yeah, attend katten's diversity panel and get "whitelisted" by future Biglaw employees.

Why can't law firms just hire people on merit without regard to skin color? It really is that simple.

Candid Discussion Moderator:

"Every single one of you pasty-faced patriarchs is an evil oppressor. I don't care if you do better work than the others, its all racist/sexist evaluations that make it seem so. If law were based on something other than convincing people in court and profits and success, you wouldn't be near the top. Bow to your non-white, non-male peers. Now, let me hear your gripes so I can note down your name and fire you next year for 'unrelated' matters."

Anyone taking this bait is walking into a trap.

This is a ridiculous idea for a panel.

All these "diversity panels" and "diversity meetings" are just CYA by Biglaw because alot of big corporate clients demand that the law firms they hire reflect the community at large.

Biglaw does not care about diversity for social jusitce, race relations or any other touchy feely bs. it is all down to cleints and $$$. But this is biglaw...are you surprised??

Dear White Boys- the law and society discriminates against you because everyone hates a winner. So just bite your lip, smile and nod at the children trying to bring you down to their level.

Dear Kattan White Boys- I think next Tuesday around Noon is your kid's school play, right?

2:49, is that a dig at Katten or Biglaw? Katten is as diverse as next V100 firm. Diverse partners and associates. Diversity in the chairs of large practice groups. The fact that you have WASP and Katten in same paragraph makes me think you really mean all of BIGLAW or do not understand what WASP stands for.

I think it sounds like good event, and why should white males not be allowed discuss diversity, what it means to them and how to encourage it in a meaningful way? I don't really get why this is noteworthy, unless Lat somehow means to imply that it is a bad thing to do. Should straight white guys not be allowed contribute?

I don't care if my law firm is diverse, I care about them winning and keeping the costs down.

Diversity=amorphous phrase no one can define but basically means hiring lesser-qualified applicants to make the company brochures look like a United Colors of Bennetton Ad.

"The best way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

- Chief Justice John Roberts

Total attendance = zero

"As for the panel's exploration of "ways in which white men can help create a more diverse legal profession," here's one answer: THEY CAN LEAVE."

OUCH.

I guess Lat prefers the dark meat.

2:58: Corporations don't care about diversity, they care about profits. It would be a stupid corporation that judged a law firm based on its racial make-up---rather racist, wouldn't you say?

BigLaw is just afraid Al Sharpton/NOW will launch lawsuits and rallies against them if they don't fill a quota. Bad press avoidance=='diversity" initiatives.

The bottom line is this. People are graduating law school with massive debt. The only way for most people to pay off this debt in short order (rather than 30 years) is to secure a job in Biglaw. Biglaw jobs are way oversubscribed. White male law students are not going to be in favor of any policy that lessens their chances of securing one of these jobs. Simple.

You don't really give a sht about diversity when you a looking down the barrel of a $1400 a month loan repayment on $45,000 a year as opposed to $160,000 a year.

2:49 - Huh?

White men can contribute to diversity if they are gay, handicapped, or both.

2:49, spoken like someone who's never had to deal with the barrage of "advice" women and minorities have to deal with all the time, wherein we are told all the ways in which we have to be more like white men if we ever want to get anywhere in the law. The reaction to your proposed modification would be "oh, great. Another person telling us how being ourselves is an inherent disadvantage in the law. Awesome. That's, like, totally news."

I mean, seriously dude. Are you that retarded? I get emails like that ALL THE FUCKING TIME. Jebus Christ, these whiners.

HAHAHAHA. They can hold each other and shake fists at the way the world works. Or talk about their one black friend.

3.04pm

I agree. Corporations care about anything that adversely affects profits, including a Jesse jackson style shakedown and the ensuing bad publicity.

herpes.

2:59, people only hate winners when the winners got to start the race being trotted around in a horse-pulled carriage with servants to fan them and peel their grapes, while the "loser" women and minorities got to start the race half an hour later, and after having their legs tied together and invisible paint slathered on them to make it harder for the judges to tell when they've reached the finish line.

