Pure Gold!
-
Denver mayoral candidate flubs when asked what ‘NAACP’ stands for; blames 'momentary lapse'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/denver-mayoral-candidate-flubs-when-asked-what-naacp-stands-for
Denver mayoral candidate Jamie Giellis stumbled this week when asked on a live Facebook program what “NAACP” stands for.
Giellis was being interviewed Tuesday on “The Brother Jeff Show,” which focuses on African-American issues. Off camera, a man asked her what the acronym means.
“National African-American ... ,” Giellis began, before the man told her she was wrong.
“You gonna test me on this?” Giellis asked, looking uncomfortable.
NAACP stands for “National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.” The civil rights organization was founded more than a century ago and has chapters across the U.S.
Shay J., host of the program, asked Giellis if she knew what the NAACP did. Again, Giellis appeared caught off guard.
“Well, they do advocacy for the African-American community," she responded. "They talk about policy. They talk about issues. They stand up for some rights.”
Then social media pounced.
“If you’re running for mayor of Denver… you might wanna know what NAACP stands for, Jamimie Gillis. Also might wanna know what they do,” wrote one Twitter user.
Giellis’ rival, incumbent Mayor Michael Hancock, called the clip, “alarming.”
Shay J. told Denver's KCNC-TV that she gives Giellis credit for agreeing to the interview, but said Giellis should’ve been better prepared.
Giellis apologized Wednesday, explaining that she “momentarily struggled to recall” when she was asked what the NAACP was, Denver’s FOX 31 reported.
“Moments after the show, while collecting my thoughts, it came to me – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I told the hosts what it stood for and apologized for my momentary lapse,” she said.
-
-
Denver mayoral candidate flubs when asked what ‘NAACP’ stands for; blames 'momentary lapse'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/denver-mayoral-candidate-flubs-when-asked-what-naacp-stands-for
Denver mayoral candidate Jamie Giellis stumbled this week when asked on a live Facebook program what “NAACP” stands for.
Giellis was being interviewed Tuesday on “The Brother Jeff Show,” which focuses on African-American issues. Off camera, a man asked her what the acronym means.
“National African-American ... ,” Giellis began, before the man told her she was wrong.
“You gonna test me on this?” Giellis asked, looking uncomfortable.
NAACP stands for “National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.” The civil rights organization was founded more than a century ago and has chapters across the U.S.
Shay J., host of the program, asked Giellis if she knew what the NAACP did. Again, Giellis appeared caught off guard.
“Well, they do advocacy for the African-American community," she responded. "They talk about policy. They talk about issues. They stand up for some rights.”
Then social media pounced.
“If you’re running for mayor of Denver… you might wanna know what NAACP stands for, Jamimie Gillis. Also might wanna know what they do,” wrote one Twitter user.
Giellis’ rival, incumbent Mayor Michael Hancock, called the clip, “alarming.”
Shay J. told Denver's KCNC-TV that she gives Giellis credit for agreeing to the interview, but said Giellis should’ve been better prepared.
Giellis apologized Wednesday, explaining that she “momentarily struggled to recall” when she was asked what the NAACP was, Denver’s FOX 31 reported.
“Moments after the show, while collecting my thoughts, it came to me – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I told the hosts what it stood for and apologized for my momentary lapse,” she said.
Denver mayoral candidate flubs when asked what ‘NAACP’ stands for; blames 'momentary lapse'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/denver-mayoral-candidate-flubs-when-asked-what-naacp-stands-for
Denver mayoral candidate Jamie Giellis stumbled this week when asked on a live Facebook program what “NAACP” stands for.
Giellis was being interviewed Tuesday on “The Brother Jeff Show,” which focuses on African-American issues. Off camera, a man asked her what the acronym means.
“National African-American ... ,” Giellis began, before the man told her she was wrong.
“You gonna test me on this?” Giellis asked, looking uncomfortable.
NAACP stands for “National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.” The civil rights organization was founded more than a century ago and has chapters across the U.S.
Shay J., host of the program, asked Giellis if she knew what the NAACP did. Again, Giellis appeared caught off guard.
“Well, they do advocacy for the African-American community," she responded. "They talk about policy. They talk about issues. They stand up for some rights.”
Then social media pounced.
“If you’re running for mayor of Denver… you might wanna know what NAACP stands for, Jamimie Gillis. Also might wanna know what they do,” wrote one Twitter user.
Giellis’ rival, incumbent Mayor Michael Hancock, called the clip, “alarming.”
Shay J. told Denver's KCNC-TV that she gives Giellis credit for agreeing to the interview, but said Giellis should’ve been better prepared.
Giellis apologized Wednesday, explaining that she “momentarily struggled to recall” when she was asked what the NAACP was, Denver’s FOX 31 reported.
“Moments after the show, while collecting my thoughts, it came to me – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I told the hosts what it stood for and apologized for my momentary lapse,” she said.
Ugh when she starts to give the smile of a kid who is about to lie about a book report. "Well you can see by the cover there is a dog and a boy..."
-
that deer in headlights was pure gold. And immediately to the water bottle. LMFAO
-
If a kid did this about Devin Nunes, he would be suing and menstruating on TV about it.
Why would he?
Most on your side don't even know who Devin Nunes is.
I suspect you're just irked because AOC got ridiculed again.
Why would he?
Most on your side don't even know who Devin Nunes is.
I suspect you're just irked because AOC got ridiculed again.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I consider myself a "small L" liberal, but I also own firearms/believe in the 2nd Amendment, prefer to have a limited government, and personally believe that AOC is an unhinged Retard.
"That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence”. - Christopher Hitchens "The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you". - Neil deGrasse Tyson -
Why would he?
Most on your side don't even know who Devin Nunes is.
I suspect you're just irked because AOC got ridiculed again.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I consider myself a "small L" liberal, but I also own firearms/believe in the 2nd Amendment, prefer to have a limited government, and personally believe that AOC is an unhinged Retard.
-
Why would he?
Most on your side don't even know who Devin Nunes is.
I suspect you're just irked because AOC got ridiculed again.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I consider myself a "small L" liberal, but I also own firearms/believe in the 2nd Amendment, prefer to have a limited government, and personally believe that AOC is an unhinged Retard.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I'm positive you could have made your concerns known much earlier ....or do you have Cleve on ignore too?
Or is it because Cleve is on your side? Which one?
-
Why would he?
Most on your side don't even know who Devin Nunes is.
I suspect you're just irked because AOC got ridiculed again.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I consider myself a "small L" liberal, but I also own firearms/believe in the 2nd Amendment, prefer to have a limited government, and personally believe that AOC is an unhinged Retard.
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I consider myself a "small L" liberal, but I also own firearms/believe in the 2nd Amendment, prefer to have a limited government, and personally believe that AOC is an unhinged Retard.
baloney. On the 2nd Amendment you're good, I think, but other times you argue points incorrectly - you don't get them right in the beginning. THAT makes it tough to discuss anything meaningfully with you.
-
This is why we probably never seem to have meaningful discussions on this board. Once you "other someone", it's easy to disregard them and kill any chance of meeting in common ground.
I'm positive you could have made your concerns known much earlier ....or do you have Cleve on ignore too?
Or is it because Cleve is on your side? Which one?
I'm positive you could have made your concerns known much earlier ....or do you have Cleve on ignore too?
Or is it because Cleve is on your side? Which one?
Well, seeing as how in just the past two weeks:
- both of my parents have been hospitalized
- i've been ill with the flu
- have been working 12hr shifts at my job while sick in order to keep the lights on at home.
...perusing the Pol board in any greater detail than casual glances hasn't exactly been high on my priority list, so sorry I haven't been johnny-on-the-spot with my commentary.
As for being on ignore, the only person that I have on ignore is Cal, and even then, I still tend to respond to him, for what its worth.
As for being on Cleve's "side", the only person's side that i'm on is myself, because that is who i'm ultimately responsible for. Cleve does many things which I do not agree with. Cal sometimes says things I agree with. There's no "side" for me to be on.
I still stand behind my original comment towards you, but it could be applied to most commentators on this board, including myself, on occasion. Sometimes I have the feeling that most of us on here value being able to burn other posters on here instead of focusing on where we all agree on things and building from there.
-
I'm positive you could have made your concerns known much earlier ....or do you have Cleve on ignore too?
Or is it because Cleve is on your side? Which one?
Well, seeing as how in just the past two weeks:
- both of my parents have been hospitalized
- i've been ill with the flu
- have been working 12hr shifts at my job while sick in order to keep the lights on at home.
...perusing the Pol board in any greater detail than casual glances hasn't exactly been high on my priority list, so sorry I haven't been johnny-on-the-spot with my commentary.
As for being on ignore, the only person that I have on ignore is Cal, and even then, I still tend to respond to him, for what its worth.
As for being on Cleve's "side", the only person's side that i'm on is myself, because that is who i'm ultimately responsible for. Cleve does many things which I do not agree with. Cal sometimes says things I agree with. There's no "side" for me to be on.
I still stand behind my original comment towards you, but it could be applied to most commentators on this board, including myself, on occasion. Sometimes I have the feeling that most of us on here value being able to burn other posters on here instead of focusing on where we all agree on things and building from there.
Well, seeing as how in just the past two weeks:
- both of my parents have been hospitalized
- i've been ill with the flu
- have been working 12hr shifts at my job while sick in order to keep the lights on at home.
...perusing the Pol board in any greater detail than casual glances hasn't exactly been high on my priority list, so sorry I haven't been johnny-on-the-spot with my commentary.
As for being on ignore, the only person that I have on ignore is Cal, and even then, I still tend to respond to him, for what its worth.
As for being on Cleve's "side", the only person's side that i'm on is myself, because that is who i'm ultimately responsible for. Cleve does many things which I do not agree with. Cal sometimes says things I agree with. There's no "side" for me to be on.
I still stand behind my original comment towards you, but it could be applied to most commentators on this board, including myself, on occasion. Sometimes I have the feeling that most of us on here value being able to burn other posters on here instead of focusing on where we all agree on things and building from there.
That's tough, Jblu. 12 hr shifts are really tough on anybody, especially with the flu and all. Seriously.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login