Random Politics & Religion #09

Better prepare yourself too then. You are already as crazy as Nik sometimes.

Farnsworth: You can't just waltz into the Central Bureaucracy. It's a tangled web of red tape and regulations. I've never been but a friend of mine went completely mad trying to find the washroom there.
Leela: Then we'll need a guide. Someone who's been there before.
Farnsworth: Oh, I've been there. Lots of times!

The right way to handle it is to let the next administration pay it up,

Not really an argument for Trump.

And I propose the inverse is true.

Which is why we're all bickering and nitpicking over which pile of ***to eat.

Such a Bush supporter thing to say!

If I'm going to eat ***, it better have some leftover steak in it!

Hey, you were the one who said nobody is arguing for a candidate! I'm picking the pill of ***to eat that doesn't have corn in it!

You are already as crazy as Nik sometimes.

Oh c'mon now...nobody is that crazy... or stupid.

And should... at some point in the future... he ever get here let's not pretend be'll be able to turn it off and on...

In 1998, fifteen former colleagues and I — eight Republican and eight Democrat former U.S. Senators — co-authored a letter to the Senate, that was intended to dissuade what appeared at the time to be a post Cold War zeal to expand the NATO alliance, even as we were building new relationships with Russia. Along with the others who signed, I knew the subject well after serving from 1987-1990 as Assistant Secretary General for Defense Support at NATO.

To put that letter in perspective, both then and now, it should be noted that when the Cold War ended, the mission of NATO – a 16 nation alliance formed at the end of WWII specifically to provide collective security against the Soviet Union (Warsaw Pact) — was both successful and complete. NATO was no longer justified under its original mandate.

The proper path would have been to create a new treaty outlining a new purpose for the alliance, not just to keep the club together. The EU, including its U.S. Ambassador, was already present in Europe, and some in the EU also had a military alliance created by the Treaty of Rome. Multiple layers of government doing the same tasks is nothing more than bureaucracy.

So, that 1998 letter came to mind recently after hearing members of the media and self-appointed policy experts blanching at the Republican presidential nominee’s suggestion that NATO might be obsolete in its current composition, and that its 28 member nations should meet their commitments of two percent of GDP for defense spending.

The response from Beltway opinion was bemusement, along with claims that this was the “first mainstream presidential candidate to ever suggest that the United States withdraw from NATO,” though that’s a rather obvious distortion of what Mr. Trump said. More recently, President Obama called Mr. Trump’s views on NATO “an indication of the lack of preparedness that he has been displaying when it comes to foreign policy,” without a hint of irony.

When Mr. Trump suggested earlier that he thought he “could get along well with Vladimir Putin,” many in the establishment media and even a number of our fellow Republicans took issue with the statement — as if it is an imperative that any presumptive president should reflexively denounce the Russian president, even when he could very well end up as a necessary partner in regional conflicts. As an email scandal has erupted at the opening of the Democratic National Convention, the official Democrat response has been to place the blame directly on Moscow.
Mr. Trump’s notably more diplomatic response reminded me of one of the 1998 letter’s more prescient lines: “we seem to take rather cavalierly the opportunity at long last to build a friendship with Russia.” There was a brief window after 1991 when the former Soviet Union opened up to the West. William Perry, who was President Clinton’s Defense Secretary from 1994 to 1997, recently recounted this opening during a speech in London: “In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at the actions that Putin has taken. But in the early years I have to say that the United States deserves much of the blame. Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when Nato started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia.”

At that time, America’s standard strategy of “forward defense” was already being displaced by the use of smaller, more nimble forces. NATO itself had long recognized the need to adjust to a changing threat matrix, reducing U.S. forces in Europe by two-thirds between 1992 and 1994 and establishing a Rapid Reaction Force to provide more flexibility.

More recently, when answering a question about whether the U.S. would respond if Russia attacked one of the smaller NATO allies like Estonia or Latvia, Mr. Trump said, “If they fulfill their obligations to us, the answer is ‘yes.’” President Obama demurred, saying, “There is a big difference between challenging our European allies to keep up their defense spending, particularly at a time when Russia’s been more aggressive, and saying to them, ‘You know what? We might not abide by the central tenant of the most important alliance in the history of the world.'”

Yet “challenging” NATO allies to pay their contractually-obligated 2 percent of GDP for defense has thus far failed, as only five of the 28 member countries are currently meeting that obligation. But the vastly more perilous side of the contractual-obligation — putting NATO members’ troops in harm’s way — is expected to be followed without question.

But this is also not a new problem with our NATO partners. Back in 1984, we passed legislation which, “Mandate[d] repayment of NATO debt before certain further U.S. appropriations would be freed.” NATO owed U.S. government over $250 million in back payments even back then.

When my former colleagues and I came together to write that bipartisan letter back in 1998, we could see that NATO had the potential to become less of a bulwark than a tripwire if it continued its trajectory of ill-advised expansion. Our question was, “How can we admit some and exclude others without creating instability and tensions?” If the goal was stability in Europe, how, we asked, “can there be stability if Russia is destabilized by expansion?”

Today, I find that the reluctance to question the role of NATO in its current form is far more dangerous and short-sighted than a pragmatic proposal to reevaluate its efficacy in light of changing conditions. In his autobiographical “Waging Peace, 1956-1961: The White House Years,” President Eisenhower, noting his own concerns, expressed to JFK during his transition that, “America is carrying far more than her share of free world defense.” Mr. Trump’s suggestions that NATO’s members share its costs more equitably and that its doctrine be adjusted to focus more on terrorism, where the U.S. and Russia’s threat horizons converge, seems more realistic and wise in the light of history.

ASBURY PARK, NJ—Saying their findings were consistent across all demographic groups, researchers at Rasmussen Reports published the results of a new poll Friday revealing that four out of five Americans would just *** destroy a pan of brownies. “We found that if given the opportunity, 80 percent of the individuals we surveyed would completely demolish a tray of freshly baked brownies, scarfing down every sweet morsel without hesitation,” said Rasmussen statistician Jennifer Tracy, who added that if respondents had a glass of milk, the vast majority would tear through an entire 8-inch-by-10-inch pan of warm, chewy brownies in 10 minutes flat. “Among those Americans who would flat-out wreck an entire plate of brownies before anyone else even got a chance to touch them, we found that three quarters would not stop eating the baked fudgy dessert until there was nothing left behind but a few crumbs, and roughly half would continue housing the whole damn pan of chocolatey treats even when they started feeling sick.” The poll also found that an equal percentage of Americans would burn the ***out of their mouths attempting to wolf down hot brownies straight from the oven.

*** brownies.....oh wait, that's racist!

http://www.theonion.com/article/new-poll-finds-80-americans-would-just-***-des-53462

This is the kind of hard-hitting journalism I'm all about.

The mayor of Fairfax, Va., a wealthy Washington suburb, was arrested on charges of distributing methamphetamines as part of an alleged "meth-for-sex" scheme, Fairfax County Police said Friday.

Mayor Richard "Scott" Silverthorne, 50, who is also a substitute teacher for Fairfax County public schools, was arrested Thursday after he allegedly provided meth to undercover officers who met him at a local hotel, police said....

Stockton Mayor Anthony Silva was arrested Thursday at his youth camp on charges that he played strip poker with a minor and provided youngsters with alcohol, according to authorities.

Silva was taken into custody the day after Amador County prosecutors filed criminal charges against him based on evidence uncovered by the FBI.

The 42-year-old mayor stands accused of one felony count of making an illegal recording and one misdemeanor count each of providing alcohol to a minor, cruelty to a child by endangering their health and contributing to the delinquency of a minor....

Fed up with what he says is the governor’s failure to properly fund his overwhelmed office, the state’s lead public defender ordered Gov. Jay Nixon this week to represent a poor person in Cole County this month.

Michael Barrett said he was using a provision of state law that allows him in extraordinary circumstances to delegate legal representation “to any member of the state bar of Missouri.” He’s starting with the state’s highest-profile lawyer: Nixon.

Barrett says the governor has repeatedly declined to give the public defender system the money it requests and is withholding promised funding increases this year.

“Providing counsel to poor people who face incarceration is the obligation of the state. It’s not fair to go after private attorneys who are trying to pay the rent when they had nothing to do with contributing to this,” Barrett said in an interview Wednesday.

Barrett never exercised this power before because he thought it was wrong to place the burden of public cases on private attorneys “who have in no way contributed to the current crisis,” he wrote in a letter to the governor dated Tuesday.

“However, given the extraordinary circumstances that compel me to entertain any and all avenues for relief, it strikes me that I should begin with the one attorney in the state who not only created this problem, but is in a unique position to address it,” Barrett wrote, referring to Nixon, a Democrat who was a four-term attorney general before becoming governor....

