ADVERTISEMENT

Racism/Sexism continues in Biden Admin

jfegaly

Bull Gator
Feb 1, 2006
7,639
12,716
113

If Your initial criterion for hire are race and sex, then you literally are being racist. What a POS we have as POTUS
 
Liberals are racist. They always know what is best for their brown and black brothers and sisters. Incredible how blacks and hispanics (though in far less #s) continue to support the party of racism. And now, should this judge be seated, there will always be the question as to her intellect. Had she not been a black woman, would she be on the SC?
 

If Your initial criterion for hire are race and sex, then you literally are being racist. What a POS we have as POTUS


"President Reagan promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor. President Trump promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, so I'm not complaining about that."
 


"President Reagan promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor. President Trump promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, so I'm not complaining about that."
Ok so, a few things. Gonna cast my pearls on swine even though I know better.

Good to see you admit that Biden is a racist and sexist as those were his criterion.

Second, who gives a fook what the rino McConnell thinks

Lastly, your reading comprehension skills still suck on your CNN link. Trump was in the midst of actually replacing a Supreme Court position when those comments were made. Which means he likely had his candidates interviewed, narrowed down and more than likely decided.

Biden made that as a campaign promise which means his criteria was in this order

1. Race/sex

Qualifications were down the list somewhere. Which means there is a possibility a more qualified candidate was overlooked based on race and sex. By definition that is both racism and sexism.

For the record, IF trumps number one criteria before candidate selection was sex, then yes that is sexist.

That being said, Trump was replacing a woman. Biden? Not so much.

It’s always the same story with you though. The first thing you always do is rush to see if you can find something on Trump. Change the subject instead of calling a racist/sexist POS what he is.

so we can agree right? Biden is a racist/sexist POS? Correct?

Stay on topic. This is about Biden. If you want to talk about Trump, fire up your TDS and start a thread.

#whataboutism
 
Last edited:
Ok so, a few things. Gonna cast my pearls on swine even though I know better.

Good to see you admit that Biden is a racist and sexist as those were his criterion.

Second, who gives a fook what the rino McConnell thinks

Lastly, your reading comprehension skills still suck on your CNN link. Trump was in the midst of actually replacing a Supreme Court position when those comments were made. Which means he likely had his candidates interviewed, narrowed down and more than likely decided.

Biden made that as a campaign promise which means his criteria was in this order

1. Race/sex

Qualifications were down the list somewhere. Which means there is a possibility a more qualified candidate was overlooked based on race and sex. By definition that is both racism and sexism.

For the record, IF trumps number one criteria before candidate selection was sex, then yes that is sexist.

That being said, Trump was replacing a woman. Biden? Not so much.

It’s always the same story with you though. The first thing you always do is rush to see if you can find something on Trump. Change the subject instead of calling a racist/sexist POS what he is.

so we can agree right? Biden is a racist/sexist POS? Correct?

Stay on topic. This is about Biden. If you want to talk about Trump, fire up your TDS and start a thread.

#whataboutism
Bush promised a black candidate with C. Thomas. It's common and normal. Get OVER it.

You have plenty reasons to hate on Biden, this isn't one of them.
 

If Your initial criterion for hire are race and sex, then you literally are being racist. What a POS we have as POTUS
Yep. Picking someone based on race is the definition of racism. Not surprised to see @kalimgoodman rush in to defend it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jfegaly
Bush promised a black candidate with C. Thomas. It's common and normal. Get OVER it.

You have plenty reasons to hate on Biden, this isn't one of them.
Yes this is one. He is Racist, and so is Bush. Bush is a rino though so not surprised.
It should not be normal. Period.

Here is the test to ask yourself. I ask you to only answer this question.

If Biden said. The only candidates who need to apply are White Males. Would you consider that racist?


So I guess we can conclude you support racism and as such are racist yourself. I mean after all, racism isn’t something to hate on Biden for, right?
 
Last edited:
Yes this is one. He is Racist, and so is Bush. Bush is a rino though so not surprised.
It should not be normal. Period.

Here is the test to ask yourself. I ask you to only answer this question.

If Biden said. The only candidates who need to apply are White Males. Would you consider that racist?


So I guess we can conclude you support racism and as such are racist yourself. I mean after all, racism isn’t something to hate on Biden for, right?
You call it racist because he's excluding white people, some call it diversity because he's adding race/sex to diversify the court. It's really how you view it.

My opinion is that it's nothing, so many presidents did similar things. It's politics.

Now to answer your question. If Biden or anyone wanted to add a white person to an all black panel to add diversity, I would welcome it. I strongly believe in diversity.
 
Yes this is one. He is Racist, and so is Bush. Bush is a rino though so not surprised.
It should not be normal. Period.

Here is the test to ask yourself. I ask you to only answer this question.

If Biden said. The only candidates who need to apply are White Males. Would you consider that racist?


So I guess we can conclude you support racism and as such are racist yourself. I mean after all, racism isn’t something to hate on Biden for, right?
He supports whatever his party does. Blindly.

How 'independent' of him.
 
You call it racist because he's excluding white people, some call it diversity because he's adding race/sex to diversify the court. It's really how you view it.

My opinion is that it's nothing, so many presidents did similar things. It's politics.

Now to answer your question. If Biden or anyone wanted to add a white person to an all black panel to add diversity, I would welcome it. I strongly believe in diversity.
It really isn’t how you view it. Judging someone by the color of their skin is racism. Period.

I call it racist because it’s racist. Doesn’t matter which race he is

quit being obtuse.

I have a job position available. I am only interviewing white people. Racism. Period.

I have a job position available. I am only interviewing black people. Racism. Period.

same rules always apply

DIVersity is for those that wish to DIVide.

we are one race. A human race.
 
Last edited:
You call it racist because he's excluding white people, some call it diversity because he's adding race/sex to diversify the court. It's really how you view it.

My opinion is that it's nothing, so many presidents did similar things. It's politics.

Now to answer your question. If Biden or anyone wanted to add a white person to an all black panel to add diversity, I would welcome it. I strongly believe in diversity.

He calls it racist because the decision was based on race. If anything he should have also added sexist as the decision was also based on sex.

The SCOTUS was already diverse fwiw.

IMHO, Biden's promise to add a black woman, because she was both black and a woman, cheapened the actual achievement.
 


"President Reagan promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor. President Trump promised to put a woman on the Supreme Court when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, so I'm not complaining about that."
Biden only considered black women for the nomination. Completely different,once again you dont disappoint with your shallow arguments. What if he said the field of nominees is only white women? Nevermind, I don't want to read a b.s. excuse from you.
 
Last edited:
Racism/sexism is OK when it works against white men.

I mean, let's face it, non-white men need help to achieve anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nail1988
Democrats have been pimping out African Americans for almost 200 years. Andrew Jackson, in 1829 became the first Democrat POTUS, he was a slave owner. Democrats lost control of the African American community in America for about 40 years after the civil war - they fixed that…

Joe Biden is a corrupt, racist. This is why Trump in 2020 got the highest percentage of African Americans to vote for him in my lifetime… “Blexit” certainly is growing. This is very, very good (if not fantastic).

I am sure Judge Jackson is brilliant & qualified. However, her nomination & potential approval to SCOTUS has and always will be smeared. She’s going to be disrespected- viewed as Kamala Harris 2.0. That is very sad!

We should be way past this obvious race-baiting. We are not! It shouldn’t be this way…
 
Last edited:
Senator Biden wasn't looking for any diversity when he presided over that shameful "lynching" of Clarence Thomas or that filibuster (now a racist tool according to dems) against a black woman named Janice Rogers Brown. Biden is the biggest racist president we've had since Lyndon Johnson.
 
It really isn’t how you view it. Judging someone by the color of their skin is racism. Period.

I call it racist because it’s racist. Doesn’t matter which race he is

quit being obtuse.

I have a job position available. I am only interviewing white people. Racism. Period.

I have a job position available. I am only interviewing black people. Racism. Period.

same rules always apply

DIVersity is for those that wish to DIVide.

we are one race. A human race.
The definition of racism is the unfair treatment of people who belong to a different race; violent behaviour towards them

The definition of racist is having the belief that some races of people are better than others or having general beliefs about other people based only on their race; showing this through violent or unfair treatment of people of other races

By definition you are incorrect about racism/racist. Just throwing out the word for political purposes just like the hard left.

I'm not shocked that you are anti diversity. Diversity matters because it brings different experiences. Being black, poor, female, suburban will add a different viewpoint than male, rich, white, Asian, rural.

Diversity doesn't divide, people who fights diversity divide.
 
The definition of racism is the unfair treatment of people who belong to a different race; violent behaviour towards them

The definition of racist is having the belief that some races of people are better than others or having general beliefs about other people based only on their race; showing this through violent or unfair treatment of people of other races

By definition you are incorrect about racism/racist. Just throwing out the word for political purposes just like the hard left.

I'm not shocked that you are anti diversity. Diversity matters because it brings different experiences. Being black, poor, female, suburban will add a different viewpoint than male, rich, white, Asian, rural.

Diversity doesn't divide, people who fights diversity divide.
You are ok with racism if your party does it. That's all you had to say.
 
a2f.jpg_large
 
Here's what will happen next: Soon, the media will start to run 'Why racism isn't really that bad' articles. Just like they did with abortion, pedophilia, every moral depravity the dems have.

At first they will say it's ok to be racist against whites, cause well we deserve it of course. Then it will be ok to be racist against SOME minorities, especially ones that tell the truth about the democratic party.

Aw hell, that's already all happening, isn't it? Nevermind.
 
Yes this is one. He is Racist, and so is Bush. Bush is a rino though so not surprised.
It should not be normal. Period.

Here is the test to ask yourself. I ask you to only answer this question.

If Biden said. The only candidates who need to apply are White Males. Would you consider that racist?


So I guess we can conclude you support racism and as such are racist yourself. I mean after all, racism isn’t something to hate on Biden for, right?
They will never answer this, it PROVES how racist they are
 
You call it racist because he's excluding white people, some call it diversity because he's adding race/sex to diversify the court. It's really how you view it.

My opinion is that it's nothing, so many presidents did similar things. It's politics.

Now to answer your question. If Biden or anyone wanted to add a white person to an all black panel to add diversity, I would welcome it. I strongly believe in diversity.
LOLOLOL Answered JUST AS YOU WOULD EXPECT A RACIST TO ANSWER!! LOLOL
 
The definition of racism is the unfair treatment of people who belong to a different race; violent behaviour towards them

The definition of racist is having the belief that some races of people are better than others or having general beliefs about other people based only on their race; showing this through violent or unfair treatment of people of other races

By definition you are incorrect about racism/racist. Just throwing out the word for political purposes just like the hard left.

I'm not shocked that you are anti diversity. Diversity matters because it brings different experiences. Being black, poor, female, suburban will add a different viewpoint than male, rich, white, Asian, rural.

Diversity doesn't divide, people who fights diversity divide.
No...WRONG. THIS is the definition

a person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.

So, if you EXCLUDE ANY group because of their skin color...it is RACIST!! Thick headed much?
 
He calls it racist because the decision was based on race. If anything he should have also added sexist as the decision was also based on sex.

The SCOTUS was already diverse fwiw.

IMHO, Biden's promise to add a black woman, because she was both black and a woman, cheapened the actual achievement.
I don't believe it cheapen the achievement at all. Sometimes in life, things like that are needed for advancement of our country. When Reagan added a woman it was a game changer and helped America see woman in that light. Same with Thurgood Marshall..

Just look at sports. Jackie Robinson was courted because he was black. Nate Northington with SEC football. All were giving opportunities to break barriers. Sometimes, actually most of the times, it doesn’t happen organically. People need help.

This will help and inspire black woman, young girls more then you guys could imagine. Just like Thurgood did to black men or O Conner to white women.

Think big picture
 
No...WRONG. THIS is the definition

a person who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.

So, if you EXCLUDE ANY group because of their skin color...it is RACIST!! Thick headed much?
Where did you get that from? It's not Oxford or Webster.
 
Where did you get that from? It's not Oxford or Webster.
From Webster...


Definition of racism

1: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2a: the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

2b: a political or social system founded on racism and designed to execute its principles

 
  • Like
Reactions: jfegaly
I don't believe it cheapen the achievement at all. Sometimes in life, things like that are needed for advancement of our country. When Reagan added a woman it was a game changer and helped America see woman in that light. Same with Thurgood Marshall..

Just look at sports. Jackie Robinson was courted because he was black. Nate Northington with SEC football. All were giving opportunities to break barriers. Sometimes, actually most of the times, it doesn’t happen organically. People need help.

