I once had a boss who preached that business is a game and you play it to win, no matter what the cost. To him all of life was a game and you had to learn to play the game in order to make it in this world. To them it was throw ethics to the wind. To an extent, this practice worked for him but it never seemed quite right for me, my conscience could not get used to that type of business. Maybe that is why I still struggle to make a living daily, at least I feel good about what i do. Business is a game, but a game played with ethics.

Along comes a company like Google. A company started by two men, Larry Page, Sergey Brin in 1998. They had a vision and an idea and they went with it. No one thought at the time that a search engine such as this would become such a big corporation and money maker. These two had an idea and they let it grow and grow - it grew quickly. By June of 2000 they were the worlds largest search engine. The searches were much more accurate than previous search engines. They have fought many battles along the way and one thing I always noticed is they operated with a set of ethics, standards they held the company to. They have stood their ground and have become more successful than even they had imagined.

Now, they take a big stand and pull the plug on China. A country with well over a billion people, a virtual money pit for a company like Google. They shocked many in the business and technology field with this move. They did it in the sake of ethics - showing the world they understand and know right from wrong. There is no room for censorship of the web and a country controlling what can or can not be seen on the web.

So now I wonder, will other companies follow suit? Will they put ethics over profits? Or - will companies like Microsoft's 'Bing" try and capitalize on this move by Google. Will other companies remove themselves from an oppressive society? I applaud the actions of Google. I applaud them many times over. They have proved my point - Ethics are a core part of any business - doing what is right and forsaking profits. So will others follow suit?

Spector

Specter is no big loss to the Republican Party, but changing parties at this time should not really be allowed. If you are elected a Republican you should stay so until your term expires. Here is a man who knew he was going to lose in the next election, more than half the Republicans polled in Pennsylvania said they wanted someone new in the senate seat. He is of the old guard with old ideas, the people want a fresh face.

Reid called Specter a "man of honor and integrity" who would be welcome in the Democratic caucus – switching parties in mid stream is not what most would call honor and integrity. I would relate this to the running back on a football team knowing he is going to lose switching teams at halftime. In more direct terms a traitor to his team. But he was not much of the team player recently as realized by his vote on the stimulus package.

Specter was expected to face a very tough primary challenge in 2010 from former Rep. Pat Toomey, who came close to defeating Specter in the Pennsylvania GOP primary in 2004. Why would the democrats want someone who switches teams when the cards are down on their team. I would say this of anyone who switches parties while they are in office. There should be a rule if you switch parties while still serving your term you must surrender your seat. The people who put him in office were not the Democrats; therefore he should do the honorable thing and step down. If he is confident he can win the seat as a Democrat he can run in the next election and see what happens. Again just my opinion – my explosion of thought!