Well, that is according to a new report by House Democrats. The WaPo took the time to dissect this study
According to the report by the Democrats:
Women made up about 37 percent of the 2,786 political appointees in the Bush administration in 2005, compared with about 47 percent in the Clinton administration in 1997, according to the report and supplemental data released last week by the Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee. Similarly, about 13 percent of Bush administration appointees last year were racial minorities, compared with 24 percent in the fifth year of Clinton’s presidency, the report found.
And what the WaPo found:
What the report does not mention, however, is that Bush has established a record of diversity in his Cabinet. Bush’s Cabinet, which includes the vice president and the heads of 15 executive departments, currently has two Hispanics, two African Americans and two Asian Americans. Three departments — State, Education and Labor — are headed by women, and a fourth, Interior, has an acting secretary who is a woman.
Before Bush took office, no minority had occupied any of the four highest-profile Cabinet positions — attorney general and the secretaries of the Defense, State and Treasury departments. Now, Alberto R. Gonzales, a Hispanic, is attorney general. Condoleezza Rice is the first African American woman to be secretary of state; her predecessor, Colin L. Powell, was the first African American named to that post.
So am I to understand that the Democrats want less diversity in positions that matter and more diversity in positions that don’t matter as much?
Hat tip to Michelle Malkin
49: SFL, you overuse the rolling eyes thing. And once again, you just repeat what someone else said and change it slightly.
Have you no originality? Have you no imagination? Have you no creativity?
39–I wasn’t saying I didn’t believe him, I had just honestly never heard of cats voting. It doesn’t surprise me, though.
Alyssa, there is no limit to the democratic party’s rampant voter fraud here, and i suspect other “inner cities”
First of all… don’t democrats believe in a hard core separation of church and state? If that’s the case….why, every two years, do I have to see liberal democrats (always white..shockingly), attempting to sing gospel and clap their lilly white hands, IN BLACK CHURCHES.with some racist ass “preacher” extolling his robot-like “flock” to vote for this wonderful dumbocrat??? Isn’t that the epitome of church/state????
SF??? Any thoughts? (without your usual “I know you are, but what am I? bullshit)
“Conservative/Fascist/Autocratic/Republican. All variations on a theme: ”
are you kidding me, SF?
Communism has killed more humans than any other ideology in human history..and yet you guys still believe it can work..if only YOU can try it.
“You overuse the rolling eyes thing. And once again, you just repeat what someone else said and change it slightly.”
#1. It’s a good emoticon; it conveys the right feeling without saying anything. If it really bothers you, I’ll stop…
#2. It’s called SARCASIM, Robert. When someone posts something stupid and baseless like you did, it warrants a sarcastic stupid and baseless response. I’m not trying to “copy” you; I’m making fun of the lameness of your statement. Get it now?
Robert, you shouldn’t take personally or get upset during internet political discussions. It just isn’t worth it.
Don’t stop using it on my account, but it is getting shopworn.
Sarcasm is fine when you use some creativity, some imagination. Just repeating (and/or slightly modifying) what someone else posts is boring.
I have to stick up for SF here, he is a pompous, clueless, racist, monolingual, militarily ignorant peacenik…but to attack him for an emoticon???
“Sarcasm is fine when you use some creativity, some imagination. Just repeating (and/or slightly modifying) what someone else posts is boring.”
Posting crap drivel like your Democrat/Communist thing BEGS for a sarcastic reply…
Same goes for crap like “Liberalism is a mental whatever”
All I’m doing is trying to show you, by reversing the words, just how F’ing lame sh*t like that is.
You’re good peoples, Mike Kilo.
Gosh, I must have hit a nerve, pushed a button. SF Lib comes out swinging!
Liberalism is a form of mental illness, and I came to that conslusion more than 10 years before Mike Weiner started his version.
Demcrites, Liberals, Socialists, Communists, all share a common theme. Some just a little more so than others. Here’s two of my favorite quotes:
A Communist is a Socialist in a hurry.
A Socialist is a Communist with no guts.
And another:
The Conservative believes what he sees. The Liberal sees what he believes.
Truer words were never spoken. Now I know these nuggets of wisdom, distilled from the collective experience of many years, are antithetical to you, like a cross to Dracula. But they are quite true, and capture the essence in just a few words (like a Haiku poem) of reality.
Right back at you, SF!!
You go to cha cha cha yet?
59: Do you suppose Mike is being…sarcastic?
SFL posted: “Ask around, and ask the hard hitting questions about why most of their communities vote for the Democrats all the time.”
And you’ll get some meaningless soundbyte answer like “They care about the people” or “George Bush doesn’t care about black poeple” or some other cliched version of the Big Lie that the Democrites and their MSM propaganda arm have been promoting for 60 years.
What they’re talking about are the bennies, doled out in exchange for their fealty. like we have been saying forever.
Robert, that’s where you kind of have to give them credit…to keep this big a lie going for this long??? You have to admire their committment!!!!
Well many of them do truly believe that they have the moral high ground, that they are genuinely trying to do good. They’re misguided, however.
The leadership is completely amoral, soulless, and interested only in their own advancement, promotion, and gratification. Take HilLiary, for example. I truly believe that she has (metaphorically) sold her soul to the devil in exchange for her success.
“Truer words were never spoken. Now I know these nuggets of wisdom, distilled from the collective experience of many years, are antithetical to you, like a cross to Dracula. But they are quite true, and capture the essence in just a few words (like a Haiku poem) of reality.”
“Do you suppose Mike is being:sarcastic?”
No, he and I are utter political opposites, but we both like the same music and that counts for a lot…it’s common ground, of sorts.
But Mike, I only like the first 6 Ozzy albums of Black Sabbath…you’re not a …>shudderDio fan, are you?
“What they’re talking about are the bennies, doled out in exchange for their fealty. like we have been saying forever.”
Oh, come on man….you’re just jealous of the Left for having such a firm grip on the minority vote.
It doesn’t mean Republicans are the party of white people, as much as it looks like it, but it just means that the majority of blacks just don’t like Republican policy.
“It doesn’t mean Republicans are the party of white people, as much as it looks like it,… ”
Yes, with black people in such high positions in the Bush Cabinet, it really does look like republicans are all just for the whites only, doesn’t it?
Hey now, SF.. I’m not completely opposed to a little DIO action!! Heaven and Hell and Mob Rules are both quality efforts, and there are some nuggets here and there from the Tony Martin era….but NOTHING that rises to the level of Master of Reality, or Sabbath Bloody Sabbath..
That’s why you don’t see Ronnie Dio’s munchkin ass in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.
and we are not as politically opposite as it seems, I think we both want smart immigration law enforcement, we both think the war on drugs is an abysmal failure, we both think that Liberal=Terrorist and conservative=nazi is useless, blowhard rhetoric.
What I am trying hard to get you to see is the institutional slavery that exists in the democratic party.
Address just ONE of my points on this subject. Why can’t democrats allow Black parents to free their children from the shackles of those babysitting gulags you people call “public schools”????
“Why can’t democrats allow Black parents to free their children from the shackles of those babysitting gulags you people call “public schoolsâ€????”
Because as bad as the state of public education is right now, it is the universal equalizer (or it should be, if properly funded) here in America and – theoretically – allows for a kid in New York to get the same quality education as the kid in Kansas.
Now, that said, there is a huge problem with funding and neglect of schools in poor neighborhoods…
I don’t support vouchers because it takes money away from public schools and gives it to private…
I’ll get more into it with you when I get back…
I have Jury Duty in one hour…haha…:sad:
(I just need to keep telling myself it’s my civic duty, but god damn, it is sooooo boring)
“and we are not as politically opposite as it seems, I think we both want smart immigration law enforcement, we both think the war on drugs is an abysmal failure, we both think that Liberal=Terrorist and conservative=nazi is useless, blowhard rhetoric.”
Right on…more common ground!
“That’s why you don’t see Ronnie Dio’s munchkin ass in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.”
SFL, the Gov’t skools are getting plenty of money. Just not enough of it gets down to the classroom level.
how can it be about funding when the DC schools spend 10,000 per pupil and have among the worst result, and rural Pennsylvania districts spend a third of that and graduate everyone?
and why are you opposed to private schools? They get results. I suppose it’s better than the 30% of americans in private schools are getting quality educations and the 70% in public schools are getting horrific ones?
wouldn’t 100% of students getting quality educations in private schools be better?? Oh, but then the teachers unions would cease to have any power..and that’s really what its about.
you know what’s funny..I have voted in EVERY election since 1990 and I have NEVER been called for jury duty…nor do I know another single registered republican who has EVER been called for jury duty in Philadelphia…why is that?
not that I want it…but, are they avoiding registered republicans?
I am very fortunate to be able to send my kids to a Catholic school…in Kansas no less…I wouldn’t do it any other way. If democrats are so pro-choice, as they say they are, why not let minority and poor families choose where they want to send their kids? If there is a private school down the street, why not be given that choice? If schools had to compete for business, they might try a little harder to educate kids properly…it’s called free enterprise!
Here in Kansas, some public schools spend close to $10,000 per year to educate one student. Our private school spends $3800, and the kids get a better education!! What does that tell you? And on top of that, our “liberal” State Supreme Court says we have to spend another $500 million a year on education in the state!!! Courts are now telling us how much money should be spend where!!! My taxes are going to go up to pay for the damn schools that I don’t even use!
It’s frustrating just typing about it…I need a beer!
Sandy, right on the money…. why is the liberal answer ALWAYS more money???? (Don’t answer that, we all know)
Tip one up for me! I’m thinking about a Hefe-Weizen today
What’s bad is when we ask where more money is needed and where the money is being spent now, nobody seems to know…not even the Supreme Court. They say we need to spend a hell of a lot more, but they have no clue where all the tax dollars are being spent now. Can you imagine if we ran our businesses or our personal accounts like this? And Kansas is a pretty conservative state overall. I would hate to see the state of New York with their pathetic excuse for schools.
Sandy, well said!:smile: