Saturday, August 11, 2007

[crunch time] cat toying with mice

Which one are we?

I tell you it's induced, I've spelt out the agenda in many posts and I state further that this is a trial run just now. Who baled the banks out this time?

A credit crunch has been averted with the help of world banking 'super-friends', but stock-watchers are divided on the wash-up.

And this:

The Fed promised to provide whatever funding was needed to ensure that banks were able to continue lending to each other at its desired interest rate of 5.25 per cent and pumped $38bn (£18.8bn) into the system in three separate open market operations.

And this.

Yet at the October 25th FOMC it was noted that:

The President recently signed the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006, which gave the Federal Reserve discretion, beginning October 2011, both to pay interest on reserve balances and to reduce further or eliminate reserve requirements.

And this:

This amounts to the most extensive liquidity support operation undertaken by the US central bank since the 9/11 terrorist attacks and follows similar steps by the European Central Bank and Japanese central bank in the past two days. Among the main central banks, only the Bank of England has declined to inject extra cash into the markets.

In layman's terms, the problems are soft GDP, rampant consumer debt, sluggish housing market and inflation. Even a non-economist can draw conclusions from that.

Now, add to that the factor of China [hat tip Wolfie]:

The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Add to that the suicidal consumerism in recent decades, the drop in the real value of the monetary unit against key commodities and the tightening of government control of all aspects of people's lives to an unprecedented peacetime level plus the European "feelers" from Merkel on gearing-up for war and the surreptitious pushing through of the Euro treaty and what have we got?

Above all else, whilst you consider this, also consider who is actually at the helm. Which men and women are actually running the economy? Do you trust a CFR or European financier to act in your best interests, come the credit crunch?

There are therefore a series of recommendations, all but one posted here before:

1] Quietly get out of any credit arrangement within the next two years or any other mechanism where you are in thrall to a financial body;

2] Take legal advice on the status of your private property and ensure the title is secure in your name;

3] In the case of a mortgage, be prepared to have the balance called in by 2012, i.e. be prepared to concede the loss of your property when the 2nd Fed induced crash comes;

4] Therefore have some fallback living facility somewhere, even if it's only a beach house with a garden.

5] "You've got to have cash," says Roger Montgomery, managing director of Clime Asset Management.

[blogfocus saturday] know thy pet

Otherwise known as the Great Pet Quiz. Your task - to match the "posts and pics" [which do go together] with the personage listed below. Those with eight right win three bags of chaff.

1 Holly can't understand why Harvey is apparently standing, staring into space; she doesn't realise he's adapting my 'I'm just admiring the scenery' approach when I stop, panting, halfway up a hill. And this evening he ate some fish skin and a bit of dog food - hand-fed by me. One is born every minute.

2 Simi has had the first of her summer haircuts today and is very pleased with herself. She got lots of treats afterwards for having proved herself to be "educata" [well brought-up] at the doggie grooming parlour!

3 I had posted this in the past but thought I`d throw it up again for a laugh. I had this doilie on my computer chair and there must have been a crumb of food there because next time I turned my head, there was Elvis wearing the doilie!! LOL He stayed that way long enough for me to grab the camera near by.

4 Tiny "circling the herd" on Sunday as diners played defense with their lobsters, clams and mussels during the Down East Clambake at Goomp's

We're posting a cute kitty pic because we didn't want to leave that somewhat unnerving image of the Shellfish McToast at the top of our blog overnight.

5 The RSPCA had sent him there after they had made five unsuccessful attempts to find him a permanent home. It is a little known fact that the RSPCA do kill dogs they are unable to re-home, unlike the National Canine Defence League. But they give them a last chance – before the final deed is done. So he was on doggy death row and staging 24 hour barking and dirty protests.

6 As you know, I am the proud owner of a wonderful Jack Russell, called Gio. I am pleased to say he has never behaved quite as badly as Bert, a Jack Russell owned by Tory MP Andrew Turner. Bert took it upon himself to embarrass his owner while visiting the Isle of Wight Show when he savaged a Polecat to death.

7 The grey mare and I have just celebrated our fifth anniversary together. As far as relationships go, I think it’s very satisfactory: she carries me on her back, and I feed, worship and adore her. Prior to the grey mare, I had acquired my horses: she is the first one I paid for. Hunting for a horse can be a harrowing business.

8 OK, no. They aren't champs. They have various "not quite perfect" traits. But I love 'em. To bits. And not for the world would I hold their tails out, raise their heads unnaturally or flick at them with a brush like a demented game show contestant (not in public anyway).

And the personages for this evening are:

Iain Dale, Tea & Margaritas, Mopsa, Liz, Mutley, Welshcakes, Sisu, Mutterings and Meanderings.

[smallmindedness] petty bureaucrats strike again

Arch-criminal June Turnbull [79] hard at work flouting the law

Excuse me whilst I pause for a few moments and collect myself, regain a little self-control, you understand. All right, I'm ready now.

Regulars know that I often blog on the macro-crims in the fetid recesses of Britain, Europe and America but I don't get upset about them. It's just a job warning everyone what el creepos are up to.

What does upset me though and upsets me greatly are the jobsworths, the petty bureaucrats, the mealy-mouthed pedants, the regulation spouters and the like. In other words, the pedants who run Urchfont in Wiltshire, whom the Lone Voice [Newport City] deals with at his blog.

In a nutshell, June Turnbull, 79, has been working on a public flowerbed in her village every year for no remuneration and she pays for the flowers and compost out of her pension [hundreds of pounds so far].

Suddenly, recently, a highway inspector "caught" her doing it, reported her to the Wiltshire County Council who have now "ordered her to carry three metal signs, post a lookout and wear a fluorescent safety jacket".

She says:

"I come and work on the flowerbed at the drop of a hat when the weather is fine and I have some time to spare. I can't drag around three great metal signs and have someone standing by in case I might want to do a bit of work on it.

I work there until the gardening is done. I love doing it. It is my bit to keep the village tidy. It is a lovely little village. I don't care what they do to me. I will continue working on the flowerbed."

The council has retaliated by ordering her to:

"stay away from the flowers until she complies with their safety regulations."

Mrs. Turnbull has replied:

"They can send me to jail if they like. I just want to be left alone to do it. It is a very pretty flowerbed. I have tried to make it look very natural."

Residents credit her with "transforming the flowerbed into a gorgeous focal point, which helped Urchfont win the title of Best Kept Village in Wiltshire two years ago" and to be fair, Parish Council Chairman Peter Newell thinks the County has gone over the top on this.

The mental deficient who ordered this thing, Peter Hanson, divisional highways manager for the county council, has insisted:

she has no "Section 96" safety licence and thus must cease work for her own "public health and safety".

Can anyone tell me if public lynchings are illegal these days? More seriously, is there any "recall" mechanism in local government procedures which could be invoked to rid society of this sort of moron?

You can hear the defence now:

"If we start making exceptions, yes even for this old lady, where would we all be, eh? Law and order would break down before we knew it."

Rustic Urchfont, hotbed of septuagenarian crime


The Lone Voice concludes:

Hurrah for the endless sheets of paper that need to be filled in before anyone can to do anything in this nation, hurrah for the many countless and pointless bans, rules, red tape and assorted bull shit that now make up this merry isle.


[status] patrician or pleb?

"You have no business to take our books; you are a dependent, mamma says; you have no money; your father left you none; you ought to beg and not live here with gentleman's children like us and eat the same meals as we do and wear clothes at our mamma's expense." [Jane Eyre]

So what's your immediate reaction? That the young lady is right and that the obnoxious teacher has been rightly put in his place or that what the obnoxious little madam needs is a good, sound spanking?

What confers status?

1 age and seniority, as in the case of this teacher;

2 specialized knowledge, like the senior mechanic who services your car;

3 job, as in the teacher and gentleman's daughter;

4 birth;

5 money;

6 intelligence and general ability;

7 what else?

Python always seem to have something pertinent to say on social issues so here's their take. Two pepperpots are sitting on a sofa, looking through an album of baby photos:


Mrs Nigger-Baiter Oh, yes, he's such a clever little boy, just like his father.

Mrs S D'you think so, Mrs Nigger-Baiter?

Mrs Nigger-Baiter Oh yes, spitting image.

[The door opens. The son comes in.]

Son Good afternoon, mother. Good afternoon, Mrs Nigger-Baiter.

Mrs Nigger-Baiter Ooh, he's walking already!

Mrs S Yes, he's such a clever little boy, aren't you? Coochy coochy coo ...

Mrs Nigger-Baiter Hello, coochy, coochy, coochy coo...

Mrs S He...llo, he...llo... (they tickle him under the chin)

Mrs Nigger-Baiter Oochy coochy. (the son smiles a little tight smile) Look at him laughing... ooh, he's a chirpy little fellow. Isn't he a chirpy little fellow ... eh? eh? Does he talk Does he talk, eh?

Son Yes, of course I talk, I'm Minister for Overseas Development.

This status question was thrown into sharp relief recently at my own employer, the Minister of Truth. We're a bit of a mutual admiration society and the mix is just right, a comfortable situation for both. I acknowledge his higher status and he acknowledges my expertise.

Trouble is with the drivers. They still retain the old Soviet notion that no man is higher than another and if they see half a chance to put themselves on a level with you, they take it. That's no problem for me because I love to chat with anyone.

What I didn't understand was that to "lower" yourself to that point over here loses you all respect with the more menial workers, who expect you to stay aloof. Result - one driver who started game playing and having jokes at my expense.

The matter was resolved quietly and he got the message but what he didn't get was that, irrespective of relative status, there's never any call to act disrepectfully, even to a political opponent. We need to accord the same attitude to a child of three as to a Prime Minister.

Just one man's point of view, of course.

Charlotte Bronte

[stylistica] not essential but adding spice

Spicing up your writing is not just a matter of learning or knowing these. They need to be "felt". This is a large and complicated field and only some are referred to below:

1. Imagery

a) metaphor: Substitution of one word for another

[Example: "the eye of heaven" for the sun]

b) simile: Explicit comparison

[Example: your eyes shine like the sun]

c) symbol: Concrete thing representing something abstract

[Example: the rose as a symbol of love; the cross as a symbol of Christian religion]

2. Devices that rely on the sound of the words

a) alliteration: Repetition of the first sound in two or more words

[Example: "A cold coming we had of it" T.S. Eliot; Journey of the Magi]

b) onomatopoeia: Sounds imitating the thing they refer to

[Example: The name cuckoo imitates the sound this bird makes]

3. Sentence construction

a) parallelism: The structure of successive sentences or phrases is the same

[Example: The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. Winston Churchill]

b) anaphora: Obvious repetition of a word or phrase at the beginning of successive sentences.

[Example: " Though bladed corn be lodged and trees blown down, Though castles topple on their warders´ heads, Though palaces and pyramids do slope..." Shakespeare, Macbeth]

c) enumeration: A list of words, phrases or sub-clauses, usually employed to illustrate a comprehensive phrase or term by listing some of the elements it describes.

[Example: "I grant him bloody, luxurious, avaricious, false, deceitful..." Shakespeare, Macbeth]

The enumeration may be in climactic order.

[Example: " ... businessmen who have lived five, ten, twenty years in America..." W.A.Henry, Against a Confusion of Tongues]

4. Various other stylistic devices

a) direct address: The author speaks directly to his reader – this device can often be recognized by the second person pronoun "you". The appeal to the reader may occasionally be intensified by the use of the imperative in direct address.

b) rhetorical question: The author asks his reader a "question", the answer to which is perfectly clear anyway. So its function is not that of a real question – it is to lead or force the reader into agreeing with the author´s views.

c) quotation: The quotation of experts, of public figures or from other texts serves to support the author´s ideas and lend them a higher degree of acceptability. (Sometimes an author may quote an "expert" who is not actually a specialist in the field the author is dealing with – this is known in classical rhetoric as an "argumentum ad verecundiam".)

d) allusion: The author does not quote directly from some other text – instead, he uses ideas, concepts and references from well-known texts or historical events in the hope that an educated reader will recognize them and see them as support for the author´s own ideas. One of the most common allusions is the biblical reference.

e) repetition of key words: An important idea or concept may be stressed by its repetition. The fairly simple trick is that the reader cannot help but realize that something must be important if it is mentioned often enough.

f) personification: The author speaks to an object or an abstract idea as if it were a person.

5. Devices that rely on features of the layout

Two features which should be mentioned here are:

a) capitalization: The author may choose to write nouns that he considers very important with a capital letter at the beginning. He may even use only capital letters in writing a key word.

b) italics: Printing words, phrases or even complete sentences in italics is one of the simplest and most effective ways of showing that they are important.

6. Two other specific devices

Zeugma is a device in which a verb or other part of speech is appropriate to a following word or phrase but is then also applied to a second (or even third) word or phrase, not strictly correctly but acceptably.

eg. She raised the blinds and [lifted] my spirits.

Syllepsis is like zeugma but the verb is used in a different way from the first to the second following word or phrase. This results in a humorous effect.

eg. He leaned heavily on the podium and stale jokes.

Friday, August 10, 2007

[feminism] a fine answer to a supposed detractor

Welshcakes has answered my posts on radicalism:

First of all, let us remember that throughout history, there would have been no change without those who were willing to be strident, to break the law for what they believed in and even to risk their lives for it.

In the following paragraph, if you take out the word "feminism", which claims the credit for women's advances and substitute the word "women" for the people who actually achieved it, then I agree that:

[Feminism], in winning the freedoms and rights that women in western countries now enjoy, was and is a necessary movement, for once freedoms have been won, they have to be protected.

Welshcakes, of course, correctly observes:

Where it all goes wrong, I believe, is when we say, “Ok, we’ve got those so now let’s get more rights and freedoms than men have.” I have never, for instance, gone along with the “wages for housework” idea for none of its proponents ever stopped to consider that single women have to do it as well, and certainly nobody was going to reward us.

This was my point all along. It was radicalism, not feminism, which I was attacking but feminists might tend to overlook that. The next part, strangely, I cannot agree with:

And, however “hard” running a home might be, it cannot, just cannot, be compared with competing in the ruthless, target-setting environment that is the world of work today.

I'm in this "ruthless, target-setting environment" now and I also have to run the home and of the two, I feel the latter is far harder, especially when there is a family. Welshcakes is an adept - just look at her productions - so she might feel the former is harder.

It's a lovely post and argues the case for feminism very well. The feminist lobby could do worse than to snap up her text, as JMB is doing and use it as a bulwark against the sorts of incursions I've seemingly been trying to make.

If you haven't already read it, here it is again.

[bigotry post] roll up and be insulted

The last bigots' post was done on purpose.

My next post might have a go at British men or maybe the gays or straights or maybe Man United or Green Bay Packers fans or the Scots or whoever.

It doesn't really matter - the Italian girls were close to hand so … Poor Tuscan Tony thought I was fisking him but quite the opposite, actually.

The ones I really have it in for are the killjoys who would legislate against anyone expressing his or her opinion. I don't think you fully appreciate over there in the west just how far these people have strangled the life out of western society and are tightening the PC noose more and more every day.

Say what you like but I'm in the land of free speech over here in the fSU [provided you go easy on Vlad the Impaler] and Britain, America and the Antipodes are now like Stalag 13.

In a western office, try saying to any girl, the more feminist the better: "Whoa, really love your butt - wanna shag?" and see what happens. Try saying it here and the girl would grin and get back to her work, striking that idiot off her eligible list.

Try saying over there: "I think you gays can do your biz to your heart's content but I don't think this country should be run by the homosexual mafia," and see how far you get. Try saying it here and they'd turn to each other and call you: "Ham", meaning "lowest form of coarse, uncultured beast", then get back to whatever they were up to.

Try saying that the aborigines are holding the Australian government to ransom over these ridiculous tribal land claims just because they think they'll make some cash out of it. Why don't they kick up a fuss over the Simpson Desert then? No money, eh?" You'd be drummed out of Australia or imprisoned for sedition.

Legislation to prevent a person saying what he feels. That's all this comes down to. You don't like what I say but instead of moving on, you try to invoke the law on me. So let's really open the throttle. Try these for size:

There was absolutely no holocaust and the Jews are holding the world to ransom - so there. Or this one - Islam is insidiously worming it's way into Europe. Let's think of another - Christians are narrow minded bigots. Atheists are irrational morons. What else? The English are greedy and don't wash. The Americans are stupid and have no sense of humour. The Scots want to have their cake and eat it too - [West Lothian]. The only concession to gaiety in Wales is a striped shroud. I'm going to discriminate against the Irish by refusing to. James Higham is a smelly, disgusting little man and he can't even write properly and he probably has a tiny willy. What else can I think up on the spot?

I've run out of ideas. Try this site.

Outraged: "These bigots have to be made to understand …"

Me: "Why so? Why must they be made to understand and what are they going to understand?"

Outraged: "Well they'll think twice after cooling their heels in prison, mark my words …"

Me: "You really think so? You've just given them free publicity, that's all."

Outraged: "Well, it's the principle of the matter. These people can't just run around spouting whatever bile they like…"

Me: "Uh-huh."

[italian girls] the time bomb factor

Mama and her bambinos
UPDATE: It's been pointed out to me today by certain Italians and Welshcakes has also drawn attention to it: "
Grammar note, Mr Headmaster: [You do it to others, after all!] The plural of bambino is bambini but as they are all girls in the pic, it should, strictly speaking be bambine."
Thank you, m'lady.

Now this problem of Italian women we've all been grappling with. Just how real or how ridiculous is it? Tuscan Tony set the cat among the pigeons with his statement [and he lives over there]:

The intense diet of pasta and red wine has them playfully puppy-fat laden until the age of around 35, when they suddenly go up like auto-inflating liferafts.

This seemed unfair, even if popular wisdom did dictate that the Italian sweetie becomes the Italian balloon. So I tried to research it but it was so difficult to get hard data. Here is one from a medical record:

Italian women were shorter and fatter compared with age-matched Danish women, but in middle-age, had less abdominal fat distribution.

This seems to suggest that they put the weight on all over, especially in the arms and legs. A glance at the photo above seems to suggest though that it's more that their large frames get better covered, as nature intended, rather than trying to be anorexic any more.

And Italian men are noted for liking their women on the voluptuous side. Twiggy would have no place in Tuscany.

Now to the second major issue - is this post sexist, as Ellee might say?

Well, quite frankly, yes. It is obsessed with women because this blogger is interested in women's bodies, minds, souls and intelligent conversation. I'm afraid the statistics on the fatness of Italian men does not move me to quite the same degree.

And what?

The word "sexist", I feel, is an overused word, invoked at the drop of a hat and always with negative connotations. So let's liberate the word - set it free from its shackles!

Of course a man is going to prefer photos of women or talk about women or make love to them. Would you prefer me to be obsessed about men? I'd rather have a beer and an intelligent conversation with a man than talk with him about his body or sexuality.

I'd be interested in Ruthie Zaftig's take on this and Welshcakes Limoncello's. :)

Thursday, August 09, 2007

[sherlock holmes] adventure of what?

Racking the brain trying to remember the Holmes story in which the events I'll describe took place. The thing is, it might have been one of Poirot's but I simply can't remember. I know that the man who tried to help had a partner, so that could be either Watson or Hastings.

Can you help me? Here's the plot, as briefly as I can put it:

Someone, possibly the mother, comes to Holmes [?] asking him to intervene - the daughter has got herself into the clutches of a charming rogue and the mother wants to stop the match. She's tried everything - reason, persuasion, threats, all to no avail of course.

Once a girl gets it into her head that a bad man is interested in her, something romantic turns her head so that reason flies out the window and the more the pressure is applied, the harder she digs her heels in and clings to him.

In this case, the rogue, [whose motivation I'm not entirely sure of - maybe he can't help consuming girls and spitting them out], has schooled her in all the possible people who'll come at her and what they'll say about him.

He explains everything about every possible incident [the ones which could possibly arise, that is] and puts his own slant on it. You know the type of thing - sitting on the edge of the settee, hands clutching, head bowed gravely and her young heart goes out to him.

Sure enough, they do come to her one by one and she "receives" them politely but haughtily.

"Yes, James warned me you would visit, so let me assure you, Mr. H, there is nothing you could possibly add to the wrongful slurs which have already been meted out to my James, the noblest man who ever walked the earth," etc. etc.

Impossible.

Another young woman accosts the silly young thing and in very direct language explains just what a womanizing beast "her James" really is. Same result. Head in the air:

"Yes, well, I can see how the machinations of a woman such as you and an earnest desire to malign and sully the reputation of …" etc.

Call in Holmes.

He has some failures and then hits on the only way. They purloin the rogue's personal diary and leave it where the girl will find it.

Game set and match.

In that diary were all his secret perversions, the way he womanizes for his own all-consuming need and so on. Relationship off and the rogue finally exposed.

So, if you can remember the story, please tell me. I'd be interested to read it again. Thanks.

[tents] fun in the rain

Tents have been the butt of jokes since time immemorial.

