Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Lost chord. Fishcakes. Breathe. A day without politics. In. Out. Taste. Life lives.

Lost Chords of fishcakes. 
Occasionally in reach
Never repeated.
Glorious fishcake!
Combined once. Heaven appears.
Ingest, slowly. Ommmmm. *
* Caretaker spins about:  Emergency fridge, frozen little cod loins  Thaw, sizzle, just a little, Lovely huge white sweet onion? You know it's there in the back. Chop up, add some excess pickle juice from the bread 'n butters. let it become companionable in fridge. Chop some green scallion tops, add the 1/4 cup leftover breakfast oatmeal, an egg, shake about some Old Bay (Delaware roots), Still too soupy? Add plain Panko. Mm. Use mom's old ice cream scoop with the lever and dump out on pan of more Panko, flip, flatten, add oil to pan, put on warm, dump scoops of gorgeous Panko-ed and etc cod, flatten evenly, and just before serving WHOOMP up the temp, watch it now, WOW we're cookin'! Flip back and forth until just so, dance and find your little glass of dumb wine, find the or make the Tartar (read first: http://www.sras.org/the_effects_of_the_mongol_empire_on_russia), sauce a little mayo will do with whatever pickle is left, no fuss, HOOT for the family just ending watching evening news we don't care whose, just gist; and GATHER YE ROUND.
Daily overwhelm:
The lost chord. Infinite calm.
Our discordant life.

Webster Booth. Clara.
ButtBenjamino Gigli.

Coming strife.
Harmonious echo.
Fevered spirit.

Soul of the organ.
Death's bright angel. Speak again.
In that chord. Amen.

Cook as ye must, for
Inner lives of caretakers?.
Taken for granted.

Of gone generations, sounds,
Can reach some of us.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Moot? Evade review, because the situation has faded? Not so if recurrent, like presidential conflicts of interest. Pursue.

 Congress. Get on your horse. You. Now.

 How to press legal, equitable and ethics issues in presidential conflicts of interest, which are capable of repetition, yet evade review for any concrete, particular example. Our law requires actual cases and controversies, and one that does not stay around long enougn to litigate, or otherwisefades by passage of time (the sales contract was completed, and then resold), or replacement, may not meet the definition, see http://federalpracticemanual.org/chapter3/section3  Are we left with mere gamesmanship, whack-a-mole? No. Pursue diligently. Pregnancy was one such issue. The Supreme Court heard it anyway, see http://joshblackman.com/blog/2016/06/16/scotus-applies-capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review-standard-for-short-term-contracts/

A better route is Congress. There is a clear gap in the law, exempting the President from attacks based on conflict of interest, self-enrichment by mean of office (personal kleptocratic behavior), apparently. Has that really been argued, with vigor and tenacity?  Not at first look. So, Congress, change the law.  See http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/12/07/can-congress-end-donald-trumps-conflict-of-interest-exemption.

Will this Congress do it?  Possibly, with enough pressure and Mar-a-Lago type egregiousness, see https://hellofodderhellobuyer.blogspot.com/2017/02/mar-a-lago-ghost-of-marjorie-merriwether-post-history-of-uses.html 

On the other hand, why get on that horse if you might actually have to put nation ahead of party.  Perish the thought.

1.  Moot. In legal terms, it means generally that there will be no review because the issue has faded with passage of time or agreements, or other reasons.  Nobody has a stake it in any more.  The case is now just a hypothetical. Like pregnancy.  This one peaks at the birth, so do actions triggered by situations before that birth fade? No -- situation recurrent, but evading review for good reason, so hear it now.
  • Where a specific fact situation may have faded, yet recurs as a situation encountered by others, and each such case will be shot down unless somebody addresses the genre, exceptions to "mootness" are available.   See three exceptions to the fatal mootness:  at  https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/art3frag23_user.html.  Recurrent, yet incapable of review.  No mootness will arise.
2.  Applicatioins.  Officials who engage in many, many questionable acts in many, many places, love mootness. Can't catch me, said the little gingerbread man. Find that and other saucy runaways from authority at the runaway pancake series, at http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type2025.html 

3.  Apply to presidents, presidents-elect, other elected officials. If too much is happening in economic empires, deals and more deals, for news and watchdogs to keep track, how to use courts to review when it is over by the time of filing.

