Oh wow…now this sucks.
HURRAY FOR 100 POSTS!
================
Quiz for monday…under 3 hours
Work, power, energy,pressure,depth, thermal properties of matter, buoyancy,heat,thermal resistance,convection, thermodynamics.
yep…my life sucks when its physics time -_-. not that i am illiterate in the field (mind you, i got a 94 on my prelims, 1.5 in UST’s grading system) its just so irritating that he has to give a quiz about all the topics of the finals in one freaking day, for 3 freaking hours. does he have any idea how many calculations, formulas, and terms we have to remember?! the F*CK is up with that >_> then on friday, we’ll be having a quiz AGAIN on the 6 reports which i barely understood since i really don’t like listening to reports in the afternoon when i’m sleepy and all 
the ones i can remember: electric current, sound waves, wavelength, intensity of sound. and the other 2 i just erased from my head >_> and NO i don’t remember ALL THOSE SLIDES (reports were all shown via powerpoint). i just remember the topics…and maybe some of the words but not all of them. about 30% i guess.
update on my student life:
finished my written reports on enzymes and pigments. vitamins will be last (10 pages each >_>)
unfinished homework in calculus concering trigonometric integrals
unfinished homework in food analysis
unfinished article review on food chemistry
almost finished technical writing report on E.Coli (with all the professional format and formalities including a thesis statement and data sheets @_@)
haven’t studied for the quiz on the informal fallacies of logic (from ad ignorantiam upto ad mefailingthequiz)
i actually expected my weekends to be busy…but not CRAMMED with all these subjects @_@ not to mention that my data 2 for the effect of vit.e on the rancidity of corn oils was lost by a classmate of mine who borrowed my manual without my permission. it just so happens that i keep my “scratch” data there in a piece of paper. and damn! it fell wherever >_> i could only theorize the effect on week 2 now T_T and this report was going to be my favorite since it was so easy! guess i’ll be hitting the book shelves…AGAIN.
hope you guys have a better status in life. ’cause mine’s just about to blow up!
Google To Fund Ideas That Will Change the World
“This week, as part of their tenth birthday celebration, Google announced the launch of project ten to the 100th, a project designed to inspire and fund the development of ideas that will help to change the world. They have called on members of the public to share their ideas for solutions that will help as many people as possible in the global community, offering a $10 million prize pool to back the development of those chosen as winners. ‘We know there are countless brilliant ideas that need funding and support to come to fruition,’ says Bethany Poole, Project Marketing Manager for Google. ‘These ideas can be big or small, technology-driven or brilliantly simple — but they need to have impact.’ The project’s website asks entrants to classify their ideas into one of eight categories listed as Community, Opportunity, Energy, Environment, Health, Education, Shelter and Everything Else. Members of the public have until October 20th to submit their ideas by completing a simple form and answering a few short questions about their idea.”
MythBusters Viewer Challenge!
Calling the MythBusters YouTube community… submit your myth to Adam and Jamie for the NEXT viral video episode, coming in 2009!
Tell us which YouTube videos you’d like to see debunked by posting the USERNAME and TITLE of the video in the comments section. Or post them as a video response and tell us what you’d like to see Adam and Jamie tackle next.
If you want to submit a clip to be considered for testing on MythBusters, please make sure to review these terms first:
Do not do anything reckless, dangerous or illegal in the preparation of your clip.
Do not do or include anything that is a violation of anyone’s privacy.
By submitting a clip and participating, you agree that you and your participants release, discharge, indemnify and hold harmless Beyond Productions Pty Limited (Beyond), Discovery Communications, LLC. (Discovery) and Discovery’s cable service providers from any and all claims, actions, costs, damages and expenses, including those arising in any way out of your creation of the clip, posting the clip, or Discovery or Beyond’s use of the clip.
===============
Writer’s note: i wanna submit an entry! but i don’t know what! O_O and LOL on Jamie looks like he has a small head 
House Republicans Rebuff Bush on Bailout
WASHINGTON — The seeds of the House Republican revolt over the financial industry bailout were sown in an e-mail message circulated Monday night as internal animosity built quickly over the Bush administration’s request for $700 billion to prevent an economic collapse.
In a message to members of the conservative Republican Study Committee, leaders of the bloc of more than 100 lawmakers solicited ideas, calling for a “free-market alternative to the Treasury Department’s proposal so that, regardless of how individual R.S.C. members vote on final passage, House conservatives have something to be for.”
As the week progressed, it became abundantly clear that one thing conservative Republicans were most certainly not for was the Treasury plan, prompting them to begin searching for an alternative to avoid the perception of strictly being naysayers.
By the end of Friday, at least a portion of their alternative seemed likely to be included in the broader proposal as a sweetener for Republicans, although closed-door negotiations continued into the evening on Friday, and the contours of the final package remained in limbo.
After years of acceding to the White House on a variety of initiatives despite deep misgivings, House Republicans found the administration’s latest proposal to be too much to swallow.
Just as they were trying to reassert themselves as a party of fiscal restraint, President Bush, on his way out the White House door, was asking them to sign off of on a $700 billion bailout built on taxpayer dollars, with very few questions allowed.
“You were being asked to choose between financial meltdown on the one hand and taxpayer bankruptcy and the road to socialism on the other and you were told do it in 24 hours,” Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, head of the conservative group, said. “It was just never going to happen.”
As they dig in against the White House, House Republicans are drawing strength and encouragement from outside critics of the bailout, like former Speaker Newt Gingrich and the Club for Growth, a conservative economic group known for financing primary challenges against apostate Republicans.
Richard Viguerie, the longtime conservative leader, on Friday heralded House Republicans for guarding against “this total cave-in by President Bush and the Senate Republicans.”
The resistance caps two years of frustration among House Republicans after losing the majority in 2006. They believe they have suffered serious mistreatment at the hands of the Democrats and that they have been marginalized in legislative negotiations since they, unlike their Senate counterparts, do not have the procedural weapons to force their way to the negotiating table.
They also complain that Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. has been too quick to bargain mainly with Democrats, led by the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, and Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, not only on this plan but on the stimulus proposal earlier this year, a subsequent housing bill and other economic measures.
The Monday e-mail message, which led to a statement of principles that many other conservatives embraced, became their manifesto. By Thursday, a legislative alternative was circulating, one centered on federal insurance for mortgage assets combined with tax cuts on investment gains. When Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, put that alternative on the table at the White House on Thursday afternoon, a verbal brawl broke out, scuttling a grand compromise and forcing negotiators back to the table.
With the blessing of Mr. Boehner, the plan was promoted by a troika made up of Mr. Hensarling along with Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, a major fund-raiser and a rising star in the Republican ranks, and Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, who is seen as one of the sharpest economic minds in the Republican conference.
The legislative alternative, combined with anger at their vastly reduced power on Capitol Hill and fueled by an internal power struggle , has made House Republicans suddenly relevant again. They have become the chief impediment to speedy approval of a bailout plan, because Democrats say they will not push one through on their own.
It represents a risky approach, raising the prospect that Republicans could be blamed if the bailout collapses and the markets plunge. But they could also claim victory if some of their plan is incorporated into the final product and it generates Republican support — still a large question mark as negotiations continued. Democrats and the Treasury Department both say the Republican plan is flawed and unworkable.
Recognizing the prospect that a failure could be attributed to them, Republicans took pains Friday to make it clear they recognized some government intervention was necessary, just not the sort sought by the White House. And Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 2 House Republican, was tapped to serve as an official emissary to the negotiations.
Mr. Cantor acknowledged, “People want to see a deal made, no question about it.”
Yet, at the same time, it was becoming quite obvious that some House Republicans no longer saw themselves as an extension of the Bush White House.
For example, in advance of the president’s speech Wednesday, Representative Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, a member of the Republican leadership, sent out this statement expressing his pique: “Who’s giving the Republican response?”
The revolt surprised many because the Republican leadership of the House and Senate initially appeared to be solidly in Mr. Paulson’s corner. Participants at last week’s meeting between the leadership and administration economic advisers said Mr. Boehner was among those most willing to endorse a drastic intervention, a position he emphasized in a later television interview, calling for speedy action.
But he began rolling back as the negotiations moved ahead and was adamant, after the Thursday announcement of a deal in principle, that there was no deal he had blessed. By Thursday night, he had moved behind the Republican alternative, demanding it get a hearing.
Aides to Mr. Boehner said he was motivated partly by what he saw as a political effort by Democrats to seal a deal before Senator John McCain, the party’s presidential candidate, could have a say in talks when he arrived Thursday.
On Friday, when House Republicans met to review the state of play, Mr. Boehner received a standing ovation at the Republican meeting in tribute to his decision to balk at the plan.
“Republicans say they believe they stand to be rewarded for forcing closer review of the bailout. They say Democrats can always pass the Treasury plan on their own.
“If Democrats believe the only plan that will save the economy is the Paulson plan, they have the power and the moral responsibility to go ahead and pass it,” said Mr. Hensarling. “They don’t have to have Republican votes to get it done.”
Flu-fighting efforts focus on getting kids immunized
Dr. Gerald R. Greene, a pediatrician in Highland, helped coordinate a complicated flu-immunization program for children in San Bernardino County.
With flu season nearly here, the push is on to curtail outbreaks — and the spread of disease. The best place to start appears to be schoolchildren.
THE UPCOMING flu season could be the start of something big.
Not “big” as in the severity of flu. By all accounts, this year’s influenza vaccine should be more successful than last year’s only partly effective one. And it’s too early to tell whether the flu this season will be especially widespread.
Over the last decade, public health officials have been expanding the recommendations on which age groups of children should get the flu shot. This year marks the first time in history that flu vaccination is recommended for everyone age 18 and younger, with the exception of infants 6 months old and younger.
The main question is: Will parents go for it?
Physicians hope that vaccinating kids en masse will not only spare thousands of them from the aches and pains of flu, missed school days and hospitalizations, but also will hinder the spread of illness throughout the rest of society — parents, grandparents, baby-sitters, neighbors, teachers, coaches, office workers, healthcare personnel, bus drivers, and on and on.
“This is the concept of herd immunity,” says Dr. Stephen C. Aronoff, chairman of the department of pediatrics at Temple University in Philadelphia. “The more people you vaccinate, the less likely you are to see infection in people who are not vaccinated.”
For example, a vaccinated child won’t pick up the virus at school, bring it home to Mom and Dad, who then infect their co-workers, clients and any others with whom they come in contact, including elderly people. Children, because of their biology and their not-too-great hygiene, are germy little beings who have the potential to spread flu far and wide.
Flu vaccination guidelines made by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have undergone major revisions over the last 20 years as more evidence points to children as carriers of the disease. In 2004, a recommendation was added that babies age 6 months to 23 months be vaccinated. In 2005, the CDC tacked on vaccination for age 24 to 59 months (with the exception of some children with illnesses such as reactive breathing disorders).
The recommendation to add youths ages 5 through 18, announced earlier this year, is based primarily on the fact that children suffer disproportionately from flu. Roughly 1 in 100 kids with flu is hospitalized, and 75 to 150 children die each year of the disease. Death rates are much higher among those 65 and older, but the rates of hospitalization for children 2 and younger match those of the elderly, and children 2 to 5 have the highest rates of seeing a doctor or visiting the emergency room because of the flu. And overall, young people ages 5 to 18 have the highest rates of infection.
“There is a higher rate of infection with influenza in school-age children — what we call the highest attack rate,” says Dr. Jeanne Santoli, deputy director of the Immunization Services Division of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at CDC. “We know the vaccine is effective in this age group, and we know it’s safe. So the recommendation is based on the direct benefit to these children. But there’s another reason too. What does it mean to the community if we vaccinate these children?”
Vaccinating children could mean less flu all around, research suggests. From 1962 through 1987, most schoolchildren in Japan were vaccinated, and flu rates and deaths dropped significantly throughout the Japanese population.
In another example, officials in a small town in Michigan vaccinated schoolchildren at the start of the 1968 flu pandemic. The town had one-third the number of flu cases overall of nearby towns where children were not vaccinated.
Studies show that children are especially potent transmitters of the flu, says John Talarico, interim chief of immunization at the California Department of Health Services. Adults transmit flu germs for three to five days after symptoms first appear; children, about 10 days.
Expanding the pool of vaccine recipients is probably only part of the solution to curbing flu outbreaks, says Dr. Peter Szilagyi, a pediatrician and expert in child immunizations at the University of Rochester Medical Center in Rochester, N.Y.
“We also need more effective vaccines. I think the combination of those two things will really help.”
In the meantime, the CDC will be monitoring outbreaks over the next several years to determine whether its push to immunize children reduces the nation’s flu load.
Top 10 Mobile Phone Screwups
Los Angeles (CA) – Mobile phone engineering and marketing is all about compromises, but sometimes these compromises turn the phone into a very expensive paper weight. Sure, you can’t exactly cram every feature under the known Universe into a phone, but at least give us the features that we want.
iPhone: sealed batteries
It’s remarkable that the iPhone succeeded at all with so many weaknesses, but what’s remarkable is that it managed to get away with a non-user-replaceable battery. I mean, how many phones with sealed batteries can you count? But that’s not all, the iPhone battery replacement program slaps you with a $79 service fee for the replacement battery, plus $6.95 for shipping. Now you know why Apple likes iPhone batteries sealed. What’s next? Cars with sealed reservoirs that can be refueled only at Shell gas stations?
