fustakrakich's Journal: Blonde Bombshell

"First, could you explain what you did in 2008 for Citi that warranted payment to you of close to $1 million, most of which was a bonus. Second, what was it about your performance that merited your bonus from a company that was being propped up by taxpayer money and are there any records of your performance assessment - or are there any assessments of your performance. Third, your employment agreement included a clause stating that 'your guaranteed incentive and retention award' would not be paid upon exit from Citigroup but there was an exception that you would receive that compensation 'as a result of your acceptance of a full time high level position with the United States Government or a regulatory body.' Now is this exception consistent with President Obama's efforts to 'close the revolving door' that carries special interest influence in and out of the government?"

You see, Mr. Smith, some of us don't like Obama any better than you do. But we pick issues that continue on a day to day basis in a reflection of past policy that goes back to at least to the 1870s, if not the beginning of time, as opposed to a single event in an attempt to to target a specific, quite disposible individual that simply serves as a mouthpiece. In fact, I would consider yours and your friends' thing as an obessesion, only to be fortified in textbook fashion <random explanation> when challenged.

Are you critiquing, or justifying?

[smittyoneeach]

From the linked comment, emphasis mine:

The best way to illustrate cognitive dissonance is via the classic experiment: you assign someone (e.g., a student) a Homer Simpson-esque job that's boring him to tears. Then you one day say he can stop doing it, you have something better to do with him. But you ask him if he can find a replacement for that previous crap job. You even offer a dollar if he does. So he'll go try to convince someone else that it's a great job to take. The fun thing is, after a while he'll

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Please rephrase the question

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Where is the moral (or if you prefer, ethical) line on the limits of persuasion?
In truth, we seek to influence others, covertly or overtly, at least slightly, with every exchange.
But let's constrain the question to a senior/subordinate situation in the work place. When have you laid on too much Lumberg?

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Should be obvious. Anything less than physical coercion is legit. Even lying, attempted bribery, the works... It's up to the rest of us to learn to say no, turn our backs, and walk away.. Any parent or teacher who doesn't teach that is negligent.

Besides. you're drifting from the main point of the JE. Maybe the link did, too. Yours is more of an issue of consistency and bias. And your excuse of being slow on the pickup will never fly with me. Calling the republicans 'progressive' only verifies you really ha

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Calling the republicans 'progressive' only verifies you really haven't 'learned' anything.

OK, so transcripts of Republicans (Romney, McCain) identifying themselves as Progressive doesn't mean much?
Could you provide a URL to this esoteric wisdom I've not 'learned', oh wise one? Just because I've not internalized dumb ideas is not the same as saying I've not encountered them.