Jun 5, 2008
Well, aren't you just an angry little man. Cute, really. I don't piss away enough time on this board to know how to do that whole point by point response to please try to follow. No, they may or may not be equally quallified. According to Steele, the impression given by AA could lead a hiring manager to believe that a person of a protected class got to the place they are not through merit, but through affirmitive action, or just fear of reprisal by activist groups. Yes by other white heterosexual males, they are the ones that still run the world idiot, they are the one that will decide if you get a job or not. Like I siad, I look at the world as it is, not as I wish it were. I also have no preconceived conclusins on anything. i am simply citing a reference that is topical to this thread, as opposed to spouting my biased opinion like you. I don't know who's secretary you are, but no sweetie, most business deceions are made based on the gut of the highly paid white heterosexual male executive that makes them. That's kinda why we still run the world. I've heard you cite that "fact" about forutne 500 companies courting gay employees. I would love to see that research. No one is "courting " 4% of the nations's population, that according to you, is "just like everyone else." Therefore gays are a cross section of the population as a whole, and account for such a minute number of people that the idea of looking for a gay professional as opposed to looking to the 96% of the rest of the workforce is just stupidity. Biggots don't require reasons for biggotry. Hiring managers, however, do apparently require reasons to believe that gays are going to act like everyone else and not try to start a movement in their accounting department. Perception is everything, sweetie, and people like you make it very hard for people like me to believe that hiring a gay man is not going to lead to problems down the road that don't exist with a straight man. I have no concern for your group or any other. I just like making lots of money, and will do whatever I need to to make sure that that continues. (Oct 14, 2011 | post #50)
Well, I can not make you actually read, nor understand the simple post I made. You obviously read this with your own slant and view things through that lens. I never said any laws mkarginalize gays. I said the impression that is given by the us vs them in every argument ever made by gays, or blacks or women, or anyone seeking protected status does. I don't have a weird weay of looking at things, I see them as they are, not as you wish them to be. Granted my view is far less likely to allow for progress than yours, but most of us live in my world, not yours. The study referenced in the OP, and the heart of this tread is about perception, plain and simple. Its not about fact, its not about laws its about perception. I can tell you that if someone sent me a resume with the positions listed in the "Gay resume" (what is that anyway, a resume that likes other resumes?) I would most likely never interview that person. My reasons are irrelevant. Honestly I would also be more likely to ignore the resume of anyone who plastered any politically charged experience on it. Loud rabble rousers who want to change the world are a distraction, and have no place in a business that is simply out to make profit. Listing experiences that potentially offend potential employers show a lack of judgement that I want no part of in an employee. That stands to reason weather you are gay, an animal rights activist, a tea party member or a pro-life activist. Laws don't marginalize people, people marginalize themselves. Oh and just for the record, referencing the work of a respected, social scientist is hardly a rant, even if you disagree with it. Your intolerance for anyone that does not agree with you is incredibly clear. (Oct 14, 2011 | post #49)
Yawns, sarcasm and talking points make for fun internet arguments, but they make no difference in the decison making process when I am reading a resume. I am not a real fan, but one of Shelby Steele's papers on affirmitive action and the new glass ceiling actually makes a lot of sense. (like I said, I'm not a fan, actually his views on Obama make him look borderline insane.) Steele contends that in any instance of group based prefernce, a question of qualifications eventually have to arise. If a white, heterosexual male and a black lesbian are both equally quallified and up for the same promotion, the eventual deciding manager could, with cause, reason that the member of the protected class MAY have gotten to the position she is in based on preference, not quallification. The member of the non-protected class would be deemed to have achieived thier status though merit. The fact is that, in the words of Bruce Hornsby(also not a fan,) "A law can't change people's minds when all they see at hiring time is a line on a color bar." Impressions are everything. Most business decisos are made based on impression. If someone has the impression that you are a member of a protected class, by law or judical activisim, you will be labeled as such and may see backlash. I am neither a troll, nor a homophobe, I am a realist who sees the world as it is. I, also don't appreciate your weak attempt at sarcasm. it makes you look ignorant, and just offers more reason for people to look more favorably at Bigoty. Us versus Them only works if the us is in the majority. The Us versus Them that you set up with your silliness only serves to further maginalize your group. (Oct 13, 2011 | post #44)
Based on Judicial activisim from partisain politically appointed federal "judges" , not legislation that is created by duly elected legislators, representing the will of the people. As such, I have to side with the poster above who said that if you are an employer who fears the risk of a lawsuit, you would be wise to avoid gays in your employment decisons. Judicial activisim and affirmitave action have created a glass ceiling that can't be ignored by a rational thinking employer. Every extra protection you give to a class of citizen is another reason to stick with white heterosexual males who have no recourse if you screw them. (Oct 13, 2011 | post #40)
Wait, MY buddies. Davey, Davey Davey, like it or not, YOU would be my only buddie on this thread. You would be the only person was still talking to, until the loonies came along and hijacked what was a good thread about an important issue. I honestly have'nt read anything any of them are saying. Its all about me and you, dear. Did you see the protest at the Capitol today? You could be right, the whiners my actually get some of the nonsense saved. So answer me this. How is it that whenPenn State threatens to cut valuable research and educational programs due to budget cuts they are victims? If the things they are crying about losing are so important(and some of them are-like the PSU Agricurtual Extension program) why not keep them and cut the nonsense like Athletics and Student life? Or do you contend that Arts and Football are more important than academics and research? (Apr 5, 2011 | post #520)
So what does any of this bullspit have to do with SSHE funding? The answer: Nothing. Another Topix thread killed by Dan the unemployed former mortgage man that used to put stupid bilboards on 83. Come on Harrisburg you remember this loser. (Apr 5, 2011 | post #491)
Wow, Dan you are the biggest thread killer on Topix, please go away. Dave-Sorry, Whatever on the property tax. Not sure how we got on that tangent since this thread is about the SSHE. I am fine with my property taxes. I grew up in the Lehigh Valley and live near Harrisburg. People in Central PA don't know what high property taxes look like. I'm not demanding I pay less taxes, I am simply stating I will no longer pay more taxes. Learn to do without. Spend less on something if you want to spend more on something else. Its worked fine for me all muy life, maybe the SSHE should be forced to try it. Don't really care what "guy on Topix that doesn't know me" thinks that makes me. I would need to see citation on those tax cuts. Please post one or don't state it as fact. Why forgo 400-600 millionin revenue? BECAUSE THE MONEY DOES NOT BELONG TO US YOU COMMUNIST SUNUVBITCH! We do not work for the government we are not "forgoing " on anything, it is not ours, so don't count it as revenue. The money the Gas industry makes belongs to them, not you. And I really could care less what other states do. Personaly, I think we should cut the Legislature by 85% and the Governors office by the same. No sweat off my back. And one more post that will not restore any of the non-existant money in the state treasury to the SSHE. Ohh what's that I just heard? Oh is the Political Science department at Millersville getting the pink slip. Oh, there goes the Clarion lacrosse team. Oooooh listen to that, its the sound of Sociology no longer being taught at EastBerg, Hey I can hear the mass firing of the Art department at Edinboro. Bye bye pops. (Apr 4, 2011 | post #419)
Oh so not a bitter college kid, but a mentally unstable retired PTSD case. Well, that explains tons. The museum is 2 doors down to the right. Figure out where the curator wants you to stand. And yet after another volly of personal attacks on both our parts, there is still no more money in the state treasury and we still are not giveing the SSHE any more money, so all the whiney "this aint what I fought for" crap in the world won't change the fact that I am right, you are wrong, and all the garbage that you think should be paid for with tax dollars will be gone soon enough. Bye now pops. (Apr 4, 2011 | post #401)
First of all, I never once said to replace property taxes. Second, porperty taxes have absolutly nothing to do with this thread, as they do nothing to fund the SSHE. Second, you can say all you want to say. The fact is WE WILL NOT LET TAXES BE RAISED! PERIOD! With that said, every other stupid thing you post about is just nonsense. It is irrelevant. None of it matters. Weather you are correct, or I am correct, adn the SSHE is wonderful and shouldn't change a thing, or its a massive tax pit, things WILL BE CHANGING. There is simply no money to pay for it, therefore it will change. What freaking part of this do you not understand. You talk like an idiot. You keep babbleing about what should be done, when no one can pay for it. Therefore it will NOT BE FUC^*NG done! What is hard to understand? I think you are actually a bitter little college kid who sees the writing on the wall and knows you are not going to get the same benefits I got from the SSHE. Yeah it sucks, well you AND I are not go9ing to get the same beenfits from Social Security that the locusts that are the result of the 10 year fuc*fest after WWII got. Bummer, If you want the governmnet to pay for it, you will take what you are given, and NOTHING MORE! (Apr 4, 2011 | post #399)
Its not, moron. That's why we are cutting your nonsense crap from the SSHE budget. The money is not coming from anywhere, taxes are not going to be raised, we will cut progrrams until we meet budget requirements. SOOOOOOOOO With that REALITY in mind, should we cut the business, ed., or science programs at SSHE schools or should we eliminate Performing arts centers, athletics, and useless coursework that the public doesn't wish to pay for like Political science and Anthropolgy? Its time for the public to force educators at all levels to simply educate our children, and not think the public will pay for their entertainment and philosophical ventures! (Apr 4, 2011 | post #393)
You won't get any arguemnet from me on that one! Hell, get rid of the dept. of ed and I'll let dipspit from Martinburg keep his silly Sociaology classes at Ship! :-) (Apr 1, 2011 | post #361)
Yeah, that's not happening either. (Apr 1, 2011 | post #360)
Uh, not for 2 years you cant, and when you can you will not make much difference. In two years all 203 house seats and half the senate seats will be up for grabs. The Senate is curently 30-20 GOP. So, there is no way possible to take the Senate, the best you could hope for is a tie, which would be broken by the Republican Lt. Gov. The makeup of the house is 112-91 in favor of Republicans. So you would need to change the parties in 21 districts in what will be the first election of a newly redistricted Legislative map. A map created by and in favor of the party that controls the House-the GOP. Good luck with changing this legislature any time this decade. No, I'm pretty sure that Corbett will have a united partisain legislature that is going to do exactly what he wants. And will most likely be reelected as most PA goverors in history have been. So, no, you will not be getting any more money for frivolity on SSHE campuses, in fact I see them getting slashed more all the time. Sorry, you lose, please come again. (Apr 1, 2011 | post #359)
I couldn't agree more. None of what you say requires Social Science, Arts and Humanities, Sports, or Student Life programs on campus. Oh and just for the record, there are no CHILDREN on college campuses. They are adults, and thier entertainment should be paid for by them, not the taxpayer. (Apr 1, 2011 | post #339)
Q & A with robo0425
Vladdy's little impaler.
15th century Wallacia
I Belong To:
When I'm Not on Topix:
I am impailing.
Read My Forum Posts Because:
of my diabolical brilliance.
I'm Listening To:
The voices in my head.
Sharp posts, hogs fat to lube sharp posts, bloody Ottomans.
On My Mind:
How can I sharpen enough logs to impail all those Ottomans.
I Believe In:
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC