Sunday, December 31, 2017

North Korean Black Market for Oil and Other Supplies

A couple of recent news stories have said that Russia, or a Russian-owned group, may have supplied oil to North Korea and that a Panamanian-flagged ship of unknown ownership had been taken to prevent delivery. It is my belief that the potential for conflict between United States and its allies with North Korea should be reason for any nation having an understanding or treaty with North Korea should declare their involvement, so that misunderstandings can be avoided. This could be a relationship of various kinds: economic or military aid or even of a mutual defense pact. The latter would be most serious because a conflagration would automatically mean another nation becomes involved immediately. The "Western" nations which form NATO have declared their relationship publicly as did the Warsaw Pact nations of some years ago. With nuclear weapons 'on the table' it is much more critical that such treaties or relationships should be known. Simply knowing where a nation's loyalties lie is critical if we are to maintain peace.

Report: Russian Tankers Fueled North Korea | HuffPost

Second Ship Suspected Of Providing Oil To North Korea Seized | HuffPost

Friday, December 29, 2017

The Presidency and the Justice Department

When Pres. Trump says he can do anything he wants with the Justice Department (and its FBI) he is simply wrong. When he claims Pres. Obama demanded the same kind of loyalty he is wrong.

In a tweet Thursday night, Vance expressed her respect for President Obama and how he made it clear to his appointed US attorneys—who they will be serving. Here is what she revealed.

Joyce Alene @JoyceWhiteVance

"The first time President Obama met with US Attorneys, he told us, 'I appointed you but you don't serve me. You serve the American people. And I expect you to act with independence & integrity.' None of us ever forgot that."

December 29, 2017

Trump demanded government employees (appointed or not) give their sole loyalty and service to him."

Donald J. Trump was, and remains, unfit to be president!

Monday, December 25, 2017

Russian Politics

Lest there has been any doubt, it is now perfectly clear that Russia is no a Democratic nation.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-putin-critic-navalny-barred-from-russian-presidential-election-2017-12

When you can simply ban your opponents from running for office by having them charged with a crime that would disqualify them from elective office, then you have too much power. It is a corruption of the political process.

Of course, here in America we just use gerrymandering to select the voters our incumbents need to get reelected.

There are political problems in Russia AND America, as well as many other nations around the globe. One would hope that in the new year some of these might be fixed or improved.

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

N. Korea Wants Us to Stop Military Exercises Until After the Olympics

Message to Kim: Hold off on developing your nuclear weapons until after you've brought your nation's economy up to the level of other East Asian nations.

Full stop.

Monday, December 18, 2017

Aside from the Amtrak Accident

Here are some interesting articles about current issues which are worth reading.


Marijuana

I've never heard of someone doing violence under the influence of marijuana and Portugal has seen that and now Norway is going to check it out.




Science: Green Energy, Hurricanes, Bees, Huntington's Disease, blood cancer treatment
A new approach to treating blood cancer just got a promising set of results

Thursday, December 14, 2017

USA v USSR 1990s edition

Has our government gone crazy? We may think the Trump administration is off its rocker, but the story of this article relates to the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations. The public needs to hear from top officials of those times about the decisions, the plan, what they thought the consequences of lying to the Russians would be, and what they thought we would be able to do today to avoid an apocalypse?


http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/newly-declassified-documents-gorbachev-told-nato-wouldnt-23629

Monday, December 11, 2017

movie recommendation, Bridge of Spies

I recommend Bridge of Spies, It's based on historical events and was written (in part)
by the Coen Brothers, directed by Steven Spielberg, and stars Tom Hanks.

Similar in some ways to The Good German, it tackles the post WWII era, and with
"Bridge" the beginning of the Cold War and the construction of the Berlin Wall and the
trade of Rudolph Abel for Francis Gary Powers. It's in color (The Good German isn't).

It's dramatic. It's personal. It has some humor. It's a great flick.

Monday, November 20, 2017

Republicans and Democracy

I know Republican politicians will say anything, so asking them questions is pointless. But, we should at least ask rhetorically, when will the Republicans announce they will support Democracy in America, even when the demographics have their very far-right wing politics clearly in the minority. In the last presidential election the Democrat won by over 3 million votes nationally and the Republicans said they were prepared to lose by as many as 4 million and still win the electoral college. Do they want majority rule in America? How far will they go to prevent it?

Crosscheck, the War on Drugs, closing voting places, voter ID, and many other techniques have been used to help them "win" and it's subverting Democracy.

Do they really want Democracy in America?

Sunday, November 12, 2017

Trump's Tweeting Twilight

"Trump tweeted this:

"When will all the haters and fools out there realize that having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. There always playing politics – bad for our country. I want to solve North Korea, Syria, Ukraine, terrorism, and Russia can greatly help!"
"

I'll ignore that "They're always" has been misspelled by the leader of the Free world as "There always".

Most of the haters in America are Republicans and there are fools equally on all sides.

Most of us do realize that good relations with all nations is a good thing, but we don't like having 'good relations' with nations which intend us harm. It's essential to be able to recognize opponents and deal with them appropriately. Many Americans do not think Russia itself is a problem, but that Vladimir Putin is dangerous and means us ill.

Politics and government are always intertwined, as everyone knows. To insinuate American opponents of Trump are 'playing politics' is in its own way 'playing politics' and it's demeaning to claim people are not sincere about their views, but are only playing games. It happens, but there are enough important issues with regard to Trump policies and relations with Russia and Putin, that we can't afford to play politics on those things.

It would be great if Trump wanted to "solve NK, Syria, Ukraine, terrorism, etc.", but we haven't seen a lot of speech which indicates Trump knows much about them or how to create a strategy which everyone can support. What is Trump policy toward NK? Calling Kim names and claiming we'll destroy them has a point, but repeating this incessantly is seen more often as inflammatory and not helpful. What is Trump policy with regard to Syria? Nobody knows. Could Russia help? Sure, if they kick Assad out. But, Putin wants a government in Syria he (practically) owns, so he can protect Russian interests. He has no interest in protecting human rights, such as Syrians from being slaughtered. Is there a Trump policy on Ukraine? I can't imagine it being one Americans would support. Isn't the general policy toward nations where Putin has an interest to give Putin what he wants? In Ukraine American and Putin's interests are diametrically opposed (that means the opposite). Putin wants control of Ukraine, despite having no right to that, and America wants Putin to stay out of Ukrainian affairs.

If we ever saw Putin do something to improve these issues, rather than just pursuing his New Russia policies, then we could talk. Therefore, putting any trust in Putin is a bad policy.

Trump seems to be nothing more than a Putin toadie and Putin-wannabe and America won't stand for that.

Saturday, October 28, 2017

Potpourri

Iraq & Kurds

I was sorry to hear that Iraq decided to attack Kurds instead of rewarding them for their tremendous help in fighting ISIS. It shows that having the majority does NOT always translate to intelligence about how to govern. Lack of power sharing is part of what caused Saddam Hussein to be hated so. America should make it clear we are friends with the Kurds and will help them any time they need help in the future.

Kurds lose their independence gamble, ask Iraq for ceasefire and talks – ThinkProgress


Airbus & Bombardier

I was very happy to hear of the Airbus & Bombardier connection. I don't think it will hurt American aircraft manufacturers so much as it will inspire them to compete more. It should also be good for Honeywell, who manufacture engines for (at least some of) the Bombardier aircraft.
Why Airbus's tie-up with Bombardier is so damaging for Boeing

YouTube.com video on the Bombardier Learjet 75:  Pilot Report: Flying the Learjet 75 - YouTube
Yes, Bombardier owns the Learjet which was originated by an American named Lear in Texas, USA.


