Democrats Have a Gaggle of No-Good Candidates; Why is That?

One must wonder at the Democrat Presidential candidate roster so far. There are 24 announced or with exploratory committees and none seem Presidential.

Criteria for a President should include a few items.

1) Has read the second edition of Ecological Economics by Dailey and Farley
2) Has read The Unconscious Civilization by John Ralston Sauls
3) Served as an officer in any branch of the military
4) Has run two miles in under seven minutes
5) Was born in the U.S.A.
6) Read the Dialogues of Plato
7) Can accurately summarize the constitution of the United States
8) Completed a college course in science and can pass a general science CLEP exam
9) Has good verbal communication skill
10) Isn't a socialist or member of the communist party
11) Regards U.S. citizenship and political egalitarianism as important enough to secure borders against illegal entrants
12) Is fundamentally color blind in economic policy

That isn't much to expect. Democrats have a litmus test however that falls short of common sense. They expect a Democrat candidate to have these attributes;
1) Be pro-abortion including infanticide
2) Pro-homosexual and lesbian including homosexual marriage even if that goes against rationality
3) Flood the nation with illegal aliens that might vote Democrat some day and in the meantime will be good cheap labor for feminists and homosexuals-lesbians
4) Pro-corporatism and socialism
5) Not be a straight white male even if they say they support lesbians, homosexual and trans-gender bathroom choice and cross-dressing.
6) Hate Russia except when oligarchs make contributions to your foundation

Why Corporations Should Be Limited in SIze

There are several factors that make wealth concentrate in the Unites States. The U.S.A. is supposed to be a democracy with sovereign citizens getting their political interests done through representatives elected to government. When corporations become to large, wealth and powerful democracy is effectively eclipsed and the political philosophy of corporatism (invented by the fascist dictator Mussolini).

Too large of corporations in number of employees just have too much political and social influence and probably corrupt free market competition in a number of ways. Very large corporations and subsidiaries form networks and insider stockholders by into other large corporations and corporate boards may be overlapping. Such vast power and wealth networks drive business in the direction that best suits the bottom line of profit. The media fawns over Wall Street and no wonder- its owned by the most wealthy people.

https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/20957/as-inequality-grows-in-mexico-so-does-social-polarization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

Too large of corporate employment numbers also return outsize salaries to CEOs and board members reinforcing the concentration of wealth. Patents are filed by the truckloads by Silicon Valley American zaibatsu. Individualism is dampened.

A remedy would be to limit any corporation to just 20,000 employees. Then a corporation would think twice about paying huge salaries and stock packages to CEOs. If corporations could have no more than 20,000 workers and no individual could own shares in more than three corporations competition would increase and inventiveness would be more reward,, the concentration of wealth might slow a little for the 1% and democracy might emerge from the dark, dank moldy sub-basement it is locked in by Wall Street.

When some corporation has need of more workers it could form ad hoc business relationship with other corporations as needed. The army hiring civilian contractors used to work that way.

One shouldn't establish such large businesses and corporate networks that hey become regarded as too big to fail. That applies to banks too. One of the challenges of reforming mass economics to a sustainable ecologoical economic infrastructure is that too large of corporations put up far too much political and social economic resistance to change. Too large of corporations are maladaptive to the pace of economic reform required for a sustainable human economy.

Socialists are an even worse problem compounding the error of too large of corporations as they seek to ossify Wall Street with high taxes and socialist hegemony doubling down on the corporatist philosophy that creates a maladaptive macro-economy for the nation and ecological sustainability.

Moderate size corporations can be allowed to fail without social disaster. It is easier to modify and reform smaller corporations. Smaller corporations may be components for the macro-economy that can be integrated within a sustainable economic system more readily and without the disruption required for the very large.

Dictator Kim is Likely Stalling for Soft Democrat in 2020

Dictator Kim Un seems to have played president Trump in order to avoid war before he has good nuclear junk to throw at San Francisco. He needs to seem to want to move toward normalized relations yet in fact is simply a Dictator with no intention of relinquish Hitler-like domination over North Koreans. If he did he might be hung.

The Dictator probably hopes a soft-on-defense Democrat is elected to the WHite House in 2020 so he can have bread from Washington D.C. as well as nuclear weapons.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/432900-trump-very-disappointed-if-north-korea-rebuilding-missile-launch

Who to Believe; Michael Cohen or Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren

A recent poll showed that voters believe Michael Cohen more than President Trump. Belief in the veracity of Michael Cohen is a kind of test of the emergency broadcasting media system. Voters may compare Michael Cohen usefully to numerous Presidential candidates past, present and future to determine who is more truthful or less false.

https://nypost.com/2019/03/05/voters-believe-michael-cohen-more-than-donald-trump-poll/

It is possible that the Mueller Report will be delayed for some time because it may have nothing positive about collusion in it. If it released and is a goose egg for Democrats they would look bad, so having the Michael Cohen truth meter ready to apply should amuse the voters until the Congress finds a new way to celebrate jihad on President Trump.

Senators Seek to Curb Executive Emergency Response Power

Senator Rand Paul and others including Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski are seeking to curb Executive power to respond to national emergencies such as gross border insecurity. If today's Senators had lived as politicians in the founder's era the nation and people would still be owned by England.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/432572-rand-paul-says-at-least-10-gop-senators-are-ready-to-vote-against-trumps

https://www.foxnews.com/us/more-than-76000-migrants-tried-crossing-southern-border-in-february-officials-say

Fundamentally Senators against enhancing national border security are globalists for the corruption of national integrity regarding rights of citizenship. The treasonous ten are like dumb cattle doped by the most rich and nationally unvirtuous elements. (Republicans with Democrats being a lost cause). Mass illegal immigration is the greatest direct assault upon effective national democracy and the real value of constitutional rights of American citizens. Citizenship is meaningful only if it is. 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/february-marked-12-year-high-for-illegal-immigration-76-000-encountered-at-southern-border

Rights of citizenship and sovereignty are basic, integral elements of freedom in the given land area that is the nation. Foreign sovereign states have no need at all to sign off on U.S. constitutional rights nor respect them. Neither do U.S. Senators have a necessity to support and defend the constitution of the United States or the physical boundaries of the nation,if they are treasonous. They may nominally but not actually support and defend the constitution, borders and interests of the people of the United States.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/list-31-national-emergencies-effect-years/story?id=60294693

Considering Neo-Trade War Tariffs

 Before the neo-trade war it did seem as if some rectification of China-US trade policy needed to be implemented. President Trump worked to accomplish that and tariffs are part of the method of making trade adjustments.

The United State seems to go with short term profits in business cycles more so than with long term strategies. Inertia drives non-sustainable economic methods that are a continuua with an evolving capital investment paradigm. Challenges and responses create opportunity and impediment to business in relation to tariffs and lack of tariffs. Long-term interests, and I wonder what time is regarded as long term, are subverted by the change of population demographics and culture far more than tariffs that are temporary and less than a speed bump in history.

Tariffs on particular businesses such as manufacture of solar voltaic panels have raised the cost to consumers of Chinese products yet the Congress does more to harm American electric vehicle and solar panel manufacture than tariffs on Chinese products. Those low cost semi-flexible 100 watt solar panels can easily recharge batteries for 12 volt devices. Because of the weight of batteries the U.S. domestic battery market probably isn’t too impacted by tariffs.

Why the Gag Order on Roger Stone?

Gag orders made by judicial coercion seem unAmerican. They seem like the kind of thing card-carrying Democrat Party members would work on people.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/04/robert-mueller-notifies-judge-that-roger-stone-shared-instagram-image.

Why shouldn't those being persecuted by the state exercise free speech as they like without gag orders? The Soviet Communist Party used that sort of thing with arrest and export to the Alexander Archipelago. Censorship of political adversaries is perennially popular with Democrats lacking solid facts to win political points.

Attorneys usually advise their clients to say little to prosecutors. In the case of Roger Stone there might be an exception. It is disturbing to have ham-fisted goons ordering U.S. citizens to give up their free speech or be jailed.