Use the good side of mootness: It will not be moot, evade review, if the situation as generic recurs.

 Recurrent, but evading review, because the particular stakes can be sold off just in time.

4.  The solution is to press the issue. Collect similar situations. How to act against Presidential conflicts of interest in specific acts by the boys to further the brand?  Sounds good, but like a wet kite, will not fly, Why? Because we have Three Blind Mice at the helm, at the Gate:  Mitch, Paul and Jeff. And they will not act to challenge their personal piper, the President, and so hurt the party, in order to serve the nation.  Selah. 

Trump Doctrine. Autonomy deprivation. Does it keep workers as serfs, broadly. Trump learned Russia's lesson well.

Trump Doctrine. Deprive of autonomy.
Dictate, deprive, deceive.
Dictate, with penalty for disloyalty, disagreement.
Deprive people of tools for autonomy..
Deceive as to intention to put needs of ordinary people over corporate interests.

Update:  Zbigniew Brzezinsky, and Paul Wasserman, New York Times op-ed, Why the World Needs a Trump Doctrine.  Here, they have it.  Not what was wanted, but the de facto Trump Doctrine so far.  Further documentation:  Manipulation of law to try to cover unconstitutional "strict liability" in immigration, see  PoseJuxta.com, Unconstitionality of applying strict liability, absent demonstrated exigent circumstances and other administrative exceptions, to broad immigration issues. 

1.  Working class in name, serfs in reality. Is that so? How did we get here?

To be autonomous, people need mobility, education, health, enough over sustenance to acquire assets.

 In our own history, this was a goal for the downtrodden, and required a blend of giveaway, starter funding, and ready markets.

  • Look at the freebies that underscored the rise of Plymouth Plantation -- It was not enough to declare something like 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.'  That early experiment in a strict form of socialism failed.
  • Instead, Plymouth gave, yes gave, seed assets away. 

2.  Can that be done again.

Yes, but ideological adjustments are in order, given longstanding vilification of the idea in Republican circles, without apparently looking at our own history. Anything "free" has been demonized, except if received by the ethnic-economic elect. Those freebies only applied to the ones who got inheritances, breaks, could change their names and "pass" -- and so on, as with Donald Drumpf  now Trump; Rush Limbach now Limbaugh/  Other races and workers who could or did not pass in time, exploited.

Is out system really fostering serfhood in the modern day, a status reality behind the words.

II.  Serfs:  Kept tied to the land, the estates on which they were born, taxed to bare sustenance level, virtual slavery for many, rights of nobles and other landed to go after them, bring them back. It took years to get them freed in name. Are they freed in reality.  Look at the income disparity there, and answer your own question. See http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/inequality-and-the-putin-economy-inside-the-numbers/

  • PBS and the arts are, curiously, one of the resources for self-education that we have, and it is on the chopping block of the Trump Doctrine.  See  http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/pbsnpr-panic-trump-administration-defundprivatize/
  • Combine that with privatizing education, underfunding or nonfunding of public education, and no internet subsidies, and how can people educate themselves.  
  • Trump just wiggles his little fingers and leaves the stage.

III. The Trump Doctine.  The Trump Doctrine today takes away any idea at any stage of a nation's development where there are gross disparities in economics based not on merit, but on tax and cultural breaks over time for the wealthier.  This is not to suggest a socialist from each according to ability, and to each according to need, to the exclusion of personal acquisition; but Trumpism undercuts the ability of the workers and those unable to work to get ahead.

  • Trump looks at low wages, defunct jobs in transportation-stagnant areas and outside, but without meaningful retraining, fostering finding new employment, in a different sustainable industry for example. 
  • The Trump Doctrine does its dance and says, Watch me now (whoomp whoomp.  I'll make you jobs. (wVhoomp whoomp).

