Online Left

Gingrich Lies....Again

Republican presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich, would have you believe the press lied about his reported criticism of Paul Ryan's attack on Medicare on 'Meet The Press' last Sunday.  In fact, Gingrich's response essentially accused anyone who reported his words verbatim were lying.

MR. GREGORY: What about entitlements? The Medicare trust fund, in stories that have come out over the weekend, is now going to be depleted by 2024, five years earlier than predicted. Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors...

REP. GINGRICH: Right.

MR. GREGORY: ... some premium support and -- so that they can go out and buy private insurance?

REP. GINGRICH: I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don't think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate. I think we need a national conversation to get to a better Medicare system with more choices for seniors. But there are specific things you can do. At the Center for Health Transformation, which I helped found, we published a book called Stop Paying the Crooks. We thought that was a clear enough, simple enough idea, even for Washington. We -- between Medicare and Medicaid, we pay between $70 billion and $120 billion a year to crooks. And IBM has agreed to help solve it, American Express has agreed to help solve it, Visa's agreed to help solve it. You can't get anybody in this town to look at it. That's, that's almost $1 trillion over a decade. So there are things you can do to improve Medicare.

MR. GREGORY: But not what Paul Ryan is suggesting, which is completely changing Medicare.

REP. GINGRICH: I, I think that, I think, I think that that is too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the -- I don't want to -- I'm against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.

Tea Party Nuts for Terrorists

Earlier today, the Tea Party Nation circulated the following message:

An action alert from Tea Party Nation -

A few days ago, Geek.com and others reported that the Federal Government had shut down blog hosting site, Blogetery. The site that hosted Blogetery stated they were contacted by the Federal Law Enforcement and had little choice but to shut the site down immediately.

This action silenced 73,000 blogs.

Until this action occurred, none of us at Tea Party Nation had even heard of this site. We do not know what kind of blogs were hosted on this site, but we suspect they cover the range from personal to political.

This is why the Tea Party Movement needs to be involved immediately.

The Obama regime has taken a very hostile attitude towards our First Amendment rights. Is this a dry run the government is taking to shut down sites that are critical of the regime?

We need to act.

Call your Senators and Congressmen today and demand that the Senate and the House investigate which agency shut this site down and why. Email your friends and ask them to call as well. We need an explanation and we cannot let the regime off on this issue.

Along this line, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan has said she sees nothing wrong with the government suppressing speech the government finds offensive. Given the regime’s attitude to the First Amendment, we must be vigilant.

Remember to keep calling the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee and reminding them to vote "NO!" on the Kagan nomination.

Here are the direct numbers to the Republicans on the committee.

Ominous enough, but is there any truth to it? It took me all of 15 seconds to find the answer posted to PC World. I guess, of course, the Tea Party leaders would argue that PC World is part of the conspiracy, secretly owned and operated by members of the Obama administration, but you and I -- otherwise known as normal people -- know the truth. The Tea Party is a bunch of lying, scum-sucking, knuckle dragging idiots, who bring nothing to the political arena but hate and lies.

Here for anyone who actually sought the truth is a response to the lies circulated by the tin-foil hat crowd.

The blogosphere and online message boards have been buzzing with speculation as to why blogging website Blogetery.com, which claims to have hosted more than 70,000 bloggers, was suddenly shut down last week.

Was the site a haven for terrorists? Packed with how-to advice for bomb builders? Rife with child porn? And did the FBI really order the blogging site's host BurstNET to pull the plug?

BurstNET officials on Monday attempted to set the record straight by issuing the following statement:

"On the evening of July 9, 2010, BurstNET received a notice of a critical nature from law enforcement officials, and was asked to provide information regarding ownership of the server hosting Blogetery.com. It was revealed that a link to terrorist material, including bomb-making instructions and an al-Qaeda 'hit list', had been posted to the site. Upon review, BurstNET determined that the posted material, in addition to potentially inciting dangerous activities, specifically violated the BurstNET Acceptable Use Policy. This policy strictly prohibits the posting of 'terrorist propaganda, racist material, or bomb/weapon instructions'. Due to this violation and the fact that the site had a history of previous abuse, BurstNET elected to immediately disable the system."

So it appears that terrorist activity, including a "hit list," were key factors that led to Blogetry.com's shutdown, as well as the fact that the service had previously violated BurstNET's usage policy.

That explanation probably won't wash with numerous online commentators who've speculated that the Blogetery.com shutdown was part of a government plot to stifle free speech and control the Internet.

Apparently the use of the website for terrorists and racists didn't deter the crazies from coming to their rescue.

Oh, and another thing. The spokesperson doesn't identify the "law enforcement officials" who contacted them. It could have been the FBI, it could have been the state police, or just as likely a member of the local police force, but don't let the truth which you could have discovered in 15 seconds deter you from a good scare tactic.

Assholes!

Kindle 2.0 vs. Sony e-Reader

Unfortunately for my bank account, I'm a confirmed "early-adopter." If it's new and fairly affordable, I want one, and I want it now. The latest device to get my attention is the Amazon Kindle 2.0.

