Ohio cabinet all-white for the first time since 1962!

[Zarn]

No.

Someone should have sent that link to Kasich.

Again, it does not matter. As long as people make race an issue, it will be an issue.

[DrScholl]

It's not about diversity for diversity's sake or race at all, it just is very odd that not one person of color made it into the cabinet for the first time almost 50 years. Was the pool of qualified candidates really that racially homogeneous?

[Torie]

Perhaps the threshold question is whether there were any reasonable choices out there for positions in Kasich's cabinet who happen to be black whom Kasich passed over.

There are literally hundreds, probably thousands, of "reasonable" choices for such positions, so Kasich fails your test but only because you're setting the bar ridiculously high.

Do you have any specific names in mind Lewis?  I mean a cabinet position is a rather high office requiring a considerable skill level presumably, and should be held by someone loyal to the administration. I am not trying to pick an argument here, but if I were governor, I would take those appointments very seriously, and would not choose just to pick a couple of window dressing blacks for show. I don't operate that way, and I don't think Kasich should either. JMO.

[Zarn]

It's not about diversity for diversity's sake or race at all, it just is very odd that not one person of color made it into the cabinet for the first time almost 50 years. Was the pool of qualified candidates really that racially homogeneous?

It's about who is best for the job, not who is qualified or race.

[phk]

How many non-whites has Ohio averaged in any given cabinet from 1962 to 2010?

[DrScholl]

It's not about diversity for diversity's sake or race at all, it just is very odd that not one person of color made it into the cabinet for the first time almost 50 years. Was the pool of qualified candidates really that racially homogeneous?

It's about who is best for the job, not who is qualified or race.

I didn't say anything about it being about race, that's your fiction. What I said was it was odd that for the cabinet ended up being so racially homogeneous after decades.

And I do think these positions are based on qualifications, it's very silly to suggest otherwise. Best for the job includes qualifications.

[Zarn]

It's not about diversity for diversity's sake or race at all, it just is very odd that not one person of color made it into the cabinet for the first time almost 50 years. Was the pool of qualified candidates really that racially homogeneous?

It's about who is best for the job, not who is qualified or race.

I didn't say anything about it being about race, that's your fiction. What I said was it was odd that for the cabinet ended up being so racially homogeneous after decades.

And I do think these positions are based on qualifications, it's very silly to suggest otherwise. Best for the job includes qualifications.

You mention race, so it now about race.

Of course, but it is not like you just pick a random person from a pool of qualified people. Some are more qualified than others.

[phk]

Nobody has answered my question.

How many non-whites has Ohio averaged per cabinet since 1962?

[minionofmidas]

Nobody has answered my question.

How many non-whites has Ohio averaged per cabinet since 1962?

That's because we haven't a clue.

[Mjh]

Oh no, I guess this means that Kasisch wants racial segregation in Ohio, given what a racist he apparently is.

Maybe he is a member of the KKK too?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Who cares?  He should pick the best people who can do the job...

Why should we presume he has picked the best people who can do the job, though?

Because that's his job.  What evidence is there that he hasn't?

I'm prodding on this because I think it's too easy to take a marketing line like "I picked the best people possible" as truth, and that's dangerous, because it implies that having a diverse Cabinet would have meant that more qualified white people would have been excluded and the quality of administration would have suffered. I am not insulting Kasich, but I doubt any executive at a state level truly finds the best possible people for all positions. Instead, they look to people they are friends with, people they're comfortable with, and leaders within their party, most of whom can do their jobs well enough. The "best possible people" is a piece of propaganda that people say to sound good, it's not accurate. I don't think it's a crime not to have any minorities in his Cabinet, but I very strongly push back at the implication that this is what results if you pick the best possible people and push all that affirmative action stuff aside. That's incorrect and unfair.

I don't doubt his people will be competent enough, with the usual rotten eggs that always slip through, but that's not the point. What this shows is that the circles he works in, are almost entirely white. No, I'm not calling him a racist, I don't think that's what this shows or that it's a fruitful discussion to have. But I do think that having a Cabinet that inadvertently excludes people who were excluded from government until recently and still have to leap higher hurdles than comparable white men to get elected shows less of a meritocracy than an old boys' club. And that is not a good thing for the country, and certainly shouldn't be praised.

Is Ken Blackwell the only African-American in the Republican Party in Ohio?

Then again, doesn't familiarity with your cabinet add to the quality of a job they can do?

[Dgov]

So?

Seriously, Ohio is like 85% White, and most of the other 15% are highly-democratic blacks.  If you picked 20 Registered Republicans at random in Ohio, it's likely that you'd get 20 White people. 

[Brittain33]

So?

Seriously, Ohio is like 85% White, and most of the other 15% are highly-democratic blacks.  If you picked 20 Registered Republicans at random in Ohio, it's likely that you'd get 20 White people. 

Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama each included at least one Democrat in their cabinet. In addition, there are black Republicans in Ohio, presumably some of them have risen through the ranks and met the governor other than Ken Blackwell....

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

No.

Someone should have sent that link to Kasich.

Guilty til proven innocent seems to be your position on Kasich throughout the thread.  That's unusual for you......or am I misreading your posts?

[Brittain33]

No.

Someone should have sent that link to Kasich.

Guilty til proven innocent seems to be your position on Kasich throughout the thread.  That's unusual for you......or am I misreading your posts?

What do you think I am finding Kasich guilty of? That, to me, is the big disagreement in this thread... whether this event has meaning, and then what that meaning is. I don't think this demonstrates Kasich is a racist, and I am sure this was not a deliberate decision, nor do I think he is a racist or presume I can get into his head to find out. I'm making a big deal out of this because I think this is how race matters today: in power relationships that evolve a certain way without any intent to cause harm, but which results in excluding people informally who were, until recently, excluded formally.

I think the issue of party is a real one and helps explain why Kasich has little or no professional contact with black people, but that elides the question as to why we have one political party, many of whose members identify with it because it is full of people just like them and not others. This is less of an issue in Ohio than it is in other places, but I think people are too quick to see racial divisions by party as a one-sided case of self-segregation without acknowledging the powerful dynamic at play when a majority behaves a certain way vs. the minority, or the appeal of being in an exclusive party.

This isn't about Kasich, to me, beyond a smaller point I'll identify below. He's not someone I have a problem with or has shown he'd deliberately seek to exclude people. It's about bigger social issues, and that's what I'm here to talk about. I think this situation is a sign of something unfortunate, and I think people saying "you're looking at race when I choose to see it" are being disingenuous given how much ink flies on the demographics board where we all carve up states according to race and everyone can see how informally segregated the lives of millions of Ohioans, and Massachusettsians, and Floridians, and everyone else are. I think Kasich has demonstrated with his Cabinet that he's not concerned with this as a problem, either because he doesn't think about it or because he actively disagrees that it's a problem to be acknowledged. I don't know which it is. But it's not the same as being actively racist.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

No.

Someone should have sent that link to Kasich.

Guilty til proven innocent seems to be your position on Kasich throughout the thread.  That's unusual for you......or am I misreading your posts?

What do you think I am finding Kasich guilty of? That, to me, is the big disagreement in this thread... whether this event has meaning, and then what that meaning is. I don't think this demonstrates Kasich is a racist, and I am sure this was not a deliberate decision, nor do I think he is a racist or presume I can get into his head to find out. I'm making a big deal out of this because I think this is how race matters today: in power relationships that evolve a certain way without any intent to cause harm, but which results in excluding people informally who were, until recently, excluded formally.

I think the issue of party is a real one and helps explain why Kasich has little or no professional contact with black people, but that elides the question as to why we have one political party, many of whose members identify with it because it is full of people just like them and not others. This is less of an issue in Ohio than it is in other places, but I think people are too quick to see racial divisions by party as a one-sided case of self-segregation without acknowledging the powerful dynamic at play when a majority behaves a certain way vs. the minority, or the appeal of being in an exclusive party.

This isn't about Kasich, to me, beyond a smaller point I'll identify below. He's not someone I have a problem with or has shown he'd deliberately seek to exclude people. It's about bigger social issues, and that's what I'm here to talk about. I think this situation is a sign of something unfortunate, and I think people saying "you're looking at race when I choose to see it" are being disingenuous given how much ink flies on the demographics board where we all carve up states according to race and everyone can see how informally segregated the lives of millions of Ohioans, and Massachusettsians, and Floridians, and everyone else are. I think Kasich has demonstrated with his Cabinet that he's not concerned with this as a problem, either because he doesn't think about it or because he actively disagrees that it's a problem to be acknowledged. I don't know which it is. But it's not the same as being actively racist.

Ok, friend, nice post........that clears it up. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

He didn't give Ken Blackwell any positions?

[cinyc]

He didn't give Ken Blackwell any positions?

Perhaps Ken Blackwell was happy keeping his current job.   Chances are, going back to government work would mean a pay cut.

[Badger]

I honestly have to wonder: would a black governor be criticized for hiring all-black people for his or her cabinet?

Yes, mercilessly. And thanks to double standards, with over 10 times the flack Kasich's received.

Do you seriously doubt that?

[Badger]

It all depends....

Do we define racism as only people who burn crosses? Do we limit it to people who are suspicious of their black neighbor's kids and would blow a fuse if their kid dated them? If so, I have no doubt Kasich's not the former, and--not knowing him personally--have no reason to believe he's the latter.

But is that really the limit of the definition? What about "soft racism"? Sure he may not have any problem with sharing a meal with blacks, but he rarely ever will because he doesn't know any or care to make an effort to. I'm not talking about BS condescending "Hi, black person! Let's be interracial friends" silliness. What I mean is in John Kasich's immediate world blacks and minorities are unknown. These cabinets posts are promoted by friends and allies--people close to him. Lo and behold the people who matter in John Kasich's world promoted their friends and family, and none of them were minorities either. On a day to day basis, they're invisible to him.

Now, that may apply to more than a few of us, especially those of us in small towns outside the south. Like many of us, Kasich may have to go to 3 or 4 degrees of separation to reach a minority who is truly a friend (rather than an acquaintance white people invariably call "a friend") or a friend of a friend. The difference is that Kasich doesn't see that as a problem or a shortcoming---at all. He's 100% satisfied with his closed world and doesn't see one iota of reason to come out of his shell and see anyone else's view or give a damn if there is one.

And that leads the real problem with Kasich; not that he's racist, but he's the walking definition of cronyism even by politician standards. He's worked hard to remove public scrutiny and access to salaries or applications of state economic development jobs for the explicit purpose of hiring firends from his Wall Street days without all that nasty oversight. While the rest of the budget is about to be slashed with a chainsaw, he's secured very hefty raises for his immediate advisers.

Kasich takes care of his own far better than the average person, and--campaign demagoguery aside--its still apparent his crowd is very much the very very very wealthy folks he's fallen in with during the last few years. He's hardly the only politician from either party to be guilty of that sin, but with Kasich he just doesn't particularly care beyond traditional lip service for people outside his world. He doesn' hate poor and working class people by any means, but that's not who Kasich is out to help. His world view seems to end and the extent of his extended circle of friends, which excludes anybody who isn't rich and, apparently, white.

BTW: a 20% female cabinet? When a majority of law school grads are female for about a decade now? Could this guy work any harder to re-institute the old boys club, literally?