March 5, 2015

Ask Third-Way Manny!, Inaugural Edition

(The first, and hopefully the last, in a series.)

Dear Third-Way Manny:

I'm the CEO of an enormous American company. I recently hired someone, let's call her him Bartleby, to run the critical group which is responsible for our partnership agreements with other huge companies. He came highly recommended, although I couldn't actually figure out what he'd done to earn such impressive accolades. But he seemed to be a fighter and a winner, so I hired him.

A most unusual thing occurred his first day on the job! During training on how to use our email system, Bartleby simply declined to use our email system, saying plainly "I would prefer not to." Instead, Bartleby announced that he'd use only his personal email address (bartleby@ifwecandoitformarcrichwecandoitforyou.com) for all corporate correspondence, and further - are you sitting down? - that his personal email would be hosted from a computer in his basement!

This seemed a little unusual, and perhaps risky. For example, we have a policy of retaining company email to ensure that we comply with audit laws, but Bartleby would not hear of it. "I would prefer not to. Instead, I'll sort through my personal emails after I am no longer in your employ, and send to you those I deem to be yours."

Certainly, from time to time some of our employees use personal email for business, say, when they need something to get through our highly-secure networks that sometimes prevent attachments from going in or out. But to totally refuse to use our email system? As the kids say these days, WTF?

Third-Way Manny, as the CEO of an enormous corporation, I'm certainly not one of the Lumpenproletariat that are normally becalmed by your concise and mellifluous explanations using only small words. But still, I admire your incredible wisdom, insight, and lightning disco-moves; and today I seek your good counsel: What am I to do about Bartleby and his unusual demands around using email?

--------------------

Dear Reader,

There's nothing wrong, or even suspicious, about what Bartleby wants to do -frankly, only a Lumpenprole would use a business email address for business email. The real question is why are you totally obsessed with hating on Bartleby over something that happens all the time? A hatred so unwarranted, so desperate, and so intense, it can only stem from something to do with private parts.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

March 4, 2015

Good to know that email-gate only stinks to high heaven

and was not illegal.

Whew.

March 3, 2015

Does anyone here know Hillary personally?

I have some useful information for her.

If she ever needs to keep track of one email account seperately from another, say, if one is for private personal email and the other is for public correspondance with foreign leaders that might determine the very lives and deaths of billions of people, this can be easily accomplashed through using different email accounts for the two purposes.

One could be something like hillary@whatever.com, the other like secstate@whatever.com

This means that your staff wouldn't have to read tens of thousands of emails after the fact, to make sure that only the ones that other people should see are released. You could just release all of the emails in one of the accounts.

To be fair, the technology behind "having different email addresses for different purposes" was not widely available until 2014. But it might come in handy for Hillary in the future, so it would be good if someone could get her this information.

No thanks needed, but maybe she could ask Lloyd if there's any openings in his IT group?

Regards,

Earnest-Computer-Nerd-Persona Manny

March 3, 2015

Jeb was in an awful rush to release all the emails he wrote

as Governor of Florida, now we probably know why. Likely he knew that Our Next President™ was about to have some issues, and wanted to be able to say "see, I played by the rules and even released my emails", doing this before this incident so it wouldn't look like he was beating up on Clinton after the fact.

My own guess is that this isn't as bad as it seems - that Clinton had staffers send any really important emails, and only sent "Hi! How're the kids!" emails in the capacity of SoS on her own account. Or at least that's what she'll claim, we'll never know for sure because many emails are likely gone.

Ah, the Clintons. They'd be entertaining as hell, if only they were a TV show.

March 3, 2015

Here's what the Angry Elizabeth Warren Left can't understand

NOBODY put you moonbats in charge of deciding who's a Democrat.

A Democrat is anyone who says they're a Democrat. Period.

If Ted Cruz himself changed his affiliation to our party, without changing a single view, we should welcome him with open arms. Because Cruz wins elections. And just think: if ALL elected Republicans became Democrats, we'd handily win every election! Whatsamatta, Libs, don't wan't permanent control of government?

So cut the crap and fall in line. Well, not a line per se, because that would smack of some sort of agreement on an organizational scheme. But you know what I mean.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

March 3, 2015

Why Republicans win, part another

You know damned well that if Democratic Speaker of the House invited the head of a foreign country to address Congress, not a single Republican would show up.

Not one.

This is why Republicans win despite having an utterly berserk world view: they fight, they fight, they fight. And they've won this one, because they'll look strong, while our President and Congressional Democrats look weak.

@#$&.

March 1, 2015

A thread in support of ousting Third Wayer Rahm Emanuel

From Chicago government, and from all government, forever. It'll be a tough thing to do, but let's think good thoughts and help as we can.

Our ideas may be "#%^*ing retarded" Rahm, but at least we're decent human beings who don't seek to cheat, steal, lie or torture. And we'd like government that reflects those values.

March 1, 2015

Texas to Televise Executions Live on Pay-Per-View

http://dailycurrant.com/2014/12/29/texas-to-televise-executions-live-on-pay-per-view/

The State of Texas passed a law today allowing death penalty executions to be aired live on pay-per-view television.

As part of the deal with a local production company, the execution procedure will be changed to ensure the deaths of prisoners last at least 12 hours. Officials say the goals of the new policy are to deter crime, entertain law-abiding citizens, and partially defray the cost of executing prisoners.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has been a longtime champion of the idea, telling The Cowboy Gazette, “At the end of the day, the guy’s still dead. What’s the difference if they die in a minute or eight hours? At a certain point, the criminal will become unconscious, so it’s not really torture if he’s unconscious.”

February 28, 2015

What have we become?

Please watch this, and resolve to help someone you don't know, in some way, today.

This is how Holocausts happen: we look away.

(Thanks to Quixote1818 for originally posting this video and to 1StrongBlackMan for pointing it out to me. I was surprised by how few recs it got, hopefully GD will give it some more love.)

UPDATE: one_voice *did* post this video in GD yesterday.

February 28, 2015

The Clinton Wing

For me, this is the really important question:

Thinking only about the 99%, over the past 20 years, the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party...