I also remember Obama being re-elected..

Obviously, ignoring the base has ZERO consequences for a POTUS.. :D

Michale

I am sure her base didn't want Clinton to use a private insecure homebrewed hackable and hacked email server...

I am sure that Clinton's base didn't want him to get a blow job in the oval office..

The "base" is just a means to an end.. And the end is power and wealth for the Clintons..

Clintons don't care about no stinkin' base...

Michale

Umm, because her base wants it. You don't dis' your base if you want a second term or a compliant congress (remember when Obama and the Dems caved on demanding a 'single payer' health care plan, and liberals stayed home in the next election?). The incentives are there.

Don [50] - the next time, please just type your opinion, rather than asking us to look on several previous threads for it. That said, I did that research and was quite disappointed. Voucher Vendetta? What a diaphanous, useless scam. You'd really choose that over repeal of Citizen's United? I would hope not.

Two party system annoy you? Blame the founders, who fell into competing camps before the ink was dry on the constitution, and decided even before that, that their government was not parliamentary.

There is, however, the House, which is a semi-parliamentary body, and could be influenced by a significant number of third-party members. This has in fact happened over the last few years as Tea Party Congressmen exerted influence beyond their actual numbers, owing to a Republican majority concerned about losing their votes. In similar manner, the House Congressional Black Caucus announced the other day that they do not support open primaries, at least not until polls are completely open to their own voters. Although they are not 'in power' in the house, that will have significant influence this summer at the Democratic Party Convention. That's what political force multiplication looks like, and why I wish on every star that we can someday find a way to make young liberals pay more attention to mid-term elections.

Not to be a smart-ass (well not TOO much anyways.. :D) but doing the wrong thing for the right reasons, even if it turns out to be the right thing, doesn't fly too well in the US military...

The military can only function when soldiers follow orders...

"We're here to preserve democracy, not to practice it."
-Gene Hackman

"God help you if you're wrong."
"If I'm wrong, then we're at war. Then god help us all."

Having said all of the afore, Hackman's actions AFTER the mutiny/counter mutiny were appalling..

"Hold it right there, sir!! I said hold it!!!"
"Shoot me!!"
"Oh shit!!"

:D

Michale

Ya'all demonize and castigate Republicans when they shut down government..

But when DEMOCRATS do it, it's all of the sudden a noble thing...

I know, I know...

"Well, that's different"

It always is...

Michale

Democracy, if it means anything at all, implies a process. There is an established procedure that is often lengthy, cumbersome, and frustrating. You don't get what you want when you want it and often times you don't get it at all. And when that happens, you just work harder to win elections at all levels of government.

Yup... Yup.... Yup.... :D

Michale

And you believe her???

Considering the hundreds of millions she has been given, where is her incentive to actually follow thru with her promise??

I won't even bother to point out that, as far as upwards of SEVENTY percent of Americans are concerned, LIAR is the best word to describe Hillary Clinton..

Why do you think she is telling the truth here??

Michale

And as things turned out, had Hackman launched,

Yes, that's what the script called for..

But in a real world scenario, it could just as easily have gone the other way. Washington waited to confirm the message, the message was just a meaningless update and the west coast of the US was totally decimated in a nuclear attack...

In the real world, DW would have been shit-canned for failing to follow Navy regs..

It's also likely that Hackman would have been quietly retired..

Above and beyond all that, CRIMSON TIDE was a real kick ass movie..

Michale

Yet you are timid about actually naming the third option that you obviously have in mind. Is it Gary Johnson? Bernie Sanders? Ron..er..Rand Paul? Jill Stein? Mitt Romney?

There are plenty of contenders for 3rd party status. Of those, only the Libertarians have gotten themselves onto the ballot in all 50 states. Good for them. So it can be done, despite the duopoly! I expect Johnson and Weld to make it to the debate stages as well, as young, educated, conservative voters dive for the exits of the Trump Towering Inferno.

You write as if the 'two party system' is a giant, recently-concocted conspiracy of Washington elites, out to suppress the voices of the hinterlands, like the government of Panem, but you've missed your mark by, like, twenty feet. Because the politicians are, by definition, limited by their ability to get re-elected, whereas the lobbyists, businessmen and special interest groups who currently (thanks in part to the Supremes) have a stranglehold on Congress by pushing up the price of elections, ensuring that politicians whose interests don't line up with donor interests can't be in the game. Even Trump has discovered this uncomfortable truth, even after showing everyone (in ghastly manner) how one can run on the cheap by garnering billions of dollars worth of free media from a voracious media complex that consumes novelty and controversy like it's high-grade meth.

And yet, of all of the candidates likely to be on the ballot this fall, only Hillary has pledged to do anything about election reform, including repealing Citizen's United. I wish she would do more, but thank goodness there's at least one person in the race who at least acknowledges that there's a problem.

And as things turned out, had Hackman launched, knowing that the possibility of a contravening order existed and given also that he understood the dire consequences of an incorrect decision, he might have been brought up on charges of having committed a war crime under the principle of Command Responsibility for negligently failing to insure that the second order wasn't a stand-down order.

As for Washington's character, there's evidence that, in real life, he'd have been acquitted of insubordination and mutiny, given that the order to stand down had in fact been sent before he acted, so it could be argued that those, and not Hackman's, were the lawful orders governing the situation. DW had the legal authority as a senior officer under conditions of conflict to decide that he'd seen enough evidence that Hackman was incorrect to justify his lawful removal of Hackman from command. The fact that he was right and Hackman was wrong about the second transmission as a matter of fact would mitigate strongly in his favor.

Fun fact: Young lieutenant and future baseball great Jackie Robinson was court-martialed for insubordination after he refused to move to the back of a military bus in 1944, eleven years before Rosa Parks. He was acquitted by an all white tribunal of senior officers. Had he not been court-martialed, he would have gone to Europe with his former unit, the 761st Tank Battalion, nicknamed the "Black Panthers". Instead, he was reassigned to oversee the athletic program on a small post in Kentucky, a position that would lead him eventually to wealth and fame.

BBBBRRRRRRRRRRRR

Wrong answer...

They both were right..

" Now you may have been proved right Mr Hunter, but in so far as the letter of the law is concerned, you were both right - and you were also both wrong."
-Jason Robards

Hackman had orders in hand. Message fragments do not constitute a contravention of orders...

In a real world scenario, Washington would have been shot and Hackman would have launched...

Actually, yes. And why not?

No, the Obama Administration DOESN'T want to study that..

Because that would refute the need for WOULDN'T IT BE NICE gun control laws...

Michale

Sticking with the metaphor, just as there are multiple causes and types of auto-immune diseases and cancers, there are multiple reasons each side can go off the rails. The 4 factors you cited would be specific reasons for the current problems, while I was talking in more general terms.

Does the Obama Administration want the CDC to study THAT?

Actually, yes. And why not?

Of course it is. Anything else would be political malpractice. But those leaders are chosen by voters, who have a variety of motivations, which would require several venn diagrams to sort out. Constituencies overlap, believe it or not. For example, some Catholics can be simultaneously anti-abortion and pro-immigrant.

Who was right?? Hackman or Washington??

Washington, of course. You never want a military that blindly follows orders: you'd end up inadvertently marching them over cliffs, like the soldiers in Candide. Given that in an actual wartime situation there's no chance that only one submarine would have determinative firepower, Washington's character's caution was entirely justified and defendable.

that's because, as far as the Left Wingery is concerned, as far as the Obama Administration is concerned, there IS no difference between the two...

The goal is a gun ban....

But hay... I'll be yer huckleberry...

Lets study the gun violence in Chicago.. In California.. In Washington DC... In Baltimore... In New York City..

Let's study the gun violence in ALL THOSE Democrat enclaves that have the STRICTEST gun control measures possible and are a hellhole of gun violence..

Let's study how gun ownership has EXPLODED by the MILLIONS yet gun violence is actually going down..

What ya say???

Does the Obama Administration want the CDC to study THAT!???

Of course not...

THAT doesn't further the unpopular, unnecessary and useless agenda...

Michale

I was in an ABC Sunday Night Movie back in the day as an extra. The man who did wardrobe for the movie was telling us about all the different shows he'd worked on and some of the funnier memories he had of them. He claims Mork's spacesuit was actually the result of a screw up on his part....the triangle was meant to go the other direction, but that the producer liked it when Robin walked in wearing it so he kept it. Mork & Mindy was huge at the time. I remember that my mom was impressed with many of the movies this guy had worked on, but I didn't pay attention to anything else he said I was so star-struck knowing he'd worked with Robin Williams!

TheStig wrote:
Note to Apple: why does my spell checker flag the last error AFTER I press submit?

Hehehehehe That made me laugh... :D

Michale

And Obama saying that terrorism is a gun control issue is JUST as moronic..

Let's face the facts.. It's a backdoor way for Democrats to push an unpopular, unnecessary and COMPLETELY useless agenda...

Again, it is convenient to make this your "go to" response to suggested solutions when you won't allow studies that could possibly show how these things could prevent gun violence to be funded!

Fine, you want to do studies!! DO STUDIES!!

But having the CDC do gun control studies is as MORONIC and STOOPID as having the EPA do gun control studies..

Like I said.. If you want to harass legal and legitimate gun owners, create an agency to do that.. Or use an existing enforcement agency to do that.. Why the frak do you think the ATF exists??

Let the Democrats initiate a police state.. Let's see how the American people respond to THAT...

Ahhh, but there is the rub.. If the Democrats use an actual ENFORCEMENT agency...??? Well, that just wouldn't look right...

It's political correctness, Listen... That's all...

The Orlando shooter was a lawful gun owner up until the point that he tried to kill over 100 people in a gay bar.

And would ANY proposed legislation by Democrats have prevented him from purchasing weapons?? Would ANY of the WOULDN'T IT BE NICE laws proposed by the Left Wingery have prevented Orlando?? Sandy Hook??? San Bernardino?? Fort Hood?? Navy Yards?? Blacksburg?? Killeen?? San Ysidro?? (I was there for that one) Benghazi?? 9.11???

NO.....

So, come talk to me when there is ACTUAL and and LEGITIMATE legislation that will ACTUALLY prevent or help prevent the very acts that PROMPTED the hysteria....

Until such time, it's ALL nothing but WOULDN'T IT BE NICE laws, that push a partisan, ideological, unpopular, unnecessary and completely useless agenda...

Michale

The biggest problems I see are:

1 Both parties are overly influenced by wealthy aristocrats and corporations
2 Both parties are regional
3 Voters in large states are under represented and subsidize the smaller states
4 The House O' Reps is wildly rigged by gerrymandering

None of the above are new, they are chronic diseaes.

On Tuesday, in the wake of Sunday’s Orlando gay nightclub shooting, the American Medical Association announced that gun violence in America had become a “public health crisis” that required a comprehensive public health response and solution.

Your little breakdown of the CDC's purpose based solely on the three words that make up it's name is a sophomoric attempt at humor at best; and at worst, a pathetic attempt to stop the prevention of gun violence. Are you claiming that the NRA shouldn't have anything to do with legislation that relates to handguns, since they aren't the NHGA? No? It is crazy to me that people screaming that guns aren't the issue are so afraid to allow scientific research into the problem that could verify their claims.

And you have YET to show how this will prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings and terrorist attacks..

Again, it is convenient to make this your "go to" response to suggested solutions when you won't allow studies that could possibly show how these things could prevent gun violence to be funded!

But here is the real heart of the problem, I believe:

You want to harass lawful gun owners??

What is with the "I am such a victim!" attitude by people who wouldn't be affected by proposed legislation whining that they are being treated unfairly? You are a gun owner already. You can purchase a gun. None of the proposals would affect your ability to purchase a gun. But this is "harassment" to you!? And everyone is a "lawful" gun owner until they aren't. The Orlando shooter was a lawful gun owner up until the point that he tried to kill over 100 people in a gay bar.

No, no. Yarnek was dumb as a rock. He conjured Lincoln (not Washington) to join a 'good' team that included Kirk and and the Vulcan founder Surak to fight an 'evil' team that included the Klingon founder Kahless, Genghis Khan, and a 'Colonel Green' from 21st century earth who wears the (actual) uniform worn by Mork from Ork.

Actually, in a later novel (SAVAGE TRADE) Yarnek became General George Washington... It's a good read...

But kudos on the "dumb as a rock" quip.. THAT was funny... :D

Anyway, the point of the episode was that the difference between good and evil wasn't their tactics, it was their motivation. Not their means but their ends. It's a morality play.

Exactly.. And, in the here and now, the motivation for both Democrats and Republicans is Political Power...

Some people assert, following Clausewitz's (usually misstated) aphorism that "War is a mere continuation of policy by other means",

AND a CRIMSON TIDE fan...

Who was right?? Hackman or Washington??

:D

Michale

The problem that I've seen in recent years is that America's conservative party has gotten it's priorities skewed.

To be fair, it's gotten YOUR priorities skewed... :D

Having said that, I have to muse...

The result would be no better if the conservative party disappeared altogether though, and probably worse. A progressive party without opposition might make some beneficial changes in the short term, but as it went on, the changes would get bigger and more radical, creating unexpected and unintended problems that would be extremely difficult, if not outright impossible, to fix. It would end up being somewhat similar to a cancer.

So there you have it, conservatism at its extreme is an auto-immune disease, while progressivism at its extreme is cancer. You need both an immune system and cell growth to survive, but you also need to keep both in check or you get sick and die.

Could you be describing myself and the rest of Weigantia?? :D

Michale

No, no. Yarnek was dumb as a rock. He conjured Lincoln (not Washington) to join a 'good' team that included Kirk and and the Vulcan founder Surak to fight an 'evil' team that included the Klingon founder Kahless, Genghis Khan, and a 'Colonel Green' from 21st century earth who wears the (actual) uniform worn by Mork from Ork.

Yarnek wanted to pit the two sides in a fight to the death (as noted in Futureama: this is also the plot of TOS episodes 19, 46, 56, 66 and 77) in a moronic attempt to see which side, good or evil, was 'stronger'.

Anyway, the point of the episode was that the difference between good and evil wasn't their tactics, it was their motivation. Not their means but their ends. It's a morality play.

Which, by the way, is horseshit, unless you're willing to equate cruelty and mercy, particularly in warfare. This is why the term 'war crimes' isn't an oxymoron.

Some people assert, following Clausewitz's (usually misstated) aphorism that "War is a mere continuation of policy by other means", that the opposite is also true, that politics must therefore also be waged as war. This is also nonsense: there are plenty of instances in which men of good will have resolved their differences amicably and peacefully, it's just that those instances are a lot less sexy - as TheStig notes, almost nobody noticed that a Zika bill was passed during the protest.

Current events seem to be validating a deliberate tactic by the Republicans: by obstructing Obama's agenda, and exaggerating political conflict, they've mobilized a base that is convinced that all politics is a zero-sum game. If this Frankenstein monster doesn't destroy its own maker (an increasing possibility), it will poison politics for decades to come.

Worse, a win for the know-nothing, do-nothing side would be a giant kick in the groin for those who have worked more peaceful, more rational, and more stable in the interest of peace. Do we really want a world in which insults, saber-rattling and nationalistic jingoism replaces diplomacy and incrementalism? Some in this country say Yes to that. In my opinion, they are as thick and rock-headed as Yarnek.

The problem that I've seen in recent years is that America's conservative party has gotten it's priorities skewed. Instead of just working to protect the people from damaging changes, they've tried to prevent any change at all, even the changes that would be helpful. They're almost like an auto-immune disease, they're overreacting to the point that they're harming the very thing they're supposed to be protecting.

The result would be no better if the conservative party disappeared altogether though, and probably worse. A progressive party without opposition might make some beneficial changes in the short term, but as it went on, the changes would get bigger and more radical, creating unexpected and unintended problems that would be extremely difficult, if not outright impossible, to fix. It would end up being somewhat similar to a cancer.

So there you have it, conservatism at its extreme is an auto-immune disease, while progressivism at its extreme is cancer. You need both an immune system and cell growth to survive, but you also need to keep both in check or you get sick and die.

Despite all the rhetoric from the Left Wingery to destroy the GOP... :D

I think the US Constitution gets that part right - our two party system is relatively durable.

Given the recent events, even the most durable system wears out and breaks down...

Michale

Two sides in a conflict tend to think of themselves as justified and the other side as unjustified.

But my point borders on the semantical... I accept your rephrase...

Michale

Not at all...

Democrats and Republican BOTH want power... Power for themselves and not the other...

Their goal is identical...

Hence, the conflict...

Michale

Not exactly...

I would rephrase it as:

Two sides in a conflict tend to think of themselves as justified and the other side as unjustified. Both sides in a conflict tend to converge on the same methods in furtherance of their competing strategic objectives. One side gets battleships, the other builds battleships, to the limits of their ability.

If Democrats and Republicans had the same objectives there would be no conflict between them and no reason for either to exist. Politics is conflict.

I've said it many times on C.W.com, but it's worth repeating, both parties work from the same tactical playbook,. Different strategies, 'cause they have different constituencies with different needs. If one party finds an effective tactic, the other will co-opt it. After 200 + years of experience, there aren't a lot of fresh tactics left....just variations on old themes to account for changing technologies, changing fashions, plus more and money in the game. If you aren't cynical, you aren't paying attention. That's another Lily T. quote.

"Your good and your evil use the same methods to achieve the same goals.."
-Yarnek/General George Washington, STAR TREK

So, you would agree with that statement vis a vis Democrats and Republicans, Stig??

Michale

I've said it many times on C.W.com, but it's worth repeating, both parties work from the same tactical playbook,. Different strategies, 'cause they have different constituencies with different needs. If one party finds an effective tactic, the other will co-opt it. After 200 + years of experience, there aren't a lot of fresh tactics left....just variations on old themes to account for changing technologies, changing fashions, plus more and money in the game. If you aren't cynical, you aren't paying attention. That's another Lily T. quote.

I know, I know...

But, seriously, I can't help it..

Someone who thinks that TERRORISM is a gun control problem is as much of a moron as someone who thinks that Pearl Harbor was an air traffic safety problem....

Michale

(and some of your points ARE valid)

Really?? Which ones?? :D

Michale

maybe CW should run a political emmy award show. the end of year awards do have a category for theatre, but perhaps it doesn't get the attention it deserves.

JL

agreed on the name Occupy being reserved for citizen protests. disagreed on allowing guy fawkes to send his kids to private school on the public dime. call THAT something people will care about enough to investigate. Trump was successful demagoguing the GOP primary largely by name-calling his opponents. CW has name-calling or bumper sticker contests because having the right words MATTERS, and it matters ESPECIALLY in a name, title or slogan.

"verily, but dost thou think Pete Rose by any other name would still smell as sweaty?"
~pinky & the brain

@russ [6],

right on the money with that comment!

@michale [7,8,9,10,11]

here you're being kind-of the counterpoint to my argument on name-calling. if you're going to call someone a name, do a better job of it! and be more concise! any valid points you may have (and some of your points ARE valid) tend to get lost in all the noise.

JL

Makeup, hair dye, hair spray, hair plugs. Theatre! Moving the actors to the aisles just makes it avant guard theater, kind of, it has been done before, nothing's really new in theatre.

Strange...

It wasn't like that when Democrats were in charge... :^/

Michale

The House O' Reps was dysfunctional before the "Sit In", A Zika bill gets passed during the demonstration. Maybe that's good, but isn't that socialized medicine? If you're concerned about mass dosing with fluoride, shouldn't you give pause to mass exposure to Permethrin, a neurotoxin? Toxicology is not a core job skill.

The House floor is all about theatre. Even when The Leaders turn off The House Cameras...which merely shows the Leadership doesn't understand cell phones and YouTube. Most of the hard work in the House and senate gets done by staff. Your elected Rep probably spends half of his/her time on the phone soliciting campaign contributions so that he/she may continue to strut the stage next season. When not on long recess breaks..

Makeup, hair dye, hair spray, hair plugs. Theatre! Moving the actors to the aisles just makes it avant guard theater, kind of, it has been done before, nothing's really new in theatre.

That's our Democrat Party...

Still stuck in the 60s.... :^/

Michale

Ya'all's idea of gun control simply DOESN'T work..

But that's the point..

It's NOT about GUNS...

It's about CONTROL...

Michale

ding, ding, ding!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

Don't get me wrong, I support any effort that motivates and focuses the larger electorate on gun control,

Yea.. WOULDN'T IT BE NICE laws... :^/

s (e.g. registration and liability insurance just like automobiles)

And you have YET to show how this will prevent or help prevent crowd-based mass shootings and terrorist attacks..

Logic, facts and decency are not important. Sad, but true.

Exactly.. Which is why Democrats only trot out this felgercarb when a tragedy occurs... They politicize the HELL out of these tragedies to push their unpopular, useless and ignorant agenda..

The American people don't WANT what the Democrats are selling...

What part of that do you not understand???

Michale

Don't tell me, let me guess.. Yer a fan of Stallone's COBRA...

"Crime is a disease and I am the cure.."

:D

Let's look at the name..

CENTER... Nope, nothing to do with guns, crime or violence there..

DISEASE... Hmmmmm Cobra notwithstanding, doesn't seem to be gun related...

CONTROL... Now THERE you might have a case because you want Gun CONTROL... But CONTROL is attached to DISEASE so it doesn't work..

So, we broke it down and we can factually state that the CDC has absolutely NOTHING to do with guns or gun violence...

You want to harass lawful gun owners??

Create an agency to do that....

Michale

"After the worst mass shooting in modern history, it's time for Speaker Ryan to bring a bill to the floor."
-House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md

It wasn't a mass shooting, ya fraking moron!!!!

It was a terrorist attack!!!!

I can just picture these utter morons on the afternoon of Dec 7th 1941...

"AFTER the worst airplane catastrophe in US history, it's time for the Speaker to bring this transportation legislation to the floor!!!"
-Moronic Democrats

I said it before and I'll say it again..

ANYONE who thinks that Gun Control will prevent or help prevent terrorist attacks is an ignorant MORON who gives up ALL rights to speak intelligently on the subject...

Michale..

In a few weeks most people will have forgotten, and only the gun nuts will be turning out to hassle their elected representatives, etc.

We saw how a committed minority who stayed on message continuously changed the country's views on gay marriage (congrats to them), and we are seeing the gun nuts do the same for their twisted and deadly cause.

If 20 murdered kids in Sandy Hook didn't impassion the general public, nothing will.

Passion outweighs polls. Logic, facts and decency are not important. Sad, but true.

Paula -

I always said that the reason that Hillary stayed in the race to the very end of the '08 primary was to build up that supporters list, which grew a little each time she had a rally. Although I'm sure that eight-year-old list has been data-mined within an inch of its young life, and surely merged with Obama's equally impressive (I'm sure) supporters list and possibly the DNC database, it probably forms the basis of her ground game for this year, so you could say that, in a way, she is still running the same campaign she was in '08!

Want to point out something else that makes me really happy: Hillary is implementing the 50-State Strategy and has a long-term plan for reinvigorating the party around the country. To me it's another example of her learning. She is not running the same campaign she did in 2008 and she may even be improving on Obama's outstanding efforts in '08 and '12. That's what I want to see!!