• Obama effectively backing fracking after killing Keystone oil pipeline. He does know fracking is one of the most damaging to the environment, right? So if he backs fracking then why kill the Keystone pipeline. A bit hypocritical for one espousing green jobs.
• The expected “fairness” issue, which is misleading and downright false, being used to push class warfare once more.
• No real mention of the President’s failure to repair the economy, nor taking responsibility for his failed economic policies.
• Another attempt at getting the DREAM Act put into place, forgetting somehow that he couldn’t even garner Democrat support for a bill rewarding illegal aliens while ignoring the needs of its citizens.
• The lie that ObamaCare relies on a reformed private market, not a government program. ObamaCare clearly creates a government program for those who’ve bothered to read it, such as myself. (That puts me way ahead of the politicians who voted for it without reading it.)
• The bailout of the auto industry is thanks to Bush, not Obama. It should have never happened. Failing companies should be allowed to fail, so new ones can come in and take their place. By supporting these companies they’ve actually hindered smaller companies (i.e. Arcimoto, Tesla, et. al.) from being able to enter the market without interference from the Big 3.

1. Fairness. Or Obama’s version of fairness, which based on his record means what he thinks is fair, not necessarily what is actually fair. Another reference often used to refer to redistribution of wealth and raising taxes.
2. Bolster economy and jobs growth by pushing for green jobs. This was tried and already failed. Solyndra anyone? How about the Fisker debacle? Better still, why kill the Keystone oil pipeline deal that would create jobs, especially given the presence of one pipeline already in operation? Anyone with half a brain knows we need to utilize all energy resources in this country.
3. End income disparity. In other words, class warfare and demonizing successful Americans.
4. Corporations are evil. Even as the President takes money from companies like GE that made record profits but paid nothing over the past few years.
5. The Rich are evil and should pay their fair share. Which they actually do comparatively speaking when you look objectively at the amount of revenue they generate for the government.
6. America’s policy failures are Congress’ fault. Ignoring of course complete Democrat control of the Congress for his first two years and his own lack of leadership skills.
7. Tax reform. But is it really tax reform or just another stab at redistribution of wealth? How about a plan in which all Americans pay taxes, especially the 40% or so who currently pay nothing.
8. The GOP is evil for not working with him. Of course, he’ll ignore the rage over his party abusing their control over the Congress to push things people didn’t want like ObamaCare (socialized medicine/individual mandate/new taxes/less care/less choice) and  Stimulus (a payoff to unions and party supporters) without working with the Republicans. He’ll also conveniently forget that the Senate is still in control of his own party.

Obviously, I’m skeptical of the President’s speech. But then I’m skeptical of his entire presidency for good reason. Maybe he’ll surprise me.

Democratic state Rep. Ruben Gallego of Phoenix says the bill would add “long-term unemployment status” to the list of factors that employers are prohibited from considering.

Yesterday I posted about California addressing the discrimination against the unemployed. Today, an Arizona representative in the state house wants to put forth a bill addressing the issue. I think it’s a good idea, but unfortunately the representative putting the bill forward may have killed it due to his efforts to repeal SB1070, efforts that are dead on arrival in the state legislature if legislative leaders are to be believed.

Hopefully, his fellow representatives can look past his anti-SB1070 efforts and work together in crafting an anti-discrimination bill for the unemployed. I say hopefully because rhetoric from the anti-SB1070 crowd has poisoned much political discourse here in Arizona an a variety of issues by those few who’ve tried to turn everything into an issue of race or ethnicity. Most have put in on the back burner until the SCOTUS makes a final determination later this year but there always those who fixate on issues.

Lawmakers Propose Local Fast and Furious Probe

Now state lawmakers are taking the investigation into their own hands. House Speaker Andy Tobin and other Arizona lawmakers are forming a bi-partisan committee to investigate whether Fast and Furious broke any state laws or if any new laws are needed.

I’m not surprised at this since United States AG Holder’s Justice Department refuses to do a proper investigation into the issue and agencies involved. Unfortunately, I also already know what associated federal agencies are going to do: claim immunity under federal law for any potential criminal activity that they participated in. In other words, more corruption from the federal government in it’s failure to protect the American people and uphold the law.

A bill introduced Jan. 5 and sponsored by Democratic Assemblyman Michael Allen wouldn’t allow unemployed job-seekers to sue for discrimination, but companies that violate the law would face investigation and fines of up to $10,000.

“There’s been an increasing utilization of using this as a crude screening process to keep applicants from even being interviewed,” Allen told The Huffington Post. “It’s better to be proactive rather than to let this become a common practice.”

I rarely like government making regulations on business given the plethora of bureaucracy such laws often create, but this is one of those times were such regulations I feel are necessary. I’ve known several people that were denied jobs simply because they were currently unemployed at the time the interviewed. I was once told that I fit all the criteria for a position but that I was not selected to be hired solely on the grounds that I was not “currently employed” while undergoing the hiring process. I discussed the issue with the HR person, who agreed with me that it was silly not to hire a perfectly qualified candidate based on their current unemployment, but ultimately it was the bosses decision to make. While I felt it unfair I moved on as working for such a company, in my opinion, isn’t worth it as such an attitude often reflects a lack of commitment and respect by the employer towards their employees.

Unfortunately, I’ve heard similar stories from assorted friends, family, and associates over the years, particularly when the recession really hit hard between 2008-2010. I’ve even seen posts at job board over the last couple years while I was hunting for contract and freelance work with the ridiculous requirement that one must be employed in order to be hired. In other words, it’s slowly becoming a serious problem and a means used by some unscrupulous employers to justify their personal biases. (I still get amusement over an HR person for a foreign company wanting to hire American engineers and designers insisting I was lying about being a U.S. citizen because I had a “strange accent”. I assume they meant my native Arizonan accent, which is rare and really not that noticeably different.)

Yes, employers want their employees to be up to date on their skills, but an employed person is not necessarily one who has kept current for their field. (I’ve certainly met enough to confirm that over the years.) This desire for skilled labor does not justify discrimination in any form, especially against those who need the work the most: the unemployed.

I guess it’s a good thing I simply don’t get the need of others to discriminate. If someone’s qualified and can do the job, who cares about their appearance, gender, beliefs, or any of the rest. If they can do the job and work with their fellow employees to accomplish tasks, that is what should matter.

In a statement issued by Senator John McCain, he said the move “is a devastating blow to job creation in northern Arizona, particularly in Mojave County.” McCain went on to say that the decision made by the administration was impacted by a campaign that placed the love of the Grand Canyon in direct opposition with a form of mining that occurs several miles from the walls of the Grand Canyon and in no way affects the quality of drinking water.

My only question is this: was the 20 year ban based on genuine environmental concerns or politics? I’m suspicious given the current administrations oft abusive and over reaching claims to authority over the business and people of the United States in recent years including interfering with legitimate business practices (i.e. interfering with Boeing opening a new facility) and private property rights (i.e. EPA threatening owners of property with fines for building homes of their private land).

While I am concerned about preserving Arizona’s natural heritage (far more so than the arrogant and ignorant President and Congress whom regularly try to undermine Arizona and Arizonan’s independent inclinations) I question the ban given the poor economy and the administrations active efforts to drive up the cost of energy in order to push a biased green agenda that is already leading to investigations such as Solyndra. I also have to question that if the uranium mining is as dangerous to the environment as they say, then why not have all the mining shut down? It just smacks of political pandering, especially given the administrations hostility towards certain forms of energy generations such as nuclear power.

As noted in IER’s Tom Pyle issues statement on Arizona mining ban | Institute for Energy Research

“Today’s announcement further compounds a man-made energy crisis that has been planned and executed in Washington D.C. To push back uranium exploration in Arizona until 2032 greatly hinders our ability to meet the challenges of our energy future with clean, safe nuclear technologies. It also appears to fundamentally undercut the administration’s own goal of reducing carbon emissions.

To meet our nation’s need for energy we must employ all sources, including nuclear. This ban appears to be in direct opposition to the administrations claims that it wants to solve America’s energy woes.

For now I’ll try to ignore my inherent distrust of the Obama administration and give them the benefit of the doubt on this issue, but there is no way you can convince me that this was done for anything but political purposes for an election year in which the incumbent President could lose re-election.

Regime Change 2012
Vote All The Bums Out!

While the USDA attempts to assure the public that 2,4-D is safe, scientists have raised serious concerns about the safety of this herbicide, which was used as a key ingredient in “Agent Orange,” used to defoliate forests and croplands in the Vietnam War.

I’m not surprised in the least that Obama has once more sold out the American public to his corporate donors. This time he’s just being thorough by polluting the entire food supply, destroying organic growers and leaving future generations to suffer from cancers and deformations as a result of these dangerous chemicals and frankenfood. Just another reason to make sure Obama is denied a second term as President.

In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions “are now forced to take their children to food banks.” You have to admire the audacity. That’s the kind of damning observation the opposition brings up when you’ve been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection!

Why? Because, you see, he bears no responsibility for the current economic distress. It’s the rich. And, like Horatius at the bridge, Obama stands with the American masses against the soulless plutocrats.

This is populism so crude that it channels not Teddy Roosevelt so much as Hugo Chavez. But with high unemployment, economic stagnation and unprecedented deficits, what else can Obama say?

He can’t run on stewardship. He can’t run on policy. His signature initiatives — the stimulus, Obamacare and the failed cap-and-trade — will go unmentioned in his campaign ads. Indeed, they will be the stuff of Republican ads.

What’s left? Class resentment. Got a better idea?

While I often find myself disagreeing with Mr. Krauthammer’s interpretation of things in this article he is correct in questioning Obama’s ridiculous attempt to stir up class warfare in an attempt to get himself reelected. As noted in the article, Obama himself claimed he should be a one term president if he hadn’t fixed the economy. Of course, in true corrupt Washington elitist fashion, Obama has no intention of not running for a second term. So for the next eleven or so months we get to listen to the old Obama lies and deflections about how he did everything right at it’s everyone else’s fault that things are going wrong.

Sadly I have little hope anything will get better with the corrupt officials in Washington, especially with the passage of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and SOPA.

Most concerning to me are the detainee related provisions in the 2012 NDAA. While the government claims that there should be no concern over violating civil rights, I simply no longer trust the government, especially as corrupt and full of would be dictators as we have right now. All we need do is look to the abuses, failures and corruption running rampant in the DOJ, DHS, ICE, and TSA to see that the government is not trustworthy when it comes to guaranteeing and protecting American civil liberties, civil rights, and justice.

If there’s something the Occupiers and TEA Party should be united on it is opposition to the NDAA (as noted in Wendy Kaminer’s What Occupiers and Tea Partiers Should Fear Most – Wendy Kaminer – National – The Atlantic) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).

At issue with the NDAA is Section 1031 which allows the indefinite detainment of terrorist suspects, including American citizens, without trial. This doesn’t sound bad to most people until you consider the full ramifications that you need only be deemed a suspect to be held, potentially without the ability to confront your accusers. Worse is knowing some wanted indefinite detention to be applied to American citizens and that these same people are still in the House and Senate. It simply saddens me to see the nation I love slipping further into fascism and dictatorship every under the guise of security and protection.

So then we have SOPA, a bill that ostensibly was to protect copyrighted material and such. Unfortunately, in true corrupt fashion, our politicians are using it to cripple the internet in favor of corporate special interests. I’m all for ending piracy and intellectual property theft but the manner in which SOPA goes about addressing the issue could easily lead to censorship, crippling free speech, and crippling business under a flood of lawsuits. SOPA is especially suspect in that it seems to target open source software projects, cripple US based internet companies (such as cloud computing and web hosting). It’s basically a giant mess that seems to be written not with fairness and neutrality in mind, but in ensuring hegemonic corporate control over internet content. Sadly, it will do nothing to stop online piracy. In it’s current state it appears it will only create problems for internet based businesses and websites as the concept of Net Neutrality is gutted for the corporations bottom line.

Regime Change 2012
Throw All The Bums Out!

So my list of acceptable GOP candidates that I’m willing to vote for has been trimmmed to two, in my preferred order:

1. Jon Huntsman
2. Mitt Romney

There is no way in hell I’ll support the rest. If I have to, I’ll vote for a third party candidate than support the right wing craziness of the likes of Bachmann, Perry, Gingrich, et al. I hate the right wing GOPs efforts to impose their sanctimonious religious based dogma as much as the progressives-cum-socialists of the Democrat’s extreme left-wing.

I’m disappointed and saddened at seeing violence erupt in Egypt again such a short time ahead of their elections. My hope is that the current military junta (which has allowed the violence to occur, IMO) will not use this as an excuse to subvert democracy in Egypt out of fear, ignorance, or desire to to hold onto power or play king makers. The military’s reputation has already been damaged in Egypt with recent attacks (both militarily and in the state run media) against Coptic Christians and their Muslim supporters (yes, you read that correctly. Not all Muslims hate Christians.) resulting in their deaths and once more now attacking protesters legitimately frustrated with what is happening in their country.

Hopefully, all of this will work out. We will simply have to wait and see. It is looking dim though with the fresh violence in Tahrir.

The part that really pisses me off is it updated to v4 without my input. Unrequested updates are my number one pet peeve with any product regardless of whether its a small blogging app or a major corporate CAD package, particularly with regards to applications on the internet since it is so easy to have malicious code.

I suspect I’m going to look for a new blogging app just on principle for the unrequested update alone. I don’t condone anyone changing anything on my computer without my knowledge. Makes me understand better why Firefox 8 automatically disables third-party apps until users give the go ahead.  May not stop the unrequested update BS going on but still nice to think at least someone seems to get it. As it is I’m waiting for a bit before going to FF8, just to make sure some of the add ons I prefer have had time to update to the newest release of the browser.

Okay, enough useless ranting.