"Draining the swamp" is a list of five specific policy initiatives about changing the way lobbying works in washington. It has nothing to do with his cabinet appointments. And in your quote he's talking about the use of the phrase "drain the swamp," not about the policies themselves. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/p...
If Trump implements those 5 policies, he will have "drained the swamp." That is all. There's no reason to think he won't implement these policies, because they're pretty simple, and he's not beholden to anyone who benefits from the status quo with regards to lobbying. It's unlikely he'll get Congress to pass laws limiting their ability to become lobbyists in the future, but that could actually work in his favor. He'll have implemented the policies in the executive branch, and then he can scream invective at the legislature for not cleaning up their act in this regard whenever he gets in a fight with them.
But I agree with Trump that use of the phrase was a bad idea, because political opponents who are either lying or uninformed just pretend it means whatever they want, and then swing it around as a rhetorical weapon because whatever it is Trump's doing will never be their made-up definition of "draining the swamp." "OH MY GOD TRUMP DIDN'T APPOINT ANY LESBIAN ESKIMO TRANSMIDGETS TO HIS CABINET HE'S NOT DRAINING THE SWAMP!!!!"
the only way to combat it is by some incorruptible authority guarding against it with an eagle eye, and taking relentless vengeance against it when it does occur.
But incorruptibility is impossible because, as you said, human nature. This is why we have cycles to history. Polybius figured this out a few thousand years ago. A recent retelling is Strauss-Howe Generational Theory. We're in a Turning right now. Trust in individuals is high, trust in institutions is near zero. No one has faith in our government, media, educational system or businesses. So, the people sent Trump to destroy them and take your "relentless vengeance" upon them. Then we'll have to build something new, and it'll be corrupted again in a few generations, and the cycle repeats.
The put the bullshit yardsticks in intentionally. "8 years of experience with MS SQL Server 2014 required." Then they can refuse any American applicant for either not having those qualifications or lying about them, and then hire Habib from Bangalore knowing full well he's lying on his resume.
Whenever any authority says they are in favor of whistleblowers, it's as big a lie as "we support affordable housing".
No, they're not lying. The government is very in favor of whistleblowers who snitch to the government. They think whistleblowers who snitch on the government can get fucked though.
Do you believe in our intelligence community? Big fan of the CIA and the NSA, are ya? Those 3 letter agencies were four letter words on Slashdot before they mumbled something about Trump being bad.
I think you give Russia and China more credit than they're due. Russia has an economy smaller than Spain's, and if China did what you suggest their economy would collapse, too.
That said I agree Obama has been an unmitigated disaster on foreign policy. When the state department is running missile launchers through Libya to jihadis in Iraq which wind up in the hands of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan and shoot down our own helicopters, and then the Pentagon is bombing the same people in Syria that State is arming...it's an incoherent mess. I agreed strongly with Trump's foreign policy speech back in June. Since the Cold War the US has lost its way. We need some honest conversation about what exactly America's ideological interests and goals around the world are.
The Obama administration played critical roles in destabilizing/overthrowing the governments of Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Only Ukraine would I call a "democracy."
I support both Trump and Snowden, but Trump has never had nice things to say about Snowden. Trump is definitely in the "law & order, fuck traitors" camp. Putin gave Snowden asylum to embarrass Obama. I would not be at all shocked if Putin, as a show of good faith in the improving relations between the US and Russia, returned Snowden to his new pal Trump. Snowden needs that pardon from Obama or he's fucked.
I don't understand how Obama could pardon Snowden if he has not actually been convicted of anything to be pardoned for.
Pardons don't work that way. Ford pardoned Nixon, who was never even charged. A Presidential pardon can read "So-and-so is pardoned for any and all crimes they may have committed between the dates of forever ago and now." It's an immensely powerful tool, which is why people are always so critical of abuse of it.
Also I wonder if Putin will rescind Snowden's amnesty. Putin only did it to embarrass Obama. But for his new pal Trump he might very well hand him over. "As a sign of improving relations between our two nations, we are returning this criminal to you that you may serve justice." Snowden needs that pardon, PDQ.
As others have said, no, but to elaborate, you don't even have to be accused. The President can say "Known Nutter is pardoned for any and all crimes that he ever may have committed."
I saw one poll that showed 5% of people who voted for Obama believe he's the anti-Christ. Also, something like 5% of Hillary voters believe she was involved in child sex trafficking at that pizza place. You can find a handful of nutters who believe just about anything you can imagine.
It is only in your narrative that immigrants are like Schroedinger's cat: that somehow they will both adopt our values and not adopt our values at the same time. You aren't alone in this, of course. Plenty of anti-immigrant people also blame immigrants for both taking all the jobs and taking all the welfare (as in, not working) at the same time.
Or perhaps some immigrants will adopt our values, and some will not, and some will take jobs, and some will take welfare?
The only solution to climate change acceptable to the left is "give the government more and power and money," which coincidentally happens to be their overriding goal with everything they do. Not nuclear power, not economic sanctions against polluting nations like China and India, not decreases in immigration to consumer-heavy western nations, not an end to subsidizing the coming African population boom. Why do you suppose that is?
Of course, but I'm an evil right-winger. I thought the Good People (TM) told us the immigrants just want the same opportunities as us and will obviously adopt the values of western liberals, which are universal to all people. All those muslim and mexican migrants are going to become SUV driving doctors and engineers, and that'll kill the planet faster, no?
But their populations continue to increase because of migration. If we're truly facing an end-of-the-world scenario because of climate change, shouldn't we be cutting off immigration from the third world (low carbon footprint) to the first world (high carbon footprint)?
But we can look at the trend and say "gee, there's 20x more events now than there used to be".
About 10 years ago 5 hurricanes hit the southeast in one year and everyone screamed "it's global warming!!!! This is going to happen all the time now!!!" And then pretty much no major hurricanes have hit since.
We know that some things we do can be making things worse, and some things we can do that improve things. Rather than arguing about whether or not the warming is our fault or not, we should be focused on doing what we can to slow or stop it.
Sure, but the political solution offered by the left exempts China and India, so it's all for nothing. Vote Republican and we all die. Vote Democrat and we all die poor. Shrug.
What Mayer needed to do to be successful was to take the talent and the revenue and use it to create an entirely new business.
One can argue Steve Jobs succeeded in doing that, transforming Apple from a failing computer company into a fashionable consumer electronics company that also sold computers. Has anyone else ever suceeded in doing something similar? Usually the company that dominated the old paradigm dies (Blockbuster) and the upstart takes their place (Netflix). The old company doesn't transition to the new paradigm because inertia.
Pulling all of the employees back into the office was part of her strategy for doing that, based on the theory that co-located people are more capable of generating innovative ideas
Even if someone came up with the idea for the next big thing, how do you sell it to the shareholders? "Forget search and email, Yahoo! is now going to sell brain implants!"
I agree with you I don't think it was really possible to save Yahoo. The core business died and I don't think you can just pick a new core business off a shelf.
Well they're talking about the bullet itself here, not the case. Cleaning up brass is easy ("Private, go pick up all that brass on the range.") Digging bullets out of the backstop less so.
When I was a grad student I was sysadmin for my high-performance computing research lab. Every few months we were adding more nodes to our cluster, so I'd be assembling, say, 32 new servers, and invariably we'd get a bad motherboard or something in the mix. Since I've got the guts of 32 identical machines in front of me, it's pretty easy to troubleshoot and figure out what the problem is, but when calling for an RMA you'd still always have to work through the whole tech support script. Thankfully a few of my lab mates were Indian.
Intel: (in heavy Indian accent) "Hello, thank you for calling Intel, this is Josh, how may I help you?"
Me: "Hi, Josh, is it? Please speak to my friend Rajagopal."
And then Raj would rapid fire something in Hindi at "Josh" and we'd get our RMA without the 30 minutes of plodding through the troubleshooting script.
I'm already tech support for my entire family. Now I get to be tech support for their appliances. Every Thanksgiving is going to be "oh, since you're here, can you fix the wifi on the fridge?"
Of course, and I suspect this was largely your point, those people are also not the people who are reflashing the NES.
1. Yes. I think assembling a RetroPie is easier than the instructions for reflashing the NES. You can even buy complete kits off Amazon where all you need to do is snap the Pi into a case.
2. I'm also posting on slashdot, which used to be a website for l33t computer h4xx0r types who would have no problem doing any of this. I didn't think I would need to qualify who the audience for comment was to my audience, I also forgot this is slashdot, where everyone is a pedantic nitwit.
Slashdot Mirror
"Draining the swamp" is a list of five specific policy initiatives about changing the way lobbying works in washington. It has nothing to do with his cabinet appointments. And in your quote he's talking about the use of the phrase "drain the swamp," not about the policies themselves. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/p...
If Trump implements those 5 policies, he will have "drained the swamp." That is all. There's no reason to think he won't implement these policies, because they're pretty simple, and he's not beholden to anyone who benefits from the status quo with regards to lobbying. It's unlikely he'll get Congress to pass laws limiting their ability to become lobbyists in the future, but that could actually work in his favor. He'll have implemented the policies in the executive branch, and then he can scream invective at the legislature for not cleaning up their act in this regard whenever he gets in a fight with them.
But I agree with Trump that use of the phrase was a bad idea, because political opponents who are either lying or uninformed just pretend it means whatever they want, and then swing it around as a rhetorical weapon because whatever it is Trump's doing will never be their made-up definition of "draining the swamp." "OH MY GOD TRUMP DIDN'T APPOINT ANY LESBIAN ESKIMO TRANSMIDGETS TO HIS CABINET HE'S NOT DRAINING THE SWAMP!!!!"
the only way to combat it is by some incorruptible authority guarding against it with an eagle eye, and taking relentless vengeance against it when it does occur.
But incorruptibility is impossible because, as you said, human nature. This is why we have cycles to history. Polybius figured this out a few thousand years ago. A recent retelling is Strauss-Howe Generational Theory. We're in a Turning right now. Trust in individuals is high, trust in institutions is near zero. No one has faith in our government, media, educational system or businesses. So, the people sent Trump to destroy them and take your "relentless vengeance" upon them. Then we'll have to build something new, and it'll be corrupted again in a few generations, and the cycle repeats.
The put the bullshit yardsticks in intentionally. "8 years of experience with MS SQL Server 2014 required." Then they can refuse any American applicant for either not having those qualifications or lying about them, and then hire Habib from Bangalore knowing full well he's lying on his resume.
Whenever any authority says they are in favor of whistleblowers, it's as big a lie as "we support affordable housing".
No, they're not lying. The government is very in favor of whistleblowers who snitch to the government. They think whistleblowers who snitch on the government can get fucked though.
Do you believe in our intelligence community? Big fan of the CIA and the NSA, are ya? Those 3 letter agencies were four letter words on Slashdot before they mumbled something about Trump being bad.
I think you give Russia and China more credit than they're due. Russia has an economy smaller than Spain's, and if China did what you suggest their economy would collapse, too.
That said I agree Obama has been an unmitigated disaster on foreign policy. When the state department is running missile launchers through Libya to jihadis in Iraq which wind up in the hands of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan and shoot down our own helicopters, and then the Pentagon is bombing the same people in Syria that State is arming...it's an incoherent mess. I agreed strongly with Trump's foreign policy speech back in June. Since the Cold War the US has lost its way. We need some honest conversation about what exactly America's ideological interests and goals around the world are.
The Obama administration played critical roles in destabilizing/overthrowing the governments of Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Only Ukraine would I call a "democracy."
I support both Trump and Snowden, but Trump has never had nice things to say about Snowden. Trump is definitely in the "law & order, fuck traitors" camp. Putin gave Snowden asylum to embarrass Obama. I would not be at all shocked if Putin, as a show of good faith in the improving relations between the US and Russia, returned Snowden to his new pal Trump. Snowden needs that pardon from Obama or he's fucked.
I don't understand how Obama could pardon Snowden if he has not actually been convicted of anything to be pardoned for.
Pardons don't work that way. Ford pardoned Nixon, who was never even charged. A Presidential pardon can read "So-and-so is pardoned for any and all crimes they may have committed between the dates of forever ago and now." It's an immensely powerful tool, which is why people are always so critical of abuse of it.
Also I wonder if Putin will rescind Snowden's amnesty. Putin only did it to embarrass Obama. But for his new pal Trump he might very well hand him over. "As a sign of improving relations between our two nations, we are returning this criminal to you that you may serve justice." Snowden needs that pardon, PDQ.
As others have said, no, but to elaborate, you don't even have to be accused. The President can say "Known Nutter is pardoned for any and all crimes that he ever may have committed."
I saw one poll that showed 5% of people who voted for Obama believe he's the anti-Christ. Also, something like 5% of Hillary voters believe she was involved in child sex trafficking at that pizza place. You can find a handful of nutters who believe just about anything you can imagine.
It is only in your narrative that immigrants are like Schroedinger's cat: that somehow they will both adopt our values and not adopt our values at the same time. You aren't alone in this, of course. Plenty of anti-immigrant people also blame immigrants for both taking all the jobs and taking all the welfare (as in, not working) at the same time.
Or perhaps some immigrants will adopt our values, and some will not, and some will take jobs, and some will take welfare?
The only solution to climate change acceptable to the left is "give the government more and power and money," which coincidentally happens to be their overriding goal with everything they do. Not nuclear power, not economic sanctions against polluting nations like China and India, not decreases in immigration to consumer-heavy western nations, not an end to subsidizing the coming African population boom. Why do you suppose that is?
Of course, but I'm an evil right-winger. I thought the Good People (TM) told us the immigrants just want the same opportunities as us and will obviously adopt the values of western liberals, which are universal to all people. All those muslim and mexican migrants are going to become SUV driving doctors and engineers, and that'll kill the planet faster, no?
But their populations continue to increase because of migration. If we're truly facing an end-of-the-world scenario because of climate change, shouldn't we be cutting off immigration from the third world (low carbon footprint) to the first world (high carbon footprint)?
But we can look at the trend and say "gee, there's 20x more events now than there used to be".
About 10 years ago 5 hurricanes hit the southeast in one year and everyone screamed "it's global warming!!!! This is going to happen all the time now!!!" And then pretty much no major hurricanes have hit since.
We know that some things we do can be making things worse, and some things we can do that improve things. Rather than arguing about whether or not the warming is our fault or not, we should be focused on doing what we can to slow or stop it.
Sure, but the political solution offered by the left exempts China and India, so it's all for nothing. Vote Republican and we all die. Vote Democrat and we all die poor. Shrug.
What Mayer needed to do to be successful was to take the talent and the revenue and use it to create an entirely new business.
One can argue Steve Jobs succeeded in doing that, transforming Apple from a failing computer company into a fashionable consumer electronics company that also sold computers. Has anyone else ever suceeded in doing something similar? Usually the company that dominated the old paradigm dies (Blockbuster) and the upstart takes their place (Netflix). The old company doesn't transition to the new paradigm because inertia.
Pulling all of the employees back into the office was part of her strategy for doing that, based on the theory that co-located people are more capable of generating innovative ideas
Even if someone came up with the idea for the next big thing, how do you sell it to the shareholders? "Forget search and email, Yahoo! is now going to sell brain implants!"
I agree with you I don't think it was really possible to save Yahoo. The core business died and I don't think you can just pick a new core business off a shelf.
By now even clownpenis.fart is taken.
Well they're talking about the bullet itself here, not the case. Cleaning up brass is easy ("Private, go pick up all that brass on the range.") Digging bullets out of the backstop less so.
When I was a grad student I was sysadmin for my high-performance computing research lab. Every few months we were adding more nodes to our cluster, so I'd be assembling, say, 32 new servers, and invariably we'd get a bad motherboard or something in the mix. Since I've got the guts of 32 identical machines in front of me, it's pretty easy to troubleshoot and figure out what the problem is, but when calling for an RMA you'd still always have to work through the whole tech support script. Thankfully a few of my lab mates were Indian.
Intel: (in heavy Indian accent) "Hello, thank you for calling Intel, this is Josh, how may I help you?"
Me: "Hi, Josh, is it? Please speak to my friend Rajagopal."
And then Raj would rapid fire something in Hindi at "Josh" and we'd get our RMA without the 30 minutes of plodding through the troubleshooting script.
I'm already tech support for my entire family. Now I get to be tech support for their appliances. Every Thanksgiving is going to be "oh, since you're here, can you fix the wifi on the fridge?"
1) This thread is about how you can hack the mini NES so you can use it to load copied ROMs.
2) Copyright infringement isn't theft, this is slashdot, and you're a faggot.
Of course, and I suspect this was largely your point, those people are also not the people who are reflashing the NES.
1. Yes. I think assembling a RetroPie is easier than the instructions for reflashing the NES. You can even buy complete kits off Amazon where all you need to do is snap the Pi into a case.
2. I'm also posting on slashdot, which used to be a website for l33t computer h4xx0r types who would have no problem doing any of this. I didn't think I would need to qualify who the audience for comment was to my audience, I also forgot this is slashdot, where everyone is a pedantic nitwit.
So instead teach them the delusion of artificial scarcity? I'd think lying to them like that might be some kind of child abuse.
Also you're on slashdot faggot.