Former White House Press Secretary Carney still considering Apple PR role, Bloomberg says

16781012

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 230
    bergermeisterbergermeister Posts: 6,784member

    Wow.  What a thread.  

     

    Should be moved to Political Outsider.

  • Reply 182 of 230
    jessejjessej Posts: 29member

    Not if it disqualifies members with less than 100 comments from participating in dialogues.

  • Reply 183 of 230
    Lol. The only problem with Fox is that they call themselves "news". Foxnews is news like Weekly World News is news.

    Remember the bit about "Taliban Monkeys" on Fox or Karl Rove's ridiculous insistence that Ohio had not gone to Obama in 2012?

    LOL.
  • Reply 184 of 230
    bergermeisterbergermeister Posts: 6,784member

    I think it would be the perfect place for it. 

  • Reply 185 of 230
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    If Tim Cook hires him then he loses me as a customer.

    Good. 

  • Reply 186 of 230
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jmz101 View Post



    If Carney is appointed PR director for Apple - I will literally puke.

    I'm hoping that you also choke to death on the puke.

  • Reply 187 of 230
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,772member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    Wow, what a nasty, toxic post - par for the course for you. You're really attacking people on hypocrisy? Everyone knows you'd have no problem with this hire if this guy was a Bush PR flack. The ONLY reason you're riled up is that Carney worked for the Obama administration. Also, liberals are "girly men"? Are you fucking 8?


    You have to know when to tune him out. He talks crazy pretty regularly. Apple is as liberal as a company can get. The problem is there isn't a major tech company that isn't less liberal than Apple that makes good products. Innovation requires science. Conservatives don't believe in that if it contradicts their religious views. 

  • Reply 188 of 230
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    adonissmu wrote: »
    Conservatives don't believe in that if it contradicts their religious views.

    Not entirely. They want you to be silent if you you decide to question the word of God or talk about civil liberties. :D
  • Reply 189 of 230

    Carney is as believable as Baghdad Bob. It beats me why Apple would even consider a person who lies and obfuscates the way Carney in his Whitehouse gig. 

  • Reply 190 of 230
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

    Wow.  What a thread.  

     

    Should be moved to Political Outsider.


     

    I used to do that with all threads like this. Now they don’t care.

     

    Originally Posted by JesseJ View Post

    Not if it disqualifies members with less than 100 comments from participating in dialogues.

     

    YES. PARTICULARLY IF IT DOES THIS. We don’t need more rampant political trolling nonsense here. This is a perfect reason to move it there.

  • Reply 191 of 230
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,491member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    I'm sure Cook couldn't care less but I doubt I'd be the only one. That Bloomberg article have over 200 comments most of them negative. I can't remember the last time a Bloomberg article on Apple generated over 200 comments.

     

    Negative comments on any forum mean absolutely nothing.   The web has become a place of mindless idiots who preach hatred for various things, some trivial ("George Lucas ruined my childhood") and some important (Mideast issues) without really understanding the issues.

     

    One can have any opinion they want and do with their money what they want, but I think it's completely absurd that because one has decided they hate liberals in general or Obama specifically (for either valid or invalid reasons), that if his former press secretary joins Apple, they would abandon the company.   Does everyone who is an executive at Apple have to meet your political litmus test?   Is there no room for someone who has different opinions than you do?

     

    Have fun buying Dell.  

  • Reply 192 of 230
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

    Does everyone who is an executive at Apple have to meet your political litmus test?


     

    They have to pass an executive litmus test, at least. He wouldn’t be an executive.

     

    I rather think much of the problem with him is his congenital lying. 

  • Reply 193 of 230
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,453member
    splif wrote: »
    That's Obama's fault also, along with bad weather, being the anti-christ, Hitler, terrorist fist bumps & trying to indoctrinate our children into his cult ./s

    ... and not even an America ... /s
  • Reply 194 of 230
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,453member
    zoetmb wrote: »
    Negative comments on any forum mean absolutely nothing.   The web has become a place of mindless idiots who preach hatred for various things, some trivial ("George Lucas ruined my childhood") and some important (Mideast issues) without really understanding the issues.

    One can have any opinion they want and do with their money what they want, but I think it's completely absurd that because one has decided they hate liberals in general or Obama specifically (for either valid or invalid reasons), that if his former press secretary joins Apple, they would abandon the company.   Does everyone who is an executive at Apple have to meet your political litmus test?   Is there no room for someone who has different opinions than you do?

