The Biden Cabinet and Transition Thread (1 Viewer)

[GrandAdmiral]

Ok the rules:

• Your post can only contain one department and guess.
• You may post more than once for different departments.
• Post can contain comments about previous guesses.
• Guesses for one department can be used for other departments.
• Minds can, of course, be changed.

I will kick things off first...

Secretary of State: Susan Rice

This is as clear a choice as there can be. She has all of the credentials and rep to begin healing as relationships with our allies.

 

[SaintForLife]

It's amazing how often, when someone asserts that there's "not a single shred of evidence", they really mean, "I ignored that evidence." But I'm sure that's not the case here, and that there really isn't contemporaneous evidence showing that Kristen Clarke didn't hold those views, and was using satire to expose double-standards and hypocrisy. I'll just take a few seconds to Google and check though.

Oh.

Call for Retraction Not Professional | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson

I was infuriated by the lack of professionalism in The Crimson's editorial demanding that Black Students Association (BSA) President Kristen

www.thecrimson.com

And seriously, finding people who didn't get satire in 1994 does not show that something isn't satire. It shows that satire whooshed over people's heads back then as well.

It's amazing how you think Clarke "clarifying" what she really meant after her article received criticism is somehow evidence of satire. Can you point out anything in her original article that shows that it was really satire? What about the other instances of her own racist past?

 

[SaintForLife]

Oh, and I am absolutely going to say “I told you so” about using the National Review as a source without fact checking.

Oh look. You are crying about other people's sources again. Should I start complaining about every source you post or should I just state what's inaccurate?

 

[SaintForLife]

Didn’t you argue that it was terrible to go into Kavanaugh’s past to dig up dirt on him?

It's getting exhausting that you to keep assigning a view to me simply for me pointing out something isn't accurate.

I could care less what Clarke said in college, but I will point out how obvious it is that she's lying. There is nothing in her article that indicated it was satire and an after the fact "clarification" after she received criticism doesn't show that it was satire.

 

[RobF]

It's amazing how you think Clarke "clarifying" what she really meant after her article received criticism is somehow evidence of satire.

Huh. See, I think it's amazing that you give the opinion of an angry crank who can't use google more weight about what an article means than you do the author of the actual article, but there you go.

Can you point out anything in her original article that shows that it was really satire?

Yes. The contents.

What about the other instances of her own racist past?

Yeah, I'm not here for the literal whataboutery. Just pointing out the article you linked to was inherently flawed having simply ignored the evidence it claims doesn't exist in its headline. Ignorance of evidence is not absence of evidence.

 

[SaintForLife]

Huh. See, I think it's amazing that you give the opinion of an angry crank who can't use google more weight about what an article means than you do the author of the actual article, but there you go.


Yes. The contents.


Yeah, I'm not here for the literal whataboutery. Just pointing out the article you linked to was inherently flawed having simply ignored the evidence it claims doesn't exist in its headline. Ignorance of evidence is not absence of evidence.

An yet you try to claim that her clarifying her article after criticism is evidence of satire. The contents lol.

 

[RobF]

An yet you try to claim that her clarifying her article after criticism is evidence of satire. The contents lol.

Yes.

Additionally, the article you linked, the letters it linked to, and your own posts, are not just in themselves evidence that it's satire, they're evidence that's it's highly effective satire too. Still effective more than a quarter of a century after it was written!

 

[samiam5211]

An yet you try to claim that her clarifying her article after criticism is evidence of satire. The contents lol.

The author claiming it is satire, is pretty strong evidence that it is satire absent evidence to the contrary.

 

[SaintForLife]

The author claiming it is satire, is pretty strong evidence that it is satire absent evidence to the contrary.

If I write and article and after it receives heavy criticism can I just say it's satire?

 

[samiam5211]

If I write and article and after it receives heavy criticism can I just say it's satire?

Yes.

Are you still trying to say that the intro to the article in question was not satire? Even with the corroboration from a primary source written at the time?

 

[MT15]

Oh look. You are crying about other people's sources again. Should I start complaining about every source you post or should I just state what's inaccurate?

Dude, you’re the one who keeps posting from the shirt sources. You posted a very biased hit piece and then you cry about it when it’s pointed out. You are not a victim here.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Her statement is absolutely true. Have you not read our founding documents...

Criticism of slavery was removed from the Declaration of Independence just so it wouldn't piss off the southern states and the delegates would sign it.

The original Constitution is riddle with white supremacy (3/5 clause ring a bell)?

 

[SaintForLife]

Dude, you’re the one who keeps posting from the shirt sources. You posted a very biased hit piece and then you cry about it when it’s pointed out. You are not a victim here.

Cool. I will now complain about every source you post without saying what's inaccurate. When will you be posting something from the Lincoln Project guys, Iraq War David Frum, & disgraced Andrew Wiseman again?

 

[MT15]

Lol, you already do that. Plus I didn’t say what was wrong with your article because Rob did a good job of that already. Didn’t want to seem to be piling on.

 

[SaintForLife]

Her statement is absolutely true. Have you not read our founding documents...

Criticism of slavery was removed from the Declaration of Independence just so it wouldn't piss off the southern states and the delegates would sign it.

The original Constitution is riddle with white supremacy (3/5 clause ring a bell)?

Slavery is one thing, but it's quite a stretch to claim “White supremacy is weaved into our founding documents and principles.” Doesn’t weaved make it seem like white supremacy is a core part of our constitution?

What principles of the US are white supremacy? What about the 13th amendment?

It is very odd that she called the UN Human Rights Council, that includes China, Cuba, Libya, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and Venezuela, trailblazers.

 

[samiam5211]

Slavery is one thing, but it's quite a stretch to claim “White supremacy is weaved into our founding documents and principles.” Doesn’t weaved make it seem like white supremacy is a core part of our constitution?

What principles of the US are white supremacy? What about the 13th amendment?

It is very odd that she called the UN Human Rights Council, that includes China, Cuba, Libya, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and Venezuela, trailblazers.

The 3/5 compromise should be all the evidence you need to see what she means.

 

[SaintForLife]

The 3/5 compromise should be all the evidence you need to see what she means.

If its weaved throughout our constitution white supremacy must show up in other areas too right? Didn't the 13th amendment cancel out the 3/5?

Who are the trailblazers on the UN Human Rights Council?

 

[samiam5211]

If its weaved throughout our constitution white supremacy must show up in other areas too right? Didn't the 13th amendment cancel out the 3/5?

Who are the trailblazers on the UN Human Rights Council?

I just picked on very obvious example.

Since black people were property at the time, pretty much anything dealing with protecting property rights has a dash of white supremacy.

 

[coldseat]

Slavery is one thing, but it's quite a stretch to claim “White supremacy is weaved into our founding documents and principles.” Doesn’t weaved make it seem like white supremacy is a core part of our constitution?

What principles of the US are white supremacy? What about the 13th amendment?

It is very odd that she called the UN Human Rights Council, that includes China, Cuba, Libya, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan and Venezuela, trailblazers.

I'm trying to understand I you can disconnect slavery from white supremacy in this country?

The 13th amendment wasn't part of our "founding documents and principles", which is what she was commenting on. That came later.