Denny Hastert

[yumyumtree]

It doesn't look as if anybody else is going to wade into this one, so I guess I will.

I have two basic thoughts about this.  The first one is what is it about the cover-up mentality?  I have been observing this ever since Watergate happened when I was a teeenager.Sometimes the stuff people do in the process of covering up is more evil than whatever the original thing was. Why do they think they will get away with it?  Well, I suppose to be fair, we don't know about the cases in which they do get away with it, because the cover-up has worked.

The second point is a lot more sensitive because nobody wants to look as if they are blaming the victim.  In this case, however, people can't be blamed for having  a few questions. This guy (the first one) must be in his fifties now. Interesting that he must not have realized how traumatized he was until Hastert started making big money as a lobbyist.  Also notice that much like the Chandler family in the Michael Jackson affair, cashing in was more important than being a good citizen, possibly protecting future victims or bringing a wrongdoer to justice.

[albrecht]

It doesn't look as if anybody else is going to wade into this one, so I guess I will.

I have two basic thoughts about this.  The first one is what is it about the cover-up mentality?  I have been observing this ever since Watergate happened when I was a teeenager.Sometimes the stuff people do in the process of covering up is more evil than whatever the original thing was. Why do they think they will get away with it?  Well, I suppose to be fair, we don't know about the cases in which they do get away with it, because the cover-up has worked.

The second point is a lot more sensitive because nobody wants to look as if they are blaming the victim.  In this case, however, people can't be blamed for having  a few questions. This guy (the first one) must be in his fifties now. Interesting that he must not have realized how traumatized he was until Hastert started making big money as a lobbyist.  Also notice that much like the Chandler family in the Michael Jackson affair, cashing in was more important than being a good citizen, possibly protecting future victims or bringing a wrongdoer to justice.

And IF this a blackmail scheme the "victim" should also be prosecuted- especially the statute of limitations is well over for the original crime. The biggest thing of the whole scandal is the "crime" of structuring, which is ridiculous. If anything it should be the person who got the funds in the payoff, settlement, or blackmail (depending on what it was) who should be prosecuted under the IRS reporting requirements not the person who simply withdrew funds. And, largers, is whether this information was known by other politicians, the government, lobbyists, companies, or foreign governments and used as leveraged for votes and procedural moves in Congress ("political blackmail.")

[yumyumtree]

Yes, a lot of people brought that up.  I don't have enough money for this to be an issue, but another example of rights gradually being eroded,, and banks becoming another arm of the government, but we already knew that, didn't we?

Some hve specualted that something like this happened to Justice Roberts, and this is why he ruled the way he did with Obamacare. I don't, personally.  I think he just thought it was the right way for some reason known only to him.

[albrecht]

Yes, a lot of people brought that up.  I don't have enough money for this to be an issue, but another example of rights gradually being eroded,, and banks becoming another arm of the government, but we already knew that, didn't we?

Some hve specualted that something like this happened to Justice Roberts, and this is why he ruled the way he did with Obamacare. I don't, personally.  I think he just thought it was the right way for some reason known only to him.

If you look at the various scandals in the UK or at the "lolita flights" and parties with that Epstein guy and the list of people who flew or attended them (or other stuff that, occaisionally pops up and is usually covered up or "goes away") there is opportunity for political blackmail. And not just by foreign actors. I won't go full Bill Hicks/Alex Jones (not that they are the same person  ) and say that the President is shown the Zapruder film and asked "any questions?" upon election BUT shading dealings and ESPECIALLY sexual peccadilloes or perversions are great fodder for blackmail.

I would imagine it would less of a Mexican-style "plato o plomo" these days but more nuanced and used even early in careers so by the time they get powerful offices they are already compromised. Example like  1) we got this picture/video/witness of you cheating on your wife (not such a big deal now days but maybe in the past it might have been), screwing a kid, being a fag, etc and 2) we will also donate to your campaign or give you support on xyz bill if you 3) will support this bill or fiscal scheme (usually more nuanced I think, in that, it might simply be support a procedural move, don't vote at all, or even vote the way you told your constituency you would but don't speak against it, etc.) Most is likely just plain old wheeling and dealing and horse trading (you support my bill, I'll support yours, etc) that looks bad (if one looks at the entire system or country) as the amount of power and spending the government has aggrandized but makes "sense," and even good, if one looks at a particular politician's career or local area.

[NowhereInTime]

I wasn't going to wade into this because Speaker Hastert is innocent until proven guilty (cough), but, typical of the Jackboot Jackals lurking these threads, its already into "Deflect Mode". 

"Why, Denny Hastert, the (alleged) Kiddie Fisting, Duggar Family Values Scion of Conservatism isn't the true villain here! No, friends, it's in fact the "victim", who, upon seeing the cashiering opportunity has besmirched the Reviled Good Name of Denny the Teenage Boy Toe Sucking Pederast!"

Typical.  Do anything, Say anything to keep your house of cards together.

Conservative, thy name is Hastert.  Enjoy prison.  Plenty of toes to suck on there. Allegedly.

[SciFiAuthor]

I wasn't going to wade into this because Speaker Hastert is innocent until proven guilty (cough), but, typical of the Jackboot Jackals lurking these threads, its already into "Deflect Mode". 

"Why, Denny Hastert, the (alleged) Kiddie Fisting, Duggar Family Values Scion of Conservatism isn't the true villain here! No, friends, it's in fact the "victim", who, upon seeing the cashiering opportunity has besmirched the Reviled Good Name of Denny the Teenage Boy Toe Sucking Pederast!"

Typical.  Do anything, Say anything to keep your house of cards together.

Conservative, thy name is Hastert.  Enjoy prison.  Plenty of toes to suck on there. Allegedly.

I doubt Hastert will see prison, but he certainly deserves it. I actually found myself cheering Nancy Pelosi today for getting in the way of Obamatrade. I feel dirty after that, but it happened. So where the fuck have you been? It got boring in here for lack of communists to fight with.

[Juan]

Maybe he's been at Seminar Poster Class preparing for the upcoming political season.

I haven't seen where Hastert has been charged with kiddie fisting, but for hiding blackmail payments from the government.  The bigger question is, how did a dedicated public servant become a multi-millionaire on his government pay?

[Catsmile]

Maybe he's been at Seminar Poster Class preparing for the upcoming political season.

I haven't seen where Hastert has been charged with kiddie fisting, but for hiding blackmail payments from the government.  The bigger question is, how did a dedicated public servant become a multi-millionaire on his government pay?

UUUMMM... therez big money in fisting kids?

[albrecht]

I wasn't going to wade into this because Speaker Hastert is innocent until proven guilty (cough), but, typical of the Jackboot Jackals lurking these threads, its already into "Deflect Mode". 

"Why, Denny Hastert, the (alleged) Kiddie Fisting, Duggar Family Values Scion of Conservatism isn't the true villain here! No, friends, it's in fact the "victim", who, upon seeing the cashiering opportunity has besmirched the Reviled Good Name of Denny the Teenage Boy Toe Sucking Pederast!"

Typical.  Do anything, Say anything to keep your house of cards together.

Conservative, thy name is Hastert.  Enjoy prison.  Plenty of toes to suck on there. Allegedly.

I agree. Throw the homosexual in prison. Clinton, and his buddy Epstein, and the various other 'connected' people who traveled to those orgies and on the Lolita Flights shouldn't face any time.  It was an outrage that Epstein was convictedat all. Lolitas and under-age girls are ok and since they are paid, with I'm sure the proper IRS reporting, makes it all the better. Boys will be boys, after all. Right? Throw Hastert the homo in prison and use financial reporting laws to do so (since sodomy laws got taken off the books.)

[onan]

I agree. Throw the homosexual in prison. Clinton, and his buddy Epstein, and the various other 'connected' people who traveled to those orgies and on the Lolita Flights shouldn't face any time.  It was an outrage that Epstein was convictedat all. Lolitas and under-age girls are ok and since they are paid, with I'm sure the proper IRS reporting, makes it all the better. Boys will be boys, after all. Right? Throw Hastert the homo in prison and use financial reporting laws to do so (since sodomy laws got taken off the books.)

Let's make Hastert to be the victim of homophobia. Cuz it isn't at all about his hypocrisy and wanting jail time for Clinton for having sex with a young adult. He deserves time in gen pop in a state prison.

[albrecht]

Let's make Hastert to be the victim of homophobia. Cuz it isn't at all about his hypocrisy and wanting jail time for Clinton for having sex with a young adult. He deserves time in gen pop in a state prison.

Obviously, I was being facetious that if the pervert is "ok" politically any behavior is acceptable or at least excused. If not, then go after them with financial reporting laws, which in of themselves I am against (and often the more leftist types are, except in this case.) Interestingly even if Epstein, Clinton, etc "Lolita Flights" or reported island orgies happened in international waters or in other country's jurisdiction it still would violate US Federal Law (sex travel etc act), but only Epstein, so far, was charged and convicted on State charges (due to him recruiting and doing some acts in Florida.) And the statue of limitations has not expired on those charges, as they have with Hastert (so they went after the financial reporting issue.) In normal prosecutions if someone's cell phone and flight plans show such contact with a criminal they would be investigated at least, usually prosecuted and get victims and co-conspirators to "turn." Now since Epstein, private school teacher turned billionaire, apparently filmed the antics, including with secret cameras,....where are and what happened to those recordings?

Re: Hastert.  I still wonder if there also was blackmail involved (a separate crime even if one is a victim, but especially now that victim is of-age and statute of limitations of crime has expired.) I wonder if his lawyers will go there or if the government also might have some charges against other parties, especially if the potential blackmail involved Congressional activity.  They should at least investigate it. As an aside, one reason the "sodomy" charge, thrown out now, was a decent law to have on the books was not due to the "morality" but because, IF DA's used discretion, the Prosecutors could "get" convictions, or plea down to it, in cases of more serious charges, that couldn't be proven (rape, child abuse, etc) on prima facie evidence where witnesses wouldn't comply, the age, sexual history, or mental health of victim was suspect, or to avoid trials and cross which could impact the victim. It was another "bullet" in the gun. And even if the charge carried less actual time-served it would also be "on the sheet"  so future crimes could be solved more quickly (since many rapists and especially child sex offenders repeat.)

[HorrorReporter]

Two things that I cannot stop thinking..
Denny Hastert was not a player anymore.. Why now?
The theory I have.. tin foil hat adjusted: This was a message to someone else. They got the dirt on them all. Someone told someone else they are trying to strong arm, 'Watch what happens to Hastert next week.'
Just my theory.

[albrecht]

Two things that I cannot stop thinking..
Denny Hastert was not a player anymore.. Why now?
The theory I have.. tin foil hat adjusted: This was a message to someone else. They got the dirt on them all. Someone told someone else they are trying to strong arm, 'Watch what happens to Hastert next week.'
Just my theory.

I don't even consider this a conspiracy theory anymore. Posit that the NSA (and other ABC agencies) admit spying on everyone, even Congress. Look at the BBC and government officials in the UK what with the child abuse sex stuff recently. And all the "conspiracy theories" and the ACTUAL sex cases in DC and in State legislatures. I see it like the Mafia, think Godfather II if you must, not that you must commit a crime, or that they fake it, to "get in the gang" but that they move people up "in the gang" with known peccadilloes (or worse outright perversions and real crimes) and it likely works like any addictions. Some mild infidelity here, some casual drug use here, then after a few years they need a bigger fix and once in they are locked in. Go public and this comes out. And, every so often, they throw a few to the wolves caught with an intern or caught being a homo, not so much to "get them," but to remind others. I don't see why our society/government shouldn't exhibit the same behavior as others throughout history. Power corrupts and it also takes a "special" type of mind to want to be so controlling over others. On paper politicians don't make so much money. So what is their motivation? To be able to tell others what to do. (And for insider trading deals which, basically even with the reform, remain legal.) Look at what happened in various Royal houses or ancient times with the "fun" the leaders had, at some points it even became entertainment for the masses. Look at classic honey-traps and spy manipulation blackmail. Why if it works between adversaries (Cold War and otherwise) why wouldn't it work "internally?"

[SciFiAuthor]

Obviously, I was being facetious that if the pervert is "ok" politically any behavior is acceptable or at least excused. If not, then go after them with financial reporting laws, which in of themselves I am against (and often the more leftist types are, except in this case.) Interestingly even if Epstein, Clinton, etc "Lolita Flights" or reported island orgies happened in international waters or in other country's jurisdiction it still would violate US Federal Law (sex travel etc act), but only Epstein, so far, was charged and convicted on State charges (due to him recruiting and doing some acts in Florida.) And the statue of limitations has not expired on those charges, as they have with Hastert (so they went after the financial reporting issue.) In normal prosecutions if someone's cell phone and flight plans show such contact with a criminal they would be investigated at least, usually prosecuted and get victims and co-conspirators to "turn." Now since Epstein, private school teacher turned billionaire, apparently filmed the antics, including with secret cameras,....where are and what happened to those recordings?

Re: Hastert.  I still wonder if there also was blackmail involved (a separate crime even if one is a victim, but especially now that victim is of-age and statute of limitations of crime has expired.) I wonder if his lawyers will go there or if the government also might have some charges against other parties, especially if the potential blackmail involved Congressional activity.  They should at least investigate it. As an aside, one reason the "sodomy" charge, thrown out now, was a decent law to have on the books was not due to the "morality" but because, IF DA's used discretion, the Prosecutors could "get" convictions, or plea down to it, in cases of more serious charges, that couldn't be proven (rape, child abuse, etc) on prima facie evidence where witnesses wouldn't comply, the age, sexual history, or mental health of victim was suspect, or to avoid trials and cross which could impact the victim. It was another "bullet" in the gun. And even if the charge carried less actual time-served it would also be "on the sheet"  so future crimes could be solved more quickly (since many rapists and especially child sex offenders repeat.)

The one that really astounded me was when the sleazy libs in Hollywood wanted to give Roman Polanski a break.

[albrecht]

The one that really astounded me was when the sleazy libs in Hollywood wanted to give Roman Polanski a break.

There is a lot of "nuance" depending on one's political persuasion, friends, money-generating ability, "artistry," etc. Who knows? Nobody is perfect but it is odd that for certain figures crimes, or at least behavior, deemed bad, criminal, or sanction-able is overlooked for the "greater good" or "look at the complete man," but historical figures, Founding Fathers included, are constantly re-evaluated, criticized, and condemned for actions/beliefs, or alleged actions/beliefs, that, in keeping with their time were totally the norm. Tear down their statues, but celebrate and erect others (I WILL say two example both to be inflammatory and to speak "truth to power"  Mandela and MLK Jr specifically) even if they had more questionable personal lives sexually or academically or, in the former case, an outright, violent and corrupt past.) But they are beyond reproach (as MLK Jr's relatives fight over the estate and if the press or museums can use his works. Not to mention Winnie and the political party and armed wing of Mandela's did for South Africa.)
But, back to the sex and finance stuff, if you are making the "right" people money your actions will, usually, be covered up. Heck even promoted and lauded for decades (Savile for example.)

[SciFiAuthor]

There is a lot of "nuance" depending on one's political persuasion, friends, money-generating ability, "artistry," etc. Who knows? Nobody is perfect but it is odd that for certain figures crimes, or at least behavior, deemed bad, criminal, or sanction-able is overlooked for the "greater good" or "look at the complete man," but historical figures, Founding Fathers included, are constantly re-evaluated, criticized, and condemned for actions/beliefs, or alleged actions/beliefs, that, in keeping with their time were totally the norm. Tear down their statues, but celebrate and erect others (I WILL say two example both to be inflammatory and to speak "truth to power"  Mandela and MLK Jr specifically) even if they had more questionable personal lives sexually or academically or, in the former case, an outright, violent and corrupt past.) But they are beyond reproach (as MLK Jr's relatives fight over the estate and if the press or museums can use his works. Not to mention Winnie and the political party and armed wing of Mandela's did for South Africa.)
But, back to the sex and finance stuff, if you are making the "right" people money your actions will, usually, be covered up. Heck even promoted and lauded for decades (Savile for example.)

It's true. Our politics and pop culture are so fused now that it's not just schizophrenic but outright polymorphically perverse. It lacks any kind of absolutes, so there's plenty of room to slip and slide on things like Polanski screwing a 13 year-old. Because he's a supposedly great director, that outweighs his crime in the eyes of someone who lacks absolutes. As a result, the only one who pays is the 13 year-old. It's basically a liberalism-driven regression back to the days when nobility were not accountable to the law in the same way the peasantry is.

[albrecht]

It's true. Our politics and pop culture are so fused now that it's not just schizophrenic but outright polymorphically perverse. It lacks any kind of absolutes, so there's plenty of room to slip and slide on things like Polanski screwing a 13 year-old. Because he's a supposedly great director, that outweighs his crime in the eyes of someone who lacks absolutes. As a result, the only one who pays is the 13 year-old. It's basically a liberalism-driven regression back to the days when nobility were not accountable to the law in the same way the peasantry is.

Yep. Interestingly it was when a "middle-class" (use whatever term you wish depending on historical timing) that you get more stability without as much mayhem and perversions, which oddly, seem to be done by a leisure class with full power or by poor people, who abused and desperate, resort to abuses (self and otherwise) of various types to have any diversion from daily reality and to provide any source of income. With cycles in both. Not to say it doesn't happen elsewhere but without the money, over time to cover-up or excuse, or the apathy and broken families and movement, it makes it "harder" to support deviant, criminal, lifestyles hidden in the "middle classes." At least over generations. And, just a theory, that the relative wealth and purpose and support by working, going to school, etc means less want to go crazy or to extremes?  I almost sound Marxist what with the class explanations but he hated the middle-class for holding those bourgeoisie values and preventing the revolution that, when tried, resulted in even more mayhem than the royals or captialists...haha

[SciFiAuthor]

Yep. Interestingly it was when a "middle-class" (use whatever term you wish depending on historical timing) that you get more stability without as much mayhem and perversions, which oddly, seem to be done by a leisure class with full power or by poor people, who abused and desperate, resort to abuses (self and otherwise) of various types to have any diversion from daily reality and to provide any source of income. With cycles in both. Not to say it doesn't happen elsewhere but without the money, over time to cover-up or excuse, or the apathy and broken families and movement, it makes it "harder" to support deviant, criminal, lifestyles hidden in the "middle classes." At least over generations. And, just a theory, that the relative wealth and purpose and support by working, going to school, etc means less want to go crazy or to extremes?  I almost sound Marxist what with the class explanations but he hated the middle-class for holding those bourgeoisie values and preventing the revolution that, when tried, resulted in even more mayhem than the royals or captialists...haha

That's absolutely correct in my opinion. A diminishing middle class isn't just undesirable, it's suicidal for a society. We basically live in the conditions of pre-revolutionary France. Our middle class diminishes, our poor begin to rise up, yet the politicians are basically paralyzed by corruption while the rich tell us to eat cake. It's going to be downhill from here on out because as a society we are incapable of fixing the problems that are destroying the middle class. It's just going to shrink into oblivion at the hands of both parties.

But this time we have a key secondary problem. Just over the horizon looms technological unemployment. We will hit a point, roughly about 10 years out, where jobs will be automated faster than they can be created. Our entire economic system hinges on job creation and the market's ability to create jobs as fast as they are lost. Those days are ending. And when they do, because of corruption and political paralysis, there will no longer be any liberals or conservatives. Only guillotines and angry people.

I know I sound like a particularly apocalyptic occupier, but I'm not. I just realize that there is a reality wall coming and neither the conservatives nor the liberals are equipped or even prepared for it. Those ideologies are soon to be made irrelevant by our advancing technology. 

[albrecht]

That's absolutely correct in my opinion. A diminishing middle class isn't just undesirable, it's suicidal for a society. We basically live in the conditions of pre-revolutionary France. Our middle class diminishes, our poor begin to rise up, yet the politicians are basically paralyzed by corruption while the rich tell us to eat cake. It's going to be downhill from here on out because as a society we are incapable of fixing the problems that are destroying the middle class. It's just going to shrink into oblivion at the hands of both parties.

