CNN

I do not find this article offensive or insulting. Just a statement of facts based on our political culture and climate.

I don't roll my eyes in disgust every time a person not-of-color is supported for an available position...

Anyone serving under Bush will simply be his lap dog. Who wants their resume tainted? Just look at Condi who has not achieved a single success. Condi for next Prez!

I'm not a fan of affirmative action. I do believe that the most qualified person should get the job.

However, I don't think Roland Martin meant to say that race should matter over qualifications. At least, that's what I hope. My view is that he's saying, look, all things being equal, if it's down to like 6 candidates and 5 are white and 1 is a minority, maybe you should pick the minority just the mix it up and not have everyone be white.

It's often hard to judge who is the "most qualified." Candidates are often very similar. Oh, you graduated first from Harvard, but the other guy graduated first in Yale. Or, one guy won 300 cases, but the other guy only won 290. I mean, these guys are all very similar. So if you have to break a tie or whatever, perhaps lean toward a minority guy. Once again, i don't subscribe to that line of thinking, I just don't think people like Mr. Martin are saying that race should be considered above qualifictions. Just that if there's no clear "most qualified" then perhaps race should be considered.

What would be wrong with a Native American Indian .
Isn't this Racial thing getting out of hand .

What on earth does RACE have to do with anything?

Many groups in this country have raised a lot of ruckus over making America a "color-blind" society. Stuff like this doesn't help.

When will we begin to judge people by their ABILITIES and not by the color of their skin?

I found the racial elements of this story offensive.

75 comments and it's still unanimous:

CNN writes a racist article and the people are ticked off about it.

Thisi is so typical...every time someone in the "mainstream" screws up, there's always talk of a person of color to come in and "clean up" the mess. Perhpas if more minorities were considered from the onset, we wouldn't have some of these problems!!!

To "Spinstopper",
What color is the sky on your planet?? Really, you must grow a lot of flowers with all the BS I've sen from you.

Most diverse adminstration? Race doesn't matter – they all lie for Bush

Biggest tax cuts – for the rich!

Longest economic expansion – also for the rich.

Highest home ownership – actually most mortgage defaults

The best one – 9/11 stewardship – into an unnecessary war in Iraq while the real perpetrators of 9/11 are staging a comeback in Afghanistan. And bin Laden (dead or alive) is nowhere to be found. Didn't Bush say he was going to get him?

Afghanistan and Iraq democracies? LOL. Why don't you move there?

No more terrorist attacks – it was eight years between attacks on the WTC. It's only been 6 years since 9/11. Give Bush a chance!

If you're truly a spinstopper, why don't you talk to Rush, Hannity, O'reilly and the RNC. They're spinning out of control.

You get over yourself

"I would think Bush has done enough of that already. Short of divine providence nothing has the power to change History for the Bush Administration." – Tricia M PEI

You can say that again Tricia!

1)Most diverse administration.
2)Shortest recession(not even one statistically).
3)Biggest tax cuts.
4)Longest economic expansion.
5)Highest home ownership(all races).
6)9/11 stewardship!
7)Afghanistan and Iraq democracies!!
8)No more terrorist attacks.
ETC
ETC

Dems opinion of Bush? Dems attempts at history revision??
Not in the history books!! (see Roosevelt, Churchill).

Get over yourself already..

So, race is an "added element" to be considered in the selection of an AG? Really. Gonzalez was a "first," and look how well he turned out. How about get somebody who is qualified to do the job? Crazy idea, but it might have some merit. If Thompson is qualified, then bully for him; however, aren't we all supposed to be color-blind by now? You know – the amount of melanin in one person's skin shouldn't qualify/disqualify them from a position they are worthy of, and all of that. Hey, I hear that there's this Eskimo lawyer that's available for the slot; what a bonus! It'd be a first, right?

I swear, Roland Martin, you know how to stir up a hot mess. Since Larry Thompson has all these credentials why do you find it necessary to throw race into the mix? If you believe he is the best qualified that is all you need to say, but now that wouldn't be controversial would it?

Roland Martin, whomever he is, apparently uses the CNN platform to further his own agenda. I grew up in the 60's when equal rights weren't. Now we have to read a "commentary" from a guy pushing his own agenda. When did high political positions get to be about race and gender instead of "qualifications"? Apparently Gonzalez was appointed to "elevate" Hispanics. It didn't work, and we all suffer. Now Martin comes along with his axe to grind, and you publish it. What he should concentrate on is ALL Americans, not just a few. We ALL need a good AG. If he's black, so be it, if not, so be it. To make this a quota thing is just plain wrong. If Martin gets to have his say just because he's black, what does that say about his actual credentials? It's time everyone put this race garbage behind us. Look at America. Look at what its gotten us. We're going in the wrong direction over political correctness.

Being that everybody he appoints ends up shamed, disgraced, and discarded. I would thank him not to disgrace any other minority race by touting them as "first" but them actually only being puppets.

The only one that as stuck with him the whole time is Rice. Though I don't actually like the women, she seems less like a puppet than the rest. Maybe that's b/c she's the only one that may be as smart as Cheney. Also is it just me or is she RARELY ever in the same room as Bush.

Don't do it Thompson. The dems, with CNN's help, will surely paint you as an Uncle Tom. They are the real party of bigotry.

Dear Mr. Martin:

I don't think this is time to bring the race card out.

As far as making history for the Republicans, I would think Bush has done enough of that already. Short of divine providence nothing has the power to change History for the Bush Administration.

Leave it to CNN to play the race card.

Who cares what color the guy is, is he the best qualified? If so, hire him. If not, don't.

I find it interesting that CNN does not point out that this President, a Republican and Conservative has placed more minorities in high positions than any other President. Including the Liberals.

I guess Republicans are the party of inclusion.

I say being white is a plus. Brown could be a plus as well. Not to mention, yellow, pink...Hmm, seems like any race is a plus, which kind of makes race a non-factor.

"He needs to fight back charges from Democrats that the Justice Department has no credibility"

Talk about a bias intro.. CNN is the one with credibility problems. Not Bush! Even terrorist know Bush means what he says...

Rolan Martin.... you need to can this type of stupid remarks, period!

I don't think that race should even be a factor in consideration for the next AG. What we need, and what the Senate needs to consider when voting for nomination, is someone who will stand for justice and the Constitution and say "shove it" to the administration when they cross the line. If Mr. Thompson can do that, so be it.

"His race is an added element."?? For what? To boost the morale of disadvantaged urban youth? To make middle-of-the-road Reps feel they're helping the black man get ahead. Try sentimentizing how getting an elected Irish-American is a plus. Would you state that getting a Jewish-American is a plus in government? How 'bout a grossly-overweight-American for Atty. General? Lord knows the majority of adults could relate to him/her.

The law should be blind and society should be colorblind. The most qualified person who is willing to serve should be the next A.G. Period.

A Black AG? Great. Another person put in place because of, not in spite of, his race or gender. I thought "equality" was about removing the stereotypes from the job. Why advocate a particular "category" of individual to fill the job? If the man happens to be black, fine, if he's Hispanic, fine. Just don't put him in place BECAUSE of that. It is an insult to both the candidate and those who pay the taxes to support this nonsense. Next you'll advocate a "woman" for President just because we haven't had one of them either. How about just "qualifications"? Ever heard of them?

I think that it does not matter who get nominated. While we should have a government that is representative of the people and our diversity, we just witnessed a political lynching of a hispanic Attorney General. Does anyone really believe that the Democrats will be any kinder to an African American?

How about rephrasing that title to "it is time to consider a black for attorney general"? The article clearly states that the appointment should be qualifications based first. Race is an "added element" to an already favorable resume.

I get frustrated when I read polarizing headlines. While the headline needs to draw attention, it doesn't need to divide us.

I don't see what relevance a person's race has to do with the job of A.G. (why a "Black A.G." is my point, what does that actually MEAN as to the job performance and capability to fulfill the job requirements).

I'd rather see Ted Olson appointed as A.G. than Chertoff, as to the position otherwise.

Oh, and Ted Olson would make a "White Attorney General" - just to make an illustration of how foolish mentioning someone's race is as to that (or any) job.

I don't care if our Attorney General is black, white, green, or yellow; just as long as they are honest and will work their butts off for the American people.

This is a good example how people think, in racial terms. How about a person as Atterny General that has a good record and will be good for the country and not what color he is.

It's not time for a black, brown. white or purple attorney general. It's time for a honest, law abiding one.

just one problem, Roland Martin and CNN aren't part of the nominating process. You report not create it or manage it, that's all. You had no business running that artical. Free speech? I don't think so, nothing free about yours with the tire ad above it ad free speech is only guarenteed to the people (citizens). CNN is not a citizen and you are acting as a paid employee of CNN.

What happened to "qualifications" for top government jobs? Much has been made of Gonzalez being the "first" Hispanic to hold the office of AG. Look at how that ended. Now, you want to have a black in that position? Even if the man is qualified, why add the "distinction" of his race? Wouldn't someone rather get the job because he was qualified, rather than because he is a "qualified black" or a "qualified whatever"? This is ridiculous. Hire the man because he is qualified, not because he fills some minority "vision of success". America is where it is now because of stupid thinking. Next you'll suggest we vote in a "woman" as President just because we haven't had one of them yet either. How stupid can you get?

When are you liberals going to get beyond skin color? How about picking the most qualified person?

Also do you think that the democrats would be less inclined to drag a black man' name through the mud than a mexican?

I agree with the no race issue. Race should not be a factor in such a top political hiring; good leaders and idiots come in all shades. But in this situation, an African-american GA would also probably set black people back. Bush and his administration are a sinking Titanic. They take down everyone who gets involved with them.

Quit putting color on appointments and elections. Why not ask for the most qualified?

I think that it's too bad that, in this day and age, we still have to mention race. Raising the issue of race simply invites debate, and distracts from what is important.

Race is and, I think, should be discarded as a factor. I would prefer to read or hear a nomination based solely on professional qualifications. Then, when the candidate appears for confirmation, his or her race – whatever it is – would be apparent, but would be relegated to its proper position: irrelevant.

I hope that I live long enough to see the human race get past race and every other truly natural trait, and become confident enough to focus on what matters: the individual's God-given gifts and what he or she has done with them.

why do we always bring up race gust get one that is honest and will inforce all the laws not pick and choose

"...Another plus? He’s African-American..."

That's right, let's now bring race in as a qualifying factor. When will people finally realize that the racial divide in this country will never end until we treat all matters with full equality - and that means racial classes need to take the first step by proving they can move forward in society solely on their own accomplishments.

You are kidding ..... aren't you? Why should race be a factor, when this has already proved to be failed practice in our society.

What? How about a competent one? Black has nothing to do with it.

Why not a blue one? How about "time for a good one," who cares what ethnicity the new AG is as long as he/she is capable of performing their duties well.

Truly, if we expect change to take place we need to envaluate the individual nominees for the positon. We need to look for his/her track records, whether or not such person is objective enough to do the job. Race shouldnt even come up, because it shouldn't be the sole consideration if the person is Black or White. When it comes to the Constitution, we need someone with good judgment and his objective enough to face any pressure. I believe Thompson is qualified and if the Congress accept him, then that goes another history made in the Bush administration.

Geez, give me a break Roland. How about we just get a competent AG, huh?All I ever hear out of you is the black thing. A different minority at the position just wasn't good enough for you. Add other colors to your black and white crayon set.

Please tell me this article is a joke.

Color hasn't mattered in this administration up to now, how can anyone believe it will matter now? President Bush will pick someone he thinks can do a good job, racial politics be damned.

Roland Martin, some may argue you have "a face for radio".

But, with this garbage, you clearly have a mind for racism.

CNN, shame on you for even publishing this garbage.

Of Color, Not of Color. Male, Female. Gay/Straight. Jerw/Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddhist/Pagan.

I don't care what combination as long as he/she is a qualified candidate with at least an ounce of integrity and humility.

THAT will be a welcomed change!

Why do we need a black AG? Are they supposed to be better or somehow less corrupt? We need someone who can get the job done right and restore the confidence in the Justice Department. We don't need someone just to appease minorities or any other group for that matter. We also sure as hell don't need anyone who will be a White House puppet...

What the hell does race have to do with anything? Whoever wrote this article needs a brain surgery.

I agree with what"s been said. It is this continued talk about race mattering that keeps the races divided, Let's just leave it that he's the best one for the job...no "added bonuses."

As a black man, I'd like to see a black attorney general–someday, but not right now. I don't necessarily trust that any black appointed by President Bush would actually have the best interests of the black community, specifically, at heart.

One big piece of the Department of Justice is the enforcement of civil-rights laws. After terrorism struck our shores in 2001, the Bush Administration has chipped away at those rights. All Americans have been affected, of course, but black Americans tend to be more acutely affected in situations like this.

I don't care what color the new AG's skin is. All I care about is that whoever takes the job, he's strong enough to maintain the balance of justice in the face of an administration that feels it is above the Constitution.

Are you kidding me? Are you black sir? Are you trying to promote your own racist agenda? People like you need to stop looking at Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation, or Political Party affiliation, etc when making decisions of this nature. It is about picking the right candidate for the job and one who will protect the rights of the people and the Constitution of the United States. Not about any of the above mentioned items and especially not their Race!! You truly should go back to school and get an education because all you are doing here is breeding racism!

I don't care if the new Attorney General is purple with yellow polka dots, as long as he enforces the laws of the United States, and works to make the Constitution relevant again.

I don't care if s/he is purple! We need someone credibility and someone who will be the peoples attorney; not another Bush 'yes man'.

No, it's not time for a black attorney general. It's time for the most qualified candidate for the job whether he/she be white, black or whatever. Why are we always so obsessed with race? Enough already.

I find it condescending that the media needs to point out what race an individual needs to be. I'm a Black Sales Executive. Does that make me any more "special". When will the media start living in a world that Dr. King dreamed about? Isn't it racism when race needs to be mentioned in this way?

I'm offended. I can't believe people in this day and age continue to think in terms of black, white, yellow etc.... The choice as to who should be Attorney General is simple... the best and most qualified person should occupy that position... regardless of race, gender, age etc.... End of story.

It's time the Media got over its asinine obsession with race.

Thompson being black doesn't help Bush one bit. The emasculation of Colin Powell by the Bushies and the religious right – oh, wait, I forgot: same thing – could only have occurred with Powell's acquiescence.
The real question is, can Thompson avoid the goose-stepping Cheney faction at the White House and actually perform his job, using the CONSTITUTION to guide all decisions?

The real problem is: it's time to impeach Cheney. It's time to remove this war criminal, domestic criminal, corporate criminal – and his minions – currently bent on destroying this country.

In the movies, Cheney would be hunted down in the woods like Jefferson Davis was in 1865, then imprisoned so that, like Davis ruing the fate of his own monarchist Confederacy, Cheney could spend most of the rest of his life gnashing his teeth at the failure, again, of another Republican Thousand Year Right (SEE Newt "I Served Divorce Papers On My Dying Wife" Gingrich).

Time for a black president, a woman president, a black attorney general, etc... Whatever happened to having the most qualified PERSON serving the American people? We should not compromise our leadership for some quixotic quest to erase past mistakes. American opinion is changing; a black attorney general, along with all other races, will come in due time. Those miles-stones will occur when the right man/woman comes along, which is exactly how it should be. Let our nation be run by the most competent, the brightest, and the most honorable individuals among us. At such times, it will not matter what race/gender our leaders are. That is when we will have put past prejudices behind us; and begin to see ourselves as equals.

What the heck does it matter what color or national origin the Attorney General is??!! It is not time for a black, white, brown, yellow, or whatever AG! It is time for an attorney general that will do his/her job right! The last time I checked a hire is made (and should be made) based on whether someone can do a job not on what color, national origin, or sex he/she is!

I have a dream that one day we'll stop saying, "Is it time for a black..."? Sure, it's time for someone from any race, religion, or ethnicity. For Pete's sake, let's stop talking about racial issues and affirmative action and how choosing someone of ethnic background pushes some political agenda and just choose the best person for the job.

In a recent WSJ article titled, "Affirmative Action Backfires", some preliminary studies show that there are actually fewer black attorneys because of affirmative action.

Easily the most startling conclusion of his research: Mr. Sander calculated that there are fewer black attorneys today than there would have been if law schools had practiced color-blind admissions - about 7.9% fewer by his reckoning. He identified the culprit as the practice of admitting minority students to schools for which they are inadequately prepared. In essence, they have been "matched" to the wrong school.

Let's start treating all men and women as equals, singling them out for their talents, qualifications, and abilities and not for their race, religion, or ethnicity.

Excuse me? The President needs to fight back charges from the Democrats about credibility? Las time I looked, the Democrats in Congress didn't have much credibility either.

And enough of the race card. Condi Rice and Colin Powell are both outstanding Americans who achieved and served their country best through their skill and their character, not their colour. Maybe it would have been different sixty years ago, but times have changed. "Be all you can be" is not just a slogan anymore and America is a far better place for it.

I could understand the publication of a reasoned piece in support of Mr. Thompson, but a commentary which seemingly advocates the appointment of a generic "black Attorney General" (and which refers to his racial designation as "another plus") is not only condescending but disturbingly racist. Why must Mr. Thompson's candidacy be cast in racial terms? In what possible way could this generate an intelligent discussion of the rather sizeable field of well-qualified candidates? I have always felt that the news-media has a responsibility to its consumers to advance the social and political discourse of the public; with fewer exceptions than examples, that duty has been observed. Mr. Martin's piece, however, has no discernable substance. He neither compares Mr. Thompson with other qualified candidates nor provides any real insight into his work, beliefs or achievement to support his position. It is as though the entire article is directed to the singular end of blindly advocating a black candidate – any black candidate – to satisfy the as-yet unfulfilled niche of "first African-American to serve as attorney general." Similarly disconcerting is Mr. Martin's assertion that "his race is an added element," compounded by the fact that he makes no attempt to substantiate the claim by making reference to the strategic or political considerations which would make this so. Perhaps Mr. Martin should reevaluate his conception of journalism, or at least provide more than empty and bigoted commentary to his readers.

Mr. Gonzales was liked by both parties. The Dems brought up bogus charges against Him. If Mr. Gozales were here for a democrat Prez, and did all the same things, you liberals would be praising Him.The only thing this administration did wrong was to let those attorneys keep their jobs for 6 more years.( a good thing) God bless this Man, I hope He gets treated better in His next endeaver.

Aren't we past the point where we need to look at anything but a person's qualifications?

Black, white, brown, yellow, purple, who cares?

How about someone who will enforce the law, with liberty and justice for all?

I don't think the AG job description requires one to be black or white. This is American and I am proud to be a Black American who periodically reads The Constitution that endows us all with equalities. May the best of the best qualified be appointed as AG.

Why are we always so concerned about the diversity of skin color? Why can't we focus more on the diversity of ideas? Shouldn't that be the most important factor? Skin color should have nothing more to do with the debate than someone's height or weight. It is the thoughts, beliefs and even more importantly, the actions of candidates that should be considered when determining the best person for this; or any other position.

Using race as the central argument for one's commentary demonstrates a disturbing lack of depth in the thinking and writing of the commentator. I could have made a much better case for the appointment of Roland Martin as Attorney General and the fact that he is black would have never entered into the discussion.

This is a stupid question. I don't care if he's black, white, purple or pink polka dot.

As long as he's honest and actually upholds the laws of the land instead of the will of the dictator in chief.

If he's honest, Bush is toast within six months. Remember that.L

If he's making more money in the private sector, what would make him leave? History? Why, so he can be attached to the mediocre legacy of the Bush administration? I'm sure he has a little more sense than that.

Sorry, no. Awarding someone a high ranking position because of their race is a recipe for another disaster. Get the most qualified, and move on from there.

Roland Martin, as a black man and as a person with a brain I find this article offensive. This type of debate is exactly what we don't need. "reporters" of your type of ALL races are the same ones making Michael Vick a Hip Hop issue and Alberto Gonzalez a Mexican story. You're not helping the cause, your setting it back with your divisiveness.

This administration is out of control and we need an Eliot Ness of any color restore integrity. If that happens to be an Asian woman or damn cyclops I don't care. and neither should you.

If Larry Thompson is such an obvious choice then you would have no need to mention what color he is.

No matter who you put into the AG spot...this past Presidential term ('04-'08) will go down as one of the top 5 worst Presidential terms in the history of this country.

Why on earth we we focusing on someone's skin color instead of their resume? If they're qualified to do their job, then let them do their job.

Leave color out of this.

Hey Gonzales was Latino and that didnt seem to matter to those who like destroy people's careers for their own political gain. Why even make race an issue?

PERSONALY I DO NOT CARE WHAT ETHINICY THE PERSON IS, IF IT IS SOME ONE THAT WILL RESPECT THE CONSTUTION AND THE LAWS OF THIS COUNTRY. BUT YOU CAN BET THAT BUSH WILL TRY TO TIE THEIR HANDS BY SCREAMING EXECUTIVE PRIVILIGE ON ANY THING THE A.G. TRIES TO DO THAT IS STRAIGHT FORWARD AND HONEST.

Could be. We've had a Hispanic one and that hasn't worked out too well.

Black, White, Brown, Red, Yellow, Zebra Striped...whatever. Give us an AG who's honest, non-partisan, and more interested in Justice than in kissing some politician's backside. I'm sick and tired of our do-nothing government and its bowing to the will of the corporations and obscenely rich instead of the people. To paraphrase FDR, "...the only thing we have to fear is government."

Hmmmm....all things being equal this candinate is better because he is African-American...

is racism.

However, I won't hold that against Larry Thompson just as I don't hold it against Condi Rice. In fact I love Condi Rice and if Larry Thompson is that good beg him to take over.

I am tired however of media types, the government, and business using race as a qualifying criteria.

That is blantant racism and needs to be flat out banned no matter what two-faced justification is used for it.

It's time for a transgendered little person-of-color Attorney General.

Or maybe it's time for a smart and competent one, of a size, shape, color, and gender that's that person's own business.

I understand he has the qualifications, I understand that he has done a good job in the past I also understand that both parties have liked him. If he is accepts this job he will have a fery tough job ahead of him. I think he is very qualified for the job but, what I do not understand is what does the fact that he is an African American have to do with him being able to fill the job.

Time for orange underwear

The orange underwear are functionally similar to the green underwear, so I guess it's a matter of preference.

Folks who are partial to orange underwear will probably wear those.

Not being politically savy, I'd wrongly conclude that choosing an attorney general based solely on qualifications would be a reasonable approach.

Somehow CNN only cares if a woman or black man is elected president. Shouldn't we be wanting the best. Again CNN is propaganda, like FOX and MSNBC.

We should stride for people not based simply on their "qualifications", but should look for the MOST qualified person. Race must never be included as a "qualification" if we are to achieve the goal of a color blind society. Shame on you, Mr. Martin!

When are people (especially the media) going to learn that color, religion, gender, etc. are irrelevant!

We need the "best qualified" person for the job, regardless of anything else they may happen to be, not some "token black" or whatever!

No black man should even consider the job. Bush has never done a damned thing for black folks so why should one bail him out.

Be careful, folks. As soon as you start posting something that makes sense here, CNN moderates it so they can perpetuate their irrational agenda.

His race is an added element? Is affirmative action for presidents next? Oh, wait, it is.

I've decided that racism only exists in this country because the media wants it to. The media perpetuates it, not the people. All of you "journalists" who write "headlines" such as this one and "stories" such as this one are collectively no better than bottom feeders in a stagnant pond. Take your "credentials" and shove 'em.

Not a single person in America outside of media circles was thinking to themselves, "Well, I guess now that Alberto is out we can get a BLACK guy in there, because that's what we REALLY need."

Only the media would think that a change of skin color in office would make a world of difference.

Maybe I should add my skin color to my resume like CNN does for Larry Thompson's resume:

* Supervised 13 employees, over half of whom were purple
* Proficient in all the usual desktop applications
* Orange skin color, so I'm much more qualified than the aquamarine majority
* I like horses

Another plus? He's African-American?

Come on man. It's not a plus and not a minus, not at this stage of the game. We're a race/gender neutral nation now. Look what Obama and Clinton are doing! It's the man/woman with the plan not the race or gender.

"Time for a black attorney general" is a terrible title. Would the new attorney general be a better leader because he (or she) was black? Would he be a better leader if he was white? Hardly! Both premises are ludicrous. Let's stop promoting race as a consideration and start considering who would do the job best. If the result is someone who is black, Irish, handicapped, or Jewish (or all four) then we should celebrate that we found the right person and not promote the premise that he or she satisfies some racist agenda.

Anyone who is connected with this government in it's present state is a traitor to the American people republican,democrat,black,white or whatever.
It has been too long since our government has done the right thing by the American people.The entire Federal Government needs a good cleansing not just a new Attorney general who is nothing more than a mouth piece for this country's elite class..

Wouldn't make a single difference. The GOP doesn't get any credit on race, while the Dems can blow their horns on it all the time.

I'll say Randy Barnett, a law prof who blogs at volkh.com.

Time for a black attorney general?

Why does it matter in the slightest whether Gonzales' successor in black? Doesn't it matter a whole lot more that he's honest? That he takes the Constitution seriously? That, unlike Mr Gonzales and the rest of the Bush administration, he respects the rights of American citizens?

I've no idea what Mr Thompson's qualifications to be Attorney General are; I know nothing of his character. I do know that the color of his skin has no bearing at all on those qualifications or his character.

That race is, or ought to be, irrelevant has been a tenet or, at least, a goal of American society for half a century. To suggest that Mr Thompson is somehow more qualified to hold the office of Attorney General simply because he's black utterly repudiates that goal.

This is ridiculously shallow, callow, and just plain naive to write an article on promoting someone to a position BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE.

This is racism. RACISM. Is Mr Martin a high school dropout, or did he get someone to buy him a degree at some backwater college?

Shaking my head in amazement at the depths to which CNN has plunged....

Why does CNN even publish this thinly veiled racist commentary?

more idiocy...thanks Mr. Martin

Hey, why not a black, gay, hispanic woman with purple hair and ... (any other minority not covered?)

Why is this crappy commentary posted on cnn.com? Why the heck was this allowed up? Do you people at cnn have any standards at all?

"Another plus? He’s African-American.
Sure, people should be appointed based on qualifications, but he has that. His race is an added element."

His race is an added element???? Are you kidding? What happened to the ideal of a color blind society. It is clear CNN does not value nor want that goal to be enacted. It is clear by the allowing of this racist posting that cnn is in favor of a society where we continue to look at the pigment of a person's skin. AND THAT IS A DISGRACE!

Why do we have to bring in race? Who cares. He is either qualified or unqualified. The fact that he's black should have nothing to do with the vetting process. The fact that you give "bonus points" for being a minority is ridiculous.

Why should George Bush, who I am not a fan of, pick a "black" anything unless that person is the most qualified person? What has he gotten for lacing other blacks such as Condoleeza Rice or Colin Powell in high ranking slots? He's gotten nothing yet the black population seems to love Hillary Clinton, perhaps even more than Obama, and who did did Bill Clinton ever appoint to such positions? No one, yet blacks continue to flock to him and other Democrats like sheep heading to the slaughter.

How about the most qualified? Why a race issue.

Time for a BLACK attorney general?

Look what the last affirmative action AG choice wrought.

Let's just shoot for a competent one, hmm?

I say NO to Larry Thompson. Any black won't do. Just look at Clarence Thomas as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall.

Heck, can we just get one who OBEYS THE LAW!?!?! I don't care if he or she (just throwing that one out there) is black, white, yellow, or blue. I don't think we have anywhere to go but up – although if Michael Chertoff gets it I may end up eating my words.

You might be well-intended but you lost all credibility once racial background came into play. It is NOT a factor. Race has nothing to do with anything – OR AT LEAST it shouldn't. That's half everyone's problem. The only thing that matters is how qualified one is for the job, whether it be janitor or United States Attorney General. Start talking common sense, please.

This kind of commentary is a disgrace to be on the front page of CNN.

The race of our next attorney general is irrelevant.

Rather, the qualifications of this person are relevant – will they enforce the law, will they serve our country, will they follow the law?

That this commentary is somehow on the front page of esteemed CNN.com is disparagable.

Dear CNN and Roland Martin,

NEWSFLASH: We Americans want someone who has the credentials to do the job. All race does is inspire a particular ethnic group and make the administration look like they accept minorities. We should be looking for the best man or woman for the job, and it is surely not Chertoff or any other Bush good-ol'-boy.

I think the next attorney general should be chosen based on their merits rather than their race. That would be fair, would it not?

Poor article .. sadly reflective of current thought. "Time for a black attorney general?" His being black or any color/race/religion, etc should quite obviously have no bearing on his being a good candidate.
The mere stating of such sadly reflects that people do still factor in such things. Often while claiming not to do so. If it truly matters in no way (a pro or a con), then why are such things brought up time and again? A continuing disappointment to common state of mind

What a headline! I know it's simply to the point but come on. I guess it's too much to ask the media to help society rise above any strife, they've got the feed it to get the story, of course...

The correct question should be...Time for a qualified, honest, and ethical Attorney General??? Race should be the least important thing here.

Your headline and entire article is obscene. You might be well-intended but you lost all sense once racial background came into play. It is NOT a factor. Race has nothing to do with anything – OR AT LEAST it shouldn't. That's half everyone's problem. The only thing that matters is how qualified one is for the job, whether it be janitor or United States Attorney General. Lose the politically correct slant for once please and start talking common sense.

Please do not bring race into this discussion. If Thompson is qualified, let his experience speak for itself. Race has nothing to do with this.

An added plus, he African America,
How dare you... you racist.
What if I said, an added plus, he's a white man.
If I can't say it, you can't.
I am tired of it. I am a German Americam. Where are my rights?

As others note, we need an AG who respects rule of law.

Putting in a black AG in such a deeply corrupt administration that is just trying to dodge investigations until the end of the term is not doing that person any favors. It's no prize.

Chances are, if appointed in a Bush administration, a first black AG will be stained with failure and corruption like Powell and Rice have been.

Why is being African-American a "plus"? If we really want equality in this country, we should stop looking at people's race altogether when it comes to an issue like this. Based on his credentials, would Thompson be a good fit? Of course! Should we give him extra consideration because he happens to be black? NO! As long as we have race supremacists (on every side of the spectrum), we can forget about this whole equality thing.

Why would anyone who is qualified and agrees with G.W.Bush be willing to submit them selves to the abuse they would get from the Democratic Congrss?

If they do not agree with Bush why should he nominate them?

Race should not be a factor. If Thompson is the best qualified, then he should be nominated. If he is not, then someone else should be nominated.

When people make statements endorsing candidates because they are African-Americans, they should imagine the reaction if someone publicly endorsed another candidate because he is Caucasian.

I hope Bush doesn't put in a black AG. The repugs only exploit blacks in America and make superficial attempts (Powell and Rice). They don't really take black issues into consideration.

If they nominated a black man for AG – we'd end up with Clarence Thomas II.

Stop deleting this valid comment.

Your headline and entire article is obscene. You might be well-intended but you lost all sense once racial background came into play. It is NOT a factor. Race has nothing to do with anything – OR AT LEAST it shouldn't. That's half everyone's problem. The only thing that matters is how qualified one is for the job, whether it be janitor or United States Attorney General. Lose the politically correct slant for once please and start talking common sense.

why does race have to be brought up????

As a country, we are NOT going to be able to move-on from the racial segregation era until we stop using race as a criteria....

If Mr. Thompson is qualified, IS COMPROMISED WITH UPHOLDING THE LAW, and both sides like him, WELCOME!!!

BUT PLEASE STOP MAKING RACE THE FIRST CRITERIA IN THE "THINGS-TO-CONSIDER" LIST!!!!! IT SHOULD NOT MATTER

WHILE SEEING AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN IN THAT POSITION WOULD BE A GREAT MOVE LETS MAKE SURE WE ARE GETTING THE MOST QUALIFIED,WELL ROUNDED AND SOUND INDIVIDUAL FOR THE JOB...IM AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN WHO JUST BEAT DOWN THE SAYING BY COWORKERS THAT I GOT IT BECAUSE IM BLACK AND NOT THAT I AM THE ONLY ONE IN AREA WITH A DEGREE AND EXPERIENCE, SO LET'S MAKE THE MOVE ON MERIT ...

Posted By Moe, NY : August 27, 2007 9:11 pm

Well said sir? are you running for President? you have my Vote!

Anyone with a lick of sense – be it African-American, Chinese-American, or Heinz 57 – should avoid this administration like the plague. While the honor of being the "first" is worthy, to be the "first" amongst a band of criminals isn't noble.

Why is being black an added element? That is a racist comment. If it was said that someone should be picked because he/she had the added element of being white would that be acceptable? How do you think Sharpton and Jackson would respond?

Please do not bring race into this arena. Race should not under any circumstances be a factor in this area. Race just does not matter! What matters is that the person appointed be HONEST, work for and with the American people, and he/she should not cave into pressure by the present administration (or future administration) as to their political agenda.

At this juncture, race is not as important as someone who will do his or her job. Let's face it, any person that would pass the standards of George W. would be useless to us as a country. Raising the cry for an African American is a futile distraction that detracts from the true needs of the African American community. Having a black person in the AG's seat will not help the community or the country if their only qualifier is that they are black and available to take our turn in the position.

It doesn't surprise me that Roland Martin has made this suggestion! Most of his pieces/columns have a single agenda–promoting African-Americans (be it Obama, Rice or Thompson) at any cost! Someone should tell him that not everything is about race!

Actually, right now all we need is an AG with respect for the law. We haven't had that yet with this administration in either of the confirmed AG's or the nominees who were also forced to withdraw in shame.

So much for equality I suppose... now that we're going to start identifying which race a public figure is supposed to be. I suppose we can also add that to the long list of "affirmative action" doctrines to which society so strongly holds on to... "Ok, we've admitted 4 white students, time to pick a latino applicant outta this pile so we can be fair!" Yep... makes perfect sense to me.

wow! if someone were to say the next attorney general should be white, wouldn't he be accused of racism?

Would love to see him in the job. He is doing a great job at Pepsi but it would be great for our Country to have someone who may be able to bring some unity to this America.

Your headline and entire article is obscene. You might be well-intended but you lost all sense once racial background came into play. It is NOT a factor. Race has nothing to do with anything – OR AT LEAST it shouldn't. That's half everyone's problem. The only thing that matters is how qualified one is for the job, whether it be janitor or United States Attorney General. Lose the politically correct slant for once please and start talking common sense.

how about a qualified attorney general

Black A.G.? What difference does that make? No, it's time for an Attorney General who will expertly serve HIS COUNTRY, instead of HIS OWN PERSONAL AGENDA.

Shouldn't color not matter? Don't we want the most highly qualified person for Attorney General?

Since when did race become a plus for someone when it comes to hiring. The fact is that Mr. Martin could have written this article without even mentioning the fact that Mr. Thompson is a black man. Mr. Thompson is qualified. He is a moderate who may be able to heal the wounds, and he is widely respected. But the fact that he is black makes absolutely no difference. This only shows that Mr. Martin is a racist. That his people should be given a plus because of their color.

I have read many of Mr. Martin's articles. The majority of them tend to have racial overtones. In one article several months ago he complained about Christianity focusing on things which he felt were not important issues. So be it. That is his opinion and I respect that. However, along the way he somehow got race involved in the issue. Racial issues have no business being promoted through religious dialog. The fact that he does this is sad. And in this case he also has tried to promote his race through politics.

Mr. Martin, we can no longer live in
the past as many African-Americans do. Your race is not owed anything. You now are on equal footing in this country. Laws, policies, and attitudes have all been changed to accommodate different races. Are there still instances of racism in America? Absolutely. But many of them are being displayed by races that are not Caucasian.

I would hope that in the future you could write about a topic and not turn it into a racial issue.

Racism won't protect Bush; it didn't protect Gonzales; it doesn't protect Obama.

Why isn't time for honesty in the Bush administration?

How about Rudy G. for AG he's got the background.

Based on the treatment of Colin Powell appointing someone simply because of their minority status isn't enough. The person who gets the job must be independent of the Bush control which caused Gonzales failures.This could be the man. Who wants the pressure and would be independent enough to survive that Bush/Cheney inner circle that excluded General Powell.

Just because Alberto was corrupt doesn't mean all Latinos are. And it's unfortunate that one of the first Latinos to a high level government position messed up in a such a way, given racists one more reason to look down on them.

This article is disguisting. Does anyone else hear the word "Token" blaring in the back of your mind as you read this? Next AG won't be appointed because he or she is the best man or woman for the job, they won't be appointed because of the skin color, religious beliefs or gender. This administration will continue to surround itself with "Yes men" the Next AG will be a "Yes Man or woman." This artilce also seems to smack C. Rice and C. Powell in the face by just stopping shy of suggesting that they were appointed to there positions of service not because of there outstanding service to this country over the last few decades, but because of there skin color. Although i'm not a big fan of either of the two, the should be given there proper due. they earned there spots. How about its Time for a just AG"

Here's an idea! Why not pick whoever's the best qualified for the job & ignore what his/her race, creed or religion is... That's IS the Law.. which is supposed to apply to ALL of us Americans....

Forget all the men...black, white, brown, blue, whatever. Get some women in office and maybe things won't be so screwed up!!

A pretty good piece....what I think is ironic, as a African American myself, that there was quite a few African-Americans involved in what could be considered the worst administration in the history of the United States...though I'm not blaming Thompson, if he gets appointed, or Colin Powell, he was a patsy that jumped ship early, but for face value its pretty ugly.

The most competent person who is available should get the job. It shouldn't matter what color that person is. Color neither adds to nor detracts from one's competence. At this time of crisis in the Bush administration, nothing less than the best will do.

Why is his being an African American a plus. That's what is wrong with our country today. Who cares if he is a black or white. I think you know the answer to that question. If he is qualified for the job then great. But please don't say it's a plus since he is black. What if he were Chinese. Guess your comment would be a little different.

WHY does it always have to come down to RACE?

Novel idea – how about we seek the best QUALIFIED person! Leave race, gender, sexual orientation, and any other label out of the equation.

Coming from Roland,I'd wager Mr. Thompson is a poor choice.The right-wing representatives are not big on brain power.I've found Mr. Rolands contributions to be negligable,and his ideas old.He consistantly defends the indefensible.

The next attorney general nominee should be prepared to answer the following questions during the confirmation hearings:

Have you ever suffered blunt head trauma that has resulting in you not being able to recall important events and meetings in your life?

Have you heard of 'habeas corpus'?

Do you believe that the Bill of Rights is similiar to the Pirates Code – they're more like guidelines than hard and fast rules to follow and live by?

-–citing an excerpt from a web site on terrorism faced by srilanka--

At a time when the world has given the highest priority to rooting out terrorism following the 9/11 attacks in the USA, and the 2001 UN Convention on the Suppression of Financing of Terrorism, we find that the western powers focused all their attention on combating the Al Qaeda and other Arab terrorist groups that were considered a threat to their own interests. They allowed the LTTE to operate with impunity within their jurisdictions cultivating politicians in exchange for campaign funds and votes of the Tamil diaspora, thereby discounting the unceasing turmoil, bloodshed and destruction caused by the Tamil Tiger Terrorists to Sri Lanka’s institutions of governance and the civilian population from all the ethnic communities.

..or, just maybe he's smart enough to stay out of "mess on the hill"!! hahah!

Former VP of PepsiCo? Yeah, that's all we need, more puppets of big business running the government. Bush has already shown us how well that works.