Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (486053)	5/7/2012 8:43:51 AM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Respond to of 793851

Bridge Bomber's Name Appears on Occupy Cleveland Bldg. Lease, Occupiers Mad at FBI Instead By publiusforum, Sunday at 1:04 pm -By Warner Todd Huston chicagonow.com In another story that should surprise no one, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reveals that the name of one of the Ohio bridge bombers nabbed by the FBI is so closely involved with Occupy Cleveland that his name appears on the lease of the rented warehouse they use for a headquarters. Instead of being ashamed, though, the Occupiers are mad at the FBI, apparently. When stories about the late April arrest of five Ohio men who had formed a plot to bomb some key bridges in Ohio first surfaced, the Old Media calledthem merely "anarchists." It wasn't long, though, before the New Media began to find out that they weren't just any amorphous "anarchists," but members of the Occupy Wall Street movement in Cleveland (Occupy Cleveland). No Old Media outlets reported this in the beginning despite how easy it was to find the facts. OWSers initially denied this claim saying it was just a smear job on them but now the newspaper in Cleveland finds that one of the accused, Anthony Hayne, 35, signed the lease of the building the Occupiers use for an HQ. No denying it now, eh OWSers? The reaction of the OWSers, though, needs to be examined. The CPD notes that instead of being furious at their own member for his desire to kill people and indulge wanton destruction they were mad at the FBI and more worried about bad publicity. Apparently having murderous bomber wannabes in their midst wasn't that big a deal. The paper notes that in a video of an OWS meeting one OWSer says, "We have a person facing terrorism charges on the lease of our warehouse. If this gets into the media, it would be a disaster." I guess having the terrorist among you isn't as bad as the bad publicity when people find out? Notice no condemnation of the terrorist, there. Another OWSer notes that they are trying send it all down the memory hole and have the landlord erase the accused's name from the lease. Another seems to think it is important that even though Hayne's name is on the lease he never had the rent money in his possession. Why this makes any difference or absolves them from his membership is beyond me. But the most telling part of the video was this… During the general assembly meeting, one leader asked the group, "Is it just me? Aren't you uncomfortable living in a warehouse where a guy has been arrested for terrorism? I don't want to live in a place and have the FBI show up." If this isn't hilarious! Instead of being ashamed that a would-be killer was one of their central members, they are disgusted that the FBI had once come to their warehouse HQ! They are more comfortable with a domestic terrorist being among them than they are with having the FBI around! That's pretty telling about what sort of people make up the Occupy movement.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (486053)	5/7/2012 10:46:17 AM
From: FJB	5 Recommendations Respond to of 793851

Obama campaign office staff lacks racial diversity, may violate civil rights law Published: 11:42 PM 05/06/2012 Read more: dailycaller.com Civil rights lawyers told The Daily Caller that President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign managers may have violated employment law by hiring an overwhelmingly white office staff for his campaign headquarters in Chicago. That skewed workforce is starkly visible in an April photo released by Obama’s Chicago office, which shows roughly 100 of the office’s staff. Only two of the people in the photo, far in the back, are clearly African-American, far below their 13 percent of the national population, and their 33-percent representation in Chicago. “Were I the general counsel of an employer in Chicago with the workforce in the picture … I would be concerned,” said Charles Shanor, a law professor at Emory University and the former general counsel at the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. “The workforce is overwhelmingly made up of young white males [and is] a demographic profile that could raise red flags under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act,” he told TheDC. If asked by managers, “‘Do we run a risk of legal liability?’ I would say ‘Sure,’” if a company’s picture showed only two African-Americans in a staff of 100, said Northeastern University’s Roger Abrams, a left-of-center law professor and former dean of the Rutgers School of Law. Skewed hiring happens, Abrams told TheDC, because “people are simply not aware of what they’re doing … [or that] the racism, the sexism, the discrimination on the basis of other grounds, are just a way of life.” “An underrepresentation of a particular group is a red flag … but underrepresentation by itself is not proof of a violation,” said Michael J. Goldberg, a law professor and former Acting Dean at Widener University. This is not the first time Obama’s campaigns have bumped up against the law. In 2008, his campaign managers choose to accept donations from unidentified donors, and then returned some of those funds after investigations by online media outlets. The Obama campaign did not respond to TheDC’s repeated emails about its hiring decision, even though the campaign’s hiring pattern clashes with Obama’s campaign-trail rhetoric. “We have to move forward, to the future we imagined in 2008, where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules,” he declared May 5 at his kick-off campaign speech to supporters in Ohio. Politico reported on April 18 that Stefanie Brown, who heads the campaign’s outreach to African-American voters, sent an urgent memo asking for help in “staffing up in states around the country, and I need your help to find qualified, African American candidates.” The plea may be a response to the campaign’s pallor problem, which could hurt its standing with its vital bloc of African-American voters. The image of Obama’s nearly all-white campaign staff “is not a surprise to me, because if you look at that [senior campaign] team you can’t see any diverse people,” an African-American diversity consultant told TheDC. “I hope it gets fixed,” the consultant said, adding, “you’d expect something better from him.” Officials with the Obama re-election campaign worry that turnout among African-American voters may fall below their participation level in 2008, partly because African-Americans have seen little recovery from the collapse of the 1994-2008 real estate bubble. Since that collapse, the median wealth of African-American families has been halved, according to the Pew Research Center. And less than half of black men between 18 and 30 have full-time jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Politically, the African-American community is being eclipsed by the Hispanic community, whose swing voters both the Democratic Party and the GOP are wooing. But the image of Obama’s nearly all-white office staff is also a red flag for lawsuits claiming “disparate impact” violations, said lawyers. Disparate impact law allows penalties against employers whose apparently color-blind practices unintentionally produce varying outcomes for women, African-Americans or Hispanics.