I don't want diversity hires operating on me, giving me anesthesia, flying any plane I'm in, teaching my kids, or guarding my president or president to be. I also want the biggest, strongest, most agile, quick thinking and smartest people in the Secret Service to be well trained, well paid and able to have a voice in who their team members are. This is common sense. No place for DEI in any job, especially those that requires extraordinary skill, training and mental/physical ability. If they can't pass the hardest tests, execute at the hightest level, keep themselves in top shape or communicate clearly and accurately, they need not apply. Everyone should have an equal opportunity for a a great education but outcomes should derive from merit alone and nothing else.
Comments (6)
sorted by:
Agreed. I just saw the clip of the 3 or 4 women secret service agents guarding the beast after DJT was put inside. All cute with their pony tails. Sorry but that is a man's job. It's purely a matter of biology.
Those of us who have been saying this all along have been called racist, sexist, transphobe, white supremacist, etc - I hope more and more people realize what a bunch of BS DEI is, and that it helps no one.
As one of my business school professors used to say:
People should be given the equal opportunity to succeed.
And they should be given the equal opportunity to fail.
In other words, you want to be a USSS agent? Fine, take the same test as everyone. And if you fail, you fail. No weighting the scores to get a sub par person to pass.
WELL SAID!!!!
Dollars to donuts the reason so many parts are falling of planes right now is diversity hires.
ABSOLUTELY! [to use an overused word]
But in this case, consider that the fumble-inas were not placed on the detail that day because they had to BE fumble-inas [they did not have to mess up as part of the plan, the shot was not expected to miss] but to LOOK like fumble-inas and DEI hires from the bottom of the barrel.
[Also to telegraph: this is what we think of your protection, Trump.]
It creates / supports the Narrative that it was a security failure by incompetent LEs and DEI SSs.
Just as all the numerous sightings of the kid on the grounds and on the roof supported the Narrative that Crooks did it, lone shooter, etc.
The two-pronged Narrative was supported by the numerous very obvious sightings of the kid, and the obvious incompetence of the very noticeable female SS who did not resemble the strack SS in a suit image we expect . . .
I am now thinking that they overplayed the distractions so much, it points directly to obviously orchestrated distractions . . . We were watching a script played out . . .