Ok, this is BS.

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
Devildog01 said:
Stop being such a fucking pussy.Say what you really mean.You want the communist democrat nigger out of office and the wealthy white republican voted in.Just type the truth and it will set you free.

Well, you proved my point in a big way. Like JohnB, you view things emotionally and assume I must be a racist since I would rather vote for Romney, when in fact my opinions of each candidate has nothing to do with religion, race, age, etc. It has to do about substance, not shallow superficial reasons which it seems you base your decisions on. It basically comes down to money. I like it and don't want to give it to people who don't earn it. Why is it that hard to understand?

Are you on a medication for a psychological condition? Did you forget to take a pill? It sounds like you have some issues that you might need to talk to someone about, assuming you aren't already.

One last thing: if you have a net worth of $11,000,000 or so, would that make you wealthy?
 

knewsom

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2008
5,262
0
La Mancha, CA
kennith said:
Note that, at the end, you back up to partisanship again. If they don't understand, they must be brainwashed.

They could say the same about you.

In my personal opinion, such action within a business is poor form, and nothing more. The boss has an opinion as well, and he can't easily run around to every desk arguing about it all. Would I do it? Probably not, but only because the risks could outweigh the benefits.

I might allow paid, rotating free days to encourage interest in the election process and offer people more time to consider voting.

It is my belief that people get away with far worse in the academic world.

Cheers,

Kennith

Academia is a different discussion, and I'd rather not lump the two together, since one is largely in the public sector and one is largely private - in my opinion bosses shouldn't talk politics with employees at all, regardless of setting. Companies and unions can endorse whoever they want, but when you bring heated political discussion into the workplace (ANY workplace), or thinly veiled threats of layoffs if the boss's guy doesn't get elected, believing something different than the boss might make you wary of being a target, and might put the the boss in danger of a lawsuit should he fire someone with he or she disagreed with politically. It's a liability, and I believe it does threaten freedom of speech.

It's kinda like why bosses shouldn't date their employees, and teachers shouldn't date their students, and superior officers shouldn't date their subordinates. It is simply not an equal relationship and there's a reason for the protocol we've evolved.

kennith said:
Yes it does. You are hardheaded.:rofl:

Cheers,

Kennith

Seems I fit in pretty well here after all. :p

Blue said:
I completely agree with this.

THANK THE FUCKING LORD. :bigok:
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
knewsom said:
It's kinda like why bosses shouldn't date their employees, and teachers shouldn't date their students, and superior officers shouldn't date their subordinates.

Guilty as charged. On all counts and worse, from the reverse perspective. I used to be slightly promiscuous.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

mgreenspan

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2005
4,723
130
Briggs's Back Yard
knewsom said:
Academia is a different discussion, and I'd rather not lump the two together, since one is largely in the public sector and one is largely private - in my opinion bosses shouldn't talk politics with employees at all, regardless of setting. Companies and unions can endorse whoever they want, but when you bring heated political discussion into the workplace (ANY workplace), or thinly veiled threats of layoffs if the boss's guy doesn't get elected, believing something different than the boss might make you wary of being a target, and might put the the boss in danger of a lawsuit should he fire someone with he or she disagreed with politically. It's a liability, and I believe it does threaten freedom of speech.

It's kinda like why bosses shouldn't date their employees, and teachers shouldn't date their students, and superior officers shouldn't date their subordinates. It is simply not an equal relationship and there's a reason for the protocol we've evolved.



Seems I fit in pretty well here after all. :p



THANK THE FUCKING LORD. :bigok:

Well you have again ignored my post. From your quote I would conclude that you would have no problem with a regular employee sending out the same informative email. You cannot compare a boss of a regular private company to an officer. They are two very different things. If you want th to be the same you want to live in a very different government.
 
Jan 3, 2005
11,746
73
On Kennith's private island
Mike_Rupp said:
Well, you proved my point in a big way. Like JohnB, you view things emotionally and assume I must be a racist since I would rather vote for Romney, when in fact my opinions of each candidate has nothing to do with religion, race, age, etc. It has to do about substance, not shallow superficial reasons which it seems you base your decisions on. It basically comes down to money. I like it and don't want to give it to people who don't earn it. Why is it that hard to understand?

So why are you voting for Romney then? You do not honestly believe in him, do you?

Here's the deal. The system is fucked up. It's broken. Obama is running his $1-BILLION campaign and Romney is just as full of shit as Obama. The two-party system is fucked-up and broken. All these jokers are doing is buying votes and making themselves out to look like asses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/us/politics/obama-and-romney-raise-1-billion-each.html

The election is over. As much as I'd like to see Romney beat Obama, it didn't happen. That's not to say I support either candidate. I don't. But I do think Obama needs to go because in his next four years the shit is going to hit the fan. We have a lot to lose with Obama in charge including gun rights and healthcare - and yes, higher taxes. The best we could have hoped for in the last month or so was a Romney/Biden team - at least that way the Rep/Dem would be forced to work together.


Here we are four days before the "election". Obama has the electoral collage locked up. Romney is out. So what ballot box do you check on Tuesday? A wasted vote for Romney? Or do you shake up the election process for 2016? If Gary Johnson receives over 5% of the popular vote, that would give the Libertarian candidate $10M Presidential Election Campaign Fund for 2016; or, 4x what what they had to work with this year. For a third party candidate, this is significant. Call a spade a spade and admit that a vote for Romney is a wasted vote and a vote for Johnson is a protest vote. We need a protest vote to help us get away from the two-party system.
http://www.examiner.com/article/an-updated-look-at-the-2012-electoral-college-map-with-polls-15


Or, we could do this all again in four year with equally shitty candidates.
 
Last edited:

JohnB

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2007
2,295
12
Oregon
Mike_Rupp said:
Well, you proved my point in a big way. Like JohnB, you view things emotionally and assume I must be a racist since I would rather vote for Romney

Are you on a medication for a psychological condition? Did you forget to take a pill? It sounds like you have some issues that you might need to talk to someone about, assuming you aren't already.

Actually Mike you are not leading by example. Just proving that you are very emotional and intimidating.
How to Diagnose Narcissism
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>Most people think of narcissism as simply a person's unrelenting self-satisfaction, need for attention and lack of respect or empathy for others. People who display those qualities may, in fact, be suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

But I love You