Thursday, June 18, 2009

Reverse Racism? Really?

I really like the word, "really". My favorite response to any and everything is, "really, though"? It sums up exactly how I feel, whether I am surprised, upset, angry or just feeling some kind of way.

"No one has brought forth the slightest evidence she has the intellectual candlepower to sit on the Roberts court. By her own admission, Sotomayor is an "affirmative action baby."

Though the Obama media have been ballyhooing her brilliance - No. 1 in high school, No. 1 at Princeton, editor of Yale Law Review - her academic career appears to have been a fraud from beginning to end, a testament to Ivy League corruption.

Two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton, Sotomayor was advised to read children's classics and study basic grammar books during her summers. How do you graduate first in your class at Princeton if your summer reading consists of "Chicken Little" and "The Troll Under the Bridge"?"

-Courtesy of Cagle's Index.

Really, Pat Buchanan?

Here's why I'm mad:

Many, if not all of the comments in this article are ridiculous to say the least, including him lamenting white males as "victims" of affirmative action and how it perpetuates "race-based bigotry against whites". I am sorry Mr. Buchanan, but last I checked, my race was overpowered overwhelmingly at my Alma Mater by you guessed it... whites. I would even venture to guess that most, if not all, Ivy League schools are still majority white. I may be over-reaching with this next comment too, but shoot, I would not be surprised if all the schools, save for HBCUs, were majority white.

I am not going to debate the pros and cons of affirmative action; that is for a different post, but it is foolish to believe that Judge Sotomayor was nominated to the Supreme Court bench just because of her race with absolutely no credentials to back her up.

We all know how college admissions work- majority of your application is based on your numbers: SAT, GPA, LSAT, etc., but they take other things into consideration as well; volunteer work, recommendations, work history, etc. Judge Sotomayor might not have been the strongest on paper, but she might have other skills that made her a considerable candidate. Things like work ethic, honesty, determination, being a hard worker- things that grades do not tell you, but recommenders can. Those qualities are things you cannot study for, but you can surely earn.

Stranger things have happened, but to think that one's race is the sole purpose for one's career advancement is truly ridiculous. Some people know they are where they are because they are Black, Latino, Asian, etc., but they also know they deserved a chance because otherwise they would not have received one. I believe Judge Sotomayor fits that description and I am very glad that Princeton, Yale and now the White House thought she was deserving enough to get a chance to do what she clearly does best: succeed.

It is quite obvious that Buchanan is a bafoon. What is really sad and quite upsetting is that he and millions of other white people believe this foolish rhetoric. I do not know much about Judge Sotomayor, but I am quite sure and confident that she is much smarter than Pat Buchanan gives her credit for.

1 comment:

Dr. J said...

"Indeed, the White House itself leaked that the final four court candidates were all women and Sotomayor was picked because she was a Latina."

A comment that you left out of your excerpt. I do in fact agree with Pat on this one, she would not have been where she is today without the help of affirmative action. Therefore, it's not too far fetched to say that someone else, more qualified, was denied an opportunity so that she could have hers.

I mean seriously the basis of her appointment was that she was Latina... come on now. This is the United States Supreme Court, not Princeton University.