The US is keeping up with its payments too. In fact its creditors consider it so trustworthy that they're lending to it at negative real interest rates.American Politics
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
The US is keeping up with its payments too. In fact its creditors consider it so trustworthy that they're lending to it at negative real interest rates.CPAC convention going on atm. wonder if CR can give a blow by blow....
US secrecy policy run as though formed by Orwell and Kafka – top official
William Leonard, who oversaw state secrecy under George W Bush, says successive US presidents have abused system
Leonard, the former head of the Information Security Oversight Office from 2002 to 2007, said that what was at stake was "the abuse of the very form of government we are operating under, as unilateral executive powers go unchallenged."
He said: "Governments have decided under the cloak of secrecy to unleash the brutality of violence in our name and that of our fellow citizens. So extra judicial kidnapping becomes 'rendition', torture becomes 'enhanced interrogation', detainees are held on information that barely qualifies as hearsay, and assassination becomes 'targeted killing'."
Leonard told a high-level discussion group on secrecy and security convened by the Brennan Center for Justice in Washington that even language had suffered in this scramble for new powers. "It is as if Lewis Carroll, George Orwell and Franz Kafka were jointly conspiring to form official US policy."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/15/us-secrecy-policy-orwell-kafka-security-official
William Leonard, who oversaw state secrecy under George W Bush, says successive US presidents have abused system
Leonard, the former head of the Information Security Oversight Office from 2002 to 2007, said that what was at stake was "the abuse of the very form of government we are operating under, as unilateral executive powers go unchallenged."
He said: "Governments have decided under the cloak of secrecy to unleash the brutality of violence in our name and that of our fellow citizens. So extra judicial kidnapping becomes 'rendition', torture becomes 'enhanced interrogation', detainees are held on information that barely qualifies as hearsay, and assassination becomes 'targeted killing'."
Leonard told a high-level discussion group on secrecy and security convened by the Brennan Center for Justice in Washington that even language had suffered in this scramble for new powers. "It is as if Lewis Carroll, George Orwell and Franz Kafka were jointly conspiring to form official US policy."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/15/us-secrecy-policy-orwell-kafka-security-official
It is keeping up with its payments by borrowing more. It is running at a deficit, as is the UK. Are the people in the article? I doubt it.
I agree that a parallel with households is facile and not very helpful in the first place, but just declaring levels of absolute debt without taking into account the income or assets that balance them out is not a useful piece of analysis.
I, for example, have a fairly big credit card balance at the moment. It will be paid off next month. I also have a mortgage, which I am deliberately keeping for now as interest rates are low. I will probably pay it off this year. My absolute debts are high, but my finances are sound. I would personally never carp at how others manage their money but I certainly could.
Fair enough, and nice work on your mortgage... but the public rhetoric on the GOP side during the recent battles over the debt ceiling, 'fiscal cliff' and sequester has been pretty much 'debt is bad', with no sense that it might be a good idea to borrow when, for instance, demand is non-existent and people are paying you to borrow their money.
Yeah well I don't really want to defend the way rich US senators patronise their citizens, I just didn't think much of the analysis.
Patronising their citizens is the least of it. They're actively trying to slash spending on unemployment benefits and food stamps in a time of mass unemployment, while writing budgets that would massively transfer wealth from the poor to the rich... and all justified by 'debt is bad' rhetoric, when much of the debt was caused by their own tax cuts on the rich under Bush. They're a bunch of cnuts.
But yeah, I take your point about the article. They also found a surprisingly small number of indebted senators.
But yeah, I take your point about the article. They also found a surprisingly small number of indebted senators.
Old video, but Stewart really nailed GB here.
Also, I just found this gem
The people did not vote Bush in to start wars under false pretenses now did they?( Nor did they want him and Chenny to out American covert operatives. )The cost of which is not just the tanking of the economy because it was not paid for...but the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives...unless you consider non-American lives unimportant. Ramping up Iran??
Lets put it this way it is impossible for anyone to be like Bush...because no one can be that incompetent...
EDIT:
hey CR...what the heck are they saying in Fox now??
What a ridiculous statement. did the American people know 9/11 would happen? He had FULL support on Afghanistan. Some on Iraq (and yes it was a mistake and shouldn't have happened). I love how Dems always break out the "2 illegal wars" battle cry when I think only 1 senator voted against it. Obama escalated Pakistan and other areas with his drone policy. It's undeniable. And this all after he was going to "reach out to our friends" in the middle east. And no idea how you can say his drone policies are "a lot more effective". Just because they are being ordered by guy? More liberal revisionist history.
Defused Iran? How is saying they are "about 1 year from getting a nuke" and "that will not be allowed" and "all options are on the table" defusing the situation? You better tune back to Chris Matthews buddy?
And just vote it down in the Senate if you don't like it the bill. It's the House's job to fund/defund. Is it stupid politics by the Repubs? Very much so. But Reid is only guilty of the same thing. I'm not going to disagree with you on the ACA matter. It passed, live with it.
really don't know where to start...Newsflash. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Overwhelming evidence neo-cons made up 'evidence' to start the war. I'm not giving a pass to democrats who voted to support the wars...but lets be clear Bush was in charge...well technically anyway.. so he is responsible for the debacle. Afghanistan...we were right to go in...but Bush went for nation building...we could not just come out immediately...I would say though we need to be out of there quicker...their president is nothing but a drug lord. Pakistan?? hmmmm no mention of bin Ladin...yeah they really are our good friends. come on....They are our sworn enemy. Iran...oh dear..suddenly the repubs want to to hold Iran's hands??...surely your guy Romney was frothing at his mouth to invade Iran...the least he could do for his neo-con buddies... or have you forgotten that so fast? Senate? before complaining about Reid...please look at the numerous filibusters by your little party......and they keep getting smaller if you have not noticed.
you really should get out of that Fox bubble CR...
so he is responsible for the debacle. Afghanistan...we were right to go in...but Bush went for nation building...we could not just come out immediately...I would say though we need to be out of there quicker...their president is nothing but a drug lord. Pakistan?? hmmmm no mention of bin Ladin...yeah they really are our good friends. come on....They are our sworn enemy. Iran...oh dear..suddenly the repubs want to to hold Iran's hands??...surely your guy Romney was frothing at his mouth to invade Iran...the least he could do for his neo-con buddies... or have you forgotten that so fast? Senate? before complaining about Reid...please look at the numerous filibusters by your little party......and they keep getting smaller if you have not noticed.you really should get out of that Fox bubble CR...
I'm not even sure where you get so0me of this stuff. Pure comedy. Who wants to hold hands with Iran? Pakistan is our "sworn enemy"? And a nice little deflection on Reid. Typical liberal argument, 'their guy did it so it's ok for my guy'. Main reason I left the 2 main parties is because of brilliant thinking like that. If you won't live in reality, discussion is impossible.
so brilliant of you not to address bin ladin....at the least. yeah..Pakistan is our close ally...that is why they hide the guy who killed innocent Americans.
cut the bull about leaving the GOP. you are just ashamed to call yourself a republican...dont blame you...but you bloody vote them everytime.
and you talk about liviing in the real world...
so brilliant of you not to address bin ladin....at the least. yeah..Pakistan is our close ally...that is why they hide the guy who killed innocent Americans.
cut the bull about leaving the GOP. you are just ashamed to call yourself a republican...dont blame you...but you bloody vote them everytime.
and you talk about liviing in the real world...
You're turning into LABOB......
You're turning into LABOB......
oh dear..is that your best?
answer. Is a country hiding Osama bin Ladin in your books an ally?
You're turning into LABOB......
you should be more concerned about turning into mjs.....
LABOB and I have have a lot off diferences...he has integrity.
Anyone else see that story about Nixon's treasonous disruption of the Paris peace talks? His actions surely led to the deaths of Americans. It's kind of like Reagan and his deal with Iran.
I mostly stay out I this thread when Red Dreams and Cali Red are going at it but I want to say that I think #771 is a fair post.
Wait, Grinner's back? Awesome!
Could somebody please explain what a filibuster is, in laymen's terms.
Delaying tactics, through tons of loooooooooooooooong speeches.
Constitutionally you only need a majority in the Senate (51 votes, or 50 + the President of the Senate (which is the Vice President of the US), whose vote decides a tie) to pass a bill. A filibuster is a tactic to prevent a bill from coming up to a vote by debating/talking, and you need 60 votes in the Senate to end a filibuster (cloture). So if a bill has 59 supporters, and 41 opponents, the 41 can threaten a filibuster and basically kill the bill (they usually don't even have to go through with the talking/debating, because everyone recognizes it's a waste of time). So a party needs 60+ representatives in the Senate for it to be considered "filibuster-proof".
There were about 30,000 Americans killed after Nixon had disrupted those peace talks. Nothing compared to the genocidal figures suffered by the bombing campaigns against the Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians. Nixon and Kissinger basically ordered them bombed into the stone age. Villages and urban areas. Much of it secret and "illegal." Possible worst of all, is their secret bombing of Cambodia and ensuing chaos was directly responsible for the the rise of Pol Pot.
It's also worth noting that Kennedy was certainly moving towards getting out of Vietnam, or at least deescalating the militancy, when that "magic" bullet fired by the "lone" gunman got a hold of him. Especially after he had gone through a bay of pigs invasion of Cuba done amazingly behind his back, and the total failure of it. The same lone gunman techniques that blew out his brother and MLK's brains.
It's good to know the modern history of Amerika, especially that of Republikan Amerika, to start seeing certain patterns of behavior.
Here's a documentary vid of what happened over in Southeast Asia once Nixon and Kissinger treasonously swindled themselves into the White House. This should be shown en masse to Americans instead of the white washed patriotic crap they're spoon fed of history. I can't see how anyone could possibly grasp the the extent of immorality and plain evil of these bombing campaigns.
There's some faux outrage popping up about The Amazing Race and a sequence shot in Vietnam. In light of the above it's simply breathtaking that nobody gives a feck about what Nixon did.
It's the craziest fecking thing about American politics. When I first heard about it, I didn't actually believe it was real. It was too stupid.
If there was any justice in the world, Kissinger would be tried as a war criminal. Among other things.
Indeed, it's literally pointless. But neither side wants to get rid of it for fear that it might enable the other party to do what they want to when they get to power again.
Can't believe I haven't watched that doc yet. It's been on my to-do list for quite some time. Love me some Hitch.
Basically the constitution is very old and was never meant to last this long.
The filibuster isn't constitutional. Or rather, there is no mention of the filibuster in the constitution. It's part of the rules of the Senate (which can be changed).
That's the weird thing about US Govt. Once you get into power any old feckwit can stop you from doing anything worthwhile.
This elevation of the FFs to godlike status with zero chance of infallibity is stupid and dangerous, not to mention highly inaccurate.
This elevation of the FFs to godlike status with zero chance of infallibity is stupid and dangerous, not to mention highly inaccurate.
You're right, I always presumed unlimited debate was enshrined in some way. Need to know my constitution better!
Monsanto Protection Act now law.
Is that true? Seems mental.
The machine keeps rolling on.
It's not pointless. Used in moderation it's actually a nice addition to the Madisonian system, because it grants increased power to passionate minorities. That can be a great thing since minority groups of senators, or even individuals, can fight legislation that might contain corruptions, or discrimination, say, that the majority doesn't care about.
Obviously, when the entire minority party uses it to obstruct every single majority bill - not to mention routine executive branch appointments - then you have a problem, so it does need to be redesigned. But in principle it's a useful feature.
Yep the cons have been pulling that shit for years but nobody calls them on it. Where is the outcry today even when Anon says it disrupted Karl Rove from rigging the voting in Ohio? The American media are a useless shower of cnuts.
I don't see how it could ever be "used in moderation," though. Anyone with access to it will use it when it is in their interest. It works better as an idea than in reality.
And yet, none of this incriminating evidence has surfaced..
what evidence? its all ones and zeros with no paper trail thats the feckin point.
They're making some pretty big claims, and such claims require evidence. Not the mention, one of their main points was that if they attempt this again they will provide the evidence for it.
- Status