Merry Christmas

And if you don't like it you can translate it as either "have a good day" or "go to hell". I'll let you decide how to translate it.

The Race for Governor - Crowded

Here is a list of candidates and their websites. Some have been omitted due to not being able to find the website, and some are omitted to save you some time. I have provided the various reasons should a website not be given. Next week I will detail the proposals which stand out as unique. I could detail every proposal but there is only so many times you can hear a group of politicians say "I support the schools" before realizing such a statement means absolutely nothing for policy or separation from other candidates.

-Democratic Party-
Donna Dion
http://donnajdionforgovernor2010.com/
Dawn Hill
http://www.dawnhillforgovernor.com/
Elizabeth (Libby) Mitchell
http://www.libbymitchellforgovernor.com/
John Richardson
http://www.johnrichardsonformaine.com/
Steven Rowe
http://www.roweforgovernor.com/
Rosa Scarcelli
http://www.rosaformaine.com/home
Peter Truman
I do not support felons involvement in politics.
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=282192&ac=PHnws
-Republican Party-
Matt Jacobson
http://www.jacobsonforgovernor.com/
Paul LePage
http://www.lepage2010.com/
Peter Mills
http://www.millsformaine.com/
Les Otten
http://www.lesotten.com/
Bruce Poliquin
http://www.bruceforme.com/
J. Martin Vachon
"I am the only candidate who will reverse the trend of social decay that threatens our civilization."
-Green Party-
Patrick Quinlan
Not found.
Lynne Williams
http://www.lynnewilliams2010.org/
-Independents-
Samme Bailey
"I'm not qualified".
Eliot Cutler
http://www.cutler2010.com/
Augustus Edgerton
Not Found.
Alex Hammer
Anyone who knows him knows why I didn't give the link.
Beverly Cooper-Pete
Not found.
John Whitcomb
http://whitcombformaine.com/

Political Violence in Copenhagen

The climate change debate has gone into scandal since East Anglia's leaked emails. However, the opposition is going through the proper peaceful forms of dissent against scientific fraud and political agendas. However, supporters of the idea that humans cause climate change don't represent themselves as peaceful or legitimate when 600 of them decide to riot in favor of legal action on climate change.

Out of the 30,000 on a "peaceful" march 600 decided to riot. This shows the majority as peaceful yet to this day I've yet to see a riot of those within the opposition to human caused climate.

Some shall claim this was a one time incident however 40 people earlier in the week were arrested for rioting in favor of action on climate change.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6954510.ece

Fixed-Price Contracts In Military Research

The Pentagon has decided to move forward with having fixed-price contracts for new weapon research and development. I have yet to determine if this will apply to manufacture of already widely used weapons as a logical decision would have, or if this only applies to research.

This would make sense if it was for production. You say what you are going to pay for a product and the various companies can "bid" (lower than original price) for the contract. Having a price fix of not having companies come up with their costs first makes sense as a company will always look for a profit.

Now, I know some instantly are thinking "companies are greedy and the government should just tax the profit out of them". Not exactly. With a fixed price before bidding companies would either accept lower bids or lose the business. A government tax on the companies would simply add paperwork that would cost more than this alternative.

My problem, however, is the restriction on research. A fixed contract for research will drive companies away because they will not have the funds they need to achieve results. I would prefer a system where there is a set budget for research, as a whole, possibly divided up based on area of research and tell all companies to come up with a product fitting the required aspects if they want the research fund. A competition with military industries would be beneficial because their incentive would be guaranteed production rights for which they would be given enough profit to overcome the loss of research if they bid appropriately. Overall the government cost would go down, and the military industry would become more efficient and effective. (In other words: no more $500 hammers.)

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BA42720091211