Category Archives: Technology

Word of the day – “MICROAGGRESSION”.

The word “microaggression” has cropped up with increased frequency over the last year, to the point that now I see it almost daily! What does it mean?

Webster’s says it has “no meaning.” It’s not a word. It doesn’t exist! Various blogs, papers, and online source provide a definition, but they’re not “official” dictionaries.

And then, I found www.microaggressions.com. This site was obviously built by people who can’t stand anyone who might, kinda, sorta, could have some kind of privilege going for them. According to this site “microaggression” is defined as:

“Racial micro aggressions are brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”

I have said it before… words no longer have meaning and this is another perfect example of why. This definition specifically says it’s aimed at people of color.

Based on the many “microaggression” stories I’ve covered, the definition should read as follows:

micro aggressions are brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative slights and insults towards; __________. (INSERT – anyone identifying as LGBTQ, a woman, a minority, or some other subset of people, no matter how ridiculous).

Recently at Brandeis University, the Asian American Students Association was accused of microaggression for putting up a display to explain microaggression using only Asians… REALLY?

A group at Oberlin University had to issue a warning of microaggression or triggering alerting readers they were about to see “Discussion of rape culture, online harassment, victim blaming, and rape apologism and denialism. REALLY? They needed a warning?

Recently Johns Hopkins University refused to allow Chick-Fil-A to open on campus because the campus LGBTQ club considered it an act of microaggression. So now anyone or anything that offends is microaggression? Well, kinda sorta. It really only seems to apply to certain groups.

If you ask me to remove my Bible from view, you would consider that your right not to be “assaulted” by my belief. But by the definitions above, wouldn’t that be considered a microaggression toward me and my religion?

The latest in microaggressions was reported at Arizona State University. Students petitioned staff to change the name of pedestrian walkways. Why, you ask? Because not everyone can walk and that COULD be viewed as a microaggression to someone in a wheelchair or on crutches. Even the people who were supposed to be offended (those in wheelchairs or on crutches) thought this was ridiculous.

Read the rest at: microaggressions

Amazon’s Jeff Bezos’ Rocket Has Successful Launch

Blue Origin - New ShephardAmazon’s Jeff Bezos has a rocket and it (mostly) works. The “New Shephard” is made by Bezos’ Blue Origin company, is 60ft tall and can carry up to six people into space.

 

This launch took the craft to 58 miles above the earth and successfully returned the unmanned capsule to the ground by parachute.

The booster section was supposed to be recovered and re-used, but due to a hydraulic failure, recovery was not possible.

CenturyLink acquires Orchestrate to enhance cloud platform with new database capabilities

CENTURYLINK, INC. LOGOMONROE, Louisiana. and PORTLAND, Oregon, April 21, 2015 /PRNewswire/ — CenturyLink, Inc. (NYSE: CTL) today announced the acquisition of Orchestrate, a company that offers a fully managed database service for rapid application development. The acquisition enhances the CenturyLink Cloud platform with new Database-as-a-Service (DBaaS) capabilities and adds Orchestrate’s experienced data services team to CenturyLink’s Product Development and Technology organization.

“CenturyLink’s customers, like most enterprises, are expressing interest in solutions that help them meet the performance, scalability and agile development needs of large-scale big data analytics,” saidGlen F. Post, III, chief executive officer and president of CenturyLink. “The Orchestrate database service’s ease of use and ability to support multiple database technologies have emerged as key differentiators that we are eager to offer our customers through the CenturyLink Cloud platform.”

With the advance of mobile, real-time and Internet of Things applications, companies need scalable, flexible databases. In many cases, they need more than one database to provide the social, mapping and messaging features users expect. Orchestrate provides multiple flavors of well-tuned, managed NoSQL databases, to save organizations the headaches of running their own instances. Orchestrate provides full-text search, time series, graph and key-value storage through a single, simple API that combines the developer-friendliness and ease of use of NoSQL databases with the reliability of distributed databases.

Orchestrate co-founders Antony Falco, chief executive officer, and Ian Plosker, chief technology officer, as well asDave Smith, vice president of engineering, are among those joining CenturyLink.

“CenturyLink Cloud features one of the most sophisticated service infrastructures in the market, with a great interface and lots of options for managing complex workflow and third-party applications in the cloud,” Falco said. “Orchestrate’s database service takes the same approach to delivering cost efficiency and ease of use. Enterprise customers are increasingly expecting one global platform to provide these services.”

Earlier this year, Orchestrate’s service became deployable via CenturyLink Cloud. CenturyLink’s other recent big data analytics moves include the acquisition of Cognilytics, a leading provider of advanced predictive analytics and big data solutions; the launch of Hyperscale high-performance cloud server instances designed for web-scale workloads, big data and cloud-native applications; and the availability of automated cloud-based Hadoop solutions. Other recent additions to the CenturyLink Cloud ecosystem include the acquisition of DataGardens for disaster recovery services.

Liftoff of SpaceX CRS-6

The SpaceX CRS-6 Falcon 9 rocket lifts off from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station carrying a Dragon spacecraft on the sixth commercial resupply services mission to the International Space Station. Liftoff was at 4:10 p.m. EST.

Like Obamacare? You’ll Love what New FCC Rules will do to the Internet

Like a cancerous growth spreading throughout an otherwise healthy body, government overreach, regulation, and control of every aspect of our free-market system continues to expand, infesting and damaging economic activity one organ, or industry, at a time. The Internet, that bastion of freedom and entrepreneurship, is about to become the government’s newest victim.

fcc-chief-on-net-neutrality-trust-meFederal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman, Tom Wheeler, an Obama appointee, is presenting the president’s “net neutrality” plan for the commission’s vote in two weeks. As promoted publicly by the administration, even on the White House website, the concept sounds meritoriously egalitarian, preventing internet providers from doling out more bandwidth to some paying customers, like Netflix, than others. But it’s clearly designed to facilitate much more.

The administration’s plan calls for reclassification of the Internet, in toto, as a Title II telecommunications service. Such a designation would allow the government to regulate the Internet based on the Communications Act of 1934, just like the telephone industry.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai holding new Net Neutrality rules.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai holding new Net Neutrality rules.

The 332 page proposal has not yet been made public, though the recommendations are widely known. The “net neutrality” proposal wording was enough for one FCC commissioner to conduct a news conference this week to warn the public of the “secret plan to regulate the Internet.” FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai said the plan was even “worse than I imagined,” and will invariably lead to “rate regulation and taxes.”

The full report and recommendation will not be released to the public until after the FCC approves it at their Feb. 26th meeting. FCC Chairman Wheeler must subscribe to the Nancy Pelosi regulatory and legislative mantra, that it has to be passed so we can know what’s in it. Yet another administration slap in the face of “transparency.”

As reported in National Journal, commissioner Pai acknowledged that the actual regulations take up just eight pages of the document. Another 79 pages are citations of the Communications Act, which will also dictate the practices of broadband providers. The rest of the document is a summary of public feedback and reasoning for the FCC’s decision, which Pai said is “sprinkled” with unofficial rules.

87293_600According to Pai, about the worst part of the proposal is exercising FCC dominion based on Title II. By implementing “net neutrality” under Title II, regardless of the prima facie reason for the new order, the FCC is “giving itself the authority to determine whether a variety of practices—including prices—are ‘just and reasonable.’” In other words, it’s the camel nose in the tent door metaphor. Pretty soon the camel (government regulators) occupies the tent and the providers are out on their ears.

The evidence seems to be on Pai’s side. He explains specifically, “The plan repeatedly states that the FCC will apply sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act, including their rate regulation provisions, to determine whether prices charged by broadband providers are ‘unjust or unreasonable.'”

Commissioner Pai cautioned that not only does the proposal “open the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband,” but that with the Title II reclassification, technically the government could exercise control over content, as well.

net-neutrality-comic-3Current broadband consumption illustrates how ludicrous the proposal is. According to Sandvine data, “in home data consumption is approximately 150 to 200 times greater than mobile consumption. Google (including YouTube) and Netflix account for 45% of fixed broadband traffic. iTunes, Facebook, Amazon and Hulu account for 6% in aggregate. Google and Facebook account for 42% of mobile data. Netflix, Pandora and iTunes take an additional 14%.”

According to the new rules, broadband usage must be shared equally, without allowing providers the ability to adjust for consumption and demand, and other factors. So if you think you’re sick of seeing the spinning “buffering” wheel when watching video online, you “ain’t seen nothin’ yet!” Welcome to the world of net neutrality, a euphemism for broadband socialism – everyone gets their “fair share.”

These are the reasons John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, said, “To go back to a 1950s voice mentality with Title II and net neutrality would be a tremendous mistake for our country… this is a very bad decision. I think the whole country has to rally [against it]. This will cost the country jobs and economic leadership.”

The first step of governmental encroachment into an area of the private sector is always the most crucial. For once the proverbial foot is in the door, they just keep pushing and shoving until the door is clear off the hinges, and they control the industry. We’ve seen it time and time again, from banking, telephony, energy, manufacturing, and most recently, health care insurance. The promises are always minimalist, yet the eventuality always exceeds even extreme expectations. Consequently control increases, costs of production and services increase, and those costs are passed from companies in the private sector down to consumers. And the process always seems most costly and punitive to the middle and lower classes.

156139_600Ronald Reagan explained this governmental cycle years ago. “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” Except in the case of “net neutrality,” they’re regulating it first, and then will come the taxation, the fees, and perhaps even control over accessibility and content.

We’ve seen just recently how governmental control over private sector services changes an industry dramatically, a la Obamacare. It appears we’re about to see “Obamacare” for the Internet, if the FCC rules go into effect. But don’t worry, they promise us that everything will be just fine. If you like your broadband, you can keep it. That sounds eerily familiar.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

May I Present, Our Emperor and Chief, His Highness Barack Obama

L

Last week Mr. Obama declared himself our emperor! Well, at least in so many words.

You didn’t hear it? Of course you did, but it was thinly veiled and you have to do a little work stringing it together. Just like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse-tung before him Mr. Obama has been openly laying out his plan in his speeches across the country. Hitler never said he was going to “kill millions of Jews.” He said, and I quote, “the discovery of the Jewish virus is one of the greatest revolutions that has taken place in the world” and “If only one country, for whatever reason, tolerates a Jewish family in it, that family will become the germ center for fresh sedition,” and “the heaviest blow which ever struck humanity was Christianity; Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew.” Even with these blatant statements, no one believed what was being rumored to be going on at death camps across Germany.Obama_emperor

These quotes were bits and pieces of conversations and speeches over time. But people were too dull or simply afraid to pull it all together. Well, I’m not. And neither are many of my brothers in this battle for liberty, freedom, and the real American way.

My family represents everything that is great about America. We are an interracial, legal immigrant, blended family who worked their way up from living in one of the poorest cities in the country (the area I grew up in was once referred to as the “Bangladesh of America”) to a great middle-class area in California. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Enter Barack Obama… and I quote:

“The problem is that you know I’m the President of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed, and Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.” – President Obama on Feb. 14, 2013

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed.” – President Obama on March 28, 2011

“Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.” – President Obama on March 28, 2011

These are all his speeches in his words as dictated by his teleprompter. On many more occasions he reiterated that he lacked the legal authority to take action on the immigration issue.

Yes, on Thursday he admitted that there were presidents before him that broke that law and that he was going to hide behind them and break the law himself. Because he’s a “take action” kind of guy!

“There are actions I have the legal authority to take as president – the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican presidents before me – that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.” – President Obama from Thursday’s speech

Hello, Mr. President, are you now saying that you have the right to break the law because others before you have done it? Is that what this has been all about? Have you evolved on this issue like you have with gay marriage?

Mr. President, you’re supposed to be a man of integrity. Integrity dictates that you do the right thing no matter who’s watching (or not watching) or what kind of backlash or applause you may or may not get. Not what you think is the right thing… but the right and legal thing.

If my family is hungry because I can’t provide for them, does that give me a pass to steal from the local grocery store? NO! Never. Not for any reason. But what this country allows me the freedom to do is knock on every door of every vendor in the street to see if they will let me do a little work to buy food for my family. Or I can go to the grocery store and offer to do anything to raise money to feed my family. But it never gives me permission to break the law.

Mr. President, you have single-handedly made a mockery of your position and of our country.

When you say “I’m the President of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed….” but then you go on to make or change a law to the point where it no longer resembles the original law, then you have appointed yourself emperor by your own words and deeds.

When you say “… the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed,” then by suspending deportations you have broken the law. Those are your words, not mine.

And when you say, “…Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws,” but then you, sir, change the law to make it unenforceable as passed by the congress, you are once again breaking the law as you stated it is.

This is what makes you a hypocrite. Not the color of your skin. Not you party affiliation. Not your religious affiliation. Not even where you may or may not have been born. It’s just your inability to find the truth and live by it.

An emperor is someone who rules as the highest power in the land. He has all authority to make and execute laws and can change them at any time without penalty.

If this was the position you sought, you came to the wrong place because the “peasants” are on the rise and have had it. A revolution is coming and as in the Russian revolution the people in power chose to ignore the outcry of the “peasants” and the rulers lost.

Keep ignoring us and discounting us your Highest Emperor Obama and it will mean political destruction for you and your team.
Read more at TheRealSide

Strike 9! You’re out!

I believe in giving people many chances… as long as they are willing to work at correcting it. I never fired anyone for making mistakes at work, as long as I knew we had properly instructed them in their duties, that they were working at making it better, and that the mistake, though possibly costing the company money, was an honest mistake and not malicious in any way. We always gave them a numerous chances, unless the person made no effort to fix the behavior or patterns causing the issues.

Some employees come into a job thinking they have all the answers, they know better than the boss, and they could actually run the company better than anyone else. In most cases they are dead wrong! I also found that in most cases, when I gave these people management responsibilities to prove a point, I was right and they would fail miserably. Interestingly, they would always blame it on someone else. Sound like someone you know?

Me too. Enter Mr. Obama.

First let me say, don’t waste the electrons writing emails to me telling me how other Administrations have lied to us in the past. Like the national debt, Mr. Obama and his Administration have racked up lying stats as never seen before in this nation’s history. It’s almost like their M.O. (modus operandi) is to tell everything in lie format that way you never have to worry about the truth.

There are more and more “main stream” journalists and news reporters coming out in agreement that this Administration will be known as the most secretive Administration ever! In Sharyl Attkisson’s book “Stonewalled” she goes over story after story (confirmed) as to how this Administration purposely mislead the news media or didn’t answer questions all together with intent to keep them in the dark from what really happened in situations like Benghazi, the IRS scandal, Fast and Furious, and Obamacare.

Do you know that not once, not one time, has this Administration come out to the podium on the first round and admitted to making a mistake and shared how they were going to fix it? And when they finally do admit to the “mistake,” they blamed it on another agency or someone else.

My new question is… Is lying just part of being a Democrat? I hope not. I have many friends that are Democrats. They are nothing like those on Capitol Hill. Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Mrs. Pelosi, Mr. Holder, just to name a few, have been caught in “serial lies.” They work off of each other to keep a lie in the air and Americans confused. But it’s not working.

According to inside sources, even Hillary Clinton had the good sense to back out of these issues. She refused to go out on the interview circuit days after the Benghazi attack because as she put it “I’m not going out into that mess.”

Yes, Obama “stays the course” of lie, lie, and keep lying some more until “they” finally believe it. I don’t know who “they” are any longer because fewer and fewer believe what he’s trying to sell.

Do you think, really think, the White House knew nothing of what Professor Gruber said this week. You know, that the healthcare bill was drafted to hide the fact that it was a tax and that they were banking on the ignorance of the American people’s blind trust in the president? Do you really think that Mr. Reid, Mrs. Pelosi, and Mr. Biden didn’t know how they were going to have to prostitute (no insult meant to prostitutes) themselves to sell this to the American people?
Read more at: TheRealSide

He’s Free! Now What?

President Obama has stated that he had a pen and a phone and would use it if Congress didn’t act. He insinuates that they do nothing to help the American people. He seems to forget that there are over 380 bipartisan bills sitting on his top lapdog, Harry “Hindlick” Reid’s desk who refuses to bring them to the floor for a vote. Why? If they are truly bad and Reid has control of the Senate, and his minions, then there shouldn’t be an issue. Maybe he can call Reid and knock them lose? Never mind. I know his phone is dead!
The phone has to be dead, because for 214 days he was unable to make a phone call on behalf of Marine Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi to Mexican President Enrique Nieto. He also was not able to get Secretary John Kerry on the phone, nor was he able to reach California Governor Jerry Brown who hosted the Mexican president in California to discuss the issue with either of them. Interestingly, a State Department spokesman said they had visited the Sergeant several times in prison. Apparently, he was too doped up to remember.
At first I thought the president must be working behind the scenes with his staff and team like he did to secure Bowe Bergdahl’s release, right? That had to be it. After all, getting one Marine who made a wrong turn out of a Mexican prison had to be so much easier than releasing 5 terrorists who swore Jihad on Americans in exchange for one potential traitor and deserter, right? Wrong!
I believe President Obama, once again, showed his contempt for our military men and women by completely ignoring Andrew’s issue. Really, how easy would this have been? Obama calls Nieto. “Yo Nieto, help me out here. I need to get a boatload of these Dems re-elected so we can set up some more watering stations in the desert for your people to be able to make it across the border safely, that way they can work and send money home for you to steal it from them. I can’t do that if we don’t win. So send the marine home. Tell them what a great job I and my administration did to negotiate a release and I can almost guarantee open borders for all. Waddaya say?” Sounds easy enough. Or he could have suspended NAFTA with that pen of his until he was released.
All I can figure is that what the president did was to respect another country’s legal system and allow their laws to play out. I guess Mexico doesn’t have an “executive order” clause for Nieto to use whenever he feels like it.
Looking back, it was the “do-nothing” Congress, not the “do-everything-wrong-and-in-secret” Administration that got Andrew released. It was several Republican representatives, including Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce, Matt Salmon, and former Governor Bill Richardson who went to Mexico and kept applying pressure to the Mexican Attorney General. The judge didn’t release Andrew. It was the AG who dropped the charges forcing the judge to release Andrew.
One unnamed source said that when the AG was explaining how America should understand that Mexico is a “rule of law” country and allow Mexico’s legal system to run its course, the representative basically responded, “So is America, would you like us to allow our legal system to work as it pertains to illegal immigration?
Read the rest at: TheRealSide

There is No Voter Fraud… Honest!

If you want to see someone on the progressive left blow a gasket, talk about voter fraud. They will all tell you that it doesn’t exist or it’s so small it’s immeasurable. I say they can’t see the forest for the trees!

The hard part about voter fraud is, you have to prove the person knew what they were doing was illegal. Imagine hearing this at the poll:

Poll worker: Hello, your name?

Fraudulent voter: John Smith.

Poll Worker: Sign here Mr. Smith and I’ll give you your ballot.

Poll Worker: Sir, do you know if you are NOT Mr. Smith and you are voting for him it’s a federal offense punishable by fines and jail time?

Mr Smith: Yes, Mr. Poll Worker, and I assure you I’m Mr. Smith.

Please!!!! Have you ever heard this at the polls? Never!

One state assembly person voted 19 times, and yes, she finally got caught. She tried to say that she didn’t remember voting (18 extra times?)

In Florida, major cases of voter fraud go back to 1984 when it became so bad that it was hard to miss. According to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, types of voter fraud included:

  • Someone voting on behalf of someone else.
    • Purchasing or selling absentee ballots or someone’s vote.
    • Non-city residents voting in municipal elections.
    • Changing of ballots.
    • Voting by absentee ballots under the name of deceased persons.
    • Voting in the election by non-U.S. citizens.
    • False statements or information being provided with regard to address information or changes of addresses on voter registrations.
    • Possible use of certain addresses within the City limits as the “new address” for persons not residing within the City; done with the apparent sole purpose of permitting voting in the municipal election.

Andrew Ladanowski, owner of a computer software company, suspected Florida’s Division of Elections wasn’t really verifying any information.

There were over 700 voter ID cards in Florida that seemed to have been duplicated. He verified his suspicions by dong a quick analysis of Miami-Dade’s voting systems where, it turned out, there were 44 voter ID’s issued to the same person. Elections officials admit 42 of those 44 were duplicates. But what I want to know is, can’t the computer systems find these issues? Can’t we divert some of the millions of dollars wasted on the Obamacare site (or any one of the hundreds of other government programs wasting good tax money) to cleaning up voter registrations?

When finished he found over 762 Florida voters have more than one county-issued voter ID card. Some are registered with the same address, and others are registered in different counties. And a computer can’t flag this information, why?
Read the rest at TheRealSide

The Pledge of Allegiance is Political?

Now, I have heard it all! CBS Sports banned a commercial with a little girl reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. The ad promoted something very American, “The Rodeo,” around September 11th. The little girl in the commercial was the granddaughter of the owner of the company running the ad. He though it was a really cool idea.

Well, the PC police at CBS Sports had other ideas. At first I thought “here we go again.” It has the words “under God” and we don’t want to offend the 20% of the country who doesn’t believe in God and we certainly don’t want them to feel left out. But that wasn’t the problem. Then I thought they must have been tight on time and a 15-second Pledge would have caused them to have to bump one of those commercials with a hamburger-eating, sauce-dripping, car-washing, bikini-clad woman who uses the top part of her bikini to wipe off the BBQ sauce. Nope. That wasn’t what happened either. OK, then WHAT?

The knuckleheads at CBS Sports decided that it was too political. Yup, the Pledge of Allegiance is too political. They won’t return any news organization’s phone calls. They’re CBS. Why should they?

This is just another example of an ungrateful company not understanding what the Pledge actually means!

For those of you who may need a refresher, the Pledge simply means that as Americans we will stand up for the American way of life, it’s freedoms and it’s opportunities and it’s liberties. Hey CBS! Those are the same ones that you used to build your companies! The American tax laws that you take advantage of and the security you feel, in most cases, going to other countries knowing that, as Americans, your company and employees have the United States of America’s resources to protect you!

