If people didn’t want Elon musk going on an ideological campaign against American institutions, then they shouldn’t have turned American institutions into ideologically captured cesspits of of corruption
So, you still have not got the mental gumption to accept what is obviously true: Musk lies to further his narrative. And with a little research I have found what I figured. The clip is cut off to remove the important section: However, Wilmore said the astronauts did not have any information on the offer made by Musk. “We have no information on that, though whatsoever. What was offered, what was not offered, who it was offered to, how that processes went. That’s information that we simply don’t have," he said. He also downplayed the significance of political interference, noting, "From my standpoint, politics is not playing into this at all."
Do you just take everything that everyone says at face value? With no thought for people’s motives? He is wise to say that. But when Musk literally has a rocket ready to go… it’s obvious what happened.
last engagement, and I’ll even let you like a child get the last word. The only person that always brings up race like a one man crusade on here is you. You always put the word ‘white’ in any sentence that has the word British in it. You are a thick, vile racist thug. There is no other way to spin it.
I'm afraid there's truth to what Os says. I've seen it myself and suspect it's more common than people think. I was present for a conversation about recruitment 18 months ago. A council in London was hiring a Head of Service for one of their departments. Two candidates were interviewed. Candidate A gave a good, solid interview. Exactly what you'd expect for that role. Candidate B either "went to pieces" or "fell apart" during the interview. So Candidate A got the job, right? Well, no. At that point what was clearly the key question was raised, "But do you want to be seen to appoint a middle-aged white man when you could appoint a young woman of colour?" Candidate B was appointed. I was deeply shocked by this but, when I mention it to people I know who work for local authorities or other public sector bodies (which I've done several times), they tend to shrug their shoulders and either change the subject or say something like "What can you do?"
I listened to the words and it doesn't confirm anything. 'I believe Mr Musk, but I don't know anything about it'. If I ignore context (they are about to be brought home by a SpaceX flight), even then it doesn't say anything. At which point, neither of us know. We can use our confirmation bias to make it fit our beliefs, but it isn't a demonstrable fact. It's also, as loading rightly says, whataboutism. You say the left are evil, but on the whole the democrat party (which isn't left, but labels are mixed up nowadays!) stands for better healthcare, looking after the vulnerable, looking after the planet etc and they do this largely though bigger, but less centralised government and higher taxes. I'm generalising wildly I know, but it's not 'evil' to want those things. What you are angry about here is potentially the 2 party system in the USA that results in a hugely partisan and largely corrupt government. This doesn't get better when someone decides to be an autocrat. There's no perfect system, of course there isn't, but the US system causes more problems than many others. Whataboutism just results in a back and forth of heinous acts (like separating children from their families when they try and cross a border) and it isn't hugely helpful. I would tend to disbelieve Elon Musk, or at least think that there is a twist of the truth in there, because he post lies or mistruths way more than he posts the truth. The same would be true about the Donald. He lies overwhelmingly more often than he tells the truth, so trusting anything he says is difficult. Biden was far from perfect and certainly not a good leader (IMO), but his pants on fire moments were fairly few and far between. Gosh, I only meant to write the first paragraph and even then it was supposed to be just a few words!! sorry.
I agree with you and it shouldn’t happen. I have had it the other way where I sent out identical CVs for a role to a few companies - the only difference was the surname. 3 out of 7 companies asked me for an interview with the surname ‘Smith’ rather than the other.
I have another take on this DEI. There is no legal requirement to hire anyone based on background, but there is legal requirement to invite to interview a range of candidates. I personally have never seen anyone picked for the optics - but that is a failing of the employer and not the law if it happens. Every environment I have worked in which has been diverse has been better for it as different backgrounds offer different viewpoints and skills.
It’s happening. For real. Just like the divorce courts are insanely biased towards women. It’s like because men are seen as an evil patriarchy, it’s ok to discriminate against them.
Why do the liberals that are supposed to be so moral and virtuous, always resort to insults and abuse? Deep down I think even you know that you’re being hyprocrites about all this stuff so you just lash out.
Yeah, fair point. I think my wife's company has HR redact all personal information from job applications, which seems reasonable to me and largely addresses that one but it's not really practical for an interview.
I think only really insecure men think this. There is a genuine argument here about the disenfranchised masses. But it is not a racial or sexist one. It is one wealth vs poverty. Opportunity vs hopelessness.
Again with the dismissive insult. Your prejudice is so ingrained into you that you casually throw it out. Yes, of course. You’re absolutely right. Why should men get fair representation when they are all so evil? Why even discuss any of these points when everyone is so sexist, patriarchal and evil
