U.S. Politics Thread

[Sackett]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

At this point the question becomes whether someone gave the Republicans an edited version of if they made the edits themselves. If they did, their whole campaign about "Americans deserve the truth" and "without the truth the trust in government is eroded" looks highly hypocritical. Not that I'd be surprised if it were really the case, though. A career politician will play politics to keep their job; what would they be doing to earn a living if they weren't in politics?

Sounds like the issue was about there first being a release of a "summary" of the emails rather than the emails themselves and the Republicans quoted the summary.

The summary made some statements explicit that were only implied by the actual emails. Seems more like an incompetent cock-up rather then an intention to mislead.

[Vexx]

At this point, I don't have a lot of confidence in either major political party's competence in running the government. They're all trained marketeers, no more skilled than "news personalities" and fund-raising schmooze.

It's the "B Ark" people in full control (Hitchhiker's Guide reference)

[Ledgem]

Originally posted in the Syria thread, but worth reposting here:

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

Exclusive: John McCain Slips Across Border Into Syria, Meets With Rebels:

"Sen. John McCain Monday became the highest-ranking U.S. official to enter Syria
since the bloody civil war there began more than two years ago, The Daily Beast
has learned.

McCain, one of the fiercest critics of the Obama administration’s Syria policy, made
the unannounced visit across the Turkey-Syria border with Gen. Salem Idris, the
leader of the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army. He stayed in the
country for several hours before returning to Turkey. Both in Syria and Turkey,
McCain and Idris met with assembled leaders of Free Syrian Army units that
traveled from around the country to see the U.S. senator. Inside those meetings,
rebel leaders called on the United States to step up its support to the Syrian
armed opposition and provide them with heavy weapons, a no-fly zone, and
airstrikes on the Syrian regime and the forces of Hezbollah, which is increasingly
active in Syria."

See:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...th-rebels.html

Senator McCain is technically free to do what he wants, but this action seems a bit troubling to me. He was elected to be a state representative, not to act as some sort of foreign diplomat. Our country's stance on Syria is not fully decided, and McCain's visit seems to send mixed signals and pushes us in a particular direction. It seems a bit strange for a state representative to be focused so heavily on international matters, and to be acting independently in that manner. Imagine what it would be like if more of our state representatives ran off around the world, meeting with groups that they supported and saying what ever they wanted to various factions and governments. That sort of scenario seems very unprofessional.

I also found one of his anecdotes, a reason for why we should get involved, to be a bit odd:

"This woman who was a schoolteacher said, 'Sen. McCain, do you see these children here? They're going to take revenge on those people who refused to help them,' " McCain recalled. "They're angry and bitter. And that legacy could last for a long time too, unless we assist them."

There are an awful lot of countries in the world besides the United States who aren't getting their fingers involved with Syria, so why are people going to seek revenge on the United States in particular for not doing anything? Beyond that, if we do get involved then we'll be involved in killing and injuring some group of people; it seems that would incite a similar amount of anger and bitterness toward us.

[ArchmageXin]

There are an awful lot of countries in the world besides the United States who aren't getting their fingers involved with Syria, so why are people going to seek revenge on the United States in particular for not doing anything? Beyond that, if we do get involved then we'll be involved in killing and injuring some group of people; it seems that would incite a similar amount of anger and bitterness toward us.

The problem is U.S has a tendency to "bring democracy to the world". People believe America espouse those ideas, then they should "own it up" to these ideas. Classic examples are Eastern Europe (Hungary?) when young Hungarians heard Radio free Europe calling for them to overthrow Soviet power, but when Soviet Tanks showed up, U.S Jet Squadrons didn't do anything while the protesters got jailed or massacred.

Or Bay of Pigs/Tibet, where CIA sent Cuban/Tibetan trained armies to fight the Cubans/Chinese, but ended up abandoning them in the last second.

Same thing with Syria. The classic "Dictator must go" but yet America don't really do anything once the uprising started.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by ArchmageXin

The problem is U.S has a tendency to "bring democracy to the world". People believe America espouse those ideas, then they should "own it up" to these ideas. Classic examples are Eastern Europe (Hungary?) when young Hungarians heard Radio free Europe calling for them to overthrow Soviet power, but when Soviet Tanks showed up, U.S Jet Squadrons didn't do anything while the protesters got jailed or massacred.

Or Bay of Pigs/Tibet, where CIA sent Cuban/Tibetan trained armies to fight the Cubans/Chinese, but ended up abandoning them in the last second.

Same thing with Syria. The classic "Dictator must go" but yet America don't really do anything once the uprising started.

The point here is that America realised now, how hard it is to actually bring Democracy, and that America doesn't actually know how to accomplish it intentionally. It has happened in the past, but now we know it isn't something that is automatic. No one knows how a democratic state arises and get accepted by the population. All we know is that forcing it doesn't work.

And with Syria, no one can see a Democratic ending. One way or another, there will be revenge killings at the end. America is staying away because now the nations knows its limits.

[synaesthetic]

We're starting to realize that butting into other countries and forcing them to be like us isn't a good way to go about things.

[ArchmageXin]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

We're starting to realize that butting into other countries and forcing them to be like us isn't a good way to go about things.

Or is just simply too expensive (Iraq), things not going our way (Palestinians elect Hamas), or things get out of hand (just about everyone of U.S's recent adventures)

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Senator McCain is technically free to do what he wants, but this action seems a bit troubling to me. He was elected to be a state representative, not to act as some sort of foreign diplomat. Our country's stance on Syria is not fully decided, and McCain's visit seems to send mixed signals and pushes us in a particular direction. It seems a bit strange for a state representative to be focused so heavily on international matters, and to be acting independently in that manner. Imagine what it would be like if more of our state representatives ran off around the world, meeting with groups that they supported and saying what ever they wanted to various factions and governments. That sort of scenario seems very unprofessional.

This comes with a very big caveat on whether McCain is doing that of his own volition, or with the consent and possibly direction of the Administration, in which case it raises the interesting question of why the President wants, or allows, Senator McCain to go there.

However, it's not so abnormal. American Senators, when overseas, are considered highly public ranking figures akin to ambassadors and Presidents have purposely sent them to foreign countries on key missions before. Kerry as a resident foreign policy expert in the Senate often served as an envoy for Obama to critical regions long before he became Secretary of State.

And of course, during the 2008 election campaign, Obama did embark on a successful European and Middle Eastern tour which laid the groundwork for restoring American reputation overseas from the nadir of the worldwide anti-Bush hatred. Presumably he at least signaled his intentions with the then-current Bush administration.

"Going rogue," however, is an incredibly bad idea which should without question brings censure and reproach. Bringing dirty domestic partisan politics into a crisis zone = just no. We've had enough with "Benghazi-gate" (the term itself is already a true butchery of language and class).

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by ArchmageXin

The problem is U.S has a tendency to "bring democracy to the world". People believe America espouse those ideas, then they should "own it up" to these ideas. Classic examples are...

You claim that America has a tendency to "bring democracy to the world" and then list a series of examples where they pretty clearly did not. I think America thinks that it has a history of bringing democracy to the world, but people who consider history would see that it isn't the case. I would have assumed that people outside of America wouldn't buy into the whole "America brings freedom" delusion.

That delusion creates an angle to manipulate the country, though. It makes us a nice target. If the Syrian teacher had made a comment like that to a British or French representative, would anyone in either of those countries care? They would probably dismiss it in a manner similar to how I did. But the remark will resonate with some Americans, because they believe that we're special, that our country is better than everyone else's and that everyone else must want to be like us (and if they don't want to, they should be like us anyway). Here we have someone asking us to get involved! They want what we're offering. What more justification for getting involved could a person possibly want?

I'd want a lot more, but then I also don't view the world as being easily divided into "good" and "evil."

Originally Posted by Irenicus

This comes with a very big caveat on whether McCain is doing that of his own volition, or with the consent and possibly direction of the Administration, in which case it raises the interesting question of why the President wants, or allows, Senator McCain to go there.

That's an interesting thought. I looked for more news on the event and it seems that it's not entirely clear whether he acted on his own or through the President. The White House hasn't commented, and a member of the State Department confirmed that the trip was made but referred all questions to McCain's office. Given that McCain is rather passionate about this issue and has also been very critical of Obama's handling of the situation he represents a logical choice and also a puzzling choice to act as an envoy to the president.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

I don't see McCain doing anything on Obama's behalf. He is STILL a Republican, and we know that working for the President means being black-listed by the GOP. Unless he switched sides and is going to become a Democrat, McCain is going there on behalf of the Republican leadership.

[Kyuu]

Former Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said Tuesday she agrees with former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole’s critique of the modern GOP and said Republicans need to “rethink their approach as a political party.”

“I certainly do agree with the former majority leader, Bob Dole, with whom I worked when I first entered the Senate and who was a consensus builder and understood what was essential and important for the Republican Party and what was important for America,” she said on MSNBC. “And that, unfortunately, has been lost today on Capitol Hill.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...ole-91930.html

Nice to know, some of the more prominent old schoolers are speaking out and talking against the current incarnation of the Republicans.

And Bob Dole is right: Reagan in today's version would have been stamped out.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Kyuu

And Bob Dole is right: Reagan in today's version would have been stamped out.

And given than Reagan is looked by Today's republican like the messian make the situation weird on more than one level.

Colorado marijuana regulations signed into law
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...05-28-19-00-34

[speedyexpress48]

I invite everyone on this thread to read this article;

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/26/amer...angerous_myth/

It's a long essay, but it puts a lot of things in perspective, including our current "nation-building" endeavors.

[ganbaru]

Ardent conservative Bachmann to not seek re-election to Congress
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94S0E020130529
Probably a good thing, given how much crazy she is.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Ardent conservative Bachmann to not seek re-election to Congress
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94S0E020130529
Probably a good thing, given how much crazy she is.

The only question is if her replacement would drop the pretence, or try to imitate her insanity.

Still, one way or another her seat is in play. We just don't know if it would have been to Dem's advantage for Bachmann to try and contest the seat again.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Ardent conservative Bachmann to not seek re-election to Congress
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94S0E020130529
Probably a good thing, given how much crazy she is.

She knows that no amount of theatrics will change the reality that she will most likely lose if she runs again.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The only question is if her replacement would drop the pretence, or try to imitate her insanity.

Still, one way or another her seat is in play. We just don't know if it would have been to Dem's advantage for Bachmann to try and contest the seat again.

this helps the R more then the D. Her district voted for Rommy 56%. As long as the R put someone who isn't insane they will keep this district.

[ganbaru]

Immigrants are net contributors to U.S. Medicare program : study
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94S1GB20130529

[ganbaru]

Republican vs. Republican on covering uninsured
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...06-01-12-40-04

WASHINGTON (AP) -- It's Republican versus Republican in the latest round of political battles over health care.

Conservative Republican legislators in major states are trying to block efforts by more pragmatic governors of their own party to accept health insurance for more low-income residents under President Barack Obama's health care law.

[AnimeFan188]

Obama Struck Secret Deal to Support Hillary in 2016: Book:

"A new book by journalist Edward Klein says Obama has been pushed into
supporting a 2016 presidential run by Hillary Clinton. Obama offered the
endorsement in exchange for Bill Clinton's enthusiastic key nominating speech at
the 2012 Democratic convention, says Klein in an extract of the book published in
the New York Post. The deal was allegedly struck in spite of a history of animosity
between the two presidents. "Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He
doesn’t know how the world works. He’s incompetent. He’s an amateur!" Klein
quotes Bill as saying privately, via a source."

See:

http://www.newser.com/story/168880/o...2016-book.html