2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Considering the damage the Christian Tea Party has caused the country with the school shootings, the blatant hate speech and acts of violence directed at Muslims, and the like, a better question would be if there's such thing as a "mainstream" church.

"Acts of violence against Muslims?" "School Shootings?" This is the kind of "thinking" that blamed Sarah Palin for Tucson or Limbaugh for OkC. Generally confined to the sun decks of state institutions.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I suppose in your world employees don't interact with customers, I don't live in that world

Like I said, if they can help me make money, I don't see any reason not to hire them. Isn't that the point of business in Capitalism? To make money?
I don't know a lot of programmers who deal directly with customers. If I were running a sandwich shop, it'd kind of behoove me to hire a person with good grooming habits to make sandwiches. Again, that goes back to the whole "making money" thing.

 

[pirate]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Little Dick's grandstanding about what should happen to military people convicted of sexual assault comes back to bite him in the a*s in at least two cases.

http://www.stripes.com/judge-obama-sex-assault-comments-unlawful-command-influence-1.225974

Sounds like it may be more than 2...why would the next defense attorney ignore this ruling?

In the world(s) I've worked in it was pretty much a basic precept of leadership that you didn't go around saying publicly so and so should be promoted for what they did or that so and so should be fired for what they did. You may believe either, or both, but you also know the wheels turn and the best thing you can do is not set false expectations, appear to be unaware of process or appear to be influencing the outcome.

As the article said, you'd think somebody with a clue would have positioned his words better. He doesn't have to be soft on the issue, a simple "I trust they will investigate thoroughly and bring the guilty to appropriate and timely punishment...those who are guilty need to know this is not acceptable" would suffice.

Now, if he wants to call a general or two and tell them directly that he expects the penalties to be more than peeling potatoes or if he wants to hear back from said general before sentencing is communicated...that makes sense.

He should want to sound strong on the issue, there are ways to do that without goofing up the process.

 

[pirate]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

The question wasn't whether I had a lot of experience hiring people, the question was would I hire the individuals in question. If a person can help me make money/make a better product/etc why the hell would I care about his grooming habits?

i shouldn't but I'll try...so, you hire said smelly or disheveled person...the person next to them complains to the manager about the smell, the person on the other side decides it must be fine to come to work looking like charles manson after a week at the dump, the next person figures if bo is ok then they can wear 12 oz of Walgreens perfume each day, so the next person complains to HR. Somebody from HR asks the manager to address the bo, and the smelly person says "what about Tiffany and her putrid perfume?" so the manager talks to HR and they agree somebody needs to talk to Tiffany....but it has to be a woman because if a man talks to her about perfume she'll file a sexual harassment suit, she brings up the appearance of charles manson and says that makes her just as uncomfortable as her perfume makes other people.

Desk decorating is the same thing.

So, when people complain about dress codes or rules for what is appropriate, they think it is the company trying to dictate how they look or decorate...the company would prefer to spend no time on that, per your point about focusing on making money, but they also know if they have no policy somebody could come to work dressed as a swimsuit model (it's never the good looking ones though) or wearing a dead goat around their neck...or would have pictures of Jesus or naked girls on their walls...and somebody will sue, and the judge will side agains the company 110% of the time and the company makes even less money than if they spend time on developing 'guidelines' for dress and decoration.

So, if the person can't look presentable for an interview...they will inevitably be a pain...if they are such good programmers they should stay in mom's basement and be a contractor

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I suppose in your world employees don't interact with customers, I don't live in that world

The less computer programmers interact with customers, the better for all involved. That's what business analysts and salespeople are for.

But in all kidding aside, you are correct, most corporate environments are not going to tolerate badly groomed, slovenly employees, no matter how well they do their jobs.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Sounds like it may be more than 2...why would the next defense attorney ignore this ruling?

In the world(s) I've worked in it was pretty much a basic precept of leadership that you didn't go around saying publicly so and so should be promoted for what they did or that so and so should be fired for what they did. You may believe either, or both, but you also know the wheels turn and the best thing you can do is not set false expectations, appear to be unaware of process or appear to be influencing the outcome.

As the article said, you'd think somebody with a clue would have positioned his words better. He doesn't have to be soft on the issue, a simple "I trust they will investigate thoroughly and bring the guilty to appropriate and timely punishment...those who are guilty need to know this is not acceptable" would suffice.

Now, if he wants to call a general or two and tell them directly that he expects the penalties to be more than peeling potatoes or if he wants to hear back from said general before sentencing is communicated...that makes sense.

He should want to sound strong on the issue, there are ways to do that without goofing up the process.

He's in his second term. You would not have been unreasonable to have assumed he had some knowledge of the UCMJ, the chain of command and other relevant structures. Recall that during the Manson trial Nixon made some statement to the effect that Charlie was guilty. And Manson whipped out a copy of the LA Times and showed it to the jury. Naturally, he didn't get a mistrial because he had showed it to the jury. He's not allowed to benefit from his own misconduct. And, Big Dick wasn't in his chain of command anyway.

The right thing for Little Dick to do here is keep his big yapper shut. These are military proceedings and he has a definite role to play. And he simply shouldn't run the risk of compromising military justice by posturing. Boy, I'd love to hear that he had hot breathed some generals about a specific trial. Talk about an impeachable offense. He appoints the SecDef and the service secretaries, he should make his wishes known through them.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

i shouldn't but I'll try...so, you hire said smelly or disheveled person...the person next to them complains to the manager about the smell, the person on the other side decides it must be fine to come to work looking like charles manson after a week at the dump, the next person figures if bo is ok then they can wear 12 oz of Walgreens perfume each day, so the next person complains to HR. Somebody from HR asks the manager to address the bo, and the smelly person says "what about Tiffany and her putrid perfume?" so the manager talks to HR and they agree somebody needs to talk to Tiffany....but it has to be a woman because if a man talks to her about perfume she'll file a sexual harassment suit, she brings up the appearance of charles manson and says that makes her just as uncomfortable as her perfume makes other people.

Desk decorating is the same thing.

So, when people complain about dress codes or rules for what is appropriate, they think it is the company trying to dictate how they look or decorate...the company would prefer to spend no time on that, per your point about focusing on making money, but they also know if they have no policy somebody could come to work dressed as a swimsuit model (it's never the good looking ones though) or wearing a dead goat around their neck...or would have pictures of Jesus or naked girls on their walls...and somebody will sue, and the judge will side agains the company 110% of the time and the company makes even less money than if they spend time on developing 'guidelines' for dress and decoration.

So, if the person can't look presentable for an interview...they will inevitably be a pain...if they are such good programmers they should stay in mom's basement and be a contractor

One of the best "60 Minutes" segments ever had to do with a NY non-profit that trains people how to look for and then interview for jobs. These folks were hard core unemployed. Some of 'em never had jobs. Yet this agency had an amazing record. Among other things, they role played job interviews. And the participants harshly critiqued their colleagues who wore distracting doodads, inappropriate clothes, spoke inappropriate English ("Ebonics"), bad posture, no eye contact, etc. etc. Watching people who had never really been employed, showing immense satisfaction when they were hired, made it all worth while. I'm convinced that many folks living on government handouts of one sort or another would like to work. They just don't know how to go about getting a job. They need some instruction, just like the folks in the piece did.

We're all aware that HR types frequently inflate the "job requirements" just to reduce the number of interviews they have to conduct. So demanding that someone be a graduate of Julliard to be a counter person at TCBY makes their job a lot easier.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

i shouldn't but I'll try...so, you hire said smelly or disheveled person...

Why (and shame on you Priceless for even giving it thought) is this even a debate? I've never had a, "smelly and disheveled" applicant walk through the door in my 20 years of being directly or even indirectly responsible for hiring. Why not ask him if he'd hire someone with purple skin? This is about as arcane and superfluous of a debate as I've ever come across. If said applicant does come in to apply (miraculously meeting the pre-applicant standards of the day) I'll be might curious if his/her interview passes the "smell" test.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Why (and shame on you Priceless for even giving it thought) is this even a debate? I've never had a, "smelly and disheveled" applicant walk through the door in my 20 years of being directly or even indirectly responsible for hiring. Why not ask him if he'd hire someone with purple skin? This is about as arcane and superfluous of a debate as I've ever come across. If said applicant does come in to apply (miraculously meeting the pre-applicant standards of the day) I'll be might curious if his/her interview passes the "smell" test.

Priceless is "primus inter pares" for those who claim to be free of original sin. Who would never, ever stoop to judging anyone, ever, for anything. Why just the other day he extended the benefit of the doubt to a "mother" whose infant child had suffered fractures of all four limbs, ribs and several to his skull inflicted by her "husband." His reasoning? She may have been "out" during this serial battering. Yeah, that's the ticket, she was "out." Rehearsing for her Interlochen audition no doubt.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I'll try to make this simple enough for you to comprehend, though I doubt it's possible. As a nation we have limited resources (I know the libs don't believe that but it's true). If we're going to look for terrorists with those resources,where should we do it? A mainstream Christian church or Synagogue, or a hard line Muslim masque known to have an extreme Imam?

Now that your up to speed...(everyone on the board already assumed limited resources). Beyond that...

You either believe Islam is the source of terror or you believe extremism is the source of terror. In the west, we always pursue extremists and not religions. As a country, the US does not practice stupid, bigoted stereotypes.

 

[pirate]

Why (and shame on you Priceless for even giving it thought) is this even a debate? I've never had a, "smelly and disheveled" applicant walk through the door in my 20 years of being directly or even indirectly responsible for hiring. Why not ask him if he'd hire someone with purple skin? This is about as arcane and superfluous of a debate as I've ever come across. If said applicant does come in to apply (miraculously meeting the pre-applicant standards of the day) I'll be might curious if his/her interview passes the "smell" test.

I'm not debating anything.

I've exaggerated a bit but the scenario isn't that outlandish and the scenario of why a company cares what you look/dress/smell like is accurate.

Plenty of google results for HR people trying to solve the "my employee smells" issue.

Might not be common at law firms etc. but service jobs, call centers, big retail etc...plenty of issues you'd swear could never happen.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Now that your up to speed...(everyone on the board already assumed limited resources). Beyond that...

You either believe Islam is the source of terror or you believe extremism is the source of terror. In the west, we always pursue extremists and not religions. As a country, the US does not practice stupid, bigoted stereotypes.

Nonsense. The source of terror is Islamic extremism. There are plenty of Jews, Catholics & Protestants with "extreme" views. However, none of them are planting bombs at marathons, blowing up airplanes, flying airplanes into buildings, executing teenagers in front of their parents for "blasphemy," beheading Filipino teenage girls (also for "blasphemy"), stoning adulterers, hanging gays and all of the other savage manifestations of the "religion of peace." To put an end to criminality, you find the criminals where they are and put their lights out. As a dues paying member of the ladies libtard chorale you'd be an expert in stupid, bigoted stereotypes; as this post clearly demonstrates.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

We're all aware that HR types frequently inflate the "job requirements" just to reduce the number of interviews they have to conduct. So demanding that someone be a graduate of Julliard to be a counter person at TCBY makes their job a lot easier.

I laughed because it's true. These days, when a company says "3-5+ years experience" in one of their job descriptions and includes "salary commensurate with experience", that often means they'll consider a new college grad for a three to six-month contract that might lead to a full-time offer starting at $35,000/yr.

 

[XYZ]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Now that your up to speed...(everyone on the board already assumed limited resources). Beyond that...

You either believe Islam is the source of terror or you believe extremism is the source of terror. In the west, we always pursue extremists and not religions. As a country, the US does not practice stupid, bigoted stereotypes.

And what do you do when a majority of violence-inducing individuals hail from a certain religion? The world is gray, Jack.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Nonsense. The source of terror is Islamic extremism. There are plenty of Jews, Catholics & Protestants with "extreme" views. However, none of them are planting bombs at marathons, blowing up airplanes, flying airplanes into buildings, executing teenagers in front of their parents for "blasphemy," beheading Filipino teenage girls (also for "blasphemy"), stoning adulterers, hanging gays and all of the other savage manifestations of the "religion of peace."

Or shooting doctors in the head, blowing up an FBI building or planting a bomb at the Olympics..

Priceless is "primus inter pares" for those who claim to be free of original sin. Who would never, ever stoop to judging anyone, ever, for anything. Why just the other day he extended the benefit of the doubt to a "mother" whose infant child had suffered fractures of all four limbs, ribs and several to his skull inflicted by her "husband." His reasoning? She may have been "out" during this serial battering. Yeah, that's the ticket, she was "out." Rehearsing for her Interlochen audition no doubt.

Has she been charged by the police yet?

And what do you do when a majority of violence-inducing individuals hail from a certain religion? The world is gray, Jack.

You get a search warrant for probable cause and snoop away. It isn't like the FISA court actually says no to any of these requests.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Here's the right question to ask Priceless - isn't that quote in your sig judgmental of all conservatives/Republicans? We know based on that, and your posts here, that the answer is yes, so you would still hire one despite his/her inclinations, right?

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Here's the right question to ask Priceless - isn't that quote in your sig judgmental of all conservatives/Republicans? We know based on that, and your posts here, that the answer is yes, so you would still hire one despite his/her inclinations, right?

I'd hire Republicans! Many of them are very good at making money.

 

[XYZ]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

You get a search warrant for probable cause and snoop away. It isn't like the FISA court actually says no to any of these requests.

Correct. But that doesn't address his original vague and amorphous point.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Or shooting doctors in the head, blowing up an FBI building or planting a bomb at the Olympics..


Has she been charged by the police yet?


You get a search warrant for probable cause and snoop away. It isn't like the FISA court actually says no to any of these requests.

I don't take your second reference. Maybe you're thinking of Little Dick's buddy Bill Ayers. But the guy who shot the doctor, in his home, in front of his teenage son should get the needle. Today. Same for Eric Robert Rudolph, who by the way, didn't plant a bomb at the Olympics, he planted one at Olympic Centennial Park in Atlanta (I doubt you were thinking of Munich, because those Olympic terrorist murderers were Islamists, and we shouldn't judge them, right?). Also two bombs at an abortion clinic, one timed to go off after the first responders arrived. And a bomb at a lesbian club. He, too, should be pushing up daisies.

But to conflate these separate, discreet events with a world wide effort at Jihad is a little silly, even by your standards. There is no either or here. We can and must oppose Islamism wherever we find it. Because they are planning to kill us 24/7. They've already killed thousands of us and planned to kill thousands more. They also control or greatly influence governments and may soon (if they don't already) have access to nukes.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't vigorously pursue pathetic right wing nutbars who express themselves with bombs or bullets. Not to mention pathetic left wing nutbars, even if they are presidential pals. But even you should see the threat levels as being vastly different. Besides, one outrage does not excuse or justify other outrages. Are you ever going to learn that? Or are you going to continue with your incessant tu quoque argumentation? Or are you just bucking for troll du Monde?

As to your heroine (not heroin) from Watertown: I don't know whether she's been charged or not. And don't care. What difference would it make anyway? You'd only make excuses for her if she were. Just like you've been making since the story broke. I look forward to seeing her perform with the other kids at Interlochen later this summer.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Nonsense. The source of terror is Islamic extremism. There are plenty of Jews, Catholics & Protestants with "extreme" views. However, none of them are planting bombs at marathons, blowing up airplanes, flying airplanes into buildings, executing teenagers in front of their parents for "blasphemy," beheading Filipino teenage girls (also for "blasphemy"), stoning adulterers, hanging gays and all of the other savage manifestations of the "religion of peace." To put an end to criminality, you find the criminals where they are and put their lights out. As a dues paying member of the ladies libtard chorale you'd be an expert in stupid, bigoted stereotypes; as this post clearly demonstrates.

Our Christian nation has its fair share of crimes. So where is this overwhelming correlation of criminal activity and Islam. So how many of the eight million American Muslims are criminal or terrorists?