Support NeoGAF

[Vimes]

I think Occupy never really died. It sort of just murmured in the shadows. Bernie is basically Occupy's presidential candidate, even if the actual group was long gone.

They likely would have been more successful had they started up these days. It's interesting the attitudes against Wall Street seem more powerful now than they were 10 years ago, even if WS hasn't really done anything of importance since the crash.

I don't necessarily think anger at Wall Street was a dividing element between supporters of the different wings of the party, either. Myself and other Clinton supporters I know weren't happy about her speeches just because we looked the other way; we all want the banks taken to task because we see it as necessary to us actually getting a future instead of descending into a neoliberal dystopia or whatever.

So I think it's important to stress that just because someone defends Clinton or Obama for being cozy with the banks or doing the speeches, doesn't mean they aren't angry as fuck about the state of affairs. I know I am.

I also think Sanders gets more ownership over the issue than he deserves, given what Warren is doing.

 

[kirblar]

Use context clues

Hard to use them when "elite","establishment", etc. are always a generic scapegoat boogeyman, regardless if the person using them is on the left or right.

Also, see Croc's point about the "WWC" (where social conservative/economic lefty often mixes) making getting a precise read on what someone means pretty damn difficult.

I don't necessarily think anger at Wall Street was a dividing element between supporters of the different wings of the party, either. Myself and other Clinton supporters I know weren't happy about her speeches just because we looked the other way; we all want the banks taken to task because we see it as necessary to us actually getting a future instead of descending into a neoliberal dystopia or whatever.

So I think it's important to stress that just because someone defends Clinton or Obama for being cozy with the banks or doing the speeches, doesn't mean they aren't angry as fuck about the state of affairs. I know I am.

I also think Sanders gets more ownership over the issue than he deserves, given what Warren is doing.

Seriously, it's not like we're conservatives here- we want stronger regulations on the industry!

 

[CygnusXS]

Human rights, who needs 'em?

I'm not sure if this is a new branch in American FP ideology, or if it's just really internally confused ideology.

Like, is this "only money and power matter in structuring the international order" or is this "uh I'm just kind of guessing out here." How coherent is the motivation behind statements like this?

 

[pigeon]

The thing is, though, that I dont think you get to this point without Occupy.

I agree with this.

Occupy's pretty much winning. It's just taking a while.

 

[TestOfTide]

It depends on who is using "elite"

The left talks about the rich and elite all the time, but they obviously are not angry rural people mad at city livers. It means different things to different ideologies.

Depends on which part of the left.

If it's Bernie or Bust left it may as well be treated the exact same as when conservatives use the term considering the last one I argued with on GAF literally used it in conjunction with the term "Real America".

Occupy Wall Street had some good intentions but overall it just fed too much into populist bullshit. Our Intelligence agencies even have concluded that Russia, while not the starters of the movement, did feed into it.

With BLM you had very clear statements on what the leaders wanted. Occupy Wall Street came off way too much as "fuck the man". Like great, but what are your requests to actually solving the problems of our nations?

I agree with this.

Occupy's pretty much winning. It's just taking a while.

I think a better way to put it is that Occupy had its split up during last year's primaries, but has been revitalized as the #Resistance.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I'm not sure if this is a new branch in American FP ideology, or if it's just really internally confused ideology.

Like, is this "only money and power matter in structuring the international order" or is this "uh I'm just kind of guessing out here." How coherent is the motivation behind statements like this?

The White Moderate approach. "who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice;"

This quote but about foreign policy.

 

[Barzul]

Mad About Obama's Paid Speeches? Blame Gerald Ford.

Former President Barack Obama's decision to accept $400,000 from investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald for a speech about health care generated plenty of outrage last week that he is monetizing the presidency. Then there was the counter-argument that those concerned about Obama's new source of income are just racists.

But aside from the accusations of racism, this debate isn't new. Debates about the propriety of ex-presidential behavior trace back to the country's founding. But the contemporary question begins 40 years ago with an important decision made by Gerald Ford.

Yes, Gerald Ford.

Few historians would put Ford, the 38th President of the United States, on their list of most influential and important presidents. His accidental ascension to the presidency after the resignation of Richard Nixon is perhaps best remembered for the pardon he gave his predecessor and his oversight of the country's official retreat from Vietnam.

It was Ford's time as an ex-president that was truly revolutionary. In a break from every ex-president before him, Ford decided to turn the prestige of the presidency into cash. He joined corporate boards and hit the paid-speaking circuit.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I honestly don't think Obama doing the speeches matters all THAT much, given he's not running for an office in which he will be responsible for neutrally governing them like Hillary was going to be, but at the same time, I also think he probably should have governed in such a way (such as criminally prosecuting top bankers responsible for the 2008 crisis) that Wall Street would not have WANTED a cozy, cordial relationship with him.

Edit: Re: Tillerson's statement, it's not like the US isn't actively engaging in international relations with human rights-denying states right at this moment. I actually don't mind greater honesty about what motivates the US's foreign policy much of the time.

 

[B-Dubs]

I honestly don't think Obama doing the speeches matters all THAT much, given he's not running for an office in which he will be responsible for neutrally governing them like Hillary was going to be, but at the same time, I also think he probably should have governed in such a way (such as criminally prosecuting top bankers responsible for the 2008 crisis) that Wall Street would not have WANTED a cozy, cordial relationship with him.

Edit: Re: Tillerson's statement, it's not like the US isn't actively engaging in international relations with human rights-denying states right at this moment. I actually don't mind greater honesty about what motivates the US's foreign policy much of the time.

If we're being honest about the nature of the whole paid speeches thing, they'd want him if he sent a ton of them to jail or not. It's a prestige thing for them, it's not about currying favor with him, it's about currying favor with their peers. The bigger name they get, the better they look to all the other firms. If a firm was doing a conference on financial ethics or something along those lines they'd try and get someone like Bernie or Warren (given they were no longer in Congress). It's about prestige and legitimacy for them.

 

[pigeon]

With BLM you had very clear statements on what the leaders wanted. Occupy Wall Street came off way too much as "fuck the man". Like great, but what are your requests to actually solving the problems of our nations?

I mean, this is the same critique white people make about BLM. Occupy had some goals, but if you think somebody's goals are unrealistic or poorly considered it's easy to say they're just too vague.

I think there's a good argument that BLM and Occupy are actually quite similar. I know in Oakland they involved a lot of the same people! And ultimately, again, they don't need to be opposed to each other. That's the establishment talking. They have the same interests.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Is it okay to say Van Jones is kind of a dick at this point?

 

[Teggy]

See, this is the problem. The longer Republicans cause uncertainty, the more this will happen

Dan Diamond @ddiamond

Aetna out of Virginia market, citing both financial losses but also “uncertain outlook for the individual marketplace.”
3:06 PM · May 3, 2017

 

[Cesare Borgia]

Is it okay to say Van Jones is kind of a dick at this point?

Throwing away self respect and friendships to raise his profile with CNN. Pathetic.

 

[TestOfTide]

I mean, this is the same critique white people make about BLM. Occupy had some goals, but if you think somebody's goals are unrealistic or poorly considered it's easy to say they're just too vague.

I think there's a good argument that BLM and Occupy are actually quite similar. I know in Oakland they involved a lot of the same people! And ultimately, again, they don't need to be opposed to each other. That's the establishment talking. They have the same interests.

Which is why I said that the 2016 primaries was Occupy splitting into two sections: BLM and BernieOrBust.

But luckily the whole #Resistance has kinda helped recombine the two.

 

[Diablos]

See, this is the problem. The longer Republicans cause uncertainty, the more this will happen

Motherfuckers.

 

[sc0la]

See, this is the problem. The longer Republicans cause uncertainty, the more this will happen

That's kind of their plan at this point.

GOP: "All according to sepuku."

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I said this in the thread, but it certainly appears that Anthony Weiner trying to bait a minor into having sex with him put James Comey in the most unenviable position in modern political history.

 

[B-Dubs]

See, this is the problem. The longer Republicans cause uncertainty, the more this will happen

I would take them at their word on this after what they pulled the last time they started pulling out of exchanges. There's probably something else behind it.

 

[Crocodile]

A) For all the talk of momentum (which could be real I'm not discounting it), the biggest moves seem to have been two Congressmen who were YES on AHCA on Sunday, NO on Monday but are now back to YES today?

B) If my House Rep is a Democrat is there anyone for me to call? Or do just yell at my Republican Senator even if it hasn't left the house yet?

 

[pigeon]

I said this in the thread, but it certainly appears that Anthony Weiner trying to bait a minor into having sex with him put James Comey in the most unenviable position in modern political history.

Hillary's position was probably a little worse.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

A) For all the talk of momentum (which could be real I'm not discounting it), the biggest moves seem to have been two Congressmen who were YES on AHCA on Sunday, NO on Monday but are now back to YES today?

B) If my House Rep is a Democrat is there anyone for me to call? Or do just yell at my Republican Senator even if it hasn't left the house yet?

Yeah might as well start the Senate resistance running.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Hillary's position was probably a little worse.

idk, Comey was basically in a position where no action could result in him not being scorned. Either he didn't say anything, it leaks, and he looks like a partisan hack covering things up for "crooked Hillary" (and the election maybe goes even MORE south since it plays even more perfectly into the narrative), or he goes against policy, says something, it leaks, and he looks like a partisan hack trying to rig things for Trump.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

Human rights, who needs 'em?

"Dont worry, youll have a fulfilling career somewhere else where you wont have to get caught flatfooted by a crooked idiot all the time"

 

[royalan]

idk, Comey was basically in a position where no action could result in him not being scorned. Either he didn't say anything, it leaks, and he looks like a partisan hack covering things up for "crooked Hillary" (and the election maybe goes even MORE south since it plays even more perfectly into the narrative), or he goes against policy, says something, it leaks, and he looks like a partisan hack trying to rig things for Trump.

Again, how would it look partisan for Comey to follow what was standing protocol?

Better question: how would that have looked more partisan than his actual partisan actions?

 

[RastaMentality]

I mean, this is the same critique white people make about BLM. Occupy had some goals, but if you think somebody's goals are unrealistic or poorly considered it's easy to say they're just too vague.

I think there's a good argument that BLM and Occupy are actually quite similar. I know in Oakland they involved a lot of the same people! And ultimately, again, they don't need to be opposed to each other. That's the establishment talking. They have the same interests.

A lot of the black critiques of Occupy was how white and upper middle class it was though. The attempts to diversify it with Occupy the Hood and such were not successful.

Hell, I just got done reading the Afrikan Black Coalition's demands of the UCSC campus and it includes a direct critique of the whiteness in the Occupy movement:

We are pushing back against the language of “occupation” in recognition of the largely white-centric and fairly recent “Occupy Movement”.

http://afrikanblackcoalition.org/2017/05/02/black-students-at-uc-santa-cruz-protest-hostile-campus/
---------
BLM has been more successful because of its simple message and the forcefulness of the name. It's also dealt with decentralized leadership in a way bettter fashion than Occupy ever was (as much as BLM Toronto continues to irritate this forum).

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Again, how would it look partisan for Comey to follow what was standing protocol?

Better question: how would that have looked more partisan than his actual partisan actions?

Because the Right's entire narrative relied on Hillary being a crooked political insider trying to rig the system to cover up her crimes - see: Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac - and if suddenly a leak comes out (and this was basically guaranteed) that says that there are MORE emails out there than just what the FBI had looked at at the time of Comey's briefing to Congress, and that Comey said nothing about them after recommending no charges, the Right would have gone apeshit.

Shit, his letter was a total nothingburger in terms of its content, to anybody with any sense, yet it cost Hillary the election, anyway. Protocol, in this case, played right into the narrative he wanted to avoid (namely, that the FBI was trying to act as a partisan election broker), but the other course of action had the exact same effect. Hence, unenviable.

 

[tedrotheredro]

I said this in the thread, but it certainly appears that Anthony Weiner trying to bait a minor into having sex with him put James Comey in the most unenviable position in modern political history.

Please. Comey should have never sent the letter. Nothing he's said defending it makes any sense. I wish the senators had the guts to push him a bit more on it, he was making no sense today.

His story is he sent the letter before a search warrant because he thought he wouldn't be able to complete the investigation into e-mails before the election, yet his "wizards" magically scanned all the e-mails quickly and gave the okay so he sent another letter confirming "it's fucking nothing".

What actually happened was he found some new e-mails, freaked the fuck out because he thought it was the BIG ONE even though he didn't know what was in them, and because his republicans were going to lose and he didn't want to lose the senate, he sent a letter to congress. Then when everyone overreacted he told his agents to hurry (to grab the warrant and scan the e-mails) and it took them like a couple of hours to scan the e-mails, no magic because people who actually know how to analyze data can tell his excuse is bullshit.

 

[royalan]

Because the Right's entire narrative relied on Hillary being a crooked political insider trying to rig the system to cover up her crimes - see: Bill Clinton meeting with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac - and if suddenly a leak comes out (and this was basically guaranteed) that says that there are MORE emails out there than just what the FBI had looked at at the time of Comey's briefing to Congress, and that Comey said nothing about them after recommending no charges, the Right would have gone apeshit.

There weren't more emails. The vast majority of the emails found on Abudin's laptop were either unrelated, or copies of emails they already had.

But more importantly, if Comey was concerned about what it would look like if people found out that the FBI discovered additional emails, why WASN'T he concerned about how it would look when it was found that Trump himself was under federal investigation for possible treasonous behavior? His behavior doesn't follow.

And I've said this before: That Comey might have acted in a certain way due to pressure from the right is exactly what makes this partisan.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Mittens outbid Jeb's group to buy the Marlins.

Poor Jeb! Can't even win at buying a baseball team

 

[B-Dubs]

Mittens outbid Jeb's group to buy the Marlins.

Poor Jeb! Can't even win at buying a baseball team

 

[BoogieWoogie]

So Comey didn't reveal that Trump was being investigated because Obama said No. Did he run permission by Obama with Hilary's emails?

 

[tedrotheredro]

So Comey didn't reveal that Trump was being investigated because Obama said No. Did he run permission by Obama with Hilary's emails?

I believe the op-ed was only about Russian influence, not about Trump or his associates. There's a big difference, but he seemed to rely on it heavily today to defend his actions.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

There weren't more emails. The vast majority of the emails found on Abudin's laptop were either unrelated, or copies of emails they already had.

But more importantly, it Comey was concerned about what it would look like if people found out that the FBI discovered additional, why WASN'T he concerned about how it would look when it was found that Trump himself was under federal investigation for possible treasonous behavior?

And I've this before: That Comey might have acted in a certain way due to pressure from the right is exactly what makes this partisan.

I would argue it's realpolitik in the most basic sense - dude was going to lose face either way due to the NY FBI's office threat of leaking there being emails on Weiner's PC (whether they were actually new emails is immaterial to how they would have been represented by right-wing media and conservative social media), he attempted to walk the route that made him look magnanimously transparent, and it turned out to have a horrible outcome. Dude obviously fucked up, which even he acknowledges, but I don't buy that it was some Machiavellian scheme to favor Repubs, just a shitty situation he found himself in that had no good outcome for him or the country.

 

[tedrotheredro]

I would argue it's realpolitik in the most basic sense - dude was going to lose face either way due to the NY FBI's office threat of leaking there being emails on Weiner's PC (whether they were actually new emails is immaterial to how they would have been represented by right-wing media and conservative social media), he attempted to walk the route that made him look magnanimously transparent, and it turned out to have a horrible outcome. Dude obviously fucked up, which even he acknowledges, but I don't buy that it was some Machiavellian scheme to favor Repubs, just a shitty situation he found himself in that had no good outcome for him or the country.

A few things here:

Does it matter if a leak occurs? It's not official, so how could you even believe it? Fake news was everywhere the last few weeks of the election. Hard to say it's fake news when the FBI director is sending letters left and right.

Also, he didn't acknowledge he fucked up. He said he would do the same thing again and defended his actions to an obnoxious degree.

 

[broz0rs]

I love how Republicans are rushing through this version of AHCA and its last minute amendments so that they can avoid knowing the CBO score.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

A few things here:

Does it matter if a leak occurs? It's not official, so how could you even believe it? Fake news was everywhere the last few weeks of the election. Hard to say it's fake news when the FBI director is sending letters left and right.

Also, he didn't acknowledge he fucked up. He said he would do the same thing again and defended his actions to an obnoxious degree.

Do you think the mainstream media would NOT have picked up a leak as readily as they picked up a letter?

 

[neurosisxeno]

I love how Republicans are rushing through this version of AHCA and its last minute amendments so that they can avoid knowing the CBO score.

I mean, the end CBO score for any proposal they put forward is going to be the same; it's bad.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

So even though they admittedly do not have the votes, they're still going to try tonight or early tomorrow for a vote.

I guess they hope to shame some reps to vote for it, but I think it'll have the opposite effect. They're already super uncomfortable with this bill, they're rushing it through and adding junk to it randomly, it seems like it would make already gun shy reps even more scared.

 

[tedrotheredro]

Do you think the mainstream media would NOT have picked up a leak as readily as they picked up a letter?

Correct, I think the story is far lessened by being sourced anonymously and unofficially.

 

[kess]

Aetna must really, really want this bill to go through.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Kind of weird AARP has been kind of quiet lately.

 

[kirblar]

Kind of weird AARP has been kind of quiet lately.

They're not: https://twitter.com/AARPadvocates

It's just not an election year.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

They're not: https://twitter.com/AARPadvocates

It's just not an election year.

Oh, I didn't know they had two Twitter accounts

 

[SomewhatGroovy]

Susan Rice refuses Senate request to testify on Russian Hacking.

Is it okay to say Van Jones is kind of a dick at this point?

What did I miss?

 

[Trouble]

Susan Rice refuses Senate request to testify on Russian Hacking.

Huh? Why?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Steve King from a yes to maybe on ACHA. Doesn't like the concessions made to the moderates and thinks it'll be watered down in the senate.

Rep. Steve King said there was an agreement that his language in the original bill that would "strike out" the requirement to cover essential health benefits would be offered in the Senate with the support of President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. But now, he said, he wasn't so sure.

"Once they negotiated (essential health benefits) with the Freedom Caucus and Tuesday Group, it is hard for me to imagine they will bring that language in the Senate, or that it will be effective because they diluted this thing substantially," he told CNN's Chris Cuomo Wednesday on "New Day."

lol

 

[B-Dubs]

Steve King from a yes to maybe on ACHA. Doesn't like the concessions made to the moderates and thinks it'll be watered down in the senate.



lol

Yea, this ain't passing.

 

[Plinko]

Steve King from a yes to maybe on ACHA. Doesn't like the concessions made to the moderates and thinks it'll be watered down in the senate.



lol

"Thinks?"

 

[RustyNails]

Huh? Why?

Its a bullshit request. About the "unmasking" business. GOP needs to fuck right off.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I wrote like a page about how this is wrong. Did you read it?

I did.

It was as unconvincing as when Comey said that he wasn't concerned with politics.