Connect with us


Obama, Romney Ad Campaigns Attacking Each Other about “Revenge” Comment




Obama Romney Attack Ad

With election day right around the corner, both presidential candidates are doing what they can to get votes come Tuesday. Republicans Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are hitting the campaign trail and trying to use a comment said by Barack Obama in Ohio Friday to their advantage.

While talking to a crowd of potential voters, a point came when the crowd began booing after Romney’s name was mentioned. As a result, Obama replied, “No, no, no — don’t boo, vote. Vote. Voting is the best revenge.” The Romney campaign has responded by running a new ad and also talking to voters by asking them to vote for the reason that you love your country; not for revenge.

Obama’s aides quickly came to defend his comment by saying the comment was meant to reflect Romney’s so-called “scare tactics.” Obama’s campaign spokesperson, Jen Psaki, said the comment the President made was in the context that Romney is “closing his campaign with an ad full of scare tactics that’s frightening workers in Ohio and thinking falsely that they’re not going to have a job.” It was also intended to send a message to voters that they could decide to vote against Romney if they felt that his plan ultimately is “a bad deal for the middle class.”

Romney’s new television ad that was released on Saturday on the exchange is called “Revenge or Love of Country.” During the ad, Romney is shown saying the line that refers to love of country. It is followed by a text popping up on the screen, asking “What is Your Reason for Voting?’ While Romney appears in a television spot trying to use Obama’s revenge comment to the Republicans advantage, Paul Ryan was trying to achieve this Saturday morning in southeastern Ohio.

Ryan spoke to an enthusiastic crowd in the recreation center at Marietta College chastising Obama for not fulfilling his promises. “In 2008, he appealed to our higher aspirations. Now, he’s appealing to lowest fears. “Just yesterday, he was asking supporters at a rally to vote out of revenge. Mitt Romney and I are asking you to vote out of love of country.”

Former South Carolina Republican Governor, Mark Sanford, had dismissed Saturday the revenge comment made by Obama. He felt that the statement seemed reasonable and that Romney should just leave it alone. Speaking with Fox News’ Gregg Jarrett about Obama’s comment, he felt that the Republicans should not focus on the comment “because I think if you look at this whole notion why people vote, well, they don’t vote for the idea of country generally, they vote for specifics they believe in.”

Sanford also said that instead of focusing on Obama’s comment, he should be focusing on more important issues. “I just think, again, this is much ado about nothing, and he would do a lot better focusing on economy and jobs.” To Sanford, the issue mostly was part of the “incredible partisan nature of the final days of any campaign, when you mention the guy’s name and the crowd starts booing.” He continued later by saying “It’s sort of the theatrics of politics. And you have this back-and-forth, it turns a lot of people off.”

Obama Says VOTING IS THE BEST REVENGE Against Romney

When giving Speech at Campaign Rally in Springfield, Ohio November 2, 2012, Obama told a crowd at a campaign rally to stop booing Romney and, ” Vote! Voting’s the best revenge!”

Mitt Romney Ad Against Obama

We each have our own reasons for voting. President Obama said voting is the best revenge. Mitt Romney asked supporters to vote for love of country.

Obama, Romney Ad Spending

Environmentalist. Consumer Tech Journalist. Science Explorer. And, a dreamer. I've been contributing informative news content since 2010. Follow me on all socials!

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Trump Impose Higher Tariffs On Chinese Goods But Risk American Consumers In The Process




President Donald Trump announced last Thursday that the United States would impose a new 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of products imported from China, putting an end to the temporary ceasefire between the trade war of the two economic giants.

Earlier this month, President Trump indicated that he would not push through with imposing more tariffs over China after their meeting during the G20 Summit. In particular, the meeting transpired that both countries are willing to go over trade talks.

Earlier this week even, Trump took to Twitter indicating that the meeting with Chinese officials and the U.S. Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer, and Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin, was “constructive” when they traveled to Shanghai — furthermore saying that negotiations were scheduled to resume in September in Washington, D.C.

“When my people came home, they said, ‘We’re talking, we have another meeting in early September,’ ” Trump told reporters. “I said, ‘That’s fine, but in the meantime until such time as there’s a deal, we’ll be taxing them.’ “

However, a few days later, Trump announced that he would be imposing an additional 10% on the current tariffs on Chinese imports starting September 1, arguing that Beijing had broken some of the promises it made in trade negotiations.

Currently, there are an imposed 25% tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese imports.

Trump also argued that he was disappointed by the lack of progress in the talks, saying China had failed to follow through on promises to curb the sale of fentanyl and buy more products from U.S. farmers.

“My friend, President Xi, said that he would stop the sale of Fentanyl to the United States – this never happened, and many Americans continue to die!” Trump said in a tweet.

The new import taxes — which Trump later said could go “well beyond” 25% on a long list of goods — expected to significantly affect products such as smart-phones, laptop computers, and children’s clothing.

Surprisingly, the President ended on a positive note, saying, “We look forward to continuing our positive dialogue with China on a comprehensive Trade Deal, and feel that the future between our two countries will be a very bright one!”

Upon Trump’s announcement, major U.S. stock indexes fell about 1 percent, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down 280 points, and oil prices tumbled nearly 8 percent.

Trump is insisting that the US will earn more due to higher tariffs for China goods, and will also pressure them to agree on terms regarding trade. However, industry groups said otherwise, indicating that the new tariffs will hurt businesses and fall on consumers.

“We are disappointed the administration is doubling-down on a flawed tariff strategy that is already slowing U.S. economic growth, creating uncertainty and discouraging investment,” David French, vice president of government relations at the National Retail Federation, said in a statement.

“These additional tariffs will only threaten U.S. jobs and raise costs for American families on everyday goods.”

Apart from the US companies suffering from tariff hikes, Chinese companies are also losing business since another logical workaround for paying the tariffs is to source materials outside China.

Apparently, Chinese exporters are not paying the tariff rates alone — U.S. importers also pay a fraction of that rate.

Tariffs are a tax on imported products and are paid by U.S.-registered firms to U.S. customs when goods enter the United States.

In turn, these U.S. imported pass added costs to consumers by raising their prices.

The U.S. retailers called Trump’s move as “another tax increase on American businesses and consumers.”

For example, the tariff costs have increased Caterpillar Inc’s production by $70 million in the last quarter. It expects to pay between $250 million and $350 million in tariffs this year. In response to higher manufacturing costs, the heavy equipment maker has increased prices.

Walmart Inc., the world’s largest retailer, and department store chain, Macy’s Inc., have warned of an increase in prices for shoppers due to higher tariffs on goods from China.

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates for the first time since 2008 to help U.S. businesses adjust to the changes in global economies.

“Certainly, we’ve seen … that when there’s a sharp confrontation between two large economies, you can see effects on business confidence pretty quickly and on financial markets pretty quickly,” Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said in a news conference after the interest rate announcement.

Continue Reading


Cybersecurity Directorate Is The NSA Cyber Frontier

The division’s first Director of Cybersecurity is Anne Neuberger.



Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

The National Security Agency announced that they plan to establish a defense-minded and cybersecurity-focused division that centered on defending the U.S. against foreign cyber- threats.

The division which will be given the name Cybersecurity Directorate will conduct its first operation starting October this year. The young division will aid in the defense against foreign adversaries, right in time with the increasing election intrusion by foreign nations such as Russia as a strategy of an ongoing plot to undermine the West.

The division’s first Director of Cybersecurity, Anne Neuberger, will report directly to General Paul Nakasone, the NSA’s Director. Neuberger previously held positions as the NSA Chief Risk Officer; Deputy Director of Operations; and Lead of NSA’s Russia Small Group, an organization with joint collaboration between U.S. and NSA Cyber Command during 2018.

The NSA has been known for its efforts in developing and improving the cybersecurity arsenal of the U.S. According to NSA, “this new approach to cybersecurity will better position NSA to collaborate with key partners across the U.S. government like U.S. Cyber Command, Department of Homeland Security, and Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

“It will also enable us to share information with our customers better, so they are equipped to defend against the malicious cyber activity,” they added.

Nakasone announced the new cybersecurity directorate on an International Conference on July 23 at Fordham University. He said that “over the past couple years, as we did a number of different reorganizations, one of the things I think we lost was the emphasis on cybersecurity.”

Under the jurisdiction of President Donald Trump, the NSA has been working hard towards a more aggressive way to defend the state and its infrastructures against foreign adversaries such as China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea (CRINK).

Philip Ingram MBE, a former colonel in the British military intelligence, pointed out that the U.S. Cyber Command has existed for “quite some time” The unit has an attack and defense remit capability, he added.

Thee move forms part of a wider effort to more closely align the agency’s offensive and defensive operations. And it seems like the agency is also excited in announcing this new development in their structure. NSA tweeted, asking citizens to “start spreading the news,” as the agency “is operationalizing intelligence to secure the country.”

In the past months, it seems that NSA has been tearing up a page out of U.S. Cyber Command’s book by sharing information with the private sector. On Twitter and VirusTotal, there had been a series of sharing of malware samples by the U.S. Cyber Command.

With those alerts, the private sector was able to boost detection capabilities for possible or ongoing attacks from foreign threats. A US Cyber Command alert prompted that there will be a wave of assaults manipulated by Iranian Hackers and gripping Outlook vulnerabilities. This alert was a massive help since it was able to prevent a widespread loss on Outlook.

