DISQUS

AMERICAblog: Hispanic leaders demanding "another Hispanic" in the Cabinet (they already have two)

  • RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago
    Liberals do NOT acknowledge "quotas," even though they like them. They call them "goals" or something like that.
  • Akaison · 11 months ago
    Neither do conservatives, although they clearly have them with their interest groups in the form of Christian Conservative grads from schools like Liberty University, etc. But, let's pretend that's also not about quotas.
  • RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago
    Sounds good. Note that the religious nutbars you mention are not selected on the basis of race, gender or ethnicity, just on their ability to spew religious crap and their claim to heterosexuality.
  • boloboffin · 11 months ago
    And there is no thought of a fairness limiting the number of str8 religion spewers. They pump in as many as they think they can get away with.
  • RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago
    Yup. They would be seen as the comic-psychos that they are, but for the fact that there are so many comic-psychos who validate their acting-out.
  • John B. · 11 months ago
    How about Obama pick the best PERSON for the job, not the best stereotype.
  • John Aravosis · 11 months ago
    Well, after intentionally choosing a diverse cabinet of blacks, white, women, Latinos and Asians - but no gays - we're far beyond the "don't pick someone based on their self-identification" bs.
  • KarenMrsLloydRichards · 11 months ago
    This is how Identity Politics is fucking us up. Obama is right to try and move beyond. E Pluribus Unum, baby!
  • John Aravosis · 11 months ago
    Move beyond? He pandered to every single ethnic, racial and gender minority except gays and lesbians. Suddenly, when we're the only key Democratic constituency deemed pariahs we're expected to "move beyond"?
  • KarenMrsLloydRichards · 11 months ago
    Off topic, but this just in: Norm got shot down by the MN Supreme Court.

    Bill O'Reilly's head should be exploding right now.
  • jcgraham77 · 11 months ago
    We rae the only key Democratic constituency who never takes their vote anywhere else or sits it out. And they know this.
  • yawn · 11 months ago
    ok so let's figure this out. Where do we go/what do we do. I need a plan. Do we "just stay home" during the midterms? Do we all focus our energy on some progressive third party for a single election? I agree that we need to look like a threat. We have a stereotype of being weak, and the Dems believe that to be true. I think we can sacrifice one good election to make a point. Hell if we all stayed home or voted for Dennis Kucinich in 04 and 00 we still would have ended up with W.
  • jcgraham77 · 11 months ago
    I think a third party....a real grass roots effort to cross over to a third party...it would freak the dems out and have the repugs salivating.
  • yawn · 11 months ago
    good, I for one would love to see a truly progressive third party be a viable option. I'm willing to sacrifice a few years of repub rule if it balances out. I've already lived my entire adult life under W. What I think could really happen would be Libertarians, business minded Repubs, Joe Lieberman, fiscal conservatives, Ron Paulers, and conservative/moderate dems, form a third party. Let the theocrats keep the Republican party, and let the Dems get a really progressive platform. I think we could easily sustain 3-4 parties if people actually voted on their beliefs rather than regional or religious identification. I'm ready to scare the dems as they are now. Perhaps gay folks should start pushing for IRV so we can make a statement without taking the blame for loses.
  • timncguy · 11 months ago
    I think we need to push for some gay friendly legislation BEFORE the mid-term elections. I believe Obama has already put out the word that DADT won't be repealed during the first two years. Well, wat about ENDA or hate crines legislation during the first two years?

    There are certainly enough people in the administratino and congress that they could multi-task and accomplish these two things along with fixing the economy.

    ENDA legislation is already there from a couple of years ago. Just ADD the geneder identity to it and do it.

    Hate crimes should be easy too. All it encompases is ADDING sexual orientation and gender identity to EXISTING hate crimes laws. IT's not like you have to come up with new laws.

