Julia Pierson hire. Affirmative action at its best.

[juneaubound]

She was an agent for many years so I have to presume (maybe correctly and maybe incorrectly) that she was competant at her job. Being a competant field agent doesn't necessarily mean that she was management material, and from some of the artilces that I have read in this thread the culture in the Secret Service was toxic before she arrived and continued to be toxic once she had been promoted into her position as head of the SS.

My husband was working in law enforcement in Tennessee back in the 80's when Reagan was scheduled to come into the Knoxville airport. Members of the SWAT team (including my husband) were set up in positions at the airport, in conjuction with the Secret Service team that had been sent up to secure the place before Regan's arrival.

According to my husband the Secret Service at that time were everything that you expect the SS to be. Professional, focused, humorless, all business. Both my husband and another officer were stationed on roof tops (he on one and a fellow office on another) during Regan's arrival. When my husband glanced over at his colleague at one point he saw that the officer was looking at Reagan through the scope of his rifle. The cop told my husband later that he simply wanted to get a closer look at the president.

My husband got on the radio (one of those "what the hell are you doing?") conversations. He had seen the cop, but also seen one of the SS on another roof top. The agent already had his own rifle pointed at the officer. Those guys didn't f*ck around in those days.

Nothing should be politically correct, no corners should be cut, no feel good policies should be taken into consideration when defending and protecting the president of the United States. We need focused and highly trained warriors from top to bottom. Not Mickey Mouse and Goofy.

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

True. There is this to consider. When someone makes this kind of accusation, and there is no proof behind it, this can be concluded from it.

1) Deep-seated anger at women being in positions of power.
2) Deep-seated anger at the President.

Can you prove there is deep-seated anger at women being in positions of power or deep-seated anger at the president?

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by jman07

Accusations?! Our president openly supports affirmative action! No accusation is necessary!

You act like hiring people based on their sex and race over ability is something to be ashamed of. Like discrimination or something. Roll eyes.

Affirmative action is not actually about hiring, its about applications and interviews.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by momonkey

Can you prove there is deep-seated anger at women being in positions of power or deep-seated anger at the president?

Making accusations without solid proof. If you do that, you have a problem. Taking a stab at the female and at the President.

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by Vector1

It is a disingenuous question as it would be very hard, if not impossible to find such information unless the person themselves admitted to receiving special hiring or promotions based on AA.

So while there is probably not proof she was an AA hire or was promoted to the top spot because of it, there is plenty of reason to believe she was.
Let's start with her less than stellar background/qualifications prior to being hired. That combined with when she was hired (early 1980's), when affirmative action was at it's peak, and few woman were members of the Secret Service.
Then combine that with the prostitute scandal that rocked the service, the optics of promoting a woman to the top spot is certainly worthy of speculation as to why such an incompetent person was appointed to head this vital agency.

Heck even the liberal Huffington post is highly critical of her;

Julia Pierson Wanted To Run Secret Service 'Like Disney World': Washington Post

On a side note, my understanding is that the nut that got into the White House overpowered a female agent/guard as well.
I don't know about those who want to defend affirmative action in the face of obvious differences between men and women when it come to size and strength, but to guard the POTUS, I'd want the top and best guys like;


I must break you - YouTube

vs.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojvHyQCHhVc#t=10


How about you?

`

The addition of female police also increases the number of police on civilian shooting as female officers don't have credible intermediate force options available the way male officers do.


http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/FoxnewsAffActionPol.html

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

True. There is this to consider. When someone makes this kind of accusation, and there is no proof behind it, this can be concluded from it.

1) Deep-seated anger at women being in positions of power.
2) Deep-seated anger at the President.

Originally Posted by momonkey

Can you prove there is deep-seated anger at women being in positions of power or deep-seated anger at the president?

Originally Posted by green_mariner

Making accusations without solid proof. If you do that, you have a problem. Taking a stab at the female and at the President.

And what would be your proof of the deep-seated anger to which you referred?


You made the claim.


Back it up!

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by momonkey

And what would be your proof of the deep-seated anger to which you referred?


You made the claim.


Back it up!

Ok. Making accusations of someone without proof. Why would someone do that? Think about it.

[green_mariner]

Proof of what I was talking about: Psychological projection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



False accusation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[doc1]

Originally Posted by Spaten_Drinker

Look for Barack to hire the Black Panthers to take over.

Oh man, I WISH!

I would pay to see that, LOL!!!!