Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This goes along with the concern a few of these men have expressed about a lack of due process.
Okay, fine. If they really wanted due process, and aren't getting it otherwise, they could sue for slander/libel. But you notice, they don't. They don't want due process because they know what the outcome will be.
Forgive me, but I don't know what Rob Porter's nastiness as a husband or significant other has to do with his skill on the job. It seems that "sensitivity" has overriden other considerations for evaluating our elected and appointed officials. I can see its importance for a chief elected leader; they are supposed to set an example for others. But the people can make that decision. I can see its importance for, say, a doctor in direct physical contact with young gymnasts.
But we seem to have reached a period now where merit matters little and political and behavioral characteristics overrides (I don't want to say "trumps") all else. If we found out that Jonas Salk was a misogynist would that diminish the value of the polio vaccine? Would we have deprived him of the use of a lab at the University of Pittsburgh to do his work?
Ty Cobb was a notoriously nasty individual. Would we have deprived him of a spot on the Detroit Tigers? Alexander Hamilton was notoriously unfaithful to his wife. Need I say more?
I think we should balance what a person has to offer with their negatives as a person. And not go to absolutes of keeping people with bad aspects out of all employment, not to say public life.
This is why we need to get more women in office, so we don't get more attitudes like this, which is apparently the molester-in-chief's attitude, as well.
First...it's a CRIME. He SOCKED a person half his size in the eye, and other times tried to strangle her. This is credible...two people claimed about the same thing. No...he doesn't have a criminal record. BUT TI WAS SERIOUS ENOUGH THAT HE WASN'T GIVEN SECURITY CLEARANCE. And yet, Trump went ahead and "pretended" he had security clearance.
Second...he could be BLACKMAILED over it. The perp wouldn't want his violent acts getting out. Easy to blackmail him.
As for being on a sports team vs the govt, that's silly, since I hope people understand the difference between playing and working for the country and for the people...including the people the perp used to beat up.
How can a person who beats up or molests women possibly protect their interests, while working for them in the government?
Trump's admin. pays the women 37% less than the men. That's an extension of the attitude I refer to above. The lower pay results in lower Social Security, so the discrimination doesn't end with the low wage at time it's earned.
If you don't believe beating people up disqualifies a person for high level government office requiring first level security clearance, I'd say you don't understand the situation at all.
I've often wondered how any politicians get security clearances. If they were held to the same standards as the general public, we'd have a very, very different political landscape.
In fact, I'd wager that if presidential candidates had to get a clearance (using the same standards the DoD uses for defense workers) before they were allowed to run for office, neither Trump or Clinton would have been on the ballot.
This is why we need to get more women in office, so we don't get more attitudes like this, which is apparently the molester-in-chief's attitude, as well.
First...it's a CRIME. He SOCKED a person half his size in the eye, and other times tried to strangle her. This is credible...two people claimed about the same thing. No...he doesn't have a criminal record. BUT TI WAS SERIOUS ENOUGH THAT HE WASN'T GIVEN SECURITY CLEARANCE. And yet, Trump went ahead and "pretended" he had security clearance.
Second...he could be BLACKMAILED over it. The perp wouldn't want his violent acts getting out. Easy to blackmail him.
As for being on a sports team vs the govt, that's silly, since I hope people understand the difference between playing and working for the country and for the people...including the people the perp used to beat up.
How can a person who beats up or molests women possibly protect their interests, while working for them in the government?
Trump's admin. pays the women 37% less than the men. That's an extension of the attitude I refer to above. The lower pay results in lower Social Security, so the discrimination doesn't end with the low wage at time it's earned.
If you don't believe beating people up disqualifies a person for high level government office requiring first level security clearance, I'd say you don't understand the situation at all.
Most of your post is spot on, with the exception of a few sentences:
"This is why we need to get more women in office, so we don't get more attitudes like this" should be changed to "....need to get more decent people in office..." Women don't have exclusively rights to decency. Neither I, nor any man I know, think what Rob Porter did was acceptable.
"Trump's admin. pays the women 37% less than the men. That's an extension of the attitude I refer to above. The lower pay results in lower Social Security, so the discrimination doesn't end with the low wage at time it's earned." Not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, or even if its true.
You make some really good points, but injecting feminism into your argument isn't helping your case.
I've often wondered how any politicians get security clearances. If they were held to the same standards as the general public, we'd have a very, very different political landscape.
In fact, I'd wager that if presidential candidates had to get a clearance (using the same standards the DoD uses for defense workers) before they were allowed to run for office, neither Trump or Clinton would have been on the ballot.
That's a GOOD thing.
Why do we allow rich/pseudo important people to get a pass. I'm not saying your background should be squeaky clean but there is a HUGE difference between smoking weed in your early 20's and physically abusing 2 wives a few years ago.
I do think if you are proud that you could grab a women's gentiles and get away with it, you should be disqualified.
I do think if you've scammed a bunch of money out of your foundation and lied to congress on events that lead to servicemen's death you should be disqualified.
Why are we so content with a "race to the bottom". I wouldn't trust either of them to watch my dog, let alone lead me.
Yes, I think it's a problem if the leaders of our country would not be able to get clearance that would allow them on a military base.
I've often wondered how any politicians get security clearances. If they were held to the same standards as the general public, we'd have a very, very different political landscape.
In fact, I'd wager that if presidential candidates had to get a clearance (using the same standards the DoD uses for defense workers) before they were allowed to run for office, neither Trump or Clinton would have been on the ballot.
One of my close friends, who is personally honest to a fault didn't get clearance. Why? The polygraph test, which is well-known to be unreliable and rarely admissible even in court. The criteria for security clearance must have been invented by Rube Goldberg.
As a former leader of a small to mid size team I really grew to dislike problem children. They usually thought they were worth more in merit than they were and dealing with all their personal foibles did not make it worth it. Why keep ***h***** around? No reason to.
Guess what, there is always someone else out there with less drama that can do the job. Often there is a woman who fits the bill, but they usually get overlooked and you can tell thats true by just looking.
Was I willing to deal with problematic personal characteristics? If someone was no kidding truly truly worth it in some way. Really talented, really smart, really energetic, really hard working, some special talent that benefitted the team - they had to have something that was remarkable to make up the difference or I would find some way to get rid of them. It was too disruptive to the team. And no I wouldn't keep someone around no matter how special if they were truly nasty.
I often said I'd rather have a team of honest, hard working, easy to get along with, reliable, average or less IQs than a team of...brilliant name your poison (ego's, cheats whatever) because you know what? They don't get the job done because they are causing to much drama even if you don't always see it.
Over the years there were a couple that I kept around because they had a special talent, were really good at something important to my team, and the reverse was true too. I kept one guy around who had a lot of processing issues and didn't necessarily get stuff done. People thought I should get rid of him. But to me he was worth it because when the xxxx hit the fan and I needed a body he would always come in and do whatever I asked, grunt work etc. And he never caused drama about it either.
As an honest hard working American, veteran, someone who held a security clearance for 30 years, no character issues, no addictions, no sex problems, no marital problems, never hit anyone etc. etc.
The MINIMUM I expect from my elected government is the the same.
Its really not that hard to be a decent person. Or it shouldn't be. If you ask me we let things slide and look where we have ended up. Almost total dysfunction.
Most of your post is spot on, with the exception of a few sentences:
"This is why we need to get more women in office, so we don't get more attitudes like this" should be changed to "....need to get more decent people in office..." Women don't have exclusively rights to decency. Neither I, nor any man I know, think what Rob Porter did was acceptable.
True enough that women as a whole have their own issues...but a more diversified workplace means there are different kinds of people who will "squawk" about different things. That's why management doesn't like diversity - it makes it tougher for them because everyone doesn't just rubberstamp and go along with stuff. Diversity means people with (hopefully) different views will look at things from different angles and ferret out the issues - not turn a blind eye.
It's not perfect, but it surely must be better than what we're getting now from this very male and very pale administration.
Most people do not have any idea of what it takes to get a full security clearance.
When I was stationed in an naval air cargo squadron back in 1952, I got a phone call from my father. He wanted to know what was going on, as they were really worried. The FBI had 2 men going around our small Northern California Town, checking me out. They had been to former teachers, high school principal, and numerous others, asking all kinds of questions about me. It was like I was under a serious criminal investigation.
I had no idea of what they were talking about. A few days later I was called into the commanding officers office to go there immediately. I had no idea of what was going on. When I arrived I was told I needed to read this 3 page form, and sign it if I could agree to it. It all came down to the fact that I had to go under oath to not reveal what cargo was on an airplane we loaded. I would be the only one on the base that would be able to see the manifest as items were loaded, and verify the number on the box (some huge wooden crates down to small boxes) against the manifest, which designated exactly what was in that box. It was secret enough, that when the trucks came in, they were with a marine escort that after the trucks pulled up next to the big cargo plane, the marines set up a perimeter guard line to close off that area. I could not reveal what was in the boxes, or anything else that others did not see happen at the loading site. Sometimes it took as many as 3 large cargo planes to hold the entire shipment. I realized when I signed the documents that what the FBI was checking out, was my integrity and able to not tell anyone what was in shipments.
The only 2 people that had that clearance was the commanding officer and myself. A couple of months later I was sent to the big Naval Air Transport squadron in Hawaii. We handled passengers and cargo. I was the section leader over all cargo that went out, every other day on 24 hour shifts. One day a large lane came in, and when it was parked it was surrounded by armed marines dress right dress. That means put up your right arm and touch the man next to you. Talk about top secret flight. The manifest we were given, was a sheet that said manifest to follow in few days. The plane was bound for Washington D.C. area military airport. They had a problem, was they did not know how to set up the coffee equipment on board. And no one without top secret clearance could go aboard. As I was not working with my TS clearance, it was sealed in my orders, only to be opened with my approval. I told the CO that I had the clearance, and they could find that sealed envelope in my file. He had it checked out, and I went aboard to show them how to handle the coffee equipment. I saw there was a fighter jet, with wings and upper part of tail removed, and those parts along the side of the cargo bay. I could not tell anyone what I saw, including the CO.
Three days later the manifest came through and it said 1 Enemy Fighter Plane. It was the Mig that the USA offered any Korean pilot that would deliver one to a base of ours, $1,000,000 and Citizenship in USA. I saw the plane on that big aircraft less than 24 hours from the time it was brought in to us, and was in Washington D.C. less than 24 hours later.
And there are a lot of things that will get your TS Clearance removed and in the White House if the clearance removed you will be out. Things like I beat my wife, etc., are things that they can be used to blackmail a TS holder, and get them to reveal secrets to protect their reputation. You have to be squeaky clean to hold that type of clearance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