But this time we have a key secondary problem. Just over the horizon looms technological unemployment. We will hit a point, roughly about 10 years out, where jobs will be automated faster than they can be created. Our entire economic system hinges on job creation and the market's ability to create jobs as fast as they are lost. Those days are ending. And when they do, because of corruption and political paralysis, there will no longer be any liberals or conservatives. Only guillotines and angry people.

I know I sound like a particularly apocalyptic occupier, but I'm not. I just realize that there is a reality wall coming and neither the conservatives nor the liberals are equipped or even prepared for it. Those ideologies are soon to be made irrelevant by our advancing technology.

Remember when, and it did to a large extend in some arenas, when technology was going to make life and society better. Nobody has to "work" (because that is a bad thing so it was said) and no deprivations? There are 3rd positions and other political avenues, even if the media doesn't let them gain traction. They could be "bad" but, maybe, less worse than a total world collapse, civil wars, etc. As I see it entities and relationships most able to survive, over time, especially en extremis are smaller (family/clan/town based) or larger (ethnic/religion/race based)...not necessarily the "best" or "ideal" model I would like or even the social controllers wish to have but better than genocidal or world wars. The Nation was and then Nation-State was, I think, at least for a time the most stable model for a modern, technological world, unfortunately, it also, due to the peaceful times, allowed also the most innovation, rapidly, which went, alas, towards better ways of both maintaining their own, and killing other, populations. There needs to be more devolution to more local control, at least in existing powers where people have proven to be able to handle it, and, maybe, for a short-term, at least some more centralized control in some areas where people have proven time after time that they CAN'T handle it. (Though this will, no doubt, cause consternation, but otherwise, what, let places like much of the African continent just totally die? Or let the Chinese take it afterwards? And until we get over our addiction for foreign, or at least Middle Eastern, hydrocarbons we will be dealing with wars and crap forever.) 

[SciFiAuthor]

Remember when, and it did to a large extend in some arenas, when technology was going to make life and society better. Nobody has to "work" (because that is a bad thing so it was said) and no deprivations? There are 3rd positions and other political avenues, even if the media doesn't let them gain traction. They could be "bad" but, maybe, less worse than a total world collapse, civil wars, etc. As I see it entities and relationships most able to survive, over time, especially en extremis are smaller (family/clan/town based) or larger (ethnic/religion/race based)...not necessarily the "best" or "ideal" model I would like or even the social controllers wish to have but better than genocidal or world wars. The Nation was and then Nation-State was, I think, at least for a time the most stable model for a modern, technological world, unfortunately, it also, due to the peaceful times, allowed also the most innovation, rapidly, which went, alas, towards better ways of both maintaining their own, and killing other, populations. There needs to be more devolution to more local control, at least in existing powers where people have proven to be able to handle it, and, maybe, for a short-term, at least some more centralized control in some areas where people have proven time after time that they CAN'T handle it. (Though this will, no doubt, cause consternation, but otherwise, what, let places like much of the African continent just totally die? Or let the Chinese take it afterwards? And until we get over our addiction for foreign, or at least Middle Eastern, hydrocarbons we will be dealing with wars and crap forever.)

The hydrocarbon question will be rendered moot within 15 years. It basically already is. We have fusion energy now. The media doesn't report it, the culture at large is unaware, but Lockheed-Martin solved the hydrocarbon problem with compact fusion. Energy will soon be a non-issue, as will carbon emissions, people just don't know it yet. The real problem will be in how technological development and politics develop over the next 20 years. If we responsibly manage it, we will transition from a post-capitalist (which we are now) corporatist society to something resembling both communism and libertarianism in that the corporations will automate themselves out of their own markets as they fire everyone that could buy their products in order to automate and cut costs leaving it up to the governments of the world to nationalize, or even globalize, the means of production.

But the political system and the current liberal and conservative ideologies have no way of dealing with rapid change, much less manage anything responsibly, so we're fucked until something changes. For example gays. We're not even decades away from biotechnology that will allow people to choose and change their own sexuality. Be gay one day, straight the next, whatever floats your boat all it takes is microrobot to rewire your brain. Does anyone realize that this is a very real, very present possibility? Nope. They're still fighting about the word marriage. Well, you tell me, how would our current society, lib or conservative, deal with the development of choose-your-own-orientation tech? The fact is it's incomprehensible to us. But not to biotech, expect it in less than 20 years.

[albrecht]

The hydrocarbon question will be rendered moot within 15 years. It basically already is. We have fusion energy now. The media doesn't report it, the culture at large is unaware, but Lockheed-Martin solved the hydrocarbon problem with compact fusion. Energy will soon be a non-issue, as will carbon emissions, people just don't know it yet. The real problem will be in how technological development and politics develop over the next 20 years. If we responsibly manage it, we will transition from a post-capitalist (which we are now) corporatist society to something resembling both communism and libertarianism in that the corporations will automate themselves out of their own markets as they fire everyone that could buy their products in order to automate and cut costs leaving it up to the governments of the world to nationalize, or even globalize, the means of production.

But the political system and the current liberal and conservative ideologies have no way of dealing with rapid change, much less manage anything responsibly, so we're fucked until something changes. For example gays. We're not even decades away from biotechnology that will allow people to choose and change their own sexuality. Be gay one day, straight the next, whatever floats your boat all it takes is microrobot to rewire your brain. Does anyone realize that this is a very real, very present possibility? Nope. They're still fighting about the word marriage. Well, you tell me, how would our current society, lib or conservative, deal with the development of choose-your-own-orientation tech? The fact is it's incomprehensible to us. But not to biotech, expect it in less than 20 years.

I admire the positive attitude, and I hope you are correct. It likely will be like much progress some steps forward and some steps back. I tend to think on the negative side. Sharing of ideas, in infancy, over cultures, in "real time", by AI or computer assisted systems, and even by people etc, might lead to LESS innovative, independent thought or reasoning, Tending towards consensus, ignoring another way to get to a solution, formulating the same idea by yourself in a different way. Maybe not. But like viruses, technology and instant contact/communication, could hurt with rapid spread. Maybe assist is some Darwinian ideal? Who knows? But certain Utopian ideas have failed? (But only due to backlash from primitive cultures? Who knows, with bio-hacking or manipulation of the genome and total political control? Spengler etc might be right.) I don't want it but it will be interesting. Where will all these politicians and lawyers make their money when it is all down due to deterministic, though fuzzy, programming (as if it isn't 

[SciFiAuthor]

I admire the positive attitude, and I hope you are correct. It likely will be like much progress some steps forward and some steps back. I tend to think on the negative side. Sharing of ideas, in infancy, over cultures, in "real time", by AI or computer assisted systems, and even by people etc, might lead to LESS innovative, independent thought or reasoning, Tending towards consensus, ignoring another way to get to a solution, formulating the same idea by yourself in a different way. Maybe not. But like viruses, technology and instant contact/communication, could hurt with rapid spread. Maybe assist is some Darwinian ideal? Who knows? But certain Utopian ideas have failed? (But only due to backlash from primitive cultures? Who knows, with bio-hacking or manipulation of the genome and total political control? Spengler etc might be right.) I don't want it but it will be interesting. Where will all these politicians and lawyers make their money when it is all down due to deterministic, though fuzzy, programming (as if it isn't 

Well, actually, I'm really not that positive rather I'm apocalyptic. I think we could face challenges posed by increasingly rapid technological advances that we cant socially address as fast as they come with our current social model. Much like plucking an uncontacted tribe in Brazil and transporting them to New York City, we're not going to know what the hell to do in the coming years. We already don't, we still live in an age where kids have their faces planted in their phones 24/7 but us older folks have either adapted or we haven't and the very old have no clue what's going on. But the fact remains that if you want to make a living in the modern world, you need a cell phone. That's the bottom line. In other words, in just a few years, it's become impossible to function productively in the world without a brain prosthesis, which is what a smart phone is, if you think about it.

The fact is, technological advancement is proving to be exponential rather than a steady curve. We're not ready for that as a culture. We expect tech to move in a linear fashion; one thing leads to the next and it all makes sense. But it's not going to happen like that. It already isn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_change

Leading to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_unemployment

Leading to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

We are in deep shit if we don't do a global rethink of politics and prepare it for dealing with ever increasing socially changing technological developments that will change the face of humanity in just a few years. Imagine the social ramifications of the links I've given. Conservatism and Liberalism no longer matter in a future like that, and it's not a future that's 100 years off or 200 years off, it's almost here if you dig deep into the tech articles.

We live in a society designed for humans solely, yet we're moving in the direction of a society where most humans have no place. Won't that be a bowl of freaking cherries.

[NowhereInTime]

I doubt Hastert will see prison, but he certainly deserves it. I actually found myself cheering Nancy Pelosi today for getting in the way of Obamatrade. I feel dirty after that, but it happened. So where the fuck have you been? It got boring in here for lack of communists to fight with.

Work's been nuts and frankly the reading's a little light around here lately.  I never even got pointed to the last book only to see you just finished another.  What the deuce?!?

[NowhereInTime]

Maybe he's been at Seminar Poster Class preparing for the upcoming political season.

I haven't seen where Hastert has been charged with kiddie fisting, but for hiding blackmail payments from the government.  The bigger question is, how did a dedicated public servant become a multi-millionaire on his government pay?

I don't know if that's a "bigger question" than whether or not he was paying off people not reveal his Pederastert Proclivities, but he became a millionaire precisely the way most public servants do; by gaming the system (looking at you, Hillary...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-dennis-hastert-made-a-fortune-in-land-deals/2015/05/29/680f357a-0628-11e5-bc72-f3e16bf50bb6_story.html

[albrecht]

I don't know if that's a "bigger question" than whether or not he was paying off people not reveal his Pederastert Proclivities, but he became a millionaire precisely the way most public servants do; by gaming the system (looking at you, Hillary...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-dennis-hastert-made-a-fortune-in-land-deals/2015/05/29/680f357a-0628-11e5-bc72-f3e16bf50bb6_story.html

Good article. I guess most people just accept this or have become cynical but we should be outraged that people go into office and come out millionaires. Insider trading and using regulations to make themselves rich should be illegal. I'm sure there are few honest ones and also cases in which "one hand washing the other" might even result in good policies but for the most part it just seems a big corrupt mess. I think the only way to fix is is to limit the amount of money taken by the government and limit the amount of bills and regulations they can make.

I would also be curious if Hastert was pressured on any votes using his homosexual hidden activity for blackmail. He should have been indicted on those charges, not "structuring"- that is another law and regulations that should be dropped.

[SciFiAuthor]

Work's been nuts and frankly the reading's a little light around here lately.  I never even got pointed to the last book only to see you just finished another.  What the deuce?!?

I kick 'em out assembly line style. Sharknado 11 will be done in two weeks and my new gay romantic comedy Glad Max - The Anal Apocalypse premiers two weeks after that under my other pen name Lance California. $14.95 on Amazon in the dirty section. Cha-ching.

[onan]

I kick 'em out assembly line style. Sharknado 11 will be done in two weeks and my new gay romantic comedy Glad Max - The Anal Apocalypse premiers two weeks after that under my other pen name Lance California. $14.95 on Amazon in the dirty section. Cha-ching.

Please tell me there are gay vampires.

[SciFiAuthor]

Please tell me there are gay vampires.

Oh hell yes. There's a gay vampire in everything I've ever written including the non-fiction. And tween angst.

[DanTSX]

Please tell me there are gay vampires.

George's Halloween costume for the last 7 years.


He pulls it off a little TOO well.

[DanTSX]

This is wrong.  He's a dirty creep.


But when Hillary Clinton pays off Bill's discarded side-pussy, it's empowering.


I like how the republican double standard of their leadership indulging in homosexual relationships is negated by the double standard of democrats using homophobia to attack a republican..  This is a great example of leadership for our children.