Politics

[wizards8507]

How Trigger Warnings Are Hurting Mental Health on Campus - The Atlantic

Really long ass article that I think is a very interesting lead. Crazy to think how recently I graduated from college and my experiences were nothing like what is being described.

Fascinating that this kind of article founds a home in The Atlantic.

 

[phgreek]

...So we met with China, talked some climate change etc., and clearly the topic of Cyber crime came up. I would expect some tough talk...Err, maybe not.

We (the US and China) have agreed to fight Cybercrime together...

So, do you think Jinping spanked Mr. Obama's bare ass when he put him over his knee?

I mean, you've got to be kidding me...its like teaming up with Lucky Luciano to break up organized crime...and then proudly announcing it.

 

[woolybug25]

...So we met with China, talked some climate change etc., and clearly the topic of Cyber crime came up. I would expect some tough talk...Err, maybe not.

We (the US and China) have agreed to fight Cybercrime together...

So, do you think Jinping spanked Mr. Obama's bare ass when he put him over his knee?

I mean, you've got to be kidding me...its like teaming up with Lucky Luciano to break up organized crime...and then proudly announcing it.

So you would rather have us not open up lines of communication and set parameters around our communication? With this, there is no "we had a miscommunication" bs going forward.

What "tough talk" did you expect? Obama challenging them to a game of basketball? Want Kerry to box Xi Jinping for US's honor? Give me a break.

 

[IrishLax]

So you would rather have us not open up lines of communication and set parameters around our communication? With this, there is no "we had a miscommunication" bs going forward.

What "tough talk" did you expect? Obama challenging them to a game of basketball? Want Kerry to box Xi Jinping for US's honor? Give me a break.

Both of those options I would pay good money to watch.

 

[phgreek]

So you would rather have us not open up lines of communication and set parameters around our communication? With this, there is no "we had a miscommunication" bs going forward.

What "tough talk" did you expect? Obama challenging them to a game of basketball? Want Kerry to box Xi Jinping for US's honor? Give me a break.

Well if it isn't ole outback griz bringing his brand of love to the fore. How ya been.

I'd have expected some serious discussion regarding the attacks on our military installations, which last I checked is the cyber crime we are most concerned about. Further, I'd expect we would have set parameters for when use of such information triggers a military response. Further I would have made those discussions public.

And what the hell are you talking about...miscommunication...about what...what could we possibly say that makes it a miscommunication to have them attack our military information assets?

Don't invite me to give you a break...I might misunderstand.

EDIT: and the optics suck...the world knows they nailed us, and we "team up"...

 

[pkt77242]

Well if it isn't ole outback griz bringing his brand of love to the fore. How ya been.

I'd have expected some serious discussion regarding the attacks on our military installations, which last I checked is the cyber crime we are most concerned about. Further, I'd expect we would have set parameters for when use of such information triggers a military response. Further I would have made those discussions public.

And what the hell are you talking about...miscommunication...about what...what could we possibly say that makes it a miscommunication to have them attack our military information assets?

Don't invite me to give you a break...I might misunderstand.

EDIT: and the optics suck...the world knows they nailed us, and we "team up"...

What kind of military response? Do you really think we should bomb China?

Also we are probably doing the same thing too them that they are doing to us, so wouldn't that be the pot calling the kettle black?

 

[phgreek]

What kind of military response? Do you really think we should bomb China?

Also we are probably doing the same thing too them that they are doing to us, so wouldn't that be the pot calling the kettle black?

Lots of military options ... thinking Naval primarily.

...what China has done and is doing goes a hell of a lot further than gathering intel on weapons and methods. So no, its not the same.

 

[woolybug25]

Well if it isn't ole outback griz bringing his brand of love to the fore. How ya been.

Oh, you know... just takin' it easy for all you sinners out there...

I'd have expected some serious discussion regarding the attacks on our military installations, which last I checked is the cyber crime we are most concerned about. Further, I'd expect we would have set parameters for when use of such information triggers a military response. Further I would have made those discussions public.

Outside of making it public, I believe that is what happened. The conversations were framed about the protocol of communication. Any "misunderstandings" outside of that protocol are clear abuses of that arrangement.

And what the hell are you talking about...miscommunication...about what...what could we possibly say that makes it a miscommunication to have them attack our military information assets?

That has been the status quo for many years. We get attacked, we call China, they tell us it was a "misunderstanding". We are neck deep in an information war with China. We have to set the rules of engagement and these meetings did just that.

Don't invite me to give you a break...I might misunderstand.

EDIT: and the optics suck...the world knows they nailed us, and we "team up"...

We didn't "team up" with them. We sat down with them and set parameters of how we will handle intelligence between eachother. It doesn't make sense to continue down the same path where we are both constantly spying on eachother and then absolving ourselves from it once we get caught. There are no ground rules. These talks set those ground rules.

 

[ACamp1900]

Both of those options I would pay good money to watch.

Will the BBall game involve sharks with laser beams on their heads?

 

[phgreek]

Oh, you know... just takin' it easy for all you sinners out there...



Outside of making it public, I believe that is what happened. The conversations were framed about the protocol of communication. Any "misunderstandings" outside of that protocol are clear abuses of that arrangement.



That has been the status quo for many years. We get attacked, we call China, they tell us it was a "misunderstanding". We are neck deep in an information war with China. We have to set the rules of engagement and these meetings did just that.



We didn't "team up" with them. We sat down with them and set parameters of how we will handle intelligence between eachother. It doesn't make sense to continue down the same path where we are both constantly spying on eachother and then absolving ourselves from it once we get caught. There are no ground rules. These talks set those ground rules.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/...-to-work-with-u-s-to-prevent-cybercrime/?_r=0

People should expect other countries will attempt to gain information regarding performance of weapon systems, and war fighting techniques. However, gathering data on all the people in the federal service is far beyond that. That goes beyond a defensive posture and is the sign of someone assembling assets for more aggressive activity...in short that is war time conduct, and should be treated as such.

Teaming up may have been more than what was intended...but if you think this through to its logical conclusion...how do we cooperate? How does one establish such a cooperation...disclosure and restriction. I have no confidence in those type of relationships. We STILL abide by disclosures and restrictions required by ICBM treaties the Soviets don't. So I don't want "cooperation", I want boundaries, and consequences given to China, and them to understand they are walking us toward a military response...

 

[connor_in]

Will the BBall game involve frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams on their frickin' heads?

fify

 

[Circa]

John Boehner blowing his nose repeatedly during the Pope's address to congress is insane. I don't care what the excuse was. suck It up you're looking human and like an ass all at once.

 

[Circa]

Company hikes price 5,000% for drug that fights complication of AIDS, cancer

I don't have the link but Hep C patients are dealing with a similar case of the crooks.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

So even McConnell is saying the Tea Party has taken over the Republican Party..... No room for moderate republicans in the Tea Party anymore. Where do they go?

Seriously? Half the Republicans in Congress are soft RINO's. We're trying to get rid of them because they might as well be Democrats. The Democrats on the other hand, forget it. They are a united front that's been taken over by CA and NY Democrats. Show me a moderate Democrat and I"ll show you some dude/ woman in Wyoming no one has ever heard of.

Boehner resigning is long overdue. Monkey humping a football.

 

[phgreek]

Seriously? Half the Republicans in Congress are soft RINO's. We're trying to get rid of them because they might as well be Democrats. The Democrats on the other hand, forget it. They are a united front that's been taken over by CA and NY Democrats. Show me a moderate Democrat and I"ll show you some dude/ woman in Wyoming no one has ever heard of.

Boehner resigning is long overdue. Monkey humping a football.

Amen...

 

[ACamp1900]

Thirded

 

[Cackalacky]

Haha. Well we know where the RINOs will end up then. There goes another 20% of the electorate.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Seriously? Half the Republicans in Congress are soft RINO's. We're trying to get rid of them because they might as well be Democrats. The Democrats on the other hand, forget it. They are a united front that's been taken over by CA and NY Democrats. Show me a moderate Democrat and I"ll show you some dude/ woman in Wyoming no one has ever heard of.

Except that's not how everyone who isn't overwhelmingly conservative sees it. I haven't read any respected political writer talk about how the Republicans have gone left (or "soft"), because it's just not reality.

Of course, if one were extremely conservative, no one in the Democratic party would look like a moderate. That's the nature of having that view of the world.

This astonishing chart shows how moderate Republicans are an endangered species - The Washington Post

And it makes sense that someone who has no shortage of conservative emotion wants to see the moderates purged from the party, it's been happening for years and years.

The Republican Party took a right turn in the mid-1970s and hasn't changed course. Whereas the Democrats, while still kneeling to their corporate donor daddies at every turn, still at least resemble something more in line with the rest of the developed world.

 

[woolybug25]

Except that's not how everyone who isn't overwhelmingly conservative sees it. I haven't read any respected political writer talk about how the Republicans have gone left (or "soft"), because it's just not reality.

Of course, if one were extremely conservative, no one in the Democratic party would look like a moderate. That's the nature of having that view of the world.

Interesting that that graph portrays the "Greatest Generation" as the most moderate in both parties.

Coincidence?

 

[NDgradstudent]

Except that's not how everyone who isn't overwhelmingly conservative sees it. I haven't read any respected political writer talk about how the Republicans have gone left (or "soft"), because it's just not reality.

Of course, if one were extremely conservative, no one in the Democratic party would look like a moderate. That's the nature of having that view of the world.

When 40% of the country describes itself as "conservative," and 20% describes itself as "liberal," you would expect conservatives to be a stronger force within the Republican Party than liberals are within the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party has been led by its left for awhile now (Kerry, Pelosi, Obama), and Republicans are reacting accordingly.

The bottom line is that the country is polarized and the parties just reflect that.

 

[pkt77242]

When 40% of the country describes itself as "conservative," and 20% describes itself as "liberal," you would expect conservatives to be a stronger force within the Republican Party than liberals are within the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party has been led by its left for awhile now (Kerry, Pelosi, Obama), and Republicans are reacting accordingly.

The bottom line is that the country is polarized and the parties just reflect that.

First off the numbers are 38% and 24% but most importantly those words mean different things to different people. That is pretty much a worthless poll.

 

[connor_in]

Of course, if one were extremely conservative, no one in the Democratic party would look like a moderate. That's the nature of having that view of the world.

[.

Of course, if one were extremely liberal, no one in the Republican party would look like a moderate. That's the nature of having that view of the world.

Correct?

 

[IrishinSyria]

Drones, deportations, no single payer health insurance, ...

I'm pretty sure Obama is far from the left of his party, or American politics. Indeed, I'd put him in the center of things.

 

[Circa]

Interesting that that graph portrays the "Greatest Generation" as the most moderate in both parties.

Coincidence?

and... they were human... H.cow

 

[phgreek]

Interesting that that graph portrays the "Greatest Generation" as the most moderate in both parties.

Coincidence?

nope...they were too effing busy trying to eat and survive...

Any time we want to roll back to their mentality/attitude toward the constitution, enforcement of laws ...I'm all in.

 

[Grahambo]

An honest question I've always thought to myself, what would politics look like if we did away with party lines?

 

[Cackalacky]

Ben Carson's Creationist Views Pose A Political Threat To Reality

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

Ben Carson's Creationist Views Pose A Political Threat To Reality

He thinks that the universe was literally created in 6 days. Wow!

 

[Cackalacky]

Carly Fiorina Makes a Lot of Stuff Up About Everything | Mother Jones

As it turns out, Fiorina's tendency to embellish—or altogether avoid—the facts goes back much farther than last week's debate. Below is a partial compilation of some of her less-than-truthful moments:

1. Claim: Fiorina was not fired from her job at Hewlett-Packard because of performance.

Facts: In February 2005, Fiorina was dismissed from her post as CEO of HP by a board of directors that she's since called "dysfunctional." At the time, she roundly told reporters that the firing was not about performance. She struck a similar note in her 2006 memoir, Tough Choices, writing that after more than five years leading HP, by December 2004 she had pulled the company toward success. She cited a strong fourth quarter, despite a third-quarter "stumble." In fact, the stumble was an enormous shortfall: HP missed its earnings projections that quarter by 23 percent. "When companies miss by a few pennies, it doesn't mean all that much," the New York Times wrote of Fiorina in 2006. "When companies miss by 23 percent, Wall Street starts wondering if the people at the top have a clue as to what's going on in the various businesses." The Times also pointed out at the time that although Fiorina wrote in her memoir that HP missed its numbers on her watch only three times, "in fact, the company fell short at least nine times on either revenue, profit or both."

2. Claim: The Securities and Exchange Commission investigated allegations of HP's violations of the Iran embargo and cleared HP management of any knowledge of the problem.

Facts: Last week, several news outlets reported that Fiorina was CEO of HP when the company allegedly sold products to Iran via a third-party company in Dubai, potentially in violation of US-Iran sanctions. When conservative radio host Sean Hannity questioned Fiorina about the allegations last Friday, she said, "The SEC did a thorough investigation and concluded that no one in management, myself included, knew anything about it."

In fact, there's no evidence that an SEC investigation of the allegations ever happened. The SEC did inquire about the company's Iran dealings in a 2009 letter, after Fiorina had left the company. But there's no evidence that a ruling clearing management of any knowledge was ever issued. What's more, in their response letter to the SEC, HP indicated that management was aware of the Dubai-based company Redington Gulf's sales of HP products to Iran, but that such sales were legal under US law.

3. Claim: Fiorina told Fox News host Chris Wallace last week that Redington Gulf was "not honest" with HP about selling HP products to Iran, a potential violation of US-Iran sanctions.

Facts: Redington Gulf was open about its sales of HP products to Iran. The company issued a press release in 2003 saying that its relationship with HP began in 1997 to focus on "one market—Iran."

4. Claim: Buying a semi-automatic weapon in the United States is illegal.

Facts: In 2010, Fiorina ran for the Senate in California against three-term incumbent Sen. Barbara Boxer. During their first debate, the moderator asked Fiorina why she opposed reinstatement of the federal ban on assault weapons. She responded with several inaccurate points: "First of all, you know, assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons are not the same thing," Fiorina said. "It's a definitional issue. There are—but here's the important point: It's illegal today to be buying semi-automatic weapons."

In fact, it is very much legal to buy semi-automatic weapons in the United States. The AR-15, one of the most popular guns in America, is semi-automatic. Congress did ban the sale of fully automatic weapons (also known as machine guns) in 1986. Also, in contrast to Fiorina's claim, the vast majority of assault weapons—a term defined in the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban—are semi-automatic, though gun rights advocates dislike the term. They argue that many typical sporting rifles are also semi-automatic, so "assault weapon" is a misleading, politicized term that should instead be used to describe fully automatic weapons.

5. Claim: Taxpayers can fund "virtually any" abortion.

Facts: During her 2010 Senate debate against California incumbent Sen. Barbara Boxer, the moderator asked Fiorina about her views on abortion. "I understand that this is an emotional issue for many women," she responded. "I happen to be pro-life. Barbara Boxer holds a very extreme view: that taxpayers should pay for virtually any abortion, any time, anywhere, for any reason." In fact, the Hyde Amendment, which Boxer supported as a "good compromise," prohibits using federal dollars to fund most abortions, unless the pregnancy arises from rape, incest, or the abortion is needed to save the life of the mother.

6. Claim: Fiorina's second husband picked her out of "the secretarial pool."

Facts: During a town hall in New Hampshire over Labor Day weekend, Fiorina described meeting Frank Fiorina. "It was a long time ago in the technology world and there weren't that many people actually who took a young woman from the secretarial pool all that seriously. And he did—so I had to fall in love and marry him." But as the Washington Post points out, Fiorina was not a secretary when they met. She was working in government communications at AT&T. Her future husband was in a higher position and took interest in one of her ideas.

7. Claim: Thanks to Fiorina's leadership, HP became the world's first $100 billion IT company.

Facts: Fiorina's 2010 Senate campaign website trumpeted her achievements as HP's CEO, saying that she "positioned HP to become the first $100 billion information technology company." HP did become the first IT company to reach $100 billion in sales, but not until 2007—several years after Fiorina's departure and during the tenure of CEO Mark Hurd. Fiorina's presidential campaign says her leadership in the years leading up to this milestone—particularly the Compaq merger she orchestrated—was key to reaching the $100 billion mark. But the merger was widely deemed a failure, rather than a financial boon for the company.

8. Claim: As president, Fiorina would not negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin

Facts: During her presidential run, Fiorina has repeatedly said that, as president, she would completely avoid negotiations with Putin. "Russia is a bad actor," Fiorina said during last week's primary debate. "Vladimir Putin is someone we should not talk to, because the only way he will stop is to sense strength and resolve on the other side, and we have all of that within our control." But before being so tough on Putin, Fiorina expressed being very impressed with his leadership in Russia. As the Daily Beast points out, Fiorina met Putin in 2001, at the APEC CEO summit in Beijing. Both of them were slotted to give speeches, and Fiorina—then CEO of HP—spoke immediately before Putin. She talked about how Putin had led Russia through a dramatic transition to democracy. "Hewlett-Packard has been at the center of a lot of change in our 62-year history. But President Putin was elected president in the first democratic transition in Russia in 1,000 years," Fiorina said. "Talk about giving new meaning to the word 'invent.'" The Fiorina campaign disagreed with this interpretation, telling the Daily Beast that this was merely "a fairly banal statement of fact."

 

[woolybug25]

Ben Carson's Creationist Views Pose A Political Threat To Reality

I wonder if he believes that dinosaurs existed?