« | Home | Categories | »

Entirety Of Man’s Personal Data Protected By Reference To Third Season Of ‘The West Wing’

Posted on August 26th, 2014 at 17:21 by John Sinteur in category: Privacy, Security

[Quote]:

Online sources confirmed Wednesday that every piece of 34-year-old Mark O’Connell’s personal data is currently protected by a reference to the third season of long-running NBC political drama The West Wing. Reports indicate that the reference, derived from the name of a guest character in an early-season episode of the Aaron Sorkin drama that went off the air in 2006, is, at present, all that stands in the way of strangers gaining total access to intimate details of the automotive insurance agent’s personal, professional, and financial life. In particular, sources noted that the security of everything from O’Connell’s banking and credit card accounts, to proprietary documents from his work, to his social media profiles, to all of his email correspondence, rests solely on the wry nod to a scene during the Emmy-nominated episode “On The Day Before,” in which the White House staff hosts a dinner for several Nobel laureates while President Bartlet works to veto an estate tax bill. Those close to the situation, however, noted that some of O’Connell’s most sensitive information is safeguarded by a secondary layer of protection in the form of a security question about his favorite character from Sports Night.


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. I know that episode. Wonder if I could get all of his goodies.

Church took 20 years to defrock paedophile priest, inquiry hears

Posted on August 26th, 2014 at 11:22 by John Sinteur in category: Pastafarian News

[Quote]:

Archbishop Hart told the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse that Father Michael Glennon was first convicted and jailed in 1978 but it was not until 1998 that he was laicised.

He was convicted five times on multiple charges and died in jail in January this year.

Archbishop Hart, who was vicar general of the Melbourne diocese before being appointed archbishop in 2001, replacing George Pell, told the hearing it was very difficult before 2001 to get approval from the Vatican to defrock a priest.

“The difficulty would be a serious concentration on procedure,” he said.

“If every I wasn’t dotted and every T crossed in the way that they wanted, then there was a leaning in favour of a priest who might have been accused of something.”


Write a comment

Faith, Hope and Love… | Nate Phelps

Posted on August 26th, 2014 at 10:01 by John Sinteur in category: News


Write a comment

Cornel West: “He posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit. We ended up with a Wall Street presidency, a drone presidency”

Posted on August 26th, 2014 at 1:35 by Desiato in category: News

[Cornell West on Obama]:

It’s like you’re looking for John Coltrane and you get Kenny G in brown skin.

Ouch.


Write a comment

Comments:

  1. True — an another reason the US needs to become a multi party system. Too many voices are not heard in the the current one party $ystem (one party with two names: Republican$ and Democrat$).

  2. I knew Obama was a fraud when as Senator from Illinois he completely reversed his stance on FISA from opposition to support. Unfortunately, when running for President, the alternatives provided by the Republicans were even less palatable for me, so I voted for him. I just wish we had a slot in the elections for “None of the Above”, and if NOTA gets the most votes, then all candidates are disqualified from running again, and the election, starting with the primaries, is begun all over. None of the Above would have received my vote!

  3. I wonder how a NOTA option would do. There was quite a bit of excitement on the left about Obama, but Romney wasn’t popular on the right. Still, wouldn’t most conservative voters have held their nose and voted Romney over NOTA to try to vote against Obama?

    I’d love to see a rank-n-runoff system.

  4. How about a “Not that person” vote – instead of voting FOR a candidate, you can vote AGAINST him. The guy with the most net votes (FOR minus AGAINST) wins. If all the NOTA voters would then vote “really, NOT that one!” it just might help a third party candidate.