Nanny Camera Making Certain Your Kid Is Secured And Looked After

Submitted by: Raul Crasmin

Greater than ever demand along with better technology of nanny cams has led to the accessibility of a range of spy cams. Luckily, these cameras are designed in such a way that they can be with no trouble hidden anywhere and wherever you want in your house. Despite the fact that wireless IP spy cams let you direct and continuous and uninterrupted access by means of live video streaming of the incidents in your house, the other kind of spy cams are as well an excellent option for the reason that they let you to record the incidents every day. The cost of these spy cams being affordable now, with prices beginning from just around $100 for a basic spy cam with remote computer access to the more costly $500 digital spy cams, you can decide to view pictures and videos live on your computer or cell phone. Spy cams bring you a great deal necessary serenity and faith in your kid’s nanny or babysitter, moreover confirming the wellbeing and protection of your family members.

However, there are a few drawbacks of a spy cam; the most palpable drawback of a surveillance camera is the covert nature of this piece of equipment. The majority of caretakers want to be familiar with in advance, if they are being monitored in order that they are mentally ready for the check. A few other drawbacks of these spy cams is that these can be used for immoral activities by setting up a spy cam in a bedroom, hotel room, bathrooms and so on. Besides, spy cams or nanny cams can be used for various other purposes in addition to childcare. Spy cams can be used to keep an eye on domestic helps, repairperson, babysitters, and nanny or simply use it to keep your home safe from burglars.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhG1rpAiE9Q[/youtube]

Coming on to the bigger question, are spy cams legal? Luckily, almost all nations and government agencies approve of spy cams for legitimate use and approve video recording of the incidents as an evidence in the court of law. However, do check in for your local laws before installing it so that you do not infringe on person s rights.

At present, spy cams and other similar surveillance cameras are simply accessible at many local spy stores and departmental stores. On the other hand, unique models or high-end spy camera models that are hidden in alarm clocks, wall clocks, mirrors, picture frames, teddy bears, DVD players, air freshener, smoke detectors, boom box, pens, wristwatches, sunglasses, and so on can be bought online or at special spy shops. However, do remember to shop around and compare prices as it might vary from one vendor to another.

As a final point, make use of a spy cam if you have doubts about the wellbeing of your child. As a parent you can by no means be too suspicious or too vigilant as it comes to making certain your kid is secured and looked after well, therefore do consider what is best for him/her. Order a spy cam now!

About the Author: Raul is an expert in the field. For more information on

nanny camera

and on

wireless spy camera

Please visit: http://www.my-spycam.com

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=557780&ca=Computers+and+Technology

UK’s Liverpool FC unveils plans for new stadium

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Liverpool FC revealed the plans for its new Stanley Park Stadium today. The stadium is to be built over the next three years in Stanley Park, to replace Liverpool’s long time home at Anfield. The plans as submitted would provide for a capacity of 60,000, with a possible increase towards 80,000.

The design by HKS is situated approximately 8 meters below the surface to lessen its impact. The cost of construction is said to be £300 million.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=UK%27s_Liverpool_FC_unveils_plans_for_new_stadium&oldid=850215”

Scientology protest group celebrates founder’s birthday worldwide

 Correction — March 19, 2008 The next protest is scheduled for April 12, 2008. The article below states April 18 which is incorrect. 

Saturday, March 15, 2008

The Internet group Anonymous today held further protests critical of the Church of Scientology.

The global protests started in Australia where several hundred protesters gathered at different locations for peaceful protests.

In a global speech, the Internet protest movement said Scientology “betrayed the trust of its members, [had] taken their money, their rights, and at times their very lives.” The protesters welcomed the public interest their protests have led to, and claimed they witnessed “an unprecedented flood of Scientologists [joining] us across the world to testify about these abuses.” The group said it would continue with monthly actions.

In a press statement from its European headquarters, Scientology accused the anonymous protesters of “hate speech and hate crimes”, alleging that security measures were necessary because of death threats and bomb threats. This also makes the Church want to “identify members” of the group it brands as “cyber-terrorists”.

Wikinews had correspondents in a number of protest locations to report on the events.

