Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Obama Creates Office Of Diversity

The new Office of Diversity and Inclusion will ensure that the entire U.S. government develops comprehensive strategies to drive and integrate diversity and inclusion practices. It will assist the different agencies in building a workforce that “respects individual and organizational cultures” by examining policy options, data trends and employee survey findings.

The goal is to eliminate demographic group imbalances in targeted occupations and improve workforce diversity. To attain this, special initiatives have been created targeting specific groups, including Hispanics, African Americans, American Indians, women and gays and lesbians. The idea is to create a workforce that truly reflects America’s diversity, according to the Obama Administration.

In fact, the Obama executive order creating the new agency assures that it will promote the federal workplace as a model of equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion. It will also establish a coordinated government-wide initiative to promote the cause. The investment is worth it because a commitment to equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion is critical for the federal government as an employer, according to the commander-in-chief.

The president’s new plan will force agencies to identify and remove barriers to equal employment opportunities that may exist in the federal government’s recruitment, hiring, promotion, retention, professional development and training policies and practices.

Comment:

The author is quite correct. With all the government waste, and a Depression going on, the last thing we need to do is spend even more government money on something that is nothing more than an extra, not a necessity. Although, since it will benefit non-Whites, I'm sure they would say it is a necessity.

This brings me to my next point.

The author said, "The president’s new plan will force agencies to identify and remove barriers to equal employment opportunities that may exist in the federal government’s recruitment, hiring, promotion, retention, professional development and training policies and practices."


What barriers would those be? Come on you liberals A-Holes! This is the 21st Century! It's not the 1960's, 1970's - even the 1980's. Those racial barriers have long since been removed. If they're truly qualified, non-Whites have the same chance, no, a better chance at these jobs than Whites - even without the free brownie points.


For those of you who are unaware, not counting elected or appointed positions, government jobs are based on a point system. An applicant gets so many points for education, so many for experience, so many for being a veteran (even more if they're a combat veteran), more if you speak a second language, and more for being anything other than a White male. Plus they have to pass civil service exams. White males are LAST to be considered for these jobs. We have to be WAY more qualified, not just slightly more qualified to be considered.


As I've previously said, what ever happened to the best qualified person getting the job, irregardless of race or sex? If that person is almost always a White, then that is no longer our fault. It's true 30 plus years ago, we were doing what we could to "keep Blackie down". Not any longer.


With student loans and grants, everyone who can make the grade has a chance to go to college. Maybe not Harvard or Yale, but we do have some good state universities and colleges. How about UCLA? USC? Kent State? Florida State? UVA, LSU? All excellent and well-known state universities. With all the financial aid out there, everyone can go to college IF they are smart enough. But as Shakespeare said, "Aye, there's the rub." If they are smart enough.


There have been little-known studies that indicate the Black person's IQs are 10 points lower than Whites on average. Is that our fault? Liberals say yes. They say that Whites create IQ tests, and make them racially biased. How?! Whether you're Black or White, speak English or Spanish, 2 + 2 =4. And a square is always a square, and a triangle is always a triangle.


I remember reading a Black researcher's criticism of IQ tests. One example he cited was a word problem that involved calculating how many feet away from the house was the gazebo. He complained that the question was harder for Blacks because most Blacks were Inner City kids, and did not know what a gazebo was. I say, so what! The problem wasn't for the kids to explain what a gazebo was, it was to determine how far it was from the house.


Here's what I mean. If I said, the myxysptl is 50 and 2/3 yards away from the house, how far is it in feet? You don't need to know what a myxysptl is (I made it up, of course), you just need to figure how many feet are in 50 and 2/3 yards. What a myxysptl, or a gazebo is, is irrelevant.


Now, if Blacks are slightly less intelligent than Whites, are we supposed to dumb down the curriculum so they can pass school? NO WAY! If they can't pass, then they can't pass. If they can't score as high on a civil service exam, as we supposed to spot them so many points, like they're playing a game of one-on-one?


In any society, there are the intellectually superior, and the intellectually inferior. The superior ones must lead, and the inferior ones must follow. It's the logical way.


By the way, those who have not been to college are NOT necessarily intellectually inferior. You are just less educated. You can be very smart, yet still not have been to college. Natural intelligence is useful amongst Blue-collar workers. After all, if you are a high steel worker, you want your foreman to be intelligent, and not an idiot, right? The smarter blue-collar workers should be the foremen and supervisors, and the inferior one have to be part of the crew. Again, it's only common sense.


Going to college doesn't in-and-of-itself make you superior. Either you're born with superior intelligence or you're born with inferior intelligence. College simply helps you to make the most of what nature gave you.


Now, we have inferior, less qualified people in government jobs, just so we can have things racially diverse. Just look at the results. KABOOM!


Thanks again to Comrade Raymond Bxxxxxxx for sending this to me.


Dan 88!


BTW, does anyone know why parts of my post look like they are highlighted? I am NOT doing it on purpose. Someone mentioned something called "cross site scripting". It's a form of hacking. However, I did some checking, and it seems that XSS as it's abbreviated, is used on sites where products are sold as a way of stealing information. What information is there to steal here? If anyone has any knowledge of this phenomenon, please let me know via the comments section. I'd very much appreciate it. - Dan 88!

11 comments:

  1. Heads-up..."irregardless" is not a word, it's just "regardless".

    ReplyDelete
  2. -------------------------------------August 31, 2011 at 10:12 PM

    I checked the "Oxford English Dictionary, 2002 Edition". It does list irregardless. It is considered to be slang, rather than proper English. It says, and I quote, "It should be avoided in favour of regardless." Thank you for pointing that out.

    Dan 88!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I also read that it can happen when someone sends you a link to a corrupt site. Your highlighted parts I thought you were doing on purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Irregardless is a double negative and people in the south use a lot of this type of slang. When they say the word "irregardless" it is usually with a lot of voice inflection and a slight pause thereafter in the south because what information follows it may be a lot and they want you know to disregard all that and focus on the key point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. CORE or Congress on Racial Equality has this already; it's freaking what they do all day long is point out inconsistencies, black vs. white inequality etc. People should have known ahead of time that negra's are going to push the negra agenda... which btw is not the American agenda. Black America vs. just America is racist in itself.

    ReplyDelete
  6. -------------------------------------September 2, 2011 at 10:26 PM

    6:56 PM - I wonder if I have malware on my computer?

    7:00 PM - I'll try and avoid using "irregardless" in the future.

    7:25 PM - I tend to agree with you. I think Blacks are more racist than we are. They blame all their problems on Whites. Whatever bad things happen, it's usually directly or indirectly our fault. That may have been true back in the day, but not any longer. Sure, there may be some isolated White on Black cases of discrimination every now and again. But there will always be a few cases of ALL kinds of discrimination no matter which direction the country takes.

    Dan 88!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dan, I am probably a racist... but I prefer the words "personal preference". The word "racist" has a lot of negative things associated with it so I dislike it. To stick with your own kind is instinctual for me so it just goes without saying and my life does not revolve around my race. Like NS will go well out of their way to buy from only whites or whatever; things like that and disassociate from certain people or events because they perceive it to be integrated. I don't do that type of stuff. I can go most anywhere and get along. I'm also not going to drive clear across town to buy a stick of gum from a white store owner and things of that sort. That's what I mean by not being as racist or having the same mindset as some NS do. They tend to take it to the extreme. So like if overnight it turned all white it would not make that much difference to me. I would be the same person able to get along with most anyone because I never put race before the getting to know the people I have to contend with on a daily basis which btw is mostly on a professional basis. I don't think it's the same when it comes to personal association so therefore I would say that I am racist.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dan, I agree with you that Black racist are worse than white racist. I don't really know this to be true but it seems that way. I guess we need a comparative study. lol! White racist scare the hell out of me because they seem to act irrational once something ticks them off enough. Prior to becoming pissed off they just sit around and let things escalate before acting which seems illogical to me because they could have difused the situation and acted rationally ahead of time. I guess it seems worse because black agenda for a black america come under disguise as helping black people to come up in the world. They use the race card to gain favortism that otherwise would not happen for them based on skills, merit. I think white people feel often times like they are held down over a barrel. Whenever you are working say soley for the benefit of black people that changes your perspective quite a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  9. -------------------------------------September 5, 2011 at 12:11 AM

    8:45 AM - Personal preference? Why not?! True, racist does have negative connotations. Racialist and racially aware also do, though to a lesser extent. Anything with the a form of the word race in it can be looked on by many as hateful.

    As someone who lives in a VERY White-minority area, I'll do whatever is reasonable not to be offensive, as long as it does NOT compromise my National Socialist ideals.

    Like they say, you DON'T have to like someone to get along with them. By "get along", I mean to show common civility to people.

    8:55 AM - You said it, comrade!

    Dan 88!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dan from time to time if I go into the neo nazi sector and leave out of the WWII history arena then I have viewed websites like the SPLC. They have some kind of hate map. I really can't stand that squirelly headed Dees because of his motivations so I try not to stay long if I visit that website. But if you notice the markings for hate are all white racist groups with the exception of one black racist group I do believe is on the map. Why aren't they marking all the other hate groups out there and signaling out whites? I guess you are the elite then. lol! Quite some type ago there was a documentary on Dees that I vaguely recall but wasn't there something about his childhood where he was ashamed of his father because of some racist act and so now he feels like righting the wrongs done by racist and he uses his law degree to sue them and take property away to give to poor blacks and other minorities? For example, Metzger I think had a run in with Dees in court, you know it's not the propaganda that is put out because then we'd have to sue Anton Lavey for any satanic ritual killings and things of that sort. I think it's up to the individual to decide what actions to take and they are the ones soley responsible for their actions. Otherwise it's just frivilous lawsuits, a game of connecting the dots until you get the right one with the assets to grab onto. Those kinds of lawsuits make me sick and I do believe those are illegal and morally wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  11. -------------------------------------September 5, 2011 at 10:29 PM

    Yes they do single out White groups. They have certain criteria they use to determine if a group is a hate group. White groups they stick to their criteria to the letter. Non-White groups they give more leeway to. The Non-Whites are "frustrated and angry" at how Whites have treated them, so $PCL isn't as hard on them as they are with us.

    Dan 88!

    ReplyDelete