- Time
- Post link
Yet another thing that makes you go hmmmm.
The Person in Question
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 190
This topic has been locked by a moderator.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I know people hate her, but how was she not qualified?
People often say lots of things “disqualify” someone, rather than just looking at a set of prerequisites. I personally thought her vote on the AUMF was a war crime. I thought her vote on the MCA was abhorrent. I’m sure some people would say that because she used e-mail, she’s disqualified, but I’m not among them. I don’t think these things disqualify so much as significantly push down her appeal. Frankly if she’d never been a Senator, and she’d only been Secretary of State and First Lady (and all her qualifications from before), I may have happily voted for her, rather than with the same shudder I gave when I voted for Kerry. Nevertheless, the fact that she had any qualifications at all, and that she wasn’t endorsed by the Klan, and that she wasn’t the Kremlin’s pick, put her over the top for me. It’s a low bar, but she cleared it easily.
As for qualifications, she doesn’t rank up there with Jefferson or Bush I, but she’s up there. She was extremely qualified. But her record as a Senator was troubling.
So she’s a war criminal, but at least she’s not endorsed by people you don’t like?
I think “war criminal” is a bit hyperbole. It was a vote to use force against terrorists days after 9/11.
There are lots of opinions on that matter, but I’m using the Nuremburg standard. The AUMF was a blank check to someone who’d already made it very clear he planned to attack the Iraqis on any dreamed up pretext. If Bush had been a little more guarded about his plans, or if there was ever any credible link between Iraq and Sept 11, there’d be more room for argument. As it was, Hillary knew the Iraqis posed no threat, and she knew she was authorizing an attack on them. The only thing she didn’t know is that we weren’t just planning to attack, we were planning to occupy–and that there would be political fallout because of that. Had she known that, she may have calculated differently.
She was fortunate that Trump was also in the “I supported the invasion until it started losing popularity” club, or he may have gotten more votes than her.
Oh you mean the Iraq Resolution? Well that’s a bit different, though we still should remember people thought they had WMDs at the time.
Which the Bush administration deliberately LIED ABOUT just so his cabinet could get rich off Iraqi oil reserves (and no, this isn’t a conspiracy theory). Cheney planned the invasion and occupation of Iraq all the way back in 1992, and all he needed was a terrorist attack to justify imperial conquest (again, 9/11 was preventable, this is not a conspiracy either, read the commission report).
Half a million civilians were murdered in Iraq by Bush administration, and yet none of the people responsible will ever face punishment for their war crimes. This is the reason why today the government can check every single person’s internet and phone call history without regard civil liberties. This is why Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden sacrificed their freedom to expose the Orwellian dystopia the United States has become int he last fifteen years. This is why Donald Trump became president and ISIS took over in the Middle East. This is why any nonwhite person can be detained regardless of guilt or innocence, and spend the rest of their lives imprisoned at a CIA black site because of suspected terrorism.
All this happened because an illegitimate presidency (Bush v Gore installed it) wanted to make more money at the expense of the rest of the world.
- Time
- Post link
This is fantastic.
http://gizmodo.com/worlds-most-useful-robot-prints-and-immediately-burns-t-1793747437
@BurnedYourTweet is a robot and a Twitter account which prints and immediately sets fire to Trump’s 140-ravings. It films itself spitting out POTUS’s groundless accusations and whimpering loser bullshit onto what looks like receipt paper, sheers them off with scissors, sets them aflame, and gingerly drops the burning embers into an ashtray. The resulting video is then tweeted at Trump himself.
- Time
- Post link
The FBI requested direct access to the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) hacked computer servers but was denied, Director James Comey told lawmakers on Tuesday.
The bureau made “multiple requests at different levels,” according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a “highly respected private company” would get access and share what it found with investigators.
“We’d always prefer to have access hands-on ourselves if that’s possible,” Comey said, noting that he didn’t know why the DNC rebuffed the FBI’s request.
The director was testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee in a rare open session on Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election.
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in news reports over whether the FBI asked to examine its servers directly.
The DNC told BuzzFeed in a statement published last week that the FBI never requested access to its servers after they were breached.
But a senior law enforcement official disputed that characterization the following day.
“The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated,” the official said.
“This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.”
CrowdStrike, the private security firm in question, has published extensive forensic analysis backing up its assessment that the threat groups that infiltrated the DNC were associated with Russian intelligence.
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I hate the way that the Planned Parenthood official claimed that you can’t “target women” and get away with it even though one of the people charged is a woman. I also don’t think that their investigation was a legitimate violation of privacy.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I hate the way that the Planned Parenthood official claimed that you can’t “target women” and get away with it even though one of the people charged is a woman.
What does that matter? If a woman bombs an abortion clinic, she isn’t targeting women? Only men can target women?
I also don’t think that their investigation was a legitimate violation of privacy.
Maybe, maybe not, but it was certainly against the law.
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press_releases/Complaint Affidavit_SF.PDF?
- Time
- Post link
Yet another thing that makes you go hmmmm.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
‘Anger as US internet privacy law scrapped’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39427026
&
‘US consumers lose privacy protections for their web browsing history’
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/28/privacy-protection-sell-web-browsing-history-data
&
‘Your internet history on sale to highest bidder: US Congress votes to shred ISP privacy rules’
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/28/congress_approves_sale_of_internet_histories/
^ as with many articles on The Reg, the comments section is always worth a read too…
A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…
Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
‘How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com - includes info on how to ask for a fan project and how to search for projects and threads on OT•com.
A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)
Take your time to look around this site before posting… Do NOT just lazily make yet another ‘link request’ post - or a new thread asking for projects.
- Time
- Post link
So reading on the ISP privacy thing, they say they repealed the law because it should be the FTC making the rules, not the FCC. But instead of waiting for the FTC to make the rule, they left this hole where they could do it. It doesn’t make any sense to me either way.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
When wiping the floor with Presidents Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Reagan, Eisenhower, both Roosevelts, and Wilson just isn’t enough, you know you’re facing a 21st Century Problem.
?
Sorry, that was posted before I realized that you and I were using the word “Qualified” very differently. I was using it like you do in a job interview (and frankly, so do most people): “What are your qualifications? Well, I spent X years as a US Senator, where I did X and Y” and so forth. So in that sense of the word, Clinton was easily much more qualified to be President than all of those people who were actually President (and others too, I had to stop somewhere). So when you said you had a high bar for the modern world’s problems, and Clinton didn’t seem extremely qualified–well, that was my response–Clinton beats all those Presidents and still doesn’t make the cut?–that’s ridiculous. My “qualifications” is kinda like “experience” except experience can often be used to prop up a do-nothing safe-seat candidate over someone who hasn’t been in office as long but has accomplished much more, or as an ageist dog whistle. Clinton had qualifications, and she accomplished a lot–much of which I disagreed with, which came into play later. But “extremely qualified” applies.
Now I know you were using “Qualified” to mean more like “Would you make a good President?” which is much more subjective and simply can’t be quantified like my definition. Obviously you and I are more in agreement about how your definition would apply to Clinton, since I voted for both Obama and Sanders in the primaries, both of whom were less qualified (in my sense of the word) than Clinton.
EDIT: And in case you’re wondering “Why are qualifications in your sense even relevant, if you voted for the less qualified candidate?”. Of course they’re relevant–they’re simply not the only consideration. The Bush I/Bush II contrast is a case in point. Both of them were military adventurers, both of them ran on supply side economics. But Bush I had a lot of experience, and his military adventures were well-executed, had clear objectives, and involved a high level of diplomacy. Bush II, not so much. Bush I knew from experience that supply side economics was all political BS and sometimes you just had to raise taxes on rich people to pay for the stuff you’re doing. Bush II, not so much. Basically, policies that I oppose, executed competently, still end up better than policies I oppose, executed incompetently. You may think the incompetent boob would be better, because they’d fail to get anything done, but that’s a failure of imagination, and/or wishful thinking (see: Trump). The boob can mess things up in ways nobody ever thought possible. Qualifications matter. And Obama and Sanders were both qualified, just less than Clinton.
- Time
- Post link
Well…yeah, of course.
- Time
- Post link
Subhead says it all.
Scrapping Obama’s Clean Power Plan won’t bring back jobs or save the towns of Appalachia. It will only serve to make America sicker and more disappointed
- Time
- Post link
A big gigantic f*** you goes out to NJ state Pinelands Commission member Jane Jannarone for forgetting about the 1st amendment. She mad a decision about the Pinelands that a lot of people don’t like. The posted negatives opinions about the decision and her and her facebook page. She doesn’t like and now she is suing them. HELLO‽‽‽‽‽‽ FREEDOM OF SPEECH‽‽‽‽ The people she is suing should counter sue for violation of Constitutional rights! F*** YOU!, YOU B****!!!
- Time
- Post link
I don’t know if she was truly defamed, but defamation is not protected speech.
- Time
- Post link
I don’t know if she was truly defamed, but defamation is not protected speech.
Read the article and tell me that people should be sued for posted the stuff they posted. I realize that defamation is not protected speech, but we should be careful to give what is protected speech a wide berth, lest we give politicians the power to shut down any speech they don’t like under the argument that it is defamation.
- Time
- Post link
This is fantastic.
http://gizmodo.com/worlds-most-useful-robot-prints-and-immediately-burns-t-1793747437
@BurnedYourTweet is a robot and a Twitter account which prints and immediately sets fire to Trump’s 140-ravings. It films itself spitting out POTUS’s groundless accusations and whimpering loser bullshit onto what looks like receipt paper, sheers them off with scissors, sets them aflame, and gingerly drops the burning embers into an ashtray. The resulting video is then tweeted at Trump himself.
LOL!!!
- Time
- Post link
I don’t know if she was truly defamed, but defamation is not protected speech.
Read the article and tell me that people should be sued for posted the stuff they posted. I realize that defamation is not protected speech, but we should be careful to give what is protected speech a wide berth, lest we give politicians the power to shut down any speech they don’t like under the argument that it is defamation.
I don’t disagree.
- Time
- Post link
I don’t know if she was truly defamed, but defamation is not protected speech.
Read the article and tell me that people should be sued for posted the stuff they posted. I realize that defamation is not protected speech, but we should be careful to give what is protected speech a wide berth, lest we give politicians the power to shut down any speech they don’t like under the argument that it is defamation.
People should not be sued for posting the stuff that was quoted in the article. If the article in question was written without an agenda, then those posts are representative and the whole thing is stupid. However, I’ve never heard of this media outlet before, so it’s possible they quoted the more innocuous posts in an attempt to make her look worse. Luckily this is probably so clear cut it’ll get decided quickly.
- Time
- Post link
I don’t know if she was truly defamed, but defamation is not protected speech.
Read the article and tell me that people should be sued for posted the stuff they posted. I realize that defamation is not protected speech, but we should be careful to give what is protected speech a wide berth, lest we give politicians the power to shut down any speech they don’t like under the argument that it is defamation.
People should not be sued for posting the stuff that was quoted in the article. If the article in question was written without an agenda, then those posts are representative and the whole thing is stupid. However, I’ve never heard of this media outlet before, so it’s possible they quoted the more innocuous posts in an attempt to make her look worse. Luckily this is probably so clear cut it’ll get decided quickly.
The Courier Post is local South Jersey newspaper.
- Time
- Post link
I hate the way that the Planned Parenthood official claimed that you can’t “target women” and get away with it even though one of the people charged is a woman.
What does that matter? If a woman bombs an abortion clinic, she isn’t targeting women? Only men can target women?
That’s a false equivalence. I’m talking about the way pro-abortion advocates frame the issue as you being either for abortion (and for women), or against abortion (and against women). I doubt that the woman arrested for the undercover filming of Planned Parenthood thinks she’s against women. She would say that she is in favor of the unborn babies aborted at Planned Parenthood, which would be approximately 50% female. That’s how she, and other antiabortion activists see the issue. At most, you can say that they’re against women that get abortions.
I also don’t think that their investigation was a legitimate violation of privacy.
Maybe, maybe not, but it was certainly against the law.
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press_releases/Complaint Affidavit_SF.PDF?
I know it was, but it doesn’t look like it was an invasion of privacy or something that actually harmed anybody so it shouldn’t be framed that way.
The Person in Question
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Well, it would have been nice if the Dems would have had someone better than Hillary.
It would be nice if I was actually a millionaire. We have to play the cards we are dealt, but some chose to fold and cry instead.
Kind of like how it would be nice to be Batman, but then you’d also have to forever cope with your parents being murdered right in front of you when you were a kid.
…or maybe it’s nothing like that at all. I don’t know why I make that comparison.
chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.
- Time
- Post link
I’m Batman, you insensitive clod!
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
This is fantastic.
http://gizmodo.com/worlds-most-useful-robot-prints-and-immediately-burns-t-1793747437
@BurnedYourTweet is a robot and a Twitter account which prints and immediately sets fire to Trump’s 140-ravings. It films itself spitting out POTUS’s groundless accusations and whimpering loser bullshit onto what looks like receipt paper, sheers them off with scissors, sets them aflame, and gingerly drops the burning embers into an ashtray. The resulting video is then tweeted at Trump himself.
It’s like something out of Terry Gilliam’s Brazil.
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1VXmdrDVv8
Cross Talk with Peter Lavelle
The battle of two very different narratives define Washington politics: On the one hand, the Russians did it, and on the other, the outgoing Obama administration did everything possible to undermine the new Trump presidency. Both narratives are polarizing – will one prevail over the other? CrossTalking with Rob Taub, Ray McGovern, and H. A. Goodman.