Fame Right off the Stage Trump


In a previous post, I indicated why I think Trump is making this bid for president. He want’s Fame! [1]

Think about it. The guy has plenty of money, but he’s getting older.

He has to be thinking to himself that it won’t be long before things like “Trump steak” will have any meaning.

But, if he can become the United States president. Well, then he would have some sort of permanent legacy upon which to hang his hat.

Sorry Don-Don, I don’t think that’s going to be the case.

True, if you win it, you would be president, but in all reality how many of us remember many of the presidents beyond those which we encounter during our lifetime.

Think you are going to magically snap your finger and a wall will be built to keep out illegal mexicans and then again to balance the current accounts deficit with China. Yea right!

What you will achieve at best is infamy. But, as you have shown to date, that’s a boundary you are not at all afraid to cross.

[1] Enjoy David Bowie’s Fame [HERE].

Love You Till Tuesday?


The Republican race only worsened by virtue of Trump’s widening margin after his coral of majorities yesterday in Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii. [1] There appears to be potential room for Ted Cruz if Marco Rubio and John Kasich were to fall in line behind him … but they won’t.

Whereas Trump is otherworldly in a completely inappropriate way, Cruz is quite likely too far right to be a viable candidate in the general election. So, what might be the best way to get out of the morass?

If I had the power to wave a wand, I would convince Rubio to step in behind Kasich.

Rubio is young and had – as game theorists call it “defected” on his mentor Jeb Bush. At present, he faces the prospect of losing in his home state of Florida. To avoid this political nightmare, he should strike a deal with Kasich to serve as his mentor by taking him under his wing as the man he would declare his running mate.

The benefit of this would likely be to bring Rubio’s ties to the Hispanic community under a Kasich-Rubio tent.

With this tent constructed, one would then hope that Kasich and Rubio would together would  take down not only Florida and Kasich’s Michigan, but also Illinois – certainly in both Trump and Christie’s mind – the state which holds a mere “Second City.” To Rubio: “Think long and hard about it.”

You really ought to beware the Ides of March when those three states and North Carolina all have their primaries.

Trying to bet on an open convention is too low of a bar. Individually, you might not be able to cement your intended locks. Together, it just might work out. If so, start the lovin’ now. Because if you don’t, your respective state electorates might just pull a Love You Till Tuesday – i.e. next Tuesday, March 15 – at which time they will pitch you aside for Trump’s bromides. [1]

[1] See The New York Times results for the March 8 Primaries [HERE].

[2] See David Bowie’s Love You Till Tuesday [HERE].

2016: A Space Oddity?


Yesterday, while focusing on religion touched on the topic of space exploration. A year prior to David Bowie’s release Space Oddity in 1969, Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey was released. It’s story sought to explain that there must be some advanced knowledge which has at critical thresholds – i.e. boundaries –  in the development of mankind has provided an assist.

Notwithstanding that assist, mankind’s over reliance on rational thought proved deadly in the mission which the two astronauts – and their space ship – were aiming at accomplishing. Essentially, there was no “Kill Hal” switch worked into the space ship’s mechanisms to provided needed relief when Hal’s functioning was clearly out of bounds.

Today – on my father Walter Marshall Zierman’s 76th birthday – I post out an article rejected for the King County Bar Associations March Bar Bulletin for the topic of Force.  Notwithstanding, I want to put this out into “space.”


— Force Yourself to Consider the End Game —


By Robert WM Zierman


This year’s Super Bowl had quite likely the most forceful and yet arresting advertisement of all time. In this advert, [1] sitting just shy of catatonic in his I Dream of Jeanie-esque home, filled with glory days gone by memorabilia, is an astronautical “commander.” Both his dispassion and his visage remind one of the penultimate scenes of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey.


He doesn’t alter his stare when his house assistant removes his tray of uneaten chicken, mashed potatoes, cubed carrots and peas. Neither does his trance alter as his son low roars up onto the drive nor the next frame which cuts to the inquiry: “Is he eating?” A question simply answered: “Nope.” [2]


However, he does slightly raise his head when his son says softly: “OK commander, come with me.”

They languidly pace together to the son’s sports car as the strum of a mic’d acoustic guitar begins. Son passes his key to Dad – the “Commander.”


And then it happens!


Blasting off to the sound of the late, incredibly great David Bowie’s [or perhaps better – Ziggy Stardust’s]  Starman … he’s alive again. Not to go unnoticed, this is one moon shot he shares with his son.


The 60 minute spot might not say it all … but it comes damn close. The father led the ultimate life of Icarus. Almost certainly he put everything into his career. This garnered not “a” but instead “the” most unique experience imaginable. This certainly was an experience which played out triumphally on a world stage. So, how do you beat that?


Even if you go in a new direction … and say set out on a course to run a three and a half minute mile … at some point don’t you break down under the strain thinking: “Oh what’s the use?”


You want to better your relationships with your spouse and kids? Get real. They’ve lived their life without you for far too long. You are just as distant from them when you sit down to Thanksgiving dinner as when you walked on your personal moon … whatever that happens to be.


So, now you are old. You’ve got all that great memorabilia which if you don’t donate to a museum will probably be hawked on eBay after you pass along.


Now it would be nice to think that a car ride with your child will give you reawake. Will it? The answer is probably not. And even if it does, how long will that shot in the arm last?


Ours is a culture in which we are told, no rather we are browbeat with the notion that, if we are to be really successful we will concentrate on one thing. And that one thing is something we will do over and over and over again.


Yet, when you look at some of the people who have done this, you realize that life for many if not most of them is generally rather pallid. That’s the very nature of life. It’s not the end game that counts … it’s the journey.


In a brief interview segment, Steve Jobs explains success as being a result of two primary things. The first is to find and do what you love. He indicates this is necessary because if you don’t love what you are doing, when it gets really tough – and it will – you’ll otherwise quit. You’ll quit because you are sane.


The second reason he similarly explains is that you have to get a team of good people around you. Presumably, he meant to express this is to be a team who also loves their respective jobs and as a result will work hard and not quit. [3]


Yet, as Jack Nicholson so forcefully demonstrated in another Stanley Kubrick masterpiece The Shining: “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” [4]


So what’s one to do? Give up? No, that’s not the answer. Instead, work hard … and play hard.


In younger days I would equate “play” with “booze.” And though I’m not saying to refrain from liquoring up from time to time, or now even have a marijuana smoke-out if that’s your thing, I am saying figure out something else that you can pour some of your time in – most preferably with family – so you can enjoy your whole life which of course includes your work.


Why? If you force it too hard and too long you’re likely to break. And even if you don’t, when all is said and done and you’re staring back at your life’s course … will it even matter? [5][6]


Robert WM Zierman is the founder of Justice Smiles, pllc, a firm that seeks to attack boundary dispute problems and provide resolutions for its clients and their neighbors.

[1] See the Washington Post article and the advert itself [HERE].

[Author’s Note: I am reluctant to provide this link as I suspect it is more likely you will hunt it down and enjoy if not so readily available.]

[2] As an aside, I once had the displeasure of being billed $40 for an intellectually rigorous and temporally extensive exchange with another attorney in our community in which my query was answered exactly the same.

[3] See Steve Job’s interview segment about passion [HERE].

[4] See Shelley Duvall’s discovery of the depths [absent breath] of her character’s husband’s written works [HERE].

[5] Enjoy Huey Lewis & The News’ We’re Not Here For A Long Time –We’re Here For A Good Time [HERE].

[6] Enjoy David Bowie’s Starman in full [HERE].


Religious Rebel Rebels are Needed to Strike Peace


‘May you always be able to look further beyond the horizon than your neighbor. Yet, let it not be so far beyond that you can’t point it out to him.’

