Keepin' it real fake, part CCXVII: Not even Obama can sell us on BlockBerry
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted Jun 18th 2009 11:26AM
posted Jun 18th 2009 11:26AM
The ad reads: "Obama have BlackBerry, I have BlockBerry." BlockBerry, of course, being haff-comm's Huawei K3-based WinMo 6.1 handset. This Storm 9500 KIRF packs a 460MHZ processor, a 3.2-inch touchscreen, WiFi, Bluetooth, GPS, and supports 3G and EDGE. Some people's audacity, it seems, knows no limits.
something tells me this isnt OBAMA-proofed
Maybe he'll appoint a KIRF czar?
I'm not sure what's funnier...
the fact that ANYTHING Obama does is top news: i.e. "Obama swats a fly", "Obama pardons White girl with excuse note" etc...
Or the fact that placing his image on anything gives people "hope and thoughts of change".
Obama just might be the biggest celebrity since Michael Jackson.
Well, since he trying his best to destroy everything that is good in this country, it should be big news.
The only problem is that the news media in the tank with him. We have a state run media now.
wow, that might be a world record into diluting something into a political statement. im shocked and awed.
@kjb434
How can Obama possibly destroy stuff that's already been destroyed by a failed organization of 8 years. Stop listening to Rush and get a clue. Let me see your comeback blah blah blah blame bush blah blah blah... Well guess what until at least a year has passed it still is Bush Admin fault. Now anything passed that we can start blaming this guy.
kjb434: theorize conspiracies much?
kjb434 said "Well, since he trying his best to destroy everything that is good in this country, it should be big news.
The only problem is that the news media in the tank with him. We have a state run media now."
I see you've been reading the right wing talking points. Go back and hide in your cave you idiot where you can foam at the mouth all you want. The rest of us are trying to fix the problems that the republican assholes like yourself got us into.
Since this phone is tied to Obama, it will be free. But your grandkids will have to pay 2 Trillion for it. Hail to the theif!
Name one thing he has done to fix problems. Throwing money at a problem does not fix anything.
Thief
@kjb434
See now you've gone and done it. The O-cult is offended.
The sad thing is that NONE of these kids know what this guy is doing, dont care, and will chalk it up to "right-wing talking points".
I just make sure I have enough popcorn on hand when their little bubble gets nuked by "hope and change"
While kjb434 is in fact an idiot, you other morons are even worse. Get it through your thick heads, no President, except maybe Taft, could have caused this kind of disaster. This is due to the Government and Wall Street as a whole and their actions over the past 20 years. That means the president, congress, banks, investment firms, etc. Next time, try a half intelligent remark when you're calling someone an idiot.
As for Obama fixing this situation, It's not hard to see that he's fixing it from a purely liberal nanny-state type of point of view. Hell, doing things like regulating private health care more and reducing mal-pratice, say setting caps, would probably be far more effective then the government, and its $400 for a screw policy, running an insurance of any kind. But, you're right, I'm just an angry rabid republican.
you guys do know this is a gadget blog?
@kjb434 and Look_Around_You
I'm not a personal fan of Obama. But what exactly is he "destroying" that was so awesome? Sub-prime lending? Yeah that was awesome. Speculation? Good too. It's not like ANY of that was what got us into this situation in the first place. /s
Seriously, he's being very open about what he is doing. If you have a problem with it, make yourselves heard, but only in a way that is positive criticism. Say, "here's what he's doing wrong, here's what he should be doing."
Right now all I hear is "He's destroying our country in an ambiguous way! Wah!" Be specific.
Hey geeks, you're out of your realm. For the sake of this blog, stick to technology.
I'm not a personal fan of Obama. But what exactly is he "destroying" that was so awesome? Sub-prime lending? Yeah that was awesome. Speculation? Good too. It's not like ANY of that was what got us into this situation in the first place. /s
Uh, precisely what did Obama do about sub-prime lending? As a senator he proposed no bill to reign it in. One of the reasons is that his party was behind the concept as a way to put their core voting block (e.g. ACORN) in the position to get loans for homes they could not afford. Sub-Prime developed out of a Democrat mandate to increase the number of people in homes. They backed it until the shit hit the fan. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were two of the chief protectors of this.
Speculation is not a crime nor is it evil. If I but a lot of memory cards expecting a lot of people needing them so I can sell them at a markup, guess what, I just engaged in speculating. That is one of the pillars of capitalism that makes all of these gadgets, even the KIRF ones, possible.
If Obama is destroying speculating then that would be #1 on the list.
#2 Free enterprise, and free markets. NOWHERE in the constitution of the nation does the president have the power to take over a company, fire the CEO, appoint a new one, and allow the government to become a shareholder in it or regulate the day to day operation of that business.
#3 appointing "czars" over various industries. Unelected persons, that answer to him and him alone.
#4 putting 1/5 of the nation's economy (health care) under the control of the federal government.
#5 crippling taxes, that any tom fool knows will have to pay for this. Things like a Soda tax to taxing cell phone use are on the docket. Dig into a legit news source (i.e. not HuffPost or the Daily Show) and you will find this out.
#6 cutting off our ability to explore and utilize our own natural resources.
"Seriously, he's being very open about what he is doing. If you have a problem with it, make yourselves heard, but only in a way that is positive criticism. Say, "here's what he's doing wrong, here's what he should be doing.""
People have. They got together in rallies back in April, and were called racist, freaks, extremist, and confused by the state-run dinosaur press.
"Right now all I hear is "He's destroying our country in an ambiguous way! Wah!" Be specific."
Hope this helped. God knows that list is much longer.
@fernando
Don't let these morons get to you all of this "this guys destroying our country" bs is coming from closet racists, insecure and or scared caucasians. Who can't stand to see person(s) that don't look like the status quo, doing or will do a better job than any president in recent memory. But really all the blame shouldn't be laid on them it's mostly inherited.
bombgiggity - yep, just as I suspected, dissenters are racists. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
#2 Free enterprise, and free markets. NOWHERE in the constitution of the nation does the president have the power to take over a company...
Duh, considering corporations didn't even exist when the Constitution was written, then they shouldn't have any rights at all, unless of course the Constitution is ONLY flexible when it suits you.
#3 appointing "czars" over various industries...
Oh, you mean like the unelected managers of hedge funds that eat into 401ks, or the unelected CEOs of HMOs who put health care second to their golden parachutes?
As for the people protesting in April being called racists etc... when I see people with 'no black man should..." or "there goes the neighbourhood", well, I'm perfectly comfortable with calling them racists. You know why?
Because their racists, and not very good at hiding it.
@Look_Around_You
All those things you said about Obama doing, no where in the constitution does it say he or the government can't do any of those. The constitution is design to grow and change with the times (of course with amendments to it that they haven't done).
This is to everyone. Obama can't do anything in this government. Bush didn't help the current issues to come about, but you can't just blame him. The entire government along with the economic sector caused this issue in one way or another.
As for health care, I don't even want to hear about government help care (according to you 1/5 by the government, BS) until the United States realizes that other governments around the world have FULL government health care and it works there.
As this is a tech blog and I'm know this is outside of my general field of interest, I may be wrong but I do believe that several changes need to happen to save this country from the general course of history. (fall of the Roman empire and British Empire are some that have fallen)
On a real tech note. This is wrong to want this phone if it's really a good phone?
"All those things you said about Obama doing, no where in the constitution does it say he or the government can't do any of those. The constitution is design to grow and change with the times (of course with amendments to it that they haven't done)."
EXCUSE ME!?????
We have a process of making changes to the constitution. Do they still teach that to your generation. It doesn't "grow or change" or any of that fruity bullshit. When that day comes when government puts a real boot on your liberties that you cant just brush off, then maybe you'll appreciate the process that IS IN PLACE FOR A REASON!.
"As for health care, I don't even want to hear about government help care (according to you 1/5 by the government, BS) until the United States realizes that other governments around the world have FULL government health care and it works there."
Really, so explain to me why people in those nations fly to the us for surgeries and treatments that are not available in their utopian systems? Why do people have to wait months for treatments that they get here in a fraction of the time. Explain to me why older people in those systems are not covered nearly the same way they are in the U.S..
Those systems are not free, and offer rationed health care as a rule.
"As this is a tech blog and I'm know this is outside of my general field of interest, I may be wrong but I do believe that several changes need to happen to save this country from the general course of history. (fall of the Roman empire and British Empire are some that have fallen)"
FOLLOW THE DAMN CONSTITUTION AND RESPECT THE SEPARATION OF POWERS, STATE SOVEREIGNTY, AND FREE ENTERPRISE!
PROBLEM SOLVED.
@bombiggity
"Don't let these morons get to you all of this "this guys destroying our country" bs is coming from closet racists, insecure and or scared caucasians."
Oh and btw, jackass, I'm not white. Thanks for asking.
It's Obama's fault that AIG was bailed out before he became president. The Blockberry is also his fault.
/sarcasm
I'm not going to get into the political argument, but bombgigitty, that was the dumbest crap I have seen in a while. You are really part of the problem when you just blindly call everyone racist because they don't agree with the political actions occurring right now. That was just pathetic and hateful. You were the only one to make race an issue.
Hey, Look_Around_You
“If Obama is destroying speculating then that would be #1 on the list.”
Oil speculation was the reason we were paying upwards of 4 dollars for a gallon of gasoline. Do you still like rampant unregulated speculation because I dont.
“#2 Free enterprise, and free markets. NOWHERE in the constitution of the nation does the president have the power to take over a company, fire the CEO, appoint a new one, and allow the government to become a shareholder in it or regulate the day to day operation of that business.”
"Implied powers" are powers not given to the government directly through the constitution, but are implied. These powers fall under the Elastic Clause in Section 8 of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution. This document lets the government create “necessary and proper” programs/laws and retain them, such as creating the Air Force. The Air Force is an implied power because the constitution did not give the power of the Air Force to the federal government, because airplanes didn’t even exist.
“#3 appointing "czars" over various industries. Unelected persons, that answer to him and him alone.”
Ya, I could see this one. Congressional oversight would be better.
“#4 putting 1/5 of the nation's economy (health care) under the control of the federal government.”
Because it works so well right now. Lets just leave it to the multi billion dollar insurance conglomerates. They got our back, right?
“#5 crippling taxes, that any tom fool knows will have to pay for this. Things like a Soda tax to taxing cell phone use are on the docket. Dig into a legit news source (i.e. not HuffPost or the Daily Show) and you will find this out.”
Reality check. Generating revenue is necessary to run the country. We cant continue Bushonomics and spend ridiculous amounts of money with no intention of increasing taxes or decreasing the deficit.
“#6 cutting off our ability to explore and utilize our own natural resources.”
I assume your talking about drilling in Alaska? Sorry bud, but that wont solve our energy crisis. It would take the better part of a decade before we saw any oil. Not to mention it wouldnt affect oil prices signifigantly because the supply is never really strained. Speculation has much more to do with gas prices. Even then why should we be dependent on a non-renewable resource. Nuclear power is where its at and Obama is open to it so I hope that he follows through with that.
I cant say that I agree with everything that Obama does but you sir are a mindless tool.
Fellow nerds and geeks. The only thing that should be dividing us is our phone's OS, not our political background. So the next time someone asks you what is your affiliation, you should respond: WinMo, WebOS, iPhone OS, Android, RIM OS, etc. not Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution, Green, or Marijuana (well maybe this last one we can pledge alliance to).
the commander in theif! i mean chief
"Oil speculation was the reason we were paying upwards of 4 dollars for a gallon of gasoline. Do you still like rampant unregulated speculation because I dont."
I do. You cannot legislate out speculation because one group uses it with results you don't like without stamping it down in places where you benefit from it. Many of those guys lost their shirts when we hit an oil glut and prices fell through the floor. Government didnt make that happen, market forces did.
"Implied powers" are powers not given to the government directly through the constitution, but are implied. These powers fall under the Elastic Clause in Section 8 of Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution. This document lets the government create “necessary and proper” programs/laws and retain them, such as creating the Air Force. The Air Force is an implied power because the constitution did not give the power of the Air Force to the federal government, because airplanes didn’t even exist.
Uh, the air force is part of the armed forces of the United States. Defense is one of the jobs of the federal government.
Here is the part of the constitution that spell it out clearly.
Amendment 10
((((((The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. )))))))
“#4 putting 1/5 of the nation's economy (health care) under the control of the federal government.”
"Because it works so well right now."
Yeah it does.
" Lets just leave it to the multi billion dollar insurance conglomerates. They got our back, right?"
Does the federal government got yours?
If i dont like my insurance companies policies, I MOVE TO ANOTHER. If you dont like the way the feds are running it, where do you move to then?
"Reality check. Generating revenue is necessary to run the country. We cant continue Bushonomics and spend ridiculous amounts of money with no intention of increasing taxes or decreasing the deficit."
We just piled 2 Trillion dollars of debt on us....IN THE PAST 3 MONTHS. More has been spent since O got into office than in the whole history of the nation, let alone Bush! Care to explain to me what the hell are we running with that money? If the government stayed in the borders of the constitution, the cost of government would be a fraction of what it is now.
But if you think more of your check vanishing into the void is so damn cool, then PAY MORE. Show us how it's done.
And I hope you aren't cheating by looking for deductions when you do your taxes generating revenue is necessary to run the country dont ya know.
“#6 cutting off our ability to explore and utilize our own natural resources.”
"I assume your talking about drilling in Alaska? Sorry bud, but that wont solve our energy crisis. It would take the better part of a decade before we saw any oil."
If we had drilled 10 years ago, when people were trying to get this started, then you would have it NOW. Now nations like China have drilling rights right off our nautical border, and nut job state like CAli STILL wont drill right off their coast! Apparently the ChiComs dont buy the bullshit that oil "just aint cool man".
Good luck fueling an economy on bike power and ethanol. btw How many alternative sources of energy are you using?
" Nuclear power is where its at and Obama is open to it so I hope that he follows through with that."
Uh huh, and I suppose the Green movement that froze nuke development for the past 30 years will just say oops when they are too busy pushing windmills and solar panels?
"I cant say that I agree with everything that Obama does but you sir are a mindless tool."
^The irony isnt lost on me either, folks
@Look Around The only thing i have to say on this subject is, why don't you pay for health insurance for 30 years and never need a hospital, and then lose your job and your insurance, and then come down with a serious health problem. YOu know what happens you stupid ass who thinks he is always right? YOU DIE, that’s what happens, and all the rich private industry "health care" people dont give 2 shits, cause they have your money.
You have no insurance, all the multi-billion dollar companies have your thousands and thousands of dollars you paid out, and what do you have? A heart attack.
Why don't you stop for 1 second trying to be mr imalways right, and think about reality for a second.
You are a troll, and one of the worst ever.
@look also quit making shit up. Your responses to Truth's statements have no bearing in reality.
@Dillinger
Before we were married, my wife had to have emergency surgery. She had no health insurance. Guess what? She didn't die. The hospital gave her what is called charity care and wrote off her expenses. She was stuck with zero bills. There are problems that extend way beyond the insurance companies themselves. Illegal aliens and people without insurance using the emergency room as a regular doctor office drive costs up for everyone. Ridiculous awards on frivolous lawsuits and the crippling cost of malpractice insurance that get passed on to the end consumer. Look at how well the government runs things like SS to get a glimpse at how poorly they will run healthcare.
And really, if you're going to try to prove a point, at least try to do it without tossing names around like a 4 year old. It really devalues anything you have to say.
Well if the Obama bashing comment was made to give this device more coverage and comments... It worked. i think we can all agree kjb434 comments were poorly thought out.
@ Fernando
I'm sorry but i take issue with liberal people like you who blame all the failures of our country on bush. First off i want to know what you think he destroyed? The president has relativiely little power in making laws and most of his actions are checked by congress. guess what?? all the things gone bad right now were caused by a congress with the majority of people in congress being democrats. this war... aprroved by democrats in congress. this economy cant be blamed on anyone other than greedy CEO's trying to become even richer. other than that i think americas doin alright. granted i disagree with a lot of the things people are trying to set in place, like allowing gay marriage.
end of rant
@Look_Around_You
Are we* imperialist?
*we as in the United State of America
@ Look_Around_You
Very well said. I'm not surprised that a tech blog like this would attract so many young, uninformed hipsters that are full of Obamamania without even following his politics.
He is for whatever reason, a rock star to those on the left, despite the fact that he has proven he wants to get the government's hands on everything that he possibly can. I can't say that I was a fan of GWB, as he was of course far from being conservative. But the pace at which Obama has nationalized various industries is staggering.
Hell, even the Russian papers realize him for what he is - a socialist. Liberals hate hearing that word don't they?
Look_Around_You, Let me explain what I mean when I say your a mindless tool. I hope your ready for some amateur psychoanalysis.
Your Parents are most likely have the same political beliefs as you. You probably love and respect your parents. So from a very young age when your mind would processes beliefs contrary to the ones instilled in you by your parents you would interpret them as a personal attack on your parents beliefs. You do this because you have a high opinion of your parents and if some thing contradicts them it must mean your parents are wrong. This creates dissonance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) in your mind which leads you to make a rationalization as to why someones opinion would contradict your parents opinion. You think, “Oh, that cant be right. Its just those stupid left wingers trying to spread their stupid opinions and run the country into the ground.”. Over the coarse of making hundreds even thousands of these rationalizations to protect the respect you have for you parents you begin to polarize yourself and no longer are your opinions based on fact but instead personal bias. This of coarse is just an example and the instance of parents could be replaced with anyone who has had a mentoring role in your life.
Pretend I were to watch a live cat scan of your brain when a valid point contradicting your beliefs passed through. The reasoning parts of your brain wouldn't even light up because you wouldn't even consider that you could be wrong because your mind is driven by rationalizations especially in terms of politics. It is plainly obvious when you use terms like “nut job” that your brain is using a rationalization. If they disagree with you they must be a “nut job”, because you cant possibly be wrong.
What would be better is if you could objectively process information. You obviously cant if you think that Obama has no redeeming qualities, which is just silly. No one wants to run the country into the ground. We all just want to be the best we can be and we have different ideas on how to achieve the same goal.
There's a book I just started reading called Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me). It's a psychology book thats actually very interesting.
@m3tric: "Hell, even the Russian papers realize him for what he is - a socialist. Liberals hate hearing that word don't they?"
No, actually, we don't. "Socialist" is only a 4-letter word to you non-thinkers. I'm a proud socialist. Those who hate socialism have never experienced how good it can be. They've never been outside this country to the beauty that is Scandinavia to see just how well socialism treats the citizenry. Clean roads, universal health care, 35-hour work weeks, clean air, high literacy rates...it works. It's not perfect, and you're guaranteed to nit-pick it until you make it seem as if it's a complete failure, but fact is socialism can pretty much rock. You putting it down is like a little kid saying he hates chocolate when he's never actually tried it. Pure illogic.
@Truth
You think you are any different? Let's face it everyone's beliefs are generally rooted in their parents beliefs even if their parents were strong democrats and their parents were strong republicans. Take my father for example, his parents were strong democrats however they believed in republican values and were simply following the crowd at the time, my father picked up on the values, not the fact that they were democrat or republican
No, but I think its important to be aware of the processes that go on in our minds of which we normally are not aware. In fact i think its more amusing than anything else because nobody is going to change anyone's mind no matter how well they debate. The only purpose of this arguing is to make other people angry. It might be a little bit ironic too.
Wonderful. I didn't want to comment but I've had it with the inaccuracies and foolishness. Don't make statistical claims unless you can back it up with official numbers and DOCUMENT your sources. This is a technology blog, so we should all stfu about politics, but I can't avoid what was already started.
The easiest thing to clear up is someone's incorrect debt numbers. From http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm (note the .gov address), Bush started with about $5,674,178,209,886.86, as this was the number on 09/302000 (and it didn't increase more than 200,000,000 to the next fiscal year). On 09/30/2008 (before he left office), it was $10,024,724,896,912.49. For those who are bad with estimation, that is about $4,350,546,690,000. I think that is significantly more than even the ~$2,000,000,000 number thrown out before. And on top of that, it was the impractical fiscal and monetary policies of the Bush-era *government* (not only Bush, although he had, perhaps, the largest role of any individual) which necessitated this recent addition to the national debt. This money, it must be noted, has probably had at least some positive effect, which is evidenced by the fact that the NASDAQ has gone up by about 19.1% since the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (to verify this go to finance.google.com and select NASDAQ and put in the date 02/17/2009 for the first one on the chart).
Now let's look at the constitution. The judicial branch, specifically the Supreme Court, interprets the constitution. Until there is a Supreme Court ruling against it, Obama's "meddling" in private corporations is entirely constitutional. The constitution also doesn't give the President the power to choose a pet for the White House; does that make it unconstitutional? More relevantly, it does not give him the power to create the Air Force or make the Louisiana Purchase (Wikipedia's examples). Article I Section 8 of the constitution allows him (and the rest of the government) to do all of these things, including "taking over" corporations.
Personal attacks on commentors (including calling them racist or mindless tools) and the president (Bush or Obama) are irrelevant. There have been plenty of jerks who were right and better at their jobs than "nice" people. And Truth, my parents are Republican but I am (mostly) a Democrat. So don't use your amateur psychoanalysis on too many people. I agree with your sentiments, and they may be right, but let's just objectively argue the facts and not say why the commentors themselves are stupid, okay (even though many are)? I'm not trying to argue to arouse anyone, just to let certain people know the *truth*.
As for what was Bush's fault, let's look at majorities in congress first, shall we John? Referring to http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm (towards the bottom), you can see that Republicans had a majority for most of Bush's presidency in the senate. When Democrats had a majority, it was never by more than two, whereas Republicans had an 11-person majority at one point, which would make Democrat-initiated bills much harder to pass. When the Democrats had a no-person majority, the VP would override any tie in favor of the Republicans. As for the House of Representatives (refer to the link at the end of the previosly-cited page), it was a Republican majority until 2007. On top of all of this, the president, in reality, "suggests" many things to congress and has major influence with his veto. Many Democrats would not initiate bills for fear of veto.
Let us clear one thing up about the definition of socialism. Wikipedia, indiana.edu, and sonoma.london.edu all state some variation of "Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods". This is not, however, what the government is doing, because they are not involving themselves in the production and distribution of goods, but merely ownership. Ownership does not necessarily effect specific distribution, and the U.S. government is leaving it up to corporations to decide specifics. They are not regulating prices of goods, which is central to *communism* (the economic derivative of socialism, not a more extreme form of it). Thus, capitalism is still promoted. Socialism would be more akin to high tax increases, but even at 50% levels, no one considers France to be a socialist or communist country. It would probably make a lot of sense to stop whining about taxes and increase them for once.
I have to quote this directly to address it.
"“#4 putting 1/5 of the nation's economy (health care) under the control of the federal government.”
"Because it works so well right now."
Yeah it does.
" Lets just leave it to the multi billion dollar insurance conglomerates. They got our back, right?"
Does the federal government got yours?
If i dont like my insurance companies policies, I MOVE TO ANOTHER. If you dont like the way the feds are running it, where do you move to then?"
Right now, most people do not have the option to move to another with ease. On top of that THEY ALL SUCK (see, I can do the all-caps annoyance as well!). Moving from one piece of crap to another doesn't help. Perhaps you don't understand the realities of insurance because you are too young to have dealt with it (I'm not attacking you, I'm just hypothesizing why you wouldn't see the problem in the insurance industry that even staunch Republicans do). "If I don't like the way the feds are running it," I vote the people in control out of office. On top of that, human nature is greed, and I hope everyone can agree that the insurance industry is a private corporation out to make money and with no other explicit purpose. The government, however, is driven by money but rather by voter approval. This is more directly related to consumer approval (and thus making it better for users) than money because, with the effects of insurance similar to interlocking directorates, consumer approval is only relative to the crappy insurance and high prices from other companies. Many countries have properly implemented socialized (now is the proper time to use this non-profane term and sometimes-useful strategy). I personally know many people who have waited less time in Canada for invasive surgery than others I know here.
I believe I already countered your (non-enumerated) point 5. I must say, I appreciate how easy rebuttal is with a clear list like that!
Well, you're a dumbass for taking this to California. That just got me more determined to show how foolish all of your points are. Let's disregard the CO2 emission/greenhouse gas/global warming problem for a minute (although it is much more relevant to this blog). Pretending that isn't an issue, oil, at current consumption rates, will last about until 2050 (http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/news/headlines/econference_masters.html). Serious talk of drilling in Alaska did not start early enough to have the incredible amount of infrastructure needed to have oil pumping out of there at any reasonably ROI-positive rate. And drilling off of California will have much more severe and negative effects on the environment than positive ones for the price and duration of oil. I'm not going to list the environmental detriments here; you can look those up yourself. There are problems with ethanol (corn prices), but few with wind and solar. Fusion technology is developing quickly, and there are other frontier energy sources that will become more widespread over a few years that are better than fusion. Fission power (classically referred to as "nuclear/nucular" depending on whether you are talking to Bush or not) has problems with disposal, but there are facilities in the desert that are not yet in use and space is a pretty big junkyard (if we can develop a safe way to get it up and keep it up). So I think I'd rather keep the Earth in tact.
Oil speculation is not really possible to directly regulate. That's like saying "no stock market!". So prices will stay on a roller coaster until alternative sources are more used than oil. Which is exactly why we need them. I might be crazy, but I don't think high oil prices are positive, and capitalism is not perfect (recession anyone?). So let's help it out a little.
For some more examples (other than the ones I wrote before and overlapped), refer to appointment of ambassadors. Not in the constitution. How about creating the FCC or TVA or any technology-related agency? Not in the constitution. And let's justify government takeovers like you did the Air Force: part of the government's job is to "promote the general Welfare" (from the preamble, as was your justification). This is helping to keep jobs in America and stabilize the economy (refer to stock numbers previously quoted). Thus, it is justified.
And one last reality check for you, sir. Reducing the deficit *is* a priority of the Obama administration. Emergency spending such as this (and I doubt few in their right minds would not agree that this is a fiscal emergency) is not analogous to the incessant spending of the Bush administration.
On the real issue, I wonder how well this phone would work with Android on it. Obviously pretty crappily, but it would still be interesting!
hail to the thief!
excellent album. but doesn't apply here, friend.
what about that backwards flag on his lapel?
in regards to the backwards flag:
Photoshop>Image>Flip Vertical. (duh...)
in regards to the political comments:
Take it to a politics blog. this is about gadgets (enGADGET...see?)
In regards to this story:
If you're going to steal industrial design from BlackBerry, that's understandable, they're nice looking machines, but why in the hell would you put Windows Mobile on it????
what else could they put?? Symbian?
3.2 Touch lens?
Wouldn't BlackBarry have been a more accurate rip-off name? Well, half-accurate.
Take a look at it more closely everything matches up from the Model # of the phone and everything. The only thing they changed was the company name so they couldn't face legal issues. I've never seen a company go this far to make a fake product seem just like their rivals...
That's why it'd be hilarious to actually have one. If it actually worked, which I doubt it does.
@Alex
Wittiest comment I've seen in a while. Good one.
I think you guys missed the joke. Black "Barry" is in reference to Barry Obama--Barack's shortened name. The "half right" part of the joke is about him being half black. So it should really be, HalfBlackBarry.
wow that certainly didn't go over nohumanape's head
Personally, I would've gone with BarackBerry.
If this thing actually has WiFi than maybe I should be trading my Storm in, haha.
^ Ya, I was thinking the same thing... at least these guys got that part right.
Well it would actually be MulattoBerry, not BlackBerry.
Barack Obama Approves This Message
This kind of stuff cracks me up. The billion dollar CEO and his crocked board-members have no problem shipping off every job to China, where they are breaking every labor law and human rights law they can, just in order to make another dollar. But as soon as China starts breaking into their profit even .000001%, with knock offs, well then they are worried about wether or not China is following international laws. I use to hate when they made this knock of crap, but if they don't mind shipping us all up the river, I don't mind if they keep ripping of the companies. Speaking of which, couldn't we ship the CEO jobs over seas, and cut that cost by about 95%?
Um, BlackBerry is made by a Canadian company, RIM. If you want a RIM job, you'll have to put down the Lou Dobbs podcast and go to Waterloo, Ontario.
LOL @ Lou Dobbs podcast. Does he actually do one, because I don't get enough fear mongering in my life. :)
PS: I wouldn't recommend a job at RIM, unless you like a long commute, or can put up with Waterloo. :)
Actually, I know a lot of cities where you can get a rim job.
Yours is exactly the kind of uninformed anti-corporate populism that really scares me right now.
Waterloo is awesome! University of Waterloo graduate here...
@Bosco, lol, he said RIM job.
But my Blackberry is made in Mexico, and I live in Toronto!. Does Lou Dobbs know about this?
So, RIM is now giving out rim jobs. No wonder the share price continues to rise in a poor economy. I knew those WS analysts were getting something out of shilling for RIM.
Ahhh good ol' Obama & his Blockberry.
Endorsed by our first block president.
Haha
Block President: AHAHAHAAHAA
+1000
too friggin funny dude
well, don't forget the haff-comm branding.
He's only haff block.
This is simply amazing.
Blackberry's and Gov't run health care? No thank you.
LOL, Borock Oboma endorsos blockborry.
Handset design imitates the storm. UI imitates HTC TouchFlo 3D. Hilarious.
"Obama have BlackBerry, I have BlockBerry."
The ad is written in Chinese. Why would you assume it's grammatically incorrect?
Anyway, the translation is more like, "Obama's Blackberry, my Blockberry."
In Soviet China, Phone endorses YOU!
"Soviet' China already own a majority of the U.S. I don't think they want R.I.M. (which is canadian)
haff-comm, that's translated to something meaning 'harvard communication' on that phone too. it looks like a WiMo phone...
It is a WinMo phone - it says in the picture.
Actually, they archieved exactly what they wanted by using Obama ...... I bet that people are considering buying it , because even bad publicity = Sales
Hey, at least they ripped off the TouchFlo interface which is actually pretty sweet. My only question... is it the 2D or 3D (latest with the Calendar sweetness)?
Damn I really should visit the Chinatown Centre here in downtown Toronto and go on a KIRF hunt.
Maybe they didnt want to call it the "BLACK" berry cause it would offend him....so they went with "BLOCK"berry?
Nice... some peoples audacity... you get it? The audacity of hope? har har. In all honesty one of the funnier things i've seen here in recent history.
If it wasn't intentional, I'm an idiot. :-)
Anyone notice Obama's image picture is flipped? The flag pin is wrong...
Obama's image is mirror-reflected. His flag pin is on the right lapel, and the jacket flaps to the the left.
BOROCK OBOMA.
WOLL SMOTH.
I see wut u did theeer
Maybe they should have called it a Barakberry
you win
Audacity of Hope It Works?
wonder if it has as many problems as the storm
opple ophone
Whats funnier is that that version of win-mo seems to have HTC's proprietary touch flow interface installed. So they stole a hardware design and software for this thing...
exactly what I was thinking! Completely stolen, at least most don't steal TF3D
isn't that astoundingly illegal to due to likeness to the BB logo?
Thief! that is. =)
Thief that is. Trying to beat the grammar police. =)
excellent album. but doesn't apply here, friend.