The world’s biggest banks are working with one another and police to gather intelligence as protesters try to rejuvenate the Occupy Wall Street movement with May demonstrations, industry security consultants said.

Among 99 protest targets in midtown Manhattan on Tuesday are JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America offices, said Marisa Holmes, a member of Occupy’s May Day planning committee.

Events are scheduled in more than 115 cities, including an effort to shut down the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, where Wells Fargo investors relied on police to get past protests at their annual meeting this week.

“Our goal is to kick off the spring offensive and go directly to where the financial elite play and plan,” she said.

After evictions and arrests from Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park to London that began last year, the movement against income inequality and corporate abuse will regain strength, said Brian McNary, director of global risk at Pinkerton Consulting & Investigations.

CONTINUED at The San Francisco Chronicle.

STORY 1: Mandatory ‘Big Brother’ Black Boxes In All New Cars From 2015:

Provision is part of controversial MAP-21 bill expected to pass House.

A bill already passed by the Senate and set to be rubber stamped by the House would make it mandatory for all new cars in the United States to be fitted with black box data recorders from 2015 onwards.

Section 31406 of Senate Bill 1813 (known as MAP-21), calls for “Mandatory Event Data Recorders” to be installed in all new automobiles and legislates for civil penalties to be imposed against individuals for failing to do so.

“Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall revise part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to require, beginning with model year 2015, that new passenger motor vehicles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder that meets the requirements under that part,” states the bill.

Although the text of legislation states that such data would remain the property of the owner of the vehicle, the government would have the power to access it in a number of circumstances, including by court order, if the owner consents to make it available, and pursuant to an investigation or inspection conducted by the Secretary of Transportation.

Given the innumerable examples of both government and industry illegally using supposedly privacy-protected information to spy on individuals, this represents the slippery slope to total Big Brother surveillance of every American’s transport habits and location data.

The legislation, which has been given the Orwellian title ‘Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act’, sailed through the Senate after being heavily promoted by Democrats Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer and is also expected to pass the Republican-controlled House.

Given the fact that the same bill also includes a controversial provision that would empower the IRS to revoke passports of citizens merely accused of owing over $50,000 in back taxes, stripping them of their mobility rights, could the mandatory black boxes or a similar technology be used for the same purpose?

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

STORY 2: Your Car Set To Become Part of ‘The Internet of Things’:

Transportation bill orders implementation of ‘Vehicle to Infrastructure Communication System’.

A bill already passed by the Senate and set to be ratified by the House not only mandates black box tracking devices in all new cars, it also orders the deployment of ‘vehicle to infrastructure’ communication systems, in other words your vehicle will become part of ‘the Internet of things’ and will be open to constant real-time tracking, eavesdropping and surveillance.

However, the bill is stuffed full of nightmare big government regulations, includingempowering the IRS to revoke passports of accused tax delinquents as well as mandating the installation of black box tracking devices, eventually designed to be used in a tax-by-the-mile system, in all new vehicles from 2015.

Yet another Big Brother measure that is contained deep within the bill appears in Section 53006 – the “Vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications systems deployment.”

‘(a) In General- Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives that–

‘(1) defines a recommended implementation path for dedicated short-range communications technology and applications;

‘(2) includes guidance on the relationship of the proposed deployment of dedicated short-range communications to the National ITS Architecture and ITS Standards; and

‘(3) ensures competition by not preferencing the use of any particular frequency for vehicle to infrastructure operations.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

Techie types years ago started using the prefix mega–for millions of bits or bytes of data–and got even more excited when they could adopt giga, for billions. Now IBM wants to apply the term tera to communications.

The computer maker on Thursday is disclosing a prototype set of chips that it believes is the first to reach a terabit–delivering a trillion bits of data per second. That’s the equivalent of downloading 500 high-definition movies, and is roughly eight times the capacity of comparable chip sets now on the market, Big Blue says.

IBM’s innovation is not about the speed of any particular stream of data, but the number of streams available at the same time–like adding more lanes on the freeway can get more cars from Point A to Point B in a given amount of time. That improvement in bandwidth appeals to companies that make servers and need to connect them together, in hopes of speeding applications like sending videos to more Internet users at a higher speed.

The research effort is based on optical technology, which uses laser pulses to send data. In this case, the experimental IBM chip has 24 channels to receive data and 24 channels to transmit it, each handling data at speeds of 20 gigabits per second. The miniaturization effort required IBM researchers to create 48 holes in the transceiver chip, which is soldered together with lasers and other components in a package that the company dubs a “holey optochip.”

Besides raw speed, computer companies like IBM are concerned with space and power efficiency. The transceiver chip measures only 5.2 millimeters by 5.8 millimeters–about one-eighth the area of a dime–and draws 4.5 watts, a modest amount compared with other comparable components, IBM says.

“We were very constrained here,” says Clint Schow, who manages the IBM research team that worked on the effort. “We had to have a huge amount of bandwidth in a very small area.”

Exactly how, and when, the development might find its way into commercial products is not clear. IBM doesn’t sell such components, so would be inclined to hunt for partners to help commercialize the technology, Schow says. …

Source: Wall Street Journal.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I’ve been spending so much time covering the 2012 presidential election that I really needed a break from it all. Sure, there were the Nevada caucuses this past weekend and I do plan to write my two cents on the results but I was thoroughly distracted by three days of greatness. Saturday was spent at the Hilton in Naples, FL at an all-day event held by FEE: the Foundation for Economic Education. Sunday was full of lots of meat, beer, a bounce house and the Super Bowl. Monday capped off the long weekend with an event at the Ritz-Carlton that was put on by one of the greatest libertarian think tanks in the world, the Cato Institute.

Friday night, I planned to get to bed early, as I wanted to be bright and alert for the all-day FEE event in my hometown. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get to sleep so I sat in my room, sipping a tall glass of 1792 Ridgemont Reserve Bourbon while picking at some leftover BBQ ribs and watching ‘Battlestar Galactica’ on Netflix, as I haven’t watched the newer series but was a big fan of the original as a kid. I typically don’t get into shows until they are over, as I hate the suspense of waiting week-to-week for cliffhanger resolutions. After that, I tried to kill time in ‘Just Cause 2′ on my PS3 but I just couldn’t doze off. It was well after 3 a.m. before my head finally hit the pillow, which seemed like the quickest sleep I ever had when my iPhone alarm started blaring Wu-Tang Clan’s “Bring the Ruckus” at 6 a.m.

Saturday – FEE’s 1st Annual Winter Freedom Academy: 

So I woke up, showered, killed a bowl of Cracklin’ Oat Bran with a peanut Sweet & Salty bar, threw on a three piece suit, jumped in my car and drove down to the Naples Hilton half-asleep nursing a heavy hangover. Needless to say, I was ready for ten or so hours of hardcore economic thinking. Truth be told, as soon as I hit the hotel, I wandered into Shula’s Steakhouse looking for a tequila sunrise. Apparently it was too early and the bartender wasn’t working yet so I had to fill up on bagels and Diet Coke, which had a very negative effect on my mind and my nerves, as I gave up caffeine a month or so prior. It did nip that hangover in the bud though.

While waiting to move into the hall where the event was being held, I had a good long talk with one of my local heroes, Ismael Hernandez, who runs the Freedom & Virtue Institute. I also spoke to my friends from the Libertarian Party of Collier County, FGCU’s Eagles for Liberty and the Ayn Rand Society for Individual Rights of Naples (ARSIRN). After immersing myself in philosophical and political discussion for a good forty-five minutes, I felt ready to begin my day of economic awesomeness.

The event was emceed by Michael Yashko, who not only did a great job at coordinating and managing the event, but also gave a fantastic presentation on the Founding Father’s Constitution versus the abhorrent version of that sacred document we are stuck with today. I’m not sure if anyone at FEE was filming the event but if they did, I’d definitely link to the video on TheSwash.com as part of our Tuition Free Tuesdays weekly feature.

Yashko was then followed by Professor Nikolai Wenzel who teaches at Hillsdale College as well as Florida Gulf Coast University. Prof. Wenzel’s presentation was a perfect compliment to Mr. Yashko’s as it was about constitutional constraint and government mischief. Wenzel gave a great lecture and like Yashko’s (and really all the lectures at this event) I’d love to post video of it to the Swash so that our loyal SwashPeeps could experience it for themselves.

The next speaker was Lawrence Reed, who I have had the pleasure of seeing several times now between events held by FEE – which is the organization he is the president of, The Southwest Florida Young Republicans and Eagles for Liberty, who are FGCU’s chapter of the more widely known Students for Liberty. Mr. Reed’s lecture was called “Money Mischief Since the Founders”. It was an amazing lecture jam-packed with so much knowledge that taking notes was damn near impossible but it did give me several ideas for articles I should probably write. Like his other lectures I’ve seen, one about the myths of the Great Depression and another that compared the United States to Rome during its collapse, this fifty minute lesson was a real treat and had me captivated the whole time. I leaned over to my friend Shawn when Mr. Reed wrapped up and whispered, “I could sit through four hours of this guy.” He nodded in agreement.

The next speaker was Ismael Hernandez who gave an incredible speech about compassion. Not government compassion with a gun to your head but real honest truthful compassion and how to express it effectively. Mr. Hernandez spoke about his past and how he grew up in Puerto Rico as a communist raised by a Black Panther father and how he came to America and experienced this country for himself without the direct influence of communist rhetoric. After telling his very personal tale and giving the audience the rundown on how compassion truly works, the crowd got to their feet and applauded Mr. Hernandez for his great story and his invaluable insight.

After Ismael Hernandez’s great lecture, we all went off to lunch. I was fortunate enough to partake in a special luncheon with Lawrence Reed that helped to benefit students wanting to go to FEE camps to learn about economics. At that lunch, I was seated next to both Michael Yashko and Lawrence Reed, which was awesome in itself. While munching on salad, a turkey sandwich and a cookie, I got two more doses of Mr. Reed, who went on to tell those of us at the special luncheon two stories. One was about Nicky Winton who saved 669 mostly Jewish children from the Nazis and found homes and safe passage for them in Britain. The second story was about a pirate radio station somewhere in Soviet controlled Europe. I can’t even begin to try and retell these tales, as Mr. Reed did it in such a profoundly poetic way. However, both these stories were really touching and went to show that no matter how bad we think we have it in the United States right now, it could always be very much worse. In retrospect, this is why we need to fight for liberty and freedom because it isn’t a stretch to envision an America that could fall that far.

After lunch, we went right back into more fantastic lectures. Professor Bradley Hobbs of FGCU gave us a pretty awesome lesson about business and economics. He spoke to us about his personal experiences growing up on the Space Coast where, as a kid, he worked for his father in the family pharmacy. The business has been so successful over the years that it has grown large enough to fill up an entire strip mall, minus a bagel shop and a medical supply store that the family also owns. Hobbs lectured greatly and had a very pleasant demeanor that made his presentation enjoyable, which made me feel like I should go back to school and take up economics at FGCU. The college is practically in my backyard, therefore much closer than George Mason where I was thinking of applying if I decided to go back to college.

The next speaker was former CEO of BB&T, John Allison. Mr. Allison, who has had several appearances on one of my favorite shows – ‘Stossel’, has been known to be a big fan of Ayn Rand and her philosophy: objectivism. In fact, Mr. Allison used to assign ‘Atlas Shrugged’ to all of his senior executives as required reading. He has referred to ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as “the best defense of capitalism ever written.” He’s been a large contributor to the Ayn Rand Institute and through the BB&T Charitable Foundation has given dozens of colleges and universities millions of dollars to start programs devoted to the study of Rand’s work. Apart from all this backstory, Mr. Allison gave one of the most inspiring lectures of the day. He talked about leadership and how to properly grab the reigns of a company or any situation and take control effectively and respectfully. John Allison gave us insight into the TARP bailouts and how he fought against them but ultimately lost and was forced to partake in the financial tyranny. He spoke heavily against regulation, especially in the financial industry. Truth be told, I walked away from these lessons with the intent to leave Wells Fargo and put all of my money in BB&T. You have earned a new customer Mr. Allison, even though you no longer work for BB&T.

Following John Allison was author John Blundell. This well-spoken Englishman talked to us abut his newest book ‘Ladies For Liberty: Women Who Made a Difference in American History’. Blundell, who wrote a well-respected book about Margaret Thatcher turned his attention to many of the woman who have played a major part in building and shaping America throughout the years. He gave us some deep insight into the book and how it came to be and through his passion he sold me on buying a copy on the spot: call me an easy sell. I got to talk to Mr. Blundell one-on-one while he signed my book where we briefly discussed the possibility of him doing a follow-up book about woman who fight for liberty today.

After Blundell, two FGCU professors closed out the day. First up was Dean Stansel, who gave a great talk about taxes at a more local level. He pulled out a bunch of studies he did for the Cato Institute that showed the correlation between taxation and economic growth in various cities throughout the last several years. It didn’t teach me anything I didn’t already know but it did present a lot of data, collected through Stansel’s hard work, that solidified my beliefs even further.

The last of the final speakers was Professor Carrie Kerekes. Prof. Kerekes gave us a pretty solid rundown of FGCU’s economic and business programs. I feel like it was a thirty minute infomercial for FGCU but it was effective and made me incredibly happy to know that there was a university, just down the street, that was teaching the right side of economics. If I do indeed end up going back to school, I think I may be a future student of several of the professors who spoke at this FEE event.

Once the event was officially over, I got a tequila sunrise or six and sipped them down at the bar in the hotel lobby where I mingled with the other attendees. I didn’t hang long, as I don’t nurse my alcohol and was pressed for time as I had to drive down to my boss’ lounge to celebrate two of my other bosses’ birthdays. I left that crazy party fairly early however, as I was tired from a previous night of no sleep and a day full of awesome economic discussion.

I do have to say that the FEE event was, by far, one of the greatest economic and political events I have ever attended and trust me, I’ve been to a lot more than my fair share. If you are in the Naples area and you don’t go next year, you’re certainly missing out on a great day; consider me a FEE lifer at this point.

Sunday – Super Bowl XLVI:

The following day was Super Bowl Sunday and even though I couldn’t care less who won between the New York Giants and the New England Patriots, I was geared up to party with my peeps and indulge in a lot of food and booze. It’s hard watching American football when it isn’t a New Orleans Saints game but the overindulgence in food and booze made dealing with my team not being in the big game much more bearable.

I kicked the day off by going to my mum’s where I watched the Chelsea v. Manchester United game, which may have been the best EPL game I’ve seen this season even though it ended in a tie. Between kicks and goals, my mum and I emptied two cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon into a bowl full of flour and made some real serious beer bread. Shortly after this, I helped my friend Michael make our special treat: meat turtles. Essentially, you take a giant mound of ground sirloin and mix it up with a bunch of shredded cheese and whatever sauces you may want to put in it. You then wrap the big ball of meat in a shell of bacon – woven together. You then stick three hot dogs through it – making four feet, a head and a tail, which creates the shape of a turtle (see pic to the left).

So we took our meat turtles (made of Kobe beef and Kobe bacon) and our beer bread to Michael’s co-worker Mikey’s house. Lots of Mikes I know but it gets even more confusing when Mikey’s father and grandfather are also both named Mike. Anyway, we blew up a bounce house, drank beer and had a real party going even before the Super Bowl kicked off. To compliment the day even more, Mikey’s dad made a monstrous beef brisket and a giant mound of pulled pork. There was also BBQ chicken, homemade baked beans and so much other food that listing it all would take entirely too long for me to type and too long for you to read. Plus this is making me hungry again.

The food was beyond amazing! I gorged until I couldn’t move, waited a while and gorged again. We all drank beer and whiskey to wash down the giant mounds of meat scattered throughout the large kitchen and followed that up by firmly planting ourselves in recliners in front of a giant screen to watch the game. I missed parts of the contest between the Giants and Patriots as I kept nodding off into sporadic but very short-lived food comas. When I was able to be mobile enough to get up, I only did so to cut myself a piece of red velvet cake. I was on a serious mission and it was mission accomplished!

In the end, the Giants won and I couldn’t find anymore PBR or whiskey.

Monday – The Cato Institute’s Policy Perspectives 2012:

I woke up late Monday morning, as my alarm either didn’t go off or I somehow crawled across my room, turned it off and then crawled back into my bed. While that is theoretically possible, I’ve never made it comfortably back to my bed after turning off my alarm. Usually I awake to find myself curled up in the fetal position trembling from being in my boxers on my very cold tile floor. It’s kind of like waking up on a frozen lake with nothing more than swimming trunks on. Luckily for me, I didn’t find myself on the floor and I didn’t have to fight off hypothermia as I showered and threw on a suit to head down to the Ritz-Carlton, Naples Resort for the Cato Institute event featuring Tucker Carlson, David Boaz, Ed Crane and Robert Levy.

I arrived at the Ritz-Carlton just before 10 a.m., so I at least got there before the opening reception and was able to score the best table in the house for attendees who weren’t a part of a larger group. The early bird most definitely catches the worm and in my case, these words were never truer, as the table I selected was quickly filled with a few other like-minded early birds – one of which provided me with one of the best moments of my life.

The woman who sat to my left came to my table and asked if she could sit there or if it was reserved. I told her anyone could join me, as I was by myself with seven empty chairs surrounding me. She sat down and I’m not sure how we arrived to this point but we started talking about objectivism. After several minutes of discussing Ayn Rand’s philosophy, this woman – who’s name is Elayne Kalberman, opened up and told me that she used to work for Rand. In fact, she was the sister of Nathaniel Branden, a very close confidant and partner of Rand who helped bring her philosophy to the world.

Mrs. Kalberman went on to tell me that she used to be a part of a group that would meet with Rand weekly at her home to discuss ‘Atlas Shrugged’ while it was being written. This small group of intellectuals met in an effort to make sure that Rand’s philosophy was coming through and that all the points that she needed to make were hit effectively. So here I am, sitting in a room full of libertarians of all ages who would probably worship this woman, if they were even slightly aware of her presence there and I was the lucky guy that got to sit next to her out of the 400 plus other people!

I’m not going to discuss the details of all the things she told me and the stories I found so engaging and incredible, as they are her tales to tell, not mine but it is worth mentioning that we talked for a few minutes about the fall of one-time objectivist and Rand ally Alan Greenspan. Mrs. Kalberman and I discussed the Federal Reserve, inflation and she shared her insightful thoughts and solutions on it with me. We spoke about her brother and about the fact that there was a falling out between their family and Ayn Rand. One thing she did say, that I will share, as I know others who knew Rand felt the same way, is that Mrs. Kalberman didn’t like the way Ayn Rand treated young people who wanted to better understand objectivism. Rand was often times mean and had a very abrasive attitude towards those wanting to come to the same conclusions Rand arrived at.

Mrs. Kalberman and I also talked about Murray Rothbard, my favorite economist and someone who she had a lot of dealings with throughout the years. She was a pleasure to sit next to and a very nice woman. I hope to one day cross paths with her again as I couldn’t fully pick her brain on things due to the fact that we only had a few minutes here or there to discuss these things between all the different speakers who were at the event.

Speaking of which, the event was emceed by Cato’s Robert Levy who is not only hilarious and quick-witted but also a great teacher and speaker. Next up was Cato Founder and President Ed Crane who gave us an informative Powerpoint presentation that included a great scene from ‘Monty Python’s Life of Brian’ about people needing to be individuals and not a collective desperate to follow a leader. Cato’s Executive VP David Boaz lit up the room with his lecture, as he always does. He talked about effective ways of reclaiming freedom and entertained the crowd with his sharp and witty ways. All the Cato speakers aren’t just near-geniuses they are all practically stand-up comedians who know how to properly mix together their lessons and their humor in a way that keeps everyone engaged.

This was followed by a reception in the courtyard outside of the event hall where I may have drank too much “lady wine” – my name for white wine. After the fifteen minute binger, we were brought back into the large hall for lunch. We were served some sort of strange salad with a green dressing that was more like an emerald-colored Béarnaise sauce than actual salad dressing. The main course was a chicken cutlet covered in tomato sauce with a strange potato thing and a mixture of spinach leaves and mushrooms, which was surprisingly the tastiest thing on the plate. Dessert was a small rectangle thing that looked like it came straight out of ‘Alice in Wonderland’. When I bit into it, I realized that it was the world’s fanciest piece of key lime pie. I don’t mean to knock the Ritz-Carlton, as they host events incredibly well, but being the food snob I am, I wasn’t all that impressed with the culinary display on this day.

After lunch we got the main event, which was a great lecture by Tucker Carlson who owns the Daily Caller, works for Fox News and has previously worked for CNN and MSNBC. He talked about the 2012 presidential race and gave us all some of his personal insight on Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. He talked about supporting Ron Paul during his 1988 run for president when he ran under the Libertarian Party. He spoke about Rick Santorum the man but understands why people are turned off from him due to his stance on social issues. Tucker told us about his relationship with Newt Gingrich and mentioned that Newt’s office is practically next door to his. He also talked about Romney being the “prefect candidate”.

Tucker explained that all the things that the voters gripe about they actually don’t care about because it rarely, if ever, sways the consensus. He talked about how people always point to flip-flopping but defends it saying that when you get all the facts and new data becomes available, you should take the best stance and in certain cases, that could mean that a politician flip-flops. Realistically, the issue is what they flip-flopped on and why, not just that they switched positions. While I understand this point and agree with it to some degree, I do feel that politicians should be real students of the game and truly study up and know what it is they are voting on or supporting. I’m not a politician but if I don’t know something as fully as I should, I tend not to comment on it and I’m honest about it when pressed on it. Maybe it’s different when you’re playing the games that the Beltway Suits play.

He also told us that the night before the Cato event he was in Chicago with Andrew Breitbart and a few others where they had dinner with domestic terrorists and leaders of the Weather Underground, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. He said that they pretty much denied everything Tucker asked them about and that these fighters for socialist causes hosted the dinner event in the penthouse of one of Chicago’s nicest and tallest buildings. Maybe it took place in the penthouse that the Joker crashed in ‘The Dark Knight’, seems fitting anyway. In any event, Tucker finished by telling us that Ayers asked where he was going from there and Tucker responded by telling him a Cato Institute event, which caused Ayers’ lip to quiver.

During the Q & A session after the lecture, Tucker said that he didn’t believe Ron Paul would run third party and that Gary Johnson going third party and potentially getting a Paul endorsement would most certainly split the vote and get Obama re-elected. Tucker said that Obama was beatable and then went on to talk about how Ron Paul is resonating with people and that the GOP is essentially careless in not embracing him and more of his ideas, as it could cost them the race. He was also asked if Hillary Clinton would run as Obama’s VP but Tucker was certain she wouldn’t and then shared some recently acquired insider knowledge that she may become the new head of the IMF or the World Bank. He then spoke about how Joe Biden is made to look dumb by the press who are fed stories from the White House but in actuality, even though he is an outspoken passionate blowhard, he understands the game much more than Obama and is actually a solid VP for the Democrats.

At the end of Tucker’s time on stage, people quickly filtered out of the large hall, as I walked towards the front of the room to talk to the man. We talked about a few different issues but the most important part, at least for me, is that he was very complimentary of what it is I do. We talked about building Internet new sites from the ground up and he gave me some solid advice on what I need to do to take TheSwash.com to the next level. We talked about the difficulty in getting started and how to build your brand and bring in other contributors. He said that he really likes the name “The Swash” as it was really memorable and it sounded “dirty”. It was a great discussion with a great guy that only wanted to offer advice and to help out another guy clawing his way up from the bottom of the barrel to the top.

Tucker dipped out and so did I while running into a good friend and congressional candidate Trey Radel. I talked to my friend Trey and mentioned interviewing him for the Swash. He’s game and I’m going to try and set something up. He’s already got my vote, not because he’s a friend – I have other friends in the hunt, but because of his stance on NDAA, SOPA and PIPA. He’s also a very pro-constitution candidate, which we don’t have enough of. This was followed up by a thirty minute wait in the valet line and a trip to my local watering hole to reflect on the awesome weekend.

I did good this round.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Here we are again in South Carolina with the last debate in the state before they hold their primary election. This version of the ongoing shit show was put on by CNN. Unfortunately they brought back the throat gurgling champion of Dorchester, MA Mr. John King himself. Unlike last time however, we weren’t subjected to Mr. King’s guttural throat interruptions and in all honesty, he was pleasant to watch this time around.

Now be forewarned, the majority of this debate consisted of pointless bickering and while I did enjoy the bloodshed, the Santorum-Romney-Gingrich ménage à trois was more annoying than entertaining and for the most part it pushed Ron Paul out of the debate several times. I wish John King had been a bit more pro-active in squashing some of these squabbles, as it created an atmosphere of elitist shitcocks stealing the spotlight from the only sane man on stage. However, even with this issue, Ron Paul was not stopped from pulling off on of his best performances to date. When the man had time, he fucking shined. His smack downs to Rick Santorum were also the best jabs of the night and proved that Paul can battle it out with the establishment Neanderthals when need be.

It was a good night for Ron Paul, in fact he got the loudest ovation during the introductions which was refreshing considering how the South Carolinians treated him during the last debate. I’d like to say that the crowd was great and they really won over my support for South Carolina, as I was about ready to hire a witchdoctor to curse the everliving shit out of that state just a few days ago – following the last shit show. I guess it was just the people of Myrtle Beach that sucked because the Charleston crowd was a beast when it came to cheering for liberty and sanity.

The first question went to Newt Gingrich and it was about his ex-wife, who came out earlier in the day saying that he was a monster that ended their marriage because she wouldn’t give him permission to cheat. Without even answering or addressing the concerns brought up by John King, Newt brushed it off to a loud ovation. Gingrich said that he was “appalled” at the media for promoting this scandal and extremely upset that the subject kicked off the debate. As he continued to bash CNN and John King for their “despicable” actions, the crowd shot up to their feet! Honey Badger don’t give a shit! Newt finally addressed the issue after a long-winded smack down and said that the story was false and claims that he offered real witnesses to ABC that would debunk the story but apparently they weren’t interested. He went on to say that companies like ABC are just out to bash the GOP and protect Obama as he tries to get re-elected.

Now I understand Newt’s frustration and do agree with his feelings about the media but he was really just acting like a cornered dog – snapping at anything he deemed a threat. Whether the incident happened or not, it was well over a decade ago and the fact that the media and his ex-wife are bringing this story out now just shows that they are only out to hurt him. Frankly, as I’ve said before, I don’t care what a politicians dick does; I just care about how they lead and the decisions they make.

In an effort to save himself from looking like an ass, John King asks the other candidates their thoughts on the issue. Santorum skirts around giving a real answer and just mumbles about morals, leadership and Jesus. Romney says “Let’s get to the real issues.” Ron Paul warns about the corporate run media and how they can shape public opinion.

Ron Paul is then asked about whether or not we need the federal government to set up specific plans to help solve the unemployment problem. Paul says that we need sound currency and for the federal government to get out of the way. He calls for a near zero percent income tax and for regulation to be reduced in order to help create more jobs. He explains that we need to get rid of our excessive debt and malinvestments. He adds that the government shouldn’t be bailing people out and that they need to just stay out of everything. He says that they should focus on enforcing contract laws and bankruptcy. On the same subject, Newt says that we have to eliminate Dodd-Frank. He also talks about tapping into offshore natural gas, as that industry could create tons of jobs. He adds that we should look at overhauling the Corps of Engineers.

King switches the discussion over to Romney and Bain Capital. I’m so tired of this damn subject. Newt claims that Bain’s business model destroyed companies. Romney, like a fucking coward, diverts the whole issue and goes back to talking about job creation. Mittens blames Obama for using crony capitalism which is just a soulless attempt at getting cheap pops from the crowd. He then rambles about unimportant nonsense but throws “capitalism” around for even more cheap pops. It gets to the point where all I hear is “Capitalism!” “Capitalism!” “Capitalism!” “Capitalism!” and applause. Santorum jumps in and says that he “..still believes in capitalism.” Man, this guy is funny! He then tells stories about Iowa just so he can make an Iowa connection and brag about how it came out earlier in the day that he actually won Iowa and not Romney.

Ron Paul is asked if the federal government should help veterans get jobs, as statistically the unemployment problem hits vets the hardest. Paul says that he is concerned about soldiers coming home and trying to adjust to regular life again. He says that the vets do need help especially in regards to health. He talks about how veterans traditionally get shortchanged. He also talks about helping them with their mental health, as the suicide rate for veterans is very high.

Santorum is asked the same question as Paul. He feels that there should be special preferences for veterans. He then turns that into a rant about Obama wanting to cut the military and says that it is “disgusting”. On the same subject, Romney says that while he was governor of Massachusetts he helped vets with college and job training. This isn’t about you asshole. He then spins it into typical Romney rhetoric and finishes by saying he will build a military so strong, no one will dare test us. What about people who like challenges Mr Romney? Someone will always test it. Gingrich then talks some smack about Ron Paul which turns into him calling for a transition program for veterans, which is essentially the same thing Paul was suggesting.

On Obamacare, Mitt Romney says that an executive order won’t kill the bill. He says that we have to go after a complete repeal. He adds to his point that the American people need to stand strong and united in order to influence Democrats to help end Obamacare. Mitt then says that he will replace Obamacare with his own program. Huh? Wait.. what? Mitt claims that he will protect people and give them insurance options. He then says that he’ll help save health care with “free market principles”. Oddly, none of this sounds like “free market principles”. All Romney proposes to fix government intervention into health care is a different form of government intervention into health care. Government intervention is the opposite of free market.

Continuing on with the health care portion of the debate, Newt Gingrich tells parents to vote for the GOP candidate because they’ll create an environment that’ll get kids out of the house and off of their insurance plans. Santorum disses Romney and starts a Romneycare rant. Ricky Boy then starts dissing Gingrich for being in favor of individual mandates. Rick then talks about how he was the author and architect of a private health reform project that no one but him was interested in. Romney responds to Santorum saying that Romneycare wasn’t a government run system. He then points out that people in Massachusetts still approve of Romneycare 3-to-1. Mitt also claims that insurance rates dropped under his plan. Ricky Boy jumps back in and says Mitt’s facts are wrong and then reveals that Romneycare was the model for Obamacare! Dude, that’s like really old fucking news. Romney and Santorum then go back and forth for what seems like forever on Medicare and Medicaid.

Gingrich then jumps in, making it a three man dick-wagging contest. He calls Santorum “mildly lazy”. He then says that he led the charge against Hillarycare and that he was the guy that helped Rick Santorum try to gain traction with his private health reform project. He then challenges Obama to a Lincoln-Douglas style debate, which causes Santorum to make fun of him for suggesting that without having yet earned the GOP nomination. They then go back and forth as John King tries to bring Paul, the only doctor on stage, into the health care debate.

Ron Paul admits that the likelihood of repealing Obamacare isn’t good. He then talks about how he practiced medicine before government got involved and describes how well it worked back then. Paul points out that Santorum, regardless of his claims, expanded government control over health care based off of his policies. Paul then gets into the massive spending on the military and talks about how if we can bring that down, we’d have more to use elsewhere, even though he plans to attack the budget on every front.

Rick Santorum is asked about Newt Gingrich’s recent comments that called for Santorum to drop out of the race. Ricky Boy looks kind of hurt by the question, poorly shrugs it off and says that grandiosity is Newt’s style. He then points out again that he won Iowa and had twice as many votes as Newt so Newt should STFU and GTFO. Ricky Boy then claims that he was 2-0 going into South Carolina, which is a blatant lie. Then, comparing himself to Gingrich, says that he is steady and solid and even if he isn’t charismatic and doesn’t have good soundbites he is still a top tier candidate. Santorum basically said, “Hey, if you didn’t know my faults, here they are! Vote for me! Lulz!”

Gingrich then immediately gives us a Reagan name drop, as well as a Jack Kemp name drop. He goes on to describe his record versus Santorum’s and says that Rick isn’t qualified to be president. He adds that we need real leadership that can take on big projects and makes it known that Santorum can’t carry the ball at that level. Ricky Boy snaps back, getting personal, saying that under Newt, the House of Representatives was “undisciplined”. He then says that Newt doesn’t have the courage to stand up against rival leadership. Newt then lists off all the shit he did that he feels is bad ass, in an effort to prove that he is a rebel.

Continuing with the pot-stiriing bullshit, John King asks Romney about him calling Gingrich an unreliable leader. Mitt diverts the question in typical Mitt fashion and instead, talks about how the spat between Newt and Rick is why we need “a guy that’s lived in the streets to run this country.” By streets he means inside of the gated community. Romney filibusters for so long he pauses, looks at Newt and literally asks him “where are we at?” because he can’t even remember the original question and apparently can’t follow his own train of thoughts. Mitt comes back though and takes a shot at Newt saying that if he and Reagan were so tight, why is he only mentioned once in his diary.. oh snap! Gingrich doesn’t even flinch, he just name drops Reagan again, ignoring Mitt’s comment about them not being homies. Suddenly everything starts to fall apart on stage and we are stuck in another long-winded three man dick-wagging contest. There was almost some full-on full frontal fencing between the three swashbucklers.

The issue of releasing tax returns is brought up. Ron Paul says that he is afraid to release his as he’d feel embarrassed to have his income compared to those of the other men on stage. Paul jokingly points out that he isn’t a fat cat like the dick-wagging three amigos who are ballin’ outta control. Romney says he will release his taxes in April when he is done with them. Hasn’t this motherfucker heard of Turbo Tax? It’s January and I’ve got my taxes done already. That shit only took twenty minutes! Romney then wastes everyone’s time to ramble about Obama playing golf while Americans are out of work. He then bitches about the pipeline and Obamacare and doesn’t seem to realize that other people need to answer the tax question. Gingrich says that if there is nothing to hide, then Mitt should release his tax info. Newt adds that he released his earlier in the evening. Santorum says that his taxes are on his computer at home and that he hasn’t done them yet, as he’s been campaigning. When asked exactly when and how he will release his tax info, Mitt says that he doesn’t know and gets greeted with a chorus of incredibly loud boos. However, South Carolinians are apparently gullible as Mitt quickly adds that he “..won’t apologize for being successful”, which causes them all to cheer. I think these people have serious ADD.

Santorum and Paul then get into a spat. Ricky Boy starts by saying he would cut corporate taxes in order to allow us to compete with our foreign rivals. Paul comes in and says that you have to create the right conditions to bring companies back to America. He explains how free trade with China actually helps the American economy, contrary to modern conservative bullshit. Paul then points out that Santorum has damaged the economy by not supporting “right to work”. Santorum snaps back saying that he would support it as president. Sure you would now dicknose because you’re pandering to the people!

The hot button issue of the week, SOPA and PIPA, come up. Just the mention of SOPA gets the crowd fired up to where they boo loudly and uncontrollably. Gingrich is questioned about it first and he responds to King saying, “You’re asking a conservative about the intellectual interest of Hollywood?” In typical fashion, Newt’s clever one-liner got a lot of applause and cheers, however it is just a clever one-liner and pretty soulless as it offers no substance and doesn’t answer anything. Truth be told, whether he’s a conservative and Hollywood is liberal doesn’t matter. Artists have a right to own their own property and not have it infringed upon. Newt doesn’t care about the rights of who he perceives as his enemy however. Now I am not saying this in support of SOPA and PIPA, I vehemently oppose those laws; I am just pointing out how empty Newt’s one-liners are. After his big soundbite, he looks a little befuddled, like he has no idea what all this SOPA and PIPA talk is. He does finally add that laws already exist that allow companies to sue those who infringe on them.

Romney says that Gingrich is right and adds that the SOPA and PIPA laws are too intrusive and too expansive. He feels that these laws would have a “depressing impact” on the Internet and all of the industries attached to it. Romney wants more effective laws to bring the digital pirates to justice and says that these laws aren’t going to do that.

Ron Paul tells us that he was the first Republican to come out and oppose the law. He then says that the bills will not pass but that everyone should be vigilant as similar laws will come back up in the future. Paul feels that the Republicans have been on the wrong side of the issue. He then says that freedom and the Constitution bring people together and this is a great example of it due to the strong opposition to these laws all over the Internet.

Santorum says that he doesn’t agree with the law but then goes on a tangent about how the Internet isn’t a free zone where people can just trample on the rights of others. What the fuck does he know? His computer is powered by musk turtles. Santorum, who is talking against SOPA and PIPA, as the crowd hates it, still thinks that there should be a law like it. He then asks, “Who on the Internet said ‘anything goes’?” Shut up fucktard.

The debate then shifts to illegal immigration and border security, which these fucking guys have talked to death every single debate. I honestly lose interest and find myself staring into an empty bottle of bourbon that was used to wash down the twelve pounds of sushi I ate just a couple of hours prior. I snap out of my sushi-bourbon coma and hear Newt talking about modernizing visas, Ron Paul talking about how taking care of the needs of illegals hurts our schools and hospitals and then I get distracted by porn on the other television.

Gingrich and Romney argue over pro-life shit for quite some time and then Santorum jumps in making it round three of the GOP dick fencing competition. John King steps in after this abortion debate has raged on forever and goes to Ron Paul in an effort to change the subject. The crowd immediately erupts with boos as they are not happy that, once again, the only doctor on the stage was left out of a medical portion of the debate.

Ron Paul, on abortion, says that laws won’t correct the morality of people. Santorum jumps on his shit and says that he only has a 50 percent “right to life” voting record, responding to what he thinks is an attack on him by Paul. Ron Paul laughs and tells Ricky Boy that he is “too sensitive” as he wasn’t referring to him in his comments. Paul then goes on to explain how bullshit his 50 percent “right to life” voting record is, as he follows the Constitution and his record with that is 100 percent. Paul further explains that these “right to life” laws should be handled at the state level and that is how he has always voted. Santorum just stands there like a dork dick with his bitch tail between his bitch knees.

The debate ends with a segment where the candidates are given time to beg the South Carolinians for their vote. They all say what they have all been known to say over the course of this primary adventure and I don’t feel like wasting time typing out the details. This was a pretty good debate, there have been better ones and worse ones. Ron Paul’s time was limited due to the gay three-way the other candidates were having but Paul utilized the time he had brilliantly and really pulled off one of his best performances. Paul was the real winner here and Gingirch, although I don’t like many of his answers, also did well after having a really shitty day due to his ex-wife. Santorum sucked per usual and Mitt just looked like a sack of crap. Mitt getting booed made me giddy inside.

Grading Scale:
Grade A+: Ron Paul
Grade A-: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Rick Santorum
Grade D-: Mitt Romney

How television executives are adjusting to the post-Netflix world.

The Television Critics Association press tour is a chance for the networks to show off their new shows and returning hits to television critics. But as viewers increasingly use technology ranging from DVRs to streaming services like Hulu and Netflix to watch television, and as artists increasingly tell and sell stories outside the conventional network structure, how network executives approach technology is as important as how they think about storytelling and marketing. These are the five smartest ideas we heard at the press tour in Pasadena over the last two weeks.

1. Use web content as a development pool for the airwaves.
Executive: Kevin Reilly, Entertainment President, Fox Broadcasting Company
While some of the people who make Internet television series are happy to stay online, there are plenty who would love the support of networks, and to make the jump from the Internet to the airwaves. Friends alum Lisa Kudrow’s Web Therapy, for example, started as a web-only series and is now aired on Showtime. Reilly’s bright idea is to jumpstart that process and to bring it internal. Fox has a strong foothold in animation in prime time with shows like The Simpsons and Family Guy. So Reilly announced that Fox is going to start an aggressive program to develop animated series online to compete with YouTube, which is building out a series of web TV channels anchored by celebrities. And he says that “something that starts in digital could be the next big prime-time hit…You’re seeing those entities [like YouTube] beginning to see the value of content. We have an expertise, and a history, and a proficiency, and a prime-time audience base.” Tech companies from Netflix and Hulu to Yahoo are behaving more like content providers. It’s smart of Fox to start acting like a tech company.

2. If you want critics to assess your ratings more creatively, give them more data.
Executive: John Landgraf, President and General Manager, FX Networks
Landgraf started his session at TCA with a plea to critics to look beyond the ratings of shows when they air in their initial time slot, and to include viewing of repeats of episodes in the same day that they air, and DVR viewings of shows both in the three and seven days after episodes air. Only reporting the first dramatically underestimates the true audience for his shows, Landgraf argued, saying “We’re getting paid, from an ad sales standpoint, for about a third of the audience of our show…if we hadn’t gotten into the ownership [of shows that air on other networks] business, we’d be struggling to maintain this level of business.”

But ratings come out in piecemeal ways, and it can be hard to aggregate numbers and draw trends. So I asked Landgraf if he’d build a portal or tool for journalists to help us get the data we need to do what he’s asking. He said he would. If he lives up to that promise, it would help journalists quantify the time-shifting revolution—especially if other networks follow.

3. Help advertisers find their way to audiences, not shows—and support cult favorite series, while you’re at it.
Executive: Andy Forssell, Senior Vice President of Content, Hulu
You know all that time you spend watching Community on Hulu? And clicking yes or no when the company asks if the ads you’re watching are relevant to you? Or subscribing to Hulu Plus? Hulu generates a lot of information about who you are and what you watch. And when the company’s 1,069 advertisers come to them and want to reach a very specific audience, Hulu tells them exactly where to go, even if it’s to shows that they wouldn’t expect. In other words, Hulu is treating television programming like print content’s being treated online for years. And if that approach can generate extra revenue for low-rated but critically-brilliant shows like Community, all to the good.

4. If you want people to put television on their calendars, make television that’s worth the appointment—in every way.
Executive: Paul Lee, President, ABC Entertainment Group
Lee isn’t alone in recognizing this. But he was the executive of the press tour to point out that if you want people to plan their weeks around television shows, you have to give them not just can’t-miss plots but visual spectacles that they want to see on television screens, which have gotten larger and cheaper even as we’ve added multiple smaller screens. “I think part of that is we are taking risks and having fun and a lot of feature [movie] directors are attracted to that…that’s one of the reasons you saw Phillip Noyce” (the movie director who helmed two episodes of ABC’s Revenge and an upcoming episode of HBO’s Luck) “coming in. I think you’re going to see feature actors as well as directors.” The profusion of movie actors, such as Anjelica Huston on Smash, Josh Lucas on The Firm, and Dustin Hoffman on Luck, coming to the small screen in mid-season seems to be proving him right. It may not have worked for The Firm, which is floundering, but we’ll see how Smash and Luck do.

5. Time slots don’t matter. Nor does waiting between episodes. Or traditional seasons.
Netflix didn’t present at press tour this year, but the service and other streaming providers were an undeniable factor. Particularly given how many questions executives were asked about serialized versus one-off storytelling. They’re in a bind: serialized stories may make it harder for viewers to drop in casually or mid-season, but they may also hold up as more consistent and coherent for viewers who binge on entire seasons of television at a time. In its foray into original content, Netflix is leaning heavily towards serialization, releasing the entire season of its mobsters-in-Scandanavia drama Lilyhammer at once. Technological developments don’t just affect distribution and marketing: They affects storytelling, too. And all the networks are trying to figure out what that means for them.

Source: The Atlantic.

It’s unclear exactly why, but the Department of Homeland has been operating a ”Social Networking/Media Capability” program to monitor the top blogs, forums and social networks online for at least the past 18 months. Based on a privacy compliance review from last November recently obtained by Reuters, the purpose of the project is to “collect information used in providing situational awareness and establishing a common operating picture.” Whatever that means. Either way, the list of sites reported by Reuters reveals in a Wednesday afternoon exclusive is pretty intriguing:

Social Networks

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Myspace

Blogs

• The Drudge Report
• The Huffington Post
• The New York Times‘s Lede blog
• Wired’s Threat Level
• Wired’s Danger Room
• ABC News’ investigative blog The Blotter
• “blogs that cover bird flu … news and activity along U.S. borders … drug trafficking and cybercrime”

Multimedia

• Hulu
• YouTube
• Flickr

In conclusion, the Department of Homeland Security is just like you. We’ve seen no reports of The Atlantic Wire being on the list. But if we are, hello Department of Homeland Security employees — thanks for reading!

Source: The Atlantic Wire.

Freedom of speech might allow journalists to get away with a lot in America, but the Department of Homeland Security is on the ready to make sure that the government is keeping dibs on who is saying what.

Under the National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative that came out of DHS headquarters in November, Washington has the written permission to retain data on users of social media and online networking platforms.

Specifically, the DHS announced the NCO and its Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS) can collect personal information from news anchors, journalists, reporters or anyone who may use “traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”

According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.

Also included in the roster of those subjected to the spying are government officials, domestic or not, who make public statements, private sector employees that do the same and “persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest,” which to itself opens up the possibilities even wider.

The department says that they will only scour publically-made info available while retaining data, but it doesn’t help but raise suspicion as to why the government is going out of their way to spend time, money and resources on watching over those that helped bring news to the masses.

The development out of the DHS comes at the same time that U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady denied pleas from supporters of WikiLeaks who had tried to prevent account information pertaining to their Twitter accounts from being provided to federal prosecutors. Jacob Applebaum and others advocates of Julian Assange’s whistleblower site were fighting to keep the government from subpoenaing information on their personal accounts that were collected from Twitter.

Last month the Boston Police Department and the Suffolk Massachusetts District Attorney subpoenaed Twitter over details pertaining to recent tweets involving the Occupy Boston protests.

The website Fast Company reports that the intel collected by the Department of Homeland Security under the NOC Monitoring Initiative has been happening since as early as 2010 and the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.

Source: RT.

Stocks added to their sharp gains on the first trading day of the New Year following a better-than-expected manufacturing and construction reports in addition to a robust economic report from China.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared, led by BofA [BAC  5.89    0.33 (+5.94%)   ] and JPMorgan [JPM  34.86    1.61  (+4.84%)   ].

The S&P 500 and the Nasdaq also rallied sharply. The CBOE Volatility Index, widely considered the best gauge of fear in the market, was trading near 23.

All 10 S&P sectors were firmly in the black, led by financials and materials.

CONTINUED at CNBC.

At UCLA’s Laboratory of Integrative Neuroimaging Technology, researchers use functional MRI brain scans to observe brain signal changes that take place during mental activity. They then employ computerized machine learning (ML) methods to study these patterns and identify the cognitive state — or sometimes the thought process — of human subjects. The technique is called “brain reading” or “brain decoding.”

In a new study, the UCLA research team describes several crucial advances in this field, using fMRI and machine learning methods to perform “brain reading” on smokers experiencing nicotine cravings.

…In essence, the algorithm was able to complete or “predict” the subjects’ mental states and thought processes in much the same way that Internet search engines or texting programs on cell phones anticipate and complete a sentence or request before the user is finished typing. And this machine learning method based on Markov processes demonstrated a large improvement in accuracy over traditional approaches, the researchers said.

…In future research, the neuroscientists said, they will be using these machine learning methods in a biofeedback context, showing subjects real-time brain readouts to let them know when they are experiencing cravings and how intense those cravings are, in the hopes of training them to control and suppress those cravings.

CONTINUED at Eureka Alert.