If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(PJ Media)   In May, the Justice Department began recruiting dwarfs, schizophrenics, and the 'intellectually disabled'. May? They weren't doing it earlier?   (pjmedia.com) divider line 43
    More: Stupid, Justice Department, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, mental disorders, probationary period, OTOH, DOJ  
•       •       •

629 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Aug 2012 at 1:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-22 10:25:09 AM
I'm a schizophrenic dwarf with ADHD in need of a job. Where do I sign up?
 
2012-08-22 10:27:45 AM
photos.imageevent.com
 
2012-08-22 10:32:40 AM
The DOJ encourages diversity hires and the bananas-in-pajamas crew has an apocalyptic shiatfit.

Is that what I just read there?

Can I get those seconds back somehow?
 
2012-08-22 10:33:54 AM
I am all for equal treatment.

Alas, it cannot always be this way.

Those in wheelchairs cannot be firemen for a very good reason; they are more likely to be a liability instead of an asset.

No one bats an eye when those who have D's for their grades in HS are declined for college, and yet that would also be discriminatory in many senses because a group of people are being treated better than them. Not everyone is meant to be the President of the United States. More likely they will be destined to work at McDonalds all of their life by no fault of their own. They were just born with an unluckiness of having a lower ability to retain knowledge.

Selection based upon skin color? Unacceptable. Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable. Selection based upon certain jobs that require physical activities? Yes, that is acceptable depending upon the circumstance
 
2012-08-22 10:43:13 AM

cman: I am all for equal treatment.

Alas, it cannot always be this way.

Those in wheelchairs cannot be firemen for a very good reason; they are more likely to be a liability instead of an asset.

No one bats an eye when those who have D's for their grades in HS are declined for college, and yet that would also be discriminatory in many senses because a group of people are being treated better than them. Not everyone is meant to be the President of the United States. More likely they will be destined to work at McDonalds all of their life by no fault of their own. They were just born with an unluckiness of having a lower ability to retain knowledge.

Selection based upon skin color? Unacceptable. Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable. Selection based upon certain jobs that require physical activities? Yes, that is acceptable depending upon the circumstance


Well, not reading the article, since Instapundit has certainly mucked it up, but this being about the DOJ I don't think they're hiring a lot of firefighter (in wheelchairs or not). They're also not hiring anyone to be Preisdent. Isn't it possible that the DOJ has job openings for D students in some capacity? Not every job opening there is for a litigator. And how does being a dwarf impede the mental capacity needed to be a lawyer?
 
2012-08-22 10:47:32 AM

propasaurus: cman: I am all for equal treatment.

Alas, it cannot always be this way.

Those in wheelchairs cannot be firemen for a very good reason; they are more likely to be a liability instead of an asset.

No one bats an eye when those who have D's for their grades in HS are declined for college, and yet that would also be discriminatory in many senses because a group of people are being treated better than them. Not everyone is meant to be the President of the United States. More likely they will be destined to work at McDonalds all of their life by no fault of their own. They were just born with an unluckiness of having a lower ability to retain knowledge.

Selection based upon skin color? Unacceptable. Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable. Selection based upon certain jobs that require physical activities? Yes, that is acceptable depending upon the circumstance

Well, not reading the article, since Instapundit has certainly mucked it up, but this being about the DOJ I don't think they're hiring a lot of firefighter (in wheelchairs or not). They're also not hiring anyone to be Preisdent. Isn't it possible that the DOJ has job openings for D students in some capacity? Not every job opening there is for a litigator. And how does being a dwarf impede the mental capacity needed to be a lawyer?


I was speaking in generalities. I was talking about it in a more broad sense rather than being tied to the topic at hand.
 
2012-08-22 10:49:02 AM
Explains the pending case of US v. Stonehenge.
 
2012-08-22 10:49:21 AM
I have to admire Glen Reynolds. This mutton-head just keeps on trying and trying. Through all the tears and badly-battered key-fingers, he continues to pound along, diligently descending into the fecculent haze of his own irrational rage and fear. He's bleated out this dreck for ages. It's been ridiculed, mocked and never seen as serious.

But, he continues.

He's like Drudge with a day job.
 
2012-08-22 10:50:20 AM

cman: propasaurus: cman: I am all for equal treatment.

Alas, it cannot always be this way.

Those in wheelchairs cannot be firemen for a very good reason; they are more likely to be a liability instead of an asset.

No one bats an eye when those who have D's for their grades in HS are declined for college, and yet that would also be discriminatory in many senses because a group of people are being treated better than them. Not everyone is meant to be the President of the United States. More likely they will be destined to work at McDonalds all of their life by no fault of their own. They were just born with an unluckiness of having a lower ability to retain knowledge.

Selection based upon skin color? Unacceptable. Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable. Selection based upon certain jobs that require physical activities? Yes, that is acceptable depending upon the circumstance

Well, not reading the article, since Instapundit has certainly mucked it up, but this being about the DOJ I don't think they're hiring a lot of firefighter (in wheelchairs or not). They're also not hiring anyone to be Preisdent. Isn't it possible that the DOJ has job openings for D students in some capacity? Not every job opening there is for a litigator. And how does being a dwarf impede the mental capacity needed to be a lawyer?

I was speaking in generalities. I was talking about it in a more broad sense rather than being tied to the topic at hand.


Copy that.
 
2012-08-22 10:50:41 AM
Look, the State Department hired midget Hillary Clinton, so the Justice Department needs to hire more midgets too.
 
2012-08-22 11:00:29 AM
Can I rent a hot dwarf chick?
 
2012-08-22 11:05:29 AM
The PJ Tatler has obtained documents from the Justice Department detailing efforts to recruit attorneys and staff who are dwarfs or who have "psychiatric disabilities" or "severe intellectual disabilities."

Well, I'd think more aggressive on-campus recruiting at the law schools would easily knock out the latter two. Law schools are packed to the rafters with those sorts.
 
2012-08-22 11:06:23 AM

Nabb1: The PJ Tatler has obtained documents from the Justice Department detailing efforts to recruit attorneys and staff who are dwarfs or who have "psychiatric disabilities" or "severe intellectual disabilities."

Well, I'd think more aggressive on-campus recruiting at the law schools would easily knock out the latter two. Law schools are packed to the rafters with those sorts.


Of course, with that last one, you might have a tough time dissuading them from pursuing a seat on the bench.
 
2012-08-22 11:10:17 AM
Hey anyone remember back when Bush was in office and he hired Alberto "I don't remember" Gomez to head it and packed the DOJ with fundified Regent grads who made other applicants have to go through a political purity test?

Yeah, good times.
 
2012-08-22 11:25:18 AM

quatchi: Hey anyone remember back when Bush was in office and he hired Alberto "I don't remember" Gomez to head it and packed the DOJ with fundified Regent grads who made other applicants have to go through a political purity test?

Yeah, good times.


At least they weren't dwarves.
 
2012-08-22 12:46:13 PM
i.imgur.com

What about antique furniture?
 
2012-08-22 01:37:04 PM
As long as they don't look at me with their little dwarfy eyeballs!
 
2012-08-22 01:39:57 PM
Oh, sure! Dwarfs get all the luck! Do you see them preferentially hiring freakishly tall people? Noooooo.

Hey, Justice Department hiring people! Call me! As an added bonus, any time I'm heading somewhere with all your new-hired dwarfs, it'll look like I'm leading a field trip! Instant advantage, us!

cman: Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable


Ability and achievement despite disadvantageous socioeconomic status *absolutely* deserves special consideration, particularly in college admissions. Otherwise, we wind up with a world where only the rich succeed, only the rich get richer and the cycle of poverty is invincible. It's bad enough as it is.
 
2012-08-22 01:48:18 PM

SFSailor: Oh, sure! Dwarfs get all the luck! Do you see them preferentially hiring freakishly tall people? Noooooo.

Hey, Justice Department hiring people! Call me! As an added bonus, any time I'm heading somewhere with all your new-hired dwarfs, it'll look like I'm leading a field trip! Instant advantage, us!

cman: Selection based upon social status? Unacceptable

Ability and achievement despite disadvantageous socioeconomic status *absolutely* deserves special consideration, particularly in college admissions. Otherwise, we wind up with a world where only the rich succeed, only the rich get richer and the cycle of poverty is invincible. It's bad enough as it is.


You make a valid point. I did not think of that when I wrote it.
 
2012-08-22 01:58:47 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

The DOJ already had a black, a woman, two Jews, and a cripple.
 
2012-08-22 01:58:57 PM
Decent of this administration to actively recruit Republicans.
 
2012-08-22 02:00:57 PM

Sybarite: As long as they don't look at me with their little dwarfy eyeballs!


www.theage.com.au

THE TRAIN DWARF IS REAL!
 
2012-08-22 02:01:36 PM
It's much better to make them apply, not hire them because they don't meet the social standards of typical interviewers, have them be unemployed and keep them on welfare, then eventually cut welfare.

Right, asstardmitter?
 
2012-08-22 02:02:13 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Decent of this administration to actively recruit Republicans.


Dwarf is not the same as mental midget.
 
2012-08-22 02:03:30 PM
I guess Liberty University must be struggling w/o Jerry Falwell.
 
2012-08-22 02:13:06 PM
Given who current sits in the WH I can see why they need the second two groups of people, but I wasn't aware that Obama was also insecure about his height.
 
2012-08-22 02:19:19 PM

cman: I was talking about it in a more broad sense


So you were talking about women.
 
2012-08-22 02:20:44 PM

img805.imageshack.us
 DISAPPROVES
 
2012-08-22 02:29:35 PM
GIS for Dwarf Lawyer

i.dailymail.co.uk
/hot
//you know it
 
2012-08-22 02:30:16 PM

cman: You make a valid point. I did not think of that when I wrote it.


Huh. I'll be damned. What's the proper farky-ing color for "might post something wildly misguided, but at least will think about it, if addressed rationally"? This is Fark, man! Aren't you supposed to call me a worse-than-Hitler libbiest-lib-who-ever-libbed demoncrap?

I honestly think I understand where the "no extra points for skin color or background" argument comes from, and understand why people make it, but I disagree with it: I also think there's some credence to the idea that even [arbitrary physical trait you'd rather not see used for bonus points] presents challenges that majority / not-unusual people don't face. And, historically, certain characteristics were nearly-inextricably tied to socioeconomic status, so using them as a shortcut did more good than harm. Yes, I think "I have faced more adversity because of who I am, a [characteristic]" is valid to earn bonus points, but I also understand how people could rationally disagree with that idea.

I do not understand how someone can rationally disagree with helping people who have succeeded and tried to better themselves and their situations despite socioeconomic disadvantage, starting the 100yd dash 10 yards behind the start line and hungry from a lack of breakfast.

And, for the record, I say all this knowing that I, a middle-ish class white male kid, not someone trying to self-justify using trait- or SES-based bonuses to get a chance.
 
2012-08-22 02:34:18 PM

Rich Cream: [img805.imageshack.us image 666x360]
 DISAPPROVES


I got that backwards.

/that's my cue to put the mouse down and step away from the keyboard.
 
2012-08-22 02:58:55 PM

Tax Boy: [upload.wikimedia.org image 242x318]

The DOJ already had a black, a woman, two Jews, and a cripple.



That was the DOI, but I can understand your confusion in being off by one lettes.
 
2012-08-22 03:08:59 PM
Eh, they've hired Regents graduates for years, and if those people aren't intellectually disabled, I don't know who is.
 
2012-08-22 03:09:54 PM

TrollingForColumbine: GIS for Dwarf Lawyer

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x312]
/hot
//you know it


Even better, her hands would make my cock look HUGE.
 
2012-08-22 03:56:16 PM
Your blog, it sucks.

/Chris Walken voice
 
2012-08-22 04:19:08 PM
There will never, ever, be a better time to be a retarded dwarf with a law degree who hears voices.
 
2012-08-22 04:48:35 PM

jjorsett: There will never, ever, be a better time to be a retarded dwarf with a law degree who hears voices.


If he solves crimes, we've got the next primetime hit from Fox
 
2012-08-22 04:54:15 PM

jjorsett: There will never, ever, be a better time to be a retarded dwarf with a law degree who hears voices.


i780.photobucket.com
Does a GED in law count?
 
2012-08-23 12:43:24 AM

SFSailor: cman: You make a valid point. I did not think of that when I wrote it.

Huh. I'll be damned. What's the proper farky-ing color for "might post something wildly misguided, but at least will think about it, if addressed rationally"? This is Fark, man! Aren't you supposed to call me a worse-than-Hitler libbiest-lib-who-ever-libbed demoncrap?

I honestly think I understand where the "no extra points for skin color or background" argument comes from, and understand why people make it, but I disagree with it: I also think there's some credence to the idea that even [arbitrary physical trait you'd rather not see used for bonus points] presents challenges that majority / not-unusual people don't face. And, historically, certain characteristics were nearly-inextricably tied to socioeconomic status, so using them as a shortcut did more good than harm. Yes, I think "I have faced more adversity because of who I am, a [characteristic]" is valid to earn bonus points, but I also understand how people could rationally disagree with that idea.

I do not understand how someone can rationally disagree with helping people who have succeeded and tried to better themselves and their situations despite socioeconomic disadvantage, starting the 100yd dash 10 yards behind the start line and hungry from a lack of breakfast.

And, for the record, I say all this knowing that I, a middle-ish class white male kid, not someone trying to self-justify using trait- or SES-based bonuses to get a chance.


Partisanship is what is destroying this country. I am more worried about working together to fix the problems than just putting my thumb up my butt blaming the other side for the country's ills.

As for your second point, the way that I processed that thought was that I was looking at it from a sort of aristocracy angle, where those who were Lords and had money had everything given to them. My thought process was that the good ole boy network which keeps poor people out due to their economic class is one of the biggest problems.
 
2012-08-23 01:33:33 AM
DOJ?
schizophrenics, and the 'intellectually disabled'?
oxymoron?
yeah! Just like the Secret Service.
If the shoe fits, wear it!
 
2012-08-23 09:44:55 AM

cman: My thought process was that the good ole boy network which keeps poor people out due to their economic class is one of the biggest problems.


We agree on this point. Except that it's more than just a good ole boy network (although maybe you include more than I do in using that term). It's tax code, laws, the very structure of our society that keep the rich rich and the poor poor. Our current taxes, laws and common political philosophies do much more to make sick people poor, and make rich people richer, than they do to make poor people rich. Socioeconomic-status-based affirmative action is just one small (very small) thing that can be done to impede the cycle.

I take it you agree, at least in part, with OWS -- or, at the very least, understand where some of their motivation comes from?
 
2012-08-23 09:58:21 AM

SFSailor: cman: My thought process was that the good ole boy network which keeps poor people out due to their economic class is one of the biggest problems.

We agree on this point. Except that it's more than just a good ole boy network (although maybe you include more than I do in using that term). It's tax code, laws, the very structure of our society that keep the rich rich and the poor poor. Our current taxes, laws and common political philosophies do much more to make sick people poor, and make rich people richer, than they do to make poor people rich. Socioeconomic-status-based affirmative action is just one small (very small) thing that can be done to impede the cycle.

I take it you agree, at least in part, with OWS -- or, at the very least, understand where some of their motivation comes from?


I understand where their motivation comes from. But, as for OWS ideology, I am not really much of a fan. I have no problem with the people running OWS. My only problem lies within how they want to change. OWS, more or less, wants to get far more Governmental oversight into these banks. I am against a huge expansion based upon principle alone. I try my best to shut out context because I like being consistent. Not only that, but I have other concerns, like many businesses who find loopholes and exploit them. Bureaucracy encourages red tape to the point where change is only superficial at best. Remind me again, how many corporations paid 0% taxes last year again?

The economy is driven by the consumer. OWS has very valid arguments. Thats where it should start, by consumers refusing to do business with unethical corporations.
 
2012-08-23 01:04:08 PM

Cythraul: I'm a schizophrenic dwarf with ADHD in need of a job. Where do I sign up?


With any of the DOJ officials who have been making Fark-able decisions recently.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report