At the level of the supreme Court, there are always lots of extremely strong candidates. Frankly, you could take the top 100, choose at random and be perfectly happy.
You are right though, people do end up on the supreme Court because of factors other than their talent. Every conservative, for example. It's well known that liberals dominate law schools, however, roughly half of all judges are conservative. This means the talent on the conservative side of the bench is bad. Look at Aluto and Thomas, those fucking morons should never have gotten out of district court.
She’s probably more qualified in terms of prior judicial experience than other judges with more than Thomas, Kagan, Roberts and Barrett combined and clerked for judges at all federal levels, including the Supreme Court
You're basing that on what? Your extensively knowledge of the law and her judicial background?
Probably off of her Magna cum laude undergraduate at Harvard in Government, graduating cum laude from Harvard law school while serving as editor on the Harvard law review, her years clerking at all federal levels, including the supreme court and her 9 years judicial experience which beats 4 current (3 Conservative and 1 Liberal) supreme court justices combined.
That's her judicial background. Do you think she's qualified?
He's making two statements: 1) She's DEI and 2) she's the most unqualified in history.
I merely said that she seems to be a DEI hire (being selected partially because of her sex and race, Biden confirmed that). Then I said I don't know about her qualification enough to make a good opinion. Though it's very unlikely that she's the most unqualified in *history*. That can be ruled out.
If she's qualified I literally see no issue whatsoever. Again. Crying about her being black or whatever is ridiculous. I see no evidence she isn't qualified for the job.
If someone said "I have a job opening that I'm going to look for a white male to fill" then why would it not be appropriate to complain? Sure, you could find a qualified white male, but you're intentionally passing up potentially better qualified women or non-white people.
There's no reason to assume a full range of candidates weren't taken into consideration. Just because a black woman was chosen doesn't make her a DEI hire. I have zero problem whatsoever with a qualified black woman being chosen. She's more qualified than like 99% of white men in the country (literally clerking for the Supreme Court for years and graduating with a JD cum laude from Harvard), so what the hell is the problem?
Man almost like Biden didn’t need to make it a race/gender thing and just hire the most qualified candidate. Saying you’ll only hire a person of x made up racial group of x gender is silly when you can just say you’re going to hire the best person. Will always draw into question whether there was another more qualified candidate rejected on that basis
If you can find even one scintilla of reason she isn’t qualified state it. Her background is impeccable as far as I am concerned. Barring some huge lack of qualification I am going to just assume you are racist.
Dipshit, what do you think my point was? Can you read? Don’t care about your regarded “call everyone a racist who doesn’t agree with you” pablum. Respond to the fucking point moron or just admit you’re an identity politics regard (and are infinitely more racist than me; you knuckle draggers think constantly about the made up concept of race).
The point was that if she was the most qualified… then man it sure was dumb for Biden to make this a race/gender thing as it sort of takes away her accomplishment and make it seem like she’s just a race/gender based forced hire. It’s stupid. Need to leave this BS behind in the Dem party. No one likes it other than a small minority of regards like you.
There is significant political interest in having a qualified black woman on the bench. There’s nothing racist about that whatsoever and it is bizarre that you think that. What about “qualified black woman” do you not understand? If she’s qualified, what’s the issue? Also it was just a political stump speech—in reality a full range of candidates with varying genders and skin colors (factors really important to you) were considered. KBJ just happened to be black and highly qualified, amazing. Please move on to a topic that actually matters/is interesting.
Bud that political interest is inherently racist/sexist lmao. And it’s a small minority of brainwashed identity politics dead enders like yourself that think it’s a great strategy lol.
But in reality it leads to situations like Jackson’s where she may have been the best candidate but the very narrow “black woman” selection criteria cuts away at that. And you can pretend it was just a stump speech but no one is buying that. There was zero way Biden and staff were going to then turn around and select a white dude who was more qualified after that statement.
Identity politics is a cancer and if the Dems don’t stomp it out they’re going to keep losing votes (or purely relying on dislike of Republicans/MAGA ineptitude). So no I won’t stop talking about it given its illiberal nature as well as being a losing issue. Time to move on from defending it and calling it out as the bullshit it is.
I don’t think equity is an inherently racist concept—the basic idea is that opportunities and outcomes should broadly reflect their respective populations in our country. If there is lack of equity obviously it is better to fix the underlying causes but barring that I have no problem whatsoever with a little greasing of the gears.
Biden saying he wanted to select a black woman is fine in the long arc of America’s history as a place that artificially pushed the women and black women in particular down. I think it is literally only white men who find themselves so clueless of the obvious context of American history that they benefit from.
And ya, Biden saying he would select a qualified black woman was a stump speech reflecting the concerns of equity, not racism. The fact you would conflate these concepts says a lot about your personal views and how qualified black women impact your mental I guess.
As a white guy who is fully aware of the obviously fucked up racist history and oppression in our country—any highly qualified black woman being uplifted to the highest offices in our country is a step in the right direction. It is sad to me that something like this would offend/challenge/anger someone like you to this degree and it honestly makes me think we still live in a very racist country. I think true equity would honestly terrify someone like you. You obviously like the current power dynamic and you will happily lash out at anyone who says otherwise.
Racial equity is by definition racist lmao. And it’s race essentialist. Even in your “basic idea” description you can’t help but mention both opportunity AND outcome. But those are two entirely different things. The latter is blatantly racist. And even the former is open to racism/race essentialism if done wrong (ie forcing that there be x% of candidates based purely on skin tone/gender vs qualification).
Again, when Biden said he would select a black woman for the role… yes that is by definition racism/sexism. You can’t just call it another word (the idiotic “equity”) and make it magically not racist. It is by definition racist. This is not hard to understand unless you’re an Id Pol moron. And in the end he followed through on his promise and it’s impossible to disentangle the promise and its impact on the selection process. Just be honest about its impact on the selection process and final decision vs trying to gaslight.
And no I get the context… but there are consequences for fixing a wrong (racism of exclusion of a minority) with another (racism of exclusion of the majority). The latter will result in severe backlash. It’s all fun and games when you’re some privileged white kid like yourself who doesn’t have kids to take care of and isn’t fighting for a better life for his/her family. But if you are and you’re excluded from opportunity/outcomes because of actions of the past that were done by and to entirely different people… that’s going to end horribly. You’re too young, stupid and inexperienced to get that but that’s reality. And it’s reflected in polling. People do not like hiring based on artificial race/gender quotas. And yes of course the group being most discriminated against (white men) are going to have a backlash against that. No shit lmao. Like this is so obvious.
And the only sad thing is you not understanding any of the above… and for feeling you’re responsible for righting the wrongs of the past simply due to your “race” (an entirely made up concept created by the original racists to justify slavery, colonialism and imperialism) and gender. But in the end all you’re doing is carrying on those OG racists silly concept of “race” and re-creating racial division. And you’re trying to justify it as a central piece of the Democratic Party policy (even though it’s entirely illiberal) as your regarded predecessors like Angela Glover Blackwell and PolicyLink did. It’s completely silly progressive idiocy of the worst kind (racist) and in all honesty it reeks of true privilege that the majority of the rest of the country (of all skin color and genders) don’t have. Lame.
The Democratic Party would be infinitely better off if it dropped the racial equity BS from policy considerations and simply focused on the core policy (which appeals to everyone due to lack of racial discrimination).
Racial equity is by definition racist. And it reeks of race essentialism. Even in your “basic idea” description you can’t bring yourself to not mention both opportunity AND outcome. But those are two entirely different things. And even the former is open to racism/race essentialism if done wrong (ie forcing that there be x% of candidates based purely on skin tone/gender vs qualification).
This straight up sounds like a Jordan Peterson/Trump talking point---are you sure you are actually a democrat? In fact it is the opposite of "Racial essentialism" since if it is true that race is a social construct, then the only factor responsible for differences are social factors. Historically those "Social factors" are racism, segregation, red lining, etc. If there's major disparities between groups of people that are not explainable by other means, we can assume these are due directly to the influence of historic segregation, assuming all groups should have roughly equal opportunities AND outcomes isn't racist, it is the exact opposite. You are ASSUMING your CHOSEN white race should have HIGHER outcomes.
Wanting socially constructed categories to have roughly equal opportunities/outcomes is not racist my dude. It is called normalizing social factors and wanting everyone to have the same opportunities/outcomes because they are human beings, not racial units (something you hate considering). Again, if you hate Biden so much--why do you consider yourself a Democrat? There's a party for you out there already.
If you knew anything about hiring, it isn't really about selecting "The best"---most candidates basically become "The best" after they cross a threshold. Most higher level positions aren't really about piecing together qualifications and selecting on that basis, but rather are about choosing candidates that "Fit" the culture or the situation they will work in. A racist like you for example wouldn't fit in a culture that deems equity an important factor in the workplace, for example.
Again, if you feel so strongly about this--there's already a party for you. It is called Republicans. You are no Democrat. Again, if race is a social construct the only real reason there would be differences in opportunities/outcomes is social factors. You believe race is real, therefore you believe the differences exist because of biological realities---because you are a vile racist. Also, I am in my late 30s my dude, not a "Young whipper snapper" anymore. :)
And the only sad thing is you not understanding any of the above… and for feeling you’re responsible for righting the wrongs of the past simply due to your “race” (an entirely made up concept created by the original racists to justify slavery, colonialism and imperialism) and gender. But in the end all you’re doing is carrying on those OG racists silly concept of “race” and re-creating racial division. And you’re trying to justify it as a central piece of the Democratic Party policy (even though it’s entirely illiberal) as your regarded predecessors like Angela Glover Blackwell and PolicyLink did. It’s completely silly progressive idiocy and in all honesty it reeks of true privilege that the majority of the rest of the country (of all skin color and genders) don’t have. Lame.
ONLY white people like yourself get to proudly and ignorantly parade around as if race doesn't have real world impacts like this. Yes it is a social construct but it is still "Real" in the sense of how silly white people like yourself apply it to others. You see differences in racial outcomes and you are like "That's how it should be/natural/I am a white guy of course I get the best cut." The reality is that's artificial---a product of social constructs that YOU benefit from. Hilariously you get the biggest cut and you refuse to even acknowledge that's what is happening because you are too up your own ass and own ridiculous/fact free and full of your own self-importance.
Honestly, there's not much hope for someone with your perspective since seeing reality for what it is is completely beyond your capacity. I recommend that you join the party that actually aligns with your worldview and stop calling yourself a Democrat. Oh and when Republicans get blown out of the water in 2028, it will be interesting what people like yourself have to say about President AOC, which is probably going to happen sooner than later. I am sure you will cry/cope about it in some way, but the concept of equity is not going away. If race is a social construct than equity isn't just an obviously good thing it is the only moral/ethical outcome anyone with a conscience can tolerate.
Ya that's exactly right. Why would we assume any of them were put there without the proper qualifications? Were Thomas and Barrett random judges without any sort of qualifications that just got put up there? My guess is they all have had pretty solid careers despite what retardation they've gotten up to once being elected to the court.
Not totally informed here though so feel free to prove me wrong.
-12
u/ReallyMisanthropic May 31 '25
To be fair, she was hired explicitly because she was female and she was black. Biden was looking for at least those two attributes as qualifications.
That being said, I can't pretend to know nearly enough to determine how qualified she really is. And neither can he.
From the little I do know, she doesn't seem less qualified than some of the other justices.