(02-26-2016 06:50 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 03:30 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hope the establishment isn't simply panicking but getting the message.

America despises the establishment. It's time for them to go and take their ****** policies, underhanded tactics, and crappy politicians with them.

Ive been noodling about on this for a few days now, maybe couple weeks.

I'm thinking what we are seeing is what I'll call the "rise of the tweeners".

I'm not a boomer. Close, but no boom. I'm most certainly no millennial, got a couple of spawn that are, so have some experience there as well.

So, what we have here, friends, is the bit, nay a boat, of disgust that the tweeners are seeing all around them. The Boomers have taken the greatest, richest, most prosperous and promising Country and system in the history of mankind and summarily effing wrecked it.

We've got a debt that will, frankly, never go away. Ever. We've been slammed HARD, now twice. We do and have worked hard, played by the rules, and got our asses handed to us in the aftermath of 9/11 in 2001, the Tech crash, tech bubble whatever. Then we get our collective feet under us and *poof* a decade and a half later we have the housing bubble, and BURST. Massive job loss, stocks get smoked yet again, hard earned real wealth disappears, people that otherwise should be enjoying peak earning years are losing homes, moving back in with elderly parents, having to take secondary crap jobs to make ends meet. It's been VERY rough for millions and millions of people. Not to mention the rank corruption of some wall st types, the ponzi scheme guys, politicians lining their pockets and those of their cronies all while wrecking localities, bankrupting municipalities and crushing the people that had devoted a lifetime to making those places work in the first place.

So there's one side of the coin. Who's the candidate that is NOT a part of that crap? Someone picked by George Will or the others in the K Street club? Bush? (though I personally would have been okay with that, grudgingly). Clearly not. Those are the guys that never so much as made it out the gate.

Then further, we turn on our telly, and what do we see in response to some relatively mild adversity? We are INUNDATED with more schit than one can stomach by the kids of those mentioned above- The most self entitled, self absorbed, me, me, lookame generation to ever soil the soil of this great land. They are unapologetically chasing a socialist so perhaps they will give them all the free schit they feel they are entitled to, simply by showing up one day.
If their parents have been staggered by investment loss, home values collapsing, insurance going through the roof, stagnant wages and everything else of late, they want to have Government provide it all instead. And when that doesn't happen? They WHINE. They sit-in. They demand "safe-spaces", they refuse to even entertain opinions that might make them feel uncomfy in their onesies. They somehow have an inherent RIGHT to anything they deem worthy. If you say, "uhhh, no, there's no 'right' to that", you are deemed a "hater" and are to be summarily dismissed and destroyed via social media, utubes and whatever other whining vehicle one can find.

The "Tweeners" have had it. Their not settling in and waiting their "turn" while the Boomers pick another flawed candidate to further the corruption and bloat that is endemic in the DeeCee region. Nor will they sit idly by and be told it's now the millennials turn to try their hand at wrecking things even further in their post adolescent angst.

The Tweeners have basically been skipped, or so you'd think if you look at what is supposed to be the 2 competing groups out there trying to drive policy and politics. One group that KNOWS they have completely screwed the pooch, over and over and over again. Squandering in large measure what the Greatest Generation so generously left them. So in their collective guilt they have doubled down on the awful by producing the Gimme Generation that feels socialism is the answer. The collective gasp of the aging hippies is ALL over academia and our campuses etc. both in the Faculty and the students.

Leaving that big ol donut hole in between. That's the pushback we're seeing from those tired of the "We've always done it this way" gang and the "living wage, even though I've not earned bumpass, and free college" collectivists.

There. That's one big asss nutshell, but it's tough to get it all in a message board post.

The tweeners are tired of all of it. Their turn now, not listening to the wreckers or the whiners any more.

Great ******* post!


Sent from #ClutchCity using Tapatalk

(02-26-2016 06:50 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 03:30 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hope the establishment isn't simply panicking but getting the message.

America despises the establishment. It's time for them to go and take their ****** policies, underhanded tactics, and crappy politicians with them.

Ive been noodling about on this for a few days now, maybe couple weeks.

I'm thinking what we are seeing is what I'll call the "rise of the tweeners".

I'm not a boomer. Close, but no boom. I'm most certainly no millennial, got a couple of spawn that are, so have some experience there as well.

So, what we have here, friends, is the bit, nay a boat, of disgust that the tweeners are seeing all around them. The Boomers have taken the greatest, richest, most prosperous and promising Country and system in the history of mankind and summarily effing wrecked it.

We've got a debt that will, frankly, never go away. Ever. We've been slammed HARD, now twice. We do and have worked hard, played by the rules, and got our asses handed to us in the aftermath of 9/11 in 2001, the Tech crash, tech bubble whatever. Then we get our collective feet under us and *poof* a half a decade or so later we have the housing bubble, and BURST. Massive job loss, stocks get smoked yet again, hard earned real wealth disappears, people that otherwise should be enjoying peak earning years are losing homes, moving back in with elderly parents, having to take secondary crap jobs to make ends meet. It's been VERY rough for millions and millions of people. Not to mention the rank corruption of some wall st types, the ponzi scheme guys, politicians lining their pockets and those of their cronies all while wrecking localities, bankrupting municipalities and crushing the people that had devoted a lifetime to making those places work in the first place.

So there's one side of the coin. Who's the candidate that is NOT a part of that crap? Someone picked by George Will or the others in the K Street club? Bush? (though I personally would have been okay with that, grudgingly). Clearly not. Those are the guys that never so much as made it out the gate.

Then further, we turn on our telly, and what do we see in response to some relatively mild adversity? We are INUNDATED with more schit than one can stomach by the kids of those mentioned above- The most self entitled, self absorbed, me, me, lookame generation to ever soil the soil of this great land. They are unapologetically chasing a socialist so perhaps they will give them all the free schit they feel they are entitled to, simply by showing up one day.
If their parents have been staggered by investment loss, home values collapsing, insurance going through the roof, stagnant wages and everything else of late, they want to have Government provide it all instead. And when that doesn't happen? They WHINE. They sit-in. They demand "safe-spaces", they refuse to even entertain opinions that might make them feel uncomfy in their onesies. They somehow have an inherent RIGHT to anything they deem worthy. If you say, "uhhh, no, there's no 'right' to that", you are deemed a "hater" and are to be summarily dismissed and destroyed via social media, utubes and whatever other whining vehicle one can find.

The "Tweeners" have had it. Their not settling in and waiting their "turn" while the Boomers pick another flawed candidate to further the corruption and bloat that is endemic in the DeeCee region. Nor will they sit idly by and be told it's now the millennials turn to try their hand at wrecking things even further in their post adolescent angst.

The Tweeners have basically been skipped, or so you'd think if you look at what is supposed to be the 2 competing groups out there trying to drive policy and politics. One group that KNOWS they have completely screwed the pooch, over and over and over again. Squandering in large measure what the Greatest Generation so generously left them. So in their collective guilt they have doubled down on the awful by producing the Gimme Generation that feels socialism is the answer. The collective gasp of the aging hippies is ALL over academia and our campuses etc. both in the Faculty and the students.

Leaving that big ol donut hole in between. That's the pushback we're seeing from those tired of the "We've always done it this way" gang and the "living wage, even though I've not earned bumpass, and free college" collectivists.

There. That's one big asss nutshell, but it's tough to get it all in a message board post.

The tweeners are tired of all of it. Their turn now, not listening to the wreckers or the whiners any more.

Well, while I guess I chronologically fit into the boomers, I've always played by the rules as well and have always thought hippies smelled bad among other unsavory things.

I'm hoping that the tweeners will carry the day as there appear to be too many idiots among the other groups that think money grows on trees and that somehow, the Federal government will take better care of people than they themselves will - even though that has shown to be an abject failure EVERY time it's been attempted.

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:33 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  I'm not sure you've been following this closely.

I've covered this ad nauseum for months now in other threads...I'm not going to rehash it again here. Look me up when the investigation is over.

If this were a Snowden or Petraeus or Assange or Manning....there would be people ready to execute them. And they would be in a cell already.

I think you know that.

Didn't the people you listed ACTUALLY release classified information?

You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I've covered this ad nauseum for months now in other threads...I'm not going to rehash it again here. Look me up when the investigation is over.

If this were a Snowden or Petraeus or Assange or Manning....there would be people ready to execute them. And they would be in a cell already.

I think you know that.

Didn't the people you listed ACTUALLY release classified information?

You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  If this were a Snowden or Petraeus or Assange or Manning....there would be people ready to execute them. And they would be in a cell already.

I think you know that.

Didn't the people you listed ACTUALLY release classified information?

You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

(02-28-2016 09:59 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  Didn't the people you listed ACTUALLY release classified information?

You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

Did you just seriously go full Redwingtom on him?

(02-28-2016 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 09:59 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

Did you just seriously go full Redwingtom on him?

If you are saying that Redwingtom likes to verify information , then I will say yes.

You may want top try it sometime.

(02-28-2016 10:06 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 09:59 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

Did you just seriously go full Redwingtom on him?

If you are saying that Redwingtom likes to verify information , then I will say yes.

You may want top try it sometime.

Aren't you adorable.

No, when you go full Redwingtom it means you attack the source/link as "not being good enough". The fact you demanded a reputable news source tells me whatever link is offered, will immediately be deemed "not good enough".

(02-28-2016 10:23 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 10:06 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 09:59 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

Did you just seriously go full Redwingtom on him?

If you are saying that Redwingtom likes to verify information , then I will say yes.

You may want top try it sometime.

Aren't you adorable.

No, when you go full Redwingtom it means you attack the source/link as "not being good enough". The fact you demanded a reputable news source tells me whatever link is offered, will immediately be deemed "not good enough".

that's SOP for "link demanders". despite the Internet being obviously at their fingertips, they're constantly insisting that someone do their homework for them.

I believe that they demand links because they know they've lost the argument, and want to change the subject - which, typically, becomes the relative merit of the news source. I ignore the link demanders. if they can't use google, then they have much bigger problems than I can help them with.

(11-13-2015 06:52 PM)Hitch Wrote:  

(11-13-2015 04:08 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(11-13-2015 02:19 PM)Hitch Wrote:  If trump or carson wins the nomination, Hillary might as well start picking out her cabinet.

Trump will crush Hillary.

uh huh...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...-5491.html

I just want to point out something interesting from this link. Yes, it shows Clinton ahead by 2.8 points "currently". But since May of last year Trump has closed the gap from a high of 24 points down to 2.8. We still have a while to go...

(02-28-2016 10:41 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  

(11-13-2015 06:52 PM)Hitch Wrote:  

(11-13-2015 04:08 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(11-13-2015 02:19 PM)Hitch Wrote:  If trump or carson wins the nomination, Hillary might as well start picking out her cabinet.

Trump will crush Hillary.

uh huh...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...-5491.html

I just want to point out something interesting from this link. Yes, it shows Clinton ahead by 2.8 points "currently". But since May of last year Trump has closed the gap from a high of 24 points down to 2.8. We still have a while to go...

pray for an indictment after the convention.

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 06:02 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 05:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:41 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 04:37 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I've covered this ad nauseum for months now in other threads...I'm not going to rehash it again here. Look me up when the investigation is over.

If this were a Snowden or Petraeus or Assange or Manning....there would be people ready to execute them. And they would be in a cell already.

I think you know that.

Didn't the people you listed ACTUALLY release classified information?

You are trying to walk a very thin line that isn't supported in law.

Any private server attached to the internet that you dump above Top Secret info onto where its not supposed to be....is considered a release.

Do you have a link to support that? Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

yeah, google.com

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  Do you have a link to support that?

I don't need a link, I was subject to the law for 25 years and I know how it works.

Quote:Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

How do you know that?

By the way, it's not classified because of what the handling instructions say, it's classified because of content. So removing the classification indicia does not remove the classification and is in fact a violation of law.

Trump said this morning if he doesn't win the primary, he will run third party.

Happy Days are here again !

(02-29-2016 10:00 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Trump said this morning if he doesn't win the primary, he will run third party.

So Trump, Bernie & Cruz ?

(02-29-2016 10:14 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(02-29-2016 10:00 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Trump said this morning if he doesn't win the primary, he will run third party.

So Trump, Bernie & Cruz ?

Wow, what a trio.

Which would be a Comrade Bernie victory, of course. Unless Bloomberg joined in to attract the center-leaners (relatively speaking) from the Democrats and Independents. It'd really throw the whole 270-to-win thing into a maelstrom, which would be funny to watch.

(02-29-2016 09:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  Do you have a link to support that?

I don't need a link, I was subject to the law for 25 years and I know how it works.

Quote:Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

How do you know that?

By the way, it's not classified because of what the handling instructions say, it's classified because of content. So removing the classification indicia does not remove the classification and is in fact a violation of law.

And you still don't have ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE THAT THIS WAS DONE!

(02-28-2016 10:23 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 10:06 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 01:36 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-28-2016 09:59 AM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 08:06 AM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  You do realize Clinton had people remove the classified headers on some docs so that the state department server would stop blocking them. Also, a document is classified not at the time of marking it so, but at the time that the info therein could be deemed classified. Moreover, since the Sec of State is one of the privileged few that can deem docs classified, the knowledge of their classification is imputed to her. Contrast with Colin Powell where the information was treated as not confidential for a significant time until a change in policy/strategy/influence made it necessary to mark the documents as classified.

Do you actually have a link to a reputable news source to so I can realize?

Did you just seriously go full Redwingtom on him?

If you are saying that Redwingtom likes to verify information , then I will say yes.

You may want top try it sometime.

Aren't you adorable.

No, when you go full Redwingtom it means you attack the source/link as "not being good enough". The fact you demanded a reputable news source tells me whatever link is offered, will immediately be deemed "not good enough".

I'll let you in on a little history of my time here DC1.

From the moment I got here, pretty much anything I posted from either Huffpo, TPM, Mother Jones, etc. was met with a laugh about the source. It was rarely a reply that continued information citing that the source had incorrect information. In fact, I would get this even when one of those sources were actually just reprinting a Reuters or AP story! It was ridiculous.

So, yeah, I'm going with the "they started it" defense.

So my initial response was to start doing the same thing to others. However, over time I realized this was wrong and I curtailed it quite severely. And now, I rarely use this tactic. With the exception of anything from Fox Nation, WND, or Infowars and Alex Jones. Which I hope we can all agree are just batshit crazy. Much like the fact that I don't use Daily Kos, DU or Politicususa for any of my sources.

And when I post links now, I go out of my way to look for corroborating sources...and I use them instead of Huffpo, TPM or MJ.

So in this case, all DC was looking for was a solid source and not something from the likes of Infowars. Mainly because the claim by pharaoh0 is just ridiculous. There has not been one shred of evidence found that Hillary or her staff removed any classified labels. None.

And I can guarantee you that if this evidence is presented, I and DC will review the evidence and comment on it alone and not the source.

(02-29-2016 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-29-2016 09:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 07:56 AM)dcCid Wrote:  Do you have a link to support that?

I don't need a link, I was subject to the law for 25 years and I know how it works.

Quote:Regardless no thing that was classified top secret at the time was dumped on the server.

How do you know that?
By the way, it's not classified because of what the handling instructions say, it's classified because of content. So removing the classification indicia does not remove the classification and is in fact a violation of law.

And you still don't have ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE THAT THIS WAS DONE!

Actually there is, inferentially. There is no way for what happened to have happened without that.

I realize that you don't understand the process and for that reason you don't comprehend this. But I think everybody on here who has been involved in OPSEC and COMSEC understands this implicitly. I'd be really interested if someone familiar with the procedures could provide a plausible explanation of how we could get to the situation that has been reported without this having happened.

I'd be interested in your taking a shot past it for that matter, just so I could have some better understanding of how you are failing to comprehend the process.