Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday January 15 2018, @01:56AM   Printer-friendly
from the representative-of-the-people dept.

Chelsea Manning eyes U.S. Senate seat for Maryland

Chelsea Manning, the transgender U.S. Army soldier who served seven years in military prison for leaking classified data, is seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for the U.S. Senate seat from Maryland, according to Federal election filings seen on Saturday.

[...] Democratic Senator Ben Cardin was elected in 2006 to that seat and is expected to run for re-election this year. He is the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Cardin was easily re-elected in 2012, beating his Republican challenger by 30 points in the heavily-Democratic state.

Previously: Chelsea Manning Released from Prison, Remains on Active Duty Pending Appeal
Harvard Dean Rescinds Chelsea Manning's Visiting Fellow Invitation, Calling It a 'Mistake'


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @03:14AM (34 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday January 15 2018, @03:14AM (#622393) Journal

    On the one hand, after Grabby McOrangewig getting elected president, I don't think anyone has a right to bitch about someone else's qualifications. On the other hand, she could potentially be a long-lived, long-lasting gadfly (read: relentless pain in the ass) to the creepy surveillance-obsessed cryptofascists on both sides of the aisle, which is fine by me. And we've already had one transwoman be elected to office, so there's precedent, which is nice.

    I don't know what to think about this. Again, I want to say lack of qualifications, but she can't possibly be worse than anyone the Republicans are running. And besides, these days it seems like "qualifications" means "has so many corporate dongs up one's ass they need to use a double-wide toilet to take a shit and not have it go splattering on the floor."

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Kell on Monday January 15 2018, @03:22AM (10 children)

    by Kell (292) on Monday January 15 2018, @03:22AM (#622396)

    Whistleblowers are inherently unpopular to those whose misdeeds they reveal, but it shows that they genuinely are prepared to put the public good ahead of their own good. Chelsea paid a heavy price for her actions - rightly or wrongly. I would vote for her.

    --
    Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
    • (Score: 2, Troll) by canopic jug on Monday January 15 2018, @08:52AM (9 children)

      by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @08:52AM (#622494) Journal

      Voting for him would knock a fairly senior Democrat out of office. Since so much goes by seniority that would be a significant loss of influence just to advance a man-in-a-dress for the sake of advancing a man-in-a-dress with no qualifications. It's not a fair trade. Don't be a chump.

      --
      Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by julian on Monday January 15 2018, @06:09PM (8 children)

        by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @06:09PM (#622652)

        I agree with your electoral assessment. Republicans would count Manning being elected as a win. They'd prefer a Republican Senator, but a weakened Democrat would be an improvement for them. Obviously we don't want that.

        I am modding you -1 troll because of the pointlessly inflammatory rhetoric about Manning's personal life. Your parents should have taught you that good manners don't cost anything. You can hold whatever private views you want on transgenderism but until she insults you personally there's no excuse for being churlish.

        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by canopic jug on Monday January 15 2018, @07:07PM (7 children)

          by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @07:07PM (#622666) Journal

          If he wants to ponce about in women's clothes, technically that's his right. If you want him to run for office, that's your right. Just don't ask the world to pretend he's qualified. Worse don't show off how much biology and logic you missed in school by pretending he's other than a man in a dress.

          How many legs does a dog have if you call his tail a leg? Four. Saying that a tail is a leg doesn't make it a leg.

          --Abraham Lincoln

          --
          Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by julian on Monday January 15 2018, @07:42PM (4 children)

            by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @07:42PM (#622682)

            I essentially share your stance, with some reservations; the difference is I don't feel compelled to articulate my views with mean-spirited insults. And seeing as I am a biologist by education I would wager I have a deeper and more nuanced understanding of this than you do.

            But this isn't a question of biology, it's about basic decency. You could try showing some.

            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by canopic jug on Monday January 15 2018, @07:57PM (3 children)

              by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @07:57PM (#622695) Journal

              Since when should lying be equated to decency? Since when should the truth be construed as an insult?

              He's neither qualified, nor experienced, nor other than a man in a dress. As mentioned he's within his right to run, but in the unlikely chance that he wins, chalk on up for the Republicans. They'll probably even back him financially if it comes down to it. However, the cynic in me says he's just trying to cash in on some publicity since fading from view after the pardon and his repugnant response to Obama.

              --
              Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
              • (Score: 3, Informative) by RedBear on Tuesday January 16 2018, @12:01AM (2 children)

                by RedBear (1734) on Tuesday January 16 2018, @12:01AM (#622856)

                Since when should lying be equated to decency? Since when should the truth be construed as an insult?

                Transgender individuals (people with clinically diagnosed gender dysphoria) are no more "lying" about their condition than are people with depression, schizophrenia, synesthesia, word aphasia, dyslexia, amnesia or any other condition that originates in the brain. You just can't get past the body and acknowledge there is a mind inside that body that doesn't match the external equipment. I know the bigoted things you say make sense to you, but it's really you who have the emotional problem with accepting the experience of other people. Your typical misgendering of her is extremely petty and counterproductive.

                There are lots of people who cross-dress and don't claim to be transgender, because they aren't. Many of them aren't even gay necessarily, they just like the clothes. Conversely, there are many transgender people who aren't really interested in dressing in specific clothes to match their mental gender, and others who are extremely unhappy every minute they have to wear the "wrong" type of clothing to keep bigots like you from antagonizing them and making their lives even more of a living hell. Humanity is much more complicated than you want to believe. There are historical signs that gay and transgender people have been part of humanity going back to antiquity. It's not a new thing someone invented last week.

                Chelsea Manning wasn't pardoned, by the way. The remainder of her 35-year prison sentence was commuted. That isn't the same thing. And this is what she actually said:

                Although Manning, her family and many supporters are undoubtedly grateful that Obama dramatically reduced her sentence from its initial 35 years to just a few more months, plus time served, the former Army private still suggested that the ex-president's penchant for compromise with his political foes hamstrung his administration.

                "For eight years, it did not matter how balanced President Obama was. It did not matter how educated he was, or how intelligent he was. Nothing was ever good enough for his opponents," Manning wrote in The Guardian. "It was clear that he could not win. It was clear that, no matter what he did, in their eyes, he could not win."

                "The one simple lesson to draw from President Obama’s legacy: do not start off with a compromise. They won’t meet you in the middle. Instead, what we need is an unapologetic progressive leader," she added.

                I voted for Obama twice and find nothing repugnant in what she said. She had the courage to speak the truth regardless of her situation. Obama was absolutely hamstrung during his administration by continual attempts to compromise with extremists who had no interest in ever compromising, and his commutation of her sentence rather than a pardon was part of his compromising.

                When I took a close look at what she has written over the years and since her release, I saw a person with unusual inner strength and emotional conviction to do what is right regardless of personal negative consequences. I would absolutely vote for HER for any office in the land, and I'm glad she's going to run.

                --
                ¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
                ... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
                • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by canopic jug on Tuesday January 16 2018, @06:19AM (1 child)

                  by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 16 2018, @06:19AM (#623012) Journal

                  I found his writings unnoteworthy except for their provenance. His speaking is underwhelming and not something you'd want in the senate going against articulate opponents. In one panel he said barely a peep and when he did it was not relevant and barely on topic. I can see the Republicans eagerly bankrolling his campaign.

                  I know the bigoted things you say make sense to you, but it's really you who have the emotional problem with accepting the experience of other people. Your typical misgendering of her is extremely petty and counterproductive.

                  And right on schedule, out pops the name calling. It might work on your fellow high school students but going ad hominem indicates that you've lost and concede.

                  Like I said, if he wants to ponce about in women's clothes, technically that's his right, and if you want him to run for office, that's your right, too. However, don't ask the world to try to play along with phantastical abuse of language just to push a misguided agenda. Save your fake rage for the scum running the industries that are filling the biosphere and food with hormone mimic contaminants.

                  --
                  Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
                  • (Score: 2) by canopic jug on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:19AM

                    by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:19AM (#630255) Journal

                    Since he is running for office, his communication skills are most certainly on topic. He will have to write and speak as part of the campaign and if he makes it into office by knocking out a senior Democrat. Being so weak in both is an extreme liability which will hurt the party's influence, above and beyond losing the seniority. Which is more important pushing an anti-social, gay, niche agenda or democracy?

                    --
                    Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
          • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:43PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:43PM (#622715)

            Saying that a woman is a man-in-a-dress doesn't make her a man.

            FTFY

            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @10:21PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @10:21PM (#622795)

              How many X- and/or Y- chromosomes does this woman or man-in-a-dress have?

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by takyon on Monday January 15 2018, @03:25AM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Monday January 15 2018, @03:25AM (#622397) Journal

    What qualifications are actually needed? I'm pretty sure anyone with half a brain can pick up parliamentary procedure with a few days of study. Almost everyone is opinionated enough to choose a position on an issue and vote, although you could just follow the party line (Democratic in this case).

    Being able to write legislation is harder. For that the senators will be delegating research and writing tasks to their staff of minions, if not allowing lobbyists to write the bills altogether. If you are in the House of Representatives you could just blend in without trying to write any legislation.

    Being a state governor or even a mayor has the potential to be a much harder job than being a U.S. Senator. An inexperienced politician might not be very effective in accomplishing their goals in the U.S. Senate, but it is at least straightforward.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday January 15 2018, @07:11AM

      by Sulla (5173) on Monday January 15 2018, @07:11AM (#622484) Journal

      I personally find the problem not "picking up parlipro" but rather "willing to follow parlipro" . This is a condemnation of most politicians and not this person in particular.

      State jobs have an additional difficulty of not paying a high enough wage to make it worth doing unless you really care or are corrupt. Once I am debt free and have a good savings I will try my hand at local, but it is tough I imagine to be honest.

      --
      Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by beckett on Monday January 15 2018, @03:40AM (19 children)

    by beckett (1115) on Monday January 15 2018, @03:40AM (#622407)

    I want to say lack of qualifications, but she can't possibly be worse than anyone the Republicans are running.

    This is what is going to propel Oprah to become president one day. It's just so short sighted for both US tribes, red and blue, to compromise so hard on basic qualifications of leadership just so they WIN.

    What's most concerning is as Trump rolls back and makes best efforts to erase Obama's legacy, the incoming Deomcratic president will just deal reverse to the right wing. the US will be mired in this cyclical legislate-recind-legislate-recind pattern for decades to come. The one thing that is guaranteed is the level of discourse, as well as the long term progress on many social, economic issues will go by the wayside because Hey, Better Than Trump!

    Pax Americana will not endure, but fade within our lifetimes with such a sophomoric approach to governance. These are as much signs and portents for other countries headed down the same path as it is a dire warning for the US right now.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @03:45AM (3 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday January 15 2018, @03:45AM (#622412) Journal

      I've been feeling and thinking the exact same things, but what can we do? The two party system has a stranglehold on the US's elections, and when Sanders, who would probably have been the best choice and would have kicked Trump's fat ass up and down the eastern seaboard, tried to run, the Democratic party machine stabbed him in the back.

      Until we get money out of politics, until Citizens United is reversed, there is no hope. Money has strangled the election system to death.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:50AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:50AM (#622493)

        And either resettle somewhere else, or create a new country of your own.

        Neither will be easy choices, but the problem is that right now there are essentially no choices in American Politics.

        In order to gain choices we need people to stop campaigning as either Democrats or Republicans, and we need citizens to stop voting FOR Democrats or Republicans on the principle of the matter, regardless of which partisan side they normally would follow.

        If both of those choices among the potential electees and the voting base can be pushed to happen, then we can move on to what is required to actually *FIX* the system, which at this point is either abolishing the electoral college, OR eliminating the voting positions and simply making the votes given based on the states final vote results (has the same effect and eliminates the possibility of the electors voting against their constiuents) while protecting the 'all 50 states are not equal population-wise. Following that is removing first past the post, and choosing either a point pool and points based system, or voting tiers and iterating through each tier until a candidate has a clear win, ideally of either 51 or 67 percent majority, which ensures the candidate elected should recieved a majority approval rating at least until he begins acting on (or against the) behalf of the United States of America.

        Those changes could also provide the necessary push to see more of the inactive voter base to reregister and actually feel their vote makes a difference, since an official who might not pass in FPTP voting may find that the second or third tier of votes pushes them way ahead of the other candidates, who were only popular amongst their party-base while broader approval was gained by a third party candidate across multiple ideological groups.

        Personally I have lost whatever faith in America I might have once held and am going to try and do a better job wherever I end up. Perhaps the rest of you can elicit some change that will make me regret that decision, but as it stands there is nothing for me to lament losing here.

      • (Score: 2) by beckett on Monday January 15 2018, @11:02AM (1 child)

        by beckett (1115) on Monday January 15 2018, @11:02AM (#622526)

        i think you have the overall strategy corralled: get the money out of poiltics. On a direct action level, work through the existing infrastructure on a municipal and state level. Use the Tenth Amendment leverage States' Rights for something other than a dog whistle for segregation and against gay marriage.

        I agree somewhat with the AC that replied to you: move elsewhere not to turn tail, but to find venues that are more ripe for change. Use the Constitutions right to free movement; don't occupy a park, but move to places where the change you want to see is more possible. Forward thinkers should not keep concentrating in California or New York; the bravest of you should establish footholds and find fellow travelers in Tennessee, Louisiana, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, and Alabama. municipal politics has even less inertia than either federal or state level politics.

        By no means would it be easy or quick. But the Supreme court ruling against North Carolina redistricting policy is as potent and promising as Citizens United is discouraging. Lets see what happens in Wisconsin next with regards to gerrymandering.

        Above all, people have to be motivated to get involved, and increase voter turnout more than polarization and anger over the other tribe have consumed the larger conversation. There has to be more effort for bipartisan collaboration; devolving into further polarization only will exacerbates the crass tribalism that has shaped the last two decades of federal US politics.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @03:59AM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @03:59AM (#622417)

      Trump actually has a history of getting shit done. What other president had that?

      Looking back, I suppose Teddy Roosevelt might qualify. Eisenhower might. Mostly, we have along history of electing people whose primary skill is bullshitting.

      Trump of course has the bullshitting skill, since you can't get elected without it. Unlike the others though, he has a clue about operating a business. That is a step up.

      • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday January 15 2018, @04:15AM (2 children)

        by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Monday January 15 2018, @04:15AM (#622423)

        He's also a warmonger and an awful authoritarian who is continuing many unconstitutional policies of previous presidents, such as the NSA's mass surveillance. I don't want to hear about how the vast majority of politicians are corrupt authoritarians, since that just means they are evil along with Trump. There are no excuses here.

        Trump actually has a history of getting shit done.

        Only valuable if he tries to do things that are actually good. Tell me when he ends all the wars, when he abolishes the TSA, when he stops the drug war, when he stops police asset forfeiture (theft), when he pardons Snowden, when he ends the NSA's unconstitutional mass surveillance, etc. As the president, he could at least speak vehemently against those things even if he can't unilaterally stop all of them, and since you said he has a history of "getting shit done", he should be able to accomplish this. All of those things are part of the swamp, and he said he would drain it, so where is he? Oh, wait, he's actually said he's in favor of many of those policies, and is silently continuing the rest.

        Really, it seems to me that the only people who could possibly praise Trump at this point are people who are stupid, ignorant, authoritarian, or some combination of those.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @11:46AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @11:46AM (#622533)

          He's also a warmonger

          Remind me, what wars has Trump started so far?

          Syria is at the calmest it's been for years, after the proxy war with Russia was stopped.
          North Korea is now talking directly with the South, after years of international antagonism and effective inaction (through successive US presidencies) over the North's nuclear development.

          Trump's a sabre-rattler, for sure, but the only fights he's started have been political.

          • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday January 16 2018, @01:46AM

            by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Tuesday January 16 2018, @01:46AM (#622928)

            Remind me, what wars has Trump started so far?

            He's continued the 7+ different interventions from previous presidents. That is bad enough, and there are no excuses. He doesn't need to start any new wars to be a warmonger; continuing previous wars is bad enough.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @06:07AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @06:07AM (#622450)

        Trump actually has a history of getting shit done. What other president had that?

        Are you really this stupid? There is no history. No legislation, except for a disastrous tax bill that Republican Greedy Bastards have been pushing forever. And in the private sector? Trump went bankrupt on a Casino, veritably a license to print money, and he couldn't get it done. Trump Steaks, Trump University? All failures. And Trump Billionaire? Highly suspect. I infer that Trump has never gotten anything done, except promoting the Donald. Housing for Seniors? Civic improvement? Economic Development? No, more like banging pron actresses and getting hair plug implants, and beating his first lady. Total loser! And, New Yorker, the object of derision and scorn of every decent rural American everywhere, until now. Oh, and a pious "pussy-grabbing" Christian as well. Let's "Git 'er done!" Amerika!

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:57PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:57PM (#622694)

          I see you left out the ice rink. President Trump wrote about it in one of his books. You should buy all his books.

          That tax bill is a disaster... for rich people in high-tax states. Can't we tax Madonna a bit more? I think so. I think it's a fine idea. Middle class people are struggling, and they need the tax cut.

          The golf courses and hotels are pretty sweet. Not every business will be a success. People like Obama and Hillary, who never even tried running a business, are failures by default.

      • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @06:38AM (2 children)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday January 15 2018, @06:38AM (#622469) Journal

        Does it hurt to be this completely, utterly, fractally wrong? Because if not, that's a good argument for atheism or maltheism right there...

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46PM (#622686)

          I could do without the prayer, but Trump has to give it lip service. Even Obama pretended to be Christian.

          I voted for Trump. I figured he wouldn't try to keep his promises, but Hillary would, and her promises were pure evil.

          Much to my delight, Trump has been getting promises fulfilled.

          • (Score: 2, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @08:39PM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday January 15 2018, @08:39PM (#622711) Journal

            Are you sure you're an atheist? Remember, you can worship something and not be religious in the traditional sense, but still have a God. Even if it's money, power, or "haha take that, everyone who doesn't think like me."

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @05:56AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @05:56AM (#622444)

      It's just so short sighted for both US tribes, red and blue,

      Republicans drew first Blood! So no mercy! We will run Oprah! We will run PeeWee Herman! We will run Justin Bieber Timberlake! All because the Republicans aspired to Dynasty, and they could not find out who killed JR, so they elected W! An ignorant man, an easily controlled man, the type of idiot that would invade Afghanistan, the graveyard of Empires. And then they elect a clown, mostly because Mike Pence has had sex with animals, and that the rest of the stable was not more insane than W. So when your Grandkids ask you, who destroyed American, you can just say, "Republicans". Them and Rand Paul. And Paul Ryan. And Ayn Rand and Paul Ryan. And Ron Paul. And Nixon. And Reagone. And Bill O'Really. And Shawn Hankerchief. And Milo Holdmydickabit. And Runaway1956.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46AM (4 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 15 2018, @07:46AM (#622487) Journal

      This is what is going to propel Oprah to become president one day. It's just so short sighted for both US tribes, red and blue, to compromise so hard on basic qualifications of leadership just so they WIN.

      The only qualifications for US president are a few constitutional provisions (35 years or older, "native born". etc) and winning the electoral college. That is it. As for Oprah, she would be more successful a businessperson than anyone who has been in the office ever. That's a pretty significant qualification right there.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:31AM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:31AM (#622489)

        What really matters is policy. The fact that she supported the Iraq war, among other horrendous things, does not give me confidence in her ability to oppose the military industrial complex or the surveillance state.

        Too bad there aren't real penalties for violating the Constitution, like prison time. I would think 'respecting the Constitution' would be a requirement to remain in office, but nope.

        • (Score: 2) by beckett on Tuesday January 16 2018, @05:43AM (2 children)

          by beckett (1115) on Tuesday January 16 2018, @05:43AM (#623009)

          The fact that she supported the Iraq war

          Do you have access to her voting history as a senator from the future?

          What really matters is policy.

          If this is what really matters, then i'd advise giving her an opportunity to write policy before passing any kind of judgement.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 16 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 16 2018, @07:51PM (#623257)

            Do you have access to her voting history as a senator from the future?

            We have access to clips from her television show from the past. Bill Moyers selected a few about Iraq for Buying the War: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlDwzb0tp8 [youtube.com]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @01:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @01:06PM (#622548)

    You win the analogy of the day award. I almost choked on my toast just now. xD