The murder of Charlie Kirk
Can we all admit that the majority of extremism is coming from the left over the last handful of years?
Apparently they j
Last I knew (it's been a while since I dealt with this stuff) all states except Montana are "at will" states. In Montana, after a probationary period, you need a reason to fire someone. I have no idea how strict the requirements for the reason are. Maybe all you need to say is "he didn't fit in".
This is probably correct, but I haven't checked.
That is not the case. The young Turks recognized the danger and unpopularity of cancer culture/wokeism. They are now warning Democrats to not go down that route again. To return to supporting working class policies like universal healthcare, addressing college debt. Enough of the culture wars. There’s nothing wrong with left-wing and right wingers coming together on numerous i
Yeah, when you reach a certain amount of money you don’t care about making more or having more influence. Said no one ever. People who have hundreds of millions are always hungry to make more money and to influence more people. They don’t magically stop caring once they make x amount of money.
Charlie Kirk’s legacy is being fought over right now by the right, and everything you have said is consistent with that.
I really care almost zero what your opinion on Cenk, Ana, and TYT is. They are thorns in the spine of the Democratic party and they will do anything except play nice with the people they grift money off of. They can go do their Dave Rubin apology tour with the right-wing all they want to. As far as I’m concerned I’d be happy to get rid of such useless. performative, and idiotic people.
Really? The Left did that? I don't believe it. That would make me politically happy and one thing I've learned about politics is I'm not allowed to be politically happy.I think - and I am open to correction here if Rococo wants to chime in - that in order to avoid a wrongful termination suit you'd have to link the employee's political opinions to being in violation of company p
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/no....
Officer Who Gave $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse’s Defense Is Fired
Lt. William Kelly of the Norfolk Police Department in Virginia was relieved of duty by city officials, who said his support for the Kenosha, Wis., shooting suspect undermined the public’s trust in law enforcement.
You can fire your employee if you hate him being MAGA for example, america is the land of the free, not a communist country. You are free to stop giving money to people you dislike. Communists limited those freedoms, you can't dislike someone race or gender or religion (or age or disability), but at least if you dislike other things you can fire your employee
So you can fire people because you don't like their haircut? Looks like I had a totally wrong conception of what wrongful termination meant. So there are a few set aside reasons you can't fire someone, but outside of that the entire universe of reasons is valid (and if under contract other rules apply).Between learning this and that groypers are into trans women because they ar
Yes? you don't have to motivate a firing (they usually do to avoid discrimination lawsuits for protected classes though)
Last I knew (it's been a while since I dealt with this stuff) all states except Montana are "at will" states. In Montana, after a probationary period, you need a reason to fire someone. I have no idea how strict the requirements for the reason are. Maybe all you need to say is "he didn't fit in".
there are some states /localites which are "less at will" than federal rules would allow, ie which expanded the protected classes.
California, and DC made it illegal to fire someone for political beliefs/political action afaik.
Maybe there are other places as well
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/no....Officer Who Gave $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse’s Defense Is FiredLt. William Kelly of the Norfolk Police Department in Virginia was relie
Not sure how 'free' you are when your ability to feed and cloth yourself is dependent on your expression of bog standard public opinions. People call anyone who isn't a Republican a communist, should they all be fired if the person can prove they're not a communist? Seems a bit silly to think of pressing anyone to fire someone for that, even though it's usually meant as a epitaph, even if, in theory, someone could legally be fired for it. Part of freedom of speech is letting a little water roll of the duck's back
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/no....Officer Who Gave $25 to Kyle Rittenhouse’s Defense Is FiredLt. William Kelly of the Norfolk Police Department in Virginia was relie
Police officers are slightly different because they tend to be under contract/collective bargaining agreements.
Also this guy never should have been fired lmao
Edit: I read the article and because of his rank he wasn’t under contract.
Also I guess they claim he fired him for this statement?
