From the New York Times:

Trial by Firefighters
by Lani Guinier and Susan Sturm

… But the Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision last month — that New Haven should not have scrapped the test — perpetuates profound misconceptions about the capacity of paper-and-pencil tests to gauge a person’s potential on the job. Exams like the one the New Haven firefighters took are neither designed nor administered to identify the employees most qualified for promotion. And Ms. Torre’s identity-politics sloganeering diverts attention from what we need most: a clear-eyed reassessment of our blind faith in entrenched testing regimes.

New Haven used a multiple-choice test to measure its firefighters’ retention of information from national firefighting textbooks and study guides. Civil service tests like these do not identify people who are best suited for leadership positions.

This one sentence is the most interesting part of the op-ed: Sturm und Guinier give away the hushed up fact that “civil rights” – as currently understood by, say, Sonia Sotomayor–is an assault on America’s once proud tradition of civil service reforms. (more…)

In her opening remarks, Sonia Sotomayor said “the Constitution made my dream possible.”

Specifically she means affirmative action policies, various race and gender based advantages and basic cheating made her dream possible. In fact I would remind everybody with this widely popular quote by Ms. Sotomayor exactly how important race is to her:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” she said October 26, 2001.[CNN 5/28/09]

Of course she talked about how important her Latina mother is and more or less how much more important her nomination is than say…a white male?

Clearly these hearings are going to be difficult for me to watch.

Yes, she’ll be confirmed because Democrats have enough votes to make it happen, not because Senator Graham, the other Republicans or millions of rational thinking Americans want her confirmed.

There is a possible silver-lining: If Republicans are smart they will see this hearing as an opportunity to show Americans how different the Obama agenda really is from the one he sold us last November.

The appointment of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court brought to the attention of the entire Senate (and hopefully the world) piles and piles of documents proving the racial bias and liberal extremism practiced and promoted by those associated with this administration.

Beliefs not shared by middle America no matter how diligently the MSM works to prove the contrary.

Hopefully Republicans will realize that they are fighting a battle today in war that will not be decided until tomorrow. By the end of the day, Democrats will get what they want but that isn’t necessarily the end of the story.

If Republicans are brave enough to question Sotomayor on her record and more to the point, hold her accountable for the racially motivated judicial decisions and public statements she had made over the years, they too can have their own victory.

The Obama-led Democrats will succeed in placing their gal on the bench but it is doubtful that anybody outside of their Klan will agree that she belongs there. They will however be left with no doubt that race and gender are more important than talent and character…at least to this administration.

The hearings are in recess right now but VDARE.com will update you as the hearings proceed.

On Thursday, the Prayer,Action And News blog reported in S.O.S. on 909 that

Senate Armed Services Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) confirmed that a “hate crimes” bill will make its debut in a matter of days. Levin said he plans to attach an expansion of hate crimes law to the defense policy bill, meaning that a vote on the legislation, S. 909, could be as early as this week.

The Rev. Ted Pike who continues to be indispensible in following this matter (sign up for his E-Alerts at the top of this website) takes this seriously. In POSSIBLE HATE BILL VOTE ON MONDAY! 11 July 09 he points out:

The DOD bill is scheduled to begin Senate floor action at 11 a.m. EDT on Monday. Since S. 909 is an “omnibus bill,” Sen. Reid or any cosponsor might introduce it as an amendment. Amendments could be offered any time next week!

Pike further points out that since Attorney General Holder conceded last month that the Bill was not intended to protect Servicemen, there is not a shred of justification for attaching this controversial measure to military appropriations legislation. Of course, this is not likely to deter Levin.

He also reasonably complains of the defeatism of the larger Christian lobbying outfits

…on Thursday, Focus on the Family’s James Dobson and Tom Minnery along with Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins covered themselves with shame by announcing to Dobson’s vast audience that it is now impossible to defeat the hate bill…Focus on the Family and FRC, perhaps the two most powerful evangelical “watchdog” groups, have done virtually nothing of real significance to fight the hate bill since January.

Here at VDARE.com, we are equally disgusted with the silence of the Plutocrats of the Immigration Reform community – NumbersUSA, FAIR and CIS. Do they want the Immigration debate shut down?

On a happier note, Cato’s David Rittgers has succeeded in placing an anti-Hate Crimes Bill editorial in The Christian Science Monitor: Hate-crime legislation would backfire July 10 2009

Rittgers again deploys a favorite argument: that the legislation could stimulate these kinds of actions:

If there is a subset of the local population that shares the views that drove the perpetrator to commit his crime, then the imposition of federal jurisdiction based solely on the motive of the criminal engenders resentment and encourages others to mimic his behavior.
What is being proposed is feel-good legislation that gives ideologues more incentive to commit their crimes and a bigger platform for their views. The federal government should not create an aid program for hatemongers.

I have to say this analysis has never seemed particularly persuasive to me: but it has persuaded the U.K. authorities, who, shamefully, have actual experience in enforcing this type of measure:

TAKE IT EASY ON MUSLIM EXTREMISTS, POLICE TOLD By Macer Hall Daily Express Saturday July 11, 2009

POLICE will be ordered not to charge Muslim extremists in many hate crime cases – to stop them becoming more militant.
Officials… want to avoid alienating Muslims on the fringes of extremism by dragging them to court over petty allegations unlikely to result in conviction

A Home Office spokesman said: “Preventing people becoming radicalised is a key priority for the Government. The police response needs to be proportionate to deal with crimes people commit while reducing the risk to public safety.”

Of course, in reality this simply reflects the political strength of British Muslims – and demonstrates what a disaster politicizing the Justice system will be.