Closing Thought–24Nov17

The Pentagon in its normal stupidity has decided that a jet fighter, the F-35, would be a better fit for our troops in close combat situations….to that I say BULLSH*T!  There is NOT a better plane for close combat support than the A-10.

The F-35 is NO better than the F-105 from the the Vietnam era….it was nicknamed the “THUD” for that was the sound it made when it hit the ground……

The A-10 the best friend a grunt can have in the air…..and here is why……

The A-10 Thunderbolt II is a single-seat, twin turbofan-powered aircraft designed specifically for close air support and ground attack missions against armored vehicles.

The aircraft’s sub-sonic speed and large straight-wing design allows for extreme maneuverability at low altitudes and extended time on target or to loiter above the battlefield.

The airframe was designed from the very start as a short takeoff and landing aerial platform for the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger rotary cannon, which can fire 3,900 depleted uranium shells per minute. When combined with the ability to carry the AGM-65 Maverick air-to-surface missile and laser-guided bombs, the A-10 can destroy enemy armor at close range or from a standoff position.

If they can keep a dinosaur like the B-52 flying then the A-10 deserves its chance also.

I have been writing about the A-10 and its virtues since the Air Force talking about retiring it in favor of a flying brick, the F-35……and I shall continue to do so…..

Our troops deserve the best in close air support and it gets NO better than the A-10.  PERIOD!

Again I apologize for the extra reading but I have so many drafts that need to see the light of day….I appreciate your patience…..

That is it for me for today…..I am off to start my weekend….I hope everyone has a good evening and a good weekend….be well….be safe…..chuq

South Sudan–We Must Choose Sides

How many know of the problems in South Sudan?

My guess would be 1 in 10 may have an idea….otherwise NO one gives a crap about what is happening in Africa.

Before I go nay further maybe a little background would help my readers……

An overwhelming majority of South Sudanese voted in a January 2011 referendum to secede and become Africa’s first new country since Eritrea split from Ethiopia in 1993.

The young state plunged into crisis in December 2013 amid a power struggle between the president and his deputy whom he had sacked.

Fighting between government troops and rebel factions erupted into a conflict that had killed thousands and prompted more than 2.2 million people to flee their homes by the time a tentative internationally-mediated peace agreement was signed in August 2015.

Now that you have the background I will get to the meat of this post……

The incompetent ambassador of the US to the UN, Nikki Haley, has made it clear that the US must take sides…..

The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations says the South Sudanese government is engaged in a brutal, protracted military campaign against a fragmented opposition and says, while both sides are responsible for atrocities against civilians, the government is primarily responsible for ethnically based killings.

Nikki Haley, who made those remarks Wednesday at Washington’s Holocaust Museum, says nothing prepared her for the level of suffering she saw when she recently visited South Sudanese refugee camps.

She may have been a good enough governor of South Carolina but that is where any competency stops.

Must take sides in the South Sudan situation?

What about the US taking sides with the killing and land theft of Palestinians?

Or what about taking sides on the atrocities being committed in Yemen?

NO!  She can only think of the situation in South Sudan in which the US needs to take sides.

And yet North Korea has been added to the list of state sponsored terrorism…..makes one think.

This illustrates just how out of her league is she is at the UN.

Hired by another incompetent fool.

Iraq Update

Hey there.  Does anyone remember Iraq?  That is our other war that we do not talk about anymore.  You would think that after a 13 year conflict that it would be more important.

ISIS (remember them?) seems to have been all but totally defeated in Iraq….word is there are isolated pocket of ISIS resistance left in the country…..mostly in the western desert.

Now the question is what’s next for Iraq?

With the recent fall of Raqqa, Dair ez-Zor and now al-Qaim, the military defeat of Islamic State (IS) is at hand. For strategists, it is thus timely to question whether the three years of war against this adversary have yielded strategic victory—and the answer is vague indeed.

The significant attrition experienced by IS in Mosul may have overwhelmed the idea of the caliphate. Rapid capitulation in Tal Afar and Hawijah suggests either a loss of morale or a change in strategy towards posturing for an insurgency. Evidence of the latter has been seen in Europe, where attacks by IS increased in frequency despite its losses of terrain and senior leadership in the Middle East and North Africa. The IS leadership may be purposefully choosing to transition to a global insurgency paradigm—akin to a Maoist latent/incipient phase of guerrilla warfare—leveraging an IS-affiliated diaspora across the globe. Alternatively, IS may be rejecting a territorially based identity that would understand defeat via this Westphalian norm. It must therefore be expected that the group will continue to inspire terrorist activities to create instability, progress global insurgency, and grow the virtual caliphate.

There is no way of knowing what will be next for Iraq….but now that the fighting is mostly done….Iran is moving to consolidate its power base in Iraq…..

Iran is consolidating military control in Kirkuk. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al Abadi appointed an Iranian-friendly commander, Lieutenant General Ali Fadhil Imran, to lead the newly created “Kirkuk Operations Command” on October 28, 2017. Imran is the former head of the Iranian-influenced 5th Iraqi Army (IA) Division, based in Diyala. Photos in Iraqi and Jordanian media and a Facebook page linked with Imran show him closely coordinating with Iranian proxy Badr Organization leader Hadi al Ameri in 2015. The 5th IA Division is a component of the Dijla Operations Command (DOC), which is responsible for security in Iraq’s Diyala Province along the Iraq-Iran border. Iran’s influence over the DOC’s leadership is a template for how the security structure in Kirkuk will likely evolve. Iran’s proxies have disproportionate influence over the DOC. A video published by Vice News in February 2015 shows the former head of the DOC Abdul Amir al Zaydi taking direct orders from Ameri. Imran will likely provide a durable conduit for Iran’s proxies to dominate Kirkuk’s security structure similar to their role in Diyala.

Will this become a problem?

The US is already beating the war drum towards Iraq and yet the prudent decision would be to appoint a special envoy to go to the Kurds and act as a diplomatic buffer… would think right?

The United States has said there was no need to appoint a special envoy to resolve the crisis between Iraq and Kurdistan Region, saying that such a dispute could be resolved “internally”.

“We certainly heard about that idea to appoint a special envoy. We believe at this point that this is an issue that can be worked out internally, that it can be worked out between Baghdad and Erbil and don’t feel that it’s necessary to appoint some sort of United States envoy in some sort of new position to handle this,” U.S. State Department spokeswoman, Heather Nauert, said in a press briefing late Tuesday.

Not to worry…..the American military will be standing by to re-invade if necessary.

A special envoy would be the perfect answer to a tense situation.  But Fearless Leader has no time for diplomatic solutions to complex events…..too busy with all the “slap and tickle” stuff he can Tweet about.

While he is busy on Twitter Iran is slowly consolidating a power base in Iraq….maybe Fearless Leader should look up from his phone every now and then and see what is happening while he Twaddles away…..

North Korea….The Saga Continues

North Korea is back in the news….not from a Tweet or whatever it is Li’l Kim does but because a soldier from the North made a dramatic escape South…..and of course this was almost as important as all the “slap and tickle” stories and speculation.

But the real stories that should foremost in the media’s sights are the little things going on in the background…like Li’l Kim’s response……

What does North Korea think of the US’ Monday decision to relist it as a state sponsor of terror? Now we know: In the country’s first public statement on the subject, a rep for the Foreign Ministry tells state-run KCNA that while North Korea doesn’t care “whether the US puts a cap of ‘terrorism’ on us or not,” the move is a “serious provocation and violent infringement” that only serves to strengthen its “deterrent force,” as Yonhap puts it. Reuters and the AP have 4 more fiery quotes:

NK remains a thorn in the butt of Fearless  Leader….what is to be done?

The growing lethality of North Korea’s military threat increasingly undercuts America’s ability to use diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions or military force to counter its dangerously provocative behavior. As Kim Jong Un accelerates the buildup of his nuclear-tipped missile arsenal, there is a distinct possibility that no matter what actions the United States and its allies take, the Korean peninsula is headed for war.

What is to be done? It is important to keep demonstrating U.S. resolve—shooting down a missile perhaps—to reinforce the credibility of American deterrence. Yet it is vital that the U.S. also take steps to drive events toward a more acceptable outcome. Diplomacy could have consequences almost as bad as a conflict. Should Kim Jong Un’s challenge of American resolve be rewarded with a diplomatic settlement, the U.S. will be seen as having been forced to accept the North’s terms—something that would irreparably damage the credibility of America’s extended deterrence worldwide.

Of all the ideas about NK Trump’s is the worse…..putting them on the Terror List was not his best thought…..that is assuming he has them from time to time…..

Trump’s North Korea policy keeps getting worse:

The United States is imposing further sanctions and penalties against North Korea by designating it a state sponsor of terrorism, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday.

Putting North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism is a bad decision on the merits, and it will also make it more difficult to de-escalate the situation with North Korea. North Korea hasn’t been a state sponsor of terrorism for decades, and it was removed from the list of state sponsors in recognition of that fact. Designating them as a state sponsor was a lousy idea when Ted Cruz proposed it a few weeks ago, and it is still a lousy idea today. As I said last month:

It is dangerous to add states to the list just because we see it as a way to lean on their governments, because that makes the designation meaningless and arbitrary.

Before the List we decided to impose further sanctions….you know thinking about it what could possibly left to sanction the US has been imposing these things for 20+ years there cannot be much left to play keep away with…..all that aside we have added further sanctions to the load….

Secretary of State Tillerson explained the administration’s thinking, such as it is, for imposing additional sanctions on North Korea:

Tillerson cited other recent sanctions from the United States and the United Nations on the North and added that the redesignation “continues to tighten the pressure on the Kim regime, all with an intention to have him to understand, ‘This is just going to get worse until you’re ready to come and talk.’”

No one would accuse the Trump administration of understanding the first thing about diplomacy, but even for them this is a bizarre position to take. Administration officials fail to imagine how the North Korean leadership will perceive and react to these moves. If they gave this much thought, they would realize that Kim is much more likely to view these punitive measures as a challenge, and that would make him even less likely to agree to talks of any kind. The U.S. and its allies have been trying punitive measures for more than a decade without success, and yet they keep clinging to the idea that one of the world’s most isolated regimes can somehow be caused enough economic pain to make it give up on the things that it considers essential to its survival. The U.S. remains wedded to pursuing an unachievable goal (denuclearization) through ineffective means (more and more sanctions), and in so doing it is closing off the one path that might lead to a workable, negotiated compromise.


After all these years just how is our North Korean policy doing?  The truth is….it sucks!

The situation with North Korea was getting critical. The lights, to use the worn-out phrase, were blinking red.

The State Department, the Defense Department and the White House were increasingly concerned either that the North Korean regime was hiding components of its plutonium program from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), or that it would exploit any negotiating track to stall the international community while improving its nuclear capacity. The motives of the Chinese, Pyongyang’s biggest trading partner and bankroller by far, were unclear—adding more complication to a problem that was already far too complicated.

Let’s be honest….our policies have had little effect on North Korea and now we have a Fearless Leader that thinks he knows best….personally without diplomacy then this is not going to end well for the US and South Korea.

What Price Freedom?

I have been writing about the antics of the US best bud in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia….recently the aging king changed up the order of ascension to the throne and named MbS as the next in line and he immediately started arresting anyone that could have a beef with his new position… about in an IST post….

All his victims were housed in the Ritz in Riyadh and to gain their freedom they would have to pay MbS a sizeable sum…..

According to the Financial Times (FT) the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohamed Bin Salman, is negotiating a settlement with some of the country’s most well-known figures who have been detained under corruption charges since the beginning of the month.

In some cases, Saudi officials are demanding 70 per cent of the suspect’s wealth in exchange for their release.

It was widely suspected that Bin Salman’s anti-corruption purge was part of a wider strategy to raise money for the country’s depleting treasury, which has grappled with a recession triggered by prolonged low oil prices.

Think about that for as couple of minutes…..70% of their wealth and one guy is worth about $7 billion….that is billion with a “B”…..

But what if the guys being held did not want to pay the ransom?

Enter the American mercenaries working for Blackwater or whatever these thugs are calling themselves these days….. can disclose that the arrests have been followed by ‘interrogations’ which a source said were being carried out by ‘American mercenaries’ brought in to work for the 32-year-old crown prince, who is now the kingdom’s most powerful figure.

‘They are beating them, torturing them, slapping them, insulting them. They want to break them down,’ the source told

‘Blackwater’ has been named by’s source as the firm involved, and the claim of its presence in Saudi Arabia has also been made on Arabic social media, and by Lebanon’s president.

This is the guy, MbS, that is going to bring change to the Saudis….so far it looks like the same murderous bunch they have always been.

Stay Tuned!

The US In The Middle East

There is so much happening in the Middle East and all we Americans get as far as news goes is the slap and tickle crap by a bunch of perverts.

There is a lot of information here but well worth the time it will take to digest it.

On November 3, professor John Mearsheimer made a short and stunning presentation at “U.S. Foreign Policy in the Trump Era: Can Realism and Restraint Prevail?” conference held at George Washington University in Washington, DC. In the unipolar world after the collapse of the Soviet Union, he claimed, realists urged nonintervention and staying out of conflicts and countries that “really don’t matter much.” Unfortunately, American “crusaders” prevailed and pushed the US into a series of unnecessary quagmires across the greater Middle East.

Americans appear to agree. When presented with a list of expenditure categories, and polled about which should be the single top priority for budgetary cuts by Congress, “US military actions in the Middle East” was far and away their top choice. But most Americans probably have little idea how enormous those costs truly are.

AS a wonk for international relations and conflict management I need to cover something about our involvement in the region……that is besides fighting wars without end…..for 15 years the US has been involve in the Middle East as an invader….when it should be a mediator for a peaceful conclusion for all the craziness.

In the past the US has been a force for good but all that ended with the destruction of the Twin Towers….and this lack of diplomacy has made the US little more than a bystander to the events unfolding……

Without a diplomatic component to our policies then we are basically giving Russia the upper hand….

The U.S. is abdicating its role as a diplomatic powerbroker to Russia in Syria. The U.S. is ultimately empowering a political process driven by Russia that will not secure America’s strategic objectives in Syria. Those objectives include the Trump Administration’s focus on “neutralizing” Iran’s influence and “constraining its aggression” as well the lasting defeat of Salafi-Jihadists such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held an informal meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in Vietnam on November 11. The two leaders later released a joint statement that ostensibly reiterated their commitment to previous agreements on the Syrian Civil War, including bilateral military de-confliction, de-escalation zones, and a negotiated settlement through the UN Geneva Process. The statement nonetheless reinforces a number of persistent fallacies regarding the interests of Russia in Syria.
Some even seem to think that we have given Iran a free hand in the Middle East……

A large, bipartisan delegation of lawmakers warned the Trump administration on Tuesday that its regional policies are laying the groundwork for Iran to takeover Syria, according to a letter sent to the State Department that urged the administration to present Congress with a plan for combating the Islamic Republic’s foothold in the war torn country.

Nearly 50 members of Congress who recently returned from a trip to the Middle East warned Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that Syria is falling into Iran’s hands, a situation that has caused anxiety among Israeli leaders, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the WashingtonFree Beacon.

This part here is the neocons wanting to beat the war drums toward Iran…..and they are doing a good job with the help of the Saudis.
To the point that some say were have done Iran a favor in the Middle East…..

Kurdish aspirations for independence in Iraq faced the obstinate resistance of both regional and international actors which favoured the territorial integrity of Iraq. The rationale for their stance was that the independence of Kurdistan would undermine the stability of Iraq. 

Regardless of whether such predictions were right or wrong, Iraq’s one and only stable region has now been dragged into the persistent and endemic instability of the rest of the country. The political impasse that arose from both the intra-Kurdish conflict and Baghdad’s aggressive policy of controlling borders drove Iraqi Kurdistan swiftly into turbulence. The conditions in the Kurdish region are exacerbated by the newly imposed sanctions and negotiations over the 2018 Iraqi budget, which deepen the ongoing economic crisis.