Energy

This stunning statement from General Motors will keep Big Oil up at night – ThinkProgress

With fast-charging, electric cars will soon match or beat gasoline cars in every respect – ThinkProgress

Tesla unveils 'first of many solar+storage projects' at hospital in Puerto Rico | Electrek

The increasingly irresistible case for electrifying city buses

Oil giant Shell buys leading operator of electric vehicle charging stations | TheHill



Economy

There's a reason politicians don't believe businesses should be left to regulating themselves. Here is one example:
This Company Added the Word 'Blockchain' to Its Name and Saw Its Shares Surge 394% - Bloomberg


Crypto-Security

As people become more aware of the dangers and lack of privacy of most e-mail, they may switch to others which offer more.
Here is one example: ProtonMail as a Gmail alternative


Science

This story caught my eye and the videos are fascinating. Home sweet home...
This is the Most Detailed Map of the Universe to Date


Monday, October 23, 2017

Solar POWER

The change is coming rapidly. Solar power is getting cheaper at a rate nobody has predicted.

https://thinkprogress.org/stunner-lowest-price-solar-power-f3b620d04010/

The war on coal is just the progress if science and technology.

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Movie recommendation: Beat the Devil

This 1953 movie was directed by John Huston. The screenplay was based on a novel and written by Truman Capote and Huston. It starred Humphrey Bogart, Gina Lollabrigida, Jennifer Jones, Robert Morley, Peter Lorre, and other unsavory characters. It's an 80 minute romp in black & white.

It's about some unscrupulous men trying to go to a place in East Africa to invest in (or steal) property which has uranium. They say in life it's not the destination, but the journey which is important. That's also true in this movie.

They back-stab, lie, (fake) laugh, manipulate and somehow move the show along toward their destination. There is love, hate, betrayal, lust for money, and some crazy people to keep it entertaining. I can't decide if it was meant to be a comedy or drama or some kind of ironic philosophical moral. I loved every bit of it.

I would love to say the "good guys" won, but in this story there don't appear to be any "good guys".

If you like classic movies, this is a good one. Enjoy!

Sunday, October 1, 2017

An Observation on Our Economic System


There was a day in the American colonies when the government decided how much profit a firm could make. That was definitely not a 'free market', yet America thrived because our economy was largely agricultural and to some extent based on barter.

Later when America became industrialized and more people were employed to work by/for companies, the markets became more sophisticated, but were still regulated in significant ways by government. Still, the world of business was free for robber barons to buy politicians and the laws they wrote and controlled resources their competitors needed and the competition could be quite fierce. Fortunes were made, even as employees were being paid better and better. America flourished.

In the early years of my life the idea of more accurate product pricing was still new and based somewhat on the cost of production and "a fair markup". In those days America did well, unions existed, and America was mostly a domestic economy. The nation's wealth was being shared almost equally between workers and companies.

Then a new idea came to the fore: pushing government back to let businesses compete and letting market rules be limited to contract enforcement. This was a slow-changing process, but government bent to the will of the rich. Even as late as the 1970s the trucking, communications, airlines, stock markets, and other things were quite regulated. Ma Bell still ruled the telephones of America.

As government deregulated, something surprising began to happen -- unions began to decline because businesses moved from states where unions were prevalent to other states, and eventually they moved out of the U.S. altogether. They hated the strictures of unions and government. They wanted to be free from all hindrances (like paying the kinds of wages which had been typical for decades). They wanted to reduce their costs. This also meant reducing the numbers of people working for them in America. Needless to say, this was a dramatically different concept than what had gone before.

It used to be that a growing powerhouse company was steadily employing more people and offering higher wages to get the best people. Now they were cutting the labor force and claiming this made the company more profitable. They also introduced many more computers as the microcomputer industry boomed. They also began to employ more women whom they could pay lower wages. Maybe the nation's GDP was doing better, but individuals were frustrated, unemployed, underpaid, going nowhere. That condition has largely remained for several decades now.

What's the solution to the problem of too many unemployed people? Even as late as the 2012 presidential election the Republican party proposed spending more money on the military, as an economic stimulus plan. That is bizarre and not helpful.

So, let's look at the situation a bit more closely and understand it better.

When companies moved from the "cost plus a markup percentage" model to the "charge what can be paid by the customer" model it meant prices would be set differently. It meant employee pay was no longer a neutral factor, but a cost to be minimized. It meant that the number of employees indicated how much drag there was on a more pure company model of selling nothing for all the money in the world (that is their ideal). Once companies had computers and this new economic model and enough money to buy politicians they could change the world -- and they have.

They say employee pay is decided by the market and when globalization was in full-swing the market only required them to pay pennies for foreign labor rather than tens of dollars for American labor. It was almost like having slave labor (and indeed some people claimed there were slaves doing some of the work).

So, the system was putting more money into the pockets of the company stockholders and leaving more people unemployed. How can this be understood in terms the field of economics would use?

Once the price began to be set using the Demand Curve concept it always meant that those below the curve, those who couldn't afford to pay the price would be left without that product. If sellers could set various price points specifically for certain customers they could milk the market for every penny available. So, they began to price airline seats and hotel rooms at different rates depending on the day of the week, how long you would require the product and with other critiera which helped companies distinguish between the deep-pocketed business traveler and the normal family travellers. They began to offer a basic price and then higher prices for every little amenity to let ordinary people afford a hotel room, but for a business traveler who had corporate deep-pockets they would have the high-priced amenities available. For automobiles which use gasoline they would charge one price and diesel fuel which is primarily for big trucks they could charge differently. Not long ago (within the last 10 years) they charged corporate truckers less for diesel than the gasoline using family driver. That flipped and now diesel is higher by about $0.40/gallon.

So, they are essentially designing a pricing structure which gouges everybody at the rate they can pay. If you are in a business where your material costs are dictated by someone else you might not have much pricing flexibility for your own finished products. If you have high costs to produce the market may not be elastic enough to pay that.

In the new area of 'green energy' wind turbines and solar panels begin with high costs and for them to be self-sufficient they are requiring assistance from government and corporate customers (or wealthy individuals) and science to produce new technologies which will be cheaper in the near future.

It's an exciting industry to follow because the new technological developments have been appearing and costs have been declining, so that more and more it appears these will become very important energy sources for the future. Their costs have declined sufficient that no new nuclear or coal-burning electricity plants are being built: they won't be competititve in the near future, so there's no reason to invest for the long-term. That's market competition in action.

Another example is diamonds. They are expensive, and have been for a long long time, not because they aren't plentiful or because they're expensive to produce, but because the people controlling that industry ensure few of them get to market. They artificially control the supply and that combined with the natural delight people take in these sparkling rocks ensures they can price them to make a very nice profit. If they were priced according to supply or cost they would be very cheap.

So, why doesn't market competition hold down prices in the healthcare field?

First, all the companies are pricing to get the maximum possible and they aren't competing to bring costs down, but to raise them higher. Second, they have customers who require care when they're ill and the ER (Emergency Room) care in hospitals is naturally the most expensive care there is. Seeing a specialist doctor is also very expensive. Naturally the advent of the "specialist" was about the time in the 1960s or 70s when the new economic model came to the fore. Doctors ensured they had plenty of reason to charge high prices by raising the cost of getting a medical education and by restricting the number of medical college openings were available to maintain a limit on the number of doctors offering a service. Market control is a powerful mechanism. Having a captive customer (like a dying patient) is also powerful. It's no wonder Americans pay more than 15% more for healthcare than OECD nations and we get nothing more for that money spent.

How much would companies charge for air or water if they could own that? The sky is the limit. Everybody needs those and everybody would die without them, so we would all pay every penny and offer to pay more for those. If we require government to regulate those, then why don't we require government to regulate healthcare? People require that too.

A modern economy is a complicated thing, but when there are a handful of basic concepts which companies and governments use to run the thing, then it's important to know how they work or don't work. Today workers are suffering tremendously in America, but they say the stock market is at an all-time high and the national GDP is great. Why do we allow the American worker to suffer being at the mercy of the companies? Can this kind of economy be sustainable when the inevitable ups and downs of the world bring us another recession? How many people must be unemployed for the system to work and for a handful of people to be wealthy beyond anyone's wildest imagination? It seems to me that a system which has so much wealth, but so much despair, is just not good.

Yet, there is no thought of changing it in Washington or in the corporate boardrooms. Nobody (currently) seems to have a clue how it could be changed to keep it profitable and yet to make everyone's lives better. The thought of a digital blockchain-based currencies should terrify us all because a private economy where the government doesn't know transactions are occurring or where individuals are being paid or even where monies are being held (in banks and nations) could mean the end of our current systems of raising revenues for government operations.

It isn't yet a Brave New World. At the moment it seems pretty terrifying.

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Thursday, September 21, 2017

Mon Gyong Bong and All That

National Review magazine has published an article which asks whether Vladimir Putin is responsible in some way for the very fast advances North Korea has made in it's nuclear weapons program.

National Review - Is Putin helping Kim

It's worth reading and considering. It makes sense that Kim would pursue this path as a way of paying off their debt to Russia and it makes sense that Putin would love to have a 3rd party doing his bidding.

Friday, September 15, 2017

The Presidency vs. Congressional Republicans

We have a surprising situation today. It wasn't so surprising when the Congressional Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell in the Senate and Paul Ryan in the House of Representatives, decided to oppose President Obama and prevent as much legislative movement as they could. But, today they are opposing almost everything President Trump proposes. This and the occasional chaos in the White House and the Election/Russian Investigation have made our government a mess.

It was clear during the presidential primaries that many of the Republican politicians and big-wigs didn't like Donald Trump (the same was true of the Democrats of course), but for them to oppose a sitting Republican President is unusual and shocking. They have managed to work on healthcare reform and produce nothing (again Democrats are happy with that) and they have failed to take up infrastructure spending in a serious way (that may be Trump's fault for not negotiating properly) and they say they're working on tax reform, but it's not yet clear they can really manage that either. They should have had infrastructure legislation ready to go by March 2017, but now it's September and there is nothing except a dollar amount ($50-$60 Billion / year for 10 years with an option to renew or to establish an infrastructure bank). If they had been efficient they would already have budget/spending ready, but it may not be until December. In short, the legislative process is very very slow. America moves very very fast, so this is not a good match.

My advice to the president is to match some of what Pres. Obama did: focus on providing a general direction for legislative efforts and then let the spotlight fall on Congressional Republicans and their work or inability to deliver AND for the president to put most of his attention on staying connected with "The People" while working on foreign affairs. I don't know if that advice is 100% perfect for these times, but it may be the best we can manage today. There is also (unfortunately) plenty to do and say about disaster relief. In Houston and Florida they had hurricanes of unusually large magnitude and in the Great West there are fires and fires. We need to discuss these problems and how we can work to survive them better in the future. Some Republicans won't like discussing hurricanes because of the Climate Change issue, but on a strictly disaster-based reasoning we still have problems paying for repairs and recovery from these disasters. It would help if our government were better capable of helping people. It wouldn't hurt to also put a focus on Congress and it's (sometimes) inability to speedily pass recovery legislation. It has gotten too political.

This isn't the most hopeful blog post I've written, but I think it's realistic until the political picture of the American electorate changes.

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

Sugar and Fat, URL to .pdf Technical Paper and Super-short Summary

In short, it says that high sugar, high fat diets are terrible, but high fat alone doesn't do the same kind of damage.

"A high-carbohydrate, high-fat diet, but not low-carbohydrat, high-fat diet, induces obesity and increases the hypothalamic inflammatory response." -- from the paper

This is terrific scientific support for the low-carb diets such as the Atkins Diet. YMMV


Sunday, September 3, 2017

Will We Live Tomorrow?

We waited while N. Korea ranted.
We waited while they built a nuclear bomb.
We waited while they built an ICBM capable missile.
We waited while they built an H-Bomb.
We waited while they built an ICBM carrying an H-bomb.
We waited after they blew up Alaska, thinking they might have had enough.
We waited while they built 20 H-bomb ICBMs.

How will everyone explain the crazy Americans after we're gone?

Unless there is information about this situation which isn't available to the public, I feel we have been more than generous enough with time. Now it's time to be generous with our military.

Friday, August 18, 2017

Trump's New Chance

What will Donald Trump do next to have an administration that isn't a disaster? What will he do to embellish his history? I think it lies in simply doing the job better.

1. Get the budget done properly and with Congress. That may seem mundane, but it would show he can work with Congress to do some important things.

2. Go with his strong point: his background as a builder. This means two policies he has spoken about have a chance of appealing to him now.
    a. the Infrastructure Plan
    b. a new idea to ensure greater access across the country to investment capital

3. Tax reform which is needed.

Starting with this short focused agenda can help him politically and to actually help America in significant ways.

It seems simple, but executing the plan is important and how it turns out depends on the quaint old phrase "the Devil is in the details". Time will tell whether his work product and his administration make him a loser or a winner.

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Trump Must Remove White Supremacists From The White House

It's time for Donald Trump to remove anyone from the White House if they sided with the White Supremacists in the recent violence in Charlottesville, VA. He owes it to the American people to demonstrate that he sides with the U. S. Constitution and Law, rather than violent deplorable people.

Photo

This isn't the America the founders of this great nation wanted for us.

Thursday, August 10, 2017

North Korea: The Aftermath

If we are indeed required to remove Kim and his military regime and this happens, then it would be good for there to be a replacement government. Since the Chinese don't want that to be a Democracy, they should stand ready with a plan and people to move in and stand up this new government with North Koreans in the lead roles. They should be ready to do that since we don't know if or when it would be required. They have had a lot of experience and have seen how their own government has changed and they have seen great hardship, as the North Koreans are experiencing, so they should have a good basis for creating the kind of government which they believe the North Koreans would need.

I suppose we could say that is one of the prices they have to pay for allowing Chinese businesses to enable North Korea with technologies of destruction, but it is a relatively small price if they want North Korea to remain unaligned and non-Democratic.

Thursday, July 27, 2017

The History of Rapping

I can remember when 'rapping' meant making a fist and tapping your knuckles against a pane of glass, a door, a table top or even a noggin. Remember what a 'noggin' is?

In the 1960s rapping became 'sitting around talking with your friends'. It is also sometimes known as "shooting the breeze". But, the Conservatives didn't like those people because many had long hair, smoked pot (or used other drugs), and didn't conform to 'normal' rules of society. I guess they didn't like Freedom and Liberty when it meant someone could be different than them.

So, in the 1970s they made up the "War on Drugs". This enabled them to put a lot of those people they didn't like, and those who voted against them, in jail. Thus began the long 'rap sheets' of people in and out of jail. It also enabled the Conservatives to win a lot of elections.

The Conservatives were on the up-swing and they continued this program, but in the music world the people who didn't like this trend and those who were being locked-up began to 'rap' and they told stories of failed families, communities, and lives. They rapped about violence in their lives and how they had to do "what had to be done" to survive and get "bling bling".

