Stupid liberal idea of the day

[zoid]

The fact that you don’t like her gives her a 10 point bump.
Kinda the opposite of the Colbert effect.

[elucidator]

@adaher

No love for Bob Menendez’ pending indictment yet?

Denounce, renounce, and condemn. Next?

[Rick_Kitchen]

@adaher

No love for Bob Menendez’ pending indictment yet?

Menendez is not a liberal.

[rsa]

DINO

[running_coach]

@Rick_Kitchen

Menendez is not a liberal.

He’s to the left of adaher, right?

[Rick_Kitchen]

@running_coach

He’s to the left of adaher, right?

So is Mussolini.

[eschereal]

You know who else was left of adaher?

[adaher]

Menendez isn’t a liberal? Unless we’re defining liberal as “agrees with the President all the time”, he’s quite liberal.

[running_coach]

@adaher

Menendez isn’t a liberal? Unless we’re defining liberal as “agrees with the President all the time”, he’s quite liberal.

Just a sample from Wiki.

In 2010, The Wall Street Journal reported that Menendez had written to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, asking him to approve an acquisition that would rescue from the prospect of receivership a New Jersey bank, First Bank Americano, operated by Menendez contributors.
On December 12, 2012 it was reported that the Senator’s office had an unpaid intern volunteering who had let his visitor visa expire and who was a registered sex offender.

It was reported on March 14, 2013, that a federal grand jury in Miami is investigating Menendez regarding his role in advocating for the business interests of ophthalmologist Salomon Melgen. Menendez’s efforts to push U.S. government officials to enforce a lucrative port security contract would benefit one of his major donors, Dr. Salomon E. Melgen, as well as Pedro Pablo Permuy, a former national security adviser and senior legislative aide to Mr. Menendez.[136] In 2012, Melgen’s business had donated over $700,000 to Majority PAC, a political action committee supporting Democratic candidates; the PAC spent more than $582,000 on Menendez’s behalf.

Peddling influence, bribery, self-centered greed, favors for supporters. Doesn’t sound much like a liberal. Just the opposite.

[adaher]

Corruption is non-ideological.

[crowmanyclouds]

@adaher

Corruption is non-ideological.

So then it’s not a stupid liberal idea of the day is it?

CMC fnord!

[Askthepizzaguy]

You could call it stupidly corrupt liberal of the day. I’d be fine with that.

Although I’m sure it’s happened plenty of time that a Republican got roasted in the other thread for doing stupid things that weren’t necessarily conservative, just awful.

[adaher]

Dana Milbank highlights the really stupid part of the story: the idea that obsessive secrecy is a good idea:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clintons-debilitating-caution/2015/03/06/e3225638-c411-11e4-9ec2-b418f57a4a99_story.html

This week’s revelation that she used only private e-mail to conduct her public business as secretary of state is not a knockout blow to the likely Democratic presidential nominee; she has weathered worse. But it is a needless, self-inflicted wound, and it stems from the same flaws that have caused Clinton trouble in the past — terminal caution and its cousin, obsessive secrecy.

In trying so hard to avoid mistakes — in this case, trying to make sure an embarrassing e-mail or two didn’t become public — Clinton made a whopper of an error. What’s troubling is that she’s been making a variation of this mistake for nearly a quarter-century.

[eschereal]

@adaher

Dana Milbank highlights the really stupid part of the story: the idea that obsessive secrecy is a good idea:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clintons-debilitating-caution/2015/03/06/e3225638-c411-11e4-9ec2-b418f57a4a99_story.html

WTELF?? Do you even know what “reading comprehension” is? Sometimes you start to sound reasonable, but always, back into the pit of teh stupid.

[adaher]

Then explain it to me. Is Milbank endorsing obsessive secrecy and I misunderstood him? What am I missing?

[elucidator]

Galaxies.

[Askthepizzaguy]

A wild pizzaguy appears.

But it is a needless, self-inflicted wound, and it stems from the same flaws that have caused Clinton trouble in the past — terminal caution and its cousin, obsessive secrecy.

Your quote, it would seem that the writer is putting obsessive secrecy in the bad column.

I did not read the article or click your link, this is just what I saw from being subscribed here.

[adaher]

George Will said on TV yesterday that the Clintons could find a loophole in a stop sign. Heh.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@adaher

Also, she went much farther than anyone else. She had her own server, used multiple email addresses. And by the time Clinton became SecState, the culture, if not the rules, strongly discouraged personal email use.

I don’t know that it’s “going further”. I am slightly encouraged by the fact that she seems to have paid more attention to security. I’m also not buying the “culture” argument. I highly doubt that the State Department has ever had a culture where employees using non-official e-mail addresses was okay.

[elucidator]

You mean, like, why would there be any reason for diplomats to have a “public” dialogue separate from a more “internal”, candid means of conversation?

“Why, no, President Obongo-bongo, she did not, by any means, suggest that the people of Uvula were primitive and backward, she was lauding your rich tapestry of cultural heritage… No, I quite understand, still, recalling your ambassador seems rather extreme…”