    • But at what wage, what opportunity. What pollution of the environment where we all live and work. What food safety. Work!  Work! it will be so wonderful. 
      • Russia in 1905, Bloody Sunday, refused to recognize basic needs of workers, resulting in long term upheaval, start with http://www.totallytimelines.com/tsarist-russia-1855-to-1922/; and Russia's Age of Serfdom 164-1861.

IV  Trump Doctrine Constituency conundrum.  Add that to the content.

Not only leadership failure to coalesce, failure to plan, failure to vet and provide time for candidates to provide financial information, but topheavy-all-rich-self-interested-profiteers.  See https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/trump-cabinet-tracker/510527/

The message to workers should be clear, but isn't

  •  By its actions, cabinet barely functioning to date and ongoing vacancies and vacillations, and targeting the tools of advancement to cut people off, it appears that Mr. Trump's wealthy constituency prefers serfs instead of autonomous citizens well able to manage their own affairs, if Trump and other forces would lift the foot. 
    • Conundrum.  Workers who can go nowhere, stay sick, ignorant, off the internet, any route to real competition. Mr. Trump's working class constituency should be appalled, but stay lured by the idea of jobs. What kind. What future. What participation. Mr. Trump wiggles his fingers and leaves the stage. How will he reconcile that, once the working people realize everything is going to the top.
      • Mr. Trump, any group seeking a better life needs as a start what Plymouth offered. 
        • Seed resources. Tools and means to acquire.
        • Sustenance to tide over, or for the unable, to live a dignified life. Value productivity, in the form of transportation, good wages, good health, opportunity to set aside, child care these days, adult education, all out of the grasping hands of the private sector at that point.
    • Government programs for transportation, infrastructure, education, health.
    • Place for private sector in basic needs areas:  Only when people have the chance to get away from them and their profit-seeking.  Base line through government.
      • The Trump Doctrine. Unbridled exploitation.

V.  The place for capitalism. Not for the enforcement of serfdoms.

Let the private sector make money off people once they are at basic sustenance, education, mobility, health.  And have the educational and practical ability to get away from the capitalists. Not before. No ripping off payday loanees, seekers of reasonable mortgages. Build in performance requirements over time, not lying in wait and then foreclosing.

Voting: Government can set up storefronts, walk-in vans for getting ID's. Talk about basics for civic participation.

In other words, no unbridled capitalism. No unbridled exploitation.

Regulations  for safety and environment, that protect health, safe food, make the profiting sustainable and non-exploitive. Nice list. Send it to the T. You can find him in front of a camera, not listening.

Jobs? How about government services like post office -- let it be competitive. Another topic. Privatizing for basics, essentials, is exploitive.

Monday, January 9, 2017

Oppose confirmation rubber stamps. Is there any Manafort connection in foreign policy matters, for example.

Paul Manafort watchers want to know if he has any role or political relationship with Trump and Trump people now, or in the works. Where does he put his exerting his energies and funds now? Is any entity paying him. His name was on a Ukraine oligarchy remuneration notation list.  The former Trump campaign head was forced out in August 2016 after his name appeared on a remuneration list, Ukraine oligarchs, see Washington Post.

Vet for connections. Gilded appointees to Trump positions await their 5 minute hearings, sans vetting, sans tax returns, sans inquiries into relationships, sans everything. No.

Activities log;  He took time off (doing what?), then tweeted in November 2016 predicting a Trump win. Manafort is still loyal, and that counts, see http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/paul-manafort-first-tweet-since-leaving-trump-230735,  Is Manafort being considered for other reward, like an ambassadorship somewhere that would not get much scrutiny in a 5 minute rubber stamp? That is how it's done. Instant rehab opportunity. See http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/us/donald-trump-ambassadors.html.

In December, then, he got support.  Russia sided with Manafort by accusing Ukraine of sabotaging the Trump campaign:  Russia contends that Ukraine  1) Planted fake news about Manafort;  2) Trashed Trump on social media; and  3) Leaked records about Manafort. See http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/russia-ukraine-trump-manafort-232101.  Time for irony.

Paul Manafort  activities timeline since? Has Donald Drumpf or someone in his cadre sought out consultations, entered into quid pro quos? Paul Manafort -- still in line to collect the big one, COD, in the shadow worlds.