The Conservatives thought they had a lot of power and the "silent majority" to back them. They thought they would control government for ever. They tried to impeach Pres. Clinton and narrowly failed. It was a bad rap! To ensure they didn't end up with rap sheets they changed the laws on contributing to political campaigns. They even sought campaign funds overseas. In 1996 it was the Dole campaign which did this first (as far as I know),

The Citizens United decision erased laws restraining the flow of money in politics. Then Barack H. Obama won the presidency twice. Boy could he hold the audience in rapt attention. The Conservatives decided they had to take more risks and get the "unified government" (control of the Congress, the Presidency, and the Supreme Court).

This brings us to Donald H. Trump of the great state of New York. He changed all the rules by telling the audiences what they wanted to hear (he rapped like no politician ever had) about misogyny, racism, hate, fear, and how they had to forget the old ways and TAKE BACK what was theirs and "Make America Great Again". Trump had been sued many times over the years and fined by the federal government for many crimes, but he had always avoided admitting guilt. He didn't have a rap sheet, though he was clearly a bad dude. His voters simply didn't care. They admitted he was unfit for the presidency, but they liked his message. Though he lost the national popularity vote he won the electoral college and that made him president. To the Conservatives that was all that mattered.

So, what has this election brought us? AG Sessions is upping the ante on the War on Drugs. DHS is exporting a lot of people of color (POC). Conservatives are using Crosscheck, gerrymandering, voter ID laws, and other means to kick even more Democratic voters off the voting rolls. If it worked in the past, then it should work again in spades.

Then it was discovered nearly all of Trump's associates had strong connections to Russians. This is plainly bizarre and not traditional. What does it mean for America, for Democracy? How many of these people will eventually go to jail and end up with real rap sheets? Even Trump's family members are part of this.

In the history books the rap on the Trump era will have to be that the Conservative movement became so dissatisfied with what America had become that they were willing to do anything, and I mean ANYTHING, to get power and restore their country to what they thought was good. They didn't care about Democracy any more. They didn't want consensus government or compromise. They began to believe a foreign leader (Vladimir Putin of Russia) was a great guy despite Putin's efforts to harm America. They will have to write the historical rap sheet of how the Republican party leaders, pundits, etc. worked together and with Putin to undermine our nation and to throw America into chaos. Though they were following the lead of their voters they didn't try to restrain the voter's worst instincts. They became like Putin: powerful, kleptocratic, destructive, horrible.

That's my rap and I'm sticking to it.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Sen. McCain has Brain Cancer, but Donald Trump is Crazy -- UPDATED

Our nation is being held hostage by a crazy president and his supporters who say they would want him to remain in office, even if it was proven he had colluded with the Russians to destroy our Democracy. Apparently they truly do believe he could kill people and they would continue to support him.

Meanwhile, when the president's healthcare legislation was to come up for a vote it became clear that Senator McCain had a health problem. At first they removed a large blood clot from above one of his eyes and then they discovered a cancerous brain tumor. Best wishes to Senator McCain and his family. My family has suffered from cancers and it is a terrible thing. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

The upshot of this is that Sen. McCain will not be returning (any time soon) to Washington to vote on legislation. That puts a crimp in the Republican party's legislative agenda.


Then the president decided to let the New York Times interview him and in that interview he essentially threatened the Attorney General, the special investigator/prosecutor Robert Mueller, and the FBI director. One can only guess the investigation is getting close to Trump and he wants to have leverage over those individuals. If they had any sense they would simply turn on Trump and support the U.S. Constitution. Patriotism first! However imperfect, each of the people Trump is trying to take down with him, they could survive better by letting Trump sink on his own.

Donald Trump doesn't seem to understand that our president is not owed loyalty above the Constitution. The Attorney General and the FBI director are (perhaps more than most other positions in government) have to work for the law, the Constitution, and the nation, but not for individuals.


UPDATE: Sen. McCain has already returned and cast a vote on the AHCA to move it forward. My how cancer has stricken and been relieved.

Latest Research on "Low-Carb" and "Regular" Diets with Regard to Weight Loss

Apparently exercise is good for your health, but not especially great for weight loss.
Also, the quality and quantity of our eating matters for weight and health.
But, if you have health issues you have to adjust your diet as required.

We've long blamed carbs for making us fat. What if that's wrong? - Vox


Bon appétit.

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Mail Trucks and Energy Usage

I just spoke with the mail carrier delivering junk mail to my home. I noticed he uses a special kind of vehicle designed specifically for the purpose of delivering mail. It's small and would seem to be quite economical to run. I first asked him what fuel it used. He said gasoline and that it only got about 7 or 11 miles per gallon. That's amazingly bad. My big car probably gets 28 mpg. He also described a couple of the other vehicles the Postal Service uses and how they all have terrible mileage. He contributed that it was probably because of their stop-and-go driving. They also wear out their tires and starters (they stop the engine each time they leave the vehicle and restart it when they return).

My first comment is, OMG that's incredibly bad mileage and you would almost have to go out of your way to create such a horrible fuel usage rate.

My second comment is, there has to be a better way.

That brings me to the obvious alternatives to consider: vehicles without starters or energy usage based on stops & starts -- electric vehicles.

Many kinds of vehicles run only in cities have short ranges and aren't often far from their refueling stations (e.g. taxis, buses, delivery vans, mail carriers, etc.) Why should these specialized fleets of vehicles be used when they are obviously not the best designs for this kind of driving? Electric vehicles do not stop and start the way an internal combustion engine does and they don't need a starter like those. Their energy use isn't related to the stop and go nature of city driving. And, when you compare energy usage an e-vehicle is very good compared to normal usage gasoline cars, so they would be tremendously better than these low mileage special vehicles.

Cities need to begin switching to vehicles like the new Chevy Bolt (for small one-person driving like mail carriers) for short-range in-city driving. The current e-cars can get about 300 miles per charge and many fleet vehicles don't drive that much in a day. Soon there will be batteries which charge quickly and then range will become a much smaller issue.

Activist governments which want to save on maintenance and fuel/energy costs should look at the cost/benefit analyses on these choices to be sure their cities or companies aren't losing out on a great opportunity.

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

My Computer is Sending Bad Packets to the Microsoft Technical Department

I often receive calls from these fraudsters claiming my computer is sending bad packets to their Windows server at the MS Technical Department. It's a bad joke and I usually hang up immediately. Today I decided to take a different tack, just for fun. I told the man how glad I was that he had called because I wanted to thank them for all the help they had given to me and how much faster my computer was running. He complained that this made no sense since my computer was still sending bad packets to their Windows server. I said, "Yes, that's what I mean. Since you guys sped up my computer it can send bad packets much faster now and I loved that because it kept them busy and unable to pester people so much." He paused a second and then kept going in circles a while before he couldn't take it any more. Then he just started laughing.

See, not all junk calls are a waste of time.

I'll probably still get their calls though. Automation does not change because of humor.

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

North Korean Threat

Kim Jong Un has said he will never stop his nuclear program. He has regularly said he will destroy America with them, so the United States simply cannot trust him to have weapons and not use them. He is too unstable. That means there has to be a war to end his regime.

The military should immediately create plans and/or put together a set of plans which our political leaders can study. We should be able to act decisively and with as much destruction to the regime as possible and as little collateral damage to Korea and surrounding nations as possible.

This may mean an assassination plan or a plan wherein the United States acts alone without South Korea or other possibilities I haven't imagined.

The world seems to care naught for Korea and the people there. It's amazing. I hope Kim isn't being advised by someone outside of Korea because that would mean a wider involvement of nations. Certainly the Chinese companies selling weaponry to Kim are complicit in this. Not unlike the makers of the Titanic who used second-rate steel under the assumption the ship would never sink. They made a big profit, but a lot of people died. In a war with Kim there could be an effect far beyond the Korean peninsula.

One would have to think the Chinese and Russians would have a strong reason to avoid war since they repeatedly say they are concerned about Korean refugees flooding into their countries -- particularly China. But, if Kim is just obstinate, then even China will suffer from this disaster.

Can the rest of the world act in any way to prevent the disaster? I cannot imagine they could possibly accuse the United States of a crime. Could they be accused of negligence for not doing more to intervene?

This is a sad sad day.

Sunday, July 2, 2017

Republicans and Healthcare Reform

They're having trouble creating something new which can work because it isn't in their DNA. They fundamentally do not believe in the federal government doing things for people which require taxing the rich (or anyone) except those things which are absolutely required for the rich to be happy.

They believe in big military spending and corporate law and the judicial branch courts and jails and light regulations to ensure the rich can be safe and make more money. They do not believe in regulating big business which pollutes, sells dangerous drugs, may sell contaminated foods, shoddy construction, or anything which may harm the public, the consumer, the little guys.

They would roll-back everything the Liberals have done since Franklin Roosevelt and perhaps to a time before Teddy Roosevelt.

Thus, for them to 'replace' Obamacare with something better is like asking me to fly like a jetliner. It isn't going to happen.

Yet, healthcare reform is necessary. The only way for us to get there is to put Democrats in charge and both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will do everything they can to prevent that. They are set on destroying much of America.

Democrats began looking at healthcare reform when it became obvious America could and should be insuring everyone and when costs began to rise beyond the ability of people to pay. Bankruptcies went through the roof and it was just obvious.

Republicans opposed it on principle: that you should have to pay your own way and only those worthy of having a lot of money may be the only ones who can afford healthcare. Everyone else may just have to die. Of course, they don't say that publicly, but it is the only possible inferred outcome of their views.

Perhaps the economic system could have offered people more income, so at least working people could have a standard of living which would pay for healthcare -- indeed many working people get insurance through plans their companies get. But even that hasn't kept millions of people from going through live with only the Emergency Rooms for insurance.

So, the situation is that we can go forward for the American people or we can accept the Republican view that only the rich white men of America are worthy of 'the American Dream'.

On the social issues front the Republican believe similarly, that blacks, women, disabled people, homosexuals, immigrants, and anyone else not like themselves isn't due equal rights. They didn't want women in the work place or the military or voting. They don't want blacks anywhere. Donald Trump still calls Mexicans rapists and drug dealers and dangerous. That vile set of views is contrary to the U.S. Constitution, but they don't care. It is their "traditional family values" (as determined by the rich old white men of their traditional families, and they're sticking to that.

We can either move America forward with Equal Rights for everyone and a real chance at achieving their American Dreams or we can let the Republicans hold us back, or push us back. Today there is no guarantee which we will do. There are more Americans who voted for Hillary Clinton for president, but our electoral college gave the win to Donald Trump. Similarly, Democrats have more votes behind our U.S. senators, yet Republicans have the majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives. It seems that even our Democracy is in question with this current brand of Republicans.

This is why the current politics are so divisive, visceral, angry, and important.

Friday, June 30, 2017

Recent Deaths of Trump Associates

Adnan Khashoggi was a long-time hustler of the highest-order and was a friend of Donald Trump. In the article here it is pointed out that he was alleged to have hidden at Mar A Lago one time. His death is not considered suspicious since he had Parkinson's Disease, but he died recently.

Trump, Khashoggi, & Germany's Criminal Deutsche Bank


Peter W. Smith was interviewed by the Wall Street Journal about his efforts to get Hillary Clinton's e-mails and his possible contacts to both General Flynn and Russian hackers. He died at the age of 81, ten days after the interview with WSJ.

Who Was Peter W Smith? GOP Operative Implied Michael Flynn Tie To Seek Clinton Emails From Russian Hackers | International Business Times



While these deaths may be entirely normal, it is surprising when there are several in a short time frame when Donald Trump is beginning to see "the writing on the wall".

In Russia and Ukraine there are individuals who have been very close to Vladimir Putin, but also died recently. One investigator suggested "following the dead Russians" as a trail of breadcrumbs to sources of evil-doing. Perhaps there are friends of Donald Trump who should hire bodyguards to stay safe.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Would Trump Endanger Coalition Forces in the Syrian Fight?

I fear Donald Trump intends to cooperate with Vladimir Putin to draw coalition forces into unsafe situations where they may be harmed. Do coalition nations trust us enough to follow our direction or lead into harms way?

If I were advising a coalition nation I would tell them to be wary of plans which might place their forces in danger. They should be concerned American forces would suddenly leave them without support. Our military leaders wouldn't do that, but under orders from Pres. Trump anything is possible.

If Pres. Trump does something despicable which leads to deaths or other harm to our coalition partners, then he must be impeached immediately.

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Shooting Where Republican Representatives Were Targeted

This would not have happened if there were no guns.
This might not have happened if people with a record of violence couldn't have guns.
This might not have happened if people with mental problems couldn't have guns.
This might not have happened if the Republicans hadn't made America a divided nation.
This might not have happened if Trump had not incited violence for the last two years.
This might not have happened if the Republicans had not decided to hand America to Putin.

This wouldn't be so bad if Republicans would take responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming Liberals.

This didn't have to happen, but if Republicans don't change quickly it is almost guaranteed to happen again.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Creeping Putinism, in Russia and Perhaps in America

I just read a VOX.com article about the way things looked in Russia as Putin took over. It is remarkably similar to what we are seeing in America today.

https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/4/12/15210732/putin-russia-protests

Read it. Think of what we are seeing in America today. Replace the name "Putin" with "Trump", or "Republican".

Monday, June 12, 2017

Does Donald Trump Think He Is A Dictator?

Today I heard that Donald Trump's lawyer Jay Sekulow said the president was a "unitary Executive". This language was used a time or two during the presidency of George W. Bush and it always seemd to indicate that Bush could do anything without Congress stopping him and perhaps without laws restraining him. Does Trump think he is beyond check, beyond restraint?

It is important to know because there is possibly no law against killing someone who tries to overthrow our government and Constitution to institute a dictatorship. It would certainly indicate that now is the time to impeach him and toss him out of office.

Friday, June 9, 2017

Comey's Counterintelligence Plan

The hypotheses in this article are explosive. It argues that James Comey, as FBI Director, knew he would be fired and that he set in place a counter-intelligence operation to catch any (expected) attempts by Trump people in the  administration to steal FBI data and give it to the Russians.

According to the article this is precisely what happened and the plan worked to  catch it.

If it is true...

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

South Korean Policy with regard to Americans and North Korea

I read today that after the scandal in South Korea, they elected a "Liberal" to lead them. I don't know anything about him except that he has announced America will not be allowed to install more THAAD missile defense systems in South Korea until an environmental report is done.

On the face this seems insane. Wouldn't the environmental impact of a North Korean missile be worse than a THAAD system?

They don't want China angry and China seems to be worried that our THAAD systems (with radar) can 'spy' on Chinese military forces. I don't know if this is technically true, but it really doesn't matter when the existence of the South Koreans, the Japanese, and even Americans is at issue. America has the right to defend itself.

But, if South Korea isn't appeased they may tell us to leave altogether. That would change the picture of that area in a major way. On the one hand we would no longer have to expend effort to defend South Korea and the North may bomb them at will. Good luck with that! On the other hand, we would have much more difficulty without military forces near North Korea. Basing our defence from an ocean-based platform could not be better than having a land-based defence.