Android G: no headphone jack
The first Android-powered Google phone is an excellent device at first sight. On a closer inspection, however, compromises and weird design choices start to show. We were tempted to pick G1’s plasticky appearance and the aesthetics that surely won’t win any beauty contest, but it is the lack of headphone jack that truly amazes us. It’s beyond comprehension how collective design minds of Google, HTC and T-Mobile came to such design. It’s almost as if Apple made cool new iPod with a tiny mono speaker and no headphone jack.
Blackberry Touch: I am the iPhone lookalike
The first Blackberry touch-based smartphone reminds me of Steve Ballmer in this “I am a PC!” video. Touch screams “I am an iPhone lookalike (and proud of it)” and we’re sure that it will do really great e-mail. That’s about it, really, thanks to practically lack of any form of marketing from Blackberry. Underselling itself is the biggest blunder of Blackberry Touch. If you want to compete with iPhone, you just don’t keep your mouth shut.
Garmin Nuvifone: another propriatory operating system
Garmin Nuvifone came out of nowhere. We admit, we are sold on the idea of the GPS focused mobile phone from a compan specialized in GPS navigation systems. Unfortunately, this indicates Nuvifone could suck as a mobile phone. Not that it is short on specifications – on the contrary – but all that hardware is useless without elegant software. Instead for choosing, for example, Android or Windows Mobile, Garmin decided to power Nuvifone with its own operating system used in their GPS gadgets. Now, everyone who has used Garmin’s navigation equipment knows that it comes short of sleek graphics, smooth animation and desktop-like features. It’s the software, stupid!
Motorola Z1: kick-arse kick-slider causes back-bending
Motorola didn’t learn a thing from last year’s problems that plagued Z8 slider-phone. The Symbian-powered Z10 is take-two for the kick-slider concept that hinges the phone as it opens into a curved shape. And what is the reasoning behind this wizardry? It allegedly improves call quality by bringing the microphone closer to the mouth. It wasn’t really necessary to tank the otherwise great handset that has excellent video recording capabilities juts for the sake of wow effect when you kick-slide it open. Do it too many times and you risk back-bending.
Nokia N96: feature beast for geeks
Expected to arrive during the quarter, Nokia N96 is by any measure a feature monster that has it all. But top-notch hardware has no match in software and the end result is actually a concept phone that proves how much can be crammed into a handset. N96 is not perfectly balanced product, although it could have been. It is too heavy, looks bulky and if its predecessor is any indication, clunky user interface and unreliable navigation button will appeal only to geeks. If only we could have the iPhone with N96 hardware.
Nokia Tube: boring, commodity “lifestyle” phone
Finnish mobile phone leader will bring a plethora of touch screen-based devices to the market by year’s end and one of them is going to be called Tube. The device will be aimed at “volume market”, which most likely means a lot of compromises. Why is it taking Nokia so long to come up with a product that can take the iPhone head-to-head? Tube is the biggest blunder because it looks like to be typical underwhelming, cheap phone aimed at average consumers who really doesn’t but the lifestyle that Nokia serves in ads.
Palm Treo Pro: tiny, narrow physical keyboard
I don’t get it… With 50% of Americans with sausage fingers, Palm makes this touchscreen phone with a narrow physical QWERTY keyboard below the screen. Guys, if you bothered to make a real keyboard it’s either landscape-oriented QWERTY keyboard that slides-out beneath the screen or nothing. If Treo Pro had slide-out keyboard like G1, it would have actually been much more interesting smartphone than G1 is. Bar the narrow keyboard, Treo Pro is pretty capable Windows Mobile smartphone.
Samsung Instinct: bad marketing cripples a great product
The only iPhone challenger this summer, Instinct sells for $129 with a 2-year Sprint service contract. It’s a great handset with some features that the iPhone 3G lacks, such as camcorder camera, live TV and music downloads over the cellular network and touchscreen that also works with a stylus. Instinct is also a prime example how bad marketing cripples a great product. Samsung was so confident in Instinct that it made ads that pitched key Instinct features against the iPhone, with both handsets shown side-by-side. As if providing free advertising for the iPhone wasn’t enough, the ads became irrelevant when iPhone 3G came out soon thereafter, but it took Samsung weeks to remove videos from Instinct site. Next phase brought trailers and scenes from an imaginary high-tech spy movie starring Instinct, but they were later removed, too. Makes you wonder who exactly is a target customer for Instinct if not a 13-years old kid?
SonyEricsson Xperia X1: comes too late
If SonyEricsson launched Xperia X1 this summer, it could have become a huge hit and practically the only viable challenger to the iPhone 3G. But man is this phone way too late… With G1’s release and other smartphones scheduled to arrive in the coming weeks, Xperia doesn’t look so groundbreaking anymore – its mojo wore off by now. As if bad timing wasn’t enough, SonyEricsson will initially launch the phone across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, but not in the U.S. where it is expected to come possibly by year’s end.
GAO report critical of FDA oversight of produce
The Food and Drug Administration’s oversight of food safety in the fresh produce industry has been hindered by an inadequate budget and staff, according to a study released by the Government Accountability Office.
At the same time the agency has devoted resources to investigate foodborne illness outbreaks and an increased role in counterterrorism efforts, taking away from inspections and other preventative measures, the office said in a report on fresh produce.
The GAO said in the report, released Sept. 26, that FDA spent $20 million — about 3% of its food safety budget — on fresh produce in 2007. The agency in June requested to have its overall 2009 budget increased by $275 million.
The report highlights the previously published fact that less than 1% of the nation’s fresh produce imports are inspected by FDA. Furthermore, GAO found that 92% of samples taken from imports were tested for pesticides rather than pathogens. The report says inadequate funding led the agency to shed 17% of its food safety staff since it peaked at 3,969 workers in 2003.
The report was critical of FDA’s lack of intervention with domestic firms. The report says that 2,002 domestic companies were inspected an average of two times from 2000 through 2007. Though problems were observed in 41% of these inspections, FDA frequently relied on firms “to take voluntary corrective action.”
The report also includes previously unpublished FDA data indicating that from 1996 through 2006 there were at least 96 outbreaks, 10,253 illnesses and 14 deaths linked to fresh produce.
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.) and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) called for the GAO study after the 2006 E. coli outbreak linked to fresh spinach.
“This report paints a frightening picture of the FDA’s fresh produce safety efforts — insufficient resources and staff, infrequent inspections and a failure to punish known violators,” Boxer said in a statement. “It also offers further proof that the Bush Administration’s disdain for government oversight and regulation has had disastrous consequences in terms of food safety and public health, let alone the financial markets. This report should serve as a wake up call to do more to protect the nation’s food supply.
“I strongly urge the next President to make the necessary administrative changes recommended in this report, and I am committed to working with my colleagues to make sure that Congress passes common-sense legislation to help the FDA achieve its mission of keeping our food safe and healthy to eat,” her statement read.
The GAO reported that the FDA’s Food Protection Plan could significantly enhance the agency’s oversight of the industry. However, since much of that effort remains in the planning stages the report said it is “difficult to assess the likelihood of success.”
The Food Protection Plan includes plans to update guidance on Good Agricultural Practices and Good Manufacturing Practices, and the agency has asked Congress for authority to implement preventive controls for high-risk commodities as part of the plan.
The GAO recommends updating those guidance documents and pursuing preventative controls in the report.
An FDA spokesman could not be reached for comment, but the agency released a statement in response to the report.
“FDA appreciates the Congressional investment in its efforts to implement the Food Protection Plan, which calls for two of the very same authorities recommended in this report,” the agency said. “In addition, FDA will soon be awarding grants to states to further food and feed safety — one of the many steps we are taking to transform food protection.”
The full report is available here.
T-Mobile’s G1 in Pictures
This week T-Mobile introduced the first phone to use the open-source Android operating system. Here’s our look at some of the G1’s most interesting features.
Sizing Up the G1
T-Mobile this week unveiled the first phone to use the open-source Android operating system developed by Google and its partners. The G1, based on HTC’s Dream handset, will be available in the United States starting October 22.
The T-Mobile G1 design is similar to that of the iPhone, but some differences distinguish the two. The G1 is bulkier than the iPhone, nearly 30 percent thicker, and almost 20 percent heavier. Nevertheless, it’s a bit narrower than the iPhone and comes with a 320-by-480 touch screen. Below the screen, the bottom juts out slightly, with five buttons and a small BlackBerry-like trackball to aid screen navigation.
G1 Does Contacts Right
The T-Mobile G1 has a visual contact list that grabs contacts associated with your Gmail and Google Talk accounts and Google Calendar. As on the iPhone, you can flick through your contacts by moving the list up or down. The G1 also uses an “online presence” feature to let you know which contacts are available for a Google Chat or Talk session.
G1 Camera Bests Most Others
On the back of the G1 is a 3.2-megapixel still camera (no video support); it’s a touch higher in quality than the iPhone’s 2-megapixel camera. The improved resolution will translate into slightly better pictures that will be larger in file size. That could be bad news if you aren’t on T-Mobile’s unlimited data plan and you like to send pics from your phone.
Hardwired for Google
Google has its fingerprints all over the G1. Besides coming preloaded with Google Gmail, the handset offers a one-touch search button on the pull-out keyboard that takes you straight to a Google search box. The phone also has a Google search box embedded into its desktop by default.
All About the G1 Web Browser
The G1’s Web browser is based on the same open-source technology (WebKit) as the iPhone’s browser. The big difference when using the G1’s browser is that you can’t employ finger gestures (such as pinching and double-tap for zooming) for page navigation. To zoom in to a portion of a page with the G1, you drag your finger across the screen. Once you do that, a virtual lens allows you to focus on parts of the Web page. You can also choose to view the entire page by zooming completely out.
A Look at the Desktop
The G1’s desktop may appear similar to the iPhone’s, but the G1 desktop is completely customizable. It comes with four standard application icons and a clock widget. You can move the app icons around by holding one down with your finger and dragging it. By flicking to the left or right, you open up other desktops that you can customize just as easily with shortcuts to your favorite applications.
A Keyboard, and a Black-and-White Choice
The G1 has a physical keyboard that reveals itself after you slide open the screen. The keys are flat, requiring you to reach your right thumb around the bottom portion of the G1’s body to press keys. People who don’t care for the iPhone’s virtual keyboard should appreciate this physical QWERTY keyboard.
T-Mobile is following Apple’s lead and keeping color choice for consumers simple. You’ll be able to choose a black or white G1 when the models go on sale October 22 for $179 with a two-year contract. You’ll have to rely on cell phone skins to liven up your device.
Customizable Desktops
T-Mobile’s G1 allows for much more customization of the desktop than competitors do. On the G1 you can put application shortcut icons on the desktop along with shortcuts to a clock, a music playlist, a Web page, or a folder full of documents.
Google Tentacles
Google’s tentacles extend beyond the G1’s access to fast Google searches. Just as the iPhone is optimized for iTunes, the G1 is optimized for Google. Google has customized its services for the G1, going so far as embedding shortcuts for the Google home page, Gmail, Calendar, Reader, and other Google properties directly onto the phone’s desktop.
The Way to a Mobile User’s Heart Is Apps
The ability to add third-party applications to the G1 from the Android Marketplace is one of the most appealing aspects of the phone. The application pictured in this slide is a special version of Google Street View for Android. With it you can view a snapshot of an entire street scene from any of several U.S. cities on your G1. When you move your phone, the Street View scene moves with you. Other Android apps, such as one called Locale, use GPS technology to switch your G1’s ringer to vibrate in a movie theater. Another app, BioWallet, turns the G1’s camera into an iris scanner to help you lock down any sensitive information you might put on the phone.
Accelerometer Not Fully Implemented
Just like the iPhone, the G1 has an accelerometer that detects the phone’s movement and changes the display accordingly when you’re using apps such as Street View. Curiously, the G1 does not rotate the display from portrait to landscape when you’re viewing Web pages or the desktop. You have to flip out the keyboard to get the screen to switch into landscape mode.
Short on Built-In Video Support
The G1 does not natively support video playback; you’ll have to download a third-party video player from the Android Marketplace. And as mentioned before, the G1 will not capture video with its camera.
Access to Apps
Besides the applications that you can launch directly from your desktop, the bulk of your apps reside in a “virtual drawer” that you slide open via a swipe of your finger. Either flick it open with your finger or tap the bottom tab, and it expands to reveal your programs.
============================
Writer’s note: I’m thinking of getting this since its from google, and I’m a proud google fan. But to be honest, any of the latest cellphone companies (Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Samsung) can best this one in terms of Apps and Features.
Transcript of presidential debate
WASHINGTON (CNN ) – Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama are debating on the campus of the University of Mississippi Friday night. The moderator for the debate is Jim Lehrer of the NewsHour on PBS. What follows is the continuing transcript of the debate:
LEHRER: Gentlemen, at this very moment tonight, where do you stand on the financial recovery plan?
First response to you, Senator Obama. You have two minutes.
OBAMA: Well, thank you very much, Jim, and thanks to the commission and the University of Mississippi, “Ole Miss,” for hosting us tonight. I can’t think of a more important time for us to talk about the future of the country.
You know, we are at a defining moment in our history. Our nation is involved in two wars, and we are going through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
And although we’ve heard a lot about Wall Street, those of you on Main Street I think have been struggling for a while, and you recognize that this could have an impact on all sectors of the economy.
And you’re wondering, how’s it going to affect me? How’s it going to affect my job? How’s it going to affect my house? How’s it going to affect my retirement savings or my ability to send my children to college?
So we have to move swiftly, and we have to move wisely. And I’ve put forward a series of proposals that make sure that we protect taxpayers as we engage in this important rescue effort.
No. 1, we’ve got to make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole process; $700 billion, potentially, is a lot of money.
No. 2, we’ve got to make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains, if the market — and when the market returns.
No. 3, we’ve got to make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes.
And, No. 4, we’ve got to make sure that we’re helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country. Read more about the expectations
Now, we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down.
It hasn’t worked. And I think that the fundamentals of the economy have to be measured by whether or not the middle class is getting a fair shake. That’s why I’m running for president, and that’s what I hope we’re going to be talking about tonight.
LEHRER: Senator McCain, two minutes.
MCCAIN: Well, thank you, Jim. And thanks to everybody.
And I do have a sad note tonight. Senator Kennedy is in the hospital. He’s a dear and beloved friend to all of us. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the lion of the Senate.
I also want to thank the University of Mississippi for hosting us tonight.
And, Jim, I — I’ve been not feeling too great about a lot of things lately. So have a lot of Americans who are facing challenges. But I’m feeling a little better tonight, and I’ll tell you why.
Because as we’re here tonight in this debate, we are seeing, for the first time in a long time, Republicans and Democrats together, sitting down, trying to work out a solution to this fiscal crisis that we’re in.
And have no doubt about the magnitude of this crisis. And we’re not talking about failure of institutions on Wall Street. We’re talking about failures on Main Street, and people who will lose their jobs, and their credits, and their homes, if we don’t fix the greatest fiscal crisis, probably in — certainly in our time, and I’ve been around a little while.
But the point is — the point is, we have finally seen Republicans and Democrats sitting down and negotiating together and coming up with a package.
This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight. It has to have options for loans to failing businesses, rather than the government taking over those loans. We have to — it has to have a package with a number of other essential elements to it.
And, yes, I went back to Washington, and I met with my Republicans in the House of Representatives. And they weren’t part of the negotiations, and I understand that. And it was the House Republicans that decided that they would be part of the solution to this problem.
But I want to emphasize one point to all Americans tonight. This isn’t the beginning of the end of this crisis. This is the end of the beginning, if we come out with a package that will keep these institutions stable.
And we’ve got a lot of work to do. And we’ve got to create jobs. And one of the areas, of course, is to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.
LEHRER: All right, let’s go back to my question. How do you all stand on the recovery plan? And talk to each other about it. We’ve got five minutes. We can negotiate a deal right here.
But, I mean, are you — do you favor this plan, Senator Obama, and you, Senator McCain? Do you — are you in favor of this plan?
OBAMA: We haven’t seen the language yet. And I do think that there’s constructive work being done out there. So, for the viewers who are watching, I am optimistic about the capacity of us to come together with a plan.
The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?
Two years ago, I warned that, because of the subprime lending mess, because of the lax regulation, that we were potentially going to have a problem and tried to stop some of the abuses in mortgages that were taking place at the time.
Last year, I wrote to the secretary of the Treasury to make sure that he understood the magnitude of this problem and to call on him to bring all the stakeholders together to try to deal with it.
So — so the question, I think, that we’ve got to ask ourselves is, yes, we’ve got to solve this problem short term. And we are going to have to intervene; there’s no doubt about that.
But we’re also going to have to look at, how is it that we shredded so many regulations? We did not set up a 21st-century regulatory framework to deal with these problems. And that in part has to do with an economic philosophy that says that regulation is always bad.
LEHRER: Are you going to vote for the plan, Senator McCain?
MCCAIN: I — I hope so. And I…
LEHRER: As a United States senator…
MCCAIN: Sure.
LEHRER: … you’re going to vote for the plan?
MCCAIN: Sure. But — but let me — let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that. A lot of us saw this train wreck coming.
But there’s also the issue of responsibility. You’ve mentioned President Dwight David Eisenhower. President Eisenhower, on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letters.
One of them was a letter congratulating the great members of the military and allies that had conducted and succeeded in the greatest invasion in history, still to this day, and forever.
And he wrote out another letter, and that was a letter of resignation from the United States Army for the failure of the landings at Normandy.
Somehow we’ve lost that accountability. I’ve been heavily criticized because I called for the resignation of the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. We’ve got to start also holding people accountable, and we’ve got to reward people who succeed.
But somehow in Washington today — and I’m afraid on Wall Street — greed is rewarded, excess is rewarded, and corruption — or certainly failure to carry out our responsibility is rewarded.
As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen.
LEHRER: Do you have something directly to say, Senator Obama, to Senator McCain about what he just said?
OBAMA: Well, I think Senator McCain’s absolutely right that we need more responsibility, but we need it not just when there’s a crisis. I mean, we’ve had years in which the reigning economic ideology has been what’s good for Wall Street, but not what’s good for Main Street.
And there are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place. And that’s why it’s so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues that have led to wages and incomes for ordinary Americans to go down, the — a health care system that is broken, energy policies that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound.
LEHRER: Say it directly to him.
OBAMA: I do not think that they are.
LEHRER: Say it directly to him.
OBAMA: Well, the — John, 10 days ago, you said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound. And…
MCCAIN: Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?
LEHRER: I’m just determined to get you all to talk to each other. I’m going to try.
OBAMA: The — and I just fundamentally disagree. And unless we are holding ourselves accountable day in, day out, not just when there’s a crisis for folks who have power and influence and can hire lobbyists, but for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer, who, frankly, at the end of each month, they’ve got a little financial crisis going on.
They’re having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments. We haven’t been paying attention to them. And if you look at our tax policies, it’s a classic example.
LEHRER: So, Senator McCain, do you agree with what Senator Obama just said? And, if you don’t, tell him what you disagree with.
MCCAIN: No, I — look, we’ve got to fix the system. We’ve got fundamental problems in the system. And Main Street is paying a penalty for the excesses and greed in Washington, D.C., and on Wall Street.
So there’s no doubt that we have a long way to go. And, obviously, stricter interpretation and consolidation of the various regulatory agencies that weren’t doing their job, that has brought on this crisis.
But I have a fundamental belief in the goodness and strength of the American worker. And the American worker is the most productive, the most innovative. America is still the greatest producer, exporter and importer.
But we’ve got to get through these times, but I have a fundamental belief in the United States of America. And I still believe, under the right leadership, our best days are ahead of us.
LEHRER: All right, let’s go to the next lead question, which is essentially following up on this same subject.
And you get two minutes to begin with, Senator McCain. And using your word “fundamental,” are there fundamental differences between your approach and Senator Obama’s approach to what you would do as president to lead this country out of the financial crisis?
MCCAIN: Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control in Washington. It’s completely out of control. It’s gone — we have now presided over the largest increase in the size of government since the Great Society.
We Republicans came to power to change government, and government changed us. And the — the worst symptom on this disease is what my friend, Tom Coburn, calls earmarking as a gateway drug, because it’s a gateway. It’s a gateway to out-of-control spending and corruption.
And we have former members of Congress now residing in federal prison because of the evils of this earmarking and pork-barrel spending.
You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don’t know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers’ money. And it has got to be brought under control.
As president of the United States, I want to assure you, I’ve got a pen. This one’s kind of old. I’ve got a pen, and I’m going to veto every single spending bill that comes across my desk. I will make them famous. You will know their names.
Now, Senator Obama, you wanted to know one of the differences. a million dollars for every day that he’s been in the United States Senate.
I suggest that people go up on the Web site of Citizens Against Government Waste, and they’ll look at those projects.
That kind of thing is not the way to rein in runaway spending in Washington, D.C. That’s one of the fundamental differences that Senator Obama and I have.
LEHRER: Senator Obama, two minutes.
OBAMA: Well, Senator McCain is absolutely right that the earmarks process has been abused, which is why I suspended any requests for my home state, whether it was for senior centers or what have you, until we cleaned it up.
And he’s also right that oftentimes lobbyists and special interests are the ones that are introducing these kinds of requests, although that wasn’t the case with me.
But let’s be clear: Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget. Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion.
Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important.
And in his tax plan, you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out.
So my attitude is, we’ve got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I’ve called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent.
And that means that the ordinary American out there who’s collecting a paycheck every day, they’ve got a little extra money to be able to buy a computer for their kid, to fill up on this gas that is killing them.
And over time, that, I think, is going to be a better recipe for economic growth than the — the policies of President Bush that John McCain wants to — wants to follow.
LEHRER: Senator McCain?
MCCAIN: Well, again, I don’t mean to go back and forth, but he…
LEHRER: No, that’s fine.
MCCAIN: Senator Obama suspended those requests for pork-barrel projects after he was running for president of the United States. He didn’t happen to see that light during the first three years as a member of the United States Senate, $932 million in requests.
Maybe to Senator Obama it’s not a lot of money. But the point is that — you see, I hear this all the time. “It’s only $18 billion.” Do you know that it’s tripled in the last five years? Do you know that it’s gone completely out of control to the point where it corrupts people? It corrupts people.
That’s why we have, as I said, people under federal indictment and charges. It’s a system that’s got to be cleaned up.
I have fought against it my career. I have fought against it. I was called the sheriff, by the — one of the senior members of the Appropriations Committee. I didn’t win Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate.
Now, Senator Obama didn’t mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs.
Now, that’s a fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama. I want to cut spending. I want to keep taxes low. The worst thing we could do in this economic climate is to raise people’s taxes.
OBAMA: I — I don’t know where John is getting his figures. Let’s just be clear.
What I do is I close corporate loopholes, stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas so that we’re giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage.
I think those are pretty important priorities. And I pay for every dime of it.
But let’s go back to the original point. John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.
But the fact is that eliminating earmarks alone is not a recipe for how we’re going to get the middle class back on track.
OBAMA: And when you look at your tax policies that are directed primarily at those who are doing well, and you are neglecting people who are really struggling right now, I think that is a continuation of the last eight years, and we can’t afford another four.
LEHRER: Respond directly to him about that, to Senator Obama about that, about the — he’s made it twice now, about your tax — your policies about tax cuts.
MCCAIN: Well — well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax.
Right now, the United States of American business pays the second-highest business taxes in the world, 35 percent. Ireland pays 11 percent.
Now, if you’re a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then, obviously, if you go to the country where it’s 11 percent tax versus 35 percent, you’re going to be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, et cetera.
I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in — in the United States of America and create jobs.
But, again, I want to return. It’s a lot more than $18 billion in pork-barrel spending. I can tell you, it’s rife. It’s throughout.
The United States Senate will take up a continuing resolution tomorrow or the next day, sometime next week, with 2,000 — 2,000 — look at them, my friends. Look at them. You’ll be appalled.
And Senator Obama is a recent convert, after requesting $932 million worth of pork-barrel spending projects.
So the point is, I want people to have tax cuts. I want every family to have a $5,000 refundable tax credit so they can go out and purchase their own health care. I want to double the dividend from $3,500 to $7,000 for every dependent child in America.
I know that the worst thing we could possibly do is to raise taxes on anybody, and a lot of people might be interested in Senator Obama’s definition of “rich.”
LEHRER: Senator Obama, you have a question for Senator McCain on that?
OBAMA: Well, let me just make a couple of points.
LEHRER: All right.
OBAMA: My definition — here’s what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut. And if you make less than $250,000, less than a quarter-million dollars a year, then you will not see one dime’s worth of tax increase.
Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right. Here’s the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world.
And what that means, then, is that there are people out there who are working every day, who are not getting a tax cut, and you want to give them more.
It’s not like you want to close the loopholes. You just want to add an additional tax cut over the loopholes. And that’s a problem.
Just one last point I want to make, since Senator McCain talked about providing a $5,000 health credit. Now, what he doesn’t tell you is that he intends to, for the first time in history, tax health benefits.
So you may end up getting a $5,000 tax credit. Here’s the only problem: Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you’re getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you’ve got to go out on the open market and try to buy it.
It is not a good deal for the American people. But it’s an example of this notion that the market can always solve everything and that the less regulation we have, the better off we’re going to be.
MCCAIN: Well, you know, let me just…
LEHRER: We’ve got to go to another lead question.
MCCAIN: I know we have to, but this is a classic example of walking the walk and talking the talk.
We had an energy bill before the United States Senate. It was festooned with Christmas tree ornaments. It had all kinds of breaks for the oil companies, I mean, billions of dollars worth. I voted against it; Senator Obama voted for it.
OBAMA: John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion.
MCCAIN: You’ve got to look at our record. You’ve got to look at our records. That’s the important thing.
Who fought against wasteful and earmark spending? Who has been the person who has tried to keep spending under control?
Who’s the person who has believed that the best thing for America is — is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair? And I’ve fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it.
Let’s give every American a choice: two tax brackets, generous dividends, and, two — and let Americans choose whether they want the — the existing tax code or they want a new tax code.
And so, again, look at the record, particularly the energy bill. But, again, Senator Obama has shifted on a number of occasions. He has voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year.
OBAMA: That’s not true, John. That’s not true.
MCCAIN: And that’s just a fact. Again, you can look it up.
OBAMA: Look, it’s just not true. And if we want to talk about oil company profits, under your tax plan, John — this is undeniable — oil companies would get an additional $4 billion in tax breaks.
Now, look, we all would love to lower taxes on everybody. But here’s the problem: If we are giving them to oil companies, then that means that there are those who are not going to be getting them. And…
MCCAIN: With all due respect, you already gave them to the oil companies.
OBAMA: No, but, John, the fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out. We’ve got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you’re opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies.
LEHRER: All right. All right, speaking of things that both of you want, another lead question, and it has to do with the rescue — the financial rescue thing that we started — started asking about.
And what — and the first answer is to you, Senator Obama. As president, as a result of whatever financial rescue plan comes about and the billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it’s going to cost, what are you going to have to give up, in terms of the priorities that you would bring as president of the United States, as a result of having to pay for the financial rescue plan?
OBAMA: Well, there are a range of things that are probably going to have to be delayed. We don’t yet know what our tax revenues are going to be. The economy is slowing down, so it’s hard to anticipate right now what the budget is going to look like next year.
But there’s no doubt that we’re not going to be able to do everything that I think needs to be done. There are some things that I think have to be done.
We have to have energy independence, so I’ve put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years’ time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel, making sure that we’re developing the fuel-efficient cars of the future right here in the United States, in Ohio and Michigan, instead of Japan and South Korea.
We have to fix our health care system, which is putting an enormous burden on families. Just — a report just came out that the average deductible went up 30 percent on American families.
They are getting crushed, and many of them are going bankrupt as a consequence of health care. I’m meeting folks all over the country. We have to do that now, because it will actually make our businesses and our families better off.
The third thing we have to do is we’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education. We’ve got to invest in science and technology. China had a space launch and a space walk. We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.
And one of the things I think we have to do is make sure that college is affordable for every young person in America.
And I also think that we’re going to have to rebuild our infrastructure, which is falling behind, our roads, our bridges, but also broadband lines that reach into rural communities.
Also, making sure that we have a new electricity grid to get the alternative energy to population centers that are using them.
So there are some — some things that we’ve got to do structurally to make sure that we can compete in this global economy. We can’t shortchange those things. We’ve got to eliminate programs that don’t work, and we’ve got to make sure that the programs that we do have are more efficient and cost less.
LEHRER: Are you — what priorities would you adjust, as president, Senator McCain, because of the — because of the financial bailout cost?
MCCAIN: Look, we, no matter what, we’ve got to cut spending. We have — as I said, we’ve let government get completely out of control.
Senator Obama has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. It’s hard to reach across the aisle from that far to the left.
The point — the point is — the point is, we need to examine every agency of government.
First of all, by the way, I’d eliminate ethanol subsidies. I oppose ethanol subsidies.
I think that we have to return — particularly in defense spending, which is the largest part of our appropriations — we have to do away with cost-plus contracts. We now have defense systems that the costs are completely out of control.
We tried to build a little ship called the Littoral Combat Ship that was supposed to cost $140 million, ended up costing $400 million, and we still haven’t done it.
So we need to have fixed-cost contracts. We need very badly to understand that defense spending is very important and vital, particularly in the new challenges we face in the world, but we have to get a lot of the cost overruns under control.
I know how to do that.
MCCAIN: I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong. And we fixed it and we killed it and the people ended up in federal prison so I know how to do this because I’ve been involved these issues for many, many years. But I think that we have to examine every agency of government and find out those that are doing their job and keep them and find out those that aren’t and eliminate them and we’ll have to scrub every agency of government.
LEHRER: But if I hear the two of you correctly neither one of you is suggesting any major changes in what you want to do as president as a result of the financial bailout? Is that what you’re saying?
OBAMA: No. As I said before, Jim, there are going to be things that end up having to be …
LEHRER: Like what?
OBAMA: … deferred and delayed. Well, look, I want to make sure that we are investing in energy in order to free ourselves from the dependence on foreign oil. That is a big project. That is a multi-year project.
LEHRER: Not willing to give that up?
OBAMA: Not willing to give up the need to do it but there may be individual components that we can’t do. But John is right we have to make cuts. We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn’t work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare works.
They did it on the Medicaid prescription drug bill and we have to change the culture. Tom — or John mentioned me being wildly liberal. Mostly that’s just me opposing George Bush’s wrong headed policies since I’ve been in Congress but I think it is that it is also important to recognize I work with Tom Coburn, the most conservative, one of the most conservative Republicans who John already mentioned to set up what we call a Google for government saying we’ll list every dollar of federal spending to make sure that the taxpayer can take a look and see who, in fact, is promoting some of these spending projects that John’s been railing about.
LEHRER: What I’m trying to get at this is this. Excuse me if I may, senator. Trying to get at that you all — one of you is going to be the president of the United States come January. At the — in the middle of a huge financial crisis that is yet to be resolved. And what I’m trying to get at is how this is going to affect you not in very specific — small ways but in major ways and the approach to take as to the presidency.
MCCAIN: How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs.
LEHRER: Spending freeze?
MCCAIN: I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans national defense and several other vital issues.
LEHRER: Would you go for that?
OBAMA: The problem with a spending freeze is you’re using a hatchet where you need a scalpel. There are some programs that are very important that are under funded. I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy doesn’t make sense.
Let me tell you another place to look for some savings. We are currently spending $10 billion a month in Iraq when they have a $79 billion surplus. It seems to me that if we’re going to be strong at home as well as strong abroad, that we have to look at bringing that war to a close.
MCCAIN: Look, we are sending $700 billion a year overseas to countries that don’t like us very much. Some of that money ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations. We have to have wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power.
Senator Obama opposes both storing and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. You can’t get there from here and the fact is that we can create 700,000 jobs by building constructing 45 new nuclear power plants by the year 2030. Nuclear power is not only important as far as eliminating our dependence on foreign oil but it’s also responsibility as far as climate change is concerned and the issue I have been involved in for many, many years and I’m proud of the work of the work that I’ve done there along with President Clinton.
LEHRER: Before we go to another lead question. Let me figure out a way to ask the same question in a slightly different way here. Are you — are you willing to acknowledge both of you that this financial crisis is going to affect the way you rule the country as president of the United States beyond the kinds of things that you have already — I mean, is it a major move? Is it going to have a major affect?
OBAMA: There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it. Not only — Even if we get all $700 billion back, let’s assume the markets recover, we’ holding assets long enough that eventually taxpayers get it back and that happened during the Great Depression when Roosevelt purchased a whole bunch of homes, over time, home values went back up and in fact government made a profit. If we’re lucky and do it right, that could potentially happen but in the short term there’s an outlay and we may not see that money for a while.
And because of the economy’s slowing down, I think we can also expect less tax revenue so there’s no doubt that as president I’m go doing have to make some tough decision.
The only point I want to make is this, that in order to make the tough decisions we have to know what our values are and who we’re fighting for and our priorities and if we are spending $300 billion on tax cuts for people who don’t need them and weren’t even asking for them, and we are leaving out health care which is crushing on people all across the country, then I think we have made a bad decision and I want to make sure we’re not shortchanging our long term priorities.
MCCAIN: Well, I want to make sure we’re not handing the health care system over to the federal government which is basically what would ultimately happen with Senator Obama’s health care plan. I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government. Look. We have to obviously cut spending. I have fought to cut spending. Senator Obama has $800 billion in new spending programs. I would suggest he start by canceling some of those new spending program that he has.
