Transparency - Not!

[TheMercenary]

Looks pretty bad for ole Holder and the DOJ since Obama took office...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...prss=rss_print

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Do you have any proof of this new prevailing attitude?

because it really sounds like you're the one being racist right now.

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

So blame Bush and Mukasey for their actions.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

That is the law. Some might suggest it is racist, I would disagree.

Of course you do, it is your job.

But under your standards, why is Bush's AG Mukasey not the racist, given that he was the one who initiated the employment discrimination case against Dayton, not Holder, and he, not Holder, was the one who agreed to the settlement that lowered the testing standards?

Holder was enforcing the court order as required by the law.

I never said Mukasey was not. I said Holder was, and there is ample evidence that Holder and the Obama Administration pushed the issue to drop any cases that were not dealing with minorities only. That is a huge difference.

Hell, Holder should be brought up on charges if they find out he knew about the ATF gun sales that lead directly to the death of an agent on the border.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

So blame Bush and Mukasey for their actions.

Are they still in those jobs?

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Of course you do, it is your job.


I never said Mukasey was not. I said Holder was, and there is ample evidence that Holder and the Obama Administration pushed the issue to drop any cases that were not dealing with minorities only. That is a huge difference.

Hell, Holder should be brought up on charges if they find out he knew about the ATF gun sales that lead directly to the death of an agent on the border.

Your prejudice is blatant and non-productive as is repeating baseless charges.

[TheMercenary]

Hardly baseless charges. They are quite public.

A new supervisor, Julie Fernandes, arrived to oversee the voting section, and Coates testified that she told lawyers at a September 2009 lunch that the Obama administration was interested in filing cases - under a key voting rights section - only on behalf of minorities.

"Everyone in the room understood exactly what she meant," Coates said. "No more cases like the Ike Brown or New Black Panther Party cases."

Fernandes, through a department spokeswoman, declined to comment.

A few months later, Coates requested a transfer to the U.S. attorney's office in South Carolina. When colleagues scheduled a farewell lunch, one lawyer who attended said Coates vented his frustrations, criticizing the department for failing to enforce the law "on a nonracial basis.''

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Holder and the DOJ illegally withheld documents pertinent to the case. The case was dropped because of the new prevailing attitude that cases not involving "minority" cases were not going to be followed, racism.

Originally Posted by DanaC

Do you have any proof of this new prevailing attitude?
because it really sounds like you're the one being racist right now.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What prevailing attitude. Cases should be taken on merit, not race. Just because a person is white does not mean they can not experience racism. Just because a person is some other color than white does not mean standards should be lowered to ensure that people with less merit are promoted above those who previously met the standards for promotion.

You tell me what prevailing attitude. You're the one who suggested it.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Your prejudice is blatant and non-productive as is repeating baseless charges.

It is not prejudice to ask for equal protection and treatment under the law. Not what we are currently getting from Obama, Holder, and the DOJ.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

You tell me what prevailing attitude. You're the one who suggested it.

Read the link and get back to me.

[DanaC]

Which link? I asked a simple question about what you classified as a 'prevailing attitude' and then you seemed to back off it.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Hardly baseless charges. They are quite public.

I think it was Abigail Thernstrom, the very conservative Republican vice chairman of the Civil Rights Commission who said (paraphrasing) hearsay and unsubstantiated allegations from former Republican appointees to the DoJ are hardly evidence of some vast conspiracy within the DoJ.

Yet, those who are predisposed to believe, will believe and take it as fact.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

I think it was Abigail Thernstrom, the very conservative Republican vice chairman of the Civil Rights Commission who said (paraphrasing) hearsay and unsubstantiated allegations from former Republican appointees to the DoJ are hardly evidence of some vast conspiracy within the DoJ.

Major fail on your part Shillster....

The complaint went to Christopher Coates, the section's chief. A respected voting expert, Coates had been hired at Justice during the Clinton administration after a stint with the American Civil Liberties Union. His name appeared in an internal watchdog report criticizing politicized hiring at the division during the Bush administration. The report referred to him as "a true member of the team."

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Which link? I asked a simple question about what you classified as a 'prevailing attitude' and then you seemed to back off it.

I am not backing off of it. This is one, you will have to go back through the threads to look up the others.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...prss=rss_print

[TheMercenary]

You all enjoy! Off to cook some steak on the barbie!