36 ms·

Forget the public, why don't elected officials themselves act more in simple self-interest? Not all of them are bankrolled by the military-industrial complex, y

Forget the public, why don't elected officials themselves act more in simple self-interest? Not all of them are bankrolled by the military-industrial complex, yet not a one ever utters a peep about the trillions we spend on evil security-theater bullshit. No, killing lots of people in the Middle East does not make us safer, which anyone on any of the relevant Congressional committees could tell you. Most of them would be happy to spend those trillions on other priorities. None of them, with the partial exception of e.g. Rep. Gabbard, ever say a thing about this. Why is that?

playeren 7y ago
I would guess that people in general are fearful of reprecussions when the antagonists are 'better connected', 'higher ranked' or 'richer'. Often the scariest threats are those implied.
- fsagx 7y ago
  In a moment of accidental candor on Maddow's show, Senator Schumer lets you know who he thinks really runs DC... "Let me tell you: You take on the intellegence community and they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QbADuhhu7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QbADuhhu7w
  - playeren 7y ago
    The possibility of a secret police state scares me more than any bombs or shootings ever could. It is absolutely an existential threat to freedom, because as part of its nature, it is able to quell dissent, and largely control the flow of information "in the name of freedom". Hypothetically, of course.
InvaderFizz 7y ago
There are plenty that do. They end up making waves in the libertarian and conspiracy communities and are generally blacklisted by the mainstream press. The two communities above are receptive to messages about government overreach and corruption, the general public seems not to care much. I suspect this is largely because libertarians and conspiracy theorists (which do overlap to some extent) are already skeptical of government "goodness" and anything that feeds that skepticism is easily accepted. The general public places government on a higher moral plane of existence and any challenge to that is met with skepticism and excuses. The end result is that those that speak out/expose the government are sidelined and punished through smears or government action. See: Attacks on Gabbard, Ron Paul, Snowden, Bill Binney, Assange, etc. It always fascinated me that the discussion of the leaked Clinton emails conveniently focused on the speculative source and motivation, never on the content of the emails with valid DKIM signatures. There is literally no question that those emails are real and unaltered.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago
  > It always fascinated me that the discussion of the leaked Clinton emails conveniently focused on the speculative source and motivation, never on the content of the emails with valid DKIM signatures Because there was nothing in them that painted Clinton in a bad light. They were normal boring emails that were sensationalized in conspiracy blogs but recognized as normal boring emails by professional journalists.
  - drak0n1c 7y ago
    There were multiple emails from journalists at supposedly neutral reputable outlets asking the campaign to check and edit their articles before publishing. Also in an email Donna Brazile of CNN agreed to forward the debate questions to the campaign before the debate. If the act of leaking emails about media collusion is a "bad" thing that influenced the election in one way, so can the media collusion itself be a "bad" thing that influenced the election the other way.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      Was there ever any evidence that having the questions is actually dirty pool, or was that more an instance of "ask and ye shall receive, and nobody else asked?"
    - lern_too_spel 7y ago
      > There were multiple emails from journalists at supposedly neutral reputable outlets asking the campaign to check and edit their articles before publishing Despite what the conspiracy bloggers would have you believe, this is standard fact checking. If the conspiracy bloggers did that, they wouldn't have anything to report. > Also in an email Donna Brazile of CNN agreed to forward the debate questions to the campaign before the debate. This was heavily covered mainstream news and resulted in CNN firing Brazile. Brazile also assisted the Sanders campaign as the Sanders campaign has admitted, but we don't have the Sanders campaign emails to see how much. https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303868-sanders-aide-defends-donna-brazile-after-leaked-emails?amp&ampcf=1 https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/3038...

playeren 7y ago

I would guess that people in general are fearful of reprecussions when the antagonists are 'better connected', 'higher ranked' or 'richer'. Often the scariest threats are those implied.

fsagx 7y ago
In a moment of accidental candor on Maddow's show, Senator Schumer lets you know who he thinks really runs DC... "Let me tell you: You take on the intellegence community and they have six ways from Sunday of getting back at you." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QbADuhhu7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QbADuhhu7w
- playeren 7y ago
  The possibility of a secret police state scares me more than any bombs or shootings ever could. It is absolutely an existential threat to freedom, because as part of its nature, it is able to quell dissent, and largely control the flow of information "in the name of freedom". Hypothetically, of course.

InvaderFizz 7y ago

There are plenty that do. They end up making waves in the libertarian and conspiracy communities and are generally blacklisted by the mainstream press. The two communities above are receptive to messages about government overreach and corruption, the general public seems not to care much. I suspect this is largely because libertarians and conspiracy theorists (which do overlap to some extent) are already skeptical of government "goodness" and anything that feeds that skepticism is easily accepted. The general public places government on a higher moral plane of existence and any challenge to that is met with skepticism and excuses. The end result is that those that speak out/expose the government are sidelined and punished through smears or government action. See: Attacks on Gabbard, Ron Paul, Snowden, Bill Binney, Assange, etc. It always fascinated me that the discussion of the leaked Clinton emails conveniently focused on the speculative source and motivation, never on the content of the emails with valid DKIM signatures. There is literally no question that those emails are real and unaltered.

lern_too_spel 7y ago
> It always fascinated me that the discussion of the leaked Clinton emails conveniently focused on the speculative source and motivation, never on the content of the emails with valid DKIM signatures Because there was nothing in them that painted Clinton in a bad light. They were normal boring emails that were sensationalized in conspiracy blogs but recognized as normal boring emails by professional journalists.
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  There were multiple emails from journalists at supposedly neutral reputable outlets asking the campaign to check and edit their articles before publishing. Also in an email Donna Brazile of CNN agreed to forward the debate questions to the campaign before the debate. If the act of leaking emails about media collusion is a "bad" thing that influenced the election in one way, so can the media collusion itself be a "bad" thing that influenced the election the other way.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    Was there ever any evidence that having the questions is actually dirty pool, or was that more an instance of "ask and ye shall receive, and nobody else asked?"
  - lern_too_spel 7y ago
    > There were multiple emails from journalists at supposedly neutral reputable outlets asking the campaign to check and edit their articles before publishing Despite what the conspiracy bloggers would have you believe, this is standard fact checking. If the conspiracy bloggers did that, they wouldn't have anything to report. > Also in an email Donna Brazile of CNN agreed to forward the debate questions to the campaign before the debate. This was heavily covered mainstream news and resulted in CNN firing Brazile. Brazile also assisted the Sanders campaign as the Sanders campaign has admitted, but we don't have the Sanders campaign emails to see how much. https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/303868-sanders-aide-defends-donna-brazile-after-leaked-emails?amp&ampcf=1 https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/3038...