First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
Post Reply John Lewis
35657 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/16/17 , edited 1/17/17

Ejanss wrote:
(Sorry, just heard the Mark Hamill Joker version of that, and I'm still cracking up.
https://audioboom.com/posts/5501476-a-very-special-message-for-martin-luther-king-day )


Oh god, hahah, he did that one too?

Can we pay him to do this full time for the next 4 years? Maybe start a Gofundme.
25686 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 1/16/17

runec wrote:
Why is it rubbish? The office of the president has a certain level of respect and professionalism too it. The highest level in the country, really. It should not conform to whatever fucktrumpet is elected into it. They should conform to it.


Hah, CONFORM. Right, they should just conform. Okay, well, maybe there is some manual on presidential decorum. In which case, we'd have to cite the specific violations, not just complain that someone is misbehaving according to our personal standards. It could be that something is grounds for impeachment, like getting sucked off by a secretary (apparently that wasn't serious enough, though).

I mean, we get it, you don't like his personality. That's just, like... your opinion. Which is fine, I agree sometimes, but it seems like you're saying it's something more than just an opinion, but I'm not sure how that can be. There's either a rule the president must follow, or there isn't and the only punishment comes around at election time.
Ejanss 
16621 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/16/17 , edited 1/16/17

Kavalion wrote:


runec wrote:
Why is it rubbish? The office of the president has a certain level of respect and professionalism too it. The highest level in the country, really. It should not conform to whatever fucktrumpet is elected into it. They should conform to it.


Hah, CONFORM. Right, they should just conform. Okay, well, maybe there is some manual on presidential decorum. .


Yeah. MAYBE there's some basic ground rules of professionalism in any national government office, especially those that represent the state, or answer to an electorate.
(Or is that a Trump Maybe, like "2 + 2 = 5! I grew up believing that, and it's a shame our educational system still teaches otherwise! It's totally unacceptable in this country!.........Okay, maybe it equals 4." )
You'll find it's the same when you work for anyone else's job and demanded responsibilities, which, we freely admit, Mr. Trump has not had much experience of on his own resume'. Well....guess what.

For all of Thomas Jefferson's legendarily radical/brainiac populist ideals of the role of the presidency, he believed the man was the office, and that the White House was the private residence of the chief executive.
When he deliberately tried to be informal, and was still wearing his morning robe when he met the new British ambassador for a breakfast meeting, the ambassador was not amused. Some speculate it took us that much closer to the War of 1812.
mxdan 
10944 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 1/16/17
I mean if someone gets hired onto any job they can't just say whatever they want and tear apart company ethics because they have no sense of purpose. Unless, maybe, they created the company? Which trump did not create U.S.

I guess my problem with this PC movement is that while yes there are times when it's ok and say and do what you want within confines because it can initiate progress. It operates under this assumption that it's always ok to operate uninhibited... This really deconstructs what it means to exist in society. We have boundaries because we respect people who live here with us. We have decorum because it is a means of effective communication and not primal impulse. If someone thinks they should be free to just act regardless of who or what is around them then you simply have anarchy in some form. How is society supposed to progress without respect?
35657 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/16/17 , edited 1/17/17

Kavalion wrote:
Hah, CONFORM. Right, they should just conform. Okay, well, maybe there is some manual on presidential decorum. In which case, we'd have to cite the specific violations, not just complain that someone is misbehaving according to our personal standards. It could be that something is grounds for impeachment, like getting sucked off by a secretary (apparently that wasn't serious enough, though).

I mean, we get it, you don't like his personality. That's just, like... your opinion. Which is fine, I agree sometimes, but it seems like you're saying it's something more than just an opinion, but I'm not sure how that can be. There's either a rule the president must follow, or there isn't and the only punishment comes around at election time.


If the way you're behaving would get you fired from a Wendy's than you should probably grow the fuck up taking on the office of the United States, yes. The literal weight of the world is on your shoulders. You can't be acting like the world's oldest 8 year old boy. It damages the image of the office and the country. Which is already tanking pretty bad at his election to begin with.

There is no codified decorum for the president because you've never elected a president that has so flagrantly shit on it right out of the gate before.

As for me not liking his personality; the problem isn't that that's my opinion, it's that his personality and behaviour are objectively not good things to have in the leader of the free world. If not legitimately dangerous things. They would serve him well as a third world despot ( which is essentially what he acts like ). But at the head of a global superpower? Dear lord.

The best case scenario is he only starts trade wars. I mean, he already can't handle it and he's not even taking the job yet. What sort of shit fit are we going to see on Saturday after not enough kids come to his birthday par-inauguration and the even larger protests roll out the day after?





19306 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / San Francisco
Offline
Posted 1/16/17 , edited 1/19/17

mxdan wrote:
How is society supposed to progress without respect?


Comedy.

There was a time in the not too distant past when comics could insult everyone. Handicapped? Yes. Women? Yes. Men? Yes. Whites? Yes. Blacks? Yes. And everyone was equally picked on. Old comics were like a season of "Family Guy"; pretty much no group escaped unscathed. And, you know, it was good. It was funny. You might feel a little sore when your group was picked on, but you were in a room with a group of people of various backgrounds, and they laughed equally as hard at jokes that picked on them. So, you put your big boy panties on, put your feelings aside and laughed too. I still enjoy George Carlin, along with old, OLD SNL. It may have been incredibly sexist and racist, but everyone equally was picked on, and it was funny.

But now, no...we can't have that. Making fun of women isn't PC. Or minorities. Or the handicapped. Instead of teaching our young to embrace life's imperfections and laugh at it, we've taught them that they should be offended. White person dressed in Korean outfits? That's cultural appropriation and not allowed! You can't even have little kids dressing up as ethnic Disney characters any more without some group, such as the Polynesian Americans with the recent "Moana" film, getting wrapped up that a five year old is appropriating their culture for a fun night of trick-or-treating. I've never been one to ramble on about how things were so much better when I was a kid, but it's here where I really feel that it was. People didn't get so bent out of shape in the 1980s, and certainly not when it came to children dressing up as cartoon characters. We recognized that society is imperfect, that none of us, because of our race/gender/religion/socio-economic background, would ever be truly equal. But we could all get together in a room, call each other out, and laugh.

25686 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

mxdan wrote:
I mean if someone gets hired onto any job they can't just say whatever they want and tear apart company ethics because they have no sense of purpose. Unless, maybe, they created the company?


Well, that's a fair point. I mean, that's actually interesting to discuss and has some logic to it. A company can evaluate employees like that and can get rid of them if they seem disruptive.

However, in this case it's an elected official, not someone who was hired and answers to a boss responsible for evaluating his performance.

So, there seems to be some differences here. The argument that a boss at Wendy's might fire someone for ??? tweeting, or having a personality they don't like, or whatever, well, that's a possibility (that creates its own controversies), but how does that apply to an elected official? It's the voters who put him in power and they can only take it away at the next election, barring some criminal offense that calls for impeachment.

So, my question is, who's going to fire a president just for a bad attitude? I believe there is some sort of mechanic to do that, like a motion of no confidence, but it probably requires extreme circumstances and I don't know if it has happened before.

In the absence of that, I don't really see where the notion of "that's misbehaving" is coming from. I mean, we can say we'd spank him if he were our child, but unless there's an actual mechanism for political spanking, then it's not actually misbehaving.
21553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 1/17/17
Lewis is so bad that his fellow black panther is calling him out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK0Zxuz3f64
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

Rujikin wrote:

Lewis is so bad that his fellow black panther is calling him out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK0Zxuz3f64


You would think that the Black Caucasus would want to help their people, but as I've said in another thread, the promise to protect welfare from being cut is one strong reason these poor continue to re-elect these people. It's not that they want to remain on welfare, it's that there's no way out of it. You'll have to dig it up. I posted on it on CR and provided links to articles explaining this trap, that keeps these politicians in power.

Poor Blacks in inner cities

http://blackdemographics.com/households/poverty/


According to the 2014 U.S. Census Bureau ACS study (see charts below) 27% of all African American men, women and children live below the poverty level compared to just 11% of all Americans. An even higher percentage (38%) of Black children live in poverty compared to 22% of all children in America. The poverty rate for working-age Black women (26%) which consists of women ages 18 to 64 is higher than that of working-age Black men (21%).

Poverty rates for Black families vary based on the family type. While 23% of all Black families live below the poverty level only 8% of Black married couple families live in poverty which is considerably lower than the 37% of Black families headed by single women who live below the poverty line. The highest poverty rates (46%) are for Black families with children which are headed by single Black women. This is significant considering more than half (55%) of all Black families with children are headed by single women.


But I argued, in that other thread, that this trap was not exclusive to only the Black peoples in inner cities. The poor Whites in rural America are similarly trapped.

Poor Whites in rural America

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/white-working-class-poverty/424341/



For the last several months, social scientists have been debating the striking findings of a study by the economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton.* Between 1998 and 2013, Case and Deaton argue, white Americans across multiple age groups experienced large spikes in suicide and fatalities related to alcohol and drug abuse—spikes that were so large that, for whites aged 45 to 54, they overwhelmed the dependable modern trend of steadily improving life expectancy. While critics have challenged the magnitude and timing of the rise in middle-age deaths (particularly for men), they and the study’s authors alike seem to agree on some basic points: Problems of mental health and addiction have taken a terrible toll on whites in America—though seemingly not in other wealthy nations—and the least educated among them have fared the worst.

Meanwhile, other recent research has piled on the bad news for those without college degrees. A Pew study released last month found that the size of the middle class—defined by a consistent income range across generations—has shrunk over the last several decades. In part, this is because high-paying jobs for the less educated are vanishing. The study builds on other recent research that finds that almost all the good jobs created since the recession have gone to college graduates.


The articles I posted above don't talk about welfare. They talk about the poor Blacks and Whites in America. I wanted to show that it isn't only Black people who are suffering at the hands of corrupt politicians who have created this trap for them in the inner cities, but poor White Americans are similarly trapped in poverty by what their corrupt politicians have done to them. Namely create trade policies that has seen their good paying jobs shipped off-shore, and entrapping them in this condition.
31316 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Ajures
Offline
Posted 1/17/17
What right does trump have as president have if he can't handle, deal and work with Lewis?
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

Aoikihen wrote:

What right does trump have as president have if he can't handle, deal and work with Lewis?


The shoe goes on the other foot, too. What right does Lewis have, as Congressman, if he can't work with Trump?
21553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 1/18/17
Hahaha!

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/uh-oh-rep-john-lewis-didnt-pay-taxes-nearly-1-million-d-c-townhouse/

Uh Oh! Rep. John Lewis Didn’t Pay Taxes On His Nearly $1 Million D.C. Townhouse
7019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M
Offline
Posted 1/19/17 , edited 1/19/17

Rujikin wrote:

Hahaha!

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/uh-oh-rep-john-lewis-didnt-pay-taxes-nearly-1-million-d-c-townhouse/

Uh Oh! Rep. John Lewis Didn’t Pay Taxes On His Nearly $1 Million D.C. Townhouse


Yeah, that's pretty funny, a congressman who was late on his property taxes. Know what's even better? That same year, 2010, Trump University was imploding and setting the stage for a $25 million fraud settlement! And *that* fraudster is now our president! Can you f'ing believe it! Hahaha! Politics are hilarious. I just hope we don't all die laughing.

31316 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Ajures
Offline
Posted 1/19/17

DeadlyOats

The shoe goes on the other foot, too. What right does Lewis have, as Congressman, if he can't work with Trump?


No, no, no Dets smh You don't mess with John Lewis. You just don't.

Just stop Dets.

Go to your trump shrine and burn it with fire.

86768 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 1/19/17 , edited 1/19/17
Trump should ignore Lewis (and Saturday Night Live); he ...and all the other irrelevant Democrats scorning the peaceful transfer of power by skipping the inauguration. Loosing track of all the performers bullied out of the inauguration by crazed leftist liberals.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.