Mr. Kelly, 41, became an executive officer for internal affairs of the Norfolk Police Department last month, according to his LinkedIn profile.
His name appeared on a list of donors obtained by Distributed Denial of Secrets, a watchdog group that said in a Twitter direct message on Wednesday night that it had received the list from an external source. It shared the material with The New York Times.
On the GiveSendGo crowdfunding site, Mr. Kelly checked that he wished to remain anonymous, but appeared to use his Norfolk city email address for the donation, which included a message of encouragement for Mr. Rittenhouse.
“God bless,” the message said. “Thank you for your courage. Keep your head up. You’ve done nothing wrong. Every rank and file police officer supports you. Don’t be discouraged by actions of the political class of law enforcement leadership.”
Chip Filer, the city manager of Norfolk, said in a statement on Tuesday that he had accepted the recommendation of the police chief to relieve Mr. Kelly of his duties and that Mr. Kelly had the right to appeal the decision.
“His egregious comments erode the trust between the Norfolk Police Department and those they are sworn to serve,” Mr. Filer said. “The City of Norfolk has a standard of behavior for all employees, and we will hold staff accountable.”
lol I guess the only argument would be he made his superiors look bad by trying to say they are making political decisions.
I know dumb people oftentimes have trouble understanding what people say, but if you’re going to hyper nuance bro Charlie’s intentionally inflammatory statements,
Again that is your opinion and has nothing to with him being a racist. You are moving the goal posts because you can't actually prove he was a racist. Regardless if he was a racist (he wasn't) a police officer should not be publicly saying he has no sympathy for a murder victim. That's not politics, it's standard professional code of conduct.
Not sure how 'free' you are when your ability to feed and cloth yourself is dependent on your expression of bog standard public opinions. People call anyone who isn't a Republican a communist, should they all be fired if the person can prove their a communist? Seems a bit silly to think pressing anyone to fire someone for that, even though it's usually meant as a epitaph, even
If you believe in the market as always strictly superior to planning (ie if you are not a communist) you should believe in people not firing very productive people with minor divergences. And if a republican fires all leftists he will pay a price if he can't find righwing employees for his roles, while the person willing to hire them will gain.
discrimination doesn't work and you lose money UNLESS your discrimination actually filters out worse people... so the discriminated against people either find jobs elsewhere , and the person firing them loses out, or don't, then they did deserve to be fired in the first place.
The text exchange indisputably was weird, but the people claiming it was fabricated having offered a plausible explanation for who faked it and why? Was it an attempt to frame an innocent person? If so, why? And how were the people around this guy (including his father) convinced to go along with the plan to frame him? Was it an attempt to frame a guilty person? If so, why
I don't think they framed the shooter, I think they are framing the "roommate" in order to wage war on the LGBT community. They were hoping the shooter was LGBT before they caught him, and then when they found out he wasn't, they made up the roommate to make the shooter look like they had ties to the LGBT community.
It's also possible that everything about the roommate is true, and that they were in a relationship, but the text message was still fabricated. The "roommate" hasn't been charged yet (odd), and they could be telling him he will be charged if he publicly denies the text exchange happened.
Watching the press conference live as it happened, my BS detector went up immediately at the way it was written. It reminded me of reading bad stories in my creative writing classes in college - contrived dialogue that's completely out of character. That's not how 20 year olds talk.
Again that is your opinion and has nothing to with him being a racist. You are moving the goal posts because you can't actually prove he was a racist. Regardless if he was a racist (he wasn't) a police officer should not be publicly saying he has no sympathy for a murder victim. That's not politics, it's standard professional code of conduct.
He didn’t say he has no sympathy for Kirk, and I didn’t say that Kirk was racist just that a normal person would perceive him as racist because of his statements.
I think you might just be incapable of reading and representing other people’s arguments properly. No wonder a ****** like you thinks the guy said he doesn’t care Kirk was murdered.
It reminded me of reading bad stories in my creative writing classes in college - contrived dialogue that's completely out of character. That's not how 20 year olds talk.
It wasn't talking, it was writing. And, as your own account affirms, it is student-age people who do write like that.
He didn’t say he has no sympathy for Kirk, and I didn’t say that Kirk was racist just that a normal person would perceive him as racist because of his statements.
No, you said it was a "normal criticism" and then attempted to how Kirk was racist and decided to go with he made "inflammatory statements". I said we should stop making racist a normal criticism of our political opponents when there is no proof.
I think you might just be incapable of reading and representing other people’s arguments properly. No wonder a ****** like you thinks the guy said he doesn’t care Kirk was murdered.
Why so angry? What did he mean by calling him an open racist not winning in sympathy department then?
No there was no general sense at all. It was a list of black women who he considered atrocious and who according to him stole spots from skilled people who weren't black.
The fact that those people exist creates a problem for every single black person in any position of actual power because the correct doubt in everyone minds will always be "is he there even if unskilled because of DEI"? that's a very common argument against DEI , that it ruins the life of actually skilled minority people, as they will FOREVER live with that shadow behind them even if they are guilty of nothing at all.
It's a torture that punishes skilled minorities AND skilled people of the discriminated against ethnicities/races. And it's also completly illegal btw which should matter.
Basically it's impossible to be in favor of DEI/affirmative action and be a decent person. It's an illegal , systemic form of racism that discriminates against the best people in society: skilled minorities (for the reasons explained) and skilled people not in the minority in general.
It's the literal opposite of what any healthy society would want
Why so angry? What did he mean by calling him an open racist not winning in sympathy department then?
I’m not angry. I’m calling you a ****** because you consistently misquote people while getting mad at other people misquoting. And it seems like you misquote people because you actually can’t read. The word “sympathy” wasn’t even in the text of what was said. You actually just can’t read and yet are trying to do Kirk hermeneutics because you’re part of the cult of Kirk.
Again I post the text of what was said so that everyone can see what a dishonest ****** you are.
No there was no general sense at all. It was a list of black women who he considered atrocious and who according to him stole spots from skilled people who weren't black.The fact that those people exist creates a problem for every single black person in any position of actual power because the correct doubt in everyone minds will always be "is he there even if unskilled because
He literally said 3 successful and well qualified black women “didn’t have the brain power” and stole from “more deserving white people”. Now that’s verbatim.
You can’t justify that type of language as “not seeing race”
I mean you can try but you look dumb af doing so
If you believe in the market as always strictly superior to planning (ie if you are not a communist) you should believe in people not firing very productive people with minor divergences. And if a republican fires all leftists he will pay a price if he can't find righwing employees for his roles, while the person willing to hire them will gain.discrimination doesn't work and yo
Yea this is just a redux of the racism can't exist because people would just hire black people that is transparently not true, because we've seen it not be true for hundreds of years. And again, the part you didn't answer is 'how free are you if you're forced to find a new job any time the eye of Sauron looks at you for expressing pretty bog standard opinions'? Like for instance you're throwing the word communist around a lot, and I don't think the people you're talking about are communists, should I then go and look up your employer and call them? You may be like 'sure go ahead' but a world where people are constantly calling up people's employers for talk that's not out of place in a standard internet forum isn't really a 'free' society in any sense of the word, especially for those lower on the totem pole.
He literally said 3 successful and well qualified black women “didn’t have the brain power” and stole from “more deserving white people”. Now that’s verbatim.
You can’t justify that type of language as “not seeing race”
I mean you can try but you look dumb af doing so
"If we would've said that Joy Reid, and Michelle Obama, and Sheila Jackson Lee, and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. But now they're coming out and they're saying it for us. They're coming out and they're saying, 'I'm only here because of affirmative action.' Yeah, we know. You do not have the brain-processing power to otherwise be taken seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to be taken somewhat seriously."
michelle obama was a dei hire for, and did not have "the brain-processing power", to fulfill the job of *checks notes* wife
