Slashdot Mirror

YES.

Higher ups at the DNC proposed and approved a plan to spam Craigslist with sexist fake Trump ads. link

The DNC controls the narrative at NBC News, and scolds their anchors whenever the Hillary coverage isn't positive enough. link

The DNC has off the record meetings with multiple media groups - leaks anti-Sanders propaganda to them. link

DNC details their underhanded plans to attack Sanders' Jewish religion. Why they're attacking their own candidate during a primary, you can only come to one conclusion. link

I know it's embarrassing to you when the head of the Democrat party, in her role as the Speaker Of The House and the person who is completely in charge of the legislative agenda surrounding the bill in question gets up at her podium in an official press event and says that to you and me and everyone else on video ... I know you find that awkward.

Find what awkward? Your continuing decision to lie about it?

No, nor more than I do the lies about Shirley Sherrod.

Nothing awkward for me. It's curious that you bother, but not awkward for me.

Why would you think that? Are you somehow confused about what words mean, or do you just have no understanding of people's actual feelings?

If anything, every time somebody brings it up, I know it means they have nothing of substance to actually say.

I suppose I might feel chagrin though, that instead of healthy discussion and debate, we get lies.

And I understand that your instinctive liberal reaction is to wish the facts away so that you can pretend the person in charge of the congressional process of writing and handling that bill didn't actually say those words and cheerfully in many other settings convey the same sentiment. I know you wish that hadn't happened. But lazily attacking the person who reminds you of that, doesn't that ever get to you? Don't you ever wince when you try that craven bit of juvenile ad hominen in an effort to alter reality?

You're expecting me to put much effort into it, when it's been a debunked story known for years?

You might as well expect me to care about Romney's claim about an "act of terror" in the presidential debates.

But seriously, you've got nothing but ad hominem, that's why you can't defend your own words or ideas, but have to offer lies.

I know, you want us all to believe that you consider the Congressional Record to be a concoction.

Oh, you want to know who edited the Congressional Record? But I guess if you don't intend to make factual statements, you wouldn't want them to be kept.

The question is, who do you think is so dumb that they'll fall for your lazy attempt to distract? The bill in question was a disaster from conception to execution. The principal players involved in ramming it through knew that, lied about it repeatedly, and are well aware of the damage it would do and has done. Just like you. You will now once again try to tap-dance around the actual facts on the ground, and try some more childish foot-stomping. Carry on!

You're the one not talking about an actual bill, or offering a countering proposal, but spending a considerable amount of effort to belabor us with nothing more than an empty, long-discredited, shameful attempt at castigating Nancy Pelosi for a speech that you so desperately need to take out of context.

Unfortunately for you, the real speech can be read, go ahead, take your time:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered a speech this morning at the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties (NACo). This year marks the 75th anniversary of the organization. Below are the Speaker’s remarks:

“Thank you, President Valerie Brown [of Sonoma County, Calif.] Don’t we all take pride in Valerie Brown recently being named County Official of the Year for her advocacy on behalf of all of America’s counties? Thank you, Valerie. Her

http://mediatrackers.org/wisco...
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news...
http://www.campusreform.org/?I...
http://www.mediaite.com/online...
http://taxprof.typepad.com/tax...
http://www.climatedepot.com/20...
http://freebeacon.com/issues/s...
http://overlawyered.com/2015/0...
http://legalinsurrection.com/2...
http://dailycaller.com/2014/03...

Are you saying FBI Director did not recommend prosecution because he did not think DoJ would prosecute

That is, how FBI's statement is worded. The real reason, of course, was a polite request from the White House. Clintons and Obamas hate each other and that's why the investigation was allowed to proceed as far as it did.

But, without any other credible options for Democrats come November, Obama held his nose and asked (ordered?) the FBI to stop it... For the good of the Party.

Couldnt he have just recommended prosecution and lay the blame on the DoJ then? Am I missing something?

He likely wanted to, but that was not deemed good enough for the ruling Democrats. Loretta Lynch is already known as a highly partisan figure in cahoots with Clintons. So Comey was asked to lend his credibility to the cause.

The entire Federal government is now pulling for Hillary — not only because she is the Government Party's candidate, but because she is a vindictive bitch — another fact known since the 1990ies. If she prevails and becomes President, those who opposed her will find themselves rather inconvenienced. Whereas if Trump wins, nothing bad will happen — Comey, for example, will likely retain his job.

As someone mentioned to me, this current election is between a grandma that can't figure out her email, and a grandpa that believes everything he reads on Facebook.

Let me first say that I do regard Sanders as the ...

Sanders is the grandpa that can't even get your name right.

The FBI has enough evidence that they believe is cause for an indictment. The Department of Justice is just sitting on it and not pursuing the indictment.

That is not true at all apparently. The FBI has found "no criminal wrongdoing". The Justice Department isn't sitting on anything because so far there is nothing to sit on. While the investigation goes on, so far it is much ado about (almost) nothing.

The whole thing is sleazy and it's showing just how incestuous DC can be.

Sleazy politicians? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you... [/sarcasm]

Don't you watch Fox News? Their lawyer guests agreed Clinton didn't break any laws. They said that last month on a program, and to a viewing audience, that is not supportive of the Clinton campaign.

So keep huffing and puffing, maybe something besides gas and poo will eventually come out of there.

Oh, well! If a group of TV pundits say it's OK, that should put the matter to rest.

Don't you watch Fox News? Their lawyer guests agreed Clinton didn't break any laws. They said that last month on a program, and to a viewing audience, that is not supportive of the Clinton campaign.

So keep huffing and puffing, maybe something besides gas and poo will eventually come out of there.

a gay man is XY, has male body parts, and self-identifies as male

Ah, so the chromosomes and the body parts do play their part. Very good... Unfortunately, you chose to add the "self-identification" part into it too — despite my warning against it.

Because, if — as logical consistency demands — we take your approach to other cases of delusion, we'll have to agree, that this White woman is not White, and this human is not human. They both do not identify as what they appear, and thus — by your definition — are not that... (Not to mention the various other sufferers, who similarly "self-identify as" Napoleon Bonaparte and similar figures.)

Having thus shown your approach as self-inconsistent, I don't even need to creatively redefine, what "winning an argument" means — nor claim to identify as victor in this little debate of ours. I simply am. Remember to logout.

I did invent it.

Thank you for this admission. But we are still conversing in English and reinventing terms to mean something new is not acceptable.

There are simply men and women. If, despite having been born with distinctive genitalia, someone considers himself to be of the opposite sex, then they suffer from a delusion:

a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary

My recent argument with one such person ended, when I asked him to define terms: what is the definition of the term "man"?

If you choose to reply to this, be sure to include your definition. And, no, do not try to imply some difference between "sex" and "gender" — they are synonyms (except when talking about grammar rules).

And, no, contrasting what you are vs. how you identify is bullshit too — unless you are prepared to treat this human as a cat, and this White woman as Black.

or a cookie

You have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

This is what the Republican Party had to say about the 2012 election. Read it. Educate yourself.

http://goproject.gop.com/rnc_growth_opportunity_book_2013.pdf

And you demonstrate your ignorance every time you post, yet like the idiot you are, you just keep at it.

I love trolling the trolls on Slashdot.

it's not as if other republicans haven't noticed something odd...
"Republicans have to stop buying into things that demonize the president. I mean, why aren't Republican leaders shouting out about all this birther nonsense and all these other things? They should speak out. This is the kind of intolerance that I've been talking about where these idiot presentations continue to be made and you don't see the senior leadership of the party say, 'No, that's wrong.' In fact, sometimes by not speaking out, they're encouraging it. And the base keeps buying the stuff. "And it's killing the base of the party. I mean, 26 percent favorability rating for the party right now. It ought to be telling them something. So, instead of attacking me or whoever speaks like I do, look in the mirror and realize, 'How are we going to win the next election?" -Colin Powell, 2013 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po...
"The GOP “still looks down on minorities,” Powell said. He slammed Sarah Palin‘s “shuck and jive” comments from last year about President Obama and criticized Republican’s use of the word “lazy” to describe the president. “Why do senior Republican leaders tolerate this kind of discussion within the party?” he asked." -Colin Powell, 2015 http://www.mediaite.com/tv/col...
"Let me just be candid: My party is full of racists," Col. Lawrence Wilkerson said Friday on MSNBC's "The Ed Show." "And the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander in chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin. And that’s despicable." https://www.washingtonpost.com...
"The Republican Party and the conservatives have shown very little interest in black Americans and have actually done things to leave the impression among blacks that they are antagonistic to their interests. Even as someone who's labeled a conservative --I'm a Republican I'm black, I'm heading up this organization in the Reagan administration--I can say that conservatives don't exactly break their necks to tell blacks that they're welcome." -Clarence Thomas 1987 http://reason.com/archives/198...
"The party must follow Governor Bush's lead and reach out to minority communities and particularly the African-American community -- and not just during an election-year campaign," General Powell said pointedly. "It must be a sustained effort. It must be every day. It must be for real." He did not spare the party for its record on affirmative action. There was "cynicism in the black community," he said, because "some in our party miss no opportunity to roundly and loudly condemn affirmative action that helped a few thousands black kids get an education." But, he added, "hardly a whimper is heard from them over affirmative action for lobbyists who load our federal tax codes with preferences for special interests." -Colin Powell 2000

I don't see anyone claiming Hillary is literally going to be Hitler. I don't see anyone saying that about Bernie either.

Actually, lots of right-wing figures are saying it.

Disgraced televangelist Jim Bakker has said that Bernie Sanders is "going to be like Hitler". Not that Bakker is a reputable source by any stretch, but he's said it. Bakker said that Sanders’ support from young people proves that the U.S. is transforming into Nazi Germany.

“One of the most popular politicians right now is a socialist,” Bakker said. “And who is his biggest following? The young people of America, from the colleges. Maybe you understand a little bit what it felt like to live when Hitler was reigning and the church had to sit by and keep watching it and watching until millions, tens of millions — they had to build factories to kill people. All it takes is a couple bombs and all of America will be dead within a year, less than a year, just months.”

---------

Also, earlier this month, the conservative National Review’s Kevin Williamson drove a steamroller over this line in the sand. Williamson’s article, “Bernie’s Strange Brew of Nationalism and Socialism,” which was published two weeks ago but became available on the conservative magazine’s website on Monday, is not a model of clarity. It bounces between criticism of Democratic presidential candidate and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ trade policies and quotes from some of Sanders’ least thoughtful supporters. Yet, as the title of the article suggests, Williamson does come to a bold conclusion — Bernie Sanders is a literal Nazi who is leading a literal Nazi movement in the United States.

Williamson lays this thesis out in one paragraph:
"In the Bernieverse, there’s a whole lot of nationalism mixed up in the socialism. He is, in fact, leading a national-socialist movement, which is a queasy and uncomfortable thing to write about a man who is the son of Jewish immigrants from Poland and whose family was murdered in the Holocaust. But there is no other way to characterize his views and his politics."

---------

Conspiratorial right-wing radio host backing frontrunner Donald Trump’s campaign, Alex Jones, is comparing Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders to Hitler and calling for violent attacks against his supporters. Alex Jones’ boosterism of Trump has turned to a violent obsession with one Democratic candidate and a determined campaign to smear “Creature Bernie Sanders.”

“This is the most gang mentality, dumbed-down, it’s like, ‘We want to elect Hitler, he says he’ll invade France and give us free stuff,'” Jones ranted about the Sanders campaign last week.

Jones has described Sanders as “a hardcore commie who wants to put me in a forced relocation camp like Mao Zedong”:

---------

Jason Villalba, the Republican state representative from Texas’ 114th district in Dallas County, recently tweeted an image comparing Bernie Sanders‘ professed Democratic socialism to World War II-era Nazism. Accompanying the tweet’s text was an image comparing Sanders’ Democratic socialism to Adolft Hilter‘s Nazism. http://www.mediaite.com/online...

--------

So yes, there are people saying "Bernie is the next Hitler". They may be cranks, but they are saying it and they're saying it loudly and proudly. They're not hinting about it, they're declaring it with certainty.

Are you kidding... for a free blowjob, I'd vote for someone...

This is disgusting. I mean, do you really want a blowjob by Trump?

How about from his daughter? Seems even The Donald, himself, would go for that - you know, if she wasn't his daughter.

"I saw thousands cheering in the streets"

Funny, I saw it on TV too, it just so happened to be occurring in the middle east.

"80% murdered by..."

Not sure what you are talking about there...

"According to Bob the Border Guard, those sneaking in are mostly criminals..."

No, it wasn't Bob the border guard, it was Fusion, a Univision owned magazine's article.

http://www.mediaite.com/online...

But don't let the facts get in the way of your dialog. Oh, and did you know, Hillary and Trump are good friends, your candidate is just as much pro business!

It captures what's going on frequently enough that it's causing problems for everyone

One's generalization is another's stereotyping. Fuck you and your White tears!

Lrnu, V'z gebyyvat.

Lets start with the four mentioned ... Mkay?

http://www.mediaite.com/online...

As the article suggested, if just having your name and email address on a "free to sign up" website database, then Barack Obama was trying to cheat on his wife at Ashley Madison.

But it is much easier to get people to spread the lies, than it is to actually verify them. Just accuse, and disseminate the lies and as Harry Reid says about his lying "It worked".

This is why I can't stand many progressives, they don't care about the truth, only the narrative they are promoting. "It was a YouTube Video"

"HP Is Now Two Companies. How Did It Get Here?"

Two words: Carly Fiorina.

I know people throw around the term psychopath in connection with CEO character a lot but in this case, she absolutely ticks off the boxes, including :

PATHOLOGICAL LYING

Carly Fiorina Makes a Lot of Stuff Up About Everything

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...

CONNING AND MANIPULATIVENESS

"..the thing that comes through clearest is this almost, if we werenâ(TM)t on TV, Iâ(TM)d say almost psychopathic denial of reality. As you saw, even the creators of that hoax Planned Parenthood video, that even they say that this is not the footage that she says it isâ¦when she was national finance chairman for McCain, she was jousting with him, what his positions are on contraceptives, trying to contradict him in real time. It was very bizarre.

Or saying that he is not equipped to be the CEO of a corporation, but he could be the commander in chief while sheâ(TM)s helping to run his campaign, and then denying she said it when it was on tapes everywhere.

This is like, she stomps her feet and demands that black is white, hot is cold, and rich is poor and wins are losses.â

âoeâ¦Many great leaders failed. but their resilience came from exoneration or contrition. She just stomps her feet and demands redemption. You have to earn redemption.â

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-...

LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT

Wallace: âoeWhat about the 30,000 American jobs that you laid off?â

Fiorina: âoeYou know, every family and every business in California knows what it means to go through tough times. And every family is cutting back, and every business is laying off right now. I donâ(TM)t say that with delight. I say that with sorrow. But yes, it is true that jobs are being taken out of California. By the way, China fights harder for our jobs than we do.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-...

SHALLOW AFFECT / CALLOUSNESS / LACK OF EMPATHY

As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina laid off 18,000 workers. When reflecting on her tenure, she admitted she wished she had "done them all faster."
Fiorina Fired At Least 18,000 HP Employees

POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS / IMPULSIVITY

According to those who work with her, she has a barely stifled impulsivity towards make deeply personal and alienating remarks to others, and for no real reason :

She once ridiculed the music interests and appearance of a dissenting board member Walter Hewitt, son of HPâ(TM)s co-founderâ"as well as the allegedly dowdy look of rival Senate candidate Barbara Boxer.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazi...

a trait she *barely* has under control as evidenced by this live mic "accident" .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

IRRESPONSIBILITY

"....She makes irresponsible decisions. At HP, Fiorina abruptly pivoted from a strategy of chasing IT services to a splashier, but less sound strategy of ramping up in device manufacturing.

While her predecessor, revered HP CEO Lew Platt, traveled coach in commercial planes, she demanded the company buy her a Gulfstream IV. More recently, her service on the Taiwan Semiconductor board indicates continued irresponsibility. Financial disclosures at the time Fiorina left the board in 2009 show that she attended just 17 percent of the companyâ(TM)s board meetings."

"HP Is Now Two Companies. How Did It Get Here?"

Two words: Carly Fiorina.

I know people throw around the term psychopath in connection with CEO character a lot but in this case, she absolutely ticks off the boxes, including :

PATHOLOGICAL LYING

Carly Fiorina Makes a Lot of Stuff Up About Everything

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...

CONNING AND MANIPULATIVENESS

"..the thing that comes through clearest is this almost, if we werenâ(TM)t on TV, Iâ(TM)d say almost psychopathic denial of reality. As you saw, even the creators of that hoax Planned Parenthood video, that even they say that this is not the footage that she says it isâ¦when she was national finance chairman for McCain, she was jousting with him, what his positions are on contraceptives, trying to contradict him in real time. It was very bizarre.

Or saying that he is not equipped to be the CEO of a corporation, but he could be the commander in chief while sheâ(TM)s helping to run his campaign, and then denying she said it when it was on tapes everywhere.

This is like, she stomps her feet and demands that black is white, hot is cold, and rich is poor and wins are losses.â

âoeâ¦Many great leaders failed. but their resilience came from exoneration or contrition. She just stomps her feet and demands redemption. You have to earn redemption.â

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-...

LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT

Wallace: âoeWhat about the 30,000 American jobs that you laid off?â

Fiorina: âoeYou know, every family and every business in California knows what it means to go through tough times. And every family is cutting back, and every business is laying off right now. I donâ(TM)t say that with delight. I say that with sorrow. But yes, it is true that jobs are being taken out of California. By the way, China fights harder for our jobs than we do.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-...

SHALLOW AFFECT / CALLOUSNESS / LACK OF EMPATHY

As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina laid off 18,000 workers. When reflecting on her tenure, she admitted she wished she had "done them all faster."
Fiorina Fired At Least 18,000 HP Employees

POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS / IMPULSIVITY

According to those who work with her, she has a barely stifled impulsivity towards make deeply personal and alienating remarks to others, and for no real reason :

She once ridiculed the music interests and appearance of a dissenting board member Walter Hewitt, son of HPâ(TM)s co-founderâ"as well as the allegedly dowdy look of rival Senate candidate Barbara Boxer.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazi...

a trait she *barely* has under control as evidenced by this live mic "accident" .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

IRRESPONSIBILITY

"....She makes irresponsible decisions. At HP, Fiorina abruptly pivoted from a strategy of chasing IT services to a splashier, but less sound strategy of ramping up in device manufacturing.

While her predecessor, revered HP CEO Lew Platt, traveled coach in commercial planes, she demanded the company buy her a Gulfstream IV. More recently, her service on the Taiwan Semiconductor board indicates continued irresponsibility. Financial disclosures at the time Fiorina left the board in 2009 show that she attended just 17 percent of the companyâ(TM)s board meetings."

Rand Paul 11 hour speech against patriot act renewal http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Rand Paul swipes against GOP on another Iraq war http://www.mediaite.com/tv/pau...

I can't think of a valid reason an individual LEO should be allowed control of an individual self-driving vehicle, ever. There is simply too much potential for abuse.

I got one, the split second that one of the following is threatened or harmed by an auto-drive vehicle, a baby / elderly person / politician / some move star / etc., is when some group will DEMAND from on high that an officer can do just that. That occurrence is a matter of when not if. (Remember it only has to APPEAR that way on the 6'o clock news for people to be fooled in the US.)

If you think that will have some logistic problem, forget about it. The very nature of the current auto-drive systems as you have pointed out are centralized. Once the appropriate legislation has passed, all it will take is some cop on the road with a tablet or smartphone to push a button and whelp looks like you need to buy some tickets now......

The real scary thing is what happens to that auto drive system's security when that legislation passes. Any cop that needs to access it will probably not be using 2 factor authentication to do so. (That might cause a waste of time and LIVES to be lost!) Given that possibility, I'm sure that the adage around Slashdot about some hacker on an overpass will come true, as will any terrorist group or sociopath's dreams of killing unsuspecting people at the push of a button. May you live in interesting times.......

Sadly we seem to be on a never ending roller coaster of bad ideas when it comes to connecting things to the net, and I don't see it changing anytime soon. I do know one thing though, if the damn auto-drive vehicles become mandatory I'll be walking or biking instead.

Yes, you're both the /. elites, only you two understand how the world works, and if anyone has other ideas, you're there to snark them down.

I know a little bit.

I'm focusing in on those people that were harmed by "reform". Here we are at the end of hope and change and health insurance costs more than ever and for a lot of people, it comes with more exclusions.

Yeah, and every time one of th smart people try to ope up venues to sharehow the magic negro and his hordes of Kenyan communists have completely wrecked the country with their death panels meting out punishment to 99 percent of us......

They don't get that. They don't get the response they want. More like they get people who are happy that they are getting healthcare.

Republican heart and soul, Canadian Theodore Cruz, the man responsible for such a vehement hate for Obamacare, that he purposely shut the country's governement down:

http://www.mediaite.com/online... Cathy McMorris Rogers:

https://politicalfails.wordpre...

Here is an actual story of a cofirmed Obama hater, who knew that this obamacare is the worst thing that ever happened. My wife's boss.

His wife had breast cancer, and he had a blood clotting problem. She was in remission, would appear by this time, cured, and he'sdoing well.

Oh, but that insurance. His proper insurance provided by American insurance companies with the fair and balanced plans was ratcheted up - three times in one year alone, eventually raised to about 4000 a month. And he and his wife were now stuck. No good old fashioned American upward mobility, because once they defaulted or tried to get a new policy was denied this American - no one would insure them. At all - preexisting conditions, you know.

And I'm not certain the Republicans would want to tell a long time supporter to "die quickly".

Today, he has quietly switched to Obamacare, is paying a fuckton less money for healthcare. And by the way, Ted Cruz and his family? On Obamacare. The only ones benefiting are the ones getting a full or partial free ride.

I love this myth from the know-it-alls that the poor are left with just the ER or they die in the gutter. There are local public health clinics. There are services for the poor at many major hospitals or other health care centers.

Great bolshy yarblockos. This myth you speak of. There are a lot of Doctors at emergency rooms that differ from your "experience" . Perhaps it's because they see the poor come in everyday. And then you really step in it by this pearl of wisdom repeated again because it's worth repeating.:

"There are services for the poor at many major hospitals or other health care centers."

"There are services for the poor at many major hospitals or other health care centers."

No shit Sherlock. It's those emergency rooms you declare are only used by people with actual emergencies . And guess who pays for that in the end......

Regradless, in the last year of my father's life back in 2011, we were graced with several emergency room visits. In each visit, there were quite a few people there who were by general appearance, obviously not from the higher socioeconomic classes. Most of them looked healthy, other than minor things, or a child with a cold or something. In talking with one of the ER room doctors, I asked about them. "Those are the poor uninsured" and he explained how they didn't have regular doctors, and with no insurance, they used the emergency room for general medicine. I noted that must be a nuisance, and he noted that they were getting the world's most expensive health care for things like an earache. And that the cos

This is hilarious, it was quite obvious that you only read the first paragraph article you cited... and now you didn't even read the first paragraph of what I last cited, allow me to demonstrate. You claim:

State may have them. Nobody knows except the State Department.

Except that's not what the State Department has said, to quote the last article I cited (and the first paragraph no less):

The State Department said Thursday that it could not locate “all or part” of 15 e-mails provided last week to the House Select Committee on Benghazi by Sidney Blumenthal from his exchanges with then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Still not convinced? Why not consult a whole number of articles from various sources which report the same thing?

http://news.yahoo.com/state-de...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/15...
http://www.nbcnews.com/politic...
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/...
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/26...
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sta...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes...

Noticing a trend yet?

Thus, your claim that we know she didn't turn over all of the emails is false. The State Department might have them, they might not.

So you are calling the professionals at the State Department and national archives incompetent because they cannot adequately locate these documents they may or may not have? Riiight. Occam's Razor would seem to apply.

You're misunderstanding the quote. According to them the information should have been deemed confidential.

On the contrary, I understand it quite well (as unlike you I've spent some time reading on this subject. Failing to set the 'classified' flag on an email doesn't change whether it is actually classified or not, it simply flags it for filtering & handling... not unlike putting "ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED" in a subject line of an email. It's the content that matters, not the subject of flags.

It wasn't, though. That means there is no proof that she sent material that was, at the time it was sent, deemed classified.

Again... that's not what the IGs (two of them) have said. Though even your use of the term 'proof' is laughable. The intelligence agencies do not deal in proof the way the rest of us do, but in terms of probability. And the IGs have determined it is very probable that classified information that Hillary had access to is not in the control of the government due to her. That's the first step to opening a criminal investigation which will hopefully lead to a trial and proof that even you would accept.

Say hi to President Sanders for me.

Non-black people are attacked by police every day.

Really? You see any riot police in paramilitary gear in the below pictures? Any white "thugs" getting shot in the back while running away? Hell, if you're white, you don't even have to run away. White guys have walked into movie theaters armed like Rambo and murdered a bunch of people in cold blood and the police take them alive and make sure they don't bump their head on the cruiser door when placing them in the back seat.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...

https://www.google.com/search?...

You can not possibly believe that interactions between police and white people are anything like interactions between police and black people or hispanic people. Let me ask you this: You hear about any white people who have been shot and killed in police custody with their hands handcuffed behind their back?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_new...

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/in...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/vid...

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

I'm going to leave this here for anyone who is curious about the real context of the quote you delight in repeating. It's not stupid when read in context.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the...

Just in case that comment is taken as hyperbole, the video of Walter Scott's shooting was released only BECAUSE of police corruption. The officer lied, and the department backed him.

http://www.mediaite.com/online...

Build-a-Wall: that is stupid. it didnt work in berlin, it didnt work in china, it doesnt work in Israel

You seem to think, that if the wall fails to prevent all trespass, it may as well not exist at all. This is profoundly wrong.

Contrary to your unsubstantiated statements, the wall did work in Berlin:

It was a desperate – and effective - move by the GDR (German Democratic Republic) to stop East Berliners escaping from the Soviet-controlled East German state into the West of the city

and still works in Israel:

Opponents of the wall grudgingly acknowledge that it's been effective in stopping bombers

A wall around my property is also working very nicely, thank you very much, as is one around the White House and other numerous installations world-wide, both private and public — fence-builders are not out of business, are they?

It didn't do much for China, because walls by themselves aren't enough — an unattended and unpatrolled border will be breached — but it still slows an invasion down and makes the defenders' (if there are any!) job easier.

One has to try real hard to get more wrong than you just did, congratulations...

Did not violate any rules regarding email retention

Yes, she did. It may not have been against the law just yet, but it was certainly against the State Department's own rules already.

The stupid arrangement left communications of the top American diplomat vulnerable — something Russia and other enemies would be happy to exploit on any day, but fine, a President is not supposed to be proficient in communication security.

But we should discard public servants at the first sign of hypocrisy — and that's exactly, what's on display here. And here...

Did what every other Secretary of State did in regards to email.

Citations needed.

Hillary is not a bad choice.

Lovers gonna love.

what are we better than? the truth?

the GOP is the party of stupid. who said that?

the GOP said that:

http://thehill.com/video/in-th...

you haven't noticed a connection between incredibly ignorant, antiscience statements and the GOP? oh i'm sure you can find a democrat who said something stupid. and i can find ten republicans for every one odd democrat

do you want to bet on that?

let me get started:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep...

http://www.scientificamerican....

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08...

that's off the top of my head

how many more do you want?

tell me how we are one iota better off today with the democrat in the White House.

Your justifiable disappointment in both parties leads you to renouncing both of them equally, which is not justifiable in the slightest.

Had a Republican won, we would've still been capturing enemies to be held in Guantanamo — instead of simply killing them. Osama bin Laden would've been on trial, rather than fallen victim to extrajudicial killing .

Putin would not have dared to invade Ukraine. Gaddafi — who has made amends with US after seeing the capture of Saddam Hussein on TV — would've remained in charge of Lybia, instead of that country plunging into chaos. We wouldn't have left Iraq in such haste, which would've kept ISIS in check.

Domestically we would not have had the grossly unpopular Obamacare forced upon us with such vigor, most people — proponents and detractors alike — could not even understand the proposed law before the voting took place.

Republicans and Democrats are an inbred family, sleeping together for the past three generations.

Though the less principled "centrists" or "pragmatists" of the two parties do meet in the middle like stalactites and stalagmites, as those geological phenomena they too come from opposite ends.

It was either this guy or this guy.

I Prefer to Die Standing Up than Live on My Knees

(this and other interesting comments in that article)

Dogs are the best self-defence weapon.

Apparantly not if you happen to be the secret service.

I'm going to wager that you didnt watch Cosmos did you? He presented probably the simplest most accessbile explanation posssible.
Here's a good link to the clip: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nei...
That or you still dont understand the concept of averages.

It's not that "climate != weather"
It's that climate = sum(weather) / (time*area)
IE, climate is the average of weather over time or a region or both.

hurricane, tornado, drought, and heat wave to global warming?

Do those thing represent one day of local weather, or large events on large scales that last a long time?
I'll break it down for you again, and ignore your attempt to put words in my mouth, and then tell me how I'm wrong.

-Weather is what's ouside your window. It's what's happening right now. In a very small time scale, in a very small regional-scale. Local, short term observations.
-Climate is a whole bunch of those local observations strung together. It's a very large time scale, on a very large regional-scale.

Hurricanes are a climatological event that produce extreme weather (wind, rain). They are spawned by climatological factors, but grow and self-reinforce on a large scale and themselves grow to affect climate (in a way they give vent to rather large pent up energies). Tornadoes are a weather event, but the supercells that form them are themselves driven by climate trends. A heat wave is a string of related weather events. It may be localized or cover a large area, but being a string of related weather events again points more to the climate side of the scale. Droughts again: large scale, long term, climate.

In the case of AGW those scales are a) global, and b) range from a couple centuries, to several My depending on which line of evidence you're looking at.
It was unusually cold in New England this winter. That's weather. But overall, this winter was still one of the 5 warmest on record. That's climate.

All these things are interwoven together. Ocean currents, the jet stream, warm/cold water layer mixing, warm/cold air mixing, humidity, water/air temperature gradients...all these things combine and interact to create the global climate which you see on a daily basic as weather. If an ocean current shifts it can reduce cloud formation lowering the water content of an air mass and increasing the radiative heating of the land surface immediately inland. these combined factors can lead to a lack of rainfall and/or increase in temperates. IE, drought and/or heat wave. In Cali's case, the Sierra range normally causes some preciptation as the air mass moves eastward, trapping it as snowpack, which then feeds water over the year into the arid region we know as the Central Valley. its what allows an arid region to also be good farmland inspite of its aridity. this year, there wasnt even enough moisture in the air for the mountains to squeeze any out.

The polar vortex happened because something pushed the normal wind pattern out of shape. it allowed a large mass of unusually cool air to penetrate south a long ways. The reverse also happened: a large mass of warm moist air pushed much north than normal, leading to increased temperatures in the North Pacific and Alaska, and parts of western Canada. Some climatalogical event altered the normal roughly stable route of the vortex. The vortex itself then affects large scale climate effects and drives local extreme weather.

See, the mistake here that denier consistently make is in thinking that this is a basic input output machine. It's not. It's a web of interconnected loops. Every output is the input to another stage in the machine, and every stage of the machine is linked to every other stage. Everything is in a feedback loop to something else.

Woe if you post any significant segment of a US football game.

Yes, even posting a single second of those 11 minutes could land you in jail!

Oh, OK, the companies are EVIL, but they're also really stupid, right?

Sir, I point you to "business moguls" the George W. Bush the Misunderestimated, Donald "Nobody knows why there are 13 strips on the American Flag" Trump, or maybe Robert "Bodycount is a great metric" McNamara.

There's a certain irony in the air of superiority that's lost on many.

Yeah, the threat that there might be someone with a gun would sure work as a deterrent for someone who plans to off himself in the end anyway...

Gee, I do wonder why you would use "in the end"...

If their goal were really only to simply "off himself in the end" they wouldn't shoot up schools or movie theaters. He'd just "off himself".

Because even you know it - it's not about "off[ing] himself". You used the term "off himself in the end". The end if WHAT?

Oh yeah, the shooting spree where they're invincibly massacring innocents.

Others being armed prevents that "invincibly massacring innocents" that's the entire point of the "off himself in the end".

Don't think so?

Too bad for you:

The study, “An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates,” conducted by Quinnipiac University economist Mark Gius, examined nearly 30 years of statistics and concluded that stricter gun laws do not result in a reduction in gun violence. In fact, Gius found the opposite – that a proliferation of concealed carry permits can actually reduce incidents of gun crime.

And it's not an isolated study, either::

Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. ...

Go back to Fantasyland.

Sadly, Russia is turning more and more to Soviet ways. Putin was even rehabilitating Stalin.

Putin Reportedly Claims the Dissolution of the Soviet Union May Have Been Illegal

This may not end well.

An appropriate title for this would be "The Empire Strikes Back"

Sadly, Russia is turning more and more to Soviet ways. Putin was even rehabilitating Stalin.

Putin Reportedly Claims the Dissolution of the Soviet Union May Have Been Illegal

This may not end well.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/brilliant-audi-ad-mocking-sochi-olympic-rings-fail-is-probably-fake/

... a stunt meant to punish the mayor of an affected town for opposing his reelection.

It is now suspected that this might not be the motivation for the bridge closure.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maddow-nj-bridge-scandal-was-political-revenge-but-maybe-not-for-the-reason-you-think%E2%80%A6/

It is also interesting that given the amount already spent they still have 60% of the system to build. They don[t have any way to distribute the funds yet , they made the front end without building the parts that would actually pay for the services.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cms-official-60-to-70-of-obamacare-architecture-not-yet-built/

My previous analysis

Simply:

One: Schedule Fail. Compounded by late award of the contracts to develop/influence:

Contracts Awarded Dec 2011

Two: massive requirements base to develop specification for development and implementation: The PPACA was 1800+ pages, and the associated regulations are 10,000+ pages, and are STILL changing. Can't develop without a spec and design, with big parts of requirements still changing.

Three: inadequate testing. The above-referenced link states that security testing BEGAN in August 2013, less than two months before rollout. There's no mention of load testing.
UPDATE: There WAS load testing, Radio reports say it was tested with a 1000-user simultaneous load. EXPECTED was 60K simultaneous users. . .
However, the only CONCRETE numbers I've found say it crashed at several hundred simultaneous users. . . .

Four: Integration issues. The Obamacare Exchange system combines data from numerous agencies and systems, and integrating between them is always a difficult task.

Five: Identity-management. This is in parallel to Integration, somehow all identities need to be federated into a single overarching system.

Twenty-three (now 25) months, even with a top-flight team, would simply not be enough to do this: this is a 5-7 year job. . .

I saw it mentioned this morning on CNN.

So, is this manifesto a good thing or a bad thing?

Yep. That must be why people who watch the Daily Show tend to be better informed on facts regarding current events than people who watch Fox News.

The typical approach is "we need more time/money". And Nancy Pelooney says that the cupboards are dry and there are no more cuts to make. Because obviously the government does not wast money.

Riiiiiiiiight...

I'd venture to say 95% of politicians have lost complete respect for taxpayers' money.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505269_162-57606633/obamacare-website-looks-like-nobody-tested-it-programmer-says/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/some-say-health-care-sites-problems-highlight-flawed-federal-it-policies/2013/10/09/d558da42-30fe-11e3-8627-c5d7de0a046b_story.html?hpid=z3

http://www.elpasotimes.com/politics-national/?third_party=many-tried-to-warn-officials-of-obamacare-website-jam

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/10/09/3-million-obamacare-website-may-face-months-glitches-experts-warn/

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/debbie-wasserman-schultzs-shocking-insufficient-rambling-response-to-msnbc-on-obamacare-enrollees/

First, before anything, let me sincerely thank you for working in the military. I know you could likely get a better job that pays more in the civilian world. I am grateful to all the people who serve or have served in the armed forces.

Now, having said that: It's not the Republicans that are fucking you over. It's the Democrats. And I personally hold President Obama as the most responsible, as "The Buck Stops Here" refers to him right now.

This is the 18th government shutdown. None of the previous 17 have been as viciously handled. Never before has the World War II monument been closed... in the past, signs were put up saying "nobody is on duty here because of shutdown" but now the government erected temporary fences around an open-air area and is paying people to keep our veterans out. Never before have privately-funded historic sites on government land been commanded to close their doors. Never before has the Amber Alert federal website been shut down (while the First Lady's "Let's Move" website is still up). People have been forced out of their homes! And, oh yes, this weekend the President was able to play golf at a golf course on Federal land... that wasn't closed (I guess it is an "essential" golf course).

This administration is determined to make this shutdown as painful as possible for the common people, in hopes that common people will be so clueless that they will blame the Republicans for the pain.

The Republicans in the House are attempting to use the power of the purse, which the Constitution gives to them. The budget situation is FUBAR anyway because the Senate hasn't passed a budget in over four years, despite that being a clear Constitutional duty of the Senate. And the Republicans keep passing bills to fix the worst of the pain: bills to immediately pay soldiers, to let the National Institute of Health look after kids with cancer, etc. And the Republican Party has offered the money to pay for staff at the memorials. All of these offers are rejected by the Democrats... in other words, the Democrats have chosen to keep the pain as high as possible, and you are personally feeling that pain.

The previous shutdowns have pretty much ended in compromise. This time around, President Obama has publicly declared that he will not compromise at all ever, and he and the other top Democrats have used the most incendiary language possible. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/wallace-grills-jack-lew-your-history-is-wrong-obamas-refusal-to-negotiate-unprecedented/

So the Republicans are trying to get a one-year delay in implementing Obamacare. We have Obamacare websites that don't work, we have waivers granted to many large companies, we have a one-year delay in corporate obligations under Obamacare, This thing isn't ready to go. And yet President Obama and the other top Democrats are choosing to maximize the pain of the shutdown while at the same time proclaiming that they will not compromise at all ever.

If the Republicans back down at this point without getting anything, they are screwed several ways. As far as I can tell, this is exactly what President Obama wants. Therefore he wants the common people to feel pain, to blame the Republicans for the pain, and to demand that the Republicans cave. (You may feel that this is over the top. Ask yourself: when was the last time a President tried to talk the stock market DOWN? That's unprecedented but Mr. Obama did it.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-cbs-reporter-margaret-brennan-responsible-for-current-proposal-on-syria/

Is CBS Reporter Margaret Brennan Responsible for Current Proposal on Syria?
by Andrew Kirell | 12:09 pm, September 10th, 2013 VIDEO
  It was one of those moments for which every journalist strives. A simple question posed to a public figure led to a major shift in policy.

When CBS correspondent Margaret Brennan asked Secretary of State John Kerry if there is anything Bashar al-Assad‘s Syrian regime could do or offer that would stop a U.S. military strike, she likely did not expect for Kerry to respond with the “hypothetical” heard ’round the world.

“He could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week,” Kerry responded, seemingly in jest. “Turn it over, all of it, without delay, and allow a full and total accounting for that. But he isn’t about to do it, and it can’t be done, obviously.”

Obviously it can’t be done and is not worth considering, right? After all, the State Department clarified that his statement was a “hypothetical.” Except, later that day, Kerry’s off-the-cuff remark became the foundation for a major Russian proposal: Assad hands over his chemical weapons stockpile to the international community and the U.S. military strikes.

Hours later, President Obama conceded to NBC News that this new Russian proposal-via-offhand-Kerry-remark could represent “a significant breakthrough,” signaling a shift in U.S. policy from trying to obtain congressional approval for military strikes to a U.N. Security Council resolution involving the overturning of chemical weapons.

While major questions remain as to whether Syria could realistically hand over chemical weapons stockpiles while in the midst of a bloody civil war; or whether this proposal represents a stalling by all sides until the next Assad “red line”-crossing; this much is clear: A single question from a tough-minded journalist provoked a bumbling remark from a major policy official — a remark that has, for the time being, significantly altered the course of this ongoing tension and effectively delayed the use of American military assets against the Syrian regime.

Take note, aspiring journalists.

Watch Brennan’s history-making exchange with Kerry below, as captured raw by CNBC:

Let's not forget the earnest young airhead on CNN who asked Bill Nye if the near-earth encounter earlier this year was due to global warming: Bill Nye Vs. the Airhead. Yes, I know it's a right wing news site, and the simple act of viewing it is likely to rot your mind, curve your spine, and bring us (God help us,) peace without honor, but for some strange reason, the links to the event on CNN are no longer working.

American is propaganda. Merely reinforcement of official statement:

Two weeks ago, Schieffer spewed a vicious, one-sided attack on Edward Snowden, accusing him of "putting the nation's security at risk and running away." Echoing Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani, Schieffer added:

I know eleven people who died or lost a member of their family on 9/11. My younger daughter lived in Manhattan then. It was six hours before we knew she was safe. I'm not interested in going through that again. I don't know yet if the government has over-reached since 9/11 to reinforce our defenses, and we need to find out. What I do know, though, is that these procedures were put in place and are being overseen by officials we elected and we should hold them accountable.

"I think what we have in Edward Snowden is just a narcissistic young man who has decided he is smarter than the rest of us. I don't know what he is beyond that, but he is no hero. If he has a valid point -- and I'm not even sure he does -- he would greatly help his cause by voluntarily coming home to face the consequences."

How come you're allowed to have that opinion and be an "objective journalist"? How come none of the people so very upset that those who are reporting on the NSA stories have opinions are objecting to any of that or calling the TV host an "activist"? The answer is clear: "objectivity" in Washington journalism does not mean being free of opinions; it means the opposite: dutifully echoing the official opinions and subjective mindset of those in political power. In the eyes of official Washington and its media mavens, spouting opinions is not a sin. The sin is spouting opinions that deviate from the ones expressed by and which serve the interests of those in power.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/12/michael-hayden-nsa-media-reverence