• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT3| 1,000 Years of Darkness and Nuclear Fallout

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm at some politico breakfast thing. This is awful. I hate myself.

Its like an anthropological study of the city.

Edit: Oh god mike allen made a this town joke

Kelly O'Donnell and peter baker is complaining about "official photos". Mark libovitch seems openly contemptuous
 
So Podesta compared the GOP to the jonestown cult and the right is freaking out, good a time as ever to post this awesome article from gawker that hits at something I've been noticing too, calls for civility used to stifle debate

On smarm
 

teiresias

Member
MITT - Official Trailer - A Netflix original documentary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLHxbemvpxY

Anybody else going to watch this?

Damn that very first scene . . . "Anyone know what to put in a concession speech." I want to watch it just to see if there's any footage that reveals definitively who in the campaign, if anyone, bought into all the deskewing nonsense.

In other news, Herring's lead over Obenshain continued to grow during the recount in VA.
 
MITT - Official Trailer - A Netflix original documentary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLHxbemvpxY

Anybody else going to watch this?
They have footage of him immediately after losing, as he was considering his concession speech? Very interesting, I'll definitely watch. I remember Kerry having a similar documentary in 2004. I watched it on YouTube and it literally ends aburptly after it's clear Kerry lost; the footage cuts out. I would have loved to see Kerry's direct reaction to losing, given how close he came.

Romney is actually pretty funny, it's a shame he wasn't able to just be himself while campaigning. He tended to look awkward as fuck, whereas any behind-the-scenes look at him features his humor, and he was cool when I met him in 2007.
 
In other news, Herring's lead over Obenshain continued to grow during the recount in VA.
Reports are that Obenshain is going to concede.

There was buzz about the House of Delegates (overwhelmingly GOP controlled) was going to fuck with the election results by invoking some constitutional clause, but that seems to be off the table.

Quinnipiac Iowa Senate poll shows Bruce Braley (Democrat) leading all comers:

In the 2014 Senate race, U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley, the Democrat, gets 43 percent, while U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker, the Republican, gets 40 percent. Braley tops other possible Republican contenders:

44 - 38 percent over State Sen. Joni Ernst;
46 - 37 percent over businessman Mark Jacobs;
44 - 36 percent over former U.S. Senate aide David Young;
45 - 34 percent over radio commentator Sam Clovis;
46 - 40 percent over political activist Bob Vander Plaats.
This in spite of Obama's approval rating at just 38% in the state.
 
Reports are that Obenshain is going to concede.

There was buzz about the House of Delegates (overwhelmingly GOP controlled) was going to fuck with the election results by invoking some constitutional clause, but that seems to be off the table.

Quinnipiac Iowa Senate poll shows Bruce Braley (Democrat) leading all comers:


This in spite of Obama's approval rating at just 38% in the state.
Hope this bodes well for the open seat

Politico just pushed the conceding story. #demsindisary
 
Doesn't Obama's low approval rating (62% not approving) suggest that the undecided voters are likely to skew Republican, though? That would be enough to push them over the top of Braley in some matchups.
I'll eat my hat if Obama's approval is that low by election day.

APKmetsfan said:
Politico just pushed the conceding story. #demsindisary
Ah, but the fact that McAuliffe and Herring won by such small amounts means the Republicans actually won! Neverminding that this is in fact a 15 point swing from the 2009 elections in both cases.
 
taperrrrrrrrrr

tapir.jpg
 
The Federal Reserve said on Wednesday that it would reduce its monthly bond-buying campaign to $75 billion in January, beginning a retreat from its stimulus campaign, because it no longer saw the need for the full force of those efforts.

The Fed sought to offset concerns that it was once again pulling back too soon by reinforcing its intent to hold short-term interest rates near zero “well past the time that the unemployment rate declines below 6.5 percent, especially if projected inflation continues to run below the committee’s 2 percent longer-run goal.”​

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/business/economy/fed-scales-back-stimulus-campaign.html

Economists like Stephanie Kelton have suggested that QE has been deflationary rather than inflationary, so it is possible the decision to "retreat from its stimulus campaign" may in fact be a form of (tiny) stimulus by leaving higher interest bearing assets in the private sector. (In other words, QE was a program by which the Fed bought US bonds from the private sector and replaced it with lower earning reserves, so it was net-reducing the financial wealth of the private sector.) Still, all this is probably relatively negligible stuff in the grand scheme of things and pales in comparison to what an actual stimulus looks like (i.e., a sharp increase in net fiscal spending).
 
What are your opinions on Barbara Walters saying she and others though Obama was the next messiah?

What are your thoughts? Or is this another drive-by post.

A lot of people thought Obama was special, and there's no doubt many in the media felt they were watching a truly historic moment. There's no question it was a historic moment, not just the 2008 general election but the primary contest between Obama and Hillary. Obama is very good at being a multitude of things to different people. Some thought he'd change Washington, be a transformational president, be a liberal icon, be a bipartisan warrior, be a communist, etc.

The reality has been a disappointment for most people who are honest with themselves. I voted for him twice and would again, given the GOP alternatives, but I don't think he's a "good" president and in many ways has been a stunning failure (civil liberties/NSA, drones, his corporatist lean, etc). Granted I knew he was the Goldman Sachs choice, I just didn't expect it to be to the degree he has displayed over the last 5 years.
 

Aylinato

Member
Reports are that Obenshain is going to concede.

There was buzz about the House of Delegates (overwhelmingly GOP controlled) was going to fuck with the election results by invoking some constitutional clause, but that seems to be off the table.

Quinnipiac Iowa Senate poll shows Bruce Braley (Democrat) leading all comers:


This in spite of Obama's approval rating at just 38% in the state.

What clause were the republicans thinking of to fuck elections with? I've gone over it(just now) to see anything they could is but I couldn't think of anythig
 

Sibylus

Banned
White House Speeds Release of Report on Changes to N.S.A. (David E. Sanger, NYT)
The White House said on Wednesday that it would release later in the day a report of a presidential advisory committee that issued more than 40 recommendations about how to alter the National Security Agency’s data gathering at home and abroad.
According to officials familiar with the report, the advisory group called for continuing the bulk collection of data about telephone calls, but moving it to private hands, a process that officials say could take several years. Some members of the group also favored splitting command of the N.S.A., which conducts surveillance, from the United States Cyber Command, the Pentagon’s cyberwarfare unit, to avoid concentrating too much power in the hands of a single individual. But Mr. Obama has rejected that approach.
Mr. Obama has embraced the bulk collection program, though officials say he may agree to the recommendations that the telephone “metadata” — essentially the same kind of information that is contained in a telephone bill about numbers called and the duration of conversations — be held by private industry.

Many telephone companies have been reluctant to retain that data beyond 18 months, because of the cost and the fear that it would be sought in private legal actions, including divorce cases. It is possible that a consortium of private companies may be created to organize the data in one place, but keep it from government hands unless a warrant for the data is issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Releasing the report in advance is a good move, but I'm skeptical about privatization being the fix that bulk collection needs. If the FISA court system gets teeth and intelligence agencies are restricted from taking what they want from corporations at their whim, it would be a lot of something. There's a lot of holes you have to fill if reform is a serious wish.
 
Mr. Obama has embraced the bulk collection program, though officials say he may agree to the recommendations that the telephone “metadata” — essentially the same kind of information that is contained in a telephone bill about numbers called and the duration of conversations — be held by private industry.

This may be among the stupidest things I've ever heard. What the hell is wrong with these people? What universe do they live in?
 

bonercop

Member
Mr. Obama has embraced the bulk collection program, though officials say he may agree to the recommendations that the telephone “metadata” — essentially the same kind of information that is contained in a telephone bill about numbers called and the duration of conversations — be held by private industry.
i don't

how is that a solution to anyone but the most batshit-kind of libertarian, exactly???
 

Tamanon

Banned
I fail to see much distinction between the Government paying for a private company to hold and collect data which it accesses and the Government itself doing it.
 
It just means the onus on maintaining that metadata information storage should be on the telephone carriers themselves. It's actually more regulation on the carriers.

It doesn't sound like that from the quotes posted. For example: "According to officials familiar with the report, the advisory group called for continuing the bulk collection of data about telephone calls, but moving it to private hands, a process that officials say could take several years." This seems to refer to "moving" extant data to "private hands" (whatever that means). And this: "It is possible that a consortium of private companies may be created to organize the data in one place..." This sounds like a government endeavor to me.
 

Sibylus

Banned
I fail to see much distinction between the Government paying for a private company to hold and collect data which it accesses and the Government itself doing it.
There's very little when the NSA has tended to break in to acquire what it feels it needs anyway. And who knows, corporations might be required to store the data indefinitely, and then it really is merely a shell moved to a different hand.
 
It doesn't sound like that from the quotes posted. For example: "According to officials familiar with the report, the advisory group called for continuing the bulk collection of data about telephone calls, but moving it to private hands, a process that officials say could take several years." This seems to refer to "moving" extant data to "private hands" (whatever that means). And this: "It is possible that a consortium of private companies may be created to organize the data in one place..." This sounds like a government endeavor to me.

Oh, I did miss some pertinent points, sorry.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
White House Speeds Release of Report on Changes to N.S.A. (David E. Sanger, NYT)




Releasing the report in advance is a good move, but I'm skeptical about privatization being the fix that bulk collection needs. If the FISA court system gets teeth and intelligence agencies are restricted from taking what they want from corporations at their whim, it would be a lot of something. There's a lot of holes you have to fill if reform is a serious wish.

Skeptical? Hell, I straight up reject it. How about we just stop doing it period. I certainly don't like the idea of it being in private hands
 

bonercop

Member
As mentioned in the article, they already hold this particular information, its more about the length in which they hold it.

the fact that they hold this kind of information is already problematic in and of itself. further institutionalizing the practice is a shitty move, and not a solution to anything.
 

Sibylus

Banned
Unless the Supreme Court states they can't do it(which they most likely will never do), that's not going to happen.
the fact that they hold this kind of information is already problematic in and of itself. further institutionalizing the practice is a shitty move, and not a solution to anything.
The Senate could potentially get something rolling, but they're divided between curtailing and legalizing bulk collection, or sinking it.
 

Sibylus

Banned
@mgsledge 8m

Leahy on WH #NSA review report: "“The message to the NSA is now coming from every branch of government ... You have gone too far"
Leahy is backing abolition of bulk collection, if memory serves.
 

Tamanon

Banned
The Senate could potentially get something rolling, but they're divided between curtailing and legalizing bulk collection, or sinking it.

The Senate and the House want nothing to do with the NSA's programs. They're the ones who created the whole concept in the first place. Nothing is coming from that front. I mean, don't you find it odd that opponents are always talking about Clapper lying to Congress, and yet the folks who held a year's worth of hearings on Benghazi won't say one word?

There's a reason they took an invasive intelligence technique, shrouded it behind what claims to be independent oversight and handed the reins off to the executive branch.
 

Sibylus

Banned
The Senate and the House want nothing to do with the NSA's programs. They're the ones who created the whole concept in the first place. Nothing is coming from that front. I mean, don't you find it odd that opponents are always talking about Clapper lying to Congress, and yet the folks who held a year's worth of hearings on Benghazi won't say one word?

There's a reason they took an invasive intelligence technique, shrouded it behind what claims to be independent oversight and handed the reins off to the executive branch.
There's still a lot of hot potato being played by anyone near the thing, may not be concretely sure of culpability short of a leak (or plain disclosure much further down the road), unfortunately. I can see it having gone a lot of ways.
 
Baucaus going to China. Puts a 1 year incumbent in the seat.

Don't know if it changes much. Wonder if Schweitzer will reconsider if he wants to be nominated?
 
Baucaus going to China. Puts a 1 year incumbent in the seat.

Don't know if it changes much. Wonder if Schweitzer will reconsider if he wants to be nominated?

He sounds like he's running for president, given his jabs at Hillary. Would be interesting, however I wonder if liberals can support someone with an A rating from the NRA.
 
Oh, I did miss some pertinent points, sorry.

Possibly, it's not clear from those quotes (I haven't read the article yet). If they're just talking about retention by communications companies, that's a little less problematic, but still something new for the US. Many European countries mandate that communications data be retained by providers for so many years, but that doesn't exist here (yet). However, those quotes suggest something even more than that to me.
 

Sibylus

Banned
Possibly, it's not clear from those quotes (I haven't read the article yet). If they're just talking about retention by communications companies, that's a little less problematic, but still something new for the US. Many European countries mandate that communications data be retained by providers for so many years, but that doesn't exist here (yet). However, those quotes suggest something even more than that to me.
Relevant blurbs:

Recommendation 1
We recommend that section 215 should be amended to authorize
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to issue a section 215 order
compelling a third party to disclose otherwise private information about
particular individuals only if:
  • (1) it finds that the government has reasonable grounds to believe
    that the particular information sought is relevant to an
    authorized investigation intended to protect “against
    international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities” and
  • (2) like a subpoena, the order is reasonable in focus, scope, and
    breadth.

Recommendation 4
We recommend that, as a general rule, and without senior policy
review, the government sh
ould not be permitted to collect and store all
mass, undigested, non-public personal information about individuals to
enable future queries
and data-mining for foreign intelligence purposes.
Any program involving government collection or storage of such data
must be narrowly tailored to serve an important government interest.

Recommendation 5
We recommend that legislation should be enacted that terminates
the storage of bulk telephony meta-data by the government under
section 215, and transitions as soon as reasonably possible to a system in
which such meta-data is held instead either by private providers or by a
private third party. Access to such data should be permitted only with a
section 215 order from the Foreign Intellience Surveillance Court that
meets the requirements set forth in Recommendation 1.

Recommendation 20

We recommend that the US Government should examine the
feasibility of creating software that would allow the National Security
Agency and other intelligence agencies more easily to conduct targeted
information acquisition rather than bulk-data collection.​

Recommendation 20 is basically recommending ThinThread, which would conceivably end the necessity of bulk collection. Up to the administration to take things that route, of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom