pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @79c9095526 OP 15 Sep \ parent \ on: Rules for thee, not for me lol
He specifically says you should ALWAYS oppose someone getting fired over a controversial speech.
It couldn't be any more clear how he is contradicting himself.
Take away your feelings about the situation, it isn't about that. It is about firing someone over a tweet, which he clearly disagreed with ALWAYS (meaning, without exception), but now he would like people to be fired over a tweet.
This isn't that complicated ;)
reply
You're changing the subject to remove focus from the point of this post. You want to make this about something else to avoid the difficult reality of his change in stance when it no longer is beneficial to him.
The post is about a man saying no one should ever get fired for sending out a controversial tweet. But that seemingly only applies to people on "his team" that send out controversial tweets. It does not apply to 'others' who send out controversial tweets that he dislikes.
reply
reply
My post is self explanatory. You have strong feelings about something tangentially related (but not at all the point of the post) and you ascribed some other meaning onto my post to set yourself up to dunk on that meaning (which was invented by you).
When I chose not to engage with you and explained the point of the post (assuming you innocently misinterpreted me), instead of saying oh ok my bad, you then say I'm axe grinding.
You never engaged in good faith. You just needed to spit your venom and thought you had an easy target for it.
reply
Your explanation is charitable and possibly what happened.
Is it also possible that this person lacked the ability to put himself in someone else's shoes (which is quite common)? He was unable to see that words can deeply hurt another person until those words hurt him. Then he called for people to be fired for saying those words because it actually affected him.
They say this is often what happens to people who hated the fact that they had to pay into the social safety net their entire lives, but then realized the value of this safety net when they ran into an unfortunate circumstance later in life. At this point, they will often complain the safety net is not sufficient to help people with their unique circumstances.
Another example may be the soybean farmers across america who are now demanding a bailout (which they will inevitably get as they did during the first trump admin) after voting in the man who destroyed their industry with his non-free market policies.
reply