Horse 3435 - This Is How The Union Crumbles?

If you ever wanted to see an empire fall apart in real time, then the arrival of Donald J Trump as the 47th President of the United States, might very well have been the trigger which allows you to see precisely that. His general level of disdain for people who do not show loyalty and fealty to him is more or less normal at this point but the sheer level of disdain that the President has shown to the State of California in these past few days and weeks is horrible. California has had to deal with very very big bushfires and the loss of billions of dollars worth of home and infrastructure, and Mr Trump's behaviour in relation to this is simply not befitting of a president. Then again we already knew that in times of crisis, the commander-in-chief has been gloriously uninterested in actually doing the job of governing. 

Mr Trump's disdain for people who are crying out for help has actively demonstrated that he can not and should not be relied upon. Moreover the sparks of his invective, have ignited another series of debates, which threaten the very fabric of the union itself.

Probably in response, the California Secretary of State Shirley Weber indicated this week that what was floated as an idea, is now officially on the table:

https://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/news-releases-and-advisories/2025-news-releases-and-advisories/Proposed-Initiative-Enters-Circulation-Requires-Future-Vote-on-Whether-California-Should-Become-Independent-Country

Proposed Initiative Enters Circulation:

Requires Future Vote on Whether California Should Become Independent Country.

Initiative Statute.

REQUIRES FUTURE VOTE ON WHETHER CALIFORNIA SHOULD BECOME INDEPENDENT COUNTRY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

If enacted, this measure places the following question on November 2028 ballot: “Should California leave the United States and become a free and independent country?” If at least 50% of registered voters participate in that election, and at least 55% vote “yes”, it would constitute “a vote of no confidence in the United States of America” and “expression of the will of the people of California” to become an independent country, but would not change California’s current government or relationship with the United States. Creates commission to report on California’s viability as independent country.

- Shirley Weber, California State Department, 25th Jan 2025

Yes, you did in fact read that correctly. The California Secretary of State, has officially started the process to gather signatures for a vote on California leaving the United States, and for California to become an independent country. Secession is now up for discussion.

Now exactly how far this thing gets, whether it burns hot or fizzles out to a dead ember, remains to be seen; but before we pour petrol on the fire and burn this metaphor to the ground, there is just one slight problem with any attempt by California trying to secede from the Union.

It's illegal.

Rather, it is invalid.

The reason we know this is that the United States has been here before. The United States which was started as a tax dodge, in order to avoid punitive taxation which was designed to coerce the thirteen colonies to abolishing slavery, never actually resolved that central question of the nation's creation and embedded the notion of slavery in the Constitution. Slaves in these new United States, although they did not have the franchise, counted as three-fifths of a person in the reckoning of how many Representatives a state sent to the nation's Congress.

Rather than dealing with the issue, it racistly bubbled along quite toxically for the next 70-odd years, and as states were added to the Union they were either declared as Slave States or Non-Slave States, as various compromises and concessions were made at law. Finally when Abraham Lincoln was elected to be the next President in 1860, seven states decided to leave the confederacy and would form the Confederate States of America; which apart from being explicitly racist, were also increasingly belligerent and tensions boiled over into war in April of 1861.

On 1st February, 1861, a specially convened Texas Secession Convention drafted and approved an Ordinance of Secession. The Ordinance of Secession was sent to the Texas State Congress, wherein it was passed by both houses and the Governor put the same question to the people of Texas by means of Referendum. The Referendum was approved overwhelmingly in the majority, by the people of Texas. 

So when the war failed and when the Confederate States of America lost and the United States scrobbled around trying to reconstruct the Union out of the previously warring parts, the United States Department of Treasury inevitably wanted to reclaim its monies. 

However the specific point of order which is relevant for this discussion, is the ruling made by the United States Supreme Court in the wake of the Civil War in relation to a case in which State of Texas tried to sue various governors of banks (of which White was one of many), reclaim the monies that had been gained as a result of illegally selling US Treasury Bonds. Mostly that case relates to the actual obligation and order to pay, but almost as a side-ruling, SCOTUS was quite clear about its opinion on whether or not a State has the right to secede.

In Texas v. White, SCOTUS held at point of order No.7 that:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/

7. Considered as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention, and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.

- Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868)

In essence, SCOTUS held that Texas (and by inference the rest of the Confederacy) never actually left the Union during the Civil War, because a state cannot unilaterally secede. The Ordinance of Secession, was "absolutely null" and "utterly without operation in law". 

You will not find anything about what happens if a state wants to leave the Union because the framers of the United States Constitution in yet another demonstration of practical legal blindness, never foresaw nor imagined that as a possibility. As they never foresaw nor imagined that secession could be an option, there are no clauses or rules to say what happens if a State wants out. The 1868 decision by SCOTUS, stems from the original jurisdiction that is conferred to it by Article III, Section 2, and which SCOTUS took for itself in Marbury v. Madison (1803) at 177. "to say what the law is."

Logically if Texas never actually left the Union during the Civil War and the rest of the Confederacy never actually left the Union during the Civil War because a state cannot unilaterally secede, then it follows that California which hoping to put to referendum a motion of secession and to become an "independent country", is also invalid.

It really makes you wonder what the actual point of Shirley Weber's motion to attempt a referendum is. Surely you would assume that the Secretary of State for California would have read law at some point; especially when it comes to a matter as crucial as this. I mean, if I am not even a poor ol' country lawyer, and I am literally on the other side of an ocean, and I know of cases which directly relate to this question, and even I can see that this is like a broken pencil in that it is pointless, then why do it? 

What the jinkies is this trying to achieve? The only thing that seems sensible to me here is that when even the California Secretary of State knows that all legal avenues are utterly useless, and when the President himself is a horrible horrible knave who has no regard for his own citizens, then running this up the flagpole may very well be the only flag which can be legally raised. Perhaps Ms Weber knows that this is legally a waste of time but given that there are no legal avenues to take, rather than raise the white flag of surrender she has decided to raise the red flag. Though traitors flinch and tyrants sneer, she'll keep the red flag flying here?

Horse 3434 - The Thousand Year Descendent Of Vikings

I really like the literary device that all stories exist in the same universe, no matter how insane or ridiculous, or how many elements of plot, narrative, decoration, or even how untenable the continuity needs to be. If every story, regardless of narrative, genre, author, style, time period, or place, are all interconnected, then in theory characters can appear in any other story, encounter objects, fragments, plots devices, et cetera, from other stories, and cross over everywhere.

This is why I think that Star Wars with Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin is a First Doctor story, because Peter Cushing played Doctor Who in the movies; why Red Dwarf is also in that universe as the Tardis is parked on the outside of Red Dwarf in the opening titles; and why Star Trek is also is also in that universe as various iterations of Captains of the Enterprise have met the Doctor in comics. The Thick of It is a Twelfth Doctor story. Broadchurch is a Thirteenth Doctor story. Withnail and I is an Eighth Doctor story. On that note, Red Dwarf is doubly in that universe as Brian Williams and Father Brown are actually just what happened to Petersen.

The Pixar theory also makes use of this same concept; which is why Dinoco frequently appears across various films, and is the explanation of how we get from sentient toys in Toy Story, to the world being trashed by the time that Wall-E happens; to the homunculus explanation of what is actually going on inside the cars of Cars. 

Most recently I was alerted to the fact that Eiichiro Oda was inspired by the 1974 series Vicki The Viking, to write One Piece. There are even hints to this in One Piece on several occasions where Vicki, Halvar, Faxe, Gorm, Ylvie, and Tjure, have all appeared. That sent me down yet another trail of investigation and I ended up here:

On the left is Vicki The Viking. Vicki The Viking is the titular protagonist of the 1974 German/Japanese anime series which bears his name. On the right is Mr Benn. Mr Benn the titular protagonist of the 1972 British series. Side by side, these two shows look like they could be connected because of the same kind of claire ligne art style but that doesn't do very much by way of explanation. If we are going to get the grand theory of literature that all stories exist in the same universe, no matter how insane or ridiculous, then we're going to have to work harder to find the connection.

As if by magic... the shopkeeper appeared. I've got it! I've found the solution!

We are perpetually unsure of how old Vicki The Viking is. We know that he is at least ten because that is his stated age in the very first episode but beyond that, weeks, months, and maybe years pass in the show. In that time frame, the crew of seemingly the village of Flak's only ship, sails to: Denmark, Greece, Bulgaria, France, Italy, Sweden, Finland, England, Greenland, Iceland, America, and Alaska. At least canonically, this one ship has travelled far and wide across the Baltic, North, and Mediterranean Seas, and across the Atlantic Ocean. Even now, that's a very long distance to travel and is worthy of its own saga. Take careful note of the fact that they have been to England.

I would like to posit that at some point, Vicki marries Ylvie. It is straight up stated by Ylvie that she wants to grow up and marry Vicki at least three times in the series. That's fine. By the end of the 78th episode, there is still plenty of time for that to happen in their future. 

We also know that the Viking invasions of Britain, happened in several waves from about 850 up until just before the Norman invasion and conquest in 1066 (which is the only date in English history that anyone can remember). And since it is never stated exactly when Vicki The Viking is set, then this gives us a two hundred year window. I would like to suggest that Vicki The Viking is set in 972 because that means that the 1974 German/Japanese anime series is set a thousand years ago.

Since Mr Benn is set in 1972 because we have to assume that it is contemporary of the day, then we have just found out connection. At fifteen years per generation, then this means that Mr Benn is the Great 62x Grandson of Vicki and Ylvie.

In the very first episode of Mr Benn, we learn that he has been invited to a fancy-dress party but does not like parties. Having exhausted the normal shops, he stumbles into the costume shop, puts on the costume of the Red Knight, is whisked away to have an adventure which involves defeating a dragon; and then decides that he does not want to go to the fancy-dress party after all. He does promise to return to the costume shop to try on other costumes and have other adventures.

The fact that Mr Benn does not like parties but still wants to go on adventures, parallels nicely with Vicki who is a very strict pacifist and does not like fighting but still wants to go on adventures. If Mr Benn is the Great 62x Grandson of Vicki and Ylvie, then we have a very nice explanation for Mr Benn's latent adventure seeking desire.

Mr Benn as the thousand year descendent of Vikings, which even though he likely works in The City at a bank (he does wear a bowler hat), still retains a very small spark of that adventuring spirit that wants to come out. 

Horse 3433 - Not Because Of Obligation But Because We Love Big Brother.

One week after the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States as only the second President to serve non-consecutive terms, apart from pardoning everyone involved in the January 6th riots at the Capitol which included the murder of some and the permanent brain damage of other police officers (which kind of negates any and all rhetoric that he will ever say about supporting the police), and starting a series of trade wars, the one promise that Trump made which absolutely has not been kept was to end the war in Ukraine on Day One. 

That is probably a good thing.

Because given Trump's own hints to buy/invade Greenland, to vow to take back the Panama Canal, his statement that "anything could happen" in relation to starting a war with Iran, I can only assume that the statement that he wants to to end the war in Ukraine is to surrender it to Russia. Trump has for several years made statements that the United States should pull out of NATO because NATO nations don't pay their won way apparently, and his actual executive order which has pulled the United States out of the World Health Organisation, means that we should assume that as Commander-In-Chief that he personally sees the US Military as his possession and that he will use it if he feels that other nations do not show him personal fealty. This was last demonstrated in 2017 when he ordered cruise missiles to be sent into Syria; without really having a military objective for doing so.

So given all of this, a conversation which was held in a press gaggle on board Air Force One aught to leave the world at large slightly worried and Australia in particular very worried indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8CfuMh87gA

Reporter: Can you tell us about your call with the King of Jordan today?

President Trump: It is a very good call; he's a friend of mine; I know him very well; I've gotten along for the over the years very well and he's done a wonderful job. He really houses, you know, millions of Palestinians and he does it in a very humane way, and uh, I compliment him on that but he really... Jordan's done an amazing job of housing largely pal-Palestinians and he's done it in a very successful...

Reporter: What was the subject of discussion was it (interrupted)

President Trump: Pretty much that. I said to him "I'd love you to take on more." 'Cause I'm looking at the whole Gaza Strip right now and it's a mess. it's a real mess. see You'd like Jordan

Reporter: See? You'd like Jordan to House people from (interrupted)

President Trump: I'd like him to take people. Uh.. I'd like Egypt to take people and meeting with talking to, uh, General el-Sisi tomorrow. Sometime I'm L(?) and uh I'd like Egypt to take people and I'd like Jordan to take people.

I could I mean  you're talking about probably a million and a half people and we just clean out that whole thing. It's you know, it's over the centuries that's had many many conflicts that site, and I don't know it's something has to happen but uh it's it's literally a demolition site right now. Almost everything's demolished and people are dying there so I'd rather get involved with some of the Arab Nations and build housing at a different location where they can maybe live in peace. 

Reporter: for change temporar or... (garbled - interrupted)

President Trump: Could be either it could be temporarily, could be long term.