Anonymous states that the next protest is scheduled to take place on April 18, which happens to be the birthday of Suri, the daughter of Tom and Katie Cruise.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Scientology_protest_group_celebrates_founder%27s_birthday_worldwide&oldid=4462734”

Fear and loathing on the campaign trail, October 2008

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

October on the campaign trail presented the last chances for the campaigns to present their messages to the American people. A vice-presidential and two presidential debates were held, one of which added a new political lexicon, perhaps the closest thing to an October surprise. One candidate seemed to pull way ahead as early voting began in many states near the conclusion of the month.

Democrats
  • At the beginning of the month, due to the continued economic crisis, Obama took a clear lead over McCain in opinion polling, leading by double-digits in many surveys. Obama maintained his lead throughout the month and mounted leads or stayed within the margin of error in some states won by Bush in 2004 including Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Colorado, New Mexico, Missouri, Florida, Iowa and North Dakota.
  • Joe Biden debated Sarah Palin in St. Louis on October 3, in a forum moderated by Gwen Ifill. Biden issued very little criticism of Palin and remained subdued for much of the night, focusing mostly on foreign policy. Ifill became a subject of controversy before the debate, with commentators questioning her impartiality with the upcoming release of her book, The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.
  • On the campaign trail, prior to the third presidential debate, Obama was approached by plumber Joe Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio. Joe asked Obama whether his taxes would be raised if he bought a plumbing company as he was planning to do. Obama stated that he didn’t “want to punish [his] success” but that “everyone who is behind him” should be given a “chance at success.” He later stated that he thought “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
  • Obama defended his tax plan during the third presidential debate with McCain while facing many McCain comments about “Joe the plumber.” He repeatedly stated that his tax plan would lower taxes for households making under US$200,000 a year, which he said made up 95% of Americans.
Republicans
  • At the vice-presidential debate, Sarah Palin became the first woman since the 1984 United States presidential election to participate in such an event. It was the most widely watched vice-presidential debate in history with an estimated 70 million viewers. During the debate Palin characterized herself as a “Washington outsider” who “may not answer the questions the way the moderator and you (Senator Biden) want to hear.” She focused mostly on energy policy during the debate.
  • The second presidential debate was held on October 7 and moderated by Tom Brokaw. During the debate McCain announced his support for a spending freeze of programs other than those for defense or veterans. When discussing energy policy, McCain famously referred to Obama as “that one.”
  • The McCain campaign launched a series of ads connecting Obama to former Weather Underground member William Ayers, who served on a board with Obama and held a venue at his home for the Senator when he began his political career. Palin accused Obama of “palling around with terrorists.” Some pundits saw the new strategy as a last ditch effort by the McCain campaign.
  • McCain’s campaign was compared to that of segregationist George Wallace’s by Congressman John Lewis, who commented that the campaign was “sowing the seeds of hatred and division.” Lewis pointed to McCain supporters who shouted obscenities about Barack Obama during a McCain rally, including one who reportedly yelled “kill him” when referring to Obama (a claim later refuted by the Secret Service). McCain discussed this during the third presidential debate, and asked Obama to repudiate the comments.
  • During the third presidential debate, McCain used the earlier discussion between Obama and Joe the Plumber as a tool to attack Obama on his tax policy. He strongly objected to Obama’s support for “spreading the wealth” which he likened to socialism. The debate led to a small comeback for McCain in opinion polling, cutting into Obama’s lead as the month came to a close.
Third parties
  • Ralph Nader and Chuck Baldwin were able to participate in a third party presidential debate on October 23 in Washington. Each discussed their strong opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as their disapproval of the government’s bailout plan. Baldwin and Nader had some disagreement on abortion, with Nader standing pro-choice and Baldwin standing as pro-life. Nader emphasized the need to control the power of corporations over consumer’s lives and Baldwin stated that his number one priority as president would be to secure the borders.
  • On October 30, Nader and Baldwin participated in another third party debate. Libertarian party nominee Bob Barr joined the candidates for this debate. During the debate, the candidates railed against the two major parties with Ralph Nader complaining that they don’t like “competition.” Barr conveyed his frustration with the Justice Department for their failure to prosecute Wall Street corporate leaders. Baldwin expressed his fear for America’s future.
Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Fear_and_loathing_on_the_campaign_trail,_October_2008&oldid=4641417”

