feb/25/how-real-is-that-atlas-robot-boston-dynamics-video.
Anyway...
This pretty much sums up the current situation:
These videos are more press release than research paper, designed to show the subject in the best possible light. I doubt we’ll see Atlas running cross-country races any time soon, and there are a whole host of limitations, from battery life to noisiness, which would need to be overcome for success in the wild, or even a warehouse. Still, if you’re in any doubt as to what its creators have accomplished, or how hard this is to do, I’ll leave you with a compilation of some of its peers.
Sure, it's neat to see videos of robots jumping up and down while doing things that would be impossible for most people. On the other hand, I wonder how fake those happen to be. Are the interviews with AI chatbots staged by people who know what to ask.
Yes, yet another attempt to get information from a computer "gatekeeper" which ended in failure.
You can't really complain to the company since the AI won't let you talk to a person: especially if your query isn't in their menu of options. This is why a human is far better than a machine--no matter how "intelligent" it may appear.
In this current case--I have received notice that a shipment is on its way from a company I am not familiar with. I contacted the company, but this shipment appears to be a mistake. So, I thought I would try to find out more from the carrier.
Unfortunately, the AI works as a gatekeeper to prevent me from actually getting help with my issue.
As I said, AI is more useless than trying to talk to someone in a call centre who happens to speak my language as a second language: if even that. At least the person in the call centre will make some effort. The machine lacks empathy and understanding of the actual issue.
The only thing to worry about artificial intelligence is that there isn't some form of human check to keep if from doing what it does best.
Fuck things up.
It was very weird for me to watch the coronations of Charles and Camilla on French TV. There was the distance caused by the language and commentary. Also, it seemed like something from the past, which it is. But it seemed even more anachronistic.
Toss in that it is way more ostentatious than any of the other European monarchies, there are 12 of them, six of which are members of the EU (Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden). Things have changed quite a bit since at the start of the 20th century only France, Switzerland and San Marino were the only European nations to have a republican form of government.
Unfortunately for the people who want to say the US is a republic, not a democracy, the only real difference between those two systems of government are that democracy has the ability to be a monarchy. Euronews has an interesting article: Politics and popularity: Why are there still so many monarchies in Europe? It's not the only news source discussing European monarchies.
I'm not sure how I feel about monarchy these days. Although I do side with the comment that “There is no contradiction between a country being a monarchy and being an advanced democracy”. Also, “One of the roles for the royal family is to be a symbol for the nation as a whole and therefore the monarch as an institution has to strive to represent the whole of the nation.”
Monarchy unifies a nation as Clement Atlee said: “Far less danger under a constitutional monarchy of being carried away by a Hitler, a Mussolini or even a de Gaulle.” That's an interesting thought to ponder in light of US politics.
“Luddite” is now a blanket term used to describe people who dislike new technology, but its origins date back to an early 19th-century labor movement that railed against the ways that mechanized manufactures and their unskilled laborers undermined the skilled craftsmen of the day.
Machines are like people who have a limited understanding of a language, yet are working where they need total fluency and proficiency. Sometimes, they don't even rise to that level as the Comcast "intelligent assistant demonstrates". I kept asking it the same question and wanting to speak to a human, but it ended up disconnecting me.
I find interactions with Artificial Intelligence to be more frustrating than helpful. And once one sees past the illusion, AI proves to be totally useless. One doesn't need Luddites to smash the machine: the machine is useless. Still, the bosses would prefer to spend the money on technological toys than hire people to actually do the job.
I was going to give ChatGPT a try to see how long it would take to show it isn't worth the hype, but I would need to sign up for an account. That doesn't make me trust it since there is no disclaimer as to what this company will do with my information.
I have tinkered with AI art programmes with varying results: most of which I would consider crap. Of course, some people find the results to be incredible.
On the other hand, AI is worse than the call centres in some country where they do not speak my language as a first language. Although, in reality, they are both pretty bad. At least the human is making an effort to communicate.
A computer can't.
It cannot truly empathise with your situation. It doesn't really understand what is happening. It only compares what it is being told to possible scripts, but life is not scripted.
So, don't worry--just unplug the thing. And hope that business will realise that it isn't saving money in the long run--especially if they start haemorraging customers.
As I detail in my book, DNA samples recovered in Egypt from the New Kingdom to the Roman Period reveal that Egyptians had predominantly southern European and Near Eastern ancestry; sub-Saharan African ancestry didn’t exceed 15 percent in the ancient times and doesn’t exceed 21 percent in Egypt today. So it’s safe to say that even with some Egyptian heritage, in today’s terms she wouldn’t have been Black but biracial.
There are quite a few important things to keep in mind here since the Mediterranean is surrounded by three continents: Europe, Africa, and Asia and there was trade between those continents from pre-historic times (yes). OK, this map is modern, but the geography is pretty much timeless.
It's simplistic to think of Europe as being this island in the upper parts of the Eastern (and some Western) Hemisphere isolated from the rest of the "known world": especially when you think of "here be monsters" on old maps. But the Hereford Mappa Mundi includes India.
I have no problem with the actress playing Cleopatra since she pretty much looks like what I would expect a Cleopatra to look like, instead of Elizabeth Taylor. Biracial and lighter complected.
Just because I identify with the Eastern Hemisphere, and Europe, doesn't mean I don't acknowledge that other cultures haven't been influential in Europe. It's hard to deny when Africa is touching Iberia at the west.
I am very familiar with Antrim County, MI. Something had to be wrong when Biden somehow "won" the election in 2020.
Wouldn't the Libertarians be out of the duopoly? nwmichiganlibertarians.org/2020-election-who-knows-what-really-happened-in-antrim-county-michigan/
Anyway.
Don't question US elections!
I know the person who repaired Hunter's laptop--this sucker is real.
It's not Russian disinformation.
The same thing applies to my lack of support for Hillary Clinton. I was an early Sanders supporter and I considered it a joke since I knew the Democrats would never allow him to run.
The nice thing is that the Democrats can continue to neglect the problems with their party, but I will never vote for the duopoly.
It's time for a change.
Russell Brand hits the nail on the head about Biden, Trump, and the fake US elections. The stories about Biden's corruption would be everywhere if it had been Trump.
Crickets for Biden.
You can fix an election by controlling the information the voters have to make their decisions.
And I don't trust the US media one bit.
I am going to make a disclaimer that I believe in true public broadcasting, but US public broadcasting is commercial. It has commercials in the form of "underwriting" by large corporations, which is pretty much the same thing as being commercial. Yes, the fact that it is not free of big money influence make it a part of the rest of US media. Big business can threaten to take away its money and PBS is SCREWED--BIG TIME!
Which takes us to this clip from PBS News Hour where one of the commentators says "There hasn't been any obvious gaffes, big scandals, or anything like that."
Funny how Hunter's Laptop has been missing from the media (and I never heard back from Burisma about my job application).
It will probably also be missing again this election cycle (PBS shut off comments to this).
I should add that these two clowns are from the New York Times and the Washington Post. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos who would be eating 50 cent burritos if the duopoly wasn't in power and was whacked by someone vaguely like Bernie Sanders enforcing US competition laws.
But this gets to where Fox News is wrong: The Democrats are nowhere near left wing. In fact, the Republicans have also strayed from their true populist roots, which makes it even funnier when I read Shot in the Foot's blog: they might want to look up Minnesota Justice Harry Blackmun. Or even better, look up Richard Nixon's comments about firearms ownership.
As I like to say, I was rather shocked when I watched a documentary about Nixon (on PBS) and realised how lefty he seemed in the early 1990s!
Sorry for the digression, but US Politics has moved to the right. The Democratic Party has pretty much extinguished anything vaguely New Deal-Roosevelt, which means that someone like Bernie Sanders has no part in that party. Which is why I distrust anyone who claims to be to the left and is associated with that party. It cannot be fixed from within.
The reason that Biden is president is that he appeals to the big donors, which is why the Tech giants can deny the existance of Hunter's laptop and what it means to Joe Biden. So, that really wasn't that much of a digression.
There isn't much of a "lefty media" in the US other than some things on the internet (E.g.: Real News Network and Democracy Now), but they don't have much of an audience. Which means we are left with Fox News and Sky News Australia who get only part of the story, and are taken about as seriously as Democracy Now.
I feel like someone in occupied Europe trying to get reliable information when I look at the US media because it isn't there.
"All the News fit to Print" is propaganda, or at least explains their editorial policy in that they only feel they need to print what they believe should be printed.
And Hunter's laptop and associated scandal is nowhere to be seen.
The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is making dire predictions about the need for addressing climate change. It's 2023 Climate Change report highlights the need for serious action NOW!
More than a century of burning fossil fuels as well as unequal and unsustainable energy and land use have led to global warming of 1.1°C above pre -industrial levels. This has resulted in more frequent and more intense extreme weather events that have caused increasingly dangerous impacts on nature and people in every region of the world. But there are multiple, feasible and effective options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to human-caused climate change, and they are available now, said scientists in this IPCC report. Taking effective and equitable climate action will not only reduce losses and damages for nature and people, it will also provide wider benefits, the report points out, underscoring the urgency of taking more ambitious action now to secure a livable sustainable future for all.
The US bizarrely holds onto the car as a practical form of transportation while pretty much neglecting high speed rail. The reason I say bizarrely is that the US was once on the vanguard of train technology, but cars were subsidised and have led to the destruction of cities, which is another post, and are enviornmentally unfriendly.
The French are incredibly train friendly with the National Assembly voting to abolish certain domestic air routes, in case of alternatives by train of less than 2h30. This climate bill intends to eliminate links between Paris (Orly) and Nantes, Lyon or Bordeaux, but provides for exceptions for connecting journeys. The Citizens' Climate Convention had called for domestic flights to be waived in the case of alternatives of less than 4 hours by train, not 2.5 hours.
Transposing that onto the US, transportation on the east coast would be pretty much transformed to primarily rail: especially if the four hours by high speed train limit were imposed. Fortunately, US trains are pretty slow compared to those in other countries. Even Acela is pokey by the standards of other countries.
Again, there are other issues here in how environmentally and socially unfriendly modes of transport have been supported, which don't make sense here. What I really want to talk about is the concepts of Flygsam and Tågskryt, or flight shame and train pride. Greta Thunberg hasn't flown since 2015 in order to reduce her carbon footprint. Some Swedes are trying to emulate her. I would like to do so, but unfortunately, I have to fly sometimes, but I buy carbon offsets and have been doing so for a while now.
On the other hand, she has the option of taking the train in Europe. The US continues to invest in technologies which are soon to be obsolete, if they haven't been obsoleted based upon their harm to the planet. Yes, people can pretend that change is unnecessary until it becomes obvious to even the most ignorant.
The US needs to reassess itself in the light of reality.
I've been thinking about posting this video clip since I first saw it.
I have a weird feeling this post will be pulled by the overly sensitive pro-gun crowd: which is why I titled it what I did.
This video is (1) A good reason to check out the words to a foreign song...and also the video (2) disturbing.
"Tu me Manques" is French for I miss you. Of course, It can also mean "missing" in the context of "missing the target". She misses him in the first sense, but not the other. It's a nice song if you just listen to the lyrics and music.
The video is something else.
It's weird how even "progunners" when pressed begin to realise that maybe the right they believe to exist is actually limited.
It would be nicer if they would just use their brains and do some serious research.
But that would mean that they would have to admit that they have been living a lie.
It would be nice if I gave a translation of the words:
I'm wasting my time and my spring
Wandering around Paris
I don't care about the people who are always telling me
You gotta forget about him
I should erase your face
I'm not sure what to do, I'm not sure what to do
But your words are echoing
I'm drowning in them
I'm drowning in it
And I miss you
I'd have to forget about you but you haunt me
And I miss you
I'd like to forget you but you haunt me
I'm pretending, absent gaze
To fill my boredom
I don't care about the people who keep telling me
You gotta forget about her
I should erase you
And go straight to the front
But there's your words that resonate
I get lost in it
I get lost in it
And I miss you
I'd have to forget about you but you haunt me
And I miss you
I'd like to forget you but you haunt me
We've got our whole life to do over
We're wasting time, we're wasting time
I don't care about the whole world
I'm not pretending, I'm not pretending
I'm ready to do anything to please you
I'm not gonna let you down, I'm not gonna let you down
And you're gone in a flash
I'm waiting for you
And I miss you
I'd have to forget about you but you haunt me
And I miss you
I'd have to forget you but you haunt me
℗ & © Dorcas 2023
Wow! Thanks. I've screen capped the Good Guys And Gals With Guns? post since you just made the argument for why the relaxing of concealed carry is bullshit from a practical point of view.
According to some reports, the Nashville Covenant school was not a gun free zone...
Some of the usual suspects are already trying to use this factoid to indict the idea of armed school staff:...
