Posted on 04/14/2016 9:27:48 AM PDT by Syncro
Katrina Pierson, Trump Campaign Spokeswoman, responds to comments made by Facebook's Zuckerberg about not building walls.
Katrina Pierson, a spokeswoman for GOP front-runner Donald Trump's presidential campaign, said Wednesday that she can't take Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg seriously after the tech billionaire made a thinly-veiled reference to her candidate's positions.
"Self-righteousness isn't very proactive: We can talk about taxes, we can talk about jobs and even immigration, but that doesn't really put food on the table and save lives," she told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street."
"I think I'll take Mark Zuckerberg seriously when he gives up all of his private security, moves out of his posh neighborhood and comes live in a modest neighborhood near a border town, and then I'm sure his attitude would change," she added.
At Facebook's F8 developer conference on Tuesday, Zuckerberg spoke out against those seeking to build walls — physical and digital.
"As I look around and I travel around the world, I'm starting to see people and nations turning inward, against this idea of a connected world and a global community," he said. "I hear fearful voices calling for building walls and distancing people they label as others. For blocking free expression, for slowing immigration, reducing trade, and in some cases around the world even cutting access to the internet."
Pierson fired back and said that Silicon Valley should stick to what they do that gives America a competitive advantage.
*snip*
"It's great that we can have innovation in this country, but you should be able to do that without putting the lives of Americans at risk."
Excerpt, read more at CNBC
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Ain’t that the truth, they do not want us to build walls and be “open” however when it comes to their property and what they own, the rules are different for them, why we have to deal with the crap but they do not I wonder.
No, that’s not the point. Libs always berate the wealthy, unless it’s their wealth.
A nationalist lib would at least hire Americans instead of H1Bs to save money, especially at that level of wealth. But they tend to hate their country and apparently everyone in it.
Many people with excessive wealth lose touch with reality because they never have to live in it.
Zuck does Suck....Big Time!
Weasel that he is, should reside in the zoo along with the other wild animals
Me thinks he should enjoy his Chinese Asian honey and not worry about things that are above him.
In all candor, none of us would be unaffected by it. Being a traitor doesn’t work though. Zuck is a typical Harvard leftist/globalist POS.
Zuckerberg is a child with way more money than brains. He fits Winston's definition of a socialist perfectly.
A similar quote from an early land Barron in Oklahoma.
All I want is what's mine and what joins mine.
LOL Schmuckerberg
Your personal insult shows you totally missed my point...
Stopped reading your post at the Cruz reference, fwiw.
Most people stop reading things that mention him these days. We feel your pain.
Not really, it was countered quite brilliantly.
Yes, Zuckersperg, muslim invaders and Mexican invaders are “others.”
(He has a Hello Kitty cover on his iPhone? If I ever get a cover for my iPhone, it will be a skull or a demon or a cougar or some such.)
Actually, you did completely missed my point.
My pint was not about Zuckerberg or jobs, but about the personality trait that modivates one to personal attacks on those who disagree with you politically by a politician.
You went off on the jobs rant. Apparently I spoke above your comprehension level, even with my “lower intelligence”..
zuck is a typical hypocritical liberal.
I did “completely missed” your point?
Your “pint” was not about...
(Where’s your grammar, and don’t tell she is in the kitchen baking cookies)
Facts is not (at)tacks
Speaking of comprehension levels, check to whom you are posting: not the person you are attacking by replying to me.
Do you comprehend that your rant to me is completely misdirected?
If you really, honestly judged others' intellect by their grammatical skills, you most certainly would have disqualified Trump as a viable Presidential candidate long ago. You have not, so it does not carry that meaning for you.
If you inject yourself into a conversation, don't be surprise others consider you in the conversation. But to clarify: He didn't address my point. And you chimed in and said he did. You are wrong.
And since you went there: "Facts is are not (at)tacks".
See this?: “And since you went there: “Facts is are not (at)tacks”.
I was mimicking yer grammatical style to make you feel more comfortable.
And making it rhyme, pretty cool don'tcha think?
Spellcheck does it's thing off screen so you can't choose the right spelling? Bummer.
My phone is 3.75" and I can see which word to choose just fine. My phone doesn't do it out in the ether somewhere, but right on the screen. Maybe you need a smaller phone so spell check can appear on the screen.
I didn't judge you just wondered why you castigated me for something I did not post.
You told ME that I went off on a jobs rant.
Nope, completely false.
Maybe you can find who you meant to post to and go all postal on him/her.
I didn't really say he got your point, I merely stated the fact that he countered your point quite well. Which he/she did.
I notice you seeming lack of a sense of humor.
Dr Zoo of the Institute of Phenomonology has a procedure in which he injects that particular sense into willing subjects.
There is a small fee, I have pinged him.
I feel like I am listening to an argument with one my my grandson’s smartalec classmates. They are 7, so this type of behavior is expected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.