- via Forbes, 25th Jan 2025

Under the previous Trump Administration, Donald Trump personally via executive order, changed the official stance of the United States and officially recognised Jerusalem as Israel's capital. In no way did that ease tensions in the region and if anything emboldened Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to look for any excuse for Israel to 'defend itself' against Palestine. Netanyahu found that excuse on October 7th 2023, when Hamas led an attack on Israel by firing more that 4300 rocket; which killed 1139 people. Israel responded by repaying evil for evil and instead of an eye for an eye, has killed at least 53000 civilians and so that works out to be an an eye for two whole classrooms of now blinded children.

Now it should be pointed out that Hamas and Hezbollah are evil. This doesn't change the fact that Likud and the IDF as directed by Benjamin Netanyahu are also evil. I can not say how much I wish that Hamas, Hezbollah, Likud, and the IDF should all be exiled to a place in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. Backing one evil side in a conflict against another evil side does not make either side less evil. The only thing that makes sense here is that the various parties find some sort of weird gratification in seeing innocent people pulped into chunky marinara. 

Mr Trump who is a deeply narcissistic fool, in saying that "we just clean out that whole thing" should be taken to mean that if "anything could happen" in relation to starting a war with Iran, then committing American troops to fight a war in Israel to clear Gaza is not off the table either. As Mr Trump's moral compass is such that the ends are bent in such a way that no matter which way it points, the points always point back to him, would have no moral qualms in turning ever more people into chunky marinara.

What does this mean for Australia though? We can rest assured and know that if the United States does decide to fight a war in Israel to clear Gaza, that not only will Australia be complicit in evil but active in sending troops to commit evil.

The United States Department of State, has this to say about Australia's role in being an obedient little lap dog with no back bone:

https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-australia/

Bilateral defense ties and cooperation are exceptionally close.  U.S. and Australian forces have fought side-by-side for more than one hundred years, in every major conflict since World War I, beginning with the Battle of Hamel in 1918.  In 2022, the United States and Australia marked the 80th anniversary of several key World War II battles, including the Battles of the Coral Sea, Midway, and Guadalcanal.  Moreover, 2021 marked the 70th anniversary of the signing of the Australia, New Zealand, and United States (ANZUS) treaty, Australia’s pre-eminent alliance, which enjoys broad bipartisan support.  Australia invoked ANZUS for the first time in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

- Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet, US Department of State, 23rd Jul 2024

Ever since January 26th 1788, Australia has basically never had any kind of foreign policy, with regards anything. Australians fought in the Crimean War, and the Boer War, and both the First and Second World War; because the various State Governments and then the Commonwealth Government rolled over and immediately became an obedient little lap dog with no back bone for big brother John Bull. The Pacific Conflict from 7th December 1941 changed our perspective a bit and after World War Two, Australians have fought in Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iraq again, because the Commonwealth Government rolled over and immediately became an obedient little lap dog with no back bone for big brother Uncle Sam.

The signing of the AUKUS Treaty as far as I can tell, provides less than zero benefit to Australia; with the 'purchase' of imaginary submarines to the value of $368bn. That is a call on the Federal Budget of $350m per week, every week, for 20 years. If the rightist side of politics wants to complain about the cost of the ABC, then they need to repeatedly punch themselves in the head until they bleed because the yearly budget of the ABC is less than three weeks of the loyalty and fealty payments that we have committed to in tribute, for literally nothing at all. Australia is never ever ever going to see even a single submarine; and if you think that we are then not only do I have a bridge to sell you but you might also like to repeatedly punch yourself in the head until you bleed because that's the only way that any kind of sense will be beaten into you.

The question therefore is not whether or not Australia would send troops to fight a war to clear out Gaza until every last building has been levelled and to turn whomever is left into chunky marinara (because we absolutely would without question), but the consolation question of whether or not Australia is obligated to send troops.

The AUKUS Treaty between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mentions literally nothing about either what happens in the even that any of them are attacked or if they choose to be the belligerent. The ANZUS Treaty of 1952, despite the fact that New Zealand unilaterally pulled out, is still in operation in perpetuity until the point that either Australia or the United States pulls out. Now I would assume that in the event that Australia was attacked by China or some other future great power, that the United States would drop us like a plate of cold vomit and pull out immediately. However, Australia as the obedient little lap dog with no back bone, would rush to the aid of the United States.

Article II of the ANZUS Treaty states that:

https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/wopapub/house/committee/jfadt/usrelations/report/appendixb_pdf.ashx

Article II

In order more effectively to achieve the objective of this Treaty the Parties separately and jointly by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack. 

- Article II, ANZUS Treaty, 29 Apr 1952

Now as previously mentioned, Australia invoked ANZUS for the first time in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; which was seen as a direct attack on United States' soil. So good, so far. However, the United States sending in troops to fight a war to clear out Gaza, is not of itself an "armed attack" which needs resistance. I can absolutely see Australians being sent in to murder unarmed Palestinians, on the basis that everything that moves will be assumed to be the enemy (this is the current stance of the IDF in practice), but the one consolation that we have before we do decide to get blood on our hands and lick it up and politely ask for more, is that it will not be because of legal obligation, but it is all right, everything is all right, the struggle is finished. We love Big Brother.

Horse 3432 - NSW Proclamation Day

Happy Not Australia Day.

If you think that this is Australia Day, you are a sad strange little person.

26th January is not the date that Australia became a nation. Nope. That date was 1st January 1901; when after a series of Constitutional Conventions, a series of Referenda, the colonies of Fiji and New Zealand both choosing to withdraw from the process of Federation, the legislation that created the new Crown as a separate legal person called the Commonwealth Of Australia cam into effect after being passed by the British Parliament in 1900.

26th January is not the date that Australia was first settled by the British. Nope. That date was 7th February 1788; when after leaving merry old England in May 1787, the eleven ships which comprised the First Fleet, vomited out their cargo of convicts, criminals, ne'er-do-wells, and chancer sailors who wanted titles, upon the lands at Gadigal and the Eora people. The 11 Ships had originally planned to dump their prisoners at Botany Bay on 20th January 1788 but in a remarkable act of British optimism, Captain Arthur Phillip saw that the bay was far to shallow to be sensible and sent scouts up the cost wherein they found the very deep river/port of Port Jackson.

26th January is actually the day that Captain Arthur Phillip decided to stick his flag in the dirt and claim it in the name of King George! Hurrah! On 7th February 1788, Captain Arthur Phillip decided to make his claim permanent, retroactively from the date that he stuck a flag in the dirt; so 26th of January is actually New South Wales Proclamation Day.

And in fact, Proclamation Day is the name of the day that is used right through official documents in the early days of the colony; including when Governor Bligh in an heroic act of hiding under the bed when the New South Wales Corps decided to arrest him and then throw the colony under direct military rule in 1808. Proclamation Day is the name of the day that was used during the half-hearted Golden Jubilee of the colony and in the celebration of the Centenary in 1888.

The name 'Australia Day' doesn't really appear until during the First World War, when various charitable appeals were made to fund things like medical supplies and other comfort goods, to make the lives of volunteers who had left to go and fight in a mess in which they found the horrors of mechanised and chemical conflict first hand. Australia Day was on different dates and was on 30th July 1915, 28th July 1916, 27th July 1917, and 26th July 1918. 

The 26th of January sort of fell into relative obscurity until 1938 when suddenly a wave of patriotism fell over the nation as the gathering storm clouds of war loomed over Europe for a second time. The 150th Anniversary of British Settlement was flogged for all it was worth, likely to garner support for PM Lyons' expected eventual unconditional decree to send more Australian bodies into the meat grinder of a European conflict. Lyons helpfully died in office, which meant that the UAP was thrown into confusion and Earle Page became PM for a bit; then Menzies took exactly the same actions that Lyons would have done.

The 26th of January 1938 was also declared as an unofficial Aboriginal Day Of Mourning, because the injustices of having land taken without consent, being killed for a bounty of ninepence per head, having no legal rights at all in some states until Federation, and then having even basic rights surrounding citizenship denied, had never been addressed. To this day, we still have no treaty, and no formal process for trying to reconcile the tensions and the knavery of refusing to deal with unceded sovereignty. The next presumed Prime Minister is openly unrepentant and unapologetic for these injustices.

It wasn't until 1988 that full-on flag-waving patriotism was foisted upon Australia for the Bicentenary and it wasn't until 1994 that the date actually became a national holiday. It had been a holiday previously in different states.

The thing that the flag-waving hooray henrys haven't been able to tell us ever, is why anyone outside of New South Wales has an interest in Proclamation Day; especially New South Wales Proclamation Day. What makes these people think that anyone living in Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Tasmania, or Western Australia, would want to celebrate the official founding of New South Wales? 

The number plates in the different states used to have slogans like "South Australia - The Festival State", "Queensland - The Sunshine State", "Victoria - The Garden State", but in here we had "New South Wales - The Premier State". It used to be that every time our yellow and black number plates travelled to these often hostile and unfriendly backwaters, they'd proclaim the New South Wales is The Premier State, the Best State; and they knew it. It is no coincidence that it was only after state slogans appeared on number plates that the other states decided that they had to cower in the glory of New South Wales and try to claim our Proclamation Day as Australia Day.

Moreover, why should the decent and good and fair people of New South Wales want to share this holiday with them? They're all a bunch of splitters. As far as the fair people of New South Wales are concerned, we are the best. The rottenest bit of this island of ours, is held in the hands of five unfriendly powers.

"It would therefore seem obvious that patriotism as a feeling, is a bad and harmful feeling, and as a doctrine is a stupid doctrine. For it is clear that if each people and each State considers itself the best of peoples and States, they all dwell in a gross and harmful delusion."

- Patriotism And Government, Leo Tolstoy (1900)

It used to be that the only time that anyone in this country cared about patriotism, it was to wrap ourselves in green and gold because of sport. We should rightly view any overt display of patriotism as unAustralian because it is deeply suspicious and suspect. Just who do those people think they are anyway? Do they want to be Seppos? Imported patriotism from Seppoland is also deeply suspicious and suspect.

Yeah, nah bro. Australia Day is unAustralian. Especially because it is actually NSW Proclamation Day.

Horse 3431 - Trump Tries To Extinguish 14A, Section 1

On President Trump's first day back in office, once again as predicted, he signed a heap of executive orders which have immediately culturally jolted the United States further to the right. If Elon Musk's Nazi Salute at the inauguration (which he did twice in case you didn't get the message the first time) wasn't enough, then executive orders which are policy in action, should have made the point loud and clear.

The President on Day One, withdrew the United States from the World Health Organisation, pardoned more than 1500 people for their part in the January 6th Insurrection (which kind of proves that it was absolutely an insurrection), and signed an executive order which at more than 700 words long, removes the birthright of children who have been born in the United States, to citizenship.

Now obviously this was always going to be controversial because citizenship has been part of the increasingly white nativist agenda now for more than 10 years. Trump came to power in the first place, because he questioned Barack Obama's citizenship despite the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii. That sparked off a bunch of dog-whistling and now the whistling has become so much of din, that any opposing voices are legally drowned out. Let's not pretend that this is about anything other than fragile white people who have been emboldened to become explicitly racist. 

The mechanics of birthright citizenship are such that a child born in the United States, is automatically a US Citizen; regardless of the status of their parents. The other weird mechanics of this are that if a child is born anywhere in the incorporated territory of the United States then the child is automatically a US Citizen, but if a if a child is born in an unincorporated territory of the United States then the child is automatically a US Citizen; thanks to the insular cases from SCOTUS which were passed before 1930. To take this to its extreme, a child born in Puerto Rico might not be a US Citizen even though Puerto Rico even has an Observer Member in the House of Representatives, but a child born on Palmyra Atoll which currently has a population of nil but is administered by the Department of the Interior, would be.

- Sad Coconut is a US Citizen by birthright

Naturally, this set of mechanics is known and openly abused. People wishing to gain entry to the United States know that if they do what comes naturally and have a baby, and then have that baby on United States' incorporated territory, that that baby is automatically a US Citizen; regardless of the status of their parents. Then is US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers arrive and try to deport someone who might have arrived illegally or overstayed their visa, they are in a pickle because that means having to deport a US Citizen by virtue of them having gained that citizenship through no other process than simply having been born.

Yes, the law is stupid; but has Horse has been at pains to point out in many posts about the US Constitution, the US Constitution is frequently stupid. So how did we get here? Yet again the apple of racism hasn't fallen very far from the tree at all; and in this case the nation conceived 'in liberty' as a tax dodge which was trying to keep and retain slavery, is the ultimate reason why US birthright citizenship exists.

The words to Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution read:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/

SECTION 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

- Section 1, 14th Amendment to the US Constitution

All of this sounds good and reasonable and proper, except looking through the lens of 156 years of hindsight. If "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" and the first clause has already stated that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside" then it US birthright citizenship looks pretty watertight. So why is it here?

The two important dates which accompany 14A tell the story excellently. 14A was passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and then ratified on July 9, 1868. This means that we are squarely in the era of reconstruction which followed the Southern War Of Aggression To Further Keep And Retain Slavery, after seven southern states seized Federal assets and Forts, following the election of Abraham Lincoln as President, who did not want any more slave states as the United States expanded to the west. Four years of unpleasantness followed and the United States between the two warring factions of "Yay Slavery!" and "Boo Slavery!" decided to turn hundreds of thousands of its own citizens into chunky marinara to prove the point. After the disagreement, there was the problem of what to do with all the people left over.

Before 1868, there was no directive whatsoever about who was a United States' Citizen and as the States themselves kind of had plenary and very punitive powers within their own borders, by the time of the Southern War To Keep People As Chattel Goods, no fewer than thirteen states had already decided that not only were slaves not citizens and not entitled to due process of law, but in some cases they were also not people at law. This caused something of a problem when trying to refashion two parts of a broken nation back into one.

So for a short period of time, an amazing amount of reconciliation work at law was done; part of that work included 14A; which was intended to give former slaves and people who were considered to be chattel, citizenship and some kind of recognition and protection at law. 

So here's the central quandary. Legal problems often have long tails. In this case, that long tail and expansive wording has created a set of conditions 150 years' later; which the framers of this piece of legislation neither thought of, nor bothered to care about. 

President Trump's executive order is blatantly unconstitutional. There is no other way to say this. The other side of the coin is that he simply does not care. In just one day he proved that his oath to "faithfully uphold and execute the constitution", was a lie and is worthless. With a toady sycophantic Congress and an equally permanent toady sycophantic 6-3 SCOTUS, this is likely to remain unchallenged.

However none of this, questions the fitness of law for purpose. S1.14A is clearly bad law. If that is true, could there be better law? Yes; very yes.

The mechanics of the Citizenship Act 1949 in Australia are such that children who are born here do not automatically have birthright citizenship. For the vast majority of children born here, where one or both of their parents are citizens, they too are citizens. The big material question is whether or not their parents have been citizens for ten years or more. Even a child born in Australia to migrant parents, where neither of their parents are citizens, is entitled to citizenship upon their tenth birthday. The United States, in attaching citizenship to the Constitution and with a set of hard blanket clauses, is stuck with this.

The other weird thing about this is that the nexus of bastardry is such that the same people who howl that S1.14A is out of date, will then turn around and defend 2A despite the fact that it is 76 years older and by action gives rise to nearly 40,000 deaths per year.

Horse 3430 - The Inauguration... Of The King.

"Did you watch the inauguration?"

Me:

"No. I watched the arrival of the king."

When it comes to championships in motorsport, seven seems to be an almost impenetrable ceiling. In NASCAR there have been three 7x Champions: Richard Petty, Dale Earnhardt, and Jimmie Johnson. In Supercars, only Jamie Whincup stands alone with 7x. In Formula One, there are but two; being Michael Schumacher and Lewis Hamilton. In fact, the only person who seems to have broken through is Giacomo Agostini; who won eight 500cc Motorbike World Championships.

Probably the reason why seven is the normal upper limit, is that not only is everyone always trying to win the championship and so it is already a very hard thing to do but to consistently stand at the very zenith requires someone to not only be in the right place at the right time but for them to be so dominant for so long, that all others appear to fade at the same time. Even if you have a championship with rate of one every two years, that's a thirteen year minimum timeframe. Of course a 7x Champion is only ever going to be a once in a generation thing because they themselves, singularly define that generation.

Okay, the rest of the world might have been looking at Washington and the passing parade of the President of the United States, I and many people like me were watching the formal arrival and announcement of Lewis Hamilton at Ferrari. 

However much the people the SpA want to imagine themselves as a business that sells cars, Ferrari is not a car company. Ferrari does not exist to sell motor cars. Scuderia Ferrari exists for the same reason that Manchester United, the New York Yacht Club, or any Tuesday Night Indoor Cricket Team exists - to win trophies. Mercedes-Benz, Renault, Red Bull, Alfa Romeo et. others, exist to sell cars or sugary drinks. They are businesses whose aim is to spin a profit. Scuderia Ferrari in principle, doesn't care about profit. It only exists to make and be champions.

And to that end, the Scuderia is in a bad way. Not since 2007 when Kimi Raikkonen won the championship have Ferrari been on that very top step. In that time they have had Sebastian Vettel, Fernando Alonso, and Kimi Raikkonen all try and fail for them. For 18 years, no new champion has been crowned in a scarlet machine.

We have been here before. From 1979 until 2000, Ferrari went through another period of sadness. Jody Scheckter won the title in 1979 and then for 21 years, in which time they hired Alain Prost and Nigel Mansell, the cabinet remained empty. When Michael Schumacher arrived in 1996, who was at that time a 2x World Champion, the immediate period looked like it was going to be even more false dawns until 2000 when he went on a five year tear.

In 1996, Ferrari knew that Schumacher was good but not even they could have know how good the combination of Schumacher and Ferrari would be. For four seasons Schumacher came close but not close enough. Only one can stand at the very top of the mountain.

This is why the signing of Lewis Hamilton for Ferrari is so massive. Since I was born, five former World Champions have arrived in Modena to drive the scarlet machines with Enzo's prancing horse on them, and not even they could turn around the fortunes of the team which not only knows its reason for existence and its purpose but feels it. Ferrari has been around for so long and sings so sweetly in the symphony of motorsport that many are drawn to it; and like the song of the sirens of Greek mythology, Ferrari has drawn in many and caused the deaths of people's careers. Lewis Hamilton though, might be different.

It could very easily be that Lewis is merely filling out his coffee club card and collecting stamps; however, it could be that the period of Red Bull dominance with Max Verstappen has been enough for Lewis and Ferrari to snap out of the malaise and propel the Scuderia to the top. I do not know if Lewis Hamilton is as good or better than Michael Schumacher, for when they competed head to head Schumacher was well into the twilight of his career and ironically helping to build the organisation which would give Hamilton the Silver Arrows that he needed to claim six championships. If Hamilton is better than Schumacher then at least in 2025, he will prove it by knocking Verstappen off the top.

On that note, Hamilton would prove that he is better than Schumacher by virtue of finally breaking through that imaginary ceiling of seven championships. I hope so. I would not normally be a Hamilton fan and I would not normally be a Ferrari fan, and while from the outside this might look like I am jumping on a bandwagon, this is different. Hamilton's arrival at Ferrari holds the potential to finally correct the mistake that the FIA made in 2021 and if that happens at Ferrari, then not only will the loyal tifosi be singing all of Italy will be dancing. 

Horse 3429 - Change The Change

It is 2025. This means that another calendar year has rolled about and we are all one step closer to the day when Grimaldi Mietitore as agent for The Eternal One, knocks at your front door and arrives to collect. As he walks at only a leisurely 1mph, then provided that you can outwalk him, you are safe. Be warned though, he will collect eventually.

After having lived through a century with our very own plague, as the people of the twentieth century did, them perhaps it is a good idea to address the maelstrom in out pockets. Admittedly, in a world of Electronic Funds Transfer and where people do not want to carry coins or notes any more (including the banks whose job it is to do banking), the demand for new coins is decreasing; however, I think that this is as good as any time to address the fact that the planchets of the coins that we use, were designed more than 200 years ago and are not really fit for purpose any more.

The last time that Australia had any significant kind of currency reform was 57 years ago in 1966, when we switched from a hybrid dozenal/vingtinal system of currency, to a decimal (cential?) one. One Dollar with 100 cents and 1000 mils (never issued) replaced the old Pound Australian of 20 shillings and 12 pennies. Opponents thought the old system daft. Starting on the 14th of February 1966, new coins and banknotes passed into the hands of shopkeepers and the general public.

This time around though, what I propose is not a total currency reform. I do not propose getting rid of any of the banknotes; merely replacing all of the little coins, with one single new one.

Here's why.

One 1966 Dollar had the same buying power as $15.59 in 2024. One 1966 Dollar was a brown banknote with a picture of the Queen's head upon it. One 1966 cent, that is the hundredth part of a dollar, would now have the same amount of buying power as 15.59 cents in 2024. Already we have two coins which now fall underneath that value; so by rights we could easily just get rid of them. Nobody would miss their departure.

But "oh, no no!" I don't hear you cry because this is the medium of text and you might be very very far away, getting rid of coins is chaos incarnate, is not? Well, no. The truth is that we have been here before any nobody really gave much of anything beyond a resigned sigh.

In 1992, Australia demonetised the 1c and 2c coins and as we proved, apart from hysterical people who claimed that charities would suffer (they didn't) getting rid of those coins and replacing with nothing at all, went by without a hitch. Everyone got pretty used to Swedish Rounding really quick; so any and all hoo-haa that was imagined, never happened. Likewise, when New Zealand went one step further and demonetised their 5c coins, that also went by without a hitch and minimal hoo-haa.

So my solution is to simply replace all of the cupro-nickel coins with this:

The 25c coin, which was tested and released into circulation, proved to be as boring as any other coin. The 25 coin is about as big as a Penny; which is fine. I got mine in change somewhere, spent a few, and kept one. There was a little bit of a look but beyond the initial interest, there was also minimal hoo-haa. 

We could easily eliminate the 5c, 10c, 20c and 50c (the 50c is still a little bit useful), and replace them all with  just quarters. Keep $1 and $2 coins and maybe bring in a $5 coin if we're that way inclined but as we've proven again and again, people get used to things pretty quickly and the break points for rounding up and down would be: 12, 37, 62, 87. 

Just eliminating all of the coins of less than a Dollar value while being a perfectly sensible idea, at this stage is just too far of a step to jump across. One Dollar often doesn't buy things of itself but by the same token, it is a massive leap if the amount that someone has to pay for small items is $1.25 and either the shop or the customer has to lose a quarter of the value of the transaction. As it is, restaurants often already do not quote cents in their pricing but when the price of a burger is more than $20 at a fancy place (which seems like highway robbery perpetrated by the Hamburglar, to me), then the loss of 25 cents in 20 dollars is less than the price of the transaction fee which a shop might have to pay if this was done electronically.

Anyone who has ever played Monopoly knows that eliminating the black One Pound note happens voluntarily; round about when players start to buy houses. People are less likely to want to have to deal with the little black annoyance; so will accept fivers and tenners instead. At that is in a tiny ickle wee economy with only Fifteen Thousand Pounds in cash, in it. Old Kent Road's £2 ground rent is almost instantly an insult and an annoyance from the get go.

I know that a currency reform this late in time might look like rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic as it hits the iceberg and slowly sinks into the sea of the cashless society but part of the reason why banks especially do not want to carry cash is the expense of carrying different coins. If a coin fails at doing the only job for which it was intended, which is to facilitate the exchange of goods and services for fiduciary tokens, then it is easy to see why fewer and fewer people want them in the first place.

I like cash. I like coins. I like knowing that the amount of money that I have on hand, is what I can actually use to pay for stuff. I like the false barrier to purchase that cash imposes because if you do not have the cash on hand you are less likely to buy stupid stuff. Like most people I huff and puff about having to do my own grocery checkout because I hate the idea that we've replaced someone's job with a machine that works not for dollars per hour but cents per month, but it really gets my hackles, feckles, and schmeckles up, that even supermarkets are baulking at the prospect of wanting to take cash. Chucking a bunch of coins into a machine aught not to be that difficult. Coin vending machines can even be operated on a purely mechanical basis.

Eliminate all the silver coins. Replace the lot with the quarter. Put a picture of a bumblebee on it. You'd get four bees to a Dollar. The important thing to remember is that I had an onion tied to my belt; which was the style at the time.

Horse 3428 - To The RTBU and ETU: Is this the way to Amarillo? Really?

After ample warning, the Rail, Tram, and Bus Union (RTBU), made good on their warning and went ahead with protected industrial action.

The cover story (which if you accuse someone of lying they will likely sue you for libel, so it's simply better to say I do not believe) was a series of checks were deliberately not carried out; which meant that the running speed over points and various interlockers was reduced to yard speeds, which is not more than 8 km/h. The story could very well be true, and if it is true then that means that the Electrical Trades Union (ETU) has also taken protected industrial action and also withdrawn their labour.

The story about points not operating, or signals not working, or a multitude of other reasons given, is conveniently convenient because it means that the blame is spread so thinly that repercussions can not fall back on a single person. I however simply do not believe the story in the first place, because the RTBU and ETU in warning that they were going to proceed with protected industrial action and then actually doing said industrial action, still doesn't change the fact that the whole thing stinks. Tell me any story you like, if it makes you feel better, but the truth remains that you've already caused me massive irritation; and I still think you are a knave. On day two of this malarkey, I don't even believe the announcements that rail staff apologise for anything; because if they actually were sorry, they wouldn't have done it twice.

If there is a pile of assorted chicken manure, horse manure, cow manure, cat poo, dog poo, mouse poo, elephant poo, et cetera, then I do not care a jot as to what kind of poo is actually causing the stink. I especially find it unpleasant when the RTBU and ETU expect us the general public to have a poo sandwich for breakfast; when you consider that we didn't cause the reason for their dispute in the first place.

Long time readers of this blog will probably come to realise by now that I generally do not wave the blue flag of conservatism, nor the yellow flag of libertarianism, or the green flag of environmentalism. My default flag is the red flag, under which cowards flinch and traitors sneer, while singing the song of angry men. I would have very much belonged to the British Labour caucus of 1948; which looked to the future and wanted to build that future for everyone. So when the RTBU and ETU take protected industrial action, I am simultaneously sympathetic to their cause and deeply angry at them.