That’s the essence of a message which an expat friend of mine in China shared well over a decade ago. However, it wasn’t until more recently that I came to learn this wasn’t his idea, but rather one which he found in Samuel Butler’s The Way of all Flesh. [1] I haven’t read this book about multi-generations living through England’s Victorian-era. I’ve also never watched any Downtown Abbey shows either.

Notwithstanding this ignorance, I suspect I would not be too far off the mark to conjecture that each explores the boundaries of class during the English periods which they represent. My understanding is social boundaries in England are much more rigid than here in the United States. As a result, the United States has generally had more social mobility.

So what happens when you defy social boundaries? It could easily devolve into the social anarchy in which patriarch Charles Manson orchestrated multiple murders and stabbings in the summer of 1969. Or, it could result with the incredible gift to the world of David Bowie’s Space Oddity. [2] That song’s release was orchestrated to occur mere days – 9 to be exact – before ground control received word from Neil Armstrong of his “one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” [3] [4]

In this Rebel Rebel dichotomy of extremes, what is the difference? [5]

I would suggest it amounts to the regard one places on life. David Bowie appears to have had a very high regard for life and wanted to push the boundaries of its exploration. By contrast Manson – with his Swastika on his forehead – does not. He appears to have been more interested in using the ability of mind control to explore death. [6]

So how is all this important?

Well, because my dear “neighbor” I want to take a moment to point out the dust stirring – not all that far off into the horizon – which will be the yield from the very harsh political rhetoric to which our ears currently are made to ring.

It is important for diplomacy to first be engaged in softly and then, only if necessary, war must be engaged hard – not vice versa!

This is to say that the lunacy which is being bandied about to gin up the vote on the right is very dangerous and if not willing to put to pursue to the endpoint of all out war – for which we would certainly feel great pain too – it is time for the Republican candidates to ratchet way back on their maniacal rhetoric.

This is a position which I have held for some time and though writing for January’s issue of the King County Bar Association’s Bar Bulletin with the theme of Trios was held back until this February’s issue subject Faith.

You may read my article titled, Could It Be World War III? [HERE].

Interestingly, it led to an invitation for me to attend tonight’s Interfaith meeting:

Standing Together for Human Dignity-Justice-Compassion-Wisdom. [7]

As a citizen of the world in which our ‘equalizers’ are guns of such scale as to have the ability to obliterate it- i.e. WMDs, it is no time to deny religion.

Yes, I realize many people wrongly believe that eliminating religion will eliminate non-tempered emotions … but they are wrong!

The way to change the way people act is not so much by changing external factors. Instead, it the internal factors of mind and soul which need to be explored. And it is religion – especially those tenants which are universally accepted by all religions – which best assists to conduct this exploration.

So, it is time to agree on the fact that there is not a one of us who knows with certainty what is beyond life’s boundary into death and as such each of us is free to seek to reconcile the fact of our mortality in the manner most suitable to our upbringing, culture, and temperamant.

So, I suppose in a round-about way it really does come down to the Tea Party’s idea of “Don’t Tread on Me” …

However, the corollary of that which unfortunately doesn’t seem to be regarded in turn is that – unless you are stirring up discord in the world – it then becomes necessary for me to …

Not Tread on You!

[1] Find more at Amazon [HERE].

[2] See video of Space Oddity [HERE]

[3] See video of Neil Armstrong’s first moments of the [earth’s] moon [HERE].

[4] As an aside, I am often reminded by my mother that my due date was July 20, 1969 – the day of the moon landing.

[5] See David Bowie’s Rebel Rebel [HERE]. 

[6] For an interesting New York Times video article about what the effect of at least one whose mind became controlled by Manson and the subsequent consequences see [HERE].

[7] If yet able and wanting to attend this or further events between the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim communities, I invite you to come [HERE].

Time to Fully Reposition Your Aim Hillary

**FOR USE WITH AP LIFESTYLES**  **FILE***   This Sept. 13, 1988 file photo shows Democratic Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis as he gets a free ride in one of General Dynamics' new M1-A-1 battle tanks at its land systems division in Sterling Heights, Mich.     (AP Photo/Michael E. Samojeden, FILE)

Bernie Sanders appears to be on a trajectory to drive his political vehicle into the left ditch of oncoming-traffic. As an upshot, Madame Secretary Clinton will likely get the nod to take on the Republican’s challenger. Below I argue she should almost fully dismiss Mr. Sanders and train her guns elsewhere.

Why should she recalibrate?

Because Sanders’ message and Trumps’ message appear to meet at the political equivalent of the international date line.

So by taking down Trump, where everyone else in the Republican race is too much of a wuss to do so, she effectively get a two-for-one shot.

All that said, there is one one resonant stump message of Sanders which must be qualified.

Sanders unqualified message is essentially: ‘No one gets anything without a fight.’

Yet, the reality of the “fight” prattling around in the Bernstein Bear’s mind is much more nuanced as than he explains.

Yes, privileges are extended to certain people merely as a result of the fact that they as Warren Buffet says: ‘win the birth lottery.’ From Buffets’ perspective this means he was lucky that of all the countries in the world into which he could be born, the one to which he was born was the Unites States.

Perhaps if we all felt so lucky we would end up more like Warren Buffet.

Now it is true that Buffet further had the “privilege” of growing up in a fairly stable home environment. But what really made Buffet the success he is today is that he was able to learn and apply certain principles repeatedly. For Buffet, even though investments are enjoyable, staying as focused on one thing is often times extremely hard work. [1]

And it is this, the “fight” to overcome one’s aversion to exerting extreme effort in the performance of hard work, which is the “fight” from which the thing of success is made.

Why is this important?

Because Sanders appears to be suggesting that the United States ought to fight to “take back” wealth that is in the concentrated aggregation of the “1 percenters.”

Those folks are considered to be the ones who control the political right. Give me a break!

Don’t be so naive, people of that status have their chips down on every square, corner, color, and strata (and remember there are three running both horizontally and vertically) of the roulette table.

For the 1% the maxim is: “Any port in a storm.”

So listen up folks, though World War II started by fighting and defeating a far right-wing, nut-job and the official end of that war’s conflict in the European Theatre ended on May 8, 1945 followed shortly thereafter on September 2 with Japan’s surrender, the war was only half complete.

This is because the heat of World War II was soon followed by the Cold War of the US against the USSR. This was where democracy had to turn away from fighting the far right – i.e. fascism – and instead contend with the far left – i.e. communism.

So, it wasn’t until the November 9, 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall – which beyond being a huge physical boundary was an even more formidable boundary of political ideology – that democracy finally won.

It was only on that date in 1989 that the US – With a Little Help From [its] Friends – had finally taken care of both of the far ends of the political spectrum. [2]

And all of this is important WHY?

It is of critical importance because while current, political left-wing wacko Bernie Sanders is losing ground to the moderating leftist Ms. Clinton …,

On the right – and I’ll clarify that I am a Republican – we currently have an abject nut-job who is a far, far worse candidate out in front.

Trump appears not to have any editor and has assisted to array “mobs” – both physical and virtual – against individuals and protesters. That’s damn scary!

Ms. Clinton appeared to originally want to make her presidency one which flows from the benefit of having a woman as president.

Perhaps that would be a great thing for the women’s movement on its own.

But in a political environment in which many others on the right appear to believe that Barrack Obama was an “all ranch and no cattle” political pollutant created from an environment of political correctness run amok, it would be very stupid for Hillary to continue to hitch her cart to a horse which consummates the Nineteenth Amendment – the Constitutional disallowance of prohibiting women their right to vote.

Now returning to the late ’80s – just before the fall of the Berlin Wall – do you remember who was the 1988 democratic nominee? [3]

No? Well, let me remind by giving further explanation to the above Featured Image.

That is none other than Michael Dukakis. Mr. Mike’s campaign was destroyed as a result of his “joy ride” in that tank.

Though Dukakis wanted to use that imagery to project that he was tough enough to take on the USSR, his diminutive features didn’t quite fit that exosceletal profile and instead it was his campaign which tanked.

So, why do I say this Hillary?

Because there is an image which I am sure the republicans will trot out in much the same fashion. It is the one in which Secretary Clinton purportedly in apparent horror witnessing the live feed of the kill of Osama Bin Laden.

Hillary, there is a very good chance that the United States – including Republicans like me – will need you.

So, in a contest of you against Trump which you should consider to have already commenced, I highly suggest you knock off all this women’s rights nonsense.

Women, like incoming president-elect of the Land Surveyors’ Association of Washington AND Surveyor of the Year Carla Meritt who received that award last night have fought hard – admittedly very likely much harder than most men – to do a great job!

It is because of that fight that the LSAW president-elect was honored. It certainly was not because it “ought” to be given to her.

So, my advice would be to “fight hard” to convince voters what you can and will do.

Get on board with Obama for the greater good of not only your party, not only the US, but quite likely the world, and have him – Obama – man up to the fact that the Iran deal was a loser.

This will give you free reign to attack it with more relish than Trump.

Afterward, go on the stump and TROMP,  tROMP, trOMP, troMP, tromP, tromp on donald trump as if he had dismissed you like Goodfellas’ Spitshine Tommy. [4]

Beat him into a bloody pulp. Make Trump bleed from … wherever! [5]

True, the effects of that will redound not just to you but to another candidate in the Republican party if you get this done before the Republicans finally select their candidate. That certainly may involve some political risk.

However, if you think you can wait until after the Republican primary is locked up to start pounding in earnest on Trump … you are gravely mistaken. In all honesty, I think about the only thing which will stop this guy is an Act of God.

So, how about this, please scrub any sound of Suffragette City from your talking points – at least for now – and go for the kill. [6]

You do that and the nation will thank you with their vote. And then you can help your gal pals. OK?

[1] To purchase Warren Buffet’s biography by Alice Schroeder The Snowball, Warren Buffet and the Business of Life, go [HERE].

[2] See The Beatles With A Little Help From My Friends [HERE].

[3] See YouTube video of David Bowie’s Ashes to Ashes [HERE].

[4] See the “shine box” scene from Goodfellas [HERE].

[5] See Fox News Channel anchor Megyn Kelly question Trump about his on record views of women from the first republican debate of this political season [HERE]. Then view Trump’s double down recoil in which he says Kelly was “bleeding from … wherever” [HERE].

This derivative news event was given more import in articles by The Washington Post [HERE]; The New York Times [HERE]; The Wall Street Journal’s report of its backlash [which Trump now clearly appears to have overcome] [HERE]; and perhaps is best analyzed by Slate [HERE].

[6] See David Bowie’s Suffragette City [HERE].

Land Surveyors’ Association of Washington’s Banquet is Tonight


Today is the second day of the Land Surveyors’ Association of Washington’s (LSAW) Annual Conference.

This year the conference is back at the Tulalip Resort.

As always there will be a Banquet. I certainly will be there this evening.

The reason beyond the good food, fun, and fellowship, is because this will be the end of Michael McEvilly’s presidential term.

In my mind at least, this is a significant rite of passage. Although likely not past the mid-point of his 40s, Mike crosses to the realm of a “senior statesman” within the land survey profession.

Notably, Mike has much more than mere street cred for this in the legal community too. WHY?

Mike is the downline “intellectual descendant” of the nationally recognized real property scholar who studied law and then teught at the University of Washington – the late William Stoebuck.

This intellectual dynasty is traced through Jerry Broadus – who was mentored by Stoebuck – and who is both a retired surveyor and lawyer who had employed Mike.

Jerry is now retired to siting birds instead of fences and other lines demanded by the survey profession to which his subsequent legal education was largely used to inform.

For lawyers what is perhaps most important about Mike is that he, along with Desirae [né Harpel] Schilling, provided “invaluable researching and proofreading help” in the creation of Jerry Broadus’ 2009 treatise …


Congratulations Mike!

Why don’t you click [HERE] to que up the music; put on your red shoes; and do a little jig.

Comfortably – but not too long – after that, I hope we can get down to business. Cheers!

God’s Miraculous Conversation with James


After yesterday’s blog post in which the featured image had David Bowie as Hamlet turning the skull to his audience, I determined to commit myself to referencing his artistry with respect to boundary disputes this month. To this end my initial thought was to conduct analysis of the Super Tuesday results and what it all means especially with respect to Trump going beyond proper boundaries with his Jersey Boy Chris Christie in pursuit of – drumroll please … Fame.

However, I’ll let that go at present because I note a trickle of new comments are yet dribbling in at the particular Survey Connect site to which I have been referencing. See [HERE]. Towards the end of that site there appeared to have been an exhortation by “billvhill” in which similar to Rodney King he essentially queries: ‘Can’t we all just get along.” The ‘Pleas’ express language – “I thought the purpose of this site was for the exchange of ideas, opinions, and knowledge, not to attack other members” – also appears to request continued meaningful conversation.

Unfortunately, the return appears likely – though perhaps not certainly – to have been a rebuke designed to score points instead of to indicate a principle by “James Fleming”. Specifically, he posted a picture of Spock indicating [to billvhill] “SO … YOU’RE NEW TO THE INTERNET, AREN’T YOU?”

Question: What is the principle conundrum?

Answer (by reframing the question to): How do you enter in and participate in a public discourse in an effort to learn by an exchange amongst peers, WHILE at the same time being sufficiently respectful that principles are not allowed such dominant force as to crush people’s willingness to engage in exchange because it may be hurtful to the subjective – i.e. feelings?

James Fleming cleverly seeks to push this hard aside by referencing a quote in Pulp Fiction.

Let’s put that quote up again and then instead of under the microscope, let’s pull back and look at it with a macroscopic view. So, first the quote …

So if you’re quitting the life, what’ll you do?
That’s what I’ve been sitting here contemplating. First, I’m gonna deliver this survey to Marsellus. Then, basically, I’m gonna walk the earth.
What do you mean, walk the earth?
You know, like Caine in “KUNG FU.” Just walk from town to town, meet people, get in adventures.
How long do you intend to walk the earth?
Until God puts me where he want me to be.
What if he never does?
If it takes forever, I’ll wait forever.
So you decided to be a bum?
I’ll just be James, Vern – no more, no less.
No James, you’re gonna be like those pieces of s#&t out there who beg for change. They walk around like a bunch of f#@$in’ zombies, they sleep in garbage bins, they eat what I throw away, and dogs piss on ’em. They got a word for ’em, they’re called bums. And without a job, residence, or legal tender, that’s what you’re gonna be – a f#@$in’ bum!
Look my friend, this is just where me and you differ –
– what happened was peculiar – no doubt about it – but it wasn’t water into wine.
All shapes and sizes, Vern.
Stop f#@$in’ talkin’ like that!
If you find my answers frightening, Vern, you should cease askin’ scary questions. 

All appears well and good, right? Yea, OK … Yet, I would suggest that everyone note this quote is only a portion of the second half of the dialogue that Vern and James are having in the restaurant. If we want to be faithful as to the “boundary” to which they are speaking we should first go to the scene showing the miracle to which has James realizing God has intervened. You will recall that James puts it upon himself to quote Ezekiel 25:17 before any execution style kill.

Notably, this is the perspective initially allowed the moviegoer of the scene which later provides the miracle. [2]

But, it’s not the only one. Later, there is a repeat from the perspective of one of the roommates of “MR. WHAT” who after beseeching “OH GOD, I DON’T WANT TO DIE”, bursts through the bathroom door with something straight from Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry gun collection and pops off as many shots as possible.

None of them hit though! [3]

Segueing now to the scene which includes the dialogue in the restaurant quoted above, we find it starts with banter typifying the stupid stuff of religion. These are the doctrines which doesn’t seem to get you any closer to God … nor your fellow man. The specific conversation is about bacon, Judaism, filth and filth’s exceptions. It is with this background in place that we can now have an intelligent conversation about the above quote. [4]

Notwithstanding the fact that he is a hit man, Travolta’s character of Vern is someone who ‘lives’ his life in fear. He’s afraid to embrace life and so is willing to simply do his job.

Yet, because he is someone who is afraid, to have his partner recognize that there is something more to life — or more particularly death — makes him especially unsettled. Essentially, he’s hoping to convince James as a proxy for himself that indeed religion – with all the heaven and hell nonsense as is ascribed to it – is bullocks.

So, the line: “If you find my answers frightening, Vern, you should cease askin’ scary questions.” while appearing to be used by James Fleming at Surveyors Connect in an attempt to mock “billvhill”, appears to me to actually self-impugn the very one who cloaks himself with its use in the post. … Of, course I MIGHT be wrong.

But I don’t think so. Why? Because Taylor Fleming has seen Pulp Fiction. And as a result of that we know that he has viewed the film’s final scene in which James “purchases” Ringo’s life.

Well boys and girls guess what? After having spent a good portion of my life on and off as a China-Hand who is now trying to draw down conflicts, that’s me … “I’m trying real hard.”

“Now, Go [and watch the final scene] [HERE].”

If you have never watched Pulp Fiction for fear of its violence, you are missing a lot.

Separately, and to tie this to David Bowie, perhaps because I have never watched Inglorious Bastards – which is another Quentin Tarantino film – it is me who has also missed a lot.

Regardless, I intend to have a post on Bowie’s song “Putting Out the Fire” prepared for Good Friday.

Preview Inglorious Bastards’ song video  [HERE].

[1] See James Fleming’s post Today [03.02] at the current end this Survey Connect thread [HERE].

[2] See execution scene from outside the bathroom door [HERE].

[3] See execution scene redux starting from inside the bathroom door [HERE].

[4] See the scene of the discussion in the restaurant from which James Fleming quotes [HERE].

A Norwegian & A Polack Who Don’t Meet in a Bar — Hamlet’s Poland Sub, Subplot


My Network response [HERE] to Survey Connect’s original comments [HERE] produced the reply titled “An example of throwing mud gains little ground” [HERE]. That’s kind of the point … throwing mud back and forth usually leads to much worse.

Now while Survey Connect’s two threads appear to have run their course and I am not interested in taking any unwarranted shots, I do yet seek to continue on with the rich churn which was generated.

Why so? Why prolong this at the risk of alienating those who comprise an industry which in the main I both admire and rely? Simple …

Because it seems that there are a number of surveyors – just as is the case as with members of all professional ranks, including certainly my own – who never found the higher ground of their profession’s code of ethics.

Fundamental Principles

Professional Land Surveyors uphold and advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the land surveyors’ profession by:

  1. Using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare; [1]
  2. Being honest and impartial, and serving with fidelity the public, their employers and clients;
  3. Striving to increase the competence and prestige of the land surveyors’ profession; and
  4. Supporting the professional and technical societies of their disciplines. See About page of  LSAW.org [HERE].

