|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Pay no mind to the littlest wonk. If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. Obama was elected on an anti-Iraq platform, State leaks have shown that State careerers were on a bullhorn about needing to kneecap ISIS, and yet Hillary's State failed to do anything but press the panic button when ISIL were days from Erbil. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Apr 25, 2015 |
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:49 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. That's never been helpful before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. It'd be faster to point out where you're occasionally (but infrequently) right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. No need to do that, people can just look at your post history
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. Obama was elected on an anti-Iraq platform, State leaks have shown that State careerers were on a bullhorn about needing to kneecap ISIS, and yet Hillary's State failed to do anything but press the panic button when ISIL were days from Erbil. ISIS was thoroughly kneecapped by the time the U.S. withdrew, they didn't become big until they injected themselves into the Syrian Civil War and drew a lot of support and fighters from al-Nusra. Also Hillary was long out of the Department of State by the time ISIS was advancing in northern Iraq. And the Department of State is not the military. And you are MIGF, and stupid as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Kalman posted:What illegal NSA spying? No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. I don't know if I agree with Kalman's characterization that it's perfectly legal (or more accurately, Constitutional since its authorized by law), but it would have to be ruled unconstitutional first for the continuance of the program to constitute some kind of crime (though what that crime would be, I'm not sure). But that will never happen because of standing/state secrets privilege so w/e
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
By the way, with all the Wheeler chat going on, let me just plug his book - I grabbed it at more or less random and it's actually kinda interesting if a little dry Caveat: I spend my day working in robots, data mining, and logistics systems, so my definition of interesting may differ from yours Fried Chicken fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. Why do you want the terrorists to win? Do you hate America?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Do you hate America? Because it illegally spies on us duh
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Hillary is not going to get a chance to do anything in office anyway. Her first two years will be like the last six, 2010-2016, of Obama's presidency. She'll have a Republican House and probably a Republican Senate so judicial and other appointments are going to be the only thing she actually gets to do; other than continuing the trend of governing by executive order. This is where I think popular wisdom on D&D is getting it completely wrong. I haven't posted much here but my reg date is in the early 2000's and I'm fairly certain I did post a few times here among other forums about why I thought both Obama and Hillary were great candidates but supported Hillary in the primary. If someone with a fancier account than me can dig in my post history you'll probably find some posts on the subject ( and I hope 2008 me doesn't embarrass now-me if someone does ). My prediction was that Obama was climbing to high to fast and that this represented a bad combination of inexperience and lack of connections. Presidents tend to come from either a governor's mansions or the senate. Each track has its own advantages and weaknesses. If they are ex-governors they have executive experience they can transfer to their new job but lack connections/relationships that make things smoother. If they are ex-senators they have a wealth of connections and collegiality to smooth things over as they adjust to an executive role. Obama was effectively neither. Obama had never held an executive office and was a senate freshman in 2007. On top of that, everything I read indicated he wasn't spending his time in the senate to good effect by networking. He was described as a "loner" in the senate not just by political opponents but also by fellow democrats. Which was really weird given how charismatic he is in speeches but all accounts from all sources I've found agree that he did not apply his charisma to his fellow senators. To skip this antisocial newbie over all the long serving senators to the big chair that they all dream of ... well even if he weren't black that comes with a host of problems. Racism certainly added a vile flavor to the mix but the real poison would be/was professional jealousy. My argument then - and now - was that this double penalty would/did cause a ridiculous amount of gridlock. Above and beyond inevitable political theatre, being cut to the head of the Senate line outraged a lot of people Obama needed to be able to work with. Obama needed to serve longer in the senate both to build professional relationships and to pay his dues like everyone else. I feel that the passage of time has born out my predictions. Hillary is the complete opposite of Obama. Instead of a double penalty she has a double bonus. She has both paid her dues/networked in the senate and also had a lot of second hand executive experience first as First Lady of Arkansas and then as First Lady proper. The personal animosity that Obama had to deal with simply isn't there for Hillary. And that animosity - not racism - is what keeps the non-tea party republicans from being able to work with Obama. The TP republicans are newbies themselves so have no networks and yeah, racism/sexism will remain the driving forces there. But they are a minority that the rest of the GOP doesn't like. Hillary can work with that in a way Obama simply couldn't. I propose a simple test of my hypothesis. Open two browser tabs and in one Google "republicans praise Obama" and in the other "republicans praise Hillary". Compare and contrast. I just did the Google test and I found more praise for Obama than I expected but it was mostly in the form of backhanded insults for policy, not for Obama the person. So Obama gets the occasional "ok, he didn't gently caress that one up completely", while Hillary gets a lot of "I disagree with her on a lot of things ... but she's very smart and I like her as a person" from her republican co-workers. Scott brown even had a "scandal" where he said things that were too nice and had to clarify that of course he disagreed with all her policies, he just meant she was a friend - misguided sure but a nice person. That matters. Good will makes a big difference. If your coworkers personally resent you - you end up with Obama's presidency. And cue the tin foil hats worrying that she's a crypto right winger because she followed vile rat's basic diplomacy advice of being nice to people you have to work with. http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/31-hillary-clinton-john-mccain.jpg radical meme posted:edit: I'm just hoping the Democrats can get enough seats in the House and Senate to support her vetoes I do too. Which is why this whole, "to cool to like Hillary" thing bothers me. The best way to get a wave election is to get people excited.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. If its illegal, Congress will investigate and defund the agency. If its not illegal, it gets funded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
We probably would have been better off if Hillary won in 2008 and Obama won in 2016. Hillary wouldn't have taken the GOP's bullshit and played around with grand bargains her first term.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. I mean I agree that it shouldn't be continued but it is legal
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Armani posted:I love your posts, McAlister. Thanks for all of this. Thank you for reading. I have some painting to finish while the light is still good but I'll try to continue this tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If you disagree with me, please point out where I'm incorrect. Obama was elected on an anti-Iraq platform, State leaks have shown that State careerers were on a bullhorn about needing to kneecap ISIS, and yet Hillary's State failed to do anything but press the panic button when ISIL were days from Erbil. Sorry, "Hillary's State"? Because didn't Daesh really only get rolling in 2013, after Hillary left the State Department?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
I'm sorry, what does the State Department have to do with war again? Was Hillary Clinton the Secretary of Defense at some point, because I never heard that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:I'm sorry, what does the State Department have to do with war again? Was Hillary Clinton the Secretary of Defense at some point, because I never heard that one. She didn't send enough diplomats to negotiate with ISIL, this is her fault
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
McAlister posted:words n poo poo I think your analysis is too "inside baseball" to really be accurate, you completely disregard voters and the theatricality of politics. A lot of politicians were fearful of working with Obama, either because of primaries in the GOP or old dumbshit voters for the bluedog Democrats and behaved accordingly. Resentment for leapfrogging doesn't really account for the absurd parody that Republican opposition to Obama has become. Also he had plenty of friends in the Senate, including major players in the Demonrats like Ted Kennedy. Hell, he's friends with Tom loving Coburn and that guy opposed basically everything he did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
If there is one thing the last six years has taught me, it is that idealism is incompatible with the modern institution of the Presidency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Sorry, "Hillary's State"? Because didn't Daesh really only get rolling in 2013, after Hillary left the State Department? No, ISIS was kicking around in Jordan in 1999, and really got energized in 2003. Then some of their members met up with AQ people in Iraq prisons (including Abu Ghraib) and started making their play in 2006. In 2009 they got noted as being markedly more effective over their previous behavior. They started claiming territory as part of those "resistance fighters" in Syria in 2011.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:If there is one thing the last six years has taught me, it is that idealism is incompatible with the modern institution of the Presidency. USPol Ongoing: Abandon hope, drink alcohol
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:We probably would have been better off if Hillary won in 2008 and Obama won in 2016. Hillary wouldn't have taken the GOP's bullshit and played around with grand bargains her first term. Healthcare-wise Hillary probably would have pushed harder on a public option, although with how much of a clusterfuck passing the ACA was who knows if it would have worked. The Supreme Court would still be handing down lovely 5-4 rulings, so they would probably figure out some way to gently caress over "Hillarycare" in addition to still smacking down the Medicaid expansion, coming up with Citizen's United, gutting the VRA with Shelby County, and a host of other lovely stuff. The events of the Arab Spring were already in motion, so we'd still have intervened in Libya, and we probably would have directly backed the Kurds/FSA in Syria with a no-fly zone; to be honest Syria might have ended up in slightly better shape if we had done that, although both Libya and Syria would still be Libya-style clusterfucks in the aftermath. Post-Syrian intervention trails off into an impossible to guess quagmire of "what ifs". (Just like the Middle East!  ) ISIL as a group was already in motion, but who knows if they'd become the powerful and insanely brutal group they are currently, or just continue on as a branch of al-Qaeda in Iraq/Syria. Hell, Iraq/Syria might morph into something like Yemen, who knows.To give Obama credit where it's due, I don't think Hillary would have been so gung-ho on getting an Iranian nuclear deal or starting reconciliation with Cuba, and she definitely wouldn't be so willing to openly start trolling/distancing the US from Bibi/Israel, so I'll happily say "score three to Obama" with those things. Given how big a (potential) Iranian Nuclear deal, ending the standoff between Cuba and the US, and the shift in US-Israeli policy could/will be to the future, I honestly don't know if Hillary really comes out that far ahead. Like I said, this all degenerates into "what-ifs/maybes/shoulda-beens". fade5 fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Given the longstanding Republican opposition to Hillary and the longstanding Republican opposition to women, I'm expecting people to pine for the days when Republicans and Democrats could get along under Obama during the Hillary regime.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
