Steamd

It’s been a while since I’ve done any political posts on McCain. To be honest, I’m getting to a point where I’m so burned out on even trying to get any reasonable research to post. The kind of research I was aiming to do takes a lot of time to collate and put together in a form that’s presentable on the web. We’re talking tons of material from The Library of Congress on both candidate’s Senate records and each candidates positions based on the material freely available on their websites. Frankly, I think anyone who wishes to have an educated opinion on each of these candidates really needs to get on these sites and take some time to really read up on them. For now though, I’ll keep my posts centered on very specific areas.

Last week, my wife forwarded me a post made on The Carpetbagger Report entitled

“Jukebox John changes his tune every few minutes“. Author Steven Benen talks about how McCain has not been very consistent with his position on different policies and lists 60 different issues McCain has flip-flopped on. It’s quite an extensive list but, to name a few, here’s some of the ones (and perhaps the most dangerous ones) that really stick out for me:

1. McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
2. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
3. McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
4. McCain was against expanding the GI Bill before he was for it.
5. McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
6. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
7. McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
8. McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
9. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.
10. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
11. McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.
12. On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own bill.
13. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
14. McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.

Be sure and visit the site and read the others. Links are provided to legitimate sources that cite each of these positions.

Sure, people change their minds everyday, but for one man to constantly go back and forth on so many issues, that’s more than just simply changing your mind. It would seem that McCain’s position changes if it suits him politically. But, unlike McCain, Obama has always seemed very consistent in his positions. And when he has changed his mind he’s always been pretty good at explaining why. Not so with McCain.

Keith Olbermann some weeks back on Countdown mentioned many of the same points:

This weekend, I plan on posting another blog entry as sort of a followup to this post. I think my main criticism of McCain is that McCain is not a good representative of the Republican Party. Hell, I don’t think even the Republican Party is a good body of representation for true Republicans and conservatives alike, much less McCain. This is what I’ll be targeting with my next post. I think once you read it you’ll clearly understand where my criticism of McCain is coming from and why I think it’s unwise for so many Republican’s to embrace him simply because he is a Republican.

More on that later…

Last week, someone over at the Free Software Foundation posted a blog entry called 5 reasons to avoid iPhone 3G. I’m all for free software and a big proponent of open source software. Hell, I help develop for MODx, which is open source. Although my Mac is my primary desktop, I have an OpenSuSE desktop server running that I use as my development environment. So, yeah, I understand the open source community quite a bit. So when I read this list of reasons to avoid the iPhone I found it laughable at best because the very reasons they claim are reasons to actually get it.

So, here’s my comments about what this guy has to say. Let’s start with reason #1:

1: iPhone completely blocks free software. Developers must pay a tax to Apple, who becomes the sole authority over what can and can’t be on everyone’s phones.

Wait a minute…so what about all those free apps on the iTunes App Store? You mean that developers still have to pay Apple to distribute those apps? No sir, they don’t! Developers are only taxed on the apps they put price tags on. Even then Apple only gets a 30% cut. Now, you could say that that’s a rip off but, let’s face it, Apple is in the business of making money. And have you seen the apps on the App Store? Doesn’t look like Apple is playing the authority figure you claim it to be. If that was the case then I would estimate that at least two-thirds of the apps on there would have been rejected. As it stands though that is simply not the case. Apple nor anybody else in the iPhone community requires you or any other developer to put a price tag on an iPhone app. If you want to put an iPhone app on the App Store for free you’re more than welcome to do so. So your notion that Apple completely blocks free software is bullshit at best.

2: iPhone endorses and supports Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) technology.

Apple does NOT endorse and support DRM technology. It’s a well known fact that Steve Jobs is not all that fond of DRM systems. But, as you say, it’s been a year and half since BMI started allowing Apple to sell DRM free music:

With great hesitation, he allowed a handful of files to go DRM-free on iTunes, but kept in place the requirement that they be purchased using the proprietary, DRM-infected iTunes software. Since then, he has done absolutely nothing to act on those words.

It’s not Steve Jobs or Apple that’s the problem…it’s the big music and media houses that are the problem. Apple has no control over the decision to put DRM on the media they sell because they aren’t the ones controlling the publishing rights to the music and media. Only the music and media companies have those rights. If Apple could remove all DRM restrictions on the music and media they sell on iTunes tomorrow they would. Wanna know who you need to complain to? Complain to companies like Sony, BMG, Warner, Universal and others who are doing their best to maintain the status quo and keep the traditional business model of selling media by restricting what you can and can’t do with the media you buy. Don’t bitch at Apple, bitch at them!

The truth is that there are thousands of software, music, and media creators who want to share their work more freely.

Last I checked, there are tons of independent musicians, such as Jonathan Coulton, sharing and selling their work on iTunes. Same applies to media creators. The notion that Apple only cares about the big labels and doesn’t allow independent artist to distribute their work easily on iTunes is bullshit.

I get a lot of my music and media in plenty of different ways. iTunes is just one source. I get stuff from Amazon, podcasts, CDBaby, and other sites. Apple doesn’t pigeon-hole you. You do have a choice.

Plus, there are tons of developers offering free software to use on the Mac. It seems for every good paid app there’s an equally good free app as well. Not all of them are open source but, still, if it’s free how can you complain?

3: iPhone exposes your whereabouts and provides ways for others to track you without your knowledge.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit! Have you even used an iPhone? Every app that accesses the GPS API is required to ask you for permission to use your current location. Even then, the coordinates are only used for that given app and aren’t transmitted for the world to see. The only way people can see where you are is if you allow for it. Loopt is a good example of this and, even with Loopt, you have to specifically give friends permission to see you before they can do anything. Based on that, if the iPhone is exposing your whereabouts it’s because you allowed it to, not because it just does it on its own.

4: iPhone won’t play patent- and DRM-free formats like Ogg Vorbis and Theora.

Ok, so you’re partially correct…but only partially. Yes, it’s true that no iPhone or iPod will play Ogg Vorbis or Theora files natively. And, yes, it’s true that both MP3 and AAC are patented technologies. But, unlike MP3, no licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format. However, to create AAC files does require a license since it is a proprietary format. Interestingly though it isn’t owned by a single company since it was developed by multiple organizations in an effort to develop a more standardize file format.

Neither MP3 or AAC are DRM formats in and of themselves. DRM can be added on to these formats, sure, but they’re not DRM formats natively. Apple and other companies add on DRM to these formats because they are required to do so by the media companies.

Apple and other organizations would likely embrace open formats like Ogg Vorbis if they truly felt that it would be cheaper and more beneficial than what they are predominantly using now. However, as it stands, that’s simply not the case. So what you say is only half right.

5: iPhone is not the only option. There are better alternatives on the horizon that respect your freedom, don’t spy on you, play free media formats, and let you use free software — like the FreeRunner.

Yes, the iPhone is not the only option. There are other smart phones out there that have capabilities similar to the iPhone. And, honestly, if there was a phone better than the iPhone I would certainly buy it. Right now though, today, there is no equivalent of the iPhone anywhere.

Fortunately, we will soon be able to have all the convenience of a mobile computer that also makes phone calls without selling our freedom to Apple, Microsoft, BlackBerry, or anyone else. The Neo FreeRunner is a promising free-software phone, being developed in cooperation with the same worldwide community responsible for the GNU/Linux operating system.

Great but, really, is that the best the open source community can do? I’ll give them credit for coming up with a completely open solution. However, I’m far from being impressed with the design of the FreeRunner. It’s not inspiring and the software looks like shit, but that’s just my opinion.

About the only phones that could remotely compete with the iPhone are phones powered by Google Android. However, I hate to break it to you but even Google Android is not as open as people thought. Also, exactly how good Google Android powered phones will be remains to be seen. I wouldn’t be counting my chickens just yet.

iPhones can now also only be activated in stores — despite the fact that in the U.S., the Register of Copyrights ruled that consumers have the right to unlock their phones and switch to a different carrier.

Yes, you’re right, consumers have the right to unlock their phones and use them with other carriers and they are more than welcome to do so if they choose…but at a price. Although customers can reserve the right to unlock their phones, carriers can reserve the right to charge a fee to allow you out of your one or two year contract. Plus, most carriers subsidize the price of the phone so in order to get an iPhone (or any other phone for that matter) that is unlockable without a contract, be prepared to pay a lot more for it. This isn’t Apple’s doing though. This is the cell phone industry. AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, they all do this. If Apple could sell iPhones to every carrier without some bogus stipulations in their contracts they would. That day may come but right now Apple is tied to AT&T for contractual reasons.

I will say this though: If the FreeRunner or a Google Android phone were to beat out the iPhone on design, features, usability, and integration into my lifestyle I will gladly give up my iPhone for any one of these phones. My phone is a part of my everyday life. As an information worker, it’s absolutely necessary that I remain in touch with everyone I work with. As such, the iPhone give me that and much more. For any other phone to trump it will be difficult.

Personally, I don’t really care if the iPhone is completely open or not. I just care about good, solid product design that integrates into my life well. For now, the iPhone is my smart phone of choice, and not because Apple has tricked me with some David Copperfield illusion either. No sir, it’s because Apple created a good product that is well designed. If another phone does it for you then, great, buy it. Otherwise, shut up!

Today, my wife sent me a link to a bumper sticker that said “All Your Fears Are Lies“. This made me think about a recent e-mail I received regarding a man in Canada who had problems receiving proper health care:

A Short Course On Brain Surgery Worth Watching…

A short but poignant independent film on government sponsored healthcare systems. Everyone who plans to vote for our new President in 2008 NEEDS to see this. Regardless of the person for whom they would vote. Please forward this to everyone you can think of as soon as you can.

The problem with e-mails like this is that it makes the bumper sticker seem a whole lot more true. People do indeed fear what is essentially a lie. There’s no doubt in my mind that the system of healthcare in Canada can cause many problems for many Canadians. I don’t think anyone can deny that. The part of this video I disagree with is the last part where the narrator says this:

“Isn’t it ironic that while the Canadian government’s monopoly on health care is slowly crumbling in the face of widespread suffering, liberal Democrats in the U.S. are pushing to adopt a system much like the one that has failed so miserably in Canada.”

Which Democrats want to create a true socialized heath care system like Canada? Obama? Nope. He doesn’t want to create a total socialized heath care system. He just wants to insure that everyone in America has access to affordable health insurance. Read the attached documents and tell me exactly what parts of it are not true and what parts make it a socialized system. Seriously, read each of these thoroughly and completely. These are taken straight off of Obama’s web site:

Barack Obama’s Plan for a Healthy America

Background Question and Answers on Health Care Plan

Now compare the very well thought out, highly detailed verbiage in these documents to McCain’s web site. Notice a difference? Not to knock on McCain but personally it looks like McCain is really good at identifying all the problems but not providing any real solutions…just band-aids.

The problem with health insurance in this country is that it’s not accessible and unaffordable to many Americans that are without health care insurance. Unless you work at a job that either provides full coverage or really cheap health insurance then you’re pretty much screwed if you can’t afford it on your own. I know this because I’ve personally been shopping for health insurance and, yes, it’s expensive!

Wal-Mart is a good example of a company that, although provides a health insurance plan, doesn’t follow through to insure that every employee can afford it. Here’s what it says straight off their own web site:

Every associate who works in the United States can become eligible for individual health coverage costing as little as $5 per month in some areas and as little as $8 per month nationwide. As soon as an associate becomes eligible for benefits, their children become eligible too.

Today, more than 92 percent of associates have health insurance–either through us or through other coverage. For our associates who choose coverage with Wal-Mart, we also offer more than 2,400 generic prescription drugs for $4. This includes prescription drugs to treat everything from diabetes to heart disease.

Wal-Mart associates will find more than 50 ways to customize their health coverage. They can select from a menu of deductibles, health care coverage options, and health credits and premiums.

We want associates and their families to have the peace of mind that their healthcare needs will be met, especially when they need it most. To ensure that peace of mind, Wal-Mart’s health coverage includes no lifetime maximums on most health care expenses.

92% insured? Really? So, by that measure, Wal-Mart went from only 50% insured to 92% insured in just 6 months. Check out this article on the New York Times website dated January 23, 2008:

Wal-Mart Says More Than Half Its Workers Have Its Health Insurance

This is a company that makes billions of dollars a year and 50% of their employees can’t even afford to buy the insurance provided to them. Granted, some of them probably have spouses that get insurance from their employer. But what about the ones that don’t? Where do they get health insurance? Right. Social services which consequently come right out of the taxes we pay. If even two-thirds of the estimated 1.4 million Wal-Mart employees have insurance that would still leave over 900,000 employees who are forced to used government provided programs for health care and other needs. Yeah, Wal-Mart sure is taking care of their employees alright.

This isn’t an Obama vs McCain, Democrat vs Republican, Liberal vs Conservative, Socialism vs Capitalism issue. This is an issue that affects peoples lives. And, like the video about Canada, it can be a matter of life and death for some people. It’s one thing to claim that providing affordable healthcare is socialism. It’s another when doing virtually nothing to address the problem is the alternative solution. Millions of people in America can’t afford health care. What do we say to them?

I personally believe that regardless of whether you’re a Republican, Democrat, Independant, Conservative, Liberal, or whatever that you can still look upon others who are on the opposite side of the fence and see eye to eye on the issues that effect our country. But its not till we can seriously talk about the issues and discuss the solutions till we can get to that point. It’s one thing to talk about the problems. It’s another to really address them and come up with worthwhile solutions. Not every solution is perfect…but if the politicians we are voting for can at least propose good, solid, well thought out solutions based on the facts then that is a step in the right direction. I’m not a Republican or a Democrat. I’m voting for who I believe to be the person who is trying to address the problems and come up with worthwhile solutions. Again, they may not be 100% perfect…but they’re solutions nonetheless.

My job as a web developer is much harder when ideas aren’t flowing. Each and every project has to start somewhere. Even if the ideas aren’t perfect you have to start somewhere. A good start on coming up with ideas, even flawed ones, is much better than no start at all. Wouldn’t you agree?