Unlike some of those 3rd world nations who dictate what news gets broadcast and when and who you hire and fire and if they decide you’re not so good at it they simply take it away from you, you have freedoms here. Go ahead and try to appeal to that 3rd world country’s supreme court. That’d be a joke!

How would you like it if our military refused to take the Pledge and only fought if and when they felt like it and for whatever cause they felt was worthy? With no allegiance to a country, there’s no real reason to fight or uphold its laws.

CBS Sports you are an embarrassment. You have spit in the face of many that came before us to fight and died protecting what the flag and the Pledge represents.

This madness is happening all around the country. I can count no less than 5 recent stories on City Councils that refused to say the Pledge because “there wasn’t enough time.” And even more stories on school districts that have decided reciting the Pledge “once in a while” is good enough.

And what the heck is political about the Pledge? Does it only apply to Republicans? Or only Democrats? Maybe just the decline-to-state or Libertarian or Green Party? I know the Communist Socialist Democrat Party of America finds it offensive. Who cares! If you don’t like it, shut up and sit down because that’s the freedom afforded you the Pledge and by those who came before you who fought and died for your right to disagree without being taken out back and being beheaded.


Read more at The Real Side

The NEW Meaning of the Word Transparency!

Depending on the sound clip you find, you will hear Mr. Obama say, “I will have the most transparent administration this country has ever seen” and “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstone of this administration.” (Insert cricket sounds here.) We have heard this line over and over and over again. As President Obama would say, “Let me be Clear.” Transparency, as defined in Webster’s dictionary, means: Able to be seen through, easy to notice or understand, not secretive, fine or sheer enough to be seen through, free from pretense or deceit, easily detected or seen through, easily understood. Do I need to go on? Come on. Really!?

Mr. Obama, I’m not going to call you a liar. I’ll just let your words speak for themselves. Just recently at a press conference, both of these lines were use in the same speech! “Our objective is clear, and that is to degrade and destroy [ISIL] so that it’s no longer a threat not just to Iraq but also the region and to the United States.” That’s pretty clear. And for further clarity, Webster’s says destroy means; to cause (something) to end or no longer exist: to cause the destruction of (something): to damage (something) so badly that it cannot be repaired.

Now, not being an English major, I can guess that the president is saying he will make it so ISIL no longer exists and will damage it so badly that it cannot be repaired. I’m in! Where do I sign up? But wait! There’s more. He goes on to say; “We can continue to shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, effectiveness, finance, military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem.”

Me not being an English scholar and believing the president’s meds are balanced and that he knew of what he spoke, I had to be the one confused. Webster’s definition of manageable says: easy to control or deal with. Hmmm? If you are going to deal with or control something doesn’t it have to be in existence? And if he wants to destroy it in one breath (which means to eliminate it) and then wants to manage it in the next sentence (it would have to be in existence to manage) either his teleprompter is messed up or he is confused.

Which is it? Destroy it or manage it? He must be confused since, in his words, he said; “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstone of this administration.” Is he hiding something from us or not?

He stated we had no plan to deal with ISIS(L). When his generals, and others on his security council, said we have a plan and are waiting on the White House to act, the White House quickly came out and stated what the president really meant was, they were “fine tuning”, “looking at all options”, “hadn’t decided on one.” Transparency, easy to understand, easy to see through, easily detected, easily understood. I’m sorry, but none of this is “easily detected, understood or seen through” aka “transparent.” It’s all pretty hazy if you ask me.

Now, people involved in the Benghazi debacle have come forward stating that orders were in fact given to stand down. Four men who were part of the rescue team who were there to protect the embassy all swear that orders were given to stand down! The White House seems to be in the ever-proverbial cover-thy-butt mode. Why aren’t there any military personnel who can corroborate that the White House gave orders to go early enough to make a difference? One side has all kinds of witnesses. The other side has two. Just Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton. Neither has any credibility at this point. Transparency: easy to notice or understand, not secretive, free from pretense or deceit, easily detected or seen through, easily understood. Epic fail!

When Mr. Obama’s administration started moving illegal immigrants that rushed our borders to various communities he only informed the Democrats in those areas. That doesn’t sound very transparent to me. And now he refuses to tell Congress where those kids have been located. HELLO! This is not a dictatorship Mr. Obama! This isn’t the mafia and you don’t get to be Don Obama for a day. You have no right to hide this information from the American people. Transparency: easy to notice or understand, not secretive, free from pretense or deceit, easily detected or seen through, easily understood. Fail, AGAIN!

