Sunday, April 12, 2015

I've received some unhappy news about a family member. I'll be a little late tonight.

The Democrats of Iowa are waiting for no one. Good for them.

These are two of prospective candidates for president 2016. They gave great speeches and are equally as dedicated to a high moral standard for the USA.

Former Senator James Webb (D-VA) and former Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD) (click here) delivered the keynote speeches at the Polk County Democrats' 4th annual spring awards dinner held at the Local 450 United Automobile Workers Hall in Des Moines. They both focused on preserving the American Dream though the economy, higher wages, and higher education. Former Senator Webb also focused on criminal justice and social reform while former Governor O’Malley spoke more about economic reform and the struggles of the poor and the middle-class.

I like her.

I like her. I think she is brilliant and knows more about the USA than anyone alive. I mean that. She has known the ups and downs of the USA. She knows it from a unique perspective. She is woman from a family that wanted her to achieve and what she decided to achieve in was a huge surprise. I don't know why it would seem like a surprise, but, rarely one day of her life did she only think of herself. 

I like her. That isn't going to change. She has discerning insight, the moral backbone and the ambition to make America the greatest country in the world. I look forward to her leadership and resolve.

The USA, it's people and allies are in for a real treat.

I'll be busy for the remaining afternoon which was planned some time ago. 

I am looking forward to a great campaign for an American hero in Hillary Clinton.

I am happy she decided she would run.

What is an oligarch?

This is from Wikipedia. 

Business oligarch is almost a synonym of the term "business magnate", borrowed by the English-speaking and western media from post-Soviet parlance to describe the huge, quickly acquired wealth of some businessmen of the Post-Soviet states (mostly Russia and Ukraine) during the privatization in Russia and other post-Soviet states in the 1990s. The history of the business oligarchs in post Soviet Union states is discussed in the following articles relating to specific regions of the former Soviet Union:...

July 12, 2015
By Simon Goodley 

Gun battles and 'extortion' in latest Russian oligarch legal battle (click here). 

Billionaire aluminum tycoon Oleg Deripaska being sued by Michael Cherney in high court for 20% of Rusal....

London's latest legal battle between oligarchs from the former Soviet Union kicks off on Monday with a $2.5bn case featuring gun battles and alleged extortion payments at the heart of the fight to control the country's nascent aluminium industry in the 1990s.

Oleg Deripaska, the billionaire metals tycoon whose friendships with Lord Mandelson and financier Nat Rothschild have ensured his name is well known in the UK, is being sued by Michael Cherney – an Uzbekistan-born Israeli who claims that he is owed 20% of the shares in Rusal, the aluminium giant controlled by Deripaska.

While Deripaska admits to having paid Cherney $250m following a 2001 meeting in London's Lanesborough Hotel, he will argue that the sum was a final instalment of an extortion – or krysha – payment to organised crime groups represented by Cherney.... 

We have seen them in Ukraine when the government failed the people. In Ukraine the actual question is not that the government failed, but, when did it fail? It didn't first fail in the Maidan. The uprising at the Maidan was a symptom, not the coupe. When did the coupe happen?

What was learned about the Ukraine national military after the deaths in the Maidan?

The Ukaine national military was completely disarmed and made ineffective to the point where members in Crimea had their lives in danger when another militarized force came forward. The national was completely disarmed and helpless in Ukraine.

What is the definition of sovereignty?  

Sovereignty is a governable state. It is not just a geographical state although that is required to put forward a governable state, but, it is the state of the people within their borders to be self-sufficient within those borders. 

Once a people are decided to be a governable state, that is an authority. That authority puts forth the standards of their people and the ability to govern their borders and any possessions of that authority. Is national security important to govern as an authority of a governable state?

National security is absolute in the definition of sovereignty because otherwise it is anarchy where people live and die through confrontations and I am not referring to civil war. Civil war is a completely different dynamic.

In the case of Ukraine the national military was overthrown by the then President Yanukovych and his oligarchs that hacked into Ukraine to create their own Middle Ages surfdoms. Ukraine's oligarch was definitive to the rise of oligarchs in Russia. Literally, the oligarch becomes his own government. I don't recall any female oligarchs anywhere in the world. Doesn't mean there isn't, I just am unaware of one.

Oligarchs are primarily economical There be other ones, but, in the democracy of the USA and a constitution that is suppose to be an authority by, of and for the people; oligarchs are primarily economic.

To return to the USA where the local government tout elections as the definitive measure of sovereignty. When that local, state, federal government is noted to provide equipment or otherwise paid for by private citizens there is an imposition by those within the governing authority to maintain that source of generosity. Is it corruption? I consider it corruption, but, there is a higher standard that defines corruption as a 'serve in exchange for monies.' Is that going on in Oklahoma? The people have to decide if their lives effected by police financed by questionable sources including corrupt courts that disregards civil rights to benefit the city's treasury. 

In the case of Black communities and individuals, this is widespread. This is something that was conducted by an authority in the past administration. Was Bush diluting legitimate police forces that worked for all the people for those that have become killing forces? All I'll say is that "W" was fully in charge when the USA police departments became militarized. Was that similar to the Ukraine President? Sure looks like it. Did "W" benefit from militarizing the USA police? Sure, he benefited politically. Ultimately anyone can look at the "W" White House and know there was a great deal that occurred by 'chance' because of incompetency. The USA is still attempting to push back against the idiocy handed down from DC post 911. 

Do I have to make a list to the incompetency and brutality of that White House? Socially that administration caused a great shift from advances by the USA to regressive measures. "W"s White House was looking to shut down telescopes in the country. Like, what? There was a big 'thing' about large scientific telescopes during that administration. It was completely bizarre during those eight years. All one has to do is appreciate the hideous dynamics of the global economic crash. It was like; what?

I think every police involvement with deaths of American citizens, especially Black men, needs to be assessed individually. Albuquerque, New Mexico is not New York City. New York City is not Ferguson. But, I think this Oklahoma situation is typical of the impoverished cities of the south. A wealthy individual will bolster important governing measures such a police simply because there is a narrow group that actually has good incomes. The tax base is impoverished as well as the people. That leaves open the dynamics of Ferguson. The more impoverished tax payers become the norm in the USA the far less effective their governments will become.

If I may?

Be careful in stating generalities. Those generalities exist, but, can't be stated until discovered and validated. There is liability both financial and political in jumping to conclusions.

Is racism in the USA?