Tag Archives: government

Ultimate Stress buster? iPhone 4 shot at, microwaved!

New gadgets are always put to vigorous tests to check for durability and stability. With the iPhone 4 technology has gone to a new level and so did the tests. http://itgrunts.com/2010/06/28/ultimate-stress-buster-iphone-4-shot-at-microwave… added by: itgrunts

Supreme Court Rules Against Christian Student Group

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 that a Christian student group that bars LGBT members and their allies cannot receive official recognition and funding from a public law school. The case, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, centered on the Christian Legal Society at the University of California Hastings College of the Law. The student group refused membership to LGBT individuals and those who advocate for them, and sued when the university denied institutional support to the group in response. According to the Associated Press, “The court on Monday turned away an appeal from the Christian Legal Society, which sued to get funding and recognition from the University of California's Hastings College of the Law. added by: TimALoftis

MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Urges Homeowners to Stop Paying Mortgages As a Leftist Protest

MSNBC afternoon host Dylan Ratigan took to the ramparts of The Huffington Post on Thursday and urged home owners to stop paying their mortgages as a leftist protest against a government too cozy with the bankers. The title was “They Keep Stealing — Why Keep Paying?”    The crisis was all Wall Street’s fault, and now they’re back to paying themselves bonuses after a federal bailout. So stop paying them. (Notice Ratigan doesn’t suggest you protest Washington and TARP by refusing to pay your taxes.) This piece sounds like a direct-mail letter: You didn’t cause this mess. They did. Now you are struggling to make the same payments on this mortgage on your now overpriced home even in light of a crashing economy and massive deflation, all while the government does everything in its power to help Wall St. keep the bonuses coming. Well, it is becoming time to take matters into your own hands… I suggest that you call your lender and tell them if they don’t lower you mortgage by at least 20%, you are walking away. And if they don’t agree, you need to consider walking away. It probably doesn’t feel right to you. That is because you probably are a good person. But your mortgage is a business deal, and it is not immoral to walk away from a business deal unless you went in to the deal with the intention of defaulting . But somehow, even though the corporations are pumped to exercise their new rights, former bankers like Henry Paulson, current ones like Jamie Dimon and — get this — now even Fannie Mae execs want to keep you from exercising your rights. But before you let them (or anyone commenting below) force you into paying that $500k mortgage on a $300k house, ask them if they’ll push Jerry Speyer into “honoring his obligation” by breaking into his $2 billion personal piggy-bank to keep paying for Stuyvesant Town? Or how about asking Hank and Jamie to lecture fellow bailed-out CEO John Mack about how “you’re supposed to meet your obligations, not run from them”? Maybe make him use some of his $50+ million for those buildings he bought in San Francisco? And before shaming and punishing American homeowners, did they nag Steve Feinberg about helping “teach the American people…not to run away” by writing a check out of his billion-dollar pocket to cover all the stiffed landlords and vendors at Mervyn’s? After all, at least you aren’t single-handedly putting 1,100 employees out of work when you walk on your mortgage. As part of the deal for your house, your mortgage holder gets interest payments from you and they also use the note to your house for their capital reserves. In return, they take the risk of a foreclosure. In many states, you paid extra to have a non-recourse loan where the lender just gets the house back if you stop paying — your interest rate would’ve been much lower if you were held personally liable like a student loan. But if you still feel bad, then donate the money saved to charity instead of to their bonuses. Even if you agreed that everyone on Wall Street is a knave and a thief, Ratigan is still preaching that two wrongs make a right. Or, to be more precise, the second wrong helps the populist agitators regain “our captured government” from the financial elite. (Did he clear that phrase with Chris Matthews, because it sounds “dangerously anti-government,” doesn’t it?) Meanwhile, our captured government has made it clear that they want to further reward these banksters because there are clearly better ways to “save” the economy without rewarding those most responsible for the damage. Instead of claw backs for the past theft and strong financial reform for the future, they choose to cover-up the gross misuse of our tax money, making our country worse by helping the criminals on the backs of the most honest. But thankfully, in this country we still have the tools to fight back and regain our country. Our vote, our voice, our laws and what we choose to do with every penny we have that doesn’t go to taxes are the benefits of our hard-fought freedom, and in this battle we must use them all to fight back. It’s time for the citizens to once again own this place. [HT: Jack Coleman]

Visit link:
MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Urges Homeowners to Stop Paying Mortgages As a Leftist Protest

Obama Can Shut Down Internet For 4 Months Under New Emergency Powers

President Obama will be handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday and now moves to the floor. The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from certain countries under a declared national emergency. Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed in the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor. In response to widespread criticism of the bill, language was added that would force the government to seek congressional approval to extend emergency measures beyond 120 days. Still, this would hand Obama the authority to shut down the Internet on a whim without Congressional oversight or approval for a period of no less than four months. The Senators pushing the bill rejected the claim that the bill was a ‘kill switch’ for the Internet, not by denying that Obama would be given the authority to shut down the Internet as part of this legislation, but by arguing that he already had the power to do so. They argued “That the President already had authority under the Communications Act to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” when there is a “state or threat of war”, reports the Sydney Morning Herald. ears that the legislation is aimed at bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the U.S. government in an offensive against free speech were heightened further on Sunday, when Lieberman revealed that the plan was to mimic China’s policies of policing the web with censorship and coercion. “Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman told CNN’s Candy Crowley. While media and public attention is overwhelmingly focused on the BP oil spill, the establishment is quietly preparing the framework that will allow Obama, or indeed any President who follows him, to bring down a technological iron curtain that will give the government a foot in the door on seizing complete control over the Internet. As we have illustrated, fears surrounding cybersecurity have been hyped to mask the real agenda behind the bill, which is to strangle the runaway growth of alternative and independent media outlets which are exposing government atrocities, cover-ups and cronyism like never before. Indeed, China uses similar rhetoric about the need to maintain “security” and combating cyber warfare by regulating the web, when in reality their entire program is focused around silencing anyone who criticizes the state. The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers. added by: im1mjrpain

WaPo’s Stevens-Arroyo Calls for Catholics to ‘Embrace a Redistribution of Wealth’

The Washington Post’s really should consider renaming Anthony Stevens-Arroyo’s column in its “On Faith” blog. “Catholic America” should be “Liberal Democrat Catholic America,” just for the sake of truth in advertising. On June 23, left-wing hack Stevens-Arroyo again injected his politics into the ostensibly religious column. In “ Common good v corp. profits ,” he actually wrote that Catholics should “embrace a redistribution of wealth.” The column sought to explain how Catholics and others should view Judge Martin Feldman’s ruling overturning the Obama moratorium on off-shore drilling. Why, the reader may ask, should this event have Catholic significance, beyond the fact that a liberal writer whose column has “Catholic” in the title was upset about it? It doesn’t. But Stevens-Arroyo gamely offered that, “There may not be a ‘Catholic’ position about the immediate politics of off-shore drilling, but there is an on-going Catholic approach to resolving the competing interests.” Not surprisingly, that approach vindicates the left. To Stevens-Arroyo, the issue came down to “common good,” which led him to make this puzzling statement: “While we have considerable freedom about our personal political choices in the application of principles, Catholics in America are bound to embrace a redistribution of wealth, even if it goes contrary to ranting from groups like the Tea Party or Wall Street.” He never explained where exactly it states Catholics are bound to encourage the government to confiscate legally earned private property to give it to whomever it deems more worthy. Catholics are bound to assist others through charity, not compulsory redistribution. This isn’t the first time Stevens-Arroyo has conflated socialism with faith. Last year he declared that “ the most Catholic ” part of Ted Kennedy’s funeral was the senator’s grandchildren pleading for nationalized health care. But, not content being an arbiter of what is Catholic and what isn’t, Stevens-Arroyo set himself up as a law scholar, hypothesizing that the “Reagan-appointed judge” Feldman’s ruling could be seen as the work of an “activist court.” He ranted that, “a judge is supposed to be limited to matters of constitutionality — and not to impose his jobs’ policy. There can be no doubt that a presidential moratorium falls within the powers of the White House, so stopping this legitimate executive order on questions about its consequences constitutes activism.” Even the Associated Press explained that the moratorium was overturned because the “Interior Department failed to provide adequate reasoning for the moratorium.” Stevens-Arroyo has a history of being unable to hide his liberal viewpoints. Just last March he claimed that Fox New’s Glenn Beck was using “the same strategy of the Hitler Youth and the Polish Communist Party … ” In December he also attempted to compare Ft. Hood shooter Hidal Hassan to World War 1 hero Alvin York and General Patton.

See the original post:
WaPo’s Stevens-Arroyo Calls for Catholics to ‘Embrace a Redistribution of Wealth’

Florida Gulf Oil Spill: Plans to Evacuate Tampa Bay Area Are In Place : Veterans Today

Hernando County Political Buzz Examiner By Maryann Tobin Note to readers: This reprint of Maryann Tobin’s news story has over 14,700 reads as of June 24th. UPDATED: June 14, 2010 Gulf Oil Spill 2010: Plans to evacuate Tampa Bay area are in place. As FEMA and other government agencies prepare for what is now being called the worst oil spill disaster in history, plans to evacuate the Tampa Bay area are in place. The plans would be announed in the event of a controlled burn of surface oil in the Gulf of Mexico, or if wind or other conditions are expected to take toxic fumes through Tampa Bay. This practice has been used by the US Forestry service, when fire and smoke threaten the health and well being of people. The elderly and those with respiratory problems would be more susceptible to health risks, in the event of a controlled burn. Estimates of the rate of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill have varied. Independent scientists now suggest that the true spill rate, before the riser pipe was cut off in June, was between 20,000 and 50,000 barrels a day. Since the April 20th explosion, which resulted in the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig, there have been more than a million gallons of chemicals poured into the Gulf of Mexico in efforts to break up the spill. The chemicals have come under scrutiny because of their own toxic nature. It is not certain if the massive slick will have to be set on fire near Tampa Bay, but the possibility has not been ruled out. BP has been using controlled burnes as a way to contain the oil spill since the crisis began. Plans to do additional controlled burns around the well site were announced by Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen at a briefing in early June added by: Monkey_Films

Tar Sands Poised to Become the Next Fossil Fuels Disaster

The Syncrude tar sands operation in Canada. Photo by David Dodge of the Pembina Institute. If we could go back in time before the BP Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, what would we learn? What steps would have helped avert what is now the nation’s worst environmental disaster? Could this hindsight help us prevent similar catastrophes in the future? Would our political leaders have the moral compass to “get it right” this time around?… Read the full story on TreeHugger

The rest is here:
Tar Sands Poised to Become the Next Fossil Fuels Disaster

Australia’s New Prime Minister on Climate Change

Photo: Herald Sun As we alluded to earlier , in a very historic day, Australia has a new Prime Minister. In her first speech as the nation’s 27th Prime Minister, and first female in the role, Julia Gillard, had a few things to say about climate change: “It is my intention to lead a Government that does more to harness the wind and the sun and the new e… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Originally posted here:
Australia’s New Prime Minister on Climate Change

Australian PM to fight shock leadership challenge

SYDNEY (AFP) – Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced a shock ballot Wednesday to fight a challenge from his deputy Julia Gillard, raising the prospect of the country's first female head of government. Rudd, who has slumped in the polls as elections loom, emerged from marathon late-night talks with Gillard and other ministers to tell a hastily convened press conference the vote would be held early Thursday. “I was elected by the people of Australia as prime minister of Australia,” Rudd said. “I was elected to do a job, I intend to continue doing that job. I intend to continue doing it to the best of my ability.” Deputy Prime Minister Gillard confirmed she would be a candidate in the vote, which follows a dizzying turn of events for Rudd's government ahead of elections expected this year. “I confirm I will be a candidate in tomorrow's ballot,” Gillard told reporters in a brief statement. Rudd was in pugnacious mood as he faced journalists in Canberra and detailed his achievements in office since the landslide defeat of conservative prime minister John Howard in November 2007. The centre-left leader is facing down Labor Party factions who have become convinced he is a liability for the upcoming elections following a steep drop in personal support. “I was elected by the people of Australia to do a job. I was not elected by the factional leaders of the Australian Labor Party to do a job — but they may be seeking to do a job on me,” he said. Local media said Labor's factions have swung behind Gillard, who also gained the backing of the powerful Australian Workers' Union late Wednesday and is considered favourite in the vote. Rudd has consistently enjoyed strong popularity until recent months, but his support has suddenly fallen away after a series of missteps and a reinvigorated opposition under conservative leader Tony Abbott. The highly rated Gillard has been playing down prospects of a leadership challenge for several weeks after a poll showed her breathing down Rudd's neck as preferred party leader. “There's more chance of me becoming the full-forward for the Dogs (Western Bulldogs Australian Rules football team) than there is any chance of a change in the Labor Party,” she said last month. Rudd's support has crumbled since he shelved a flagship carbon-trading scheme and a free home-insulation scheme, and unveiled a 40 percent tax on the mining industry, which is heavily invested by shareholders and pension funds. The steep and unexpected fall has left the government in danger of becoming the first since before World War II not to secure a second term. Elections are expected later this year. Last week, top officials including Foreign Minister Stephen Smith were forced to scotch rumours of a leadership challenge. In recent days, the opposition targeted Rudd with attack ads portraying him as a cartoon lemon. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100623/ts_afp/australiapoliticsrudd_20100623145555 added by: Stoneyroad

Newsweek Wonders if Utah Republicans Will ‘Play Dirty’ by Voting for Leftist in Dem Primary

Liberals in the media frequently paint conservatives and Tea Party activists as pushing the GOP too far to the right to be electable in general elections. But the same complaint isn’t repeated on an endless loop when it comes to leftist activists challenging more centrist Democratic incumbents in primary contests. In fact, in some of those occasions, the media find a way to cast aspersions on Republicans. Take, for instance, a June 22 story on Newsweek.com, the headline for which posed the question, “Will Utah Republicans Play Dirty Today?” Writer McKay Coppins explained how one Republican state lawmaker had suggested that the party faithful in the state’s 2nd Congressional District should take advantage of the Democrats’ open primary system to cast votes for Claudia Wright, a liberal insurgent challenging Rep. Jim Matheson (D), rather than weighing in on the GOP primary contest. Although he noted that historically such tactical voting hasn’t been successful and that state Republican officials have officially “denounced the plan,” Coppins explained that the local media have become fixated on the notion and at least one radio host has described the crossover voting idea as “sleazy”: [F]or a while, it looked like a real possibility. An anonymously created Web site called “Conservatives for Claudia” has attracted thousands of page views, and Matheson himself has spent $800,000 this primary season to warn supporters that the party-crashing threat is real. And even though Republican officials (including, eventually, Wimmer) denounced the plan, it has continued to draw attention from the local press, with popular radio talk show host Doug Wright devoting significant air time to the idea. (He called it “sleazy.”) Republicans still might get their wish, though. A recent poll places Matheson 19 points ahead of Wright, but midterm primaries in Utah have historically garnered low turnouts, and early voting this year has been exceptionally unimpressive . With a passionate left-wing base, Wright could be poised for an upset in the primary – giving Republicans exactly what they hoped for.

View post:
Newsweek Wonders if Utah Republicans Will ‘Play Dirty’ by Voting for Leftist in Dem Primary