[johnforbes]

Mr Forbes feels the same way about Clowntoker, who on an almost daily basis causes the fabulous Forbes to break down into uncontrollable weeping.

Only the internal strength of Mr Forbes -- combined with his taut and tawny physique, not to mention his good looks and charm -- saw him through:

"Former staff of Vice President Kamala Harris are coming out of the woodwork to expose her "toxic behavior" in the workplace. Only four out of her initial 71 staffers hired during her first year as VP remain on the job.

According to the Daily Mail, 67 staff members of the original 71 in her initial wave of hiring either quit or were fired. As far back as 2010 when she was the California Attorney General, Harris has been known to have a "toxic" workplace environment. Congressional sources told the outlet that Harris would berate staffers with expletive-laden tirades and frequently lashed out at subordinates. She earned an alleged reputation as a "soul-destroying" bully in the workplace."

[Clownkicker]

What johnforbes is apparently trying to say is that Harris may actually give Trump a run for his money concerning toxic workplace turnover and resignations.

I would think johnforbes would be all for that, seeing as how he had nothing but praise for Trump's personnel policies of hiring "all the best people."

[johnforbes]

Actually, Mr Forbes felt that many of those personnel selections were mistakes.

For instance, Amy C Barrett on the Supreme Court probably won't turn out to be anything like a genuine conservative. Law professors are famously leftist and, in the long run, she'll sadly probably regress to the mean.

If memory serves, Trump appointed Wray after Comey got fired, didn't he?

Every president, including Trump, has made personnel choices which don't turn out well for the country, eh?

[Clownkicker]

johnny, Harris' staff turnover is identical to Trump's staff turnover at 92%. Yet you never started a thread about how toxic the Trump workplace environment was nor how Trump is a soul-destroying bully. (Which even his supporters admit is true)

Why is that, you hypocritical partisan turd?

Is your point that Harris is just as bad as Trump? And if so, why do Trump supporters now pretend to care? They couldn't care less about how toxic Trump is. In fact, they applaud his toxicity to this day.

They should love Harris.

[johnforbes]

Why is that?

Well, for a very good reason -- namely, the press of other business.

When a person is as charming as Mr Forbes, he is in demand all over the Interwebs.

And, of course, in real life, where the good looks and charm of the fabulous Forbes are even more undeniable.

[Clownkicker]

Yup, johnforbes was caught with his pants down yet again and all he can say is he's got nothin' as always.

[johnforbes]

Only a small portion of the business day of the fabulous Mr Forbes can be devoted to brushing aside the postings of Clowntoker.

The press of other business, and Mr Forbes faces many imperatives in the course of his busy life

This morning, the stock market was up a bit, but then went down quicker than a Clinton intern...

[Clownkicker]

Yes, johnny, I imagine it is hard to find the time to post the truth about Trump when you spend all day enthusiastically licking his ass.

And stop pretending that your starting a thread about how Harris' workplace is as toxic as Trumps was is somehow "brushing aside" someone's postings. It is your partisan hypocrisy and nothing more. I never said anything about it until you started obediently distributing the day's talking points from your handlers.

[johnforbes]

As the rain pours down in the sultry August afternoon, it is not uncommon for us to ponder the depth of Clowntoker's ignorance.

It is a darkness not at noon (to mention another book Clown has never read or heard of), but a darkness at 3pm.

Mr Forbes uses no "talking points" and requires none.

Nay, Mr Forbes takes his guidance from the major thinkers of western philosophy.

Indeed, the famous myth of the cave was actually written about Clowntoker's first casa and how it left Clown in the literal darkness in addition to the figurative darkness of Clown's leftist ideology.

[Clownkicker]

Once again, johnforbes' partisan hypocrisy is clearly pointed out to him, which leaves him no alternative but to resort to more impotent ad hominem attacks.

johnforbes is nothing if not a predictable partisan tool.

[johnforbes]

No, that was not an ad hominem remark.

As applied ot Clown, it was more of an ad soyboy remark.

For further details, Mr Forbes need only commend the attention of gentle reader to Clowntoker's own personal web site, which is: Soyboy-socialist.org.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^ As I said, johnny can't make a cogent argument for his partisan positions, so he resorts to all he ever has: humorless personal attacks on his betters.

[johnforbes]

No, that was not an ad hominem remark.

As applied ot Clown, it was more of an ad soyboy remark.

For further details, Mr Forbes need only commend the attention of the gentle readers of this fine forum to Clowntoker's own personal web site, which is: Soyboy-socialist.org.

[Clownkicker]

Yes, johnny, it sounds even dumber and more pathetic the second time around.

Stop embarrassing yourself this way, dimwit.

[johnforbes]

Clown's commentary did seem more stale.

The remarks from the fabulous Forbes contained -- as they always do -- a freshness more pure than the April rain.

There was no ad hominem remark.

As applied ot Clown, it was more of an ad soyboy remark.

For further details, Mr Forbes need only commend the attention of the gentle readers of this fine forum to Clowntoker's own personal web site, which is: Soyboy-socialist.org.