“What bugs me is that it seems the only source for this claim of road blocks, etc. is Horsford. I've not seen one independent news source documenting his claims (and one would expect the news to be all over this!)
I think this is just political theater, although I certainly would like to be proved wrong.”
“I'm seeing a lot of post that point fingers at conservatives. But I'm going somewhat contrarian here and point out there is a lot of this junk on the left as well. Perhaps even more than the right although it is hard to judge because if one has a liberal outlook, the conservative falsehoods will naturally imprint on you more than the liberal falsehoods (and vise versa if you are conservative).
I actually spend more time trying to debunk liberal falsehoods, because as a liberal, I think it is more important to see the values and beliefs I hold important are kept to truth. (That, plus the liberal conspiracy anti-science crowd really annoys me).”
“I don't believe this guy (Horsford). I saw him make the claim on TV this weekend, and when the interviewer drilled in, his 'evidence' was one email that he had not even researched. He was getting on a high horse with absolutely no evidence.
He may have more evidence now, but based on the original accusation, this seems like someone just playing politics and to heck with facts.”
Mopshell on Apr 30, 2014 at 13:23:15
“Will you believe Paula Wikan?
"One resident, Paula Wikan, told me [reporter Jon Ralston] that on Easter Sunday, armed militia members greeted her neighbors on their way to church. “I know of a few people that did not even enter for fear and disgust of having their church basically held captive,” she said."”
“There are a couple of issues to explore here. The first is "Is the claim true?". Just because he said CU fired him for the ad does not make it true.
But just as critical is the dirty little secret of adjuncts in higher education. An adjunct can be fired for any reason (including discriminatory reasons) and there is no appeal, no legal protection. Actually, a school typically does not give a reason (which makes me wonder about the supposed reason Witteregg gave). You just do not have classes in the following term.”
“I would have liked to have seen some examination of the truth/falsehood of the accusation in this article. Articles like this seem to encourage partisanship because they do not look at the facts of the issue, only the accusations and denials.”
iseedeadppl on Apr 25, 2014 at 13:32:07
“Have you ever seen an article at the HP that doesn't encourage partisanship?”
“The adjoining Travel Ideas for Geeks was horribly off for a couple things I knew. The Space Center is not in Orlando, but 60 miles away. There is no 'station' there. And the tours are not of the "Visitor Center Complex", but instead the Space Center. In a like manner, the picture associated with Wellington is at the Hobbiton set, over 100 miles away.”
“Obviously, not a true libertarian. A true libertarian would say the state has no right to tell a person where he or she can and cannot live.
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" - Emma Lazarus”
“In my experience, there are two basic types of 'Christians' (yes, I know I'm over generalizing here). One type of Christian follows and believes in the teachings of Jesus Christ. The other type of Christian only worships Jesus Christ while pretty much rejecting his teachings (and typically follow the teachings of Paul and Jehovah).
I would suggest Huckabee is one type of Christian and Obama is another.”
“What I find really troubling is him firing his staffer. If this is a fire-able offense (actually, private relationships should be private IMHO), then he should fire his own self first. The double standard here is mind boggling.”
“I'm not sure the caption for the photo of the damaged aircraft is correct. They were obviously propped up like that, and for that matter why would there be aircraft sitting in a square to be damaged by a crowd?
My guess is that these were old aircraft modified to act as anti-aircraft guns. But that is even a weak guess. Ideas?”
Autora on Apr 10, 2014 at 12:05:08
“They probably dragged them there, if they hadn't been there already.”
“Ah yes, the old right wing argument that having knowledge of the subject automatically invalidates the argument. And let's throw some red herrings in while we are at it.
The fact remains, you are arguing that corporations have the right and responsibility to invade the private space of an individual employee. The tea party would love you.
IMHO, the individuals rights to political opinion, even political opinion that I do not like, should superseded the corporation. Corporations should not have the right to dictate political opinion to it's employees.
If you don't like that opinion, fine. But quit with the false argumentation..”
Peter Mercuri on Apr 2, 2014 at 13:54:41
If you have done something immoral in the past that could bring shame and hurt a company's image and reputation, it would be in the best interest of the company to not hire you.
“Having been a CEO more than once, I can tell you a CEO certainly is an employee. My contracts made this perfectly clear. I think you have been watching too much Mad Men.
As for RuPaul, and don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about, I never watched the show and do not have the slightest idea what that has to do with this discussion. I can however say that the couple of times I've met her, I have been under impressed.”
Peter Mercuri on Apr 2, 2014 at 11:30:39
“I think you just provided insight into why you are trying to minimize the role of a CEO.”
“In one word, Bullpucky. Your argument sounds pretty much the same as the right wing nuts that say any disagreement with their religious belief is an attack on their religious freedoms.
A persons right to action does not prohibit someone else from making observations about the value and yes, wrongness, of those actions.
And if my observations do not matter, why are you wasting time here?”
Abnormal Wrench on Apr 1, 2014 at 20:39:19
“Your argument is you feel the need to dictate when and where people are allowed to not buy products,and you think my position is the privileged authoritarian? You clearly are not grasping your own argument, let alone my argument. I'm saying freedom is being able to buy products or not buy products, regardless what you think about it. I'm amazed you don't see how unbelievably arrogant your position is.”
“Sean, you drew a line and I'm asking exactly where that line is. You said there is a difference between an employee who is a CEO and a rank and file employee, and I'm trying to figure out which employees fall on which side of the line and why there is a line.
It seems to me that you are confused on some of the issues here. Kovaks has not made any offensive statement AS THE CEO. He has not caused Mozilla to engage in any offensive political actions. The problem that people have is his political support as a private citizen. And I am suggesting his private beliefs and political support is not the corporations responsibility. To make it the corporations responsibility is a dangerous place to walk, because it then opens the door for a corporation to hire and fire any employee based on their private life and values.
Now, if he engages in political actions as the CEO, or has Mozilla engage in political actions, this changes. Then Mozilla is responsible for those actions. But that has not happened yet, and it's irresponsible to hold Mozilla to task until that happens.”
“I totally disagree. When it comes to the private beliefs of an employee, there is absolutely no difference between the CEO and the lowest paid worker. ALL are public faces of the company.
So where would you want to draw the line? Do you hold the companies President, and VP's also responsible for their private beliefs? What about the section heads? The managers? The spokespeople? Where exactly do you draw the line in saying the company is responsible for employee A's beliefs but not employee's B's beliefs?
And if a company is responsible for an employees private beliefs, does the company then not have the right to hire and fire based on those private beliefs? That is a pretty scary power you are handing to corporations. A power that I think should NEVER be given to them.”
BluBlood38 on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:03:00
“I'm not sure what you mean "draw the line". Nobody is advocating for censorship, but when you make a political statement that offends a sizable portion of your customers, be prepared for the fallout in the form of the boycott. To borrow from the Ayn Rand types...its the beauty of the "free market"”
“That is what is known as a red herring argument. I said nothing of the kind.
The scary thing here is the implications of the argument that a company is responsible for the private beliefs of an employee. If this is true, if a company is responsible for the private beliefs of an employee, then a company MUST have the right to hire and fire based on those private beliefs. And that is a very scary thought.”
Abnormal Wrench on Apr 1, 2014 at 12:05:13
“This has nothing to do with companies being responsible with employee beliefs, this has to do with the right of consumers to spend their money when and where they feel like it, even if their rationale is unacceptable to you. It doesn't matter whether you find it agreeable or not.”
“I cannot support this (and I'm trans and like OKCupid). The CEO is still just an employee of a company. Should we look into the private life of each and every employee of a company and punish that company for the private views of it's employees? Where is the dividing line?
This steps over the line.”
Peter Mercuri on Apr 1, 2014 at 15:22:11
“You should look into what it means to be the CEO of a company. They're not just another employee.
Not everyone recognizes your line. Did you object to supposedly 'transphobic' language being used on RuPaul Drag Race?”
BluBlood38 on Apr 1, 2014 at 09:31:06
“There is a HUGE difference between a CEO and rank and file employees. A CEO is a VERY public figure, the "face" of the corporation if you will. Once that public face/voice begins spewing forth unsolicited social commentary, or involving him/herself in political races, people are going to attribute those acts and beliefs to the corporation...its that simple. More sinisterly, lets not forget how many CEO's in the last election cycle issued "not-so-veiled" threats as to which candidates to vote for.”
Jeffrey Marks on Apr 1, 2014 at 06:24:30
“Employers will admit that most of them Google potential employees to see what type of social media footprint they have left. So yes, this is fair.”
Abnormal Wrench on Apr 1, 2014 at 01:45:16
“So you're against boycotts? Does that mean people aren't allowed to not use/buy products that they find an issue with?”