Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol @ the super dumb poster who thinks veterans preference isn’t part of DEI. It absolutely is. And it particularly falls under the “i.” Damn the American education system is really failing people.

Veterans preference is based on a particular type of work experience that reflects virtue and self-sacrifice - it’s WHAT YOU CHOSE TO DO (serve in the military) versus DEI, which is based on characteristics that are not in your control. Normal people can see the difference.

Weird because for years you people have been saying it’s a choice to be gay

Who is “you people”? I voted for Harris and can still see the damn difference between veterans preferences and DEI. Get real.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

Remind me, which of the letters "D," "E," or "I," stand for "race," "gender," or "ethnicity?"

What a surprise, another braindead regressive who has no idea what the thing their boomer memes told them to hate even is.

I'm pretty sure all this talk on DEI in the last four years wasn't talking about people of Italian versus Polish ancestry, was it?

Everyone knows what DEI really was all about. Black people. That's it. It was never about any other group of people no matter what lip service may have been paid here and there. In practice it was just affirmative action on steroids and creating by fiat a bigger black sinecure roles that couldn't happen on its own. The revising of American history was solely about black experience, not Latino or Asian or Italian or Polish or whatever. The whole DEI boom followed Biden's election in 2020 as part of his deal with Clyburn of SC to get the endorsement, and with the black votes, the nomination. That's why Kamala Harris was picked for the VP slot, why KBJ was appointed to SCOTUS, why a very high percentage of Biden's appointees and judges and nominees were... you got it.... black.

If you think it was anything but about black people, then there's a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.

My post is not about the merits of DEI or the pros or cons of DEI, but simply pointing out the reality of DEI and what it meant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol @ the super dumb poster who thinks veterans preference isn’t part of DEI. It absolutely is. And it particularly falls under the “i.” Damn the American education system is really failing people.

Veterans preference is based on a particular type of work experience that reflects virtue and self-sacrifice - it’s WHAT YOU CHOSE TO DO (serve in the military) versus DEI, which is based on characteristics that are not in your control. Normal people can see the difference.

Weird because for years you people have been saying it’s a choice to be gay

Anonymous wrote:lol @ the super dumb poster who thinks veterans preference isn’t part of DEI. It absolutely is. And it particularly falls under the “i.” Damn the American education system is really failing people.

Veterans preference is based on a particular type of work experience that reflects virtue and self-sacrifice - it’s WHAT YOU CHOSE TO DO (serve in the military) versus DEI, which is based on characteristics that are not in your control. Normal people can see the difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

LOL. It's not based on any qualification except that they were in the service. How is that any different from any other special hiring class? If they were qualified, why is the preference necessary? Probably because they were NOT being hired. Just like woman and POC and the disabled. The infuriating thing is that people are born with a gender and race and many disabilities are from birth. A job preference based on an earlier job is not remotely similar and is more egregious than hiring that is discriminatory based on immutable characteristics.

lol @ the super dumb poster who thinks veterans preference isn’t part of DEI. It absolutely is. And it particularly falls under the “i.” Damn the American education system is really failing people.

Anonymous wrote:Any agency actually put DEI staff on admin leave?

Mine did, sub component of DHS. They were put on admin leave yesterday and mgt was told they were not allowed to reassign. All will be terminated on the 30th.

Anonymous wrote:Any agency actually put DEI staff on admin leave?

Yes-DHS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

Remind me, which of the letters "D," "E," or "I," stand for "race," "gender," or "ethnicity?"

What a surprise, another braindead regressive who has no idea what the thing their boomer memes told them to hate even is.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

Based on "qualification"? Say what?

Any agency actually put DEI staff on admin leave?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

Remind me, which of the letters "D," "E," or "I," stand for "race," "gender," or "ethnicity?"

What a surprise, another braindead regressive who has no idea what the thing their boomer memes told them to hate even is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Pffft.

Veterans preference is based on qualification, and is race/gender/ethnicity blind.

It is not even remotely the same thing as DEI.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like people are getting DEI and affirmative action and quotas all very much confused.

That’s the point. MAGA spread the lie and is using at as cover to roll back antidiscrimination policies.

affirmative action, quotas, and DEI are all NOT “antidiscrimination policies” which are old school EEO laws that are not going anywhere

And yet Trump revoked the 1965 EO on them

An EO with a bunch of extra language in it is NOT the law? Presidents of both parties have abused EOs like effing crazy.

^^^ Looking at you, Biden, with your trash EO trying to amend the constitution to include the ERA!

I know! Equal rights? How disgusting! EOs should only be used to remove amendments. Like the Fourteenth.

Or… presidents shouldn’t do this authoritarian crap period. Biden sucked. So does Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like people are getting DEI and affirmative action and quotas all very much confused.

That’s the point. MAGA spread the lie and is using at as cover to roll back antidiscrimination policies.

affirmative action, quotas, and DEI are all NOT “antidiscrimination policies” which are old school EEO laws that are not going anywhere

And yet Trump revoked the 1965 EO on them

An EO with a bunch of extra language in it is NOT the law? Presidents of both parties have abused EOs like effing crazy.

Yeah, it must have been super crazy! That’s why it was in place for 60 years and never revoked.

Funny way to say you agree with me. Thanks!

Totally. Civil rights were much better before 1965.

The 1960s civil rights laws are still law. You know that and want to catastrophize because !!!!!EOs!!!!!