Thứ Năm, 2 tháng 8, 2018

News on Youtube Aug 3 2018

America!

Land of the free and home of the brave

And also some pretty weird borders

Why do the Gulf Coast States look like this?

Why do Louisiana and Florida steal coastline that looks like it should belong to Mississippi

and Alabama?

Well

Under Spain, Florida's panhandle reached as far west as the Mississippi river.

But, since the US and Spain were having a conflict over the Western borders of Louisiana,

and the US wanted to control both banks of the Mississippi river, in 1810 they invaded

Spanish Florida and annexed the land west of the Pearl River to Louisiana.

Later, during the war of 1812, the US annexed the land west of the Perdido river and made

it part of the Mississippi territory.

Then in 1816, the territory was split vertically roughly in half into Mississippi and Alabama.

Why is the upper peninsula a part of Michigan?

Why not Wisconsin, or it's own state?

Well, in 1835 there was a dispute between Ohio and Michigan over a strip of land on

Lake Erie

The Toledo Strip

Why?

Well, the Northwest Ordinance declared that a state could be created from the Northwest

Territory with all land north of a straight east-west line from the southern point of

Lake Michigan

That state being, Michigan

Now, based on that, the Toledo strip should definitely be part of Michigan

But the maps used at the time showed Lake Michigan as being further north than it actually

is

But then, why didn't Ohio just give up the land after the truth was revealed?

Well, the Toledo Strip was rich agriculturally, multiple canals were going to be built there,

and it included the mouth of the Maumee river

As such, Ohio didn't want to lose Toledo to Michigan

And, since Ohio was a state, while Michigan was not, Ohio had a lot more political representation

As such, Ohio was given the Toledo strip, while as a consolation, Michigan was given

the Upper Peninsula

Why does Oklahoma have that skinny Panhandle?

Why isn't it just part of Texas?

Well, it was a part of Texas

Until in 1845 when Texas tried to join the Union

And it wanted to maintain slavery

But, due to the Missouri compromise, new territories could only permit slavery if they were south

of 36 degrees 30

So Texas gave up claims to territories north of that line, some of which is now the Oklahoma

panhandle

But then why isn't the Oklahoma panhandle just part of Kansas?

Well

The originally proposed southern border of Kansas was 36 degrees 30, which would have

made the Oklahoma panhandle part of Kansas

But Congress instead set the border at the 37th parallel

Why?

Well, look at Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota

They all have 3 degrees of height

See, Congress wanted states to have similar sizes to each other, which can be seen in

the previous example, as well as in Colorado Wyoming and Montana all having 4 degrees of

height, and all of these states being the same width

Okay, but if Congress wanted states to be similar sizes to one another, then how come

Texas and California are so huge?

Well

Almost immediately after California was taken from Mexico, gold was discovered there

And so the population exploded

Because of this, California tried to make itself a state

But it still needed approval from Congress to do so

So why didn't Congress split California into smaller states?

Because of how far away California was from other heavily populated areas of the US

See, California could have just declared independence from the US, and the US would not have been

able to take it back

"She is practically further removed from us than England.

We cannot reach her by railroad, nor by unbroken steam navigation.

We can send no army over the prairie, mountain and the desert."

So, since California could do basically whatever they wanted, they made their state stretch

as far south as the port of San Diego, and far enough west to include all the Sierra

Nevada gold fields

But what about Texas?

Well, Texas was an independent country before becoming a state

And it joined the Union at a time when many Americans supported the idea of Manifest Destiny,

that America should control all of North America

So America didn't want to force Texas to split into smaller states out of fear that that

might make them refuse to be annexed

Why does this strip of land even belong to Idaho?

Wouldn't it make more sense to be part of Washington?

Well, it was part of Washington

But when gold was discovered in the region, settlers came from different parts of the

country

Due to cultural and political differences between these settlers and the people on the

Pacific coast, they split the state roughly at the 117th meridian west

But then, why isn't part of Montana just a part of Idaho?

