TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

DeviantBraeburn Wandering Jew from Dysfunctional California Since: Aug, 2012
Wandering Jew
#56276: Jun 9th 2013 at 8:26:23 PM

I'm calling it right now. This thread is gonna get ugly fast.

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56277: Jun 9th 2013 at 8:45:33 PM

I'm of the opinion that while Mannings public justification of why he did what he did was "It's the right thing to do!" about 90 % of it was his own loathing at a poor adjustment to Army life, given what some of the IRC chat logs I've seen of his conversations post-leak consisted of.

Lots of whining about yoked out alpha males that he didn't get along with, et cetera. I think "screw the army" was his main actual motivation, and his own moral compass was a small part of it.

That's my piece on that. But yeah, on principle, don't violate your security clearance. When your ass is in a sling after the fact for doing that, you deserve it.

DrunkGirlfriend from Castle Geekhaven Since: Jan, 2011
#56278: Jun 9th 2013 at 8:47:50 PM

Essentially, you can talk about why Manning's actions were needed all day long (and probably be right), he still broke the rules. Screw the Rules, I'm Doing What's Right! doesn't usually lead to favorable consequences in reality.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56279: Jun 9th 2013 at 9:04:16 PM

If he had some specific thing he was trying to get addressed, a) there are channels to do that which don't involve violating your security clearance, and b) you don't need to release the massive amount of crap that Manning did in order to do that. Snowden I'll at least give that much credit to; he released a handful of things in order to make his point, rather than just leaking a huge swath of unrelated crap.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#56280: Jun 9th 2013 at 9:08:11 PM

Yeah? Well, when you get a security clearance, one of the things you do is agree not to allow classified information into the hands of people without a security clearance. You can't up and change your mind and un-agree to that after the fact. Both Manning and Snowden are idiots who deserve whatever sentence they're inevitably going to end up with.

Security clearance and contracts, thankfully, are not the extent of a humane and just society.

Though I do feel some of the stuff Manning leaked really needed to be, I get the same feeling from him as Barkey does, that it was mostly lashing out from personal issues and the majority of his leaks were irrelevant and not particularly responsible (which in my mind still doesn't excuse how his arrest and incarceration have been handled). It was something that got done wrong by the wrong guy, but still doesn't mitigate how badly it needed to be done.

I'm not really getting that vibe with Snowden. It feels more level.

[up] I'll give you b), but a)...not so much.

On that note, Daniel Ellsberg (the Pentagon Papers whistleblower) is in full support of the guy. Iceland is in the process of offering asylum via the freedom-of-speech organization International Modern Media Institute.

edited 9th Jun '13 9:16:08 PM by Pykrete

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56281: Jun 9th 2013 at 9:47:54 PM

^

If you are referring to all of his solitary, there's good reasons for that. One is that he is a major suicide risk and has to be monitored constantly, the kid is fucking loony tunes. The other is that he can't be put in general population, not even at Leavenworth. Treason in a military prison is like being a pedophile in a regular prison, it'll get your ass killed.

I don't get the "personal vendetta" vibe from Snowden either though. I'm much more sympathetic to his side of things.

edited 9th Jun '13 9:48:22 PM by Barkey

Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#56282: Jun 9th 2013 at 11:22:00 PM

[up]I agree. Snowden comes across as a principles thing. I bet he even knew exactly what was coming and accepted it ahead of time as part of the price (even if he's not currently enjoying it).

I can respect that, even if I still think it was a bit idiotic.

edited 9th Jun '13 11:22:24 PM by Euodiachloris

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56283: Jun 9th 2013 at 11:37:47 PM

Yeah, then again that's the caliber of people we're talking about, someone in his line of work versus some mentally fucked specialist in the Army.

Is desire to give Manning wall to wall counseling in his cell showing strongly enough? Just making sure.

edited 9th Jun '13 11:38:15 PM by Barkey

deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#56284: Jun 10th 2013 at 12:01:12 AM

Honestly? I'd probably do what Snowden did as well, but see if I could arrange asylum somewhere in private before going public as the one who did it.

Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#56285: Jun 10th 2013 at 12:26:19 AM

I bet he even knew exactly what was coming and accepted it ahead of time as part of the price

He explicitly said as much in his correspondence with The Guardian.

Suffice to say it's going to be a lot more difficult for media to demonize this guy to the public. Manning was disgruntled and had a host of outwardly obvious issues, the leaked info was unfocused and not all of it relevant to corruption, and there was always the argument made at every opportunity that the leaked info would jeopardize field agents, and he still got tons of public support. Snowden comes off as a lot more stable, and the info leaked wasn't really anything that plausibly endangers anything but the Friendly Big Brother narrative and the image of the companies working with them (and that we all suspected anyway). AFAIK he didn't even give sufficient detail for anyone to circumvent their actions, much less foreign powers suddenly being able to skullfuck our networks at will like Clapper would have you believe.

[down] No argument there. He said he was prepared to go to prison for it if necessary, but obviously that's a last resort given he hightailed it to Hong Kong and is shooting for more permanent asylum in Iceland.

edited 10th Jun '13 12:41:38 AM by Pykrete

Medinoc from France (Before Recorded History)
#56286: Jun 10th 2013 at 12:31:54 AM

I don't see why he should accept it. He betrayed an organization that had betrayed its country's people and principles first. To me, this voided any loyalty he owed to them.

"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."
Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56287: Jun 10th 2013 at 1:55:04 AM

Yeah, nothing Snowden has really done has angered me at this point. On a personal level, I approve, PRISM is an unethical program. It's a massive broad-base wiretap warrant with no probable cause.

RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#56288: Jun 10th 2013 at 5:44:23 AM

Just saying that not everyone agrees with going after Manning. I don't think it's realistic that Manning go unpunished: Gandhi and MLK didn't bitch when they were sent to jail. A willingness to accept consequences is part and parcel of civil resistance. But I still hope his trial goes well for him and he gets out before he's 40.

(Remember: Anarchist here. People get privacy rights; State Departments enjoy privacy privileges that can be revoked if abused.)

edited 10th Jun '13 5:45:01 AM by RadicalTaoist

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56289: Jun 10th 2013 at 6:09:47 AM

Maxima, all rudery aside, please read the article I linked to if you honestly want to learn about why someone would stop supporting the Pro-Life movement and start supporting the Pro-Choice movement.

It's convenient there's a gag order on really discussing abortion, and thus the half-truths and flat out fallacies can't be challenged.


re: Bradly Manning and the NSA whistleblower - I'm of the opinion that if it is revealed that breaking your oath is necessary to uphold the greater good, I see no issue with that.

I recall after WWII, the new German Army had rules that basically stated you had a right and an obligation to disobey an immoral order. Snitching on the government's unjustified spying on its own citizens would seem to fall under that conscientious disobedience of orders.

edited 10th Jun '13 6:17:14 AM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#56290: Jun 10th 2013 at 6:36:16 AM

The gag order is to keep the threads civilized; it's the sort of topic that is best discussed via PM.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#56291: Jun 10th 2013 at 7:06:55 AM

It's convenient there's a gag order on really discussing abortion, and thus the half-truths and flat out fallacies can't be challenged.

Well as there is a gag order in place, can we please drop it before we start getting thumped?

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
midgetsnowman Since: Jan, 2010
#56292: Jun 10th 2013 at 7:30:59 AM

Especially since as anyone should know by now, its a circfular debate becauise both sides come from completely different moral frameworks and seem incapable of understanding the other, period.

GlennMagusHarvey Since: Jan, 2001
#56293: Jun 10th 2013 at 8:14:10 AM

If only a courageous mod would come out with a very fair statement objectively laying out the positions and merits (or lack thereof) of all the major arguments regarding abortion.

Anyway...

> Snowden

Isn't this the name of a Catch-22 character?

edited 10th Jun '13 8:14:18 AM by GlennMagusHarvey

optimusjamie Since: Jun, 2010
#56294: Jun 10th 2013 at 8:18:04 AM

[up]Yes, I believe it is.

Direct all enquiries to Jamie B Good
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56295: Jun 10th 2013 at 9:23:59 AM

I'm not sure that we want to go there on the abortion topic. I think that the entire mod team is pro-choice, for one thing. One reason that we ban the topic is that it's too easy for us to get caught up in it as well and lose our objectivity.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Karkadinn Karkadinn from New Orleans, Louisiana Since: Jul, 2009
Karkadinn
#56296: Jun 10th 2013 at 9:31:50 AM

I don't think there's really anything new to be said on the topic right now, either. It usually devolves into an argument on philosophical principles unless there's very specific legal measures being enacted at the time of discussion. And arguments on philosophical principles about controversial subjects don't do no one no good no how on the internet.

It would perhaps be different if there were new headlines to address talking about specific levels of funding and operational procedures for relevant health organizations, and so on.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56297: Jun 10th 2013 at 9:45:36 AM

As for Manning and the other so-called "principled leakers", I think that, regardless of whether they were acting out of moral principles, greed, pique at some imagined slight, youthful naivete, or whatever, they broke the law and should suffer the consequences of doing so. If they really are crusaders for freedom, transparency, or whatever, they should be willing to pay the price.

While there's an argument to be made as to whether any large organization can function with complete transparency, you have to be able to trust the people who work for you, and a system whereby you can't know if any particular "secret" document is going to be leaked to the press is too chaotic to work.

edited 10th Jun '13 9:48:14 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#56298: Jun 10th 2013 at 11:51:52 AM

And here I was thinking that's what courts are for, to determine if the smaller crime is mitigated by its motive, specifically so we don't apply the letter of the law hamfistedly and ignoring its spirit.

Granted Whistleblower Act appeals already result in like 98% denials of protection against employer retaliation, so...

As for the latter point, I'd much prefer a minor chaos where employers have to, y'know, not do stuff people would be willing to lose their jobs leaking (like flagrant human rights violations), rather than institutionalized blind obedience.

edited 10th Jun '13 11:53:31 AM by Pykrete

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#56299: Jun 10th 2013 at 12:00:50 PM

I'm not sure that courts are inclined to accept principled objection as a mitigating circumstance in assessing guilt. Maybe in the penalty phase. Frankly, Manning could be tried as a spy and executed for providing secret documents to a foreign national.

Corporate whistleblowers are different than government whistleblowers. For one thing, it's not a crime to do that in a business, other than the purely civil matter of whether you violated your employment contract. The company that I work for even has an integrity hotline that employees are encouraged to use if they detect wrongdoing.

On the government side, the issue is one of classification, not leaking per se. I'm not saying that whistleblowers aren't sometimes necessary, merely that the law is very specific as to what happens if you give something stamped Top Secret to anyone without that clearance.

edited 10th Jun '13 12:04:28 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#56300: Jun 10th 2013 at 12:08:47 PM

I recall after WWII, the new German Army had rules that basically stated you had a right and an obligation to disobey an immoral order.

Shit, every army should implement that. Like, srsly. That is the best rule ever.


Total posts: 417,856
Top