Master Index of Archived Threads


Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm Jan 01 2015 06:40 AM

Jeb Bush appears to be gearing up for a presidential run.

Nymr83 Jan 01 2015 03:08 PM Re: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Jeb Bush appears to be gearing up for a presidential run. saw a great sign the other day, something along the lines of "Bush vs. Clinton 2016 - Which country are you moving to?" hardly fair to either of them as I think most Republicans will agree she can't be as bad as Obama and most Democrats agree he can't be as bad as his brother, but a good joke none the less.

Mets Guy in Michigan Jan 02 2015 11:19 AM Re: Politics in 2015

A very special Inauguration Day here in Michigan -- my first as a staff member and not a reporter. Very emotional day because I believe in what we are doing.

Edgy MD Jan 22 2015 08:14 AM Re: Politics in 2015

And Sheldon Silver gets busted, bringing a bipartisan sheen to corrupt NYC politics. Ugh.

Nymr83 Jan 22 2015 08:26 PM Re: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: And Sheldon Silver gets busted, bringing a bipartisan sheen to corrupt NYC politics. Ugh. Finally joins Bruno in disgrace, those two helped make Albany the most corrupt legislature there is. maybe they can turn over a new leaf up there now... nah.

Edgy MD Jan 22 2015 09:14 PM Re: Politics in 2015

I find myself in recent years gravitating toward the notion that we should just let politicians take whatever money and gifts people want to throw at them, whether in the form of campaign contributions or personal enrichment. It just seems so futile and expensive to build cases against them that take years to put together, only to have to launch further investigations into the guys that replace them. Plus you have to police the prosecutors to make sure they're not going after politicians with political motivations of their own. If you just let them take what they want, just make sure it's all documented, and let the voters play jury come election time. It's a cynical view of politicians and the prosecutors that hunt them, but I like to think it's also a romantic view of the power of the electorate.

Frayed Knot Jan 23 2015 06:44 AM Re: Politics in 2015

Personally, there are not a lot of things that piss me off more than official corruption and so I consider any day where an entrenched politician is perp-walked in front of cameras to be a good day.

Mets – Willets Point Jan 23 2015 08:16 AM Re: Politics in 2015

People often say that the states and cities where the politicians are frequently busted are the most corrupt, but I wonder if the places where politicians are never busted are actually far more corrupt.

d'Kong76 Jan 23 2015 08:36 AM Re: Politics in 2015

Hope this guy lives to be a 110 so he can rot in jail for 50 years... http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/ ... 032195.php

Frayed Knot Jan 23 2015 10:18 AM Re: Politics in 2015

Mets – Willets Point wrote: People often say that the states and cities where the politicians are frequently busted are the most corrupt, but I wonder if the places where politicians are never busted are actually far more corrupt. In this particular case it appears that Silver's alleged corruption has been going on for a while and NYS law enforcement was on the trail until Gov Cuomo's administration abruptly called things off. Kudos here go to the Feds for picking up the ball. But, in a general sense, yes, the lack of arrests or prosecutions in a particular locale is hardly proof that they're corruption free.

Edgy MD Jan 30 2015 07:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

Mitt Romney expected to announce today whether he's returning for a third campaign in 2016. Despite the fact that he's allied with Jeb Bush and the two share much of the same donor base, more than a few sources seem to think he's going to go for it again. I understand the temptation. You can fall into the trap of thinking that all the damage done to his last campaign was self-inflicted (a lot of it was), so if he can just avoid those, he'll be fine. But... .

Benjamin Grimm Jan 30 2015 08:03 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

My hunch is that he's going to run again. I saw some recent polls that say that he's the GOP front-runner. I don't think he'd turn away from that.

Edgy MD Jan 30 2015 08:06 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

Sure, but it's all name recognition at this point. The highest profile guy from the last cycle is always going to be the frontrunner. And if the front runner has 18% vs. 15% for some other boob, you've got to put that in perspective. You've also got the highest negatives in the field.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 30 2015 08:10 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

h/t ambler: He lost to a black socialist with a middle name Hussain in the worst recession of our lifetimes.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 30 2015 08:17 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Sure, but it's all name recognition at this point. The highest profile guy from the last cycle is always going to be the frontrunner. And if the front runner has 18% vs. 15% for some other boob, you've got to put that in perspective. You've also got the highest negatives in the field. I agree. But I don't think Mitt is looking at it that way.

Ceetar Jan 30 2015 08:51 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Mitt Romney expected to announce today whether he's returning for a third campaign in 2016. Despite the fact that he's allied with Jeb Bush and the two share much of the same voter base, more than a few sources seem to think he's going to go for it again. I understand the temptation. You can fall into the trap of thinking that all the damage done to his last campaign was self-inflicted (a lot of it was), so if he can just avoid those, he'll be fine. But... . Oh good, so it's only going to be almost 2 years of mundane election run-up.

Mets – Willets Point Jan 30 2015 09:02 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government: Politics in 2015

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: h/t ambler: He lost to a black socialist with a middle name Hussain in the worst recession of our lifetimes. But this time the GOP candidate will be facing a candidate who is absolutely despised by at least half of the country in Hillary Clinton. No wonder they have so many candidates chomping at the bit since victory is assured. Starting January 2017, the Republicans will have full control of Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 30 2015 09:09 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Obama's also despised by half the country and he won reelection. 2016 is far from a sure thing for either party.

sharpie Jan 30 2015 09:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

AP reporting that Mitt not running.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 30 2015 09:23 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Shows what I know!

Edgy MD Mar 03 2015 09:32 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Democratic giants retiring: former senator and current diplomat Russ Feingold and longest-serving female Senator Barbara Mikulski. Both champions of campaign finance reform. Secretary Clinton catching a lot of heat, mostly from her left, for exclusively using private e-mail during her tenure at State. Nobody really making a splash coming out of CPAC.

Edgy MD Mar 10 2015 09:26 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I will not stand for an America where drug dealers and government bureaucrats can sabotage our beloved family pets. Political Rhetoric Generator

dgwphotography Mar 10 2015 11:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: I will not stand for an America where drug dealers and government bureaucrats can sabotage our beloved family pets. Political Rhetoric Generator That's hysterical Unlike myself, my opponent wants an America where pedophiles and Rupert Murdoch yes-men can make a mockery of our iPhones.

Ceetar Mar 10 2015 11:59 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Know this: that I will protect our brave police force, our iPhone apps and our right to kill foreigners.

Mets – Willets Point Mar 10 2015 12:10 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I'm sure this is an actual quote from a GOP member of congress: I will work for an America where Taliban militants and Hollywood liberals can't make a mockery of our basic democratic principles.

metsmarathon Mar 10 2015 12:20 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Secretary Clinton catching a lot of heat, mostly from her left, for exclusively using private e-mail during her tenure at State. this is either no big deal, or a massively big deal that isn't getting talked about enough. and i lean heavily towards the latter. i mean, there was a big deal about hte president having to trade in his venerated iphone for a secure blackberry thingy when he took office, and she's rolling in there with ihatebluedresses@yahoo.com, or whatever her real email address is?? that nobody in state thought to raise it as a massive breach of protocol, and security, is beyond me, and that's not even touching on the record-keeping side of things that seems to be more the focus of the criticism. seriously. anybody and everybody in the government recieving an email from her should be ashamed of themselves for not noticing something amiss.

Mets – Willets Point Mar 10 2015 12:27 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

As someone who works in Archives and Records Management and has an understanding of the laws and security risks regarding recordkeeping, this is is a HUGE deal.

Frayed Knot Mar 10 2015 02:03 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

And then beyond the historical, legal, and procedural questions, it dredges up the never-far-from-the-surface Clintonian attitude of, 'Rules? ... oh those don't apply to us'.

Ceetar Mar 10 2015 02:37 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I fail to see how it's a really big deal, for one she released a whole ton of those emails anyway, and for two, said email is likely also archived on the other party's end. It's a very poorly understood area. I mean, is she allowed to have a conversation in a room that doesn't have a microphone and recording device saved to public record?

Edgy MD Mar 10 2015 06:32 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I will also voluntarily let you see all my closets that don't have skeletons in them.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 10 2015 07:03 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: I fail to see how it's a really big deal, for one she released a whole ton of those emails anyway Yeah, but not all of them. Ceetar wrote: and for two, said email is likely also archived on the other party's end. Except for the ones that she decided to delete before they were archived.

metsmarathon Mar 10 2015 07:10 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: I fail to see how it's a really big deal, for one she released a whole ton of those emails anyway, and for two, said email is likely also archived on the other party's end. It's a very poorly understood area. I mean, is she allowed to have a conversation in a room that doesn't have a microphone and recording device saved to public record? she was america's number one top diplomat, failing to use secure means of communication, ignoring the rules and regulations which govern her communication, and nobody she communicated with saw fit to raise a red flag about it. secure, documented email communication is not a rule for the sole purpose of inconveniencing the communicating parties. she and her staff chose to see it as only that, and ignored the rule. how much of our diplomatic mission was, or could have been compromised?

Edgy MD Mar 10 2015 08:17 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I fear this is going to be one of those "it doesn't matter because the sun is going to burn out eventually, and human rights are nothing more than a quaint societal construct, and anything that gets me what I want is, by definition, justified" moments.

Nymr83 Mar 10 2015 08:31 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 11 2015 07:40 AM

edit- was responding on my phone and didnt see the entire second page, my post made no sense without beign directly below what i thought i was responding to.

metsmarathon Mar 11 2015 07:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: I fear this is going to be one of those "it doesn't matter because the sun is going to burn out eventually, and human rights are nothing more than a quaint societal construct, and anything that gets me what I want is, by definition, justified" moments. y'know, the more i think about this thing, the more outraged i get. with as much snooping as goes on out there, where basically everything unencrypted that happens on the web, she's just using an un-secure email account. it's a private email server located in her personal house. how secure is that going to be, unless she's got a full-time staff of IT grunts fighting off the angry hordes? how can that not be anything but readily vulnerable? how robust was the encryption? how robust was the firewall? the physical security? so on, so forth. she claims that no classified materials were sent using her home email, and ok, i'll give her the benefit of hte doubt that she's not completely incompetent, but an accumulation of sensitive material can cause it's classification level to increase. and i'm damned sure she sent sensitive information. because, let's be real. if the secretary of state is not sending and recieving emails containing sensitive materials, the secretary of state is probably not doing a good job at all of being a diplomat. also, hell, how secure was her iphone, or whatever smartphone she was using? the whole damned reason that the government exclusively used blackberries for so damned long was because their email was more secure, the devices more secure.

metsmarathon Mar 11 2015 07:24 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

and yeah, i'm focused more on the national security angle instead of the record-keeping, transparency angle, though in the grand scope of a civilized, properly functioning, democratically-elected, non-corrupt government, the transparency and record-keeping thing trumps all. but that doesn't seem to be nearly as tangible to people, and is, i think, more readily hand-waved away by the rank and file. "whatever, let them keep secrets from us" is probably the common refrain. the problem is, that hillary, in trying to keep her secrets from us, likely gave our enemies unfettered access to our secrets.

Frayed Knot Mar 11 2015 07:37 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I thought a column I read yesterday summed it up pretty well: - as to how someone could serve four years as secretary of state with no official e-mail account and instead conduct business from a private address with its own domain and server? Answer: Deliberately. - and WHY someone would bypass the State Dept's version of IT and go through the trouble of setting up their own system? A: To be able to decide which e-mails would become part of the historical record and which wouldn’t.

