Rick Perry Heads to Connecticut – Malloy on Gun Manufactures – As Long as what they produce is legal?- Texas stands to gain.

That rascally Govenor from Texas, one Rick Perry, is at it again. He’s traveling cross-country – bringing his message of success, less taxation, better working environments and the like to businesses in states where the business climate is less than perfect. This benefits Texas in two ways: One it insures extra jobs in a state that is the number on job destination state in the nation, and as more people move to Texas in search of jobs from Massachusetts, California, Illinois and other personal tax happy states – Perry finds himself in the position to bring in businesses to keep employment up.

Next stop is Connecticut. wtnh is reporting that Perry’s on his way – with a message of hope to “businesses, while the current Govenor, suggests: that he has already beat Texas in some competitions for business.

"Where we have gone head to head recently with Texas, specifically with respect to CIGNA and with respect to ESPN, we have actually won," said said Governor Dannel Malloy, (D) Connecticut. “ Therefore Malloy has kept two businesses in a state that desperately needs employers. Standing at the alter of better business conditions in the States Gun and Defense industry – where Perry is fishing. That may lead to quite a haul for the welcoming Texas Govenor.

There was one blurb in the article about Perry running for President, which, is most likely not the case, although no crystal ball is employed here. But suffice it to say, as long as he continues to run Texas the way he is running Texas, - as one former Massachusetts and now 20 year Austin Democrat noted: Perry can be Govenor for: Life if he wants.

Obviously, those that are not recent transplants or so partisan they can’t see the forest through the herds of cattle, wont’ exactly put that way, however, Perry is setting a fine example on how to run a state and make it profitable. A lesson that those governors form the northeast and New York may want to pay just a smidgen of attention.

In a recent search of Career Builder one finds that there are currently 1 - 25 of 41,359 jobs found in Texas, while in Connecticut a total of 6643 positions can be found One suspects, that there would be a disparity between Texas and oh Massachusetts, New York, etc -= The jobs available in Texas versus the State of Connecticut also show a different type of opportunity –less in the service industry in Texas.

Malloy should start to study Rick Perry and do what Perry has done – it may take some time, but Connecticut would recover to its once great stature. Unlikely

MA Senate Campaign – Media Spin: How to Turn a Mystery Into a Shaky Fact – Gomez PAC Support Not What It Appears

Of one thing one can be certain, if there is a smidgen of a name, or association, no matter how ridiculously far-fetched, it will be spun as a “fact” by the opposition and eventually wind up in an ad, or an article. The MA special election for the vacant Senate seat is one example: Ed Markey, the Democrat in the race, has had everyone show up except Ted Kennedy’s ghost – in an apparent effort to hang onto his base. Meanwhile, understanding just how bad it may be (even though he’s ahead in local polls, and in a dead heat in national polls), Markey’s fans are so concerned, that the issue of the opposition, Gabriel Gomez, the Republican in the race, may have a PAC supporting him that must have something wrong with it. Never mind the fact that Markey has had PAC’s throwing more money at Massachusetts than the state’s deficit – that apparently receives a pass.

The gist: From Politico - Headlined: ” Mystery PAC backing Gabriel Gomez in Massachusetts”, speaks to the fact that the Gomez campaign is receiving a bit of help from an outside source, and Politico cannot, with all of its ability, find out whence this PAC came from. The one thing they have gleaned from the PAC is that it appears not to have an affiliation, but a Republican firm is buying the ads on the PAC’s behalf – the button pusher: And the group’s treasurer, Nancy Watkins, is a Republican who has worked for a number of outside groups, according to past news accounts. She also served as treasurer for Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign.”

Suddenly an article appears on the Hill Blog: and this significant ad by in Massachusetts for the Republican, Gomez, is being handled by Michele Bachmann.

Michelle Bachman, recently announced her retirement from Congress, and is, in the eyes of the media, a crazy congresswoman who embraced the “Tea Party”. If one is following the gist – simply put, the Dems that be, are desperate to find anything to discredit Gomez, therefore, watch Gomez get slammed for being supported by and a member of those Tea Party Groups!!

This is not a stretch of the imagination – given the poorly constructed ads which the Markey campaign has airing, badly spliced segments of Gomez speaking, attempting to discredit him on the issue of social security, gun control and the like.

Gomez shot back with an ad that’s sort of hilarious – knocking the attack ad, and possibly just as badly produced in straight satirical form.

Perhaps, just perhaps, those living in the state of Confusion might see through the absolutely nonsense that is this campaign and choose for themselves – rather than play into the old tried and true of an entrenched Congressman from MA looking for a lifelong seat. His primary opponent, Lynch, would have been a better choice, but those crazy progressive, want a pure party player, so Massachusetts gets – Markey

Maybe

Which is why this is getting so childish – it’s almost as if no-one wants to even get out and vote for Ed – it’s embarrassing.

One has to ask, does it really matter who is sending all that cash into MA, be it one of Markey's many PAC supporters, or individual party players, or Gomez' PAC and/or any Republican or Independent PAC or person who is supporting him - as this PAC is from Miami, where, one might imagine there would be more than a few Latino-Hispanic individuals who support Latino candidates (see Marc Rubio), then, one might imagine that is where the money is coming from.

Class Action Lawsuit Filing Today – Man Versus Obama-PRISM-Verizon – Civil Liberty or National Defense on Steroids

A class action lawsuit is being brought against President Obama, and the companies tied to PRISM today in U.S.Disctrict Court of D.C. The case is being filed by “former Justice Department prosecutor Larry Klayman amended an existing lawsuit against Verizon and a slew of Obama administration officials Monday to make it the first class-action lawsuit in response to the publication of a secret court order instructing Verizon to hand over the phone records of millions of American customers on an "ongoing, daily basis."(USNews)

The companies listed in the suit, according to US News are: AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, PalTalk, Skype, Yahoo! and YouTube.

The Administration and the NSA has continued to insist the culling of personal data, including emails, phone records, and video, et. al, is necessary for National Defense. The opponents suggest that the amount of data, specifically data of millions of American’s who could in no wise be suspected of terrorist activity has gone too far.

This is not the first suite that has been suggested. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said during a Sunday appearance on Fox News that he intends to file a class-action lawsuit against Verizon and the Internet companies over the surveillance programs, but it’s unclear how exactly he will proceed with the plans.”I’m going to be asking all the Internet providers and all of the phone companies: Ask your customers to join me in a class action lawsuit,” Paul said Sunday. “If we get 10 million Americans saying we don’t want our phone records looked at, then maybe someone will wake up and something will change in Washington.”(patdollard.com)

There has been, for years, no expectation of privacy when it comes to social networking sites, and even one’s cell phone, specifically if photo’s are shared, but, it was “friends “and the ability to share data that caused the issue – it was not the Federal Government overseeing every move a citizen (or not) might be making.

Although argued that this is justifiably constitutional under the law, the suits will challenge that assertion, and the courts will eventually decide. One might think that given the courts propensity to side both for and against the administration – this would be a case worth watching – slippery slope syndrome is all over this one.