ترول ایرانی

گالری عکس

Archive for October, 2012

Let’s Check in on those 2008 Obama Celebrity Pledges, Shall We?

Well done Nick.  Well done.

(And like Gillespie, I ain’t going anywhere near Arrested Development star Jason Bateman’s.)

Leave a Comment

Cartoon of the Day

Leave a Comment

Bonus Cartoon of the Day

Suck it Vi-Queen fans!

Spotted and stolen from a friend on Facebook.

Leave a Comment

Something Tells Me Wisconsin’s in Play

Well, we’re gonna be busy next week.  All four members of both tickets will be in the state over the next 5 days.

Mitt Romney will be back in Wisconsin on Monday for the first time since August, right after Paul Ryan was picked as his vice presidential nominee.

Then there’s this, Romney’s gonna open up TV advertising in Minnesota — not to target to Minnesota, that’s probably safe in the Obama column — but to target western Wisconsin counties.

Republican Mitt Romney is placing television ads in Minnesota, a move that pushes his presidential campaign into a state Democrats have held for more than three decades.

Republicans and Democrats who track campaign spending confirmed late Thursday that Romney will begin running ads in Minnesota over the weekend. The investment is described as a small buy that Democrats suggest is simply intended to generate media coverage and force President Barack Obama’s campaign to invest there as well.

Romney’s campaign would not comment on its advertising strategy.

The move comes as the Republican’s campaign works to expand its path to the 270 electoral votes required to win the presidency.

Richard Nixon in 1972 was the last Republican to carry Minnesota.

Nixon will still be the last Republican to carry Minnesota after November 6th, just saying.

Ads in Minnesota are about winning Wisconsin, bank on it.

Leave a Comment

Cartoon of the Day

Leave a Comment

The Circle is Now Complete

Apple now owns the logo for Apple.

(Okay, let me explain.)

People who know the history of Apple Computers know that the company is named after Apple Records, the recording label the Beatles used.  This was because Steve Jobs was a huge Beatles fans and wanted to show his love the for band in his work.

Fast forward to today and you find that Apple Computer now owns the very iconic “Granny Smith Apple logo” which appeared on millions of Beatles records around the world.

Since then, the two companies have been waring over the name “Apple” for years.  Apple Computers has officially won.

Besides Apple the tech company, there’s another famous company with an apple-shaped logo: Apple Corps, a UK-based multimedia corporation founded by members of the Beatles. Now, the Canadian IP Office has disclosed that company’s logo has become a registered trademark of Apple Inc.

The two companies engaged in several trademark-related disputes, finally settling their qualms in February 2007. Under the terms of the agreement, Apple Inc. owns all the trademarks related to “Apple,” licensing them back to Apple Corps for continued use.

Apple is currently suing a Polish online grocery store over the Apple name as well.

Leave a Comment

Guess Oshkosh Corp. Ignored the Memo

Late September…

The Obama administration has doubled down on its plea to defense contractors not to warn employees about possible layoffs due to looming budget cuts —  going so far as to offer to cover legal fees in compensation challenges.

The move drew a stern rebuke Friday from South Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune, since federal law requires employers to give notice if mass layoffs are likely.

“For the second time, the Obama administration has now encouraged government contractors to ignore the WARN Act and hold off on warning employees about possible layoffs due to the looming sequestration cuts,” Thune, lead author of the Sequestration Transparency Act, said Friday.

The offer to pay the legal fees was included in a memorandum issued by the administration Friday that also restated the Labor Department’s position from July that contractors should not issue written notices to employees because of the “uncertainty” over the across-the-board cuts to the defense budget and other federal spending that will occur Jan. 2 unless Congress reaches a new deal.

The notices are required under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act and generally require employers with more than 100 employees to provide 60-day notices of “mass layoffs if they are reasonably foreseeable.”

The projected $500 billion in Pentagon cuts under the so-called sequestration will occur because Congress failed to agree on a deficit-reduction plan this summer.


The end of some hefty government contracts will mean 450 production job cuts at Oshkosh Corp. in January.

The company said in a statement released Thursday that the layoffs will happen at its defense division in Oshkosh. The maker of military vehicles and heavy equipment said it still will employ 3,500 people in Oshkosh following the layoffs, which will begin Jan. 11 and take place over a three-week period.

John Daggett, a spokesman for the company, said Oshkosh Corp. had been discussing potential production reductions for several months in anticipation of defense spending cuts heading into 2013.

“This is something we’ve been talking about for months,” he said. “For the past year, we knew that the military requirements for tactical vehicles would be down and (defense) spending would be going down and some contracts are getting near their end.

Biden is to be in Oshkosh tomorrow at UW-Oshkosh.  Wonder if he gets asked about this?

Admittedly, I don’t doubt that some of Oshkosh’s defense contracts are up, but as the AP-C clearly reports, this is all about the defense sequester.

Leave a Comment

Scottish Independence Could Leave Britain With Nukes

This might not happen at all — the vote isn’t until 2014 and if it is successful, the official “break-up” doesn’t occur until 2017 — but you kinda have to wonder what the Brits were thinking putting all their nuclear warheads and nuclear submarines in Scotland in the first place?

Scottish independence will force the remainder of the UK to abandon nuclear weapons for at least two decades, according to report by MPs published today.

The Commons Scottish Affairs select committee said it would be possible to move Trident submarines and their missiles from their base on the Clyde within two weeks of separation.

However, the construction of replacement facilities south of the Border could take up to 20 years, they said, effectively forcing the UK Government into “unilateral nuclear disarmament”.

The Continuous At Sea Deterrent, whereby at least one of the submarines is patrolling the UK’s shores around the clock, would stop as a result.

The MPs said it was extremely unlikely a separate Scotland would allow Trident to remain permanently, while basing the submarines abroad would be politically fraught.

A possible solution would be a gentleman’s agreement that would allow the UK to continue basing the submarines inScotland while they found a suitable alternative elsewhere and built the necessary facilities.

True story, after the Soviet Union broke up, they practically went to being a nation without a navy overnight.  The Ukraine, and its location on the Black Sea (and thus access to the Mediterranean through Crimea) pretty much made the Black Sea Fleet under Ukrainian control until an agreement was worked out.

Currently, depending on how pro or anti-Moscow the Ukrainian government is, the lease expires in five years or 30 years.

Expect to see something like that worked out between London and any type of “Free Scots” government if one becomes a reality in two years.

After all, we’re living out a lease on Cuba at Guantanamo Bay, aren’t we?

Leave a Comment

Cartoon of the Day

Leave a Comment

White House Knew of Nature of Benghazi Attack in Hours Via Email

This is just brutal for the White House. 

This is embarrassing for the State Department.  And frankly, it may well be time for an independent prosecutor since I don’t think anyone in the Justice Department is going to have the stones to ask around if the White House was stonewalling, or outright lying and concocting a story.

Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

Real question is does the media jump on this.  We’re 13 days until Election Day and it is being obviously clear that no one in the MSM wants to go back to talking about the attacks in Libya because it will make the President look bad.  And a President that looks bad — especially a Democratic one the media has invested in heavily on — doesn’t often get re-elected.

Leave a Comment