Govt of Alaska: Sarah Palin is Vice-President with McCain

[Tousi]

Exactly! Maybe his friend is afraid to admit that there were no deaf people there at the RNC??

It's no skin off my nose as it's been my life-long experience that the deaf population is pretty heavily liberal Democratic. Point is, at least there was an interpreter there and I couldn't care less how many deafies were there, if any.

 

[Deaf Mortgage]

Actually, Obama's plan addresses the issue of pre-existing conditions in regard to health insurance. It really isn't an issue with the ADA.

If an employee fails to disclose an existing disability and the possible need for accommodation to an employer at the time of hiring, they can legally be refused accommodation.

Umm... Ok... another way to look at it...

If I failed to disclose and I get hired, I get refused accommodation.

But..

If I tell and never get hired, does that mean equal opportunity act help me to get job? I doubt they can help if you have no proof.

Looks like dilemma between two option. I prefer to do first choice and then dare to challenge for accommodations when hired.

So how can we make sure we all get job when we needed and qualified for.

 

[Reba]

If a person is in a wheel chair, one can safely assume that they are experiencing mobility difficulties. If a person is wearing a hearing aid, one can safely assume that they have experienced a hearing loss. MS, as well, presents with observable symptoms, and the fact that someone is wearing dark glasses is far from the only observable symptom of blindess or visual difficulties. CP, as well, presents with observable physical symptoms.

Yes, all those things are visible in certain settings. The setting of a convention is hardly a normal environment. There are many people whose disabilities would not be easily discernible.

Obviously, the cameraman didn't have any of the persons of whom were so rare in the RNC audience to focus on. However, they were available to be focused on at the DNC.

Good for them. Give me some numbers, not perceptions, to compare.

Since I watched the same station for both the DNC and the RNC, one would expect the same production for both.

So you would think.

The fact that accurate numbers are not available is exactly a point we were discussing. Because numbers haven't been released, we have to go on the observable. And what was observable was that many more people with disabilites and people of color and diversity were observed at the DNC than at the RNC.

And who was in charge of what was "observable"?

 

[Reba]

It's no skin off my nose as it's been my life-long experience that the deaf population is pretty heavily liberal Democratic. Point is, at least there was an interpreter there and I couldn't care less how many deafies were there, if any.

From my interpreting experience, I know that many functions hire terps even if they are 99.999% certain that no deafies will be present. It's either expected or required to hire the terps, so they do it. It's just another check mark on their list of things to do when preparing for an event.

 

[Reba]

Like I have been told early that rich people are our source for job. :roll:

Well, how many poor people are doing the hiring?

Yes, it's true. Rich people hire people, buy products, and invest in production.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone; it's a secret.

 

[Deaf Mortgage]

Before you create another thread.. take your time to visit this site;

FactCheck.org

as some of your statements are misleading...

and as for the tax; see this;
FactCheck.org: A New Stitch in a Bad Pattern


cheers!

Excellent - I am looking at the website to verify it too. That why i said I want make sure sources are valid before say anything more.

 

[jillio]

Umm... Ok... another way to look at it...

If I failed to disclose and I get hired, I get refused accommodation.

But..

If I tell and never get hired, does that mean equal opportunity act help me to get job? I doubt they can help if you have no proof.

Looks like dilemma between two option. I prefer to do first choice and then dare to challenge for accommodations when hired.

So how can we make sure we all get job when we needed and qualified for.

Well, if you disclose, and are not hired based on disability, then you have legal recourse. If you don't disclose, and are fired because you cannot fulfill the job requirements because you failed to disclose the need for accommodation, you have no recourse.

 

[jillio]

Yes, all those things are visible in certain settings. The setting of a convention is hardly a normal environment. There are many people whose disabilities would not be easily discernible.


Good for them. Give me some numbers, not perceptions, to compare.


So you would think.


And who was in charge of what was "observable"?

So, you're telling me that a person in a wheelchair would not be observable in all settings? Which settings might those be?

According to you, the cameramen and the producer in the booth were in charge of what was observable. Are you suggesting that the producer intentionally told the cameramen not to photograph anyone with a visable disability at the RNC?

 

[Byrdie714]

I will need to look into that. Ummm... Interesting point of view.

ADA also only apply to business office that has more than 15 employees. If business is under 15 employee, they are not require to comply to ADA ruling. There are many loop holes that need to be addressed and to be considered as major factor.

I wonder how to re-write ADA ruling with pre-conditions disabilities. If they had a pre-condition, wouldn't they need to have accommodations? Its something to consider.

Now I am curious... is ADA same as Health Insurance? Health Insurance will reject clients that have pre-condition of something that cost a lot money.
I am curious what McCain and Palin's reason if promoting Disabilities. If they can change health plan to accept pre-condition and also change ADA to accept pre-condition history as back up accommodations?

This is definitely a food for our thoughts!

There are ways around the pre-existing clause when one has a medical condition/disability.

First if they are already insured and are changing insurance to their new employers--the previous insurance company by law has to provide a certificate of coverage and under the new employer's insurance--they can't enforce the pre-existing clause.

Now if you have no insurance and are getting insurance for the first time, I would wait until the pre-exisiting clause passes as many health insurance companies have a waiting period on pre-exisiting conditions.

 

[Byrdie714]

Well, if you disclose, and are not hired based on disability, then you have legal recourse. If you don't disclose, and are fired because you cannot fulfill the job requirements because you failed to disclose the need for accommodation, you have no recourse.

It's a "catch-22". Which...sucks!

The issue with the above is that there are certain medical conditions/disabilities that many employers aren't aware and if one reveals their condition/disability, it can either make or break them.

Definately a tricky line.

 

[fredfam1]

Really? You mean you can just look at someone on camera and know they are deaf, have mobility problems or a chronic disease or epilepsy, are missing a limb that's on the other side, or blind but not wearing tell-tale shades, or have ADD or autism or MS or CP? Wow! If you can do that just by looking why should people bother going to doctors for an expensive diagnosis?

I thought that has long been the complaint of people with disabilities that so many of their disabilities are ignored or downplayed precisely because they aren't obvious. This is a revelation to me.


The cameramen pan the audience looking for "interesting" subject matter, whatever that may be. The director in the control room decides which views will be shown.

I guess those 24 years that I worked in public affairs and media relations were a waste of experience. :roll:



People of all descents can be decent.

Anyway, if you have some accurate numbers of proof comparing disabilities and races that attended each convention, and their reasons for attending, then we can have a serious discussion. Otherwise, we're just falling into the public relations game that has been set by media.

I'm classified by the VA as 40% service connected disabled. Yet I can walk,
sit, (not very long) work, (If I am very, very cautious and wear a back brace)
and the only thing I don't do well is bend at the neck and waist very well. No one could tell I was disabled just lookin at me. Unless I show em my scar!

 

[Maria]

Sarah Palin does meet both of your exception because of you are pro-life (it means against all of abortion) and possibly against on gay rights as well, correct me if I'm wrong.

Maria, she's governor in your former state, it does gave you an good memory.

It is not just, because I was in my former state. I think, it is because, she did it a good job... a well good job. And, yes I am pro-life and I opposed abortion when it is given a life in a mother's womb on Day One once it conceived. A living cell products a life.

 

[Byrdie714]

It is not just, because I was in my former state. I think, it is because, she did it a good job... a well good job. And, yes I am pro-life and I opposed abortion when it is given a life in a mother's womb on Day One once it conceived. A living cell products a life.

This question has been asked before and it seems no one has an answer to it.

In regards to Sarah Palin stance is that she is pro-life and pro-death penalty.

How can one be pro-life and pro-death penalty? You are still taking a life. :roll:

 

[Tousi]

This question has been asked before and it seems no one has an answer to it.

In regards to Sarah Palin stance is that she is pro-life and pro-death penalty.

How can one be pro-life and pro-death penalty? You are still taking a life. :roll:

Because their welcome on earth are at opposing ends of one another, lol.

 

[Foxrac]

Maria, that's fine with you, if happens then that your choice.

I was just point about happens to varies of women, however Sarah Palin could talk whatever she want, no offense to her or you, also I don't believe in government who control our life either, except for some of stuff.

On 3rd paragraph of my post #203, it's just like compare to about what happen if we ban on gun then crime would skyrocket, just example.

 

[Reba]

So, you're telling me that a person in a wheelchair would not be observable in all settings? Which settings might those be?

Not all people with mobility problems ride in wheelchairs. Also, disabilities that involve wheelchairs are a small percentage of the disabled population. I'm sure you are aware of that.

According to you, the cameramen and the producer in the booth were in charge of what was observable. Are you suggesting that the producer intentionally told the cameramen not to photograph anyone with a visable disability at the RNC?

I didn't say that. I said the control room director picks which camera views will be broadcast. I also don't necessarily believe the director said to avoid people with disabilities but he could have said to focus on other shots, such as the crazy hats, awkwardly bebopping middle-agers, cute kids, distinguished military veterans, pretty girls, or whatever.

If they had focused on disabilities and ethnicities, viewers might have complained that they were exploiting them.

The point is, the guy in the control booth has a selection of shots to chose from, and shows what he wants to show.

Aside from all that, if you have proof that the RNC didn't support disabled convention participants please present it. If you just want to hash over convention coverage, I'm starting to repeat myself so I'm done.

 

[Reba]

I'm classified by the VA as 40% service connected disabled. Yet I can walk,
sit, (not very long) work, (If I am very, very cautious and wear a back brace)
and the only thing I don't do well is bend at the neck and waist very well. No one could tell I was disabled just lookin at me. Unless I show em my scar!

Exactly!

If you are ever at a televised convention, maybe you should flash your scar; that would be an attention getter!

All kidding aside, thank you for your service to our country.

 

[fredfam1]

Exactly!

If you are ever at a televised convention, maybe you should flash your scar; that would be an attention getter!

All kidding aside, thank you for your service to our country.

Thank you too Reba. I salute you! Even if you weren't an Ocifer. (were you)

I'd flash it in a heart beat!

 

[Reba]

Thank you too Reba. I salute you! Even if you weren't an Ocifer. (were you)

An officer? No, I worked for a living, ha, ha. (Old military joke.) I was enlisted, a Chief Journalist.

I'd flash it in a heart beat!

All right!

 

[jillio]

Not all people with mobility problems ride in wheelchairs. Also, disabilities that involve wheelchairs are a small percentage of the disabled population. I'm sure you are aware of that.


I didn't say that. I said the control room director picks which camera views will be broadcast. I also don't necessarily believe the director said to avoid people with disabilities but he could have said to focus on other shots, such as the crazy hats, awkwardly bebopping middle-agers, cute kids, distinguished military veterans, pretty girls, or whatever.

If they had focused on disabilities and ethnicities, viewers might have complained that they were exploiting them.

The point is, the guy in the control booth has a selection of shots to chose from, and shows what he wants to show.

Aside from all that, if you have proof that the RNC didn't support disabled convention participants please present it. If you just want to hash over convention coverage, I'm starting to repeat myself so I'm done.

No, not all people with mobility problems use wheel chairs. But the DNC certainly had several that were seen on camera.

Funny, that didn't seem to be a fear during the DNC.

I didn't say that they didn't support them. I said they weren't there.