What the jinkies do you think you're doing, people? 

Do you really think that the government, which is currently a Labor Government and who should in theory be broadly sympathetic to your demands, are going to be able to wave a magic tonfa around and beat the parliament into acquiescing to your demand? Do you really think that you're going to make the government care? Do you really think that you're going to achieve anything by giving the general public the irrits? Do you honestly think that this is going to cause anything other than even more ire in the general public?

Where once there may have been goodwill, this is the surefire way to burn any support that you may have had with the general public. Where once there may have been people sympathetic to your cause, when people like nurses and doctors can not actually go to their place of work as a direct result of your actions, I can guarantee that as sure as God made little apples, that the only fruit which will be produces as a result of this action, is a desire that not only do you lose but that you all get fired and replaced with robot trains.

I leave the house at 0640 of a morning, to be on the 0651 train from Marayong to the City, or to take a bus to Blacktown and chance my luck with whatever comes from the mountains. Yesterday, there was no train to the City; so I put on my Rocket Pants and ran like a mad thing to get the 752 bus to Blacktown; wherein I did get a train. From 0659 it took until 1003 to get to Wynyard and I finally reached my destination at 1028. That's 3 hours, 48 minutes. 

Today, I left the house at 0640, found that there was no trains on the Richmond Line at all, took the the 752 bus to Blacktown and a train which was already sitting there for goodness knows how long, eventually left in its own sweet time. I got to Wynyard at 0922 which is a 41 minute improvement, and I finally reached my destination at 0941. That's 3 hours, 1minute; so it is an improvment.

My question to the RTBU and the ETU, is why do you think that me as a representative of the general public, wouldn't want to do anything other than cause civil violence to you? Surely this is not the way to get people like me on your side.

How have you helped your cause? You have not. Not an iota. So why do it? As a display of the power that you have over people who you are trying to turn against you? That smacks of the heraldic lion of Finland which is trying drive a sword into its own skull. Is this the way to Amarillo? I do not know. I have never Amarilloed. 

Horse 3427 - Samurai Pizza Cats: Imagining The Reboot

For the purposes of this post, I shall be using the English names for characters and places.

I have recently come to the end of an 87 episode podcast run, called the 'Samurai Pizza Cast', which as the name suggests is a deep dive and dissection into anime's most dubious dub of a 1989/90 series called 'Samurai Pizza Cats', or in Japanese 'Kyatto Ninden Teyandee' (Cat Ninja Legend Teyandee).

It can be found here:  https://pizzacast.libsyn.com

The series which was created by Tatsunoko Productions and ported into English by Saban, ends with a classic "everybody dies - or did they?" trope, in which the city of Little Tokyo is first threatened to be destroyed by a meteor and then actually destroyed by a nuclear missile which is deployed from Lucille's head because she is so happy that Speedy and Bad Bird were not killed by the meteor (or rather that's what should happen as the English version has tried to edit its way out of the plot problem of having Tokyo destroyed by a nuclear missile).

Suffice to say, the fact that we are here in 2025 and the series is slowly fading into obscurity, no second season was ever commissioned; even though this whole fully realised world with its departures into the surreal, constant fourth-wall breaking, and straight up madness, practically demands for a new set of writers to play in it. The other way of looking at this is that the series is already perfect because it wears its faults and foilbles like a macrophage that has displayed its conquests like trophies and medals all over itself.

The hosts of the 'Samurai Pizza Cast' in episode 87, made an attempt at trying to run through a kind of pilot for an imaginary reboot and while their concept is fun, I think that they have leaned far too heavily into the meta-narrative. Part of the problem with attempting to write meta-narrative is that you still need a proper overt narrative to make a story work. You can only burn the oil of meta-narrative so far because very quickly you run out of substance. So then, without writing a pilot episode, I will attempt to write a series arc overview of how I would reboot Samurai Pizza Cats.

Samurai Pizza Cats is essentially a farcical comedy of manners. The series has at its core: Emperor Fred who is clearly incompetent and not in control of his government, his daughter Princess Vi who is also incompetent and who might actually run the country but she is deeply selfish and irrational, Prime Minister "The Big Cheese" (Seymour Cheese) who knows all of this and is trying to overthrow the Emperor, Al Dente who is part of the Imperial Retinue and who covertly hires the Pizza Cats as a vigilante force to thwart The Big Cheese; and the Pizza Cats themselves whose series of adventures mostly amount to defeating The Big Cheese' plans, via a robot/monster of the week (which the Big Cheese is clearly paying for out of the Imperial Budget).

Most of the characters in Samurai Pizza Cats are defined by central character flaws: Big Cheese - Vanity, Fred - Incompetence, Vi - Impulsiveness, Speedy - Headstrong Recklessness, Guido - Lust, Polly - Rage, Francine - Greed, Lucille - complete obliviousness to reality, et cetera. This is why the series and the world seem so very very big. So in trying to attempt to reboot the series, it is the prime motivations and flaws, which should drive both the plot and the complications.

So then...

------

The Reboot:

------

Season 2, Episode 1 precise:

The year is 20XX. XX years have passed since the events of episode 54 and E2.S01 is the re-establishing episode.

Emperor Fred is dead. Fred died after staring intently at a particularly beautiful Onigiri. 

The Government Council has an emergency meeting and has decided that Prime Minister Big Cheese after being given an unconditional pardon by the late Emperor and having been restored to the Prime Ministership (the council is completely oblivious to everything which happened in Series 1), should succeed Fred in an Emergency Government.

Cut to a series of spinning newspapers and a montage of various events, which show Big Cheese being inaugurated, sitting behind a desk signing things, opening train stations and hospitals, and Little Tokyo being rebuilt into an even better techno-future-past-metropolis than it was before. Accompanied with this is the old imperial mon being replaced with Cheese' own black and gold fox mon. Opinion polls show that Big Cheese has an approval rating of 83% and people generally believe that he is good and competent. 

------

Princess Vi who has been going to university overseas (studying politics, law, economics, protocol, macramé, and knife-fighting) for six years, arrives back home in Little Tokyo (on a Big Cheese branded plane) and discovers that she can not  simply walk into the Imperial Palace any more. 

As Princess Vi wanders the streets aimlessly, she happens to walk through that part of the city where Francine is again running the Pizza Cats shop. Princess Vi who recognises the place, walks in to find Francine behind the counter, with Bad Bird wiping tables and Carla sitting at a table reading the newspaper.

Bad Bird who is clearly afraid of Vi, hides behind Carla before he is met with "I don't love you any more" and Vi returns to speak with Francine (whom she has apparently never met before). Francine explains that after Fred died and Vi went away, Big Cheese was installed as "Lord Protector" (not Emperor), and that Little Tokyo and by extension Japan is now a republic. 

Vi who is clearly unhappy about this, demands that the monarchy be restored and that she should rightfully assume her place on the throne as the new Empress. Perhaps to her surprise, Francine not only agrees with her that there should be a plan to restore the Empire, but also agrees to take on Vi as an employee and to give her somewhere to stay.

------

Al Dente who has been demoted from the Palace Household to merely being head of security detail on the Palace Walls, now lives in a small house in the corner of the Palace complex. It is clearly a doghouse. He receives a phone call on the Bone Phone; which is covered in cobwebs and has not been used for a considerable amount of time.

Francine explains that Princess Vi has returned and that this means that their long forgotten plan to restore the monarchy should be put in place. Al Dente calls for a meeting of the Pizza Cats to plan out how they should go about this but Francine further explains that all of the Pizza Cats have gone their separate ways.

------

Cut to a series of short vignettes showing where the seven Pizza Cats have gone.

Spritz is in Hawaii; running a surfing class.

Batcat is in Paris; working as a window cleaner.

General Catton is in New York; on a building construction site.

Meowsma is in London; as a train driver on the London Underground.

Polly and Guido, now apparently married, are now in Hokkaido; running a local tax accounting firm.

Simultaneously, all five of their emergency telephones ring; and they are informed that the Samurai Pizza Cats are getting back together.

Bad Bird notices that Speedy did not answer the phone. Francine explains that nobody knows where he is, and that the only person who might know is Guru Lou.

------

Bad Bird arrives at Guru Lou's house in the mountains. Lou is scared of Bad Bird and immediately brandishes a sword and pins Bad Bird to the ground. Bad Bird hurriedly explains that he is looking for Speedy and Lou relents. Lou who is off-grid, has no idea that the Emperor has died, has no idea that the Big Cheese has taken over as Lord Protector, and also has no idea where Speedy is.

Inside Guru Lou's house, amidst the detritus of old newspapers, dusty science equipment, piles of books and scrolls, an old photograph of Guru Lou and Speedy flashing a peace sign, sits on a mantlepiece.

------

Oblivious to everything, Speedy is working as a Sushi Chef in Seoul. Working behind a sushi train, he uses sword skills to slice fish and other ingredients very dramatically; to the applause of the customers.

The last shot of the episode is the jingling of his little bell and a closeup of Speedy's face as he realises that for the first time in years, he has been called into action.

------

Roll credits.

------

Augie Doggie (who is now older) and Doggie Mommy (who is going grey), are at Lucille's teahouse. Doggie Mommy complains directly to the camera that she wasn't in this episode. End with charcoal freeze frame; fade to black.  

------

End.

------

The entire premise of a reboot series in my not very well paid opinion, should be a 26 episode arc which is a restoration comedy. Instead of being on the outside, Big Cheese is now Lord Protector and runs a surprisingly competent government. 

The monster of the week element can remain, as Big Cheese' motivations to send out big robots and monsters are no longer to seize the reins of power but to scare the populace into thinking that they are in danger and it is only through his good and competent leadership that these monsters are thwarted. 

In the the long run of the series and while restoring the monarchy, the Pizza Cats' internal conflict is that they know that while restoring Princess Vi to her rightful place on the throne is the proper and correct thing to do, she is horrible. In achieving the proper end, they will be bringing about a worse outcome for everyone... and they know it.

There still needs to be outdated pop culture references as though the writers live 50 years ago. There still needs to be absurd fourth wall breaks. There still needs to be absurd plots and devices that are unhinged from reality. Princess Vi needs to fall in love with another incompetent Panda like her mum did. Francine still needs to be hyper-competent and running the Pizza palace as a front company but still realising that running the Pizza palace as a front company is more profitable than the actual business of covert ninja action.

I don't think in rebooting the series, it makes good sense to stray too far from the bumbling idiocy of the original or imagining the world inside as vastly different. None of the characters should ever learn anything at all because the world is big; it just needs to be played inside of.

Horse 3426 - Shall We Play A Game?

Picture this.

It is January 5th.

Joe Biden resigns.

This would mean that Kamala Harris is the 47th President.

Already, all of the MAGA 47 merchandise is wrong.

Already, all of the programs that have been printed, will be wrong. 

This would mean that all of the things which have been prepared for the incoming Trump presidency, will likely end up in Goodwill and other thrift stores and reject shops.

However, something else comes into play:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt25-1/ALDE_00013871/

Section 1:

In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

- Section 1, 25th Amendment to the US Constitution. 

Okay, if Kamala Harris is the 47th President, according to the rules of the Constitution, not only would she be entitled to the normal Secret Service Detail as per the other former Presidents, something else immediately has to happen.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt25-1/ALDE_00013871/

Section 2:

Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

- Section 2, 25th Amendment to the US Constitution. 

Why would someone want to do this?

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/section-1/clause-3/

The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President.

- Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3, US Constitution

John Adams famously decried the office of Vice President as "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived" as the only three duties of the Vice President are:

1 - to be the replacement to the President upon their failure to exist as President any more

2 - to be the deadlock breaker in exactly tied votes in the Senate

3 - to act as President Of The Senate.

That third duty, is the duty that actually certifies the opening and the counting for the next term of the  Presidency. It is either very boring, or a bit sad. Very rarely is it the job of a Vice President to certify the electoral college results for the person against whom they lost the election to. Probably Richard Nixon is the only person to have been made to suffer this, and I am very likely to be wrong in my guess.

Nevertheless, if Biden resigns, and Kamala is the 47th President, someone would have to become to the new VP. If I was acting out of pure spite, then I would Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to be the next VP.

The Congress would HAVE to confirm AOC, because without a sitting Vice President, there is nobody legally to confirm the electoral votes on January 6th. If there is no VP, then we have a problem. Of course in this scenario, AOC would dutifully do the job of VP as President of the Senate and then declare Donald Trump as the next President... unless.

Harris resigns on January 7th.

Then what?

The 25th Amendment says that upon resignation, the Vice President shall become President. See above.

Of course Congress with two houses of Republican majority would then never confirm President Ocasio-Cortez' pick for VP but who cares? She's basically got two weeks to fire all kinds of crazy executive orders 

Yeah, none of this is going to happen.

Still, the American people, after seeing what happened on January 6th four years ago, decided that they want a 34x convicted felon and a confirmed rapist in the White House. To be perfectly honest, my playing games of nonsense, is somehow more plausible than the real world.