• You are losing out on amazing benefits because you are not a member. Join for free. Register now.
  • Latest One-Day Giveaway - Win a Google Home Mini Smart Speaker and a Mystery Gadget. Enter Here.

Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support

Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
58,969
#62
None of this is remotely true. How am I "extreme left"? I'm sorry you don't want to discuss the substance of what I posted, and prefer out-group vitriol. :)
Hard to discuss anything with you since you only come online at midnight, post a bunch of crap, drop links and disappear. That's on you not me.
 

Tman*

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
2,058
#63
Dems: You are allowed to have rights, and free speech, and you are welcome to identify as a non binary gender neutral transvestite helicopter.

But if you dont agree with my opinion, you are WRONG, and you offend me, and then I am a victim to your oppression!
 

Eniigma

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
1,186
#64
No, you misunderstand what I was saying. I don't care what Kaplan himself does. He's clearly a conservative dude with specific political affiliations he cherishes. That's fine, he can do what he likes, support who he likes etc. I'm saying it's not good for Facebook's VP of Public Policy to do this, whoever that person is.

And yes, that would apply to someone like Sandberg, too.

Let's say Facebook had a different VP of Public Policy that leaned left, and they threw celebration parties for Democrat nominees and supported them at confirmation hearings. Do you really think they wouldn't be accused by right-leaning folks (on here and elsewhere) of evidence that Facebook is 'picking sides'? This is what happened here, after all.
I 100% agree with you, if it Sandberg or another VP or even Kaplan that was supporting Ford or throwing a party for the Dems like you said , there would be cries from the right about picking sides.

And that is in essence the whole issue here.

The issue here, is he's being attacked by people within the company for doing something on his own time because they don't like it. The reality is you can take Facebook out if it and replace it with any company.
 

Eniigma

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
1,186
#65
That sums it up perfectly.
He's extreme left, but doesn't agree with freedom of association. That is a founding principle of liberalism. Orbital is just deluded :D
They wont even watch the video as it would make them feel like foolsTools.
Get ready for a new barrage of BS garbage to follow ....... soon.
Wush the will spend sone of their energy on issues here at home. But I guess that would be too much to expect from libtard shills.

PS: I note some already arrived.
I often agree with you guys but really posts like this aren't helpful when trying to have a serious discussion, it just drives the wedge deeper and reinforces the libtard/conservtard division.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
58,969
#67
I often agree with you guys but really posts like this aren't helpful when trying to have a serious discussion, it just drives the wedge deeper and reinforces the libtard/conservtard division.
It does, I agree.

But the division is being driven by them with or without our participation.
 
Last edited:

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
17,541
#68
I often agree with you guys but really posts like this aren't helpful when trying to have a serious discussion, it just drives the wedge deeper and reinforces the libtard/conservtard division.
So much this....
 

Seriously

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
16,586
#69
I often agree with you guys but really posts like this aren't helpful when trying to have a serious discussion, it just drives the wedge deeper and reinforces the libtard/conservtard division.
Well I care less for either extreme but watching live the difference of treatment between the Republican team and the seemingly rag tag Democrat's team and how they treated Kavanaugh, in a "job" interview as opposed to Ford changed my whole outlook in one day. I cannot consider myself to be involved with such a monstrosity the Democrats displayed, acting like a bunch of scumbags, including Feinstein. There were only one decent female senator that have shown some respect and decency to Kavanaugh. The Democrats seemed to me to be on the same level as the migrant refugees over running Europe.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
2,103
#70
This is where i think there is no hope for you...


And then you pull it out the fire.

100% agree with that bolded bit.

I think most people are actually a mix of all. I lean strongly to the right, but there are a number of issues where I'm far left and many I'm more in the centre.



But OD, you seem to agree with the facebook staff that Kaplan's appearance in his personal capacity was a problem. Is this due your need at some level to support the liberal view point or do you really beleive that people above a certain level suddenly can't show any politicial views? And by that matter if it was a problem, would Sandberg's (COO) appearance there supporting Ford have been equally problematic?
At last the world is beginning to catch up with me. I have been banging on about the inadequacy of the left/right model for 50 years now. It is a model that caters for those with limited comprehension abilities. Eysenck suggested a vertical axis combined with a horizontal axis (he suggested left /right and tough /tender minded as two possibilities in 1957 in 'Sense and nonsense in psychology' published by Penguin books. But be warned that some of his phrasing (such as reference to 'savages') would not now be printed!) I would go further and propose a three dimensional model (vertical, horizontal, and through the middle back to the front axes - or even more if I had the ability to operate in more than three dimensions). The back through to the front axis could for example be selfish to selfless, or whatever takes your fancy.
As to the second bold point, when I joined HMC&E in 1961 as an Officer of Customs & Excise, I was not permitted to join a political party, or to seek election in local politics except as an independent. Lower grades, such as Departmental Clerical Officers, could however join political parties, and I recall one who was a paid up Communist. So I see no reason why this particular Facebook person should not be barred from supporting a political party as a condition of service. BUT he would not be allowed to support ANY party, including the one his colleagues seem to have given their stamp of approval to. I had no problem with my condition of service: its point was to remove the possibility that any rulings I gave were politically motivated. Many colleagues were in fact elected as independent members of local councils, and were seen as independent of local 'bigwigs', and so to be trusted. The lack of trust in politics generally these days is quite marked. I myself certainly admit to being sceptical of all parties, although there are individuals I am prepared to trust, both here and in the UK.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
2,103
#71
It does, I agree.

But the division is being driven by them with or without our participation.
Are you but a sheep then? You do not have to go along with fermenting division. Try striking out on your own and showing some independence of mind. It would do us all a favour, presuming we want serious non dogmatic discussion.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
58,969
#72
Are you but a sheep then? You do not have to go along with fermenting division. Try striking out on your own and showing some independence of mind. It would do us all a favour, presuming we want serious non dogmatic discussion.
Dono what you on about?

I will no longer let these libtards post the lies and deceit they have been pushing. Sorry that it makes it a bit harder for you guys.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
2,103
#73
Dono what you on about?

I will no longer let these libtards post the lies and deceit they have been pushing. Sorry that it makes it a bit harder for you guys.
Pitbull, it is a matter of style rather than substance. You can disagree without being rude (in the English rather than the SA usage sense.)
 

Seriously

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
16,586
#79
Whatever your views on Ford/Kavanaugh, IMO it is absolutely horrific that a decision like this is made by people voting along party lines.
Anything goes, with gloves off, when you are desperate to steal back power.
 

Eniigma

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
1,186
#80
I often agree with you guys but really posts like this aren't helpful when trying to have a serious discussion, it just drives the wedge deeper and reinforces the libtard/conservtard division.
It does, I agree.

But the division is being driven by them with or without our participation.
It's something we're all guilty of, except maybe @Ninja'd because just cracks jokes but I think we'd all better off with taking a chill pill and deep breath before going in swingning.

As to the second bold point, when I joined HMC&E in 1961 as an Officer of Customs & Excise, I was not permitted to join a political party, or to seek election in local politics except as an independent. Lower grades, such as Departmental Clerical Officers, could however join political parties, and I recall one who was a paid up Communist. So I see no reason why this particular Facebook person should not be barred from supporting a political party as a condition of service. BUT he would not be allowed to support ANY party, including the one his colleagues seem to have given their stamp of approval to. I had no problem with my condition of service: its point was to remove the possibility that any rulings I gave were politically motivated. Many colleagues were in fact elected as independent members of local councils, and were seen as independent of local 'bigwigs', and so to be trusted. The lack of trust in politics generally these days is quite marked. I myself certainly admit to being sceptical of all parties, although there are individuals I am prepared to trust, both here and in the UK.
I agree and disagree with you here...
There are certain employements where political affiliations should be not allowed... things like Judges, Law enforcement, emergancy services and various gov deptartments like SARS, C&E, Home Affiars etc. Politics has no place there, but telling a private company or somone in a private company they can't have their own beliefs... that's wrong on every level. Sure you can tell them to keep in their pants so to speak, with no displays, discussions etc at work, but saying they can't take a days leave or go support something on their own time is wrong.

I get scared when all the "liberal" guys here start agreeing with me.
 
Top