Are we ready to admit that Woke & DEI and woke wasn’t what was holding you back from success?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/arlington-cemetery-scrubs-website-dei/#:~:text=Cemetery%20officials%20confirmed%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%20that%20the%20pages%20were%20“unpublished”%20to%20meet%20recent%20orders%20by%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20Secretary%20of%20Defense%20Pete%20Hegseth%20targeting%20race%20and%20gender%2Drelated%20language%20and%20policies%20in%20the%20military.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/arlington-cemetery-scrubs-website-dei/#:~:text=Cemetery%20officials%20confirmed%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%20that%20the%20pages%20were%20“unpublished”%20to%20meet%20recent%20orders%20by%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20Secretary%20of%20Defense%20Pete%20Hegseth%20targeting%20race%20and%20gender%2Drelated%20language%20and%20policies%20in%20the%20military.

I think it's good that our veterans are being honored for their service, and are no longer being filtered and sorted by race and gender. I don't find this change objectionable. People serve our country and that's great. They are service members, not "black service members". Not everyone is like you, thinking that people must be categorized and presented by race first. That's a segregationist mindset (like your family's) and I don't condone it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

We have repeatedly told you. We don't like your brand of Klu Klux Communism and are happy to see it diminished. We are getting what we want, and all you're telling us is that you don't understand what we want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/arlington-cemetery-scrubs-website-dei/#:~:text=Cemetery%20officials%20confirmed%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%20that%20the%20pages%20were%20“unpublished”%20to%20meet%20recent%20orders%20by%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20Secretary%20of%20Defense%20Pete%20Hegseth%20targeting%20race%20and%20gender%2Drelated%20language%20and%20policies%20in%20the%20military.

I think it's good that our veterans are being honored for their service, and are no longer being filtered and sorted by race and gender. I don't find this change objectionable. People serve our country and that's great. They are service members, not "black service members". Not everyone is like you, thinking that people must be categorized and presented by race first. That's a segregationist mindset (like your family's) and I don't condone it.

Segregationist family? Where do you get that?

You’ve been so incredibly intellectually dishonest throughout this whole thread. All you do is make stuff up out of thin air and lie. You’ve forfeited all credibility. I was right about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/arlington-cemetery-scrubs-website-dei/#:~:text=Cemetery%20officials%20confirmed%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%20that%20the%20pages%20were%20“unpublished”%20to%20meet%20recent%20orders%20by%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20Secretary%20of%20Defense%20Pete%20Hegseth%20targeting%20race%20and%20gender%2Drelated%20language%20and%20policies%20in%20the%20military.

I think it's good that our veterans are being honored for their service, and are no longer being filtered and sorted by race and gender. I don't find this change objectionable. People serve our country and that's great. They are service members, not "black service members". Not everyone is like you, thinking that people must be categorized and presented by race first. That's a segregationist mindset (like your family's) and I don't condone it.

Segregationist family? Where do you get that?

You’ve been so incredibly intellectually dishonest throughout this whole thread. All you do is make stuff up out of thin air and lie. You’ve forfeited all credibility. I was right about you.

I bet you often find you're right about people, Georgette Wallace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love how people immediately shifted the racism from the person making the gross comment to the person who called out the gross comment. MAGA are masters of projection.

Because my original comment wasnt about race. It was about ugly people. If you think black people are ugly that's on you, and IS racist, because black people as a category are objectively not ugly. You'd have to be uncomfortable with and judgemental of black people to think that.

Also you don't get to say that black people are ugly and then claim that's what I really meant. Okay? All flavors welcome here.

And now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never, ever, not once, claimed that black people were ugly. I interpreted YOU as saying that, because my MAGA relatives have said on several occasions they find black people objectively less attractive than white people, and I was concerned that you might be expressing a similar sentiment. Since DEI includes black people and race was mainly what was being discussed at that point, saying “thank God I no longer have to look at ugly people (thanks to DEI)” implies that the category “ugly” includes black people. It’s a reasonable interpretation. That’s why I called it out.

All you had to do was say “no, that’s not what I meant” and explain what you actually meant. By trying to twist it around and accuse me of racism for questioning what I saw as racism, you’re doing the same thing. Questioning a thing isn’t the same as doing the thing.

Let’s agree that there are extremely attractive black people and they should be in ads.

And THAT is called projection

Actually, it’s called “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”.

The only person here calling black people ugly copped to the fact she was patented by racists. Who's got the fleas really?

Where did you get “parented” from? I said MAGA relatives, none of whom I talk to any more BECAUSE OF THEIR RACISM. These are not close relatives and none of them had anything to do with raising me.

You people really are unbelievable, the way you invent stories and put words in people’s mouths.

Oddly enough, the ——-> DISTANT MAGA RELATIVES I NO LONGER TALK TO BECAUSE THEY ARE RACIST <——- used to do the same thing. Another reason I distanced myself from them.

You said you were raised among racists and that's why when you saw the word ugly, you immediately thought black. It’s really disgusting that you jumped to that.

This should go without saying, given that the biggest maga influencer is a black woman, but maga doesnt equate to racist. You seem to have a problem with putting people into broad and unflattering categories so I dont expect this to sink in.

Again, I didn’t say I was raised among racists. You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

Still waiting for you all to explain Pete Hegseth’s decision to remove black, women, and Latino service people from the Arlington Cemetary website.

Lady, I don't even know what you're talking about so I am not going to explain it.

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/arlington-cemetery-scrubs-website-dei/#:~:text=Cemetery%20officials%20confirmed%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%20that%20the%20pages%20were%20“unpublished”%20to%20meet%20recent%20orders%20by%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20and%20Secretary%20of%20Defense%20Pete%20Hegseth%20targeting%20race%20and%20gender%2Drelated%20language%20and%20policies%20in%20the%20military.

I think it's good that our veterans are being honored for their service, and are no longer being filtered and sorted by race and gender. I don't find this change objectionable. People serve our country and that's great. They are service members, not "black service members". Not everyone is like you, thinking that people must be categorized and presented by race first. That's a segregationist mindset (like your family's) and I don't condone it.

Segregationist family? Where do you get that?

You’ve been so incredibly intellectually dishonest throughout this whole thread. All you do is make stuff up out of thin air and lie. You’ve forfeited all credibility. I was right about you.

I bet you often find you're right about people, Georgette Wallace.

Yep. I am.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

The OP’s question is secondary to the fact that the libs have been wholly owned.

But here is an answer - we all benefit when educational and job opportunities are awarded based on merit, not race, gender, or sexual orientation.

If you need medical help, do you want a doctor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best doctor.

If you need legal help, do you want a lawyer who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best lawyer.

If you need financial advice, do you want a financial advisor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best financial advisor.

Nobody in their right mind wants DEI hires serving themselves or their families in their own personal lives.

So why do you think it makes sense as a national policy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

The OP’s question is secondary to the fact that the libs have been wholly owned.

But here is an answer - we all benefit when educational and job opportunities are awarded based on merit, not race, gender, or sexual orientation.

If you need medical help, do you want a doctor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best doctor.

If you need legal help, do you want a lawyer who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best lawyer.

If you need financial advice, do you want a financial advisor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best financial advisor.

Nobody in their right mind wants DEI hires serving themselves or their families in their own personal lives.

So why do you think it makes sense as a national policy?

There are plenty of mediocre non-DEI doctors and lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

We have repeatedly told you. We don't like your brand of Klu Klux Communism and are happy to see it diminished. We are getting what we want, and all you're telling us is that you don't understand what we want.

We asked specifically for examples of how you are no longer being held back from success. You still haven't given any. Babbling nonsensically about "Klu Klux Communism" isn't responsive to that question. It's a deflection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

The OP’s question is secondary to the fact that the libs have been wholly owned.

But here is an answer - we all benefit when educational and job opportunities are awarded based on merit, not race, gender, or sexual orientation.

If you need medical help, do you want a doctor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best doctor.

If you need legal help, do you want a lawyer who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best lawyer.

If you need financial advice, do you want a financial advisor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best financial advisor.

Nobody in their right mind wants DEI hires serving themselves or their families in their own personal lives.

So why do you think it makes sense as a national policy?

You're assuming the best doctors, attorneys, financial advisors etc can't include blacks, women, latinos, gays, etc. That's a faulty assumption but one that your entire anti-DEI vitriol is firmly established on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

We have repeatedly told you. We don't like your brand of Klu Klux Communism and are happy to see it diminished. We are getting what we want, and all you're telling us is that you don't understand what we want.

You didn't even understand the question yet you're complaining that we don't understand what you want.

Meanwhile, we do understand what you want. You want to be allowed to be racist, misogynistic, antisemitic, ableist, homophobic and in every other way nasty and vicious, and it shows. We understand it perfectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16 pages in and there's still no meaningful response to the OP about what's changed and is no longer "holding anyone back" professionally now that "woke" and "DEI" are gone.

I'd say that's a fail for the right wing, no matter how much they flail about some random company's ad campaigns or whatever else.

Note also that no Democrat ever mandated ad campaigns featuring acne or ostomy or whatever else. That was entirely a private sector decision.

+1 I haven’t seen any concrete examples either

The OP’s question is secondary to the fact that the libs have been wholly owned.

But here is an answer - we all benefit when educational and job opportunities are awarded based on merit, not race, gender, or sexual orientation.

If you need medical help, do you want a doctor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best doctor.

If you need legal help, do you want a lawyer who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best lawyer.

If you need financial advice, do you want a financial advisor who got their position through DEI? No, you want the best financial advisor.

Nobody in their right mind wants DEI hires serving themselves or their families in their own personal lives.

So why do you think it makes sense as a national policy?

You're assuming the best doctors, attorneys, financial advisors etc can't include blacks, women, latinos, gays, etc. That's a faulty assumption but one that your entire anti-DEI vitriol is firmly established on.

Sorry where did I say that? I said you want the best regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Your post is actually the opposite of what I wrote. But as with almost everything said by a liberal, the polar opposite is true.

In your mind, Racism lurks around every corner. The fear consumes you.

I’ll bet you’re also on the lookout for the one-armed man, the man on the grassy knoll, and the man in the grey flannel suit.