They used this visit to announce their new party policy on protections against identity fraud. At present, credit rating companies are exempt from aspects of the Data Protection Act and can forward personal information about an individual’s financial history to companies without the subject’s consent. Clegg proposes to give individuals the rights to “freeze” their credit records, making it more difficult for fraudsters to impersonate others.

See also the Cambridge Evening News article and video interview.

The Anchorage Daily News reports back in September 2004:

Sarah Palin never thought of herself as an investigator. Yet there she was, hacking uncomfortably into Randy Ruedrich’s computer, looking for evidence that the state Republican Party boss had broken the state ethics law while a member of the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission.

The next week, when Palin went back to work at the AOGCC, she noticed that Ruedrich had removed his pictures from the walls and the personal effects from his desk. But as she and an AOGCC technician worked their way around his computer password at the behest of an assistant attorney general in Fairbanks, they found his cleanup had not extended to his electronic files.

The technician “said it looked like he tried to delete this, but she knew a way to go around and get some of the deleted stuff,” Palin said in an interview. “I didn’t know what I was looking for, but I was there.”

And this is how Salon reports the same incident:

“In a neat symbolic fit, the agent responsible for Alaska’s current moment of reform and modernization is a woman, a breed once nearly as rare in far Northwest politics as a Democrat. Sarah Palin, a libertarian and hockey mom from the fast-growing suburbs of Anchorage, began her political career — as an appointed member of the state’s Oil and Gas Commission — by hacking into the computer of another commissioner, Randy Ruedrich, chairman of the Alaska Republican Party. Palin was seeking the evidence that she would eventually use to charge him with an improper relationship with lobbyists. (Ruedrich would later settle state ethics charges against him by paying a $12,000 fine.)”

Is this where the McCain administration is going to get their computer security expertise? She’s not a security expert but it is nice to see someone at the level of state govenor who knows their way around a computer.

So, they played three monkeys and said, “la la la, I can’t see it. la la la” (not an exact quote) But, that’s not where the absurdity ends. The EPA could have sent a printed copy and that would have been the end of it.

Nope.

Instead they rewrote the conclusions to make more palatable for the dunking bird-set. Email has always been a best effort tool that has morphed into business critical function over the years. But, to say they wouldn’t open an email…wow. Remember folks, if you are a Republican or Democrat be sure to VOTE. You have a responsibility.

From NY Times:

Over the past five days, the officials said, the White House successfully put pressure on the E.P.A. to eliminate large sections of the original analysis that supported regulation, including a finding that tough regulation of motor vehicle emissions could produce $500 billion to $2 trillion in economic benefits over the next 32 years. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter.

Both documents, as prepared by the E.P.A., “showed that the Clean Air Act can work for certain sectors of the economy, to reduce greenhouse gases,” one of the senior E.P.A. officials said. “That’s not what the administration wants to show. They want to show that the Clean Air Act can’t work.”

November can’t come soon enough.

Article Link

Since I chimed in on Super Bowl Sunday, let me press my luck and talk about the primaries of Super Tuesday. I stayed up late tonight switching between CNN and Fox News to really get a "fair and balanced" view of what was going on.  I must say that in all of the years I have been watching presidential races (and the first one I remember was '68), I don't remember both parties having such close races this late in the season.  Without letting my own political beliefs get in the way here is my analysis:

1. The Republicans - They are in a fight for the soul of this party.  Though all three leading candidates claim the title of heir to the Regan revolution, in my mind it is a bit different.  Mike Huckabee, clearly is the choice of the Karl Rove wing of the party. He is the choice of the religious right and the South.  This is the bedrock of the Republican presidential majority.  Taking them on is John McCain who is a genuine war hero, but independent enough to stand for what he believes in and has the record and stature to stand up for it.  He makes no bones that he is all about the traditional Republican argument of being strong in foreign policy and probably a bit less involved in economic matters. Finally, you have Mitt Romney who represents, to me anyway, the traditional Republican big business view.  So who wins this fight for what it means to be a Republican.  Are the Republicans a party of the religious right who vote primarily on social issues such as abortion, gay rights, etc.  Are the Republicans the party of big business/small government which was their traditional stand as I grew up. Or finally are they the party who is best suited to keeping America safe and recognizing our own self-proclaimed "manifest destiny".  I guess the rest of the primary season will answer that question.

2. The Democrats - Obama has certainly energized a large section of the populace. He is bringing people who never voted or are usually very under represented in elections into the process and that is a good thing.  However, when you examine the wins, a Democratic winning their primary in Utah, Alaska and Idaho is just not very exciting. He has as no chance of winning those states in the general election. On the other hand Hillary has certainly demonstrated her ability to win in the traditional Democratic states (including Michigan and Florida, whose votes will have to count in a close race). But is she electable in a general election.  She is a lightening rod for Republican wrath it seems.  Maybe it is part of that vast right wing conspiracy that she always spoke about.  What is interesting on the Democratic side, is I really don't just see a lot of difference in their positions.  In fact most people I speak to say it would be cool if they would just join up and run as a ticket.  Of course who is on top and bottom is the key to that one, but I don't think it will happen, to much ego there.

So, here we are Super Tuesday is over and still no conclusive answers. This is what I do know.  No matter who wins the primaries, 40% of this country is going to vote Republican and 40% is going to vote Democrat.  It is who the other 20% vote for that will will determine the next President.  But as someone who remembers the Civil Rights movement and the womans lib movement.  I can tell you that I am thrilled as an American to see in my life time that either an African-American or a woman will be the nominee of one of the major parties.  I think it will be a while until we see something like that on the Republican side, but it will come.  In the meantime I am looking forward to seeing how this all plays out. But this race is not done so yet, it is up to you to decide who wins.  Get out and vote!