E-Books aren't new to me. I've owned two Sony e-Readers, the PRS-500, and then the PRS-505. I resisted buying the original Kindle even though some of its features I found very impressive. With all the hype about the newest version of the Kindle, version 2.0, I felt I had to at least give it a try. As with so many of my previous purchases, I was comfortable knowing there was always E-Bay. If I don't like it, sell it. So, when the Kindle was announced on February 9, I went to the Amazon website and placed the order.

After a week or so, I thought better of the order and decided to stick with the Sony. Of course, that didn't last long. As I watched the other early-adopters report on their new toys, I again placed an order for the Kindle and the leather cover. Two days later, on Friday February 27, I returned to my office to find the new Kindle and Cole-Haan cover on my desk.

I've been using the Kindle for a little over 24 hours now, and I wanted to share a few of my first impressions. Of course, the killer feature was the first to show its shine. Ordering wirelessly using Sprint's Whispernet is, without a doubt, the feature that sets the Amazon Kindle and the Sony e-Reader apart. I charged the Kindle battery for about 3 hours and once fully charged I started ordering books and newspapers from the online store. All worked exactly as advertised. After the orders were placed and confirmed, the material appeared on the device within one to two minutes. Impressive!

As for fit and finish, the Kindle doesn't come anywhere close to the Sony. Compared to the e-Reader, the Kindle feels like a toy. It is mostly white plastic, except for the metal plate on the back. Everything fits together nicely, and I guess if weight is the primary consideration, lightweight plastic might be the material of choice. But, compared the the sturdy feeling Sony, the Kindle doesn't feel as substantial. And, while much has been made of the new button design on the Amazon entry, I don't care much for them. In fairness, they might be much better than the original. I never owned or used the original version, but compared to the Sony, it's often for me a hit-and-miss proposition when buttons are pushed. While the Kindle buttons appear flat on the surface of the device, it appears you have to put the buttons on the left hand side, rather than in the middle. I'm hopeful it's due to the fact I've only used the device for a short period, or maybe it will be easier to manipulate after it's been "broken in" for awhile.

Based on what I've experienced after only 24 hours, if I had to make a choice, I guess it would have to be the Amazon Kindle 2.0. As I mentioned earlier, the ability to order wirelessly -- no matter where you are -- is the feature I find most useful. For this reason only, the Kindle should win a battle of electronic books. The technology in the two devices is in all other ways, almost identical. I like the way the Sony e-Reader is constructed and is certainly a more sturdy device, but having to connect the device to your computer to transfer purchased books from the Sony Store is a step that makes it inconvenient.

I don't know what Sony is working on, but I would strongly suggest they develop a wireless method of transferring purchases to the e-Reader. If not, I'm guessing they'll have to get out of the electronic book market in the very near future. On the other hand, I find their physical device preferable in every other way.

Oh, and as for the Cole Haan leather case -- do yourself a favor and look for other options. Both the outer leather cover, and the suede-like material on the inside is very nice. My complaint is primarily with the system to attach the cover to the Kindle. For the price of $99, you get a nice leather cover that attaches to the $359 device by four ribbons of elastic! While I've only had it for one day, I already envision the Kindle becoming undone from the elastic and crashing to the floor, destroying my expensive tech toy.

There are certainly better ways to anchor an expensive toy, such as the Kindle, to a leather case better than this. And, based on what I've seen so far, most manufacturers of Kindle covers use the same attachment system. Only the Amazon-branded cover seems to securely hold the Kindle in place, and while it's cover is faux leather, my guess is that it will protect the device to a greater degree than it's $99 counterpart.

And of course, my Dooney and Bourke cover for the Sony e-Reader is nicer than anything I've seen for the Kindle.

Attacks We're Likely to See in 2009

Weather Channel Accused of Pro-Weather Bias

Candidates as Phone Technology

Received today from a friend:

More Faux News and Drudge

On the October 27 edition of Fox News' The Live Desk, co-host Trace Gallagher falsely suggested that in 2001 comments about attempts to pursue "economic justice" through the court system, Sen. Barack Obama had advocated "chang[ing] the mission of the Supreme Court in some facet," a statement with which Fox News Washington deputy managing editor Bill Sammon agreed.

Gallagher's comments echoed a false headline posted by the Drudge Report earlier on October 27: "2001 Obama: Tragedy That 'Redistribution of Wealth' Not Pursued by Supreme Court."

In fact, in the interview to which Gallagher was referring, Obama did not say that the mission of the Supreme Court should be changed. He also did not say, contrary to an assertion by the Drudge Report and by Fox News in on-screen text earlier in the day, documented by Media Matters for America, that it is a "tragedy" that the Supreme Court has not addressed wealth redistribution.

To the contrary, as Media Matters for America noted, Obama said that the "traged[y]" lay in the civil rights movement's overreliance on the courts to bring about political and economic justice, when the judicial system is not the appropriate vehicle to effect broad economic change.