Guns.

mace1229 · September 22

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

Women are 50% of the population, not 10%. And 60% of college graduates are women. People keep focusing on POC, but it is women too.

Yes, but over 90% of pilots enrolled in a commercial training program are white males. So that's why I referred to the 90%. The other 10% make up women and minorities.

mrussel1 · September 22

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

Women are 50% of the population, not 10%. And 60% of college graduates are women. People keep focusing on POC, but it is women too.

Yes, but over 90% of pilots enrolled in a commercial training program are white males. So that's why I referred to the 90%. The other 10% make up women and minorities.

I thought you were saying how do you make 10% of the population (minorities) 50% of the class.

If you're saying only 10% of candidates are female or POC, then I would agree that's tough to get the most qualified. But is that really the case? Is it really that low?

mace1229 · September 22

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

Women are 50% of the population, not 10%. And 60% of college graduates are women. People keep focusing on POC, but it is women too.

Yes, but over 90% of pilots enrolled in a commercial training program are white males. So that's why I referred to the 90%. The other 10% make up women and minorities.

I thought you were saying how do you make 10% of the population (minorities) 50% of the class.

If you're saying only 10% of candidates are female or POC, then I would agree that's tough to get the most qualified. But is that really the case? Is it really that low?

I did say POC, but I was referring to the united policy which includes both. I was just being lazy and not typing them both out.

When I googled it earlier today, it was about 90% of pilots in armed forces or pilots enrolled in commercial training programs are white males. I would think it's safe to assume that it would be the same as ratio for applicants. If it's not, and there's a lot of women and minorities trying to get in and they just aren't being accepted, then that's a completely different issue.

josevolution · September 22

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

you didn't see him say "If I see a black pilot I get nervous"?

Let me clarify.
First, the question was about united's policy, and that the 50% claim was a lie. Specially the "The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie." All I did was show a link that showed they want their training program for new pilots to be 50% female or minority, which was what the claim was. So it wasn't a lie.

Then the it turned into that Kirk claimed they lowered requirements (not about the united policy anymore).

To that, I don't think he ever made that claim. He may have said some controversial things that could lead you to believe that, but I don't think he ever made that claim.

And so to your question, yes. And then he follows it up and says it is specifically because they are hiring based on race and he wouldn't have thought that without the policy in question. So he states that before the policy he wouldn't have felt that way with a black pilot. And he wants the most qualified to get the job. In the entire exchange of the interviews I've seen he elaborates to say when you make a policy like that, it forces people to wonder if you got the job because of your qualifications or because of your race, and says that is a horrible way to think. He wants to see a black pilot and know he was the most qualified. He also related it do doctors and surgeons. If your life depended on it, do you want the one that was ranked higher in his class, or do you want the one that was hired to fill a quota?

Now I will add I don't agree with his assertion that he gets nervous, and you can infer he thinks they lower the standard. But my point was he never said, as far as I can tell, they they lowered the standards for black pilots.

I think it was a separate "debate" where he was asked to clarify that, and he related it to the NBA. If they mandated that 50% of the NBA was white, that would be some better NBA players would not get the job to fill some of the white positions. That doesn't mean they can't play basketball, but that there are just better ones out there that didn't get the job.

Taking into the whole context that he was referring specially to racial quotas for hiring when he said that, added that he wouldn't have thought that without the quota, I don't agree his stance was "black people are not capable of being pilots."

Spin the black circle! I’ve never seen you here admit that maybe just maybe you are wrong! It must be great always being correct

mrussel1 · September 22

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

Women are 50% of the population, not 10%. And 60% of college graduates are women. People keep focusing on POC, but it is women too.

Yes, but over 90% of pilots enrolled in a commercial training program are white males. So that's why I referred to the 90%. The other 10% make up women and minorities.

I thought you were saying how do you make 10% of the population (minorities) 50% of the class.

If you're saying only 10% of candidates are female or POC, then I would agree that's tough to get the most qualified. But is that really the case? Is it really that low?

I did say POC, but I was referring to the united policy which includes both. I was just being lazy and not typing them both out.

When I googled it earlier today, it was about 90% of pilots in armed forces or pilots enrolled in commercial training programs are white males. I would think it's safe to assume that it would be the same as ratio for applicants. If it's not, and there's a lot of women and minorities trying to get in and they just aren't being accepted, then that's a completely different issue.

It's a good question of whether it is or isn't. However, when you are a company like United, you don't just announce this as a strategy and hope you get enough candidates. I would expect that they begin investing in recruiting and developing talent all the way down to seniors in high school, focusing on improving entry into aviation school, etc.

Halifax2TheMax · September 22

* The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747

This is what people are defending? Agreeing with? It’s good to know where people stand.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DOylB8EEbGX/?img_index=1&igsh=MTFzdTB2bXVyZmViaA==

mickeyrat · September 22

mace1229 said:

mickeyrat said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

Go Beavers said:

Go Beavers said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

njhaley1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

njhaley1 said:

Bentleyspop said:

brianlux said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Tim Simmons said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Go Beavers said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

The fact his entire family is maga could mean nothing. He could be the black sheep who is the only liberal. And could have caused such a giant swing he could have been radicalized.

Or he could be radicalized maga.

The point being, we don’t have anything verifiable yet.

The governor came out this morning and said based on information from the family, friends and his partner and private messages, he was “radicalized” by the extreme left. As far as I know, that is the first official response from anyone directly involved in the investigation as to the shooter’s beliefs.

How does one in Utah go radical left?

Binge watching the West Wing?

Read A Moving Train message boards?

the bitterness

Literally the same comment as the west wing, is that one bitter?

west wing is a phenomenal show, back when there wasn’t a woke litmus test among democrats.

had a nice long post for u the other day about why nyc mayor race is very relevant to national politics….its not bitter at all.

No. The fact that you think this place is so ‘radical left’ that it upsets you so much that you need to keep trying to get that dig in whenever you can.

I have to admit I haven't but up to speed on this place lately, but it amazes me that here, of all places, anyone still refers to some of the people on this forum as "radical left". That's like saying a high of 82 degrees Fahrenheit is an indicator of a major heat wave, or the common house fly is and large insect. Good grief!

It's a dogwhistle utilized by the retRUmplicans to wind up their base. Any ideas, policies, thoughts that don't align with their regressive theology is "radical left".

When "woke" just doesn't cut it and you need people to be more afraid and hateful.

Woke is a better way of describing the far left than using extremists or leftists?

and for those thinking the shoe doesn’t fit, set up a new acct and comment like a centrist. Watch the replies with joy.

I feel like "woke" is describing a philosophy of treating everyone with respect, having empathy; being inclusive and supporting a diverse range of opinions, cultures, and beliefs; being a polite member of society, etc. Many of the things that CK was decidedly not. I would love to believe that that applies to many of us here.

Radical left, on the other hand, suggests something more subversive, think IRA, Weather Underground, etc.

I would guess I'd be labeled as "woke" - I've spent my life in a career that started out heavily dominated by white males - like 90%+, and I was one of them. Now, our incoming professionals are 80% women with many minorities represented - Indians, Asians, Hispanics, Arabs. It's awesome, this field is significantly better because of it; even if I'm old enough to feel a little uncomfortable around intelligent women with opinions, that's my problem, not theirs.

My boss is a black woman with a medical degree and a law degree - would someone say she benefited off of affirmative action and doesn't deserve her job? Probably, but she's great at her job and I respect her quite a bit. I often wonder about what she's had to go through to get where she is, the grit she's had to have to ignore comments like those.

I have a trans (M>F) neighbor and while I sometimes feel like I'm gawking at a fish on a bicycle, it's more curiosity - what is her life like? Is she terrified living in a ruby red neighborhood? I'm empathetic to her situation, I don't wish she were dead or blame all of my problems on her or think she needs to find Christ and a wife and have kids.

If these things make me "radical left," well shit, I'll be one of the first to hop on the trains. But I like to think it's how Christ would handle things, even though I consider myself an atheist.

Your bottom paragraph is EXACTLY how I explain it to cons/religious folk. JC certainly would have been left, he certainly WAS woke, and he absolutely was a radical.

( 🙋‍♂️Agnostic here)

The problem is that the textbook definition of woke is different than the practical definition we often see play out.
Textbook definition is to be aware of racial or social injustices. Which we should be doing.
The problem is when a company takes that, and like United Airlines, says that 50% of all new hires must be of a minority group. I don't think that's a practical application of being woke. Or, when I worked in Colorado, I was literally told by admin that we can't discipline minority students because "it makes us looks racist." How well do you think those minority schools worked out? Most people would see that as a woke approach to a problem. SO when I, or people in my circles, complain about something being woke, I'm talking about these asinine policies that have developed about race. A kid can cuss me out, and if he's white he gets suspended, if he's black I'm told ignore it. Literally.

Do you have a source for the united 50% reference? I’m interested in reading that.

No worries on the source. The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie, which is at the foundation of a lot of Kirk’s positions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-sets-new-diversity-goal-50-of-students-at-new-pilot-training-academy-to-be-women-and-people-of-color-301262479.html

"Over the next decade, United will train 5,000 pilots who will be guaranteed a job with United, after they complete the requirements of the Aviate program – and our plan is for half of them to be women and people of color," said United CEO Scott Kirby.

Right. Those are targeted hiring goals. Do you think, like Kirk did, that the faa and the airlines lowered the qualifications and requirements for minority pilots? They didn’t, so that’s the lie Kirk’s
position is coming from.

Did he ever say that? All I recall him saying from videos I've watched was that you will pass by more qualified people to meet the quota. Which is statically true. If a group is only 10% of the applicants, but you are required to make them 50% of people hired, will you not likely pass over some even more qualified people in order to meet that goal? That doesn't mean those whoa re hired are not qualified or do not meet the standards, but there are likely ones who didn't get the job who had even higher scores.

I don't think he ever said they would lower the criteria and standards. Do you have a link or quote of him saying that, because I don't think he ever did.

you didn't see him say "If I see a black pilot I get nervous"?

Let me clarify.
First, the question was about united's policy, and that the 50% claim was a lie. Specially the "The 50% of United’s hiring thing was another lie." All I did was show a link that showed they want their training program for new pilots to be 50% female or minority, which was what the claim was. So it wasn't a lie.

Then the it turned into that Kirk claimed they lowered requirements (not about the united policy anymore).

To that, I don't think he ever made that claim. He may have said some controversial things that could lead you to believe that, but I don't think he ever made that claim.

And so to your question, yes. And then he follows it up and says it is specifically because they are hiring based on race and he wouldn't have thought that without the policy in question. So he states that before the policy he wouldn't have felt that way with a black pilot. And he wants the most qualified to get the job. In the entire exchange of the interviews I've seen he elaborates to say when you make a policy like that, it forces people to wonder if you got the job because of your qualifications or because of your race, and says that is a horrible way to think. He wants to see a black pilot and know he was the most qualified. He also related it do doctors and surgeons. If your life depended on it, do you want the one that was ranked higher in his class, or do you want the one that was hired to fill a quota?

Now I will add I don't agree with his assertion that he gets nervous, and you can infer he thinks they lower the standard. But my point was he never said, as far as I can tell, they they lowered the standards for black pilots.

I think it was a separate "debate" where he was asked to clarify that, and he related it to the NBA. If they mandated that 50% of the NBA was white, that would be some better NBA players would not get the job to fill some of the white positions. That doesn't mean they can't play basketball, but that there are just better ones out there that didn't get the job.

Taking into the whole context that he was referring specially to racial quotas for hiring when he said that, added that he wouldn't have thought that without the quota, I don't agree his stance was "black people are not capable of being pilots."

but it infers black people and women are inherently less qualified than white men.

I don't agree with that. When 90% of the applicants are a certain demographic, but you are forced to make half of your hires from the other 10%, it means you will be ignoring some very qualified people to meet a quota. Thats all that means.
Also, like many other things, there are factors like social-economic challenges that go into becoming a pilot that do impact minority groups harder than white males. But I don't think it means they are inherently bad pilots and less qualified.

united isnt being forced to do anything.

Halifax2TheMax · September 22

* The following opinion is mine and mine alone and does not represent the views of my family, friends, government and/or my past, present or future employer. US Department of State: 1-888-407-4747.

I find it interesting in all of this discussion about whether folks are qualified and trying to be more reflective of society is a good/bad thing, and the folks who have the biggest concerns don't ever seem to express any opinion on whether CCOOTWH's hires are the "most qualified" and whether other "more qualified" candidates were passed over for any position that he's filled. Nor do they question whether the person got the job because they were black, a woman, or a white male. Why is that?

But god forbid any company in 'Murikkka have its own hiring process and state what they'd like their employee profile to look like.

gimmesometruth27 · September 22

i can't believe the gop fumbled the narrative on this kirk assassination. the only reason people are even talking about it today is because the funeral was yesterday.

before yesterday people pivoted to abc suspending kimmel and the threat to the first amendment. now that kimmel is back tomorrow, people are not talking about kirk. they are talking about how the gop politicized the entire situation.

tempo_n_groove · September 23

gimmesometruth27 said:

i can't believe the gop fumbled the narrative on this kirk assassination. the only reason people are even talking about it today is because the funeral was yesterday.

before yesterday people pivoted to abc suspending kimmel and the threat to the first amendment. now that kimmel is back tomorrow, people are not talking about kirk. they are talking about how the gop politicized the entire situation.

No conservative groups are saying that are they?

DE4173 · September 24

An FBI official said the shooting incident at the Dallas ICE field office is being investigated as "an act of targeted violence."

Rounds that were found near the suspected shooter "contain messages that are anti-ICE in nature," according to the official.

https://x.com/ABC/status/1970874547537695051?t=C7qqvu9w3XTN4EqlgsjIDw&s=19

https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-people-shot-dallas-ice-field-office-source/story?id=125887376

Go Beavers · September 24

DE4173 said:

An FBI official said the shooting incident at the Dallas ICE field office is being investigated as "an act of targeted violence."

Rounds that were found near the suspected shooter "contain messages that are anti-ICE in nature," according to the official.

https://x.com/ABC/status/1970874547537695051?t=C7qqvu9w3XTN4EqlgsjIDw&s=19

https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-people-shot-dallas-ice-field-office-source/story?id=125887376

Reports are that he shot migrants.

mace1229 · September 24

Looks like an odd choice of ammo. Looks similar to an 8mm Mauser or something else of the WWII bolt action era.

gimmesometruth27 · September 24

DE4173 said:

An FBI official said the shooting incident at the Dallas ICE field office is being investigated as "an act of targeted violence."

Rounds that were found near the suspected shooter "contain messages that are anti-ICE in nature," according to the official.

https://x.com/ABC/status/1970874547537695051?t=C7qqvu9w3XTN4EqlgsjIDw&s=19

https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-people-shot-dallas-ice-field-office-source/story?id=125887376

coming from the current administration, i find this to highly likely be bullshit.

nobody writes "anti ice" on shells that they are going to use to shoot migrants, which is what ice would want.

wouldn't an "anti ice" shooter target, like, i dunno, ice agents?

Gern Blansten · September 24

He was either a really bad shot or he wrote that on there to appear like a libtard

josevolution · September 24

Yeah I’m anti ice so let me kill some immigrants makes zero sense! That’s like the shooter of the ear saying I hate Biden so let me shoot Trump

gimmesometruth27 · September 24

josevolution said:

Yeah I’m anti ice so let me kill some immigrants makes zero sense! That’s like the shooter of the ear saying I hate Biden so let me shoot Trump

we are through the looking glass here.

DE4173 · September 24

Go Beavers said:

DE4173 said:

An FBI official said the shooting incident at the Dallas ICE field office is being investigated as "an act of targeted violence."

Rounds that were found near the suspected shooter "contain messages that are anti-ICE in nature," according to the official.

https://x.com/ABC/status/1970874547537695051?t=C7qqvu9w3XTN4EqlgsjIDw&s=19

https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-people-shot-dallas-ice-field-office-source/story?id=125887376

Reports are that he shot migrants.

Correct. From the ABC News link:

A sniper opened fire on the Dallas Immigration and Customs Enforcement field office on Wednesday morning, killing one detainee and critically wounding two other detainees, the Department of Homeland Security said.

DHS previously said two detainees were killed and one was injured; the agency later issued a correction saying one died and two were shot but survived.

One of the wounded is a Mexican national, according to Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

njhaley1 · September 24

I believe he opened fire on a van, and may have not had any idea who was in the van or coming out of the van when he did.

But I agree, "Anti ICE" is an odd thing to write. "I H8 ICE", "ICE is Gay" and "ICE Sucks" was probably on the underside of the ones we can't see.

Evel K · September 24

josevolution said:

Yeah I’m anti ice so let me kill some immigrants makes zero sense! That’s like the shooter of the ear saying I hate Biden so let me shoot Trump

The shooter of the ear? That is your stance on the attempted assassination of a former President of the United States who was campaigning for a second term. Do you really have to question why Americans will hold tight to their guns when people downplay such a significant moment in our history.

Guns.

Comments

Categories