Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-13-2011, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
25,826 posts, read 20,694,370 times
Reputation: 14818

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alltheusernamesaretaken View Post
Exactly.

Obama is the one looking at race and gender, instead of qualifications.
But I don't want to mess up anyone's agenda.

Does it occur that Obama is simply not disqualifying based on race? That perhaps he is picking from a wider pool than previous presidents who failed to entertain the possibility that women and minorities are as qualified as white males?

If we are to be judged by our peers doesn't it make sense to choose more minorities? Don't minorities make up a disproportionate number of the people who face a judge on any given day?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-13-2011, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Center of the universe
24,645 posts, read 38,639,083 times
Reputation: 11780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Since we are talking about 0bama and his administration, I don't see where logic enters into anything he does.
And I can't see any discussion of Barack Obama that you do not enter without a huge amount of prejudice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 09:39 AM
 
1,759 posts, read 2,028,891 times
Reputation: 950
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
Don't minorities make up a disproportionate number of the people who face a judge on any given day?
Do minorities commit a disproportionate amount of crime?
They seem to, and/or seem to be charged with a disproportionate amount, whether justified or not.

Whoever finds themselves in front of a judge may not always be guilty of a given crime,
yet the guilty who are taken to task by law enforcement to have only themselves to blame,
regardless of their demographic group or how often said demographic group finds itself in that position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:28 AM
 
Location: On a Long Island in NY
7,800 posts, read 10,103,496 times
Reputation: 7366
Federal judges should be selected because they are QUALIFIED, not because they are a woman, or because they are a borderline Marxist, or because they are Black, Hispanic, Asian, or whatever.

I have noticed a recurring problem with minorities (especially Hispanics) being very ethnocentric, meaning they put their race before the good of the nation and that is bad. Such people should not be allowed to hold any government positions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,943,485 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006 View Post
Federal judges should be selected because they are QUALIFIED, not because they are a woman, or because they are a borderline Marxist, or because they are Black, Hispanic, Asian, or whatever.

I have noticed a recurring problem with minorities (especially Hispanics) being very ethnocentric, meaning they put their race before the good of the nation and that is bad. Such people should not be allowed to hold any government positions.
There are only 3,000 federal judges in the nation of 310 million. The number of vacancies during an administration is only 150 or so. There are thousands of lower court justices and tens of thousands of prominent attorneys who would be rated technically "qualified" by the ABA.

Given that the number of possible qualified nominees vastly overwhelms the number of vacancies, a president can use other criteria in his/her selection among the possible qualified candidates. It is very easy to select candidates who are ethnically and racially diverse while also selecting qualified candidates. The two are not mutually exclusive.

EDIT:
Claiming that 'Hispanics put their race before the good of the nation' is a clear example of stereotyping and repulsive. The same bias was used against Jews (e.g. they all stick together.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Armsanta Sorad
5,648 posts, read 8,054,362 times
Reputation: 2462
I don't know about him choosing more minorities, but choosing women as judges will create more misandry in the justice system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Fairfax, VA
3,826 posts, read 3,386,675 times
Reputation: 3694
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k View Post
So, in effect, you're saying that based on what you know about the statistical cross section of their ethnic/racial and gender statuses, to say nothing of qualifications, you are willing to bet that they could have found more qualified (as in, more skillful) appointees in white males.

Basically, that you don't feel that minorities or women are as skilled with reliable frequency compared to white males.

Just come out and say it, man. At least it'll look like you have some stones

What are the percentages of minorities and females graduating from the best law schools. The percentages chosen should be the SAME.

If 98% of the top law schools graduate white women, then 98% of the jobs should go to that demographic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Center of the universe
24,645 posts, read 38,639,083 times
Reputation: 11780
Quote:
Originally Posted by West of Encino View Post
I don't know about him choosing more minorities, but choosing women as judges will create more misandry in the justice system.
Just what we need, huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 11:37 AM
 
589 posts, read 756,576 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
So your complaint is that he has chosen women or other races? and this is a bad thing why?

I get you hate Obama and I suspect it is because he is 1/2 black.. but I see no argument in this action. Do you want to repeal the right of women to vote too? Guess the blacks are a given on this, after all they voted for Obama.

Shame he hasn't done anything....

National Health Care ( like Rominey wanted)
Ryan White Act
eliminating our presence in Iraq
done more to thwart Al Quida than anyone
Got Bin Laden
Save the auto industry
turned the housing crisis around
kept interest at all time lows
put regulations on those that accepted gov $$$
has gotten most of the Gov bailout money back
Championed the importance of arts education
Closed offshore tax safe havens, tax credit loopholes. - (bet repugs hate that)
Cut salaries for 65 bailout executives
Dodd-Frank (DF) Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the biggest financial reform law since the Great Depression
Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act; Instituted equal pay for women
Small Business Investment Act
Modernized the USA.gov portal to connect people to the services they require
U.S. jail population declined for first time in decades
plus 560 more -
Obama Administration’s Achievements (Thus Far) » Obama's Achievements Center

Race shouldn't be a factor in getting hired or promoted, but its done every day via AA and other minority only perks. And when a article is printed for the sole purpose of pointing out how awesome it is that Obama has hired more minorities, it becomes obvious he did it to boost minority numbers in the Government [which is as bad as hiring more White males for the sake of boosting white male numbers in the Government].
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2011, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,273,993 times
Reputation: 11416
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006 View Post
Federal judges should be selected because they are QUALIFIED, not because they are a woman, or because they are a borderline Marxist, or because they are Black, Hispanic, Asian, or whatever.

I have noticed a recurring problem with minorities (especially Hispanics) being very ethnocentric, meaning they put their race before the good of the nation and that is bad. Such people should not be allowed to hold any government positions.
I notice that you didn't say white in the first paragraph.
Or are white guys the most qualified because they don't have the other qualifiers you mentioned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top