Congrats Democrats
- Thread starter snarlcakes
- Start date
It's telling that when Repubs attack Dems, you blame the Dems for not getting the joke, but when Dems attack Repubs, you blame the Dems for being divisive. Astounding that you can make such an argument seriously and not see the obvious fault.
What is so astounding? Limbaugh was a conservative radio personality to who used humor every day to advance an agenda.
Hillary and Obama . . . . .eh . . . .are not that.
Were you the guy mad that hurricane comments were not serious enough before the hurricane hit? I got the impression you hate Airplane! because air crashes are not a laughing matter.
1. Limbaugh was not a comedian.
2. Limbaugh was not the only Republican divisively insulting Democrats.
The divisiveness wasn't the result of Libs not getting Limbaugh's humor. The issue was the Republicans who didn't get the joke.
On a different note, someone describing Rush as "hilarious" tells you all you need to know about that person's sense of humor.
On a different note, someone describing Rush as "hilarious" tells you all you need to know about that person's sense of humor.
This is where I'm at with it.
Neither of them will do any permanent damage.
Both of them will be awful Presidents.
Both of them have what should be disqualifying levels of negative...stuff...
The silver lining is my hope that this might, just might, be the last time we have two historically awful candidates to choose from.
Yep. When the same guy is in charge of hurricane recovery and migrant benefits shows less sympathy for hurricane victims who lost everything than he has for destitute migrants, many of whom come here to game the system, I get pissed off.
It's fascinating watching how a certain % of his base embrace his bullshit, while the rest wink,wink,nudge,nudge over it. The real funny part is how the embracers don't realize that the nudgers think they are stupid.
PS - Trump himself is in both groups somehow.
Humor can be mean-spirited. Just saying it is humor is not enough. There are plenty of Trump jokes I am sure CO would hate.
I am talking about comments here, on this board. You did not find them appropriate.
You are talking about a lawyer here. There is nothing you can say to me about jokes.
I learned long ago that whether it’s jokes, trolling, insults or what have you, the effect they have is 100% in the mind of the beholder. If somebody doesn’t like Limbaugh humor, that dislike is only between their own ears.
Kamala is part of an administration that has already done permanent damage. And she will enable more damage with the immigration, energy, legislative, and Supreme Court reforms she promises.
Trumps boorish narcissistic personality does no real and lasting damage.
Biden used the trappings of his the office of President to say this about me and millions of others:
“Extreme MAGA Republicans just don’t threaten our personal and economic rights, they embrace political violence,”
That was not a campaign comment, it was from a serious national address given by the president of the USA. That is a totally inappropriate comment about the political opposition in this country and is among the most divisive comments made— ever. And you wanna belive that some guy on the radio is more divisive.
Trumps McDonalds event was a masterpiece of retail politics. He provoked and goaded an across the board negative reaction from democrats in office and in the media. The size and scope of Democrat response was itself hilarious.
Thanks for finally admitting you are an Extreme MAGA Republican.
As if we didn’t already know.
(Get ready for the “I’m not a Trump supporter blah blah blah blah response.)
I never denied it. I’ve said often I’m MAGA,. The extreme part is standard Democrat fare for anyone they disagree with.
For the life of me I cannot reconcile above with:
I would call an attorney, that whiplash has to be incredibly bad.
Eliminating the largest segment of the population from consideration doesn’t inspire confidence that the best candidate will be selected. It might be perceived quite differently if the stated objective was to select the best candidate…
They should have stuck with biden. He does much better with the working class.
Extreme sounds like mark copied and pasted his msnbc talking point. Good job
What is it so hard? Everything I think, say, or write, is on me. My choice.
Just like if someone likes Limbaugh's humor (or anyone's for that matter) that like "is only between their own ears." All emotional reactions or thoughts occur in the brain/body, right?
Yeah, I think each will do their own version of long-term damage.
The Biden administration has stated objectives that it will make diversity appointments, which eliminates many candidates. How can you have any confidence the best was appointed if many are not even considered? If I state I’m only going to hire white men would you assume I was going to hire the best candidate?
So you assume this particular person is unqualified because of some generic commitment to diversity?
Pretty much. Like art and wine, it’s all about how you like it. Also some people are much better at managing impulses than others.
But I fully agree there are some events that would provoke emotional reactions in everyone.
You’re right, until you give him the power of the presidency. I guess we need to vote blue.
He already was president. Who was jailed? Who did he use the military against? What citizens?
Is it just a question of “qualified” or is it a question of “best person available for this job?”
I guess it depends which part of the conversation you look at. The goalposts seem to move a lot.
Is there any way to categorically know who the BEST person is? I've been involved in hiring, it usually has come down to hair-splitting. I can't say that I've ever been in a hire where one person came in and was clearly "the best".
Mostly I have hired programmers. As an example, we have had 1 person who seemed to have more experience in the language we needed, someone with more overall programming experience, and someone with good experience but excellent at communication (since they often worked directly with clients communication was important). I don't know that I ever sat through a hiring cycle and had one person who was the best in the language we most needed, best in all the other languages we used, was the best communicator and at writing documentation, and would work for what we paid.
I think we tend to justify our decisions after the fact with "they were the best" when in reality we were splitting hairs we couldn't really see.
I've never had to hire for a highly technical, expert position, but in my experience my best hires were when I ignored expertise and went with personality.
Similar threads
