What disability does Musk have? I just read his page on Wikipedia, and the closest I could come was
If undiagnosed, then I call bullshit.
Actually, what disabilities do Simone Biles and Mariah Carey have? Extreme cuteness?
(OK, I just checked Wiki. Biles has (diagnosed) ADHD; Carey is bi-polar (diagnosed). Biles admitted the ADHD after her medical records were made public; she’s never denied it but absolutely doesn’t use it as an excuse for anything. I do now remember Carey having rather public issues. Definitely give them both credit for their success. I’m sorry, but self-diagnosis for mental issues is worth the paper it’s written on. )
All but 38 Republicans in the House voted to keep the government open without abolishing the debt ceiling. Is Elmo gonna fund 190 primaries, or is he gonna backpedal?
I don’t think Musk will be able to keep himself sufficiently in Trump’s shadow to satisfy Trump. I’ve been seeing rants about President Musk did this and that, and now Jimmy Fallon has coined the couple’s name #Elonald. I think that’ll end the honeymoon.
Native Americans, mostly not living in centralized states, did not practice warfare the “civilized” way; as in politely attacking only uniformed soldiers according to “laws of war” and leaving non-combatants like women and children alone. Instead they (quite sensibly by the standards of semi-nomadic tribesmen) waged war by guerilla tactics.
“Civilized” war by 18th-century European standards meant organized armies seeking the defeat and surrender of organized armies because they could then hold hostage the civilian populace and the farms that were the basis of almost all material wealth.
Specifically, the Americans discovered to their horror that they were on the wrong end of a colonial/imperial relationship. As the ultimate sovereign of the Empire (the royal fiction not withstanding) Parliament could in theory enact anything, limited only by the consciences of the m.p.'s. Unlike in Britain where for example the Cider Bill of 1763 - Wikipedia sparked riots, voting to tax the colonies would not risk any member of Parliament their seat. This would have inevitably meant the colonies ending up becoming the Empire’s “milch cow”. It wasn’t just the money, it was the idea of being more or less helpless subjects that the colonials objected to. The English were traditionally VERY touchy on that subject; it was the same issue over which the barons had forced John to sign the Magna Carta, Charles had ended up beheaded, and James overthrown.
To be fair that was a pretty hypocritical line, conveniently forgetting all the many times American colonists had cheerfully slaughtered native women and children. For example the Mystic massacre was arguably retaliatory, but no less bloody for it. In 19th century that fine Methodist pastor John “Nits Make Lice” Chivington didn’t even have that excuse.
People are people and many people turn pretty shitty when they go to war. “Civilized” Europeans were no exception.
18th C. warfare, as it followed the Thirty Years War where 20,000 inhabitants of Magdeburg were slaughtered and tossed into the Elbe, or Cromwell’s massacre at Drogheda in Ireland, was considered more restricted and professional. But only by the comparison to that incredibly bloody 17th Century. The practice of killing everyone in a fortified city that refused to surrender was still common. And after Culloden, the English killed every Scots male in the vicinity with pubic hair under his kilt. Both sides committed atrocities in the Peninsular War in Spain, with Goya recording those done by the French.
