Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

JD Vance Catch-all

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 964
  • Views: 32K
  • Politics 
I skimmed the transcript of the speech. No where that I saw did he say he wanted to destroy the University system. He was basically making two criticisms about the current system: 1. Universities squash any non liberal thought instead of encouraging people to discover for themselves.
2. People that don't want their kids to be HVAC technicians instead of taking on tons of debt for college because they think that is the only way to have a good life are part of the problem.

And speaking of out of context, he wasn't criticizing the treasury secretary because she was a woman. He was criticizing people that were saying you can't criticize a treasury secretary that was overseeing an economy with high inflation and other problems because she was a woman. It's right there at 14:57 minutes into the video if anyone cares to check for themselves. It's shocking to me that people that think they're intelligent can interpret that any other way.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I skimmed the transcript of the speech. No where that I saw did he say he wanted to destroy the University system. He was basically making two criticisms about the current system: 1. Universities squash any non liberal thought instead of encouraging people to discover for themselves.
2. People that don't want their kids to be HVAC technicians instead of taking on tons of debt for college because they think that is the only way to have a good life are part of the problem.

And speaking of out of context, he wasn't criticizing the treasury secretary because she was a woman. He was criticizing people that were saying you can't criticize a treasury secretary that was overseeing an economy with high inflation and other problems because she was a woman. It's right there at 14:57 minutes into the video if anyone cares to check for themselves. It's shocking to me that people that think they're intelligent can interpret that any other way.
Click to expand...
GTFOH. He said at 0:35 that people in this country have to "honestly and aggressively attack the universities" and closed with "the professors are the enemy." This was just his speech. The Q&A isn't on that video. Do you really think that he wouldn't have said "destroy" having previously said "aggressively attack"? For what purpose does one "aggressively attack" if not to destroy?

Again, the title of his speech -- the TITLE! -- was "the universities are the enemy." That is not a speech making those two criticisms.

As for Yellen, he absolutely was criticizing her for her gender. He called her a DEI hire. What the fuck does that have to do with his point? Why is he bringing that up? Yellen has impeccable credentials for her job. She's probably the most qualified Treasury Secretary in history. So when he attacks her for being a DEI hire, he's saying that any and all women are questionable selections for any public office.

To be clear: Yellen was "implementing" policies enacted into law. Her gender has nothing to do with anything. When he brings up gender for absolutely no reason, he's attacking her for it. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I think it's just possible that this left wing site may have taken Vance out of context in the hopes that people would get outraged and spread the article giving them more clicks and more advertising revenue. I'm not going to vote for Vance but he's not that bad.

The election cycle is making people who are normally very smart suspend their critical thinking skills.
Click to expand...
I think it's possible many on this board would put you on Ignore but for the fact they would miss so many great retorts from everyone else.
 
finesse said:
I suspect, when you calculate all the risk values, including being sued if one gets injured or the ramifications of getting caught or any number of factors, the back hoe.
Click to expand...
Still need them for close-in 'finishing' work though.
 
grimes70 said:
Still need them for close-in 'finishing' work though.
Click to expand...
one or two and not twenty. They still have time to clean up the job site and all the things a whole labor crew with foreman would do on larger sites. I started in the business when foundations were pick and shovel work, fork lifts were rare, there were no nail guns or variable speed drills or any of the things I wouldn't want to be without. Saw how things changed dramatically between 74 and 80.
 
dukeman92 said:
Just when Vance thought it was safe to hide behind Mark Robinson

Click to expand...

Yeah, I posted excerpts of that blog in the immigration thread, I think. It was an interesting contrast with who he has become politically but the pompous writing style was already developed.
 
Guess the dossier on him was leaked? Seems like oppo research at a quick glance.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top