Thinking that Comey is bumbling or disgruntled or sanctimonious is one thing. Not believing him is another.
Clinton, Bush, and Obama all paid significant political costs for the statements you mention, which are also widely regarded as stains on their legacies. The realistic goal isn't a system where politicians never lie; it's a system where they are strongly incentivized not to lie too much. Nihilism is damaging to that goal.
Everyone lies. Even if you are a parent who is still rolling with the Santa Claus myth with your child, you are, in fact, lying to them, either by omission or flat-out falsehoods. Hardly anyone would see this as a problem, because it has been justified by years of tradition in society.
Trump doesn't just lie, he seems to lie about nearly EVERYTHING. Even Trump Tower is advertised to have something like 10 more floors than it actually does. Beyond that, he simply makes things up out of thin air, usually to demonize a perceived enemy. Think millions of people voted illegally or that the Post Office is losing money because of Amazon. In both cases, reporting shows he was told in no uncertain terms that those things weren't true. But Trump is interested in creating his own reality, which about 35% of the country has bought into. It's not just that what he says is almost always a lie. It's that his statements bear no relation whatsoever to reality and have created an idea of the United States (in his followers) that is a complete fantasy land, a dystopian hellscape where immigrants are raping people with impunity and conspiring to steal elections.
I don't need to read Comey's book to summarize it: "blah blah blah Trump is bad". You think? I could arrive at that conclusion on my own just by looking at the text, and context, of his Twitter messages.
*************
New mass protests in Barcelona. The former leaders of the independence movement for Catalan are currently political prisoners, facing charges of rebellion.
A climate activist and gay rights lawyer in New York City, David Buckel, self-immolated to bring awareness to what he saw as an impending disaster re: the environment. Unfortunately, it is too late to tell him that no instance of self-immolation has ever brought about change--even in recent years, dozens of people in China and Tibet have self-immolated in order to advance the cause of Tibetan independence; their actions have not made any progress towards that goal. You cannot fight for that in which you believe if you are dead.
I don't need to read Comey's book to summarize it: "blah blah blah Trump is bad". You think? I could arrive at that conclusion on my own just by looking at the text, and context, of his Twitter messages.
I was saying it's nihilistic to respond to a politician's lies with a shrugging declaration that all politicians lie.
I understand being uninterested in what Comey has to say, but you said before that you don't believe him, which is different.
It's a less dramatic way to kill yourself, but hunger strikes were one of the factors prompting the peace process in Northern Ireland (Gandhi also made use of hunger strikes to bring peace in India).
A climate activist and gay rights lawyer in New York City, David Buckel, self-immolated to bring awareness to what he saw as an impending disaster re: the environment. Unfortunately, it is too late to tell him that no instance of self-immolation has ever brought about change--even in recent years, dozens of people in China and Tibet have self-immolated in order to advance the cause of Tibetan independence; their actions have not made any progress towards that goal. You cannot fight for that in which you believe if you are dead.
Kind of the eco-terrorist equivalent of a suicide bomber.
Whoa. Suicide bombers are terrorists who kill other people in the process of killing themselves. I'm not saying self-immolation is a good idea, but it's not terrorism and it's not anywhere close to being equivalent.
I'm not sure any eco-terrorist anywhere has ever killed anyone. If they have, I have never heard of it. They almost exclusively seem to halt at property damage.
Let us begin with the conjecture "all politicians lie". Clearly, this is not true--we cannot prove that *all* politicians lie. However, we do generally accept that a sufficient number of politicians lie enough of the time that there are many occasions upon which we have to take what a politician is saying with several grains of salt. This leaves us with several questions that need answering: 1) which politicians tell us lies too often for our comfort?, 2) which lies are problematic and which ones are not?, 3) how egregious of a lie must a lie be before we balk at accepting it or not worrying about it? and 4) how many of us are willing to let politicians on "our side" get away with lies for which we would excoriate politicians on "the other side"?
re: Comey...I am disinterested in what he has to say *because* what he has to say in his book is probably nothing but his attempt at getting even with Trump. Many will buy his book and believe every word (but then many of those people are inclined to distrust and/or disagree with Trump, anyway) while others will buy the book in an effort to pick it apart, looking for any misstatements, omissions, or weaknesses.
Self-immolations kicked off the Arab Spring. Hard to say that wasn't a change.
hrm....I have to agree here. Although the pressure had already been building before then, it is difficult to understate the effect which Mr. Bouazizi's self-immolation in December of 2010 had, especially in his home country of Tunisia.
I also concur--suicide bombers are not equivalent to self-immolaters other than the fact that they are forms of suicide. The motivations are entirely different.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
I got no problem with politicians or public servants ONCE THEY ARE OUT OF OFFICE making money. Sorry for caps just wanted to emphasize the distinction somehow.
Whoa. Suicide bombers are terrorists who kill other people in the process of killing themselves. I'm not saying self-immolation is a good idea, but it's not terrorism and it's not anywhere close to being equivalent.
woah woah woah, I didn't mean to draw comparisons, it was a tongue in cheek comment! Perhaps an inappropriate one in light of a tragedy, but I was just trying to lighten the mood rather than make a serious point.
I'm not sure any eco-terrorist anywhere has ever killed anyone. If they have, I have never heard of it. They almost exclusively seem to halt at property damage.
Depends. The Unabomber cited environmental concerns in his crazy-manifesto, including some psychobabble eco-anarchist return to nature stuff. He was probably too deranged to make any point though.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
There is no delicate way to say this, but literally nobody cares about his life in law enforcement. Everyone who bought the book did so to read what he had to say about Trump and Clinton, and he knew it would sell well because of that.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
I got no problem with politicians or public servants ONCE THEY ARE OUT OF OFFICE making money. Sorry for caps just wanted to emphasize the distinction somehow.
Yes, but making money and telling the truth often do not go hand in hand when it comes to books like this. Sensationalism sells.
I'm not saying that Comey lied in his book, but I will take his assertions with a grain of salt, especially considering his ineptness during the election season.
A climate activist and gay rights lawyer in New York City, David Buckel, self-immolated to bring awareness to what he saw as an impending disaster re: the environment.
Pretty messed up that he took the least eco-friendly way to off himself like that
Yes, but making money and telling the truth often do not go hand in hand when it comes to books like this. Sensationalism sells.
I'm not saying that Comey lied in his book, but I will take his assertions with a grain of salt, especially considering his ineptness during the election season.
He did things objectively that could be called inep, but he did them with good intentions. From what we know there was no malicious intent or ulterior motives.
He thought Hillary would win. Maybe that was because he knows things we still don't about the Trump investigations or even just the polling. He really seems to have thought he was doing his job by announcing that the investigation was re-opening due to new evidence. After all this was the same investigation that Congressional Republicans had forced him to testify about a short time before that and he had announced yeah the investigations closed.
He felt he was doing the right thing by saying well now it's re-opened because of new evidence. Why because he had been put in the position to be the spokesperson about the investigation because of the recusal of Obama's AG. And as such in the off-chance that FBI investigators did find something in Weiner's emails he didn't want people to point and him say "but you said the investigation was closed! Why didn't you do something?" Objectively, looking back and from any other angle, you are not supposed to make announcements about political investigations that close to an election as FBI director.
There is no delicate way to say this, but literally nobody cares about his life in law enforcement.
If not for the e-mail server incident and being fired by Trump, most people would have asked "Comey who?" had you mentioned his name. In fact, I wager that most people had not heard of him before the summer of 2016 when the e-mail server story was making big news.
A climate activist and gay rights lawyer in New York City, David Buckel, self-immolated to bring awareness to what he saw as an impending disaster re: the environment.
Pretty messed up that he took the least eco-friendly way to off himself like that
I am certain his motivation was "this will bring attention to issues which are important to me" but, truthfully, all he will ever be remembered for now is "wasn't he that guy who set himself on fire in Brooklyn?". How memorable is that? Not very--in the last 10 years, only 3 people in the United States have committed self-immolation for political or social reasons. You didn't know that--*I* didn't know that--proving that those cases were not memorable *at all*.
If Sean Hannity's career goes down in flame as a result of this, I swear to god I'm taking a day off work, buying a box of wine, and getting drunk in celebration.
I am certain his motivation was "this will bring attention to issues which are important to me" but, truthfully, all he will ever be remembered for now is "wasn't he that guy who set himself on fire in Brooklyn?". How memorable is that? Not very--in the last 10 years, only 3 people in the United States have committed self-immolation for political or social reasons. You didn't know that--*I* didn't know that--proving that those cases were not memorable *at all*.
He was probably more effective as a lawyer than he's going to be as a martyr for whatever cause he thought he was fighting for. And if he didn't martyr himself, he could still be lawyering for several more years.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
I got no problem with politicians or public servants ONCE THEY ARE OUT OF OFFICE making money. Sorry for caps just wanted to emphasize the distinction somehow.
So a senator who writes a book while in office is a no go for you?
If Sean Hannity's career goes down in flame as a result of this, I swear to god I'm taking a day off work, buying a box of wine, and getting drunk in celebration.
Most of Comey's book is not about Trump; it's about his life in law enforcement. People just focus on the parts about Trump and Clinton because Comey is most famous for his actions in relation to those two.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
I got no problem with politicians or public servants ONCE THEY ARE OUT OF OFFICE making money. Sorry for caps just wanted to emphasize the distinction somehow.
So a senator who writes a book while in office is a no go for you?
I guess that would be OK. Would not be cool if they spent a bunch of time on tour selling the book. While in the Senate, one should be a Senator. But you give an inch and some take a mile. It's a slippery slope.
You can have reasonable standards but then you get someone who will blow through reasonable unspoken norms and go golfing at his own resorts every weekend while charging tax payers to do so and then turn around and promote "access to the president!" if you pay him to join his golf club.
It's by far best to wait until you are done to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Because some people ruin it for everyone on purpose because they can.
@100 yrs old Finland, fecundity now is a thing. For reasons. (I am a bit cynical of this, do study if u wish)
The birth-rate is too low, per the powers that be.
Just that the job security for young people (-30 years) is to be diminished by the current government, for small business employers.
But more importantly: being poor predicts your children to be poor, painfully much, in our @100 Finland.
My point of view: life opportunities, please - and some real social mobility. As per getting that first job quite possibly by merit, not by relations or networking mostly.
The worst take of the day (and possibly the worst use of the fire emoji I've ever seen) just showed up on my Facebook newsfeed
I know I am overly sensitive on the issue of burning, but yeah, that is in pretty bad taste. The comments section was even worse. I can't help but think he had some serious issues going on within him. From what he has done though, I would have liked to see him continue to fight for the things he was involved in. That said, the step from life to suicide is often far too close. Without knowing what conflicting thoughts he had in his mind, a brief statement left (note) doesn't give us the entire picture.
The worst take of the day (and possibly the worst use of the fire emoji I've ever seen) just showed up on my Facebook newsfeed
I know I am overly sensitive on the issue of burning, but yeah, that is in pretty bad taste. The comments section was even worse. I can't help but think he had some serious issues going on within him. From what he has done though, I would have liked to see him continue to fight for the things he was involved in. That said, the step from life to suicide is often far too close. Without knowing what conflicting thoughts he had in his mind, a brief statement left (note) doesn't give us the entire picture.
"The Scoop" seems very suspect to me as a source critical source. Why do you think it is reputable enough to post here?
And while a "gay rights lawyer" might suicide, setting oneself on fire in political protest is more typically Tibetan, sadly.
Would someone in position of relative power not try to change the world, rather than resign?
Should this political protest suicide actually have happened, I dare think the purported suicidee would rather have you get your sources at par, as opposed your "overly sensitive" and probably dishonest post.
@TStael: I think this is another instance where you're insulting someone based on a profound miscomprehension of their post.
The tweet from The Scoop was originally posted by booinyoureyes, who was criticizing The Scoop for being tasteless. Zaghoul agreed with that criticism. "Overly sensitive" refers to the fact that Zaghoul has experienced severe burns. The suicide in question did happen. It was reported in every major national newspaper. No one here is endorsing The Scoop, and no one is being dishonest.
His death was in a public place and reported widely across all news sources, so I don't think there's any question that it was real. The post above on the Scoop article was just pointing out the inappropriate use of the emoji rather than being about confirmation of the story itself.
@TStael: I think this is another instance where you're insulting someone based on a profound miscomprehension of their post.
The tweet from The Scoop was originally posted by booinyoureyes, who was criticizing The Scoop for being tasteless. Zaghoul agreed with that criticism. "Overly sensitive" refers to the fact that Zaghoul has experienced severe burns. The suicide in question did happen. It was reported in every major national newspaper. No one here is endorsing The Scoop, and no one is being dishonest.
Tsk.
I would not want anyone to suffer burns, and do not imagine it does not import great suffering. I know.
But surely that is all the more a reason why @Zaghoul would not want flippant reporting?
To point (gently) about source criticality is not to insult, I think. Burns and all.
And to suggest a purported activist suicider would want to be used indiscriminately is a bit false and untrue, surely?
Comments
Clinton, Bush, and Obama all paid significant political costs for the statements you mention, which are also widely regarded as stains on their legacies. The realistic goal isn't a system where politicians never lie; it's a system where they are strongly incentivized not to lie too much. Nihilism is damaging to that goal.
Trump doesn't just lie, he seems to lie about nearly EVERYTHING. Even Trump Tower is advertised to have something like 10 more floors than it actually does. Beyond that, he simply makes things up out of thin air, usually to demonize a perceived enemy. Think millions of people voted illegally or that the Post Office is losing money because of Amazon. In both cases, reporting shows he was told in no uncertain terms that those things weren't true. But Trump is interested in creating his own reality, which about 35% of the country has bought into. It's not just that what he says is almost always a lie. It's that his statements bear no relation whatsoever to reality and have created an idea of the United States (in his followers) that is a complete fantasy land, a dystopian hellscape where immigrants are raping people with impunity and conspiring to steal elections.
I don't need to read Comey's book to summarize it: "blah blah blah Trump is bad". You think? I could arrive at that conclusion on my own just by looking at the text, and context, of his Twitter messages.
*************
New mass protests in Barcelona. The former leaders of the independence movement for Catalan are currently political prisoners, facing charges of rebellion.
A climate activist and gay rights lawyer in New York City, David Buckel, self-immolated to bring awareness to what he saw as an impending disaster re: the environment. Unfortunately, it is too late to tell him that no instance of self-immolation has ever brought about change--even in recent years, dozens of people in China and Tibet have self-immolated in order to advance the cause of Tibetan independence; their actions have not made any progress towards that goal. You cannot fight for that in which you believe if you are dead.
I understand being uninterested in what Comey has to say, but you said before that you don't believe him, which is different. Self-immolations kicked off the Arab Spring. Hard to say that wasn't a change.
re: Comey...I am disinterested in what he has to say *because* what he has to say in his book is probably nothing but his attempt at getting even with Trump. Many will buy his book and believe every word (but then many of those people are inclined to distrust and/or disagree with Trump, anyway) while others will buy the book in an effort to pick it apart, looking for any misstatements, omissions, or weaknesses. hrm....I have to agree here. Although the pressure had already been building before then, it is difficult to understate the effect which Mr. Bouazizi's self-immolation in December of 2010 had, especially in his home country of Tunisia.
I also concur--suicide bombers are not equivalent to self-immolaters other than the fact that they are forms of suicide. The motivations are entirely different.
I'm sure Comey wanted to tell people about Trump, but I think he chose the memoir as a more formal medium than a speech or article.
I'm not saying that Comey lied in his book, but I will take his assertions with a grain of salt, especially considering his ineptness during the election season.
He thought Hillary would win. Maybe that was because he knows things we still don't about the Trump investigations or even just the polling. He really seems to have thought he was doing his job by announcing that the investigation was re-opening due to new evidence. After all this was the same investigation that Congressional Republicans had forced him to testify about a short time before that and he had announced yeah the investigations closed.
He felt he was doing the right thing by saying well now it's re-opened because of new evidence. Why because he had been put in the position to be the spokesperson about the investigation because of the recusal of Obama's AG. And as such in the off-chance that FBI investigators did find something in Weiner's emails he didn't want people to point and him say "but you said the investigation was closed! Why didn't you do something?" Objectively, looking back and from any other angle, you are not supposed to make announcements about political investigations that close to an election as FBI director.
only after being outed eh
You can have reasonable standards but then you get someone who will blow through reasonable unspoken norms and go golfing at his own resorts every weekend while charging tax payers to do so and then turn around and promote "access to the president!" if you pay him to join his golf club.
It's by far best to wait until you are done to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Because some people ruin it for everyone on purpose because they can.
The birth-rate is too low, per the powers that be.
Just that the job security for young people (-30 years) is to be diminished by the current government, for small business employers.
But more importantly: being poor predicts your children to be poor, painfully much, in our @100 Finland.
My point of view: life opportunities, please - and some real social mobility. As per getting that first job quite possibly by merit, not by relations or networking mostly.
And while a "gay rights lawyer" might suicide, setting oneself on fire in political protest is more typically Tibetan, sadly.
Would someone in position of relative power not try to change the world, rather than resign?
Should this political protest suicide actually have happened, I dare think the purported suicidee would rather have you get your sources at par, as opposed your "overly sensitive" and probably dishonest post.
The tweet from The Scoop was originally posted by booinyoureyes, who was criticizing The Scoop for being tasteless. Zaghoul agreed with that criticism. "Overly sensitive" refers to the fact that Zaghoul has experienced severe burns. The suicide in question did happen. It was reported in every major national newspaper. No one here is endorsing The Scoop, and no one is being dishonest.
I would not want anyone to suffer burns, and do not imagine it does not import great suffering. I know.
But surely that is all the more a reason why @Zaghoul would not want flippant reporting?
To point (gently) about source criticality is not to insult, I think. Burns and all.
And to suggest a purported activist suicider would want to be used indiscriminately is a bit false and untrue, surely?