    Have fun buying Dell.  

    Nicely said.

    I'd simply put the dear chap in my block list but so many reply to his trolling it would be pointless. I'd love it if 'Block' had the extra level of also blocking replies to trolls as well as their OPs. Meanwhile I'd ask folks to ignore political hatred posts and stick to Apple if they can possible resist the reflex to correct moronic posts. Believe me, I know it is hard!
  • Reply 195 of 230
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,491member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JesseJ View Post

     

     

    PS. I still think Bush was the worst POTUS in my lifetime thus far, but Obama is rated across the political spectrum as worst POTUS. So your "Obama is still wildy popular with his base" is baseless, fake fact. There is a TON more I could say, such as N.S.A. illegal spying expanded with Obama, or how Obama protects and defends Bush and all Iraq War architects for Iraq. But your OPINION's already completely wrong, so why bother? Peace.


     

    Obama's current approval rating is 42% (Gallup July 7-13).   It's 79% among Democrats, 36% among Independents and 9% among Republicans, so I think you'd have to agree that he does have strong approval ratings with his base (stronger than I would have thought).   Obama also does better with younger people:   49% approval from people 18-29, 46% 30-49, 38% 50-64 and 35% ages 65+.    But another thing you have to remember is that the far left is also unhappy with Obama for some of the reasons that you point out, so that hurts his numbers.   It doesn't mean that those people would vote Republican in the next elections.

     

    I do disagree that Obama "protects and defends Bush...and all Iraq War architects..."     Obama got us out of there, for better or worse.   He's not going to prosecute the former administration, if that's what you're thinking.    That would rip the country apart far more than it already is, Congress would never go along anyway and it would set a precedent that would turn the U.S. into a third world country like Egypt.  

     

    Congress' approval rating is only 15% (Gallup July 7-10).  I think people who still support Obama realize that he's been totally screwed by the House, which won't let him get anything done, which is why they cut him some slack.

     

    Having said that, and as a supporter in general, Obama certainly has major faults - permitting spying on U.S. citizens being one of them.    IMO, he should have spent four more years in Congress before running for President, but I have a feeling that he never expected to win.

  • Reply 196 of 230
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    OT: I'm not a fan of the two-term system. Too much of that time is spent weighing action against what it might cost you in the next election and the direct time spent in rerunning. I propose a single 6 year term. You get in you work your ass off and then you leave.
  • Reply 197 of 230
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member

    Jay Carney obviously elicits an abundance of negative feelings. That, and the permanent scowl embedded in his cheeks from endlessly being grilled by the media, should put the kibosh on this stupid idea. 

  • Reply 198 of 230
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,453member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    OT: I'm not a fan of the two-term system. Too much of that time is spent weighing action against what it might cost you in the election and the direct time spent in rerunning. I propose a single 6 year term. You get in you work your ass off and then you leave.

    There is a lot of truth in that, and it is the same for all political positions at every level right down to villages. The career politician concept in general is the problem with the system. If the posts were held by 'real people', on a two or four year sabbatical from normal life as it were, they would not think of themselves as different and make all those laws to benefit themselves. Utopian dream maybe. The current system is basically a re making of the aristocracy.
  • Reply 199 of 230
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    mj web wrote: »
    Jay Carney obviously elicits an abundance of negative feelings. That, and the permanent scowl embedded in his cheeks from endlessly being grilled by the media, should put the kibosh on this stupid idea. 
    Jay Yarrow at Business Insider claims today that he spoke to one of Carney's friends and they say Carney wouldn't take this job because he doesn't want to leave Washington DC.
  • Reply 200 of 230
    jessejjessej Posts: 29member

    Are you trying to imply anything I posted above is "nonsense trolling"? I joined A.I. in 2003, when I bought the first flat screen iMac. I would be using my original account but I wasn't using the internet much for a couple years, years ago, and forgot what account name and email address I used to use. I might have 100+ comments with that account, I honestly don't remember. Perhaps I should try to figure it out, I know for certain it has more comments than this account does and if I used that to comment again it would put me past the >100 threshold faster. I think if a person just joined and is trolling political thread, sure. Otherwise it's pathetic to limit members' opinions in politcal threads, the way Mac Rumors does. Yay for censoring possibly dissenting voices!

Sign In or Register to comment.