Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Kapture1]

FWIW, the United Mine Workers union also declined to endorse either Hillary or Trump in 2016

They heavily supported Lamb

Rick was openly anti union

[iam416]

That said, Lamb did FAR better than Hillary in the Allegheny County suburbs too. Suburbs of big cities everywhere are driving the anti-Trump animus. Country club Republicans or maybe just well-off white women are revolting.

Heh. And I was just reading some of PAH's comments in India. With what I found surprising directness she said that married white women who didn't vote for her were doing so because they were doing what they were told by their husbands.

It's taken a lot of restraint on my part not post her comments. And, DSL, I've also declined to post more "free speech" stuff that is currently being written after a new poll came out.

Yer welcome!

[Jeff Buchanan]

....... Two dysfunctional organizations responsible for electronically protecting the electoral process should be left unfixed? ....... If you identify the problem, FIX IT.

Thanks for the link. The author is clearly biased in that he believes that not using the funding benefits the US taxpayer (don't throw good money after bad money). He appears to take the position that allowing hostile foreign intelligence agencies free hands to meddle in our elections is somehow good for Americans since it saves tax dollars. I strongly disagree. Whining that the Board of Governors needs to be fixed is the statement of Capt Obvious.....

To your first point, I am neither criticizing or defending the adminstration when it comes to taking action against foreign governments who undertake disinformation campaigns directed against us. I'm merely pointing out that your assertion that DJT has committed a treasonous act is inaccurate. Facts, man. These are important.

To your second ......It's the Brookings institute, right? I think the article I linked does a good job of helping to explain why State is nick-nammed foggy bottom. Clearly, there are problems at State, among them the dysfuction of the GEC and lack of clarity on roles regarding combating disinformation. As well, this stuff, as you point out, is important but nothing in government moves quickly under the best of circumstances and in the current circumstance where nailing the President and assuring one's job security is more important than national security, one might be able to understand why nothing has been done.

....... But when Jeff relies on an argument like that, or suggests that we shouldn't even both with Russia or whatever because the odds of criminal justice are so low, that, IMO, is the citizen's version of running away from the problem.

Get off your high horse. My post says or implies nothing one way or the other about the quality of this administration's or past administrations efforts in combating a Russian disinformation campaign that has been underway for a long time.

The purpose of the post was to clarify the issue that Jon raised and for those interested in understanding it, providing a link with some background information.

It pisses me off that you imply that I don't care about this. How do you know that?

[Kapture1]

A little more than a year ago, the State Department was granted $120 million to prevent (any) foreign countries from meddling in our elections. Not a dollar has been spent yet. The State Department's Global Engagement Center has the responsibility to engage Russia's electoral disinformation campaigns. Guess what? It has no analysts that speak Russian and the dept hiring freeze prevents them from hiring computer geeks to combat hacking. Admiral Mike Rogers, head of US Cyber Command, told Congress a month ago that Putin's cock holster has specifically withheld granting him authority to confront Russian cyber operators. Furthermore, it is Rogers' belief that this deliberate inaction has emboldened the Russkies in their preparations for future interference. Although the money has been granted, it has not been released by the State Department for use, per direction of the Executive Branch.

That is absolutely treasonous. There may not have been collusion going on in 2016, but it sure looks like the Orange Menace has failed to register as a foreign agent in 2018. He needs to be tried and sentenced without delay.

It was Tillerson that wouldn't release funding for the GEC and that decision had more to do with the GEC's dysfuction than any sort of treasonous act by DJT:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgo...s-bashing-him/

lol

[hack]

Jeff you continually declare that ``there isn't nothing that's gonna happen there and there's no collusion so quit it with that particular revenge fantasy stuff''. We've gone around about it. I recognize that you are coming from an earnest place here, so respect due, but it seems to me you are implying that Washington is going to be a swamp with swamp creatures and there's nothing we can do about it. There is no country that is completely free of corruption, but the constant effort to avoid it is a real help to countries that do this. Ignorance of it is only going to make it worse. So framing the whole thing as a procedural question over corruption is harmful.

[SeattleLionsFan]

If the State department isn’t up to the task of protecting America, it needs to be and it’s the presidents job to fix it. So fix it.

Instead 8 of the top 9 spots at State are empty.

[hack]

The Brookings story is interesting. IMO the reasoning is a bit circular at points -- ``the office is dysfunctional, one of the reasons why is that it has no leader, so that's a point that justifies Tillerson's approach...'' -- whereas in truth Tillerson is responsible for putting people in those jobs. Not solely responsible, as the administration and he have squabbled over controlling political appointments, but chalking it up to that, as if the bureaucratic process is a more important variable than the threat that created that bureaucratic process in the first place, is Washington/blinders sort of logic. The story also makes little to no attempt to put this in a wider context -- this isn't a unique case. They're trying to kill the state department altogether, and Tillerson is more than just passively complicit there.

Beyond the Brookings piece, I think there is an interesting story about the Tillerson chapter of the Trump Saga to be written. He knocked it out of the park with his opening speech to State employees, and there was hope amongst many that he would actually clear away some dysfunction. The whole ``get a CEO to run the government like a business" theory is half-baked and remains untried, but in this particular case putting a company man who rose to the top of a global organization in charge of this one had significant promise in terms of improving how the department executes its functions - or at least so I've been told by friends who work there. There was a hopeful time. Regardless of ideology, I could see Tillerson being an excellent chief executive of this huge organization when combined with the right president. Bush 41, for example, who would have brought both a sense of the importance of statecraft but also that desire for limited government.

[The Oracle]

https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/973892415307345921?s=19

[crashcourse]

The parents of Seth Rich are suing FoxNews for spreading garbage conspiracy theories as if they were real facts.

Crash will testify as a witness on behalf of the defense

The lawsuit brought by Rich’s parents accuses Fox News and two individuals, reporter Malia Zimmerman and Dallas businessman and Fox News guest Ed Butowsky of seizing on Rich’s death in an effort to exonerate the president of allegations that his campaign colluded with the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.
No parent should ever have to live through what we have been forced to endure,” Joel and Mary Rich said in a statement, according to ABC News. “The pain and anguish that comes from seeing your murdered son’s life and legacy treated as a mere political football is beyond comprehension.”
ABC News reported that Butowsky called it "one of the dumbest" lawsuits he'd ever seen.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/14/seth-rich-parents-sue-fox-news-461700

[The Oracle]

I'm shocked butowsky would think that.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Hack, you continue to imply that I choose to ignore, and in this specific case the risk to US security assignable to the Russian disinformation campaign, for unjustifiable reasons.

First, I've taken no position on this specific issue in this forum. So, I'm in no way excusing the lack of action. I am making an effort to explain it.

It's the fucking State Department, a bloated, and at this point, ineffective bureaucracy, if it was ever particulary effective at all. Statescraft, as you point out, is certainly an important tool but Trump seems to have a different view of it. You may agree or disagree with how he goes about doing things in this regard, e.g., NK or relations with the EU and now separately, the UK.

I've already said this but it bears repeating: if the opposition insists on creating more friction than is already present in a poorly oiled Federal Government then they will reap what they sow and that is usually inaction. The opposition seems more focused on nailing DJT than it is on things like Russian medling, fair trade, protecting emerging AI development in this counry or any number of critical issues. The media isn't helping either. Politicians love the lime-light and they can bask in it with the media raising a shit-ton of superfuous stories to the fore, specifically those that resonate with their underlying attempts to discredit the current administration, while ignoring the important ones.

[Whitley]

If the State department isn?t up to the task of protecting America, it needs to be and it?s the presidents job to fix it. So fix it.

Instead 8 of the top 9 spots at State are empty.

Hard to fill spots when the President wants final approval (and for the people there to be loyal to him first over anything else) over who you want in your department.

[hack]

I am completely fine with inaction. I'm not going to pretend I'm anything other than a hardcore lefty, but one area in which I do not agree is the notion that government is a force for good. I don't believe in any large organization's capacity to execute at a high level. I've worked with and sent invoices to enough of them outside media to know that. So I'm all for doing less with less, and I'm not one to wring my hands about this DOS program or that DOS program not having a political appointee at the moment. Some should; some shouldn't. This particular program isn't the only one across the USG addressing this challenge, and surely isn't the most important one either. The deep state does exist. It's watching this and I'm sure will present a plan of action to the next high-level executive that really wants to see one.

But right now if there's not friction there's something wrong. Because we know Russia's been meddling for a while. We meddle in other states' processes for choosing leaders. What's new and a real threat is the kleptocracy. There are people waiting and watching to see what happens to Trump who are much smarter and actually know how Washington works and have better plans to theive greater amounts of money from the system without being nearly so obvious about it. There is no better way to avoid kleptocracy than to throw the book at obvious kleptocrats. Trade and AI won't matter very much at all if Washington is led by looters. Looters are about looting NOW, before they get caught. They're not about careful planning for a robust future with reliable revenue streams.

[Jeff Buchanan]

......I'm not going to pretend I'm anything other than a hardcore lefty, but one area in which I do not agree is the notion that government is a force for good. .......

You've laid out your politics here with your views. I respect that but I'm dubious of the implied absolutism regarding that which you do not agree with above.

If you truly believe that government is not a force for good, why aren't you an anarchist?

[Dr. Strangelove]

I did look into it a bit and Lamb came out against Trump's tax cut. Said it went too heavily to the wealthy and corporations. He was also pro-tariff, very pro-union, and wants to save Obamacare. Personally pro-life but thinks abortion should be legal. So it's post-election spin coming from some quarters to say he only won by taking Republican positions. Which is even sillier when you watch the ads Republicans ran during the campaign claiming he's as liberal as Pelosi.

I don't know why Republicans would bother contesting and demand a recount when both guys will be running for different seats in just a few months. Seems like a waste of time and money