Take it, Paul. Make a deal. Pay some 70% of its gross before-tax value, the gross valued in the currency or specie as given, to a fine organization like the VA and receive immunity from criminal prosecution or civil penalty, on any grounds, if he does so demonstrably and within 90 days of receipt. Such arrangement shall not bar actions based on past tax returns.
  • Go, Paul. Do the right thing.

Even if Manafort is getting no more money, his services already have been substantially rendered. Is it predictable that he will enjoy reward, in specie maximumibum (maximumibus?) to be woven undetectably into other things.  We have a fine ambassador in Ukraine, She is one to brief Trump on Russia's activities and intentions there.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Trump in folktale world where everybody dupes. Defend and contain. Oops. Too late?

Cultural Tales and Insights

A. Value of folktales: learn by immersion; what works or not; admire wits, persevere
B. Lessons in tales: roles of secrecy, folly of seeking shortcuts to good rule, traits to beware
C. How dupers dupe: persuasion, know your amygdala, and how to defend

A. Value of folktales for the hardened, grizzled pol, as well as the child.

It is too late to delay the marching process in our own politics, but the lessons of folktales may steer us from deepening folly.  Legitimacy has long been a human social concern.  Where the issue is not birth legitimacy, but electoral process legitimacy, and qualifications, fitness legitimacy, the tales should be read closely. Since acts and assumptions of  folktales, fairy tales, have blurred into reality (there are no facts, there is only reaction, even extreme reaction (amygdalaand how to exploit it, harness it with dastardly and heroic stories), why not explore that world. There may be no lemmings that commit group governmental system suicide, but that does not stop people from doing so, voting for it, is that so?  Is that a joke?
B.  Lessons in tales.  See the fact pattern of the story type seen in The Emperor's New Clothes. The familiar one is Hans Christian Anderson's version, altered for Scandinavia. These are the things that trigger tales, and trouble.

1.  Self-reporting by self-interested persons.  It does not work out well. One lesson that dominates this line of folktales is the process and folly of  a)  a leader relying on the self-reporting of self-interested courtiers and denying his own experience, and even concealing it;  or  b) courtiers relying on the self-reporting of the leader and tailoring their own reports to fit what is wanted; or  c)  the people relying on either ruler or the annointed courtiers, and finally it is the people who come to their senses. Nothing is learned by the King, Emperor, Courtiers, Checkers.  They sally forth as before. No change. Don't mention the issue and let it obliviate. But it won't. Charmed, I'm sure, but only for now.

A self-interested self-reporter will tailor the report to his own interests. The testees all test out the same way:  tell the ruler what he wants to hear. Testees stick together.  Now, think the high-level duped ones, if only that child, or man, who spoke out about no clothes on the Great One, and had remained silent, all would be well.  Find that person. Arrest him. Beat him. Make him recant. Prison. There. Done. When in doubt, incarcerate. When need to feel superior, incarcerate.
  • Today on self-disclosure.   A president-elect insists (with success) that only his self-reporting will constitute his financial and business obligation-conflicts disclosure. Virtually no access to documents will be provided. Debts, how he has profited and will profit personally (including his corporate interests, to remain under his purview) from the office, hooks into him or not? No tax returns or anything much?  Ask how the self-reporting idea worked out in tales of leaders elsewhere, Not well. 
    • Self-reporting may be fine in trivia where the reporter has no self-interest on the line, and the issues do not really matter. Not otherwise.
    • Expecting others to rely on his own self-reporting without vetting is also folly. The big one, Elizabeth. Duping don't last. Disclosure do. 
2.  Demanding Secrecy. The character in a folktale who relies on secrecy often is outwitted.  There will be leaks, workarounds.  Tale: The ruler is told to keep the magic of the cloth secret. He cannot. Even to get advice he has to reveal.  A request for it should set off alarms. See moral at King and the Three Imposters. Of all the possible lessons from that tale, the specific moral is only to be wary of those who require secrecy. The secret will out. See  http://migratorypatterns.blogspot.com/2016/12/patronios-tale-king-and-three-imposters-root-of-emperors-new-clothes.html

Corollary. Transparency.  This is like coming to a wink-wink understanding with a foreign power, trying to keep it from the press, and then finding videos and recordings of, you get the idea. Or hiding tax returns. 

