|
Also several past secretaries of state also used private email severs, due mostly to the one they're supposed to have used being a dumpster fire, but they were republicans so it's okay
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:45 |
|
|
Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own, just as whether someone is arguing in good faith doesn't have anything to do with whether their arguments have merit. I'd like to say that having made it a bullshit criminal matter undermines a much more viable general attack on her judgment or decision-making, but conspiracy theories about her escaping totally airtight charges, for reals, are probably going to work pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:18
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own, just as whether someone is arguing in good faith doesn't have anything to do with whether their arguments have merit. The funny thing was that using a private e-mail server did actually turn out to be the right decision, since it was significantly more secure, user-friendly, and generally good than the flaming shitpile that was the State Department server. She mostly got told off for being a little too careless with what was and wasn't classified information and being less than honest when asked about it - and I'm being quite deliberate when I use such mild phrasing there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own, just as whether someone is arguing in good faith doesn't have anything to do with whether their arguments have merit. Yeah I'm not saying she really should have done it, but that it kinda gives away your hand if you only go after her for doing it while simultaneously throwing a big fussy baby fit over it the whole way. I heard on NPR the other day that the investigations around Benghazi have now taken longer than any other "coverup" investigation including the investigations into the JFK assassination and the watergate scandal, and they've come up with nothing but a stern talking-to by the state department IT guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own, just as whether someone is arguing in good faith doesn't have anything to do with whether their arguments have merit. That's been the Republican MO for a long time now. They take some issue that could be a reasonable discussion that might actually make the left look a little bad, and they gently caress it up by turning it into a complete and utter clown fiesta.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:The funny thing was that using a private e-mail server did actually turn out to be the right decision, since it was significantly more secure, user-friendly, and generally good than the flaming shitpile that was the State Department server. This I was not actually aware of. The last thing I read about the whole thing was a Washington Post article that made it all about "Hillary wanted to use her Blackberry" (which seemed a bit too petty to possibly be the whole story), and said that the server was basically an existing home email server that the Clintons hired some guy to set up to handle State Department email, which didn't fill me with confidence about the security of the setup at the time. Parallel Paraplegic posted:Yeah I'm not saying she really should have done it, but that it kinda gives away your hand if you only go after her for doing it while simultaneously throwing a big fussy baby fit over it the whole way. Yeah, I'm really just making a tactical criticism I guess. It's the latest in a long string of lame as gently caress fake controversies, so it will work on anyone who's been kinda swayed by those, but it tainted any legitimate criticism that would be convincing to anyone else by association.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:This I was not actually aware of. The last thing I read about the whole thing was a Washington Post article that made it all about "Hillary wanted to use her Blackberry" (which seemed a bit too petty to possibly be the whole story), and said that the server was basically an existing home email server that the Clintons hired some guy to set up to handle State Department email, which didn't fill me with confidence about the security of the setup at the time. We went over it a bit in the secfuck yospos thread, from what I understand her home setup wasn't that great, but the state department's was horrible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Don't gently caress with that guy, he's on the edge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
I want to believe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:I want to believe. It's a copy-paste, I saw the exact same message (just with some other stuff changed around) when the California Primaries ended and also New York and really most of Bernie's other 'He's gonna win it! Oh no he didn't win it' moments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
 Someone has definitely hosed with the reality faucet in the past year or two. So many wild things are happening that people are living in fantasy worlds and not even noticing each other. Wait, are we in a fantasy world too? *computer fades out before my very eyes*
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:And all of that was just a spin-off of the Republicans' other investigations into a terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, where they were bound and determined to prove Hillary had done some unspecified Bad Thing. This also went through a thousand investigations, and the final report on those recently dropped and said she did nothing wrong. What right-wing conspiracy theorists think happened: Hillary heard that a terrorist attack was going on, but told American forces who could have saved them to stand down, because sending in troops would make her look bad. (Never mind that having four people die makes her look worse, but anyway ....) Memos and emails about the spin decision prove she knew it was terrorism and chose not to send troops. When pressed repeatedly by Republicans over the fact that four people died, she said "What difference does it make [that four Americans died, because I don't give a poo poo about American lives]?" That's how it was explained to me, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
The best bit about it all was this Quixotic charge was what made Mittens look like a dingus in front of the whole nation back in 2012 (well, that and many, many other things) and the right-wing media decided that if they beat a dead horse hard enough it'll eventually compact into the shape of the consulate. Obama's secure so what the hell, FULL STEAM AHEAD ON THE HILLARY ANGLE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
The chicken nuggets oversold it. Tesseraction posted:
You taunted the AI. This election is your punishment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Where do people get the idea that the SoS can give orders to the military? Do the folks who think Hillary ordered the military to stand down during the Benghazi attack hang out on the same forums as the people who blame her for Libya while pretending Obama wasn't involved?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:Why do religions (and the bible I guess?) write Lᴏʀᴅ differently anyway, I was never steeped in religion and only ever viewed it from the outside and while I understand some parts that's always been a mystery It's because it's impractical to indicate a Being that encompasses all that Is and Is Not. Think of the rest of the Bible as being a 2d plane and those bits as being a 3d Being intruding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Where do people get the idea that the SoS can give orders to the military? Do the folks who think Hillary ordered the military to stand down during the Benghazi attack hang out on the same forums as the people who blame her for Libya while pretending Obama wasn't involved? The President can give orders, and the Clinton-Benghazi theories are just mutations from the Obama-Benghazi theories after they failed to stop his reelection. That's really all it comes down to. Peztopiary posted:It's because it's impractical to indicate a Being that encompasses all that Is and Is Not. Think of the rest of the Bible as being a 2d plane and those bits as being a 3d Being intruding. It's just a replacement for the tetragrammaton to avoid "taking God's name in vain," since nobody was quite sure what counted as "in vain." There's a whole system where certain phrases and titles in English correspond to specific names of God in the original text (YHWH/Elohim/Adonai/etc), but I forget the specifics. Goon Danton has a new favorite as of 16:26 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Tbh, it's the "what difference does it make?" thing that really gets me, because it's crystal clear that what she meant was that the important thing was the deaths of four Americans, not the media spin or whether that video was involved, and people still quote it out of context to make it sound like she didn't think it mattered that they died. Even people who hate her should be bright enough to realize that she is not so utterly incompetent a politician as to say THAT in public. Come the gently caress on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
pookel posted:Tbh, it's the "what difference does it make?" thing that really gets me, because it's crystal clear that what she meant was that the important thing was the deaths of four Americans, not the media spin or whether that video was involved, and people still quote it out of context to make it sound like she didn't think it mattered that they died. It's classic application of Rove's Law. And the stupidity of the right-wing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
He wants Hillary to fix the country from prison?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:Whether or not anyone makes a stink when others do it, that doesn't make it a good idea on its own The mechanisms by which someone is brought to account do matter. Unequal scrutiny is a kind of unfairness people tend to forget about. Anyway, no Republican gave a poo poo about Clinton's IT security. The whole point was to try to find emails that made her look bad. This is like if your high school principal raids your locker because your mom is running against his wife for a seat on the school board. Failing to find drugs, he starts to go through your notebooks looking for embarrassing doodles or little side notes to share with the whole school. Failing to get much play out of that, he says your handwriting is terrible and makes you do extra work with your English teacher to improve it. Then some people's take is, "Seems fair. You DO have poor handwriting."
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:The mechanisms by which someone is brought to account do matter. Didn't say otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Hermetic posted:What Darth Walrus said, but the reason that they "jumped in with a full federal investigation" was basically because they've been scared of Hillary since the early 2000s The early 1990s, nationally. Earlier than that in state politics. During Bill Clinton's first term, the fringe right used to claim she's the one who really ran things, even referring to him as "Billary."
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
How and why did that start so early? I thought it only even got started when Bill put her in charge of coming up with a healthcare reform plan, and given how they treated Michelle Obama, was part of a general sexist thing against First Ladies of Presidents from the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
They're terrified of women. Their whole worldview is hierarchical, and supreme over their white-over-black and rich-over-poor schemae is man-over-woman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
You forgot the part where they assume everyone else is as hierarchical as they are, and thus to them it must be an inevitable consequence of feminism that women will conquer the earth and castrate all men, because to them an equitable society is literally inconceivable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:How and why did that start so early? I thought it only even got started when Bill put her in charge of coming up with a healthcare reform plan, and given how they treated Michelle Obama, was part of a general sexist thing against First Ladies of Presidents from the Democratic Party. It's that, but also that the previous several First Ladies were super feminine and stuck to the traditional gender roles stuff. Hillary had no intention of following this path, and was very vocal about it, at a time when the country was only just starting to maybe get used to the idea that feminism could be a thing. There was also the total hate-on for Clinton himself (and therefore her by association), possibly because he stopped Bush Sr. from getting an 8-year term. The fact that she tends to play her cards close to her chest and give no fucks what anyone thinks of her also doesn't help. Basically, she represents all that right-wingers fear about women with power, and so they see her as the vanguard of feminazis coming to enslave mankind.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:It's that, but also that the previous several First Ladies were super feminine and stuck to the traditional gender roles stuff. Hillary had no intention of following this path, and was very vocal about it, at a time when the country was only just starting to maybe get used to the idea that feminism could be a thing. I was pretty young when that first happened, but I remember it. While I may not always like Clinton's policies, I always credit her with my first stirrings of feminism. I remember that some loving women's magazine wanted her and Barbara Bush to submit their favorite chocolate chip cookie recipes for the readers to try and vote on, and I remember thinking "Wait, didn't they say she's a lawyer and a politician and all sorts of cool stuff? It seems kind of stupid to ask her what kind of cookies she wants to bake..." To this day, my fondness for cookies has only grown, but I still think that was a stupid loving question to ask her. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Yeah, I remember "baking cookies" being a specific metonym for the whole issue. (Despite being significantly more interested in Ninja Turtles and the X-Men at the time.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:Mister Mean-Spirited got in a fight with someone over arrowheads, and goddamnit someone is going to HEAR about this http://mister-mean-spirited.blogspot.com/2016/06/in-praise-of-pothunters.html Update: Usually MMS gets a few comments from the same handful of people who tend to go "Right on!" or "Preach, brother!" but this time all he got was this comment quote:I agree, people who reckon they know stuff are much more accurate than people who spend their whole lives studying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:Update: Usually MMS gets a few comments from the same handful of people who tend to go "Right on!" or "Preach, brother!" but this time all he got was this comment Barring the possibility that that's sarcastic, that's basically the foundation of alt-right thought where it's better to go with your racist-rear end gut than get educated in some discipline by the Cathedral. See: ClarkHat just knowing that urbit is awesome despite little domain-centric knowledge in PL design or whatnot. Also: brazenautomaton's opinions on undertale Fututor Magnus has a new favorite as of 06:52 on Jul 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
I  love the strain of alt-rightism that's just a desire to be a Victorian gentleman.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Prepare your asses for some salty, ineffectual, racist white nerd tears: New Iron Man is 15 year old black girl Has anyone commented yet or are the cuckpocalypse takes still being furiously written?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Q: I'm aware of the general criticisms of Scott Alexander in this thread (has spent so long bending over backwards to be generous and keep talking to NRx that he's adopted a bunch of their tropes, lack of equivalent charity to the left and their '30% of sane feminists', is not actually a very astute thinker), but is there a particular criticism of the his Anti-Reactionary FAQ beyond this? I'm aware it has some eyerolling praise of reactionary thinkers in the introduction, but are there known problems with the content or approach?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Peel posted:Q: I'm aware of the general criticisms of Scott Alexander in this thread (has spent so long bending over backwards to be generous and keep talking to NRx that he's adopted a bunch of their tropes, lack of equivalent charity to the left and their '30% of sane feminists', is not actually a very astute thinker), but is there a particular criticism of the his Anti-Reactionary FAQ beyond this? I'm aware it has some eyerolling praise of reactionary thinkers in the introduction, but are there known problems with the content or approach? I actually like it for the first, idk, third of it where he just shoots down NRx tropes with actual data. After that it starts to get really stupidly ~~Fair And Balanced~~
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Prepare your asses for some salty, ineffectual, racist white nerd tears: I mean she isn't straight up replacing Tony as a character necessarily so I'm especially eager to watch them flail about this It's strangely more enjoyable to watch them flail about poo poo I actually know about
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:I mean she isn't straight up replacing Tony as a character necessarily so I'm especially eager to watch them flail about this She could be a totally standalone character unrelated to Iron Man and they'd still whine about it. One black girl too many.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:She could be a totally standalone character unrelated to Iron Man and they'd still whine about it. One black girl too many. Oh for sure I'm just looking forward to doing a breakdown on why they're idiots about this Reminder that War Machine literally started out as a replacement Iron Man. He wore the suit when Tony couldn't for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 11:45 |
|
|
GunnerJ posted:I actually like it for the first, idk, third of it where he just shoots down NRx tropes with actual data. After that it starts to get really stupidly ~~Fair And Balanced~~ I got about a third of the way through when skimming it again before making that post lol. Maybe that's what everyone remembers, because it's all I remembered.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 16:09
|
|