AA-haters: I agree with this form of Affirmative Action, don't you?

Superfreak: "What you cannot get through your head is the fact that taking affirmative action is not the same as an affirmative action program.


LadyT said:
http://www.opm.gov/employ/veterans/DVAAP.asp

Most departments and agencies in the Federal government are required to have an affirmative action program for the recruitment, employment, and advancement of disabled veterans. The law requires agencies to develop annual Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program (DVAAP) Plans.
Click to expand...


Ouch.

Strike three for superfreak.

The laws for disabled vets ARE affirmative action, ARE a "program", and ARE intended to address discrimination of disabled vets.
 
Fine... I am wrong... everyone else is right... despite there being absolutely no evidence of discrimination, this is affirmative action... not simply a benefit to our vets.
 
Superfreak said:
Fine... I am wrong... everyone else is right... despite there being absolutely no evidence of discrimination, this is affirmative action... not simply a benefit to our vets.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has argued that vets are necessarily discriminated against at this point in time. I personally don't have the facts to back that up or dispell it. If you do please share.

However disabled vets do benefit from affirmative action PROGRAMS. And there is an affirmative action PROGRAM in place to ensure that 3% of contracts go to disabled vets.
 
"The laws for disabled vets ARE affirmative action, ARE a "program", and ARE intended to address discrimination of disabled vets."

Except you keep ignoring the fact that these programs you keep referrencing have nothing to do with the awarding of contracts to businesses run by vets.

You and Tiana continue to reference labor laws and act as though this is the same situation. They are not. One deals with how employers that receive government contracts are supposed to treat new hires (ie give preferrential treatment to vets). The other deals with the government awarding a set percentage of contracts to companies owned by disabled vets. If you truly cannot see the difference here... then fine, I am wrong and obviously being too picky. Obviously I do not think I am wrong... but this is a moot point to your original question.

No, I do not have a problem with this program as it does not discriminate based on age, race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
 
"I'm fine with that. I like Desh"

You can like her all you want... I am sure she is a nice person. But she is quite clearly retarded. (what really sucks is that there really isn't anyone quite like Dixie on the left... thus I was stuck with Desh)
 
Darla said:
Are you kidding? You come up with a nail polish that doesn't chip, and it will be worth a lot more than that, total.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I already have an idea on how to try to work this out. Hey, want to be on the patent with me?
 
Superfreak said:
"I'm fine with that. I like Desh"

You can like her all you want... I am sure she is a nice person. But she is quite clearly retarded. (what really sucks is that there really isn't anyone quite like Dixie on the left... thus I was stuck with Desh)
Click to expand...

You love lefties don't you SF? You tried to hate us, but we're all charming, smart and witty.
 
Superfreak said:
"I'm fine with that. I like Desh"

You can like her all you want... I am sure she is a nice person. But she is quite clearly retarded. (what really sucks is that there really isn't anyone quite like Dixie on the left... thus I was stuck with Desh)
Click to expand...
You forgot "blunderingbear"...
 
Now that we've dispensed with the misguided attempt to spin these Vets programs as "not being AA", the fundamental question remains.

Do you support this Form of Affirmative Action....especially if you have previously expressed unrepentent hostility towards affirmative action?


:cof1:
 
NeoDixie said:
The other deals with the government awarding a set percentage of contracts to companies owned by disabled vets.
Click to expand...

When did that become the requirement of the argument? I thought we were talking about the program mentioned above being considered affirmative action.......as we've already proven.

Or are you getting desparate and trying to change up the debate again?
 
"You love lefties don't you SF? You tried to hate us, but we're all charming, smart and witty."

Some of you certainly are Darla. While I don't "hate" desh... she is nowhere near being smart or witty. She is an idiot on most topics. Doesn't make her a bad person, but she is still an idiot.
 
"You forgot "blunderingbear"..."

That I did... forgot all about him. Damn you for reminding me. That guy was a complete tool.

I suppose it is a bit late now to say LadyT=wanderingbear
 
"When did that become the requirement of the argument? I thought we were talking about the program mentioned above being considered affirmative action.......as we've already proven. "

When THAT was what was in Cypress's original post. It had nothing to do with labor law, it had to do with ownership of the companies. They were trying to give a break to companies owned by disabled vets. It had nothing to do with hiring practices. You and Cypress were the ones who continually have tried to spin this into a hiring practice that would be included in labor laws.
 
Superfreak said:
"You forgot "blunderingbear"..."

That I did... forgot all about him. Damn you for reminding me. That guy was a complete tool.

I suppose it is a bit late now to say LadyT=wanderingbear
Click to expand...

Well, my neodixie name was way funnier. You're trying to spin it like a classic Dixie whereas Wanderingbear had wild tinfoil hat theories and was high all the time. I gave you nothing but link after link debunking you're untruths.

We give that futile attempt at humor a 3 out of 10. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top