3.  Doggedness. Creates one's own problems by failing to discern when a course correction is less damaging than pushing a losing idea through.  The King had doubts all along, and refused to trust his own instincts.  

4.  Playing fast and loose with truth.  Master fibbery, as is required in any rankist system. To lie may well be the way to advance, cover one's own tail in the tale, and when the system is hierarchical, downplays roundtable give and take, keeping the top position, or staying where one is, is all.

5.  Discerning Legitimacy -- (however defined).  Status, hierarachy, privilege and limits to opportunity. It is a preoccupation of rulers: Rankism.

5.1  Noble birthThe Invisible Cloth (Spain) * (legitimacy of birth, conceived properly between proper parents between approved sheets, no bastards, no bastritas, and to be tested by the testee's ability to see the weaver's cloth. See also:
5.2  Hans Christian Anderson in the Emperor's New Clothes was not concerned with birth rank for a Scandinavian culture.  His Emperor instead, in line with the culture, sought a shortcut to discerning who was intelligent, competent. 

Immigration policy fosters definitions of legitimacy: who is properly here, who is worth keeping here, who should be pitched.

6. Cuckoldry  Not of much interest today, but a cuckold was low on totem pole. See The Miller with the Golden Thumb (England) (cuckoldry to be tested by the visibility of the golden thumb of the miller; no good old cuckold can see it)  Cuckold coming to us from the 13th Century. Does the beleaguered gent see the cloth. If not, he wears the horns.

7.  Wits. The King and the Clever Girl (India). Here, apparently, a matter of inherited right to rule is an issue, traditional;  but there is a delegitimizing factor: whether the king will lie. The recourse to intellectual wit is different from the recourse to violence in Fitcher's Bird, above, but the circumstances were also different.
  • In the King and the Clever Girl, there is a complication. A person may start out legitimate, but lying can delegitimize. Hmmm. The King says he never lies. Ho! Read this one.
  • A lowly girl gets the King to swear he will never lie. Then she promises to prove that he indeed will. She is paid to do so. Aha. 
    • And she calls on the King to come see the abode of God, that is visible only to the legitimate. All, of course, want to be seen as legitimate, and claim to see it, including the King. And then, and then....
      • Tehee, quod she (Miller's Tale at l.3741, not related to #3 above), and clapt the window to.  I got you to lie. God is a spirit and no-one can see God, etc, so he was impressed and married her. 
        • Rats. She gets status but a tether.
Legitimacy issues and lying, all in one. A culture can choose which qualities will delegitimize a leader, a courtier.
  • Who is really legitimate?  Populism: The people know. The people know.  And that can humiliate the leader who depends on duping. Wits can legitimize, just as lying can delegitimize.  A game-changer. This is how the lowly get glory, to begin with, is that so. 
    • Wits. First sustenance, health, then wits can develop more freely. Deprivation starves wits, is that so? Is that part of keeping portions of the population underserved, not able to compete.

C.  How dupers dupe.

1.  The rulers and others duped were not stupid people. Neither were the courtiers. They simply were persuaded. Defense:  education, tools, practice, mobility and sustenance to keep hope alive, affirmed purpose in life.  Ridicule the duped? That is the way of autocrats. And we teach our children to laugh at those persuaded. Teach the follies of persuasion without vetting instead.  Do not go to time-wasters [invisible ink] [or here]. Our kids and we can handle the real deal. Use simpler words, perhaps, but as much from original documents as possible, minimum use of textbooks, keep the many facets of human stories there for an inquiring mind
  • Confirm for yourself how folktale hucksters get their way.  Coax Jack to sell the cow for beans. And sometimes it does work out (the beans just might be magical), if the dupe then has wits and believes. Persuasion is also malevolent: Watch the wicked sorcerer collect and victimizes girls (as old an issue as history itself), but then (an Upper!) one clever girl who puts 2+2 together in Fitcher's Bird, a bloody cycle of duping, buys time, and by wits, prevails. That tale is seldom included in modern anthologies. It does not fit the cultural role model requirement. Autonomy in thinking, an assertive, smart female. Girlz can fight. Girlz haz wits. Also a cliff-hanger. See again, persuasion.
2.  The methodology of persuasion:  much duping.

