turkeyfoot

Those of us who believe in limited government seek deadly compromise with Trump and for that matter any candidate who doesn't align with your highest values. This election is said to have lasting consequences (like none previously) to halt forward progress towards the financial cliff. Vote Republican AGAIN. The thinking goes, Im for the person who has the best chance not for the best person. My thinking goes to the long game. 3rd party candidates are picked apart for nuanced differences they pose (foreign policy). If for example, support was given to the Libertarian Party (or in the future American Capitalist) the Rep/Dem ticket would feel the loss. To say its a losing proposition is to not grasp the long term consequences of how support grows into a competing alternative. Proponents of limited government advance the idea of selecting Trump but look at what is accomplished when selecting a candidate who has mixed premises, one of them being national health care. Its clear Libertarians dont want that. As a measure of group think the view of the least harm for the most gain is a defeatist strategy in the long run just as voting for Clinton/Sanders would be seen as an immediate capitulation of values. The crowd likes to draw a line in the sand over Libertarian views. If they looked hard enough, a vote for Trump "might" staunch the bleeding by saving the patient but the long term goal of quality of life is abandoned again for the middle of the road candidate. So all this hoopla over a Republican of a particular stripe is nonsense to me. I liken it to two teams competing on the playing field. Most people choose, I think, a sentimental favorite, a calculus over stats or the color of a uniform. I want a fair game. But I personally have no skin in the game, I want to come out ahead no matter the results. And I would have rather had my team in the finals. In other words go with the team who closest represents my values even if there is not a chance of winning presently. Will the conversation turn to criticism of ones selection when theres a failure to follow through? Cant wait for the monday morning quarterbacking.

I seem to remember a brohaha that came about when Nestles was sued overseas over the idea of a proprietary container. Some years ago. Last Xmas I was looking into buying a K cup 2.0 but decided against because of the few choices available. I found a cheaters way of overcoming it on You Tube and finally came to terms with my narrowed coffee interest. STARBUCKS BABY! Verstehen? Mox nix. Ich du lieber caffein mein fruend.

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/18/passcodes-that-can-defeat-fbi-ios-backdoor/ What this means to Iphone owners. The short version: If you’re worried about governments trying to access your phone, set your iPhone up with a random, 11-digit numeric passcode. What follows is an explanation of why that will protect you and how to actually do it. 11-digit passcodes will take up to 253 years, and on average 127 years, to crack Nerd tip: If you’re using a Mac or Linux, you can securely generate a random 11-digit passcode by opening the Terminal app and typing this command: python -c 'from random import SystemRandom as r; print(r().randint(0,10**11-1))'

In other news, the chosen one finds answers for the brain dead. http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/19/11071684/donald-trump-apple-boycott-encryption-iphone "We're gonna get force Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country, instead of in other countries." "How do you like that?" he continued. "I just thought of that."

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2016/02/17/apple-dispute-hinges-on-centuries-old-law.html "Courts have used the law to make phone companies help the government track and monitor customer calls, to compel landlords to turn over security videos and to force credit card companies to divulge customer records. They have taken their cue from a 1977 Supreme Court case called U.S. v. New York Telephone Co. The majority held that the All Writs Act empowered a judge to compel the phone company to install a pen register and assist the Federal Bureau of Investigation with operating the device, which records all numbers dialed from a particular phone line. At the time, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in dissent that the All Writs Act should be confined to orders that enable courts to carry out their functions such as enforcing previous judgments. "If the All Writs Act confers authority to order persons to aid the government in the performance of its duties," he wrote, "it provides a sweeping grant of authority entirely without precedent in our nation's history." ____________________________________ compared the government's use of the All Writs Act against Apple to law enforcement agents forcing a safe manufacturer "to travel around the country unlocking safes that the government wants to access." The company now takes the position that the All Writs Act "cannot extend as far as to compel a private company like Apple to be conscripted as an agent of the government into performing forensic services on a device in the government's possession," wrote Apple lawyer Jeffrey Landis in an October brief in one of the cases in Brooklyn.

^ From Snowdens twitter account.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

EMF is folly compared to cyber terrorism. Efrem Zimbalist Jr is dead and so is the idea that FBI's mission is to protect and defend the US. The FBI wants people to believe that Farook was using his work phone to contact other terrorists, not his private phone which he destroyed.

Someone mentioned this is the meet and greet for dancin on Bushs' grave.

From the other side of the aisle comes do do so deep that raised creased trousers are dirtied. Strains of barking dogs, HC's howlng, a vintage Howard Dean move, Stranger than fiction, more compelling than a Ripleys Believe or Not caption, with a Rod Serling just walked into the room feel. Last run, Billy Bob's coffee shuffling step and fetch it rejoinder left a chip on Zeros shoulder. An overwrought storyline with no ending.... http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/02/19/joe-biden-says-clinton-sanders-campaigns-too-gloomy-for-his-taste/ "Obama has criticized what he described as Republican presidential candidates’ “doom and despair tour,” but Vice President Joe Biden argued this week that the gloomy message about the state of the country is coming from Democrats, too." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/19/monica-crowley-why-obama-is-trying-to-torpedo-hill/?page=all#pagebreak "This brings us to the certain presidential candidacy of Vice President Joe Biden, the one person who can effectively give Mr. Obama that third term."

Anyone? ) The thing to understand about primaries is they are the best chance to affect the race. Strike now while the gettin's hot. Virginia's is March 1st. By the time November rolls around the a Republican nominee will be in place. One choice then, the whole field now. The national election isnt decided on the popular vote, its decided on the early states turn out of the primary voters. It will also explain why I'll say I voted for Cruz when he isnt then the choice. Who knows though, right? Yeah, only taken my a lifetime to figure this out. )

..........deleted.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/01/25/former-ag-mukasey-if-obama-blocks-a-hillary-indictment-expect-resignations-the-same-level-as-watergate/ Former AG Mukasey said, “The fact is that the president can direct the attorney general not to bring charges. The attorney general works for the president and the president can order that … Although I can’t believe that you wouldn’t get people resigning in the wake of something like that, the same way that we did at the time of Watergate.” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/18/ronald-kessler-obama-pardons-hillary-clinton-for-n/ "And in contrast to how uptight she has appeared to be in the recent past, if you noticed how relaxed Hillary seemed to be during the first debate among Democrats vying for the presidency, she knew exactly what the president had done: Mr. Obama guaranteed that the Democratic front-runner will not have to worry about doing time."

Compared to you all, Im a low information voter. Keeping up with the feed is a part time job for me. Sourcing material outside of OL makes me a full timer. I have a limit to what my butt can take and have considered standing up at my computer. No, not as a cheerleader. ) MK. You said almost sounded like a Trump supporter. What I heard was self promoter, tv talk show host, etc. That is far from an endorsement. Hes speaking to the choir, the message is dont take any of them seriously, beckoning back to the last debate when Trump got his panties in a bunch and appeared agitated. What would you say about O holding the cards in the FBI investigation and having input into whether HC can continue to the end. And the probabilities of Trump beating HC in the election as she continues towards that end? I would venture to say most voters only hear the most superficial drone. Its in the background for them way down the list from their primary endeavors, a job, family, activities. Theres is a lot coming from this thread that is thoughtful. Might it be that my take is the reality check needed before you guys crown Trump prior to the coronation? )

Michael, Trump does similarly, reaching back to Cruz's support of Roberts, as if to make Cruz seem contradictory on ACA and turned Reagan into a liberal. Oh the heady days of their youth. The Limbaugh piece is persuasive. It seemed Trump knew the deck was stacked against him and was prepared to counter the audience drone with an appeal to Democrats. I wouldnt have realized it without reading some commentary here, his impatience with the crowd stood out hugely, leaving him appearing to me as being a cauldron of unexpressed emotion in polite terms. Trump seemed calculated because democratic South Carolinians looking on for the first time would see someone largely in favor of and in agreement with his pronouncements. Bush, yada yada, WMD, true but Bush is not in contention. SS fraud and waste otherwise Im going to take care of people. He didnt give immigration thorough treatment other than to say hed build a wall. I thought, wow, hes separating himself from the pack in a way that seems disingenuous to his previous comments or at least understated. Hes standing out but to whom? Hes just a bit right of a left leaning democrat. Hes as manipulative as most in crafting the right message at the right time. If his numbers drop he will be sorely missed but ultimately a big mouth who lacked the right audience. Im not for Cruz. I was tallying salient talking points and am for fairness. Ive decided Im not going to cast my vote as much as stick to my conscience. I can no longer believe my vote will make a difference. If Governor Veto Gary Johnson is still on the Libertarian ticket Im going that route if I vote at all. I like that he built his house, is an accomplished athlete, had a sensible track record as governor of New Mexico and has a level headed approach to limited government. Last cycle the Libertarian Party received no electoral votes. The Rep/Dem rotation of presidents makes the US inconsistent, imbecilic with no moral compass.

MK, do you think Trump is clever or is it you believe he has the best chance to win the nomination. Is he doing it cleanly or does that not matter? Trump expressed his stance in the debate over entitlements and his comments in the moment consisted only of fraud and waste abuses. If he had a complete view to be considered in this debate maybe he should have stated what it is. Cruz is permitted us his personal view of Trump when he considers what Trump might do. He made a cohesive argument that Trump take umbrage with. Cruz didn't lie. I just watched Saturdays debate. What a petulant child like man child. Cruz reminded him of the interminable behavior of interruption. I think Trump is showing signs of breaking despite his simple messages appealing to low information voters. He senses hes riding a current wave of popularity, it being unnecessary to clarify positions while hes opponents are doing damage, imo. Cruz continues his effective barrage and Trump does himself no favors. And talk about gaffes! Carson, in response to being asked as a non politician. "I don't want to be a politician." Is he lying too? )

I'm mentioning this more as a note to myself than anything else. This was probably the most important insight I have had so far regarding Trump's persuasion techniques. Now I think I can go through the Dilbert dude's "linguistic kill shot" stuff and position it correctly. (The Dilbert dude is Scott Adams see here for his blog.) I've been putting this off because I wanted to come to some of my own conclusions through my own observations before being told what to look for. That observation of mine above does it for me. _________________________________________________________ Nice find! Scott Adams is a New Yorker from his earliest roots, as he said, he aligns himself with a NY state of mind. ) The beacon of free market values. The target of animosity. "Where I grew up, in upstate New York, empathy looks exactly like Trump. Political correctness wasn’t a thing when I grew up, and probably isn’t a thing in my old hometown today. If you’re trying to “make America great” or anything productive at all, you’re 100% empathetic according to the way I was raised. Anything else is posture. Where I grew up, you have to be useful or go home. Trump is trying to be useful. That’s empathy, according to my people." Adams is perceptive I get that Trump is in nomination mode. My upbringing, as a military brat, keeps my (feet)boots on the ground and as such, Trumps manner, while attracting attention, is, imo, negatively leaned towards self adulation, and a personal turn off. Thats not to say, it lacks substance, slinging mud in a dirt fight is good, but it doesnt hold appeal for me. I dislike authoritative speech from politicians mouths. Trump does well in that regard with his non politician like rhetoric. My assumption is we are alike in that regard. The New York state of mind thingy. A NY friend, of several decade, came over to our new house. Shes very opinionated. So much so as she walked through she mentioned everything she would have done differently. "Oh, the paint is atrocious." Shes not an interior decorator, nor does she own a swanky place. I tend to view ops as valuable, even when offered at the expense of friendship, views of the personal kind are best kept to ones self, especially since nobody asked her. ) Trump tells us exactly what he thinks. There is a lot of value in his stance taken towards the nomination in exposing others but regaling with braggadocio is beneath most of us. You can say his powers of persuasion are tops and they are good, when appealing to low information but they've failed to persuade me or change my views on many issues. Gary Johnson for president! )

Uh, thx. Argh. Dont have the stomach to watch it in its entirety. I watched a snippet. In disgust I stumbled on an other choice, conscience borne. http://tinyurl.com/gmq52pl

First Ive heard of her. That choice does seem far fetched and unlikely.

This is very bad news. For the man, and for the nation. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Senior-Associate-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-found-6828930.php We've been 5-4 on a number of very important decisions, and he's part of the five (often writing the opinion). Zero must not be given another socialist appointment (under any circumstances).

Here's an Interesting gem of historical political interest. http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/2001015/ "Every Republican candidate who finished first and second in Iowa and New Hampshire has won the presidential nomination. Having done so, Trump is now in a class with Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney. John McCain was a partial exception in 2000, having basically skipped Iowa and then won in New Hampshire. And it doesn't matter where the first and second place finishes occurred. Reagan was second in Iowa in 1980, then won New Hampshire. Dole won Iowa in 1996 and settled for second to Pat Buchanan in New Hampshire. I think it has to do more with popular acceptance and wanting to get behind a winner. Less to do with understanding what the candidate is for or against. Loved the pussy sound bite! That came from an audience member with a palpable sense of knocking someone down. Sanders has a similar message connecting his audience to Wall Street and the rich being bad. Theres very little connected to substantive issues. Its as if voters stepped off the bus with no prior knowledge of the hows and whys the current state of political affairs got them to this point. Its not money, not issues that matters most but raw emotions.

Youre finding real lines of demarcation in what you expect from real friends. But at least you have them. The only time I come close to sensing alignment with AR is when Im on OL or certain areas of FB. I frequent, a bike forum and am always finding people who subscribe to parts of my principles but generally express themselves in a cloak of emotion that doesn't pass for real understanding. We meet once a year over common interests. My real friends in essence are social acquaintances not philosophy soul mates. I part ways only when I find unscrupulousness or social mores that are found lacking. You're expecting a lot. More importantly I think what you're seeing is how relationships generally follow a dictum of no politics and religion. Also its rare when people attempt to speak of things they dont understand. Its a faith thing. My own brother with whom I've had a common interest in AR for a lifetime dedicated her book to me, saying "She spoke and many listened but, we were the few that heard. To all that is possible." All fine and good when it was written. When "life got in the way" it became apparent that whatever high falutin principles we said we subscribed to became less important than general rules of civility. My aunt, who I love dearly, who is a preachers wife, never fails to praise god, is someone, who despite our differences meets our common need for caring and connectedness.