Thursday, December 23, 2010

Clap On, Clap Off

What tha? Are we in "Good Hands" from this administration regarding intelligence and security? Maybe they should worry less about control gained via FCC toward Net Neutrality and focus on protecting State department secrets and have awareness of worldwide terrorism activities...



Ignorance about terrorism--negligent and willful.


If Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's remark that the government is "working . . . 364 days a year to keep the American people safe" made you nervous, you can relax. In another interview in the same ABC News series, President Obama's "top aide on intelligence appeared to be completely unaware . . . of the arrests this week of 12 men accused of plotting an Al-Qaeda-inspired attack," Agence France-Presse reports:
US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper was asked about the attacks, with ABC News interviewer Diane Sawyer posing the questions: "First of all, London. How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here?"
After a long pause, Clapper replied, "London?" . . .
The 12 men were arrested Monday in a sweep in the Welsh capital Cardiff, the central English town of Stoke-on-Trent, Birmingham and in London.
Sawyer brought up Clapper's apparent ignorance of the developments later in the interview.
"I was a little surprised you didn't know about London," she said.
"Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't," Clapper replied.
Later Clapper's office put out a statement calling the question "ambiguous" and asserting: "The DNI's knowledge of the threat streams in Europe is profound and multi-dimensional, and any suggestion otherwise is inaccurate."
[botwt1222]
Profound and multidimensional or not, the Daily Beast's Howard Kurtz opines, Clapper's unpreparedness "inevitably calls to mind the moment during Hurricane Katrina when FEMA's Michael Brown was unaware during a Nightline interview of deteriorating conditions in Louisiana's Superdome, despite constant news reports that day."
But we are reassured. Obviously Clapper gave the interview on the one day of the year when the government was not working to keep the American people safe. That means we don't have to worry about that day coming again.
Well, until next year--and that's a long way off.
ABC News has a long report on the third in the series of interviews with top national-security officials. Attorney General Eric Holder warns of homegrown terrorism:
"The threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming here, to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens--raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born," he said.
Hmm, what does that mean, "radicalized"? Presumably Holder isn't talking about math or chemistry, so this is a reference to ideology. What kind of radicals are these homegrown terrorists? Radical Marxists? Radical nationalists? Radical feminists? Radical individualists?
We do get one clue in the course of the story:
Holder says many of these converts to al Qaeda have something in common: a link to radical cleric Anwar Al Awlaki, an American citizen himself. . . .
Authorities say his teachings and writings have been discovered on the computers of a number of radicals who have tried to carry out terror plots here in America. Holder said Awlaki is able to preach violence on al Qaeda websites, and reach new converts.
He's a "cleric," so we know that these are religious "radicals" of some sort. But are they Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Shinto, Sikh, Baha'i, Unitarian Universalist, Zoroastrian or Rastafarian?
If you are a reader of this column, chances are you know the answer is "none of the above." But incredibly, in neither the 1,000-word writeup nor the four-minute video report on the Holder interview is there a single mention of Islam. Not only are the "radicals" not described as Islamic radicals or radical Islamists, but Awlaki is described as a "cleric"--oh so generic!--rather than an imam.
We surmise that this omission is willful. The media and the Obama administration give the impression that they are extremely careful to avoid mentioning the religion in whose name al Qaeda and similar groups commit terrorist attacks. We have a distinct sense that this is driven by fear--that they are suffering from, if we may coin a word, Islamphobia.
Consider the case of the "Nebraska man," described last week by the Bellevue (Wash.) Reporter:
King County prosecutors have filed charges of malicious harassment against a 23-year-old homeless man who insulted another man's sexuality and then punched him on board a King County Metro bus in Bellevue.
Bellevue police arrested Mustaf A. Abdille after a dispute on Nov. 30 between the suspect and several individuals. He is scheduled to be arraigned on Dec. 22. . . .
Officers tracked down Abdille, who had only recently come to Washington from Nebraska and had no place to stay. According to charging documents, Abdille was confrontational and reeked of alcohol.
As he was being booked into jail, Abdille allegedly said "In my country, we kill faggots," and "I'm going to (sic) suicide, and everybody is going down with me; I'm not going alone."
Who even knew Nebraska was a country?

67 Year Old Vietnam Vet Harrassed by Punk on a bus

http://www.youjotube.com/watch/bLQ3mXqAq_Y

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

The FCC's Threat to Internet Freedom

Robert M. McDowell: The FCC's Threat to Internet Freedom - WSJ.com

Hmm.  Shouldn't Congress be legislating, not the FCC?  Where does the Constitution give the FCC these powers.  Where does the Constitution give us the FCC?

Excerpt:

Nothing is broken that needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and the European Commission both decided this year that net-neutrality regulation was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet technology and infrastructure.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

Obama’s Learning Curve

Obama’s Learning Curve | The Weekly Standard

For a smart man, he can sometimes be awfully slow.

 Excerpts...

Starting on the negative side, the president appears to believe his policies aren’t responsible for slow economic growth and minimal job creation since the recession ended in June 2009. Rather, the darn economy is to blame. This is a case of blaming the dogs for refusing to eat the dog food. That the dog food is the problem is beyond Obama’s comprehension.
True, he reached agreement with Republicans to prevent income tax rates from rising next month, including for high earners. But he had no choice. To keep from violating his pledge not to raise taxes for the middle class, and averting political suicide, he had to forgo raising them for the upper class. He did so grudgingly. Republicans just wouldn’t “budge” on this, he said.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Like a Condom, the First Amendment Can't Protect You - Ann Coulter - Townhall Conservative

Like a Condom, the First Amendment Can't Protect You - Ann Coulter - Townhall Conservative



Ann has such a way with words...
First of all, I feel so much more confident that the TSA's nude photos of airline passengers will never be released now that I know the government couldn't even prevent half a million classified national security documents from being posted on WikiLeaks.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder will be getting around to WikiLeaks' proprietor, Julian Assange, just as soon as they figure out which law the New Black Panthers might have violated by standing outside a polling place with billy clubs.

Itching for a fight

Rove: From Post-Partisan to Most Partisan - WSJ.com

There is something wrong with this guy...
 'I'm itching for a fight on a whole range of issues." President Barack Obama made that threat last week as Congress moved to pass his bipartisan tax-cut compromise. Why was Mr. Obama so pugilistic?

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

What would we do without Big Brother?

The federal government has banned the sale of drop-side cribs, blaming them for the deaths of more than 30 infants and toddlers over the past ten years. Hear more at the top of the hour on Newsradio 850KOA.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Tax Rate Increases

I hope the tax deal does not get done so democrats get the credit for raising tax rates. The 1st agenda item Boehner will initiate on 1/4/2011 will be a better deal that will rescind the tax rate increases and make the 2011 rates permanent,

B.O. will sign it cause he knows it's the only chance the economy will improve the next 2 years and Republicans will get credit for saving the country's ass..

Thursday, December 09, 2010

Progressives

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

The beginning of the end of Ethanol subsidys?



If you are reading this you probably already know how much I am insane that our government is subsidizing the production of, protecting from competition and mandating the use of Ethanol, a product that 
  • raises our food prices, 
  • is environmentally worse in some aspects that pure gasoline, 
  • reduces MPG, 
  • is expensive and uses oil to produce, 
  • cannot be piped because it destroys the pipes, therefor must be trucked everywhere and 
  • is poison to certain engine parts.  
Here is the entire WSJ editorial from yesterday..-drm

Ethanol on the Run

A left-right coalition is emerging against this energy boondoggle.


The political class inevitably invokes the moon shot or Manhattan Project as a model for every unrealistic energy goal, but for once maybe that hyperbole is apt: A left-right coalition is emerging to end ethanol subsidies.

Last week, no fewer than 17 Senators signed a letter calling ethanol "fiscally indefensible" and "environmentally unwise." Led by Democrat Dianne Feinstein and Republican Jon Kyl, the group said Congress shouldn't extend certain subsidies that expire at the end of the year, including the 45-cent-per-gallon tax credit for blending ethanol into gasoline and tariffs on cheaper imports. Conservatives like Tom Coburn dislike this costly industrial policy, while liberals like Barbara Boxer and Sheldon Whitehouse are turning against the hefty carbon emissions that come with corn fuels.
Even Energy Secretary Steven Chu seems to have found the anti-ethanol religion. Speaking at the National Press Club last Monday, Mr. Chu said that "ethanol is not an ideal transportation fuel" and that the government's focus should be "on ways that we can actually go beyond ethanol." Like most greens, he still supports so-called advanced fuels that aren't made from corn and also aren't commercially viable, but we'll take his partial conversion.

The ethanol industry is responding by predicting disaster if it loses its taxpayer feeding tubes, with the Renewable Fuels Association evoking massive job losses and another Dust Bowl. But what kind of business can't survive without subsidies when government also mandates that consumers buy its products? As the Senators dryly noted, "Historically our government has helped a product compete in one of three ways: subsidize it, protect it from competition, or require its use. We understand that ethanol may be the only product receiving all three forms of support from the U.S. government at this time."

Sure enough, also last week, the Environmental Protection Agency ruled that under the 2007 energy bill Americans must use at least 13.95 billion gallons of ethanol next year, or about 8% of total U.S. fuel consumption. In protecting its free ride, the ethanol lobby is like Fannie Mae before the crash. But at least now there's a glimmer of political hope for taxpayers.

Thursday, December 02, 2010

New Start: What Would Reagan Do?

New Start: What Would Reagan Do? - WSJ.com

We are fortunate that Messrs. Meese and Perle are still around to clarify Reagan's positions, when President Obama takes such liberties with the truth.

Excerpts:

President Obama has taken to the airwaves to pump up support for the New Start Treaty with Russia by arguing that Ronald Reagan would have endorsed it. Both of us had the high honor of knowing our 40th president. We worked for Ronald Reagan, and we're sure that's not the case.
 President Reagan knew that in arms control the U.S. should play to win, and negotiate from a position of strength. With all the concessions the U.S. made to the Russians to secure this flawed agreement, the invocation of Reagan's memory on its behalf is at once an ironic acknowledgment that in these matters Ronald Reagan is the gold standard, and a brazen act of misappropriation.

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Computer Fingerprinting

Race Is On to 'Fingerprint' Phones, PCs - WSJ.com

Here are excerpts.

It's tough even for sophisticated Web surfers to tell if their gear is being fingerprinted. Even if people modify their machines—adding or deleting fonts, or updating software—fingerprinters often can still recognize them. There's not yet a way for people to delete fingerprints that have been collected. In short, fingerprinting is largely invisible, tough to fend off and semi-permanent.

How to 'Fingerprint' a Computer

A typical computer broadcasts hundreds of details about itself when a Web browser connects to the Internet. Companies tracking people online can use those details to 'fingerprint' browsers and follow their users.
Fingerprinting companies are racing to meet the $23 billion U.S. online-ad industry's appetite for detailed consumer behavior. Previously, the companies focused on using device fingerprints to prevent software theft or to identify computers making fraudulent transactions, in hopes of preventing future attempts.



The idea behind BlueCava's exchange is to let advertisers build profiles of the people using the devices it has identified. For instance, BlueCava will know that an IMVU fingerprint is from someone who likes virtual-reality games.
Other advertisers could then add information about that user. BlueCava also plans to link the profiles of various devices—cellphones, for instance—that also appear to be used by the same person.
Blue Cava also is seeking to use a controversial technique of matching online data about people with catalogs of offline information about them, such as property records, motor-vehicle registrations, income estimates and other details. It works like this: An individual logs into a website using a name or e-mail address.