BTW – We will be spending over $160 thousand per illegal minor. We don’t spend that much on each American citizen child. “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstone of this administration.” Is he confused, a liar, or a deceiver?

The White house has received over 40 letters from major news sources asking the White House to be more transparent by allowing the press into events at the White House again. I say “again” because the press has been removed from many of the events and functions they were always permitted to go to. They are now given selected pictures and content to print chosen by the White House. Transparency: easy to understand, easy to see through, easily detected, easily understood. Another Obama FAIL!

There have been more lawsuits filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) rules, not just requests, but actual lawsuits, because this administration has responded less than all other administrations combined.

Just a couple of quick ones and the sources:

Obama admin thwarting release of public data under FOIA, lawsuit charges: “The civic watchdog group Cause of Action on Monday sued the Obama administration, claiming that presidential attorneys have interfered improperly in the release of public documents under the landmark FOIA law in an effort to curb the release of derogatory information about the White House. The lawsuit … names 12 federal agencies that the group says slowed the release of documents so officials could consult with White House attorneys under a review process established in spring 2009. FOIA analysts say this practice never occurred in prior administrations.” (The Washington Times)

Administration won’t reveal records on health website security: “[T]he Obama administration has concluded it will not publicly disclose federal records that could shed light on the security of the government’s health care website because doing so could ‘potentially’ allow hackers to break in. … The AP is asking the government to reconsider. Obama instructed federal agencies in 2009 to not keep information confidential ‘merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears.’ Yet the government, in its denial of the AP request, speculates that disclosing the records could possibly, but not assuredly or even probably, give hackers the keys they need to intrude.” (Associated Press)

And the New York Times, always known for being such a conservative publication, states: …..

Read more at :  The Real Side

Peer Pressure Crushes Silicon Valley Entrepreneur

Monkey bureaucratsAnne Wojcicki is one of those Silicon Valley entrepreneurs that started a “disruptive” company aiming to change how we view an established industry. But she’s not one of those brain–rich, resource–poor visionaries passing the hat among bored World of Warcraft players window–shopping on Kickstarter.com.

No, she and her partners, Lucy Page and Laura Arrillaga–Andreessen — respectively the wives of Internet billionaires Sergey Brin (Google), Larry Page (Google) and Marc Andreessen (Netscape) — didn’t have to do anything so common as asking for money.

Google kick–started the project, so to speak, with an initial investment of $3.9 million and soon other vulture capitalists jumped on the bandwagon. The company, 23andMe, made its debut among the one percent at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, rubbing elbows with the likes of Bill Gates, Bill Clinton and other political or economic plutocrats.

Alexandra Wolfe writes in The Wall Street Journal, that as guests left the annual Google blowout, they were asked by “spit coaches” for a sample of their saliva. (This is one of the major differences between a redneck party and a one–percent party. At the redneck bash no permission is necessary. You just attempt to match the various pools of vomit with the contributors.)

In return for spitting in a cup the guest would receive a free DNA analysis and report. (Yet another aside: No wonder tech companies have zero concept of customer privacy, if management gives a DNA sample to a complete stranger, it’s not surprising they expect to be able to snoop freely in our secrets.)

Whereas in the past captains of industry might have indulged the little woman in a dress boutique or tea shoppe, Internet titans and their wives think bigger. Wojcicki and partners want to “drive this revolution where an individual had more of a say in health care.” Mainly by giving them a complete DNA report and analysis of individual genetic tendencies toward disease.

I don’t have a problem with any of this. It’s Google’s money and I’m not a stockholder. If the board doesn’t see a conflict of interest is funding wifey’s company, who am I to complain? Wojcicki also travels in different circles than I do and networking at the top only makes sense.

My problem is what she’s done after the product went public.

The Sultan of Spit recently made a charm offensive trip to DC and received lavish coverage in the WaPost. Wojcicki explained, “23andMe’s customers mail a test tube containing their saliva to the company, which analyzes their DNA. And for $99 they get back a report detailing any risk for more than 240 health conditions.” Time magazine was so impressed that the product was named invention of the year for 2008.

The Post writes that “celebrities gleefully tweeted their results” letting fans know if celebrity genes made it more likely for them to die of a heroin overdose in a squalid shooting gallery, suddenly change their image from that of clean teen to sex–act–simulating slut or be prone to shouting homophobic insults when surprised by a photographer.

