US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[benjipwns]

The Associated Press’ Matt Lee called out the State Department Thursday after the agency announced it will not look into undisclosed donors to the Clinton Foundation which violated the Memorandum of Understanding.

State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke told reporters during Thursday’s briefing that the more than 1,100 undisclosed donors will not be reviewed as the department moves on.

“The State Department has not, and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton’s tenure,” spokesman Jeff Rathke told reporters during Thursday’s State Department briefing.

Right away, Lee called out Rathke, telling him that the only reason they are not looking into this is because they don’t want to find any thing that “might raise a flag.”

“It seems like you’re not aware of anything — and there may not be anything there, but the reason that you’re not aware of anything is because, and not you personally, but the reason you are not aware of anything is because the building is refusing to go back and look at it to see if there is anything that might raise a flag,” Lee told the spokesman.

“Again, these private donations were — there was never any expectation that they would be reviewed…” Rathke said, before being cut off by Lee.

Bernie-mentium here we come!

[Joe Molotov]

The Associated Press’ Matt Lee called out the State Department Thursday after the agency announced it will not look into undisclosed donors to the Clinton Foundation which violated the Memorandum of Understanding.

State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke told reporters during Thursday’s briefing that the more than 1,100 undisclosed donors will not be reviewed as the department moves on.

“The State Department has not, and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton’s tenure,” spokesman Jeff Rathke told reporters during Thursday’s State Department briefing.

Right away, Lee called out Rathke, telling him that the only reason they are not looking into this is because they don’t want to find any thing that “might raise a flag.”

“It seems like you’re not aware of anything — and there may not be anything there, but the reason that you’re not aware of anything is because, and not you personally, but the reason you are not aware of anything is because the building is refusing to go back and look at it to see if there is anything that might raise a flag,” Lee told the spokesman.

“Again, these private donations were — there was never any expectation that they would be reviewed…” Rathke said, before being cut off by Lee.

Bernie-mentium here we come!

independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption

[Kara]

Conservatives are spinning it because the household survey shows a drop in full-time and a big rise in part-time jobs.

The decline of career work is OK if it's part of massive and sweeping changes to the postwar consensus, but so help me god if it happens because people got health insurance.

[Phoenix Dark]

The jobs report shows quite an increase in construction jobs, which plays a role in the part time increase. That being said all you have to do is look at the rest of the industries that increased to tell that it's a good report. Continued increases in health care jobs (I wonder why!), IT, business, etc. Those aren't bad jobs. Seems pretty weak to die on a hill over part time/shitty job increases while ignoring the influx of professional jobs.

Retail job increases were pretty low.

[Joe Molotov]

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/05/mike-huckabee-monty-python-life-brian

[benjipwns]

In an except of an interview with Fox’s Megyn Kelly set to be aired Monday evening, 2016 presidential hopeful Jeb Bush said he would have invaded Iraq, and reminded everybody that so would Hillary Clinton.

To be clear, there appears to be some confusion between Kelly’s question and Bush’s answer. Kelly asked Bush whether, knowing what he knows now, he would still invade, whereas Bush appears to answer according to the available intelligence in 2003, which was wrong but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

“In retrospect the intelligence that everybody saw, that the world saw*, not just the United States, was faulty,” Bush said. “Once we invaded and took out Saddam Hussein, we didn’t focus on security first.”

“By the way, guess who thinks those mistakes took place as well: George W Bush,” Jeb said. “Just for a newsflash to the world, for those trying to find big space between me and my brother, this might not be one of those.”

Maybe Jeb's actually trying to sabotage his campaign, he doesn't want to run but everyone is pressuring him so he's going to keep up the game while making sure to alienate moderates and conservatives every other month until he finishes like sixth in Iowa and fifth in NH and under expectations in SC then say the people have spoken and drop out before he has a shot at actually backing into the nomination.

It seems like Christie is trying to pull off a similar gambit before even launching a campaign.

[Trent Dole]

...Do you know what the worst thing I can say about Jeb without being hunted down is? Pretend I said that thing here.

[benjipwns]

Also, the Iraq line to bash Hillary with is giving me 2004 flashbacks. Though I suppose 12 years isn't as long as 30-35 years. The only thing bringing up Iraq is going to do is allow the youngins to do what Obama did and point out they weren't around in any kind of power when that disaster happened. And Rand Paul and a few others to take negative or at least ambivalent stances on it.

I think Iraq is "popular" with conservatives/Republicans more because it was "theirs" and Democrats attacked it than any actual hardcore support of it still.

[Barry Egan]

what an awkward response.  It's like he saw a rake on the floor 10-feet away and ran over to step on it.  Twice.

[benjipwns]

It's not about forgetting it as much as questioning its specific relevance. Jeb Bush is basically saying "I supported it with the knowledge at the time just like my brother and Hillary" to throw jabs at Hillary with her base like Obama did. Are people going to make their decision on Iraq? Sanders is trying to use it on Hillary: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/10/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-trans-pacific-partnership but we know that's not going to make much of a dent. I was looking for if any of the other candidates had taken stances and came across Jonah Goldberg making this point:

The weird thing is, Ms. Clinton has far more responsibility for the Iraq War than Jeb Bush does. Meanwhile, none of the potential GOP presidential hopefuls voted for the war in 2002. Scott Walker was the Milwaukee County executive; Marco Rubio was in the Florida House of Representatives; Chris Christie was a U.S. district attorney;Ted Cruz was a policy wonk at the Federal Trade Commission; Rand Paul and Ben Carson were practicing surgeons. And so on.

Ben Carson has questioned the morality of Iraq AND Vietnam. Rand Paul would probably take a stand against it if pressed. Walker can toe that line Huckabee has with the "what matters is how we deal with it now." Cruz and Rubio have that out too. Though they all seem to be in favor of fighting ISIS with ground troops. Hillary hasn't really taken a clear stance on what to do with ISIS. Santorum and Graham were both for it and Graham is for anything with men in uniforms. Nobody cares what Fiorina thinks. Perry and Jindal have spoken favorably in the past. I think Trump was against it and then for it and then against it and then for it and then against it.

Just seems like it's not anywhere near as relevant as in 2008. Where it played a role in both primaries as a referendum on the Bush years of sorts.

Then you got Gary Johnson, Jesse Ventura, Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders as all obviously against Iraq.

Hillary's got the foreign policy experience to where they basically have to run an anti-incumbent campaign against her, and after the last eight years, I don't think her Iraq War vote is going to do it. Benghazi probably literally has more attack power to it.

[brawndolicious]

Most politicians don't volunteer to put their own asses into war, I think Biden had like 5 draft deferments during the Vietnam war and of course voted in favor of invading Iraq. I could see veteran groups attacking Hillary for voting to invade Iraq due to the fact that she never face the risk of being drafted (and Bill got quite a delay for his draft meaning he didn't have to serve).

In any case, young newly registered voters would probably think that the Iraq war must have been kind of a bad thing since it left Iraq in the current carbomb-a-day power struggle with half the country overrun by ISIS militia and not one WMD ever found. If you were like 10 when the war started, you probably won't remember much of the lead up for a year before where the news was saturated with paranoia and supposedly corroborating intelligence reports trying to show those shifty Iraqis were hiding something, which I think a lot of conservatives like to think was a good enough reason for them to believe it at the time. It's basically conservative gamergate.

[benjipwns]

I think I've posted before that I thought the WMD case was the least compelling of the reasons the Bush team laid out and never understood why they went all in on that one. Clinton fired cruise missiles into their intelligence headquarters over their believed attempt to assassinate H.W. Looking at the prior twelve years of how we dealt with Iraq didn't look like there was much need for an airtight casus belli after 9/11. Real problem was the occupation and stuff after.

For whatever reason they wanted to make it seem like a serious threat. Instead of just "yo, we all hate this Saddam dude, he's been our villain for like three seasons now, we didn't go hard on anybody for the last few years, lets get serious about our foes after 9/11, we got all these UN warnings and sanctions and shit, lets end this whole drama, then we chill in his palaces and leave. If the Iran spin-off doesn't take off we can always come back with whatever strongman takes over."

[Kara]

The day we launched the invasion of Iraq, I was a freshman in college. I remember a profound sadness settling over the whole campus. We were all hoping it wouldn't actually happening.

You saw a lot of young people turn from being fairly ambivalent about Bush to actively hating him on that day.

It's kind of sad that the people who are in their early 20s now have no frame of reference for this. Generational memory can sometimes be annoying, like with the 40-somethings who were scarred by late-70s inflation, but I feel that the Iraq War isn't something we should forget.

Between the Syrian Civil War and the emergence of Islamic State the Iraq War is still ongoing, which makes its fading from the collective consciousness and the absence of any just consequences for those responsible even more revolting.

Fuck George II.

[sarslip]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden

TL;DR summary?

it was all BS.

[Phoenix Dark]

that article sounds like bullshit. I've seen a couple takedowns on it. Not to mention it being based on one source.

[sarslip]

that article sounds like bullshit. I've seen a couple takedowns on it. Not to mention it being based on one source.

not necessarily disagreeing.  but..burial at sea?  a big glorious shootout?  early reporting of human sheilds being used?  not like it would be that hard to believe we made some shit up. 

got dem takedown links?

[Phoenix Dark]

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden

[sarslip]

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden

thanks will give it a read in a bit

[Brehvolution]

An anonymous source is all the Con media needs.

[sarslip]

Ok read it,

Id lke to see his response, hersh has a real good reputation.  He isnt a fringe hack by any means...he'll have to respond if he hasnt already

[Great Rumbler]

There was a young man doing the checkout and another Walmart employee came over and put up a sign, "No alcohol products in this lane." So being the inquisitive fella I am, I used my additional set of eyes -- glasses -- to see the young checkout man's name. Let me just say it was NOT "Steve."

I pointed the sign out to Aubrey and her response was a simple question, how is it that this Muslim employee could refuse service to customers based on his religious beliefs, but Christians are being forced to participate in specific events contrary to their religious beliefs?

Boy howdy, that is one astute young lady.

Imagine that, this employee at Walmart refused to just scan a bottle or container of an alcoholic beverage -- and that is acceptable. A Christian business owner declines to participate or provide service to a specific event -- a gay wedding -- which contradicts their faith, and the State crushes them.

EDITOR'S UPDATE: We spoke to the Walmart store, and apparently employees under 21 years old are prohibited from selling cigarettes and alcohol. However, that isn't to say Walmart isn't selectively caving to Muslim demands, such as this case regarding Halal meat in Ohio.

[Joe Molotov]

You mean like Wal-Mart pharmacists refusing to give out birth control pills and then going to jail nothing?

[Great Rumbler]

“My side is I’m not a racist,” Gordeuk said. “I didn’t know ‘black people’ was a racist term. I didn’t say the N-word or anything like that ‘cause that’s not in my vocabulary.”

[Phoenix Dark]

There was a young man doing the checkout and another Walmart employee came over and put up a sign, "No alcohol products in this lane." So being the inquisitive fella I am, I used my additional set of eyes -- glasses -- to see the young checkout man's name. Let me just say it was NOT "Steve."

I pointed the sign out to Aubrey and her response was a simple question, how is it that this Muslim employee could refuse service to customers based on his religious beliefs, but Christians are being forced to participate in specific events contrary to their religious beliefs?

Boy howdy, that is one astute young lady.

Imagine that, this employee at Walmart refused to just scan a bottle or container of an alcoholic beverage -- and that is acceptable. A Christian business owner declines to participate or provide service to a specific event -- a gay wedding -- which contradicts their faith, and the State crushes them.

EDITOR'S UPDATE: We spoke to the Walmart store, and apparently employees under 21 years old are prohibited from selling cigarettes and alcohol. However, that isn't to say Walmart isn't selectively caving to Muslim demands, such as this case regarding Halal meat in Ohio.

[Great Rumbler]

Oh, and the "halal meat in Ohio" mentioned in the article is regarding a decision by a Wal-Mart store in Oxford to start offering halal-certified meat because a group of Muslim customers asked them to. That's it.

[benjipwns]

I don't want to live in a country where businesses try to cater to their customers desires.

It's my right not to have to see halal-certified meat or kosher products on the shelves and Wal-Mart better respect my wishes.

[benjipwns]

This story reminded me of something from last week, there's a local conservative idiot on the radio in the morning here and his callers are usually amazing so he sometimes gets some car time from me. Anyway, a new grocery store opened recently right near Michigan State's main campus (and the foreign student dorms are almost all within walking or at least easy biking distance) and the guy was talking immigration betrayal/end of the world/democrats/etc. so he takes a call from this woman and she starts complaining about how the new grocery store has a whole section devoted to FOREIGN foods like Mexican and Asian and...

I'm like wtf, has she not been in a grocery store in 20 years, even the crappiest ones have a "Mexican"/Chinese aisle at least. (Not to mention all the aisles that have been integrated with stuff for black people.)

But the punchline was her saying that they could be using that space in the store to have more food people actually wanted instead of trying to show off to the liberal PC crowd.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ha! I tricked you all, this was the radio equivalent of me quoting website comments!

[close]

[Rufus]

Gaze into the abyss, etc.

[I'm a Puppy!]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/05/11/405961442/jeb-bush-would-have-authorized-iraq-war-even-knowing-what-we-know-now?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150511

Jeb Bush is really trying to convince people to vote for him.

[benjipwns]

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_28074484/ruben-navarrette-halperin-interview-ted-cruz-was-painful

Watching Mark Halperin of Bloomberg Politics interview Cruz recently, I wasn't just uncomfortable. I was actually nauseated.

As a journalist, I felt embarrassed for Halperin. As a Hispanic, I felt like I was watching a college fraternity have fun with racial stereotypes, like when staging a "border party" where people show up in serapes and fake mustaches. And as someone who doesn't adhere to a party line to the point where I've been accused of being a "coconut" (white on the inside, brown on the outside), I was furious enough to -- as Sarah Palin once said approvingly about Cruz -- chew barbed wire and spit out rust.

The online interview show that Halperin co-hosts on BloombergPolitics.com is called "With All Due Respect." But there was nothing respectful about the line of questioning. It started off innocently enough with Halperin asking the 2016 GOP presidential candidate about whether he thinks Hispanics will vote for him. He also mentioned a speech that Cruz had given to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and gave Cruz the chance to explain his argument that Republican economic policies help Hispanics.

Nothing wrong with that. But then Halperin made it personal, and the interview careened into a ditch. He told Cruz that people are curious about his "identity." Then, the host asked a series of questions intended to establish his guest's Hispanic bona fides. What kind of Cuban food did Cruz like to eat growing up? And what sort of Cuban music does Cruz listen to even now?

I've known Ted for more than a decade and I could tell he was uncomfortable. But he played along, listing various kinds of Cuban food and saying that his musical taste veers more toward country.

I kept waiting for Halperin to ask Cruz to play the conga drums like Desi Arnaz while dancing salsa and sipping cafe con leche -- all to prove the Republican is really Cuban.

Just when I thought I'd seen the worst, it got even more offensive. Earlier that day, independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, of Vermont, had entered the presidential race. So, Halperin said: "I want to give you the opportunity to directly welcome your colleague Sen. Sanders to the race, and I'd like you to do it, if you would, en español."

What nerve, treating a U.S. senator like a trained seal! Who does this guy think he is, trying to evaluate how well a Hispanic speaks Spanish? And what does that have to do with being authentic anyway?

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/05/10/the-gop-field-and-liberal-identity-politics-ted-cruz-mark-halperin/

We can expect to see a lot of it in the coming months as the liberal media copes with a breathtakingly diverse Republican presidential field and seeks to brand them as inauthentic.

What Halperin did to Cruz was merely another example of the identity wars that are being fought in contemporary politics. Just as women who don’t support abortion without any restrictions are portrayed as not really female by the left, so, too are blacks and Hispanics who don’t toe the Democrat party line treated as somehow inauthentic minorities.

...

It’s one thing to denounce conservative Hispanics as wrong on the issues. It’s quite another to treat them as crypto Anglo-Saxons. But with two Republican presidential candidates of Hispanic background (Cruz and fellow Cuban-American Marco Rubio) and one GOP hopeful that is a woman (Carly Fiorina) and another an African American (Ben Carson), the liberal authenticity police will be out in force. But rather than merely ignore them as Cruz, who kept his cool with Halperin did, this insidious bias needs to be shown for what it is: a desire by the media to delegitimize anyone who doesn’t conform to their ideas about identity politics as interpreted through the catechism of liberal ideology.

[Kara]

I don't want to live in a country where businesses try to cater to their customers desires.

It's my right not to have to see halal-certified meat or kosher products on the shelves and Wal-Mart better respect my wishes.

The tyranny of the market is all well and good until you're on the receiving end of it.

[T-Short]

This is a bit bananas, isn't it?

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/05/wyoming_law_against_data_collection_protecting_ranchers_by_ignoring_the.html

Imagine visiting Yellowstone this summer. You wake up before dawn to take a picture of the sunrise over the mists emanating from Yellowstone hot springs. A thunderhead towers above the rising sun, and the picture turns out beautifully. You submit the photo to a contest sponsored by the National Weather Service. Under a statute signed into law by the Wyoming governor this spring, you have just committed a crime and could face up to one year in prison.

Wyoming doesn’t, of course, care about pictures of geysers or photo competitions. But photos are a type of data, and the new law makes it a crime to gather data about the condition of the environment across most of the state if you plan to share that data with the state or federal government.

...

The Wyoming law transforms a good Samaritan who volunteers her time to monitor our shared environment into a criminal. Idaho and Utah, as well as other states, have also enacted laws designed to conceal information that could damage their agricultural industries—laws currently being challenged in federal court. But Wyoming is the first state to enact a law so expansive that it criminalizes taking a picture on public land.

The new law is of breathtaking scope. It makes it a crime to “collect resource data” from any “open land,” meaning any land outside of a city or town, whether it’s federal, state, or privately owned. The statute defines the word collect as any method to “preserve information in any form,” including taking a “photograph” so long as the person gathering that information intends to submit it to a federal or state agency. In other words, if you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, even one that poses an imminent threat to public health, you’re obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.

[benjipwns]

MATT BAI, YAHOO: Senator Warren said this week this pact could be used to roll back Dodd-Frank --

PRESIDENT OBAMA: She’s absolutely wrong.

BAI: -- which is pretty close to your heart.

OBAMA: Right, I passed it. Think about the logic of that, right? The notion that I had this massive fight with Wall Street to make sure that we don’t repeat what happened in 2007, 2008. And then I sign a provision that would unravel it?

I’d have to be pretty stupid. And it doesn't make any sense... there is no evidence that this could ever be used in this way. This is pure speculation. She and I both taught law school and one of the things you do as a law professor is you spin out hypotheticals. And this is all hypothetical, speculative...

The truth of the matter is that Elizabeth is, you know, a politician like everybody else. And you know, she’s got a voice that she wants to get out there. I understand that. And on most issues, she and I deeply agree. On this one, though, her arguments don’t stand the test of fact and scrutiny.

gasp, Warren's a politician?!?

[Kara]

I'm no lawyer, but that seems pretty damn unconstitutional.

Is ALEC still doing the dual power thing? This story sounds awfully vintage ALEC.

[benjipwns]

I do think there are anti-environmentalist motives to it, but the law does have some more reasonable stipulations than the Slate article suggests:

Section 1. W.S. 6-3-414 is created to read:
6-3-414. Trespassing to unlawfully collect resource
data; unlawful collection of resource data.

(a) A person is guilty of trespassing to unlawfully
collect resource data if he:

(i) Enters onto open land for the purpose of
collecting resource data; and
(ii) Does not have:

(A) An ownership interest in the real
property or, statutory, contractual or other legal
authorization to enter or access the land to collect
resource data; or
(B) Written or verbal permission of the
owner, lessee or agent of the owner to enter or access the
land to collect the specified resource data.

(b) A person is guilty of unlawfully collecting
resource data if he enters onto private open land and
collects resource data without:

(i) An ownership interest in the real property
or, statutory, contractual or other legal authorization to
enter the private land to collect the specified resource
data; or
(ii) Written or verbal permission of the owner,
lessee or agent of the owner to enter the land to collect
the specified resource data.

It seems to be targeted at activists who "trespass" looking for violations. As well as people who simply cross barriers to use their selfie sticks in front of the geysers.

I do think some of their definitions wouldn't survive court challenges though. As it pretty broadly throws out evidence from being admissible simply because it wasn't obtained by a government official or meets that silly open land definition.

I also wouldn't be surprised if it's a baptist-bootlegger situation with the Wyoming department of interior equivalent.

[benjipwns]

Found some local articles from way back when there was more than people just linking to the Slate article with hysterics:

With three separate trespassing topics before Wyoming’s legislature this session, the topic is at the top of the priority list for Wyoming Farm Bureau. Trespassing topics to be addressed by the state legislature cover illegal entry on private land to collect data, difficulty prosecuting trespassers, and the Restatement of Torts where if someone trespasses the property owners do not have the same duty of care as they would if it was someone invited on to the property.

“In past legislative sessions, there have been bills to address these issues, but they always seem to get short-circuited,” said WyFB Executive Vice President Ken Hamilton in a press release. “These trespass issues are of great interest to landowners and agriculture producers around Wyoming.”

- SF0012 - Trespassing to collect data

WyFB’s interest in this Senate bill is closely linked to a current lawsuit against the Western Watersheds Project, which WyFB alleges illegally trespassed on private property to collect water quality data.

WWP had called the lawsuit an intimidation tactic aimed at destroying the organization and hiding wrongdoing by ranchers.

“The ranchers really didn’t want the public to find out how much harm their cows were causing to the public waters,” said Travis Bruner, WWP executive director, in a press release.

WyFB hopes successful passage of SF0012 would place a greater burden on data collectors in such situations, explained Brett Moline, WyFB director of government and public affairs.

“Part of what we’re trying to do is take some burden off land owners and put it on the people so they have to know where they’re at (when collecting data),” Moline said.

The bill would also change the burden or providing notice to landowners. Rather than simply providing notice, data collectors would need direct consent to enter private property.

- SF0080 - Trespassing to collect data-civil cause of action

This bill serves the same purpose as SF0012, but addresses civil penalties, rather than criminal, as does the first bill.

“It is targeted toward those people who are environmentalists, who are activists,” said Linda Burt, of the Wyoming American Civil Liberties Union, who said Utah and Idaho recently passed similar laws and have constitutional free speech challenges in the courts.

SF12 would require people to receive permission from landowners to access their property. Last year, lawmakers attempted a similar bill to empower landowners.

The issue was further examined, with input from industries such as agriculture and oil and gas, after the session. SF12 is the result of all the work, said Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs.

“We are continuing to have issues with the lack of respect for private property and those constitutional protections for private property,” Hicks said.

In June, over a dozen landowners and associations sued Idaho-based Western Watersheds for allegedly trespassing to collect water quality samples in Fremont and Lincoln counties. The alleged trespassing dates back to 2005.

Police would be exempt from the penalties. Before the bill passed out of committee, lawmakers amended it to respond to concerns about inadvertent trespassing by state employees from agencies such as the University of Wyoming, the Wyoming State Engineer’s Office and the Wyoming Game and Fish Department.

“I want to point out that if you have the legal right to be there now, either statutory or regulatory or through permission of the landowner, you're not trespassing," said Brett Moline, of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, which assisted with the bill. "In my opinion, what this does is it strengthens the position of the private landowner.”

[Brehvolution]

That's all well and good as long as the water coming off that private property is as potable as when it came onto the property.

[benjipwns]

It's all good as long as a Muslim hasn't washed his feet in it.

[Brehvolution]

Wyoming will be a hotbed for terrorists hoarding yellow cake now that no one is allowed to report them.

[brob]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden

TL;DR summary?

it was all BS.

tl;dr: 

[Phoenix Dark]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/05/11/405961442/jeb-bush-would-have-authorized-iraq-war-even-knowing-what-we-know-now?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150511

Jeb Bush is really trying to convince people to vote for him.

Isn't this textbook neoconservative shit, ie "never admit errors or mistakes because that would display weakness." Mandark explain.

edit: maybe not!
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeb-bush-misheard-iraq-question-navarro


maybe Ronito is right afterall.

[I'm a Puppy!]

"I didn't know he had a hearing impairment and we pray for his swift recovery," Begala said.

[Steve Contra]

Pay attention to David Brooks brehs

[Brehvolution]

It's still better that Brooks be writing this con fan fiction than articles praising Romney for jobs, economy, and lowering gas prices.

[Kara]

We going to pretend the electoral left hasn't had a policy idea more evolved than "conservatism with a human face" since Rudolf Meidner?

Progressivism now simply means you don't believe in denying civil rights to people because your gods hate them or they make you feel icky.

[Phoenix Dark]

I was watching a Reagan documentary on PBS last night and couldn't help but think good lord we dodged a bullet in 2012. Say what you will about Obama but nothing would be worse than decades of myth making over a President Romney after he took credit for the recovery, lowered gas prices, etc.

Though my biggest takeaway from the doc was that Arthur Laffer is a complete fucking sleazeball. I've read some of his stuff and was familiar with his bullshit but good lord, hearing him talk and explain trickle down economics.

[Phoenix Dark]

Dunno breh. I've laughed at the Laffer curve for years but seeing the man actually explain it on camera was like seeing a man explain that Santa Claus is real.

[Human Snorenado]

DEMS IN DISARRAY, TPP FAILS

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/12/politics/free-trade-fast-track-vote/index.html

[Phoenix Dark]

Good.

Gotta say Obama's tit for tat with Warren over this has been ugly to watch. Is this some attempt to triumph "taking on extremists...in both parties!" bipartisanship bullshit? I don't see any merit in trying to win democrat votes by attacking your own party and dismissing the concerns of people who voted for you.

[Kara]

No, there's more to it.

- Healthcare security for all citizens
- Actively attempt to prevent potentially catastrophic climate change
- Cut incarceration rates

Those are a few of the big ones.

The ACA is textbook conservatism with a human face, how much Victorian notions of charity can one law contain? We live a far-right shithole so it's easy to forget that.

Climate change, do you mean like cap and trade? Using the market to solve problems it created is not progressive. "Don't pollute because I said so," (mandated emissions reductions) is Leviathanesque as well.

Ending moral criminality falls within the parameters I supplied.

[Mandark]

What does leftist environmentalism look like?

[Steve Contra]

Dirty ineffectual hippies

[Phoenix Dark]

What does leftist environmentalism look like?

Al Gore on a private jet?
:lenowned

[Steve Contra]

To be honest I don't what leftist environmentalism looks like, because environmentalism is merely a cause of one specific set of leftists, but it's in opposition to so many of the stated gains that it's really it's own thing.

[Mandark]

You're having two different conversations.  When you say "conservatism" you mean modern American movement conservatism, and point out that the two major parties would enact some different policies.  When Kara uses the word, he means a much more longstanding attitude that entrenches the power of capital and its attendant institutions and provides the relatively narrow bounds of what's possible in electoral politics.  Hence the qualifier "with a human face."

Of course I'm putting words in both your mouths, but that's how I'm reading it.

[benjipwns]

In his memoir, Decision Points, W. wrestled with the dilemma of his decision to start a war on the basis of bad intelligence. Only W. did not call the intelligence “faulty,” as Jeb had. W. called the intelligence “false.”

“The reality was that I had sent American troops into combat based in large part on intelligence that proved false,” George W. Bush wrote.

Even though W. still argued that the world is “undoubtedly safer” without Saddam Hussein, he knew the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction that he used to justify the invasion was “a massive blow to our credibility—my credibility—that would shake the confidence of the American people.”

“I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it,” George W. Bush wrote. “I still do.”

cmon Jeb 

[Phoenix Dark]

Jeb just being loyal.

[Barry Egan]

It Begins

[benjipwns]

Polling firms should run interesting questions not useless ones this far out from an election. I'd like to see GOP primary polls with George W. Bush as an option for example, and Democratic ones with Bill Clinton/Al Gore/John Kerry/Barack Obama/John Edwards. (Alone vs. Hillary and the "field" and also two or more vs. Hillary and the "field.")

I imagine W. Bush would get a 20-25% plurality in most of them, but the Democratic ones would be a bit more unpredictable probably.

I mean, if they're going to run general election matchups for the next 18 months anyway. They could then throw in some other fantasy ones.

[benjipwns]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/241887-white-house-expects-apology-from-democratic-senator-who

The White House on Wednesday said it expects Sen. Sherrod Brown to apologize for calling President Obama’s criticism of Sen. Elizabeth Warren sexist.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest called Brown (D-Ohio) a “stand-up guy” who has worked well with the president in the past.

“I’m confident after he has gotten a chance to take a look at the comments he made yesterday that he’ll find a way to apologize,” Earnest said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

Brown is a chief critic of Obama’s trade agenda, and on Tuesday, he said the president disrespected Warren (D-Mass.), another leading anti-trade Democrat, when he responded to her comments on the issue.

The Ohio senator ripped Obama for calling Warren by her first name.

“A number of those phrases he used, I assume he wished he hadn’t said them because he shouldn’t have said them," Brown told reporters. “I’m not going to get into more details. I think referring to her as first name, when he might not have done that for a male senator, perhaps? I’ve said enough.”

Brown’s criticism was echoed by the National Organization for Women.