Friday, February 7, 2014

Star Trek Replicators - Fiction Becoming Fact

Food and materials replicators in our lifetime? If the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) has its way, and it is looking more and more like its space programs will, those replicators from the USS Enterprise on Star Trek will soon become a reality of everyday life for astronauts living on the International Space Station and future long distance travelers in space.

With the advent of 3D-printing new technologies are now being created that will allow those printers to take the next step in processing and actually produce food products in a matter of minutes. As the science further develops those minutes will be replaced by seconds.

The process comes from Systems & Materials Research Consultancy (SMRC), a company located in Austin, Texas and founded by wiz-kid mechanical engineer Anjan Contractor.

NASA sees Contractor’s replicating device as a means to feed future space travelers and planetary colonists.

Just as the microwave oven has become a fixture in every home the SMRC Replicator may become just as commonplace within our lifetime.

Replicated pizza anyone? Or perhaps “Earl Grey — hot.”

Tyranny Song Remains the Same - Only the Singers Differ

It has become obvious that ObamaCare (The Affordable Care Act) was never intended to work. First it wasn't needed in it's current form. To ensure the smaller percentage of those in need of healthcare in The United States only required a lesser expensive and more responsible law that would cover those individuals not require the entire populace to get onboard, especially those who were already covered with policies they could afford and had the kind of coverage they liked or needed via self pay or employer benefit.

Secondly, if President Obama and his cronies wanted a single payer platform, which was their original expressed desire, then that is what they should have brought forward to the Congress for an up or down vote instead of this current debacle that was literally pushed through without so much as a read through when the Democrat-led Congress under then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose infamous quote "First we need to pass it to find out what's in it" will go down in history as the first most obvious sign post of the death of constitutional liberty. It's not like they were inventing the wheel all over again. Plenty of other countries have national health insurance plans that seem to work for their nations to varying degrees of success.

Why introduce a law that doesn't work, apparently was never designed to work, and has only brought more confusion and division into an already very divided nation? -- unless the goal all along was to do what other successful would-be autocrats have done for centuries -- provide enough chaos and dissension into the system from within that very system which would make the irrational, dumbed-down and uninformed public begin to wonder if the old established ways of government were no longer working in their era and get THEM to begin demanding CHANGE. This is known as "reverse revolution" - people blindly being led like sheep to the slaughter by the sinister tactics of morally deficient and power-mongering leaders into believing they want a change in their lives, government and leadership that, in the end, brings them into the very corrupt slavery they thought they were being led out of. This is how every tyrannical regime has used non-violent means to takeover from within (resorting to physical violence only when deemed necessary) and we are witnessing it happening in our lifetime in our beloved America.

Political Rookie Clay Aiken Shows Up Seasoned Politicians

Say what you will about North Carolina singer-turned-congressional candidate Clay Aiken but seasoned politicians could learn a thing or two about how to put together a campaign ad from this rookie.

Democrat, Libertarian, Independent and Republican take notice -- this is how it should be done.

Thursday, February 6, 2014

What? Me Worry?

On Super Bowl Sunday Fox News journalist Bill O'Reilly was granted a 9 minute and 56 second interview with the most powerful person on the planet and recognized leader of the free world...President Barack Obama. The conversation was viewed by multi-millions, perhaps billions worldwide. Mr.O'Reilly had that short amount of time to try and touch on as many topics that still fester on the minds of Americans over the last six years of this President's administrative reign of executive power. The questions O'Reilly asked were the same ones a lot of voters in America are asking themselves, discussing around the water cooler at work and over the dinner table each night. The President may not like this fact, but it is still the facts and Mr.O'Reilly was trying to get some answers from the man who should have had them for those American voters and taxpayers.

How did the President respond to several of those questions? The image attached to this article about sums up exactly how President Obama chose to deal with these troubling events that have occurred during his tenure in the White House. He implies nothing is wrong, nothing untoward has happened and the real heart of these matters is Fox News' insistence on their continuing effort to uncover a conspiracy where none exists. The President implies by his brush-off to O'Reilly and Fox News, and thereby, all those watching - that, like a magician - there is nothing up his sleeve and nothing to see here.

After the interview the internet blogs, left-leaning talk shows and certain overt Obama supporting news agencies were quick to pick up on the President's slight at Fox News and asked the question - Yes, why is Fox still talking about all these things that the President says are nothing to be concerned about? I would remind those asking this question that if an Edward R. Murrow, a Walter Cronkite, a Chet Huntley or David Brinkley were still alive today would they have stopped their news investigative reporting on any of the supposed scandals of this presidency just because the Commander and Chief said there is nothing to see here? Of course not because they were journalists in the truest sense of the word, not just talking heads for whatever administration was occupying the center seat of power.

The President told O'Reilly that as far as the IRS targeting certain conservative groups not supportive of his policies there was not a "smidgen" of unlawfulness, impropriety, or foul intent on the part of anyone in that agency but this and other problems that have occurred in his administration were the result of some "bone-head decisions" made on the part of some of his underlyings. How could he say that and why haven't the other news agencies jumped on that preposterous statement? How can the President make such a sweeping judgment about subjects that are either still under investigation by legal government appointed bodies or have been reported on in released statements that show definite and serious missteps from this administration?

For example: The IRS' involvement in targeting certain conservative (and even some liberal) organizations not supporting him or his policies. For the President to make a statement that there was not a smidge of wrongdoing on the part of anyone in this agency is ludicrous at best and outright lying at worse. First, the House investigation into the IRS activity is still on going, still have forty-one witness to the scandal to question, and as a result of their bipartisan investigation a series of emails between the White House and the IRS have confirmed the suspicion by many that there was a coordinated effort between members of the Obama Administration and certain parties in the IRS to go after said organizations that were applying for their 501(C) status under the tax code. Secondly, the fact that Lois Lerner, former Director of the IRS Exempt Organizations division pleaded the 5th Amendment when questioned by members of Congress over her part in the Obama/IRS plan to treat these organizations differently from those that support the President and his policies. She has since resigned her post but during her tenure emails between her and members of the Obama Administration were uncovered which revealed a concerted and coordinated effort on the part of all involved to devise and implement new IRS rules for these particular organizations, but they did so "off plan" which meant those plans would never be part of the publicly disclosed 2012 schedule. These "new IRS rules" would only affect the targeted groups and not those such as Organizing for America and other groups strongly supportive of the Obama progressive agenda.

So, while some are asking "Why is Fox News continuing to go after these scandals?" The bigger question is - Why aren't the other so-called "news agencies" still working on these? Not - Why is Fox still harping on all the still unanswered questions about Benghazi, IRS, NSA, Fast and Furious, Obamacare, etc." That's the real question here.

In this interview with Bill O'Reilly President Obama simply did what he has always done when interviewed by someone with real hard hitting questions (which tends to only happen on Fox News) - deflect, change focus and blame anyone but himself or his administration. In this case his blame escapes George W. Bush and he places it into the lap of Fox News. It has worked for 6 years -- why stop now?

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Snyder Continues To Enrage Superman/Batman Fans

If you think critics and comic fans had a field day when it was announced that Ben Affleck would be director Zack Snyder’s actor of choice to don the Bat Suit for the next Batman/Superman collaboration movie then wait until you read this bit of news.

Word out of Hollywood is Snyder has made another bold (or silly) acting choice for the part of the nefarious and quirky Lex Luthor in the upcoming superhero flick. His pick is said to be The Social Network star Jesse Eisenberg.

Other interesting casting news is a report that Oscar winner Jeremy Irons (The Borgias) has signed a deal with DC Pictures to play Bruce Wayne’s loyal butler Alfred, a role made totally believable again by Sir Michael Caine in the Christopher Nolan Batman films. This casting of Irons is a welcome sigh of relieve for fans of the franchise. Nolan raised the bar with his films and Jeremy Irons as Alfred at least continues that effort.

Casting rumors continue to abound for the Superman vs. Batman movie. One such round of gossip is Joaquin Phoenix will appear in either a cameo or in a more substantial role but this cannot be confirmed at this time.

Needless to say Superman and Batman fans are livid about the Eisenberg news and the film still has two years until its expected release date of May 2016. Question is – What more crazy unexpected casting ideas does Zack have saved up for us all. And, will he end up being seen as a Svengali-like genius in the end?

Monday, February 3, 2014

Prime Minister Netanyahu Comments On Current Treaty Trend

The Prime Minister of Israel spoke briefly today about the current peace treaty negotiations being carried on between The State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority. His short statement makes the case for logical thinking in regard to both sides' acceptance of one another as nation-States, a rationale that we can only hope PA Chairman Abbas and his cabinet follows as well without adding further roadblocks to the peace process.

Here are Netanyahu's comments:

יושב ראש הרשות הפלסטינית צוטט היום כמי שאומר שהוא לא יהיה מוכן להכיר במדינה יהודית, וזה בזמן שהוא יודע שלא יהיה הסכם בלי הכרה במדינת הלאום של העם היהודי

זה אבסורד לחשוב שמצפים שיהיה הסכם שבו אנחנו נכיר במדינת הלאום של העם הפלסטיני, והם לא יכירו במדינת הלאום של העם היהודי

עכשיו נראה אם אותם גורמים בקהילה הבינלאומית, שעד עכשיו הפעילו לחץ רק על ישראל, יבהירו לרשות הפלסטינית מה בדיוק תהיה המשמעות עבור הפלסטינים אם לא יהיה הסכם. בלי שהפלסטינים יבינו שהם ישלמו מחיר על אי המשך השיחות, הם יעדיפו לא להמשיך את השיחות

בכל מקרה אני מבקש שוב להבהיר - שום לחץ לא יגרום לי לוותר על האינטרסים החיוניים של מדינת ישראל ובראשם ביטחונם של אזרחי מדינת ישראל

"[The] Chairman of the Palestinian Authority was quoted today as saying that he is willing to recognize the Jewish State, and while he knows that without the agreement [with] the nation-State of the Jewish people it is absurd to think that expecting a treaty [in] which we recognize the nation-State of the Palestinian people, and they don't recognize the nation-State of the Jewish [people]."

"Now we will see if the same factors in the international community [apply]. Until now the only pressure [has been] on Israel, [however] the Palestinian Authority will know exactly what that would mean for the Palestinians unless an agreement [is reached]. Without the Palestinians' understand[ing] they will pay a price for failing to continue the talks, [if] they [decided they] would rather not make the calls."

"Anyway, I would like to clarify again - [that] no [amount of] pressure will cause me to lose [sight of] the vital interests of the State of Israel and the safety of citizens of the State of Israel."

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Bill O'Reilly Gets Tough But Fair With President Obama 2014 Interview

Television journalist sits down with President Obama for the 2014 Super Bowl interview:

they talk about the failed online launch of the Affordable Care Act. The President's unkept promise to allow American's to keep their health insurance if they like it. Benghazi and what the President knew about it. Why the IRS director met with the President over 150 times right before the IRS abuses against certain conservative organizations, and more.

Minimum Wage - Don't Do Simon Says

Television writer and creator David Simon gave an interview with journalist Bill Moyers in which he stated his support for President Obama's desire to increase the minimum wage from its current level to a little over $10.00 (USD) per hour. If Simon would have ended his comments with his support then I wouldn't be posting this article. However, like most progressive liberals from Hollywood he simply couldn't let it end with that but found it necessary to lay at the feet of Republicans and past Republican Presidents and administrations all the current economic woes this nation is currently facing even going as far as stating that, “We are Reagan’s children, we are Thatcher’s children, we bought this stuff hook, line, and sinker. We're getting the America we paid for!” I'm not sure how America's woes get laid at the feet of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, but I suppose like many liberals Simon finds it difficult not to lump all conservatives into the same sack.

Okay Mr. Simon if you are correct in your assessment that we are the children of Ronald Reagan's economic policies, then we are also Franklin Roosevelt's children and Lyndon B. Johnson's children when it comes to draining this nation's economy dry to the bone funding so many government sponsored (which equates to taxpayer funded) social welfare programs that have tragically failed the American people over the last eight decades, and yet, you progressives insist the middle class taxpayer must continue shouldering the overall burden for them.

Wake up liberals! - there is no such thing as a level playing field - never has been, and until we achieve Gene Roddenberry's vision (and even he admitted it took the aftermath of WWIII to get that) - there will never be. This nation still pronounces itself to be Christian-based and yet even Christianity's most central character stated - "the poor will always be among you" when Judas confronted his teacher to sell the expensive oil being used to anoint Jesus' feet and instead sell it and use the gains to help the less fortunate among them. That is not a justification for not helping the poor but it certainly brings home the realization that the kumbaya-utopian society envisioned by progressive liberals in which all share equally among society is purely a socialistic pipe dream that those working hard everyday in the middle of that society always ends up footing the bill for and never seeing a positive achievable endgame or lasting outcome.

Getting back on topic, which is the minimum wage, that whole idea is pretty much a political ploy to allow large corporations and governments working together to continue controlling the lives of working individuals by making them think they are actually increasing their personal worth within the workplace by making a certain 'expected standard of living.' It doesn't matter what the 'minimum wage' is because whether it's $7.00 per hour or $15.00 per hour it is still MINIMUM WAGE. The buying power of the worker receiving whatever amount it ends up being will not increase as a result and may very well likely decrease in actual worth. Over time businesses will adjust their prices to reflect the increase in wages the new minimum wage will exact on their bottom line and that will, in just a matter of time, level out or even decrease the overall gains those who earn thought they had acquired by getting a numerical increase in their hourly rate. Nothing will get in the way of a corporation or business' bottom line. If it does profits are lost, stockholders pull out, companies go out of business or move to more profit-oriented countries to manufacture their goods and American jobs are lost thereby increasing the need for more failed social welfare bailout programs such as food stamps, unemployment compensation and welfare checks. I call these failed social programs because after nearly eighty years of operation had most of them been successful then we should have seen a decrease over time of their functionality and need instead of the overwhelming percentage jumps we have witnessed, especially within the last fourteen years.

If the majority wish to vote or let their representatives know that they want to see an increase in the minimum wage then by all means increase it. Hell, increase it to $100, $200, $300 (USD) per hour for all the real difference it will make. Increasing the minimum wage has always kept the poor poor, the middle footing the bill, and the ultra-rich unaffected. Why? Because whatever the minimum wage is becomes the new low bar standard by which all other financial classes in society are measured therefore making no real change at all in the real economic problems facing this nation and its people which is this government's insatiable, uncontrollable appetite for printing and spending money it doesn't have - not how much each worker earns per hour.