This is such a weight to load onto Harris and Justice X, but Biden created this very obvious and easy opportunity, and since it is so predictable, he's fully responsible for it. He did what he did in pursuit of his own power, and he — a white male — is President of the United States because of it. That, too, is white privilege.Biden chose Harris as his VP because of the color of her skin and sex—not qualification. She's been a disaster. Now he promises to choose Supreme Court nominee on the same criteria. Identity politics is destroying our country.
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) January 31, 2022
३१ जानेवारी, २०२२
Tulsi weighs in.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०५ टिप्पण्या:
Gabbard is not lying.
Making a selection based on melanin and gender is not only unwise, it’s illegal.
Throughout the Democratic primaries, I wondered who in the DNC had it out for Tulsi Gabbard.
The impression I got was that there was a plan from the beginning about who should get the nomination and Tulsi was refusing to go along with the plan. Once Biden won South Carolina, it seemed like the rest of the field couldn't get out of the primary fast enough which gave the appearance that deals had been made. Although I don't agree with her often, she does strike me as far more competent and able to adjust than the current Pres and VP.
"This is such a weight to load onto Harris and Justice X"
Only if you assume identity politics is wrong. For progs, it isn't. They are proud of it. They want more of it.
"He did what he did in pursuit of his own power"
Yeah, so? He calculated right by going left. He could only enhance his power because key parts of his base agree with him, not Tulsi.
"That, too, is white privilege."
Correction: white prog privilege. Any similar GOP nominee would be derided as a token Uncle Tom and subjected to a high-tech lynching.
Althouse for the Supreme Court.
It's white privilege that racial pandering works? Is there anything that isn't white privilege?
I think Tusi is right about the identity politics but wrong about Biden’s handlers. They’re going to pick a black lady Merrick Garland style ‘moderate’. A militant liberal freak in sheep’s clothing…
…If they can invent one, that is. The internet leaves tracks…
The biggest victims of this racial bean-counting aren't the whites who are excluded from consideration; it's the minority of the blacks who don't NEED the special consideration.
I suspect that Tulsi, like Sinema and Manchin, realize that there will be a leadership vacuum in the party very soon, as the hard-line progressives drive the party off a cliff.
That, too, is white privilege
So, it's "white privilege" that Kamala Harris was such a pathetic candidate that she didn't even make it to the Iowa Caucuses?
Amy Koubucher was forced to drop out of the Dem primary right before her home State caucuses, to rally the "everyone against Bernie" vote to Biden.
What happened to her "white privilege"?
There is no such thing as "white privilege", there's just racist bullshit
Biden’s Pledge To Appoint Black Woman To SCOTUS Was Quid Pro Quo For James Clyburn’s Endorsement, an article by William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection.
An excerpt (quoting Michael Isakoff):
Clyburn raised the issue with Biden on the night before the debate [on February 25, 2020], and he expected that Biden would make the commitment during the debate. But as the debate unfolded at Charleston’s Gaillard Center concert hall, Clyburn “grew more and more frustrated,” according to an account presented by the journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes in their book Lucky. “Why won’t he say it?” Clyburn asked himself.
At that point, the authors add, Clyburn — during a break in the debate — took the matter into his own hands and headed backstage to confront Biden.
“So Clyburn gets up from his seat in the debate hall in the audience, and he makes a beeline for the exit,” Allen said during an appearance on the Yahoo News “Skullduggery” podcast last March. When he found Biden, he unloaded, Allen added. “He says, ‘Look, I told you that I wanted you to say that you were going to name a Black woman to the Supreme Court. You haven’t done it yet. You’ve had a bunch of opportunities. Don’t you dare leave this stage without doing it.’”
Biden took the message — or warning — from his most important political backer to heart. When the debate resumed, Biden delivered. “Everyone should be represented,” he said when asked about his personal motto and the biggest misconception about him. “The fact is, what we should be doing — we talked about the Supreme Court. I’m looking forward to making sure there’s a Black woman on the Supreme Court, to make sure we in fact get every representation.” And then he added: “Not a joke.”
Clyburn officially endorsed Biden the next morning — and Biden went on to a resounding triumph in the South Carolina primary, putting him back on the path to the nomination.
Can we hope that the battle over Justice XX Black will finally break the PC mania? Or will it become just one more sad racist sexist episode among many others?
What strikes me as the most devastating argument against the PC types is, how can you possibly expect to get the best candidate when you refuse to consider 93% of the pool? It’s an insult to everyone concerned and will permanently taint whatever remains of the Court’s prestige.
People! People!! Let's END THIS MADNESS!!
we HAVE TO get Back, to using reasonable criteria for picking
we HAVE TO get Back, to using physical beauty when deciding Who is going to rule us
Tulsi!! Tulsi!! Tulsi!!!
(Tell me that things would be worse under her?? One of my hopes in life is to be under her!)
The quid pro quo to ensure he got Clyburns vote.
A demented white male is about at your average female level though. He could identify as a woman. Notice the quick anger.
There is a fundamental political realignment underway, and Tulsi is its natural leader.
My goodness Tulsi Gabbard is refreshing. She speaks her mind, and well. She obviously loves this country and, perhaps more importantly, believes in it. She has served (and continues to serve) honorably, without chasing accolades for it as do all too many politicians. Aside from her 180 on gay marriage (tbf she's far from the only one to do that, and she's still able to differentiate between women and men on the swim team, so she's not completely in the tank), she's been remarkably clear-eyed throughout her career. Yes, she's basically a Marxist on economic policy, but she's my kind of Marxist!
Biden messes up the easy stuff.
How can you mess a withdrawal? It was not like it was the first time it had to be done.
Now he messed up a Supreme Court pick, by saying out loud what he could/should have said privately.
Reportedly, Biden also messes up conversations with world leaders. The Ukraine president told him to "calm down" after Biden called him to tell him Putin was about to invade, prepare to be "sacked", "prepare for impact", Joe Biden told Zelensky. It shows clearly, we have a president that can be played in the world stage.
When the criteria you seek in your candidate have nothing to do with the requirements of the position to be filled, then the chances of getting a disaster increase. Nothing new to politics, see our current Sec. of Transportation.
Looks like it was a quid pro quo for an endorsement in SC in order to get the nomination when it was not a foregone conclusion that he would get it. A Biden stays bought, otherwise, the money will dry up, same as the Clinton Foundation.
Tulsi is admirable for her courage, her service and her candor. However, her observations and those of others are futile. If they are intended to influence the asshats who are running Biden. Either they are insane or their intention is to destroy the country. Given their billionaire sponsors, their control over the ballot boxes and their amorality, it is difficult to see how they can be stopped by a nation of sheeple.
The AA taint.
Wear it with pride.
>Ann Althouse said...
He did what he did in pursuit of his own power, and he — a white male — is President of the United States because of it. That, too, is white privilege.<
A stupid man, who happened to be White, made a couple of boneheaded pandering promises and thereby convinced a bunch of Black voters to vote for him, which helped him become President.
WTH does that have to do with "White privilege"?
That, too, is white privilege.
Nope. Try liberal privilege, or even more accurately Democratic privilege.
Biden was always a crass opportunistic low-intelligence politician. Now add dementia and you get a guy creating a mess everywhere he goes. Like a traveling donkey. But watch how the left’s hay carriers make his racist proclamation sound like the best possible approach given past presdominently Deomocrat slavery and Jim Crow. Being a Democrat means never having to say you’re sorry.
No problemo. Hillary will weigh in again to attempt to destroy Gabbard and Hillary's minions will obey as commanded. Watch and see.
Poor Harris. She was totally unprepared for the office she holds and was probably unprepared for the Senate. Obama decimated the Democrats' "farm team" with his unpopular policies and inept execution of them. Remember the Obamacare web site disaster ? They have no one but 80 year olds and inexperienced and unprepared identity politics candidates.
Biden makes his choice
but from a universe of
black women only
Reap what you sow.... and those that voted for Biden, or didn't vote at all, are just as responsible as Biden.
The irony is that if Joe had simply acted without the racial and gender braggadocio then the picks could have been admired for the achievement instead of debated on their immutable traits. But his tendency to pander, like trading Clyburn’s endorsement for a promise of a black female nominee, put him in a bind. Beyond this episode, what other horse-trading is there as yet unknown and how is that constraining his options now and in the future? Does Pelosi’s week end gaffe about “taking an oath” to defend Ukraine give us a clue? Inquiring minds want to know.
Biden didn't do anything. Biden is not making ANY of these decisions.
Only if you assume identity politics is wrong. For progs, it isn't. They are proud of it. They want more of it.
Sebastian’s right.
I am inviting Critical Race Theory scholars to analyze what Biden did. I think it is an instance of pursuing white supremacy. That's a hypothesis. I would like to see serious analysis of that.
He could have found the person first and declared that she's the best one for the job. Choosing otherwise, he leveraged his ascent to power, and he made it a certainty that many people will view her as chosen primarily because of race and sex, which has impaired her stature in the eyes of at least some of the people.
Biden was out-bullied by Clyburn who now owns his ass
“So Clyburn gets up from his seat in the debate hall in the audience, and he makes a beeline for the exit,” Allen said during an appearance on the Yahoo News “Skullduggery” podcast last March. When he found Biden, he unloaded, Allen added. “He says, ‘Look, I told you that I wanted you to say that you were going to name a Black woman to the Supreme Court. You haven’t done it yet. You’ve had a bunch of opportunities. Don’t you dare leave this stage without doing it.’”
What would Napoleon have said about these Democrats?
The quid pro quo for both of these women is as transparent as the effort at "election integrity" last November. Look what that produced. Inchoate, unprecedented outrage. Would it be too Machiavellian to propose that chaos is the goal? I think it would be, because it presumes a level of competence beyond anything I can discern.
I think all of this is driven by emotion and ambition, coupled with a contempt for the governed that is only visible to the objects of contempt. The way that white people exercised white privilege re: black people for centuries is an excellent metaphor for what we see. It's only white privilege when white people do it. All privilege matters.
what was LBJ sequence of events with respect to getting votes for D :
- with Thurgood Marshall to SC!
- start war in Vietnam?
Biden may be trying for a two-fer also
Tulsi for SCOTUS! She's as black as Kamala.
I think Tusi is right about the identity politics but wrong about Biden’s handlers. They’re going to pick a black lady Merrick Garland style ‘moderate’. A militant liberal freak in sheep’s clothing…
…If they can invent one, that is. The internet leaves tracks…
This should be a fairly easy victory for the Biden admin: a moderately-sounding liberal judge would easily get 5-8 GOP votes in addition to the Dems. However, I can't shake the feeling that, based on their demonstrated incompetence so far, this Admin will somehow screw it up. I suspect that they WH leaked Breyer's retirement in order to get a jump start on looking for his replacement, because they expect pushback against a "moderate" by progressive activists. Far better to have that argument and any hurt feelings now, rather than in the summer when the primaries are ongoing, and have it carry on in the fall. If they end up bowing to the left and push a radical, the danger is that the GOP solidifies against her, and a few Dems say privately that they can't support her either. Weeks are wasted trying to break the impasse, only to have the WH pull the nomination sometime in early summer.
Ice Nine almost has it right when he said "a stupid man, who happened to be White, made a couple of boneheaded pandering promises".
We call that "moron privilege"--not white privilege.
I find it amusing that Clyburn knew his man--Biden no doubt made the promise to Clyburn privately--but Clyburn didn't trust Biden to keep the promise unless Biden came out and made the promise public. Dumb--and shifty--are two of Biden's traits.
I wondered who in the DNC had it out for Tulsi Gabbard.
I've always assumed it was people in the Clinton Camp.
At a certain level, constitutional law isn't that hard. There are thousands of judges who could easily do a great job on SCOTUS. Therefore, every single swinging pick is about politics, not qualifications or technical competence. Joebiden Co is just being honest and open about the politics of this decision.
Sotomayor has proven through her own words and actions that she was never fit for the job, beyond the ability to take phone calls from Schumer on how to vote. Remarkably, the great legal mind of RBG produced a voting record that boiled down to what Shumer wanted in any given instance too. The more I think about it, the more I think SOCUT picks' main qualifications should be the same as those of Electors to the Electoral College. Proven cast iron loyalty to the party that brung 'em. All of this legal analysis is just a game to rationalize a result, see the decision regarding Trump's records, and "love wins."
Exactly Ann!!!
An easy response to Tulsi Gabbard is Harris was both selected for her race, gender, and qualifications. Further that her years as a Senator, winning a state-wide election in California makes her a bit more qualified than a Representative from Hawaii. In fact, as a Senator, Harris had already met the Constitutional qualifications to be Vice President or President; which isn't necessarily true for any Congressional Representative.
I don't disagree with Gabbard's opinion about Identity politics or that Harris has been a disaster. But the rest of her argument is easily dismissed by those who believe Identity politics is necessary to bring about "equity". Throwing around phrases, like "not qualification" when the actual qualifications are both defined and met, is inappropriate.
But hey, Blue on Blue action is fun to watch with some popcorn.
Is Biden really in charge? Or is he just doing what he's told? To what extent do politicians make decisions and to what extent are they just following the drift of their party and its elites? Trump talked about getting around the bureaucracy and the Washington Establishment and was painted as an autocrat. That was ridiculous. Not only wasn't he "building an autocracy," but he didn't weaken the Washington blob and couldn't get around it. Maybe what we're seeing now is the rule of the blob, and not the product of Biden's conscious decisions.
Mickey weighs in:
Mickey Kaus@kausmickey
Disturbing possibility is that it wasn't a ham-handed error--that it's more important to Biden's prog supporters to fully embrace principle of race preferences--'Yes, she got the job because of race/gender! That's how society should work!'--than that she be accepted as best pick.
Except I would change "supporters" to "handlers."
The odds are not great that the lady will stand on her own qualifications in any case.
The "Everybody gets to take turns" morality doesn't get you good justices. Unless good means empathy over structure.
Every morning, Clyburn calls Joe Biden and reminds him, "You will pick a black and female judge!" And Biden responds, "Who is this? Pick a judge for what?"
I heard that 60% of the American voters are against Biden choosing a Justice based on race. Looks like Joe Schmo cannot do anything right. He is the worst kind of politician who will say anything to get elected. Now, he has to keep his promise or the Black and Squad wings of the party will lose their minds.
Ann Althouse said...
He could have found the person first and declared that she's the best one for the job.
There's talk about a black XX judge from South Carolina that is in the running
(on who, possibly, is who Clyburn had in mind)
If Jo Biden had just said; "When i'm elected, i'll put HER on the court"
It would have been legal ('cause, she's The Best), unlike what he did.
This would have had him having to think on his feet though, and
That would have had him having to think
so, never mind
Madison man: I wondered who in the DNC had it out for Tulsi Gabbard.
I've always assumed it was people in the Clinton Camp.
Indeed, I remember a Tulsi tweet the tore into Hillary for her corruption.
Ann Althouse said...
"I am inviting Critical Race Theory scholars to analyze what Biden did. I think it is an instance of pursuing white supremacy. That's a hypothesis. I would like to see serious analysis of that."
Two schools of thought on this; Of course it's racist because Biden has always been a racist.
The other hand is; Biden doesn't actually control what come out of his mouth. He is parroting the narrative of his far left handlers who are themselves racist leftists.
My money is on the second choice.
Hillary will weigh in again to attempt to destroy Gabbard and Hillary's minions will obey as commanded. Watch and see.
Hillary publicly declared Tulsi to be a Russian asset in 2020. The loyal Democrat minions will believe and continue to drink the Kool-Aid.
I encourage Hillary to continue speaking out. Regardless of Trump's shortcomings, it is obvious to most that we dodged a bullet by not electing her. She is as psychologically disturbed as Uncle Joe is dumb and senile.
It's the same scenario as the affirmative action admissions to Harvard (or any Ivy school). The schools are explicit in stating that they are not seeking the best students, they are seeking students, based on race, who can meet the minimum qualifications for admission. Biden is doing the same, and doesn't much care if the new justice is some kind of relative dimbulb like Sotomayor.
Maybe what we're seeing now is the rule of the blob, and not the product of Biden's conscious decisions.
The blob is not all-powerful. They can be manipulated and directed, especially when they already want to go in that general direction.
Trump tried to fight them directly and suffered for it. Joe is too far gone to effectively use them for his own ends. The latter means that various little empires are fighting each other for power behind the scenes.
Liberals practice racism, sexism, and discrimination.
News at 11...
Ann Althouse said...
He could have found the person first and declared that she's the best one for the job. Choosing otherwise, he leveraged his ascent to power, and he made it a certainty that many people will view her as chosen primarily because of race and sex, which has impaired her stature in the eyes of at least some of the people.
Joe Biden has been an open racist his entire life.
The democrat party is infested with blatant racists and the party was founded on racism and support of slavery as a core plank.
Racism has been the core tenet for the democrat party and Affirmative Action is their new tool to divide the country and to hold minorities down.
There are a lot of people that are finally figuring this out.
Now people can pretend they never supported this crap.
That's why Kamala Harris should be the nominee! He did that one already. Win-win.
Ann Althouse said...
I am inviting Critical Race Theory scholars to analyze what Biden did. I think it is an instance of pursuing white supremacy. That's a hypothesis. I would like to see serious analysis of that.
He could have found the person first and declared that she's the best one for the job. Choosing otherwise, he leveraged his ascent to power, and he made it a certainty that many people will view her as chosen primarily because of race and sex, which has impaired her stature in the eyes of at least some of the people.
Stoaty Weasel @sweasel
It's a damn shame he did that to his SCOTUS pick. He could just have said he was looking for the very best candidate and then picked a black woman and it would have had the same political effect for him, but wouldn't have been a slap in the face for her.
Mickey Kaus @kausmickey
Disturbing possibility is that it wasn't a ham-handed error--that it's more important to Biden's prog supporters to fully embrace principle of race preferences--'Yes, she got the job because of race/gender! That's how society should work!'--than that she be accepted as best pick.
Biden’s Pledge To Appoint Black Woman To SCOTUS Was Quid Pro Quo For James Clyburn’s Endorsement,
I seem to recall rumors at the time suggesting that tens of millions made its way to Clyburn's campaign as well...
Quit cher bit-chun.
I'll wager the new Justice will be every bit as good at her job as V.P. Harris.
It's a damn shame he did that to his SCOTUS pick. He could just have said he was looking for the very best candidate and then picked a black woman and it would have had the same political effect for him, but wouldn't have been a slap in the face for her.
Bear in mind, Clyburn is the one who put Biden up to this and the one who made him say it publicly. Yes, Biden went along with it in pursuit of personal power, which will inure to the disadvantage of the eventual nominee, but this is not a simple case of "white supremacy" and instead involves the motivations of a powerful black politician as well as a desperate white one.
"Making a selection based on melanin and gender is not only unwise, it’s illegal"
It's arguably (and I'd agree) un-American, but no law at all constrains the President's nominations, apart from bribery being an impeachable offense and the Constitutional requirements of the jobs.
(Nomination is not "hiring" or "employment", so no labor laws can apply. It's just not illegal to do that, nor can/should it be made to be so, for other, practical reasons.)
Can of Cheese said it- Biden is not making any of these decisions. He does what he is told and is enjoying the perks of the job without, you know, having to do the job. The real questions is- who is making these decisions? They can't even execute a bad decision well. There is a Wizard behind the curtain, or Group of Wizards. As his term heads south, will someone in the group decide to bail out and cash in with a tell all book like happened to Trump and, will anyone have the balls to publish it? The Trump Rats were deserting a floating seaworthy ship. The Biden Rats actually have a sinking ship to escape. if the R's were as vicious and as calculating as the D's they would be floating dollar bills in front of targeted staff members now to write their memoirs of the "Biden" presidency.
That Mickey Kaus thing: "Disturbing possibility is that it wasn't a ham-handed error--that it's more important to Biden's prog supporters to fully embrace principle of race preferences--'Yes, she got the job because of race/gender! That's how society should work!'--than that she be accepted as best pick."
He doesn't know the story of Clyburn and South Carolina? When did he fall so far out of the loop?
I remember the days when some tried to paint Sotomayor as a brilliant legal scholar and jurist.
Alas, those days are gone.
Ann Althouse said...
He doesn't know the story of Clyburn and South Carolina? When did he fall so far out of the loop?
I don't think that the Clyburn deal totally invalidates Kaus' view of the situation. Whoopi and Joy spent a lot of time on The View last week going on about how Biden HAD to appoint a black woman to the court to represent all black women, totally ignoring the fact (if they even understood) that that's not how the SCOTUS is supposed to work. It's entirely possible that the Democrat base does believe that tit for tat and quotas is the way to go.
Gilbar at 8:34 FTW!
The president is supposed to chose the best nominees for his or her appointed positions, not set asides for various groups. After a black female is chosen by Biden (and not necessarily the best one at that if Clyburn’s secret deal applies to one specific black female), what “under served” special interest group is next in line for the next SCOTUS vacancy? Hispanic male? Muslim male or female (with an under the table promise to whatever influential Muslim group that the nominee can use Sharia law to trump the US Constitution in making constitutional rulings)? Native American? Pacific Islander? Transgender? Wiccan? Etc, etc. Another reason why the Dems want to pack the court - they have a lot of special interest groups to pander to by placing a special interest justice on SCOTUS, not the best qualified justice no matter their ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, or religion (I probably left out a number of the numerous special interest types in the Dems’ “Big Tent” only because they are too numerous to keep track of!).
"He did what he did in pursuit of his own power, and he — a white male — is President of the United States because of it."
No, he is "President" because a bunch of utterly corrupt Black politicians used their control of the urban shitholes to steal the election for him. And the Democrats are counting on them to steal all future elections as well. The least he can do is extend affirmative action to the Supreme Court.
Narayanan said...
Biden was out-bullied by Clyburn who now owns his ass
If that statement is accurate - and I think it is - then we already know that the eventual nominee is J. Michelle Childs of SC. Lindsey Graham can't wait to vote to confirm on that one.
Of course, if SCHMOTUS dies before he nominates her, all bets are off. Just sayin'.
I don't do much with Twitter anyway, but I find Mickey Kaus' Twitter feed particularly difficult to follow. Wish he'd go back to regular blogging.
Biden is of course a white male, so him setting up a black woman’s talents as suspect in the eyes of the nation is abhorrent. However, he did this to Janice Rogers Brown, too. He undercuts black women of both parties, which his party doesn’t seem to mind. Is this white privilege, or democrat privilege?
I keep thinking about the woman that is ultimately chosen. How will she handle this situation?
IANAL, but... It would seem to me that given the inevitability of a reliable liberal vote on SCOTUS, conservatives should maybe be happy at the prospect that that liberal Justice be a total incompetent. Aren't dissenting opinions important? What would happen if one of the Justices literally has nothing worth saying?
Ain't my white privilege. Call it Beltway privilege.
Nobody held a gun to any of these women's heads and made them accept the obvious affirmative action racial segregation jobs benefitting them.
In fact, it's likely nobody ever held a gun to the head of any of this mess of Southern Poverty Law Center racists and defense attorney scum. Which is why they're such crappy judges and elected officials mostly hellbent on unleashing criminals on the rest of us.
They get guards and limos and metal protectors, of course, while the rest of us face the consequences of their choices on the streets.
Biden doesn't have "white privilege" either. He has beltway privilege. Plenty of heterosexual white men don't experience anything but racial discrimination and animus, more every day.
Critical Race Scholars would tell Miss Annie to STFU and know her place.
And that would be the beginning, middle, and end of the discussion.
Ann Althouse said...
I am inviting Critical Race Theory scholars to analyze what Biden did. I think it is an instance of pursuing white supremacy. That's a hypothesis. I would like to see serious analysis of that.
*******************
Puh-LEEEEZ!!!
If Biden announced he would pick only a white Christian MAN for the SCOTUS slot, that too would be held up as an instance of pursuing white supremacy.
It's ALWAYS that way with CRT....no matter what Whitey does, it's ALWAYS White Supremacy.
White Supremacy all the way down.
CRT (and its adherents) Delenda est.
"This is such a weight to load onto Harris and Justice X..."
Disagree. Justice X is another story, but Harris chose this line of work. People who step into the arena in pursuit of power get slugged -- a lot -- by other people in pursuit of power and their acolytes. Their ability to be slugged and slug back is an important part of their survival and success.
Harris ran for president in 2019 and failed so badly she didn't stick around for the inevitable slaughter in 20200. Yet she is now but a heartbeat away from the presidency courtesy of a senile old grifter whom she slugged in her Quixotic run.
If Kamala can't take the heat (as the saying goes), she should have stayed home in the kitchen, barefoot, and pregnant.
Not a Critical Race Theory scholar - but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. My take is that white man uses black senator and black female SCOTUS nominee to maintain his power and control. Sounds like white supremacy to me.
@Sigivald As a federal employee, it is illegal to base hiring on race, sex, gender, religion, etc.
Ann Althouse said...
I am inviting Critical Race Theory scholars to analyze what Biden did. I think it is an instance of pursuing white supremacy. That's a hypothesis. I would like to see serious analysis of that.
CRT is an "academic" circle jerk based on the claim that any time there's an outcome that's better for "white people" than it is for "black people", it's an example of "structural racism".
And that any time there's an outcome that's better for "black people" than it is for "white people", it's perfectly understandable and reasonable.
IOW, it's a Magic 8 Ball that has two responses "structural racism" and "white privilege".
So, if a black woman does get picked, it will therefore be white privilege".
He could have found the person first and declared that she's the best one for the job. Choosing otherwise, he leveraged his ascent to power, and he made it a certainty that many people will view her as chosen primarily because of race and sex, which has impaired her stature in the eyes of at least some of the people.
Well, it should impair her status in the eyes of every non-racist and non-sexist. It's why according to ABC's latest poll 76% of Americans think the pledge is a bad idea
Althouse: "[Biden] did what he did in pursuit of his own power, and he — a white male — is President of the United States because of it. That, too, is white privilege."
************************
Huh? Are you seriously arguing that Biden's declaration about nominating a black woman for SCOTUS is the REASON he got elected? That's a helluva stretch. Where's your supporting data?
And since when is it "white privilege" for a white politician to do things to enhance his power? What did Biden do that a black politician isn't allowed to do?
When a candidate like Barack did the same kinds of things---consorting with Rev. Wright, Farrakhan and the like---to enhance HIS power, what do you call that?
Sensible people---those who haven't taken the blue pill--would call both examples of garden-variety political maneuvering. (or in half-white Obama;s case, was it only half White Privilege?)
https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2022/01/30/poll-large-majority-of-americans-not-into-affirmative-action-in-scotus-nominations-n445119
A new ABC News/Ipsos poll out this week suggests that Biden and his party are once again failing to read the room. ... More than three-quarters of respondents (76%) want Biden to “consider all possible nominees.” Less than a quarter (23%) want to see him carry through on his campaign pledge.
Sounds like Tulsi is officially throwing her coconut bra into the ring for GOP VP consideration...
Blogger Joe Smith said...
Sounds like Tulsi is officially throwing her coconut bra into the ring for GOP VP consideration...
No, she is too leftist to be a Republican but she is almost unique among Democrats in telling the truth.
"He doesn't know the story of Clyburn and South Carolina? When did he fall so far out of the loop?"
More likely, he is aware of the Bolshevik policy of giving immense power to complete mediocrities, people whose only qualification was their complete subservience to the Party. Such people were well aware that they had no personal value, and would be discarded and destroyed the moment they ceased to serve the Party.
"He doesn't know the story of Clyburn and South Carolina? When did he fall so far out of the loop?"
Embrace the resolving power of the word 'and.' It's always better to have two reasons than one.
Joe Smith said...
Sounds like Tulsi is officially throwing her coconut bra into the ring for GOP VP consideration
if (IF) there was ONE OUNCE of brain power in the DNC, they'd put ALL their chips behind Tulsi
if (IF) she was running for Democrat candidate President for in 2024.. She'd Win in a heartbeat
a) Every Dem would vote for her... 'cause she's dem
b) most of Everyone else would vote for her 'cause
....i) she's Pretty
...ii) she's a vet
..iii) she's at least moderately intelligent (which puts her lightyears ahead of the dem pack)
...iv) did i mention, she'd Pretty?
if she was on the ballot: gilbar would think.. hmmm she IS a marxist; but a Pretty marxist, OK!
It won't happen, though; because dems
effinayright asked Althouse:
Are you seriously arguing that Biden's declaration about nominating a black woman for SCOTUS is the REASON he got elected?
NO! Althouse is saying (i know because can read TEXT);
that CLYBURN is the reason biden got SC, and SC is THE reason biden got the nomination
Typical White GUY BULLSH*T! Pay an old black guy to do your liftin' and totin'
If that statement is accurate - and I think it is - then we already know that the eventual nominee is J. Michelle Childs of SC. Lindsey Graham can't wait to vote to confirm on that one
Are there odds on Childs at Ladbrokes? Worth a shilling or two…
effinayright at 12:43 PM
Are you seriously arguing that Biden's declaration about nominating a black woman for SCOTUS is the REASON he got elected?
That's how Biden won the Democratic primary-election race.
If Biden announced he would pick only a white Christian MAN for the SCOTUS slot, that too would be held up as an instance of pursuing white supremacy.
CRT = Six degrees to White Supremacy.
It's how someone like Clarence Thomas becomes a White Supremacist through their logic.
Biden's AA pick
Only black and female sought
MLK shudders
'No, she is too leftist to be a Republican but she is almost unique among Democrats in telling the truth.'
But she can be positioned and sold as a 'moderate.'
And a weak republican nominee could show how he is 'reaching across the aisle,' etc.
Kind of like when there was talk of a McCain/Lieberman ticket...
'a) Every Dem would vote for her... 'cause she's dem
b) most of Everyone else would vote for her 'cause
....i) she's Pretty'
Am I the only one who doesn't get the 'pretty' part?
She's not ugly, mind you, but I see more beautiful women making my coffee...
I think Ann makes a great point about white privilege -- that even when Biden was "helping" Black people he was only doing it to increase his own privilege.
If Biden had cared about Black people he could have selected a diverse group of prospective justices, including Black women and then picked a Black woman. People could then evaluate the group and see that the Black women were indeed competitive. The way he's done this suggests that Black women can not compete in an open field. He hasn't done them any favor but he got the benefit anyway. That's because he's the "big guy" with white privilege. The system works for him.
That sort of sums up the approach of the Democratic Party in general, even with Black politicians however. It's not surprising that the model is followed in Democratic run cities where political campaigns are tailored to appeal to racial groups and are often run by Black mayors, but the Black neighborhoods never improve. Blacks can and do play the same game. Equality.
>>As a federal employee, it is illegal to base hiring on race, sex, gender, religion, etc.
No, it's only illegal if commoners do it. It's not illegal if the Aristocracy does it.
A though experiment:
Put an ad in your local paper (or Indeed, or wherever).
Say that you are hiring an administrative assistant, but only black females need apply.
What do you think would happen?
I keep thinking about the woman that is ultimately chosen. How will she handle this situation?
----------
would it surprise anyone if any selected woman declines nomination?
and the search goes on and on
Joe Smith said...
Am I the only one who doesn't get the 'pretty' part?
She's not ugly, mind you, but I see more beautiful women making my coffee...
Respectfully, those women aren't running for office. Of the women that are...
Rosalyn C. said...
I think Ann makes a great point about white privilege -- that even when Biden was "helping" Black people he was only doing it to increase his own privilege.
You've just defined "privilege" as "power".
Which means that "white privilege", is meaningless bullshit. In this case, we're talking about a politicians power, use and abuse thereof.
Barack had far more "black privilege" than I ever had "white privilege"
"A though experiment:
Put an ad in your local paper (or Indeed, or wherever).
Say that you are hiring an administrative assistant, but only black females need apply.
What do you think would happen?"
You would be applauded for your wokeness by half the country.
She is absolutely right.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा