What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

Published

Something to understand what nurses think about re the Current News and their opinions!

Specializes in Med-Surg.
1 hour ago, Beerman said:

So, how do we know Jackson meets the most important qualifications our president requires?  That is, being a black woman. 

Um...because he nominated her from a field of candidates???  That would be my simple answer.  She meets the qualifications our president requires because he says she does.

Is this a trick question?  If not, then I'll refer you to what the White House statements regarding her qualifications

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/02/25/remarks-by-president-biden-on-his-nomination-of-judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-to-serve-as-associate-justice-of-the-u-s-supreme-court/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/kbj/

Specializes in Med-Surg.
1 hour ago, Beerman said:

What??? 

So, women who have been fighting for equality with men, should now welcome men into the women's realm?

The NCAA over the past 30 years has gone through a lot of changes to make room for more opportunities for woman athletes.

Now, they have allowed what was a average athlete for three years on the men's team to compete on the women's team.  He took a spot on the team and scholarship from another woman.   He won many competitions that should have gone to a woman.  He won a national championship that should have gone to another woman.

Lunacy!

The boxer you showed a pic of absolutely should compete with the woman.  He may or may not do well at higher levels.  They may possibly have rules on hormones and supplements and not be allowed to compete.  That's a choice he made.  

The actress I don't know much about.  I see she has been nominated and won a few best actress awards.  Is she that good, or has been elevated by her trans status?

Rachel Lavine, I don't believe would have been nominated and most if us wouldn't know her if she wasn't trans.

I'm not sure how I feel about sports.  A transgendered female that hasn't been transitioning long is still a female in my opinion (we already agree to disagree).  

I applaud the  NCAA for acknowledging her status as female.  However, I certainly can understand that just barely transitioning gives her an unfair advantage.  My main objection is the people saying "they are letting a full grown man compete".  Maybe because of this situation they might have to start coming up with some qualifications such as hormone levels, or something.  I'm not sure.  

It's interesting that you think the transman boxer should compete in woman's boxing.  Do you think the muscle building ability of testosterone wouldn't give him an unfair advantage?  I imagine outrage of him stepping into a ring and knocking out a woman.  

The actress is well deserving of her accolades.  She did however get the part she's renowned for because it's the part of a trans-woman and the producers wanted to hire trans actors.  Just as "Crazy Rich Asians" wanted to hire all Asians, and Black Panther hired black people for the black roles.

I will acknowledge that Jackson-Browne is getting her position because she's a black female.  The same reason that Clarence Thomas got his because he's a black man and they didn't want an all white Supreme Court after Marshall's death.  The same way Sonia Sotomayor got her position because she's Latinx.  The same Amy Coney got in for being female.  

Sometimes I don't approve of people getting positions like this.  Other times I know the status quo of white only rule would be intact if someone didn't step up to diversify our government to reflect our population.

At the end of the day regardless they have proven to be good justices and were vetted by the senate before getting in.  They had other qualifications besides their race and gender.   Don't you think?

People act like her being a black woman is the only thing that qualifies her.  

 

Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
1 hour ago, Tweety said:

Um...because he nominated her from a field of candidates???  That would be my simple answer.  She meets the qualifications our president requires because he says she does.

Is this a trick question?  If not, then I'll refer you to what the White House statements regarding her qualifications

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/02/25/remarks-by-president-biden-on-his-nomination-of-judge-ketanji-brown-jackson-to-serve-as-associate-justice-of-the-u-s-supreme-court/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/kbj/

Gee, I dunno.  The Federalist society said ACB and BK were qualified to sit on the court.  Are they the only arbiter of competency?  If that is true, we would be inundated with folks who want to live in the 18 century because they claim to have intimate knowledge of the framers' minds.  How anyone thought BK has a great legal mind has not much of a mind themself..

1 hour ago, Tweety said:

My main objection is the people saying "they are letting a full grown man compete".

Why are you objecting?  A year ago, he was unquestionably a full grown man.  Has anything changed, that much?  Have you seen pictures of him?  A muscalar 6'4" tall athlete.  He went from very average male athlete to a female athlete who dominated elite women's competitions.  In less then a years time.

It's ludicrous anyone thinks she should be admired.

 

1 hour ago, Tweety said:

People act like her being a black woman is the only thing that qualifies her.  

Biden came out and declared that's what he was looking for.  So, what was expected when a name was associated with it?

And, really.  What else qualifies her?

Specializes in Critical Care.
4 hours ago, Beerman said:

So, how do we know Jackson meets the most important qualifications our president requires?  That is, being a black woman. 

That's actually a totally appropriate response.  It was inappropriate for Biden to state his criteria was based on the race and gender of the candidate.  This is yet another example of Biden being, generally speaking, a moron. 

I think the only thing that the sociopathic conservative wing gets wrong about this is that this is a recent development due to some sort of age-related degeneration, he's always been a moron.

I realize it seems weird for me to agree with a poster who isn't man enough to even acknowledge I exist, except as "Cliff Clavin", which is a reference that to be honest I still don't get, but regardless, I agree with the criticism.  

Specializes in Med-Surg.
11 hours ago, Beerman said:

Why are you objecting?  A year ago, he was unquestionably a full grown man.  Has anything changed, that much?  Have you seen pictures of him?  A muscalar 6'4" tall athlete.  He went from very average male athlete to a female athlete who dominated elite women's competitions.  In less then a years time.

