Jeb Bush vs Hillary

[JollyRoger]

Republicans react badly when told email records (required by law) don't exist.

Like Walker, Christie, Bush, Jindal, Perry, and Romney?

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-email-flap-creates-awkward-gop-silence-115781.html

 

[Sommerswerd]

He just apologized according to CNN so he would be back in the game except...

He had presidential chances? How?

He is a Black Republican, and therefore has nearly zero chance of getting nominated.

Well, he was a rich white ivy league educated 6ft tall male between the ages of 45 to 70 who has previously been a governor/senator/vice president, but then he made a dumb statement so now he's done.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Most bosses know that an happy worker is a productive one, so they know that if they treat their workers fairly that the workers shouldn't complain.

You must have had only a string of perfect bosses if you think somehow this view negates the need for unions altogether.

 

[sophie]

Most bosses know that an happy worker is a productive one, so they know that if they treat their workers fairly that the workers shouldn't complain.

Happy Workers and fair treatment, right:
http://gawker.com/5805975/life-in-the-bulls-eye-target-employees-speak

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Walmart#Employee_and_labor_relations

http://www.salon.com/2014/02/23/worse_than_wal_mart_amazons_sick_brutality_and_secret_history_of_ruthlessly_intimidating_workers/

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Most bosses know that an happy worker is a productive one, so they know that if they treat their workers fairly that the workers shouldn't complain.

More correctly, that should read 'owners of capital'

You must have had only a string of perfect bosses if you think somehow this view negates the need for unions altogether.

The union is necessary because the 'boss' has been separated from the responsibility of ownership of capital. When ownership is represented by a designated negotiator who is not genuinely invested labor needs to be represented by a designated negotiator as well.

When the owner has to look his employees in the face on a regular basis he doesn't have to be 'perfect' to be held to a reasonable standard. When the owner is a nebulous cloud of stockholders that has not the first clue among them what is actually happening in their establishment there is no limitation on their perfidy.

 

[onejayhawk]

More correctly, that should read 'owners of capital'

No. It was correct already. Bosses often are not owners and vice versa.

The union is necessary because the 'boss' has been separated from the responsibility of ownership of capital. When ownership is represented by a designated negotiator who is not genuinely invested labor needs to be represented by a designated negotiator as well.

When the owner has to look his employees in the face on a regular basis he doesn't have to be 'perfect' to be held to a reasonable standard. When the owner is a nebulous cloud of stockholders that has not the first clue among them what is actually happening in their establishment there is no limitation on their perfidy.

One of the headaches of being a steward is that Unions are not necessary. If you said "The right to organize" you would be closer. Or, "The threat of a Union is necessary." Unions spend most of their time babysitting malcontents.

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No. It was correct already. Bosses often are not owners and vice versa.



One of the headaches of being a steward is that Unions are not necessary. If you said "The right to organize" you would be closer. Or, "The threat of a Union is necessary." Unions spend most of their time babysitting malcontents.

J

Agreed.

As to the separation of bosses and owners...there may be a hierarchy, but as long as ultimately there is someone in the position of responsible owner at the top things can generally be worked out. Once ownership has to be organized for collective bargaining and there is no one in particular being responsible on their side everything in labor relations becomes difficult, and inevitably labor has to be organized for collective bargaining as well.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The union is necessary because the 'boss' has been separated from the responsibility of ownership of capital. When ownership is represented by a designated negotiator who is not genuinely invested labor needs to be represented by a designated negotiator as well.

When the owner has to look his employees in the face on a regular basis he doesn't have to be 'perfect' to be held to a reasonable standard. When the owner is a nebulous cloud of stockholders that has not the first clue among them what is actually happening in their establishment there is no limitation on their perfidy.

I've had plenty of restaurant jobs where I did in fact look the owner in the face as he continued to make miserable conditions for all of us. There is no reasonable standard to hold an owner to in 'at will' employment states where you can be fired for any reason at any time.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I've had plenty of restaurant jobs where I did in fact look the owner in the face as he continued to make miserable conditions for all of us. There is no reasonable standard to hold an owner to in 'at will' employment states where you can be fired for any reason at any time.

Sure there is. Unfortunately the standard is whatever minimum keeps the place staffed adequately. All it takes is one guy who looks the owner/boss in the face and says [deleted] and walks out at the height of a rush. Assuming there is a strong general malaise the added stress of facing the rush shorthanded leads to a whole lot of "look what you've gotten us into now [deleted]" from people who the owner really has to at least temporarily appease, and they get a message that their own livelihood/business is at risk.

Put that same situation in a corporately owned operation where there is no responsible owner and you have a jerk who just shrugs and says 'I have to work here too, we all just need to suck it up', and the place either continues along the same miserable path or it doesn't and no one who cares either way is around to know.

 

[Kaitzilla]

If any of Hillary Clinton's thousands of emails as Secretary of State were damaging to the United States or her election chances, I'm sure Russia and China and their hackers would have mentioned it when donating money to the Clinton Foundation.

Hah, just kidding!
I'm sure her private email password was way stronger than Sarah Palin's email password.
There's no way any foreign country was reading all of our Chief Diplomat's email without the State Department knowing anything about it for 4 years (2009-2013).
If it had happened, we would have had terrible success during those 4 years with all our secret diplomatic positions known and outmaneuvered.

http://gizmodo.com/why-hillary-clintons-homebrew-email-is-a-security-night-1689470576

Spoiler :

I talked to security experts at Kaspersky Lab about how Clinton made herself vulnerable to hackers by exclusively using a homebrew email system, and their answer was basically, how didn't she make herself vulnerable.

"From a technical perspective, a cabinet member using a homemade solution means adding an array of technologies and middlemen through whom the United States government can effectively be severely compromised," Researcher Patrick Nielsen said.

That doesn't sound good at all. Clinton's private email system added third parties into the equation, meaning that a hacker could effectively snoop on US government mail without directly hacking US government servers. Nielsen explained that the domain Clinton used for her private email service—clintonemail.com—is owned by a Florida company called "Perfect Privacy, LLC" and registered to another private company called Network Solutions. The relationship between the two companies is unclear since some details have been masked.

Those are just two third parties in a long line of private companies involved in Clinton sending an email to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, or whomever. According to Nielsen, that email would also probably pass through the DNS servers of worldnic.com, another company owned by Network Solutions, and through a security system owned by McAfee called MX Logic.

How much encryption Clinton was using is unknown, but the McAfee software does support it. Inevitably, each of these companies are potential targets that could give a hacker access to the Secretary of State's email system, again without directly attacking the US government.

Unsurprisingly, there are far fewer gates into Uncle Sam's security system. The US government email servers are crucial resources for a secretary of state — or any public official, really — who is interacting with world leaders and attempting to keep us safe from nuclear war. The State Department's state.gov domain is owned by the federal government and sends traffic through servers used exclusively by the US government, says Nielsen.

The researcher went on to list other ways that Clinton's email service could've been compromised, like typosquatting.

He pointed out that there is another valid domain, clintonmail.com, owned by somebody else with the last name Clinton since 2002 (note the lack of an "e," which is the only difference between it and Hillary Clinton's domain). "How many emails meant for the Secretary of State has the owner of clintonmail.com received?" Nielsen asked, adding that this isn't a problem with .gov domains since only the government can register them. "In short, from a security perspective, using your own email address to conduct official business is a very bad idea, explains Nielsen.

Or, as Electronic Frontier Foundation staff attorney Nate Cardozo put it: "Clinton's decision to forgo the State Department's servers is inexplicable and inexcusable."

Nielsen isn't the only one coming to these conclusions. A team of security researchers spotted gaping security gaps according to a Bloomberg Investigation. Meanwhile, Wired's Andy Greenberg points out how Clinton turned to the private sector for email when NSA-level security like the Einstein Project have been in place to protect intrusions on government networks since 2008.

What makes it even more problematic is that McAfee, one of the private companies involved in Clinton's homebrew email system, might be responsible for a vulnerability that enables man-in-the-middle attacks. Stanford researcher Jonathan Mayer told Wired that "a misconfiguration" led to Clinton's team using a relatively hackable TLS certificate.

She showed up on Saturday Night Live a few nights ago to reassure the public.


Link to video.

Also, does anyone even know what Jeb Bush looks like?
I want to hate him since Florida leads the country in stupid things happening and he was governor there from 1999 to 2007.
But I've never seen his face or heard him talk.

 

[onejayhawk]

It does seem like a death of 1000 cuts with Hillary. The email thing would be a flea bite, except that it is built a decades old pattern of evasive behavior by both Clintons.

OTOH the Democratic pool is only ankle deep. Other than Hillary, only Elizabeth Warren has any stature and she isn't running.

J

 

[Sommerswerd]

It's still just a flea bite... The decade old record you mentioned actually works in her favor. The Clintons have successfully been through so many scandals while always remaining politically powerful and relevant... sex scandals, money scandals, military scandals, drug scandals... So now we have what?... An email scandal?? Please

Unless Hillary goes to jail (ala "Planet" Blagojevich), is Federally indicted, or dies between now and the election, she's winning. Period.

The "death-by-1000-cuts" mantra is just wishful thinking and/or media sensationalism to spice up what is going to be a boooooooring landslide election. What the media wants is an epic clash-of-titans... What they have is Hillary sitting in a chair with the trophy sitting on the desk next to her and we are all just sitting there waiting for her to pick it up at her leisure and give her acceptance speech

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Other than Hillary, only Elizabeth Warren has any stature and she isn't running.

J

Maybe next time sigh

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It does seem like a death of 1000 cuts with Hillary. The email thing would be a flea bite, except that it is built a decades old pattern of evasive behavior by both Clintons.

OTOH the Democratic pool is only ankle deep. Other than Hillary, only Elizabeth Warren has any stature and she isn't running.

J

This is hardly even a papercut. Again, no one cares outside of the Republican Fox News Echo Chamber (TM).


Meanwhile, it has raised several email/accountability issues with potential frontrunners such as Jeb Bush. While I doubt they'll go anywhere either, at least it shows that maintaining this line of attack is a potential double-edge sword.

 

[JollyRoger]

I didn't have texts with that woman.

 

[Cutlass]

Wrong.
Republicans want to heavily regulate or eliminate public sector labor unions.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...R-oppose-collective-bargaining-for-governmen/



We are just repeating history.
http://blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2015/02/28/walker-reagan-and-patco/




100% pay raise!

If FDR himself was aghast at the idea of public unions having collective bargaining, who rammed it through?



And thus the average salary of all federal workers is over $75,000 today.
This will help you get started.
http://www.amazon.com/Plunder-Employee-Treasuries-Controlling-Bankrupting/dp/0984275207

Republicans are fine with private sector labor unions.

Republicans have been trying to destroy private sector unions for decades.

 

[onejayhawk]

This is hardly even a papercut. Again, no one cares outside of the Republican Fox News Echo Chamber (TM).


Meanwhile, it has raised several email/accountability issues with potential frontrunners such as Jeb Bush. While I doubt they'll go anywhere either, at least it shows that maintaining this line of attack is a potential double-edge sword.

A paper cut is a good discription. Nothing is damning, but there has been a steady drip of small issues. This one is possibly a bit more troubling because of her history during Bill's term in office. She will be testifying before the committee twice. Expect a montage of "I don't recall." responses from the 90s. There were dozens.

I didn't have texts with that woman.

Even supporters make jokes about Clinton veracity.

Republicans have been trying to destroy private sector unions for decades.

Not so you would notice. I'm a steward, so I would know. What Republicans have been doing is promoting right to work laws. Walmart has done damage than the Republican party.

J

 

[Cutlass]

A paper cut is a good discription. Nothing is damning, but there has been a steady drip of small issues. This one is possibly a bit more troubling because of her history during Bill's term in office. She will be testifying before the committee twice. Expect a montage of "I don't recall." responses from the 90s. There were dozens.



Even supporters make jokes about Clinton veracity.



Not so you would notice. I'm a steward, so I would know. What Republicans have been doing is promoting right to work laws. Walmart has done damage than the Republican party.

J

Right to work laws have driven millions of Americans out of unions and out of a living wage and into perpetual poverty.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

A paper cut is a good discription. Nothing is damning, but there has been a steady drip of small issues. This one is possibly a bit more troubling because of her history during Bill's term in office. She will be testifying before the committee twice. Expect a montage of "I don't recall." responses from the 90s. There were dozens.

J

And those "I don't recall" responses will echo through FoxNews so people who already wouldn't vote for her can marvel at them and speculate up some mad conspiracies...while everyone else will say "I don't know where I was at 2:17 on the afternoon of May 14, 2008 either...what a stupid question that congressman is asking,"... and change the channel.

 

[RobAnybody]

A paper cut is a good discription. Nothing is damning, but there has been a steady drip of small issues.

The problem from the Republican camps is that their candidates have been taking howitzer blasts for every paper cut Hillary has been taking. Science deniers, "homosexuality is a choice because prisons", #47traitors, being super fat, etc.

This one is possibly a bit more troubling because of her history during Bill's term in office.

Bill's term in office will only help her because women will tend to sympathize with her, & if she pulls in the majority of women, it's over.

Even supporters make jokes about Clinton veracity.

Yes, but supporters will make jokes & yet... remain supporters. Again, see Bill.