Should We Replace Party Affiliation With Race And Sexual Preference

In a country that is supposed to be color-blind and all-inclusive, why is it necessary to specify the race and gender of the person needed for a particular position? If a private organization used such a practice, they would be sued for civil rights violations. So why is it okay for our Government to do the same?

The trend was started by Joe Biden when he was to appoint a replacement for Justice Breyer in 2022. Biden had expressed his parameters during the 2020 campaign. He promised if he had to replace a sitting Justice, he would choose a Black Woman to take the spot. Biden was not concerned with nominating the best available person. He needed to appease two voting blocks by his choice. The President made this terrible decision and should have been challenged in court. It was not, and a new precedent has been set.

The precedent is being played out in California. When Senator Barbara Feinstein, who was one of the oldest Senators, went ill last year, Gavin Newsom was faced with the possibility of naming a successor to Feinstein’s seat she had held since 1992. Newsom put some caveats on his choice. Like Biden’s choice, the replacement would be a Black Woman, but she could not be an announced candidate for the seat, nor could she run for the position. These stipulations made the choice a filler and a lame duck from day one. A new Senator will be elected in 2024. He spoke about his decision on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” where moderator Chuck Todd said, “it would be essentially a caretaker—an African American woman?” Newsom will satisfy two boxes, race and gender, but only for fifteen months.

So, the Democrats have redefined, illegally, I might add, the parameters for the qualifications for a job. When we have worked hard to make equal opportunity the rule, Democrats have reintroduced gender and race. To take the Democrat thinking a step further, a new ballot would no longer specify R, D, or I for a candidate’s party affiliation. We would now have W, Bl, or Br for white, black, or brown. We would also need M, F, or T for male, female, or trans. And we should probably add S, G, or O for straight, gay, or other. It is amazing, no, it is hypocritical that the Party that claims to be all-inclusive needs to apply labels to everyone and define the specific attributes needed for a candidate.

Ketanji Brown Jackson was not impressive in her nomination hearings, and her tenure has been nondescript, but for the Left, she is Black and a Woman, so everything else would be gravy. We must remember that she could not define a woman during her nomination hearings.

In the case of Feinstein’s successor, there is still a chance to have a Black Woman. Two Democratic U.S. representatives, Katie Porter of Irvine and Adam Schiff of Los Angeles, entered the race prior to Feinstein announcing her retirement. A third, Barbara Lee of Oakland, declared her campaign on February 21. Lee is a Black Woman but is considered a long shot. A good situation for the Right is for Schiff to lose the seat he has yearned for and simultaneously give up his House seat. MSNBC probably has his contract ready.