MigL

Always a pleasure discussing things with you CharonY. That is essentially correct. Unfortunately, in today's society, 'style' is what is perceived, not 'substance'. The President should be mindful of people's perception. My apologies. Like you, I sometimes get carried away, trying to make a point. I did quote you ... " if only one group is considered ( that being black females ), it's certainly discrimination." Did you not say that ?

The appointment of KBJ is not discriminatory; announcing beforehand that he would choose a back female does fit your crteria for discrimination. Quote : "If only one group is considered, it's certainly discrimination." Exactly ! Good job sharpening that pencil. There are millions of immigrants in the US and Canada. My parents came to Canada in 1968; my dad worked two jobs and my mother worked nights, so that they could own a home and put my brother and I through school ( my sister chose to become a hairdresser; yes, I have great looking hair ). And we had it very good compared to Italian immigrants to the US and Canada from the turn of the century. Those 'dagos' were certainly disadvantaged, yet they crawled up through the mud and garbage to become valuable members of current society. The same is true of other nationalities, like the Irish, Polish, and other European white males. I don't think these people were in any way privileged, and I don't think they should feel any shame for what a group of your Southern Americans did a couple of hundred years ago ( and some still continue to do ). I wonder, INow, next year, will you be telling the Ukrainian refugees who have come to the US and Canada how privileged they are to be white males ?

Please elaborate. What exactly is 'bad faith' about perception ? Perception is by its very nature, is highly subjective; how do you decide for others whether that personal subjective perception, is in 'bad faith' ? Is this like "Free speech; as long as I agree with what you say" ? *appeared to do only if you ignore pretty much all of the surrounding evidence. * apeared NOT to do, only if you ignore what J Biden actually said.

I would suggest you re-read the entire thread, TheVat, but that isn't going to happen. I will simply say, discrimination is NOT bad; it is done all the time in the process of choosing. Discrimination on the basis of skin color, gender, religion, etc. IS bad, as a matter of fact, it is against the law. J Biden's pre-announcement gave the impression ( whether warranted or not ) to some people, that he was choosing according to skin color and gender. Those people are allowed their own perception, regardless of whether you think it is 'false outrage', political partisanship, or snowflakyness.

If the point you were attempting to make was not precise enough, I suggest sharpening your pencil ( and thinking ). Absolutely. But I'm of the opinion that discrimination ( as J Biden's pre-announcement appeared to do ) is not the way to do it. That is what created this mess to begin with.

SergUpstart fails to see the connection that it is the Ukrainians who are fighting for their lives against the Russian invasion forces; just like the Russians were fighting for their lives against Hitler's invasion forces in 1941. There is no one attacking Russia ! Take off the blinders, and get the hell out of Ukraine.

Used to be 'too bad', and your fault, if you were born black, now apparently it's your fault if you are born white, as INow thinks you have to shoulder the burden of all white misdeeds throughout history. If I was an American Judge, and my president told me he will pick a black woman for the Supreme Court, apparently my delicate ego would be butt-hurt, since I have benefitted from my previous position of privilege. Now I can only speak for the large numbers of Italian immigrants to the US who may have risen to judge status, but 200 years ago, at the height of slavery in the US, and the beginning of my so-called privilege, other Italians, like me, were being oppressed by the Austrio-Hungarian Empire, the French and Spanish Empires, and the Papal States. The Polish and Irish immigrants to the US were also similarly 'privileged', and should also be ashamed of their skin color. I think the American canvas needs to be painted with a much smaller brush, INow. You are missing a lot of detail.

There was talk of Canada sending some Harpoon missiles, outfitted for coastal defense John Ivison: Ukraine asked us for missiles. We sent words | National Post but I have no idea if that got lost in red tape, or if it actually happened.

As I've previously stated, this is my subjective opinion, and I'm not even very concerned about it. I think he made a good choice; but it could have been handled differently, and I wanted to explore that particular viewpoint. What actually concerns me more ( as much as it could possibly concern a Canadian ) is the appointment of SCJustices according to political leaning. When one party is in power, they stuff the Court with their partisan candidates, and when the other party gains power, they do the same, in a never ending game of one-upping each other. The Justices should interpret law according to the constitution, and where outdated, according to societal standards; certainly not according to political expediency

You guys are, of course, entitled to your subjective opinions, as I am to mine. But would you feel the same way if he had announced beforehand "I will pick an old white man" ? I would assume all your arguments for having done his homework and picking the most qualified individual could still be made. As could arguments forsatisfying election promises to his base. But would it not leave a bad taste in your mouth ? He could have easily said "I will pick the person I think is most qualified, regardless of skin color or gender", gone ahead to pick KBJ, and no-one ( except the usual idiots ) would have complained. Not even J Peterson ( ? ), Peterkin.

You can't sue a sitting President either way. And you are still missing the point... No-one is complaining about the selection of KBJ. What 'looks' bad, is the prejudicial announcement of a choice, based on skin color and gender. You can argue all you want that it doesn't look bad, to you, but many people have complained that it does look bad ( even non-Republicans ). And I realise perception is highly subjective, but it is a fact that some people are of the opinion that it looks bad; that is undeniable.

Next time iclude some emojis, so I can tell. You have a weird sense of humor 😃😄 . ( "And that's how we do it", to quote Jayden Smith )

Was that supposed to clarify the term 'optics' ? If so, it fails miserably, 😃 . Let me give it a shot ... If I say I will buy a new vehicle next month, and it will be a red Range Rover Evoque, does that mean that I will consider the merits of an Acura RDX, or a Jeep Grand Cherokee, before making my decision ? Or does it look ( the 'optics' ) like I've already made up my mind ? Now, don't get me wrong, the Range Rover does have some reliability issues, but it is an excellent vehicle. Still, some may feel like my mind was already made up, and I failed to give the Acura, and Jeep, a fair evaluation; and they would be perfectly justified in their reasoning. Now consider how much worse it looks ( optics, again ) when the selection criteria is not 'red' and 'Range Rover', but skin color and gender. Skin color and gender should never be criteria for choosing a candidate; that is the definition of racial and gender discrimination ( it means selecting according to that criterion; there is no such thing as reverse discrimination ) I think some here are so caught up in the 'us vs. them' partisanship of American politics, that that they refuse to believe their 'side' could make a mis-step. J Biden's mis-step ( my opinion ) was not in his selection, which seems an excellent choice, but his announcement beforehand that he would choose according to skin color and gender. And while it is true that J Biden would have to be President for 40 years to equal the number of mis-steps of his predecessor, that shouldn't stop objective observers from pointing out his mis-steps. By the way, I've owned a Jeep Grand Cherokee and an Acura RDX, the Jeep was prone to rust and the Acura is no longer available with the excellent V6, so I considered the Range Rover but decided against it. I may wait another year or two and go electric for my retirement vehicle.

Did you start drinking early this morning ? Now you want to compare what is expected of J Biden with what we already know V Putin is capable of ?

In case there are doubts, I don't have a problem with his choice and nomination of KBJ either. I have a slight problem with his announcing beforehand, the criteria of skin color and gender,; simply because of the 'optics'. Thank you CharonY, for pointing out that L B Johnson and I think alike 🙂 .

By 'we', I mean us on this forum, not idiots like T Cruz. I am pretty sure most of us, on this forum ( Just to be clear ), expect a much saner Presidency with J Biden.

France actually withdrew from the NATO command structure for a period of almost 2 decades, but remained an ally. They are now again fully in, but more than any other member state, have chosen a 'go it alone' policy to weapon systems and development. They are in fact, the only NATO country, other than the US, to have their own nuclear deterrent, and the ability to deliver; the 'Force de Frappe'. Others like the UK and Germany have US nukes, which they have the means to deliver, but require US permission

Why do people keep bringing up past practice when discussing J Biden's selection criteria? Or rather, his pre-announced ( for public consumption ? ) selection criteria, which may be different from the actual ( i would hope ). Society is supposed to be progressing, for the better. 200 years ago, America had slavery; that cannot be used to justify racism today. Saying that was the way it was done, or asking why no-one complained about it then, is really bad use of 'whataboutism'. And comparisons with the Trump administration are really setting the bar low ... I would hope we all expect much better from J Biden.

This is a thread where we are discussing an on-going war that has killed thousands and displaced millions from their homes. Yet some of us think it wise to devote a whole page to discussion about who knows what, or who didn't answer a question, in an attempt to one-up each other in a discussion forum. Petty squabbles should not be this important ( even to you guys involved ), stay focused on the big picture ( Ukrainian- Russian squabble ). Again ? Maybe LaurieAG will say "Make up your mind, France"

I speak English, Italian, French, and can understand some Spanish ... Can I get some SLBM with MIRV nuclear warheads, and a submarine to carry them. Sometimes you need deterrence with your neighbors. I use my backyard for barbeques, and ICBMs would just get in the way.

As a matter of fact, yes. Ever since I was a little kid, I've always wanted to fly jet planes. Unfortunately I've been severely myopic since the age of 6, lost vision in my left eye at the age of 35 when I was diagnosed with glaucoma, had several filtering operations, cataracts, and two eye drops twice a day in my fight to keep what little vision I have left. So I know very well what I'm capable of doing; even my work knows that when I call in sick, I actually can't see well enough to drive in bad weather. I had to settle for being very interested in modern military aviation, and considered attending the University of Toronto for Aerospace Engineering, rather than Physics Not in making the selection. But in announcing beforehand that those are the candidates he is looking for. Does that exclude other candidates who are domiciled? I don't know; but it certainly 'looks' that way.

That is certainly very accurate, and my understanding also. Parse your quoted sentence very carefully, and tell me how it differs from J Biden's pre-announcement " I will pick a black woman for SCJ" ( paraphrased ).

I beg to differ. I'm visually impaired ( only see with one eye , and glaucoma in the other ) and barely able to drive, with no depth perception; I'm not discriminated against if told I cannot fly a plane. I Know I'm incapable of doing so. When did inability to do something become a discrimination ( in the accepted use of the word ) ? To be clear, just in case some are misunderstanding, I think KBJ is extremely qualified, and an excellent choice. But some people are of the opinion that preannouncing his criteria, of skin color and gender, looks bad. And those people are entitled to an opinion and a vote also, no matter how much INow protests that it's 'made up' outrage.

Well this Pollyanna certainly complained about the partisan actions of the Trump administration. I didn't have much to complaina about the Obama administration, and wasn't a member during the GW Bush administration. Or did you mean another Pollyanna ? That is not discrimination; that is inability. And i'n not saying KBJ isn't extremely capable, but that stating beforehand that you will pick a black woman gives the impression that you are discriminating ( or choosing ) according to skin color and gender. In both cases it is how things appear to the masses. Sure, but why announce it beforehand; it gives the impression that qualifications don't matter, just skin color and gender. IOW, whether true or not, bad optics.

Already addressed this ...