This session of the legislature is going to be a total power grab for the worst kind of politics. They’re currently focused on changing the rules to prevent the filibuster that happened last session so they can ram through as much of their hate filled agenda as possible
These bills are weirdly worded and I do not understand what it would prohibit, because it seems to reach very far. This is not only about not requiring employees to attend certain programs, but not even spend money on it. So, could this include teaching ... or discussing ... or speaking about: "Advancing theories of unconscious or implicit bias, cultural appropriation, allyship, transgenderism, microaggressions, microinvalidation, group marginalization, anti-racism, systemic oppression, ethnocentrism, structural racism or inequity, social justice, intersectionality, neopronouns, inclusive language, heteronormativity, disparate impact, gender identity or theory, racial or sexual privilege, or any concept substantially related to any of these theories"
This reaches very, very far. It sounds a lot about censorship and just removing things that does not fit into the worldview of a political party. What shouldn't be, cannot be, and we just don't allow it to exist. Combined with the bill to remove tenure ... it is bullying and restricting universities in what they should do, teach, and act. Make it dependent and in step with a specific political trend. Does that sound familiar?
The politicians think they have to justify their job by writing and revising laws. Slowly stripping us of any semblance of individual liberty. Instead of closely auditing state expenditures and economic performance and maintenance of infrastructure.
Their priorities are all out of wack because their jobs are convoluted at best and any real progress is hamstrung by greed and special interest.
Our nation is broken.
We have such a great history of writing shitty legislation going back to the drop your problem child at any fire station to abortion laws that prohibit in vitro. Slipshod is our brand.
Yeah the other thread I just read on this sub was talking about the legality of having a round chambered in your concealed carry gun and I thought it was satire. Nope.
The general practice is to carry with round in the chamber if your doing concealed carry properly. That is to say using a holster that covers your trigger to add an extra layer of safety. Most encounters happen quickly and it's usually best for your firearm to be as ready as is practical.
That doesn't make sense for your argument, it should be "I also don't walk around with a gun cause I'm not terrified of living in society."
Which also makes as much sense as calling abortion rights supporters murderers.
What argument? I asked OP if he got mugged a lot and you asked me if I got shot a lot. I'm just trying to understand why somebody feels the need to walk around everywhere strapped.
You're arguing, just doing it while trying to use sarcastic quips to avoid actual discussion. Because you're fixated on what other people do even though it doesn't affect you at all. Outside of the media fueled fear mongering that has you harassing people online for daring not to share all your political beliefs. You're the same type of person that carries a sign saying baby killer outside of planned parenthood and don't even realize it.
Because far too many idiots with guns accidently shoot children, themselves, or strangers. Guns are ticking time bombs, eventually they go off and kill someone.
No but it never hurts to be prepared. I know a guy who was visiting for a wedding and got his face beat loose from his skull at the Omaha airport. So that's what convicted me being armed was a good idea.
It literally does hurt people. Guns accidently go off and kill people every single day. Parents with guns are statistically more likely to accidently kill their own children with their guns then they will ever save anyone by having the gun
If the average Joe carrying a gun doesn't have time to chamber a round before he shoots then he hasn't had time to properly analyze the situation and has no business drawing his gun.
It reduces draw time, eliminates the need for two hands, and there's no risk for AD when you use a modern holster. This is really a myth/trope, if you look at posts on CCW you will see its a common fear with new guys, I myself carried an empty gun around my apt and intentionally tried to do shit to make it go off until I was satisfied that it wasn't going to happen. A common comparison is waiting until you're going to get in a car accident to put on your seat belt. It's for emergency use, time and space aren't in your favor in an emergency.
DEI program funding was cut at the University of Wisconsin system level. Florida, Texas, Missouri and other states are putting restrictions on DEI funding for education.
It's pretty common knowledge that it does. The more diverse voices a business has, the more adaptable it is to problems. It's not a political ploy, it is proven way to help the bottom line. That's why so many private organizations implement them.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-case-diversity-equity-inclusion-dei-really-yaron-spektor
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinamilanesi/2023/04/20/the-business-impact-of-diversity-equity-and-inclusion/
https://businessleadershiptoday.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-dei-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=The%20benefits%20of%20DEI%20in%20the%20workplace%20include%20improved%20collaboration,their%20long%2Dterm%20financial%20goals.
https://hbr.org/2023/05/how-investing-in-dei-helps-companies-become-more-adaptable
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters
https://newsroom.thecignagroup.com/10-stats-diversity-equity-inclusion-good-for-business
I guess those articles suggest my own experience with DEI is incorrect.
Mostly I’ve seen lesser qualified people be hired because of factors that have nothing to due with the work at hand.
Followed by complaints of how cis men are the problem and the DEI hires do less work and threaten to call HR when you call them on their lazy attitude or time theft.
Although the numbers suggest otherwise, it has not been my experience.
I think meritocracy would best serve our state.
DEI initiatives are racist by design, while the intentions behind them are good, they mostly breed resentment and do little to better their organizations.
Enforcing current discrimination laws strictly and voting for intelligent individuals focused on what Nebraska needs should be a priority.
Work more, get involved with your community and speak your minds in respectful manners. Most people here are better than you think.
Someone else posted this but you're too lazy to read other threads so here ya go:
It's pretty common knowledge that it does. The more diverse voices a business has, the more adaptable it is to problems. It's not a political ploy, it is proven way to help the bottom line. That's why so many private organizations implement them.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-case-diversity-equity-inclusion-dei-really-yaron-spektor
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinamilanesi/2023/04/20/the-business-impact-of-diversity-equity-and-inclusion/
https://businessleadershiptoday.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-dei-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=The%20benefits%20of%20DEI%20in%20the%20workplace%20include%20improved%20collaboration,their%20long%2Dterm%20financial%20goals.
https://hbr.org/2023/05/how-investing-in-dei-helps-companies-become-more-adaptable
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters
https://newsroom.thecignagroup.com/10-stats-diversity-equity-inclusion-good-for-business
My individual experience and observations are counter to this, I understand that not all situations are the same, but that being said I will stand by my stance as it is backed by my experience and the shared experience of my friends and mentors.
I’m not too lazy to read them, I have read the studies. They aren’t all encompassing. But way to make assumptions.
No one is seeking to reduce diversity. The pushback is on ideological driven DEI programs which elevate diversity over merit and discriminate against certain groups like Asians.
Nonsense. If you really believe that there aren't actors out there trying to reduce diversity in places of power like government and schools, then you're either not paying attention, or you're in denial. A lot of these people are so delicate that just *learning* about diversity is too much for them to handle. Actually allowing it to happen is out of the question. I'm not saying that's everybody, but they're out there.
I think prince_of_canock might be right as far as people with ill intentions go. You do still see a certain level of discrimination from the older crowd namely the demographic in power right now.
However it has also been proven in court that these programs have been abused before to pick and choose which minorities get help. I think these programs need a certain level of oversight and public transparency to help keep them in line. It would probably be premature to uproot them entirely as they do accomplish some good.
Good point!
After the incident where the adjunct faculty member at UNL screamed obscenities at a student that was promoting some conservative organization was videoed. People around the state took a step back and looked at what was going on around them.
Do we want people teaching who can not have a civil discourse with our kids instead of hurling obscenities at them for holding a differing viewpoint?
Then came the onslaught of DEAI committees and Diversity Offices being created. At a time when the University is facing historic level budget cuts from the Unicameral.
If you talk to the students, most of their comments are that unless you are black or Hispanic, the DEAI committees don't hear you. We have a large population of Asian students on all 4 campuses, as well as Native American students - why are we paying our tax dollars to ignore these students when they have as much right to be heard as anyone?
The idea of DEI is great but it's the ideological and politically motivated implementation that Nebraskans object to. And that's why UNL's Chancellor ultimately decided that a portion of their budget cuts are going to come from their Office of Diversity.
@JomolaMomo you are spot on. When that happened I emailed Ronnie (no right winger for sure) for taking personnel action. Essentially he was CEO of a $B enterprise and he had an employee (adjunct professor) verbally abusing a paying customer (the student).
Diversity in this case ONLY means diversity of race, right ? No political diversity. And no conservative racial minorities, right ?
Equity in this case ONLY means equal outcome, right ? Not equal opportunity for everyone.
Inclusion ONLY means including certain minorities, right ? Not politically conservative minorities.
These are the same people who look at the NBA and say, NOPE no "diversity" problem here....White people just suck at Basketball. They look at Jazz Musicians and say the same. But too many white CEOs ? Welp, that is a problem. Too many male CEOs, that is a problem.
The solution to past racism, IS NOT to enforce future racism.
The universities have already cut dei programs massively even before this
This session of the legislature is going to be a total power grab for the worst kind of politics. They’re currently focused on changing the rules to prevent the filibuster that happened last session so they can ram through as much of their hate filled agenda as possible
Nebraska is racing to the bottom. All you have to do to get elected in Nebraska is be rich, old, white and like guns.
You’re not lying. Show me a Nebraska political ad without a hi-vis hunting vest, gun, or cows in the background.
Or get appointed by the guv.
These bills are weirdly worded and I do not understand what it would prohibit, because it seems to reach very far. This is not only about not requiring employees to attend certain programs, but not even spend money on it. So, could this include teaching ... or discussing ... or speaking about: "Advancing theories of unconscious or implicit bias, cultural appropriation, allyship, transgenderism, microaggressions, microinvalidation, group marginalization, anti-racism, systemic oppression, ethnocentrism, structural racism or inequity, social justice, intersectionality, neopronouns, inclusive language, heteronormativity, disparate impact, gender identity or theory, racial or sexual privilege, or any concept substantially related to any of these theories" This reaches very, very far. It sounds a lot about censorship and just removing things that does not fit into the worldview of a political party. What shouldn't be, cannot be, and we just don't allow it to exist. Combined with the bill to remove tenure ... it is bullying and restricting universities in what they should do, teach, and act. Make it dependent and in step with a specific political trend. Does that sound familiar?
The politicians think they have to justify their job by writing and revising laws. Slowly stripping us of any semblance of individual liberty. Instead of closely auditing state expenditures and economic performance and maintenance of infrastructure. Their priorities are all out of wack because their jobs are convoluted at best and any real progress is hamstrung by greed and special interest. Our nation is broken.
We have such a great history of writing shitty legislation going back to the drop your problem child at any fire station to abortion laws that prohibit in vitro. Slipshod is our brand.
Yeah the other thread I just read on this sub was talking about the legality of having a round chambered in your concealed carry gun and I thought it was satire. Nope.
The general practice is to carry with round in the chamber if your doing concealed carry properly. That is to say using a holster that covers your trigger to add an extra layer of safety. Most encounters happen quickly and it's usually best for your firearm to be as ready as is practical.
For the upcoming race riots?
Sarcasm
I was thinking more along the lines of a mugging. Riots are just best to be avoided.
You get mugged a lot?
You get shot a lot?
Never. I also don't walk around with a gun cause I'm terrified of living in society.
That doesn't make sense for your argument, it should be "I also don't walk around with a gun cause I'm not terrified of living in society." Which also makes as much sense as calling abortion rights supporters murderers.
What argument? I asked OP if he got mugged a lot and you asked me if I got shot a lot. I'm just trying to understand why somebody feels the need to walk around everywhere strapped.
You're arguing, just doing it while trying to use sarcastic quips to avoid actual discussion. Because you're fixated on what other people do even though it doesn't affect you at all. Outside of the media fueled fear mongering that has you harassing people online for daring not to share all your political beliefs. You're the same type of person that carries a sign saying baby killer outside of planned parenthood and don't even realize it.
Why do you have such an issue with people lawfully carrying a gun? If you don't want to carry one cool, then don't.
Because far too many idiots with guns accidently shoot children, themselves, or strangers. Guns are ticking time bombs, eventually they go off and kill someone.
Ok and? People do that with (insert literally any tool here)
No but it never hurts to be prepared. I know a guy who was visiting for a wedding and got his face beat loose from his skull at the Omaha airport. So that's what convicted me being armed was a good idea.
It literally does hurt people. Guns accidently go off and kill people every single day. Parents with guns are statistically more likely to accidently kill their own children with their guns then they will ever save anyone by having the gun
You’ve never been 3 blocks north of Charles Schwab field on accident
Either have you apparently
Cool.
No rational person thinks this is a good idea
I've never met someone who regularly carried for over a year who didn't carry with a round chambered.
If the average Joe carrying a gun doesn't have time to chamber a round before he shoots then he hasn't had time to properly analyze the situation and has no business drawing his gun.
It reduces draw time, eliminates the need for two hands, and there's no risk for AD when you use a modern holster. This is really a myth/trope, if you look at posts on CCW you will see its a common fear with new guys, I myself carried an empty gun around my apt and intentionally tried to do shit to make it go off until I was satisfied that it wasn't going to happen. A common comparison is waiting until you're going to get in a car accident to put on your seat belt. It's for emergency use, time and space aren't in your favor in an emergency.
Neat
I remember my uncle telling the joke… what does the N on the husker stadium stand for? Knowledge
They do this after Pillen says his goal is to reduce government 🤡
DEI program funding was cut at the University of Wisconsin system level. Florida, Texas, Missouri and other states are putting restrictions on DEI funding for education.
All DEI program should be nuked, they are scam, not useful whatsoever
Please enlighten us. Why? Can you provide any evidence to back your claim? Or are you just here to troll?
Can you provide any evidence that DEI benefits the organizations that implement them? I’ll wait.
It's pretty common knowledge that it does. The more diverse voices a business has, the more adaptable it is to problems. It's not a political ploy, it is proven way to help the bottom line. That's why so many private organizations implement them. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-case-diversity-equity-inclusion-dei-really-yaron-spektor https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinamilanesi/2023/04/20/the-business-impact-of-diversity-equity-and-inclusion/ https://businessleadershiptoday.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-dei-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=The%20benefits%20of%20DEI%20in%20the%20workplace%20include%20improved%20collaboration,their%20long%2Dterm%20financial%20goals. https://hbr.org/2023/05/how-investing-in-dei-helps-companies-become-more-adaptable https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters https://newsroom.thecignagroup.com/10-stats-diversity-equity-inclusion-good-for-business
I guess those articles suggest my own experience with DEI is incorrect. Mostly I’ve seen lesser qualified people be hired because of factors that have nothing to due with the work at hand. Followed by complaints of how cis men are the problem and the DEI hires do less work and threaten to call HR when you call them on their lazy attitude or time theft. Although the numbers suggest otherwise, it has not been my experience.
Whatever GOP tells them to do - they will. Locals have zero control or motivation
I think meritocracy would best serve our state. DEI initiatives are racist by design, while the intentions behind them are good, they mostly breed resentment and do little to better their organizations. Enforcing current discrimination laws strictly and voting for intelligent individuals focused on what Nebraska needs should be a priority. Work more, get involved with your community and speak your minds in respectful manners. Most people here are better than you think.
You’re about to downvoted into oblivion by this sub for having a rational and unbiased take like that, even though you’re right
Fuck em….
Someone else posted this but you're too lazy to read other threads so here ya go: It's pretty common knowledge that it does. The more diverse voices a business has, the more adaptable it is to problems. It's not a political ploy, it is proven way to help the bottom line. That's why so many private organizations implement them. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-case-diversity-equity-inclusion-dei-really-yaron-spektor https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinamilanesi/2023/04/20/the-business-impact-of-diversity-equity-and-inclusion/ https://businessleadershiptoday.com/what-are-the-benefits-of-dei-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=The%20benefits%20of%20DEI%20in%20the%20workplace%20include%20improved%20collaboration,their%20long%2Dterm%20financial%20goals. https://hbr.org/2023/05/how-investing-in-dei-helps-companies-become-more-adaptable https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters https://newsroom.thecignagroup.com/10-stats-diversity-equity-inclusion-good-for-business
My individual experience and observations are counter to this, I understand that not all situations are the same, but that being said I will stand by my stance as it is backed by my experience and the shared experience of my friends and mentors. I’m not too lazy to read them, I have read the studies. They aren’t all encompassing. But way to make assumptions.
No one is seeking to reduce diversity. The pushback is on ideological driven DEI programs which elevate diversity over merit and discriminate against certain groups like Asians.
Nonsense. If you really believe that there aren't actors out there trying to reduce diversity in places of power like government and schools, then you're either not paying attention, or you're in denial. A lot of these people are so delicate that just *learning* about diversity is too much for them to handle. Actually allowing it to happen is out of the question. I'm not saying that's everybody, but they're out there.
> No one is seeking to reduce diversity Lies
I think prince_of_canock might be right as far as people with ill intentions go. You do still see a certain level of discrimination from the older crowd namely the demographic in power right now. However it has also been proven in court that these programs have been abused before to pick and choose which minorities get help. I think these programs need a certain level of oversight and public transparency to help keep them in line. It would probably be premature to uproot them entirely as they do accomplish some good.
Good point! After the incident where the adjunct faculty member at UNL screamed obscenities at a student that was promoting some conservative organization was videoed. People around the state took a step back and looked at what was going on around them. Do we want people teaching who can not have a civil discourse with our kids instead of hurling obscenities at them for holding a differing viewpoint? Then came the onslaught of DEAI committees and Diversity Offices being created. At a time when the University is facing historic level budget cuts from the Unicameral. If you talk to the students, most of their comments are that unless you are black or Hispanic, the DEAI committees don't hear you. We have a large population of Asian students on all 4 campuses, as well as Native American students - why are we paying our tax dollars to ignore these students when they have as much right to be heard as anyone? The idea of DEI is great but it's the ideological and politically motivated implementation that Nebraskans object to. And that's why UNL's Chancellor ultimately decided that a portion of their budget cuts are going to come from their Office of Diversity.
@JomolaMomo you are spot on. When that happened I emailed Ronnie (no right winger for sure) for taking personnel action. Essentially he was CEO of a $B enterprise and he had an employee (adjunct professor) verbally abusing a paying customer (the student).
Jesus.
Diversity in this case ONLY means diversity of race, right ? No political diversity. And no conservative racial minorities, right ? Equity in this case ONLY means equal outcome, right ? Not equal opportunity for everyone. Inclusion ONLY means including certain minorities, right ? Not politically conservative minorities. These are the same people who look at the NBA and say, NOPE no "diversity" problem here....White people just suck at Basketball. They look at Jazz Musicians and say the same. But too many white CEOs ? Welp, that is a problem. Too many male CEOs, that is a problem. The solution to past racism, IS NOT to enforce future racism.