The neocons are frothing at the bit over Iran and what it is doing in the Middle East…..the US has screwed up the Middle East for decades to come……and longer if the neocons get their war with Iran….since the election of Trump our status in the Middle East has dropped considerably…..
Many critiques of President Donald Trump’s foreign policy concern his open brinksmanship with enemies like North Korea or jarring antagonism of rivals like China and Iran. But much of the administration’s worst behavior concerns how it treats America’s friends.
The United States has long tried to aid and reassure its allies, helping them defend themselves and achieve their goals. America also brought its friends together, helping turn historic enemies like Germany and France or Japan and Korea into allies in their own right. The American track record is hardly perfect—as the Kurds, South Vietnamese, and others can attest. Yet such abandonment is the exception, not the rule, and the United States emerged as the leader of the free world in large part because its allies trusted it to do the right thing (if only, in a remark often attributed to Winston Churchill, after exhausting all the other alternatives). Whether it was to keep the Russians out of Europe during the Cold War, liberate Kuwait from Iraqi aggression, or build a robust global trading order, it was America that assembled coalitions, provided military muscle, and was there in the dark hours when our friends needed us most.
The US has NO standing in the Middle East other than the role of invader…..and it just keeps getting worse with every new situation that calls for diplomacy….some thing we do not have the capability of handling.
For instance…there has been a round of peace talks with Syria to include the government, some within the Free Syrian Army, some rebels and Russia….and where was the US with all this happening?

Russia’s multifaceted involvement in the Syrian war has now tipped the advantage decisively in favor of the government led by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Its well-considered system of local ceasefires and “reconciliations”—little more than glorified surrenders—between the regime and all manner of defeated members of the opposition has been fortified by a “de-escalation” regime, joined by Turkish, Iranian, and American junior partners in expanding perimeters throughout the country.

This effort is capped by a Russian-led diplomatic juggernaut in the Kazakh capital of Astana that is out-performing the moribund U.S.-led Geneva process. Russian President Vladimir Putin has defined Russian objectives clearly and resolutely, and marshaled inferior resources with skill and determination—much to the consternation of Washington.

There is movement on a peace initiative and where is the US?  We have an incompetent president and even more incompetent Secretary of State sitting in Washington Tweeting and flapping his lips in the breeze and the rest of the world is making strives toward peace.

The Turkish, Iranian and Russian foreign ministers will meet this weekend in the southern province of Antalya, in preparation for a leaders’ summit on Nov. 22 in the Russian city of Sochi on efforts to cement a truce in Syria.

“There will be a trilateral summit in Sochi on Nov. 22. Ahead of this meeting, [all three countries’] high-ranking bureaucrats and experts will meet. Likewise, the foreign ministers of the three countries will meet in Antalya on the weekend,” Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said late on Nov. 16.

The US is NO longer the messenger of peace and democracy….but rather a fool that makes policy at 140 characters and quickly becoming the laughing stock of the civilized world.

The people of the US need to have their voices heard….they need to make some noise to get the attention of the impotent a/holes in DC….what am I going on about?

On November 3, professor John Mearsheimer made a short and stunning presentation at “U.S. Foreign Policy in the Trump Era: Can Realism and Restraint Prevail?” conference held at George Washington University in Washington, DC. In the unipolar world after the collapse of the Soviet Union, he claimed, realists urged nonintervention and staying out of conflicts and countries that “really don’t matter much.” Unfortunately, American “crusaders” prevailed and pushed the US into a series of unnecessary quagmires across the greater Middle East.

Americans appear to agree. When presented with a list of expenditure categories, and polled about which should be the single top priority for budgetary cuts by Congress, “US military actions in the Middle East” was far and away their top choice. But most Americans probably have little idea how enormous those costs truly are.

Why not?  Fearless Leader has NO Middle East policy….nope….that would interfere with his damn golf game….

Time was when a mere statement from a secretary of state – let alone a US president – would have the phones jangling across the Middle East. The Reagans, Clintons, Bushes or Obamas of this world actually did have an effect on the region, albeit often malign, US leaders being poorly briefed and always in awe of Israel (not to mention its power to destroy political lives in Washington). But today, who is calling the shots across the old Ottoman Empire?

Well, just take a look at Putin and Assad and Erdogan and Sissi and Macron and Rouhani. These are the men who are currently holding the headlines, either declaring Isis dead or beaten or Syria “saved” or the Kurds “terrorists” or rescuing Prime Minister Saad Hariri from his hostage home in Saudi Arabia – although now we’ve all got to believe that he wasn’t detained and didn’t really intend to resign or did resign but doesn’t want to resign any more. And rather oddly, Mohamed bin Salman looks less and less influential, a Gulf Crown Prince whose attempts to destroy Yemen, Assad’s Syria, Qatar and Al Jazeera and even poor Lebanon look more and more like a child in a tantrum, throwing his toys around in an attempt to frighten the neighbours – including the one neighbour he will not fight, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Time for the American people to stand up and shout their wants to the clowns in DC……remain silent and watch even more quagmires pop up….and even more money wasted on the endless wars that we have grown accustom to in the past 16  years.

