Haley’s daughter gets state job; questions of nepotism

[faithful_servant]

Originally Posted by dabateman

I think my point is that it IS the governor's influence if it went as you said. The governor's influence is not merely active, it is also passive. And the shop manager thinking that it was appropriate in any way to express gratitude to the governor via hiring the daughter is nepotism. Nepotism is not merely the mother influencing the manager to hire the daughter. Nepotism is also the manager feeling obligated to hire the daughter either as a means to show gratitude for his own appointment or other reasons.



The difference becomes moot if you're trying to split hairs as you are.

WRONG!!! Nepotism is active, not passive. Without influence or pressure from the Govs. office, there is NO nepotism. By your standard, someone could make someone else guilty of nepotism who never engaged in it to any extent and that's not kosher. You are asuuming that the shop manager feels obligated, but if she doesn't feel that way and is simply grateful and took this opportunity to show her appreciation by hiring the young lady, that FAR from nepotism. Your problem is that you are assuming FAR too much. You assume pressure from the Govs. office or you assume obligation. No evidence of either one. If this was before a judge, you'd get your ass handed to you in about .01 seconds. NO proof, just assumptions and unsupported allegations.

[dabateman]

Originally Posted by faithful_servant

WRONG!!! Nepotism is active, not passive. Without influence or pressure from the Govs. office, there is NO nepotism. By your standard, someone could make someone else guilty of nepotism who never engaged in it to any extent and that's not kosher. You are asuuming that the shop manager feels obligated, but if she doesn't feel that way and is simply grateful and took this opportunity to show her appreciation by hiring the young lady, that FAR from nepotism. Your problem is that you are assuming FAR too much. You assume pressure from the Govs. office or you assume obligation. No evidence of either one. If this was before a judge, you'd get your ass handed to you in about .01 seconds. NO proof, just assumptions and unsupported allegations.

I disagree. First, this isn't in a court of law, this is in the court of public opinion. So to suggest that one have concrete evidence is unnecessary. Was it not you who brought up Obama's family getting special treatment from the INS. That is nepotism even if the President is not personally guilty. Nepotism is favoritism being shown to family members. Even if the Governor or the President did not actively support the treatment of their family, individuals in their employ did. And it may not even be favoritism. It's the question of favoritism. And that question would never be asked if the actions weren't taken...

[Infidel Dog]

Originally Posted by dabateman

And it's not the kid. It's the mother. Quit spinning out of desperation.

Who says it's the mother? Nobody I've read has produced any proof, or even support for that suggestion. Among Nikki Haley's many responsibility her department manages the department, that supervises the building, that holds the gift shop. So what? Do you have some proof saying the mother applied some pressure somewhere down that chain to get her kid an 8 buck an hour part time job? Because if you don't, who's spinning? If you don't, one has to give the benefit of the doubt, and assume the kid got the job the same way any of the other employees (I think they said 12) did.

[dabateman]

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Who says it's the mother? Nobody I've read has produced any proof, or even support for that suggestion. Among Nikki Haley's many responsibility her department manages the department, that supervises the building, that holds the gift shop. So what? Do you have some proof saying the mother applied some pressure somewhere down that chain to get her kid an 8 buck an hour part time job? Because if you don't, who's spinning? If you don't, one has to give the benefit of the doubt, and assume the kid got the job the same way any of the other employees (I think they said 12) did.

The question is one asked of the mother, not the child...

If you would quit shifting goal posts, it would be much appreciated...

[faithful_servant]

Originally Posted by dabateman

I disagree. First, this isn't in a court of law, this is in the court of public opinion. So to suggest that one have concrete evidence is unnecessary. Was it not you who brought up Obama's family getting special treatment from the INS. That is nepotism even if the President is not personally guilty. Nepotism is favoritism being shown to family members. Even if the Governor or the President did not actively support the treatment of their family, individuals in their employ did. And it may not even be favoritism. It's the question of favoritism. And that question would never be asked if the actions weren't taken...

You left out three words that make a world of difference -
Nepotism is favoritism being shown to family members BY FAMILY MEMBERS.

You didn't ask if there was nepotism happening, you flat out stated that it was. I have no issue with the shop manager being asked if she was pressured by the govs. office to hire the girl, but that wasn't what you were saying. You said that what happened was nepotism with no evidence to support that accusation other than the fact that the gov's. daughter had a state paid job.

[dabateman]

Originally Posted by faithful_servant

You left out three words that make a world of difference -
Nepotism is favoritism being shown to family members BY FAMILY MEMBERS.

You didn't ask if there was nepotism happening, you flat out stated that it was. I have no issue with the shop manager being asked if she was pressured by the govs. office to hire the girl, but that wasn't what you were saying. You said that what happened was nepotism with no evidence to support that accusation other than the fact that the gov's. daughter had a state paid job.

Kinda like you did with the President and his family... Hmmm...

It couldn't possibly be that I was suggesting, as I have time and again, it's not about the actual... It's about the image.

[faithful_servant]

Originally Posted by dabateman

Kinda like you did with the President and his family... Hmmm...

It couldn't possibly be that I was suggesting, as I have time and again, it's not about the actual... It's about the image.

Sorry, but you don't get to do that... You directly accused the gov. of nepotism with NO proof that it was happening and then tried to spin your way out of it. You tried moving the goalposts and claimed that all you wanted was for the question to be asked, but you had already answered it in your mind (and a previous post). Now you're talking about image, something entirely new to the discussion. Keep moving those goalposts and maybe you'll find a place for them where you don't come off as a hack.

[dabateman]

Originally Posted by faithful_servant

Sorry, but you don't get to do that... You directly accused the gov. of nepotism with NO proof that it was happening and then tried to spin your way out of it. You tried moving the goalposts and claimed that all you wanted was for the question to be asked, but you had already answered it in your mind (and a previous post). Now you're talking about image, something entirely new to the discussion. Keep moving those goalposts and maybe you'll find a place for them where you don't come off as a hack.

There is no goalpost moving. It's a conditional positions...

You asserted that what is going on with Haley is LIKE the Obama family situation. You have asserted prior that is nepotism. I agreed. If by your standards there are no connections between the beneficiary and official yet the beneficiary gets special treatment for merely being related to the official, that's nepotism.

[faithful_servant]

Originally Posted by faithful_servant

So how do you feel about the President's relatives getting preferential treatment from INS and our courts??

Originally Posted by dabateman

There is no goalpost moving. It's a conditional positions...

You asserted that what is going on with Haley is LIKE the Obama family situation. You have asserted prior that is nepotism. I agreed. If by your standards there are no connections between the beneficiary and official yet the beneficiary gets special treatment for merely being related to the official, that's nepotism.

No comparison made whatsoever, just a simple question asked. I asserted NOTHING, you just assumed that I did because it's easier to argue with me about something you wanted me to say than to actually address my points.

[dabateman]

Originally Posted by faithful_servant

No comparison made whatsoever, just a simple question asked. I asserted NOTHING, you just assumed that I did because it's easier to argue with me about something you wanted me to say than to actually address my points.

You asked if it's like Obama. It is.

Next?