Persuasion can be and is learned. The folktale cheats are skilled. Persuasion is separate from merit of the thing touted. Persuasion slides into the lizard brain, whether to grab our attention in tales, or in politics. The world's folktales are indeed physical -- read one aloud with gestures and hugs and face-making. Like political speeches by our own trained, experienced persuaders, they are intended to manipulate.  The  amygdala engages. Read folktales. Watch TV politics. Watach the collective amygdala get roused at some rallies. Mere facts and argument cannot counter a busy amygdala.

3.  Current.  Who do you meet in the wood? Wolf, woodsman, someone in disguise out to getcha. Discern. Of all the lessons of folktales, current politics should be most concerned with the chameleonism, fibbery, persuasion unanchored in policy, secrecy, refusal to disclose finances, who perhaps has a hook in the president-elect, his putting his business profits first, the use of public office for private gain. Those tests should have rendered him "illegitimate" for the purpose. Never too late to raise perception, prepare to defend oneself against unmerited persuasion, awareness of options even for the currently downtrodden. 
Folktales: go under the radar at  http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/type1620.html#links.   


FN 1  Moorish Spain:  Count Lucanor; or, The Fifty Pleasant Stories of Patronio by Prince Don Juan Manuel See http://www.blackhistorystudies.com/resources/resources/15-facts-on-the-moors-in-spain/. The racial angle emphasized on that site, as for black history studies, is relevant here because of the inclusion of the "negro" in a pivotal role, the role taken by the child in The Emperor's New Clothes. Moors: See research on ethnicity at http://bridgingcultures.neh.gov/muslimjourneys/items/show/218.  Would someone knowing both Spanish and English see what word is translated as "negro" in the story, and described as "he, having nothing to lose".  That is different in concept from the "child" in the Emperor's New Clothes where the inference seems to be that a child can be trusted to speak the truth, where adults dissemble and fudge in their own interest.

Get the Spanish and go from there, to check Dr. York's choice of description of the person who told the truth, as the next step.

 Illustrations: From The Ladies' Amusement, https://archive.org/details/mma_ladies_amusement_or_the_whole_art_of_japanning_made_easy_356725

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Separate merit from the made-up in political speech. Spot the viruses. How propaganda propagates. Fake news. The big lie. Fake news? now seen as new, really an old issue.

Voter defense course.
Sales and marketing techniques in political speech.

Fake news is again in the news with Comet Ping Pong. The duped voter syndrome.  A gullible person believed a political Big Lie and engaged in armed self-help, learning that he, and not the originator-disseminators of the lie, would be held responsible. So:  How to come to the aid of voters, to separate merit from the made up in political speech, spot how fake news viruses spread.  Update since the election, a victory for political sales and marketing techniques. Find out which worked best, and how, for next time.

Overview --

List A:  Propaganda techniques from the civilian WWII era information group, Institute for Propaganda Analysis 1937, SMU presentation.

List B:  Propaganda techniques from a WWII narrative, reflective presentation. Extrapolate an acronym ISSFOODR.  Hiss at the tactics, then get a bite to eat because what's an ordinary person to do?

List C:  Voter defense. Teach a process.
1. Spot the technique, the marketing, the sales tactic.
2.  Lift the curtain to see what is claimed. Then
3. Vet  the creds independently before you believe.

  • Politics is a marketed product. As with any other product being sold, check the creds. Are the claims fake, does the detergent work, what is the objective of the seller (close the deal). What is your objective? Don't get duped, as voters are.  Find reviews, comparison shop, vet before you buy.  
  • Journalists: Educate yourselves in history. These topics are not new.  Do more than report what is said, done.  That merely spreads the virus.

