Quote:
Originally posted by AKA2D '91
Question 1: The report did not give that information. There are many AA and other minority judges out there. The question is was their ideology like that of the President? or did he care not to appoint them even if they shared the same ideology? If the latter is the case, why not? was it not popular at the time? 
Question 2: You tell me. I'm speaking about Reagan and the all of the 'black" leaders and their careers he's supposedly responsible for (that someone mentioned in this thread).
It wasn't until Clinton's tenure that MORE minorities were appointed to cabinet-level positions.
Obiviously, his lack of inclusiveness is apparent. If it were not apparent, this discussion and many discussions like this would not take place as his legacy is being reviewed and discussed.
|
1) If you're going to insinuate something about a man, at least look for the information. For a person to be a judge, it's quite a long process starting with...law school. So do you really think there were that many black people that had gone to law school back then, became lawyers, became judges, and on and on? And do you know which black judges he didn't appoint given that they shared the same ideology?
2) You seem to have a great measurement system. Reagan had 1 minority in his cabinet and Clinton had more. Since you made an inference to his character based on him appointing 1 black person to his cabinet, YOU should tell me how many blacks were in previous cabinets and how many in succeeding ones. Just so you know President Bush has more minorities on his cabinet than any other president. This doesn't make him seem as though he cares about blacks and it shouldn't. In fact having blacks on your cabinet does not say anything to whether you are or aren't racist.
-Rudey