Have a simple question or two . Does it make a difference to you if it is true? Second ,what is he incentive? She is the hit person for Rowe v Wade ? What if her record is impeccable ? Third , have the fbi investigate for five days and see if there is anything they can do to either confirm or dispute her accusations . They still could get him confirmed by 10/10.
Dirty politics is practiced by left and right.
Aldrich Ames of the CIA and Robert Hanssen of the FBI both underwent a series of polygraph examinations while employed by their respective agencies without any difficulties. Both were later exposed as working for Soviet intelligence. Those two, along with Johnny Walker of our navy, had done more damage to U.S. security than anyone since the Rosenbergs. So much for the accuracy of "lie detectors".
He is the pitcher for Oregon State who pled guilty to molesting his 6 year old niece.
Ed, I am computer illiterate. Do they not have one of those sarcasm emoticons thingies or did you just forget to include it?
Wouldn't it be great if someday the American voter would be smart enough to do their homework on candidates so that they know who to vote for before they see the ballot and not be thrown off by any "next page" on the ballot? I know, it's a pipe dream....
While I like where you are going with this (always love oversight with the ability to take action immediately), I also know that in order to make money you have to spend money. No more than 2 weeks ago this board, and other places, were ablaze about the ineptitude of the CAF. The disorganization, the lack of attention to detail, etc. etc. Now, I agree that having a bunch of people standing around like it's a union shop fixing roads isn't ideal. But that doesn't mean we should go with your implication of cutting people, either. It might mean getting rid of the slackers so WSU could hire people with drive! But if we want the CAF to grow, we need more people on staff. Maybe just different people. ? But if your trying to imply we need to CUT people, I'd disagree.
My bad...I truly didn't intend to set the post off he rails by bringing up the name Kavanaugh. Was only trying to point out the long term harm what Gesser did and that it isn't a "that a boy good for you getting down a 24 year olds pants". And IF true what Kavanugh did it clearly impacted Susan Blasey Ford and why she had been in counseling 30 years later.
I don't know if this is the case at WSU, but I worked in state government for 26 years as a "director". Nearly 100% of my agency's managers– including those with a director's title– were "working" managers, meaning they had the dual responsibility of producing work while managing others who were producing work. We simply didn't have the resources to relieve managers/directors of day-to-day, front line work. In some cases, titles alone don't tell the whole story.
Agreed on this. Titles mean something but many times, it goes to the flow chart of responsibility. So there are 20 "Directors". Whoopty skip. Whom answers to whom should be the REAL question. I like Loyals concept that we'll never be able to implement... See what the list looked like before Moos and what it looks like now. And I'd LOVE to see what it looked like before Moos and then during his 3rd year. THAT would be a VERY telling tale. But sera, conjecture now.
Gonna take some time people. Someone can be a lump of lard, doing nothing and it'll take a good 6 months to a year to get rid of them. Let alone the process of finding the weak links could take years. This whole process of cleaning house and making it a well oiled machine is going to take... time. lots of time.An additional point - when someone is a "director" or "assistant director", that means they are "administrative professionals". As AP staff, they have much more flexible job descriptions and expectations than if they were "civil service" staff (which have state-defined job descriptions). As AP, they also have much more flexibility to their schedules (hence the travel and long hours of fundraising) and don't get paid overtime. So there are fairly strong economic incentives to hire people as AP, give them a nice title, and then work them like dogs.Agreed on this. Titles mean something but many times, it goes to the flow chart of responsibility. So there are 20 "Directors". Whoopty skip. Whom answers to whom should be the REAL question. I like Loyals concept that we'll never be able to implement... See what the list looked like before Moos and what it looks like now. And I'd LOVE to see what it looked like before Moos and then during his 3rd year. THAT would be a VERY telling tale. But sera, conjecture now.
Anyways, my point. I don't mind more people... as long as they're doing their jobs! Just because there are people not doing their jobs, does not mean you should cut the job. If everyone is doing their job and THEN we have people sitting around, THEN cut. As it is, we have a whole bunch of jobs that need to be done. The laundry list that gets spelled out here is proof of jobs needing to be done. Get people in there that can do them but don't cut the jobs.
Might also add. Anyone ever try to fire someone from a state position?
