Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Wikileaks absolutely does "vetting" ... (Score 5, Interesting) 302

I was not aware they ever did any vetting, and if they did, what their standard of care was

Wikileaks absolutely does "vetting" and "curation". They will edit things to remove facts contrary to the narrative they wish to promote. For example when US helicopters kill some journalists in Iraq they will remove the early parts of the video showing these journalists traveling down the street with a group of armed militants only blocks from where US ground forces are engaged in combat.

Comment Re:Bernies revolution is dead ... (Score 1) 424

Bernie's strength was in getting the message out, and nothing is stopping him from delivering more messages. If H doesn't push for the reforms she promised to push for, you'll probably hear it from Bernie. He's giving her a fair chance, first.

Bernie has no influence anymore. He is now dependent upon the good graces of the Democratic establishment for his senatorial career. Offer more than a few token complaints and goodbye committee assignments, caucusing with the other Democrats, finding cosponsors and support for any bills, etc.

Bernie has no "pulpit" anymore. The media is done with Bernie, he won't get the news coverage he has enjoyed.

Hillary won. Her vision will dominate. The Clinton political machine will support that vision. Bernie is once again irrelevant, a political footnote.

Comment Bernie supporters will be good little Democrats (Score 1) 424

I know lots of Bernie supporters like myself who are disgusted that our vote doesn't count at all and are now more likely to vote for Trump or not vote at all. If all Bernie supporters fail to vote at all, that is still a vote for Trump. It will take all of us Bernie supporters to bring a democrat to the white house. I don't see that happening.

The anger of Bernie supports will fade and by November they will be good little Democrats and vote for their party's choice. They are just going to complain for a while but come November they will vote for Hillary. Her and he supporter's actions will be vindicated.

Comment He chose career over the revolution (Score 1) 424

Platforms are nothing. They are universally ignored once in office. Its a placebo offered at conventions to "give a voice" to fringe elements. Nothing more. A "voice" that lasts about as long as the convention.

Bernie bowed to protect his Senate position. He would have been ostracized, a pariah. No good committee positions, no role in caucusing when legislation is being drafted or considered, few if any Democrats willing to work with him, etc. He had a choice, the "revolution" or his "career". He chose "career".

Comment Re:Bernies revolution is dead ... (Score 1) 424

And another example of rewarding the faithful, and the Clinton Foundation operating in concert with her government office.

"Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton received monthly missives about the growing unrest in Libya from a longtime friend who was previously barred by the White House from working for her as a government employee, according to emails received on her personal account. The messages show the role played by Sidney Blumenthal, who was working for the Clinton family foundation and advising a group of entrepreneurs trying to win business from the Libyan transitional government. Mr. Blumenthal repeatedly wrote dispatches about the events in Libya to Mrs. Clinton, who often forwarded them to her aides at the State Department. Mrs. Clinton’s earlier efforts to hire Mr. Blumenthal, who has spent nearly two decades working for the Clinton family, as a State Department employee were rejected by Obama administration ..."

Comment Re:Bernies revolution is dead ... (Score 1) 424

They are being rewarded not fired. Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already done, they are probably moving from the DNC to Hillary's campaign

DWS's position is a "honorary chair of the campaign's 50-state program". She has no responsibilities or voice in the campaign.

You mean her name will appear on no official document or email. She has access to Hillary, she is there to advice Hillary.

She was given a desk and told to STFU to limit additional fallout.

She is given a desk because they think she still has things to contribute to Hillary. Otherwise she wouldn't be at the campaign, Hillary is not being publicly hypocritical for no gain.

Once the election is over she'll not be part of the administration nor will she possibly have a senate seat. Not exactly a reward.

Criminal actions and embarrassing the Clintons is no barrier to continued employment by the Clintons. The loyalty displayed by these acts is valued, there will be more such acts so people of extreme loyalty are highly valued.

Oh, and I consider the Clinton Foundation to be an extension of a Hillary administration. So if she winds up there that counts too.

"Friday, April 1, 2005; Page A01 Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism ... Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them."

"Berger served as a foreign policy adviser to Senator Hillary Clinton in her 2008 presidential campaign."

Comment Bernies revolution is dead ... (Score 4, Insightful) 424

When you fire the entire executive staff for rigging a primary ...

They are being rewarded not fired. Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already done, they are probably moving from the DNC to Hillary's campaign, and ultimately on to positions in the Clinton administration. Like Tim Kaine, another former DNC chair who has supported the Clintons for many years.

Hillary's been nominated, the DNC's main work is done. The important folks move on to the presidential campaign. The less important folks stay behind at the DNC and work on state and congressional stuff. These people are leaving on schedule. Washerman Schultz had to leave a few days ahead of schedule, nothing more.

They fear no repercussions for any of this since Bernie's followers will be good little Democrats and vote for Hillary in the end. That is all that matters. The revolution is dead despite Bernie's claims to the contrary. He got on board with Hillary so he will not lose the committee positions and other advantages he has in the Senate. To go against her would mean he would be ostracized, so he plays ball. He talks of the platform, platforms never mean a damn thing. They are just symbolic appeasements for the fringe elements of the party. Always has been, now Bernie's revolution joins those ranks.

A Hillary victory means everything Bernie fought for was for nothing, everything Hillary and company did vindicated. Hillary and the party machine will have forgotten Bernie in a matter of days, any pain or embarrassment he caused fading by the day, soon to be forgotten. Soon to be remembered as nothing more than a defeated tough opponent. What he stood for forgotten, just that he was somehow a "tough opponent", no one remembering precisely why.

Comment Re:No one will be ruled by Trump even if he wins (Score 1) 769

I still have not seen you back up your opinion with any sort of real world example. Instead of me proving you wrong with countless other examples, how about you show me one example where congress has stopped a military operation with funding cuts, or the supreme court with judicial rulings.

You seem confused on history, the record is one of Presidents going to Congress over large scale military operations not avoiding it. As for the Supreme Court there again we have the record of history saying the Court does have jurisdiction over the military to ensure adherence to the Constitution.

History has proven time and time again that these ideological checks & balances are not working as well as they should.

Actually history shows Presidents, Congresses and Courts agreeing to make the same mistake, as in the Japanese internment case. That is something quite different than checks and balances not existing.

Comment Re:No one will be ruled by Trump even if he wins (Score 1) 769

Trump has no real base of power within the Republican party. Those Republicans who accept appointments to his administration are not going to commit political suicide by joining him in something insane. The fbi, military, etc will not follow illegal unconstitutional orders. Trump will be left to rant and yell all alone. He won't be heading a corporation where he effectively has absolute control, he can not get his way as he is used to. Politics in the US doesn't work that way. The US government is designed to prevent such things. Yes the Republican Congress would probably love to impeach him and get one of their own, Pence, into the office. White House security will escort Trump to the door if need be. A coup, a civil war, by who? Most of his voters don't like him, they just hate Hillary more. Some Bernie voters at the Dem Convention are being interviewed and saying they'd rather have Trump and four years of gridlock. This election is truly about two disliked candidates and people voting for the one they dislike the least. Whoever wins there will be no mandate and likely gridlock.

Comment Re:No one will be ruled by Trump even if he wins (Score 1) 769

Congress controls the money for the war. No funding for the war and there is no war.

Nope. Congress can eliminate the budget for the military, but doesn't approve $10M on an attack on one city, and $10B for an invasion of another. Most of the military funding is unallocated. Congress is the only one that can vote for war. Before Vietnam, that meant that no action on foreign soil (act of war) could take place without permission of Congress. Going to war was Congress's power. Controlling the military in that war was the President's.

The President can do something like Grenada or Panama on his own. However he can't do something without Congress like either Gulf War that takes immense amounts of money and months of preparation.

Comment Sanders voters will be good little Democrats (Score 5, Insightful) 270

It also explains why a Sanders voter would willingly switch to become a Trump voter

Bernie will cave in and endorse Hillary so he is not ostracized in Congress and given no committee appointments and otherwise made irrelevant.

Bernie voters will largely be good little Democrats loyal to the party and vote for Hillary. And they wonder why they are ignored. When a voter is loyal to a party they are irrelevant, the party already has their vote and need not appease them.

Bernie voters enjoy the few symbolic lines you get in a meaningless party platform that no one ever honors, symbolic lines just like every other forgotten group got in previous party platforms.

Comment Sometime a delay is helpful (Score 5, Insightful) 270

So your theory is that FB understands nothing about social networks and has never heard of the Streisand Effect.

Slow the story for a few days and it doesn't disrupt the news coverage of the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia. The goal is not necessarily to bury the info, sometime a delay is helpful.

Comment Re:Why would Putin fear Clinton? (Score 1) 769

You assume a modest lifestyle. Knowing he had such a bankroll and spending $1M more a year than his income would explain turning $150M into $100M over 50 years. You can not demonstrate business failure by accumulated wealth.

I don't care if his results are due to irresponsible business decisions or an extravagant, indulgent lifestyle. Neither of those are traits I want in a politician with the keys to my tax dollars. You keep making this argument that he might be the great businessman ...

No, I keep arguing that no one has shown evidence he is a bad businessman. I argue that wealth is not a metric to judge business success by. Are his bankruptcies more than a few failures out of dozens of projects? Are his ROI numbers terrible? Still patiently waiting ...

If you want to say his lifestyle is wasteful, fine, I have no problem with that. Just don't conflate that with being a business failure. Those are two very different thing.

Likewise if you want to argue he is a bully, a narcissist, fine, no problem. But again, those are also very different things from a business failure.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -- William E. Davidsen