Obama Picks Eric Holder To Be Attorney General

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I don't think you know how these studies are conducted. Here's a quick writeup in slate with a link to a study. Text

That's not a link to a study; it's a link to an abstract of a study. It sounds fascinating, but I'd like to read all of it, and not just a summary. I also question what exactly it proves.

From the abstract: "The results show significant discrimination against African-American names: White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews." I'm not so sure that indicates racial bias as much as it indicates name bias. We all have certain preconceptions, many of them subconscious, regarding certain names. Do you think more people would choose as a heart surgeon, someone named Stewart, or someone named Billy Joe? Who sounds sexier, Christina or Matilda?

 

[ultra laser]

Why must the American public continue to invoke the racist and anachronistic one-drop rule? This man is clearly not entirely Black, so please stop labeling him as such.

 

[alchemize]

Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: alchemize
I guess I won't bother asking a 3rd time, troll.

Anyone else feel like describing how Clinton, Holder and Emanuel represent change?

If the existing political culture is cronyism and corporate influence, then maybe hiring strictly based on qualifications for a given job represents the kind of change that I'm interested in. I'll be the first to admin though that it could all blow up in our faces - the election was two weeks ago, so who really knows?

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Yep.... more "change".... :roll:

Don't you think if people wanted a White House full of Clinton cronies they would have voted Hillary in?

Agreed, wonder when we will ever see this change that was sold througout the election?

Well, it's pretty tough to bring any change when you aren't even president yet.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Farang
He should name all his black appointments first just to freak people out a bit.. if there is a streak of like 3-4 people will probably start talking and it will amuse me

LOL, indeed. They are already busy spanking each other over the 1st one. Keyboard sales will be up next year with all the frothing going on. :thumbsup:

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Yep.... more "change".... :roll:

Don't you think if people wanted a White House full of Clinton cronies they would have voted Hillary in?

Agreed, wonder when we will ever see this change that was sold througout the election?

Well, it's pretty tough to bring any change when you aren't even president yet.

I will grant you that, and you made the first legitimate point in the thread from the Obama fluffers. But the point that I believe is quite correct, is Obama is not surrounding himself (yet) with anything but clinton cronies, including Billary! Sounds like the anti-bush to me who surrounded himself with Bush Sr. cronies.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

Well thanks for pointing that out but its pretty early on in the game to make any assumptions.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

Well thanks for pointing that out but its pretty early on in the game to make any assumptions.

I'm not making assumptions. Bringing on the old Clinton team and people like Dasshole is not "change" from the politics as usual that he kept spouting off about. Once they actually start running things then we'll be able to judge the performance for "change". You people can't hide behind the "he's not in office yet" excuse for everything. He promised "change" and has done nothing but bring in people who are politics as usual types.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

Well thanks for pointing that out but its pretty early on in the game to make any assumptions.

I'm not making assumptions. Bringing on the old Clinton team and people like Dasshole is not "change" from the politics as usual that he kept spouting off about. Once they actually start running things then we'll be able to judge the performance for "change". You people can't hide behind the "he's not in office yet" excuse for everything. He promised "change" and has done nothing but bring in people who are politics as usual types.

"you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand" <<<< is an assumption.

and thats fine, feel free to make those types of assumptions...I still say its early and he isn't even President yet.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

Well thanks for pointing that out but its pretty early on in the game to make any assumptions.

I'm not making assumptions. Bringing on the old Clinton team and people like Dasshole is not "change" from the politics as usual that he kept spouting off about. Once they actually start running things then we'll be able to judge the performance for "change". You people can't hide behind the "he's not in office yet" excuse for everything. He promised "change" and has done nothing but bring in people who are politics as usual types.

"you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand" <<<< is an assumption.

and thats fine, feel free to make those types of assumptions...I still say its early and he isn't even President yet.

You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

Well thanks for pointing that out but its pretty early on in the game to make any assumptions.

I'm not making assumptions. Bringing on the old Clinton team and people like Dasshole is not "change" from the politics as usual that he kept spouting off about. Once they actually start running things then we'll be able to judge the performance for "change". You people can't hide behind the "he's not in office yet" excuse for everything. He promised "change" and has done nothing but bring in people who are politics as usual types.

"you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand" <<<< is an assumption.

and thats fine, feel free to make those types of assumptions...I still say its early and he isn't even President yet.

You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

OHHH I see.

Well I guess the flip side of that argument is that he could have chosen people from Chicago in which case people like yourself would be claiming "Chicago Style Corruption!!! OHNOESS!!

or he could have chosen relative nobodies in which case people like yourself would be claiming "OMG TOTAL LOSER Newbies RUNNING THE GOVERNMENT OHH NOESSS!@!@!@!Obama is such a NAIVE DUMBFVK!!!"

I THINK, you have to consider that maybe the right people for the job have always been around but never chosen. And we haven't even seen how these people will perform in these selected roles.

I'm opportunistic that they will perform admirably, whether they are "politics as usual" or not I will leave that conversation up to you and your friends.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: alchemize
Daschle for HHS You can't make this shit up!

/cue the "but it's change from Bush!"

Yep, and don't mind his wife is a big time lobbyist. No issue there though....she's leaving that firm and starting her own....

I am glad to see people like you two having a hard time accepting these choices.

Makes me confident that Obama is on the right track.

Thank you.

I have no problem with his choices - they are his to make. However, what we are pointing out is that he is bringing no "change" when he brings in old Clinton people and old longtime politicians like Dasshole. IE - you people who hoped in one hand and shat in the other are just stuck with a turd in your hand.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

How about people who weren't part of the business as usual Clinton era? I don't much care who he appoints though - like I've stated - it's about the BS "change" from the "politics as usual" crap BHO sold people.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Sounds like another C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

How about people who weren't part of the business as usual Clinton era? I don't much care who he appoints though - like I've stated - it's about the BS "change" from the "politics as usual" crap BHO sold people.

Uhh... he's not president and I don't see how appointing someone who is well-qualified to be attorney general isn't change, particularly considering the muppets that occupied that position in the Bush administration. You're already biased to hating the guy despite the fact he hasn't spent one minute as AG, just like your blasting Obama before he even gets started.

 

[Throckmorton]

What about Chiquita Banana? Is it bad that he represented them? Is it a conflict of interest?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

How about people who weren't part of the business as usual Clinton era? I don't much care who he appoints though - like I've stated - it's about the BS "change" from the "politics as usual" crap BHO sold people.

CLINTON IS NOT THE PRESIDENT. OBAMA IS NOT REPLACING CLINTON. OBAMA IS REPLACING BUSH.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

How about people who weren't part of the business as usual Clinton era? I don't much care who he appoints though - like I've stated - it's about the BS "change" from the "politics as usual" crap BHO sold people.

Uhh... he's not president and I don't see how appointing someone who is well-qualified to be attorney general isn't change, particularly considering the muppets that occupied that position in the Bush administration. You're already biased to hating the guy despite the fact he hasn't spent one minute as AG, just like your blasting Obama before he even gets started.

What's with you people not reading what I posted? I have no problem with him as the choice so far. HOWEVER, the choice of a Clinton era guy is not the "change" from the politics as usual that he was promising.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY



You don't seem to understand what I've stated. So far BHO's appointments have been politics as usual - not "change"from politics as usual. We are talking about the picks- NOT what they have done, because obviously they aren't in the WH yet. People "hoped" for change but so far all they have is the turd of politics as usual.

I'm curious as to who would satisfy you as a pick or are you just hungry to point as many fingers, as quickly as possible?

Forget to read the thread?

Hence why I'm asking you who you think would be a change. It's axiomatic to say it's Obama's choice to make, but I'm curious if you can actually offer up someone who you personally would think would be a wise choice and a change.

How about people who weren't part of the business as usual Clinton era? I don't much care who he appoints though - like I've stated - it's about the BS "change" from the "politics as usual" crap BHO sold people.

Uhh... he's not president and I don't see how appointing someone who is well-qualified to be attorney general isn't change, particularly considering the muppets that occupied that position in the Bush administration. You're already biased to hating the guy despite the fact he hasn't spent one minute as AG, just like your blasting Obama before he even gets started.

What's with you people not reading what I posted? I have no problem with him as the choice so far. HOWEVER, the choice of a Clinton era guy is not the "change" from the politics as usual that he was promising.

Seems to me that it's a change from politics as usual from the last 8 years. If there was one valid complaint for the Right regarding Obama's promise of change it's that he wasn't very specific. I don't recall him saying that he'd not put experienced people in his Administration.