We had a super-duper arrangement at the beach, 18x12, with a complicated double awning arrangement over the top, 24x24, which required near scaffolding being erected and can you imagine all the lines and pegs?

My mother was never really mechanical. My father was. You can also imagine the altercations as he'd holler some instruction from a distance which my mother would completely misunderstand and as I was holding the Barnum and Bailey's centre-pole inside, I was the one with the tent collapsing all over him.

Oh, we then had carpets stretched out the front to "privatize" the space which led to the only passage to the beach, through the shrubbery for fifty metres either way and only sometimes did a foolhardy member of the public cross all the cunningly deployed guy lines and cross our hallowed carpet, to the intense glare of my mother.

Once the damned thing was up and running, once all the trenches had been dug around the tent, leading the runoff to a safer place, once my boat was parked at the front and the water, ice and everything else had been brought in, it was great for weeks, seabreeze, fresh air and so on.

Until it rained, of course.

That's why I had to laugh when reading Alice B's account of her experiences vis a vis tents. You remember Alice from the vandals who broke up her "glasshouse" teepee on her allotment.

What is it with tents? Folding poles and water resistant fabrics were invented quite a while ago now, surely it’s not that difficult to design something that basically works. It seems unlikely that people design tents who have never actually camped, but when I thought about getting a new one and saw the way some of them are made I started imagining them improvising budget versions of the product testing machines on those Ikea adverts.

“This tent is fully waterproof to 2000mm hydro static head (the recommended use for the UK is only 1500)” it said. “Abrasion, mildew and ultraviolet resistant” it said. “Fly sheet – 70 Denier Polyester (190T Threads per square inch)” . Very nice.

Cut to me lying in said tent in a muddy field, a very long way from the nearest central heating, curled around the edge with a plastic bag in the middle to catch the steady drips running straight into the tent from the ventilation mesh right in the top.

I can feel every drop, Alice.

[watch carefully] don't be lulled

Lord Nazh, he of the Longshanks' diluted blood and womanizer of royalty, has consistently said the American people wouldn't buy it and there'd be insurrection; Beach Girl said it was already underway.

What are we referring to? To the CFR plan to merge Mexico, Canada and the United States into one state, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, controlled by the NAAC [the CFR, in other words]. Details for those born on Mars are here. As you can see, it's already a done deal with the three Presidents agreeing to it on March 23rd, 2005.

One of the main whistleblowers, Matt of Buckeye Thoughts, now says this:
We're trying to figure out what the hell to do to stop the NAU but as I was telling my best friend (to whom I lent the Corsi book today), it's not going to happen. Sure, they might be able to get some stuff in but the "Grand Compromise" failure was the nail in the coffin.

No American will stand for it!

That was the first time I can remember in my twenty years of life on this planet of an issue touching such a raw nerve with the American public. If any politician tries this (in secret or in open, it's starting to get out, btw, slowly but surely), they will get smited so fast they won't be able to blink.

It might look like we're going down from the outside, but Corsi's book is starting to make a splash. People are starting to learn the truth. The US, Canada, and Mexico will stay sovereign. The citizens of each country will see to it, peacefully. If our gov'ts refuse to listen to us, then force will be used and they will listen.

Count on it!

Now I don't give a damn about being wrong. Don't you know I'm praying to be wrong and Lord Nazh right? Don't you see that I was pushing the issue ad nauseam just to bring it to the public eye, over our way.

Dear Matt and Lord Nazh - don't you boys realize the thing will be done surreptitiously, slice by slice, under different names, never becoming a constitutional issue, never becoming an issue before the election, only after?

I don't think you boys have cottoned on yet to the amazing persistence of these people. Look one more time at Senator Jenning's comment before the U.S. Senate on February 23rd, 1954:
The important point to remember about this group is not its ideology but its organization. It is a dynamic, aggressive, elite corps, forcing its way through every opening, to make a breach for a collectivist one-party state. It operates secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government without our suspecting the change is underway.
The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is not even a new idea:

October 28, 1939 - John Foster Dulles [later U.S. Secretary of State] proposes that America lead the transition to a new order of less independent, semi-sovereign states bound together by a league or federal union.

The key words were "without our suspecting the change is underway". You're not even going to know it's happened. You guys are much closer to the action than I and you are Americans after all and I'm not. That gives you way more authority than me to write on this.

And yet ... and yet ...