I.  Sales and Marketing techniques. 

List A - Clip and carry in your wallet. Extrapolate and follow topics, list from 1937 Institute for Propaganda Analysis, two presentations, Institute for Propaganda Analysis 1937 (academic, SMU), and the more colorful, at http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/index.html. Focus on the techniques. Spot the technique. Any sales and marketing course of action uses them.
1. Name-calling:  Denigrate the other. The child's game of bullying, intimidating. Dangerous for unforeseen consequences  Check this site for its assertion that well over half the murders in the US stem from someone name-calling, see http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=name%20calling
2. Glittering generalities: Use words that grab attention, attract, but remain vague. See http://changingminds.org/techniques/propaganda/glittering_generalities.htm 
3. Euphemism: Make the nasty smell sweet. The Honeywagon. See http://literary-devices.com/content/euphemism
4. Transfer: This is the Morning Joe manipulation syndrome. See the set of waving American flags in the background, that are only brought up close when Joe Hisself is speaking. The good patriotic feelings of the viewer for the flag is supposed to transfer to Hisself regardless of his verbiage. See http://unit2project.weebly.com/transfer.html
5. Testimonial: The assessment of a candidate's health, or a used car, when unaccompanied by data for vetting is a mere unsupported viewpoint whose credibility rests on the credibility of the speaker as honest and trustworthy. Can't vet? You must reject. See example: Health of Trump letter.
6. Plain Folks: Trust me because I am a straightforward, regular, grounded person just like you. See http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ct.sa.plain.html
7. Bandwagon:  I am winning by so much, hop on board. Don't get left out. See http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bandwagon 
8. Fear:  The Granddaddy element in propaganda. On a hierarchy of human needs, see Maslow's listing, fear and lack of sustenance will prevent an individual from moving on in other areas of life, as toward self-actualizing, independence. Deprive people of safety and keep them in fear means control over them. See the evolution of this concept at http://www.businessballs.com/maslow.htm 
9. Bad logic.  See examples at Google
10. Unwarranted extrapolation.  Too little data supporting a vast conclusion. If you snap your fingers at breakfast, no elephant will charge you that day.
Journalists:  Start using the searchable terms. Add the colorful Edward Bernays. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiKMmrG1ZKU .  Common core education for journalists.

List B -- The reverse side of your clip and carry.

This listing derives from a reflective narrative of a master propagator.  My Struggle, at chapter 6. It offers some similar, but some more complex concepts in propaganda. See weird acronym:  ISFOODR Defense System; extrapolations.  Make up your own acronym. Whatever is needed to remember each one. Issfoodr here: Think Hissy fit. Then go get some Food, some comfort, from a bite to eat, because this miasma of persuasion is all around us all the time.

1. Induce fear, including fear of superior identity loss, if the opponent prevails

2. Spin; including sloganeer to frame the opponent in emotionally negative terms whose catchy phrases stay memorable

3. Scapegoat - the Big Lie; claim repetitively that the opponent is responsible for all ills, regardless of fact. Obama is responsible for all fires.

4. Focus on the masses, and ignore arguments of intellectuals; show pride in the uneducated nature of supporters

5. Obstruct inconvenient facts; suppress what argues against your position. The Mitch Pitch.

6. Obliterate humanitarianism, promote self;  each person for himself; I got mine, rule of tough. See http://gawker.com/texas-gov-orders-humanitarian-nonprofits-to-ignore-syr-1743977114

7. Do not debate on merits.  Delay and pock the tennis ball back in the other's court rather than answer. Analogy from Kellyanne Conway, campaign advisor to Trump

8. Repeat. 

List C.  Voters can do what they can, or want to, to spot the technique, analyze the claim, decide whether to buy. But it takes more.  Access to computers, Wire the country, open branch libraries or internet cafes everywhere with computers, incentivize inexpensive devices.

1. Demand of yourselves a good history education. Persuasion is not new. Lend me your ears. Go ahead, nibble on the fruit, you'll be fine. Surely you can help people identify the viruses in speech instead of merely parroting what someone said.
2. Demand fact bases for assertions, details of funding required and sources proposed
3. Spot and inform voters of the danger of demands by politicians for support, including financial and emotional, based on promises without fact-bases, plans for implementation and reasons.
4. Spot and inform voters of the dangers of giving personal information at the outset of a website, before you even know if you support the site. Spam central. Sales opportunity for the site in selling your information.
*   Connecticut graveyard, near Nathan Hale Homestead, Coventry CT

Saturday, October 8, 2016

The Trump Bawdy Language Defense. .

Trump Cats

Act 1. Background.

With reference to current news item, political year 2016, Donald Trump must come up with some defenses to his use of "pussy" to diminish the autonomous dignity of women and turn them merely into mechanisms for his own pleasure, see  http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/donald-trump-on-getting-women-grab-them-by-the-pussy-1787545407

Possible defenses: In issue.

Act 2. Defenses.

First, the Nursery Rhyme defense.   It could be said that, since "I love little pussy," is a nursery rhyme, see http://www.rhymes.org.uk/a37-i-love-little-pussy.htm,  that the reference by Candidate Trump is harmless and since it references historical England, is also heightened diplomacy.

    •  If the nursery rhyme term is so deplorable, then why still allow it in children's books, a term there since the 1800's?  See flaw in that claim of defense for Trump, at Politicalimericks; and move on to another defense, secular commonplace.

Second, the Secular Commonplace defense, historically.
    • Could it then be said that the term "pussy" is also excusable by one who seeks the highest office in the land, to be a world leader, because the term is commonplace historically in adult limericks? 
That fails if we look only at limerick use.  The earliest reference I find so far is from 1942:  Check The Limerick 1700 Examples, with Notes, Variants and Index, Castle Books, The Famous Paris Edition, Complete and Unexpurgated, this edition from 1978-79.

      • Limerick there, #131 at page 28, displays the term  Here, fair use of one limerick out of some 1739 total:  Is this enough to make the term mainstream and acceptable?
"A chippy who worked in Black Buff  [where/what is that?]
Had a pussy as large as a muff.
It had room for both hands
And some intimate glands,
And was soft as a little duck's fluff."

It may succeed as a defense, that the term is indeed "commonplace" if we look at derivations and usage in history?

No, it fails on that ground, although usage is increasing in the way Trump envisions. References to specific anatomy seem to arise only in the 1800's, and late.  See Etymology of pussy at   http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pussy.
  • In the 1580's: a term of endearment for the lady, cat, puss, a rabbit. Effeminate men were also so referenced.  It was not a specific sexual term, however until the late 1800's; and even then, was still used merely as an endearment.  
        • See other speculative early linguistics analyses, site. 
Act 3. Provenance

Where did this limerick #131 come from, and are there more?

Sources.  Look up the source bibliography for Limerick 131, That Immoral Garland, see    http://www.horntip.com/html/books_&_MSS/2010s/2010-08-23_limerick_bibliography__arthur_deex_(digital_database)/
"That Immoral Garland". 1941. From the Sign of the Lampadophore. n. Manuscript Bawdy. 106. C. F. McIntyre. "Being a collection of previously unpublished limericks from the literary remains of my uncle, who gave me permission to offer them ten years after his death." Berkeley, CA, 1942."

    • This provenance, That Immoral Garland (MS), is also set out at The Limerick, Sources, at a non-numbered page immediately preceding page 1, and after the Editor's Note. at the beginning.

Act 4.  Variations:

That Immoral Garland source also provides a variant, but the variant (like a second verse here, not a substitute for the first), is at page 380 of The Limerick.  The date is also 1942, however. Still not enough to excuse the use from verse 1 as commonplace.

Why not just do a search?  The Limerick, unfortunately or fortunately, is not online as a google book, but has to be reviewed in its great tactile wonder.

Accordingly, there is no way to do a search for a particular term, and there are 482 pages to search.  I just went to the obvious section, II. Organs.  There are XVIII categories in all, any of which could include the term Mr. Trump used. See The Limerick at Index, Subjects, page 484.


None, except visceral revulsion at the usage by anyone seeking high office, particularly where that kind of usage and related behavior are not unusual.