U.S. Politics - Jeb announced yet?

[TrackerNeil]

This story on Bill Clinton's post-presidential sexual escapades is insane. It will certainly be exciting having the First Predator back in the White House.

The best is how the media dutifully plays along with the ruse that Bill and Hillary haven't been separated since he left office.

Actually, I think it will be quite boring. Americans know all about Bill Clinton's penchant for women; it didn't bother them in 1998, and it certainly won't bother them in 2016, particularly since they won't be asked to vote for or against him. (In fact, Americans under 30 probably only barely remember who Monica Lewinski was.) Only Republicans are obsessed with things Bill did seventeen years ago, possibly because they weren't able to nail him for them.

[Shryke]

This story on Bill Clinton's post-presidential sexual escapades is insane. It will certainly be exciting having the First Predator back in the White House.

The best is how the media dutifully plays along with the ruse that Bill and Hillary haven't been separated since he left office.

lolnypost

[ThinkerX]

From the loony tunes world of finance (granted, many here don't care for zero hedge, but the survey was by Citi) :

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-14/derivatives-no-longer-used-hedging-exclusively-alpha-generation

Maybe the pervasive “this time is always different” meme has been perpetuated to the point that the market actually believes it, or maybe it’s just old fashioned greed, but whatever the case, market participants (and this means central banks, retail investors, and everyone in between) have an extraordinary inclination towards Einsteinian insanity.

Given this steadfast refusal to learn from yesterday’s mistakes, it isn’t any wonder that when Citi recently surveyed 43 banks, 29 asset managers, and 31 hedge funds regarding their outlook for the credit derivatives market in 2015, the consensus was that “there seems to be plenty of room and enthusiasm to use derivatives to take leveraged risk." Phew: for a minute there it looked like leveraged risk taking with derivatives might go the way of the Dodo in the post-crisis world, making Bruno Iksil the last great example of how much fun one can have stomping around in off-the-run CDS indices with depositors’ money.

It’s also comforting to know that among those Citi surveyed, the general consensus was that

"...there seems to have been a shift from using derivatives as a hedging tool, to using them more for alpha generation [as] most products are now used more for adding risk and directional views."

Uhh...this is the same sort of stupidity that crashed the economy back in 2007-2008. Which means history WILL repeat itself, probably within the next presidential term or shortly thereafter.

[TrackerNeil]

I wouldn't dismiss that stuff too quickly at least in that it does represent troubling possibilities for Bill, and it's hard to say what that represents for Hillary the candidate. Stuff like this was one of the reasons why prominent Democrats made a behind-the-scenes push to get Obama to run back in 2008. This thing with Epstein was already a news story, and sounded sketchy before any mentions of Bill Clinton's involvement.

I think something new, and I mean really new, is going to have to arise before Americans pay much attention. After all, the fact that Bill Clinton is a womanizer is news to nobody.

[TerraPrime]

Attacking the husband of a female candidate worked form them once before, so why abandon it now? It's not like Bill Clinton offers a dearth of material.

That said, I am not sure how Bill Clinton's infidelity should cast a negative light on Hillary. I mean, that sounds almost underpants gnome-ish here:

1. Shows Bill Clinton is an unrepentent womanizer.

2. ???

3. Defeat Hillary's bid to Presidency!!

I mean, we have a long, loooooong list of wives of Republican politicians who "stoody by their men" at times when their husbands' infidelity became known. Usually these women are seen in a sympathetic light as the party being wronged (and rightly so). I guess we will see just have to wait and see how well this tactic of exposing Bill Clinton's character flaw will work in terms of defeating Hillary at the polls.

[ThinkerX]

Care to bet that the spouses of at least a few of the republican presidential hopeful's don't have at least an allegation of marital infidelity...if not the candidates themselves? Didn't we recently have a major republican governor who ended up in prison at least in part because of this sort of thing?

[TerraPrime]

Care to bet that the spouses of at least a few of the republican presidential hopeful's don't have at least an allegation of marital infidelity...if not the candidates themselves? Didn't we recently have a major republican governor who ended up in prison at least in part because of this sort of thing?

Oh, plenty of politicians from both sides of the aisle fell to the puritanical standards of sexual fidelity. It's just that when moralizing Republicans fall to that flaw, they make a bigger splash because they sit astride a higher horse. I just assume that a good 2/3 of the male politicians at the Capitol are cheating on their spouses, because they are powerful men with money and means to do so. The trick is to do so with some modicum of civility and not let it become too public.

[ThinkerX]

Ramsey - do you somehow fail to realize that the history of the middle east is pretty much 5000 years worth of nonstop massacres, invasions, revolts, coups, and persecutions and that is not likely to change regardless of what ANYBODY does or claims to the contrary?

Bush II ignored this during his invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...and we are still paying a very steep price for his ignorance.

[TerraPrime]

[mod hat]

This is a good time to remind people, since we do have a female presidential candidate likely in the limelight for the next 2 years, that insults based on gender that are typically used derogatorily towards women, and to the extent that there are fucntional and cultural equivalents against men, are not allowed here. I have confidence that nobody here will lack the means to find appropriate terms to express their disapproval and displeasure at a politician withotu resorting to gendered insults.

[/mod hat]

[Ramsay Gimp]

Ramsey - do you somehow fail to realize that the history of the middle east is pretty much 5000 years worth of nonstop massacres, invasions, revolts, coups, and persecutions and that is not likely to change regardless of what ANYBODY does or claims to the contrary?

Bush II ignored this during his invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...and we are still paying a very steep price for his ignorance.

Bush II and Hillary would be sharing a jail cell in a just world

However, the fact that massacres happen anyway does not excuse massacres that result from U.S. intervention. We insisted on picking a side in Libya's civil war, in order to "save lives," and now we see the results. And we can expect President Hillary to sow even more of this destruction, since she generally thinks Obama is too cautious or "soft."

[Shryke]

Bush II and Hillary would be sharing a jail cell in a just world

However, the fact that massacres happen anyway does not excuse massacres that result from U.S. intervention. We insisted on picking a side in Libya's civil war, in order to "save lives," and now we see the results. And we can expect President Hillary to sow even more of this destruction, since she generally thinks Obama is too cautious or "soft."

Do you think the results would have been better had nothing been done?

[ThinkerX]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/boehner-says-he%e2%80%99d-allow-homeland-security-shutdown/ar-BBhChhu?ocid=msnclassic

WASHINGTON — The House speaker, John A. Boehner, said Sunday that he was “certainly” prepared to allow funding for the Department of Homeland Security to lapse, raising the possibility that one of the government’s largest and most vital agencies could be shut down at the end of the month.

My view is it the Homeland Security shutdown should be permanent, but I doubt that will transpire, or even take place.

-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

Bush II and Hillary would be sharing a jail cell in a just world

However, the fact that massacres happen anyway does not excuse massacres that result from U.S. intervention. We insisted on picking a side in Libya's civil war, in order to "save lives," and now we see the results. And we can expect President Hillary to sow even more of this destruction, since she generally thinks Obama is too cautious or "soft."

It's the nature of that part of the world. Historically, outside interventions there tend to end very badly all the way around.

That said, Hillary managed to cause far less damage than Bush II. Get right down to it, its a devils choice between armed anarchy and propping up thugs to maintain a semblance of order. Bush II chose the anarchy option in Iraq and the result was ISIS.

[Ramsay Gimp]

Do you think the results would have been better had nothing been done?

Yes

[Shryke]

Yes

Based on?

[The Marquis de Leech]

That said, I am not sure how Bill Clinton's infidelity should cast a negative light on Hillary. I mean, that sounds almost underpants gnome-ish here:

1. Shows Bill Clinton is an unrepentent womanizer.

2. ???

3. Defeat Hillary's bid to Presidency!!

And if Jeb Bush winds up as the nominee, it becomes a throwing stones in glasshouses situation.

"Husband of womaniser vs brother of a war criminal and general incompetent".

[Ramsay Gimp]

Based on?

If the regime won, it would be bloody and cruel but the fighting would end and eventually order would be restored. At least Qadaffi wouldn't allow ISIS free reign in the country.

The rebel victory has only brought more chaos and war, as anyone could have predicted, and Libya is now a much greater threat to the U.S. than it was in 2010

[Horza]

That's assuming the Gaddafi regime would be able to restore order and rebuild its authority with brute force, and assuming that the rebels wouldn't resort to a guerilla campaign and further radicalise.

[Ramsay Gimp]

That's assuming the Gaddafi regime would be able to restore order and rebuild its authority with brute force, and assuming that the rebels wouldn't resort to a guerilla campaign and further radicalise.

Plenty of regimes fight low-level insurgencies. That would be much better for Libya (and the U.S.) than the situation now

[Horza]

Plenty of regimes fight low-level insurgencies. That would be much better for Libya (and the U.S.) than the situation now

Even assuming it was low level, this is merely kicking the can down the road. Bubbling away in all the North African revolts was the succession question, something made even more problematic in Libya by the highly personalised system of rule. This stunning conversion on your part to Hobbesean faith in Leviathan isn't meshing well with libertarianism or Libya.

[The Marquis de Leech]

This stunning conversion on your part to Hobbesean faith in Leviathan isn't meshing well with libertarianism or Libya.

I think it's more a case of starting with the idea that the US should not involve itself in foreign conflicts, and framing a view of each conflict accordingly. It's principle masquerading as consequentialism.