This will help and inspire black woman, young girls more then you guys could imagine. Just like Thurgood did to black men or O Conner to white women.

Think big picture

As we've discussed, I certainly agree that there was a time and a place for what you're referring to. I believe that we are beyond that.

Also, I think Jackie Robinson was courted because he was both mentally and physically the right man for the job. Also, he actually broke the color barrier. He was the first. That's not the case here.
 
As we've discussed, I certainly agree that there was a time and a place for what you're referring to. I believe that we are beyond that.

Also, I think Jackie Robinson was courted because he was both mentally and physically the right man for the job. Also, he actually broke the color barrier. He was the first. That's not the case here.
Hard to argue now this woman...who's first ruling came down today, got picked because she is a black woman.Brandon has NEVER aid he was choosing someone based off of their credentials.
 
As we've discussed, I certainly agree that there was a time and a place for what you're referring to. I believe that we are beyond that.

Also, I think Jackie Robinson was courted because he was both mentally and physically the right man for the job. Also, he actually broke the color barrier. He was the first. That's not the case here.
Yes we are behind that in a lot of ways as I've said to you before. I'm not opposed to removing laws that enforce giving minorities opportunities. I'm also not opposed to someone looking at the history and saying "it's time". America development in a lot of ways is based on someone saying "it's time".

She would be breaking a barrier. The 1st black female. That would be an historical moment. If she wasn't qualified then I get it but liking her positions or not, she is more than qualified.
 
Hard to argue now this woman...who's first ruling came down today, got picked because she is a black woman.Brandon has NEVER aid he was choosing someone based off of their credentials.
This is a stupid post. Do you think Biden went in a room and said just pick a black woman? He picked the most qualified black woman, something people like you like to leave out.
 
From Webster...


Definition of racism

1: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2a: the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

2b: a political or social system founded on racism and designed to execute its principles

So how does this apply to this case?

1. The white man/majority wasn't given a fair shot?

2./3. The system is designed to oppress white people from being judges?

I don't see how the word correlates with any of this. I don't you remember, so I'm not saying you but anyone calling this act racist or a form of racism is just using the word for trigger points.
 
This is a stupid post. Do you think Biden went in a room and said just pick a black woman? He picked the most qualified black woman, something people like you like to leave out.
I do not "THINK" it...it is EXACTLY what happened. It was a campaign promise. And it disqualified candidates that were more qualified. This lady was given her current job by Brandon...after he stole the election. How is she qualified...other than being a black woman? The reason she is "qualified" is she is the person Susan Rice and hussein told him to pick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nail1988
Yes we are behind that in a lot of ways as I've said to you before. I'm not opposed to removing laws that enforce giving minorities opportunities. I'm also not opposed to someone looking at the history and saying "it's time". America development in a lot of ways is based on someone saying "it's time".

She would be breaking a barrier. The 1st black female. That would be an historical moment. If she wasn't qualified then I get it but liking her positions or not, she is more than qualified.

I'm not saying that she isn't qualified. I'm saying that there were others who were more qualified. Some of them significantly more qualified.

Her nomination was an act of virtue signaling by Biden. That's what I am saying cheapens the very real accomplishment.

A black woman, sure. But we've had women and we've had black justices...so it's not exactly a Jackie Robinson or Thurgood Marshall moment.

I believe she will be confirmed by the Senate with relative ease fwiw. The biggest marks against her are her experience (lack of time in her current role) and the fact that her decisions have been overturned a few times including by liberal judges.
 
So how does this apply to this case?

1. The white man/majority wasn't given a fair shot?

2./3. The system is designed to oppress white people from being judges?

In this case only black women were considered...so anyone who wasn't black and female were given absolutely no shot.

Is it systemic racism? Absolutely not.

Is it an act of racism? I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCSpell and jfegaly
In this case only black women were considered...so anyone who wasn't black and female were given absolutely no shot.

Is it systemic racism? Absolutely not.

Is it an act of racism? I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.
It is the exact definition of racism...unless you falsely believe in "reverse" racism. But racism is racism. If Trump would have said "I will nominate a white woman" what would have been the consequences? What is good for the goose, has to be good for the gander
 
  • Like
Reactions: nail1988
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT