US Politics: Scalia Dead at 79

[Swordfish]

11 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

To paraphrase the long-debated metaphysical conundrum: if there is a majority-Muslim City Council elected in Michigan, and Sharia law is not imposed, is there anyone around to behead an infidel?

I'll do it.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

13 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

Would there be limitations based on coursework for this free education?

I'm more inclined to support this if it's limited to math and science.

I'm more in favor of any of the technical degrees...and nearly all degrees require a minimum of English/Speech/History classes

[Swordfish]

7 minutes ago, Lany Freelove Strangeways said:

I'm more in favor of any of the technical degrees...and nearly all degrees require a minimum of English/Speech/History classes

Fair enough.  It might make sense to also revisit the degree requirements.

I'm not completely opposed to providing technical training, provided it's got some boundaries around it, and we can come up with a way for it not to drive up cost, or dilute the quality of the education

[Tears of Lys]

4 hours ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

What’s Life Like in America’s First City With a Muslim-Majority City Council?

 

 

I went to a really fun wedding reception at a dive bar in Hamtramck.  I highly recommend it.

 

In Flint nassssty water news. . .  Bill Schuette, Michigan's attorney general, has publicly stated that his office will, as required by law, defend the governor and staff against any lawsuits, however, any MDEQ employees MAY be on their own.   

Some folks are shitting their pants right about now, I'd say. 

From the Detroit Free Press article:

A new legal migraine could be kicking in for seven Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employees who are being sued over the Flint water crisis.

According to a federal court filing, State Attorney General Bill Schuette said his office "likely" can’t defend the DEQ workers and that they need to find their own lawyers to represent them in a pending lawsuit filed by Flint residents. Schuette has asked a federal judge to decide the issue of whether his office has to defend the DEQ employees -- which is typically done when a state agency or its employees get sued --  or if they should get their own attorneys.

"We’re not just opening the door and sending them out into the world with no assistance," Schuette spokeswoman ... said of the DEQ employees. "We’re going to work with the governor’s office to make sure these folks have lawyers."

DEQ officials declined comment citing pending litigation, but said it is reviewing Schuette's recommendation that the DEQ employees get their own attorneys.

In a move that could suggest friction is building between various state agencies over the Flint fiasco, Schuette has said that his office can defend the governor and state, but not the DEQ employees, because their interests could be at odds as defendants in the case.

 

I shed no tears over these folks' plight, however, I wouldn't be surprised if the courts rule that the state HAS to defend them - one more kick in the ass to the taxpayers.   

 

 

[ThinkerX]

9 minutes ago, Tears of Lys said:

I shed no tears over these folks' plight, however, I wouldn't be surprised if the courts rule that the state HAS to defend them - one more kick in the ass to the taxpayers. 

I wonder...if the state really tosses these people out with the trash, then what is to stop them from cutting a deal that causes major hurt to those further up the political chain?   This fiasco goes far beyond mere water quality. 

[Tears of Lys]

6 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

I wonder...if the state really tosses these people out with the trash, then what is to stop them from cutting a deal that causes major hurt to those further up the political chain?   This fiasco goes far beyond mere water quality. 

It's not going to happen, IMHO.  Schuette's just making the gesture.  He'll leave it to the court to say his office will HAVE to defend them.  He's got designs on the governor's office so wants to play both sides of the fence and leave the tough decisions to others. 

ETA:  And I do blame the MDEQ (as I state upthread) for its large part in this mess. 

[DanteGabriel]

10 hours ago, Tears of Lys said:

It's not going to happen, IMHO.  Schuette's just making the gesture.  He'll leave it to the court to say his office will HAVE to defend them.  He's got designs on the governor's office so wants to play both sides of the fence and leave the tough decisions to others. 

ETA:  And I do blame the MDEQ (as I state upthread) for its large part in this mess. 

I'd been given the impression from things I've read that MDEQ was largely staffed with Snyder's people, at least in leadership positions. Is that accurate?

[Tears of Lys]

58 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I'd been given the impression from things I've read that MDEQ was largely staffed with Snyder's people, at least in leadership positions. Is that accurate?

The former head of the MDEQ was appointed by Snyder (he resigned in December '15.)  But he has served in similar roles for both Republican and Democratic governors for quite some time.   But the problem with the MDEQ goes way deeper than politics. 

To fully understand the situation, you've got to first start with the fact that the MDEQ was created for a purpose - to foster a "friendly" environment for business, which is something Michigan (and other states in the Rust Belt) need.  People need jobs, and if companies can't prosper in an area, they're only too happy to set up shop somewhere else, whether it be outside of the USA or even other states.   The MDEQ has a balancing act to perform between not scaring away business on one hand, and protecting the citizenry's interests on the other - NOT an easy job, especially considering the citizenry needs to earn a living.  I believe this "high-wire act" of trying to juggle both goals becomes tipped from time to time by a number of factors, only one of which is who is in gubernatorial office at the time. 

As I've said upthread, I liked Snyder and voted for him ( a decision I question now, of course, but at the time it was the only one I could have made.)  Personally, I think he had loftier goals in mind (a possible Presidential run) at the time this whole mess was going down and took his eye off the ball. 

Be all that as it may, amorphous and hazy goals that shift in the wind with political power do not make for sound decisions regarding people's lives - something that other places besides Michigan are experiencing too.

TL;DR - It's more complicated than one side's a moustache-twirling villain and the other spends its time polishing its halo.   IOW, humanity is fucked up. 

[DanteGabriel]

Thanks for the information, ToL. I have been relying on news stories for information and your perspective helps me deepen my understanding.

My own cynical view of things is that whatever cascade of fuck-ups and negligence involving various state, local, and federal authorities would not have happened if the water system in question had not been serving a poor, mostly black community, which is indeed hardly unique.

[Tears of Lys]

45 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Thanks for the information, ToL. I have been relying on news stories for information and your perspective helps me deepen my understanding.

My own cynical view of things is that whatever cascade of fuck-ups and negligence involving various state, local, and federal authorities would not have happened if the water system in question had not been serving a poor, mostly black community, which is indeed hardly unique.

We get the system we fight for, and poor, mostly black communities don't have the tools to wage that war.   It's not so much that the powers-that-be WANT poor communities to suffer such neglect, but that communities have to hold their elected officials' feet to the fire to keep them honest.  (Maybe I'm more of an optimist than I think, though...)

The news is FULL of stories of misuse of public funds, payoffs, screwing around with each other on the public's dime... just plain ol' corruption, that it's a wonder anything GOOD gets done.  And if anything good DOES get done, it's probably by accident.

Are other countries this screwed up?

[DanteGabriel]

50 minutes ago, Tears of Lys said:

We get the system we fight for, and poor, mostly black communities don't have the tools to wage that war.   It's not so much that the powers-that-be WANT poor communities to suffer such neglect, but that communities have to hold their elected officials' feet to the fire to keep them honest.  (Maybe I'm more of an optimist than I think, though...)

The news is FULL of stories of misuse of public funds, payoffs, screwing around with each other on the public's dime... just plain ol' corruption, that it's a wonder anything GOOD gets done.  And if anything good DOES get done, it's probably by accident.

Are other countries this screwed up?

The only country I know well enough to answer your closing question is a Third World country, so it's not much of a comparison to say it's worse there. But the lead poisoning of an entire American city is pretty shocking to me, and inexcusable in a nation as wealthy as ours.

[Paladin of Ice]

Thanks in large part to Congress refusing to sign onto international agreements about banking transparency and failure to regulate banks, the US is rapidly becoming the world's favorite tax haven, especially for dirty money.

(Note that there are three separate links there, including links to a long 60 minutes segment with a reporter posing as the representative of a would-be African client making suspicious purchases and a big NPR review of the story and interview with a journalist who's been covering the topic for quite some time. These are definitely long and time consuming segments, but certainly worth watching or listening to.)

Also, a number of cities in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have higher lead levels and/or children with lead exposure than Flint. For extra fun, the New Jersey cases can be at least partially traced to governors deliberately taking all the money out of the lead decontamination efforts to put it in the state's general fund, so they could appear to balance the budget without raising taxes, and Christie vetoing the attempts to put the money back multiple times. It's almost like one shouldn't handcuff themselves about how they can run their state...

[DireWolfSpirit]

Being a haven for parked money, dirty or otherwise, could be viewed as a net positive in the macro sense. Banks flush with capital would be more capable to lend and circulate that money back into the economy.

[Xray the Enforcer]

18 hours ago, Paladin of Ice said:

Also, a number of cities in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have higher lead levels and/or children with lead exposure than Flint. For extra fun, the New Jersey cases can be at least partially traced to governors deliberately taking all the money out of the lead decontamination efforts to put it in the state's general fund, so they could appear to balance the budget without raising taxes, and Christie vetoing the attempts to put the money back multiple times. It's almost like one shouldn't handcuff themselves about how they can run their state...

Thanks for these links. I knew about the NJ shenanigans (Christie really is a garbage human), but the Vox article is quite interesting.

[Hereward]

4 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Being a haven for parked money, dirty or otherwise, could be viewed as a net positive in the macro sense. Banks flush with capital would be more capable to lend and circulate that money back into the economy.

It's not a positive if that money means a surfeit of capital chasing a shortage of safe borrowers. In that case, it gets lent out as subprime mortgages and the like. 

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Clinton Emails Held Indirect References to Undercover CIA Officers

A handful of emails forwarded to Hillary Clinton's personal server while she was secretary of state contained references to undercover CIA officers — including one who was killed by a suicide attack in Afghanistan, according to U.S. officials who have reviewed them.

But contrary to some published reports, three officials said there was no email on Clinton's server that directly revealed the identity of an undercover intelligence operative. Rather, they said, State Department and other officials attempted to make veiled references to intelligence officers in the emails — references that were deemed classified when the messages were being reviewed years later for public release.

In one case, an official said, an undercover CIA officer was referred to as a State Department official with the word "State," in quotes, as if to suggest the emailer knew the officer was not actually a diplomat. In another case, an email refers to "OGA" for "other government agency," a common reference to the CIA. Yet another now-classified email chain originated with a member of the CIA director's staff, leading some officials to question how Clinton could be blamed.

Doesn't seem to me like the information would be all that damaging if it was accessed because the server was not secure, but the legal question of mishandling classified information remains.

[Commodore]

why not a special prosecutor?

[A Horse Named Stranger]

8 hours ago, Hereward said:

It's not a positive if that money means a surfeit of capital chasing a shortage of safe borrowers. In that case, it gets lent out as subprime mortgages and the like. 

THough, you must admit, the idea of Goldman losing money from the Zetas on a subprime gamble has something to it. Especially if those investors really come knocking on Blankein's door to hold him accountable for their losses. Not to mention, that it would put a new spin to possible next gen bailouts.

[The Anti-Targ]

Obama being criticised for visiting a mosque because it was a conservative mosque rather than a progressive mosque. Also criticised for not talking about gender equality.

Seems like visiting a mosque is a hard decision. Do you visit a progressive mosque as a symbol of support for the kind of Islam you want to see in the USA? Or do you visit a conservative mosque and try to convey messages that expect conservative Muslims to become a bit more progressive? Pros and cons for both I guess.

If a president wanted to visit a church to talk about progressive ideas would s/he be better visiting a conservative church that does not currently agree with these progressive ideas, or a progressive church that does agree with these progressive ideas? Or do you just not visit any churches because it ultimately doesn't achieve anything?

Personally I think the symbolism of visiting a mosque is more significant than the subjects being talked about. So I think visiting a progressive mosque is politically a better thing to do. It shows the greater public that yes there are progressives with reasonably liberal views in the Muslim world. And in terms of Islamic / non-Islamic relations that's probably politically the best thing that can be achieved at this stage. The likelihood of convincing a conservative mosque to stop being anti-semetic / anti-Israel (for instance) is extremely low. Also, where the president visits gets the "approved by the president" vibe to it. So that implies the conservative brand of Islam at that mosque has presidential approval. And perhaps that's not the brand of Islam that the president wants to be indirectly approving.

[ants]

On ‎2‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 4:17 AM, Tears of Lys said:

We get the system we fight for, and poor, mostly black communities don't have the tools to wage that war.   It's not so much that the powers-that-be WANT poor communities to suffer such neglect, but that communities have to hold their elected officials' feet to the fire to keep them honest.  (Maybe I'm more of an optimist than I think, though...)

I think its more that the government staff, politicians etc. live and in and are friends with people from other areas. Those other areas also have a lot more wealthy people with free time on their hands. So they get more focus because people are naturally biased towards themselves/their friends, and they get a bias that if a rich suburb had thought the water was crap, they'd have 10 studies done and a bunch of lawsuits forthwith.

So although the end result is evil, and you can argue the system is evil, I don't think the people in it necessarily are.

On ‎2‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 4:17 AM, Tears of Lys said:

The news is FULL of stories of misuse of public funds, payoffs, screwing around with each other on the public's dime... just plain ol' corruption, that it's a wonder anything GOOD gets done.  And if anything good DOES get done, it's probably by accident.

Are other countries this screwed up?

What on earth makes you think this is only a government issue? I could regale you with stories of the screw ups, golden parachutes, incompetence and screwing around on companies dime from my last work and the stories of friends. Companies just aren't in the public limelight, and its considered their shareholders issues.

Don't assume human incompetence and rule breaking is limited to the public sector.

7 hours ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Clinton Emails Held Indirect References to Undercover CIA Officers

 

 

Doesn't seem to me like the information would be all that damaging if it was accessed because the server was not secure, but the legal question of mishandling classified information remains.

From what that says it sounds like at the time these were not classified emails, but that later on review it was decided that they were. That's going to be an awfully grey area to try and make any headway with if you want to prosecute.