Biden declared Jackson non qualified

[marvin martian]

That's not much context. Why are white people preferred in this context? Because white skin is preferred over all others? That would be racism. But you're not giving me much to go on.

Saying you're only going to nominate a black woman is racism. Like Joe Biden, you too are a racist, so it doesn't bother you.

 

[Curried Goats]

Saying you're only going to nominate a black woman is racism. You're a racist, so it doesn't bother you.

No one but mutants and deplorables thinks Biden is being racist with this pick. Where is that notion in mainstream society?

 

[Slade3200]

If I told you where they are, then you too would think you can get nominated to the Supreme Court.....no sir!

I bet Tucker has them all in the safe behind the life sized self portrait he has of himself in his office.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

If it was unjust to give preferential treatment to whites over blacks it just as unjust when practiced in reverse

Except...it wasn't just whites given preferential treatment over blacks...

It was whites being able to brutalize, subjugate and often extinguish the lives of black folks with every lever of government at their disposal to do it...

Giving black folks a chance to go to Ivy League schools when they were otherwise excluded as a matter of policy -- is not "the same as what whites did to them"

I also noticed when I brought up legacy admissions and the ACTUAL RACIST HISTORY behind that -- not a single one fo you Conservatives touched that subject...why??

Legacy admissions also EXCLUDE white students, white students who are not wealthy......but I guess, as long as a white kid is getting special treatment, its all good...

 

[bodecea]

You are falling all over yourself trying to defend Biden's approach in finding a SC Justice. He did not have to list the personal qualifications necessary to be considered. What he did, was tell all of those you mentioned, that they need not apply, they were not wanted. Black and Female only.

You believe it's impossible for a black woman to be qualified. That's your baseline.

 

[marvin martian]

Black people are not oppressed.....HOWEVER, there are some residual flaws still left to be worked out in the system and society in general....

If this were not so, why were you morons touting Trump's criminal justice reform as some big major thing that blacks should thank him for??

Do you understand why I can easily kick you morons around for sport?? Because you are inherently on the wrong side of history and you are too cowardly to rexamine your own bullshit

You support the guy who didn't want his kids mixing with black people in a "racial jungle".

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

You support the guy who didn't want his kids mixing with black people in a "racial jungle".

No, I support the polices that are being ADVANCED CURRENTLY IN 2022 by people who wish to maintain the desegregation of public schools, universities, that wish to ADVANCE the teaching of accurate history -- so the next time someone sees how utterly juvenile and stupid these rightwing talking points are -- they destroy them with the ease I am destroying yours...

If Joe Biden is today what you folks believe he was 30 years ago -- you would support him today....but the fact he just nominated a black woman is triggering you today...not me...

 

[Slade3200]

Saying you're only going to nominate a black woman is racism. Like Joe Biden, you too are a racist, so it doesn't bother you.

That’s not racism… it is discrimination. Learn the difference

 

[Grumblenuts]

You are falling all over yourself trying to defend Biden's approach in finding a SC Justice. He did not have to list the personal qualifications necessary to be considered. What he did, was tell all of those you mentioned, that they need not apply, they were not wanted. Black and Female only.

To Biden's credit.

 

[bodecea]

If it was unjust to give preferential treatment to whites over blacks it just as unjust when practiced in reverse

Funny how that only now is a thing.

 

[Mac-7]

Except...it wasn't just whites given preferential treatment over blacks...

It was whites being able to brutalize, subjugate and often extinguish the lives of black folks with every lever of government at their disposal to do it...

Giving black folks a chance to go to Ivy League schools when they were otherwise excluded as a matter of policy -- is not "the same as what whites did to them"

I also noticed when I brought up legacy admissions and the ACTUAL RACIST HISTORY behind that -- not a single one fo you Conservatives touched that subject...why??

Legacy admissions also EXCLUDE white students, white students who are not wealthy......but I guess, as long as a white kid is getting special treatment, its all good...

I am not for legacy admissions and I wont let you use it as an excuse to discriminate against white kids who dont have rich fathers

 

[pknopp]

I hadn’t. And Rather made only one valid intelligent point. The LSAT’s serve only to predict how well a student might do if admitted into law school. They have precious little predictive value for how well a law school graduate will do as a lawyer. At least, that’s not their purpose.

Frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass how high she scored on the LSAT. I also don’t doubt that she’s smart and has credentials and judicial experience. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that she’s considered a lovely person, either. My concern about her has nothing at all to do with her gender or her race. My concern about her is entirely based on whether or not she will make judicial decisions based on the law and on the Constitution as opposed to what the left wants, politically.

Those are concerns you would have no matter who Biden nominated. Tucker is unable to make sound rational arguments.

 

[Mac-7]

Funny how that only now is a thing.

Maybe you slept through the last few decades

 

[LeftofLeft]

I'm not sure I discussed any of that. I simply stated he was right here.

Rather is playing the predictable race card. The reality is that every SCOTUS nominee gets scrutinized for all parts of their life; be it grades, position papers, views, briefs. Personally, I don’t think LSAT scores should be brought up for any judge Republican or Democrat. But, it falls under the egregious scrutiny and granularity a nominee undergoes as part of the process. If the judge is undergoing increased scrutiny or completely irrelevant scrutiny comparatively, then Rather might be on to something but watching Democrats scrutinize and smear Republican nominees and their families over the years, I doubt Rather’s claim of racism.

This is just another attempt to play on a nominee’s race and gender as a victim to bypass what every other nominee goes through.

 

[BackAgain]

Those are concerns you would have no matter who Biden nominated. Tucker is unable to make sound rational arguments.

You are absolutely right in that first sentence.

I don’t agree with you on your second sentence. Tucker has made sound rational arguments. Sometimes, though, his positions are silly, unsound, irrational and not even always buttressed by “arguments” at all.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I am not for legacy admissions and I wont let you use it as an excuse to discriminate against white kids who dont have rich fathers

Yet, I have made at least 2 posts on this message board talking about the origins of legacy admissions..

and I don't recall any "Conservatives" there agreeing with me or saying they are against it..

I think you only say it now because you know how full of shit it will make you to say otherwise..

However, affirmative action is not the same legacy admissions......and why do you keep dodging the fact that white women benefited the most from Affirmative Action??

Matter of fact, why do you morons think Affirmative Action is only about who gets into Ivy League schools??

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Rather is playing the predictable race card. The reality is that every SCOTUS nominee gets scrutinized for all parts of their life; be it grades, position papers, views, briefs. Personally, I don’t think LSAT scores should be brought up for any judge Republican or Democrat. But, it falls under the egregious scrutiny and granularity a nominee undergoes as part of the process. If the judge is undergoing increased scrutiny or completely irrelevant scrutiny comparatively, then Rather might be on to something but watching Democrats scrutinize and smear Republican nominees and their families over the years, I doubt Rather’s claim of racism.

This is just another attempt to play on a nominee’s race and gender as a victim to bypass what every other nominee goes through.

Then name the LSAT score of another SCOTUS judge. Living or dead.

You can't?

Wow, a long post of utter bullshit. Wonder what you are covering for?

No I don't.

 

[pknopp]

Rather is playing the predictable race card. The reality is that every SCOTUS nominee gets scrutinized for all parts of their life; be it grades, position papers, views, briefs. Personally, I don’t think LSAT scores should be brought up for any judge Republican or Democrat. But, it falls under the egregious scrutiny and granularity a nominee undergoes as part of the process. If the judge is undergoing increased scrutiny or completely irrelevant scrutiny comparatively, then Rather might be on to something but watching Democrats scrutinize and smear Republican nominees and their families over the years, I doubt Rather’s claim of racism.

This is just another attempt to play on a nominee’s race and gender as a victim to bypass what every other nominee goes through.

Recall, Tucker had to let his writer go awhile back after his racist views were exposed.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Recall, Tucker had to let his writer go awhile back after his racist views were exposed.

Yep. That's how these scumbags do. He wasn't fired for being a racist. He was fired for being caught.

 

[pknopp]

You are absolutely right in that first sentence.

I don’t agree with you on your second sentence. Tucker has made sound rational arguments. Sometimes, though, his positions are silly, unsound, irrational and not even always buttressed by “arguments” at all.

When your employer says you are not supposed to take things he says seriously..........