Al,
Sorry, may be a bit dim but I'm not sure what your point is.
Just IMHO, Nick, but I suspect Al's chart above was his attempt to refute this statement by me:
Keep in mind Bee-OH and his cronies are not fools (despite what the radical right is so fond of believing). Bee-OH, himself, is not only a constitutional lawyer, but also a professor in Constitutional Law. Considering that, do you think for a minute that they would have put Sharrod in her USDA position without having fully vetted her? Most assuredly not....they knew about the Pigford case and it was not enough to keep her from getting the position, certainly not enough to get her tossed after the fact.
Doug
I'm not quite sure I understand his assertion that having only 8% of his cabinet be those with prior public experience....IMHO, having such a small percentage from the public arena
might well be a positive aspect, as it would mean that 92% must have experience in governmental affairs....BUT, let's for just a moment assume that Al's point regarding "public experience" means that only 8% have had experience in governmental affairs, what would that really have to do with the issue at hand. Does Al know for a fact that none of that 8% had anything to do with the vetting of Sharrod? Most lilely not.....once again, it's just random attempts to cast dispersion on the facts, a tactic often used in politics (regardless of your particular orientation). Even if only ONE %, no, not even one %, but only ONE of the cabinet was experienced in governmental affairs, that may have been enough to have adequately managed the vetting of Sharrod. Again, I think Bee-OH is nobody's fool, he's obviously an intelligent and articulate individual (even considering his use of teleprompters), and I'd bet a paycheck that Bee-OH had Sharrod adequately vetted before placing her in the USDA position.
Now, if there were any more specific information to refute that belief, I'd like to hear about it. Otherwise, I say the same thing......FOCUS! Focus on the issue and don't let the introduction of extraneous information (such as a much lower percentage of "prior public experience" as shown in the chart) distract from the issue.
Al, if your response and chart was not in regards to my original assertion that Sharrod was adequately vetted, then I must rely on one of my favorite Saturday Night Live actresses and say "Oh. Well, that's different. Never Mind!".
Cheers from Doug