After doing my best to get to the bottom of the Assange controversy I’ve concluded if he is an enemy to anyone it is to the deep state.
Asange appears to be a Russian asset.
Why do you say that?
That only works if you first buy into the "deep state" BS.
This user is currently being ignored
What’s the latest line, "Thank God for the deep state?"
I spent some significant time researching Assange a while back. I came to the same conclusion, and not only that conclusion, but that they’re so afraid of him that they used a woman to set him up.
We’ve lived to see the existence of feral cockroaches.
The term deep state has been disfigured and propagandized by rightwing reactionaries. There is no deep state in functioning democracies. It’s the antithesis of a healthy democracy.
You are probably right.
I know little about him and, altho I keep hearing the term, I have no clue about whatever the Deep State is.
Easy answer, those are the people you don’t elect but run the country, the department heads and their cronies, especially the cronies who go on through one administration after another, people whose self interest is immune to public opinion, obscured from public examination but who steer policy.
Ummm - my BIL retired from the federal government, he was a hotshot at the NSA, am I to assume that he was Deep State? I think we should all be pretty thankful for those folks at Fort Meade.
And I have a friend that retired from working at the Pentagon for over 30 years, is he Deep State too? Could name a bunch others, that’s just off the top of my head.
They both worked and retired from government work and weren’t elected.
If the Deep State is a concern for some people, I have to conclude that it’s coming from persons who *wanted* to work for classified agencies but they didn’t qualify.
Folks like Hannity and Ingram and Rush and Jones.
Yes, and I know honourable people in government positions or who were too.
These are the people who give a gloss to the process, but who also work to their own benefit as nearly all do. They ensure the budget goes up, that staffing increases, and that threats to the previous two are opposed and quashed.
I have yet to meet a manager that does what he/she can to increase costs.
You’re not exactly winning me over into Lala Land.
I can’t stand Hannity and Ingraham but to lump them in with Alex Jones? That’s a bit too far. Hannity and Ingraham are partisan hacks (like Matthews, Maddow and Lemon) but Jones is a completely unhinged psychotic conspiratorial nutjob.
😊 point taken, RT!
I have yet to meet a manager who doesn’t do what he or she can to increase their budget, staff, and influence.
You aren’t making a point other than why you consistently support government over freedom.
I think that mark4 has worked at some really poorly managed companies/agencies/etc., if he thinks managers try to increase expenses.
Human nature says I’m correct. You on the other hand have a vested interest in combatting that truth.
No one wants expenses increased but they want their budget or money available to them, to increase and their power to increase. I think that’s true but it’s the same in the private and public sectors.
Interesting. I have a vested interest in combatting the truth? Hmm - in what way? I don’t understand .. I don’t think the principles of management have changed all that much since I got my MBA. Or since I retired from management. 🤷♀️
You have completely lost me, mark4.
Then take a course in reading for comprehension.
RT, of course private managers have the same impulses. The difference is that in the marketplace investors and customers both work against indulging them.
In government, the ones who could slow the growth are hobbled by their temporary status since a new administration means department heads change.
Almost every department head will therefore avoid making enemies of those he depends on.
This expected compliance and the cost of non-compliance is at the heart of resistance to Trump. HOW DARE HE!
I disagree with you, mark4.
Comments: Add Comment