McAlister posted:
OK I was thinking you were a intelligent, competent and political savvy poster but, I changed my mind. You're wrong and you know nothing about current politics. You are a completely delusional Hillary apologist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
I know I'm not the only person that's asked for this before but I sort of couldn't keep up with the thread for a while. Does anybody have that excellent post that talks about charter schools handy? I think it was a goon that made it and it was really good and poo poo. Thanks
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Gotta disagree. The GOP taking control of the House in 94 was in keeping with the election's fundamentals. I think it was GWU that did a study on that last December, but it was a predictable outcome driven largely by shifting demographics. The same transition in 1994 that gave Bush the governor's mansion turned out for him in 2000 and 2004 I gotta go with Jomentum on this. I was just dumb founded by the animosity towards the First Lady, Hillary, being so forward as to head a committee studying health care. It was a bi-partisan "gently caress you bitch" from both sides of the aisle. It literally was the last stand of the Blue-Dog Democrats in U.S. politics. They joined with Republicans to destroy any hope of health care reform and that set the tone for Clinton's entire presidency. readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. I'm really sorry but, literally nobody gives a flying gently caress about this. Here is proof positive of my assertion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M Hard to imagine, but true. radical meme fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:No I mean the illegal NSA spying that people are pretending is legal because politicians in both parties really like having access to our dick pics. Who gives a poo poo if the NSA can look at your dick pics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Joementum posted:You can disagree all you like, but you're wrong. The "team of rivals" meme from 2008 was explicitly about (and disseminated by) the Obama transition team to highlight his willingness to work across ideological boundaries, chiefly his (poor, as it turned out) decision to retain Robert Gates. Could you expand on this? Considering what he inherited I think Gates did a pretty solid job, but I'd be interested to hear an opposing view.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Could you expand on this? Considering what he inherited I think Gates did a pretty solid job, but I'd be interested to hear an opposing view. Gates is notoriously difficult to work with; he doesn't brook disagreement, and most importantly he will never admit he's wrong. He's not incompetent but assholes that are hard to work with can be very damaging to team synergy. Also keeping gates pissed of a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I'm really sorry but, literally nobody gives a flying gently caress about this. Here is proof positive of my assertion. Eh, I think you missed the point there. People *can* care about it as an issue, it just needs to be explained like they're children.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Gates is notoriously difficult to work with; he doesn't brook disagreement, and most importantly he will never admit he's wrong. He's not incompetent but assholes that are hard to work with can be very damaging to team synergy. Also keeping gates pissed of a lot of people. What? He talks at length about the various things he hosed up as Sec Def in his book. The difficult to work with thing is interesting. I hadn't heard that. Was that sort of complaint coming from the White House or the Pentagon? Relentlessboredomm fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:What? He talks at length about the various things he hosed up as Sec Def in his book. The difficult to work with thing is interesting. I hadn't heard that. I mean in person. It's a lot easier to admit you messed up when your putting it in print then face to face with someone. But yes Gates is the classic military establishment rear end in a top hat. I wouldn't say he was a bad Sec Def, but I would say that other people could have done better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
Baltimore lost it's mind a little tonight, some destruction of police cars and property, but I am confident that wasn't protestors. Three arrests that I know of. The city feels weird right now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Sorus posted:Baltimore lost it's mind a little tonight, some destruction of police cars and property, but I am confident that wasn't protestors. Mayors office is asking folks at the Orioles-Red Sox game to stay in Camden until further notice; protests are outside.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
After what happened and has been happening, Baltimore should be on fire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Sorus posted:Baltimore lost it's mind a little tonight, some destruction of police cars and property, but I am confident that wasn't protestors. Oh no not police cars. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:Oh no not police cars. Yeah, because the best way to deal with the people killing you is to make them angry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Sorus posted:Yeah, because the best way to deal with the people killing you is to make them angry. What else do you think the people of Baltimore should do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:49 |
|
|
Sorus posted:Yeah, because the best way to deal with the people killing you is to make them angry. You're right, the best way is to write a stern letter to city hall. Don't want to get impolite here, someone might be offended.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 03:49
|
|