Jump to content

TahoeHorn

banned
  • Posts

    617
  • Joined

Everything posted by TahoeHorn

  1. My argument is that we can do without the massive diversity and inclusion bureaucracy - that it's hurting the university. That's the only argumenty I'm making.
  2. None of my proposals have anything to do with party. The first two apply to the New York legislature, Germany and French regions just as much as the US Congress. The Third doesn't change anything; it enshrines an important rule we have.
  3. We have a voter suppression campaign in Alabama. It is designed to get the supporters of the current Governor to stay home in the June 5 primary. It has two thrusts. - Ivey is gay - Ivey is an alcoholic Both charges are questionable. Here it is: https://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2018/05/patricia_todds_gay_accusations.html https://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2018/02/tommy_battle_gov_kay_ivey_at_c.html Most all voter suppression works this way.
  4. There is a problem in politics with a certain type of simple-minded thinking. It is that people interpret, or at least characterize, constructive criticism as total opposition. For example if somebody thinks we spend too much on a defense procurement they are said to oppose national security. Or if they argue that spending a gazillion dollars on bullshit university bureaucracy, then they oppose the stated mission of the bureaucracy. This is one reason why costs spin out of control. The things that make UT great are not spending tens of millions on bullshit bureaucracies. On this thread the quality of the arguments in favor of the big bureaucracy are appalling. They consist of personal attacks and the type of simple-minded argument described above. There is no argument explaining why we need the big bureaucracy.
  5. You are wrong. You need to check your facts.
  6. I never said that. Not even close.
  7. I support this. I don't support vast bureaucracies with Deans of Diversity and Inclusion. Berkeley needs one person at $70K to go around talking to high school kids. They don't need a $20 MM budget with a zillion programs.
  8. Berkeley spends $20 million per year on the office of diversity and inclusion. For 40,000 students that $500 per head per year. That's not how I'd spend $500 if I were a student.
  9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prudence_Farrow
  10. Is UT being ruined? https://www.city-journal.org/html/hard-left-ut-15904.html
  11. It has been under investigation for some time.
  12. A lot of people (maybe everybody) create their own facts because of prejudices.
  13. I'll let you in on two little secrets: 1. All negative advertising is designed principally to suppress the vote of the opponent. For example, talking about an opponent who "voted against Social Security" isn't designed to get votes for the advertiser. It's designed to lose votes for his opponent. 2. Most/much advertising is negative. It's not a rare thing.
  14. I speculated some time back that somebody was feeding Avenatti this info. I'll speculate a possibility that Mueller wanted to put a stop to Avenatti's illegal use of FINCEN info, and somebody in that crowd freaked when things disappeared on them.
  15. Off topic but related: There are other ways to leak besides bringing your story to the press. I'm sure Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee would be interested. If the documents were pulled for good reason then they could keep it secret. If you take the position that no one in power can be trusted you'd just as well fade into Bolivian.
  16. It's very plausible that somebody at the heart of the investigation (in this case Mueller) wanted to investigate the problem confidentially, and had the pull to take it out of a database with 10,000 LEO looking at it who did not need to know about it for their investigations. I'm sure there is a formal procedure for doing such a thing. It either happened that way or it didn't (e.g. somebody up to no good did something illegal to protest Trump). I'll wait for the facts.
  17. Somebody needs to go to jail. It will be very interesting to see if the removal of the reports was legal.
  18. Somebody needs to go to jail, especially if the SAR was removed from the FINCEN database when it should not have been. If it was removed properly the leaker should be in trouble.
  19. I come to this site to be amused, and I'm not disappointed.
  20. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/16/takeaways-primary-elections-590954
  21. Do you have any thoughts on when Mueller should not release explosive info? I think it would be terribly bad form to release explosive info between Sept 1 and Election Day. I think he'll follow good form.
  22. In case some of you are interested in the opinions of the Alliance for Justice: https://www.afj.org/our-work/nominees They are perhaps the preeminent Lefty group advocating Lefty judges, and trashing Trump nominees. For example read about St. Eve and Scudder who were confirmed yesterday unanimously.
  23. He shouldn't. I 100% support Mueller. He's doing it right. But some observers think he's shown us a lot. He hasn't. And some think he has nothing. And they have no basis to conclude that.
×
×
  • Create New...