I'm Confused

[Salmon_Run]

I am truly confused by what is considered "racism" or "systemic racism"....

Black Entertainment TV vs. White Entertainment TV

Black History Month vs. White History Month

Black Achievement Awards vs. White Achievement Awards

President Biden stating he going to appoint a black female to USSC vs. someone saying they'll only hire a white male for a given position 

I grew up judging people by their character, work ethic, honesty, commitment to family and community and their individual behavior..

Is the thinking this far out of whack, am I alone bewildered by this. 

[ApexerER]

Racism is just a new trigger word the left came to love under the Obama admin and they haven't let go of it. 

Its pretty simple, if you agree with them you aren't a racist, if you don't you are.....very simplified....

[farmer 52]

It is ironic that the clown in charge can pick a person of color/female to fill a post/job ,totally leaving every other race,gender or anything else out of the loop.

I guess its just the opposite of the current nfl coaching jobs.Some of the wacko's are calling it rascism because the oc of the kc chiefs didn't get a head coaching job.

All depends on which way the wind is blowing.

[Jeremy K]

You're just not progressive enough to understand ,you should be cancelled.

[GreeneHunter]

Choosing a person because of their Race / Sex and not because of their qualifications I believe is a mistake ---- enter Kamala Harris !

[Versatile_Hunter]

4 minutes ago, GreeneHunter said:

Choosing a person because of their Race / Sex and not because of their qualifications I believe is a mistake ---- 

But that's not what's actually happening. Your boy Lindsey (he/him) can help you understand:

 

[Northcountryman]

40 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

But that's not what's actually happening. Your boy Lindsey (he/him) can help you understand:

 

So What is happening VH? 

[9jNYstarkOH]

57 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

But that's not what's actually happening. Your boy Lindsey (he/him) can help you understand:

 

Explain how Biden could state that he was going to pick a black woman in June of 2020 before he knew a position was even going to be available then?

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/26/biden-pledged-to-nominate-a-black-woman-to-scotus5-who-could-be-up-for-the-job.html

 

[Versatile_Hunter]

39 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

So What is happening VH? 

This may be disturbing to some, but there is such a thing as a qualified black woman.

[ApexerER]

3 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

This may be disturbing to some, but there is such a thing as a qualified black woman.

I'm sure you are correct. But how is saying you are only going to look for a black women any different than saying I'm only willing to look for a white guy?  How about i am going to find the best American that will follow the Constitution? No matter the color or gender....

[Chef]

I'm sure you are correct. But how is saying you are only going to look for a black women any different than saying I'm only willing to look for a white guy?  How about i am going to find the best American that will follow the Constitution? No matter the color or gender....

I actually agree with this… even if he knew he wanted to pick a black woman… he should keep it to him self and then pick a black woman.

The response should always be I will pick the most qualified person for the job!

That’s it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The_Real_TCIII]

Stating that you will be selecting someone for one the most important positions in this country using any color or gender as the first criteria is wrong. Its that simple. 

[Salmon_Run]

[Salmon_Run]

18 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

This may be disturbing to some, but there is such a thing as a qualified black woman.

VH you missed the point; it's not that a woman WOULDN'T qualify.

Not at all disturbing; I am sure there are well suited individuals of all backgrounds, races, nationalities, identities, or whatever that are qualified. I worked for 32 years under civil service rules and tested for advancement; it's a simple rule find the BEST CANDIDATE based on performance and testing...

It's about the better or best candidate and the selection should be color and gender blind. The point WAS how can BIDEN say that choosing based upon gender and color is not racist?

 

[crappyice]

VH you missed the point; it's not that a woman WOULDN'T qualify.
 

I hate to correct you but he didn’t miss the point, he simply SPUN the point.
Shocker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Salmon_Run]

1 minute ago, crappyice said:

I hate to correct you but he didn’t miss the point, he simply SPUN the point.
Shocker

 

Well played Crappyice.....

[Versatile_Hunter]

27 minutes ago, ApexerER said:

I'm sure you are correct. But how is saying you are only going to look for a black women any different than saying I'm only willing to look for a white guy?  How about i am going to find the best American that will follow the Constitution? No matter the color or gender....

America has been operating for far too long under the de facto condition that positions of power be assigned to white men. Biden isn't the first president (both Reps and Dems have done it) to state that they are looking for a specific gender/race. I don't tend to align much with Lindsey Graham, but I agree with him that there's nothing wrong with having these institutions resemble the demographic makeup of America.

[Versatile_Hunter]

12 minutes ago, Salmon_Run said:

It's about the better or best candidate and the selection should be color and gender blind. The point WAS how can BIDEN say that choosing based upon gender and color is not racist?

 

Look, once you're in this top 0.00001% of qualification, it's really hard/impossible to parse between 0.00001 and 0.000009 in a fully objective manner. Personality, politics, and even looks (remember Trump's central casting?) will factor in when the resolution disallows the separation of infinitesimal differences in qualifications.  

[Versatile_Hunter]

11 minutes ago, crappyice said:

 

I hate to correct you but he didn’t miss the point, he simply SPUN the point.
Shocker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I'm sorry, what's being spun here? The argument was "Choosing a person because of their Race / Sex and not because of their qualifications I believe is a mistake." This argument presumes that qualifications are not being considered and I rejected that. 

[Salmon_Run]

It just boils my blood with the sheer hypocrisy of it all; I hate career politicians. Wish that term limits were on every voted office where you get two terms and out the door.

These lifelong career politicians are ridiculous and clearly at some point seem to become self serving in so many ways and open to corruption. Then it becomes a red vs blue showdown where neither side produce a viable solution to get this country straightened and then add the "racism" issue. I believe that racism is present, no doubt, but how do we solve it as an issue? 

That was my rant for today; I know as an administrator of a large upstate sheriff's Office if I were interviewing candidates for any position I couldn't make the statement or apply the thinking that I chose one over another due to race, color, gender or any other factor other than qualifications due to testing, background and ability...       

[Chef]

I'm sorry, what's being spun here? The argument was "Choosing a person because of their Race / Sex and not because of their qualifications I believe is a mistake." This argument presumes that qualifications are not being considered and I rejected that. 

While I don’t disagree with your basic premise here, this can be done without announcing it. We have enough division in this country don’t Alienate more people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Salmon_Run]

3 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

Look, once you're in this top 0.00001% of qualification, it's really hard/impossible to parse between 0.00001 and 0.000009 in a fully objective manner. Personality, politics, and even looks (remember Trump's central casting?) will factor in when the resolution disallows the separation of infinitesimal differences in qualifications.  

But how can Biden say that statement BEFORE HIS SELECTION, let's reverse this and use the Trump model. You brought up Trump so riddle me this:

What if Trump had said "I'm filling a USSC position and going to select a white male" ?

 

[Northcountryman]

7 minutes ago, Chef said:

While I don’t disagree with your basic premise here, this can be done without announcing it. We have enough division in this country don’t Alienate more people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree 100% Dont announce it, just do it!! 

[crappyice]

I'm sorry, what's being spun here? The argument was "Choosing a person because of their Race / Sex and not because of their qualifications I believe is a mistake." This argument presumes that qualifications are not being considered and I rejected that. 

I don’t care what race the fireman/woman is that comes to drag my ass from a burning building but I sure do hope they are the most qualified…period!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Salmon_Run]

VH your still off the mark from my original post, the post had NOTHING to do with who or who isn't qualified, it simply about the statement made over choice.

No  one should say or make that choice based on anything OTHER THAN QUALLIFICATIONS. One can not and should say they are making a choice based on any factor other than qualifications....bottom line.

NO ONE here said there weren't any qualified black woman, not even close!  As I am sure there are many.

Just to be clear you jumped to the card that we said there were no qualified black woman. I was pointing out the utter hypocrisy of Biden's statement and how is that not racist based upon the societal norms of today?