Election Interference/Fraud

87,572 Views | 3445 Replies | Last: 23 hrs ago by BBW12OG
gtman49
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now
Dude....he looks TERRIBLE. What in the world.
Steve Williams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
WP said:

Steve Williams said:

WP said:

Steve Williams said:

Was this the riot inducing speech? I literally have never heard it.
Steve, you are kidding right? You have been my most respected person on all Pack things for a long time and always the voice of reason. If you've been sucked into the insane conspiracy/insurrectionist/traitor land, my faith in humanity is going to be permanently damaged. Please say it isn't so.
No, I wasn't joking. I have purposely tuned most anything political-related out. I saw the aftermath but never saw or read the contents of Trump's speech that led up to what happened at the capitol.
Damn Steve, this hurts. You've been one of the most rational people I've ever virtually known (obviously you have no idea who I am). How any rational person can honestly say what you typed is beyond me. I'll try to enjoy reading your articles but will never look at you the same from this day forward.
Man, I don't know what to tell you. I didn't see the speech. I asked if the text posted earlier was the speech. That was all. I'm not sure how you come to some conclusion on me based on that but have at it bro.
PackBacker07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
New thread for today's impending (second) impeachment?
I once blocked Muggsy Bogues' shot at the Siskey YMCA.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
lol.....so he's just like the rest of us
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.


Aaaaaaannnndd.....
griff17matt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
That's why the details matter to me. I can't really make a determination until I know more. But If this is his personal Car or Home insurance, how is AIG impacted by his views? His posts have no relation at all to those coverages, which are critical for financial well being.
Life insurance I could see removing if he was posting about heading to the capital ready to fight in the civil war because that affects his policy directly (increased death risk). But I have not checked on what he's said.

Social Media is different for me because you are posting your views directly on their platform and therefore every other user is impacted by them hosting your views. His social media isn't AIG's website.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackBacker07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Maybe? But it's also the free market at work.
I once blocked Muggsy Bogues' shot at the Siskey YMCA.
WolfQuacker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?
Isn't that pretty much the same scenario as a bakery not wanting to sell a gay couple a wedding cake?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackBacker07 said:

Maybe? But it's also the free market at work.


Meh. You're not for a free market. Let's not pretend here. You're just fine with who it's happening to. Mao would be proud.
ncsualum05
How long do you want to ignore this user?


This is one of the supposed "leaders of the insurrection". Listen to this guy in the video and tell me with a straight face this is not being overblown.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WolfQuacker said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?
Isn't that pretty much the same scenario as a bakery not wanting to sell a gay couple a wedding cake?


Kind of. If the gay couple bought cakes every month for 17 years, never having any issues or returns, and the baker decided to stop selling them cakes once he found out they were gay and that they called baseball players "*******".
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WolfQuacker said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?
Isn't that pretty much the same scenario as a bakery not wanting to sell a gay couple a wedding cake?
In the social media scenario yes, in the insurance case no. Main difference is speech vs. sale of a generic good.

The baker would sell other items to gay couples, but he would not bake a custom wedding cake. In the case of social media, private companies shouldn't be forced to keep up speech that they do not want to be associated with. With insurance, it's a generic product and AIG is not hosting or publicly associated with this guy in any way.

Now just because it's wrong, that doesn't mean it's illegal or should open up AIG to a lawsuit. But that assessment really does depend on what the coverage was and what was objectionable on his Social Media. I'm waiting for more info
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
That's why the details matter to me. I can't really make a determination until I know more. But If this is his personal Car or Home insurance, how is AIG impacted by his views? His posts have no relation at all to those coverages, which are critical for financial well being.
Life insurance I could see removing if he was posting about heading to the capital ready to fight in the civil war because that affects his policy directly (increased death risk). But I have not checked on what he's said.

Social Media is different for me because you are posting your views directly on their platform and therefore every other user is impacted by them hosting your views. His social media isn't AIG's website.

Yeah There was some reference to Schilling's entity (whoever had the insurance) being AAA rated and not having filed a claim for 17 years. Sounded like commercial insurance but I don't know for sure.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I fail to see how the type of insurance canceled matters.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?
Cthepack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?


Haley will be treated differently only because she will handle it more politically than Trump did. Explain the handling of George W compared to Obama by the media if you think the media does not treat one side differently.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?
It's remarkable how you justify this based on absolutely nothing regarding insurance. Lol. Literally nothing you said has anything to do with insurance. A lot of words to try and smear him because you are fine with him losing his insurance, but nothing that has an iota to do with insurance


Can rational people imagine your health insurance being able to drop you from coverage because they don't like your tweets? That is sheer lunacy. Not that health insurance happened here, but why not? Apparently the threshold is if they think you make a (as determined by their online police force) visible, trashy, and inflammatory online posts, they can drop your insurance at any time.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Civilized said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?
It's remarkable how you justify this based on absolutely nothing regarding insurance. Lol. Literally nothing you said has anything to do with insurance. A lot of words to try and smear him because you are fine with him losing his insurance, but nothing that has an iota to do with insurance


Can rational people imagine your health insurance being able to drop you from coverage because they don't like your tweets? That is sheer lunacy. Not that health insurance happened here, but why not? Apparently the threshold is if they think you make a (as determined by their online police force) visible, trashy, and inflammatory online posts, they can drop your insurance at any time.

It doesn't have anything to do with insurance. It has to do with image. This isn't news.

And yes, service providers of all types have terms of service addressing client conduct in their client agreements. I would bet my life that Schilling violated the terms of service of his contract with AIG with his conduct.

In the Service Agreement I have for a real estate service we provide a group of clients, we have the following clause in the Termination section:

"We may immediately terminate this Agreement by giving you written notice in the event...your conduct or the conduct of your employees or guests become incompatible with ordinary [service use] or is otherwise detrimental to [our business] or our reputation..."

The relevancy of client misconduct to the business service we're providing them is discussed but there's an additional clause that gives us broad latitude to address their conduct if we think it may impair our reputation. Most companies have similar terms.

AIG had an image problem with Schilling, not an insurance problem.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cthepack said:


Haley will be treated differently only because she will handle it more politically than Trump did. Explain the handling of George W compared to Obama by the media if you think the media does not treat one side differently.

'Only because'? LOLOL

She'll be treated differently than Trump because she's warmer, better spoken, less abrasive, more compassionate, more experienced, more diplomatic, more respectful, smarter, more polished, and more professional.

None of those attributes are 'political'.

Nobody's talking about media bias. Anyway, you're wasting your breath arguing about it; anybody with a brain knows it's there. But you're not going to solve it by championing Curt Schilling.
acslater1344
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cthepack said:

Civilized said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?


Haley will be treated differently only because she will handle it more politically than Trump did. Explain the handling of George W compared to Obama by the media if you think the media does not treat one side differently.

Conservative media spent YEARS claiming that Obama wasn't even a natural born U.S. citizen despite being presented with his birth certificate.
pineknollshoresking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

Pacfanweb said:

Yeah, I really don't think the whole 25th Amendment or impeachment is such a great idea at this point.

All it'll do is galvanize his base and piss them off even more. Better to just let things simmer down and move on.



I mostly agree with you. It's largely pointless, particularly the 25th.
Conviction for impeachment would bar Trump from holding future office, but what are the chances he actually runs again. It would also deny him his pension and the $1 million per year travel budget, but frankly that's peanuts right now
Probably high. Im reading some polls that says Republicans are likely to vote for him again in 2024 at greater than a 70% rate.
I am a Deplorable!!!!
pineknollshoresking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackBacker07 said:

Maybe? But it's also the free market at work.
I'm assuming you are referring to the tweet, posted by packgrad...

I'm all in favor of a free market; however, that's not what we have. A free market doesn't need government protections afforded by law. If people operate in a true free market way, government need not intervene.

So, this so-called free market we have allowed for multiple companies to paralyze and ultimately turned off another company. So, the protections provided by the government for this so-called free market did protect everybody.
I am a Deplorable!!!!
pineknollshoresking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
acslater1344 said:

Cthepack said:

Haley will be treated differently only because she will handle it more politically than Trump did. Explain the handling of George W compared to Obama by the media if you think the media does not treat one side differently.
Conservative media spent YEARS claiming that Obama wasn't even a natural born U.S. citizen despite being presented with his birth certificate.
If Haley ends up being the Republican nominee, I will choose to vote libertarian or not at all... She is the epitome of an establishment Republican.
I am a Deplorable!!!!
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pineknollshoresking said:

IseWolf22 said:

Pacfanweb said:

Yeah, I really don't think the whole 25th Amendment or impeachment is such a great idea at this point.

All it'll do is galvanize his base and piss them off even more. Better to just let things simmer down and move on.



I mostly agree with you. It's largely pointless, particularly the 25th.
Conviction for impeachment would bar Trump from holding future office, but what are the chances he actually runs again. It would also deny him his pension and the $1 million per year travel budget, but frankly that's peanuts right now
Probably high. Im reading some polls that says Republicans are likely to vote for him again in 2024 at greater than a 70% rate.
I don't think he's going to run again. Why would he? Its not worth it.

I've actually thought a lot about politicians in general over the last few weeks. The problem is that the type of people we need to be politicians and run our government don't want to do it, and don't want the power that comes along with holding office...and the people who do end up in power are the exact opposite. I mean this on both sides of the aisle, not just towards on side or another.

We need people who understand the way the world actually works and have lived as part of it, not folks who have been born and bred to be part of the system. We should have elected officials who understand the power of policy, but also understand the ramifications that come from using that power outside of just the thought of getting re-elected or hurting people that disagree with an opinion. When Eisenhower left office he and his wife hopped in their car and rode off into the sunset(really)....they didn't grasp at political straws to retain some semblance of power. Now people leave office and do everything they can to try maintain that power they had.

We don't have that. None of the people who could best help lead the country and its people want the fight that comes along with it...and by fight i mean the nasty campaign where attacks are personal and not political. Even once they are in office there is no honesty or truthfulness with anyone. You can see the absolute hypocrisy on full display every single day.

Of course this is collectively our faults. We could nominate and elect people who wouldn't do that but we don't. We like the mudslinging....hell...i enjoy the political discourse. its just a shame.
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
So what? He is still entitled to purchase insurance just as much as you and people that think like you... that's called discrimination. I figured you know that, but I guess you don't.
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
So what? He is still entitled to purchase insurance just as much as you and people that think like you... that's called discrimination. I figured you know that, but I guess you don't.

I don't know what being 'entitled' to purchase insurance means.

It's definitely not discrimination in the legal sense.

He was kicked to the curb for his conduct, not for his standing in a protected class. Being an ass-hat is not a protected class. LOL
Civilized
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agree with all this.
ncsualum05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pineknollshoresking said:

acslater1344 said:

Cthepack said:

Haley will be treated differently only because she will handle it more politically than Trump did. Explain the handling of George W compared to Obama by the media if you think the media does not treat one side differently.
Conservative media spent YEARS claiming that Obama wasn't even a natural born U.S. citizen despite being presented with his birth certificate.
If Haley ends up being the Republican nominee, I will choose to vote libertarian or not at all... She is the epitome of an establishment Republican.
If Haley would adopt the America First agenda and embrace the movement I would consider it but she's so disingenuous and like most politicians a habitual liar. So not sure I'd believe her. Probably begrudgingly vote anyway b/c voting 3rd party is a wasted vote. But I'd be dead inside.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

packgrad said:

Civilized said:

griff17matt said:

Civilized said:

IseWolf22 said:

packgrad said:

Liberalism now means you can cancel your customer's insurance if you disagree with them politically. Yay, Democrats!



What type of insurance was it and was it personal or his business (he said "we").
In general, this one concerns me far more tham social media as certain types of insurance are critical. But I don't know enough specifics about this situation. I didnt even know he was a media personality now

He's been really outspoken in the past, in an intentionally inflammatory way, about both political and sports stuff.

Calling MLB baseball players "dumbasses" and "*******s," picking fights with people about political stuff, etc.

This wasn't just about him saying he supported the rioters last week. There's a history.
What the **** does that have to do with insurance coverage?

AIG doesn't want to do business with his (presumably) business anymore because they don't align with his public image.

Again, this seemed to be the straw or at least branch that broke the camel's back.

He tweeted transphobic remarks and got suspended from his job as commentator. Then he tweeted anti-Muslim rhetoric and got fired completely from ESPN. Then he has profane rants directed towards current MLB players about trivial sports matters. Then he tweets support for the rioters. It's on and on with him.

The man walks around with a flame thrower looking for gas cans to ignite.

It's dumb and disingenuous to do that and then be all "What, poor little old conservative MEEE? What did I do?"

He didn't get dropped for a thoughtful, eloquently penned essay in support of the Second Amendment, or of a strong military.

He got dropped for having a very visible, very trashy, very inflammatory online persona.

There are thoughtful ways to express conservative views that would never in a million years get you you canceled. Conservatives do themselves no favors by picking trashy, inflammatory ass-hats like Trump and Schilling to cry foul about "censorship" of conservative views.

Just like with a scientific study, you've got to control for the multi variable situation. If people getting canceled are trashy, inflammatory, and conservative, roll some dudes out there that are just plain conservative and see if they get cancelled too. That way you're controlling for whether the others got canceled for being trashy and inflammatory or for being conservative.

I've been consistent on here saying the same thing about the Republican nomination in 2024. Nikki Haley will get treated completely different than Trump. Why is that? She's conservative too. Granted, she's conservative without being a trashy, inflammatory, petulant child. Maybe that will make a difference?
It's remarkable how you justify this based on absolutely nothing regarding insurance. Lol. Literally nothing you said has anything to do with insurance. A lot of words to try and smear him because you are fine with him losing his insurance, but nothing that has an iota to do with insurance


Can rational people imagine your health insurance being able to drop you from coverage because they don't like your tweets? That is sheer lunacy. Not that health insurance happened here, but why not? Apparently the threshold is if they think you make a (as determined by their online police force) visible, trashy, and inflammatory online posts, they can drop your insurance at any time.

It doesn't have anything to do with insurance. It has to do with image. This isn't news.

And yes, service providers of all types have terms of service addressing client conduct in their client agreements. I would bet my life that Schilling violated the terms of service of his contract with AIG with his conduct.

In the Service Agreement I have for a real estate service we provide a group of clients, we have the following clause in the Termination section:

"We may immediately terminate this Agreement by giving you written notice in the event...your conduct or the conduct of your employees or guests become incompatible with ordinary [service use] or is otherwise detrimental to [our business] or our reputation..."

The relevancy of client misconduct to the business service we're providing them is discussed but there's an additional clause that gives us broad latitude to address their conduct if we think it may impair our reputation. Most companies have similar terms.

AIG had an image problem with Schilling, not an insurance problem.
More utter nonsense. AIG did not have an image problem with Schilling. That is just plain stupidity. Nobody even knew he had insurance with them until they canceled his. Additionally, you really don't want to go down that ridiculous road of "image problem" determining who can buy your services. Your duplicity will be quite apparent.
pineknollshoresking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboypack02 said:

pineknollshoresking said:

IseWolf22 said:

Pacfanweb said:

Yeah, I really don't think the whole 25th Amendment or impeachment is such a great idea at this point.

All it'll do is galvanize his base and piss them off even more. Better to just let things simmer down and move on.



I mostly agree with you. It's largely pointless, particularly the 25th.
Conviction for impeachment would bar Trump from holding future office, but what are the chances he actually runs again. It would also deny him his pension and the $1 million per year travel budget, but frankly that's peanuts right now
Probably high. Im reading some polls that says Republicans are likely to vote for him again in 2024 at greater than a 70% rate.
I don't think he's going to run again. Why would he? Its not worth it.

I've actually thought a lot about politicians in general over the last few weeks. The problem is that the type of people we need to be politicians and run our government don't want to do it, and don't want the power that comes along with holding office...and the people who do end up in power are the exact opposite. I mean this on both sides of the aisle, not just towards on side or another.

We need people who understand the way the world actually works and have lived as part of it, not folks who have been born and bred to be part of the system. We should have elected officials who understand the power of policy, but also understand the ramifications that come from using that power outside of just the thought of getting re-elected or hurting people that disagree with an opinion. When Eisenhower left office he and his wife hopped in their car and rode off into the sunset(really)....they didn't grasp at political straws to retain some semblance of power. Now people leave office and do everything they can to try maintain that power they had.

We don't have that. None of the people who could best help lead the country and its people want the fight that comes along with it...and by fight i mean the nasty campaign where attacks are personal and not political. Even once they are in office there is no honesty or truthfulness with anyone. You can see the absolute hypocrisy on full display every single day.

Of course this is collectively our faults. We could nominate and elect people who wouldn't do that but we don't. We like the mudslinging....hell...i enjoy the political discourse. its just a shame.

cowboy, you may be correct; however, I'm listening too this impeachment hearing in the House right now. The one thing I see is that the Democrats are extremely vile. You cannot have meaningful conversation, debate, or even find any common ground with these vile people.

Some members of this very board act in the same way as the House Democrats.

I do not see a Conservative winning who has some type of Presidential countenance you aspire. I think we all with for it; however, I think those days are long gone...
I am a Deplorable!!!!
ncsualum05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboypack02 said:

pineknollshoresking said:

IseWolf22 said:

Pacfanweb said:

Yeah, I really don't think the whole 25th Amendment or impeachment is such a great idea at this point.

All it'll do is galvanize his base and piss them off even more. Better to just let things simmer down and move on.



I mostly agree with you. It's largely pointless, particularly the 25th.
Conviction for impeachment would bar Trump from holding future office, but what are the chances he actually runs again. It would also deny him his pension and the $1 million per year travel budget, but frankly that's peanuts right now
Probably high. Im reading some polls that says Republicans are likely to vote for him again in 2024 at greater than a 70% rate.
I don't think he's going to run again. Why would he? Its not worth it.

I've actually thought a lot about politicians in general over the last few weeks. The problem is that the type of people we need to be politicians and run our government don't want to do it, and don't want the power that comes along with holding office...and the people who do end up in power are the exact opposite. I mean this on both sides of the aisle, not just towards on side or another.

We need people who understand the way the world actually works and have lived as part of it, not folks who have been born and bred to be part of the system. We should have elected officials who understand the power of policy, but also understand the ramifications that come from using that power outside of just the thought of getting re-elected or hurting people that disagree with an opinion. When Eisenhower left office he and his wife hopped in their car and rode off into the sunset(really)....they didn't grasp at political straws to retain some semblance of power. Now people leave office and do everything they can to try maintain that power they had.

We don't have that. None of the people who could best help lead the country and its people want the fight that comes along with it...and by fight i mean the nasty campaign where attacks are personal and not political. Even once they are in office there is no honesty or truthfulness with anyone. You can see the absolute hypocrisy on full display every single day.

Of course this is collectively our faults. We could nominate and elect people who wouldn't do that but we don't. We like the mudslinging....hell...i enjoy the political discourse. its just a shame.

The system will never let that happen. The way it really works in most cases is party leaders who are inbred with certain money men find suitable candidates to run in districts and prop those candidates up with money and recognition. Usually other un known candidates are buried quickly in primaries and at that point it's simply are you in a red or blue district. Of course there are some competitive districts in the country where more money is needed during the general campaign. Many districts are done after the primary for the most part. Once said candidate goes to Washington they are quickly introduced to the people that got them there and are reminded that their agenda is his/her agenda. Also party leaders pressure them as well. Most fall in line or lose their money and standing. Most in Washington make a lot of money and peddle the influence of money men through the social construct as well as legislation. Money men include lobbyists and corporate sponsors as well as foreign influence. They all get rich or if they have principles they get blackballed in DC and eventually defeated.

Legislation is not so much made based on representation or the people but what is acceptable to party leaders and the money that keeps you in power. OF course some stuff helps Americans too... but that's not the first thing on most of their minds.
pineknollshoresking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BTW, some of you, including me, are now "White Nationalist"

I guess I'm guilty?
I am a Deplorable!!!!
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.