Even in “Stand your Ground” states, self-defense law doesn’t as a rule allow citizens to close with and engage perpetrators, acting as cops or infantry.
The proper role for an armed staffer, according to the way actual self-defense law works, is to barricade themselves and the kids they’re responsible for into a room, and be ready to shoot at a perp who comes through the door with mayhem in mind.
So, really armed citizens are as ineffective as unarmed ones since as you point out the only people who should be going after the "orcs"are the first responders. Armed citizens with handguns can only hope to stop someone with a long gun which is going to be far more accurate and have a higer velocity than their weapon.
So, the armed citizen hopes they might get a shot off before being
turned to hamburger by someone with an AR-15 or similar weapon. Which
does jackshit since the progunners neglect that sometimes mass shooters
have shoot outs with real trained professionals to go on to further
carnage as was the case with the Columbine Shooters.
Quite likely a mass shooter could have a bullet proof vest which would protect against handgun rounds as well.
Let's toss in the armed citizen could be confused with the active shooter for good measure as to WHY someone has to have shit for brains for even buying this argument for concealed carry in the first place. Nothing like adding to the confusion by being a halfwit with a gun.
Alas, the dumbfucks who have bought into the "pro-gun" horseshit have probably bred and are not candidates for Darwin Awards. They have progeny which we can only hope will be smarter than their parents. Emphasis on hope since I would hope most people would use their brains, but most people, especially Amerloques, tend to be intellectually challenged.
It would be nice if other pro-gunners were as honest as you. Although, it would be nice if you took your statements to their logical conclusion and realise that you are just full of shit. Also that you have been lied to by the people you see as "leaders". You are one of the sheep if you have bought into this without question.
As I like to say, the pro-gun arguments don't stand scrutiny.
And you just shot yourself in the foot.
Stop shooting in the dark, Mitch.
And thank you from all the anti-gun organisations who now have copies of this post. You are going to be the anti-gunner poster child for this statement against interest.
You should have a serious rethink of the "pro-gun" position since deep in your subconscious you know it's a pile of horsehit.
Oh, and stop using the word "ignorant" since you obviously have no idea what it means, or you would understand the irony of your posts: this one post in particular.
I couldn't agree more with what Russell is saying here:
One thing is for sure – the Democrats more interested in bringing him down than understanding what led to his rise.Toss in addressing the issues surrounding this mess brought to us by the duopoly.
And pointing out how much the Democrats have blown it with continuing their witch hunt on Trump while ignoring their own problems, which I'm not going to bother mentioning if you aren't aware of them by now.
This story is only "à la un" on the broadcast media. The print media are like the Private Eye "Heir of Sorrows" series where it listed off headlines from the British dailies. In this case, the French are concerning themselves with issues of French interest.
That is pretty much the strike relating to the change in retirement regulations making people have to wait longer to retire.
And you wonder why I prefer Europe to the US. Especially when the US has become a banana republic having to resort to political prosecutions instead of addressing the issues it needs to. The partisanism is totally disgusting to me.
As the mans says: "democracy needs policies. And it needs effective policies."
Not the "partisan" bullshit that is going on the the US.
It's interesting what he is saying. It's not exactly what my last two posts have been about, but very similar.
Liberalism in Europe, today, is something like “libertarianism”—it is a right-wing ideology. There used to be a left libertarianism, which is probably better called anarchism, and that persists in various sectarian versions, but it isn’t much in the public eye. And then in the United States, liberalism generally means “New Deal liberalism.” It’s our very modest version of social democracy, and it isn’t a very strong doctrine, since many of its practitioners became neoliberals much too easily. So, the -ism is not a strong or coherent doctrine. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t liberals. But liberals are people who are best defined morally or psychologically; they’re what Lauren Bacall, my favorite actress, called “people who don’t have small minds.” A liberal is someone who’s tolerant of ambiguity, who can join arguments that he doesn’t have to win, who can live with people who disagree, who have different religions or different ideologies. That’s a liberal. But those liberal qualities don’t imply any social or economic doctrine. So, there are liberals in the world, and I can recognize them, but liberalism does not describe their actual political commitment. The word is better used to qualify the kinds of commitments that I write about: democracy, socialism, nationalism, et cetera.
He's making a good point since "liberal arts" is a field of study "based on rational thinking, and it includes the areas of humanities, social and physical sciences, and mathematics. A liberal arts education emphasizes the development of critical thinking and analytical skills, the ability to solve complex problems, and an understanding of ethics and morality, as well as a desire to continue to learn." That means the division is between closed mindedness and open mindedness: not whether one is on the left or the right.
The problem with US politics is that it is based upon fallacious thinking. "The Democrats are progressives/socialists/liberals/etcetera" and "The Republican Trump supporters, etc." Is the divide that clear cut? Fox news calls the democratic party "socialist", yet that party has a long track record of destroying the moderate "socialist" policies of the new deal. What Sanders was proposing wasn't too far out from where FDR was going, and what is pretty much expected in the rest of the world as far as social policy goes.
As I said, not exactly what I have been saying in the past few posts, but definitely something I agree with:
On the other hand, I am extreme fringe left in the United States being aligned with Bernie Sanders. I find my home in the US with the Green Party and Democratic Socialists. I'm trying to figure out which party comes closest when I start looking at European politics, which gets interesting since some things which are called "Socialist" in the US are taken for granted in European politics. In fact, trying to take them away would make one an incredibly unpopular candidate.
But the US doesn't talk about how overworked it is until someone mentions that Europeans usually start a job with 3 weeks of vacation and work up. They also don't work more than 40 hours a week.
It's things like that that make me question the 2020 election where people were prevented from working, yet a candidate who talked about not living in fear during a period of enforced unemployment lost the election. Things like Universal Basic Income make sense when someone is told they cannot work. Likewise, so does having housing and medical care paid for.
On the other hand, it is easier to play the ad hominem card of "that candidate/party/person is a progressive..." when it's obvious that the term doesn't really apply when one properly looks at the issues.
As I like to say, if the Democratic Party were as socialist or progressive as the right/Fox news likes to claim: wouldn't it have made sense to run Bernie Sanders instead of the candidates who they did run???? Of course, Fox news would be even more embarassed since it seems that Sanders was popular on a town hall they ran.
Anyway, despite this I have to admit that I am blissfully ignorant of US politics, which was made apparent since I had no idea who Ketanji Brown Jackson was or what made up the US Supreme Court. For good reason, the institution is blatantly political. It makes decisions which are not really based in law.
And it fucking well doesn't need to.
I'm not sure if being a US Supreme Court Justice is something worthy of being: especially since it it is a purely political position. The reason I go by Laci is that someone joked that my dog had been in more courtrooms than Harriet Miers, which was probably true.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to pretend reverence for a document most people don't understand and is horrible out of touch with modern society. And they forget can be amended. Even though they say they like certain of the Amendments.
Yes, diversity is a good thing, especially if it is properly applied.
Unfortunately, there isn't too much diversity in the marketplace of US ideas, despite the First Amendment. Which is why it is amusing to me that French Newspapers could be government subsidised.
The United State is locked in partisan nonsense and needs to get parties which actually represent the people. The only way that will happen is on a local basis, where the duopoly have less control. The non-duopoly parties begin to "infect" the legislature, which is where the real change comes.
I was pleasantly surprised when Doggone told me that Antonin Scalia agreed with me about the parliamentary system.
I don't like it because of Westminster. I like it because the power is where it belongs: in the lesiglature. Additionally, because of that, there is an absolute necessity for political cooperation.
One needs to come up with a consensus for a parliamentary system to work. The government literally falls if there can't be a consensus, which is why it is necessary. A lower house of parliament with an ability to dismiss a government by "withholding (or blocking) supply" (rejecting a budget), passing a motion of no confidence, or defeating a confidence motion.
Loss of supply occurs where a government in a parliamentary democracy using the Westminster System or a system derived from it is denied a supply of treasury or exchequer funds, by whichever house or houses of parliament or head of state is constitutionally entitled to grant and deny supply. A defeat on a budgetary vote is one way by which supply can be denied. Loss of supply is typically interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government. Not all "money bills" are necessarily supply bills. For instance, in Australia, supply bills are defined as "bills which are required by the Government to carry on its day-to-day business".[1]
When a loss of supply occurs, a prime minister is generally required either by constitutional convention or by explicit constitutional instruction to either resign immediately or seek a parliamentary dissolution.
Some constitutions, however, do not allow the option of parliamentary dissolution but rather require the government to be dissolved or to resign.
