Are We Ready For a Woman President? Really?

@Lash,

It's so funny. I'm Disgusting for saying it- it's fine with you that they did it. Odd ethics on Frank.

@snood,

Quote:

Yes, yes, yes! Okay? - I think Obama had more negative, disrespectful, nasty, racist, degrading, defamatory **** heaped on him than on any president or candidate for president ever.

I agree, also finally agreed with your premise of the thread after I thought about who I rather have for Vice president, either Warren or Biden. I think deep, you may be right that a lot of us might not be quite ready for a woman president. I don't want to include myself in that number. On other hand, not sure Warren would really be ready for foreign affairs. One thing we don't have to worry about Hillary, she is more than ready for foreign issues.

0 Replies

I know we are all "sick of Hillary's emails" however, there is a new news article which new information on it. For the record, my take, it was not illegal but I think in retrospect, a mistake which she has admitted. I don't think it should be a deciding factor in deciding a president though. The only problem I have with the whole email issue is like I said, I don't understand why should we automatically delete her emails knowing her emails were state related. One question, do they delete emails on state provided servers?

Report: Clinton server's Internet connection had vulnerability

Quote:

Hillary Clinton’s private email server could be controlled remotely over an open Internet connection, potentially exposing the server to hackers, The Associated Press reported.

Clinton’s server, which the Democratic presidential candidate used to host all of her email exchanges while serving as secretary of State, was set up with a Microsoft remote desktop service. The tool allows users to control devices remotely via an Internet connection.

That connection, however, is supposed to have additional security measures, such as encryption, to block nefarious actors from exploiting the remote-control software and hijacking a device. Most employ an encrypted private connection, or virtual private network (VPN), when controlling a device from afar.

The U.S. government issued warnings about this vulnerability during Clinton’s time in office. The State Department even banned technology officials from using remote-access software to work on unclassified servers without a waiver, according to the AP.

The AP discovered details of the setup in data and documents compiled in 2012 by an anonymous hacker-researcher who scanned Clinton’s server at least twice for available entry points, or “ports.” His scan picked up the open ports created by the remote-control software.

It's not clear whether the person knew it was Clinton's server being scanned.

But if she was informed of that vulnerability why didn't she correct it?

1 Reply

@Lash,

What's more disgusting is that you use Bill's infidelity as a slam on his wife as if she is somehow to blame for his actions. His violation of their wedding oath somehow means she is a bad person. Bill had an affair with an intern so Hillary is should not be President. That I find disgusting. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for not supporting Clinton. That her husband had an affair is IMO absolutely not one of them.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Because she is either lazy, beneath her or both. Clinton has rules for everyone but herself. Her arrogance is astounding.

1 Reply

@woiyo,

I hate giving fuel for the fire, but this is a real story regardless of it being an election year and I just find the details interesting.

Anyway at the risk of getting thumbs down, which I admit do bother me, she has admitted she doesn't know about how computer works, so maybe she was simply ignorant of the remote control thingie being the mode of how her server was set up and didn't give it a thought when the ban from the state department (unless her's was waived)was issued. The Clinton people have said there is no proof a breach was actually reached, however that is not the point. The point is that it could have been. Since she chose the server, then she was responsible for it security and it seems to me, she was lax in that responsibility.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

The point is that it could have been. Since she chose the server, then she was responsible for it security and it seems to me, she was lax in that

The problem with that the government had been hack over and over again so the idea that if she had indeed used the state department servers that the Chinese and others would not had ended up reading her mail is not something I would care to bet on.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

I agree, her data would have been no safer, something I hope has been addressed and fixed. Still, not sure why she used a service which was banned from her state department because of its lack of security. I mean, you do what you can even if you are not successful.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

The reality is that she used such a service because she delegates such activities. To use a Trump answer, she hires people to do that. She doesn't approve every vendor, decide on every IT purchase. I can see the conversation now:

Abelin: Hilary, you have Debbie at the DNC at 10, Senator Sanders at 11, lunch with the President at noon and the IT guy needs 15 minutes of your time.
Clinton: OK, I can squeeze in the IT guy now.
Abelin: I'll send him in.
IT guy: Ms Clinton, I've order all the hardware for your office and put in the high speed network connection. What do you want to use for the email server?
Clinton: What are my options?
IT guy: You can use the State Department default email account or you can set up your own server.
Clinton: Which do you recommend?
IT guy: Colin Powel and Jeb Bush went the email server route. It gives you a little more control over your email and a few more options around creating accounts, but you'll have to pay for it yourself. The State Department account is free but you'll have to go through the help desk if you need assistance.
Clinton: Hah, I was on hold for an hour last time I called those guys! Do the server thing, send the bill to Bill.

I know Republicans imagine Clinton sitting in a poorly lit room wringing her hands cackling about how she will hide all her emails from the public, but just like Trump, she hires people to do that stuff. Is she still responsible? Sure. Does she personally investigate the background of all her vendors? Doubtful.

2 Replies

@engineer,

How do you explain the policy decision to delete emails after 30 days?

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

she has admitted she doesn't know about how computer works, so maybe she was simply ignorant of the remote control thingie being the mode of how her server was set up and didn't give it a thought when the ban from the state department (unless her's was waived)was issued.

Hillary is no idiot. She knew EXACTLY what she was doing. But let's play this out. Even if you are computer illiterate, you have one I-Phone for personal use and another for Business use for a reason. So even an IDIOT would know or should know not to use the business phone for personal use and vice versa.

And if she is to idiotic to understand that simple policy, can she be trusted as President?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

That's a good question to ask her. Here, we have automatic software that goes through everyone's in box, sent box and deleted folders and cleans them up every thirty days, but that's for the corporate world and the State Department should have their own email retention policy. If Clinton violated that, she is responsible but I haven't seen anyone say that she has. It should be fairly easy to do. Here's the policy, here's what you did, they don't match. Don't get me wrong here, I think asking Clinton about the email server is fine, I just think the idea that Clinton personally approved the email server vendor and oversaw the setup is silly (or paranoid). If Clinton is doing that, she has a micromanagement issue.

0 Replies

@woiyo,

woiyo wrote:

But let's play this out. Even if you are computer illiterate, you have one I-Phone for personal use and another for Business use for a reason.

Just about every business person I know here uses their work phone for personal emails. No one I know carries two phones.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

I agree, her data would have been no safer, something I hope has been addressed and fixed.

Not likely given the constant headlines of hacking such as the over 6 millions US government security clearance files that went to who? All the government can say is they think it was to China!!!!

It so very bad I can see government people trusting their own servers more then the government ones.

0 Replies

GETTING BACK TO THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD:

I am more and more certain that we ARE ready for a woman president...

...and the more I hear Hillary Clinton talk and present her ideas...the more certain I am that she should be that first woman president.

I've been a supporter of Hillary for a while now...and after seeing her in action last night, I am proud that I have been .

0 Replies

@snood,

An argument might be made, without being shouted down as misogynistic, that the U.S.A. plays a role on the world stage that requires a male head of state, since many other nations have little respect for a woman. Just my opinion.

2 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

An argument might be made, without being shouted down as misogynistic, that the U.S.A. plays a role on the world stage that requires a male head of state, since many other nations have little respect for a woman. Just my opinion.

Oh, this oughta be fun.

Where's the popcorn?

0 Replies

@engineer,

You make this sound as if it was contrived. It was an organic statement about Hillary and her lack of honesty that veered into the mirror because I thought it was really weird that she is aspiring to occupy the office where Bill and Monica enjoyed their shenanigans.

I don't hold HRC responsible at all. I do hate her incredibly hypocritical Tammy Wynette remark about standing by your man that came back to bite her in the ass, though. And it does irk the hell out of me that people think these remarks are somehow off limits. How very puritanical of such a crowd.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Well, if they learn nothing else from the whole email gate, I hope they can catch up to technology and security in the government and have more rules to safeguard information. I mean, as Secretary of State she was privy to a lot of information even if it wasn't classified still would have been better not to have been assessable to whoever wished to see it. The same goes double for Pentagon and congress and whoever else was hacked.

0 Replies

@Foofie,

We don't bow down to misogyny, we shatter it.

1 Reply

Are We Ready For a Woman President? Really?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know