President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
A lot of her issues just recently were revealed. I helped her get her job back and loaned money(stupidly) too her. It was only a 100 bucks but my friend thinks that was for drugs. If she really needed money she would have asked for more. I was good to her and she betrayed me.
She was the same girl I was hanging out with over the summer. She had been furloughed and I didn't think she would be welcomed back. When they did hire her back I stopped asking her to hang out because I am her boss. She didn't like this. Now she is working in a very awkward environment. She divulged to HR private conversations we had as consensual adults over the summer. She a
Translation: "I sexually assaulted her for months but it's all her fault!"
mongidig,
What is your overall win rate when you are reported to HR? Is it something like 10 wins and 10 losses or are you doing better than that?
It's never truly a win. People have a misunderstanding that HR is there to help you. Even if you truly are being mistreated you should still stay away from HR. They are just there to protect the asset. Even the complainer is viewed negatively. They sided with me but the damage is done. I am on the radar now just like she is. The good news is that the GM vouched for me.
My record is 3 wins 0 losses in 26 years of working there.
You did everything you could to take advantage of her drug/financial problems and your position as a supervisor and she still wouldn't sleep with you? That's rough, dude.
I never used my position of authority other than to help get her job back. This was a big mistake but I knew she was struggling. I'm a kind person.
Also, she hadn't slept with me yet. This is now not gonna happen which is a bit rough.
You mean you tried to get her her job back so you could sleep with her.
We can debate the extent to which it is appropriate to blame the ills of the country on stupid white people, but it's a pretty big stretch to argue that doing so is promoting eugenics.
i made a thread about how you can just tell people are stupid by how they look and that thread was nixed for "eugenics" and yet ed here is allowed to basically call for the cleansing of stupid whites
he obviously doesn't say those parts out loud but that's essentially the nature of his posts - that if we could somehow cleanse the earth of stupid white people then everything would be solved
sounds like someone still bitter he got picked last for kickball imo
I actually have to stand up for nemesis e_d here. I never myself got the impression that he at any point was advocating for genocide.
Hoping the white rurals eventually die off from too much greasy food (or whatever) wouldn't be genocide; since these dum-dums are essentially killing themselves.
Has mongidig ever said what he does? I feel he works at a car dealership.
i made a thread about how you can just tell people are stupid by how they look and that thread was nixed for "eugenics" and yet ed here is allowed to basically call for the cleansing of stupid whites
It was a little more nuanced than you are describing, and no one accused you of promoting eugenics in that thread. Here is the explanation that was given:
We’re not going to have this thread for a couple of reasons:A “stupid person look” is invariably going to be based upon shaming certain appearances that are simply inherent to certain human beings.Moreover, once we start breaking this down into cultures, the involvement of stereotypes and eugenics-based arguments is inevitable.It’s just not going to work well for this forum, an
And you "liked" the explanation that CN gave for closing the thread, for whatever that is worth.
Eventually mongo will take an L and Mercury morris and the rest of the living dolphins will pop champagne
Like I said, I don't listen to those guys, but the waxing poetic that you describe sounds ridiculous. Logic and rationalism are much more of a friend than an enemy to feminism.
I'm not sure that's categorically true. It would depend on what 'school' of feminism one is talking about.
Based on CN's hysterical, emotional rants, I can't say either way if her brand of feminism (whatever it is) would benefit from adherence to logic and rationalism or not.
pEdOs iNvEnTeD lOgIc
Like I said, I don't listen to those guys, but the waxing poetic that you describe sounds ridiculous. Logic and rationalism are much more of a friend than an enemy to feminism.
Sure, except the ones claiming those labels are using them to justify takes like “women can’t be president bc they get periods”
Pretty sure we even have one of those esteemed morons in the thread right now, right David?
‘I’m 3-0 against women who have taken me to HR’ is one hell of a statement
It was a little more nuanced than you are describing, and no one accused you of promoting eugenics in that thread. Here is the explanation that was given:
And you "liked" the explanation that CN gave for closing the thread, for whatever that is worth.
Damn, that looks quite reasonable. That must have been pretty early in my tenure, before you all became insufferable :p
Sure, except the ones claiming those labels are using them to justify takes like “women can’t be president bc they get periods”
I guess anyone can claim a label in the modern world.
My point was that logic and rationality are not in fact compelling starting points if you want to argue against treating women fairly and equally.
Sure, except the ones claiming those labels are using them to justify takes like “women can’t be president bc they get periods”
Pretty sure we even have one of those esteemed morons in the thread right now, right David?
I agree; anybody saying stuff like that is a several fries short of a Happy Meal.