|
|
|
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs |
|
|
Hillary is in an enviable position. She holds a commanding lead heading into the Democratic nomination process -- which makes her a natural target of her seven rivals. Yet, she and her supporters hold a get-out-of-jail card.
“John Edwards, specifically, as well as the press, would never attack Barack Obama for two hours the way they attacked her,” claimed Geraldine A. Ferraro. “It’s O.K. in this country to be sexist, It’s certainly not O.K. to be racist."
The idea that Obama wouldn't be 'piled on' by the other candidates because of his partial african ancestry was clear. And, that Hillary, a member of the fairer sex, should also be exempt from such attacks from rivals was equally clear.
While each of the opposing camps will deny that sexism was their motive, it comes down to a case of 'he said, she said'.
Since there is no defense against a claim of sexism in such a case -- other than to lamely protest -- expect to see Hillary's opponents spreading their attacks around, weakening each other instead of Ms. Clinton.
It would appear that Hillary's campaign has found a way to attack all seven of her main rivals with a single attack, effectively nullifying their 7:1 advantage in piling on.
Welcome to the new Rules of the Game.
Advantage: Hillary
| | |
| |
|
| | mail this link | permanent link | -Ray, November 9, 2007 |
|
Kucinich concerned for Bush sanity |
|
|
Declaring the President to be in need of care, Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed concern for the health of Mr. Bush -- and, by extension, the nation -- by questioning his mental health.
We look forward to Mr. Kucinich sponsoring legislation to require the executive to submit to regular mental health examinations. After all, who could object to that?
Further, we at The Null Post would also like to see a quick drug test requirement added to the bill as well. If it's important enough for football players and Tour de France cyclists, it's surely justified for the President of the United States.
In other news, Congressman Kucinich affirmed that he did, indeed, personally see a silently hovering triangular UFO.
Rival Barack Obama slyly side-stepped the issue claiming that he 'didn't know' whether there is life on other planets.
While only a neanderthal would claim, in this sophisticated age, that intelligent alien life doesn't exist, it's still refreshing to hear a man of Kucinich's stature personally attest to their existence.
Some cynical Democrats have already dismissed the UFO sighting claim as a transparent grab for the votes of the forty million-odd Americans who also claim to have seen UFO's. Others suggest that the claim was made in a desperate attempt to make his voice heard over the so-called 'top tier' candidates.
As for this reporter, I find it a bit disturbing that they would try to reduce this simple revelation to mere political positioning. |
|
| | mail this link | permanent link | -Ray, November 9, 2007 |
|
Hillary takes positions on Illegal alien license issue |
|
|
Outflanking her opponents -- and leaving questioner Tim Russert with no recourse but to lamely repeat himself -- Hillary Rodham Clinton came down firmly in favor of the New York governor's plan to issue NY drivers licenses to undocumented workers.
Then, showing her quick thinking, she immediately denied it. Senator Dodd, whose response prompted the denial, was left to ponder his dead-end argument while Hillary cruised on toward a near-certain nomination as the Democratic Party's pick for the next president of the United States of America.
Concerns of 'waffling' were dismissed on the theory that left-leaning media outlets will not dwell on such seeming contradictions.
While right-wing radio talk show hosts and websites will surely saturate their space with this story, the easily influenced undecided swing voters get their news from the afore-mentioned left-leaning 'mainstream' media.
Advantage: Hillary |
|
| | mail this link | permanent link | -Ray, November 9, 2007 |
|
The Endless Copyright Monopoly |
|
|
Ariticle 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provides for the creation of a temporary monopoly for authors and inventors on their written works and inventions.To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; These words assign to the U.S. Congress the authority and responsibility to write law implementing what we call copyrights and patents.
These laws establish a two-way deal between the public and copyright holders. The citizens of the United States are obligated to pay for the defense of authors' exclusive rights. In exchange for this monopoly enforcement, the rights to those works must automatically transfer to the public domain after 'limited Times'.
The practical ownership of ideas and particular word arrangements doesn't occur naturally among humans. Such ownership is created for the authors by these laws alone -- and was never intended to be free (as in beer).
Unfortunately, Congress has caused the duration of copyrights to extend far past the lifetimes of the 'Authors' mentioned in the Constitution.
Copyrights now expire 70 years after the death of the author, or in the case of copyrights held by corporations, 95 years after the author's death. The legal distinction that provides an extra 25 years of protection for corporations may offer a hint about the motivation behind the continued extension of copyright duration.
While one might argue that a lifetime plus 95 years is indeed a 'limited Time', it still falls outside the bounds of the Constitution wording. The actual clause gives the rights to the Authors and Inventors for a limited time. Of course, a limited time monopoly to an author wouldn't necessarily extend to their death. And since one cannot continue to control their property from the grave, it could never extend beyond the author's life.
Further, with roughly a century of protection for any given work, the citizens who actually pay for the enforcement of the monopoly will not live to personally benefit from the public release of the work. Essentially, this means that extremely long copyrights are no longer a two-way bargain but rather a simple transfer of wealth from the taxpayers and to the authors', heirs, and corporations.
Or, to put it another way, modern copyright law is a way for citizens to pay for lawsuits against themselves for no return benefit whatsoever. Is it possible that this was the intent of the constitutional clause?
The copyright laws, as written, are inconsistent with the clear intent of the plain language of the Constitution. A permanent monopoly by an author is obviously not intended by the term limited Times. Extending the author's lifetime monopoly by almost a century and passing the free protection to a corporate heir isn't even hinted at by the authorizing text. |
|
| | mail this link | permanent link | -Ray, April 23, 2007 |
© 2008 Ray Yeargin
r00t [at] [thisdomain]
| |