Well, it used to be

But due to the mountains, there was little to no interaction between the people in these

two regions

So Idaho's border with Montana was set at the peaks of the Bitterroot mountains

Why does Wyoming take what looks like it should be the Northeast corner of Utah?

Well, there are a few reasons

First, this region was cut off from Utah by the Uinta mountains, while it was easily accessible

from Wyoming

Second, this region was full of coal fields, waterways, and many roadways such as the Oregon

Trail passed through it

And many members of Congress were worried that Mormons would have too much influence

if this region were in Utah

For more infomation >> Weirdest US State Borders Explained - Duration: 4:48.

-------------------------------------------

Princess Madeleine of Sweden Is Moving Her Family to the United States! - Duration: 2:33.

 Princess Madeleine of Sweden is officially relocating to the U.S.A.!  Madeleine and her husband Chris O'Neill revealed Thursday that they are heading to Florida this fall with their three children: Princess Leonore, 4, and Prince Nicolas, 3, and Princess Adrienne, 4 months

 "The time and opportunity for the United States is good for the family when the children are still in pre-school age," the Swedish Royal Court announced in a press release

 Madeleine will continue her work with the World Childhood Foundation after the move

 "Princess Madeleine has a great commitment to children's rights and will continue working with the World Childhood Foundation and, through the move, be able to focus more on the activities in the United States," the Swedish Royal Court announced

 They added that O'Neill "has previously been working in the United States but will continue his business in Europe

"  The royal family is no stranger to settling down around the world. Although the family has been living in London during recent years, the 36-year-old royal announced she would return to Sweden to give birth to their third child earlier this year

 Madeleine and her family are also familiar with the United States. On top of having a summer home in Florida, they previously lived in New York City

Madeleine moved to the Big Apple in 2010, where she began working for her mother's, Queen Silvia, World Childhood Foundation as a projects manager

 The couple lived in New York during the early years of their marriage, even welcoming their first child, Princess Leonore, at a private hospital stateside

 In addition to their big moving announcement, they also released a new official portrait of their newly expanded family of five

In the shot by photographer Lena Ahlström, O'Neill cradles baby Adrienne while Madeleine sweetly holds hands with Nicolas

It's Princess Leonore, however, who steals the show: wearing a pink dress with a matching bow in her hair, the little princess puts on a big grin while standing on a rock and holding flowers

 Despite her royal status, Madeleine insists she's just a "normal mom."  "They wake me up and we fix breakfast together and the breakfast flies all over the place!" she exclusively told PEOPLE at the 2016 World Childhood Foundation USA ThankYou Gala in New York City

"And then we go out to the park and we swing, we try to do a lot of activities because my little Leonore, she has lots of energy, so we have to keep her stimulated and busy

"

For more infomation >> Princess Madeleine of Sweden Is Moving Her Family to the United States! - Duration: 2:33.

-------------------------------------------

Colorado State Senator Launches GoFundMe For President's Portrait - Duration: 2:03.

For more infomation >> Colorado State Senator Launches GoFundMe For President's Portrait - Duration: 2:03.

-------------------------------------------

What do states need to secure upcoming elections? - Duration: 6:32.

JUDY WOODRUFF: But first: The country's top intelligence and national security officials

gave stark warnings today on Russia's ongoing efforts to meddle in this November's elections.

In a rare joint appearance from the White House Briefing Room, the Trump administration

agency heads acknowledged the threat, while touting their stepped-up election security

initiatives.

DAN COATS, U.S. National Intelligence Director: The intelligence community continues to be

concerned about the threats of upcoming U.S. elections.

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI Director: Make no mistake, the scope of this foreign influence threat

is broad and deep.

GEN.

PAUL NAKASONE, United States Cyber Command: We're not going to accept meddling in the

elections.

And it's very unambiguous.

KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security: I am pleased to inform you that,

to date, all 50 states, the District of Columbia and over 900 local governments have partnered

with DHS in order to bolster the resilience of the nation's election infrastructure.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So, what does the administration's announcement means for the states?

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is a Democrat, and he oversees elections there.

Mr. Padilla, thank you very much for joining us.

Before I asked you about what the Trump administration officials had to say today, tell us, from

your perspective, are you seeing interference already at this point in California's elections

and discussions about election in the politics of your state?

ALEX PADILLA (D), California Secretary of State: Look if you look back from 2016 to

today and going forward, are there folks trying to find the vulnerabilities in our systems

to meddle with our elections?

Absolutely.

We see that sort of scanning activity on a daily basis.

That's nothing new.

But that's very different than whether systems are actually compromised or hacked or breached

specifically.

And so it's just a reminder.

The Russian -- indictment from a couple of weeks ago was another reminder.

And today's press conference is reminder that the threats keep coming.

The lights are blinking, as our intelligence leaders have said.

And so our defenses and security measures need to continue to increase in sophistication

as well.

And we need more resources to stay ahead of the threats.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So, what did you make of what administration and agency officials had to

say today?

Were you reassured by their message?

ALEX PADILLA: Look, I appreciate what they had to say.

But I can't help but call out the obvious here.

Number one, this is agency leaders.

It's still not the commander in chief unequivocally saying the Russians meddled with the 2016

elections.

And that is critically important.

And you have got to hold the Russians accountable if you're going to be taken seriously about

being a partner in protecting the 2018 elections, the 2020 elections and beyond.

Number two, none of what they announced today, what they're doing in partnership with state

and local governments, is anything new.

They have been doing this, rightfully so, since the end of the Obama administration.

So it does need to continue.

But I think state secretaries of state have been cleared in the following.

Number one, we need the Trump administration to hold the Russians accountable.

Number two, we need ongoing investments in the upgrade and modernization of our election

infrastructure.

A once-in-15-year investment in election security doesn't cut it.

And, number three, the White House has yet to name an election security coordinator,

a qualified, well-respected election security coordinator.

That alone speaks volumes.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So, when they say they are taking this seriously, that this an all-out

effort -- we heard the homeland security secretary.

They're working closely with all 50 states, the District of Columbia, hundreds of local

governments.

You're saying that's not sufficient?

ALEX PADILLA: It isn't sufficient.

We are working.

We are beginning to share information.

But part of what states have shared with the federal government is the need for additional

resources.

The 4300 million and change from last month was helpful, but, frankly, what Congress appropriated

last month was leftover butterfly ballot, hanging chad money from the wake of the Florida

2000 debacle.

That is not new money that's been approved by Congress or the president has called for

in the wake of the 2016 elections.

So, we need additional investment for the threats of today, not the threats of 15 years

ago.

JUDY WOODRUFF: How much more money are you calling for?

ALEX PADILLA: Here's the -- I think how -- a good comparison.

It's not just Trump.

It's congressional Republicans.

Last week, it was the House of Representatives.

This week -- just yesterday, it was the United States Senate defeating a proposal to invest

$250 million in additional money for election cyber-security grants to the states.

At the same time, approving a $700 billion defense authorization.

Protecting our elections is a matter of national security.

For less than one-tenth of 1 percent of what was given for defense spending, you could

do so much to help further secure and protect the bedrock of our democracy.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And it's an interesting point you make, because, today, the homeland security

secretary, Nielsen, said the cyber-threat now exceeds what -- she said the danger of

a physical attack on the United States.

Just finally, we heard the FBI director, Christopher Wray, say that, compared to 2016, this year,

we're not seeing the same kind of efforts to specifically target election infrastructure,

but other efforts to influence public opinion continue.

What do you see in that regard?

ALEX PADILLA: Look, I think we cannot rest on our laurels.

We take nothing for granted.

There's different types of attacks that have been coming our way and will continue.

Is it a threat on our elections infrastructure?

Absolutely.

And they will keep coming.

Is it a threat to simply create chaos, confusion and undermine confidence in elections?

Voter confidence is so critical in the strength of our democracy.

We saw that and more in 2016.

We're seeing that and more in 2018 and beyond.

So, again, our safeguard, our security measures have worked to protect elections thus far,

but we have to stay at least one step ahead of the bad guys.

JUDY WOODRUFF: California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, we thank you.

ALEX PADILLA: Thank you.

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét