I actually much prefer the years of LBJ to the power broker. Caro uses the extra length to go soon much deeper.
203 karma · joined November 19, 2016
oh gee whiz. this is such a great comment. I almost spilled coffee laughing on my keyboard. A+.
"This means most students unaffiliated with the school would be protected from any tax on graduate school tuition aid."
This clearly not true from the article you cite and the verge article (see the comments by the spokeswoman). Where is this claim coming from?
As for your statements about 2008 or 2012 I would need a lot of citations for claims about russian interference in those elections.
Your statement about this current anti-russian wave is wildly off base.
Comparing an innocuous diplomatic statement and a line during a debate with a prolonged and consistent pattern of contact between campaign officials to obtain intelligence provided by the Russian government through hacking....
Moving on-yes- lobbying is bad.
The next paragraph where you talk about Podesta is baffling to me. The strongest case against the president (note these might not actually be crimes-often the cover-up is more damaging and criminal) is that his campaign officials met with agents of the russian government (who represented themselves thusly) and intelligence services to proffer damaging material on a domestic political opponent. Your contention that it is possible that "the campaign was equally clueless about the entire thing" is belied by the fact that three of the key principals (Manafort, Kushner, Don Jr) in the trump campaign met with agents of the russian government...(among many any other incidents).
Hell there was a new york times article this very day about how the trump campaign was aware of the DNC hacks months before it became public knowledge. Donald trump cheered the hackers on in debates. Claiming the campaign was entirely unaware is dead wrong.
You then mention how there needs to be a demonstrated pattern of pro-russian behavior. I mentioned a fair few above-adding in that trump still has not implemented a recent round of sanctions.
To the geopolitical point-the actions of America are very far from perfect. I have many frustrations with the actions of my government. But I do not know if the world would be much more stable if America did not exist and neither do you.
I assure you- the united states is not a russian puppet and will never be so.
But mostly Donald wasn't hilary. Putin HATED Hilary for complex reasons linked to 1. bill clinton's expansion of NATO 2. What putin perceived as american support for violent regime change i.e. which he viewed as an existential threat. This included Hilary speaking in public in support of Russian dissidents and her exulting in the overthrow and execution of gaddafi (while she was secretary of state) 3. Hilary was basically an anti-russia hawk in general.
It seems the active measures campaign was never expected to result in Donald winning. I think the reasonable expectation was that hilary would be discredited and ineffective after winning with no clear mandate and intense resistance by the right. It was by no means random. It is intensely idiotic to think a nation state ruled by a canny, KBG trained, dictator would invest substantial resources and risk American retaliation to cause 'randomness'. His actions had chaotic results to be sure...but he had clear goals.
"If Mueller's final report says the Russians had a major influence on the election then what happens? I can't imagine it being good for anyone."
and the alternative being we close our eyes and pretend not to see? hopefully it would result in a return to paper ballots and hardened cyber security all across the Western world.
At this point though, we all know what the Mueller report will say in its generality. YES the russians had major influence on the election. Denying that at this point is delusional! Mueller is more about what role auspices of the trump campaign violated the law in their acceptance of russian aid...that is still somewhat of an open question as to degree and the level of criminality but it is quite clear that the Trump campaign had some amount of communication and coordination with agents of the Russian government.
it should be between the f35 and a different program which isn't a gross hodgepodge of the demands of everyone and their mom. concurrency, one size fits-all-fighter...madness.
Some wikipedia resulted in 600 (law)+ 400 ( medschool)+ 3140 (business)+noise term ~5000 grad students. I bet the rest of the gap is just low turnout
I feel bad attacking his credentials-I am sure he was a fine debater. This article is of course...quite silly. Comparing children reading foucault and baudrillard or cass sunstein and talking quickly about nuclear proliferation with "the kind of language currently poisoning our public sphere" is not even wrong.
High School Debate is not some monolithic top down hierachy- there is a vast array of tournaments and events that cater primarily to the needs and preferences of the students who choose to compete in them for fun.
Fast debate with competent judges doesn't just stop being debate...everyone starts slow and over time learns to speak cogently at speed. If their arguments don't make sense at speed to the judge they are typically discarded outright. Fast debate really opens the competitive landscape, since you have a lot more time to open up complex ethical frameworks and longer arguments. If you and the judge and the other debater understand what is being said..well..why should we restrict ourselves from having an educational and fun round? because it matches the preconceptions of some musician on hackernews about what 'debate' is? pish posh
An easy way to make research accessible is to write a monograph!