Why Do Cats Play Patty Cake?

election promises and consistency [updated]

Actualización2: The PSOE can turn the tables and eat breakfast in the PP, suggesting a compromise for amendments that would result in an improvement LISI: universal access and guarantee that any sanction or removal of content only can be done through the courts, not giving powers to semiprivate institutions. This requirement would be when "affecting freedom of expression and information", which is a dangerous tagline is left, but improves at least the original wording. Originally

all positive amendments were of the opposition. The PSOE no transactional necessarily the best amendment, but is that the proposals of the opposition party has made each his own and as each vote only their own, will not go forward.

The point is that the party in power seems to be clearer than the main opposition on the eve of elections go Coleguita of SGAE is not very profitable. Of course, the PSOE also falls short and does not waive the fee to support the administration or the administration proprietary software can be used by other government and our businesses and serve as a base to build new software that enhances our industry.

The PP has time to rectify and dare to go beyond PSOE in supporting measures favorable to the citizens, our institutions and companies (gentlemen, that only a few companies benefit from royalties, and all domestic firms pay). I do not know if that will score few or many (the majority of the vote will be decided on other issues), but what is clear is that one would win and lose would not lose a single vote. Or do you expect the vote of Ramoncín and company?


Updated: There is pressure to amend the order to LISI remove content from the Internet without judicial intervention, imposing liability on Internet operators or those responsible for websites, we insist, without judicial review. The control would rest with an agency with a presence majoritarian government (not Parliament) and the content industry and management entities, the presence of consumers would be testimonial. And they say the bad language but informed that the PP would propose or support this amendment.

If confirmed the news, if not rectified who have to rectify, the PP will be fatal to a large segment of the population that needs the vote as water in May. It is incomprehensible that the PP prefers to wink at the SGAE, whose members are not exactly supported near the match, to win over citizens. comment recommend Daniel Rodríguez Herrera also wrote in response to Rajoy's statements.

either not be understood if the PP does not vote in favor of free software available to the property of the Body for cost savings, government and businesses to help to develop the software industry and we are not resellers or develop only 40 Sometimes the same misapplication of limited functionality and do not innovate or by chance. Nor

means if no vote to waive the fee to the Administration, when today from the European Commission have said same thing we've discussed here. But no, if no penalty for Spain, and so happy we all pay.


I slipped on the date of the vote, which has not been yet. The amendments are still under discussion. ---------



read on the website of the Association of Internet Rajoy promised that if President would remove the "indiscriminate canon" of the SGAE and promote that we have a ADSL cheaper, a level similar to countries like France. The ideal would be to eliminate the fee for all cases (that of canon "indiscriminate" sounds like a wildcard based on the ambiguity), but it would be an improvement.

often said that promises are gone with the wind and more on pre-electoral period. But this time it will have to wait see if the saying is true: the PP can prove today whether their promises are sincere, voting on amendments to the LISI (Act to Promote the information society).

One such amendment provides that the Administration did not pay the fee. Rajoy does not specify which cases are indiscriminate canon, but it should be clear to anyone who paid the fee not only government but also any legal person, is a case of indiscriminate fee. Why? it because:
-A canon, unlike a tax, charged for a particular concept, persons or entities who have the option of using the service for which the fee is charged (eg waste collection) or considered entering the group responsible for anything negative that must pay a compensatory fee (eg cylinder vehicles because they are considered contaminants).
"You can charge a fee to a resident of a town garbage collection even though he never pull away. But you can not charge a fee to someone who does not have the right to throw away because they live in another area without garbage collection. Similarly you can not charge a fee for polluting vehicles to a person who has a bicycle.
-SGAE The fee is for the private copying right. But the right of private copying are only individuals. An NGO, company management, not have the right to private copying. If you do not have the right, are paying a fee for anything.
"Actually, the canon on CDs are paying most of those who have no right to charge (legal persons) and those not using the right of private copying, until they pay the majority of those who copy music films. The reason is that anyone who writes a lot of movies buy the "tubs" of DVDs in the typical Chinese market (formerly "100") where no fee is charged, while administration, companies and associations must have receipts to justify spending so unless they resort to trickery to make them a receipt for generic "Office supplies" (which will not happen with the administration where the procurement process is rigid) will pony up the fee will be playing.

In the past, both PSOE and PP voted against removing the fee for legal persons. Let's see if now at least one of the two major parties has seen the light, or else the promise of Rajoy will not stay beyond as we were. Again the "do not offer much, but look what the other is worse, you'll see", only now by the PP instead of the PSOE.

Publix Sub Nutrition Information

On this day , September 11

This beginning is well worth both to remember the horrible terrorist attack on New York, as the coup that triggered death President-elect of Chile and began a dictatorship where there was torture and murder. Going for some area exposes you to be accused of one ideology or another, in this society of ours so fond of putting labels quickly.

Well, I will discuss the Pinochet coup and Allende, but not to praise the memory of this policy. Sorry, but being a victim of a tyrant or another example, as a terrorist group ETA should not automatically turn the victim into a hero, even better that than the opposite end to find justifications to an event and speculate execrable up with that victim deserved it rather than to console his family. It

Allende as absurd to put a symbol of democracy. Do not talk about the first president of a democratic period, nor under its mandate was strengthened democracy argue that unfortunately it was the opposite. It was a popular president, possibly in the history of Chile no Democratic president faced so much discontent. Everyone wants to explain this as, if the right soliventó spirits, if the United States funded this or that if all the blame was Allende who was a Freemason and friend of Fidel Castro. What is a fact is that this discontent existed and that the celebrated Argentine pan for the yard have their precedent in the protests against Allende in his day, as the Chilean economic collapse of 73 (the year of the coup) negatively affected the population. He is also accused and it seems proven that the press tried to bury opositoria controlling the bins.

Put aside the charge if I went to a Communist dictatorship, as there are opinions for every taste and there should be no more than speculate, that it is the inevitable comparison with Chavez, but has no past Allende coup of Chavez. Focus on the facts, again, everyone can interpret as he pleases.
1) The 1925 Constitution of Chile establishes a presidential system, with legislatures and courts. It is a system which guaranteed separation of powers. The laws of the cameras leave, the president is the chief executive and has the power to veto laws, the Congress may lift the ban but only if they have a majority of 2 / 3. The courts can nullify laws and settle disputes between the executive and legislative branches. I guess it's a constitution inspired by the United States, because the presidential system, the veto and others is also typical of this country.
2) Allende president. He was elected with 36.6% of the vote compared to 34.9% of the conservative candidate, but also supported his party the Christian Democrats (27.8%). This game against the policy of Allende, the increase violence (a leader of this party also died killed by the far left) from which they blame for not preventing the government, in addition to the punishment of his electorate, he withdrew his support. Thus in the congress party that supports Allende in the minority, while the opposition has the majority. That majority, however not enough to Destutt Allende, it is necessary that of 2 / 3. There is a cohabitation, as has happened occasionally in the U.S. or France.
3) The opposition Congress controlled by controlling laws and Allende as president can vote on them without Congress to lift the veto. Therein lies the conflict: Allende can veto a law, but not to stay with parts of the laws that it supports his party as he did. Dispute to the ridge between executive and legislative branches: the third branch, the judiciary, both the Supreme Court as regulate, rules in favor of the opposition (Congress). Also pronounced against the legality of the actions of Allende to the bar.
4) is speculation, but there is nothing shown for or against Allende, the only way out was to raise a popular referendum on its continuation, with that lost while preserving the dignity against accusations of breaking the democratic order opposition. His party were accused of not letting him do that before we do not know how much truth there is no moderate Allende in front of a radical party. Fate says it was scheduled to announce on 12 September. It is also said charges against Pinochet in which this officer knew this before joining the coup.

a supporter of Pinochet If I read through these curiosities that Google holds no thrill. Pinochet is a hero who saved Chile from a threat of totalitarianism in the hand of Allende. If it prentendías coup, Allende was sufficient to depose and call new elections, not start a dictatorship where there was murder and torture. A Allende can be accused of many things, but it was not a criminal like Pinochet. Also judging Allende you look at their weather and climate division and extremism, which certainly contributed their share of opposition. Also the opponents of Allende normally branded as irresponsible, radical or weak, but not greedy or evil.

Speaking of Pinochet, I will stay with the question of whether it was always a tyrant, crouching waiting for their chance, or if another case of the seduction of evil. They say that Pinochet and other military who supported Allende were opposed by their own women as weak and insulted apocopated not take charge and save the country. We do not know if Pinochet lost confidence in knowing that Allende out of the situation, if at the time to support the coup overcame the ambition or the fear of losing their position or perhaps the skin, if it was at that moment where he began to neglect the ethical or coming back. Called for respect for the life of Allende and let him leave the country. But in any case after we know what he did and his cynicism and lack of repentance.

For the curious, the Wikipedia is a wealth of information:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende