Biden Tracker (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

For all the things related to the Biden/Harris Administration and their latest hits and misses

https://www.dailywire.com/news/whit...gedly-sexually-harassing-threatening-reporter

Interesting story, looks like 'only the best people' didn't stop with the new administration.

 

[MT15]

No, I agree with you, but I could believe Biden would have a soft spot for someone battling cancer, given his family history.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

No, I agree with you, but I could believe Biden would have a soft spot for someone battling cancer, given his family history.

Yeah, but either you have a standard or you don't. You don't get partial credit for half enforcing a standard.

 

[J-DONK]

I guess if we want some legit to put down. The tl:dr is son-in-law is invested in covid-19 response healthcare companies, and conflicts may arise.

As Biden's son-in-law invests in COVID-19 response, questions of family and ethics could resurface

The role of President Biden's son-in-law at a health care venture capital firm could present ethical challenges for the new administration, experts say.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Sandman]

That's a stupid reason (not saying you are defending it). Having stage IV cancer sucks, but does not give you a right to be a dick to someone, and does not entitle you to a job that you probably can no longer effectively perform since you were a dick to the people you are supposed to actually interact with.

The issue with firing someone with Stage IV cancer is the potential for a lawsuit based upon disability discrimination. He could argue that he was fired because of his cancer, not the statement. I think a suspension without pay is the correct HR call on this one. If he does it again, you have a "history" and the firing will be much stronger. That's my take on it.

 

[DaveXA]

The issue with firing someone with Stage IV cancer is the potential for a lawsuit based upon disability discrimination. He could argue that he was fired because of his cancer, not the statement. I think a suspension without pay is the correct HR call on this one. If he does it again, you have a "history" and the firing will be much stronger. That's my take on it.

Good call. I've seen just that happen before. Working in the federal government and dealing with HR rules and regs is night and day different than the private sector. It's really difficult to fire an individual who was hired under Schedule A provisions, although I'm not sure if that's the case in this situation. But firing someone with Stage IV cancer? Ehhh, good luck with that.

That said, cabinet positions and executive branch positions are a bit different animal than other federal positions in that hiring/firing there is more frequent. I'm not sure what the HR rules are for those working in and supporting the WH.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I'd rather see you start a thread discussing policy you are in favor of that would lead to a substantive discussion but it's your dime. For the record, the guy should be fired.

I mean... I'm not sure what's particularly funny about this, Farb. Every time I try to engage you in a substantive discussion it's rebuffed with emojis. Do you not want to talk about issues?

 

[Farb]

I mean... I'm not sure what's particularly funny about this, Farb. Every time I try to engage you in a substantive discussion it's rebuffed with emojis. Do you not want to talk about issues?

What was substantive about your reply? Coaching me on how to start a thread that is more to your liking? Yeah, no thanks.
If you don't like the thread, don't reply. But, by all means, you can continue with your condescending replies and I will continue to ignore them.

 

[DaveXA]

What was substantive about your reply? Coaching me on how to start a thread that is more to your liking? Yeah, no thanks.
If you don't like the thread, don't reply. But, by all means, you can continue with your condescending replies and I will continue to ignore them.

What exactly is condescending about his posts? All I'm seeing is you being dismissive of the questions he's asking.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

What was substantive about your reply? Coaching me on how to start a thread that is more to your liking? Yeah, no thanks.
If you don't like the thread, don't reply. But, by all means, you can continue with your condescending replies and I will continue to ignore them.

You see condescension where there is none. I'm legitimately asking you what issues are important to you in a good faith effort to direct the conversation to someplace productive.

 

[Farb]

What exactly is condescending about his posts? All I'm seeing is you being dismissive of the questions he's asking.

I guess we all see things differently.
What exactly was his question on the first post @DaveXA? Maybe it was the lack of a '?' but I don't see one. All I see him expressing his desire that I start a different thread.

 

[Heathen]

I take it you're not a fan of the administration, Farb?

 

[Farb]

You see condescension where there is none. I'm legitimately asking you what issues are important to you in a good faith effort to direct the conversation to someplace productive.

Again, where in your first reply was the question?

 

[Farb]

I take it you're not a fan of the administration, Farb?

You would be correct in that assumption but I hardly think that is a surprise for anyone on this board.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Again, where in your first reply was the question?

I thought it was an implied invitation. Nevertheless, rather than go off on an unimportant tangent, will you accept my apology and perhaps we can move on to a discussion of issues?

 

[Farb]

I thought it was an implied invitation. Nevertheless, rather than go off on an unimportant tangent, will you accept my apology and perhaps we can move on to a discussion of issues?

I don't need an apology to discuss issues. I get it and no big deal.

 

[SaintForLife]

What exactly is condescending about his posts? All I'm seeing is you being dismissive of the questions he's asking.

What business is it of his to tell Farb what kind of threads to start especially after the Trump Tracker Thread?

 

[Heathen]

You would be correct in that assumption but I hardly think that is a surprise for anyone on this board.

So..Trump supporter? Republican? Leftist Democrat?

Not bashing, just curious.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

What business is it of his to tell Farb what kind of threads to start especially after the Trump Tracker Thread?

I'm trying to generate some threads on actual issues which are sorely lacking. You guys think I'm being difficult or something but I'm genuinely curious about you and Farb's stances on issues and governance.

The unfortunate thing is you both limit your postings to banal media headline type of stuff. A 'but so-and-so does it shouldn't be your basis for doing it, too. I understand the rhetorical bent of why you post the way you do but, imho, the best way to defeat what you view as empty or shallow posting is to post substance discussions on the merits, not clutter the forum with even more sensationalist claptrap.