Rand Paul And His Cool Sunglasses

Rand Paul sun glasses which are money makers for his presidential run have run into difficulties. His Ray-Ban sunglasses made by Wayfarer Brand have been asked by the company to take the product off his website. The reason, Rand Paul's campaign had been selling the Ray-Ban glasses without the company's consent. The glasses have the imprinted "Rand" logo on the side and Jane Lehman, who handles the corporate media at Luxottica, Ray-Ban's public relations firm, says  "it was without consent."

Some believe he was going after the look of JFK, who wore a certain sun glass on his campaign. A caption on his site says " I can hear Senator Bentsen now "I knew Jack Kennedy and your not Jack Kennedy." Well, you and I may not be Jack Kennedy but Rand likes Ray-Bans and now we all can own Rand branded Ray-Bans"

Well we may all want these amazing cool JFK look-a-likes but can we afford them at $150.00 a pop?
The site continues to say"$150.00 is more than you might normally pay for sun glasses but these are Ray-Bans and even more, they are indelibly marked with the Rand Brand...and as always, it's a contribution to the Rand Paul for President campaign."

Is this the same man who cries and bemoans the congress for overspending and gorging the peoples monies. It may seem a small example but does it show something in his nature that it's wrong to spend the congresses money incorrectly but it's OK to over price a sun glass for my presidential campaign, after all I need the money in order to run, they all do it. Don't they? I need to ask permission to sell them on my website? Why bother me with small technicalities. I'm running for president.

My feeling, if you will do it for a website, will you do the same for larger matters? Like spending our tax dollars? Rand Paul described the product as "the intersection of politics and cool." Mr. Rand there is nothing cool about doing something without permission and then overcharging the people. In fact there is rather something wrong with it. And this could possibly show another side of Rand Paul we would really not like to see.

Where is the Democratic Party?

Over the weekend the republicans met in New Hampshire for a look at the hopefuls for the high office of the presidency. The field is growing more each day. Why so many? I can't answer but this is a crucial election after six years of an Obama failed presidency. And for the democrats so far one has put her hat in the race.  Clinton leads Rand Paul at 47% to 37%. And according to Rasmussen, she also leads Ted Cruz 47% to 38%. She is at this time showing to be a formidable candidate and has according to sources learned her lessons from the first time. And let's not forget the Clinton's have a strong army of money supporters. We also have a new problem as conservatives, a growing number of people who now call themselves progressives especially in large urban areas. For the republicans this race is not going to be a walk in the park.

But my observation is why is Hillary so far the only candidate, and why is she so far ahead? Why are there at this time no other contenders who can come near her? Have the democrats no others who can make a bid? Does this show a weakness on the democratic side? Does it show a lack of leadership? Does it show the democrats are not clearly defined on what they want to stand on? Have they been so long yes men and women to Obama laying homage at his feet? Can they no longer stand up for themselves?

I myself like the two party system with it's gives and takes. A thinking between the two sides. It is dangerous for us to have a one sided race for the White House on either side. And I call out, Where is the democratic Party? And where does it stand?

Here are the poll numbers for the republicans at this time in New Hampshire Walker 23, Bush 17, Paul 15, Christi 6, Cruz 9, Rubio 7, Huckabee 6, Carson 7

Alarming Report - Big Business's Increase Of Cyber Attacks By 40%

Cyber attacks have increased greatly this year. Symnatec, the company behind Norton published it's annual internet security report. The report came out saying 5 out of 6 companies, 2,500 employees or more, have been cyber attacked. The main attacks come from phishing or email fraud in 2014. Smaller companies have not escaped with an increase around 30%.

The biggest attacks are maleware - which attacks workers machines to gain access to data. The attacks averaged a million a day last year.

Another loss was to ransomeware which blocks access to a users date until payment is made to hackers. This increased to 113 percent last year.

The reason for the increase is attackers are finding ways to adapt to the technology companies use for protection.

I myself almost fell to a small attack which came to me as a high alert on my computer. It even stalled my computer making me think that Google itself was trying to reach me. The mistake they made is providing a phone #. I did talk to them but by this time I was coming to figure their plot. Because Google usually alerts you through an email or some other way through your computer and never calls you the plan failed and they hung up on me. I did not give them the info they wanted on the phone call.

The plan also failed as it was not a very good one, although some have probably fallen to it.

My advice, Beware, Be smart, Be careful. But don't let these attacks keep you from the enjoyment you have from your computer. Make sure you have good protection

Computers can be used for good and used for bad.

.

Russia Lifts Bann - Supplies S-300 Missiles to Iran

Russia lifts ban on supplying S-300 missiles to Iran

President Vladimir Putin signs a lifted ban on a sophisticated S-300 defense missiles system. One of the reasons, he cites, because of UN sanctions imposing over Tehran's nuclear program.