[[email protected]]

((WN's agree with militant PR nationalists that Puerto Rico SHOULD be
independent, and many that Hawaii should be too. Freeing Puerto Rico
or giving it back to Spain would be a blessing since it would stop a
constant irritating influx of "las cucharachas" into the United States
sooner or later. Bret.))

Sotomayor—A Quota Queen for the Court

By Patrick J. Buchanan

"If the U.S. Senate rejects race-based justice, Sonia Sotomayor will never sit on the Supreme Court.

Because that is what Sonia is all about. As The New York Times
reported Saturday, the salient cause of her career has been advancing
persons of color, over whites, based on race and national origin.

"Judge Sotomayor, whose parents moved to New York from Puerto Rico,"
writes reporter David Kirkpatrick, "has championed the importance of
considering race and ethnicity in admissions, hiring and even judicial
selection at almost every stage of her career."( Sotomayor’s Focus on
Race Issues May Be Hurdle, May 29, 2009 )

At Princeton, she headed up Accion Puertorriquena, which filed a
complaint with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare
demanding that her school hire Hispanic teachers. At Yale, she co-
chaired a coalition of non-black minorities of color that demanded
more Latino professors and administrators.

At Yale, she "shared the alarm of others in the group when the Supreme
Court prohibited the use of quotas in university admissions in the
1978 decision Regents of the University of California v. Bakke."

Alan Bakke was an applicant to the UC medical school at Davis who was
rejected, though his test scores were higher than almost all of the
minority students who were admitted. Bakke was white.

After Yale, Sotomayor joined the National Council of La Raza and the
board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund. Both promote race and
ethnic preferences, affirmative action and quotas for Hispanics.

But why should Puerto Ricans like Sotomayor, who were never subjected
to slavery or Jim Crow—their island was liberated from Spain in 1898
by the United States—get racial or ethnic preferences over Polish- or
Portuguese-Americans?

What is the justification for this kind of discrimination?

Like Lani Guinier, the Clinton appointee rejected for reverse racism,
Sonia Sotomayor is a quota queen. She believes in, preaches and
practices race-based justice. Her burying the appeal of the white New
Haven firefighters, who were denied promotions they had won in
competitive exams, was a no-brainer for her.

In her world, equal justice takes a back seat to tribal justice

Now, people often come out to vote for one of their own. Catholics for
JFK, evangelicals for Mike Huckabee, women for Hillary Clinton,
Mormons for Mitt Romney, Jews for Joe Lieberman and African-Americans
for Barack Obama. That is political reality and an exercise of
political freedom.

But tribal justice is un-American.

In the 1950s and 1960s, this country reached consensus that denying
black men and women the equal opportunity to advance and succeed must
come to an end. Discrimination based on race, color or ethnicity, we
agreed, was wrong.

Sotomayor, however, has an exception to the no-discrimination rule.
She believes in no discrimination, unless done to white males and to
benefit people like her.

How can any Republican senator vote to elevate to the Supreme Court a
judge who, all her life, has believed in, preached and practiced race
discrimination against white males, without endorsing the Obama-
Sotomayor view that diversity trumps equal justice, and race-based
justice should have its own seat on the high court?

Down the path Sotomayor would take us lies an America where Hispanic
justices rule for Hispanics, black judges rule for blacks and white
judges rule for white folks.

It is an America where who gets admitted to the best colleges and
universities is not decided on grades and academic excellence, but on
race and ethnicity, where advancement in jobs and careers depends not
on aptitude and ability, but on where your grandparents came from.

On principle, Republicans cannot support Sonia Sotomayor.

And politically, if they do, why should the white working man and
woman ever vote Republican again, as it is they who are the designated
victims of the race-based justice of Sonia Sotomayor?

It was Richard Nixon who brought the white working class, North and
South, into his New Majority, when he increased the Republican
presidential vote from 43 percent in 1968 to 61 percent in 1972.
Ronald Reagan solidified this base.

But why should the white working and middle class stay with the GOP?
Its presidents exported their jobs to Mexico, China and Asia, and
threw open America's doors to tens of millions, legal and illegal,
from the Third World, who have swamped their cities and towns. If the
GOP will not end race-based affirmative action, which threatens the
futures of their children, why vote for the GOP?

Why should white folks vote for anyone who says, "We are against race
discrimination, unless it is discrimination against you"?

Obama would not have selected Sotomayor if he did not share her
convictions. And there is nothing in his writings or career to hint at
disagreement. Thus it comes down to the senators, especially the
Republicans. A vote for Sonia Sotomayor is a vote to affirm that race-
based justice deserves its own seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.

But if that happens, it will not only be the race consciousness of
Hispanics that will be on the rise in the good old U.S.A."

http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/090601_sotomayor.htm