Hosting Advertisement
Main Menu
· Home
Welcome
Username:

Password:





[ ]
Featured Link
RSS Feeds
Our news can be syndicated by using these rss feeds.
rss1.0
rss2.0
rdf
Freedom is not free.
YPJ YPG

Date / Time
 
Headlines

»Nancy Pelosi - Have wages failed to go up on Donald Trump's watch?
The Truth-o-Meter says: Mostly False | Have wages failed to go up on Donald Trump's watch? On th ...
»Don Blankenship - Convicted mining CEO and GOP candidate says official papers reveal 'Obama's deadliest cover-up'
The Truth-o-Meter says: Pants on Fire! | Convicted mining CEO and GOP candidate says official pa ...
»Donald Trump - Donald Trump wrong that black homeownership rate is at a record high
The Truth-o-Meter says: False | Donald Trump wrong that black homeownership rate is at a record h ...
»Bloggers - No, Roy Moore accuser didn't admit she forged his signature in her yearbook
The Truth-o-Meter says: Pants on Fire! | No, Roy Moore accuser didn't admit she forged his signat ...
»Brendan Boyle - No, the GOP concealed carry bill does not block states from keeping guns out of schools
The Truth-o-Meter says: False | No, the GOP concealed carry bill does not block states from keepi ...


Date published: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:45:52 -0500
W3C Compliance
Valid XHTML 1.1!
Valid CSS!
Tuesday 02 June 2009
William Ayers, University of Illinois at Chicago asks President ...
amiel, Tuesday 02 June 2009 - 22:40:20 // comment: 0


This is a direct quote from the book entitled: "Twenty Years of Congress, Volume 2 (of 2)", by

James Gillespie Blaine. Copyright, 1884.

The book (actually a picture of the cover of the book), appeared on the
Federal Register Website at one time.

The book, written by James Gillespie Blaine is a legislative narrative of the
activities of the U.S. Congress from 1865 to 1885.

Contains some enlightening information on the re-formation of the United States
after the, "Political Revolution of 1860"; as the conflict was referred to.

This section of the book came to my mind when I read the AP story entitled "Dozens of Scholars (65 actually) ask president to ignore the union army solders at Arlington National Cemetery", on Memorial Day 2009.


This is a quote from the book mentioned; a statement given by house member J.H Rainey, Representative from South Carolina, on the 13th of May, 1872, at the Forty-second Congress in support of a (the) bill that would restore the rights of citizenship to former members of the
Confederate Revolution.


[quote]

The Democrats were now to witness an exhibition of magnanimity in the

colored representatives which had not been shown towards them. When

the Amnesty Bill came before the House for consideration, Mr. Rainey

of South Carolina, speaking for the colored race whom he represented,

said: "It is not the disposition of my constituents that these

disabilities should longer be retained. We are desirous of being

magnanimous: it may be that we are so to a fault. Nevertheless we

have open and frank hearts towards those who were our former oppressors

and taskmasters. We foster no enmity now, and we desire to foster

none, for their acts in the past to us or to the Government we love

so well. But while we are willing to accord them their enfranchisement

and here to-day give our votes that they may be amnestied, while we

declare our hearts open and free from any vindictive feelings towards

them, we would say to those gentlemen on the other side that there is

another class of citizens in the country, who have certain rights and

immunities which they would like you, sirs, to remember and respect.

[un-quote]

You can read the entire text of the book (or just this section) thanks to the efforts of the people at 'The Gutenberg Project'. Their website is here.

So, One Hundred and Thirty Seven years ago members of the U.S. Congress worked feverishly to restore the United State of the Union. So how is it that today Scholars justify asking the President of the United States to reverse these honorable efforts.

In the section on the Legislation that was passed on the 13th of May, 1872, at the Forty-second Congress it is made clear that the requirement to achieve a national cohesiveness was a goal of the Government. Today we see the results of Government policies that had encouraged divisiveness and focused on hatred.

