From: a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (Chris Peterson)
Subject: Re: Clint's appointments
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 06:33:08 GMT
Reply-To: a74k110@phobos.ucc.umass.edu
X-Posted-From: phobos.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <BzqsBM.CGs@ns1.nodak.edu>, green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes...
>Hmm, Clinton wants a Cabinet that represents the diversity of America.
>So, how about we have about 40% of his appointees be Republican?
> 
>A Feminist was babbling about him needing more women than the past three
>administrations, which totaled three.  Well, we have Lynn Martin as
>Secretary of Labor, Barbara Franklin as Secretary of Commerce, and Carla
>Hills as Trade Rep.  That's three women in top level positions already.
>Blacks? UN Ambassador.  Hispanics?  Manual Lujan, Secretary of Interior.
>Can someone explain how Slick's Cabinet is going to be more diverse than
>Bush's?

The feminist was complaining about CABINET positions, Carla Hills
and the UN ambassador aren't in the cabinet.  First of all, Manny Lujan
is a disgrace to the Interior dept., totally inept, so is Franklin
so is Sullivan (African-American) at HHS.  Second of all, you want to talk
about how diverse Clinton's cabinet is?  With tommorow's appointments,
the cabinet will have only 6 white men out 15 positions. That's right,
there are 9 (yes 9) minorities and women in the cabinet (as opposed to 4 
with Bush):

4 women: HHS, Attorney General, Energy, and UN ambassador (elevated to cabinet
         level by Clinton as it was during Eisenhower's administration)

4 African-Americans: Commerce, Energy(see above), Agriculture, Veterans Affairs

2 Hispanics: HUD, Transportation

There are also many, many appointments to sub-cabinet level positions
that women and minorites have been appointed to (Dep. Sec. State, Dep. director
at OMB, EPA, chair of the council of economic advisors, and others)

This is by FAR, BY FAR more diverse than any administration in the past.
But, as Clinton said the other day at a press conference, the numbers are not
the most important thing.  The MOST important thing is how much REAL
power and importance these minorities and women have in the administration.
Bush, appointed token women and minorities who weren't qualified and 
who made an insignificant if not down right terrible job at the various
posts they were given.  ALL of Clinton's appointments, minorites, women,
white men, are highly qualified for THEIR particular jobs. People may not
agree with their individual beliefs and ideas, but no one can question
their qualifications.  

I guess people like you can only think of calling people names when they
don't have an actual valid point. Slick indeed. 

>Actually, what I see in the Clinton/Algore Cabinet is a bunch of Slick
>and Hillary's academic friends, and a bunch of Carter retreads.  Some
>change.

Again, you don't have the facts straight.  The CHANGE, my friend, is in 
the quality of the appointees, unlike most of Bush's assorted inept and lousy
appointees.  Let's see now, 15 positions, broken down by "Academic friends" 
and "Carter retreads":

Defense: nope, long time house member
Treasury: nope, long time senate member
Commerce: nope, DNC chairman and private practice lawyer
Veteran affairs: nope, long time leader of a veteran's organization
Education: nope, he's a former governer that's Clinton's friend, but not
           from academia
Transportation: nope, former mayor of Denver
HUD: nope, former mayor of San Antonio
Agriculture: nope, a congress member
Interior: nope, former governer
Energy: nope, from private energy company, she did serve both in the Ford
        and Carter admin., but in relatively minor positions
Attorney General: nope, I believe she's a lawyer from Connecticut
U.N. Ambsdr.: I suppose you could count her, she served in a relatively minor
              role in the Carter Admin.
HHS: Yep, Hillary's academic friend
Labor: Yep, Clinton's academic friend
State: Yep, served in Carter admin.

So, 3, maybe 4 out of the 15 cabinet members are either "academic friends"
or "Carter Retreads".  That's hardly proof of your blanket statement above.
In the future I suggest you get your facts straight before wasting bandwidth
and calling people names.

-Chris