DelBene ruins Windows Mobile

Today's Seattle Times discusses the future of the Microsoft smartphone effort. During this time, they mention that the phone had troubles in 2005 (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2013120552_microsoftmobile10.html).

Well what do you know! Suzan DelBene (running against Dave Reichart) was "corporate vice president of the Mobile Communications Business at Microsoft Corp" during this time. She was hired in 2004 (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/delbene/default.mspx) to "oversees all marketing efforts for the division, including for Windows Mobile software for Pocket PCs, Smartphones and Portable Media Centers, and the Windows CE operating system."

Were DelBene a republican you know that they would have had a sidebar explaining her role specifically in the downfall of the Windows mobile phone.

Who made NY Mosque political?

I've heard a lot of talk about the potential of a Ground Zero Mosque. So how did this issue get so much press and who made it political are different issues. Conservatives have been blamed for making it political and for getting it so much press. Well, not so much on the first part and only partially correct on the second.

The people who made this issue political are the people in the historical society that refused to grant the building historical significance. All other buildings that had damage from the airplanes in the 9/11 attack have been given this designation. However, this building's application was refused. It was refused because of the purpose of what a builder wanted to do with it.

Yes, that's right. The society decided to be political and refuse historical designation specifically because a mosque would be built there.

So who should be blamed for making this location political? Should it be the people complaining about the inconsistency and insensitivity of the people making this decision? I think it should be the people that made the decision, not those that point out the decision being made.

American Teams at Tour de France

WOW! Four American-based teams in the Tour! Radio Shack, BMC, HTC, and Garmin-Transitions. But you would never know it by the coverage in the newspapers. Just like a couple years ago when there were two or three teams in it for the first time. Talk about historic!

For background, the first time an American team was in the Tour was 1986. So in 24 years, see how it's grown. We're getting better at putting American riders into the tour too.

World Cup Soccer

Not a fan. I've played soccer and coached soccer, so I understand something about the game. I believe that like hockey, soccer is probably better in person. Unlike hockey though, soccer is a slow game (overall). The game highlights are exciting, so it reminds me of the comment about baseball "5 minutes of action crammed into 4 hours".

I watched the US comeback against Slovenia (I only saw the second half). It was exciting, as long as I had something else to do. I even watched some entire games and not just when the US was playing. So I believe that I gave it a chance. I didn't bother to watch the final as by then I had learned that best teams don't translate into interesting games. No wonder there are so many fights at soccer games, you have to find something else to do to get through the game.

An up and down weekend of wine

A couple bottles of wine later, what a weekend. It was the best of wines, it was the worst of wines. Well, not really the worst.

Friday night, we opened an '06 'Il Re' from Arthur Earl (http://www.arthurearl.com/Winemaking_notes_ir_03.pdf). We were eating a pot roast (in a crock pot for 10 hours with onions, parsnips, and mushrooms). The meal was great. The wine was a nice complement. It's one of our favorite wines from this winery. Our favorite is usually the Mourvedre.

Sunday night, we opened the '08 Black Love (pinot noir) from Mark Ryan (http://www.markryanwinery.com/). I guess I don't like classic Pinot Noir. My lovely spouse liked the wine, but I prefer the '07. In my opinion, the '07 was what other Pinot's want to become. The '08 was fine. I didn't care for it at release weekend and I feel the same now.

Tonight, I may just have to open up a wine from Vincent Arroyo Winery (http://www.vincentarroyo.com/) to compliment the seared tuna on the menu. That would allow me to move on from Sunday night's disappointment.

Rich versus Wealthy

So today, Bill Gates, Sr. is going to announce that Washington State needs a state income tax. Great! Bill Gates, Jr. wants Washington State to implement a death tax. Wow!

These people have so much money it's great that they want to share it (by force) with us. Oh wait, I bet they won't have to pay it. Hmmmm, neither Sr nor Jr actually work that much (not receiving a salary, i.e. income).

The liberals in this country always complain about the rich, which seems strange as it's people like Ted Kennedy who used to do this. Sen Kennedy and Speaker Pelosi have lots of money. Again, that's what people think of when you say rich. But that isn't what the liberals mean.

Liberals are after people who are amassing wealth. They are trying to accumulate riches so that they will be better off in the future. But these people are not necessarily 'rich' but that is who is being targeted.

The people who have already amassed their wealth want to make sure that you and I cannot.

Free Press (owned by the government)

One topic that seems to be discussed more and more is a government bailout of newspapers. It seems that newspaper companies are really interested in government money since they are achieving less and less subscribers. Instead of being competitive with other news sources, they want to keep doing things they same way that they always have, but still get paid for doing it.

The Obama administration is a supporter of this since it is one more way that they can funnel money to organizations that support their agenda and the Democrat party. It would serve the double purpose of nationalizing yet another industry (automobile, banking, insurance?). The Seattle Times had the audacity to run an editorial saying that the only way to achieve a free press was to have it supported by the government. Wow! They really did say that.

I supposed they haven't noticed what happened at GM. The Obama administration appointed a couple of directors. One of these directors became the interim CEO when the newest CEO resigned. (This new CEO replaced the CEO that was forced to resign, by ... the Obama administration.) Then, the interim CEO, after a lengthy search, decided that he himself would be the best person to be the full-time CEO. Wow! How insightful! So one of the directors appointed by Obama (not through any shareholder vote) became CEO by his own decision (again, not a shareholder vote).

I suppose this type of intervention by the government isn't expected by the newspaper industry. I can see why. They pretty much do what the government asks them to do. Oh wait, not for a Republican administration. Do you think the Seattle Times won't cry fowl if the next administration were to become involved in the newspapers once they have been bought by the government.

Ignoring Lone Wolf on Plane

Well, well, well, looks like everyone has forgotten about the FBI being told not to investigate potential 'lone wolf' terrorists.  This directive from the White House was mentioned with the Fort Hood shooting and cited as one of the reasons why Major Hassan wasn't discovered.

So now, we've got the Christmas Day underwear bomber.  His name was everywhere, his father was warning countries about him, he was on a watch list.  But again, he was acting alone.  So once again, the 'lone wolf' directive should be front and center of the discussion.  However, I haven't heard anyone mentioning it.  I guess maybe they are tired from it being a major subject during the Fort Hood recap.

The Obama administration wants to play a game of saying that they are taking terrorism seriously, then making directives such as this one.