Is it possible Putin has been involved in Korean politics and had a hand in the big turn of events there? It is possible I suppose, but it doesn't seem likely. I think Putin has had most of his attention on America and Europe.

So, in the end, what does this mean for events in that region? It might not have much effect. But, if they ask us to leave altogether or to remove the THAAD systems (there are two already installed) it would have a big impact. It's their nation and if they don't want more of our help they have the right to order that. It's a free world, right?

This doesn't mean we will leave the region since our own national defence is involved.

Neanderthal Love

I have read a few interesting articles today about the long-running effort to discover the roots of humankind. In the stories there is some discussion of Neanderthals and then there was a link to another kind of article. I found them very interesting and so did an author who wrote a trilogy about humans and Neanderthals in a "worlds that collide" story-line.

First, a link to a new-ish discovery which is being debated.

The story of human evolution in Africa is undergoing a major rewrite - Vox


Second, an earlier story about humans and Neanderthals in Europe: their meeting and interactions.

Humans and Neanderthals had sex. But was it for love? - Vox


Third, an Amazon.com link about the books.

Amazon.com: Hominids: Volume One of The Neanderthal Parallax eBook: Robert J. Sawyer: Kindle Store


For anyone interested in the roots of humanity or possibly science fiction about this curious topic, these are articles worth reading.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

The Direction of Historical Changes

In the following litany the information comes from Wikipedia. All Hail the Wiki!


Our story begins long ago in Europe.

The START of the Iron Age proper is considered by many to fall between around 1200 BC and 600 BC, depending on the region.

Gaul (Latin: Gallia) was a region of Western Europe during the Iron Age that was inhabited by Celtic tribes, encompassing present day France, Luxembourg, Belgium, most of Switzerland, Northern Italy, as well as the parts of the Netherlands, Central Italy and Germany on the west bank of the Rhine. It covered an area of 190,800 sq mi (494,000 km2). According to the testimony of Julius Caesar, Gaul was divided into three parts: Gallia Celtica, Belgica and Aquitania. Archaeologically, the Gauls were bearers of the La Tène culture, which extended across all of Gaul, as well as east to Raetia, Noricum, Pannonia and southwestern Germania during the 5th to 1st centuries BC.


121 BC - 486 AD    Roman Gaul

Rome began to take over Celtic Gaul about 121 BC. This included the time of the rule of the famous Julius Caesar (58 BC - 51 BC). Caesar was victorious at the Battle of Alesia in 58 BC.
















Rome's rule ended with the Battle of Soissons in 486 AD. The French culture and language was influenced greatly by the Romans and the Latin language.

The Frank monarchs, beginning with Clovis I, began in 486 and the monarchy continued until 1792 when Louis XVI was overthrown by the Revolution. That was a rather long period of time. Note that this time period nearly parallels that of the Holy Roman Empire.

The word "Gallia" continued to be used in writing until about 760 AD.


962 - 1806    The Holy Roman Empire

It began (to some extent) with Charlemagne in 800 AD or per some accounts with Otto I in 962 AD.

Charlemagne, also known as Charles the Great (Latin: Carolus or Karolus Magnus) or Charles I, was King of the Franks. He united much of Europe during the early Middle Ages and laid the foundations for modern France, Germany, and the Low Countries. He took the Frankish throne in 768 and became King of Italy in 774. From 800, he served as the first Holy Roman Emperor, the first recognized emperor in Western Europe since the fall of the Western Roman Empire three centuries earlier. The expanded Frankish state which Charlemagne founded was called the Carolingian Empire.















In Gaul, Roman power was receding when Charlemagne came to power. It gradually faded until about 924 AD and was gone by the time of Otto I.

Otto I (23 November 912 - 7 May 973), traditionally known as Otto I the Great (German: Otto I. der Große), was German king from 936 and emperor of the Holy Roman Empire from 962 until his death in 973.

He has not been entirely forgotten, though other individuals garner more attention.

Otto I was selected as the main motif for a high-value commemorative coin, the EUR100 Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire commemorative coin, issued in 2008 by the Austrian Mint. The obverse shows the Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire. The reverse shows Emperor Otto I with Old St. Peter's Basilica in Rome in the background, where his coronation took place. Among others, three exhibitions in Magdeburg, opening in 2001, 2006 and 2012, have documented Otto's life and his influence on medieval European history.



This included territories from Italy to Denmark, but not westward to the Atlantic ocean. For the most part the area we know as France was not ruled by the Church.

The HRE lasted a long time and there were many important events in that time. Some of them indicated great discontent with the Church.


1279, 1290    Edward I of England (ruled 1272-1307) created a law to prevent estates from avoiding tax payment by bequeathing entire estates to the Church.


1483 - 1546    Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses in 1517 in Wittenberg, Germany.
Martin Luther's 95 Theses

He called for individuals to pray directly to their God and distance themselves from the Roman Pope. This was in part due to what Luther saw as corruption in the Church, too much taxation, and the selling of relics which he saw as a fraud.


1521        The Church Excommunicated Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms










A short time after that Henry VIII of England had his own conflict with the Church.

1491 - 1547    Henry VIII of England (ruled 1509 - 1547)

He began the English Reformation in 1532 and he changed the "cestui qui" law along with many other things. His contempt for the Church related strongly to his own personal interests.


1536        The law of Edward I of England was avoided to some extent avoided with "cestui que", a law designed specifically to assist some people to avoid paying taxes.


1536        The Statute of Uses

Henry VIII modified the laws of 1279 and 1290 and did away with "cestui que" regarding estate bequeathment. The kind of law Henry VIII created still exists in the United States, though there are a variety of them across the nation. The British law was modified again as recently as 1964.


1538        Henry VIII was Excommunicated (as Martin Luther had been)


Interestingly, the HRE ended 250 years after Martin Luther's activities. Clearly the Church had a grip on some parts of Europe, even greater than that of the Romans before in Gallia.

The HRE control in Europe came to an end with Napoleon at the battle of Austerlisz in 1806.




The French Revolutions, Empires, and Republics

This time period came before the end of the HRE, but saw the end of that period and the beginning of the new modern Republic (based to a large extent on the American Revolution which was inspired in part by French and British ideas). This was a major change in the course of history since Europe had been governed by secular monarchs, emperors, and/or the Church since a time before Jesus of Nazareth. Where Martin Luther and Henry VIII of England had been ahead of their times, Napoleon Bonaparte and Hitler were at the center of this upheaval and change. Napoleon wanted to continue the old tradition and Hitler wanted to return to it.


1776 - 1781    The American Revolution -- Establishing a Modern Democracy

The Americans acted first to separate themselves from the monarchy of the King of England. It was perhaps easier since we were so far away and the King was preoccupied with other interests. The American military forces were a rag-tag group which didn't really win any battles, but they avoided losing and that was enough. The British tried to regain power in the War of 1812, but the Americans were stronger by then and again survived.


1789 - 1799    French Revolution

During the period of transition from monarchy to something new, Napoleon Bonaparte and the House of Bonaparte ruled for nearly seventy years. That ended in 1870 with Napoleon Bonaparte III. The imperial monarchy was succeeded by the 3rd French Republic.


1792 - 1795    1st French Republic


1795 - 1799    The Directory


1804 - 1814    Napoleon I














1815        Napoleon II


1848 - 1851    2nd French Republic

Achieved by Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte, who was an elected official.



A New Beginning


1870 - 1940    3rd French Republic
    This ended the the rule of Napoleon II and the 2nd Republic.
    It was ended by World War II and Hitler.


1894 - 1906        The Dreyfus Affair, which was about anti-Semitism, showed a major nationalist-Catholic versus secularist schism in France. But, in 1905 separation of Church and State became the law. Gallicanism ended.