By June of this year Wojcicki was negotiating to sell the results from an amazing 700,000 DNA samples to Edward Snowden because information wants to be free.

And then the FDA struck.

She received a “scathing letter” ordering her to cease all sales of the DNA analysis kit because it had not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. In the letter the FDA threatened “seizure, injunction and civil money penalties.”

Why were the bureaucrats at the FDA so exercised? The Journal summary said, “The FDA contended that genetic results aren’t always accurate and can mislead consumers. Officials feared that, without the supervision of a physician, users of the service might have unnecessary elective surgery based on inconclusive genetic information.”

And even if they did, what hospital would let a walk–in start ordering medical procedures?

Alberto Gutierrez, head of the FDA’s Office of In Vitro Diagnostics, was quoted by the WaPost, as claiming “Results from questionable tests can be unnecessarily alarming, adding that some women have undergone surgery, for example, based on tests that purport to gauge the risk for ovarian cancer.”

And right here we discover why HealthCare.dud didn’t work. Federal bureaucrats are delusional. The reasoning behind the stop–and–desist order is surreal. I don’t take my car into the shop without talking to the service consultant first. Does the FDA really think there’s a danger of someone getting a DNA analysis and calling the hospital to schedule a mastectomy?

And the worry about unnecessary surgery is politically selective. If a deeply disturbed patient decides he wants a surgeon to vandalize his private parts to turn him into a woman — the definition of unnecessary, dangerous and permanently damaging surgery — the FDA, American Medical Association and American Psychiatric Association all have no problemo with that monumentally flawed decision.

I’m wondering when the FDA is going to get around to regulating newspaper horoscopes and palm readers. Gullible consumers make all sorts of life–altering decisions based on these pseudo–sciences, to say nothing of the devastation wreaked in many families by teenage nutritionists deciding to “go vegan.”

DNA results in the mail pale in comparison.

So far I’m in Wojcicki’s corner. She wants to give consumers access to more medical information so they can make their own, informed decisions. As Wojcicki told the Journal, “For example, patients often don’t know how much a procedure at a doctor’s office costs ahead of time. “That’s why I felt we had to drive this revolution where an individual had more of a say in health care.”

Her research has shown that in India hospitals post prices lists for procedures so that patients can see what their cost options are. Rumor has it that in China organ harvesters will even price their products on a sliding scale according to the age of the replacement part.

She’s on a mission and then turf–conscious, unresponsive federal bureaucrats issue an arbitrary decision that eviscerates her business. She’s faced with months of tedious hearings, requests for documents and bureaucrat butt–kissing. And all the while she can’t sell her product. It’s all outgo and no income until the problem is solved.

Prospects for reversing the FDA edict through channels aren’t promising. The Obama administration has issued over 1,800 rules and regulations in less than three years and the WaPost reports that every single one of them are illegal since the rules violate the 1966 Congressional Review Act. Yet none of the rules have been rescinded.

This leaves Wojcicki with three options:

  1. She can file a lawsuit. This is not my favorite because it puts your fate in the hands of lawyers and judges and only serves to increase their baleful impact on modern life. I’ve never had much affection for a process that lets everyone make money from my misfortune, except me.
  2. She can try to put political and media pressure on the bureaucracy and force them to reverse the decision. If you think cockroaches scuttle for the shadows when you lift a rock and expose them to the sun, you should see a bureaucrat in the glare of publicity. For a brief time it looked like this was her intent. The WaPost coverage of her “charm offensive” and her testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee looked to be the beginning, but it seemed to peter out quickly.
  3. She can surrender and hope FDA bureaucrats, once they get around to finalizing their decision, leave her a business to operate.

But what Wojcicki choose to do appears to be the worst of all possible worlds. Five days after returning to California from the DC trip, she hosts a $32,400–a–person fund–raiser for the architect of her business problems: Barack Obama!

DC bureaucrats pull the plug on her business and she responds by raising money for the man and the party that support even more crippling regulation and expanding government intrusion. Why not just sign a quit–claim on your investment and give it to the Democrat National Committee?

Evidently being part of the leftist insider tech crowd is more important to Wojcicki than saving her business and striking a blow for the free market. If 23andMe goes out of business it will be bad news for employees and the other investors, but Wojcicki will be fine. Her money comes from a company that started too small for busybody federal bureaucrats to notice and by the time they did, it was too big to stifle.

That company is Google and it can afford to indulge the lifestyle leftism of its founders and support Obama and Democrats like the rest of the cool kids.

« Older Entries