Some five weeks ago, I installed Adware virus protection on my computer. Less than two weeks later, I started having problems.

I realized once problems were mostly resolved, I needed to get rid of Adware and use MSE.

However, when I go to the Control Panel and then to "Add/Remove Program" function,I can select the Adware program, and click to remove, but it won't get removed. Instead the computer locks up, so I have to reboot.

I also can't eliminate the "LavaSoft" homepage that immediately had installed itself as my homepage when I first downloaded the Adware "virus protection" suite.

Also, I keep getting the message (while browsing the internet) that some Shockwave file is hanging up, and do I want to continue or stop it? I'd love to know what to do about that - as after the third of fourth announcement of this problem, computer locks up, regardless of whether I choose to continue it or stop it....

The program Security Task Manager tells me that the Internet Explorer is on and constantly running the Download program. Since I use Mozilla Firefox as my browser, why is this the case? That seems REAL weird, as I don't remember that being the case two months ago. Shouldn't that program run only when asked to run?

Its 2010 operation?

Among other things discussed in the below piece of writing, Olenick mentions that the computer firm that was in charge of processing his application back in early October made 30 million dollars for doing so. He broke that down over the 3,000 people who successfully enrolled, as being
a $ 10K per application cost to the system.

Then he goes on to say, maybe the ACA enrollment operation should be handled the way the US Census is handled.

Not only might this be more efficient, but it would allow millions of people a job that pays some $ 10 (or more) an hour. So it would help the middle class economy much more than the "normal" way of letting the lobbyists secure the patronage job for the big Computer Consulting Firm.

More at this link: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/michael-olenick-how-my-experience-with-health-gov-shows-better-software-may-not-be-the-solution.html#comment-1558717

http://www.scribd.com/doc/57277946/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5

the contaminated files.

I hit yes, and it started to then "clean" not just the our bad files, but my whole system. Within ten seconds I shut the system down.

What does this "cleaning" mean? I know what it means to quarantine a contaminated file, or delete it. But I really have no idea of what cleaning my system was going to do to it...

As always, any advice deeply appreciated. (And "cleanly" appreciated, too, I imagine.)

Here in Lake County, Calif., I am just reading in the newspaper about the County Supervisors meeting to decide about their request for state funds to be used in a 22 million dollar prison renovation. So it can't be that the state of California is all that broke - not if a county with 89,000 people is entitled to such a massive amount of construction monies for a prison (With under 90 cells!)

Meanwhile, the meme that worker pensions are a grand and wasteful luxury that no state can afford is going forth, with front page headlines trumpeting the righteousness of the cause.

Here is a great article on the topic:

http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/having_it_all_the_absurdity_of_the_false_choice_frame_for_pensions

Having it All: The Absurdity of the False Choice Frame for Pensions

by Dave Low, Californians for Retirement Security

The most recent alarmist language from pension opponents is that Californians must make a choice between providing a secure retirement for our state's seniors and paying for every other social service and progressive cause. The warning bells are earsplitting, as fear mongers go to such extremes as to tell us that California won't be able to tackle climate change unless we overhaul the pension system.

This is not only a false choice, it is an absurd one, used strategically to accomplish three things:

It attempts to create a wedge between voters who support both retirement security and things like K-12 education and social services. Retirement security for seniors and good public services are both worthy goals.
It shifts blame away from those elected officials who failed to fund retirement plans or the Wall Street bankers who engaged in the malpractice that crippled funds, and attempts to place it squarely on the fire fighters, police officers and teachers who rely on pensions for a secure retirement.
It turns California's budget into a zero-sum game between social programs and pensions, and fails to address the role that corporate subsidies play in our budget. State pensions make up about 5 percent of the budget, while corporate loopholes are ten times more. The state could close corporate loopholes in order to fund important social programs.
Please READ REST OF ARTICLE AT LINK BY THE TOP

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=569819336398435&set=a.251092048271167.56433.251089648271407&type=1&theater

By Nick Hankoff on October 2, 2013 in Uncategorized 7

Assembly Bill 351, commonly called the California Liberty Preservation Act, has been signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown making it statewide policy to refuse compliance with federal attempts to enforce “indefinite detention” made famous by the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). What began as a marginal issue with little legislative support has unified Californians of all persuasions and brought attention to the proper role the people and their states play in a constitutional republic.

A selection of AB 351 reads:

The United States Constitution and the California Constitution provide for various civil liberties and other individual rights for a citizen of the United States and the State of California, including the right of habeas corpus, the right to due process, the right to a speedy and public trial, and the right to be informed of criminal charges brought against him or her.
Certain provisions of federal law affirm the authority of the President of the United States to use all necessary and appropriate force to detain specified persons who engaged in terrorist activities.
This bill would prohibit an agency in the State of California, a political subdivision of this state, an employee of an agency or a political subdivision of this state, as specified, or a member of the California National Guard, on official state duty, from knowingly aiding an agency of the Armed Forces of the United States in any investigation, prosecution, or detention of a person within California pursuant to (1) Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA), (2) the federal law known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force, enacted in 2001, or (3) any other federal law, except as specified, if the state agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the California National Guard would violate the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, or any law of this state by providing that aid. The bill would also prohibit local entities from knowingly using state funds and funds allocated by the state to those local entities on and after January 1, 2013, to engage in any activity that aids an agency of the Armed Forces of the United States in the detention of any person within California for purposes of implementing Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA or the federal law known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force , if that activity would violate the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, or any law of this state, as specified.

The bill’s common name is “The California Liberty Preservation Act.” California’s legislation takes things a step further than other states, which have implemented nullification legislation with regard to the NDAA.

The bill specifically states:
It is the policy of this state to refuse to provide material support for or to participate in any way with the implementation within this state of any federal law that purports to authorize indefinite detention of a person within California. (emphasis added)

This meaning of the legislation takes aim at not only the NDAA provision, but any federal law, which seeks to disregard one’s constitutional rights.

And the Dem wussies may be behind the recently discovered "clever disguise" of San Francisco drug dealers as chess players!!

At least so says Stephen Colbert:

http://blogs.kqed.org/pop/2013/09/26/stephen-colbert-calls-out-sfpd-on-their-market-street-chess-crackdown/

Interesting discussion between Max and Stacy on the housing bubble taking off over in the UK these days. Also a discussion with economist out of Australia "Doss"


Keiser has a one liner about the current globalization of leverage being nothing more than a pogrom against the lower and middle classes.

Remarks between Keiser and Doss include Doss' witticism "The people who mind don't matter and the people who matter don't mind."