So, let’s pick up at the penultimate [Survey Connect] reply comment which quotes from Hamlet as such:

HAMLET Goes it against the main of Poland, sir,
Or for some frontier?
Captain Truly to speak, and with no addition,
We go to gain a little patch of ground
That hath in it no profit but the name.
To pay five ducats, five, I would not farm it;
Nor will it yield to Norway or the Pole
A ranker rate, should it be sold in fee.
HAMLET Why, then the Polack never will defend it.
Captain Yes, it is already garrison’d.
HAMLET Two thousand souls and twenty thousand ducats
Will not debate the question of this straw:
This is the imposthume of much wealth and peace,
That inward breaks, and shows no cause without
Why the man dies. I humbly thank you, sir.
Captain God be wi’ you, sir.

This is an integral part of the Poland Sub, Subplot – which due to Hamlet’s length – is often excised from the play. [2] But, instead of giving it the mere glancing thought which Hamlet affords within … let’s expand to find what this really entrails.

[Note the purposeful misspelling. Now let’s return …]

Hamlet of Denmark who’s dead father had previously engaged Norway in battle – i.e. had a dispute ostensibly for land  –  learns from a captain in Norwegian King Fortinbras’ army that instead of seeking to “return the favor” by attacking Denmark is going after some punty portion of land in Poland.

Hamlet, who whether asking the captain directly or perhaps instead merely thinking out loud, wonders: ‘Why, if the land isn’t worth squat, wouldn’t Poland simply give it up?’

As an important aside, unarticulated is the point that Hamlet might be much more interested in the question of why the heck should Fortinbras go after such worthlessness. My take is that this is by far the more important question and as such this chit-chat with the captain is also much more of an interrogation. So, notwithstanding Hamlet’s signoff courtesy, this would assist to explain why the Captain “blessed up” to Hamlet at the close.

Regardless, Hamlet had taken a moment to reflect on the situation a bit and thinks very briefly that either (a) the whole thing is madness; (b) 20 thousand men and as many ducats thrown after property which might be worth 5 [i.e. 4,000:1 – which may yet be more or less the ratio] may be fully plausible; or (c) both.

Hamlet then thinks about the type of men who would allow themselves to get into such a kerfuffle … and concludes that they are crazy.

You know what? Their right!

You know what’s more? I deal with them every day…!

So now with that said, let’s fast-forward from the days when “the Globe” was simply Bankside in Southwark, London [3], to just prior to The Globe’s separation into Axis and Allies. [4] Why?

Because while in the first case diplomacy ought to have been engaged in order to preserve life and wealth on both sides of a marginal, real property line fight.

However, in the second case, “When the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank” [5], there was indeed “land grab” for the “main of Poland.” See [HERE].

So, what’s the point? I have two.



[1] I have sought to “embolden” those surveyors who daily aspire to the first line order. And why should I say “daily aspire”? The answer is because to make that happen you have to work at it each and every day.

Each and every day for those who are truly fit to call themselves “professionals” – as with those seeking the brass ring in whatever realm of service they devote themselves.

The unacceptable alternative is a life on – and quite likely off – the job simply punching the clock.

[2] For those who fashion themselves Hamlet aficionados who want a puckish rebuke of Hamlet’s length, see Rowland Atkinson and Hugh Laurie seek to trim down the time of Hamlet’s most famous soliloquy [HERE].

[3] See information about The Old Globe Theatre [HERE].

[4] For those wanting to consider purchasing the game of the same title, Go [HERE].

[5] See full lyrics for Sympathy for the Devil from the Rolling Stones album Beggar’s Banquet [HERE].

[6] The “Featured Image” is of David Bowie’s Cracked Actor [HERE].

Surveyors: Instead of Depicting Calculated Corners … Are You Willing to Put Your Professional Career at Stake?


There is a renewed call for a survey which exemplifies the problems which have been kicked around at Survey Connect [HERE].

As it should happen, I have found such a survey. Please see King County recording 20141112900002 [HERE].

I invite surveyors – especially those licensed in Washington State – to provide written expression at this www situate in the comments below as to what they see.

Afterward, I’ll seek to do the same. I believe the process should be very “illuminative.”

Oh BTW, you might want to come to the party pistols loaded with “silver bullets” … I know that’s my intention. Cheers!