So, I'm just wandering along Facebook, minding my own business when one of my "friends" posts the following thread (below).
Needless to say, we're not "friends" any more. Locked and blocked. The beauty of Facebook. Relationships are easy come easy go, I guess.
Friends answer honest questions honestly. They aren't afraid of those who appear to disagree with them. They don't scrub comments they don't agree with, unless perhaps they contain extreme or offensive language.
You can make your own judgements, but I was actually with my "friend" philosophically until the "Not my fault. I voted for Gary Johnson" line.
That one was up for a challenge.
That one was up for a challenge.
Facebook can be very eye-opening sometimes. This thread (conversation) was fascinating to watch develop in real time, almost like watching a train wreck.
I was thinking, "I really can't believe this guy is doing this".
It was fascinating. I would get a "Like" message to my comment and as they were deleted from his page -- and it is his page -- they would be deleted. I tried to screen shot as much as I could, but this thread goes down as one of the most well-scrubbed threads I've ever seen.
I was thinking, "I really can't believe this guy is doing this".
It was fascinating. I would get a "Like" message to my comment and as they were deleted from his page -- and it is his page -- they would be deleted. I tried to screen shot as much as I could, but this thread goes down as one of the most well-scrubbed threads I've ever seen.
Some of the responses may appear out of order, because dude was literally scrubbing out comments with opinions contrary to his as soon as they hit for about 20 minutes.
He's done similar work on his page in a "debate" where he tried to crush Colin Powell. Seems like that would be easy enough work recently, but I guess not.
He's done similar work on his page in a "debate" where he tried to crush Colin Powell. Seems like that would be easy enough work recently, but I guess not.
I explained this "control the narrative" thing to my son once regarding how sports talk radio or any genre of talk radio (political, financial) works. It seems like some have taken the model to little old Facebook.
No surprise really. But now you know. And really, as we've seen with the whole Manti Te'o thing, this demonstrates how phony and hollow Facebook can be.
Know your friends. Now you know how some of them can be and can better judge the value of the friendships.
6 people like this.
He "un-friended" me before I could ask more questions.
Or maybe I "un-friended" him first. Hard to say.
Here is my initial thought on John's cool, reasoned response to my question:
HOW ABOUT THESE QUESTIONS JOHN T. REED? PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ADDRESS THE ONES YOU FEEL ARE STUPID FIRST, THEN YOU CAN WORK YOUR WAY UP TO THE INTELLIGENT ONES, IF YOU HAVE THE ENERGY?
CLEARLY, WE ARE IN GREAT NEED OF YOUR SUPERIOR INTELLECT.
CLEARLY, WE ARE IN GREAT NEED OF YOUR SUPERIOR INTELLECT.
You never addressed my "dish pan hands" question. Maybe it was a stupid question.
How about what happened to my 3-4 "Likes"? They seem to have been "scrubbed".
What happened to the folks you scrubbed (like Sam Grover)?
Are they OK?
Are they still your friends?
Are they OK?
Are they still your friends?
Is controlling the narrative more important than integrity in either a business or personal setting?
Please feel free to respond. I really couldn't keep up with your scrubbing of comments and likes, hence the "dish pan hands" question.
Should people in glass houses really be throwing stones?
John T. Reed's analysis of Robert T. Kiyosaki's book
Rich Dad, Poor Dad
Facebook is kind of fun, and I don't hate anybody per se, but......"Oh what a tangled web we weave...", right?
Anyway, as John well knows -- being a real estate guru and all --the second three most important words after Location, Location, Location are Comparable, Comparable, Comparable.
To compare voting for for Ross (19%) Perot in 1992 with voting for Gary (1%) Johnson in 2012 in terms of impact is, too say the least, a stretch of epic proportions.
Voting for Perot didn't keep Clinton in check, the House Republicans did. Justify all you like. Your vote aided and abetted Obama winning re-election and now you want to rail about it? He's been laughing all the way to the inauguration from Election Day that the Republican Party could possibly be that fractured and self-defeating.
At least under the Democratic big tent, they pulled together enough, in spite of some of their considerable differences, to pull out a victory. A victory that -- on Election night at least -- seemed to come with a big sigh of relief to Obama's supporters, as well as himself. I don't think even he imagined the R's would be that stupid. Apparently, they are.
So congratulate him on his victory. And to those of you who want to claim the so-called moral high-ground of "Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson" you're wasting your time. You know what they say about you and the horse you rode in on.
You've doomed your little 1% faction to a generation of voters who will view you as spoil-sports and never take you seriously on the national stage. They already view you (us?) as crack-pots. Throw prima-donna into the mix now.
Libertarians will be seen as the Randy Moss of the electorate -- unreliable and only willing to run hard if the ball is being thrown to them. I wish Rand Paul a lot of luck leaning into that.
Libertarians are the divas of politics, which is what you began your post railing about. Well, that and Beyonce. Again, people who live in glass houses...Are there no mirrors in your house?.....YADA YADA YADA.
Big problem under the Republican tent and has been for some time, this lack of team chemistry or team players. If they're not playing, most basically shut it down -- which would be bad enough -- many try to help the other team win.
Read Colin Powell, whom you've also railed about. Problem is most see the Gary Johnson crowd doing much the same thing.
If people sense that people ON the team don't believe in the team, why should ANY independent voters believe? That is what tipped the scales of the election IMO. But what do I know?
If you can't take the "heat" of a simple question to explain your position without going right to name calling 1) stay out of the kitchen of political debate 2) you really don't have a well-thought out position.
I don't know what they teach regarding tactics at West Point but they might want to lean a little heavier on integrity in the future.
The tactics demonstrated here are more suited for the Politburo and the Red Army. For that, shame on you.
I thought the old pitching coach battles back in the day were fierce, a least there seemed to be more civil debate.
These guys who fancy themselves as real estate, investment or political gurus play an entirely different ball-game.
So now you know.
No comments:
Post a Comment