get into yale university with his grades?

:)

June 29th, 2009 at 11:48 am
———————————————————–

How the hell did he get elected twice? :(

He didn’t.

This was a promotion test. I would imagine their past work history and performance reviews played a large part in them even being in line to take the test. So your argument doesn’t hold water.

The facts of the mater > what you “would imagine.”

The test entirely replaced the previous method, which had been based on past work performance.

Thus, my argument still holds water. Should you seek to puncture it, you’ll have to use something more substantial than imaginary ammunition.

That should enlighten things.

dawn,

i hope we find out before

the statute of limitations runs out.

:|

watchdog Says:
How in the hell does a damn test favor one race over another?

June 29th, 2009 at 11:42 am

***

how in the the hell did george w. bush

get into yale university with his grades?

:)

June 29th, 2009 at 11:48 am
———————————————————–

How the hell did he get elected twice? :(

Seeing as how this test completely replaced all work history and performance reviews, one might be more inclined to ask who they’d rather go into a burning building with: someone who has demonstrated a long history of competence in going into burning buildings, or somebody who passed a written exam?

This was a promotion test. I would imagine their past work history and performance reviews played a large part in them even being in line to take the test. So your argument doesn’t hold water.

I just hope that Sotomayors confirmation goes as smooth and easy as the confirmation of Clarence Thomas. I think she deserves at least that much.

I doubt if she sexually harrasses her employees, so she shouldn’t have as much of a problem.

.

backup Says:

One of the main problems with the attempts at righting wrongful discrimination with more wrongful discrimination is, for the most part, those in the target groups are not the ones responsible for the original discrimination.

It’s not “more wrongful discrimination.” New Haven could either throw out the test or not. If they had not thrown out the test, then the black firefighters would have a strong legal case against them. So as it ends up, they were screwed either way. They should have been more careful in preparing the test; that’ll be what employers take from this going forward.

Y’all keep fearing discrimination against white males, but the fact is it isn’t going to happen. The very minor incidents that you treat as equal to the horrific crimes of the past don’t compare at all, and the fact that you think they’re the same thing only provides another example that bigotry against minorities is still alive and well today.

.

CP Says:

Let’s ask the other firefighters who they would rather go into a burning building with, someone who passed the test or someone who failed the test?

Seeing as how this test completely replaced all work history and performance reviews, one might be more inclined to ask who they’d rather go into a burning building with: someone who has demonstrated a long history of competence in going into burning buildings, or somebody who passed a written exam?

Let’s ask the other firefighters who they would rather go into a burning building with, someone who passed the test or someone who failed the test?. I have known volunteer and professional firefighters. It’s not easy by any stretch. They have both written and physical testing. If these guys couldn’t cut it, they need to go back and study up and try again. There should be no short cuts in that line of work.

The real problem here is a lawsuit happy society which lead New Haven into there knee-jerk reaction.

It was a 5-4 decision, meaning that 44% of the court AGREED with her on this matter. So clearly she was not out in left field with her legal opinion.

The reason why we have 9 justices is because the Founding Fathers recognized the value of alternative points of view.

And SOME OF THEM like YOURS are RACIST KKKon *DEFECTIVE* BRAINS… ;)

I can’t help it, rhf. your posts crack me up. Laugh out loud, uncontrollable, crack me up.

Thank you.

For example. You could take a sampling of draftees of NBA basketball players or inductees to the R+B hall of fame, or members of the Atlanta City Council

http://apps.atlantaga.gov/citycouncil/

and make the assumption that they are under represented by white males due to some form of discrimination. And then call for new elections or new criteria to get a more balanced representation.

That wouldn’t make sense until you have examined the reasons behind the underrepresentation.

I think the test construction can influence the promotions. You are right about that, and it may be the real issue in this case. I don’t know. I think the answer lies in trying to construct the most objective tests for these promotions or screenings.

I object to the idea that if candidates are equal, we should give the preference to one group over the other. (as implied by other posters and preferential hiring practices or some organizations). That preference to make up for the past.

That’s not true equality.

If the candidates are that evenly matched, the decision should come down to a coin toss. Not discrimination of one group for the benefit of the other.

Two candidates, one black, one white. Both are asked to write an essay on the ‘Invisible Man.’

The white candidate, based on upbringing and dearth of black literature, may write on H. G. Wells’ book of a scientist who performs an experiment on refractive light.

The black candidate, based on a more ethnocentric upbringing, may write on Ralph Ellison and African American social issues.

While this is a simplistic example, it is one to illustrate that there are a host of disparate upbringings that one culture may consider ‘normal’ exposure, but another would not. To view this in a dominant white-only context, as has been done in this country since inception, is to unconsciously perpetuate one culture’s perception as ’standard’ over another culture, continuing a pattern of subtle dominance.