This is great and all, but does the 12th time you do something count as "making history"?
You'd think after two or three you'd just stop counting.
I think "making history" has just become one of those phrases media uses all the time now. Kind of like how any dispute is now "slamming" someone, apparently. Or how anyone you think is wrong is "unhinged".
When you get the 12th one in, your punch card gets filled and you get a free sandwich on your next visit.
He's the first one to ever hit 12, so uh yeah, he made history.
I'm surprised Trump had 2
I feel like "making history" implies that they did something that's gonna make it into the history books and be taught to future generations.
And like, maybe strictly, but like, which president appointed the twelfth black judge during their term? The twelfth female judge?
The first of anything, yeah, that's in the history books. Everything past that, maybe a footnote.
A good thing for sure, but "making history"? The language feels strong to me.
I'm guessing this would be more historical to LGBT people. If you're a member of a group, I think you're more likely to be excited to hear another member of that group being appointed to office.
I feel like we're abusing "historical" here. Is this something of particular note that's going to be taught to future generations?
Does the African American community know which president was the first to nominate twelve judges of color? Do women know which president was the first to nominate twelve women?
This is a good thing, but like, it's a good fun fact at best. I think saying it's "making history" is overstating. It'd be like saying the person who has the Guinness World Record for longest handstand is "making history."
Especially with all the anti LGBTQ laws and stuff in the US.
So... this is great and all, but how come the senate will confirm any Biden appointments? One would think these days it would just be business as usual to deny all appointments if you control the senate. They face no repercussions for anything these days it seems.
Why wouldn't they confirm his appointments? Senate is controlled by dems right now. They can either confirm Biden's appointments, and have a dem judge, or not, which risks Trump making appointments to these same positions.
Only time the judges don't get confirmed at the end of a president's term is when the opposing party controls the senate. See: end of Obama's term and his appointment of Garland to the SC.
Only time the judges don't get confirmed at the end of a president's term is when the opposing party controls the senate. See: end of Obama's term and his appointment of Garland to the SC.
This wasn't the normal process and I don't think it should be treated as such. It was a cynical ploy by the GOP to highjack SCOTUS. Unfortunately it worked.
This guy… ❤️
The Advocate - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Advocate:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.advocate.com/joe-biden-makes-history-with-12th-senate-confirmed-lgbtq-judge
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News