    JUST DO IT. And then stand by and watch Rick Warren oppose ALL of it.
  • teammarty · 11 months ago
    E Pluribus Unim? As long as you STFU except when we tell you to stand to and pray or else. Make sure you profess how "free" you are. Maybe if you zieg heil good enough, we might consider you to be part american
  • wearing out my F key · 11 months ago
    obama should go for the hat trick- a gay-hispanic-woman. OOOOH! maybe a gay-hispanic-woman who's blind, or has to use a wheelchair, or something like that. maybe a gay-hispanic-woman-handicapable who's left handed. that's it. a gay-hispanic-woman-handicapable-lefty.
  • Indigo · 11 months ago
    We gays are the entertainment. Hasn't anyone noticed how the new gay neighbor on "Desperate Hausfruas" prances in his pretty kimono? Oh, and some dancing-bear-band from San Francisco will be playing their instruments in the inaugural parade. How much more dare we hope for? After all! Harvey Milk. Matthew Shepard. What was the point?
  • Indigo · 11 months ago
    I hope that sounded angry.
  • RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago
    It didn't sound angry, but your points are well-taken.
  • RevDrBillyBob · 11 months ago
    Richardson is only half-Hispanic ? Hello ? Perhaps he should be replaced by another "half-Hispanic" ? Ah ... the difficulty of these quota questions. . . . At least McCain had a closeted gay guy (Lindsay Graham, Senator from So. Carolina) as one of his advisers, He also had a cross-dresser of unclear sexuality (Rudy Giuliani) as an adviser.
  • Andy · 11 months ago
    "The list included Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), who turned down the U.S. trade representative post"
    -I may just be crazy, but shouldn't turning DOWN a post count in the "offered" section... Just saying, if you had it offered, you can't complain if it doesn't happen again.
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    Well, why aren't gay community leaders demanding an appointment??? Who would those "gay community leaders" be? Name them. Those of the HRC? Please. No guts and in bed with Washington elite. Ellen? Rosie? Barney Frank?

    That leave you John. I'm serious. I can't think of anybody else who has the guts and the knowledge of the workings of Washington.
  • caphillprof · 11 months ago
    until gays learn how to inflict real pain on the Democrats in DC (Congress and/or the White House), there will be no respect

    it's violence, real or imaginary, that produces results in DC

    remember when aids activists shut down Wall Street. immediate change.

    remember when the Minnesota farmer shot and killed the banker come to foreclose his farm; within 48 hours a farm relief bill was passed by the congress and signed by the president

    gays probably don't need death and destruction; perhaps a concerted effort to out the closet cases on both sides of the aisle. They want bipartisanship, well let's give them some.
  • RobertSanDimas · 11 months ago
    Good one!!! Bi partisanship. :)
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    Correct, but there is no vehicle to exercise GLBT power. We've depended on Dems and that goes nowhere. Something else is needed.
  • Boycottutah · 11 months ago
    Or maybe withdrawing our financial support and creative energy as well as our votes might also make an impact.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    I'm sure there will be those who may be offended by my observation/opinion and I apologize in advance. The incessant ranting and complaining over whether someone is gay or of particular ethnic or national descent just seems to be getting old and is starting to sound like static.

    How about we let the President Elect assemble his cabinet with those that he deems BEST QUALIFIED ON THEIR MERITS?

    Barrack Obama has already had to face more challenge than any other presidential candidate in U.S. history and is already facing more challenge than any other President Elect in U.S history.

    How about we give him a little breathing room? Just a thought...
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    There's nothing wrong with asking for a GLBT appointment. If "no" is the anwer, we act on that response. if yes is the answer, we act on that one. He has all the breathing room in the world. We are just asking a question.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    I beg to differ...I don't believe he has 'all the breathing room in the world' I'm only guessing, but I imagine the machinations and pressure of not only Washington, but also international politics would literally crush almost any of us. Not to mention the literal dung heap Bush has left for Obama to clean up.

    The last administration had virtually only one qualification for appointments; loyalty to Bush. If we impose upon the President Elect that there be appointments that satisfy only one qualification, that being that they be a GLBT, then isn't that similar to the politics of the past?
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    Apologies. I never meant to suggest that he has a lot of breathing room on all issues. However, on the issue of cabinet selections, I think there certainly is much breathing room and I meant my statement to apply to that circumstance. Also, I don't think I've indicated that GLBT is the ONLY measure for cabinet selection. That would be foolish. I am stating that, just as there are qualified Hispanics, African Americans, etc., there are qualifed GLBT persons who should be considered and potentially selected. That is why the question should be asked. In fact, we know there are GLBT candidates with superior qualifications to fill certain cabinet positions, but have been passed over.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    I guess then what I am asking is- all things being equal (two extremely well qualified individuals, one GLBT and one not); does insisting that a GLBT be appointed, simply because they're GLBT, do more for the GLBT"s than focusing on the issues?

    Seems to me there were/are numerous openly gay/lesbian individuals within the Republican party. How's that been working out?
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    First question - Yes

    Second question - I'll have to use the cliche of "that's mixing apples and oranges". Openly gay republicans? Like? Jeff Gannon? I'm stumped.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    And what if one of those 'openly gay republicans' were deemed well qualified and appointed to satisfy the 'GLBT' qualification?

    And why can't a well qualified non-GLBT do as much for the GLBT cause?
  • timncguy · 11 months ago
    please name any OPENLY gay republicans.
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    I guess I'll have to respond it more stark terms. I do not believe an "openly gay republican" can adequately represent GLBT interests. They are sell outs plain and simple. Look at the McCain Campaign and the LCR's.

    Why can't a well qualified non-GLBT do as much for the GLBT cause? One small example would be asking Rick Warren to perform the invocation at the inauguration. Walk a mile in my shoes, baby!

    As timcnguy and I said before, who are those openly gay GOPers?

    Oh, I know. Larry Craig!!!!
  • Johnny · 11 months ago
    You're spot on right. All this bickering and sniping, insisting Obama have a checklist of groups making sure he picks a person from every one is just stupid.
    As a gay man I don't give wet willy if there's a gay person in the cabinet. I DO CARE if they get the freakin' economy back on track and clean up all the Cheney/Bush crime messes.
    BTW... Jews aren't represented? I thought Rahm Emanuel was Jewish?
  • devlzadvocate · 11 months ago
    Really? Really? You really don't care where or how or who represents your GLBT interests? Considering that you mention "Bush/Cheney messes", I would expect that representation would be kind of important to you. Those "messes" include denial of your rights over that past eight years. GLBT people in a presidential administration can help protect those rights and give status to the community. Nothing is gained by not asking for those appointments. Everything is to be gained by asking for them. Think about it.
  • Johnny · 11 months ago
    Of course I care about my rights. But that is not the pressing issue at the moment. Appointing a gay person to a cabinet post isn't going to right the wrongs of Prop 8 or any number of other injustices. The USA at this point is sort of like a house on fire. Put out the fire and THEN I'll worry about the other stuff.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    ridiculous to suggest that a gay cabinet member would impede economic recovery. stop the nonsense.
  • Johnny · 11 months ago
    No... I'm not saying that a gay candidate would impede economic recovery at all. I'm saying find the best qualified person for the job and take the "is he gay/hispanic/jewish or whatever" nonsense out of it.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    when you bring up the house on fire, you're implying there are no eligible gay candidates except those who would keep the fire burning.
  • Johnny · 11 months ago
    *Yawn* No... I'm not. I'm simply saying the person's sexual nature is immaterial and he/she should be chosen because of his/her expertise and experience.
    If they happen to be gay, fine. Or Latino. Or Jewish. Or what the hell ever.
    Jesus Christ suckin' a silly straw, it's NOT that difficult.
    Well... unless... you're LOOKING for reasons to feel slighted, in which case it doesn't matter what anyone says.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    actually you said that gay rights are unimportant unless there are no other "pressing issues". that would be never. now you are weighing in against affirmative action. you're all over the place.
  • Johnny · 11 months ago
    Enjoy the paisley sky and cotton candy rain in your world. It has to be better than this one. '-)
  • nicho · 11 months ago
    How about he give himself a little breathing room, instead of doing things that are guaranteed to be controversial. Did he really think that people were going to sit still for Rick Warren? If he did, then I question his judgment. Does he really think he can say nice things about the LGBT community and then not follow through? Does he really think he can run against the failed Bush economy and then copy its most disastrous policies?
  • Boycottutah · 11 months ago
    The thing is that there are so many extremely well qualified LGBT people, yet it is the one group Obama ignores. It is looking more and more like this administration is going to be one of the worst if not the worst in recent history for the LGBT Community.

    And to those of you who tell us to STFU, maybe you think our votes and money do not matter, perhaps the LGBT Community should withdraw our support from the Dems and we shall see if you really can afford to keep throwing us under the bus.

