The mule from reconstruction was one of the few historical examples provided to say that giving stuff directly to people on a large scale predated FDR. Thank you for helping me prove that was not true. The others were veterans' pensions and poor houses. Veterans' pensions are not a handout, they are an earned benefit. Poor houses were generally county or city level facilities funded locally and at least in part by the labor of the people living in them (both working farming and manufacturing as well as maintaining infrastructure). In fact, the Federal government tried to pass a bill to promote social welfare (the Land Grant Bill for the Benefit of the Indigent Insane) and it was vetoed by President Pierce because the federal government was not supposed to be involved in social welfare programs. So my original point stands that the Feds didn't really start welfare programs until FDR. As to reparations, it depends on how you define it. There are certainly numerous programs spending lots of money specifically for the benefit of black Americans and have been for decades. I think they could very easily be considered a form of reparations. It should "trigger" anyone that the President of the United States appears to be nominating people to federal appointments on the basis of race. It isn't a proper consideration.
Right on! Race shouldn't be a consideration! So why didn't you say that stupid **** when Trump appointed 189 white judges and only 9 black judges? You're saying Trump's white judges were qualified, but the only reason Biden's black judges were appointed is because they are black? https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ing-federal-judges/ft_21-01-07_trumpjudges_4/
Only white male judges are nominated on their qualifications. Every other nominee is about race or gender representation.
Biden has nominated more public defenders and civil right lawyers than every president in history *combined*. It's not just the race but fundamentally remaking the entire judicial branch. That will be bidens long lasting legacy. These judges biden is placing on the bench are late 30s. They'll be here for life.
Only 5% of all lawyers in the United States are African-American (according to the ABA). So, appointing 9 black judges out of a total of 198 is roughly in line with black representation in the legal profession. By contrast, 86% of lawyers are white non-Hispanic (presumably roughly 50% men). Appointing 5 out of 97 from the population that makes up roughly 43% of all lawyers and 22 out of 97 from the population that makes up about 3 percent of all lawyers is not at all in line with black or white representation in the legal profession. So yes, it would appear that Trumps appointments were not based on Race, but Biden's were. See above. Also, maybe consider the public statements of the people making the appointments. Which of the two Presidents explicitly identified race as a factor in selecting candidates for appointment? Here is a hint: Biden Says He Will Nominate a Black Woman to the Supreme Court #Shorts - YouTube
So based upon these numbers in comparison to percentage of population it is easier for a white person to become a lawyer . White people are 26% higher than their % of the population. Black people are 8%less. Therefore using your logic, black people are more qualified as a % than their white counterparts. See how one can make numbers show whatever they want?
It doesn't say anything about the ease of becoming a lawyer, it says only that white people more frequently become lawyers as a percentage of their population. That could be due to any number of reasons, such as interest in becoming a lawyer. I simply gave the context to refute the very poorly argued point that somehow the racial disparity in Trump appointees shows the same race based selection as Biden appointees. It does not. Trump's appointments track the demographics of the legal profession (a precondition for becoming a judge). I then provided further direct evidence that Biden was considering race in the form of a video of Biden directly stating that he was going to select only from a pool of black women for his candidate for the Supreme Court. Your analysis is meaningless. How would black people getting into the legal profession at a much lower percentage than their overall population show that black people are more qualified? White people become NBA players at a much lower percentage in comparison to their population than black people. Does that somehow indicate that the white players are more qualified? Of course not, there is no logical way to get from that data to that conclusion.
It is so funny how people like you forget that slavery ever existed or that black folks couldn't own land less than a century ago. It's almost as if we had a society that suppressed black folks and allowed white folks to gather as much as land as possible for decades.....and then to this day we still havnt passed any law to substantially tax the land that's passed over after the property owner dies which further enables race inequality. It blows my mind away how you people just disregard what America did to African American in this country for decades.
Sure Biden did made statements about race but if race isn't an issue what should it matter if he appoints a bunch of black judges as long as they are qualified. Do you believe that the judges he appointed aren't qualified?
Assuming qualifications are what Stupid thinks are important: https://ballotpedia.org/ABA_ratings_of_presidential_federal_judicial_nominees As of January 3, 2023, the ABA had offered ratings for 136 of President Joe Biden's (D) nominees. The ABA rated 113 of those nominees well qualified, 20 nominees qualified, and three nominees as qualified and well qualified. https://ballotpedia.org/ABA_ratings_during_the_Trump_administration During his four years in office, the ABA offered ratings for 264 of President Trump's nominees. The ABA rated 10 of those individuals not qualified for the nomination. Seems like Biden is doing a far better job than Trump. And Dems in general do better than Republicans: Clinton - 4 "not qualified" nominees GW Bush - 8 Obama - 0 Trump - 10 Biden - 0 Whatever process Democrats use, it seems way superior to the GOP.
This has what to do with the qualification of Federal judges? Are you just arguing in favor of race based appointments but don't want to say as much? I believe that appointing judges on the basis of race is racist, disgusting, and illegal. Would you be okay with it if a Republican president said I am going to have all white judges (which is as close as you can get to how overrepresented black women are in the Biden race-based appointments, not being able to appoint 20%+ white judges). I would hope not, but maybe you are fine with the Federal government giving one race an advantage over another. I think we are required to have a race (and gender) neutral selection process, whatever other metric they want to use. What the ABA thinks of judicial nominees is of no concern to me, as it is a quite partisan organization. Since they only rated Clarence Thomas as qualified and Sonia Sotomayor as Well Qualified, their ratings are clearly terrible. Do you also believe that it is okay for a President to make appointments on the basis of race? What if the favored race is white, still okay? It involved Dan Langhi and his potential.
