upvote
Well, who else would you hire for the circus?
reply
Perhaps don't hire people who act as foreign adversaries for government work? Is that really such an absurd proposition?
reply
You can’t assume someone is foreign based on their name.

In fact I’d guess they’re not, since they’ve been employed on government projects since a young age.

reply
>who act as foreign adversaries

This does not mean they are from another country.

reply
I don't think they were spies. They have ethnic names, but it sounds like they are just good ol' red-blooded Yankee crooks.
reply
I can understand wanting to be perceived as being on “the right team” but that comment is so silly that it undermines credibility. To put it otherwise, could you imagine a scenario where I had a labor, arbitrage opportunity that involved a higher paying job in Shanghai, China and that I had lived there for a few years to do that. Let’s also say that I was found guilty of some similar crime. Would you call me a good old fashioned red-blooded Chinese crook?

It’s OK to acknowledge that economic migrants are a thing, and that they likely have only transactional interest in where they live, such as a Bengali construction worker in Dubai, for example. That’s just part and parcel of labor mobility. For better or worse, shareholders, or middleman representing shareholders, have decided this sort of thing is a really good idea in the US, and now around half the population falls in that bucket. It’s a free country, and freedom means being free to choose short term interests. That also means you’re free to support such policies because they are good for Blue-team redistricting so we can provide free healthcare to all 8 billion people in the world somehow.

But please, nobody becomes a Yankee by the mere fact of standing on the ground. If you want that pejorative title, then you need to earn it.

reply
It was a silly comment. It was meant to be.

As opposed to...

reply
What is this even supposed to mean? “I was joking, and it’s your fault for taking it seriously?”
reply
Pretty much, yeah.
reply
[flagged]
reply
> Perhaps don't hire people who act as foreign adversaries for government work?

Hilarious in the context of this administration.

reply
deleted
reply
Yeah. Here in america, we demand domestic adversaries!
reply
Uhh... The guy in charge of the whole thing does things a foreign adversary would do. Has for years and he's back for round two. He even tried to overthrow the government once.
reply
He wasn’t hired, he was elected.
reply
That's a bit pedantic. There's really not much of a difference there.

He can be fired too, but the current shitheads in charge would never do that.

reply
> There's really not much of a difference there.

Between being hired and being elected? There’s a massive difference and it’s not pedantic at all to point out the ridiculousness of a statement like “the president was hired”.

reply
It's a common colloquialism to say "America hired him to do a job" referring to the POTUS.

From a simple query...

"It is common to use the phrase "hired" when discussing the U.S. Presidency in a metaphorical or political context, particularly to emphasize that the President is a public servant working for the citizens. While the official process is "electing," the "hired" analogy is frequently used to highlight accountability, public service, and temporary, contractual-like tenure"

Just go look it up, and educate yourself.

But this pointless internet interaction is over.

reply
Maybe they're really, really good at leetcode. You can't pass up talent like that. </sarcasm>
reply