Ontario Liberal Party Goes Full Sexist

I can see I have you on the hop, now .. since you've twisted yourself into a pretzel to make the ouch go away.

But yes, that's exactly what 'blacks' are telling you. If they're not applying for certain jobs, it's because a) they're not qualified for those jobs, or b) they don't ****ing want them. Or any one of a million reasons - all of which are personal and none of yours or my business.

You claiming to know what motivates 'blacks', or claiming to know why they don't jump through the hoops you're demanding they jump through .. is your own cross to bear.

 

... by banning individuals from something because of their gender and presumptions you base on their gender. But you don't think that's sexist, because you hope it will affect the group level statistics.

 

What is far more interesting and what sometimes helps make Wills case, is when it can be shown that "black" applicants with the same qualifications and who do apply and thus want the positions, are denied it to favour white applicants. That is racist and wrong when it happens. I'm fully with Will on that.

Where Will goes wrong with me, is that he only sees it as wrong when it is done to black people, and he actually supports it when it is done to white people. Both being individuals discriminated against by skin tone, but one he says it is ok because it may make the group level statistics look more palatable to him. Same in this case with male individuals being discriminated against by gender. He's supporting that, but is rightly disgusted when female individuals are discriminated against by gender.

 

With respect, there are significant flaws in this premise.

1) A brown man was just made head of Twitter - no doubt beating out some white people. If you're as compelled to fight racism against whites as you are when it's against POC (as per your very sound arguments), then for consistency you would have to view this with the same assumption applied when POC miss out on jobs to whites. And what about the POC who lead America's wealth stats? Will you be consistent and assume that they're stealing jobs/wealth from whites via discrimination?

2) It cannot be 'shown' that POC applicant was rejected on racial grounds. It can only be assumed (see above). In actual practice, POC in America and my own country, are beating whites to well paid jobs at a spectacular pace.

3) No two job applicants are EVER the same. Just doesn't happen.

 

Its is EASY to show when made as explicit as the Ontario Liberal Party did here in discriminating against men.

 

What knowledge would they miss exactly?

Well DUH if the were MORE qualified and if some MORE qualified than the women men came along then they might prove to advantage politically and ethically.

How about we just let both compete equally and the best person based on qualification for the job and policy get it.

 

What are you talking about I'm conservative and I am all for change. How about we change to vouchers and school choice for our children? How about we change to a National Sales Tax and get rid of the income tax system? How about we change from a dominating federal government back to strong state governments?

Do you support change like I do?

 

They are perfectly free to run the government should not be taking sides in the matter promoting some over others, we ALL have a right to equal protection under the law not some more than others.

 

Why would the best and brightest ever put themselves through what is the current state of politics? The sad fact is that if you choose to do so you are probably not the best and BRIGHTEST out there.

 

They should learn from our example with Harris, when you choose based on race and sex you may not get even mediocre let alone a best and brightest in fact you may get total incomitance.

 

Isn't it more important that the lot of winners be a diverse group rather than the best at the time? ...............

 

Sorry, these folks have decided differently.

You see, I don't look like these particular well off people or like these other people who have abused and enslaved folks years ago, and you do look like them, so I get preferential treatment over you. And no, it doesn't matter if I'm already better off than you. I got the right skin tone. Lucky me? Well not really, because then everybody questions if I deserve what I get, even when I do.

 

That is because the left has been lying about who they are who we are since the thirties.

 

By using obviously and blatantly discriminatory practices, without even the common sense to be able to see or admit that. Stupidest f-ing idea I've heard lately, and that's saying something, because recently the stupid is running far and wide. Anyone who supports this is a straight up bigot.

 

Insult aside, are you saying that all the biases that lead to X, Y, Z being left out are completely okay and reasonable? In this country, we do not have taxation without representation, but the *Golden Children* were keeping everybody else out. So, if you don't want to right that wrong, when do you people plan to return those tax dollars the "others" have been paying?

 

You can not POSSIBLY support that.

 

I think that you are ignoring that another central premise of conservatives is that the government is not capable of solving any problem. Thus, you point at anything government does and assume it's a failure without even discussing it or proposing a legitimate alternative.

 

Wow do YOU ever need a civics lesson!!

Our federal taxes are levied according to our federal legislature.

Those living in Washington, DC have NO REPRESENTATION in the federal legislature.

That is a population larger than that of Wyoming living under taxation with NO REPRESENTATION.


NOW, let's move to the states. All 50 states can set their own budgets, tax their own citizens, borrow money, etc.

Washington DC does NOT get to do that without federal legislature review. Washington DC has to submit their decisions to the House of Representatives for their approval. And, again they have no representation in the US House.


I'd also point out that all Puerto Ricans are full American citizens. For example, they can move to America with no immigration approval needed, and for voting it's the same as if they moved from some other state - they can move here and vote that easily. And, they are required to pay taxes to America.

However, Puerto Rico has NO REPRESENTATION though they are required to pay taxes to America.

 

I think you are trying to shift the subject, you claimed conservatives were not for change I cited you several KEY very BIG changes conservatives support. Do you support change or not?

 

Yes they do.

They have representatives in Congress

And DC has a city council that set's it's budget.

Well they are a federal district DUH. And they submit some decisions to Congress because it is a federal district.

They are citizens AND nationals who have their own national government. They can move to the United States and establish residency and vote here. It's not quite the same as moving from one state to another since they are not a state but a territory but very similar in that you cannot vote in another state until you establish residency there and meet those qualifications. And no they do not pay federal income taxes to United States. They participate in the Social Security retirement program and make contributions into it.

Congress is made up of the STATES, not the people. It is not some big group all voted in by the People, it is made up of the States and only STATES have a vote in the Congress of the United STATES.

 

Conservatives do not have a tax solution that conservatives would support.

And, you are making no sense at all on Education + strong state government. Education IS a state issue! How could you not know that??

And, conservative states that have taken steps toward demolishing their public education systems have found that to be a STUPID IDEA.

 

NO they do not. You are just being astoundingly silly on this. They have NO representation thag can vote in the House or the Senate.

It's like saying our founders had representation in England, because Jefferson and Franklin could visit the King.

Yes, that's what I said. They can PROPOSE a budget for themselves, but it goes to the House for review - a body in which they have no representation.

And, they are Americans who are specifically excluded from having representation in our federal government - on taxes and every other federal issue, obviously.

The point I made is that they are full American citizens in every way - EXCEPT they pay taxes without representation.

I'm sorry, but that's just not an excuse.

The very idea of there being a district of any significant size was recognized as being a PROBLEM not a solution well before the year 1790, the year of the retrocession when we fixed PART of the problem.

Since then, the problem has become WAY more significant, denying American citizens representation with NO JUSTIFICATION, slowing the improvements that states are allowed to make, and fundamentally denying equality of opportunity.

 

Feel better now?

I didn't read any of that because I don't do shouting. Relax, regroup and try again if you can be civil.

 

No. If for no other reason than because you haven't enumerated what those "biases" are. Is it bias because no women want to run for XYZ political position in whatever county, city, or State is in question? (Or in the case of this thread, Canadian Provience). If so, whose? Same question for a "POC". What if the seat has been held by an incumbent for the last 50 years, a case in which virtually nobody has any real hope of winning, regardless of their genitalia or skin color? And here's the most important part- What about the voters right to cast their ballot for whomever they like (including a write-in candidate)? When you limit who is and is not allowed to run, not only have you yourself used bigotry in a misguided attempt to fight bigotry, but you have completely disenfranchised the voters who otherwise might have voted for a candidate such stupid laws prevented from running in the first place.

What you call an "insult", in in reality just an accurate way of describing what it is you'd like to happen. But I am glad to say that such a thing would almost certainly be disallowed as Unconstitutional in the States.

 

Nobody said that, and you know it. That dishonest game is well beyond tiresome at this point. You can't use that trick to get away with explicit race or gender discrimination against U,V, or W. We see what you are doing.