Ceetar Mar 11 2015 08:02 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: I thought a column I read yesterday summed it up pretty well: - as to how someone could serve four years as secretary of state with no official e-mail account and instead conduct business from a private address with its own domain and server? Answer: Deliberately. - and WHY someone would bypass the State Dept's version of IT and go through the trouble of setting up their own system? A: To be able to decide which e-mails would become part of the historical record and which wouldn’t. first answer is also "EVERYBODY" did that for centuries. Before we jump on "Now that we can track your every move, let's do so" there should be at least a little more discussion on what should and shouldn't be covered here. Like I said before, is it her obligation to record every conversation she has verbally? scan and archive every note she scribbles on a pad? And don't tell me that there is an easy answer, because it's not true. The right to privacy of Americans, including elected/appointed officials, is a huge topic right now. Whether it's the right to be forgotten on the internet, or the right to not be recorded walking down the street, the right to record police, the right to not have pictures you've taken, or someone took of you with your consent, of yourself naked be distributed to the public. Does Hillary have the right to use a joint form of communication for personal and professional reasons? Does that make her emails to her daughter about baby spit up work emails and public record? It certainly doesn't make her work emails about 9am conference calls personal ones. Is/should email even be considered formal communication? Is it really any different than a note she jotted down on a pad or a conversation she had in the hall? Besides that we can get a copy of it easier? And of course, we can't have it both ways. Either it was too insecure to send classified documents on (and yes, that describes pretty much all email.) and therefore there's not really deleted and gone, or she sent secret documents that are actually pretty secure and we can't get at them and probably not the 'enemy' either. I really hope no one is sending classified documents by email.

Edgy MD Mar 11 2015 08:17 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"Everybody" did not conduct cabinet-level government business without regard for the government's official standards of security and archiving. This just isn't true. The times have changed. The standards have changed. The obligations have not.

Ceetar Mar 11 2015 08:36 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: "Everybody" did not conduct cabinet-level government business without regard for the government's official standards of security and archiving. This just isn't true. The times have changed. The standards have changed. The obligations have not. Can someone please post the official standards? (and standards are not laws) I'm saying the obligations SHOULD have changed. At least, they should be considered and discussed. Because the times have changed, things happen differently. What exactly is her obligation? On a high level? (not "she's obligated to make her email public/archivable/etc") Is she obligated to be completely transparent? To who? Certainly not the media/public, because presumably there IS classified/private/internal stuff that public/foreigners shouldn't be aware of. We're attributing fire without smoke here though. Did she do something insecure with sensitive information? Are there backroom dealings that she's covering up? Just saying she could have done something because the email wasn't the official .gov email is like saying she could have met someone in a back alley of DC and conducted business. So, Did she do something risky or did she merely violate protocol? And if so, what's being done in the future to lock down this protocol? That's more important than a harmless violation in the past. She did this for years and years, so it's hard to believe it's coming up now for any reason other than bs politics. And more than that, how about all those people that SENT email to a supposedly insecure email address? If Hillary's guilty every single person that communicated with her is too. If it's as easy as typing Hillary@clintonmail.com in the to: field you could just as easily type k.un@nkorea.gov in that field. Or mywife@gmail.com. And guess what? That's not secure. Because guess what? That person's wife sends back a cute picture of your kid, but in fact their email has been hacked and now your supposedly secure government servers are suspect. You think no one there ever sent an email to Sony? It's laughable because EMAIL IS NOT SECURE.

metsmarathon Mar 11 2015 08:37 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

first off, the whole argument that "the nsa can sniff out all her emails so nothing she emailed is really private, so why can't the national archives go over to the nsa and have them hand over her emails, hurr hurr" is bullshit, beside the point, and another matter entirely. this is different from the right to privacy. this is not about her personal emails. this is about her written communication to her staff, and her attempts to circumvent the rules and regulations that have been in place to document and archive those communications for the enhancement of a honest, open, and transparent government. this is not about being able to see her yoga schedule, or gaining access into the inner workings of a mother helping to plan her daughters wedding. again, it has nothing. absolutely nothing. to do with privacy. as a representative of the public, a public official, her work is public, except for that work which is sensitive and secret. and her public work should be publicly accessible and archived. and her sensitive and secret work should be held sensitive and secret and archived and stored appropriately. it is not for her to be the arbiter of what is sensitive and secret, and it is certainly not for her to be the gatekeeper and the recordkeeper. her work-related conversations should be documented. her official notes should be recorded. she is the top diplomat of hte united states of america. for centuries, papers were kept. secret papers were scandalous. secret emails should be as well. and, yes, we can have it both ways. of course we can have it both ways. the government does have it both ways, and for good reason. the internet is both wickedly insecure and spectacularly robust. there are different layers of security and different networks and different protocols. email the dod sends within itself is more secure than email i might send from my hotmail account to your geocities account, even on its "non-secure" network, especially when appropriate encryption is appropriately used. email that's sent on the secure network is, well, much more secure, and pretty much needs an insider like chelsea nee bradly manning to get it out. my concerns related to national security are not related to classified material, but to sensitive material. sensitive material is not classified; it is not secret. but it is still potentially damaging to the country if it gets out, and moreso if it is aggregated by nefarious agents. by using a private email server not subjected to the same rigorous controls as her government email would have afforded, she may have allowed herself to be a conduit for such sensitive email to become accessible to nefarious agents, whether or not such a breach actually happened. in my mind, from a national security perspective, it is not too far removed from casually leaving a folder containing classified documents on the passenger seat of her car as she hopped into a starbucks for a latte.

metsmarathon Mar 11 2015 08:47 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: And more than that, how about all those people that SENT email to a supposedly insecure email address? If Hillary's guilty every single person that communicated with her is too. this is something i have a huge problem with as well. it is not only a scandal that hillary breached protocol in such a way, but that broad swaths of the government were complicit. Ceetar wrote: So, Did she do something risky or did she merely violate protocol? And if so, what's being done in the future to lock down this protocol? That's more important than a harmless violation in the past. She did this for years and years, so it's hard to believe it's coming up now for any reason other than bs politics. there is not such thing as merely violating protocol in this regard. the crime is not in getting caught, or in finding out after the fact that a compromised security resulted in a significant breach. the "crime" is in creating the security compromise in the first place. yes, i find it impossible to believe that she did not use her work email to conduct any sensitive but not explicitly secret communications. she is at a cabinet-level position in the united states government in the 21st century. if all she did with her email account was schedule conference calls and remind everybody to pay up for the coffee club, then what the fuck was she doing for four goddamn years?

Ceetar Mar 11 2015 10:04 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

metsmarathon wrote: Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: So, Did she do something risky or did she merely violate protocol? And if so, what's being done in the future to lock down this protocol? That's more important than a harmless violation in the past. She did this for years and years, so it's hard to believe it's coming up now for any reason other than bs politics. there is not such thing as merely violating protocol in this regard. the crime is not in getting caught, or in finding out after the fact that a compromised security resulted in a significant breach. the "crime" is in creating the security compromise in the first place. yes, i find it impossible to believe that she did not use her work email to conduct any sensitive but not explicitly secret communications. she is at a cabinet-level position in the united states government in the 21st century. if all she did with her email account was schedule conference calls and remind everybody to pay up for the coffee club, then what the fuck was she doing for four goddamn years? Well, 'crime'? Is it? or is it just rules and regulations? (not arguing that it's better/worse just want to be clear) I'm not convinced her email was as insecure as it's being made out to be, but yes, surely more than the internal servers. But those emails are still traveling in public ISPs and routed through public places. I hope the encryption and all that is up to snuff, but I'm pretty skeptical. security is tough. Who knows what WiFi networks she connected to while out and about? I think this is a valid discussion, but I really do think it's less about Hillary (because clearly they were ALL participating in non-secure email exchanges) and more about trying to figure out how/what to do about it going forward. It's not so much that she had a private email server, but that A. She was allowed to have it, and B. these rules and regulations seem at best as useful as the "please recycle" paper posted in the kitchen. What's going to be done to actually enforce, and to put in place a logical protocol, these things? It goes beyond hardware, to best practices. Some emails/communications should perhaps wait, or go all super-spy like in the movies and pass messages a different way. my brother in law works for Raytheon/defense contracts. the bs they put him, some warranted, some not, in the names of 'security'. He's not allowed to have his cellphone in the secure areas. They have issues with flash drives. But that's in a specific isolated area. Trying to secure people who are all over district/country/globe is pretty tricky.

metsmarathon Mar 11 2015 10:22 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

the part of the issue that makes it about hillary is that she willfully and deliberately and with effort, circumvented those protocols and rules. and in doing so may have created significant security breaches. if your brother in law were to start wearing a pair of google glass into the secure area, or if he went around and specifically found peripheral devices that did not block flash drives and then plugged those peripheral devices into teh network for the convenience of being able to use a flash drive, this would be the same thnig as that. yes, it also necessitates there being a discussion of what to do going forward, but there should be repurcussions for what was done. certainly far beyond a collective shrug and throwing up of hands. i don't give a shit about hiillary as a presidential candidate or not. i give a shit about her as a high-ranking official of hte united states government, trusted member of its inner collective, willfully and knowingly and deliberately flouting our national security and the transparency of our government. and her staff being complicit. anyone who sent a work-related email to hillary@notmygovernmentemailaddress.com should face a reprimand of some sort, at some level, with greater reprimands due to those with greater roles and greater importance in the government. anyone in your brothers office or lab who saw him walk into the secure area with a google glass, or plugging a flash drive into a thingy, would surely face some sort of reprimand from their superiors. why should state be any different. security is a collective responsibility.

d'Kong76 Mar 11 2015 10:45 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I can't keep up with all this, but I can't help but laugh out loud that Congress closed down this forum due to security concerns.

Frayed Knot Mar 11 2015 12:16 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

NY Post headline: DELETER OF THE FREE WORLD OK it's the Post, but still kind of funny.

Mets – Willets Point Mar 13 2015 01:02 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Putin is not dead. He just has the sniffles. Really!

Ashie62 Mar 14 2015 09:28 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I guess the House could pass a resolution demanding Hillary turn over her NY server. It would be hard for her to stay on message for an extended time if that occurred.

d'Kong76 Apr 02 2015 09:17 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Dum dee dumm dumm... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... /70631152/

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2015 09:28 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I wouldn't be surprised if Valadius ended up serving time in some pit on Devil's Island.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2015 09:36 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I hear that's the minimum penalty for downloading the Crane Pool from a Congressional computer.

Mets Guy in Michigan Apr 02 2015 12:10 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

We need a nice warm, fuzzy story in this forum. I nominate this one. [url]http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/04/02/michigan-gov-rick-snyder-carves-out-own-niche-inside-gop/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fwashwire%2Ffeed+%28WSJ.com%3A+Washington+Wire%29

d'Kong76 Apr 02 2015 12:43 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

An allegedly-corrupt politician from the tri-state area getting a 68 page indictment thrown at him is pretty warm and fuzzy too! At least to me.

Nymr83 Apr 02 2015 01:12 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: We need a nice warm, fuzzy story in this forum. I nominate this one. [url]http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/04/02/michigan-gov-rick-snyder-carves-out-own-niche-inside-gop/?mod=WSJBlog&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fwashwire%2Ffeed+%28WSJ.com%3A+Washington+Wire%29 Seems like an honest politician, or the guy who wrote story just likes him?

Edgy MD Apr 02 2015 01:17 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Or a politician with a heckuva press officer, amirite?

Mets Guy in Michigan Apr 02 2015 01:58 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Or a politician with a heckuva press officer, amirite? Well, yeah! Especially that. The governor is probably the most amazing person I've ever met.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2015 02:21 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I guess that means you've never met Beyonce.

Valadius Apr 05 2015 09:20 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I'm fine, by the way.

Edgy MD Apr 05 2015 09:46 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Good to hear from you. Hang in there, man.

d'Kong76 Apr 07 2015 06:55 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Valadius wrote: I'm fine, by the way. You eat well! The pics you put on fb look delicious.

Edgy MD Apr 07 2015 08:20 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Rand Paul is announcing his candidacy, along with his declaration that "we're gonna take the country back." Listen, Senator Paul, if I'm going to war against other factions of my country, and I'm expected to take my marching orders from an eye doctor from the south, you're gonna have to get in line behind Rockin' Doc.

Ashie62 Apr 08 2015 10:24 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Rockin Doc is an eye doctor from the south.

Edgy MD Apr 08 2015 11:33 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

That's what I mean to imply, yes.

Edgy MD Apr 10 2015 11:56 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Risking nothing as the frontrunner, Clinton to announce her candidacy this weekend ... via video. Great lede at the New York Times. The prolonged prologue to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s second run for the White House will reach its suspenseless conclusion on Sunday: the former secretary of state, senator and first lady is to announce that she will indeed seek the Democratic nomination for president.

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 11:58 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Risking nothing as the frontrunner, Clinton to announce her candidacy this weekend ... via video. Great lede at the New York Times. The prolonged prologue to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s second run for the White House will reach its suspenseless conclusion on Sunday: the former secretary of state, senator and first lady is to announce that she will indeed seek the Democratic nomination for president. uh, didn't she just do that? if you announce what you're going to announce..

Edgy MD Apr 10 2015 12:00 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

That's what they mean by "prolonged prologue" and "suspenseless conclusion."

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 12:16 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: That's what they mean by "prolonged prologue" and "suspenseless conclusion." not really. They're talking about how it's been inevitable and the worst kept secret. I'm talking about the redundant 'going to announce' bs. Maybe "she will confirm on-record" would be better. She's going to "actively address" Because she's clearly been running and campaigning for a while now. Or just call it what it is. "Hillary is calling a press conference to campaign for president" Although I presume because it's technically 'news' it gets around the equal-time rule.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 10 2015 01:18 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The announcement is an "event" and she's telling the public when and where the event will occur.

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 01:27 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The announcement is an "event" and she's telling the public when and where the event will occur. the event occurred whenever that post/paper was published.

Edgy MD Apr 10 2015 01:28 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

This event occurs when I hit submit on this post.

d'Kong76 Apr 10 2015 02:00 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I used to really dislike the Clintons, not so much any longer. Wonder who she'll pick as a running mate. A woman would be cool... maybe Oprah or Ellen, if they're not too busy. HILLARY 2016 WOO HOODLE!!

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 02:05 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

d'Kong76 wrote: I used to really dislike the Clintons, not so much any longer. Wonder who she'll pick as a running mate. A woman would be cool... maybe Oprah or Ellen, if they're not too busy. HILLARY 2016 WOO HOODLE!! I've disliked Hillary since she got all preachy about video game mods back during the GTA/Hot Coffee days. But it's not like it matters I could've told you I was probably voting for Hillary in this election before I knew who she was. I don't need 60 billion hours of coverage of it.

d'Kong76 Apr 10 2015 02:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I wish it was over already... just put her in NOW!!!

Mets – Willets Point Apr 10 2015 02:18 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

We're doomed.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 10 2015 02:37 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: The announcement is an "event" and she's telling the public when and where the event will occur. the event occurred whenever that post/paper was published. The "event" occurs when she stands on a stage with music and balloons and her adoring family.

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 02:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: The announcement is an "event" and she's telling the public when and where the event will occur. the event occurred whenever that post/paper was published. The "event" occurs when she stands on a stage with music and balloons and her adoring family. Gee, I wonder what information she's going to inform of us? Something new presumably, given that that's what 'announce' means.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 10 2015 02:52 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse, so I won't comment after this one. When a candidate opens a presidential bid, they want a cheering crowd of supporters, a backdrop, music, family, and, not least of all, press coverage. For all of those things to occur, the candidate needs to announce a time and a place.

Ceetar Apr 10 2015 03:05 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse, so I won't comment after this one. When a candidate opens a presidential bid, they want a cheering crowd of supporters, a backdrop, music, family, and, not least of all, press coverage. For all of those things to occur, the candidate needs to announce a time and a place. Sure. She can do whatever she wants. It's still not an announcement. It's a rally. Or a kickoff. or a press conference. That's what she's announcing, via comments to the press or a 'leak' or whatever. The Times, and the media in general, don't need to be stool pigeons to this. The game where people leak information intentionally and the media laps it up and pretends they did some hardcore reporting to get it is amateurish. I can't be bothered with those games. The news is "Hillary Clinton is running for president (You can throw in "The Times has learned" here if it makes you feel good) and will officially launch her campaign on DATE."

d'Kong76 Apr 10 2015 03:22 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The "event" occurs when she stands on a stage with music and balloons and her adoring family. Don't forget her adoring husband (and former prez) on saxophone and Fleetwood Mac blasting 'don't stop thinking about tomorrow' and stuff!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 10 2015 10:52 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"Second Hand News" would probably be more apropos. Personally, though, I'd prefer "Tusk," because TUSK! TUSK!

d'Kong76 Apr 11 2015 09:59 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: "Second Hand News" would probably be more apropos. Good one!

Ashie62 Apr 11 2015 06:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

About to enter, stage left, Hillary Clinton.

d'Kong76 Apr 12 2015 05:53 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

And so, it's official... [youtube:3073nfl0]N708P-A45D0[/youtube:3073nfl0]

Ashie62 Apr 12 2015 05:59 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Marco Rubio FL is to announce tomorrow. Jeb and the republican flood of possible candidtates are likely not far behind in the timeline.

d'Kong76 Apr 12 2015 06:27 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

No one will beat Hillary 2016, waste of time and money to think that anyone can or will.

Frayed Knot Apr 12 2015 10:09 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

d'Kong76 wrote: No one will beat Hillary 2016, waste of time and money to think that anyone can or will. I think I heard that in 2008

Benjamin Grimm Apr 13 2015 04:32 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The difference between 2016 and 2008 is that this time around, there doesn't seem to be anyone in the race who can play the spoiler role that Obama did last time. I bet Elizabeth Warren could give Hillary a serious threat but she appears determined not to run. (Although she always seems to phrase her denials in the present tense. "I'm not running for president" rather than "I won't run for president.")

Edgy MD Apr 13 2015 05:16 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The night is young. The funny thing is that, as presumptive nominee a year and a half from the election, we can expect a campaign as controlled and risk-free as the announcement via video.

Frayed Knot Apr 13 2015 06:42 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The difference between 2016 and 2008 is that this time around, there doesn't seem to be anyone in the race who can play the spoiler role that Obama did last time. I bet Elizabeth Warren could give Hillary a serious threat but she appears determined not to run. (Although she always seems to phrase her denials in the present tense. "I'm not running for president" rather than "I won't run for president.") Sure, but I don't know that folks thought too much of Obama's chances vs Hillary back in early 2007. In the view of at least some he was running just to get his name out there for the next go-around because the party backing and the nomination was certain to be hers ... until it wasn't. True that there's no one now even at that stage of things but she can't simply decree that to remain unchanged no matter how much she'd like to or think it's owed to her. And then there's the general election (not clear whether KC was including that in his "can't be beat - waste of time and money" statement, or was just talking about the Dem side of things). The night is young. And full of terrors.

sharpie Apr 13 2015 09:56 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Also, in 2008 John Edwards was running. He was considered a top-tier candidate at the time. Obama had support and money from the get-go. This time there is no one anyone takes seriously running (maybe Jim Webb, maybe Martin O'Malley). I suppose there is Joe Biden but I can't see him getting much support. There is a far clearer path to the nomination for Clinton this time around. On the Republican side I can't take anyone but Bush, Walker or Rubio seriously.

Ashie62 Apr 13 2015 10:14 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

sharpie wrote: Also, in 2008 John Edwards was running. He was considered a top-tier candidate at the time. Obama had support and money from the get-go. This time there is no one anyone takes seriously running (maybe Jim Webb, maybe Martin O'Malley). I suppose there is Joe Biden but I can't see him getting much support. There is a far clearer path to the nomination for Clinton this time around. On the Republican side I can't take anyone but Bush, Walker or Rubio seriously. I believe you nailed it.

Mets Guy in Michigan Apr 13 2015 10:21 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

d'Kong76 wrote: No one will beat Hillary 2016, waste of time and money to think that anyone can or will. Do you mean in the primary elections, or in the general election? From an analyst's perspective, 2008 was supposed to be her year and she got beat by a guy with no record of accomplishments and no real experience. The Clinton machine went after him hard and still got beat. That's not something to be overlooked in Round Two. People's impressions of her already have been cast, and it's a huge undertaking to change them. It seems like the Dems cleared a path for her this year in part because the party has a weak bench. While she'll benefit from not having a serous primary challenger, there will be drawbacks, too. The entire GOP campaign will be focused on her from the get-go. And there's a lot to target. The response to the email situation was like picking a scab on all the things about the Clinton years that no one liked. it's a bad thing when people in your own party compare you to Richard Nixon. The Dems already will be facing an uphill battle in 2016 if the historically lopsided mid-terms are an indication.

d'Kong76 Apr 13 2015 10:36 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

General election... I think she'll steamroll in. Put her in now, so we don't have to listed to the bullshit for the next 18 months. Put Jeter in The Hall too... please!

sharpie Apr 13 2015 10:38 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Presidential years are often vastly different from midterms, especially second term midterms. The race will likely be close, although the last two haven't been. If the Republicans nominate Bush they give up their best weapon against Clinton -- that she represents the past -- just as they blunted their best message in 2008 by choosing Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate so he couldn't play the experience card. Rubio would likely be their strongest candidate though he isn't polling well at the moment.

Mets Guy in Michigan Apr 13 2015 11:28 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

sharpie wrote: Presidential years are often vastly different from midterms, especially second term midterms. The race will likely be close, although the last two haven't been. If the Republicans nominate Bush they give up their best weapon against Clinton -- that she represents the past -- just as they blunted their best message in 2008 by choosing Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate so he couldn't play the experience card. Rubio would likely be their strongest candidate though he isn't polling well at the moment. The 2012 election was 51 percent to 47 percent, though the Electoral college certainly wasn't close. You flip Ohio, Florida, Virginia and maybe Wisconsin and things tighten up in a hurry. I'm not sure I see Rubio as the GOP's best hope. Look to the governors. Remember that the GOP candidates get to run against both Clinton's record and Obama's as well. His adlib at the State of the Union about winning his two elections was a bit of hubris -- there were a lot of fresh faces in the Congress sitting in front of him because of his record. He lost control of both chambers.

Edgy MD Apr 13 2015 11:36 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I agree that Rubio isn't necessarily the best hope. The field has a ways to go before it's settled.

Nymr83 Apr 13 2015 08:44 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

d'Kong76 wrote: General election... I think she'll steamroll in. Put her in now, so we don't have to listed to the bullshit for the next 18 months. Put Jeter in The Hall too... please! I will agree to take Hillary on two conditions: 1. we start her 8 years right now so Obama is gone immediately and 2.) Jeter is banned from the Hall.

Ashie62 Apr 13 2015 09:21 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Time for non stop populist rhetoric from the left.

Edgy MD Apr 14 2015 12:49 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mayor De Blasio has somehow caused an alleged scandal by not jumping in to endorse Secretary Clinton. Isn't an endorsement kind of an empty gesture when the field contains one candidate?

Nymr83 Apr 14 2015 12:57 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Mayor De Blasio has somehow caused an alleged scandal by not jumping in to endorse Secretary Clinton. Isn't an endorsement kind of an empty gesture when the field contains one candidate? Endorse Now or feel the consequences later!

metirish Apr 14 2015 01:23 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Considering this will be my first time voting in a presidential election I'm paying special attention to what's going on........and I'm tired already of the "rolling" coverage of Clinton......every detail seems so polished, even the "caught on security camera" in chipotle

Mets Guy in Michigan Apr 14 2015 07:31 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Mayor De Blasio has somehow caused an alleged scandal by not jumping in to endorse Secretary Clinton. Isn't an endorsement kind of an empty gesture when the field contains one candidate? That, but once you make the endorsement, you lose your leverage. If someone of value -- and the mayor seems to believe he is -- thinks they can extract something in exchange for the endorsement, they'll try that. Now, the risk is if you wait too long and the candidate doesn't need your endorsement anymore, you get nothing!

sharpie Apr 14 2015 08:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I don't think he's playing that game. I think he waits til she says something he likes and then gets to endorse her on an otherwise slow news day so they both get more coverage.

cooby Apr 16 2015 10:40 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

metirish wrote: Considering this will be my first time voting in a presidential election I'm paying special attention to what's going on........and I'm tired already of the "rolling" coverage of Clinton......every detail seems so polished, even the "caught on security camera" in chipotle She stopped at a local gas station and it was in our paper

Frayed Knot May 11 2015 09:59 PM Re: Politics in 2015 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 12 2015 02:25 PM

Nymr83 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: And Sheldon Silver gets busted, bringing a bipartisan sheen to corrupt NYC politics. Ugh. Finally joins Bruno in disgrace, those two helped make Albany the most corrupt legislature there is. maybe they can turn over a new leaf up there now... nah. And now that the NY State Republican Senate leader, Dean Skelos, has resigned his position as Republican leader after being indicted on various federal corruption charges (along with his non-politico son) it completes a virtual clean sweep of NYS high ranking office holders. To fill Skelos's position, NY Repubs have chosen my long-ago neighbor John Flanagan. Back when I was a kid, the Flanagans lived across the street. John Sr was a local lawyer with four young kids and a simple law office above one of the storefronts on the village's main street. He eventually ran for the state Assembly as your typical Long Island moderate Republican type where, upon winning, he promptly moved to a better neighborhood across town. Same town, same school district and all, just better digs. Anyway, multiple re-elections followed, as they tend to do with incumbents, until one day Assemblyman John Sr was jogging around the Junior HS track with John Jr, then a 24-ish y/o law school student, when the old man, still only in his early 50s or so, dropped dead of a heart attack. Seeing as how it was October in an election year with little time to change the ballot, the party simply ran John Jr in his father's place. He won (you wonder what pct of voters actually knew it was a different person running) which essentially means the now 54 y/o has never held another job in his life unless you count that he did move up from the assembly to the Senate at some point a decade or so back. His length of service and Long Island pedigree made him Skelos's protege and now he's his successor although probably not in the way he was envisioning.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 12 2015 08:20 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Some of the older neighborhood kids could be terrifying to us younger ones, but John in my experience was always a nice guy.

Edgy MD May 12 2015 11:47 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Dean Skelos, I think, drove my then-teenaged sister home from the bar one night. Got chased off by my mother.

Nymr83 May 12 2015 02:04 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Dean Skelos, I think, drove my then-teenaged sister home from the bar one night. Got chased off by my mother. Just think, he could have been Mr. Edgy-in-law

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 13 2015 01:51 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

He could have done a lot of things for the family. A lot of things.

Edgy MD May 28 2015 10:32 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I just saw on Twitter that there were 12,500 tweets about George Pataki announcing his presidential bid. That's incredible: 12,500 talking about Pataki at the same time. I remember him first winning in New York, when his his triumph was clearly mostly the product of a Cuomo-weary electorate. And the first thing everybody said the next day was, "Waitaminute... who is this guy we just elected?"

Benjamin Grimm May 28 2015 11:47 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

He got three terms though, so I guess people eventually figured out who he was.

Edgy MD May 28 2015 09:32 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Maybe, but he seemed to just be riding his incumbency and Giuliani's coattails for a while there. I mean, what is Pataki's legacy? Crime went down markedly, but history largely puts that on Giuliani's ledger. Welfare was cut, but that was largely a state version of federal policies spearheaded by Gingrich and Clinton.

Benjamin Grimm May 29 2015 09:20 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I'm not really clear on what Dennis Hastert did that was illegal. (And I'm not referring to whatever long-ago act he was trying to conceal.) Is it illegal to pay a blackmailer? I wouldn't think so. It sounds like the problem is that he tried withdrawing his own money from his own bank account in a way that wouldn't attract attention from the FBI. Before this, I had no idea that withdrawals of more than $10,000 were reported to the FBI.

batmagadanleadoff May 29 2015 09:42 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm not really clear on what Dennis Hastert did that was illegal. (And I'm not referring to whatever long-ago act he was trying to conceal.) Is it illegal to pay a blackmailer? I wouldn't think so. It sounds like the problem is that he tried withdrawing his own money from his own bank account in a way that wouldn't attract attention from the FBI. Before this, I had no idea that withdrawals of more than $10,000 were reported to the FBI. It's even worse than you thought. You can go to jail for depositing or withdrawing cash amounts under $10,000 if law enforcement thinks you're "structuring". http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- ... idiculous/ excerpt: Apparently that made things too difficult on federal prosecutors. So Congress responded by dropping the word willfully from the Bank Secrecy Act. Now, prosecutors need only show that a defendant knows about the $10,000 reporting requirement, and makes deposits under that amount in order to avoid it. Keep in mind, it doesn’t matter if you’ve earned all of your money legitimately. It doesn’t matter if you’ve dutifully reported all of that money at tax time, and paid the government every penny required of you under the law. If you knew about the reporting requirement, and you deliberately deposited less than $10,000 in order to avoid it, you’re guilty of a federal felony. And thanks to asset forfeiture, the government can then move to seize everything in your account. And possibly more.

Edgy MD Jun 01 2015 05:54 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Martin O'Malley, jumping in despite polling at 1%. Bless your heart.

MFS62 Jun 01 2015 07:24 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm not really clear on what Dennis Hastert did that was illegal. (And I'm not referring to whatever long-ago act he was trying to conceal.) Is it illegal to pay a blackmailer? I wouldn't think so. Isn't the blackmailing itself a crime? Why aren't they going after that person? Later

Edgy MD Jun 01 2015 07:58 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Do we know that they are not going after that person?

d'Kong76 Jun 01 2015 10:23 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Pataki was our mayor for a number of years... likable enough guy for, ya know, a politician. Surprised to see he's almost 70 already, would have guessed he was a little younger but I suppose I'm no spring chicken anymore either.

Frayed Knot Jun 01 2015 10:38 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The word one often heard on Pataki was that despite -- or maybe because -- giving the impression of being kind of milquetoast type (even while standing 6' 5") that he frequently got underestimated, a skill he parlayed into 3 terms as a Republican Governor in a largely Democratic state - the only Republican to sit in that seat since the Rockerfeller era ended in the early '70s. All that said, he has only a slightly better chance at being the next President than I do. And, yeah, being more than two years older than Hillary, in a year where age is likely to be at least one of the arrows in the Republican quiver, doesn't do him any favors either.

Nymr83 Jun 12 2015 08:48 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Did Rubio pay the NY Slimes to write that hit piece on him? Its done nothing but draw criticism for the paper and make Rubio look like the rest of us... He got parking tickets? Had to pay off student loans like everyone else? Oh the horror!!!

themetfairy Jun 26 2015 10:17 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Same Sex Marriage is Now Legal Nationwide! The correct and long overdue decision!

Mets – Willets Point Jun 26 2015 10:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

themetfairy Jun 26 2015 10:50 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The full decision (along with the dissenting opinions) can be read here.

Mets Guy in Michigan Jun 27 2015 03:24 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The full decision (along with the dissenting opinions) can be read here. Our statement is here: [url]http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277--357945--,00.html

themetfairy Jun 27 2015 04:38 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The full decision (along with the dissenting opinions) can be read here. Our statement is here: [url]http://www.michigan.gov/snyder/0,4668,7-277--357945--,00.html Bravo!

Mets Guy in Michigan Jun 28 2015 09:01 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The Washington Post, or, at least columnist Jennifer Rubin, liked our statement, too! She named Gov. Snyder a "distinguished pol of the week" for the tone of the remarks. "No vilification of the court. No doomsday expressions of horror. He did not send gay marriage opponents on a wild goose chase in search of an impossible constitutional amendment. His remarks were simple, firm and, most of all, kind, and he thereby set a tone that diminishes anger and reduces conflict on a subject about which his state now has no choice." [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/06/28/distinguished-pols-of-the-week-13/ Pretty cool!

Edgy MD Jun 28 2015 10:44 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Rubin, agree or disagree with her, is a perfectly level-headed Republican, but as a Republican at The Post, she is a seriously reviled columnist from true believers left and right. Like, to read the comments under any column or post of hers is to invite disease into your eyes.

Edgy MD Jul 18 2015 02:18 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Some think Donald Trump is a gift to the Democrats. That may be so, but I tend to also wonder if "El Chapo" isn't a gift to Trump. There Trump was, waving at shadows, comically vilifying abstractions, and embarrassing pretty much the whole species, and then this Mexican narco-thug shows up and gives him a concrete enemy. A viable threat to American autonomy for Donald to rail against. But that wasn't enough for Trump. He had to pick a fight with Senator John McCain... and aim real low. "He's not a war hero. He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured." Whoah! That's... that's... something.

Nymr83 Jul 20 2015 07:46 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The only people Trump is a "gift" to are journalists.

MFS62 Jul 20 2015 08:34 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Nymr83 wrote: The only people Trump is a "gift" to are journalists. And comedians. Later

Edgy MD Aug 15 2015 12:55 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

metsmarathon wrote: Edgy MD wrote: I fear this is going to be one of those "it doesn't matter because the sun is going to burn out eventually, and human rights are nothing more than a quaint societal construct, and anything that gets me what I want is, by definition, justified" moments. y'know, the more i think about this thing, the more outraged i get. with as much snooping as goes on out there, where basically everything unencrypted that happens on the web, she's just using an un-secure email account. it's a private email server located in her personal house. how secure is that going to be, unless she's got a full-time staff of IT grunts fighting off the angry hordes? how can that not be anything but readily vulnerable? how robust was the encryption? how robust was the firewall? the physical security? so on, so forth. she claims that no classified materials were sent using her home email, and ok, i'll give her the benefit of hte doubt that she's not completely incompetent, but an accumulation of sensitive material can cause it's classification level to increase. and i'm damned sure she sent sensitive information. because, let's be real. if the secretary of state is not sending and recieving emails containing sensitive materials, the secretary of state is probably not doing a good job at all of being a diplomat. also, hell, how secure was her iphone, or whatever smartphone she was using? the whole damned reason that the government exclusively used blackberries for so damned long was because their email was more secure, the devices more secure. This report from the AP absolutely buries what should be its lede in paragraph 17. Former intelligence officials say it's a certainty that her server was compromised by foreign intelligence services. Unless they were encrypted to U.S. government standards, "In my opinion there is a 100% chance that all emails sent and received by her, including all the electronic correspondence stored on her server in her Chappaqua residence, were targeted and collected by the Russian equivalent of NSA," said former CIA case officer Jason Matthews, an expert in Russian intelligence. Yike.

Frayed Knot Aug 15 2015 08:25 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

btw, how much "work" has John Kerry had on his face?

Benjamin Grimm Aug 15 2015 09:30 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Not enough!

Ashie62 Aug 16 2015 03:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: btw, how much "work" has John Kerry had on his face? Is that why Trump called Kerry an "idiot" today?

MFS62 Aug 19 2015 07:38 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

You think US politics are interesting? My Canadian friend in Toronto sent me this: MONTREAL—The Rhinoceros party is back in the running in the federal election with a promise to nationalize Tim Hortons and move the capital to Kapuskasing, Ont. The 52-year-old political party is even offering outgoing MP Eve Adams, who lost a Liberal nomination after jumping from the Tories, a riding of her choice in any Toronto-area riding. The Rhinos have been on and off the election trail since 1963. This time, it’s promising, among other things, to move Canada’s capital from Ottawa to Kapuskasing — because it’s in the middle of the country. If the satirical Rhinos win a majority, they also have a big pilot project in their 2015-3015 election platform: the privatization of the Canadian army and the nationalization of Tim Hortons. Party leader Sebastien Corriveau was hoping to make the announcement Monday at a news conference in a Timmy’s in east-end Montreal, but he was thrown out. He had to settle on meeting reporters on the street in front of a military base across the street. “You know that Tim Hortons is a symbol of Canadian pride and we’re all very happy to be Canadians,” Corriveau said. “The best way to improve and defend Canadian values and the Canadian dream is to nationalize the Tim Hortons. “We’ll look at the results after five years, after 10 years, after 50 years and with the results of these studies we’ll be able to determine if other economic sectors should also be nationalized and be privatized.” Corriveau also boasted that the Rhinos are promising a mind-blowing experience at the ballot box on Oct. 19 for those who choose his party. “The moment when you vote Rhino, you will automatically have an orgasm,” he promised.“We’re also promising a monthly orgasm — so that’s why you have to vote for the Rhinoceros party — for happiness.” Founded in 1963 by physician and author Jacques Ferron, the party reformed in 2006 and fielded candidates in the 2008 and 2011 federal elections Corriveau longs for a repeat of the 1980s, when he said the Rhinos had 100 candidates coast to coast. One of them was Guy Laliberte, founder of the Cirque du Soleil, who ran for the Rhinos in 1980 and came fifth with 3 per cent of the vote (or 945 votes). But Montreal-area candidate Ben Benoit, who is running in his fourth federal election as a Rhino, admitted he won’t be happy if he wins. “I don’t want to move to Ottawa because it’s too far from my riding and it would be a big shock because I would have to change my job,” he said. But that didn’t stop Benoit from touting the party’s promise to move the nation’s capital to Kapuskasing in Ontario. “We find that it’s better-placed strategically in the centre of Canada,” he added. “It’s in the middle of Canada it’s the centre of the Earth.” How do we get that party on our local ballot? Later

Edgy MD Sep 17 2015 08:22 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Tom Brady outs himself as Donald Trump supporter, terrible person.

Ceetar Sep 17 2015 08:29 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Tom Brady outs himself as Donald Trump supporter, terrible person. He'd done this a couple of weeks ago actually, so now it's become a media "Ask Brady about Trump" thing.

Mets – Willets Point Sep 17 2015 09:31 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

16 GOP candidates should be paired off head to head in a bracket style election. Then again with the elite eight, final four, and a championship of the last two surviving candidates.

sharpie Sep 21 2015 02:19 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

It's quittin' time for Scott Walker. http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-d ... tial-race/

Mets – Willets Point Sep 21 2015 02:24 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom had sex with a dead pig. British political scandals outdo American political scandals every time.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 21 2015 02:31 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

sharpie wrote: It's quittin' time for Scott Walker. http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-d ... tial-race/ That's pretty amazing. Early on, weren't a lot of people expecting him to be Jeb Bush's main competition?

sharpie Sep 21 2015 02:42 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Early on, weren't a lot of people expecting him to be Jeb Bush's main competition? Yeah. He's this year's Tim Pawlenty.

Nymr83 Sep 21 2015 03:21 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

suprised to see Walker go, I thought others might have bowed out first.

Edgy MD Sep 21 2015 03:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Governor Perry waiting for him in the Loser's Lounge. Coming out of South Carolina, you should be looking at Ms. Fiorlina, Senator Rubio, and Governors Bush and Christie. Long have I foreseen it. I'm having trouble seeing Governor Christie's path, though. He could try the (failed) Mayor Giuliani strategy and put all his chips on Florida, hoping the state has enough northeast-aligned primary voters to make a dent, but that'll be hard with two strong Floridians still in the race. I guess he has to take one of the first two.

sharpie Sep 21 2015 03:53 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I think one of Carson, Huckabee or Cruz will still be around then. Don't see Christie making it that far as money will desert him if he doesn't win early.

Nymr83 Sep 21 2015 03:55 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Trump will also be there for as long as he sees a chance at continuing to get what he desires most - his face in the news.

TransMonk Sep 21 2015 04:23 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Scott Walker is a tool. I've never heard him utter an honest word. Good riddance.

Edgy MD Sep 21 2015 05:25 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

sharpie wrote: I think one of Carson, Huckabee or Cruz will still be around then. Don't see Christie making it that far as money will desert him if he doesn't win early. They may be around, but they won't be competitive at that point. Neither will Mr. Trump. Dr. Carson has motivation to stick around even if he isn't prospering, just to raise his profile and speaker fees.

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 21 2015 09:29 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 22 2015 04:02 AM

Walker's a good governor, and has survived two all-out attacks from national interests. I'm surprised that he's out this early. I think it's tough to gain traction when the GOP has such a deep, deep bench this time. There are a number of strong governors and former governors in the race, and I suspect they're all competing for the same type of donor. Walker didn't seem to make an impression at the debates and started saying some things that I suspect were attempts to gain some attention and misfired. Fiorina was very impressive and drew big crowds in Michigan this past weekend. Bush and Kasich, too. Five of the candidates were at the event.

Nymr83 Sep 21 2015 10:18 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

That's exactly how I feel with Walker. Fiorina just scares me, I like what I know about her, but having never held office scares me That we might even have someone less "qualified" than Obama, the worst and least qualified president in history.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Sep 22 2015 12:54 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Walker's a good governor, and has survived two all-out attacks from national interests. I'm surprised that he's out this early. Live by out-of-state money...

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 22 2015 04:06 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Walker's a good governor, and has survived two all-out attacks from national interests. I'm surprised that he's out this early. Live by out-of-state money... I think he had to. When a candidate is made the target by national groups, national money is going to come pouring in and you have to either try to balance that or try to get by spending less.

Ceetar Sep 22 2015 08:35 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Trump on Colbert tonight should be fun.

TransMonk Sep 22 2015 10:07 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Walker's a good governor, and has survived two all-out attacks from national interests. I'm surprised that he's out this early. Live by out-of-state money... I think he had to. When a candidate is made the target by national groups, national money is going to come pouring in and you have to either try to balance that or try to get by spending less. Why was Walker a target of the national groups? IMO, it's because he was pushing the national conservative agenda, not necessarily what was good for the state. He's a good puppet...not much more. I would also say that had the national attacks been "all-out", Walker would no longer be governor.

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 22 2015 11:22 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

TransMonk wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Walker's a good governor, and has survived two all-out attacks from national interests. I'm surprised that he's out this early. Live by out-of-state money... I think he had to. When a candidate is made the target by national groups, national money is going to come pouring in and you have to either try to balance that or try to get by spending less. Why was Walker a target of the national groups? IMO, it's because he was pushing the national conservative agenda, not necessarily what was good for the state. He's a good puppet...not much more. I would also say that had the national attacks been "all-out", Walker would no longer be governor. Not sure I agree with that. The unions unquestionably targeted Walker not once, but twice. The fact that he survived that onslaught makes his short-lived presidential campaign all the more surprising. As for the agenda, the voters in a traditionally bluish state have now had three chances to elect him, including, what, twice in three years? Clearly a majority of Wisconsinites think what he's doing is good for the state or they wouldn't keep re-electing him.

TransMonk Sep 22 2015 11:55 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Clearly a majority of Wisconsinites think what he's doing is good for the state or they wouldn't keep re-electing him. Again...follow the out-of-state money.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 22 2015 12:00 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I guess that also means that a majority of Americans feel that Barack Obama is doing a good job too, huh?

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 22 2015 12:22 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

TransMonk wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Clearly a majority of Wisconsinites think what he's doing is good for the state or they wouldn't keep re-electing him. Again...follow the out-of-state money. On both sides.

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 22 2015 12:32 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I guess that also means that a majority of Americans feel that Barack Obama is doing a good job too, huh? They certainly did elect him twice. The caution there is that his party suffered historic defeats -- losing both the House and the Senate, and a majority of the gubernatorial elections -- in the off-year elections, largely in response to his policies. The off-year elections usually don't help the sitting president's party, but these were historic losses. That's why his ad libbed boast at the State of the Union -- "I won both of my elections" -- came off as so tone deaf because the truth is that many of the people in Congress sitting in the seats before him were elected in response to him. And a fair number of his party's leaders either lost election bids or retired before they could lose. And, I'd argue, that being elected three times in four years as Walker did is a little different than a president being elected once. If a majority of the people in Wisconsin were unhappy, they had more opportunities than usual to run him out.

Ceetar Sep 22 2015 12:40 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

you make it sound like an election is based solely, even mostly, on the general populations approval. Seems that's a distant factor after money, corporate interests, cronyism, gerrymandering, and the other guy being just shy of corrupt enough to motivate voters to oust him.

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 22 2015 12:42 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: you make it sound like an election is based solely, even mostly, on the general populations approval. Seems that's a distant factor after money, corporate interests, cronyism, gerrymandering, and the other guy being just shy of corrupt enough to motivate voters to oust him. I think when we start discounting the outcomes of public elections just because we don't like the guy who won, we head down a troubling path.

Ceetar Sep 22 2015 12:46 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Ceetar wrote: you make it sound like an election is based solely, even mostly, on the general populations approval. Seems that's a distant factor after money, corporate interests, cronyism, gerrymandering, and the other guy being just shy of corrupt enough to motivate voters to oust him. I think when we start discounting the outcomes of public elections just because we don't like the guy who won, we head down a troubling path. well sure, but I like Obama and think he's doing/did a good job. I just know that the midterm elections were hardly about 'striking back' at him nor should politics be framed in a battle between two parties, because more and more people would rather it be about real things.

TransMonk Sep 22 2015 01:21 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Ceetar wrote: you make it sound like an election is based solely, even mostly, on the general populations approval. Seems that's a distant factor after money, corporate interests, cronyism, gerrymandering, and the other guy being just shy of corrupt enough to motivate voters to oust him. I think when we start discounting the outcomes of public elections just because we don't like the guy who won, we head down a troubling path. Don't mix up two different things here. I don't like the outcome of SOME elections. I think money is the biggest factor in the outcome of nearly ALL elections. Based on what you do and where I live, I don't expect us to ever be on the same page on Walker. But, IMO, money in elections is the FAR more troubling path.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Sep 23 2015 10:40 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

And we're already WELL down that path. Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: I think he had to. When a candidate is made the target by national groups, national money is going to come pouring in and you have to either try to balance that or try to get by spending less. With all due respect, squire, I believe you've got it backwards. The tap first started flowing before his initial 2010 election. Koch money wasn't used to defend a political kindred spirit; instead, their PAC coffers-- via both direct donations and Republican Governors' Association disbursements-- were used to push a guy who'd push their public union agenda.

Mets Guy in Michigan Sep 24 2015 06:28 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: And we're already WELL down that path. Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: I think he had to. When a candidate is made the target by national groups, national money is going to come pouring in and you have to either try to balance that or try to get by spending less. With all due respect, squire, I believe you've got it backwards. The tap first started flowing before his initial 2010 election. Koch money wasn't used to defend a political kindred spirit; instead, their PAC coffers-- via both direct donations and Republican Governors' Association disbursements-- were used to push a guy who'd push their public union agenda. I was referring to the recall election and the 2014 re-election bid. There is no doubt he was targeted,

sharpie Sep 25 2015 08:52 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Surprised that it's quittin' time for John Boehner. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/us/jo ... v=top-news

Frayed Knot Sep 25 2015 10:37 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

sharpie wrote: Surprised that it's quittin' time for John Boehner. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/us/jo ... v=top-news I assume he cried at the announcement.

Nymr83 Sep 25 2015 01:18 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I'm not very surprised. He is stuck between the moderate and conservative wings of his party and stuck with a president likely to veto anything he passes, if it even makes it past a senate filibuster. If his party was united behind him maybe it would make sense to stay on, but he probably realizes that we are getting close enough to the election (as if we arent in a 24/7/366 cycle anyway) that nothing is going to get done and it makes more sense for the new leadership to get in now

Frayed Knot Sep 25 2015 08:40 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

In other political news, Hillary Clinton has apparently grown several inches taller in recent years. Her campaign bio lists here at 5' 7" after saying during her run eight years ago that she was 5' 5". There's hope for older folks yet.

Edgy MD Sep 25 2015 09:01 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: Surprised that it's quittin' time for John Boehner. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/26/us/jo ... v=top-news I assume he cried at the announcement. Don't knock the criers. Criers made this world. Criers are our hope for the future. I'll tell you now that grown men cry and Irish girls are pretty. You cry all you want, Mr. Orange-Guy.

Nymr83 Sep 25 2015 10:16 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: In other political news, Hillary Clinton has apparently grown several inches taller in recent years. Her campaign bio lists here at 5' 7" after saying during her run eight years ago that she was 5' 5". There's hope for older folks yet. When you're a Clinton words lose their meaning. Height, Sex, it doesn't matter, you can just make up your own definition when it suits you.

Mets – Willets Point Sep 26 2015 08:39 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Wilmer Flores for Speaker!

Frayed Knot Sep 26 2015 10:01 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets – Willets Point wrote: Wilmer Flores for Speaker! He knows all there is to know about the crying game.

Edgy MD Oct 14 2015 07:26 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

CNN's lead post-debate story waited until paragraph 24 to include a quote from anybody other than Secretary Hilary Clinton. Even the design of their front page looks like a morning-after-the election victory layout. [fimg=500:7oy1wn3t]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/screen-shot-2015-10-14-at-9-27-44-am.png[/fimg:7oy1wn3t]

Nymr83 Oct 15 2015 10:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

they don't call it the Clinton News Network for nothing! that story was probably pre-written and just waiting to fill a few specific quotes from the actual debate in. meanwhile, is Daniel Murphy running?

Edgy MD Oct 20 2015 11:21 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Senator Jim Webb, being out raised 43:1 by Secretary Hilary Clinton and 38:1 by Senator Bernie Sanders, drops out of the Democratic primary. A grim reality-check for a guy whose platform was about getting the money chase out of the political process. That leaves five major candidates on the Democratic side: Governor Lincoln Chafee, Secretary Hillary Clinton, Professor Lawrence Lessig, Governor Martin O'Malley, and Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator Webb's side is hinting at an independent run. I'm guessing no.

Mets – Willets Point Oct 20 2015 11:35 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Meanwhile, Joe Biden is the new Mario Cuomo.

Frayed Knot Oct 20 2015 11:51 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Senator Webb's side is hinting at an independent run. I'm guessing no. In a Clinton/Trump race, an indie could gain some traction. Not enough to win I'm sure, but he could be a wrench in both their gears. Webb's kind of a weird guy. Some think he should be a Republican anyway but he doesn't seem to think so. I read a book he wrote a bunch of years back on the history of the Scots-Irish in America. He seemed to be awfully proud of a legacy that shunned education and would fight first and ask questions later if at all. Long family military background; gave all his sons the middle name of Lee in honor of Robert E.; been married three times including currently to a one-time Vietnamese refugee 22 years his junior; got into a brief tiff with George W. over a seemingly innocent question about his son's military status.

MFS62 Oct 20 2015 09:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Hey, I should run for President. I still have questions about George W's military status. Later

Frayed Knot Oct 20 2015 09:20 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 21 2015 07:49 AM

No, it was Bush asking Webb about his (Webb's) son's deployment to which Webb gave a terse 'none of your business' kind of answer. Apparently Webb didn't agree with being in Iraq or with how things were being conducted there. Nothing wrong with that of course but it just seemed like he picked a seemingly innocent question to basically jump down the President's throat and to do so in public. I believe he later quasi-apologized but Webb seems to take the title of his book on the Scots-Irish I mentioned above, 'BORN FIGHTING', a bit too literally sometimes. And suddenly there are stories about his PAC paying "tens of thousands" to several of his relatives.

Edgy MD Oct 21 2015 07:08 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Webb's platform set him apart from the others in the primary, and for that reason, I'm glad he ran, but no, he seems far too unstable (emotional and scrappy with his ideology) to give serious consideration to. I just wish there was a greater population of folks between the empty-suited, finger-to-the-wind types who change positions exactly when it's expedient, and megalomaniacal ideologues.

Frayed Knot Oct 21 2015 11:41 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Biden NOT running.

El Segundo Escupidor Oct 21 2015 12:00 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: Biden NOT running.

Edgy MD Oct 21 2015 12:05 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"If I could be anything, I would have wanted to have been the president that ended cancer, because it's possible." — Joe F. Biden

Ceetar Oct 21 2015 12:16 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: "If I could be anything, I would have wanted to have been the president that ended cancer, because it's possible." — Joe F. Biden pretty sure that one's gonna happen in a lab somewhere.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 21 2015 12:21 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

If Donald Trump becomes president he'll end cancer. He'll hire the smartest people, the best people. And he'll make the Mexicans pay for it!

MFS62 Oct 22 2015 09:26 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ryan is taking a few days off to be with his family. Isn't he the guy who has voted against paid family leave? If he's not taking/ using vacation days (do representatives get them, or just government holidays?) I hope he'll refund his salary for that time to the US Treasury. Later

Benjamin Grimm Oct 22 2015 10:02 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

To be fair, there's a difference between vacation days and paid family leave.

Frayed Knot Oct 22 2015 10:05 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

This just in: No one is "ending" cancer, least of all not a politician.

metsmarathon Oct 22 2015 12:56 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

the only way to "end cancer" is to end life. so, uh, yeah, i think the donald has a chance.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 23 2015 09:14 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"Y'know, I heard the weirdest dream the other night, where I was on a stage with Larry David and Hillary Clinton and some guy who seemed proud of killing people, and it was all on TV. Isn't that doofy? Kind of a nightmare, actually. Thank God it's over. Want to go grab some Chai? I could go for some Chai."

Ashie62 Oct 23 2015 06:53 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

This guy was a fruitloop.

Edgy MD Oct 26 2015 11:11 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

And Ryan's apparently willing to consider the speakership after all. Probably the best thing for all involved. Yay, government!

Mets – Willets Point Nov 03 2015 11:38 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Boston City Councilor Bill Linehan won reelection today in a tight race where he got 53% of the vote. He ran unopposed.

Edgy MD Nov 04 2015 05:57 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Boo, government.

MFS62 Nov 04 2015 07:04 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

In Bridgeport, CT, an ex-mayor who has spend over 5 years in jail was re-elected mayor. Later

Frayed Knot Nov 04 2015 07:37 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

So apparently ex-felons are barred from voting but not barred from being voted for. At least he wasn't actively in jail at the time of his election, although it wouldn't be the first time that's happened either.

seawolf17 Nov 04 2015 08:00 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Our local legislator, with all precincts reporting, appears to have won re-election... by one vote.

Ceetar Nov 04 2015 08:19 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

my local town 'republican party' ousted the Mayor for another guy, who ran unopposed, won something like 1000-150 (write in votes for the current mayor) well, 1000-150-1 the 1 being my write-in vote for Noah Syndergaard. I also tried to vote Elmo onto the Board of Ed. 4 people running for three spots, the only local election not run completely unopposed.

Mets – Willets Point Nov 04 2015 08:27 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

RIP, American democracy.

Mets Guy in Michigan Nov 08 2015 06:44 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

MFS62 wrote: In Bridgeport, CT, an ex-mayor who has spend over 5 years in jail was re-elected mayor. Later I used to work for the newspaper in Bridgeport, back when it was the Bridgeport Post and the Telegram. Very colorful place. On my very first day as an intern, I was sent to hang out with the City Hall reporter, and we went over to visit the Mayor. We walked into the lobby and sitting there, in a spectacularly colorful, traditional gown was Miss Puerto Rico Bridgeport. She had enough ruffles to fill two seats. Leaving the office as we arrived was Famous Amos, the cookie guy. I'm not sure if he's still around. We walked into the office amid this surreal scene and the mayor says, "Hey kid, have a cookie." Right then and there I knew I loved being are reporter. You just don't know who in the heck you are going to run into on a typical day.

Edgy MD Nov 08 2015 08:06 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Still Alive: Wally "Famous" Amos, though he goes by the name "Uncle Wally" since losing control of the Famous Amos brand.

metsmarathon Nov 17 2015 12:53 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" well, unless they're not christians, or could be not-christians, or if they're from a country that doesn't have a lot of christians, or if they look like - but are actually fleeing from - people who have done very terrible things. then, those fuckers can just burn in hell, or freeze, or maybe go back home to be executed by actual terrorists. but all the other tired, poor people, the ones who look like me and believe like me. and preferably only the smart, nice ones with a lot of money, and also plenty of time on their hands and aren't really in a big rush to get in - those guys can totally come on in. as long as they pass the religion test, that is. and aren't brown. of course. sigh.

Edgy MD Nov 17 2015 03:20 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I've read a lot of fake statistics the last two days.

metsmarathon Nov 17 2015 05:54 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Isn't refusing the refugees entry step 1 of alienating them and sending them on their way to radicalism and extremism? Isn't it harder to turn against a people who had reached out to offer assistance at your time of greatest need?

Nymr83 Nov 17 2015 06:48 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: I've read a lot of fake statistics the last two days. This was the best one I saw, no idea if it was true or satirical but the poit it makes is pretty good either way.

Edgy MD Nov 17 2015 10:24 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

That cites a source. But it's all bolluxed up. The ones I keep butting up against are (1) that 80% (!) of the refugees the US is planning to give refuge to are "young men of fighting age" and (2) that one in four refugees "have been infiltrated." I'm not sure what that even means, but if it's bad, I'd like to think whoever collected that data might tip us off as to which one in four they are.

Lefty Specialist Nov 21 2015 03:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Refugees are a convenient punching bag at the moment, but it's really really hard to enter the US as a refugee these days (Cubans excepted). That's why all the posturing by Republicans (Christie, Trump and Cruz being the worst but they have plenty of company) is almost beside the point. The 9/11 attackers weren't refugees, they got visas and overstayed them. But tightening up on tourist visas would have powerful lobbying enemies from the travel biz, doncha know. The Donald has it figured out, though. It gets cold in the US in the winter, so that'll discourage the Syrians, "who are used to 130 degrees", from coming here. Yuge, as he might say.

Edgy MD Nov 21 2015 03:42 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The Donald can't get off stage soon enough. I never took his candidacy seriously because I never thought it'd get out early primaries alive. But now he's poisoned the waters of a real issue. Show some backbone, Americans.

d'Kong76 Nov 21 2015 04:05 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets – Willets Point Nov 21 2015 05:25 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Starting to wonder if Trump is participating in a conspiracy to get Clinton elected and it's gotten out of hand.

Nymr83 Nov 21 2015 06:57 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: The Donald can't get off stage soon enough. I never took his candidacy seriously because I never thought it'd get out early primaries alive. But now he's poisoned the waters of a real issue. Show some backbone, Americans. He still hasn't gotten through an actual vote by actual people, but the media are always in need of a story and they are just gobbling up his bullshit for ratings

Mets Guy in Michigan Nov 21 2015 07:10 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I like our statement on the refugee issue. Here's our guest column in Time magazine: [url]http://time.com/4116637/paris-attacks-rick-snyder-refugees/

Lefty Specialist Nov 21 2015 07:58 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The Donald and The Ben won't get very far in the primaries because to win primaries requires a real organization, which neither of them have. It's why so many other Republicans have stuck around- they know that when people actually start to vote, those two will be nowhere and the media will be writing pieces about "What Happened to Donald Trump?" Well, what will happen will be obvious to anyone who thinks beyond the horserace of the moment. Trump is good TV soundbite stuff. The media do all his advertising for free; he knows it and they know it. But he's such good TV that they're unwilling to put the crack pipe down. Only when the actual voters intercede will his latest reality show end.

Edgy MD Nov 22 2015 07:22 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Nymr83 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: The Donald can't get off stage soon enough. I never took his candidacy seriously because I never thought it'd get out early primaries alive. But now he's poisoned the waters of a real issue. Show some backbone, Americans. He still hasn't gotten through an actual vote by actual people, but the media are always in need of a story and they are just gobbling up his bullshit for ratings I know. I think I'm trying to say as much. My position is that the media's appetite for him has given him an actual voice in an actual important debate, leading to an actual important Congressional vote. And he won!

Ceetar Nov 23 2015 07:43 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

A person that actually follows politics might have some real insight. But spitballing, it feels like the Republican primary will have record turnout just for the silent majority that isn't (as?) racist and stupid to vote against Trump. Much like the persistence of Bernie Sanders might bring out, and band together, all the people that were previously resigned to Hillary but didn't really like her.

Nymr83 Nov 30 2015 02:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Sheldon Silver convicted :)

Benjamin Grimm Dec 09 2015 07:02 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar Dec 09 2015 07:09 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Amusing. Wrong of course, but it's not like accuracy is common in the Daily News.

d'Kong76 Dec 09 2015 07:41 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I was going to post something yesterday but a)what's the point, and b)most people here don't care what I think. Trump is a kookoohead; just when he says something so stupid you think he can't outdo him- self with that one he pulls another stupid statement out of his bag of tricks. It's hard to believe that people are still buying his vaudeville act. Kookoohead.

Ceetar Dec 09 2015 07:48 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I despise the election coverage and the popular political discourse that goes on in the general public and Trump is simply a product of that. We're still so far out that it's just the media looking for quotes and Trump providing. It's much like someone will float a ridiculous baseball trade or super hype up a worthless comment ("Eli's not Elite!") and WFAN will talk about it for a week during the offseason, but pretend the offseason is 2 years long.

d'Kong76 Dec 09 2015 08:09 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I despise it too, doesn't change the fact that Herr Trumpster sounds more like he's running for dictator than president.

MFS62 Dec 09 2015 08:20 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

d'Kong76 wrote: Kookoohead. A brief, but accurate, description. Later

metsmarathon Dec 09 2015 08:30 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I find myself deeply embarrassed and ashamed for each of my facebook friends that expresses support in that kookoohead. I'm shocked and dismayed that "keep all the muslims out" is even a remotely valid stance to take, and even express.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 09 2015 08:58 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Trump isn't even trying to win, he's trying to court attention and controversy so as to enhance his own brand. Studies show he's very popular with poor white idiots. Once he's drummed out of the election, he can preside as the Uncrowned Champion of White Idiot America in a way Sarah palin could only dream of. The shame is that his stunt as edgy noted appears to be actually influencing debate.

Ceetar Dec 09 2015 09:06 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

premiering in January on Fox News "If I Won" staring Donald Trump.

Edgy MD Dec 09 2015 09:16 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: Amusing. Wrong of course, but it's not like accuracy is common in the Daily News. The News is on fire with provocative distortion and outright inaccuracy these last two weeks. Very embarrassing when I agree with their perspective but see them as grossly irresponsible in pushing it. I see this as more defensible than some of their earlier covers. I'm not sure it doesn't still help Trump's brand, however.

Mets – Willets Point Dec 09 2015 09:28 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Trump isn't even trying to win, he's trying to court attention and controversy so as to enhance his own brand. Studies show he's very popular with poor white idiots. Once he's drummed out of the election, he can preside as the Uncrowned Champion of White Idiot America in a way Sarah palin could only dream of. The shame is that his stunt as edgy noted appears to be actually influencing debate. This. I don't even think he necessarily believes all the things he says, he just tries to be as outrageous as possible and rile people up. And since he's able pay for the campaign himself he can stay in the election all the way to the convention if he likes.

Frayed Knot Dec 09 2015 09:46 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Probably everyone knew someone in your junior high school who was seemingly born without the embarrassment gene, the guy who simply couldn't be mocked because he either didn't care or simply refused to acknowledge how dopey he sounded or looked. Well Trump is that guy all grown up and now backed by a few billion dollars. I never thought he'd ever run much less win. He was forever saying he could be Mayor, Senator, Governor whenever he wanted but was too busy/important/whatever to run, thus giving himself the title of the winner without ever risking being a loser. So after getting that one entirely wrong, I still don't think he'll win the nomination -- sooner or later as the field thins out, all the backing for the 'traditional' candidates will start to accumulate on fewer guys and therefore start to rival the 'anti-insider' movement that's now mostly on Trump with (increasingly less) side support for Carson & Fiorina -- but it's embarrassing that he's gotten this far with substantial leads in the polls and backing for his words of this week. The best thing about that DN cartoon is that the artwork is better than most of the stuff they've had in recent years - or at least seems to be viewed in small size.

Nymr83 Dec 09 2015 11:01 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Mets – Willets Point wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Trump isn't even trying to win, he's trying to court attention and controversy so as to enhance his own brand. Studies show he's very popular with poor white idiots. Once he's drummed out of the election, he can preside as the Uncrowned Champion of White Idiot America in a way Sarah palin could only dream of. The shame is that his stunt as edgy noted appears to be actually influencing debate. This. I don't even think he necessarily believes all the things he says, he just tries to be as outrageous as possible and rile people up. And since he's able pay for the campaign himself he can stay in the election all the way to the convention if he likes. he doesn't even need to pay for ads, the media is doing it all for him, tripping over themselves to cover him (negatively) at every possible opportunity. this will continue until he is far enough behind in actual voting that they cant even pretend he is a story anymore. then they'll all tell you they saw it coming and pat themselves on the back for "calling it" when they were really doing the opposite.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 09 2015 10:39 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

The real head-scratcher for me is how in some precincts the Japanese-American internment is being referred to in defenses of Trump's/Trump-simpatico comments. Like, as a necessary, get-tough evil.

metsmarathon Dec 10 2015 07:25 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

yesterday on facebook I saw passed around a bit from fox news that attempted to defend trump wanting to bar entry and/or banish all muslims from the country by stating that, previously, a democratic president had barred entry and banished people from a nation which was predominantly muslim! so clearly, it's not racist or unconstitutional if trump wants to banish people from all muslim countries. except that was when a predominantly-muslim nation committed an act of overt aggression against our own, in which the American embassy in iran was overrun and many hostages were taken. in which case, I'm fairly certain that it is a relatively common occurrence to bar entry to our nation those people from a nation which has engaged in war against us, and to expel those members of that nation that are visiting our soil. in other words, I don't think we let in too many german tourists during world war 2, and probably sent packing the ones that were already here! ... at this point, where the world is now, many of our most important allies are predominantly muslim nations. turkey is a vital ally against Russian aggression and expansion, as they control entry to the black sea. nearly every nation in the middle east is a vital ally in the war on terror - hint: if you want people to be your friend, it's probably better to not refer to them as your enemy - and is an equally important ally against Iranian aggression. let alone the importance of maintaining friendly relations with Pakistan to help cool their jets against any aggression with India, and vice versa. and I'm sure that if anything untoward were to occur with china, we'd really much prefer to have the rest of southeast Asia on our side. and I haven't even touched on northern Africa. all the anti-muslim shit that has been spilled since 9-11, and even before, has made more difficult our attempts at peace and global stability. its undermined the war efforts (however ill-advised) we have undertaken, especially when one of the stated goals of those war efforts was and continues to be to "win the hearts and minds." fuck, it's damned-near treasonous.

Ceetar Dec 10 2015 07:48 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

metsmarathon wrote: in other words, I don't think we let in too many german tourists during world war 2, and probably sent packing the ones that were already here! Yes, we probably did. And sent those German Jews away to their death.

Edgy MD Dec 10 2015 08:23 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I got eight, at least one or two of which I suspect are ironic. I think. Friends Who Like Trump

Ceetar Dec 10 2015 09:00 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: I got eight, at least one or two of which I suspect are ironic. I think. Friends Who Like Trump 1, but I don't have a lot of friends. Only cousin on my Mother's side.

cooby Dec 10 2015 09:10 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I have five, two are mother and son, one who posts here, one lady whom I don't know but friended me after my husbands class reunion, and one my classmates that I didn't know well

cooby Dec 10 2015 09:10 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Not my mother and son btw

Nymr83 Dec 10 2015 09:25 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

instead of just doing this for Trump we should see how all the candidates stack up among our friends!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 10 2015 10:23 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: I got eight, at least one or two of which I suspect are ironic. I think. Friends Who Like Trump None, but I suspect if they had one of these for Carson, I'd have a few... um... discerning in-laws in there.

d'Kong76 Dec 10 2015 10:29 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I got two; one I know from high school, the other actually is still in high school.

Ceetar Dec 10 2015 10:33 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Isn't the Trump thing misleading? It's certainly possible many people clicked 'like' on his page for Apprentice reasons, or who knows what, years ago.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 10 2015 11:02 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Geez, I got 10 and at least 2 others who are big fans but haven't "liked" him. Strangest case is a guy I knew in high school who grew up to be a leading gay triathlete/bobybuilder.

Edgy MD Dec 10 2015 11:13 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Isn't the Trump thing misleading? It's certainly possible many people clicked 'like' on his page for Apprentice reasons, or who knows what, years ago. That doesn't exactly make the strongest of cases. [list]Hey, whoa, back off. I didn't like him for his hateful immigration policies, I liked him for his brainkiller of a reality show, and his using eminent domain to steal property from small businesses, and his hypocritical fashion lines, how he turned Rich New York Dick into a brand we can all be proud of, and I really like that he fired your dad without cause in 1990.[/list:u]

Ceetar Dec 10 2015 11:16 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Isn't the Trump thing misleading? It's certainly possible many people clicked 'like' on his page for Apprentice reasons, or who knows what, years ago. That doesn't exactly make the strongest of cases. [list]Hey, whoa, back off. I didn't like him for his hateful immigration policies, I liked him for his brainkiller of a reality show, and his using eminent domain to steal property from small businesses, and his hypocritical fashion lines, how he turned Rich New York Dick into a brand we can all be proud of, and I really like that he fired your dad without cause in 1990.[/list:u] eh, there's a huge difference in being entertained by his show and thinking he's qualified for president.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 10 2015 12:01 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"I don't care for the Muslim thing, either. I just like how he keeps getting hotter and hotter pieces, you know. Get that ass, Fired Guy!" Neither brand of Trumplovin' makes much of a case for I'm Someone You Should Know, is what he's saying. And, yeah, I'm there, too.

d'Kong76 Dec 10 2015 12:07 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Ceetar wrote: It's certainly possible many people clicked 'like' on his page for Apprentice reasons He ran for apprentice too?

Mets – Willets Point Dec 10 2015 01:38 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Whew! Sorry, we couldn't find any results for this search.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 10 2015 01:39 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I also came up with zero results. Thankfully!

Mets – Willets Point Dec 10 2015 01:54 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Nymr83 wrote: instead of just doing this for Trump we should see how all the candidates stack up among our friends! Bernie Sanders - 18 friends Jill Stein - 3 friends Chris Christie - 1 friend Marco Rubio - 1 friend (note: same friend likes both Christie and Rubio Jeb Bush - 0 friends Ben Carson - 0 friends Hilary Clinton - 0 friends (search shows 1 friend likes "Democrats Against Hilary Clinton in 2016") Ted Cruz - 0 friends Carly Fiorina - 0 friends Jim Gilmore - 0 friends Lindsey Graham - 0 friends Mike Huckabee - 0 friends John Kasich - 0 friends Martin O'Malley - 0 friends George Pataki - 0 friends Rand Paul - 0 friends Rick Santorum - 0 friends Donald Trump - 0 friends

Ceetar Dec 10 2015 02:03 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Bernie Sanders - 6 Hilary Clinton -6 Rand Paul - 2 Ben Carson - 2 Jill Stein - 1 Donald Trump - 1 Marco Rubio - 1 Chris Christie - 0 Deez Nuts - 0 Jeb Bush - 0 friends Ted Cruz - 0 friends Carly Fiorina - 0 friends Jim Gilmore - 0 friends Lindsey Graham - 0 friends Mike Huckabee - 0 friends John Kasich - 0 friends Martin O'Malley - 0 friends George Pataki - 0 friends Rick Santorum - 0 friends

Edgy MD Dec 10 2015 02:26 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Jeb Bush - 1 friend (my nephew/Godson, who I imagine "likes" him) Ben Carson - 9 friends (2 from here) Chris Christie - 1 friend (from here) Hilary Clinton - 9 friends (1 from here) Ted Cruz - 4 friends (1 from here) Carly Fiorina - 2 friends (1 of whom posts nothing but factually incorrect and poorly spelled left-baiting meme images) Jim Gilmore - 0 friends (sniffle) Lindsey Graham - 0 friends (also shut out on Lindsay Lohan and, surprisingly, Lindsey Nelson) Mike Huckabee - 1 friends John Kasich - 0 friends (Most ready-to-be-president guy in the Republican debates, from my perspective) Martin O'Malley - 7 friends (go home team!) George Pataki - 1 friends (Mets blogger who may only "like" him because he works as a journalist) Rand Paul - 2 friends Marco Rubio - 3 friends (1 from here) Bernie Sanders - 27 friends (four from here, one who is a sibling of somebody here) Rick Santorum - 2 friends Jill Stein - 1 friend (I'm unfamiliar with this candidacy) Donald Trump - 8 friends (1 from here) That settles it. Congratulations, President Sanders.

Nymr83 Dec 10 2015 06:25 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

It would be interesting to do this with different groups of friends as well. There are a bunch of duplicates in the list below - 1 person even liked about 5 candidates, talk about spamming up your facebook feed! 10: Hilary Clinton 7: Marco Rubio 7: Bernie Sanders 3: Chris Christie 3: Ted Cruz 3: Donald Trump 3: Mike Huckabee 2: Ben Carson 1: George Pataki 1: Rand Paul 1: Jim Gilmore Big Fat Zero: Jill Stein, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, Martin O'Malley, John Kasich, Rick Santorum

metsmarathon Dec 11 2015 07:55 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Oy. This is why I don't get political on Facebook.

metsmarathon Dec 11 2015 11:14 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Baa.

Frayed Knot Dec 11 2015 12:28 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Nymr83 wrote: Sheldon Silver convicted :) And now his longtime Republican counterpart Dean Skelos (plus his non-politico son) joins him in convict-land. As George Patton (or at least the movie version of him) said about a battle scene: "God help me but I do love it so"

MFS62 Dec 11 2015 12:32 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 11 2015 12:36 PM

Connecticut just became the first State to ban the sale of weapons to persons on the Federal Government watch list. It probably won't have much (if any) impact on the ability of terrorists to get guns (they can leave the State or have others buy guns for them), but at least it is a symbolic start. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/connecticut ... YHF4eb9d17 Later

cooby Dec 11 2015 12:33 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

How are you doing this? Btw I'm pretty sure I have liked both Hillary Clinton and Bernie sanders

Edgy MD Dec 11 2015 12:36 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

It's more than symbolic. It's certainly harder to obtain guns through a front or transport them across state lines. Not hard enough, but certainly harder. It'd be interesting if Speaker Silver and Senator Skelos got a cell together. Actually, I'd pitch that as a movie treatment. One of my Facebook friendlies who seemingly does nothing but push Bernie Sanders all... day... long... is now pushing the notion that the San Bernadino shootings were a false flag attack perpetrated by three white dudes with the Muslim couple as stooges.

Edgy MD Dec 11 2015 12:37 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Coo, go to FB, and in the search field type in "my friends who like hillary clinton" or Jim Gilmore or whoever.

Edgy MD Dec 11 2015 12:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

i amazingly have 16 friends who like Dean Skelos but none who like Sheldon Silver. So my friends tilt way left on the national scene but way right on the statewide/convicted scene.

cooby Dec 11 2015 12:42 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Thanks edgy. That kind of stuff makes me sick. Do you guys remember Justbec? She saw the second plane on 9-11 (and maybe the first one too) and there is all sorts of stuff about 9-11, sandy hook, San Bernardino, etc being fake or a government plot. There is even some guy that claims Jonbenet Ramsey is Katy perry. How do these people live with themselves?

Edgy MD Dec 11 2015 12:43 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

cooby wrote: There is even some guy that claims Jonbenet Ramsey is Katy perry. How do these people live with themselves? A new one, that.

cooby Dec 11 2015 12:45 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Came across it the other night on YouTube. Sickening. That dear little girl does not deserve this after all thse years. Neither does Katy perry

Frayed Knot Dec 11 2015 01:12 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Conspiracy theorists can be an interesting* bunch in that often the same folks will call you a nut FOR subscribing to certain conspiracies and then turn around and think you're off your rocker for NOT believing in others. * and by 'interesting' I mean not really interesting at all but their logic in getting there can be

cooby Dec 11 2015 01:54 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Thank you metfairy for writing to me and asking me to clarify... What I mean about Becky is that she saw it happening (as did millions of New Yorkers) and there is no way the second plane was photoshopped into official videos, as is suggested by some you tubers

Nymr83 Dec 11 2015 08:52 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Frayed Knot wrote: Sheldon Silver convicted :) And now his longtime Republican counterpart Dean Skelos (plus his non-politico son) joins him in convict-land. As George Patton (or at least the movie version of him) said about a battle scene: "God help me but I do love it so" Skelos is merely his "junior" partner, his true crooked Republican buddy, Joseph Bruno, was already convicted!

Nymr83 Dec 11 2015 08:53 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: It's more than symbolic. It's certainly harder to obtain guns through a front or transport them across state lines. Not hard enough, but certainly harder. It'd be interesting if Speaker Silver and Senator Skelos got a cell together. Actually, I'd pitch that as a movie treatment. One of my Facebook friendlies who seemingly does nothing but push Bernie Sanders all... day... long... is now pushing the notion that the San Bernadino shootings were a false flag attack perpetrated by three white dudes with the Muslim couple as stooges. that would be an "unfriend" for me.

metsmarathon Dec 12 2015 10:11 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

"Hey, remember that time we put a criminal, who was black, in jail? We should totally put all the blacks in jail, because precedent." Smdh. Actually the better analogy is, "remember the time we tore down a slum, where a bunch of black people lived, because the owner was a greedy, rotten, lawbreaking dickbag? We should totally tear down all the black peoples houses, because precedent."

Edgy MD Dec 15 2015 07:37 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

By the way, here in Bal'more, we're wrapping up the first of the trials of the cops being prosecuted for the death of Freddy Gray. No matter which way it goes, I have trouble seeing how it can't play into the hands of a demagogue like Trump.

Edgy MD Dec 16 2015 08:53 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Weirdest part of last night's debate was the very first moment. Clearly, the candidates were jumping to begin climbing all over each other to see who could be the look the toughest and contrast himself best with the president in the fight against Islamic terrorism. So Senator Paul has to introduce himself first, trying to simultaneously look like an anti-ISIS badass while maintaining his brand as the heir to his father's signature non-interventionism. So he ultimately tries to convince us he's going to crush ISIS while using Arab foot soldiers to stick their necks out and do the dirty work, which hit me as strikingly similar to building a 2,000-mile wall between the US and Mexico and making Mexico pay for it.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2015 09:46 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Lindsey Graham, one of the more serious candidates for president, if nobody's favorite, suspends his campaign, tired of being stuck in the undercard debates. Had been, after the withdrawal of Former Senator and Navy Secretary Jim Webb from the Democratic race, the only remaining candidate with military service, having reached the rank of full Colonel, and continued his reserve service with a deployment to Iraq as recently as 2007. Nonetheless, still projected the cherubic look of a fake TV evangelist into his sixties.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2015 12:41 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I'm sick of the euphemism "suspends his campaign" for "dropping out of the race." I guess they're trying to leave the door open that they'd be the choice of a brokered convention, but that's SUCH a remote possibility. It would be refreshing if one of these drop-outs would just tell it like it is.

MFS62 Dec 21 2015 01:19 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It would be refreshing if one of these drop-outs would just tell it like it is. You're expecting ANY politician to do that? Later

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2015 01:28 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

No, but it would be refreshing.

Ceetar Dec 21 2015 01:31 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Edgy MD wrote: Lindsey Graham, one of the more serious candidates for president, if nobody's favorite, suspends his campaign, tired of being stuck in the undercard debates. Oh good, should get an amusing Colbert/Hunger Games crossover bit tonight.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2015 01:34 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

It basically amounts to two things: [list][*]Delegates: In general, candidates who suspend a campaign, get to keep any handful delegates they may get in the primaries to date and those coming ones that still have them on the ballot. Those may come in handy in a tight race. Make me your interior secretary and I'll release my delegates. (That's the line I used on my first wife!) [/*:m] [*]Money: Ending your campaign means you can only continue fundraising to the point of covering outstanding campaign debt. Suspended campaigns may allow you to keep raising money and even possibly receiving matching federal money.[/*:m][/list:u] In 2008, then-Senator Hillary Clinton, former Senator Jon Edwards, and former Governor Mitt Romney all ended their campaigns by suspension, rather than formally dropping out.

Nymr83 Dec 21 2015 03:04 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

yeah, its a cash thing mostly.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2015 03:08 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

I guess that makes sense.

Ceetar Dec 22 2015 08:17 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Nymr83 wrote: yeah, its a cash thing mostly. shut down the thread, you've pretty much said it all.

Mets Guy in Michigan Dec 23 2015 04:31 AM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm sick of the euphemism "suspends his campaign" for "dropping out of the race." I guess they're trying to leave the door open that they'd be the choice of a brokered convention, but that's SUCH a remote possibility. It would be refreshing if one of these drop-outs would just tell it like it is. I think this might have to do with fundraising to pay off campaign debt and other such issues.

Edgy MD Dec 29 2015 09:54 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

Hey! Governor George Pataki just suspended his campaign! Never got out of the undercard debates, and denied a slot on Florida's primary ballot, he was in trouble however it shook out. I guess that leaves just Senator Rick Santorum and Governor Mike Huckabee for the undercard debates.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 29 2015 10:55 PM Re: Should We Talk About the Government?: Politics in 2015

As per WNYC's Brian Lehrer, "George Pataki" was Googled more than "used tissues" in 2015. Barely.