LOL.. Having voted for this VP might be even worse than voting for tcg

[VisorBoy]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was qualified to be VP. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

[hokie80]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

[VisorBoy]

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history), have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

[RiverguyVT]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

Is it?

Is it any more racist than advancing the attitude that blacks need you to look out for them, that they are incapable without your help?

That question is just bewildering and demonstrates a lack of understanding of these issues, I'm sorry to say.

Yes, of course it takes changes in the systemic structures in order to reduce injustice caused by those very structures. And the proprietors of those structures are the ones who are needed to change them.

You do realize that slaves didn't rise up and pass manumission into the US Constitution, don't you? It took the people in power at the time to (finally) admit the existence of the 200 years of their supporting an oppressive structure, and to formally end slavery.

Duck
Dive
Dodge

What didn't you understand? I answered your question.

No, you didn't.

[VisorBoy]

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

And we know that is why she got the job……just like the next SCOtUS appointment…….

Sandra Day O'Connor was a diversity hire. I'm a big fan.

O’Connor was qualified and happened to be a woman.

Qualification should be first and foremost. Race, sex, intersectionality………a distant second.

Kamala Harris is objectively qualified to be VP.

[hokie80]

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history), have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Biden has played identity and race politics above all else.

[VisorBoy]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

And we know that is why she got the job……just like the next SCOtUS appointment…….

Sure, if you're going to say that, among all qualified candidates, she was considered because she had a different background (and hence perspective) than other candidates and other people in the administration, go ahead.

But when you say that someone is a diversity hire, it implies (and you've since explicitly stated) that the person of color is not qualified. It is extremely derogatory.

[hokie80]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

And we know that is why she got the job……just like the next SCOtUS appointment…….

Sure, if you're going to say that, among all qualified candidates, she was considered because she had a different background (and hence perspective) than other candidates and other people in the administration, go ahead.

But when you say that someone is a diversity hire, it implies (and you've since explicitly stated) that the person of color is not qualified. It is extremely derogatory.

I would suggest there were far more qualified people for the job.

She was picked to get several demographics.

Women. African Americans and Indians. And people who sleep their way to the top.

[HokieFanDC]

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

There are plenty of black women who would be qualified to be VP. Biden's list of candidates was awful. Harris, Stacy Abrams, Karen Bass, Susan Rice. Awful.
I think Val Demings would have been good, definitely better.
The problem was that they were going for well-known black women that ppl would applaud, not going for the best candidate.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history), have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Biden has played identity and race politics above all else.

[HokieFanDC]

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

There are plenty of black women who would be qualified to be VP. Biden's list of candidates was awful. Harris, Stacy Abrams, Karen Bass, Susan Rice. Awful.
I think Val Demings would have been good, definitely better.
The problem was that they were going for well-known black women that ppl would applaud, not going for the best candidate.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history), have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Biden has played identity and race politics above all else.

There are plenty of black women who would be qualified to be VP. Biden's list of candidates was awful. Harris, Stacy Abrams, Karen Bass, Susan Rice. Awful.
I think Val Demings would have been good, definitely better.
The problem was that they were going for well-known black women that ppl would applaud, not going for the best candidate.

[HokieHam]

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

Kamala Harris got the job because she checked two boxes:
-Person of color
-Woman

That is what qualified her, in democrat eyes. Dems.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

He sure is.

[HokieHam]

This is what a diversity hire gets you….LOL…..

That is racist.

No. It’s not. It is by you wokies,

It plainly is racist to suggest that someone got the position they have because of their race and not because of their qualifications.

And we know that is why she got the job……just like the next SCOtUS appointment…….

Sure, if you're going to say that, among all qualified candidates, she was considered because she had a different background (and hence perspective) than other candidates and other people in the administration, go ahead.

But when you say that someone is a diversity hire, it implies (and you've since explicitly stated) that the person of color is not qualified. It is extremely derogatory.

She WAS a diversity hire…..first and foremost. As others have said, there are far more qualified people than Kamala to be VP. Heck, she was out after the first round in the primary. She’s unlikable and unqualified. That….is evident.

[HokieHam]

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was considered qualified. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

There are plenty of black women who would be qualified to be VP. Biden's list of candidates was awful. Harris, Stacy Abrams, Karen Bass, Susan Rice. Awful.
I think Val Demings would have been good, definitely better.
The problem was that they were going for well-known black women that ppl would applaud, not going for the best candidate.

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history), have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Biden has played identity and race politics above all else.

There are plenty of black women who would be qualified to be VP. Biden's list of candidates was awful. Harris, Stacy Abrams, Karen Bass, Susan Rice. Awful.
I think Val Demings would have been good, definitely better.
The problem was that they were going for well-known black women that ppl would applaud, not going for the best candidate.

Yup.

[RiverguyVT]

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

She was qualified to be VP. That's why she was hired. Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.

That's the racism. Right there. Couldn't have said it any more straightforwardly.

No, that isn't racism.

She was qualified to be VP.

She isn't remotely qualified. Anyone that has ever listened to her speak knows this. She's never done anything.

That's why she was hired.
She was hired because she's black, and because she's a woman. To people that think like you do, her sex and her color ARE qualifications. They are not. They are attributes but not qualifications. One has nothing at all to do with the other. To confuse color and sex with qualification is itself a form of bigotry and racism.

Saying it was because of race or sex is treating her differently than you do every other VP candidate who's ever lived and who is not a different race or sex.
No, saying it was because of race and sex is stating the obvious, given the lack of character and intellectual and idea-based qualifications.

It also implies she is not qualified for the job.
Imply nothing. She is not qualified for the job. Period.

It is racist of you to look only at race, and not character. Refusal to criticize a black person, or woman, because they are black (or a woman) is bigotry.

[RiverguyVT]

Sure, if you're going to say that, among all qualified candidates, she was considered because she had a different background (and hence perspective) than other candidates and other people in the administration, go ahead.

But when you say that someone is a diversity hire, it implies (and you've since explicitly stated) that the person of color is not qualified. It is extremely derogatory.

You make a mistake in conflating color and qualification.
No one has said she isn't qualified because she's black.
In fact, many are saying qualification is irrespective of color.

You're basically saying she's beyond examination because she's black. That's racist.
You have a plantation mentality. That's racist.

This particular person is NOT qualified. She just happens to be black. There are others unqualified that are not black. There are qualified people that are black.

You have a bad case of Khendi-itis.

[RiverguyVT]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

[RiverguyVT]

You really are this naive, aren’t you?

yes, he is... and you're only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

[RiverguyVT]

What didn't you understand? I answered your question.

You didn't remotely answer the question.

Answer it. (Or, are you going to do your usual drive by self-righteous (which is a sin) indignation, give an unrelated speech and leave?). <---That is your M.O. here.

Answer the question:

Is it?

Is it any more racist than advancing the attitude that blacks need you to look out for them, that they are incapable without your help?

From where I sit, your world view (in blue, just above) is pretty damn racist.

A simple yes or no would suffice.
Answer.

[HokieFanDC]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

[RiverguyVT]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

Visor is absolutely racist. A well-intended racist, perhaps...sure, but racist nonetheless. When he sees a black person, he sees someone that needs taking care of. He sees a pitiable creature. IIWII

As for your "it won't happen organically" -- absolute bullspit. Does a two-term Obama ring a bell?

[HokieHam]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

I’m just saying if that is what you focus on, first and foremost for a position, you are not doing your company or your nation any favors. I did not mean that if you hire a black, Latino or whatever minority, or a woman for a position that they will automatically be a bad hire or unqualified. There are PLENTY of people who ARE qualified who happen to be of whatever race or sex. It’s clear to me that KH was chosen only for the latter and as you said in a previous post, for her supposed “popularity”, if you could even call it that. She had 0 experience, like Quayle. You listed others above who were or would have been bad choices for any position.

Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable.

I agree most of these choices ARE political……which really sucks, but it is DC.

[HokieFanDC]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

I’m just saying if that is what you focus on, first and foremost for a position, you are not doing your company or your nation any favors. I did not mean that if you hire a black, Latino or whatever minority, or a woman for a position that they will automatically be a bad hire or unqualified. There are PLENTY of people who ARE qualified who happen to be of whatever race or sex. It’s clear to me that KH was chosen only for the latter and as you said in a previous post, for her supposed “popularity”, if you could even call it that. She had 0 experience, like Quayle. You listed others above who were or would have been bad choices for any position.

Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable.

I agree most of these choices ARE political……which really sucks, but it is DC.

"Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable."

That statement pretty much validates my point. If, and, some, and, and.

[HokieHam]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

I’m just saying if that is what you focus on, first and foremost for a position, you are not doing your company or your nation any favors. I did not mean that if you hire a black, Latino or whatever minority, or a woman for a position that they will automatically be a bad hire or unqualified. There are PLENTY of people who ARE qualified who happen to be of whatever race or sex. It’s clear to me that KH was chosen only for the latter and as you said in a previous post, for her supposed “popularity”, if you could even call it that. She had 0 experience, like Quayle. You listed others above who were or would have been bad choices for any position.

Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable.

I agree most of these choices ARE political……which really sucks, but it is DC.

"Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable."

That statement pretty much validates my point. If, and, some, and, and.

No, it doesn’t. I’m not saying “if” said candidate exists. I’m saying they do exist and if they are put forward for higher office, then…….

I’m sure you can find many in politics who have women and minorities as their “right hand” person. They have surrounded themselves with sound people of the same ideology. If they are a good candidate/politician, they will have well qualified people around them to appoint to whatever said candidate feels they will be best at doing.

[HokieFanDC]

Oh come off it. If you're willing to defend a comment made about the VP that she's not qualified because she's black and female (note that only she is targeted; the one black, the one female VP in history),have it. But then who is being naïve by claiming the comments aren't racist...

Except... no one said that.
they (i) am saying she isn't qualified because she's an idiot.

No one said she isn't qualified because she's black. That's your invention. And that's your racism surfacing. (again, I may add)

Ham did say this, "This is what a diversity hire gets you". If you take those words at face value, it means that if you hire someone that is a woman or black, you are going to get a crappy candidate.

I don't really think Ham thinks that, or meant that, or that he is a racist.
I also don't think Visorboy is a racist. History has demonstrated that absent someone making a conscious decision to choose a non-white male for a position like VP, or POTUS, it won't happen organically.

We've had 4 female VP candidates (Harris, Ferraro, Palin) and one POTUS candidate (Clinton).
And the first female SCOTUS member was also a diversity hire. They were chosen because they were female and/or of color. I don't think anyone who made those choices was racist or sexist. They were simply playing politics (and for the most part, failing).

I’m just saying if that is what you focus on, first and foremost for a position, you are not doing your company or your nation any favors. I did not mean that if you hire a black, Latino or whatever minority, or a woman for a position that they will automatically be a bad hire or unqualified. There are PLENTY of people who ARE qualified who happen to be of whatever race or sex. It’s clear to me that KH was chosen only for the latter and as you said in a previous post, for her supposed “popularity”, if you could even call it that. She had 0 experience, like Quayle. You listed others above who were or would have been bad choices for any position.

Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable.

I agree most of these choices ARE political……which really sucks, but it is DC.

"Meh, I don’t know about your second point that it won’t happen organically. I think if a candidate(political) is well known and surrounds himself with good people, some of those will be of said persuasion and said candidate would know their capabilities and choose to put them forward because he/she knows they’re capable."

That statement pretty much validates my point. If, and, some, and, and.

No, it doesn’t. I’m not saying “if” said candidate exists. I’m saying they do exist and if they are put forward for higher office, then…….

I’m sure you can find many in politics who have women and minorities as their “right hand” person. They have surrounded themselves with sound people of the same ideology. If they are a good candidate/politician, they will have well qualified people around them to appoint to whatever said candidate feels they will be best at doing.

So, you agree that there are qualified women/minorities. Yet, to date, there have been exactly 4 women selected as a VP/POTUS candidate.
That is an example of how minority/women are not being selected, organically.

[VisorBoy]

What didn't you understand? I answered your question.

You didn't remotely answer the question.

Answer it. (Or, are you going to do your usual drive by self-righteous (which is a sin) indignation, give an unrelated speech and leave?). <---That is your M.O. here.

Answer the question:

Is it?

Is it any more racist than advancing the attitude that blacks need you to look out for them, that they are incapable without your help?

From where I sit, your world view (in blue, just above) is pretty damn racist.

A simple yes or no would suffice.
Answer.

You didn't like my answer perhaps, but it's there. Tell me what you don't understand about it.