I am writing this to express my amazement that such a thing was asked by assumability intelligent people. And this in a very high profile way that suggests that they are somehow proud of taking such a position and making such a request.

Dude. That's totally Un-American.

Among those making the request directed at President Barrak Obama was, William Ayers, University of Illinois at Chicago education professor. For you sir here is a direct link to the text of the quoted document; here you can find the associated historic and legislative background for these remarks made by the State Representative from South Carolina in 1872.

Regards, Amiel.


On an unrelated note. Do you know which State Rep. that J.H Rainey replaced in the House of Representatives? And what were the names of the other two Black State representatives at that time? One of them was a State Representative from Mississippi.




Monday 11 May 2009
Rebuilding of America. - some are good at planning, others good at building, and others proficient at tearing down.
amiel, Monday 11 May 2009 - 20:23:53 // comment: 0

May 11, 2009 AP story describes how communities across the country are being denied the benefit of stimulus funds because some States are dispensing stimulus money for projects in geographic areas where unemployment is less of an issue instead of targeting areas where unemployment is highest (in some cases extremely high) targeting the funds in this way could be expected to have greater impact on the lives of Americans with the greatest need; those in areas hardest hit by unemployment. AND could be expected to have an immediate impact on local economies through increased local spending.

Read AP Story here

This is just theory but... If the allocated funds are spent on projects in areas where there is highest unemployment then payments for mortgages, rents, utilities(gas, water, electric), food, clothing, appliances, automobiles, tuitions, medical bills, home improvements, travel and many even some savings that are currently NOT being made WOULD be made.

The real beneficiaries of the funds would be businesses. You see because people don't eat money. They spend it. I'm not done yet, There's more to this.

Individual Americans in depressed areas who once did not spend, who now have the money to spend as a result of jobs created by new projects, will spend their incomes with local businesses. These businesses will purchase goods (further up the 'food' chain) from regional or higher level suppliers. Those suppliers in turn will make purchases that they are not making now from cash starved manufacturers who eventually would see increases in their production; sufficient perhaps to require them to do such things as re-hire laid off workers.

Just theory but some companies and individuals might even make wise and timely investments with the additional cash flow. Investments of the types that previously could not be made (possibly because there was not sufficient demand). Finally ,provided that we don't mindlessly steer money and resources to overseas companies for products and materials that can be had here in this country; then I would expect that all will be well and the economy will improve.

This brings to mind a story that I listened to three weeks ago. The Governor of South Carolina was talking on the radio; with great glee and obvious pleasure he recited the statistics that stated that only five percent of the people in his state with mortgages that were in trouble (in danger of foreclosure), had participated in Federal Government sponsored relief for homeowners. The Governor said, "Obamas assistance plan for troubled mortgages is not working".

All I could think about at that moment is how I would like to tell that man myself that it was not that Obama's plan was not working. It was that he was not working. In the same news cast (I swear it is true) it was reported that new mortgages nationwide were up one third over the previous quarter (in 2008); largely due (it was stated in the story) to the large numbers of refinanced mortgages.

Somehow only five percent of South Carolina residents with troubled mortgages choose to participate in the Federal Governments mortgage assistance program.

Now what does that say?

...it says that most likely the State of South Carolina did little to promote the Federal Program and therefore few people in South Carolina were aware of what was available to them in the way of Federal Mortgage relief through the Federal Program; the specifics of the programs, and how to access what was available and so on.

You don't have to be really smart to figure that one out.

Read some of Republican governor Gov. Mark Sanfords remarks related to stimulus funds.

But that ain't all. Today American Airlines announced that passengers could use airmiles for one way air fares.