Plastic Surgery Financing Guide

Plastic Surgery Financing Guide

by

Abigail Aaronson

Everyone who wants to have plastic surgery has their own unique and personal reasons for doing so, which is perfectly fine. If you are like many individuals who yearn to look better through the wonders of modern surgery, then you may find that the only thing that stands in your way from getting the beauty boost you want is the money needed to pay for it.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLHNBod4wAc[/youtube]

Financing the operation is a viable means of improving and enhancing your appearance. However, financing plans are sometimes confusing to make sense of and can be problematic when it comes to assessing the benefits and risks involved. Obtaining the necessary funds through medical financing might be a suitable option for you, but there are things you need to learn about it before you decide that it is definitely the correct choice for you. Financing for cosmetic as well as plastic surgery procedures is considered to be an unsecured loan. What this means is that, as the person looking to borrow cash, you are not required to provide collateral in the event that you are not able to repay the loan in full. In most cases, unsecured loans come with higher interest rates because the lender incurs more of a risk to lend money to the borrower. Medical loans for plastic surgery purposes use credit scores as a means of assessing the credit worthiness of the applicant. If this is the route that you wish to take to pay for your operation, then there are numerous medical financing businesses that you can look into to find out if they would consider you a potential candidate to lend funds to. Some of these companies finance various medical surgeries but do not include cosmetic surgery procedures in the operations they lend money for. In that case, for the service you desire there are also specific plastic and cosmetic surgery financing companies that are involved solely in helping those who wish to help themselves in this area of body and face improvement. Medical financing is comparable to financing other things that you want, such as new furniture, electronics, appliances, or a new vehicle. When you apply and pass the necessary criteria, you are then approved for a designated amount of funds. For plastic surgery, the amount you are granted could be anywhere between $2,000 to $25,000. This money can then go towards the plastic operation of your choosing. You will then be given a term in which to pay off the loan with interest. Most companies give borrowers 24 to 36 months to do so. To qualify for a medical loan to have cosmetic work done you need to have a good enough credit score. If your credit score is low due to past problems, then you should wait to apply for a loan until your score has been raised. To qualify, it is also essential that you have a low debt-to-income ratio and a relatively small credit card debt load (which is to say in the range of $10,000 to $15,000 or less). There are also age requirements and citizenship requirements. In most cases, an applicant must be a legal resident of the state in which they are applying for the medical loan in.

Once you are financed and ready for

plastic surgery Chicago

you will need to find a surgeon and practice that you feel comfortable with. A good option for you to consider is here:

theartofplasticsurgery.com

.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

Wikinews interviews Democratic candidate for the Texas 6th congressional district special election Daryl Eddings, Sr’s campaign manager

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Wikinews extended invitations by e-mail on March 23 to multiple candidates running in the Texas’ 6th congressional district special election of May 1 to fill a vacancy left upon the death of Republican congressman Ron Wright. Of them, the office of Democrat Daryl Eddings, Sr. agreed to answer some questions by phone March 30 about their campaigns and policies. The following is the interview with Ms Chatham on behalf of Mr Eddings, Sr.

Eddings is a federal law enforcement officer and senior non-commissioned officer in the US military. His experience as operations officer of an aviation unit in the California National Guard includes working in Los Angeles to control riots sparked by the O. J. Simpson murder case and the police handling of Rodney King, working with drug interdiction teams in Panama and Central America and fighting in the Middle East. He is the founder of Operation Battle Buddy, which has under his leadership kept in touch with over 20 thousand veterans and their families. He was born in California, but moved to Midlothian, Texas. He endeavours to bring “good government, not no government”. Campaign manager Faith Chatham spoke to Wikinews on matters ranging from healthcare to housing.

An Inside Elections poll published on March 18 shows Republican candidate Susan Wright, the widow of Ron Wright, is ahead by 21% followed by Democrat Jana Sanchez with 17% and Republican Jake Ellzey with 8% with a 4.6% margin of error among 450 likely voters. The district is considered “lean Republican” by Inside Elections and voted 51% in favour of Donald Trump in last year’s US presidential election. This is down from 54% for Trump in 2016’s presidential election, the same poll stated.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews_interviews_Democratic_candidate_for_the_Texas_6th_congressional_district_special_election_Daryl_Eddings,_Sr%27s_campaign_manager&oldid=4684113”

Two people die after contracting H1N1 virus, number of swine flu deaths in Scotland rises to 28

Sunday, November 1, 2009

Two people have died in Scotland as a result of the H1N1 virus, or swine flu. The Scottish Government revealed the information today.

Both of the victims were adults. One came from NHS Ayrshire and Arran and the other came from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. This announcement from the Scottish National Health Service (or NHS) means that the number of deaths from the virus in the country has now increased to 28.

Nicola Sturgeon, who is the current Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing in Scotland, made a statement about the situation: “I am sorry to have to announce two more deaths and my thoughts are with the patients’ loved ones at this distressing time.” Nicola said that most people who caught the virus would make a full recovery after experiencing mild symptoms of the flu and that both of the victims in this particular case had underlying health problems. Sturgeon, who is also the Deputy First Minister of Scotland said: “The vaccination is being rolled out but please wait until you are invited before visiting your GP for the vaccine.”

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Two_people_die_after_contracting_H1N1_virus,_number_of_swine_flu_deaths_in_Scotland_rises_to_28&oldid=4627125”

McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The two major party presidential candidates in the US, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, faced each other yesterday in the first TV debate. Despite that McCain had asked to postpone the debate, both were present at the University of Mississippi. The debate, which was moderated by PBSJim Lehrer, was planned to be focused on foreign policy, however due to concerns about the US financial crisis, the debate began focused on economy.

McCain repeatedly referred to his experience, drawing on stories from the past. Often, he joked of his age and at one point seemed to mock his opponent. Obama spoke of mistakes and repeatedly laid out detailed plans.

The debate was widely seen as a draw. A CBS poll conducted after the debate on independent voters found that 38% felt it was a draw, 40% felt Obama had won, and 22% thought that McCain had won. Voters and analysts agreed that Obama had won on the economy, but that McCain had done better on foreign policy issues, which were the focus of the debate. However, Obama had a more substantial lead on the economy than McCain did on foreign policy.

The McCain campaign faced some ridicule prior to the debate, after airing an internet ad declaring McCain had won the debate hours before it had started.

The candidates were asked where they stood on the country’s financial plans.

Obama put forward four proposals for helping the economy. First, to “make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole [bailout] process”. Second, to “make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains”. Third, to “make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes”. And lastly, “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”.

He then went on to say, “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”.Lehrer then turned to McCain, giving him two minutes as well.

McCain, on the other hand, stressed the urgency of the crisis and the partisanship present in Washington before going on. “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,” he told viewers, pausing to briefly mention energy and jobs before Lehrer stopped him.

Lehrer asked the two to come back to his question and urging them to speak to each other, first turning to Senator Obama.

“We haven’t seen the language yet,” Obama began, speaking to Lehrer and not McCain. “And I do think that there’s constructive work being done out there”, he said, before noting he was optimistic a plan would come together. “The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?”

He continued, stressing his foresight on the issues two years ago, before Lehrer turned to McCain, asking if he planned to vote for the bailout plan.

McCain stammered that he hoped so. Lehrer asked again, and McCain replied, “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.”

McCain then continued, giving a story about former US President Dwight Eisenhower, who “on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letter”. Eisenhower, he said, had taken accountability for his actions.

HAVE YOUR SAY
Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?
Add or view comments

“As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen.”

Obama then agreed with McCain, adding that more accountability was needed but not just when there’s a panic. “There are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place,” Obama continued, “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”.

Obama was asked to say it to McCain. Obama replied, “I do not think that they are”. Lehrer asked him to say it more directly to McCain, and Obama laughed, repeating himself to McCain.

McCain joked about his age, saying, “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?”

Obama said that he and McCain disagreed fundamentally and that he wanted accountability “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”. Tax policies, he said, were a good example.

McCain disagreed. “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”.

Lehrer went on to the next question, asking if there were fundamental differences between the approaches of the two.

McCain began by saying he wanted to lower “completely out of control” spending. He promised as president to “veto every single spending bill” He then attacked Senator Obama’s use of earmarks, citing it as a fundamental difference.

Senator Obama agreed that earmarks were being abused, but not that it was a large problem. “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.” He then attacked McCain’s tax plans, saying, “you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out”.

He then stressed his focus on the middle class, saying, “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”.

McCain was called on.

“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,” McCain said, attacking his opponent. He also said that Obama had only suspended pork barrel spending after he started running for president.

“What I do is I close corporate loopholes,” Obama objected, “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”.

He then turned to McCain, asking him to look at his tax policies, which he said were ignoring the middle class and a continuation of Bush policies.

Lehrer asked McCain to respond directly to Obama’s attack on his tax policies.

“Well — well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax,” McCain began. He then explained the reasoning behind his business tax cuts, saying that companies would want to start in countries where they would pay less taxes. “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”.

Obama explained that his tax cuts would affect 95% of taxpayers, then replied, “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”.

McCain, he said, opposed closing loopholes but just wanted to add more tax breaks on top of that.

This was a clear victory for Barack Obama on John McCain’s home turf. Senator McCain offered nothing but more of the same failed Bush policies, and Barack Obama made a forceful case for change in our economy and our foreign policy.

He went on, attacking McCain’s health credit idea, saying that McCain wanted to tax health credits. “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”.

McCain responded with an example of Obama voting for tax breaks of oil companies.

Obama cut in, “John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion”, he pointed out.

McCain shot back, attacking Obama’s earmark spending and tax policies. “Who’s the person who has believed that the best thing for America is — is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair?”, he said, referring to himself. “And I’ve fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it”.

He then accused Obama of voting “to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year”. Obama repeated several times that McCain’s accusations were untrue.

McCain then accused him of giving tax cuts to oil companies, which Obama once again said was untrue. “The fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out,”he said. “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 then broke in, stopping the argument. He switched to a new question, asking what priorities and goals for the country the candidates would give up as a result of the financial crisis.

He allowed Obama to answer the question first, who said many things would have to be delayed but not forgotten. He then began to list what he felt the country had to have to continue to compete.

“We have to have energy independence,” he said, “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”.

He continued, saying that the health care system had to be fixed because it was bankrupting families.

“We’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education,” he continued. “We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.” He also mentioned making sure college was still affordable.

He also stressed making sure the country was still stable structurally, “to make sure that we can compete in this global economy”.

Lehrer then turned to McCain, asking him to present his ideas.

“Look, we, no matter what, we’ve got to cut spending”, McCain began and reminded the audience that he “saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong”.

Lehrer broke in, asking if it was correct that neither of them had any major changes to implement after the financial crisis.

Obama replied that many things would have to be delayed and put aside, and that investments had to be made. He then agreed with McCain that cuts had to be made. “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 work”.

McCain then made a suggestion. “How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs”. Lehrer repeated “spending freeze?” and McCain went on, “I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues”.

Obama disagreed with McCain’s idea, saying it was “using a hatchet”. Some vital programs, he said, were seriously underfunded. “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”.

The two candidates began to argue more directly.

“We have to have,” McCain argued, “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”.

He accused Obama of opposing storing nuclear fuel.

Lehrer interrupted the two with another question, asking how the financial crisis would affect how they ran the country.

Obama replied first. “There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it”. He went on to stress that it was a critical time and the country’s long term priorities had to be sorted out.

There was one man who was presidential tonight, that man was John McCain. There was another who was political, that was Barack Obama. John McCain won this debate and controlled the dialogue throughout, whether it was the economy, taxes, spending, Iraq or Iran.

McCain replied by criticizing Obama’s health care plans. “I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government,” he said, then called for lower spending.

He went on to speak about the national debt and stressing the importance of low taxes.

Obama went on the offensive, attacking McCain’s record of voting. “John, it’s been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending”, he said, accusing him of voting for an “orgy of spending”.

McCain countered that he had opposed Bush “on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on – on Guantanamo Bay. On a — on the way that the Iraq War was conducted”. He called himself a maverick, and referred to his running mate as a maverick as well.

Lehrer asked the two what the lessons of Iraq were.

McCain answered first, stressing that the war in Iraq was going well. “I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear,” he answered, “that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict”.

He went on to praise the efforts in Iraq, saying the strategy was successful and the US was winning. “And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds”, and continued that Iraq would make a stable ally.

Lehrer asked Obama how he saw the lessons of Iraq, who began by questioning the fundamentals of the war and whether the US should have gone in the first place.

“We took our eye off [bin Laden]. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government”.

The lesson, he said, was to “never hesitate to use military force”, but to use it wisely.

McCain was asked if he agreed on the lesson, though he did not comment on a lesson learned. Obama, he said, had been wrong about the surge.

The two opponents then began arguing, as Lehrman tried to mediate them.

McCain felt it was remarkable that “Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that’s in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing”.

“The issues of Afghanistan,” Obama responded, “the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don’t go through my subcommittee because they’re done as a committee as a whole”.

He then began to attack McCain’s optimism. “You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong”.

McCain responded to the criticism by telling a story of when he spoke to troops who were re-enlisting. “And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don’t want our kids coming back here. And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq”.

McCain repeatedly accused Obama of opposing funding to troops.

Obama responded by speaking to Lehrer, to explain why he had voted against funding troops. “Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn’t believe in a timetable. I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable”.

“Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama’s plan is dangerous for America,” McCain cut in once Obama had finished.

Obama said it was not the case, that the wording was “a precipitous withdrawal would be dangerous”.

McCain then argued that Iraq, and not Afghanistan, was the central battle ground against terrorism. He also attacked Obama’s surprise that the surge had worked.

Lehrer switched to a new question. “Do you think more troops — more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?”

Obama mentioned he had been saying more troops in Afghanistan were needed for over a year. He argued that no Al-Qaeda were present in Iraq before the invasion, and the people there had nothing to do with 9/11.

He then went on to list a three part plan beginning with pressuring the Afghani government to work for it’s people and control it’s poppy trade. He also pressed the need to stop giving money to Pakistan.

To be frank, I’m surprised McCain didn’t play the POW card more tonight, consider how frequently he and his campaign have used it earlier in the campaign.

McCain responded by saying Iraq had to be stabilized and that he would not make the mistake of leaving Iraq the way it is.

“If you’re going to aim a gun at somebody,” he said, “you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger”.

Obama responded by arguing that if the Pakistani government would not take care of terrorists in it’s borders, action had to be taken. He then commented on past US policies with Pakistan, saying that the US support of Musharraf had alienated the Pakistani people.

“And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren’t going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That’s going to change when I’m president of the United States”, he finished.

McCain quickly replied that Pakistan was a failed state at the time. He then went on to talk about his voting record. “I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm’s way”.

Obama argued that Afghanistan could not be muddled through, and that problems were being caused by not focusing on Al-Qaeda. As he finished, Lehrer attempted to announce a new question, but McCain quickly attacked Obama, saying his plans would have a “calamitous effect” on national security and the region.

Lehrer directed his next question towards McCain, asking about his thoughts on Iran and it’s threat to the US.

McCain’s reading of the threat in Iran was “if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region”. He stressed the need to avoid another Holocaust, and the need for a league of democracies

Anybody hearing a snicker from McCain while Obama is talking?

to battle Iran. “I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior”.

Obama went next, focusing on the Iraq war’s effect on Iran. Iraq, he said, was Iran’s “mortal enemy” and had kept Iran from becoming a threat. “That was cleared away. And what we’ve seen over the last several years is Iran’s influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon”.

He then went on to say that refusing to use diplomacy with hostile nations has only made matters worse and isolated the US.

Lehrer turned to McCain, asking him how he felt about diplomacy as a solution.

McCain hurried through his response, attacking Obama on his willingness to meet with hostile leaders without preconditions. People like Ahmadinejad, he said, would have their ideas legitimized if a President met with them.

Obama responded by pointing out that Ahmadinejad was only a minor leader. Meeting leaders without preconditions, he said, “doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day”. He then turned to attacking McCain, who he said “would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he — you know, he wasn’t sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally”.

McCain retorted that he was not yet President so it would be out of place. The two then began to argue over the comments of Dr. Kissinger’s stance on meeting foreign leaders.

McCain argued that meeting with and legitimizing ideas was dangerous and naive, and said it was a fundamental difference of opinion.

Obama accused McCain of misrepresentation, stressing that he would not speak without low level talks and preparations.

McCain responded by mocking Obama. “So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, ‘We’re going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,’ and we say, ‘No, you’re not’? Oh, please”.

The two started arguing among each other, as Lehrer attempted to interject, finally succeeding with a new question. He turned to Obama, asking how he saw the relationship with Russia and it’s potential.

Obama began spelling out his opinion, stating that he felt the US approach to Russia had to be evaluated. He then continued that the US has to press for a unified alliance and for Russia to remove itself from other nations, adding that the US had to “explain to the Russians that you cannot be a 21st-century superpower, or power, and act like a 20th-century dictatorship”.

He went on, stressing the importance of diplomacy and affirming relationships, and inviting Russian-influenced countries into NATO. “Now, we also can’t return to a Cold War posture with respect to Russia. It’s important that we recognize there are going to be some areas of common interest. One is nuclear proliferation”.

McCain responded by attacking Obama’s reaction to the Russian-Georgian conflict, criticizing his initial comment that both sides should show restraint, calling it naive. “He doesn’t understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia. And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petro-dollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik-run government”.

Lehrer asked Obama if there were any major differences between the two’s opinion on Russia, who answered that he and McCain had similar opinions on Russia. He then stressed foresight in dealing with Russia, as well as reducing dependence on foreign oil through alternative energy.

“Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel,” he mentioned.

The two began to argue over alternative energy. As Lehrer began announcing the next question, McCain interjected. “No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he’s for nuclear, but he’s against reprocessing and he’s against storing So,” he continued, as Obama objected, “it’s hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge”.

McCain continued, as Obama interrupted to correct him, saying that he had voted for storing nuclear waste safely.

The two began interrupting each other, each trying to get a word in, before Lehrer stopped them and moved on.

“What do you think the likelihood is that there would be another 9/11-type attack on the continental United States?” asked Lehrer.

McCain said that America was far safer since 9/11, which he claimed a hand in. He went on to stress better intelligence and technology in keeping America safe, but that he felt the US was far safer.

Lehrer then turned to Obama.

Obama disagreed slightly, saying America was safer in some ways, but “we still have a long way to go”. He also felt that the US was not focusing enough on Al-Qaeda and fighting in Iraq was not making the US safer.

McCain accused Senator Obama of not understanding that “if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq”.

Lehrer asked if Obama agreed.

Obama argued that the sole focus was currently Iraq, but that “in the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed”. He noted that $10 billion was spent in Iraq every month, instead of going to healthcare. He argued that veterans were not getting the benefits they deserved, and that the next president’s strategies had to be broader.

McCain responded by attacking Obama saying he didn’t think Obama had the knowledge or experience to be President.

Obama then said that the job of the next President would be to repair America’s image and economy.

McCain concluded by citing his POW experience. “Jim, when I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being very badly treated, and it made me sad. And I embarked on an effort to resolve the POW-MIA issue, which we did in a bipartisan fashion, and then I worked on normalization of relations between our two countries so that our veterans could come all the way home”.

“And that ends this debate tonight,” finished Jim Lehrer.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=McCain_and_Obama_face_off_in_U.S._presidential_candidate_debate&oldid=1985219”

Vehicle Finance South Africa, Get A Much Better Car Finance Deal Through Us.

Vehicle Finance South Africa, Get A Much Better Car Finance Deal Through Us.

by

Auto Agent

Vehicle Finance South Africa is happy to help you get the optimum possible deal when buying a brand-new or secondhand car in South Africa and we have useful tools that will help you work things out, like a car finance calculator and links to websites that will inform you your current credit status.

We have years of experience in Vehicle Finance, Vehicle Insurance and Warranties, we pride ourselves in being really knowledgeable in the Private Vehicle Finance business, South Africa. We have aided literally many hundreds of clients with vehicle licensing, car registration and solid old fashioned proposals when it comes to purchasing secondhand cars. We are therefore highly competent to counsel you on most things associated to car finance and purchasing secondhand cars in South Africa.

I have purchased a vehicle privately, can you help me finance it?

Yes, is the only answer it s exactly what we do. Why not apply for Vehicle Finance Online.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i32QCNmYmLI[/youtube]

What precisely do we do?

Let s say you have bought a car from a colleague, or from someone less know to you on Gumtree or some different classifieds, and you would like to know if the car is safe and need to finance the vehicle privately. This is where we come in we will appraise the car, make sure that it s worth what you are going to pay for it, and then supply you with the car finance. We refer to all the major lenders, Wesbank MFC, ABSA, etc. and then choose the best business deal from the bunch. And that s not all, we supply unbeatable facility fees, and we will outperform nearly all offers from the financial institution. For instance, you WILL SAVE at least R2500 on facility fees when buying a car to the value of R100,000 and then we can give you a another saving of R1000 of licensing and reg.

Exactly are we able to offer you these savings?

As motor industry and vehicle finance experts, we saw an opportunity to help buyers in the used car market, especially those who have bought used cars from private sellers and needed financial assistance. We are happy to offer you an unbeatable deal, as we are in effect applying to the banks instantly for finance, and we stand surety against your purchase should something go wrong. It is therefore of the upmost importance that our clients are in worthy credit, as we are unable to action applications from clients who have bad credit or those who have a financial judgements.

How do I use the Car Finance Calculator and what does it do?

Our vehicle finance calculator makes it simple for you to see what kind of car you can afford. We have made sure that you are capable of calculating based on the total price of the motor vehicle, any deposit you might have and even the trade in valuation if you are purchasing a car from a dealership. The car finance calculator also allows balloon / residual calculations, if you are convinced that you will have a large sum of money when your payment term ends. Most Often, people use balloon / residuals if they are certain they will have a bonus or some other form of hard cash available.

Likewise, our convenient finance calculator will also show you just how much you might save on the facility fees, and it s normally a saving of R2,500 on a car purchased for R100,000! That s something to examine, why throw worthy cash down the drain. Cars that cost in the area of R80,000 can look to make an even bigger saving, in the region of R3000 for the facility fee and thats not all:

We will licence and roadworthy your car for R999 this represents another saving of R1000!

And we will also apply for car finance to all the leading banks, talk terms and then let you choose which offer is going to be better. We initiate with banks all day long, and we have a great relationship with many of them, so it stands to reason that we are competent to get a much better deal than if you were to approach them in private.

Vehicle Finance South Africa

– Get A Simply Excellent Vehicle Finance Deal With Us

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

CanadaVOTES: CHP candidate Larry R. Heather in Calgary Southwest

Friday, October 10, 2008

In an attempt to speak with as many candidates as possible during the 2008 Canadian federal election, Wikinews has talked via email with Larry R. Heather. Heather is a candidate in Alberta’s Calgary Southwest riding, running under the Christian Heritage Party of Canada (CHP) banner. The CHP is a minor, registered political party running a significant number of candidates across the country, looking to earn its first ever seat in the House of Commons.

Best known as an anti-abortion activist, this shipper-receiver holds a Bachelor of Religious Education from Saskatchewan’s Briercrest College and Seminary, and a BA in religion from Calgary’s Rocky Mountain College. He hosts the Gospel Road program on AM1140 in High River, and is remembered by many for his ketchup-soaked run-in with abortion law activist Henry Morgentaler.

He has run in the federal election of 1984 (Calgary South, ind.), 1988 (Calgary Southwest, ind), 1993 (Calgary West, CHP), 1997 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), 2004 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), and 2006 (Calgary Southwest, CHP), provincial elections of 1986 (Calgary Glenmore, ind), 1989 (Calgary Elbow, ind), and 2004 (Calgary Glenmore, Alberta Social Credit), and for various public school board ridings in 1989 and 1992. He has run against some big names, including Ralph Klein (1989), Preston Manning (1997), and Stephen Harper (1993, 2004, 2006). His 2006 campaign featured controversial and graphic images, to illustrate his pro-life and anti-same sex marriage messages.

His major opponent in the riding is economist and lecturer Stephen Harper, a Conservative, who just so happens to be the current Prime Minister. Harper previously represented Calgary West. Other names on the ballot include Liberal Marlene Lamontagne, New Democrat Holly Heffernan, Libertarian Dennis Young, and Green Party candidate Kelly Christie. The riding is any part of Calgary that is west of the Canadian Pacific rail line, and south of the Glenway Trail.

The following is an interview with Heather, conducted via email. The interview has had very limited editing, to eliminate in-text mentions of website addresses, but is otherwise left exactly as sent to Wikinews.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=CanadaVOTES:_CHP_candidate_Larry_R._Heather_in_Calgary_Southwest&oldid=4228883”