Biden for Prez

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Didn't Trump pick a black female for a high end Judge post and the democrats including Schumer voted against her?

I did not say anyone was unqualified. I think saying you are only going to pick from 6% of the population and even less of a percent of population of judges is not really the thing to do. If he finds one that is a top end jurist, then so be it. I think it is a mistake for any president to say they are going to pick X color or gender. It limits you from picking the absolute best person.

Regan did it. He committed to selecting the first female supreme court justice as part of his 1980 campaign and followed through with OConor in 1981.

There are many qualified judges out there and there isn't a ranking system. He has just narrowed the field to a black woman. His case is there never has been one out of the hundreds of justices in US History. Now, if the person is unqualified, I hope issues are raised.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Regan did it. He committed to selecting the first female supreme court justice as part of his 1980 campaign and followed through with OConor in 1981.

There are many qualified judges out there and there isn't a ranking system. He has just narrowed the field to a black woman. His case is there never has been one out of the hundreds of justices in US History. Now, if the person is unqualified, I hope issues are raised.

I agree in general. Reagan was also a life long democrat so maybe he did not shed all that race and gender baiting for votes persona.

Of the people I have read about (and it is very limited on what I have read about it), the people on the short list have very limited experience. I would expect them to be challenged appropriately and not have some partisan shills come out and say they were raped by them at a party when they were teens in a place they don't remember.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I agree in general. Reagan was also a life long democrat so maybe he did not shed all that race and gender baiting for votes persona.

Of the people I have read about (and it is very limited on what I have read about it), the people on the short list have very limited experience. I would expect them to be challenged appropriately and not have some partisan shills come out and say they were raped by them at a party when they were teens in a place they don't remember.

Holy Crap! Now not even Regan isn't even republican enough for you.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Holy Crap! Now not even Regan isn't even republican enough for you.

I love Reagan. However he was indeed a life long democrat and made some life long democrat thinking mistakes like amnesty. Pandering to gender for a nomination. He simply could have just nominated her instead of pandering. When you pander to race or gender, all you are doing is cheapening their accomplishments. It makes it look like you could have had someone better, but we need to settle for this instead. I don't care if it is a Republican or one of you demorats.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I love Reagan. However he was indeed a life long democrat and made some life long democrat thinking mistakes like amnesty. Pandering to gender for a nomination. He simply could have just nominated her instead of pandering. When you pander to race or gender, all you are doing is cheapening their accomplishments. It makes it look like you could have had someone better, but we need to settle for this instead. I don't care if it is a Republican or one of you demorats.

You know what else cheapens your accomplishments... If you are picked for a political agenda, just like how every judge is picked.

Only complaining about cheapening when your political agenda is threatened also cheapens your argument. Notice how the narrative went from "elections have consequences" to "your reasons cheapen accomplishments" when the tables turned. Most people are too stupid to notice. So don't feel bad if you missed it.

Originally Posted by fly135

You know what else cheapens your accomplishments... If you are picked for a political agenda, just like how every judge is picked.

Only complaining about cheapening when your political agenda is threatened also cheapens your argument. Notice how the narrative went from "elections have consequences" to "your reasons cheapen accomplishments" when the tables turned. Most people are too stupid to notice. So don't feel bad if you missed it.

I disagree. If a judge is unaware they tend to have a conservative or liberal interpretation of the law, then they are completely unqualified to hold any high office as a jurist. They would be so unaware of who they are it would just not be conceivable. It does not even approach the discussion of simply being a gender or a color.

The "reasons" you are trying to merge are not even the same. Elections do have consequences because the people who are allowed to put people forward and those who are allowed to vote have the power so the election of those people have what? CONSEQUENCES. that is no way the same as saying I am not going to look for the most qualified person with my bias. I am only going to pick you based on what you look like. That cheapens the individuals merit.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

Regan did it. He committed to selecting the first female supreme court justice as part of his 1980 campaign and followed through with OConor in 1981.

There are many qualified judges out there and there isn't a ranking system. He has just narrowed the field to a black woman. His case is there never has been one out of the hundreds of justices in US History. Now, if the person is unqualified, I hope issues are raised.

Regan was wrong if he announced his decision, prior to any vetting, based on gender. Why is this so hard to understand

Originally Posted by dougr

Regan was wrong if he announced his decision, prior to any vetting, based on gender. Why is this so hard to understand

No sorry, sorry your team and the players on it are the little people. Why not just skip the "we are nominating a black women" and just nominate the person you want! BTW, the black women, who gets into the position will always know they may have been seated just because they are black and female.

just like if I hired a little person on the bases of them being little. Why not grow up pick the person on the merit not their color. and if its a black women, great! They would have earned it based on their dedication and merit, not on the color of their skin, BUT TOO LATE everyone now knows they were nominated for being black. Kinda sad, as it strips the hard work and effort they achieved

Racism, its easy to see.