Can a female or non-white win the US presidency?

[skydyvr 0]

Please vote.

I'm surprised to hear some people think we aren't ready for a female or minority.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Amazon 7]

I think many are ready.. but there are still a large group that will not be able to handle it... and that is where the VP selection is going to be very important.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I think many are ready.. but there are still a large group that will not be able to handle it...

Look - the left is ready and willing to get a non-white or a woman into the presidency - SO LONG AS THE CANDIDATE IS LIBERAL.

Had Colin Powell run for election, he would have faced horrible drubbing from the left. Because they are NOT looking for a minority - they are looking for a minority with their viewpoint.

It's why the left so despises Clarence Thomas. He's a guy who doesn't act or think the way they want him to.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Face it... Thomas is a slug.. and has a significant group of supporters willing to clean up his slime trail...

[kallend 2,184]

Quote

Quote

I think many are ready.. but there are still a large group that will not be able to handle it...

Look - the left is ready and willing to get a non-white or a woman into the presidency - SO LONG AS THE CANDIDATE IS LIBERAL.

Had Colin Powell run for election, he would have faced horrible drubbing from the left. Because they are NOT looking for a minority - they are looking for a minority with their viewpoint.

Disagree

Quote

It's why the left so despises Clarence Thomas. He's a guy who doesn't act or think the way they want him to.

No, it's because he's an asshole like Scalia.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Had Colin Powell run for election, he would have faced horrible drubbing from the left. Because they are NOT looking for a minority - they are looking for a minority with their viewpoint.

Rice would have this problem, but Powell would do ok. It's his military past that would piss off a lot of the left.

Quote

It's why the left so despises Clarence Thomas. He's a guy who doesn't act or think the way they want him to.

Nah, it's because he was one of the least qualified ever. Evidenced before and since.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think many are ready.. but there are still a large group that will not be able to handle it...

Look - the left is ready and willing to get a non-white or a woman into the presidency - SO LONG AS THE CANDIDATE IS LIBERAL.

Had Colin Powell run for election, he would have faced horrible drubbing from the left. Because they are NOT looking for a minority - they are looking for a minority with their viewpoint.

Disagree

Quote

It's why the left so despises Clarence Thomas. He's a guy who doesn't act or think the way they want him to.

No, it's because he's an asshole like Scalia.

You just proved Lawrockets point, as usual.

[lawrocket 3]

Oh. So it ISN'T abotu racism when a black man gets attacked? That's why Thomas is called a "sell-out" or an "oreo?"

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

No, it's because he's an asshole like Scalia.

Which is the reason Jesse Jackson could not get support. Because he's an asshole.

But, tell me, point to an opinion of Thomas's or Scalia and tell me: 1) why he is wrong; and 2) why he is an asshole.

I can do it. Can you? See, I happen to believe that Thomas isn't always right. I ALSO happen to believe that Brennan wasn't always wrong.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Those people who think Thomas is an elitest, a sell out, or an asshole seem to forget one thing.

They know nothing of him, and the fact that he has dragged himself out of poverty, fought against rampant racism, and never forgot where he came from, is merely nothing in their eyes, because to them he is as sell out, for not taking HANDOUTS.

[bclark 0]

Yes, I feel that a female or non-white could be elected.

But I feel that it should be based upon their experience and aptitude for the job. NOT because they are female or non-white.

Based on those qualifications I do not believe that either Hillary or Obama should be president.

I am sorry Romney dropped out. I think that he was the most QUALIFIED candidate. Now I don't like any of my choices.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

They know nothing of him, and the fact that he has dragged himself out of poverty, fought against rampant racism, and never forgot where he came from, is merely nothing in their eyes, because to them he is as sell out, for not taking HANDOUTS.

That STILL does not qualify him to sit on the SCOTUS.... there were and are far better qualified individuals with far more jurisprudence.... if anything he was put there for this conservative credentials and nothing more.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

there were and are far better qualified individuals with far more jurisprudence....

Nobody was EVER more qualified, professionally or intellectually, than Robert Bork.

Oops. Dang. There I go again.

Let us look at the Supreme Court Qualifications Meter:

Stevens - the guy had the academic credentials and practice credentials - a top-notch antitrust guy.Nixon appointed him as an appeals court judge in 1970. Then he was elevated to the SCOTUS in 1975 - a 98-0 vote confirmed him.

Scalia - six years as an attorney. Law professor for 4 years. Then government work. Back to academia. Then in 1982 - appointed to appeals court. Then appointed to SCOTUS in 1986 - a 98-0 vote confirmed him.

Kennedy - Harvard law. 15 years in practice in Cali, as well as a professorship at McGeorge and UOP. Appeals court in 1975. SCOTUS in 1988.

Souter - Harvard guy. Rhodes scholar. Harvar dLaw. A couple of years of private practice, the deputy attorney general of Hew Hampshire, ascending to NH AG in 1976. In 1978, he was a judge, then Supreme Court NH in 1983. Then he was a federal appeals court justice for 6 months before SCOTUS nomination.

Thomas - yale Law School. Worked with Missouri Attorney generals' office for 4 years. Then to private practice for two years. Senate Legislative assistant for 3 years, asst. sec for Civil Rights, Dept. of Education for a year, and then Chairman of the EEOC for 9 years. Appellate Justice for almost 2 years, then SCOTUS. (Hmmm. Not exactly shit lousy)

Ginsburg - Harvard Law. Law clerk for a federal judge for a couple fo years. Research associate and director of academic legal service for two years. Then a law professor for 10 years at Rutgers, then another 9 at Columbia. Appointed to federal appeals court in 1980 and took SCOTUS seat in 1993. (best qualifications so far, in my book)

Breyer - Harvard Law. SCOTUS Law Clerk (folks, it really gives legitimacy in the law world) in 1964. Antitrust in the AG's office for 9 years and as Senate Committee Counsel for 7 years (okay. the dude knows gubment), with some professorships in there, too. In 1980, federal appeals court judge - chief justice in 1990. Appointed to SCOTUS in 1994. (okay. New best qualified)

Alito - Law clerk in appeals court for a year. US Attorney General positions/Govt. jobs from 1977-1990. Appeals Court judge from 1990-2006. SCOTUS in 2006 (okay. THAT is pretty impressive credentials, too.)

Roberts - harvard Law (magna cum laude). Law Clerks to an appeals court judge, then a year clerking for the SCOTUS (Rehnquist). A year with the USAG's office and 4 years as Assistant White House counsel.Private practice for 3 years before goign to Solicitor General's office - arguing 39 cases before the SCOTUS (okay. Legit, folks. Won 25, too). Represented 18 states against Microsoft. Went back to private appellate practice in 1992 and argued another 39 cases before the SCOTUS. 2 years as appeals court judge. Then SCOTUS (the guy was freaking immaculate)

So, tell me ho wmuch WORSE Thomas's credentials were than, say, Stevens.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Thomas - yale Law School. Worked with Missouri Attorney generals' office for 4 years. Then to private practice for two years. Senate Legislative assistant for 3 years, asst. sec for Civil Rights, Dept. of Education for a year, and then Chairman of the EEOC for 9 years. Appellate Justice for almost 2 years, then SCOTUS. (Hmmm. Not exactly shit lousy)

So basicly we have a republican party schill rather than someone who was FAR more qualified as a jurist.. BUT.... I wonder how much his race played in his being selected to fill all the BIG TENT philosophy.... of the Bush I White House. Remember.. he was replacing......Thurgood Marshall.
You seem to have forgotten that part counselor. Another right wing hypocrite.

What we got here.... is a man who talks the conservative line on affirmative action and forces it down peoples throats while he was at EEOC.. yet has been one of the largest recipients of it in our countires history.... What chu tink about that VINNIE

http://www.oyez.org/justices/clarence_thomas/

Clarence Thomas has lived a life riddled with irony and contradictions. Although he has opposed racial preference and affirmative action programs, he nonetheless benefited from them. As a young student, Thomas entered the College of the Holy Cross, a Jesuit institution in Massachusetts, after the school began a black recruitment program. Thomas was the beneficiary of a similar minority program a few years later at Yale Law School. As a young lawyer, Thomas aimed at a career outside the ambit of civil rights. However, for his effort, he earned appointment as the heard of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. And racial preference ultimately explained Thomas's appointment to the Supreme Court. Although President George Bush stated that he chose Thomas for his legal qualifications, it would take conscious effort to ignore the political pressures on Bush to name a black candidate after the retirement of Thurgood Marshall, the Court's first and only black justice. Thomas' nomination itself threw traditional political loyalties into disarray. Liberals, including the NAACP and Congressional Black Caucus, did not know what to do. Their desire to see a black justice on the Supreme Court competed with their disapproval of Thomas' conservative views. In the end, fearing that a black voice will legitimize the arguments of many white conservatives, the liberals sought to block Thomas' nomination. Conservatives, on the other hand, embraced Thomas. His unlikely supporters included Sen. Strom Thurmond, who had built his earlier political career on a segregationist platform. Finally, Thomas's confirmation hearings cemented the impression that his nomination served to fill an unspoken racial quota on the Supreme Court. Thus, Clarence Thomas joined the Supreme Court under the very shadow of affirmative action that he sought to avoid.

AND to top it off he had the chops of being part of the religious right... all important in the rePUBICan party.. no wander he was into talking about bestiality PORN

At his grandfather's urgings to become a priest, Thomas left his black high school after two years to attend St. John Vianney Minor Seminary, an all-white boarding school located just outside of Savannah dedicated to training priests. Thomas suffered minor episodes of racism at his new school. His fellow schoolmates excluded him from social activities and made fun of his color. Still, Thomas persevered and graduated with a good academic record.

Thomas attended the Immaculate Conception Seminary in Missouri as his next step towards attaining priesthood. He left soon after, though, due to the severe racism he encountered in the school. After taking some time off, Thomas enrolled at Holy Cross


Thomas weathered several days of questioning from the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. He was unwilling to express opinions about policies or approaches to constitutional interpretation. He maintained that he had never formulated a position on the controversial abortion decision, Roe v. Wade.


Gee RIGHT.. there is another lie.. with his background.. and what he has done since

Since becoming a justice, Thomas has aligned closely with the far right of the Court. He votes most frequently on the same side as the conservative camp of Rehnquist and Scalia. When Thomas began his tenure on the Court, many observers perceived him as a junior version of Scalia. Since then, Thomas has emerged from Scalia's shadow offering hints at his own conservative thinking.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Remember.. he was replacing......Thurgood Marshall.
You seem to have forgotten that part counselor. Another right wing hypocrite.

No, Marshall was a lefty - except for being J. Edgar Hoover's bitch. Didn't know that, eh?

He was an NAACP lawyer with a name - thanks to Brown v. Board of Education.

Why is it that people who win in an unfair race and say, "That's not fair" are hypocrites? I call it "honor."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Please vote.

I'm surprised to hear some people think we aren't ready for a female or minority.

I think we're ready, but not for the ones that are running.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Yes, I feel that a female or non-white could be elected.
...
...
I am sorry Romney dropped out. I think that he was the most QUALIFIED candidate.

Yes but the country is not ready for a Mormon. You have to be a Christian; no ifs, ands or buts.
Mormons, Rastafarians, Unitarians and Jews- close but no cigar.

[Para_Frog 1]

Very good thread you stole there Rocket. And you're absolutely right.

You're to law what nerdgirl is to, well, everything else in need of being researched.

- Harvey, BASE 1232
TAN-I, IAD-I, S&TA

BLiNC Magazine Team Member

[1969912 0]

Hell Yes! Would love to see it happen.

Conservative preferred, of course

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Casurf1978 0]

I think you're way off base on this one. Lets take a look at Fortune 500 companies. Did you know that women make up less THAN 2% of top executives as of 2 years ago, and there are only three, THREE, black CEOs. Look at how ape shit people go when the mear mention of gay rights comes up. I don't want to take this post that way. I remember male execs being praised for being aggressive and go getters, but when a female was like that I heard many people calling her a 'bitch' or a 'cunt'. How do you explain that. At my old job there were only three female execs and not a single non-white exec. I'm talking VP and above and also sitting on the board.

Edited for the following. I did a quick search and found that since 1789 there have only been 35 women senators, after the 2006 election there are 16. And there have only been three Black senator, including Obama, since the Reconstruction.

[mnealtx 0]

EEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget.

Is there still bigotry in regards to race/gender in the workplace? Absolutely. Is it becoming less prevalent and less tolerated than in the past? In my experience, yes.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

EEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget.

I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez.

[Erroll 80]

Quote

This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez.

If I were a woman or a Black person I would have found that statement so condescending! Women have always had to 'prove' themselves first, haven't they? Well, you have Allbright and Rice, you have female astronauts, you have female pilots in combat zones. Elsewhere there was Indhira Ghandi, Golda Meir, Maggie Thatcher, Bennazir Bhutto- all Prime Ministers of their countries. Of the above Israel, Pakistan and India have scarcely been independant for 60-odd years!

What growing up do you think your females have to do???

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

You're to law what nerdgirl is to, well, everything else in need of being researched.

I like to ask questions. Sometimes they're the hard questions ... which are sometimes the "wrong" questions (i.e., that get me in trouble & piss folks off). And actively solicit input from those who know more than me and those who think differently than me ... which are sometimes "wrong" people (in the opinion of those in charge/asserting a strong opinion, etc) to try to get info from all across the spectrum and orthogonal to it.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

EEO means Equal Employment Opportunity, not Equal Employment OUTCOME - something the libs tend to forget.

I'm not trying to turn this into a lib v con conversation. I'm just saying look at the numbers and they speak for themselves. Hell, we gave women the right to vote less than a hundred years ago and the civil rights movement occurred some 4 decades ago. This country needs a lot of growing up to do before we elect a female or a non-white prez.

I see/saw it as obliquely saying that until there's equal numbers of women and minorities across the spectrum that it's still unequal, hence my reference to EEO above.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706