Looks like we will finally have a change in Treasurers and a change in our currency series. I am glad she is Native American not being political or critical I just feel it is good. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...sQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1vq_nXwMXpN-xVnAyJyWRB
Looks to me like she's got more qualifications than anybody who's held the position since January 2020...
She has been the chief of a Sioux Tribe for 12 years. More experience than most all the politicians who were Treasurers before her.
Given the parlous state of the Treasury these days, I fear for her sanity on the job, even if it is mostly ceremonial.
It doesn't matter to me one way or another, however, what happened to the "He/she is qualified because...(list of work history/jobs/schooling)" rather than always stating the gender/sexual proclivity/race/immigration status as a qualifier?
"Anymore"? Sorry, I guess one-word replies would get annoying pretty quickly. To expand my question: When did we not make note that a candidate or nominee differed in some obvious way from "the usual"?
Ha! Maybe I'm older than you. I grew up in a time when you would differentiate a person for a job by achievements and qualifications and maybe sex - m/f. Not race, immigration status, sexual proclivity, etc.
Two words, I'll allow it. You're probably old enough to remember hearing about "a peanut farmer from Georgia", right?
I suspect a lot of that is because there weren't any high-level job candidates who differed along those lines. When there were, the differences were noted. Sometimes, that was enough to keep the person out of the position.
Good point. Yeast cells are asexual, agender, and probably aromantic. On the other hand, they haven't said anything about their preferred pronouns.