 Me?  I want these wars to end and the nation to get back to making this country great again……cannot do that from putting green.

The “Fantastic Eight”

I usually do not have much positive to say about the Congress….for the most part I think most of them are overpaid cowards….that spend their time screw the American people and raising cash for their next election….but there is a gang of eight that I feel are doing their job at least when it comes to national security and American foreign policy…….I think these congresspeople deserve the title of “realist”

They could caucus in a phone booth. They are known as “realists,” and their default position on questions of foreign policy and national security is one of skepticism about the value of interventions abroad and of respect for privacy at home. In a debate largely being litigated within the ranks of the Republican Party on Capitol Hill, the realists don’t have a prayer of prevailing in an up-or-down vote against the neoconservative wing of the party, proponents of an interventionist ethos to embed American values in lands far removed from domestic shores and traditions.

And yet the realists soldier on. They consider restraint a virtue and argue that foreign military adventures inevitably entail unpleasant and unforeseeable consequences. To nobody’s surprise, the realists were trounced on September 13 when the Senate slammed the door on Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s challenge to the legal authority that administrations of both parties have embraced since 9/11 to wage war. Paul’s target was actually two laws, each known as an AUMF, or “authorization for the use of military force.” One AUMF, enacted in 2001, allowed the government to pursue terrorists in the wake of 9/11; the other, passed a year later, flashed a legal green light for the 2003 Iraq invasion.

It is a shame that there are only 8 of them……and I may not agree with them on other issues but as far as our foreign policy they get my vote of confidence.

It is a shame that here are only 8 of them when there should be so many more…..for our foreign policy is too important to be shirked the way most in Congress do.

We can only hope with the next round of elections we are smart enough to choose people that have our nation’s interest at heart.

The Real Pres. McKinley

Note:  I have a habit of writing posts and putting them in my drafts and from time to time I have more drafts than I need….I use them for when circumstance takes me away from my ‘puter and I still need to post… of now I have 36 drafts in waiting so I will be posting more than my usual 5-6 posts per day…..sorry for the extra reading but these are things that need to be posted.  Thanx for your understanding.

Time again for the old professor’s classroom ( heavy sighs heard in the back of the room) and a look at an American president that most know very little about other than he was assassinated…there is so much more to McKinley’s presidency than his death…..

William McKinley was the 25th President of the United States, serving from March 4, 1897, until his assassination on September 14, 1901, after leading the nation to victory in the Spanish-American War and raising protective tariffs to promote American industry.

At the 1896 Republican Convention, in time of depression, the wealthy Cleveland businessman Marcus Alonzo Hanna ensured the nomination of his friend William McKinley as “the advance agent of prosperity.” The Democrats, advocating the “free and unlimited coinage of both silver and gold”–which would have mildly inflated the currency–nominated William Jennings Bryan.

While Hanna used large contributions from eastern Republicans (some things never change within the GOP) frightened by Bryan’s views on silver, McKinley met delegations on his front porch in Canton, Ohio. He won by the largest majority of popular votes since 1872.

The American Conservative takes a long look at the presidency of McKinley……

What’s wrong with the Roosevelts? What’s wrong is their shadow. The spotlight of history shines so brightly on Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt that most other presidents, especially conservative presidents, end up in semi-darkness. Whatever these interstitial figures gave the nation gets likewise obscured. While the Roosevelts tapdance across history’s stage, William McKinley, William Howard Taft, Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge and, of course, Herbert Hoover get locked backstage in a cabinet of “flawed figures.”

What’s more, with each passing year, the Roosevelt shadow deepens. McKinley, especially, is practically forgotten. Sometimes, the obscuring of these presidents is intentional; sometimes half-intentional. Whatever respect President Barack Obama demonstrated to Native Americans when he replaced the title of Alaska’s mighty Mount McKinley with the Native American name, Denali, the president was also doing his bit to intensify the obscurity of non-Roosevelts.

McKinley was so much more than his assassination….and now you know more than the person sitting next to you….ain’t history grand?