1905            The state religion of France, Catholicism, was disestablished.


The Dreyfus Affair and the "disestablishment of state religion" were "nails in the coffin" of Church rule in France.














1917, 1922 - 1991    The Soviet Union of Russia and surrounding Countries

This time period also saw the overthrow of the Tsarist monarchy of Russia by Communists led by Vladimir Lenin (1917) and the establishment of the Soviet Union (1922-1991).


1921 - today        Chinese Communism Began

Even in Asia the Communist movement was strong. They began with a single charismatic leader, Mao Zedong, and by 1949 they had consolidated their power.


1919 - 1933        The Weimar Republic of Germany

In Germany, officially Deutsches Reich, after World War I they were going through many of the same problems of transition from Emperors to elected officials.


1933 - 1945        Adolph Hitler, the Nazi Party, Germany, and World War II

Hitler rose to power during the Depression and when Germany was suffering economically. The people were desperate and this gave the Nazis great power. They abused it badly. It can easily be argued that Hitler wanted to return to an Imperial form of leadership, but this was not successful and the nation returned to a democratic-republican form of government which is still successful today.


1946 - 1958    4th French Republic -- Another New Beginning


1958 - today    5th French Republic, by Charles deGaulle


The first major change with this establishment was to end colonialism, something which has been involved in the European (and World) wars. Many of these nations established a Democracy or continued the Democracy the colonial power had in place. Some used dictatorships, but in the 1970s or 80s those began to also be replaced.



1991    The Fall of the Soviet Union

With the collapse of the Communist state in Russia and a beginning of evolution in China to greater individual rights, the East has also accepted a lot of the ideals of the West and the Modern Democracy (a democratic-republican form of government).



And then What Happened?

In Russia they established a new Democracy, but after the presidency of Vladimir Yeltsin, there came to power Vladimir Putin, the former head of the KGB of the Soviet Union. He was the chief spy.

There is this from his personal web-page about himself as a child in school, "From first and eighth grade, Vladimir Putin studied at School No. 193. As he recalls, he was a troublemaker, not a Pioneer."

"Even before I finished high school, I wanted to work in intelligence. Granted, soon after, I decided I wanted to be a sailor, but then I wanted to do intelligence again. In the very beginning, I wanted to be a pilot." --Vladimir Putin

"Even before he finished school, Vladimir Putin wanted to work in intelligence. He went to a public reception office of the KGB Directorate to find out how to become an intelligence officer. There, he was told that first, he would have to either serve in the army or complete college, preferably with a degree in law.
“And from that moment, I began preparing myself to enter the law department at Leningrad State University,” Mr Putin notes."

"In 1970, Vladimir Putin became a student of law department at Leningrad State University, earning his degree in 1975. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Mr Putin studied at KGB School No. 1 in Moscow."

A sailor? A pilot? An intelligence officer.
Photo from Vladimir Putin’s personal archive  
Photo from Vladimir Putin’s personal archive

"After graduating from Leningrad State University, Putin was assigned to work in the state security agencies. “My perception of the KGB was based on the idealistic stories I heard about intelligence.” " -- Putin

He married in 1983 and had two daughters.

"In 1985-1990, Vladimir Putin worked in East Germany. He served at the local intelligence office in Dresden. Over the course of his service, he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel and to the position of senior assistant to the head of the department. In 1989, he was awarded the bronze medal issued in the German Democratic Republic, For Faithful Service to the National People’s Army. “My work was going well. It was a normal thing to be promoted just once while working abroad. I was promoted twice,” Mr Putin says."

"After returning to Leningrad from Dresden in 1990, Vladimir Putin found new job as assistant to the rector of Leningrad State University, in which position he was responsible for international relations. “I was happy to find work at Leningrad State University,” he later recalled. “I took the job hoping at the same time to write my Ph.D. thesis and, perhaps, stay on and work there afterwards. That was how I ended up, in 1990, becoming assistant to the rector in charge of international relations.” "

Why was he no longer doing the normal work of the KGB? Had they reassigned him to the political world?

"Starting in June 1991, Putin began work as Chairman of the Committee for International Relations at the St Petersburg City Hall,..."

"After starting work at the City Hall, Putin sent in his resignation from the KGB."

The Soviet Union was dissolved on December 26, 1991.


In 1996, he and his family moved to Moscow, where his political career began. Photo from Vladimir Putin’s personal archive

"In August 1999, Putin was appointed Prime Minister of the Russian Government. The post was offered to him by then President Boris Yeltsin."

"“Two or three weeks before New Year [2000], Mr Yeltsin called me to his office and said that he had decided to step down. This meant I would have to become Acting President,” Putin recalled."

"Vladimir Putin was elected President of Russia on March 26, 2000, and was re-elected to a second term on March 14, 2004. On May 8, 2008, he was appointed Prime Minister by presidential executive order."

Vladimir Putin speaking at an official event celebrating the Police Day professional holiday.
"Vladimir Putin was elected President of Russia on March 4, 2012."

Putin's view on the collapse of the Soviet Union was (this quote is from the Kremlin), "Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century. As for the Russian nation, it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and co-patriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself."

His statement was translated by some as, "the collapse of the Soviet Union was the major geopolitical catastrophe of the century". This has a different meaning, that perhaps it was a very bad thing.

Considering the many difficulties nations have had during the transitions from one kind of political power to another, it could easily be considered a disaster for the people or a catastrophic event for the status quo, but whether these major transitions are bad or necessary is difficult to assess, especially in the moment. In any event, they seem to be inevitable.

Putin's behavior since has been belligerence toward the West (united States, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Germany, and other western European nations. In particular he has been critical of NATO and it's expansion of influence into nations which were formerly a part of the Soviet Union. Is this Napoleon or Hitler attempting to invade Russia again? He may have been irked most by the reuniting of Eastern and Western Germany because he was stationed in Eastern Germany at the time the Berlin Wall fell (that signaled the beginning of the end of the Soviet Union).

In Western Europe they have settled into their Democracies and have shown no aggression toward anyone.

The United States has been busy expanding opportunities for commerce on a global scale and opposing both religious militants/terrorists in the middle-east and nuclear terrorists everywhere.

Putin has announced a desire to create a New Russia and a couple of his efforts were to invade Georgia (formerly a part of the Soviet Union) and then Ukraine. He took the Crimean peninsula and a part of eastern Ukraine inhabited by Russian ethnic citizens.

He has been accused of killing or jailing his political opponents. It has also been said that the richest individuals in Russia are mere puppets of his and that his personal wealth is approximately $85 Billion. That doesn't make sense for a political figure.

Putin he has also taken previous Soviet efforts against the West to new heights using the Internet and other means. In America the intelligence community says he had the GRU and FSB interfere in and try to determine the outcome of our presidential election.

Today we have an American president, Donald Trump, who wishes to have closer ties to Russia and perhaps a weaker tie to NATO and the Western European nations. This is a startling shock to the American system.

Given the long history of Europe and of the gradual changes from tribes to Roman rule to the Holy Roman Empire and then to nation-states and finally to Democratic Republics, change seems inevitable and unpleasant, but usually for the better. What does Putin offer that is new and better? Is he only trying to become a modern Napoleon or Caesar? This is a very unsettling moment for the West. We don't know the future and the uncertainty bothers us.

Friday, May 26, 2017

Kushner's Story

If Jared Kushner is willing to take some punishment for his behavior, then he should be given a reduced sentence promise in exchange for his full truthful testimony. Nobody in this administration walks away like Admiral Poindexter or Colonel North or even Ronald Reagan. This time everybody involved must be punished very publicly and severely.

Monday, May 22, 2017

Monday Evening Terrorist Attack in Manchester, U.K.

This was at the end of a music concert and appears to have occurred in the area outside the main arena. There appears to have been about 20 deaths and quite a few injuries due to either the explosion or the rush of people to leave. The British police and emergency services immediately assisted the people. The explosion seems to have been caused by a 'suicide bomber', though at this time (8:27pm EST) that obviously has yet to be entirely confirmed and investigated.

Friday, May 19, 2017

France and the Origin of "Gaul" and "Gall___"

I am learning French and was reading Wikipedia to learn a bit about the nation. During that I came across a most fascinating section about the original name and history of the geography these people have occupied in Europe.

I've numbered (the Roman numerals seem appropriate for this) interesting bits (quoted from Wikipedia) and added some commentary of my own.


I. Source of "Gall___", as in Gallia or perhaps Galatia

a. "Greek and Latin names Galatia and Gallia -- derived from Celtic ethnic term or clan Gal(a)-to-"

b. [The people] "Galli of Gallia Celtica [a region of south-east France, Switzerland and northern Italy] were reported to have referred to themselves as Celtae [sems to be Celtic] by Caesar."


So, Galli, Gallia, and perhaps Galatia all seem to be Celtic, so saith Caesar, in his diaries.



II. source of "Gal____"

a. "Hellenistic folk etymology connected the name of the Galatians (???????, Galátai) to the supposedly "milk-white" skin (????, gála "milk") of the Gauls."

b. "Modern researchers say it is related to Welsh gallu,[4] Cornish galloes,[5] "capacity, power",[6] thus meaning "powerful people"."


Welsh 'gallu' is not Celtic, is it? Didn't Caesar say GALatia was Celtic?



III. "Gall" and "Gaul" according to the English

a. "The English Gaul is from French Gaule and is unrelated to Latin Gallia, despite superficial similarity."


Encroyable ! How is that possible? What are the odds?


b. "As adjectives, English has the two variants: Gaulish and Gallic."

c. "The two adjectives are used synonymously, as "pertaining to Gaul or the Gauls", although the Celtic language or languages spoken in Gaul is predominantly known as Gaulish."

That's consistent with "Gall___" coming from Celtic regions or even Wales, but when did it become synonymous with "Gaul___"?



IV. "Gaul___"

a. "The name Gaul is derived from the Old Frankish reflex of Proto-Germanic *walhaz, "foreigner, Romanized person", an exonym applied by Germanic speakers to Celts and Latin-speaking people indiscriminately, making it cognate with the names Wales and Wallachia."

So, 'Gaul' comes from a proto-Germanic Frank word for 'foreigner'?


b. "The Germanic w- is regularly rendered as gu- / g- in French (cf. guerre = war, garder = ward), and the diphthong au is the regular outcome of al before a following consonant (cf. cheval ~ chevaux)."

"au" is pronounced like "o", so "Gaul" should be pronounced 'g' 'O' 'l'  like 'goal'. That's weird. Imagine Charles DeGOoooooooooooooooAL Bad soccer play there I suppose. Heh.


c. "Gaule or Gaulle cannot be derived from Latin Gallia, since g would become j before a (cf. gamba > jambe), and the diphthong au would be unexplained;" the regular outcome of Latin Gallia is Jaille in French, which is found in several western placenames, such as La Jaille-Yvon and Saint-Mars-la-Jaille."

This seems to be a kind of proof that "Gaul__" is not Latin language origin.



V. "Gaul" related to "Gael"?

a. "Also unrelated in spite of superficial similarity is the name Gael."

b. "The Irish word gall did originally mean "a Gaul", i.e. an inhabitant of Gaul, but its meaning was later widened to "foreigner", to describe the Vikings, and later still the Normans."

c. "The dichotomic words gael and gall are sometimes used together for contrast, for instance in the 12th-century book Cogad Gáedel re Gallaib."

Even the Irish thought the Gauls were foreigners. Apparently it was in or before the 12th century when "gall" and "gaul" became intertwined!



Summary -- Wow


Gal -- from Welsh 'gallu' (powerful Welsh people), not related at all to France or Gauls

Galli -- people of Gallia Celtica region (south-east France, part of Switzerland and N. Italy)

Gall -- Latin words for Celtic clan, the Galli of Gallia Celtica probably

Gaul -- from Frankish *walhaz, a foreigner, not from Latin Gall___ at all!

Gael -- Irish for foreigner referred to a Gaul and later also Vikings and Normans, so came after


Thus, Gallipolis in Gallia County, in Ohio, from Latin and not the French/Frank "Gaul".

And, the Galloping Gourmet is probably not even French!


My new French-language blog (pray for me) is parleparleparle.blogspot.com


Thursday, May 11, 2017

Taxes and France

I am studying the French language, learning to communicate with it. Part of my work is to "read" the French newspapers Le Monde and Le Figaro (at least some headlines and a few short articles).

While reading today I saw a page about their new president Macron and his positions on various issues. The one which was most interesting to me and may be one of the most difficult for European leaders is taxation. They are facing the same problem of corporate tax optimization (which means the ways they find to avoid paying any taxes).

I have considered tax reform in America, but in Europe they have a much more government-intense economy with universal healthcare, more protected employment, and other things. In America we have a lot more freedom to change our tax system or rates because our government, though large, is less fixed for domestic purposes. Our biggest expenditures which are rigid are Social Security, Medicare, and Defense spending. They have those and more in France.

In connection with learning French I have briefly been considering creation of a new blog where I will write every post in my horrible French. Maybe it will get better. I am also using Google Translate.

So, now I have to consider the European Tax Issue and how that may relate to global trade and America.

Stay tuned! If and when I create a new blog I will also announce it here.

Friday, May 5, 2017

The French Presidential Election: Macron - LePen

I watched Wednesday's debate on C-SPAN and they had English-speaking men to translate. It was interesting and the moderators let it flow. Their time-keeping method is a bit different than in America and I think that contributed to a flowing conversation.

The content of the debate seemed to be LePen attacking and alleging things and Macron talking about policy and asking LePen to stop interrupting him.

I was amazed how much LePen sounds like Donald Trump and how much they both sound like Vladimir Putin.

In Putin's world he wants Russia to be independent and strong and he hates gays, women, foreigners, and challengers to his power. In the world of Trump or LePen they are supposedly Independents (new "kids" on the block), but they are connected to the dominant Right Party. They are also anti-foreigners and anyone who opposes them. Trump is anti-women, but LePen is female, so we don't see that. The key thing with Trump and LePen is that they are connected to Putin at the hip (LePen's party actually received campaign contributions and loans from Putin and Russian banks) and their policy to make The United States or France independent would make those countries weaker -- "ripping France from the EU" as LePen put it or taking the U.S. out of NATO as Trump put it. Trump has since changed his mind about NATO, but I haven't heard any comment from LePen about it. During the debate she suggested that removing the Euro as their standard currency would be important to "free" France. Macron, who is an economist, laughed at that suggestion and pointed to ways it would be catastrophic.

It's clear France and the U.S. and other Western countries need to eliminate foreign contributions to political campaigns.

On the "fake news" front, it appears someone is spreading false stories already. After the masked-rioters of last week it appears obvious to me that it is Putin's people (little green men) at work.

Here is one story about the French government trying to track down the false news story authors/distributors. Apparently they have a law forbidding those fake stories.

Here is another story which apparently was reported just a minute ago. It's about stolen e-mails being leaked. Sound familiar? These are the same techniques used during the U.S. election campaign and they are all attributable to Putin. I haven't ready this story yet, so...