U.S. Politics

[dcm1602]

I do find it increasingly amusing that the latest big national issue the supreme court has taken on is an affirmative action case which could have major implications on affirmative action in this country.

And at the same time their newest nominee getting nominated purely because of affirmative action

[ons]

I do find it increasingly amusing that the latest big national issue the supreme court has taken on is an affirmative action case which could have major implications on affirmative action in this country.

And at the same time their newest nominee getting nominated purely because of affirmative action

What do you consider to be the primary reason there has never been a black woman supreme court justice out of over 100 in US history? And the primary reason that 7/9 justices are white? And the primary reason that with 7/9 non-white justices, this is the most diverse the supreme court has ever been? Are you whites biologically superior or is it just that non whites are still so structurally disadvantaged that they are unlikely to ever be qualified?

[Badger]

Dubya did manage to put the guy who appears to be the most upstanding and reasonable dude on the court.

It'll be interesting to see if Biden goes out and trys to hire the best (liberal) dude for the job. Or if he goes all out and nominates some crazy wackjob

He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.

[dcm1602]

What do you consider to be the primary reason there has never been a black woman supreme court justice out of over 100 in US history? And the primary reason that 7/9 justices are white? And the primary reason that with 7/9 non-white justices, this is the most diverse the supreme court has ever been? Are you whites biologically superior or is it just that non whites are still so structurally disadvantaged that they are unlikely to ever be qualified?

For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution

[dcm1602]

He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.

I prefer french toast.

And I somehow doubt that's the path he goes. I think Biden realizes how deeply unpopular he is with his base. And what's going to happen in the midterms. So he's going to pick someone whose popular with his bass

[Johnny English]

For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution

Well, that's because you haven't thought about it.

You're a medical man, with presumably a better understanding of the human body and physiology than the average joe. Are you better or worse equipped to help a patient suffering with menstrual issues than a woman with the same training and experience as you, or are you both equally well equipped?

[Badger]

I prefer french toast.

And I somehow doubt that's the path he goes. I think Biden realizes how deeply unpopular he is with his base. And what's going to happen in the midterms. So he's going to pick someone whose popular with his bass

Honestly I'm going to skip the debate, assert that I'm correct, and wait for reality to prove it.

[dcm1602]

Well, that's because you haven't thought about it.

You're a medical man, with presumably a better understanding of the human body and physiology than the average joe. Are you better or worse equipped to help a patient suffering with menstrual issues than a woman with the same training and experience as you, or are you both equally well equipped?

Does everyone have the same experience, training, demeanor, intellect etc etc?

If i was the best and brightest in the field of gyn and female issues, and someone else was just mediocre but had a vagina. Does that make them the best person for the job? At the top of a field small distances apart can be freaking huge, again look at every single sport out there.

Hell look at the two most successful coaches in the NFL. The one was a freaking lacrosse player, and the other ones a 300 pound dude who loves cheeseburgers.

Hell I'm not even saying he shouldn't try to diversify the court. But to literally say it's going to be a black woman is pure pandering and affirmative action. What about a white woman? A black man? An Indian? Hispanic? The ridiculousness of it is just indefensible

[Johnny English]

Does everyone have the same experience, training, demeanor, intellect etc etc?

If i was the best and brightest in the field of gyn and female issues, and someone else was just mediocre but had a vagina. Does that make them the best person for the job? At the top of a field small distances apart can be freaking huge, again look at every single sport out there.

Hell look at the two most successful coaches in the NFL. The one was a freaking lacrosse player, and the other ones a 300 pound dude who loves cheeseburgers.

Hell I'm not even saying he shouldn't try to diversify the court. But to literally say it's going to be a black woman is pure pandering and affirmative action. What about a white woman? A black man? An Indian? Hispanic? The ridiculousness of it is just indefensible

Right now the only person asserting that someone who is less qualified is going to be selected based upon their gender and skin colour is you.

It seems inarguable that a body such as the Supreme Court will be best served by its makeup reflecting the populace which it serves, so if there's a black woman who is qualified to sit on it then it would seem reasonable that they would be considered as a priority.

I think the "best qualified person regardless of anything else" principle was put to bed with the last two appointments, if indeed it ever truly existed regardless of which side of the House was picking.

[ons]

For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution

If you consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, what is a better way to address it than making a point to give the best of the best of them opportunities to represent themselves at the highest levels after ensuring that they go through a similar career progression as other previous justices?

If you don't consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, do you consider it an inherent contradiction that in a nation built around the premise that all men are created equal, and a judicial system built around the premise that we ought to be judged by a jury of our peers, that out of 115 justices in the history of the supreme court, there have been a total of three non-white justices and five female justices? And that has no impact on the quality of the Supreme Court to accurately apply jurisprudential philosophies that reflects the reality of the population at large?

Also, do you consider it problematic that Reagan promised to place a woman on the court during his presidential campaign of 1980?

He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.

This is also true.

[dcm1602]

Right now the only person asserting that someone who is less qualified is going to be selected based upon their gender and skin colour is you.

It seems inarguable that a body such as the Supreme Court will be best served by its makeup reflecting the populace which it serves, so if there's a black woman who is qualified to sit on it then it would seem reasonable that they would be considered as a priority.

I think the "best qualified person regardless of anything else" principle was put to bed with the last two appointments, if indeed it ever truly existed regardless of which side of the House was picking.

Using Trump as a reason for doing something isn't the best idea. The guy is widely considered moron by people on both sides of the aisle. His one nominee was essentially guilty of being a rapist because of some delusional hippie and that was enough for everyone.

And I'm not the one suggesting that, Biden openly stated the next nominee would be a black woman. Therefore he decided that skin color and gender was the most important factors to consider over everything else.

And again there's how many hundred million Americans? Last time I checked there's more white women then anything, why not put a white woman on Supreme Court? There's more Hispanic women than black women, why not nominate a Hispanic woman?

And of course I agree that the most qualified person doesn't rise to the top of government, that's why we ended up with freaking Biden and Trump. But presumably Trump nominated someone that at least he believed was the most qualified person for the job.

I guess I just hate and bitch about everything the government does. I'm jaded, I own it.

[Badger]

If you were actually jaded you'd understand that every Supreme Court pick of your lifetime was not necessarily the "most qualified", just politically expedient enough to get appointed.

[Johnny English]

Last time I checked there's more white women then anything, why not put a white woman on Supreme Court?

Because they already have representation on the Supreme Court?

[bojanglesman]

Clearly we need a gay Asian non-binary on the Supreme Court.  Justice They Chang.

[dcm1602]

If you were actually jaded you'd understand that every Supreme Court pick of your lifetime was not necessarily the "most qualified", just politically expedient enough to get appointed.

I think John Roberts was a "most qualified" pick, but I don't think we've seen any of that since then.