It's ludicrous anyone thinks she should be admired.

 

Biden came out and declared that's what he was looking for.  So, what was expected when a name was associated with it?

And, really.  What else qualifies her?

 Again, we will agree to disagree on whether or not a trans woman should be considered a woman.  I don't care how ridiculous you find it. 

Please stop asking me what else qualifies her.  She's not some black woman they picked out of housekeeping just because she's a black woman.  I already said she's been targeted because she's a black woman.  I sent you the links as to why Biden thinks she's qualified, and there are articles upon articles that state that she is qualified.  She went to an Ivy League school, she did Supreme Court clerking, she was a public defender, she was on the sentencing commission, she was a district judge, and she was a court of appeals judge.  Since you keep asking, this is I think qualifies her for consideration.     

Obviously I'm an armchair quarterback and I don't really know anything about what qualifications a justice should have.  But I do know what I've read and over and over analysts are saying she has the experience and qualifications.  But I don't really know,  which is why I'm asking you to stop asking me.  I'm not the expert.

I don't even think Republicans have issues with her experience and qualifications.  It's so broad they are able to go through it and ask "well why did you rule this way in this case?", "why are you on a board of a school that teaches CRT?" and the usual trying to get to their stance on hot topics like transgender issues, abortion, etc.  All this is fair, it's what Senators do.  But they are going after issues, not saying she isn't qualified from her experience.

For any job position, it isn't always filled by the absolute best of the best and most qualified of the most qualified.  If that were the case in the Supreme Court it would be easy.   But even when it was said he was going to pick an African American female to make history and have representation there were many candidates to choose from.  Graham made his bitterness that his candidate wasn't chosen loud and clear.    

Is it fair that all white male candidates were automatically not considered.  Probably not and I believe I said so in these threads weeks ago and TMB disagreed with me that I said he shouldn't narrow the field like that.  

But does this make her unqualified?  No it does not.  Are there better candidates?  Just ask a republican senator and I'm sure they would pick someone else.  

 

10 hours ago, Beerman said:

Why are you objecting?  A year ago, he was unquestionably a full grown man.  Has anything changed, that much?  Have you seen pictures of him?  A muscalar 6'4" tall athlete.  He went from very average male athlete to a female athlete who dominated elite women's competitions.  In less then a years time.

It's ludicrous anyone thinks she should be admired.

 

Biden came out and declared that's what he was looking for.  So, what was expected when a name was associated with it?

And, really.  What else qualifies her?

It's odd that you don't have any idea how the woman might be qualified beyond her female blackness that was Biden's intention to elevate. That suggests that either you aren't interested enough to investigate or that you aren't interested enough to get beyond partisan rhetoric. Why do you think that you don't know what qualifies her at this stage of the game? Do you think that most republicans are confused about her qualifications? Maybe that's an issue with conservative media. 

It's not likely that Russia can maintain a long term occupation of these Ukranian cities. 

Specializes in Med-Surg.

McConnell understandably will not support the nomination of Jackson-Browne, citing one reason being her rulings contrasted with the three Trump appointees.  (Duh)

Again, it doesn't seem he's saying she doesn't have the qualifications for the job, but that he's concerned about how she's ruled in the past and how that would reflect on how she would rule in the future.  This is fair.

Quote

McConnell also indicated that Jackson has too slim of a record from her near-year on the D.C. Circuit. During her tenure there, she has issued two written decisions, which McConnell contrasted with the number of opinions from Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanugh and Amy Coney Barrett during their years on the federal appeals court.

 

Quote

Jackson has authored more than 570 decisions in her tenure on the federal bench, the vast majority of which are from her eight years on the federal district court in Washington. Still, McConnell said some of her decisions there, namely her sentencing record, is "troubling."

 

 

36 minutes ago, Tweety said:

McConnell understandably will not support the nomination of Jackson-Browne, citing one reason being her rulings contrasted with the three Trump appointees.  (Duh)

Again, it doesn't seem he's saying she doesn't have the qualifications for the job, but that he's concerned about how she's ruled in the past and how that would reflect on how she would rule in the future.  This is fair.

 

 

It is to be expected that Republicans will vote along partisan lines for this confirmation as they do for the vast majority of Senate business. There were no actual areas of concern about the judge's qualifications raised by republican senators during the hearing, their comments were largely centered upon issues of race, child Mediaography and abortion...sound bites for political campaigns. 

Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
58 minutes ago, Tweety said:

McConnell understandably will not support the nomination of Jackson-Browne, citing one reason being her rulings contrasted with the three Trump appointees.  (Duh)

Again, it doesn't seem he's saying she doesn't have the qualifications for the job, but that he's concerned about how she's ruled in the past and how that would reflect on how she would rule in the future.  This is fair.

 

 

So McConnell wants a rigid idealogue so that we can predict all the decisions in advance?

GOP lawmakers push historic wave of bills targeting rights of LGBTQ teens, children and their families

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/25/lgbtq-rights-gop-bills-don't-say-gay/

The Utah governor recently vetoed republican legislation aimed at transgendered youth. He said he would prefer that those young people didn't feel marginalized to the degree that suicide appears an attractive option.  

+ Join the Discussion