    Team Obama makes me think that being a gay Dem is about as smart as being a gay Republican. Both parties don't care about our basic human rights.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    And what about extremely well qualified folks that aren't LGBT?
  • nicho · 11 months ago
    Well, when you have a whole bunch of peple who are "extremely well qualified," then you use another metric to make a decision between them. Otherwise, we'd just appoint them alphabetically or by height or something else. It's no sin to appoint an extremely well-qualified LGBT person in order to assure that the interests of all Dem-leaning demographics are represented in the administration.
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    RE: "...when you have a whole bunch of people who are "extremely well qualified," then you use another metric to make a decision between them."

    EXACTLY MY POINT! THANK YOU! How about the metric being someone who the President Elect 'feel's most comfortable with? Who the President Elect 'feels' has the best potential? Who perhaps 'synergizes' the best?
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    mr. obama synergizes best with men who are turned on by firm pouting titties i guess. i'm not comforted at all.
  • Topher · 11 months ago
    They're all of the ones already appointed, smarty.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    at least in the GOP, we wouldn't be all the way at the bottom, which is reserved for blacks and hispanics in their party.
  • HereinDC · 11 months ago
    John,
    You're sort of a community leader.
    You've been outspoken.

    Don't you think you are a community leader?

    I think in this 21st Century.....A community leader encompasses the internet too.
  • quark · 11 months ago
    Great idea - let's all get in touch with a one of those nasty anti-gay members of the Obama transition team. I recommend you call Fred Hochberg, Roberta Achtenberg, Elaine Kaplan, Michael Guest, Rick Stamberger, Brad Kiley, or Thomas Soto.
  • nicho · 11 months ago
    Where are the gay people in a policy-making position, not a window-dressing tokenism position?
  • An_American_Karol · 11 months ago
    After the disappointment from the passage of Prop 8 and the Warren debacle, picking an openly gay person would send a message to the gay community that they are valued.
    Let's hope Obama does not miss this opportunity to heal a festering wound.
  • JR · 11 months ago
    Re: the headline on this: Please try not to make it sound like a children's argument over toys.
  • Klamchip · 11 months ago
    Don't forget American Indians. I have seen none named as of today. We may not be big, but have pretty much always been Dems.
  • nicho · 11 months ago
    It seems like he's "reaching out" to everyone -- except the people who put him in office.

    That made Michael Dukakis a one-term governor his first time around. It could happen to Obama. Dukakis shut out his supporters in an effort to appear "bi-partisan." When he needed help in his re-election bid, the people he stiffed stiffed him in return, and the people he "reached out" to laughed in his face.. Politics is all about "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours." Except that Republicans will allow you to pander to them and then they'll turn their back on you or, worse still, attack you openly.

    I have already unsubscribed from all Dem lists asking me for support -- financial and otherwise. I'll see what happens before making any decisions about 2010 support.

    I gave Obama money I really didn't have. So far, all I've gotten is a big "fuck you very much" in return, along with requests for more money to enable him to continue to pander to bigots.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    here's my suggestion. gays and lesbians will support Latino/a executive appointments if hispanic groups will call for gay/lesbian appointments. that's how it should work.

    OT: Obama just made a seriously progressive appointment for assistant AG:
    http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/05/dawn-johnse...
  • Andrea · 11 months ago
    The intersections of oppression cannot be solved by cabinet appointees. Someone here mentioned a gay Hispanic woman to be appointed, as a joke almost, to further be able to meet a "goal". As a queer Latina who is politically involved, I cannot express to you how frustrating it is to be tokenized in a room full of white people in activist meetings. Hispanic Americans struggle to be looked on as something other than migrant workers, to be respected no matter their last name, so it is easy to see why we need political visiblity to validate our very existance in this country. Every ethnic group struggles. Every member of the LGBTQ community struggles. Let's focus on allies, real true allies, that will go to bat for us. Sadly, I know I have different allies as a queer Latina than a gay white male. John, I am not represented just as much you are in politics and it hurts.

    Let's get to the point someday where a queer Latina isn't a demographic joke, but a reality. And a cabinet appointee will not fix that, it will throwing us a bone. I for one, am sick of being a token. Let's fight where it matters, within our communities, and develop an army that will not be pushed around. Where a white gay male will be an ally to a migrant worker, where an African American woman will be an ally to an Arab American woman. It will require us to talk to each other, understand each other, and fight for each other.

    Let's get free.
  • Webster · 11 months ago
    "We are none of us free until ALL of us are free."
  • kemowery · 11 months ago
    A. Bill Richardson steps down.
    B. Hispanic leaders tell Obama they want another Hispanic cabinet member.
    therefore, C: Obama hates gays.
  • okojo · 11 months ago
    The only label that should matter is competency.... Hispanic, GLBT, etc.. is nice but competency is the real clincher.

    A gay man helped saved Western Civlization last Sept-Oct. (Barney Frank) but it was his tactics and brain, not his sexual preference that helped get the bailout bill hammered out.

    The US has had a gay president, but he was not chosen because of his sexual preference, rather he was chosen because he was incompetent. (James Buchanan)
  • questionauthority · 11 months ago
    That's what I'm talking about....
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    zzzzzzzzzzzz
  • teammarty · 11 months ago
    Wasn't Lincoln a switch hitter.
  • wearing out my F key · 11 months ago
    but seriously, i've got a theory about this, and i'd like to hear y'all's opinion.

    my best friend, j, is a gay black man (talk about filling your quota). if you ask him about black civil rights, he knows all about it, as do his brothers and sisters. they know about the movement because j's parents made it a point to teach them about it. j's parent's parents taught them, and on and on. so, when it comes to black civil rights, j has an oral history passed on through the generations that help him understand, and participate in the black civil rights movement.

    on the other hand, j knows NOTHING about the gay civil rights movement. nothing about stonewall, milk, etc, etc. because his parents aren't gay (of course), there isn't a "gay history" passed from generation to generation. as far a j's concerned, the history of homosexuals began the day he realized he was gay.

    so, seeing how homosexuals are a "random minority of nature", born into families that are not part of that minority class, and therefore unable to provide any context to the gay and lesbian struggle, and since, until very recently, homosexuals were not having offspring of thier own, is the gay rights movement stuck with a peter pan complex, where yesterday is forgotten, tomorrow never comes, and avancements are extra hard because each generation is starting from scratch? and if so, is there any remedy to this delema?

    whadda think?
  • Webster · 11 months ago
    The terrific biography of Bayard Rustin, by John D'Emilio, Lost Prophet: The Life and Times of Bayard Rustin from the University of Chicago Press is a start:

    "One of the most important figures of the American civil rights movement, Bayard Rustin taught Martin Luther King Jr. the methods of Gandhi, spearheaded the 1963 March on Washington, and helped bring the struggle of African Americans to the forefront of a nation's consciousness. But despite his incontrovertibly integral role in the movement, the openly gay Rustin is not the household name that many of his activist contemporaries are. In exploring history's Lost Prophet, acclaimed historian John D'Emilio explains why Rustin's influence was minimized by his peers and why his brilliant strategies were not followed, or were followed by those he never meant to help."

    Rustin was indispensable to the Civil Rights movement in this country--and all LGBT people, not just African-American gays should be aware of his contribution to American History and the civil rights movement.

    Alas, Americans know nothing about history--much less the GLBT contribution to it. Now that we've had a movie about Harvey Milk--it's time for one about Rustin, as books seem to be something Americans shy away from...
  • wearing out my F key · 11 months ago
    hmm. i'll check it out. thanks.
  • Monrob · 11 months ago
    We need a gay one so he can kick Obama and Warren. Those two are hypocrites!
  • Boycottutah · 11 months ago
    Let's do the math.

    Obama + Warren =H8.

    Obama is a homophobe. Period. McClurkin. Warren. No LGBT people chosen.
  • TheNeedle · 11 months ago
    You said it. Gays will be lucky if they're not all locked up in camps by 2010.
  • pdxprobert · 11 months ago
    Until the LGBT community can present themselves as a significant voting block with some tangible numbers to back it up, LGBT's will be marginalized and get more Rick Warren moments... I wonder if the Latino voters have a right wing side comparable to the Log Cabin voters? If they don't then politically speaking it appears there is no cohesion in the gay community...

    its politics... its about horse trading...the Latino population demographics are only going to swell as the decades pass... gay people better start breeding faster if we want to swell our ranks ... ( why does that sound so strange).... its all about measurable voting blocks... why is that so hard to grasp?
  • teammarty · 11 months ago
    I guess I need to rimind you again, the gays are not the only MAJOR minority. WE atheists (15% +- of the population, about the same as the gay population) also got nothing but the back of our hand from O'same. Of course we didn't get out the vote for the dems (the not-so-nazi wing of the republicrat party) only voting 75% for Obama. Of course, the dems are jumping up and down over the 24% of the evangelical vote, which proves that they are making inroads in Real America.

    MAkes me PROUDER THAT EVER that I did not fall for the bullshit and voted Nader.

    You want something form O'Same, vote 3rd party in 2010 and make him beg for the votes of our communities
  • pdxprobert · 11 months ago
    The LGBT needs to be thought of as the important swing vote... then they would be patronized like the other well organized voting populations... but I don't vote for candidates because of their orientation, so consequently Im not unhappy because so far none of the picks in his administration have been gay... as a group of people we are well represented in honorable political positions throughout our nation... we even have a gay supreme court justice, but I don't think any of them ran on a gay platform... its about mainstream, not like Harvey Milk when he ran for office in a gay exclusive district..... our mayor didnt run for office as the gay mayor... he ran on a platform that many people could relate to... his personal life wasnt at the forefront (except when another gay person wanted to run for the same office and tried to dirty his name, but people saw through him and he's lost his credibility (i think he was a republican too)...
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    atheism is an opinion. you have to defend your opinions if you want a political job. please keep this separate from sexual orientation, which shouldn't need defending.
  • Paul · 11 months ago
    Equal Rep is putting a nation-wide campaign on to help get Fred Hochberg elected.

    See http://equalrep.com and the facebook event: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=52503152007
  • Taylor Wray · 11 months ago
    Why does any minority group feel comfortable demanding any cabinet appointees? It seems to me, the posts should be filled by the most qualified and effective candidates, period. I see absolutely no need to go to the extremes of counting and labeling each cabinet candidate according to his/her race/sex/orientation/etc. This isn't the Congress; there is no requirement that the president's cabinet be "reflective of the American people." If elderly, rich, straight, white male candidates genuinely seem to be best qualified for every position, I would not want to see a single minority appointee in the cabinet, would you? To sacrifice political skill and efficacy in order to meet this ridiculous "cabinet of the rainbow" criteria short-changes the entire population.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago
    except you're in a fantasy world. there is no world where "str8 white males" are more qualified than people outside that group.
  • MNUSA · 11 months ago
    I'm holding out for a 51% majority of women on the Supreme Court.
  • Gus Smith · 11 months ago
    "Unless the next Cabinet appointee is openly gay, I think there's going to be additional damage between Obama and the gay community. It's looking as if we have overt "quotas" for Cabinet secretaries that explicitly exclude openly gay and lesbian Obama supporters."

    The above commentary is out of bounds!! What qualification does sexual preference portray? An oxymoron to try to equate the two. Obama would be guilty of Title whatever for sexual discrimination if he even conveyed he was aware of someone's sexual orientation and used that as a basis of selection. Gays need to get mainstream qualifications.
  • kevinbgoode · 11 months ago
    "sexual preference?" You gave yourself away.
  • terrell from ny · 11 months ago
    you know what.. im sick and tired of these latino's swearing or for that much demanding that a latino be put in a high position. who the hell do you people think you are. Obama doesn't owe anybody anything beyond his family.. his obligation as far as his position is to America. he doesn't owe the white man anything, he doesn't owe the black man anything.. and NO, he don't owe latinos a damn thing. so please let him do his job.. you people are trying to sabatoge him before he even takes office. why is it so hard to just wait and see how he does. seriously
  • dula · 11 months ago
    His obligation is to America, you say? Who is America?
  • IU1995 · 11 months ago
    Rahm Emmanuel - White House Chief of Staff - Jewish
    David Axelrod - Senior Advisor to the President-elect - Jewish

    Maybe not cabinet level but they are 2 of the earliest and closely linked appointments to the President-Elect ... and they are Jewish. Do they not count as Jews in your eyes?