kallend 2,184 #26 February 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteEEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget. I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez. I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above. First rule of assessment - the OUTCOMES indicate the effectiveness of the process.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 February 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteEEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget. I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez. I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above. First rule of assessment - the OUTCOMES indicate the effectiveness of the process. Re-read the law. It says OPPORTUNITY, not OUTCOME. If outcome = effectiveness, then the law worked the first time a woman or minority became upper management.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #28 February 8, 2008 QuotePlease vote. I'm surprised to hear some people think we aren't ready for a female or minority. I say yes, eventually, with the right candidates. I just don't think Clinton or Obama are right for the job. That's all."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #29 February 8, 2008 As long as they meet a couple minimum requirements 1 - are they 35 years old or over 2 - are they a citizen I will never vote FOR, or AGAINST, a candidate SOLELY on basis of race or gender. Even worrying about it makes the solution harder to achieve - but it certainly makes both flavors of bigots very smug. I will certainly vote AGAINST any candidate that runs on a platform based on their race or gender, or tries to run on a platform based on their opponent's race or gender. Both are dispicable and perpetuates the issues. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #30 February 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteEEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget. I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez. I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above. First rule of assessment - the OUTCOMES indicate the effectiveness of the process. Re-read the law. It says OPPORTUNITY, not OUTCOME. If outcome = effectiveness, then the law worked the first time a woman or minority became upper management. OH, very droll. You REALLY should learn something about statistics.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 February 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteEEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget. I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez. I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above. First rule of assessment - the OUTCOMES indicate the effectiveness of the process. Re-read the law. It says OPPORTUNITY, not OUTCOME. If outcome = effectiveness, then the law worked the first time a woman or minority became upper management. OH, very droll. You REALLY should learn something about statistics. And *YOU* should really learn the difference between "opportunity" and "outcome". This isn't a physics experiment, Perfessor.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #32 February 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteEEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget. I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez. I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above. First rule of assessment - the OUTCOMES indicate the effectiveness of the process. Re-read the law. It says OPPORTUNITY, not OUTCOME. If outcome = effectiveness, then the law worked the first time a woman or minority became upper management. OH, very droll. You REALLY should learn something about statistics. And *YOU* should really learn the difference between "opportunity" and "outcome". This isn't a physics experiment, Perfessor. Let's try again. If the law does not produce anything remotely resembling the outcome it was supposed to, then it didn't succeed. It's not rocket science. Fact is, there are a number of iniquities that are not addressed by this law, which is why the outcomes have not been equal.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #33 February 8, 2008 Not what I'm saying. Just stating the numbers. You can interpret them as you want. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #34 February 8, 2008 Practically a foregone conclusion. It's going to be Clinton or Obama for the Dems, and no Rep is going to beat either one unless some nasty scandalous information comes into play." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #35 February 8, 2008 I'm sorry if it came across condescending, I didn't mean it to. But if you look at my previous post try to explain the numbers. Don't just take one statement w/o looking at the rest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #36 February 8, 2008 Quote If the law does not produce anything remotely resembling the outcome it was supposed to, then it didn't succeed. Indeed. Like Social Security. Medicaid. Medicare. Drug laws. Gun control. And yet we not only keep pumping more and more money into these laws, but we actually have people saying we should be pumping MORE money into them... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #37 February 8, 2008 Throwing out a couple of pennies (maybe a nickel) worth of my thoughts ... mostly ancillary ... While I do not agree with much of the politics and policy choices of both, I also find much in the path of Dr. Rice to look to as a role model and have been flattered by Justice Thomas. When I was doing my graduate work, a mutual acquaintance was serving as Federal Marshall for Justice Thomas when he was in the circuit to which he was assigned (at that time, St Louis). Eventually I became a topic of regular inquiry, and when I finished my PhD, Justice Thomas penned a congratulatory note (attached). That was kind & very cool. Prof Rice was on the initial dissertation advisor for very good friend of mine. When Rice went to the DC to be National Security Advisor, my friend had to get another primary advisor; Rice remained on her committee. It was Rice who interceded and encouraged her to stick with it (while NSA) when she was considering leaving with a terminal masters. That was very cool of her. Disagree with (some of) the politics but find value in the people. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #38 February 8, 2008 Obvious sexual harassment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,603 #39 February 8, 2008 Quote Disagree with (some of) the politics but find value in the people Condoleeza Rice is a damned impressive woman. Extremely accomplshed in many ways. And no automaton/party hack; she's shown that she can disagree with the powers-that-be. I like your viewpoint. But I guess we're off for the marriage . Lawrocket -- you on for video for a beer? Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 February 8, 2008 QuoteCondoleeza Rice is a damned impressive woman. Extremely accomplshed in many ways. And no automaton/party hack; she's shown that she can disagree with the powers-that-be. When has she proven this? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,603 #41 February 8, 2008 First, she went from Democrat to Republican. As a black woman that alone shows the ability to move from a comfortable place. The fact that I disagree with her choice is irrelevant. She has come out as pro-choice (although she'll waffle and say that she agrees that GWB is setting the right tone with a "culture of life"). She has also come out indicating that race can be a factor in ensuring diversity; trust me, that's a huge step in the other direction. She's not confrontational or noisy about these beliefs -- obviously if she were, she wouldn't be in the position she is. However, 30 seconds' research confirmed my memory, so it's clearly out there. I disagree with just a whole lot of what she believes and stands for. But she's a very intelligent, disciplined woman -- if she puts a lot of research into a subject and comes up with a radically different answer, then I might ought to at least consider how I came to my conclusion. Same goes for most people I disagree with. Might not change my opinion, but I need to consider alternatives. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #42 February 8, 2008 is there any evidence that she disagreed with Bush? We know Powell did. And he's no longer there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #43 February 8, 2008 Quoteis there any evidence that she disagreed with Bush? We know Powell did. And he's no longer there. I always got the opinion she was giving Bush his opinion even when Powell was there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #44 February 8, 2008 Quote Lawrocket -- you on for video for a beer? Heck, I'll BRING beer for the opportunity! My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #45 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote If the law does not produce anything remotely resembling the outcome it was supposed to, then it didn't succeed. Indeed. Like Social Security. Medicaid. Medicare. Drug laws. Gun control. And yet we not only keep pumping more and more money into these laws, but we actually have people saying we should be pumping MORE money into them... Hey, he is in favor of all the programs you mentioned Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #46 February 12, 2008 Quote Quote Quote If the law does not produce anything remotely resembling the outcome it was supposed to, then it didn't succeed. Indeed. Like Social Security. Medicaid. Medicare. Drug laws. Gun control. And yet we not only keep pumping more and more money into these laws, but we actually have people saying we should be pumping MORE money into them... Hey, he is in favor of all the programs you mentioned You forgot: "War on terror" and "Farm Bill" to name but two more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
