The Biden/Harris Administration Accomplishments Thread

If there was a black coach with an all black staff coaching a team in North Dakota that was made up of 90% white players said, "you know, I think the next coach I hire will be a white guy".... the majority of people would think that it was entirely appropriate.

If a white head coach with an all white staff is coaching a team in Detroit made up of 90% black players said, "you know, the next coach I hire needs to be a black guy" I would say that it was entirely appropriate ....and a little over due.

Pummeled??? lol.......That's news to me.
A diverse legal/judicial system is best for the country. Making appointments based on what is best for the country is the appropriate job of the POTUS. Pretty simple if you can clear the muck from your eyes.

on your hypothetical why is the first appropriate while the latter is "over due"?

in both instances you reduced the pool of candidates by race and thus to HDs point you have potentially ruled out the best candidate
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
More died in his watch, rehired people from jobs that were cut because of Dem policies, wasted crazy money, govt price controls.

Getting out of Afg is about the only real thing done


And even that was a completely, unmitigated disaster. Guess we’ll categorize that under half @$$ed accomplishments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Highest appointment of federal judges since Reagan
Biden has appointed 41 federal judges in his opening year at the White House. This is more than double those appointed by his predecessor Donald Trump and is the most a president has appointed in their freshman year since Ronald Reagan in 1981.

The president has also been mindful of issues of representation in his appointments over the last year, as 80 percent of the new federal judges are women and 53 percent are people of color.

Do you think those brothers in Oaktown gave a sh!t that it was Kamala Harris handing out their sentence? She was considered an ignoramus. Now we know why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and 0nelilreb
If there was a black coach with an all black staff coaching a team in North Dakota that was made up of 90% white players said, "you know, I think the next coach I hire will be a white guy".... the majority of people would think that it was entirely appropriate.

If a white head coach with an all white staff is coaching a team in Detroit made up of 90% black players said, "you know, the next coach I hire needs to be a black guy" I would say that it was entirely appropriate ....and a little over due.

Pummeled??? lol.......That's news to me.
A diverse legal/judicial system is best for the country. Making appointments based on what is best for the country is the appropriate job of the POTUS. Pretty simple if you can clear the muck from your eyes.

Yep, still pummeled. Latest example- trying to argue an "appropriate" hire would be the "best" hire. (with either of your scenarios)

In those above situations or if our legal system is actually hiring based on diversity criteria then we are doing exactly this:

Anything else is settling for exclusionary lower standards and virtue signaling.

If you could get your feces straight long enough to just posit "In the absence of any articulable advantage in empirical merit between the given candidates more diversity could be a plus." then at the very least there's a discussion to be had that's a reasonable stance. One jot, one neutrino of going in with diversity being a precursor to selection and the whole "best person for the job" discussion goes out the window.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
Yep, still pummeled. Latest example- trying to argue an "appropriate" hire would be the "best" hire. (with either of your scenarios)

In those above situations or if our legal system is actually hiring based on diversity criteria then we are doing exactly this:



If you could get your feces straight long enough to just posit "In the absence of any articulable advantage in empirical merit between the given candidates more diversity could be a plus." then at the very least there's a discussion to be had that's a reasonable stance. One jot, one neutrino of going in with diversity being a precursor to selection and the whole "best person for the job" discussion goes out the window.
All I saw was blah, blah, blah.
 
Well, you know that several one of them candidates are big suck-ups to Trump, Trump, Trump, who tried to overthrow our 2020 Election and our Constitution along with it. Maybe they are the kind of low characters you like.

That’s the winning talking point right there , you guys should roll with that one for midterms . Don’t forget to tell us all how big a racist and homophobe Trump Trump Trump was and how the economy and distribution troubles was is all Putin’s fault . That should be enough to turn both the house and senate all blue . 👍🏼
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
So, still waiting for someone to put up something that is a Biden signature accomplishment AND it be something that is actually good for the country and desired by the public (thus things like "let in 8million new illegals across our border doesnt count).

well-waiting.gif
I’m struggling to find 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Gandalf
So, still waiting for someone to put up something that is a Biden signature accomplishment AND it be something that is actually good for the country and desired by the public (thus things like "let in 8million new illegals across our border doesnt count).

well-waiting.gif
Don’t hold your breath LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and McDad
So, still waiting for someone to put up something that is a Biden signature accomplishment AND it be something that is actually good for the country and desired by the public (thus things like "let in 8million new illegals across our border doesnt count).

well-waiting.gif

Highest appointment of federal judges since Reagan
Biden has appointed 41 federal judges in his opening year at the White House. This is more than double those appointed by his predecessor Donald Trump and is the most a president has appointed in their freshman year since Ronald Reagan in 1981.

The president has also been mindful of issues of representation in his appointments over the last year, as 80 percent of the new federal judges are women and 53 percent are people of color.
 
View it like this.
When the Titans make their draft pick, will they pick the best player available or fill a specific need?
If they choose to fill a specific need, is that unfair to the better players that happen to play a position that is not as needed?
There are multiple factors to consider.
If you are a head coach and filling out your staff, I guarantee a good coach will consider many variables.
Are they a good recruiter? What makes a good recruiter?
What if candidate A is a much better recruiter than candidate B but is not as good of a practice coach?
So the one with the best qualifications should get the job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Yes, that's pretty much what I am saying.
Leveling the playing field isn't painless and without consequence.....but the longer you go without leveling it, the more painful and consequential it eventually becomes.

A judge is supposed to be impartial; that implies no bias. Yet you are saying that judges need bias to "level the playing field"; or, in other words, you support racism, sexism, or other kind of isms so long as it's not mainstream. We can't have or strive for an amalgam or assimilation because our base isn't diverse enough? We have to be diverse and decouple from reality to somehow subjugate the will of the majority, and the best way to do that is to be judged by the minority?
 
you seem to indicate the black person was still more representative than the white even though on most dimensions the white person lived a more representative life to the hypothetical constituent
Nah, I just said they were closer on the continuum. Maybe they are even on the continuum. Maybe either is just a little more representative than the other. Doesn't really change the point.
 
So the one with the best qualifications should get the job.
Which takes us back full circle to desired qualifications.
A desired qualification could very well be - female.
A desired qualification could very well be - AA.
 
Government only steps in when and where society fails. Society proved itself to be a colossal failure on some issues.
You want less government? Be a better society,

You mean government - progressive/liberal government - steps in when the majority get too uppity and attempt to set a norm.
 
A judge is supposed to be impartial; that implies no bias. Yet you are saying that judges need bias to "level the playing field"; or, in other words, you support racism, sexism, or other kind of isms so long as it's not mainstream. We can't have or strive for an amalgam or assimilation because our base isn't diverse enough? We have to be diverse and decouple from reality to somehow subjugate the will of the majority, and the best way to do that is to be judged by the minority?
WTH?????
Who said judges need bias to "level the playing field".
I said a diverse legal/justice system is one way to better level the playing field.
 
There use to be a society where only the strong and intelligent thrived. I suppose you’re saying government had to step in to bring us down.

The anti-Darwinian concept. Government rule to see that the least fit become the strongest and the most able are subjugated. An odd road to the future, and a strange path for the "party of science".
 
Nah, I just said they were closer on the continuum. Maybe they are even on the continuum. Maybe either is just a little more representative than the other. Doesn't really change the point.

it does change the point - race or gender is a very crude tool that tells us very little about a person. my degree of feeling someone represents me is based upon so much more than this characteristic and merely possessing this one characteristic does little to guarantee a match.
 
WTH?????
Who said judges need bias to "level the playing field".
I said a diverse legal/justice system is one way to better level the playing field.

That's a legislative function; judging should simply be taking established law and determining did you or did you not break it. Anything else is not justice it's tampering with justice and justifying it with social games.
 
it does change the point - race or gender is a very crude tool that tells us very little about a person. my degree of feeling someone represents me is based upon so much more than this characteristic and merely possessing this one characteristic does little to guarantee a match.
Said every white man ever.
 

VN Store



Back
Top