We can’t I think adjust spending around to take care of the very much needed programs, including taking care of our veterans but I also want to say again a healthy economy with low taxes would not raising anyone’s taxes is probably the best recipe for eventually having our economy recover.
And spending restraint has got to be a vital part of that. And the reason, one of the major reasons why we’re in the difficulties we are in today is because spending got out of control. We owe China $500 billion. And spending, I know, can be brought under control because I have fought against excessive spending my entire career. And I got plans to reduce and eliminate unnecessary and wasteful spending and if there’s anybody here who thinks there aren’t agencies of government where spending can be cut and their budgets slashed they have not spent a lot of time in Washington.
OBAMA: I just want to make this point, Jim. John, it’s been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending. This orgy of spending and enormous deficits you voted for almost all of his budgets. So to stand here and after eight years and say that you’re going to lead on controlling spending and, you know, balancing our tax cuts so that they help middle class families when over the last eight years that hasn’t happened I think just is, you know, kind of hard to swallow.
LEHRER: Quick response to Senator Obama.
MCCAIN: It’s well-known that I have not been elected Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate nor with the administration. I have opposed the president on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on – on Guantanamo Bay. On a — on the way that the Iraq War was conducted. I have a long record and the American people know me very well and that is independent and a maverick of the Senate and I’m happy to say that I’ve got a partner that’s a good maverick along with me now.
LEHRER: All right. Let’s go another subject. Lead question, two minutes to you, senator McCain. Much has been said about the lessons of Vietnam. What do you see as the lessons of Iraq?
MCCAIN: I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict. Our initial military success, we went in to Baghdad and everybody celebrated. And then the war was very badly mishandled. I went to Iraq in 2003 and came back and said, we’ve got to change this strategy. This strategy requires additional troops, it requires a fundamental change in strategy and I fought for it. And finally, we came up with a great general and a strategy that has succeeded.
This strategy has succeeded. And we are winning in Iraq. And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds.
Russia warship heads to Africa after pirate attack
MOSCOW (AP) — A Russian warship on Friday rushed to intercept a Ukrainian vessel carrying 33 battle tanks and a hoard of ammunition that was seized by pirates off the Horn of Africa — a bold hijacking that again heightened fears about surging piracy and high-seas terrorism.
A U.S. warship is tracking the vessel but there has been no decision about intercepting it, U.S. Defense Department officials said.
“I think we’re looking at the full range of options here,” Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.
It was unclear whether the pirates who seized the 530-foot-long cargo ship Faina on Thursday knew what it carried. Still, analysts said it would be extremely difficult to sell such high-profile weaponry like Russian tanks.
The hijacking, with worldwide pirate attacks surging this year, could help rally stronger international support behind France, which has pushed aggressively for decisive action against Somali pirates.
Russian navy spokesman Capt. Igor Dygalo told The Associated Press that the missile frigate Neustrashimy left the Baltic Sea port of Baltiisk a day before the hijacking to cooperate with other unspecified countries in anti-piracy efforts.
But he said the ship was then ordered directly to the Somalia coast after Thursday’s attack.
According to the British-based Jane’s Information Group, the Neustrashimy is armed with surface-to-air missiles, 100 mm guns and anti-submarine torpedoes.
Ukrainian Defense Minister Yury Yekhanurov, meanwhile, said the hijacked vessel Faina was carrying 33 Russian-built T-72 tanks and a substantial quantity of ammunition and spare parts. He said the tanks were sold to Kenya in accordance with international law.
Ukrainian officials and an anti-piracy watchdog said 21 crew members were aboard the seized ship, including three Russians. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko ordered unspecified measures to free the crew, but it was unclear whether any of the former Soviet republic’s naval vessels had been dispatched.
A Kenyan government spokesman, Alfred Mutua, confirmed the East African nation’s military had ordered the tanks and spare parts. The tanks are part of a two-year rearmament program.
“The government is in contact with international maritime agencies and other security partners in an endeavor to secure the ship and cargo,” Mutua said in a statement. “The government is actively monitoring the situation.”
A person who answered the telephone at Ukrainian state-controlled arms dealer Ukrspetsexport, which brokered the sale, refused to comment, and said all requests for information must be submitted in writing.
It was unclear where the shipment originated, though Ukrainian news agencies identified the ship operator as a company called Tomex Team based in the Black Sea port of Odessa. Calls to Tomex offices went unanswered Friday.
At the Pentagon, two defense officials said the warship was tracking the Ukrainian ship but there has been no decision about taking any other action such as intercepting it. The officials said that besides the T-72 tanks, it was carrying guns and rocket launchers. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
“Obviously, we are deeply concerned,” said Lt. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the Bahrain-based U.S. 5th Fleet, declining to provide details.
Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman, said the United States was worried about the cargo.
“A ship carrying cargo of that nature being hijacked off the coast of Somalia is something that should concern us, and it does concern us,” he said.
The Navy says the 5th Fleet includes the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier and several support ships, which “deter destabilizing activities and ensure a lawful maritime order in the Arabian (Persian) Gulf, Arabian Sea, Gulf of Oman and Gulf of Aden.”
Paul Cornish, head of the international security program at the London-based think-tank Chatham House said the tanks would be difficult to sell on to a third party — private buyers or warlords, for example — because of the logistics involved with keeping them operational.
“It’s not like (stealing) a container full of machine guns, where all you need is a tin of bicycle oil,” he said.
Roger Middleton, another Chatham House researcher, said it was unlikely the pirates knew there were tanks aboard the Faina, and also said unloading the cargo would be difficult.
“Most of their attacks are based on opportunity. So if they see something that looks attackable and looks captureable, they’ll attack it,” he said.
Middleton said it was unclear how the pirates might react if confronted by military action, noting that they have fled from authorities in the past. On the other hand, he said, they are usually well-armed and organized and are based in an unstable country — Somalia.
“It could potentially get pretty messy,” he said.
Long a hazard for maritime shippers — particularly in the Indian Ocean and its peripheries — high-seas piracy has triggered greater alarm since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States because of its potential as a funding and supply source for global terrorism.
Pirate attacks worldwide have surged this year and Africa remains the world’s top piracy hotspot, with 24 reported attacks in Somalia and 18 in Nigeria this year, according to the International Maritime Bureau’s piracy reporting center.
The issue burst into international view Sept. 15 when Somali pirates took two French citizens captive aboard a luxury yacht and helicopter-borne French commandos then swooped in to rescue them.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy this month called on other nations to move boldly against pirates, calling the phenomenon “a genuine industry of crime.”
In June, the U.N. Security Council — pushed by France and the United States — unanimously adopted a resolution allowing ships of foreign nations that cooperate with the Somali government to enter their territorial waters “for the purpose of repressing acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea.”
leave a comment