Leaders of Six Major Health Groups in the health care industry will be meeting with Barrak Obama at the White House, May 11, 2009. The group had already announced their willingness (the group is presenting a formal written pledge) to reduce the rate of growth in health care spending substantially. This I assume, is simply to address the real need to do so. In other words they got together and worked towards addressing Americas need to reduce the costs in Health Care. They did some work. The organizations that attending the meeting on may 11, 2009 were :

Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed), the medical device industry group; America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), which represents private health insurers; the American Hospital Association; the American Medical Association, which represents doctors; the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufactures of America (PhRMA), which represents drug companies; and the labor group Service Employees International Union (SEIU). It goes without saying that America appreciates the efforts of such groups and the individuals that they employ during these times of difficulty and great challenge.

In some Communities in America unemployment is at Eleven Percent (11%).

Also today an AP story identifies that U.S. Counties that are hardest hit by unemployment are receiving the least of the stimulus funds (...still reading Governor?).

Now, the way that things work in this country for those of you who do not know (and incidentally if you are an American Citizen you should know). The Congress enacts laws allocating (taxpayer) dollars to fund legislation; where domestic spending is the subject of the legislation it is the responsibility of the States to implement those Laws.

That is, the States have a role (and a responsibility) in seeing to it that the legislation is carried out. It is not the responsibility of the Federal Government to spend the money. States, through and with the guidance of their legislatures spend the money. This is always (well, mostly always) done in compliance with whatever Federal laws, Policies or Guidelines that may be in place and applicable.

So if stimulus funds available to be spent in whatever County and in whatever State, are not being spent as some think that they should be then your gripe is with the State and the County. I don't believe that the Federal government should have to create guidelines, rules, policy or other legal mechanisms to compel States to spend Federally Allocated money where it is most needed.

It would seem that adequate planning on the part of States would have sufficed to avoid this kind of a situation (AP story). Some States and Counties apparently didn't do much planning, others amongst the leadership in this country did plan. They apparently planned to ensure that the use of funds failed.

Americas problems today seem to be more rooted in the State House than in the White House.







Monday 20 April 2009
Control of Cyber Security
amiel, Monday 20 April 2009 - 23:46:39 // comment: 0

I agree with Ron Beckstrom, Cyber Security can't be controlled by or from a single entity. This without regard to how much 'expertise' that they may have in 'Cyber Security'.

The NSA should be ashamed of itself if it is in fact pressing to have itself installed as the 'head' of the governments 'Cyber Security' efforts.

Can't be done... and Mr. Ron Beckstrom seems to understand that fact. In order for the NSA (or any entity) to effectively provide the kind of management that they seem to be proposing; management of the varied agencies, varied IT resources that exist, it (the Agency) would have to provide personnel on every single site, at every single building, and in every single location where the U.S. Government utilizes IT resources of any kind, everywhere on the planet.

I'm getting my information from a N.Y. Times article dated April 17, 2009 entitled, "Control of Cybersecurity Becomes Divisive Issue".

I see where the conversation on 'Cyber Security' quickly diverged from the issue of Security to the associated issue of Law Enforcement and this without the participants apparently even realizing it. Law Enforcement becomes the topic when the question is that of effectively or fairly examining personal 'e-mail' and 'instant messaging' and so forth.

The two areas, Law Enforcement and IT Security, are associated in so far as Government efforts in these areas involve the use of computers and the use of network connections of some sort.

Important point, because it is by making this distinction that we are able to separate Law Enforcement arguments from the IT Security debate. They are not 'one in the same'. Armed with this understanding we can eliminate some of the 'noise' that has already entered the discussion.

Amit Yoran, did not make the point entirely but did reiterate the expressed opinion that the NSA was not equipped for the job. The NSA has executed some incredible hacking attacks at very high levels against impossible targets in incredibly time critical execution scenarios with incredible results.

However remember that they also had at their disposal incredibly detailed and accurate inside information and intelligence on their targets. This makes them extremely accomplished with the proviso that the associated intelligence is available to them. Hmmmm. They are incredibly accomplished, but there's just too few of them to address the needs of the entire Government.

In the NY Times Print Version Story, Dennis Blair, retired Army General apparently used the phrase, "Computer Wizards...", to describe capabilities at NSA. This tells me that he is definitely NOT the guy for the job of making the decision of what skills are of value for the needs in this case.

There are people on the job in the Government today who provide adequate levels of IT Security for the Government; in a myriad of configurations, under a myriad of job roles, varied job descriptions and job responsibilities. Some of whom know IT Security well and some of whom don't know IT Security well.

What is missing (of a certainty) is adequate training resources (number one). Adequate over-site for purposes of evaluation of preparedness (probably number two). And, I believe, adequate structured domain research and structured flow-down of security information (in general) and information on specific IT Security threats.

Tuesday April 21, 2009 Reuters reports that 'Chinese' hackers have stolen information from Lockheed Martin networks that may have compromised Military Aircraft projects. We don't need 'Wizards', General we need trained, disciplined network professionals...

...jobs that can only be carried out by entities that understand the bureaucracy of Government, IT Security, Computing (in depth) and the world of 'hacking' at least fairly in depth.

The guidance of Bureaucrats won't cut it. They will spend time debating non-issues as the N.Y Times article illustrates. They don't understand the problem; they don't even understand the terms used in the debate. And once they have arrived at a decision (based on lord know what) they will be unable to effectively communicate it and unable to effectively implement it.

The NSA lacks quantitative resources to even be a player in the solution. If you understood the problem you would know this at a glance. Qualitatively; well I'm afraid it's arguable. If they had the proven qualitative ability we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

I don't have all of the answers. But I'm certain of this; some of us are not even asking the right questions.

O.K so here's what. Take the current set of Security Professionals, put them in a room together for a day or two; asking them to come up with a plan to improve the Governments IT Security Situation; allowing them to assume that the solution may require time to completely implement. Further they should be directed to assume that the required resources are not to be found within the government.

Finally, and on a totally unrelated note. It is entirely plausible that the 'Chinese' hackers are not 'Chinese' and they may not even be 'hackers'. Only a real security apparatus could determine the likelihood of this being the case. There apparently was none in place.

Imagine that.









Monday 30 March 2009
CBS's story on Education Dollars suggests that they didn't read the Legislation very well. March 30, 2009
amiel, Monday 30 March 2009 - 23:17:49 // comment: 0

CBS's story on Education Dollars suggests that they didn't read the Legislation very well. March 30, 2009.

In Short the money is SUPPOSED to be spent on construction materials for schools like carpet, wallpaper, paint and so on; with the idea being that it provides employment to workers doing such work as well as for dollars for local material suppliers, delivery person, etc.; and it pays salaries and provides incentives to students to attend such schools benefiting from even such spent stimulus dollars.

The only individuals who could be demonized in all of this would be State and Local officials who intentionally redirect funds away from the Schools; perhaps having legitimized their actions with the rationalization that explains that the State or the School doesn't need such funds.

For 'third world states' like Texas it may seem unconscionable to State leaders, but this is what is intended; for the money to be spent on improving, expanding and modernizing schools. Period. Now the State Leadership can take that and turn it into a throughly negative indictment of the Federal Government, the Congress, the White House or whatever. But the reality is that States like Texas are so backward in their evolution that the simple concept that the money is intended to be spent locally and thereby stimulate growth in the local economy, is lost. The legislation and the availability of the funds is instead used by State Politicians as a tool to fashion negative press against the President.

And they will follow through. They will follow through with rejecting the dollars, follow through with making sure the dollars have a minimal positive impact on their local economies. Because they as individuals have nothing to worry about in the face of the recession. They are wealthy. It's just that simple. They can afford to play the kind of games that they are playing with the stimulus funds. Same is true with Georgia. Same is true with Alaska.

Same people arraying themselves in the same fashion to play the same games. For the sake of their constituencies I pray that it is a different playground that thy are playing on; and that they are not successful in undermining the benefits that my be had from the use of these dollars, by our Children and for the communities that the Children live in.

Have you heard the rational offered by Governors threatening to refuse Federal funds intended to bolster state unemployment benefits? This provides an excellent example of the 'Veil' of legitimacy that these State Leaders, similarly aligned, have conspired to use to bring attention to themselves.


Read more on that here. I have to do some more reading at the moment myself however.



I'll add it here in a day or so.


Friday 20 March 2009
Well; The American People have Spoken.
amiel, Friday 20 March 2009 - 00:42:00 // comment: 0

Well; the American People have Spoken.

Today the American house of representatives has debated, voted and passed legislation to 'Tax Bonuses paid to Wall Street Executives'

... at 90%.

Now that sounds like a solution. We may be debating this for some time; the fairness, the legality, and bla, bla ,bla; but this legislation addresses the need to bring the bonus madness to a stop immediately. It is the correct Democratic solution. It is palatable, while being distasteful to some. It should allow us all to put this matter to bed and move on.

Thank you ABC for your report. Nice picture of Senator Christopher Dodd. Includes descriptive comments from Charles Rangel.


Tuesday 17 March 2009
ABC and OBAMANOMICS
amiel, Tuesday 17 March 2009 - 15:29:36 // comment: 0

Not surprising that ABC is leading the way in promoting the phrase 'OBAMANOMICS' roughly described as of march 17, 2009 as President Barrak Obama's stance as regards economic rules applied to Wall Street vs. the same applied to America as a whole. Or something like that . This has created at least one additional activist 'Cause' to fight for or against one thing or another.

I''ve got news for ABC and their primary source of opinions on this, Jane Hamsher, the founder of the liberal blog FireDogLake, who commented Monday on ABC NewsNOW's "Politics Live.".

Here's where ABC went wrong with this. The quote from Jane Hamsher on the ABC news website reads, "People have no confidence in what's happening right now".... plain Baloney I say.

What 'people' is that that she refers to? Is that 'some people'. Or is that intended to mean 'all people'. Or is that like the Senior Bush's pet phrase that preceded nearly all of his public comments on policy, that went: "what the American people are telling me ...",and ,"what the American people want...". That was also baloney; I don't know of a single person that ever spoke to the man.

I never conferred with Jane Hamsher, and she never spoke with me on this matter. I know quite a few more people whom, I'm sure, have never communicated with her.

Had she spoken to me I would have gone into detail with her to make the point that our government cannot dictate the affairs of business and remain a Democracy, even in instances when it does not agree with the values, morals or even the economics of the particular matter belonging to that business.

We are a nation of laws. The Current Administration cannot require AIG to NOT honor an existing contract or contracts with employees at this point. Even when the arrangement is outlandish.

Everyone who has ever been employed has experienced having a contractual arrangement with an employer. In each of the Fifty States this is true; if you work for an employer that employer MUST pay you and there are laws in place to guarantee that the employer does pay you.

It is for this reason that I believe that most people DO understand the Administrations explanation of the situation. And they do NOT in fact blame or condemn the Current Administration for the use of the funds.

What's being missed here (or there at ABC) entirely is the fact that we finally have an Administration that is paying this kind of thing adequate attention at all. Most of us really appreciate that I'm sure.

So now having been provided with this kind of insightful information; having had the benefit of the details of the mobilization within the Government to address this situation. The previously un-informed come out of the shadows, slightly better informed, and immediately attack the messenger.

What happened here is that the existence of the contract was not detected before the Government provided the necessary funds to AIG.

So what.

Where were these eloquent insightful observers when no-bid contractors walked away with a cool billion US Dollars from Iraq Contracts?


Saturday 14 March 2009
Joe Liberman and Michael Jackson
amiel, Saturday 14 March 2009 - 18:52:30 // comment: 0

In the United States there are no statues of Michael Jackson that I am aware of. All of the Fifty (50) Michael Jackson concerts scheduled in Europe are sold out as of March, 14, 2009.

What is the difference between the European thinking and Western thought as regards Michael Jackson?

And does Joe Lieberman fit in here somehow?

I came across a document produced and signed by Joe Lieberman dated May 11, 2004.

The 2004 document provides a fairly detailed description of what can be expected if the United States continues to allow/promote the concept of 'Offshore' IT growth.

Today politicians are canting the phrase, "Eliminate Tax Brakes to Companies that ship jobs overseas". Today the U.S Economy is struggling to recover from a credit crisis that evolved from the lack of competent Government 'non-legislative' oversight. That is, we had idiots in charge who simply didn't respond to a, 'Clear and present danger', in the housing credit and credit markets; the negative effects of which are continuing to reverberate through economies worldwide

Incidentally it was European financial firms that initially sounded the alarm on that situation.

I was looking for some news of Michael Jacksons European Tour. Website access to all of the top sites returned in the search engine search were not available. I suspected a DOS (denial of service) situation for those sites. And was thinking, 'what kind of mind would do such a thing'. Certainly not minds from countries where they have built statues to honor the man.

I'm rambling through all of this to make a point. I got yet another email from CIO insight (a magazine). More spam with the facade of sophistication. The email is dated March 13, 2009. The subject line reads:" 10 Jobs Ready for Outsourcing. Options abound, both onshore and off..."

I'm thinking, 'this must be being produced in New Deli'. The guys that wrote this and then emailed it to Americans cannot have been living in this country for the past six months. Can't be.

O.K. So I did a search for "offshore IT", and got a zillion pages of the wonders and value of offshore IT. Amongst the search pages returned was a little ditty done by Joseph Lieberman in 2004; not too many years ago. it was around or about the same time that the 'bottom fell out' of IT hiring in the United States completely.

And so with the Michel Jackson search results on one tab in my Mozilla browser, and the 'Offshore IT' results on another tab; yet another two tabs with the Wilkopedia search results for both of the men; and finally the text of the .pdf document 'Offshoring Whitepaper' that Joseph Lieberman's Senate Office produced in the year 2004. The opening paragraph reads:

"I am releasing this white paper in hopes that it will stimulate a deeper review of the long term implications for our policy responses and change the terms of the debate on
the offshore outsourcing issue. The issues raised in this report go well beyond the current
debate and focus on the next wave of this challenge, which potentially could affect high
end R&D research jobs, not just manufacturing and call center jobs
."

Powerful stuff.

I conclude that it is ample in America to vilify the individual. And thereby eliminate or nullify any affect, or impact of anything that that individual might produce. Create that overshadowing suspicion, the doubt or the dislike for the individual and no one will listen to them. They will have been nullified, marginalized, effectively eliminated.

This Lieberman document describes the roadmap of the current Administration to restore Americas Competitiveness not only in IT, but with all of it's outward facing economics (did I coin a phrase there?).
And this Joseph Lieberman fellow is described as being a supporter of 'Global Economics'. How can the two co-exist...? Just, read.

I leave the rest to you

To Mr. Lieberman: Note that in America, politicians do not make it their business to educate their constituencies, It just makes them that much more difficult to influence.














Monday 09 March 2009
Bill Gates's Guest Visa Program - Thursday, April 28, 2005. - America's IT efforts for over four years - H1.
amiel, Monday 09 March 2009 - 00:29:05 // comment: 0

A blast from the past. - Bill Gates and American IT in 2006.

A Washington Post story published in 2006 describes the plea's from then Microsoft Chairman to loosen restrictions on foreign workers Bill Gates Stated, "We are very concerned that the U.S. will lose its competitive position. For Microsoft, it means we are having a tougher time hiring",

Two things come to mind immediately. First off, fewer and fewer competent IT people today prefer Microsoft products.

Second, there is no better way to improve Americas competitiveness than to give the jobs to foreign workers, right?

As a result of the efforts of Bill Gates and with the assistance of the Former President; IT hiring at American Telephone and Telegraph is handled exclusively by foreign workers, through foreign based consulting companies. These foreign personnel workers apply third world values to the American workplace, and thereby Americans are further displaced from remaining IT jobs.

Did you know that?

