it is incredible....
Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
31–40 of 112 posts
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#32Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have to presume Kavanaugh's innocence because no witness has come forward to corroborate any claims. In the meantime, the Democrats skewered a man for every inside joke he made in his High school yearbook with his buddies. They were picking apart his actions as a child. They weren't asking questions related to the allegations. They were trying to assassinate his character. That's fucked up I don't care who you are…
>>We have to presume Kavanaugh's innocence because no witness has come forward to corroborate any claims. By the standards of criminal proceedings, yes. But this is a job interview, the standards for disqualifying someone are lower.
> But this is a job interview
This makes me angry every time I read it. A failed job interview usually means you can just go back to whatever it was you were doing before you applied, none the worse for wear.
A job interview shouldn't require you to defend yourself against scurrilous personal attacks which result in you becoming an unemployable social pariah if you fail.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have to presume Kavanaugh's innocence because no witness has come forward to corroborate any claims. In the meantime, the Democrats skewered a man for every inside joke he made in his High school yearbook with his buddies. They were picking apart his actions as a child. They weren't asking questions related to the allegations. They were trying to assassinate his character. That's fucked up I don't care who you are…
>>We have to presume Kavanaugh's innocence because no witness has come forward to corroborate any claims. By the standards of criminal proceedings, yes. But this is a job interview, the standards for disqualifying someone are lower.
While that's true, and I personally am leaning towards believing Ford, there's also these premises we must accept:
(1) There will be millions of people against any Supreme Court nominee
(2) The bar for dismissal of a Supreme Court nominee is accusations, even without corroboration
Premise (1) is bound to be true, and premise (2) will be fulfilled if we decide Kavanaugh should not be nominated. The logical conclusion is thus likely:
(3) Any of the millions of people against a Supreme Court nominee can come forward with accusations without corroboration and block their nomination
While I think Kavanaugh's defensive and angry response is another valid issue, we could then just add a 3rd premise to the above where the uncorroborated claims would have to be met with anger by the nominee to be disqualified. It still seems like a screwed up system, with that third premise installed.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it extremist to support Kavanaugh?
In the context of most supreme court nominees, combined with the amount of contoversy surrounding his appointment yes. Every tier one tech company I ever worked for would not hire someone that caused that much ill will, from a culture perspective. The brand of the supreme court is seen as a wise, impartial, authorative, servant of the people. An imperious, rabidly partisan, agressive, evasive, offended, entitled boy…
Who caused the ill will? The man accused of something he didn't do? Or the Democrats who manufactured a mock trial with all the optics of one and with none of the evidence and due process of one.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#36I don't understand this. Kavanaugh hasnt been proven to be guilty. There are credible allegations which demand a further investigation as is being conducted by the FBI. Beyond that apart from his clumsiness at the testimony there isnt much going on against him. If these people are so data driven how come they choose to believe things for which we have no evidence. You may mock him for losing his cool but thats just about it. Anything beyond that is questionable and shouldnt be taken as the truth.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your assessment and prognosis, and look forward to employers and employees being held to somewhat higher standard of mutual tolerance (even if begrudging) and cooperation, and generally keeping it business-first while on the clock. If one wishes to protest or take other political action, sure, take a day off and head to D.C. or other visible public space. A throw-away thought: business attire used to be…
If the personal is political then we have no refuge from politics. And the only people that say this are the type that want only their specific brands of politics to dominate public and private life.
If you're a persecuted minority you don't get time out from being persecuted. If your school's teachers need food stamps to survive you don't have a 'refuge from politics'. If you get sick and can't afford health care you don't have the luxury of 'avoiding politics'.
People's politics have consequences, and they should own them.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#38There are probably a good number of Republican voters hired at Facebook. Most of those employees will be supporting Kavanaugh's nomination. There are obviously many Democrat voters employed at Facebook who won't be supporting Kavanaugh. Anyone who finds either of these two facts unacceptable should immediately walk away from their jobs or be terminated. The only alternative is to accept that there is effectively a ci…
I don't think anybody in the tech industry has the balls to come out as a Republican. The backlash would be awful. Thank God votes are secret, still.
> in the tech industry
In the liberal bubble that is the Bay area. There's tech industry outside of that bubble, throughout the Midwest, in cities like Austin. SF isn't the only place people are writing software.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#39Why is there so much political activism inside tech companies? Shouldn't this person actually do something wrong at his job before the mob goes after him? How long before you can't be an executive if you hunt, or eat meat?
People being good at their jobs isn't the only thing that matters if you're working under their direction. Especially if they're also a large part of the company's public image. If people are uncomfortable with their CEO eating meat then they should be free to ask about it and voice their opinions. If the CEO wants to change anything because of that is entirely up to him/her, just like how people are free to resign i…
>>If people are uncomfortable with their CEO eating meat then they should be free to ask about it and voice their opinions.
Expecting a person A to change their way of life, for an inconsequential act, because other person B completely irrelevant to A or A action's feels 'uncomfortable', then B has way over stepped in feeling entitled to what they want from life and society.
You don't get to dictate what religion some one should practice, or what kind of clothes they should wear, or economic system they should believe or what kind of politics they like. Unless they force you to do as they like, they are free to hold whatever opinions they like. Just like you do.
This whole thing about people wanting to control other people's life. And then claiming to victims of 'offence' and 'discomfort', when the other person doesn't comply to their dictation is the root cause of political problems today. Nobody owes you anything, others are welcome to live their life as they like, just as you do.
Re: Zuckerberg Faces Anger Over Facebook Executive’s Kavanaugh Support
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>We have to presume Kavanaugh's innocence because no witness has come forward to corroborate any claims. By the standards of criminal proceedings, yes. But this is a job interview, the standards for disqualifying someone are lower.
Imagine if every time you wanted to apply for a competitive job you would get rejected simply because some woman claimed that you raped her.
Well, if you don't rape someone, generally that's not something you need to worry about.