Cybersecurity Directorate new job will be on intelligence sharing and assessing vulnerability, a position that DHS has already been taking. How the two agencies will collaborate and will interact still remains a question to be seen as more details about the NSA’s new initiative surfaces.

However, some people do not agree with NSA’s idea of defense. As pointed out by Thornton-Trump, a cryptocurrency expert, having the military or the government organization take or even assume responsibility for the security of the public internet “might be a bit disconcerting for many folks.”

Thornton- Trump says: “it is a very difficult position to be in without appropriate governance and oversight which may not necessarily be in place given a new domestic mandate.”

“I think the NSA is caught inside a fiendish Venn diagram, with freedom on one side and security on the other,” he added. Last week, Attorney General William P. Barr defended the use of encryption backdoors- which most security experts agree that this step would be a colossal failure causing a major disaster.

It may be a two-sided battle between the NSA since they are torn between the security of the public internet and the freedom of the people to use it. Nevertheless, the NSA has been working effortlessly to provide a secure and safe internet for the public by means of increasing the defense against foreign attackers.

Continue Reading


Democrats Eye Banning Facial Recognition In Public Housing



Photo by Brandon Griggs on Unsplash

In landmark legislation to be proposed in the Congress this week, lawmakers move to ban the use of facial recognition systems in public housing, saying that facial recognition “does not belong in the home.”

The new proposed bill is expected to be submitted by Reps. Yvette Clarke, a Democrat from New York; Ayanna Pressley, a Democrat from Massachusetts; and Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, this week.

The “No Biometric Barriers to Housing Act” would prohibit public housing units who received funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development from installing facial recognition technology, according to a person familiar with the proposed bill.

Aside from prohibiting landowners from installing invasive technology, the new proposed bill will also require the Department of Housing and Urban Development to submit annual reports on facial recognition and smart-home technologies that would include details on public housing units and the impact of these systems to tenants.

The growth of facial technology and smart home devices, while being applauded by the tech sector, has been criticized by multisectoral organizations for their violation of people’s privacy. The trend has seen more and more landowners installing invasive home technology in their properties, which advocates called for regulation.

Supporters of the technology have been firm in lobbying the benefits of smart home technologies and facial recognition in housing. They said that these systems help tenants feel safe in their homes and aid the landlords in protecting their tenants as well. However, this insistence is faced with challenges as privacy advocates rebut them with the right of people to privacy.

This is the first time that legislation is focused on protecting tenants from invasive and privacy-violating technologies. While the new proposed bill will only affect public housing and those that are funded by the HUD, it opens a conversation on how important it is to protect tenants from violations of their privacy.

More and more landlords install invasive technologies in their homes

The proposed bill comes two months after Brooklyn tenants filed a lawsuit against a landlord who insisted on installing facial recognition entry system. Around 350 tenants of the Atlantic Plaza Towers said that the facial recognition system was an “excessive invasion of privacy” and cited studies detailing that facial recognition systems are prone to racial bias. However, the building in question will not be affected by the bill proposed in Congress as it is not a public housing financed by the HUD.

“The ability to enter your home should not be conditioned on the surrender of your biometric data, particularly when the landlord’s collection, storage, and use of such data is untested and unregulated,” Samar Katnani, an attorney for Brooklyn Legal Services’ Tenant Rights Coalition representing the tenants, said in May.

This is not the first legislation that challenges the use of the facial recognition system. A few months ago, San Francisco became the first U.S. city to ban the use of facial recognition by the police and other government agencies. The move of San Francisco against facial recognition has been followed by other states like Oakland, California, and Somerville, Massachusetts.

Advocates have since been vocal in spreading the ban throughout the United States. Lawmakers cite the different academic and investigative reports that point out the inaccuracy of facial recognition, adding to that the recent government-sponsored study, saying facial recognition is more likely to mismatch black women.

Back in May, Sens. Roy Blunt, a Republican from Missouri, and Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, put forward the Commercial Facial Recognition Privacy Act which prohibits businesses from using facial recognition technologies on their customers.

However, none of these existing laws and proposed bills can be used against landlords who insist on installing abusive technologies in their building amidst the resistance from their tenants who are concerned about their privacy.

According to a study, more than 20,000 homes in the last two years have been converted in smart-homes, complete with surveillance cameras and smart door locks.

In fact, in April, New York tenants have sued their landlord who installed smart lock system in their doors for their “right to own physical keys” citing that the app’s privacy policy allowed for location tracking which can be used by their landlords to stalk them. Furthermore, they argued that smart locks could also be used in potential abuse as landlords can change the locks easily without their knowledge. In the end, the landlord agreed to an order to provide the tenants with a physical key.

Continue Reading