Someone should explain to
Shirley M. Tilghman, president of Princeton University, that software development does not require any more than average maths skills. Despite the DOL mis-classification of Computer Sciences as a 'math' discipline. A responsible educator should know that.

Computer sciences, programming specifically require language and logic skills that any child can learn.



Bill Gates also wrote a second piece for publication. A link to the 2007 Washington Post article is worth reading.

The pivotal remark in his presentation was the phrase "American competitiveness also requires immigration reforms that reflect the importance of highly skilled foreign-born employees.". clearly the intent of the entire document is to allow him to sell the idea of opening up the American market to foreign workers.

Said Gates in the Washington Post 2007 article, "Education has always been the gateway to a better life in this country, and our primary and secondary schools were long considered the world's best. But on an international math test in 2003, U.S. high school students ranked 24th out of 29 industrialized nations surveyed."

If low math test scores are the reason that students are being steered away from or dissuaded from pursuing careers with computers, as Gate's comments suggest they may be, then we need to take a good close look at the Stuarts of the entire process.

Computer functionality is based on simple boolean values commonly referred to as 'Zero' and 'One'; which are utilized to represent the entirety of the functionality of the computer. Additionally a computer may be able to add, subtract, multiply and divide numeric values. That is the extent of the math 'requirement'.

Everything associated with utilizing the capabilities of that computer is based on and achieved through the programming 'language(s)' that are available for creating 'programs' that 'run' and perform some logical unit or units of work on that computer. Math requirement for this == None.

The entirety of the level of proficiency with computers is based on 'language' skills and logic skills, not on math skills.

If we are (and we are) discouraging students from pursuing careers with computers because of the Department of Labor's mis-classification of Computer Science as a math discipline then we need to be looking at the Stuarts of this national level involvement.

We don't need foreign workers we need Computer Science programs that address the reality of todays's computing world.

In a world without walls we don't need gates and we don't need windows.

Unless of course you are employed at McAffee, Grisoft , Trendmicro, Symantec, F-Secure and a host of other software companies that exist solely because of the flawed logic that has been applied on a continued basis in the development of Bill Gates' software.

For these reasons I am not comfortable having him speak for the entire country, the entire Industry and certainly for the entirety of IT America; I do not think he is qualified to be it's spokesperson I think he is qualified to speak for Microsoft
.


Sunday 01 March 2009
Today I received this unsolicited e-mail and well I'm sharing it.
amiel, Sunday 01 March 2009 - 22:13:16 // comment: 0

10 things you should know about Obama's plan (but probably don't) The plan:



Makes a $634 billion down payment on fixing health care that will go a long way toward paying for a more efficient, more affordable health care system that covers every single American.



1. Reduces taxes for 95% of working Americans. And if your family makes less than $250,000, your taxes won't go up one dime. († mostly derailed by republican legislators)

2. Invests more than $100 billion in clean energy technology, creating millions of green jobs that can never be outsourced. († derailed by republican legislators)

3. Brings our troops home from Iraq on a firm timetable, finally bringing the war to a close and freeing up almost ten billion dollars a month for domestic priorities.

4. Reverses growing income inequality. The plan lets the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire and focuses on strengthening the middle class.

5. Closes multi-billion-dollar tax loopholes for big oil companies. († derailed by republican legislators)

6. Increases grants to help families pay for college; the largest increase ever.

7. Halves the deficit by 2013. President Obama inherited a legacy of huge deficits and an economy in shambles, but his plan brings the deficit under control as soon as the economy begins to recover.

8. Dramatically increases funding for the SEC and the CFTC the agencies that police Wall Street.

9. Tells it straight. For years, budgets have used accounting tricks to hide the real costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush tax cuts, and too many other programs. Obama's budget gets rid of the smokescreens and lays out what America's priorities are, what they cost, and how we're going to pay for them.

10. This is the change we voted for. President Obama has done his part, now we need to do ours.



END


Were you looking for something a little more negative ?


Go to page  1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8