For the last two weeks, PJMedia has been publishing a series of articles on the radical attorneys who have been hired as career civil servants in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division since President Obama took office. The reports reveal an unprecedented effort by Attorney General Eric Holder and his Civil Rights Division political leadership to stack the Division from top to bottom with a cadre of hard core, left-wing partisans. The ideological litmus test being employed is undeniable: conservatives and even apolitical lawyers need not apply. Only fervent liberals are welcome.

For those of you keeping score at home, 71 career attorneys have so far been highlighted in this PJM series. Every one – without exception – has emphatically clear liberal and/or Democratic ties. Think of the odds of that occurring accidentally. It didn’t. Or to put it in terms Thomas Perez can understand, it is an overwhelming disparate impact. Of course it is more than that, too. It is part of a deliberate plan to stock the Division for decades to come with left-wing ideologues who will perpetuate a liberal agenda, irrespective of who controls the levers of government in the White House.

What facking evidence do you have that government has far surpassed its diversity goals?

What facking evidence do you have that government has far surpassed its diversity goals?

I was raised in the military starting in the late 50's,

integration started in the service long before any attempt by civilians to integrate.

End of story.

Obama hates white people.

Since a large portion of the military are blacks you shouldn't object to this either.

What facking evidence do you have that government has far surpassed its diversity goals?

What facking evidence do you have that government has far surpassed its diversity goals?

I did not say 'far surpassed', I said it had surpassed them. Less hysteria, more logic, works wonders for an individual's credibility, little man.

Look at the numbers, the federal government employs minorities at higher rates than the national average. That, little man, is surpassing it's goal. If they were 'representative', they would be the same as the make up of society - they are not, they are higher. I have no issue with that... as long as whoever is employed is the best person for the job, not the best minority candidate.

Here's some facking evidence:

Federal Workforce Diversity: Why Agencies Seek Out Minority Workers - GovCentral.com

"African Americans make up 17.4 percent of the federal workforce, as compared to 10.1 percent of the civilian labor force"

"Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders represent 4.9 percent of federal employees and 4 percent of the civilian workforce"

"American Indians form 1.9 percent of the federal workforce but make up 0.8 percent of the civilian labor force"

"Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcomes". It's still up to the individual.

Maybe it is because of an unemployment rate among minorities that is twice as high as whites?


]

Um-no. Never been true and it's even less true today.