I don't believe he wrote that. In my opinion stringing together that many polysyllabic words is beyond his capabilities. Someone wrote it but I suspect it wasn't Kennedy. I wonder if he would have even understood it if it was read to him.Kennedy's new policy rescinds Richardson Waiver entirely. He writes in stark contrast: "The extra-statutory obligations of the Richardson Waiver impose costs on the Department and the public, are contrary to the efficient operation of the Department, and impede the Department's flexibility to adapt quickly to legal and policy mandates."
Cassidy was never a "no" vote. If you didn't see that, then you're already three strikes behind.So in the lead-up to Kennedy's confirmation vote, Senator Cassidy (R-LA) said that he met with Kennedy and received private reassurances that Kennedy wouldn't do, well, shit like this, and that swayed his vote to "yes". Those assurances were evidently a lie (I know, I'm shocked as well), so the question that reporters should be asking the Senator now is "what are you going to do about it?".
(I mean, we all know that the answer will be "posture a bit, but nothing substantive", but the Republicans in Congress are enabling and supporting crap like this, and that needs to be called out. This rot and sabotage is systemic in the Republican party)
1984 will go on the pile of books to be burned in case the proles read it.Did you not read 1984?
We're in "opposite world" right now.
Transparency now means obscurity/secrecy.
Free Speech now means censorship.
Truth now means ...
Oh, I know that. If nothing else, he's terrified of being challenged in the primary by an ambulatory red hat. But, his public posture was very different. I want to see him squirm, as publicly as possible.Cassidy was never a "no" vote. If you didn't see that, then you're already three strikes behind.
According to various articles I’ve seen (based on anonymous sources “close to the senator” so quite possibly seeded by him in an attempt to excuse what he did) it wasn’t just fear of a Musk financed primary. Supposedly he and his family members were getting credible death threats and he was concerned about Trump withdrawing Secret Service protection if Cassidy crossed him by going voting against Kennedy.Oh, I know that. If nothing else, he's terrified of being challenged in the primary by an ambulatory red hat. But, his public posture was very different. I want to see him squirm, as publicly as possible.
Time to e-mail inigo_mo.tga to the United States administration.It's like when DOGE said they were going to be transparent, then stopped using Slack because it was subject to FOIA requests.
Send them as ambassadors to Japan and/or Australia? Incomprehensible!Come on America, do the thing you do with Kennedys.
I have to wonder how all the corporate supporters are feeling today as their stocks drop......A simple misunderstanding, they meant radical transparency between corporate interests and their bank accounts.
are contrary to the efficient operation
Didn't these asshats literally discuss - openly, ironically - how to avoid leaving paper trails?It's like when DOGE said they were going to be transparent, then stopped using Slack because it was subject to FOIA requests.
Radical transparency is so transparent that it is opaque.Ah. So "radical transparency" on policy in the same sense that square wheels is a "radical redesign" on a car?
My wife was diagnosed as an adult and basically felt transformed after a lifetime of having her head in the clouds (not that she minded but definitely helped work). But I guess it's worth it since apparently he's going to go after food dye or something totally life impacting.RFK hinting that he would like to eliminate ADHD drugs such as methylphenidate has me worried. My 7yo has Severe ADHD and his School work suffers greatly when he is not on it.
truthiness?Did you not read 1984?
We're in "opposite world" right now.
Transparency now means obscurity/secrecy.
Free Speech now means censorship.
Truth now means ...