Given how many budget crises happen in the US, it would probably go through governments like Italy or Belgium until the teething period was over. On the other hand, digging in on the budget would make it clear where the real power lies in government.
The presence of third parties would ensure that there was a way to gain consensus, or withhold it to bring the government more in line with the will of the people. There's a reason why the duopoly do everything they can to keep the power to themselves.
I don't have any illusions about some of the reforms which would be nice to see in US politics since Europe has them and people like Marine Le Pen are prominent in politics. On the other hand, there is a far better representation of political viewpoints in Europe than the One Party-Duopoly United States.
There's a reason I don't like discussing politics with Americans: they are worse than people who lived behind the Iron Curtain in how badly they are propagandised.
There needs to be a real free market of ideas, which isn't happening in the US.
Black History Month - What we don't know and are not taught: "Black Mozart"
Joseph
Bologne, lived during the era of the American Revolution, 1745 -1799.
He was French, the son of a slave mother and a wealthy planter father.
His father essentially bought a title in 1757, and had taken his son to
France for his education, along with his mother who continued to be a
slave. He excelled in swordsmanship. He was SO unusual, so excellent at
this skill, that when he graduated he directly became a member of the
King's bodyguard, and was knighted. He also fought duels with prominent
swordsmen who insulted him because he was bi-racial.
And the more European the title sounds the better, but any of the Three Musketeers/The D'Artagnan Romances series (The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After, and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later) would be the best bet. There was a reason the BBC cast a mixed race actor to play Porthos in their version of the books.
Alexandre
Dumas, AKA Alexandre Dumas père, author of The Three Musketeers and The
Count of Monte Cristo (and father of Alexandre Dumas fils, who wrote La
Dame aux Camélias). Alexandre père's father (or, if you prefer, the
père's père), General Alexandre (Alex) Dumas, was black Haitian, the son
of an aristocratic French father, Marquis Alexandre Davy de la
Pailleterie, and a freed slave, Marie-Cesette Dumas. Toss in that the
father was a general in Napoleon's grande armée!
The writer's father's dad sold the boy as a slave to pay for his passage to France
(that's remedial parenting classes for you, Marquis de la Pailleterie)
before buying his freedom. Later, Alex rose through the ranks of the
army to become a general before he was 30. He was so effective that that
the Austrians called him Der schwarze Teufel ("the Black Devil").
During the French revolution fought with other black men in a unit
called the African Legion.
OK, I didn't vote for John Fetterman in the last Pennsylvania Election (FYI once one emmigrates from the US, one votes in the last place they were domiciled--it seems I am currently stuck with Philadelphia due to bureaucratic BS). I don't like him for a variety of reasons, but I also Demexited in 2016 and haven't looked back on the duopoly since. I'm not going to get into why I dislike the "Berners" who have remained within the Democratic Party other than to say that I dislike them.
I voted Green in 2022 even though Dr. Oz was not my type. Although, I was walking around singing "Arc en Ciel" the day of the election...
De toute façon...
My point, My vote for Jill Stein in 2016 didn't change the election result, the electoral college did that. And the Russians had nothing to do with that, unless you want to tell me that Catherine the Great promised the Continental Congress a "Donkey Show" a few centuries later on.
My Green Party votes haven't changed the results since the duopoly pretty much runs things for the time being in the US. And no matter what Fox news tries to tell people, there really isn't that much of a difference between the two parties.
Seriously, if the "Democrats" really were socialists, they would have run Sanders in 2016 (and 2020) and won.
Electoral college or not.
But the duopoly doesn't want that to happen. And anyone who remains within the duopoly is a traitor to the movement behind Bernie.
I definitely agree with this: AI needs to be taken with careful skepticism. My car can pretty much drive itself, but I wouldn't trust it to drive anywhere without me having a veto power over what it does.
Lets toss in mistakes Siri and other voice recognition systems make. I used to collect them, but they became overwhelming.
AI cannot be trusted blindly, but it can help make life better when used WITH a human check on the system.
Like it or not, the US Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence, are anything BUT popular documents. It was written in secret by a select group of people. Sure, there were debates, but they were anything open and above board until after the document was written. People forget that some people, the anti-Federalists, were against ratification of the constitution.
I don't totally agree with his analysis (the pronouns bit is anachronistic as heck), but he does make some very good points.
It wasn't written for the benefit of my ancestors who fought for independence and revolted at Morristown. It was written for the elite who said "We the people".
