Ultimate hypocrite? Mark Zuckerberg mocks Trump yet builds huge wall around his house, jogs with security detail

So do liberals have to live in a tent because under your thinking (I use that term loosely) they are not allowed walls.

Why wouldn't a multi billionaire pay to have a security detail and massive wall around his houses? Whether the country needs one is another story.

You know there are people who decided to get health insurance for themselves but were outraged when Obama helped pass a law that required all Americans have healthcare coverage.

Aren't they hypocrites too?

So Mark Zuckerberg has in the past barely hidden his disdain for Donald Trump. He gave a speech in April where he ripped Trump but refused to say his name.

Zuck said, "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. I hear fearful voices calling for building walls and distancing people they label as others. "

So building a wall and distancing from others is bad? Yes, Rojo, every enlightened person knows that. Don't be a bigot.

Ok, so then why has Zuckerberg built a wall around his own home?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/anti-trumper-zuckerberg-buys-hawaii-property-puts-wall/

Also why does Zuck jog with a huge security detail?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3464044/Isn-t-work-T-shirt-Mark-Zuckerberg-heads-jog-wearing-trusty-uniform-carrying-phone.html

Liberal friends, how is what he is trying to do any different than what the US would do with an immigration policy?

Sort of like the hypocritical draft dodging coward Bill Clinton complaining about the:

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Clay Johnson

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Donald Trump

draft dodging coward chickenhawk W Bush

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Dick Cheney

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Newt Gingrich

draft dodging coward chickenhawk John Wayne

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Dennis Hastert

draft dodging coward chickenhawk (insert name of any republican leader here)

#%^&&YB2hj9 wrote:

Trump's wall is all about building something like the Iron curtain that is often deadly to cross but does nothing about decreasing the incentive to want to be on the other side.

Well Zuck's wall doesn't do anything to "descrease the incentive to want to be on the other side" either. There are two types of people that would want access to Zuck's house thieves (money) and madmen (Facebook ruined their lives). The wall doesn't lower the incentive of either.

Rojo Sez wrote:

Sort of like the hypocritical draft dodging coward Bill Clinton complaining about the:

draft dodging coward chickenhawk Clay Johnson

1) I'm not sure what my father has do with anything. But for the record, my father didn't dodge the draft. He was unfit for combat due to a knee injury. Blew out his knee in 9th grade or something.

2) I don't know why so many people assume I'm calling Zuck a hypocrite and am taking the conservative viewpoint on this. Do people not see the question mark after hypocrite?? I'm trying to get you to think (and make money half a penny at a time. Click bait baby).

One of the LetsRun.com co-founders voted for Bernie during this election cycle. Stop assuming you know our political idealogy.

What's wrong with draft dodging?

Let the folks who create these wars fight them. If that were the case, there would be no wars.

rojo wrote:

Liberal friends, how is what he is trying to do any different than what the US would do with an immigration policy?

Rojo, I'm not a liberal friend. Just a fellow Texas conservative. But seriously?

Individual security (mildly effective) vs national security (ineffective)

Individual privacy (effective) vs immigration control (somewhat effective)

Everyday occurrence vs symbol of division

0.5mi vs 2000mi

$500,000 vs $25billion

Nobody ever saw a wall around a house and said, "hmm they must be against a global community."

Trump is talking about a giant steel and concrete wall across the entire border. A wall like that will become a symbol. It won't to me, but it will to many. That's not what we need and more importantly the cost/benefit is out of whack.

But the border patrol says well placed fences/walls do help to slow them down and allow fewer agents to patrol a larger area. It makes sense to build them in select locations. They would range from giant concrete to simple chain link depending on location. That would be backed up by the "virtual wall" (Cameras, sensors), which is backed up by the agents. That's already what is being done, the border patrol just needs a lot more funding to accomplish it.

They are also making the fence around the White House higher. Security for me, but not for thee.

Total hypocrisy.

Oh, and I'll bet that new fence around the White House will cost about as much as a wall on the Mexican border.

Rojo wrote:

reallyrojo? wrote:

So do you agree with what they are both doing (nationalist, isolation) or disagree?

I'm just creating an interesting discussion for the message board and trying to get people to think.

Why is it 'wrong' to build a wall around your country but fine to do it around your house?

It depends on who you ask.

From Zuckerberg's perspective, this is a way to keep out "dangerous elements" (i.e., the poors).

If you ask a potential thief, he is offended because it would keep him and his friends from breaking in and stealing the billions which they think they deserve more than Zuckerberg.

If you ask a religious fanatic, he is offended because it would prevent him from breaking in and imposing his views on Zuckerberg.

On a micro level, Zuckerberg doesn't care if isolated thiefs or religious fanatics get offended and don't use Facebook. But, on a macro level, it affects his bottom line if entire groups are offended. A wall around his house won't offend an entire minority group, but supporting a Trump policy might.

This is not restricted to leftists. Our dear friend, the sub-3h (or was it 4+h) marathoner, Paul Ryan isn't less of a hypocrite:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/17/paul-ryan-builds-border-fence-around-mansion-doesnt-fund-border-fence-omnibus/

I don't see any problem with a Wall around the Zuck's house, but I find it hilarious that people think MZ is some kind of liberal savior. Dude cares about the stock price of Facebook and that alone. He has a good PR team that will make him seem like a "good guy" when in reality he is a sociopath.

Anyone notice how relaxed Zuck looks while running?

OnlySmartOneHere wrote:

Rojo wrote:

I'm just creating an interesting discussion for the message board and trying to get people to think.

Why is it 'wrong' to build a wall around your country but fine to do it around your house?

Because a house is typically private property where someone goes to spend their private time. America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. We are a shining beacon of hope; a land of opportunity. Accepting. Loving. Leading. Innovating. At least we should be. It boggles my mind to think that anyone could view these two things as similar.

Quit spewing propaganda! 100 years ago you would be correct, but not anymore.

As Milton Friedman, a libertarian, in favor of open borders once said: "It's just obvious you can't have free immigration and a welfare state."

America has become a giant welfare state and gaining citizenship allows one to cash in on benefits that are not available in many other countries. By restricting who can become a citizen to those who are most likely to be net contributors, we are protecting our land and cultural heritage, just as Zuckerberg is protecting his private property.

I'm not convinced that we need a wall, but 25 billion is a drop in the bucket for the federal government, especially if some of the funding will come from taxing money that's being sent back to Mexico, where it does our economy little good.

2/10

A wall around a bazillion dollar fear fortress is not the same as a wall across open desert.

You get 2 because you are doing the "ivy league" proud with your critical thinking skills and logic.

1. He has gotten death threats from ISIS. Pretty good reason to have a security detail, I think.

2. Being a hypocrite does not make someone wrong.

rojo wrote:

1) I'm not sure what my father has do with anything. But for the record, my father didn't dodge the draft. He was unfit for combat due to a knee injury. Blew out his knee in 9th grade or something.

2) I don't know why so many people assume I'm calling Zuck a hypocrite and am taking the conservative viewpoint on this. Do people not see the question mark after hypocrite?? I'm trying to get you to think (and make money half a penny at a time. Click bait baby).

One of the LetsRun.com co-founders voted for Bernie during this election cycle. Stop assuming you know our political [\i]ideology.

1) I agree, unrelated attacks to distract people remind me of arguing with my wife.

2) In the US democrats are called liberal, look at what they actually do and what republicans in office actually do. They both are more conservative than liberal when you compare it to the rest of the world. Also, from everything I've read Zuckerberg may not be a traditional republican but it sounds like he leans that way more than to being a democrat and he isn't formally associated with either party (unless you count holding a fundraiser for Chris Christie, but I'm not sure that tells you anything either). Things like being pro gay marriage and other social freedom issues sound to me like they should be considered conservative povs since they promote individual freedom. In the US we've co-opted the term conservative to mean so many things that aren't conservative, so I'm not sure what taking "a conservative viewpoint" means since it seems kind of irrelevant in this argument. You can create interesting discussion without trying to frame everything, even if it doesn't fit, into a liberal vs conservative argument which seems to be the intent here.

As many others have mentioned, he's not spending taxpayer money. He's spending his own money to protect himself and not relying on the government to do it for him, that's conservative, right? Something must have led him to believe all of this was necessary, at least he isn't expecting the police department to do anything special for him.

Mark Zuckerberg is a selfish coward who's messed up many people's lives with his narcissistic creation of Facebook. That site is pure scum and merely incites angry and miserable losers to attack and stalk others with their wannabe social justice warrior agenda. It encourages creation of false personas and lies just to fit in and leads people to depression. F Zuckerberg.