Hoax call put through to British prime minister

No comment
AVB

image

Yahoo News
January 24 2015
Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron in Edinburgh, Scotland, on January 22, 2015A hoax caller pretending to be a spy chief was put through to British Prime Minister David Cameron on Sunday, prompting a review of security procedures, a government spokeswoman said. The caller pretended to be the director of Britain’s electronic spy agency GCHQ Robert Hannigan, and was put through to Cameron on an official mobile phone, the spokeswoman said. “Following two hoax calls to government departments today, a notice has gone out to all departments to be on the alert for such calls,” the spokeswoman said.

Jihadi John is not a terrorist, he is a serial killer

This guy seems to get his jollies from beheading people. To me that’s not a terrorist, that’s a serial killer. He does this without remorse and actually seems to enjoy it. He’s a blotch on his people and religion. So let’s stop calling him a terrorist and call him for what he really is a serial killer.
AVB

image

He will happily start the Apocalypse for you

Željko Ivanek, he’s an actor that seems to be the go to person if you want to start an apocalypse run the post apocalyptic world with an iron fist. I keep seeing him pop up on every show, which kind of tells you the kind of TV
I watch. Just saw him on the new Syfy series 12 Monkeys but also known for his role in Revolution on NBC.
AVB

image

Found this on Entertainment Weekly’s Community Board:
Zeljko Ivanek plays hardheaded White House Chief of Staff Russell Jackson on CBS’s new hit drama Madam Secretary. Russell has an affinity for making things harder for the show’s lead, new Secretary of State Elizabeth “Bess” McCord (Téa Leoni), including an annoying habit of shooting down most of Bess’s bright ideas.

If you’ve watched the show, chances are you’ve said to yourself, “There’s that guy from that other show!” while watching Ivanek. That’s because the veteran character actor has been in countless television programs and movies. Despite not being a household name, his face is definitely a household face, as it has been broadcast into your living room time and time again.

Ivanek has a tendency to be cast as serious, intimidating men of stature, due to his intense, sharp-featured look. He has played heads of government agencies as often as Matthew McConaughey had starred in rom-coms (up until a few years ago). As you can see, Ivanek’s looks don’t change much for the majority of his roles, because an exceptionally interesting and expressive face like his doesn’t need bells and whistles.

Thousands march in Venezuela over economic crisis, shortages

Today Venezuela tomorrow the Russian Federation, countries that rely on one source of income are doomed to failure. They believe that the price of oil would keep going up,  they bet and lost big time.
AVB

image

Yahoo News
January 24 2015
Opponents of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro demonstrate in front of riot police in Caracas on January 24, 2015Demonstrators against Venezuela’s economic crisis — facing sky-high inflation and shortages of food and consumer goods — took to the streets in their thousands Saturday, banging pots and demanding an end to President Nicolas Maduro’s term. With the precipitous drop of oil, Maduro has traveled in recent days to Algeria, China, Iran, Qatar, Russia and Saudi Arabia as he makes an urgent appeal for cash.

Alabama’s same-sex marriage ban ruled unconstitutional

And that makes 37!

image

By Danielle Haynes  Follow @DanielleHaynes1  Contact the Author
Jan. 23, 2015 at 7:50 PM

MOBILE, Ala., Jan. 23 (UPI) — A federal judge on Friday ruled Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Ginny Granade struck down the Alabama Marriage Protection Act and an amendment that put it in the state’s constitution in a lawsuit brought by two women Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand. They sought to have their out-of-state marriage recognized in Alabama so they would both be considered the legal parents of their 8-year-old child.

Searcy and McKeand were married in 2008 in California and have lived in Alabama since 2011.

Granade said the act was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the 14th Amendment.

The ruling makes Alabama the 37th state — including Washington, D.C. — to recognize same-sex marriage.

“We are disappointed and are reviewing the Federal District Court’s decision,” Attorney General spokesman Mike Lewis said via email to AL.com. “We expect to ask for a stay of the court’s judgment pending the outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling which will ultimately decide this case.”

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2015/01/23/Alabamas-same-sex-marriage-ban-ruled-unconstitutional/9171422059044/#ixzz3PhQsP4zW

Divisions Emerge Among House GOP Under Pressure To Govern

The newly elected representatives in the house from the Republican Party have a more pragmatic and maybe even idealistic idea of what their job is. They are saying we want to be reelected in 2016 when there is a greater voter turnout. I think the days of the Republican Party denying climate change or packing things like the XL pipeline, which will do nothing for job making other than the temporary job of building the pipeline, are starting to rebel against these hard line views. It will be interesting to see how they will be molded into shape by the K Street special interest groups and be slapped on the wrist and told to tow the company line. If they get positive feedbacks from constituents even those that are outside of their state will continue to bolster their ability to buck the extreme right wing. This is going to be a tug of war. One of the Democrats should take advantage of when they can.
AVB

image
Congresswoman Renee Ellmers (R-NC-02) , a maverick?

THE HUFFINGTON POST
January 23rd 2015
WASHINGTON (AP) — The most conservative lawmakers in the House Republican majority have gotten their way a lot in recent years. That may be starting to change.

A group of more pragmatic lawmakers defected on an immigration vote last week, and this week forced GOP leaders to water down abortion legislation. With the new, fully Republican-led Congress three weeks old, they are serving notice they will no longer keep quiet as their more ideological colleagues push legislation to the right, demand votes on social issues, or court government shutdowns to try to block President Barack Obama. “There’s a growing sense in the conference that we need to get things done here, not just make political statements,” said Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida, a freshmen lawmaker. “We should be focused on the agenda of the American people and not on taking an infinite amount of symbolic votes that aren’t going to get anything done.”

Most of these lawmakers are self-described conservatives themselves, but with a practical, business-friendly approach, and without the uncompromising purity of some on the right. Some, like Curbelo, were elected in districts Obama previously won as Republicans posted dramatic midterm gains in November. They are looking at running for re-election in 2016 in a presidential election year when turnout of Democrats could be higher.

Now they are behind a new dynamic in the House after years when conservatives in the party caucus seemed to call the shots. GOP leaders had been forced into one embarrassing retreat after another on legislation, and the federal government had been propelled into a partial 16-day shutdown in the fall of 2013 in a failed attempt to shut down Obama’s health law.

In part, the change is because there are more of the new lawmakers. And, they say, the stakes are now higher. With the Senate now under GOP control, House-passed legislation actually has a shot at making it to Obama’s desk.

“Much of the legislation we passed in the past we knew wasn’t going to go anywhere in the Senate; we knew Harry Reid wasn’t going to bring it up for a vote,” said Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C., who led this week’s revolt over the abortion bill. “Now everything we do has got to be so careful, we have to be so careful about the legislation we put forward, because now we have that opportunity for it to pass in the Senate.”

Indeed the House in 2013 passed an abortion bill nearly identical to the one that leadership was forced to scuttle this time around, which would have banned nearly all abortions after 20 weeks. Instead the bill that passed Thursday, timed to coincide with the annual March for Life, would ban all federal funding for abortion, something that’s already mostly in place anyway.

As the new Congress got underway at the beginning of this month, conservatives appeared poised to continue throwing their weight around. Two dozen conservatives voted against House Speaker John Boehner in his leadership election, failing to oust him but boasting historically high defections. Then, as Republicans sought to use a Department of Homeland Security spending bill to oppose executive actions by Obama on immigration, conservatives pushed for language to unravel protections Obama had granted to immigrants brought illegally to the country as children — exposing those young people to eventual deportation.

The amendment on immigrant kids passed last week, but it did so by a narrow margin as 26 Republicans opposed it, exposing deep unease among some lawmakers over the direction House Republicans were taking in the new Congress’ opening days. On Wednesday, those concerns burst into the open as lawmakers rebelled against the initial version of the abortion bill, forcing House leaders to beat a retreat and setting up a new, ongoing challenge for a leadership that’s previously worried mostly about its right flank.

“Week one we had a speaker’s election that didn’t go as well as a lot of us would have liked. Week two we got in a big fight over deporting children, again something that a lot of us didn’t want to have a discussion about. Week three we’re now talking about rape and incest and reportable rapes, incest for minors but not for women of the age of majority. I just can’t wait for week four,” said Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa. “My own view on this stuff is I prefer we as a Republican conference avoid these very contentious social issues.”

___

Associated Press writers Connie Cass and Charles Babington contributed to this report.

Share, if you like

Americans’ Views on 10 Key State of the Union Proposals

For the most part the American people support President Obama’s agenda. I have found that the American people have common sense as a whole and want what is good for the country. President Obama’s proposals would be good for the country. The only exception to his State of the Union is the closing of Guantanamo Bay and I think that’s more a function of education regarding the facility rather than actual knowledge of what they want.
AVB
POLITICS
January 23, 2015

image

by Frank Newport, Jeffrey M. Jones, and Lydia Saad
Share on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on TwitterPrint
Story Highlights

A number of President Obama’s SOTU proposals do well in polls
Raising minimum wage, infrastructure spending get high marks
One proposal Americans oppose: Closing Guantanamo Bay prison
PRINCETON, N.J. — Gallup data reveal how Americans’ views line up with 10 key issues raised by President Barack Obama in his 2015 State of the Union address Tuesday night.

1. Raising the minimum wage

We still need to make sure employees get the overtime they’ve earned. And to everyone in this Congress who still refuses to raise the minimum wage, I say this: If you truly believe you could work full time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year, go try it. If not, vote to give millions of the hardest-working people in America a raise.

Gallup last asked about raising the minimum wage in November 2013, and at that time 76% were in favor of raising it to $9 an hour (from the current $7.25), while 22% were opposed. This included 91% of Democrats in favor, 76% of independents and 58% of Republicans. Separately, Gallup found 69% in favor of increasing the minimum wage to $9 along with establishing automatic inflation-based increases.

Despite this broad support, just 26% of Americans in 2014 said the minimum wage issue is extremely important for Obama and Congress to address. Altogether, 57% called it extremely or very important, but this was overshadowed by the 87% prioritizing veterans’ healthcare, 72% prioritizing pay equality for women, and 65% wanting legislation to expand access to preschool. Notably, public demand for action on the minimum wage roughly equals that for passing new immigration reform legislation (58%), and slightly outpaces that for scaling back the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare (53%).

2. Laws to strengthen unions

We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions, and give American workers a voice.

Americans always have been more likely to say they approve than disapprove of labor unions and have historically sympathized with unions over companies in labor disputes. At the same time, the public’s appetite for strengthening unions is moderate at best. Thirty-five percent of Americans say they would personally like to see labor unions have more influence than they do today, compared with 27% who prefer less influence and 23% who want their influence kept the same. And Americans widely support right-to-work laws, which prohibit requiring workers to join unions or pay union fees as a condition of employment.

3. Increased spending on infrastructure in order to create jobs

Let’s pass a bipartisan infrastructure plan that could create more than 30 times as many jobs per year, and make this country stronger for decades to come.

Gallup research from previous years has shown that the public strongly supports the idea of spending more money on infrastructure projects that would put people to work. One Gallup poll conducted in 2013 asked the question in two ways, one explicitly mentioning spending government money, and the other not, and found 72% vs. 77% support across the two wordings.

4. Reform tax code for working/middle class

But for far too long, lobbyists have rigged the tax code with loopholes that let some corporations pay nothing while others pay full freight. They’ve riddled it with giveaways the super-rich don’t need, denying a break to middle class families who do.

And let’s close the loopholes that lead to inequality by allowing the top 1% to avoid paying taxes on their accumulated wealth. We can use that money to help more families pay for childcare and send their kids to college.

Obama made no bones about his desire to increase taxes on corporations and the top 1% of income earners specifically to help ease taxes and household expenses for the middle and working class.

In 2014, 49% of Americans said the middle class pays too much in taxes. Further, 61% said upper-income people pay too little and 66% said the same of corporations. On the surface, this seems consistent with Obama’s approach to tax reform.

However, far fewer Americans expressed the relevant combination of views to be completely in sync with Obama’s redistributive goals. Just 31% say that middle-income people pay too much and that upper-income people pay too little. Similarly, 34% say the middle class pays too much and that corporations pay too little. The rest, either believe both entities pay the right amount, both pay too much, or some other combination of views.

More broadly, 54% of Americans last April said their tax bill is “fair,” but this was the lowest positive reading on this measure since 2001. At the same time, 52% said they consider the amount of federal income tax they pay as too high — indicating that they would welcome some tax relief. The percentage saying their tax bill is too high was the highest figure Gallup has seen on this question since 2008, although still below the 65% found in 2001 before President George W. Bush’s first round of tax cuts. Less than one-third of Americans in a January Gallup survey said they were satisfied with the amount Americans pay in federal taxes.

5. Authorizing the use of force against ISIL

Tonight, I call on this Congress to show the world that we are united in this mission by passing a resolution to authorize the use of force against ISIL.

Obama’s request for a resolution on ISIL, also known as the Islamic State group or ISIS, is to some degree an “after the fact” element of his speech, given that under his orders as commander in chief, the U.S. military has been launching attacks against ISIL and Islamic militants for months. There is no recent research that directly asks about a congressional resolution on such military action, but Gallup polling from 2014 shows Americans backed the military action after it began.

Gallup data from September show that Americans approve of taking military action “in Iraq and Syria against Islamic militants, commonly known as ISIS,” by 60% to 31%. This is slightly below the average support for other military actions Gallup has asked about over recent decades.

7. Lifting the Cuba embargo

In Cuba, we are ending a policy that was long past its expiration date. When what you’re doing doesn’t work for 50 years, it’s time to try something new. Our shift in Cuba policy has the potential to end a legacy of mistrust in our hemisphere; removes a phony excuse for restrictions in Cuba; stands up for democratic values; and extends the hand of friendship to the Cuban people. And this year, Congress should begin the work of ending the embargo.

Gallup last asked about the Cuba embargo in 2009, at which time Americans were more likely to favor (51%) than oppose (36%) ending it. However, the results are consistent with what Gallup found the five times it asked about the embargo between 1999 and 2009. It is unclear if President Obama’s recent moves to normalize relations with Cuba may have affected those views. Americans historically have been even more supportive of re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba and of ending U.S. restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba.

7. Reducing Carbon emissions

In Beijing, we made an historic announcement — the United States will double the pace at which we cut carbon pollution, and China committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions. And because the world’s two largest economies came together, other nations are now stepping up, and offering hope that, this year, the world will finally reach an agreement to protect the one planet we’ve got.

Americans favor proposals to set higher emission standards for business and industry (65%) and for automobiles (62%). They show similar support, 63%, for imposing mandatory controls on carbon dioxide emissions. However, their support for all of these proposals, is down considerably from the past. As recently as 2007, 79% or more favored each of these proposals. That decline may be in part related to the economic downturn — Americans tend to be less in favor of environmental protection when the economy is weaker. It may also be due to the shift from having a Republican president less likely to pursue tougher environmental policies to a Democratic president who is more likely to do so.

8. Closing the Guantanamo Bay prison

It makes no sense to spend $3 million per prisoner to keep open a prison that the world condemns and terrorists use to recruit. Since I’ve been president, we’ve worked responsibly to cut the population of Guantanamo Bay in half. Now it’s time to finish the job. And I will not relent in my determination to shut it down. It’s not who we are.

The president appears to be fighting an uphill battle when it comes to Americans’ views on closing Guantanamo Bay. Gallup has asked Americans about the Guantanamo Bay prison four times since 2007, prefacing the question by informing respondents that the prison holds “people from other countries who are suspected of being terrorists” and asking if the prison should or should not be closed and move “some of the prisoners to U.S. prisons”. A majority has opposed closing the prison each time Gallup has asked the question. Most recently, a June 5-8, 2014, Gallup survey showed that 66% opposed and 29% favored closing the prison.

Attitudes about closing the prison may be related to details about what would happen to the prisoners. A January 2009 Gallup poll that simply asked if the prison should be closed — with no further explanation — found sentiment somewhat more closely divided, with 35% saying it should be closed, and 45% saying it should not.

9. Congressional cooperation

There are a lot of good people here, on both sides of the aisle. And many of you have told me that this isn’t what you signed up for — arguing past each other on cable shows, the constant fundraising, always looking over your shoulder at how the base will react to every decision. Imagine if we broke out of these tired old patterns. Imagine if we did something different.

Obama’s call for more civility in Washington is music to the ears of at least a segment of Americans, particularly those who cite partisan politics as the nation’s top problem. Partisanship, along with a collection of other reasons to be dissatisfied with government, has been one of the most frequently mentioned issues in recent years when Americans were asked to name the most important problem facing the nation. On average, 18% of Americans in Gallup’s monthly measures throughout 2014 mentioned dysfunctional government, making it the most frequently mentioned issue, just ahead of the economy at 17%. And dissatisfaction with government remains a top problem so far in 2015, registering 17% in early January.

Although Gallup has not asked directly about Americans’ preference for increased political civility, they do show a stronger and increasing preference for political leaders in Washington to compromise in order to get things done rather than stick to their beliefs even if little gets done.

10. Reform the criminal justice system

Surely we can agree it’s a good thing that for the first time in 40 years, the crime rate and the incarceration rate have come down together, and use that as a starting point for Democrats and Republicans, community leaders and law enforcement, to reform America’s criminal justice system so that it protects and serves us all.

All Americans in general appear to be open to the idea of reforming the criminal justice system, given that the public has a relatively low level of confidence in the system to begin with. In Gallup’s annual update on confidence in institutions this past June, 23% of Americans had “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the criminal justice system, putting it in the bottom half of all institutions tested. Other evidence shows that the high visibility of the events in Ferguson and New York have eroded confidence in the police and in race relations in general, suggesting that confidence in the criminal justice system could itself be even lower now than it was in June. Aggregated data over the past four years shows that blacks are somewhat more likely to say they have very little or no confidence in the criminal justice system than whites.

A question from a 2013 Gallup poll asking if the American justice system is biased against black people revealed a much more substantial racial divide: 68% of blacks said “yes” compared with 25% of whites.

January 23, 2015
Gallup http://www.gallup.com/poll/181256/americans-views-key-state-union-proposals.aspx
Gallup World Headquarters, 901 F Street, Washington, D.C., 20001, U.S.A
+1 202.715.3030
Copyright © 2015 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.
Gallup, Inc. maintains several registered and unregistered trademarks that include but may not be limited to: A8, Accountability Index, Business Impact Analysis, BE10, CE11, CE11 Accelerator, Clifton StrengthsExplorer, Clifton StrengthsFinder, Customer Engagement Index, Customer Engagement Management, Dr. Gallup Portrait, Employee Engagement Index, Enetrix, Engagement Creation Index, Follow This Path, Gallup, Gallup Brain, Gallup Business Journal, GBJ, Gallup Consulting, Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, Gallup Management Journal, GMJ, Gallup Panel, Gallup Press, Gallup Tuesday Briefing, Gallup University, Gallup World News, HumanSigma, HumanSigma Accelerator, ICE11, I10, L3, ME25, NurseInsight, NurseStrengths, Patient Quality System, Performance Optimization, Power of 2, PrincipalInsight, Q12, Q12 Accelerator, Q12 Advantage, Selection Research, Inc., SE25, SF34, SRI, Soul of the City, Strengths Spotlight, Strengths-Based Selling, StatShot, StrengthsCoach, StrengthsExplorer, StrengthsFinder, StrengthsInsight, StrengthsQuest, SupportInsight, TX(R+E+R)=P3, TeacherInsight, The Gallup Path, The Gallup Poll, The Gallup School, VantagePoint, Varsity Management, Wellbeing Finder, Achiever, Activator, Adaptability, Analytical, Arranger, Belief, Command, Communication, Competition, Connectedness, Consistency, Context, Deliberative, Developer, Discipline, Empathy, Fairness, Focus, Futuristic, Harmony, Ideation, Includer, Individualization, Input, Intellection , Learner, Maximizer, Positivity, Relator, Responsibility, Restorative, Self-Assurance, Significance, Strategic, and Woo. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. These materials are provided for noncommercial, personal use only. Reproduction prohibited without the express permission of Gallup, Inc.

Google Glass is Dead…For Now

When I first heard about the Google Glass my first thought was I want to get a pair of these. The longer they have taken to go out to market with them,  the more I have had second thoughts about the value of this product. This week I went to a TV show filming and we weren’t allowed to bring our cell phones for fear that we would record so wearing glasses that can record video would be an issue with a lot of people. Unless they can make the glasses  red  while you’re recording I think it’s going to be a very hard sell regarding privacy issues.
AVB

image

Google Glass is Dead…For Now
By Aaron Mamiit
Jan 21, 2015 09:15 AM EST
The withdrawal of Glass from the market may mark a humbling retreat for Google, as the company may be pressing the “reset” button on the device. (Photo : Google Glass)
Google’s announcement that it is withdrawing the company’s Glass from the market for now may mark a humbling retreat by the company in its development of the much-ridiculed smart glasses.

Google previously announced that the device will be graduating from the company’s research arm, Google X, into its own team at Google. In addition, Glass head Ivy Ross will now be reporting to Tony Fadell, the founder of now Google-owned Nest smart home company who helped in the design and development of Apple’s iPod.

Google stopped selling the current version of Google Glass last Jan. 19, effectively ending the Explorer Program wherein users such as gadget aficionados and software developers, which Google called Explorers, purchased the device for $1,500 and gave the company valuable insights into the usage of the Glass as its beta testers.

Google has invested too much in Glass to entirely abandon the project. However, it seems that the company is at least pressing the “reset” button, as Google looks to re-think its plans for the device and its future moving forward.

“Google decided that they need to turn this product over to someone who knows how to bring a consumer product to market, both from a design perspective and a marketing perspective,” said Forrester Research analyst J.P. Gownder, referring to Fadell taking over for Glass.

The Internet-connected smart glasses, which provides users with abilities such as snapping pictures by blinking or sending emails using voice commands, was the major topic of the annual developer conference of Google about a couple of years ago. In that same year, Time tagged Glass as one of 2012’s best innovations.

However, Glass has become a case study on the risks of the development of hardware that has no clear purpose. The market was not entirely sure what to make of the device, which caused people to shun the Glass and its wearers.

According to Gownder, there is no vision on why people would need the Glass, which is a major problem for the device. Without a vision, people will begin to make their own assumptions, and the current thought of people is that the device is used to step over privacy limits.

Google continues to aim to become the gateway for how people live all aspects of their lives, including functions for searching, reading, socializing, exercising, shopping and even sleeping. However, to do so, Google has to dive into hardware, as technology and users move off from their computers and into other items such as smartphones and watches.

Attracting consumers to purchase hardware, however, requires the creation of devices that are not only packed with functionality, but also should have qualities such as coolness and beauty. Glass has somewhat failed in this regard, as most people see wearers of the Glass as “nerds.” Glass wearers have even earned the name “Glassholes,” and were routinely kicked out of places such as bars and movie theaters on concerns for the privacy of other customers and intellectual property violations.

Google is looking to release a new version of the Glass later this year. The market will have to wait and see if Google will be able to address all the concerns that have hindered the success of the device.

Google’s announcement that it is withdrawing the company’s Glass from the market for now may mark a humbling retreat by the company in its development of the much-ridiculed smart glasses.

Google previously announced that the device will be graduating from the company’s research arm, Google X, into its own team at Google. In addition, Glass head Ivy Ross will now be reporting to Tony Fadell, the founder of now Google-owned Nest smart home company who helped in the design and development of Apple’s iPod.

Google stopped selling the current version of Google Glass last Jan. 19, effectively ending the Explorer Program wherein users such as gadget aficionados and software developers, which Google called Explorers, purchased the device for $1,500 and gave the company valuable insights into the usage of the Glass as its beta testers.

Google has invested too much in Glass to entirely abandon the project. However, it seems that the company is at least pressing the “reset” button, as Google looks to re-think its plans for the device and its future moving forward.

“Google decided that they need to turn this product over to someone who knows how to bring a consumer product to market, both from a design perspective and a marketing perspective,” said Forrester Research analyst J.P. Gownder, referring to Fadell taking over for Glass.

The Internet-connected smart glasses, which provides users with abilities such as snapping pictures by blinking or sending emails using voice commands, was the major topic of the annual developer conference of Google about a couple of years ago. In that same year, Time tagged Glass as one of 2012’s best innovations.

However, Glass has become a case study on the risks of the development of hardware that has no clear purpose. The market was not entirely sure what to make of the device, which caused people to shun the Glass and its wearers.

According to Gownder, there is no vision on why people would need the Glass, which is a major problem for the device. Without a vision, people will begin to make their own assumptions, and the current thought of people is that the device is used to step over privacy limits.

Google continues to aim to become the gateway for how people live all aspects of their lives, including functions for searching, reading, socializing, exercising, shopping and even sleeping. However, to do so, Google has to dive into hardware, as technology and users move off from their computers and into other items such as smartphones and watches.

Attracting consumers to purchase hardware, however, requires the creation of devices that are not only packed with functionality, but also should have qualities such as coolness and beauty. Glass has somewhat failed in this regard, as most people see wearers of the Glass as “nerds.” Glass wearers have even earned the name “Glassholes,” and were routinely kicked out of places such as bars and movie theaters on concerns for the privacy of other customers and intellectual property violations.

Google is looking to release a new version of the Glass later this year. The market will have to wait and see if Google will be able to address all the concerns that have hindered the success of the device.

5 Great Moments Courtesy of Obama and 3 YouTube Celebrities

It’s nice to see this new and relax President Obama. It feels like the weight of the world is on his shoulders and he will slide to home base without any issues. He is working very hard after 8 years of lies and economic errors.
AVB

image
And last, shall we take a selfie?

The president names his favorite superpower, takes a selfie and is gifted green lipstick.

By Nikki Schwab
Thu Jan 22 20:18:40 EST 2015
On Thursday afternoon, President Obama sat down with three pre-selected YouTube stars as part of a post-State of the Union ritual to get his message out to even greater masses. While the POTUS hit on a lot of his usual policy points, the three video celebs — 19-year-old Bethany Mota, 52-year-old GloZell Green and 34-year-old Hank Green —  allowed for Obama to have some goofy moments too.

Here are the best:

1. The John Hancock Moment: The first YouTube celebrity up at bat was Hank Green of YouTube’s vlogbrothers. Green, at the end of his time, whipped out a picture of himself with a pharmacy receipt, for the president’s signature. “That’s a very fetching picture,” Obama replied. Green has a chronic medical condition and, without insurance, his prescription would run a cool $1,100 a month. “And that is a receipt showing it as $5 a month,” Green said. “Obamacare has worked for me.” The president is clearly delighted. “That makes me feel good,” he replied.

2. The Hoodie Moment: After Ferguson and the death of Eric Garner, comedian GloZell Green asks a question about the rift between black males and white law enforcement, setting it up with the best anecdote possible. Green talked about her personal reaction to the news. And how she took it out on her husband. “[H]e’s mad at me right now because I cut all the hoods off his hoodies,” she tells the president. Obama naturally cracks up

3.The Great Lipstick Mistake:  When you come to someone’s house, you should bring a present, theorizes GloZell Green. But her gift presentation to the president was a tad rocky. “I have green lipsticks,” she said, pulling three tubes of her signature color out of a drawer. “One for your first wife …” The president interrupted quickly. “My first wife? Do you know something I don’t?” Green turned red. “One for the first wife and the first children,” she stammered back.  Obama just laughed and smiled.

4.I Believe I Can Fly: During the lightning round, YouTube’s teen sensation Bethany Mota asked President Obama what superpower he’d enjoy. “I guess the flying thing seems pretty cool, right?” the president pondered. “As long as you could stay warm.” (Valid point.) “[The] invisibility thing like seems a little sneaky to me,” he continued. “What are you going to be doing with that? You’re going to be listening into people’s conversations.” (Insert NSA joke here.) Lastly, he gave an answer that Michelle Obama once teased him about. “She thought this was really nerdy,” the POTUS said. “I’d love to be able to speak any language,” he said, noting he’d like to be able to walk up to anybody in the world and suddenly understand their tongue. “I don’t think it would make a really good movie,” he also admitted. “It’s not that exciting.”

5. Time For A Selfie: It’s not surprising the interview would end this way. “One more question for you – can you take a selfie with me?” asked Mota. Even after problematic presidential selfies in the past, Obama agreed – taking a group shot with all his guests.

Watch the video here

Abortion bill dropped amid concerns of female GOP lawmakers

I think that the GOP leadership and wishing they could go back to being the party of NO. And then they made the mistake of letting women vote, which now has lead to a Republican Women’s Caucus that was able to defeat this bill.
It’s amazing on Monday night and on Tuesday during the day all of dependants whether they be conservative centrist or liberal all said the same thing this is the fourth quarter for President Obama he’s not going to be as powerful as he was, well they were all wrong. Tonight both ABC and NBC News was live from Havana Cuba singing the praises of how it will be when we have diplomatic relations with Cuba. They even said that certain Republicans in farm states have told the Democratic leadership they were going to vote for dropping the embargo against Cuba. They even agreed that global climate change was a real thing by a vote of 50 to 49 in the Senate.
AVB

The Washington Post
By Ed O’Keefe January 21 at 8:40 PM 

image
Antiabortion activists are connected with a red piece of cloth as they stage a "die-in" in front of the White House on Wednesday. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

This item has been updated.

House Republican leaders abruptly dropped plans late Wednesday to vote on an anti-abortion bill amid a revolt by female GOP lawmakers concerned that the legislation’s restrictive language would once again spoil the party’s chances of broadening its appeal to women and younger voters.

In recent days, as many as two dozen Republicans had raised concerns with the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” that would ban abortions after the 20th week of a pregnancy. Sponsors said that exceptions would be allowed for a woman who is raped, but she could only get the abortion after reporting the rape to law enforcement.

A vote had been scheduled for Thursday to coincide with the annual March for Life, a gathering that brings hundreds of thousands of anti-abortion activists to Washington to mark the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

But Republican leaders dropped those plans after failing to win over a bloc of lawmakers, led by Reps. Rene Ellmers (R-N.C.) and Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.), who had raised concerns.

The House will vote instead Thursday on a bill prohibiting federal funding for abortions — a more innocuous anti-abortion measure that the Republican-controlled chamber has passed before.

A senior GOP aide said that concerns had been raised “by men and women Members that still need to be worked out.” The aide, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly about the plans, said in an e-mail that Thursday’s vote will help “advance the pro-life cause” and that GOP leaders “remain committed to continue working through the process [on the Pain Capable bill] to make sure it too is successful.”

Other aides said that leaders were eager to avoid political fallout from a large number of female Republicans voting against an abortion bill in the early stages of the new GOP-controlled Congress.

The dispute erupted into the open in recent days and once again demonstrated the changing contours of the expanded House Republican caucus. The 246-member caucus is seeing rifts on issues where it once had more unity. That’s because there are now more moderate Republicans from swing districts who could face tough reelections in 2016 when more Democratic and independent voters are expected to vote in the presidential election.

Already this month, a large bloc of moderate Republicans voted against a spending bill that would repeal President Obama’s changes to immigration policy enacted by executive action. More than two dozen Republicans from metropolitan areas with large immigrant populations also voted against an amendment to the bill that would end temporary legal protections to the children of illegal immigrants.

The abortion bill pulled Wednesday night was strongly opposed by Democrats and women’s rights groups. But a similar version of the bill easily passed the GOP-controlled House in 2013 and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had vowed to bring it up for a vote.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), the bill’s lead sponsor, had predicted Wednesday that his proposal would easily pass because it “has overwhelming support among the American people.”

But Ellmers and Walorski had withdrawn their support and voiced concerns during meetings at the annual Republican policy retreat in Hershey, Pa. Ellmers did so again Wednesday at a closed-door House GOP meeting in the basement of the Capitol, according to several people who attended.

Seeking to rebut growing criticism from conservatives, Ellmers said on Facebook Wednesday evening that she would vote for the bill: “I have and will continue to be a strong defender of the prolife community,” she wrote.

But she had recently asked leaders to reconsider holding the vote, noting that Republicans had faced harsh criticism from Democrats in recent years for mounting a “war on women” by passing restrictive abortion legislation and other similar bills.

“The first vote we take, or the second vote, or the fifth vote, shouldn’t be on an issue where we know that millennials—social issues just aren’t as important [to them],” she said in an interview with National Journal.

The opposition set off a scramble Wednesday among top GOP leaders concerned about how several “no” votes could be perceived by their party and the general public.

With word of the opposition spreading, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) conferred nervously off the House floor after a midday vote. From there, Scalise headed to a meeting in his office suite with Ellmers, Walorski, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) — a lead co-sponsor of the bill — and several other women.

In a caucus dominated by men, a meeting with top leaders requested and attended almost exclusively by women is a rare sight.

One-by-one they exited the meeting and remained tight-lipped.

Walorski said the dispute “is no different” than conversations that occur before votes on other legislation. When pressed to explain her specific concerns, she rushed off: “I can’t. I can’t.”

Others seen exiting included Reps. Kristi Noem (R-N.D.), Diane Black (R-Tenn.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.), Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Barbara Comstock (R-Va.), Susan Brooks (R-Ind.) and Ann Wagner (R-Mo.). Hartzler had already signaled her support for the bill to reporters. The other women declined to comment.

The impasse prompted Tony Perkins, who leads the conservative Family Research Council, to visit the Capitol Wednesday to meet with Scalise.

He cited “a lot of misconceptions” for causing last-minute disputes with the bill. “We’re talking about a measure that would limit abortions after five months,” he said. “America is only one of four nations that allows abortions throughout the entire pregnancy.”

Women’s rights groups and Democrats have denounced the legislation as dangerous and unconstitutional. In a message to group members, the National Organization for Women cited federal statistics showing that just 35 percent of rape victims report the incident to police — and said that the bill will do nothing to increase the rate of reporting.

Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, cheered the decision of GOP leaders.

“I never thought I would see the day that the Tea Party-led House of Representatives would wake up to the fact that their priorities — outright abortion bans — are way out of touch with the American people,” she said in a statement. “The GOP drafted a bill so extreme and so out of touch with the voters that even their own membership could not support.”

The 22 women in the House GOP caucus are well aware that many of their male colleagues have earned the ire of Democrats and women’s rights groups for talking about rape and women’s rights.