Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin
According to the article, the main focus of diversity in the White House is on the color of the skin. I'm trying to understand what the color of someone's skin has to do with whether they'll be an effective member of the government. Why is so much importance being placed on how people look instead of how qualified they are?
|
The main focus is to appoint qualified individuals. A diversity of backgrounds and experience is an added benefit. But you just wont accept that.
Instead you ignorantly claimed they were all from wealthy families, elite social status and benefited from the best private schools and therefore werent so diverse.
I would ask you again since you never answered.....who among Obama's announced (or rumored) appointments do you think is not qualified?
Bush also promoted diversity in his cabinet.
Here is the difference, using the Secretary of Labor as an example.
Bush appointed Elaine Chao as Secretary of Labor, the first asian-american to serve in any cabinet. A bright woman by any measure, but absolutely NO experience in the field of labor relations. She is the wife of Senator Mitch McConnell, so that probably earned some points with Republicans.
A leading candidate for Obama's Secretary of Labor is Mary Beth Maxwell, who would be the first openly gay member to serve in any cabinet. Her qualifications -- founding Executive Director of American Rights at Work, a national labor advocacy organization, and more than 15 years of experience in the field of labor relations.
See the difference?