Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Democrats and their hoax call for diversity in courts.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Democrats and their hoax call for diversity in courts.

    Skipping over the fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans (76%) want old Joe to pick the most qualified candidate to replace Breyer on the SCOTUS (to "consider all possible nominees") regardless of race or gender and the Democrat's grim determination to not give a... darn. Even most Democrats (54%) think old Joe is wrong to make the pick based on filling a quota.

    Source: Democrats Don't Actually Care About Diversity in the Courts


    Democrats invoke diversity and accuse their political opponents of racism so often it's become a source of mockery from across the political spectrum. But leading Democrats' real record on the issues of race and gender paints a different picture. Take just one example that's come to the forefront of the news due to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's announced retirement: the federal courts.

    The leading (white) men in charge of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process—President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Judiciary Committee member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)—all talk a big game on the importance of diversity in the federal courts.

    "Now, with his new vacancy on the court, President Biden will have an opportunity to make history by nominating the first-ever Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court," Schumer said. "Let's face the reality here," Durbin added. "We had 115 Supreme Court Justices in the history of the United States. 108 have been white men. I really think there is room for us to consider not only women, but women of color to fill these vacancies."

    But what are these Democrats' real records when it comes to supporting female and minority judicial nominees? In 2003, and for the following two years, Senate Democrats—including then-senator Joe Biden—filibustered the nomination of California Supreme Court justice Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit, the second-highest court in the land and a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. There was much talk at the time among close observers of the courts that Brown would likely be the first Black female Supreme Court justice. But liberals smeared Brown even before she was confirmed to the California Supreme Court, inexplicably calling the first Black woman nominated to the position "unqualified" to serve. And, despite her sterling credentials, they continued to trash her after President George W. Bush nominated her to the appellate court.

    Democrats' media allies parroted baseless liberal talking points with the aim of destroying an accomplished Black woman's reputation, all because she was nominated by a Republican president and could've become the first Black female Supreme Court Justice. State-sponsored media recycled left-wing salvos against Brown. And during Brown's 2003 committee hearing, both Schumer and Durbin repeated the smear that she was unqualified.

    Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.

    In 2005, Hilary Shelton—then the director of the NAACP's Washington chapter—accused the Bush administration of seeking "to get some kind of credit because she is the first African-American woman nominated to the D.C. circuit." Fast forward to this month, when the NAACP tweeted, "President Biden is right. Appointing a Black woman to [the] Supreme Court is 'long overdue.' Diversity of background & perspective is critical on a court composed of white men for most of our nation's history."

    Why the change in rhetoric? Perhaps this is more about partisan politics than about actually increasing racial diversity in the federal courts.

    The Democrats' racist blockade of Judge Brown is not an isolated incident. In 2001, Bush nominated Miguel Estrada to serve on the same D.C. Circuit Court. Estrada might be on the Supreme Court today if Democrats hadn't blocked him because "he is Latino." Schumer filibustered Estrada seven times to prevent him becoming the first Latino on the Supreme Court.

    The truth is that Democrats only pretend to want more diversity on the federal bench. At the Article III Project—a conservative judicial nonprofit this author leads—we document all the times Democrats had the chance to support women and minority judicial nominees made by Presidents Bush 41, Bush 43 and Trump. When presented with the opportunity to expand diversity on the federal bench during Republican presidencies, Democrats consistently vote against women, Black, Asian, gay, Hispanic and other minority judicial nominees. In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, Schumer voted against 52 women and minority judicial nominees, Durbin voted against 35 and Whitehouse—who belongs to an all-white beach club in Newport, Rhode Island—voted against 28.

    If diversity were their priority, why would Democrats consistently vote against the women and minority judicial nominees of Republican presidents? Because Democrats don't really care about diversity; they care about power. And they always have. In fact, some are even calling to impeach the Supreme Court's only Black justice, Clarence Thomas, because they don't like his wife's politics. This was after Democrats attempted to derail his confirmation 30 years ago with claims of sexual harassment that then-Senate Judiciary chairman Joe Biden knew were false. Even now, a liberal Black judge from South Carolina under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy, Judge Michelle Childs—who has the support of the highest-ranking Black member of Congress, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—is under attack by leftists for being insufficiently progressive.

    According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent. Biden and his allies are attempting to use the next Supreme Court pick to revive their flagging support among key constituencies, and that's understandable from a political perspective. So the Supreme Court may soon have two more Black members than Whitehouse's beach club does. But Americans shouldn't be fooled into thinking Democrats actually care about diversity. Their priority is power.



    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    The Democrats make their biennial trip into black neighborhoods to toss out a bone and then retreat to their gated enclaves to take their support for granted for the next two years. After decades of wondering how long such a ruse could last it is heartening to see some large cracks forming in that plantation wall:

    According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent.


    And the following perfectly encapsulates old Joe's very long history of blatant racism:

    Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.


    Stopping a black woman was "the most important vote of his career."

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  • #2
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Skipping over the fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans (76%) want old Joe to pick the most qualified candidate to replace Breyer on the SCOTUS (to "consider all possible nominees") regardless of race or gender and the Democrat's grim determination to not give a... darn. Even most Democrats (54%) think old Joe is wrong to make the pick based on filling a quota.

    Source: Democrats Don't Actually Care About Diversity in the Courts


    Democrats invoke diversity and accuse their political opponents of racism so often it's become a source of mockery from across the political spectrum. But leading Democrats' real record on the issues of race and gender paints a different picture. Take just one example that's come to the forefront of the news due to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's announced retirement: the federal courts.

    The leading (white) men in charge of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process—President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Judiciary Committee member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)—all talk a big game on the importance of diversity in the federal courts.

    "Now, with his new vacancy on the court, President Biden will have an opportunity to make history by nominating the first-ever Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court," Schumer said. "Let's face the reality here," Durbin added. "We had 115 Supreme Court Justices in the history of the United States. 108 have been white men. I really think there is room for us to consider not only women, but women of color to fill these vacancies."

    But what are these Democrats' real records when it comes to supporting female and minority judicial nominees? In 2003, and for the following two years, Senate Democrats—including then-senator Joe Biden—filibustered the nomination of California Supreme Court justice Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit, the second-highest court in the land and a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. There was much talk at the time among close observers of the courts that Brown would likely be the first Black female Supreme Court justice. But liberals smeared Brown even before she was confirmed to the California Supreme Court, inexplicably calling the first Black woman nominated to the position "unqualified" to serve. And, despite her sterling credentials, they continued to trash her after President George W. Bush nominated her to the appellate court.

    Democrats' media allies parroted baseless liberal talking points with the aim of destroying an accomplished Black woman's reputation, all because she was nominated by a Republican president and could've become the first Black female Supreme Court Justice. State-sponsored media recycled left-wing salvos against Brown. And during Brown's 2003 committee hearing, both Schumer and Durbin repeated the smear that she was unqualified.

    Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.

    In 2005, Hilary Shelton—then the director of the NAACP's Washington chapter—accused the Bush administration of seeking "to get some kind of credit because she is the first African-American woman nominated to the D.C. circuit." Fast forward to this month, when the NAACP tweeted, "President Biden is right. Appointing a Black woman to [the] Supreme Court is 'long overdue.' Diversity of background & perspective is critical on a court composed of white men for most of our nation's history."

    Why the change in rhetoric? Perhaps this is more about partisan politics than about actually increasing racial diversity in the federal courts.

    The Democrats' racist blockade of Judge Brown is not an isolated incident. In 2001, Bush nominated Miguel Estrada to serve on the same D.C. Circuit Court. Estrada might be on the Supreme Court today if Democrats hadn't blocked him because "he is Latino." Schumer filibustered Estrada seven times to prevent him becoming the first Latino on the Supreme Court.

    The truth is that Democrats only pretend to want more diversity on the federal bench. At the Article III Project—a conservative judicial nonprofit this author leads—we document all the times Democrats had the chance to support women and minority judicial nominees made by Presidents Bush 41, Bush 43 and Trump. When presented with the opportunity to expand diversity on the federal bench during Republican presidencies, Democrats consistently vote against women, Black, Asian, gay, Hispanic and other minority judicial nominees. In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, Schumer voted against 52 women and minority judicial nominees, Durbin voted against 35 and Whitehouse—who belongs to an all-white beach club in Newport, Rhode Island—voted against 28.

    If diversity were their priority, why would Democrats consistently vote against the women and minority judicial nominees of Republican presidents? Because Democrats don't really care about diversity; they care about power. And they always have. In fact, some are even calling to impeach the Supreme Court's only Black justice, Clarence Thomas, because they don't like his wife's politics. This was after Democrats attempted to derail his confirmation 30 years ago with claims of sexual harassment that then-Senate Judiciary chairman Joe Biden knew were false. Even now, a liberal Black judge from South Carolina under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy, Judge Michelle Childs—who has the support of the highest-ranking Black member of Congress, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—is under attack by leftists for being insufficiently progressive.

    According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent. Biden and his allies are attempting to use the next Supreme Court pick to revive their flagging support among key constituencies, and that's understandable from a political perspective. So the Supreme Court may soon have two more Black members than Whitehouse's beach club does. But Americans shouldn't be fooled into thinking Democrats actually care about diversity. Their priority is power.



    Source

    © Copyright Original Source



    The Democrats make their biennial trip into black neighborhoods to toss out a bone and then retreat to their gated enclaves to take their support for granted for the next two years. After decades of wondering how long such a ruse could last it is heartening to see some large cracks forming in that plantation wall:

    According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent.


    And the following perfectly encapsulates old Joe's very long history of blatant racism:

    Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.


    Stopping a black woman was "the most important vote of his career."
    Well she was conservative so she wasn't black.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      Skipping over the fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans (76%) want old Joe to pick the most qualified candidate to replace Breyer on the SCOTUS (to "consider all possible nominees") regardless of race or gender and the Democrat's grim determination to not give a... darn. Even most Democrats (54%) think old Joe is wrong to make the pick based on filling a quota.

      Source: Democrats Don't Actually Care About Diversity in the Courts


      Democrats invoke diversity and accuse their political opponents of racism so often it's become a source of mockery from across the political spectrum. But leading Democrats' real record on the issues of race and gender paints a different picture. Take just one example that's come to the forefront of the news due to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's announced retirement: the federal courts.

      The leading (white) men in charge of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process—President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Judiciary Committee member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)—all talk a big game on the importance of diversity in the federal courts.

      "Now, with his new vacancy on the court, President Biden will have an opportunity to make history by nominating the first-ever Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court," Schumer said. "Let's face the reality here," Durbin added. "We had 115 Supreme Court Justices in the history of the United States. 108 have been white men. I really think there is room for us to consider not only women, but women of color to fill these vacancies."

      But what are these Democrats' real records when it comes to supporting female and minority judicial nominees? In 2003, and for the following two years, Senate Democrats—including then-senator Joe Biden—filibustered the nomination of California Supreme Court justice Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit, the second-highest court in the land and a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. There was much talk at the time among close observers of the courts that Brown would likely be the first Black female Supreme Court justice. But liberals smeared Brown even before she was confirmed to the California Supreme Court, inexplicably calling the first Black woman nominated to the position "unqualified" to serve. And, despite her sterling credentials, they continued to trash her after President George W. Bush nominated her to the appellate court.

      Democrats' media allies parroted baseless liberal talking points with the aim of destroying an accomplished Black woman's reputation, all because she was nominated by a Republican president and could've become the first Black female Supreme Court Justice. State-sponsored media recycled left-wing salvos against Brown. And during Brown's 2003 committee hearing, both Schumer and Durbin repeated the smear that she was unqualified.

      Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.

      In 2005, Hilary Shelton—then the director of the NAACP's Washington chapter—accused the Bush administration of seeking "to get some kind of credit because she is the first African-American woman nominated to the D.C. circuit." Fast forward to this month, when the NAACP tweeted, "President Biden is right. Appointing a Black woman to [the] Supreme Court is 'long overdue.' Diversity of background & perspective is critical on a court composed of white men for most of our nation's history."

      Why the change in rhetoric? Perhaps this is more about partisan politics than about actually increasing racial diversity in the federal courts.

      The Democrats' racist blockade of Judge Brown is not an isolated incident. In 2001, Bush nominated Miguel Estrada to serve on the same D.C. Circuit Court. Estrada might be on the Supreme Court today if Democrats hadn't blocked him because "he is Latino." Schumer filibustered Estrada seven times to prevent him becoming the first Latino on the Supreme Court.

      The truth is that Democrats only pretend to want more diversity on the federal bench. At the Article III Project—a conservative judicial nonprofit this author leads—we document all the times Democrats had the chance to support women and minority judicial nominees made by Presidents Bush 41, Bush 43 and Trump. When presented with the opportunity to expand diversity on the federal bench during Republican presidencies, Democrats consistently vote against women, Black, Asian, gay, Hispanic and other minority judicial nominees. In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, Schumer voted against 52 women and minority judicial nominees, Durbin voted against 35 and Whitehouse—who belongs to an all-white beach club in Newport, Rhode Island—voted against 28.

      If diversity were their priority, why would Democrats consistently vote against the women and minority judicial nominees of Republican presidents? Because Democrats don't really care about diversity; they care about power. And they always have. In fact, some are even calling to impeach the Supreme Court's only Black justice, Clarence Thomas, because they don't like his wife's politics. This was after Democrats attempted to derail his confirmation 30 years ago with claims of sexual harassment that then-Senate Judiciary chairman Joe Biden knew were false. Even now, a liberal Black judge from South Carolina under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy, Judge Michelle Childs—who has the support of the highest-ranking Black member of Congress, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.)—is under attack by leftists for being insufficiently progressive.

      According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent. Biden and his allies are attempting to use the next Supreme Court pick to revive their flagging support among key constituencies, and that's understandable from a political perspective. So the Supreme Court may soon have two more Black members than Whitehouse's beach club does. But Americans shouldn't be fooled into thinking Democrats actually care about diversity. Their priority is power.



      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      The Democrats make their biennial trip into black neighborhoods to toss out a bone and then retreat to their gated enclaves to take their support for granted for the next two years. After decades of wondering how long such a ruse could last it is heartening to see some large cracks forming in that plantation wall:

      According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent.


      And the following perfectly encapsulates old Joe's very long history of blatant racism:

      Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nomination—and even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.


      Stopping a black woman was "the most important vote of his career."
      how many black women have even been considered in the entire history of the Supreme Court?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Backup View Post
        how many black women have even been considered in the entire history of the Supreme Court?
        What does that have to do with anything?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          Well she was conservative so she wasn't black.
          Old Joe has proclaimed he is the arbitrator of who is and who isn't black, but this is well before that.

          Still, it is after he fought tooth and claw against desegregating public schools because that would result in (his words) "a jungle. A racial jungle." And his best buds in the Senate were the most strident segregationists and racists.

          And yet the duffer has the audacity to label virtually everyone who dares disagree with him a white supremacist.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Backup View Post
            how many black women have even been considered in the entire history of the Supreme Court?
            Aside from the one being groomed for it who old Joe and other Democrats did a hatchet job on?

            Btw, do you think that the best qualified person, regardless of race, sex, religion, etc. should be selected for the job, or should it be based solely on their skin color and what is between their legs, like old Joe wants?

            That was also his criteria for VP as well, and just look at the remarkable success that was.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              Aside from the one being groomed for it who old Joe and other Democrats did a hatchet job on?

              Btw, do you think that the best qualified person, regardless of race, sex, religion, etc. should be selected for the job, or should it be based solely on their skin color and what is between their legs, like old Joe wants?

              That was also his criteria for VP as well, and just look at the remarkable success that was.
              If a democrat appoints a minority, then it's obvious their qualifications are sound, and therefore the only reason you can not support them is if you are a racist. If a republican appoints a minority, then skin color is irrelevant, and everything else (ethics, opinions, qualifications, etc) are most important.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                If a democrat appoints a minority, then it's obvious their qualifications are sound, and therefore the only reason you can not support them is if you are a racist. If a republican appoints a minority, then skin color is irrelevant, and everything else (ethics, opinions, qualifications, etc) are most important.
                If a Republican selects a black person the left screams it is pandering.

                But then what else do you call making a point of selecting someone based solely on their race and sex? [note that old Joe has listed no other qualifications]

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Whenever a liberal announces that he will only pick someone from a certain demographic, people of that demographic should take offense, because it implies that they can only succeed if their competition is taken out of the running.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    Old Joe has proclaimed he is the arbitrator of who is and who isn't black, but this is well before that.

                    Still, it is after he fought tooth and claw against desegregating public schools because that would result in (his words) "a jungle. A racial jungle." And his best buds in the Senate were the most strident segregationists and racists.

                    And yet the duffer has the audacity to label virtually everyone who dares disagree with him a white supremacist.
                    And Joe's idea of "equality" is to make sure that black communities have access to drug paraphernalia.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      And Joe's idea of "equality" is to make sure that black communities have access to drug paraphernalia.
                      Do you remember when that black guy from CBS asked old Joe if he would be willing to take a cognitive test and and the angry old man shot back how would he like it if someone asked him to take a drug test? That was instinctive reaction -- a gut move -- from old Joe there. Equating blacks with illegal drug use.

                      I mean, it is not unnatural to wonder about cognitive abilities when dealing with someone who is elderly, especially if they keep exhibiting signs of slippage of mental alacrity, when they want a job that involves a lot of responsibility and an ability to think clear.

                      But, unless you are old Joe, it is not natural to immediately think about illegal drug use when you see a black person, especially if they provide no indications of intoxication or impaired abilities.

                      That, however, is exactly how old Joe thinks. Black male = illicit drug abuser.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                        If a democrat appoints a minority, then it's obvious their qualifications are sound, and therefore the only reason you can not support them is if you are a racist. If a republican appoints a minority, then skin color is irrelevant, and everything else (ethics, opinions, qualifications, etc) are most important.
                        It's actually worse than that. Since Biden's intent was to meet a racial quota, he could have just picked a black woman without publicly announcing it beforehand. But we know from Biden's racist history (not the fake leftist brand of faux racism, but an actual documented racist past), he doesn't really want a black pick, but is just appeasing a political base to score cheap political points. Moreover, it has the reverse effect. It implies Dems don't believe there will be any qualified blacks before they make the pick, thus they just rely on a fixed quota prior to the process. It's actually racist against blacks because it cheapens the value of the selection process and the person being selected, and if I didn't know any better, I'd assume Biden was intentionally doing this because of the fact he's a racist.
                        Last edited by seanD; 02-21-2022, 07:36 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          Skipping over the fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans (76%) want old Joe to pick the most qualified candidate to replace Breyer on the SCOTUS (to "consider all possible nominees") regardless of race or gender and the Democrat's grim determination to not give a... darn. Even most Democrats (54%) think old Joe is wrong to make the pick based on filling a quota.
                          If that's true, then I'm in the minority. But I'm sure that doesn't surprise you.

                          I don't believe there is such a thing as "the most qualified candidate". Once you eliminate all the people who are unqualified for one reason or another, you are left with a pool of candidates who are highly qualified, and choosing between them is a very subjective matter. At that point, "more qualified" depends on what criteria you are using to choose. I think there are plenty of black women in that pool, so it doesn't bother me if Biden chooses from among them. Though I'm sure it bothers anyone who doesn't believe that a black woman could possibly be highly qualified to be a supreme court justice.

                          I do believe there is a grain of truth in that Newsweek opinion piece. Diversity is not the only criteria that Democrats use in deciding who should be sitting on the courts. They also prefer that judges be liberals, which should not come as a surprise. But the fact that there are clearly some black women that they don't want on the courts does not mean that they don't want diversity.

                          When Mike Davis says, "Perhaps this is more about partisan politics than about actually increasing racial diversity in the federal courts," I have to wonder what makes him think it couldn't be about both.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                            I'm sure it bothers anyone who doesn't believe that a black woman could possibly be highly qualified to be a supreme court justice.
                            The fact that Joe and the Democrats apparently believe that in an intellectual contest, a black woman can only succeed if competition from men and every other race is eliminated, should feel like a racist slap in the face to all black women.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                              If that's true,
                              No "if" about it.

                              Source: 76 percent want Biden to consider 'all possible nominees' for Supreme Court



                              [...]

                              An ABC News/Ipsos poll out Sunday showed that 76 percent of Americans wanted the president to consider "all possible nominees" while just 23 percent wanted him to only consider Black women for the nomination.

                              Fifty-four percent of Democrats agreed that Biden should consider all potential candidates, according to the poll.



                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              And it is hardly a surprise that you would prefer someone solely based upon the amount of melanin in their skin and what they have between their legs. After all, it worked out sooo well the last time old Joe used that to select someone.


                              10858636.gif
                              The duffer can sure pick 'em.


                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              7 responses
                              54 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              42 responses
                              234 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              105 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              194 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              73 responses
                              321 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X