Rangel is from the pre-MLK (Have A Dream speech) days where people were judged by the shade of their skin, or sex, rather than if they were the best choice for the job.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Laughed when I saw Rangel on the news saying it. But then it is Rangel, so I really don't expect much. But I pay attention because like Pelosi you never know what they are going to say.
IN NOVEMBER 2014, WE HAVE A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN OUT THE ENTIRE HOUSE AND ONE-THIRD OF THE SENATE! DONT BLOW IT!
“When white man find land, Indians running it, no taxes, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water. Women did all the work, Medicine man free. Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex. Only whit man dumb enough to think he could improve system like that.” Indian Chief Two Eagles
The Democratic Party should be more diverse, like the Republican Party. And I agree, we should have more diversity in the White House, although I'm sure the Right would have come up with some reason to complain about it.
If John McCain had won in 2008 or Romney last year and both set out to populate their staffs largely with white people, there would be some grumbling but no one would truly question it. If Obama’s administration had turned out to be 70% black -- or 70% women even -- he would have been assailed for putting gender or race ahead of experience, the implication being that there couldn’t possibly be that many women or blacks qualified for those kinds of jobs.
Yet, the U.S. is increasingly diverse, and it seems that the administration of a man who is famously the offspring of an interracial couple should and could -- without employing tokenism, without sacrificing competence -- reflect that diversity. Besides, Obama himself says he is committed to diversity. Carney reiterated that at Wednesday’s briefing.
And the president hasn’t done a bad job at it. His two Supreme Court nominations have been women. His first secretary of State is a woman, his attorney general a black man, his Homeland Security secretary a woman.
Raees wrote: The Democratic Party should be more diverse, like the Republican Party. And I agree, we should have more diversity in the White House, although I'm sure the Right would have come up with some reason to complain about it.
If John McCain had won in 2008 or Romney last year and both set out to populate their staffs largely with white people, there would be some grumbling but no one would truly question it. If Obama’s administration had turned out to be 70% black -- or 70% women even -- he would have been assailed for putting gender or race ahead of experience, the implication being that there couldn’t possibly be that many women or blacks qualified for those kinds of jobs.
Yet, the U.S. is increasingly diverse, and it seems that the administration of a man who is famously the offspring of an interracial couple should and could -- without employing tokenism, without sacrificing competence -- reflect that diversity. Besides, Obama himself says he is committed to diversity. Carney reiterated that at Wednesday’s briefing.
And the president hasn’t done a bad job at it. His two Supreme Court nominations have been women. His first secretary of State is a woman, his attorney general a black man, his Homeland Security secretary a woman.
chickaree wrote: Doesn't it make more sense to hire the best man or woman for the job without regard to what color their skin is or what is under their pants?
It does make sense to get the right people in the right jobs regardless of race or sex which flies in the face of diversity laws, under American laws it doesn't matter who is best suited for a position. What matters is that businesses and Government departments meet the diversity quotas imposed by the law.
I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." - Henry Ford
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges; When the Republic is at its most corrupt the laws are most numerous. - Publius Cornelius Tacitus
chickaree wrote: Doesn't it make more sense to hire the best man or woman for the job without regard to what color their skin is or what is under their pants?
You would think but then it might look funny if there are a lot less fewer white people than minorities to reflect the population. That's a joke in case you were wondering.
IN NOVEMBER 2014, WE HAVE A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN OUT THE ENTIRE HOUSE AND ONE-THIRD OF THE SENATE! DONT BLOW IT!
“When white man find land, Indians running it, no taxes, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water. Women did all the work, Medicine man free. Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex. Only whit man dumb enough to think he could improve system like that.” Indian Chief Two Eagles
Raees wrote: The Democratic Party should be more diverse, like the Republican Party. And I agree, we should have more diversity in the White House, although I'm sure the Right would have come up with some reason to complain about it.
If John McCain had won in 2008 or Romney last year and both set out to populate their staffs largely with white people, there would be some grumbling but no one would truly question it. If Obama’s administration had turned out to be 70% black -- or 70% women even -- he would have been assailed for putting gender or race ahead of experience, the implication being that there couldn’t possibly be that many women or blacks qualified for those kinds of jobs.
Yet, the U.S. is increasingly diverse, and it seems that the administration of a man who is famously the offspring of an interracial couple should and could -- without employing tokenism, without sacrificing competence -- reflect that diversity. Besides, Obama himself says he is committed to diversity. Carney reiterated that at Wednesday’s briefing.
And the president hasn’t done a bad job at it. His two Supreme Court nominations have been women. His first secretary of State is a woman, his attorney general a black man, his Homeland Security secretary a woman.
Raees wrote: The Democratic Party should be more diverse, like the Republican Party. And I agree, we should have more diversity in the White House, although I'm sure the Right would have come up with some reason to complain about it.
If John McCain had won in 2008 or Romney last year and both set out to populate their staffs largely with white people, there would be some grumbling but no one would truly question it. If Obama’s administration had turned out to be 70% black -- or 70% women even -- he would have been assailed for putting gender or race ahead of experience, the implication being that there couldn’t possibly be that many women or blacks qualified for those kinds of jobs.
Yet, the U.S. is increasingly diverse, and it seems that the administration of a man who is famously the offspring of an interracial couple should and could -- without employing tokenism, without sacrificing competence -- reflect that diversity. Besides, Obama himself says he is committed to diversity. Carney reiterated that at Wednesday’s briefing.
And the president hasn’t done a bad job at it. His two Supreme Court nominations have been women. His first secretary of State is a woman, his attorney general a black man, his Homeland Security secretary a woman.
Sounds like a left wing opinion piece.. which it is.
Yes, people on the left have opinions, just as people on the right do. Imagine that.
The problem being that the Socialist Party is just plain wrong.
IN NOVEMBER 2014, WE HAVE A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN OUT THE ENTIRE HOUSE AND ONE-THIRD OF THE SENATE! DONT BLOW IT!
“When white man find land, Indians running it, no taxes, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water. Women did all the work, Medicine man free. Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex. Only whit man dumb enough to think he could improve system like that.” Indian Chief Two Eagles
