# Stupid liberal idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 20, 2011, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086 "2011-04-20T15:35:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 158
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2015, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3141 "2015-02-28T03:34:10Z")
> [@rsa](#): > > I would imagine that a lot of the pipeline construction jobs would be welders. You people are aware that there is a shortage of welders, right? Who would build our warships? Obviously we would import them on guest worker visas from Korea. The Canadians have been importing an entire production facility in large pieces from Korea, carrying it over US highways from Lewiston ID, through Montana, up to northern Alberta. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2015, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3142 "2015-02-28T03:41:40Z")
> [@Askthepizzaguy](#): > > By default, there’s gotta be millions of effing stupid liberals out there. And I love a good idiot bashing. Whether it’s a group of hippie-dips who insist on not vaccinating their children because western medicine is all about profit, and would rather visit a Reiki master to cure all their child’s real treatable maladies, or that same group praying the devils out of their childrens’ bodies while wearing their crosses on top of flag pins, both groups insist on rejecting evidence and embracing trendy non-science nonsense, to the detriment of their children’s health. Ultimately, it’s not Republican or Democrat that is to blame. That same hippy-dip is just as stupid and dippy whether s/he votes Republican or Democrat. Well, the difference is, the idiots of the left get less attention than those of the right because they are politically marginal, therefore less dangerous. Another difference is that LW ideology in its present form does not strictly **require** stupidity. ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2015, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3143 "2015-02-28T04:57:38Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, the difference is, the idiots of the left get less attention than those of the right because they are politically marginal, therefore less dangerous. Exactly. When Fox News cites liberal loonism, they have to either talk about people with absolutely zero power to make policy, like Ward Churchill or some anonymous eco-terrorist, or else they have to make shit up (or completely change the context) about politicians, like Benghazi, and “you didn’t build that.” When MSNBC cites right wingnuttery, all they have to do is play clips, in full context, of current Presidential candidates, senators, and congressmen, some of whom hold very powerful committee chairs. There’s really no comparison. ---
**Author:** ![Askthepizzaguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askthepizzaguy/32/9405_2.png) [@Askthepizzaguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askthepizzaguy)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3144 "2015-03-03T03:40:33Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > Exactly. When Fox News cites liberal loonism, they have to either talk about people with absolutely zero power to make policy, like Ward Churchill or some anonymous eco-terrorist, or else they have to make shit up (or completely change the context) about politicians, like Benghazi, and “you didn’t build that.” > > When MSNBC cites right wingnuttery, all they have to do is play clips, in full context, of current Presidential candidates, senators, and congressmen, some of whom hold very powerful committee chairs. > > There’s really no comparison. Well, on the whole, I agree. But I was particularly put off by an interview Jon Stewart did with Nancy Pelosi which I feel completely exposed her as an empty, corrupt suit that happens to have Democrat next to her name. Everything she was accusing Republicans of doing, she was doing in spades. > **[Jon Stewart Delivers One Of The Best Interviews In Recent Memory](https://www.upworthy.com/jon-stewart-delivers-one-of-the-best-interviews-in-recent-memory)** > > House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi went on "The Daily Show" for an interview with Jon Stewart. Rep. Pelosi appeared surprised and visibly uncomfortable when Stewart repeatedly confronted her with hard-hitting questions about both the corrupting... I think this is the right link, after a quick google. We all know our politicians are dishonest hypocritical dickwads, but there are degrees, and she meets the degree where you need to flush that particular toilet and start over with untainted toilet water. And then of course the Tammy Duckworth incident. > **[Jon Stewart | Mediaite](https://www.mediaite.com/tag/jon-stewart/)** > > Jon Stewart (born under the name Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz) is an American comedian, writer, commentator, and political activist. He hosted The Daily Show on Comedy Central from 1999 to 2015. After leaving The Daily Show, he has spent most of his... I’m quite liberal. Nancy might vote correctly more often than a Republican opponent might, but she is a tumor that needs to be removed from the body. She is a terrible leader, a terrible speaker, and she’s hollow and meaningless. I don’t support corrupt and empty leaders, and I don’t care if I agree with them more often than not. This happened a while ago, and I still remember it clear as day. Whenever I see leaders of the supposedly liberal party behave in this manner, I make a mental note that they’re steaming pieces of shit that need to be flushed, only slightly better than their Republican opponents. Again, why I really wish the Republican party wasn’t so godawful. I would vote for an honest conservative with integrity, that I disagreed with more often than not, over a dishonest spineless corrupt liberal, because what’s more damaging to our country is dishonest leaders, not the wrong party being in control. The wrong party is in control half the time anyway. The bad leadership is what needs to go away. Seriously, fuck Nancy Pelosi. I can handle milquetoast moderate weak leaders like Harry Reid, but I can’t fucking stand openly stinky pieces of two-faced shit like Nancy Pelosi. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3145 "2015-03-03T14:45:32Z")
While she was Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton used her personal email _exclusively_ for all her State business, according to the _New York Times_ ([cite](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-at-state-department-raises-flags.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0)). She never got an official State Dep’t email address, and conducted **all** her business through the personal account. As the article notes, previous Secretaries of State, including Colin Powell have also used personal email for their State work, but new regulations went into effect that were supposed to have prevented that. But, _you should not need a law to tell you not to do that!_ Use the fucking official email for official business! First, the emails need to be subject to oversight, retention, and archiving. Kind of hard to do when they’re not under State’s control. Second, the security implications are serious. The article doesn’t say what kind of personal email Clinton used. I don’t know if it was a webmail address, or if the Clintons have their own domain (which is probably the case). Either way, where are those emails being stored? Where are the servers located? How well is security handled on those servers? What is the backup and retention policy? Was any encryption used? Who has access to the information? It’s just…mind bogglingly bad practice. Yeah, yeah, official email wasn’t that secure either, because Bradley Manning. Here’s the thing. Manning was an insider who had to copy data to removable media and walk it out the door. And in the wake of that, security was at least tightened down to reduce the risk of that in the future. State can take steps to mitigate the risk of another Manning incident. But when the emails are flying around unencrypted, sitting on servers god-knows-where, under god-knows-whose control, the risk is completely out of the control of the State Department. They’re completely at the mercy of the email or hosting provider. I’m not sure if I’m more pissed about the disregard for transparency or the disregard for security. Adding to the stupidity, a Clinton spokesman tried to defend her: > [@NY Times](#): > > Mr. Merrill, the spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, declined to detail why she had chosen to conduct State Department business from her personal account. He said that because Mrs. Clinton had been sending emails to other State Department officials at their government accounts, she had “every expectation they would be retained.” He did not address emails that Mrs. Clinton may have sent to foreign leaders, people in the private sector or government officials outside the State Department. That “defense” is wrong on every level. Shift the responsibility to the recipients! Disingenuously leave out a big chunk of the issue! Well done! If Clinton gets the nomination, I will probably still vote for her because the Republican nominee is likely to be worse. But this does really disturb me. How much business will she conduct off the books as president? How many state secrets will sit around on email servers in foreign countries? Idiot! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3146 "2015-03-03T15:24:15Z")
I agree. This was a Stupid Liberal Idea and “Bush did it” doesn’t make it any better. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3147 "2015-03-03T15:25:37Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > While she was Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton used her personal email _exclusively_ for all her State business, according to the _New York Times_ ([cite](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-at-state-department-raises-flags.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0)). She never got an official State Dep’t email address, and conducted **all** her business through the personal account. As the article notes, previous Secretaries of State, including Colin Powell have also used personal email for their State work, but new regulations went into effect that were supposed to have prevented that. I don’t disagree that she shouldn’t be using personal accounts but I wonder why email accounts aren’t automatically assigned to incoming officials. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3148 "2015-03-03T15:27:38Z")
They probably are, unless the incoming official is the boss and tells the IT department she doesn’t want one. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3149 "2015-03-03T15:32:10Z")
This is just the usual skating the line from her. There’s no evidence of any real corruption, but the Clintons certainly don’t do anything more than they absolutely have to to stay within the rules. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3150 "2015-03-03T15:35:10Z")
I just don’t get the point. Does she want her SD emails archived for when she writes her memoirs or something? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3151 "2015-03-03T15:35:45Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > They probably are, unless the incoming official is the boss and tells the IT department she doesn’t want one. That shouldn’t be a choice. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3152 "2015-03-03T15:39:33Z")
My guess is that there’s nothing sinister about it. Hillary has been accustomed to using a certain email address and saw no reason (incorrectly) to create an official account for official business. “What’s wrong with just using what I know,” she probably (incorrectly) thought. I see people doing this _all the time_. Of course, not usually people with aspirations to the presidency. But honestly it’s a bad idea for someone in business , academia, or the government to use personal email for official communication. Yet, people do it all the time, even sometimes when they’ve been issued official email accounts. My vote is stupid idea from ignorance, and not something nefarious. Also, it’s worth mentioning that this is not an idea limited to liberals. Lots of people do this on all sides all over the place. It’s dumb for sure, but not intrinsically liberal. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3153 "2015-03-03T15:42:56Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I just don’t get the point. Does she want her SD emails archived for when she writes her memoirs or something? I think the point is simply avoidance of accountability and transparency. There are plenty of ways for her to keep records of what she writes and receives while still using a State Department email address. I fucking hate it when public officials do this shit. I hated it when it was Sarah Palin, and i hate it when it’s Hillary Clinton. The hubris and arrogance of these people is incredible. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3154 "2015-03-03T15:48:23Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > My guess is that there’s nothing sinister about it. Hillary has been accustomed to using a certain email address and saw no reason (incorrectly) to create an official account for official business. “What’s wrong with just using what I know,” she probably (incorrectly) thought. I see people doing this _all the time_. Of course, not usually people with aspirations to the presidency. But honestly it’s a bad idea for someone in business , academia, or the government to use personal email for official communication. Yet, people do it all the time, even sometimes when they’ve been issued official email accounts. If Clinton is as retarded as this, she’s not qualified to be Secretary of State, and nor is she qualified to be President. These are documents of federal government business, and are also documents of historical importance. She knew exactly what she was doing. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3155 "2015-03-03T16:05:47Z")
But every message she sent to or received from a state department official or any other US government employee would be archived on government servers. Sounds like a tempest in a metaphor. I mean, if she wanted to exchange e-mail with Ayman al Zawahiri, she could have done that through gmail anyway, or through some other private account. Ultimately, if there is any issue, she has exposed her own account/server to the broad risk of subpoena. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3156 "2015-03-03T16:19:10Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > My guess is that there’s nothing sinister about it. Hillary has been accustomed to using a certain email address and saw no reason (incorrectly) to create an official account for official business. “What’s wrong with just using what I know,” she probably (incorrectly) thought. I see people doing this _all the time_. Of course, not usually people with aspirations to the presidency. But honestly it’s a bad idea for someone in business , academia, or the government to use personal email for official communication. Yet, people do it all the time, even sometimes when they’ve been issued official email accounts. > > My vote is stupid idea from ignorance, and not something nefarious. > > Also, it’s worth mentioning that this is not an idea limited to liberals. Lots of people do this on all sides all over the place. It’s dumb for sure, but not intrinsically liberal. Sinister or not, this is not simply a matter of omission. Every place I’ve worked for the past 20 years, getting an “official” email address is a standard onboarding procedure, in most cases even for people who don’t use computers on the job – like janitors. Someone had to make a conscious decision to NOT give her a State Department email address, and the only realistic candidate for that is – Hilary Clinton. This isn’t mere stupidity. This is duplicity. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3157 "2015-03-03T16:21:31Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > But every message she sent to or received from a state department official or any other US government employee would be archived on government servers. Do you work for Hillary Clinton? Because you sound just like her spokesflack: > [@](#): > > Mr. Merrill, the spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, declined to detail why she had chosen to conduct State Department business from her personal account. He said that because Mrs. Clinton had been sending emails to other State Department officials at their government accounts, she had “every expectation they would be retained.” He did not address emails that Mrs. Clinton may have sent to foreign leaders, people in the private sector or government officials outside the State Department. As **Bayard** notes, this is the flimsiest excuse possible: hand off the responsibility for archiving your emails to the people you’re corresponding with. There are good reasons for requiring people to retain their own emails. If someone needs to go through Hillary Clinton emails for the purpose of an investigation, or for historical research, it’s far easier and less expensive to simply go to the source, rather than to have to look through the records of all of the hundreds or thousands of individuals who might have corresponded with her. Also, if her emails aren’t there, in one place and ready to be investigated, you might not even know who she was corresponding with on any given occasion. Also, as the New York Times points out, her (and your) argument about emails to and from other US government officials completely ignores the fact that the Secretary of State, given the very nature of the job, spends much of her time corresponding with people who are not in the US government. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3158 "2015-03-03T16:21:57Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > But every message she sent to or received from a state department official or any other US government employee would be archived on government servers. Sounds like a tempest in a metaphor. I mean, if she wanted to exchange e-mail with Ayman al Zawahiri, she could have done that through gmail anyway, or through some other private account. Ultimately, if there is any issue, she has exposed her own account/server to the broad risk of subpoena. It may not matter a whole lot what she wrote to her minions. But it matters a lot more IMO what she may have sent to foreign leaders, and that is gone unless they use some legal means to pry it out of her personal accounts. And that’s what they should do. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3159 "2015-03-03T16:25:29Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > It may not matter a whole lot what she wrote to her minions. But it matters a lot more IMO what she may have sent to foreign leaders, and that is gone unless they use some legal means to pry it out of her personal accounts. > > And that’s what they should do. I agree. As the NYT article notes, the emails they are getting from her private account are the ones that her own aides decide are relevant. They shouldn’t get to make that decision, because every work-related email she sent and received should already have gone through a State Department account, and should be saved. What would happen now, in an ideal world, is that Clinton would be required to hand over her WHOLE personal email account to the Archives and Records Administration, who would then go through the account (under a requirement of non-disclosure) and separate the work emails from the private emails. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/3160 "2015-03-03T16:36:16Z")
A few other thoughts, One possibility is that some of her emails chains may have included state department work with campaign work, and using her state department e-mail would have violated the Hatch act. She also probably realizes that at whether or not she’s done anything wrong, the Repblicans will subpoena her accounts, and go over every email with a fine tooth comb looking for something to take out of context and nail her with. For example if she says that in terms of the global perception of America’s strength abroad the death of an Ambassador in Bengazi was no big deal. The day after the subpoena Fox headlines would read “Clinton sees the death of an Ambassador in Bengazi as **no big dea** l” Overall I agree it’s a bad idea, but the desire is understandable even if she isn’t up to something nefarious. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=157) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=159)