Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
whembly wrote: He described one of his ideals, then following that mentioned that Anne Frank shared that particular ideal. That is quite different than actually comparing himself to Anne Frank.
See? This is why he needs to stay off the media grid, because anything he does will always be taken to extremes.
You're right, he compared his ideals to that of Anne Frank. I'll go back and edit it for you if it would make you happy, but only because I like Whembly.
'Tis cool man.
I'm sure you and I would agree that Zimmerman really need to avoid the spotlight in any form.
But, the youth vote are traditionally a tiny slice of the voting population.
True, but a tiny slice of the population if they're voting in key districts during election overseen by the electoral college system; especially now when most voters are committed to one side of aisle. In this environment the real issues of mobilizing people that you already know will vote for you, as the pool of swing voters has gotten rather small for a variety of reasons; though disenfranchisement is one of the ones most often in polls.
Yeah, Obama needed them for his re-election, but I don't believe HRC needs the youth voters. Unless, you're talking about the young Obama voters (who are 8 years older... are they still in the "youth voter" bucket?)??
I would say Hillary faces an uphill battle with nearly anyone under 30, which I think is a fair assessment of what defines youth voters for the Democrats; largely because of the effect Obama's tactics had on the Party.
Yeah.. that Katie Curic interview with Palin was a straight up fair interview.
It was reasonably fair, but that's not the main reason Palin complains about "The Media". She complains about "The Media" because conservative media personalities have to do so in order to establish themselves as sticking it to the man so that no one notices that they are "the man", and that there are plenty of conservative and relatively unbiased media outlets.
To repeal current tax laws in favor of a Flat Tax law? Of course it wouldn't be simple. That's not what I was implying.
Nor was that what I was talking about. The notion that Flat Taxes are simple is nonsense, as there are just as many complexities involved with such a system as one built around a progressive model. The only thing that would necessarily change is that base rate for certain forms of income would remain constant regardless of income level, which is not exactly a huge move towards simplification.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
But, the youth vote are traditionally a tiny slice of the voting population.
True, but a tiny slice of the population if they're voting in key districts during election overseen by the electoral college system; especially now when most voters are committed to one side of aisle. In this environment the real issues of mobilizing people that you already know will vote for you, as the pool of swing voters has gotten rather small for a variety of reasons; though disenfranchisement is one of the ones most often in polls.
Yeah, Obama needed them for his re-election, but I don't believe HRC needs the youth voters. Unless, you're talking about the young Obama voters (who are 8 years older... are they still in the "youth voter" bucket?)??
I would say Hillary faces an uphill battle with nearly anyone under 30, which I think is a fair assessment of what defines youth voters for the Democrats; largely because of the effect Obama's tactics had on the Party.
Huh... I didn't see it like that. Interesting...
I'm not sure if I'm ready to shift from my belief that President HRC is a foregone conclusion... but, you're making too much sense here man. O.o
What are those "Obama's tactics on the Party" that may adversely affect HRC's changes?
Yeah.. that Katie Curic interview with Palin was a straight up fair interview.
It was reasonably fair, but that's not the main reason Palin complains about "The Media". She complains about "The Media" because conservative media personalities have to do so in order to establish themselves as sticking it to the man so that no one notices that they are "the man", and that there are plenty of conservative and relatively unbiased media outlets.
I can walk back my previous statements, a little bit, but I still don't think Palin (or McCain for that matter) got a fair treatment.
McCain/Palin were vetted by the media in all forms... vetted hard.
Obama/Biden did go through a nasty Democratic Primary, but afterwards? It was all unicorn and rainbows as far as the media was concerned.
To repeal current tax laws in favor of a Flat Tax law? Of course it wouldn't be simple. That's not what I was implying.
Nor was that what I was talking about. The notion that Flat Taxes are simple is nonsense, as there are just as many complexities involved with such a system as one built around a progressive model. The only thing that would necessarily change is that base rate for certain forms of income would remain constant regardless of income level, which is not exactly a huge move towards simplification.
The various flat tax proposals were teired bracket system that, when you really think about it, is purely a progressive model. Primarily because deductions are nearly non-existent.
Therefore, if you'd hit that high bracket (35%?)... you're likely paying that rate on all income.
Also, what is "income" has been reclassified as well (where one model was that included investments returns as well).
Even then, you'd have to decide if we change from a Global Tax system to a Territorial Tax system.
The problem is that the tax code is gamed so much, with special interest groups carving out their favored tax policies... I'm not optimistic that we'd see any meaningful change... if ever.
I'm not sure if I'm ready to shift from my belief that President HRC is a foregone conclusion... but, you're making too much sense here man. O.o
Even without the sense I'm talking it is far from a foregone conclusion. It is rare for a single Party in the modern era (Basically after the 22nd Amendment.) to hold the Presidency for 3 full terms.
What are those "Obama's tactics on the Party" that may adversely affect HRC's changes?
A focus on spectacle over substance. Hillary is bad at spectacle, and now likely Democrat voters have been trained to expect it. That being said Republican voters have been trained to expect it too, but the GOP has the "Obama is history's greatest monster!" argument in its pocket; an argument which makes for easy spectacle manufacturing.
Obama/Biden did go through a nasty Democratic Primary, but afterwards? It was all unicorn and rainbows as far as the media was concerned.
Yeah, I'm going to call BS on that. The Obama Administration had to contend with a great deal of criticism from both conservative and liberal media outlets after it took power, though not so much from relatively neutral ones. After all, the role of relatively neutral media outlets is to report facts while being attacked by liberals and conservatives for supposedly being biased.
Ouze wrote: I was the one (at least here) who said he compared himself to Anne Frank and to be honest I need to correct that, I think I saw what I wanted to see.
That's not really what he did, I admit I was wrong.
Meh, he compared his ideals to Anne Frank's.
It's equally as bad.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Ouze wrote: I was the one (at least here) who said he compared himself to Anne Frank and to be honest I need to correct that, I think I saw what I wanted to see.
That's not really what he did, I admit I was wrong.
Now..now... don't be too hard on yourself.
Totally believable it's an honest mistake, that we ALL get snooker'ed from time to time.
I'd still say that Z really needs to stay out of any spotlight. But, that won't happen as I'm sure there's going to be book / movie deals soon.
I'm not sure if I'm ready to shift from my belief that President HRC is a foregone conclusion... but, you're making too much sense here man. O.o
Even without the sense I'm talking it is far from a foregone conclusion. It is rare for a single Party in the modern era (Basically after the 22nd Amendment.) to hold the Presidency for 3 full terms.
I'm aware that it's rare and if anyone who can overcome that challenge... my money is on HRC.
What are those "Obama's tactics on the Party" that may adversely affect HRC's changes?
A focus on spectacle over substance. Hillary is bad at spectacle, and now likely Democrat voters have been trained to expect it. That being said Republican voters have been trained to expect it too, but the GOP has the "Obama is history's greatest monster!" argument in its pocket; an argument which makes for easy spectacle manufacturing.
The distinction is HRC is horrible at campaigning... but, she excels at the 'behind-the-scene' Beltway environment. Her challenge, really, is surviving the primary. After that, she can practically coast towards the WH.
I'd be happy to be wrong, don't misunderstand me... but, I think folks are being waaaaaay too cavalier on a strong HRC campaign.
Obama/Biden did go through a nasty Democratic Primary, but afterwards? It was all unicorn and rainbows as far as the media was concerned.
Yeah, I'm going to call BS on that. The Obama Administration had to contend with a great deal of criticism from both conservative and liberal media outlets after it took power, though not so much from relatively neutral ones. After all, the role of relatively neutral media outlets is to report facts while being attacked by liberals and conservatives for supposedly being biased.
I was being hyperbolic there... but, I'm talking about during the campaign season. Not while they're in office.
I was being hyperbolic there... but, I'm talking about during the campaign season. Not while they're in office.
No, you weren't talking about the campaign season. You specifically stated that Obama/Biden went through a rough campaign season, and that "The Media" did not criticize them after the fact. This is what I was addressing.
Illinois Republican Rep. Aaron Schock, who announced his resignation last week after a series of campaign and office spending scandals, bid farewell to Congress "with sadness and humility." And then he compared his struggle with that of former President Abraham Lincoln's.
On the House floor days before his official final day in office Schock said "every person faces adversity in life" and noted that Lincoln represented the same Illinois seat in the House for one term.
"Few faced as many defeats in his personal business and public life as he did. His continued perseverance in the face of these trials -- never giving up -- is something all of us Americans should be inspired by, especially when going through a valley in life," Schock said.
He touted legislation he was proud to sponsor and projects in his district he believed helped his constituents.
"For those whom I've let down I will work tirelessly to make it up to you," Schock said.
CNN reported last week that FBI and federal prosecutors were investigating the 33-year-old congressman for potentially breaking the law in accounting for his campaign expenses.
Questions about Schock's record-keeping came after a Washington Post profile reported the congressman spent lavishly to decorate his office to resemble a set from the popular PBS show "Downton Abbey." He paid $40,000 back to his office account.
But a string of stories exposed details about the Illinois Republican flying on a private jet owned by a donor to a Chicago Bears game, taking staffers to a Katy Perry concert, bringing a large group of staff to New York using taxpayer funds and failing to disclose he took his photographer on a trip to India.
Schock also highlighted his extensive travels around the world with pictures on social media, which aided reporters who began tracking his travel.
Several news outlets reported a donor helped finance real estate transactions for Schock in his district. He also over-billed the government for mileage reimbursement on a car purchased by his campaign, as first reported by Politico.
In an ironic twist right around the same time Schock spoke for the last time on the House floor the BBC News reported that Downton Abbey would end its run after it completes its six season on television.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
In an ironic twist right around the same time Schock spoke for the last time on the House floor the BBC News reported that Downton Abbey would end its run after it completes its six season on television.
Wait! Downton Abbey is ending after season six? This is something far more newsworthy, and shouldn't have been buried at the bottom of the article!
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?)
President Barack Obama’s administration has been one rife with scandals. Some pertain directly to himself and his own actions–like the recent immigration executive order that some say unconstitutionally side-stepped Congress–and some to members of his administration, like the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS and the Secret Service’s series of embarrassments.
So in the spirit of March Madness and NCAA bracketology, The Cornell Review presents its very own Obama Administration Scandal Bracketology.
Spoiler:
Here’s mine filled out:
Spoiler:
*swoons*
Let me think about my bracket a bit... but, I totally disagree with the author's.
I don't thin Sandoval will run, he's sitting nice and tight in his gubernatorial position and that spot would be left nice and vacant for challengers if he did; something the GOP probably doesn't want. I think Angle and Rory Reid are more likely contenders.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
(Reuters) - Big Wall Street banks are so upset with U.S. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren's call for them to be broken up that some have discussed withholding campaign donations to Senate Democrats in symbolic protest, sources familiar with the discussions said.
Representatives from Citigroup, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, have met to discuss ways to urge Democrats, including Warren and Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, to soften their party's tone toward Wall Street, sources familiar with the discussions said this week.
Bank officials said the idea of withholding donations was not discussed at a meeting of the four banks in Washington but it has been raised in one-on-one conversations between representatives of some of them. However, there was no agreement on coordinating any action, and each bank is making its own decision, they said.
The amount of money at stake, a maximum of $15,000 per bank, means the gesture is symbolic rather than material
Moreover, banks' hostility toward Warren, who is not a presidential candidate, will not have a direct impact on the presumed Democratic front runner in the White House race, Hillary Clinton. That's because their fund-raising groups focus on congressional races rather than the presidential election
Still, political strategists say Clinton could struggle to raise money among Wall Street financiers who worry that Democrats are becoming less business friendly.
The tensions are a sign that the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis - the bank bailouts and the fights over financial reforms to rein in Wall Street - are still a factor in the 2016 elections.
Citigroup has decided to withhold donations for now to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee over concerns that Senate Democrats could give Warren and lawmakers who share her views more power, sources inside the bank told Reuters.
The Massachusetts senator's economic populism and take-no-prisoners approach has won her a strong following among liberals who raised 300,000 signatures for a petition urging her to run for the White House in 2016.
"They can threaten or bully or say whatever they want, but we aren't going to change our game plan," Warren said in a blog post on her website on Friday. "It's up to us to fight back against a financial system that allows those who broke our economy to emerge from a crisis in record-setting shape while ordinary Americans continue to struggle."
JPMORGAN MET DEMOCRATIC OFFICIALS
Citi spokeswoman Molly Meiners declined to comment specifically on the Warren issue, saying the bank's fund-raising political action committee (PAC) "contributes to candidates and parties across the political spectrum that share our desire for pro-business policies that promote economic growth."
JPMorgan representatives have met Democratic Party officials to emphasize the connection between its annual contribution and the need for a friendlier attitude toward the banks, a source familiar with JPMorgan's donations said. In past years, the bank has given its donation in one lump sum but this year has so far donated only a third of the amount, the source said.
Goldman, which already made its $15,000 donation for the year, took part in the Washington meeting between the four banks to talk about anti-big bank rhetoric of some Democratic lawmakers like Warren but has not had any discussions about withholding money, a source close to the bank said.
"We will continue working cooperatively with members of Congress, regulators and the industry to foster constructive discussions around policy questions," said Andrew Williams, a Goldman spokesman.
Bank of America is not coordinating with other banks on when and how much to give, according to a source familiar with the bank's thinking. It has not yet sent in its check.
"Our decision to contribute will be driven more by the fact that many members of both parties understand the important role we play in driving the real economy and serving customers across the country," said a spokesman, Larry Di Rita.
JPMorgan spokesman Andrew Gray said the bank had "always believed in the importance of engaging constructively with our public officials."
Spokesmen for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Warren and Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid all declined to comment.
Warren, a former Harvard Law professor who joined the Senate Banking Committee after taking office in 2013, has accused big banks and other financial firms of unfair dealings that harm the middle class and help the rich grow richer.
In a Dec. 12 speech, she mentioned Citi several times as an example of a bank that had grown too large, saying it should have been broken apart by the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.
In January, Warren angered Wall Street when she successfully blocked the nomination of a banker Antonio Weiss to a top post at the Treasury Department. She argued that as a regulator he would likely be too deferential to his former Wall Street colleagues.
I don't thin Sandoval will run, he's sitting nice and tight in his gubernatorial position and that spot would be left nice and vacant for challengers if he did; something the GOP probably doesn't want. I think Angle and Rory Reid are more likely contenders.
My question about the scandals is how many of them are really Obama Administration-specific scandals and how many are just the business-as-usual-in-Washington-scandals that are the result of the political climate that has evolved in D.C. over the decades?
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
Tannhauser42 wrote: My question about the scandals is how many of them are really Obama Administration-specific scandals and how many are just the business-as-usual-in-Washington-scandals that are the result of the political climate that has evolved in D.C. over the decades?
Scandal worthy tied to Obama admin:
-IRS targeting (Remember, Nixon wanted to use the IRS against his opponents)
-Fast & Furious
-Targetting of James Rosen/Sharyl Aktisson
-US Civilian Drone Strikes
-whem's fav... ends in "azi".
The rest could be argued as the usual Beltway gutter-slime
Scandal worthy tied to Obama admin:
-IRS targeting (Remember, Nixon wanted to use the IRS against his opponents)
-Fast & Furious
-Targetting of James Rosen/Sharyl Aktisson -US Civilian Drone Strikes
-whem's fav... ends in "azi".
The rest could be argued as the usual Beltway gutter-slime
I'd agree those are all generally legitimately concerning, except Mrs. Atkisson - that's all really unproven - and I don't think Benghazi was as serious as you do, but we've already had that debate.
I don't think the jury's out on the depths of the IRS scandal yet, but it belongs on the list until it is.
I'd don't think you're going to have any administration that doesn't do at least some shady gak, but I don't think that's a defense of shady gak either.
While it's not a "scandal" per se, I'm still deeply, deeply disappointed in that handling of Guantanamo Bay and it would be number one on my list of complaints.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Co'tor Shas wrote: Other than Benghazi, I'd say those are all legitimate concerns. Although F&F is more the DoJ(?) being bad at their jobs, then Obamas fault.
Yes, there's a distinction to be made between a scandal that involves a cover-up of malfeasance (like the VA cooking the books on their wait times), and just a well-intentioned operation that simply goes badly. We should still hold people responsible for incompetence obviously, but there's an element in there that distinguishes them, I think.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/03/29 04:29:47
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Tannhauser42 wrote: My question about the scandals is how many of them are really Obama Administration-specific scandals and how many are just the business-as-usual-in-Washington-scandals that are the result of the political climate that has evolved in D.C. over the decades?
