Sotomayor approved by US Senate

The US Senate has voted to approve Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the US Supreme Court.

Ms Sotomayor, 55, will become the first Hispanic justice and only the third woman to sit on the court.

The Senate voted 68-31 to approve Ms Sotomayor, with 59 Democrats and nine Republicans voting in favour.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the US, with the power to strike down unconstitutional laws. Once appointed, justices serve for life.

They are nominated by the president, but must receive approval from a majority of senators before they can take up their post.

'Inspiring' story

Mr Obama hailed the Senate vote as "historic".

"The Senate has affirmed that Justice Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation's highest court," he added.

"This is a wonderful day for Judge Sotomayor and her family, but I also think it's a wonderful day for America."

With his fellow Democrats holding a majority in the Senate, Mr Obama was not expected to face any difficulties getting his nominee confirmed.

In advance of the Senate vote, a number of moderate Republicans indicated that they would also be backing her, making her confirmation even more likely.

Ms Sotomayor's supporters say she has a reliable record - and they cite her "inspiring" life story.

She was born to poor Puerto Rican parents on a New York public housing project, rising to become a respected judicial scholar and judge.

But some Republicans claim Ms Sotomayer's record of speeches - and some rulings - shows she allows her opinion to affect her decisions.

During her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she was asked repeatedly about a speech in which she had remarked that "a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion" than a white male judge.

Critics said the remark could have been perceived as racist, but Ms Sotomayor maintained the comments had been an attempted "play on words" that "fell flat".

Ms Sotomayor has also been criticised by conservatives for her dismissal of a discrimination lawsuit brought by white firefighters in Connecticut. continues here

Discriminating Tastes

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright, President Obama’s former pastor, has often described his preaching style as prophetic, and, sure enough, his brief but spectacular turn in the campaign limelight last year has proved a harbinger of things to come. After months of criticism, Obama renounced Wright, whose fiery sermons had been widely excoriated as “racist”—that is, anti-white. Around the same time, Obama explained that when he described his grandmother as a “typical white person,” he hadn’t meant to insult white people. Then, following the Inauguration, some protested that the Reverend Joseph Lowery’s benediction, derived from an old blues song, was anti-white. And Newt Gingrich used his Twitter account to call Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor—and her “wise Latina” remark—“racist.” (A few days later, he took it back.)

One imagines that Sergeant James Crowley, of the Cambridge Police Department, had not meant to contribute to this ongoing argument when, on July 16th, he responded to a 911 call from a woman who said that there had been “two gentlemen trying to get in a house,” and, after a dispute, ended up arresting Henry Louis Gates, Jr., the There are plenty of people in America, especially in black America, who believe that reverse racism is a contradiction in terms. Racism, the argument goes, should not be thought of as a personal failing; it’s a social system, with a specific history. Discrimination against whites, however unfair, isn’t part of that system, and therefore is not analogous to discrimination against blacks. Harvard professor who lives there. One imagines the same of President Obama, who, when asked about the incident during a press conference the next week, said that racial profiling was a nationwide problem, and that, in this case, the police had “acted stupidly.” Critics claimed that Obama’s comments reflected his own biases. Thaddeus McCotter, a Republican congressman from Michigan, drafted a resolution calling on him to apologize to Crowley. National Review Online accused him of “racial self-aggrandizement.” And the radio and television host Glenn Beck said that the President had revealed his “deep-seated hatred for white people,” adding, “This guy is, I believe, a racist.”

Half a century ago, when people talked about anti-white racism, it was often depicted as a symptom of a broader derangement. In “The Hate That Hate Produced,” an influential television documentary about Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam, from 1959, Mike Wallace warned viewers about “the rise of black racism” and “black supremacy.” (Four years later, a cover story in Jet reported that Eartha Kitt considered herself a victim of “reverse racism”; the magazine said that “black supremacists” resented her marriage to a white man.) But, in the late nineteen-sixties and early seventies, in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act and the executive orders that followed, accusations of reverse racism grew less personal and more commonplace. Newspapers printed articles and letters about anti-white discrimination in the workplace. Later, protracted legal battles over affirmative action helped popularize a once novel character: the white civil-rights plaintiff.

Affirmative action, it now seems clear, helped change white America’s attitude about race, although not entirely in the way that its creators intended. In 1982, scarcely a decade after President Nixon mandated affirmative action for companies with government contracts, a study published in the American Sociological Review found that only twenty-seven per cent of whites thought that blacks had a worse than average chance of succeeding in America, while slightly more, about twenty-nine per cent, thought that blacks’ opportunities were better than average. Sixty-three per cent thought that racial minorities enjoyed at least a little bit of “unfair” reverse discrimination.

There are plenty of people in America, especially in black America, who believe that reverse racism is a contradiction in terms. Racism, the argument goes, should not be thought of as a personal failing; it’s a social system, with a specific history. Discrimination against whites, however unfair, isn’t part of that system, and therefore is not analogous to discrimination against blacks. This history adds symbolic weight to stories that might otherwise inspire only passing curiosity—like, say, the one about the black Harvard professor who was suspected of breaking into his own house. Systemic racism doesn’t require malice, or a specific perpetrator; everyone who benefits is guilty, even people who don’t think that they benefit.

In the past few decades, though, reverse racism has undergone a similar redefinition, from symptom to system. Some who are skeptical of affirmative action, and of other programs designed to advance non-whites, consider reverse racism to be so pervasive, and so well entrenched, that it can only be described as systemic. (Think of Frank Ricci, the white firefighter who argued, successfully, that the city of New Haven had violated his civil rights.) And, despite Beck’s diagnosis of Obama’s “hatred,” many of the people who worry about Obama’s view of race see him not as personally bigoted but as complicit with anti-white interests and policies.

In fact, the “reverse” has largely been dropped from “reverse racism”; in today’s mainstream political discourse, “racism” regularly refers to anti-white racism. Meanwhile, many politicians and commentators concerned with the brutal legacy of old-fashioned racism have learned to speak about it in less abstract, less inflammatory terms: they talk about too-high incarceration rates, or the need for better communication between police officers and the communities they serve. Certainly, Obama is at his most effective when he sticks to concrete prescriptions (the means) and airy evocations of progress (the end). This, by and large, has been his strategy and his script, and even he may not know exactly why, on being asked about Gates, he strayed from it. continues here

One third of whites claim they are victims of official racism

A growing number of white people believe they are the victims of racial prejudice in Britain, official research has found. 

Almost one in three - 29 per cent - said they now expected to be treated worse than other races by key public services. 

And the number of whites claiming to have been refused a job or discriminated against at work for reasons of race has doubled in the last five years, according to the Government study. 

Above Flashback: Riots in Burnley, Lancs, 2001 when whites and Asians clashed. Many white residents claimed Asians were favoured by the authorities.

Seven per cent believed they had failed to win a promotion because of their race, up from three per cent in 2003. Three per cent alleged they had been turned down for a job for the same reason, up from one per cent. 

In addition, the study reveals that most ethnic minorities living in Britain feel stronger ties to the nation than whites. 

One in six white Britons feel only a slight sense of belonging to the nation. 
Whites also now feel less able than other ethnic groups to influence decisions affecting their local area and the country as a whole. 

For example, 41 per cent of black African, 36 per cent of Bangladeshi and 35 per cent of Indian people feel they have a say in decisions affecting Britain, compared to 19 per cent of white people. The survey of 15,000 people - ordered by Communities Secretary Hazel Blears - is likely to prompt a fierce debate about the disillusionment of the white majority. 

The Tories blame Labour's race relations strategy. Tory communities spokesman Baroness Warsi said: 'It's no wonder more people feel there is an increase in racism when Labour's multicultural industry is forever talking up what divides us rather than concentrating on what unites us.' 

The research found that overall, whites are more likely than those from ethnic minorities to believe that racial prejudice and discrimination is getting worse. 

Fifty-eight per cent said they believe there was more racial prejudice now than five years ago, compared to 44 per cent who were interviewed in 
2001.

The figure for ethnic minority communities has hardly changed, at 32 per cent. 

The survey found that 29 per cent of white people expect to be treated worse than other groups by at least one of eight public services, including the police, prisons, courts, Crown Prosecution service, probation service, local housing organisations, schools or GPs. 

Whites identified council housing departments or housing associations as the most likely to discriminate against them. 

The proportion of members of ethnic minority groups who expected to face discrimination from one of the eight bodies fell from 38 per cent in 2001 to 34 per cent. But it remains higher than for white people in many categories, particularly the police. continues here

WHITE MEN FACE JOBS BAN AS NEW LAW FAVOURS ETHNIC MINORITIES AND WOMEN

WHITE men could be blocked from jobs and promotions under a so-called equality drive unveiled by Labour today.

Instead women and ethnic minorities will be favoured in the workplace under a new Bill to be revealed by Equalities Minister Harriet Harman.  

Critics blasted the measure as an unworkable piece of political correctness that will see good candidates overlooked for jobs in the interests of positive discrimination. 

Tory MP Mark Pritchard said: “Everyone supports equal rights, but special rights cause resentment, do nothing for community cohesion and do not tackle racial prejudice. This is another example of political correctness which will not achieve an improvement in equality.” 

And John Midgley of the Campaign Against Political Correctness said: “There is nothing positive about positive action or discrimination. It is counter-productive and potentially racist and sexist. This is typical of Harriet Harman, who must be the most politically correct MP.” 

Under the new measures, firms will be able to favour the ethnic minority job applicant between two equally qualified candidates. 

Officials insist the move is “positive action” rather than discrimination, and say they remain opposed to job quotas for women or ethnic minorities. 

Even equality campaigners attacked the measures when they were first announced in March. Katherine Rake of the Fawcett Society, an equal pay pressure group, said: “How you would really hold that up in a court of law is not clear and employers may be reluctant to use it. You are probably talking about a handful of cases.”  

Under the measure, companies will also be pressured into publishing clearer details of pay levels in an attempt to curb discrimination in salaries. But businesses are deeply worried about the measure undermining workforce morale and breeding more bureaucracy. 

The Bill, which will go through Parliament in the next session, will also outlaw ageism. Ministers want to stop elderly people being patronised by doctors following complaints of pensioners being fobbed off by GPs and denied health, travel and car insurance.  Continues here

Danger Ahead

Blacks hate us or should I say non- whites hate us, in many ways this is perfectly understandable, given that leftist poison has been spoon-fed to them for several years now, to the point that, they truly believe that the white race collectively enslaved them. The fact that at that time, most whites were in effect slaves themselves, merits no leniency, no recognition, in the eyes of non-whites all whites are guilty, a white race-mixer consciously chooses their path, knowing that most whites will disapprove, although whites have been frightened into silence. They will give no thought as to their unfortunate off-spring or the fact that they, through selfish action, have decimated their gene-pool, that particular family history is no more.

Miscegenation is not the issue here however, although I intend to post on the subject in the near future but if one imagines said race-mixer, in the wrong part of town, his or her predilection unknown in the locality, then in the eyes of non-whites they are merely prey, given their skin colour. Non-whites exhibit immense anger towards whites, stemming from the indoctrination referred to above and plain old-fashioned jealousy, you see they have contributed nothing; they live in an alien culture created by others. Our morals and theirs run counter and there is forever over-lap, it is a wonder that our traitorous governments have managed to keep a lid upon these skirmishes, for so long.

These incidents, what I refer to as skirmishes are in the main covered up by what passes for the press, the media generally in whichever guise presented, are complicit in the many crimes non-whites carry out, of note is the fact that, by covering up these events, they fail to warn new potential victims. I cannot say whether such suppression exists in the United States, given their admirable attitude to freedom of speech however, I can refer the reader to May 31 and Mount Clemens, Michigan, as the night yielded to June 1, The Macomb Daily carried this headline on June 2nd , Mob of young men attacks”, it then went on to describe how, “a mob of 20 to 30 young men who brutally attacked a motorist in Mount Clemens on Saturday may also be responsible for at least two other violent crimes that took place the same night”.

On June 3 The Macomb Daily reported, “Violence shocks community”, describing the unprovoked attack in more detail, “Groups of roving young adults and teenagers who apparently gathered at a carnival at the Gibraltar Trade Center, walked onto North River Road and threw bricks and rocks at passing cars. The driver of one of the vehicles was a woman whose vehicle was pelted with rocks as she drove to pick up her children from the carnival.

Moments later, they walked in the middle of North River Road and threw a brick through the side of a window of a passing car at 11:55 p.m. Saturday near Clinton Place townhouses. The 29-year-old motorist's husband then got out of the car, Hackel said, with arms raised as if to say, "What is going on?"

Several men punched and kicked the victim, knocking him unconscious. The man suffered a skull fracture and remained hospitalized Monday in serious condition at Mount Clemens Regional Medical Center.

"It's beyond my imagination that any human being would do this to another human being," Hackel said.

In a 911 cellular phone call released to the media Monday, the beaten man's frantic wife is heard screaming repeatedly as a dispatcher unsuccessfully tries to get information from her.

"There's a huge fight," another unidentified caller told police. "Twenty people on one person."

In each case the race of the attackers was unreported, the modus operandi leads one to assume that this is non-white behaviour, perhaps a reader can prove us wrong, behaviour such as described above, is as a rule Negro behaviour however, it can also be attributed to other non-whites in addition to dysgenic whites. Given that whites are a minority and will at some stage become a marginal group even within their homelands our grand children’s future looks bleak. 14

Labour report backs all-black shortlists
Gaby Hinsliff,

White candidates should be barred from standing for Parliament in up to eight constituencies in order to get more black and Asian MPs elected, says a controversial report commissioned by Labour's deputy leader, Harriet Harman.

Positive discrimination is illegal in the UK, but the report concludes that, without a change in the law allowing parties to impose all-black shortlists, it would take more than 75 years for Britain's ethnic make-up to be fairly reflected at Westminster.

The findings come amid questions over Britain's failure to develop a home-grown equivalent of Barack Obama, the black presidential hopeful. Although there have been three black cabinet ministers since 1997 - Paul Boateng and Valerie Amos, both of whom have since moved on, and Baroness Scotland, the Attorney General - no politician of the stature of Obama, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice or her predecessor, Colin Powell, has emerged.

Harman is understood to be still considering the report's findings in detail, but has expressed personal support for a change.

Simon Woolley of Operation Black Vote and the author of the review, said talented candidates were not 'getting past go' at the moment. 'The change in the law is not a sledgehammer to crack a nut; it's not forcing parties to use all-black shortlists,' he said. 'But unless we take positive action measures we are not going to have a representative democracy for more than 75 years. It's not that we don't have Obamas, but we don't have the mechanisms for them to see the light of day.'

His report is understood to conclude that all-black shortlists would be needed for two decades, after which talented candidates could be expected to make it on their own. It identifies 100 constituencies with large ethnic minority communities as prime targets for shortlists, but concludes that positive discrimination would be needed in only four to eight of those seats for four elections in a row to ensure that the proportion of ethnic minority MPs matches the proportion in the population......Article conts (-)

Linked Story

Law change urged so Labour can have all-black shortlists
Vikram Dodd

· Push to increase number of black and Asian MPs
· Chair of party's ethnic forum to introduce bill

The head of Labour's efforts to increase its ethnic minority MPs says the party is failing and wants the law changed to have all-black shortlists.

So far Labour has selected only one new ethnic minority candidate in a seat it is likely to win at the next general election, despite promises to make the parliamentary party look like the country it serves.

Keith Vaz, who chairs Labour's ethnic minority forum, says that 20 years after he was elected as one of the first four ethnic minority MPs of the modern era, the party is still failing. Mr Vaz, who also sits on Labour's ruling national executive committee, says he will introduce a new bill so all-black shortlists of candidates can be imposed on constituencies.

Such positive discrimination would be illegal, but Labour has already changed the law to allow all-women shortlists.

An internal Labour list of new candidates for the next general election, seen by the Guardian, shows that Asian and black candidates have been chosen in seats they have little or no hope of winning.

Hardyal Dhindsa was picked to fight Mid Derbyshire, a new seat created by boundary changes which is expected to go Tory. The party has chosen Rushanara Ali in London's Bethnal Green and Bow, which it lost in 2005 to George Galloway's Respect party. Yasmin Qureshi has been selected in Bolton South East and is currently the best hope of adding to Labour's ethnic minority MPs, with half of the candidates selected and an election possible this autumn. At a hustings held in May in Leicester for Labour's leadership, Gordon Brown said it was "wrong" the party did not have more ethnic minority MPs.

Mr Vaz, the former Europe minister, said a bill allowing all-black shortlists was needed: "It's the only way we're going to increase representation. The fact is the party needs to do more. We have to ensure we get more black and Asian MPs into parliament at the next election. That means we have to positively discriminate in favour and have all ethnic minority shortlists. I think all three parties have failed.".....Article conts (-)