Kansas Crimson

Sparko wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:47 am Psych, you don't have to go down with Citizen Tang. A reasonable mind is pliable and sees danger and division as an alternative best avoided when possible. And does not see danger and division where it doesn't exist within our constitutional system

KUTradition wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:58 pm white male privilege at its finest

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:09 pm Thanks, Kamala!

Under the Harris/Bidden Administration the price of oil has decreased by a fourth...25% over the last year. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US is producing more oil under the Harris/Bidden Administration than under any other administration in our nation's history?

(Let's just hope we don't run out of Houthis.)

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:12 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:09 pm Thanks, Kamala!

Under the Harris/Bidden Administration the price of oil has decreased by a fourth...25% over the last year. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US is producing more oil under the Harris/Bidden Administration than under any other administration in our nation's history?

(Let's just hope we don't run out of Houthis.)

Pretty meaningless when it doesn't translate to the pump.

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:20 pm

Sparko wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:47 am Psych, you don't have to go down with Citizen Tang. A reasonable mind is pliable and sees danger and division as an alternative best avoided when possible. And does not see danger and division where it doesn't exist within our constitutional system

Here's my problem. Your side makes these ominous statements about how female empowerment and diversity, equity, and inclusion are the future, which probably sound great to your side, but to people like me, it sounds like a plan to take from me for the benefit of others, and I'm never going to be okay with that. When job postings say "Women and minorities are encouraged to apply," that sounds suspiciously like "Psych is encouraged not to apply." Not cool.

I'm fighting tooth and nail for what I need and my family needs. I don't hate or wish ill to anyone, but I'm not interested in giving away what I have when it is already not enough. If someone wants to cast a vision for a future that includes more opportunity for those groups without doing so at my expense, I'm all for it. I see nothing in Giggles and Tampon Tim's platform to suggest any of that.

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:43 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:20 pm

Sparko wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:47 am Psych, you don't have to go down with Citizen Tang. A reasonable mind is pliable and sees danger and division as an alternative best avoided when possible. And does not see danger and division where it doesn't exist within our constitutional system

Here's my problem. Your side makes these ominous statements about how female empowerment and diversity, equity, and inclusion are the future, which probably sound great to your side, but to people like me, it sounds like a plan to take from me for the benefit of others, and I'm never going to be okay with that. When job postings say "Women and minorities are encouraged to apply," that sounds suspiciously like "Psych is encouraged not to apply." Not cool.

I'm fighting tooth and nail for what I need and my family needs. I don't hate or wish ill to anyone, but I'm not interested in giving away what I have when it is already not enough. If someone wants to cast a vision for a future that includes more opportunity for those groups without doing so at my expense, I'm all for it. I see nothing in Giggles and Tampon Tim's platform to suggest any of that.

Our society has little hope until the festering boil that afflicts the fearful and weak amongst us, i.e., the fallacious belief that, "I lose something every time you gain something", is lanced and drained once and for all.

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:43 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:20 pm

Sparko wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:47 am Psych, you don't have to go down with Citizen Tang. A reasonable mind is pliable and sees danger and division as an alternative best avoided when possible. And does not see danger and division where it doesn't exist within our constitutional system

Here's my problem. Your side makes these ominous statements about how female empowerment and diversity, equity, and inclusion are the future, which probably sound great to your side, but to people like me, it sounds like a plan to take from me for the benefit of others, and I'm never going to be okay with that. When job postings say "Women and minorities are encouraged to apply," that sounds suspiciously like "Psych is encouraged not to apply." Not cool.

I'm fighting tooth and nail for what I need and my family needs. I don't hate or wish ill to anyone, but I'm not interested in giving away what I have when it is already not enough. If someone wants to cast a vision for a future that includes more opportunity for those groups without doing so at my expense, I'm all for it. I see nothing in Giggles and Tampon Tim's platform to suggest any of that.

Our society has little hope until the festering boil that afflicts the fearful and weak amongst us, i.e., the fallacious belief that, "I lose something every time you gain something", is lanced and drained once and for all.

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:32 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:12 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:09 pm Thanks, Kamala!

Under the Harris/Bidden Administration the price of oil has decreased by a fourth...25% over the last year. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US is producing more oil under the Harris/Bidden Administration than under any other administration in our nation's history?

(Let's just hope we don't run out of Houthis.)

Pretty meaningless when it doesn't translate to the pump.

Glad you realize that it is the oil companies failing to invest to increase refining capability to increase gas supply and reduce prices that is preventing lower gas prices. Why would they spend money to decrease their profits? Also glad you realize that Trump's plan to "drill baby drill" will not affect gas prices at all.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:11 pm Do you really believe that there is a real chance that a Harris administration would even seriously pursue “outlawing gas vehicles and mandating electric ones?”

I do not.

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:11 pm Do you really believe that there is a real chance that a Harris administration would even seriously pursue “outlawing gas vehicles and mandating electric ones?”

I do not.

Newsome has been talking about it in California for quite some time. Giggles is about that dumb, hails from there, and is equally Marxist in her leanings.

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:09 pm Thanks, Kamala!

Under the Harris/Bidden Administration the price of oil has decreased by a fourth...25% over the last year. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US is producing more oil under the Harris/Bidden Administration than under any other administration in our nation's history?

(Let's just hope we don't run out of Houthis.)

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:57 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:32 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:12 pm

Pretty meaningless when it doesn't translate to the pump.

Glad you realize that it is the oil companies failing to invest to increase refining capability to increase gas supply and reduce prices that is preventing lower gas prices. Why would they spend money to decrease their profits? Also glad you realize that Trump's plan to "drill baby drill" will not affect gas prices at all.

Oil companies have no incentive to expand refining capacity when Giggles and her ilk are taking about outlawing gas vehicles and mandating electric ones. When Trump blows that out of the water, refining capacity will expand and gas prices will go down.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:11 pm Do you really believe that there is a real chance that a Harris administration would even seriously pursue “outlawing gas vehicles and mandating electric ones?”

I do not.

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:55 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 1:43 pm

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:20 pm

Here's my problem. Your side makes these ominous statements about how female empowerment and diversity, equity, and inclusion are the future, which probably sound great to your side, but to people like me, it sounds like a plan to take from me for the benefit of others, and I'm never going to be okay with that. When job postings say "Women and minorities are encouraged to apply," that sounds suspiciously like "Psych is encouraged not to apply." Not cool.

I'm fighting tooth and nail for what I need and my family needs. I don't hate or wish ill to anyone, but I'm not interested in giving away what I have when it is already not enough. If someone wants to cast a vision for a future that includes more opportunity for those groups without doing so at my expense, I'm all for it. I see nothing in Giggles and Tampon Tim's platform to suggest any of that.

Our society has little hope until the festering boil that afflicts the fearful and weak amongst us, i.e., the fallacious belief that, "I lose something every time you gain something", is lanced and drained once and for all.

I’m waiting to be proven wrong.

Case in point: for our program’s accreditation renewal, one of the requirements is to “demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in hiring and promotion policies.” I provided a copy of our institutional non-discrimination policy as well as copies of our job postings that encourage women and minorities to apply. I was told that’s not sufficient proof.

I pointed out that, out of the ten faculty I supervise, seven are women and three are minorities. I am the lone White male. Not good enough.

It appears that the bottom line is that I am expected to make a determination ahead of time that, when there is an opening, we will hire a woman/minority, regardless of who is best qualified or who is the best fit AND if no one who fits those standards applies, I am responsible for going door to door to locate them.

At least that’s what I’m left to conclude, since no one will answer my direct question of “What does ‘good enough’ look like?”

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 12:09 pm

Overlander wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 11:45 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 8:41 am

So. Frickin'. Dumb.

Dumb as in, "All I am fit to do for a living is trick people into buying stuff," dumb.

SMH.

You should put some balm on that nerve.

I guess you could also be a Dim nominee for POTUS. I haven’t heard your laugh, but I’m confident that IQ and denial skills are spot on.

twocoach wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 3:40 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2024 2:11 pm Do you really believe that there is a real chance that a Harris administration would even seriously pursue “outlawing gas vehicles and mandating electric ones?”

I do not.

Even IF she wanted to, it is not something that could be accomplished in even an 8 year administration. We do not have even remotely close to the charging infrastructure to support that.