You know, it's kindof sad where the mayor is also a substitute teacher at the same time.

I mean, if your town/township is big enough for public office elections, by gravy, have those public offices paid and full time staffed!

You know, it's kindof sad where the mayor is also a substitute teacher at the same time.

I mean, if your town/township is big enough for public office elections, by gravy, have those public offices paid and full time staffed!

I live just outside a pair of small towns. Population of both is under 5,000 combined. Each has a part time paid mayor and a part time unpaid city council. One has a full time staff member.

The town of Fairfax has about 24,000 population.

Nah. The mayoral the entire time I was growing up was a great guy who did his mayoral duties and made his required public appearances and spent the rest of his time running his lawnmower/tractor sales/repair shop. Great guy. Was sad when he passed away.

I live just outside a pair of small towns. Population of both is under 5,000 combined. Each has a part time paid mayor and a part time unpaid city council. One has a full time staff member.

The town of Fairfax has about 24,000 population.

Obama sends 400 million to the wonderful nation of Iran. Nothing to see here folks move along.

I'm picking the pill of ***to eat that doesn't have corn in it!

See, he should have given them weapons instead so they could sell it for money that way, with the vague promise of getting hostages returned. It worked for the president back in 1985.

(CNN)A machete-wielding man shouting "Allahu Akbar" was shot and killed after wounding two police officers Saturday in the Belgian city of Charleroi, police said via Twitter.
The assault occurred outside a police station in the center of Charleroi, which is about 30 miles south of Brussels.

The armed man penetrated a secure zone and wounded the officers, who suffered deep cuts around their faces, according to Radio Télévision Belge Francophone (RTBF). One officer was transported to a hospital, the other was less seriously wounded.
The attacker was shot by a third officer on the scene and died later at a hospital, according to RTBF.
Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel, on Twitter, said he was closely monitoring the situation: "I condemn strongly the attack in Charleroi. My thoughts are with the victims, their relatives and police officers."
A security perimeter was set up around boulevard Pierre Mayence.

(CNN)An Iranian nuclear scientist who once claimed he was kidnapped by the CIA has been executed after being accused of spying for the United States.
Shahram Amiri had been in custody in Iran since 2010.

"Shahram Amiri had access to the system's top secrets and had gotten connected with our number one enemy the Great Satan," Iranian judicial spokesman Hojjat al-Eslam Mehdi Mohseni-Ejehei told reporters Sunday, according to state news agency IRNA.
Amiri's case had been reviewed by the Iranian high court, which upheld the conviction, according to Mohseni-Ejehei. "The Iranian High Court reviewed this decision with extreme care given the allegations of espionage," he said.
The charge of treason in Iran could result in anything between 10 years in prison and the death penalty, Mohseni-Ejehei explained. But since the beginning of Amiri's case, all lower courts have ruled to execute, he added, according to IRNA.

Amiri vanished in 2009 during a religious pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia. Tehran accused Washington of abducting him -- an accusation the U.S. denied.
A year later, videos surfaced online showing a man claiming to be the scientist. In them he denied being a defector and claimed to have been hiding out from CIA operatives in the U.S. state of Virginia.
In a subsequent video, however, he said he was living freely in Arizona.

Two weeks later, on July 14, 2010, CNN reported that Amiri had returned to Tehran after going to Iran's interest section at the embassy of Pakistan in Washington. He repeated his claim that he was kidnapped by American intelligence operatives.
In an interview with Iranian state-run Press TV, Amiri said he faced "psychological warfare and pressure that are much worse than being in prison."
But U.S. officials at the time said Amiri had defected voluntarily and provided "useful information to the United States," a claim supported by emails sent to Hilary Clinton -- then Secretary of State -- and released by the U.S. State Department last year.

In July last year, Iran agreed to rein in its nuclear program following a landmark agreement -- called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action -- with the P5+1 group of world powers, including the United States, UK, France, China and Russia plus Germany.


Under the terms of the deal, Iran would reduce its uranium stockpile by roughly 98%, phase out its centrifuges over the next 15 years, limit research activities, allow heightened inspections and ship spent fuel outside of the country.
Iran nuclear deal one year out: The good, bad, and ugly
And in return, many of the crippling international sanction against the country would be lifted.
Critics warned the terms of the agreement negotiated with Iran -- essentially designed to thwart the development of nuclear weapons -- are time-restricted, meaning the international community, to a certain extent, is kicking the can down the road, hoping that Iran will not want to risk being frozen out economically once again.