US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2494

On November 10 2015 02:33 xDaunt wrote:


I hadn't been following the story at all until late last week, and now I see that the president has resigned. None of this makes any sense to me. I would think that there'd be a record of what exactly went wrong somewhere (ie what the university specifically ignored), but I haven't been able to find any information on that point. So I'm legitimately curious as to what the university did wrong and thought that y'all might have some information. So far I'm wildly unsatisfied.

On November 10 2015 02:33 xDaunt wrote:


I hadn't been following the story at all until late last week, and now I see that the president has resigned. None of this makes any sense to me. I would think that there'd be a record of what exactly went wrong somewhere (ie what the university specifically ignored), but I haven't been able to find any information on that point. So I'm legitimately curious as to what the university did wrong and thought that y'all might have some information. So far I'm wildly unsatisfied.

On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:

The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable.

On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:

If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice?

On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:

If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice?

On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:

If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice?

On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.

For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem.

On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:

Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough?

On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:

Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments?

On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:


I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it.

Lawyers for one of the world’s largest meat producers, Tyson Foods, are urging the Supreme Court to take its side in a case that could affect the rights of low-wage workers and, more broadly, people who want to bring class-action lawsuits. Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo is one of four cases currently being argued before the court that concern group litigation — historically, a vehicle used by employees and consumers lacking the resources to press individual claims against large companies.

The Tyson case was originally filed by six immigrant workers in an Iowa chicken-processing factory over alleged unpaid overtime wages for the minutes — and accumulated hours — spent “donning and doffing” protective equipment, such as rubber gloves, an apron, a hairnet and, in some cases, earplugs, a hardhat and plastic, knife-proof belly guard. During the trial, Peg Bouaphakeo and her coworkers offered testimony and statistical estimates to prove just how much money they were owed, in light of the fact that the employer had failed to keep legally required records. This uncompensated time before and after work, the employees claimed, added up to significant “wage theft” for some fraction of a class of over 3,300 low-wage plaintiffs, though any individual’s case would be too small to litigate on its own. The jury awarded the class $5.8 million in unpaid wages.

In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Tyson Foods maintains that a class action would be improper, given variations in the time employees need to put on and remove protective gear. Although the company did not precisely document people’s work hours, say Tyson attorneys and business associations who have submitted friend-of-the-court briefs, employees should have to prove their claims one by one, not in a collective “trial by formula.” If the court sides with the corporation, it would expand its 2011 ruling in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, where female employees were found too diverse to proceed in a class action, despite their shared allegation of discrimination based on sex.

Three other cases before the Supreme Court examine the viability of group claims, though in a consumer rights’ context. Spokeo, Inc. v. Robbins asks whether someone who has suffered the violation of a statute but no concrete damage (in this case, for having inaccurate information about him published online), can bring a lawsuit on behalf of similarly situated people — a question with implications for civil rights litigation. Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez considers if a class action should be dismissed when a defendant offers to pay the named, representative plaintiff all the monetary damages he or she seeks (here, for unwanted text messages sent by a military recruiter). And DirecTV, Inc. v. Imburgia concerns a satellite TV contract that limits a customer’s legal recourse to individual arbitration, a private, non-judicial option bolstered by the Supreme Court in recent years.

In each of these consumer cases and Tyson Foods, it’s the corporate defendant that successfully convinced the justices to hear their appeal. (The Supreme Court generally has the choice whether to take or reject a request for review.) But according to attorney Cory Andrews at the non-profit, libertarian Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), which submitted friend-of-the-court briefs in all four of the above cases, the court’s willingness to adjudicate these issues reflects a suspicion of runaway lawsuits, rather than any pro-business agenda.

On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:


I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it.

The more that Republican voters hear about Ben Carson, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, the more they like them. Jeb Bush, not so much.

A new McClatchy-Marist poll conducted from Oct. 29 through Nov. 4 found that Carson has the most appeal as voters are more exposed to him, with 67 percent expressing that favorable view, and 20 percent saying they have a less favorable view the more they hear about the retired neurosurgeon. Rubio comes in second at 58 percent to 27 percent, followed by Cruz with 51 percent to 31 percent.

But the news isn’t as good for Bush, who has been attempting a reset from flagging poll numbers and a series of underwhelming debate performances. For the former Florida governor, 58 percent of Republican voters like him less after hearing more about him, compared with 32 percent who like him more.

And while Donald Trump is in second place in the overall Republican poll, nearly half of voters say they like him less the more they hear about him (49 percent to 44 percent).

Carson continues his hold on the No. 1 spot of the survey of Republican voters, with 24 percent, but he’s just 1 percentage point ahead of Trump, well within the margin of error. Rubio comes in third at 12 percent, and Cruz and Bush are tied for fourth with 8 percent each. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul is in fifth place with 5 percent. All other candidates are at 4 percent or lower.

The McClatchy-Marist poll also found that a majority of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents — 59 percent to 39 percent — say it’s more important to have a candidate who stands for conservative principles than one who can win.

On November 10 2015 02:51 GreenHorizons wrote:


What's hilarious is how "war on Christmas" is easier for right leaning white folk to swallow than racism at a university built in part by slaves. "But where is the documentation" give me a break.

On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:

No.The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school.

Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on.

On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:
Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob?