Well.....Well....Well...

[fredtoast]

(06-25-2018, 04:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: regardless how nuanced folks want to suggest it is in an effort to excuse this intolerance.

What she was doing was taking a stand against intolerance.

Your spin is lame.  It is like accusing the people who supported the Civil Rights Act of being "intolerant" toward Jim Crow segregation.

[Belsnickel]

(06-25-2018, 04:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're the Government expert, but I'll just disagree with being a spokesman requires a high level of agreement. I've always considered them as someone that speaks for.

This isn't a government thing, this is is a communications thing, marketing, too. If you aren't behind what you're saying/selling, then you're not going to be convincing, and therefore ineffective at your job.

(06-25-2018, 04:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I do know I disagree with a number of Hillary's stances but if she wins in 2020 and wants to pay me $173,000 a year to talk to the press and be her mouthpiece to the press I'm, there and will defend her to the best of my abilities. I don't doubt there will be a population that suggests bfine believes everything Hillary does.

Yeah, I wouldn't do it for Hillary, Trump, or most politicians really. There are a few I'd do the job for, but that's because I believe in their positions.

[Belsnickel]

(06-25-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What she was doing was taking a stand against intolerance.

Your spin is lame.  It is like accusing the people who supported the Civil Rights Act of being "intolerant" toward Jim Crow segregation.

They're just being intolerant of intolerance of intolerance.

[GMDino]

(06-25-2018, 04:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This isn't a government thing, this is is a communications thing, marketing, too. If you aren't behind what you're saying/selling, then you're not going to be convincing, and therefore ineffective at your job.

This.

Unless someone is a grade A/B actor/actress they would have a hard time defending/repeating something sincerely.

Quote:Yeah, I wouldn't do it for Hillary, Trump, or most politicians really. There are a few I'd do the job for, but that's because I believe in their positions.

Tough one for me.

I think I could do it for the right price, but as soon as something crossed a personal line I'd be out.

[*bfine32*]

(06-25-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What she was doing was taking a stand against intolerance.

Your spin is lame.  It is like accusing the people who supported the Civil Rights Act of being "intolerant" toward Jim Crow segregation.

A thread is not truly a thread until Fred brings up Jim Crowe. SHS has not shown to be intolerant of any minority. This restaurant has shown they will not tolerate her in their restaurant. Whether you agree with it of not is moot.

[GMDino]

(06-25-2018, 04:14 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: They're just being intolerant of intolerance of intolerance.

Off topic: This came up in a conversation a couple weeks ago about the nazi parade and how if I speak out against them I am "anti-free speech" and "intolerant".  To which I replied I am intolerant of anyone who spews hate and division versus love and inclusion.

Unsurprisingly that didn't matter.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-25-2018, 04:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: This.

Unless someone is a grade A/B actor/actress they would have a hard time defending/repeating something sincerely.



Tough one for me.

I think I could do it for the right price, but as soon as something crossed a personal line I'd be out.

I'm with bfine.  Pay me $173,000 plus my book deal after I leave and I'll defend Hillary, Trump etc 'til the ends of the earth.

[*Nately120*]

Doesn't it all balance out because there are probably restaurants run by right-wingers that would be overly tolerant of her?

[GMDino]

(06-25-2018, 04:20 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm with bfine.  Pay me $173,000 plus my book deal after I leave and I'll defend Hillary, Trump etc 'til the ends of the earth.

I always said if I didn't have ethics and morals I'd just be a televangelist....and rich.

[fredtoast]

(06-25-2018, 04:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  SHS has not shown to be intolerant of any minority. 

Only in your imaginary world where she has disagreed with Trumps policies and where Trump hires people who don't agree with him to defend him from the press.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-25-2018, 04:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: I always said if I didn't have ethics and morals I'd just be a televangelist....and rich.

Takes a certain amount of talent as well.  There are plenty of charlatans, but only a few that become rich.  

[fredtoast]

(06-25-2018, 04:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: A thread is not truly a thread until Fred brings up Jim Crowe. 

And a thread is not a thread until Bfine dodges an issue.

Based on your logic the people who supported the Civil Rights Act were intolerant, correct?

[GMDino]

(06-25-2018, 04:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Takes a certain amount of talent as well.  There are plenty of charlatans, but only a few that become rich.  

It takes knowing the catch phrases and how to talk to people. 

Paraphrasing: 

Quote:...what I have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you.

[*Nately120*]

(06-25-2018, 04:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Takes a certain amount of talent as well.  There are plenty of charlatans, but only a few that become rich.  

True.  I don't believe in hell and I'm not a rich televangelist so clearly there is something else involved!

[*bfine32*]

(06-25-2018, 04:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Only in your imaginary world where she has disagreed with Trumps policies and where Trump hires people who don't agree with him to defend him from the press.

Ok, we'll just just let you think that it is an imaginary would where a Press Secretary, whose responsibilities are collecting information about actions and events within the president's administration and issues the administration's reactions to developments around the world. The press secretary interacts with the media, and deals with the White House press corps on a daily basis, generally in a daily press briefing. Must agree with everything that office communicates.

[*bfine32*]

(06-25-2018, 04:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And a thread is not a thread until Bfine dodges an issue.

Based on your logic the people who supported the Civil Rights Act were intolerant, correct?

No issue has been dodged. I have no idea how many people that supported the Civil Rights Act kicked folks out of their restaurant because of who they worked for.

[Belsnickel]

(06-25-2018, 04:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Tough one for me.

I think I could do it for the right price, but as soon as something crossed a personal line I'd be out.

I couldn't be on an elected official's staff at all, let along being a spox, without agreeing with them on most positions. I can work in agencies and what not, but being in a Representative's, Senator's, or White House staff would require much more from me.

Maybe I'm not typical of our society, these days.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-25-2018, 04:29 PM)GMDino Wrote: It takes knowing the catch phrases and how to talk to people. 

Paraphrasing: 

I dropped in a subtle movie reference in this thread that was ignored, so I hope you won't be Taken aback if I ignore yours.

[fredtoast]

(06-25-2018, 04:35 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No issue has been dodged. I have no idea how many people that supported the Civil Rights Act kicked folks out of their restaurant because of who they worked for.

So no one has ever been intolerant unless they kick someone out of a restaurant?

Yeah, you never dodge anything.

[*bfine32*]

(06-25-2018, 04:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I couldn't be on an elected official's staff at all, let along being a spox, without agreeing with them on most positions. I can work in agencies and what not, but being in a Representative's, Senator's, or White House staff would require much more from me.

Maybe I'm not typical of our society, these days.

It's most likely because you confusing speaking for with endorsing.