Clark mentioned this week that his show is above the political fray in general, and specifically in regards to out of control inflation, and energy prices. I am all for that! Except for the fact that Clark would consistently mention the name of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, what’s the difference Clark what has changed?
careful…they removed the politics board from the old CH site.
I legitimately would like to know what has changed, what’s the difference? This is the last place I want to be discussing politics, but why was it ok to name names in one administration, but not the other? If they want to ban my speech, they have that right as a private company.
Just saying that it might be better to ask Clark that question offline instead of here. Another board was created after the old boards shut down an a lot of political discourse goes on over there. But a sore spot on the message boards was politics. I think they’d like to avoid that on this board. I was quite active on the old politics board, but I respected their decision to take politics down an I respected their request to keep politics out of the other threads. So you might email clark.
Clark appreciates feedback, all I’m saying is stay above the political fray consistently.
The problem we all have is the fact that American politics has spilled over into most people’s daily lives. Just about anything we discuss here, or anywhere for that matter, will invariably be subject to opinions which are increasingly influenced, spun and interpreted by political pressures, (read misinformation, mal-information and disinformation.) And it comes from all directions and carriers.
I think the best way to stay out of trouble is to stick to verifiable facts, and be nice… like we learned in kindergarten.
If only we could all agree on “verified facts”
Nice Sentiment but do we know any Verified facts.
One would think that the vaccine would be a verified fact… but it is more political than most political issues.
Oh I dunno… posting an Internet source coupled with a little civil discussion should be possible. The important thing is to respect one another’s opinions and not resort to name-calling.
If there’s one thing the last five years has taught me it’s that smart people can have some really dumb ideas and say some very dumb things. I think we all have friends who hold positions and have ideas and beliefs radically different than our own. It’s possible to build trust and respect with those we might disagree with an still have civil discussions, it’s a learned skill… not an easy skill to learn, but it has some worthwhile benefits.
I can’t say I’ve heard every time Clark has mentioned Betsy DeVos. But what I have heard has never been political. From his consumer finance perspective her department was not acting in good faith toward people who had student loans and the department was pretty much ignoring the laws. No different than his calling out the mega banks for their misbehavior toward consumers.
The point is if he was willing to get involved in the political chatter, he should be willing to do it regardless of the administration.
If you look for patterns in random events, you’ll find them. It’s a human fallibility similar to the phenomena of seeing faces in the clouds or finding a rutabaga that looks like your aunt Ethel.
The book, Fooled by Randomness, by Nassim Taleb explains the phenomena in depth.
I’ve listened to Clark for nearly 18 years. That’s four federal, and countless state, administrations. During that time he has routinely called out federal, state and local agencies as well as big businesses when they are breaking or skirting laws and/or not doing what they were chartered to do with regard to consumers. Granted there is supporting structure to everything but he limits his comments to the specific entity he feels at fault and hones in on the financial issue. He cannot account for the lenses through which each listener views his statements. That’s why he has Clark Stinks.
I’ve written to Clark stinks, they refuse to read it.
I could care less who he discusses, as long as it’s consistent. He has said he wants to stay out of politics, that’s fine just stay out of it across the board. I think you miss the point.
OH…I think the point is very clear…
Try reading this book… it’ll help you understand why you’re getting the response your getting:
I understand perfectly, without a $30 book.
You should consider the possibility that you do not understand. It is easy to hear things that are not said because of a misunderstanding.
One good indication is that you hear and interpret something said by a third party different than otherr people hearing the same thing.
So, talk to him, not listeners to his show. He does not participate in this forum. We cannot speak for him and all you will do is create conflict here. You seem to be baiting us.