Scandal worthy tied to Obama admin:
-IRS targeting (Remember, Nixon wanted to use the IRS against his opponents)
-Fast & Furious
-Targetting of James Rosen/Sharyl Aktisson
-US Civilian Drone Strikes
-whem's fav... ends in "azi".
The rest could be argued as the usual Beltway gutter-slime
I would argue Fast & Furious is something that would have happened regardless of who was President (I guess that's pretty much what I was asking, which scandals would still have happened no matter which party was in the White House). The IRS targeting feels borderline to me: still the kind of thing that would have happened eventually anyway (because Washington), but only happened "now" because of the Obama Administration.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
Hillary Clinton wiped “clean” the private server housing emails from her tenure as secretary of state, the chairman of the House committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi said Friday.
“While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, said in a statement.
Clinton was under a subpoena order from the panel for all documents related to the 2012 attacks on the American compound there. But David Kendall, an attorney for Clinton, said the 900 pages of emails previously provided to the panel cover its request.
Kendall also informed the committee that Clinton’s emails from her time at the State Department have been permanently erased.
Gowdy said that Clinton’s response to the subpoena means he and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) will now contemplate new legal actions against Clinton.
“After seeking and receiving a two week extension from the Committee, Secretary Clinton failed to provide a single new document to the subpoena issued by the Committee and refused to provide her private server to the Inspector General for the State Department or any other independent arbiter for analysis,” Gowdy said.
Clinton previously said she decided to delete the emails after her lawyers reviewed the server for work-related correspondence. She said the deletion of private emails occurred “at the end” of that review.
In a letter provided to the committee, Kendall said Clinton would not be turning over the server to a third-party for review and that the emails no longer exist on the private server located in her New York home.
“There is no basis to support the proposed third-party review of the server that hosted the hdr22@clintonemail.com account,” Kendall wrote. “To avoid prolonging a discussion that would be academic, I have confirmed with the secretary’s IT support that no emails…..for the time period January 21, 2009 through February 1, 2013 reside on the server or on any back-up systems associated with the server.”
The broad subpoena from Gowdy included any emails relating to Libya, weapons located in the country, the Benghazi attacks and administration statements following the attacks on the compound.
Shortly after the New York Times reported on Clinton’s private email use, she requested that the State Department make public all documents from her time at the agency. The State Department has said it’s working though these documents – which include 55,000 pages – for review.
The agency has also said it will focus on vetting the 300 pages the Benghazi Committee has already received. Kendall said the State Department is “uniquely positioned” to respond to requests for additional documents, a sign from Clinton’s camp that they believe she has fully responded to any standing legal requests.
Kendall added, “Thus, there are no hdr22@clintonemail.com e-mails from Secretary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State on the server for any review, even if such review were appropriate or legally authorized.”
The letter added that requests from a second email, hrod17@clintonemail.com, are not germane as that address was “not an address that existed during Secretary Clinton’s tenure.”
Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the Benghazi panel, said Clinton’s response “confirms” that the former secretary of state has provided all documents related to the Benghazi attacks to the committee.
“This confirms what we all knew—that Secretary Clinton already produced her official records to the State Department, that she did not keep her personal emails, and that the Select Committee has already obtained her emails relating to the attacks in Benghazi,” said Cummings (D-Md.). “It is time for the Committee to stop this political charade and instead make these documents public and schedule Secretary Clinton’s public testimony now.”
The move all but ensures congressional Republicans’ focus on Clinton will intensify. The Benghazi panel has already said it will bring Clinton in to testify at least twice — once privately about her email use while at State and at another public hearing on the Obama administration’s reaction to Benghazi. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has also signaled plans to investigate Clinton’s use of private email.
Gowdy’s subpoenas came after it was reported that Clinton stored her emails on a private server and used a personal email address while at the State Department. Clinton has already made more than 900 pages of emails available to the committee but the panel has requested the entire swath of documents – a request Gowdy has repeatedly said is necessary to conduct a thorough investigation into the 2012 terrorist attacks.
Emperor's Eagles (undergoing Chapter reorganization)
Caledonian 95th (undergoing regimental reorganization)
Thousands Sons (undergoing Warband re--- wait, are any of my 40K armies playable?) 
