Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for your service. Out of curiosity, where do you get your news?
Out of curiosity? Sounds like you've got your own opinion. A leading question is what they call that, lol. I get my news from MSM, social, and a host of blogs and YouTube channels. Just like everyone else, I imagine. Only difference is I don't limit my sources by their viewpoint or bias. It's rare you find any source of news/information that's not slanted in one way or another. Knowing what everyone has to say about…
The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
121–130 of 191 posts
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#122One thing I've always wondered about when it comes to the temporary nature of US presidential terms and their respective administrations - why does it seem like it's so much easier to dismantle things than to create them in the first place? Especially for things that took a substantial amount of time and effort to build, shouldn't we require much more scrutiny before considering an action that effectively dismantles/…
This is just the nature of reality. Creation is incredibly difficult and requires immense struggle. Destruction is effortless. It took billions of years of biological evolution to reach a point where a mass of cells can be conceived, nurtured, and grown into a thinking breathing organism capable of manipulating its' environment. One single mindless, simple burst of radiation can completely destroy that. You're battling against entropy. The natural order of things is chaos, disorder, and dissolution. When the will to fight and struggle for an ideal is lost, the inevitable result is decay.
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Said the poster who mostly likely never served a day in the military or read one word from S&S. I've done both. More than once, actually. Both the Military Times and S&S suffer from the same bias as MSM. One down, potentially, and one to go in my mind. I also don't think taxpayer money should be going to VOA or PBS or NPR for the very same reasons. And don't think most of the military doesn't feel the same way. Most…
> I also don't think taxpayer money should be going to VOA or PBS or NPR for the very same reasons. VOA is literally a federal government foreign propaganda service that is operated (in theory, mainly as a defensive countermove against hostile government propaganda) to advance US government information interests abroad. Now, it's usually operated in a standard journalistic manner because the US government has both se…
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you a White House correspondent? Your line of questions sounds familiar.
Sounds like you're trying to ascribe malice to a pretty reasonable question. I'm just trying to understand your position: if taxpayer money should be withheld from what you view as politically biased media, then should it also be withhold from explicitly politically biased campaign events? Seems like it should be, but then again I'd like to hear your opinion.
It is absolutely the case that corruption is laundered through organizations. If a person profits it is illegal, if he directs profit to his organization and takes back a commission it is somehow fine?
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#125It seems like unusual thing to do, and considering the circumstances will surely cause some discontent (and, what's more importantly, if I'm not mistaken: discontent of some subset of Trump's supporters), so there must be some important reason to issue such an order. So what is it?
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#126One thing I've always wondered about when it comes to the temporary nature of US presidential terms and their respective administrations - why does it seem like it's so much easier to dismantle things than to create them in the first place? Especially for things that took a substantial amount of time and effort to build, shouldn't we require much more scrutiny before considering an action that effectively dismantles/…
Republicans are just as adept at constructing things as deconstructing things. Look at No Child Left Behind (fundamental reconstruction of education), the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA (large new bureaucracies), or the TCJA (fundamental reconstruction of the tax system).
I think what we actually witness in government is two different phenomenons. First, Republicans act as a largely cohesive block that requires less coalition building. Second, Republican governing philosophy has as a central tenet the idea that government is inefficient and market-based solutions are better, from Reagan's "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help." to Grover Norquist's Starve the Beast theory "My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."
And the inverse of this is also true, there is an aphorism about the two parties voters, "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line." It seeks to explain why getting voters that agree with Democratic policies to the polls seems to be more difficult than getting voters that agree with Republican policies to the polls. This extends to the politicians, who pick largely from the same menu of issues but at different priority levels. This leads to the Democrats having to expend more effort to build coalitions, an example would be something like healthcare reform. Market-based solutions like the ACA have as much a home in the Democratic party as government-based solutions like Medicare For All (M4A). With a wider gamut of policy positions, more effort inevitably must be spent getting people to consensus.
This means that Republican governments get more of their goals done, and because of their governing philosophy many of those things are deconstructing existing programs. They are capable of putting new programs into place, I named a few but there are others, so it doesn't seem to me that the main difference is constructing new thing vs deconstructing existing things, but the amount of effort it requires to get your coalition to take action.
This all is an analysis of the efficacy of the two parties in accomplishing their goals, without really treading on the more dangerous ground of "who has the better goals?" I, like everyone else, have some opinion no this matter, but to try to keep the inevitable angry responses when discussing politics to a minimum, I'm going to just avoid discussing that altogether.
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone have a full list of who they are counting as either the 8 or 13 in that quote? According to Wikipedia, the number of people who have been charged under the espionage act is much higher than 13. For example, there are 52 pages of people convicted under the act.[1] I guess it depends on your definition of "leaking". The relevant dictionary definition of leak is "to give out (information) surreptitiously".[2] Giv…
*For leaking secrets to journalists
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#128It seems there's a very simple reason. https://www.stripes.com/news/us/trump-denies-reports-that-he... A few days ago they also ran a story about a poll showing Trump lagging Biden among the military.
Ah, thank you. I was pretty sure it would be something like this, but couldn't find details anywhere else.
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The average American pays about $10k in federal income taxes each year. Do you have a source for this? There is absolutely no way this is true. Are you including Social Security contributions as "federal income tax"? Or maybe did you mean the average American household pays $10k each year?
Here you go: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/10... Say it's about $10k for federal, for ease of calculation. If it's less, then that means even more people's lifelong contributions are incinerated by a propaganda rag.
That’s the average that an American tax payer pays. That’s not what the average American pays. The difference is subtle, but meaningful. If I said, “I am an average American, how much can I expect to pay in federal taxes?” That number will not be $10k.
Re: The Pentagon has ordered Stars and Stripes to shut down
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it isn't nothing. My point is you can't wave away these numbers just by putting them next to a much larger number. These bills ultimately have to be paid, and asking whether a propaganda rag is worth >31 people's lifelong tax contributions every year is a much better framing than "we already incinerate cash, what's a bit more" - that is just utterly terrible reasoning. Try applying it to your own budget and see w…
It is nothing. For example, it is the equivalent of me budgeting for a single cup of coffee for the entire year. The administrative costs of removing that expense would dwarf the expense itself, and could actually result in significantly negative ROI when accounting for opportunity cost (hundreds, if not thousands of alternative opportunities to save more money are being ignored while leadership focuses on this one).