3:03 - I don't think Lat is anti-white-male. I think he is making fun of the idea of "ways in which white men can become and stay engaged in creating a more diverse legal profession."

Here here, 3:09. It's highly ironic that whites don't like to talk about race and racial inequality when whites are ulimately responsible for racial categories and racial injustice in our country. That's a fact.

Slow news day?

are you suggesting that the domains of "white men" and "gay" don't overlap?

3:09, I didn't have a chariot while growing up in a working-middle class family, working since I was in junior high, and earning academic scholarships for college and law school.

3:09 and 3:19, you are entitled to your opinion. But I still do not get what is wrong with this talk. Is this not your point, 3:19, that white males should talk about diversity?

In point of fact, the upper echelons of these firms are run by white men and, like all human beings, they make choices about advancement, whom to give their clients, and whom they like based on a largely unwritten set of factors. A major one of those factors -- as any social science experiment will tell you -- is 'who reminds me of myself.' Younger white dudes will get more chances and be more forgiven for mistakes than people who don't remind senior partners of themselves as a result.

The real problem with these diversity-advancement programs is that it makes some members of "diverse" groups feel stigmatized. But the stigma is undeserved ... diversity programs help self correct a natural problem.

Also, homogeneity is boring.

Put up another Paul Hastings sucks story!

I love all of these "meritocracy" arguments. The only way for white men to be candid at this event is to admit that no one benefits more from affirmative action (a.k.a. White Privilege) more than they do. This whole society, since its very inception, is premised on white male supremacy. So cry me a fucking river, white men. Then get over yourselves. And 3:02, I wish you knew that that Roberts quote is more infamous than famous.

3;15, I did but it would always break down. Finally I realized that in the 20th century, a Chariot was no way to travel. My girlfriend at the time let me borrow her Mustang.

3:09

Wow, 150 years since the end of slavery is one hell of a long half-hour. Nearly 50 years since the Civil Rights Movement is also one hell of a long half-hour.

Maybe what you really want is for all the little children to get ribbons and trophies, regardless of who the best athlete in the race really is. We're all "winners" after all, right?

It shames me to say/type that I have not done a good job of making minorities at my firm feel more welcome. By the looks of things at lunch today and EVERY DAY - I am not the only one.

By the looks of the people on this year's partnership ballot...things like lunching/golfing with associates and other peers is important to ones longetivity in a BIGLAW environment. I always get invited because my presence does not make others uncomfortable.

The proposed meeting is a start.

Not every white male makes partner.

Look at 3:21 / Michael Clayton!

3:15, you still got to start the race on time and with your legs free and no invisible paint.

3:20, good point. It's more like ten hours late, given that racial injustice and gender inequality existed for millenia before the very very very recent trends in the other direction. Regardless, are you actually proposing that, by now, surely all women and minorities (the deserving ones, anyway), MUST have caught up with the white men by now? Wouldn't they have to be FASTER than the white men to do that? Which, in turn, would mean that those who were AS FAST, i.e., EQUALLY GOOD (or, really, better, given the foot-tying and lack of a chariot) are STILL BEHIND??

I mean, have you ever actually RUN a race?

Too much. Katten hasn't exactly seen non-minority partners running for the exits because of their diversity programs. File under "novel ways to get good press for our diversity efforts".

3:19 - the amount of nonsense you were able to pack into so short a post is pretty impressive. The "herpes" commenter earlier made more sense.

If law firms aren't sufficiently diverse without diversity programs, then let's have diversity programs. 3:18 is right: homogeneity is boring.

Clarence Thomas values his Yale Law degree at 15 cents, thanks to "diversity initiatives."

Georgia Law Bans Retailers From Selling 'Pot Candy' To Minors

The funny part of this article is that Senator Stoner brought forth this bill!!!

ATLANTA -- Georgia retailers soon will be banned from selling candy flavored to taste like marijuana to children.

Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue signed a measure into law Wednesday that bans the sale of "marijuana flavored products" to minors -- anyone under 18 -- and calls for a fine of up to $500 for each offense.

It targets businesses that sell the candies with drug-inspired names such as "Kronic Kandy" and "Pot Suckers." The law says the candies promote drug use.

Senator Doug Stoner pushed the bill in the senate. "I don't think that folks are aware this is going on," Stoner told Channel 2 in April. "It's mainly, from what I can tell, particularly targeted to minority communities."

Vote Hemp, a national organization that promotes the use of hemp products and tracks legislation, says the measure would make Georgia the first state to ban the sale of the candy to minors.

as a straight white guy, i agree that 3:18 has a point. a lot of "my people" don't see how easy they've had it (even those of us who grew up working middle-class).

however, the suggestion that b/c i'm straight and white, i should stay out of the way re: diversity initiatives is stupid and insulting. it suggests that b/c i'm straight and white, i couldn't possibly appreciate the problem, or be interested in solving it.

should people only be involved in activities related to thwir own experiences? should i refuse to represent a domestic violence victim unless i've been abused? the logic is the same.

3:28, I'll buy it from him, then. I'll even pay him fifty whole dollars for it.

3:19

I don't need some "white male supremacy" hater telling me whether the quote is considered "famous" or "infamous" for me to judge the validity of his point. By the way, who do you think decides such things for the rest of us? Ah yes, those same libs that tell me I should just bend over and take affirmative action up the rear for my own good.

Do me a favor, take a look at Africa and tell me about the view. Are you going to blame that one on "the man" too? I guess it's always easier to blame someone else than to accept responsibility for making your own way of life.

Guys in my high school used to sit around and talk about how diversity in chess club made us feel all the time, it was no big deal.

In the long run minority scholarships will help whites--- the lower evolutionary bar leads to whites having to work harder to get as far as those on affirmative action, which in turn will reduce the comparative evolutionary fitness of minorities. From an evolutionary standpoint, the best thing to "do for" us minorities is to leave us alone-- it's the same thing with eyeglasses: the more people with eyeglasses, the less pressure there is for people to have good eyes, and in the long run the whole human race is affected as a result. Quit giving us a golf handicap! We can succeed without your white handouts!

"Corporations don't care about diversity, they care about profits. It would be a stupid corporation that judged a law firm based on its racial make-up---rather racist, wouldn't you say?"

Go ask Walmart, which has very specific diversity requirements that must be met if they are to hire a law firm. They don't want the cost of being mau-maued by the Raimbow Coalition.

I honestly don't care if they have some extra cocktail hours or networking events for various minority/gender/orientation/whatever groups - just another chance to eat lame food while not getting drunk and chatting like an amiable idiot. When diversity begins to impact actual career progression is when it becomes an issue - sure white men may have built this country and my law firm, but sadly for me they were OTHER white men - no relatives of mine. The fact that we share a skin pallor doesn't make my family rich or make me a legacy at an Ivy League school.

"Corporations don't care about diversity, they care about profits. It would be a stupid corporation that judged a law firm based on its racial make-up---rather racist, wouldn't you say?"

Go ask Walmart, which has very specific diversity requirements that must be met if they are to hire a law firm. They don't want the cost of being mau-maued by the Raimbow Coalition.

I honestly don't care if they have some extra cocktail hours or networking events for various minority/gender/orientation/whatever groups - just another chance to eat lame food while not getting drunk and chatting like an amiable idiot. When diversity begins to impact actual career progression is when it becomes an issue - sure white men may have built this country and my law firm, but sadly for me they were OTHER white men - no relatives of mine. The fact that we share a skin pallor doesn't make my family rich or make me a legacy at an Ivy League school.

Clients do demand that firms have women and minorities in the legal ranks. That is true. But, I've never been in a deal where someone has said "Hey, this deal team is too white male!" Clients want the best people to do their work. If that's a woman, great. If not, also great. The woman can do someone else's work and they can claim credit for having hired a diverse law firm.

I also think, that if they had their way, law firms would hire only gay men in all colors of the rainbow. (no pun intende- ok, maybe just a little.) Gays have no kids, no part time status needs, none of all that baggage that the women and staight men have. Lesbians work too, until they get the mommy urge and end up with septuplets.

You're all a bunch of whiners. There's no shortage of white men in law firms. And, Jews and Asians are passed up over underqualified white guys all the time. Stop whining and get back to work.

Jews are no longer an officially oppressed minority at law firms - we were told that during our diversity training. Members of the Tribe, according to the high priestesses of diversity, we are now fully-fledged white oppressors.

Rejoice.!

Joaquin, you say "some white supremacy hater" as if I'm supposed to feel bad for being one. And no one here was jamming any opinion up anyone's rear but you, Mr. "I Quote Roberts and Think I'm Doing Big Things." Why don't you just sit this one out?

I like how when libs are saying that white males are responsible for racial injustice, want to work with and promote people who look like them, and so forth, they (a) in the former case, are generalizing about an entire group (and expressing a willingness for the end to justify the means); and (b) in the latter, are making vague assertions that aren't supported by any facts.

If I do the same thing, but slant it the other way, I could say something like this:

Young black men are responsible for the majority of violent crimes in this country. We should lock them all up in prison before they have the opportunity to commit crimes. They are much more likely to attack white people than for white people to attack them. I think it's because they don't like white people and want to get rid of them.

How acceptable is it to say something like that? The diversity-mongers use the same argument tactics that the KKK uses, only flipped 180 degrees.

@3:38

Ouch. So I guess now we get to march people to the camps? Bogus. Its well known that even at "Jewish" firms, we get shoved into "back office" departments like tax or labor rather than litigation or securities work. Hey, Jewish guy, go spend 50 hours in the Library. You guys are good at that!

@3:38

Ouch. So I guess now we get to march people to the camps? Bogus. Its well known that even at "Jewish" firms, we get shoved into "back office" departments like tax or labor rather than litigation or securities work. Hey, Jewish guy, go spend 50 hours in the Library. You guys are good at that!

"I wish you knew that that Roberts quote is more infamous than famous."

Jesus....go back to DailyKos, simpleton.

3:33(1) -- so are you also opposed to technology and medicine? The evolutionary damage they cause is astounding.

"You're all a bunch of whiners. There's no shortage of white men in law firms. And, Jews and Asians are passed up over underqualified white guys all the time. "

Yes, the underrepresentation of Jews and Asians in American law is shocking. Truly shocking.

Really, think before you write.

The Katten people should cancel the meeting and read this thread. It shows the spectrum of white male beliefs and why white men won't be candid.

I' m gay and latino. I'm never getting fired.

Suck that, biatches!!!

3:09-
However you make yourself feel better. In the dark, when there's no one else but you and your conscience, you know that you only have yourself to blame.

kisses to teh haters!
2:59

Anyone alleging racially/sexually based discrimination better provide one thing: proof.

You can't simply say, "Because they're not enough X in this firm, it is racist/sexist against X."

You must prove the firm is deliberately disqualifying candidates from the X pool simply because they are from the X pool.

But of course, proof doesn't work for the AA crowd. Only quotas.

@3:39 --

"I like how when libs are saying that white males are responsible for racial injustice"

Uh... who, exactly, said that? I don't know many people who BLAME white men for being privileged -- we just want you to ACKNOWLEDGE it and be willing to accommodate those who don't have the same privileges. Reading that as "blame" is defensive and immature, and really a non-starter where any sort of dialogue is concerned.

I get so sick of people talking about this as though it's a blame game. Who the fuck cares about blame? The point is, we have a problem, and we can try to fix it in a way that is fair and equitable and recognizes the unique difficulties faced by some and not others, or we can sit in the corner and pout about people trying to "take away what's rightfully mine." Back to daycare with you, then!

"Yes, the underrepresentation of Jews and Asians in American law is shocking [sarcasm]"

Boy, someone's never been outside of NY/LA/SF...

So in other words, Corporations only want diversity in themselves to prevent lawsuits agianst themselves. When they outsource something---for example, law work to a firm---they don't care about racial makeup, unless the firm is deliberately discriminating.

Basically, Al Sharpton's not launching another bogus suit agianst Walmart if it's law firm isn't filling his quotas---he'll launch it against the firm.

3:38-
I was officially told the same thing. Then again I work in NYC. Guess we can't play the victim card huh?

The Chief Justice stole his quote from the dissent below in the Ninth Circuit. He changed it just enough not to have to cite Justice Bea, who said:

"The way to end racial discrimination is to stop discriminating by race."

426 F.3d at 1222

So give credit where credit is due.

That invitation should have included a picture of Admiral Ackbar, with "It's A Trap!" written in a speech bubble above his head.

You'd have to be crazy to speak "candidly" about this topic.

3:48: So would you be the first or second in line at the lynching if a white man ever spoke honestly about this diversity claptrap?

3:51: you want me to acknowledge your inferiority based your skin color, correct? sorry, I'm not into racism.

3:53: Possibly, though the big driver is still the corporate client questions about this stuff.

White guys are so funny. Better have black and brown kids because soon it won't be a white world and those kids will be the ones arguing for diversity. All you can do about it is to make sure they have good AA skills. Better attend some of these panels.

Why is it when a minority achives anything, it's because of preferences, when a white person achieves anything it's merit (and not white privilige)

And if you really want to have a candid "panel" about diversity and white male associates just recor them going out to lunch or playing softball together. I'm sure you'll hear plenty of racist complaints about "diversity" and all that

Accord, 3:33(1).

I don't think I'd ever go be candid at one of these meetings, but I guess it's nice of the firm to try. Who knows, maybe some people will be candid and won't get screwed for it, and then everyone will be able to tell the truth about this stuff and disagree respectfully.

It's worth a try. Wish my firm would try it, though I'd want to see a partner or two break the ice with some real candor before I open my mouth. I value my job more than this kind of political expression.

3:52: Or Boston, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Chicago, San Jose, Oakland, Atlanta, Houston, St. Louis, San Diego, Seattle, Portland, Albany, Indianapolis....

You're right. I'm sheltered.

I'm a male and I don't always understand why females complain so much about unfairness in law firms. But I at least realize that as a male I have a different worldview so it's probably difficult for me to understand. It's amazing that whites don't realize that they have a different worldview and can't comprehend what it's like for minorities in BIGLAW.

3:58: Yes, you're obviously right, the proof that "white privilege" is all around us is so obvious. Do you have proof?

I'd be no where in my firm without mentors and peers that were watching my back and opening doors for me. I like to think that it is because I do phenomenal work, but I know better. Anyone (white, black, yellow, etc) that does not agree with the above statement is full of it.

I think Chris Rock said it best: "Not one of you White people in this audience (it was a large venue) would trade places with me.....AND I'M RICH!"

I offer a simple test: get up from your desk, pop your head out into the hallway, and look left and right. If most of the partners you see are white males, then you don't need this panel. The white males are doing just fine.

3:39: I think what he meant was not that "white supremacy" is acceptable, which it obviously isn't, but that you fling around such callous labels to silence white people from expressing their true feelings. Many white people don't deride the obviously racist implications of AA b/c they know that they'll immediately be denounced as racist themselves. It's a silencing tactic, and you used it very effectively.

P.S. Does it really infuriate you that much to hear someone quote a conservative Supreme Court justice? Maybe you'd be more amenable if he'd quoted a race-baiting hustler like Sharpton or Jackson.

P.P.S. Let's see, being on the wrong end of AA practices for law school admissions and/or career advancement simply b/c one is not a "protected class" pretty much constitutes taking it up the rear w/ a smile. Bite the pillow, bitches!

Too bad this program won't be in public. I would certainly benefit. As a white male COA clerk and former fed. dist. clerk, I am worked with 2 white male co-clerks at the DC and am working with 3 white male co-clerks at the COA. Since I'm joining a firm this fall, I will need to put myself in the diversity mantra and could certainly use this and other programs to help ensure that I understand the great importance of a diverse work environment.

Hey 3:58, the reason why anytime the gays or minorities achieve something its based on a "preference" is because it is. In a world where gays, disabled people and minorities are given preferential treatment such as special scholarships, admission to the best law schools, based upon the color of their skin, then when they do something based on their own merit, people believe that it's because another handout is being given. Sucks to be stereotyped in that way, don't it? Same is true for all the Middleeasterners who are angry to be stereotyped at the airport as terrorists. Yes, it's a bummer, but then again, there weren't 21 white guys tying red bands around their heads and flying planes into the WTC. Preferences are the next stereotype. That's why they suck. When a person of color or a gay person achieves something, it shouldn't be considered to be a result of "preference." But when the preference has been given in the past, what do you expect people to believe?

I will be at this event and will gladly report on the content of the discussion. It seems as if this event has been promoted across Chicago for any and all to attend - CLE Credit will be awarded to those who participate.

3:56, I appreciate your sentiment. However, since this is a white male event, I think a Han Solo "I've got a bad feeling about this" caption would be more appropriate.

Heck, I'd go to this panel just so I could say I was with the program on AA. I personally hate it but if clients told me to hire martians I'd either find some or make some.

If you wouldn't do the same then I respect you but you'll never make equity partner.

This is event is open to any attorney in the city - I suggest those in Chicago attend and receive the 1.5 hours of CLE credit!

The real question is why Katten associates of all colors are fleeing for the exits.

Try bringing in more work Katten partners, so that associates of all races, creeds, nationalities, and orientations have the chance to prove themselves, rather than organizing awkward discussions that will take associates away from the billable hours of work you should be providing them.

Why is there no affirmative action for Internet connection? Minorities probably would really enjoy Internet.

lol @ 3:57. Your retort was so nonsensical I had to go back and check the time stamp to see who you were responding to. I love how privileged folks find it so easy to dismiss their (our) privilege as "superiority" and a lack of privilege as "inferiority." (This is precisely the sort of thing that's led to the disturbing trend of anti-intellectualism in our country.) But hey, why be part of the solution when being part of the problem is SO MUCH MORE FUN!!

Btw, genius, I'm a white woman from a rich family. And, unlike you, I am willing to acknowledge how far above the pack that automatically puts me (while I'm still well below white men, except those in much much lower economic classes, or those who are flamboyantly gay from a young age, living in a homophobic part of the country). I guess you still have some growing up to do before you'll accept the fact that you did not "earn" ANYTHING you were born with. Your American citizenship (assuming you are a citizen), your whiteness (assuming you are white), your maleness (etc.), your intellect (that one I now have a bit of cause to question, though...), etc., etc. was all AN ACCIDENT OF BIRTH. None of it is "merit." Your hard work is merit -- guess what, all those minorities who you think "aren't as smart" as you have almost certainly worked a hell of a lot harder than you did to get where they are, even if their LSAT is a little below yours. Which, oops, means they have more "merit" than you do. Unless you reached down from heaven and magically CHOSE who you would be at birth (and even then, like, how selfish), you have about a gazillion unearned privileges. Show some fucking gratefulness. Like, at least get to church or temple or something.

Law firms across the nation to laughable socially engineered failures!

4:05 (1):

[Slow clap.] Nicely done. I only wish those in favor of AA got this.

4:06: I think Ackbar's is funnier, if only because of the panicked way he says it. But Han Solo applies too.

"3:52: Or Boston, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Chicago, San Jose, Oakland, Atlanta, Houston, St. Louis, San Diego, Seattle, Portland, Albany, Indianapolis"

*spits drink at screen*

Houston? Atlanta? D.C.? Seriously? If you're gonna talk out of your ass, at least try to make it credible (and having lived in, worked, and/or interviewed in many of those places, I can say with authority you're pretty definitely wrong)

Thanks for the laugh though.

There is a problem with conflating white privilege with AA. White privilege won't get you into Michigan with a 152 on the LSAT. AA will. AA won't make you welcome and well-connected in BIGLAW. White privilege will. Many white men don't object to minority networking events and additional efforts to make minorities feel welcome and connected. Many white men do have a problem with AA, especially when they read Grutter and see exactly how big the numbers disparity is. Any worthwhile discussion of diversity needs to be a little more nuanced than "by any means necessary" v. "absolutely identical treatment."

Katten is a Jewish firm. Very few, if any, Asians in the partnership ranks. Check the NALP stats. Same as Proskauer, Paul Weiss, and many other NYC/LA /Chicago big law firms.

I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Affirmative action supporters, why do you hate equal civil rights and oppose the beloved Martin Luther King, Jr.?

And I would gladly trade places with Chris Rock. Where do I sign up?

I'm Dominican and firmwide emails about "diversity cocktails" etc. always make me go, "Really? Why?" This is mostly because my caucasian colleagues/friends drop by and ask me (as if I'm an authority) what people would think if they went. One is off-the-boat Lithuanian--does he count? Here in NYC he's a lot more diverse than my Washington Heights born n' raised butt, even if my culo is brown and his is white. Shit just breeds needless resentmant and distracts people from their work. If you're brown and in the firm, you don't need cocktails to revel in your diversity. The firm just showed you they care by hiring you.

4:08:
Limousine Liberal.

She'll be running the seminar, no doubt. Watch out, we pasty-faced patriarchs!

Oh, and I love how now our intellects are accidents of our birth. So no one develops their brains through hard work and study---its all racially predetermined.

Why does this limousine liberal suddenly make the case that white people are inherently smarter???!

Thank goodness Clarence Thomas sees through this double-talk and coded racial inferiority junk. 15 cents is prolly too high, though.

More accurate 4:05 --

Okay, yeah, straight white males get lots of unfair privileges. But if we fix it, people won't think you're as good as us. You're better off without AA, because when you DO finally make it to the top, having worked five times as hard as we have to get there, people will recognize that you're probably almost as good as us -- MAYBE EVEN EQUALLY GOOD!!! Isn't that totally worth it??

4:04- You are now leaving the meritocracy for the zoo-ocracy. Remember, it's not what you do or who you are, but what you look like.

4:11---having worked in two of those cities you mention and done business in the third, I can tell you're only interviewing at the WASPM firms if you're not finding a good number of Jewish and Asian associates and partners around. But what would a good lib hypocrite be without a worldview based on Hollywood movies and ivy league multiculturalism "theory"?

But even the diversity naysayers must admit - the food is wayyyyy better with diversity.

I think they should just have potlucks and have everyone bring their own cultural dish. Everyone is happier when they are mackin' down.

Finally, all the complaining on this thread makes me want to call the waaaaaah!bulance on you all.

"Limousine Liberal."

Oh crud. I've been bested by a label! Drat and confound it all!! How can I argue against such pointed analysis?!!

"So no one develops their brains through hard work and study---its all racially predetermined."

BIOLOGICALLY predetermined, asshole (within limits). That your mind jumps automatically to "race," which is a tiny part of DNA, shows just how ugly you are inside. I guess you've never, ever been treated unfairly in your life, and measures of "merit" ALWAYS get it totally, completely right.

4:15:

Good points all.

Just because you have black skin does not mean you have been disadvantaged. Most people I know who are minoroties at Biglaw have two professional parents, and Princeton undergrad degrees. The truly underprivileged are stuck in dreadful public schools in places like DC and Baltimore and never even make it to a college, never mind college, law school and then Biglaw.

Why in the world would any sane white male want to lessen white privilege?

@4:16

Or, put differently, I guess you also "earned" your fancy private schools growing up, eh? Totally the result of all your hard work in the womb surviving to birth to a rich white family and all that. Nicely done!

My firm only hires women and minorities for support staff and janitorial duties. It is heaven.

"White privilege won't get you into Michigan with a 152 on the LSAT. AA will."

I guess having a rich daddy no longer counts as "white privilege." Interesting analytical choice.

Lack of diversity at law firms is a miscarriage of justice.

4:08, if you want to reward hard work and struggles through life, fine. No white male would object to that as long as it's done for everyone. But why do you automatically assume that someone's who is black or Hispanic always struggled through life? Isn't that a little...racist, from your limousine liberal perspective? When Obama's children apply for college, can you credibly claim that they should get a boost because they had such a hard life growing up? Sure, let's just ignore the entire black middle class.

Rewarding hard work means giving a boost to the poor whites as well as the poor blacks, not just the poor blacks and the wealthy blacks. Last time I checked, there are more poor whites than poor blacks in America.

4:22--
Ahem,

1. Asserting biological predetermination in intellect necessarily asserts racial predetermination in intellect. Race is a large subcategory of biology. Your argument, therefore, inherently assumes racial disparity in intellect.

2. You did not argue within limits previously. Now you are. I suppose you have a Richard Dawkins-type model for proving within what limits their are and which races are smarter. Once again, you argue for racial superiority.

3. AA is about race. The fact that 4:16 talked about race is perfectly logical, given this context. To attack him/her for the statement about race shows you're chasing your own tail on this issue.

4:25:

let's have a contest. You find all the white privileged kids who got in on Daddy's money, and I'll find all the minorities who got in because of their minority status. Then, we'll remove them all from the law schools and law firms. Fair, no?

Wait, why are you backing away?

Agreed. 4:08 = Limousine liberal, or as is the case nowadays with man-made global warming hysteria, 4:08 = Lear jet liberal.

4:05 = Greatness

4:13 = Good point. You can't reconcile the underpinnings of MLK's speech (content of character, not color of skin) w/ the blatantly discriminatory nature of AA. But, hey, why not have your cake and eat it too?

Let's not judge non-white-hetero-males by their color/sexuality/gender, unless it benefits them. Then it's OK. White guilt? Yes We Can!

I don't know, 4:19.

What would a good ol' entitled conservative racist be without a worldview based on lazy stereotypes and anti-progress "theory"?

4:23:

Assumes all white males went to private schools. Fancy ones at that. Amazing.

I love when limousine liberals merely turn racism and sexism against others and pretend that two wrongs make a right.

4:27:
Race is just as much a social construct as it is a biological construct.

4:04, Was that a shameless plug to show off your credentials? Something tells me you won't be well liked at your firm regardless of your skin color, might want to stick to working in environments with 5 or less people.

4:32= Ethnic studies major.

Does anyone else get the feeling that all the commenters on this post who used the phrase "libs" "liberals" "limosine liberals" or any variation thereof are all actually the same person? And boy, is he bitter.

Why all the fuss about an old, old wooden ship that was used in the Civil War era?

Typical white people.

- Barack Obama

4:32, you're an idiot. The dividing lines between races are a social construct, but the actual racial differences are based on biological differences. Thus, someone who is 1/4 black would be considered probably white in Brazil and black in America, but nobody sane would argue that there is no biological difference between whites as defined by Hillary Clinton and blacks as defined Condoleeza Rice.

Perhaps, 4:37. Or perhaps there's a large number of people who dislike AA and are voicing their opinions. but that can't be right, because most people are good honest libs-liberal-limosine[sic] liberals who believe that white males are the devil incarnate plotting world domination since the dawn of womynkind.

I don't think I have ever even spoken with a minority. I have seen them on TV though. They look scary.

God DAMN white people!!

--Barack Hussein Obama

"Asserting biological predetermination in intellect necessarily asserts racial predetermination in intellect. Race is a large subcategory of biology. Your argument, therefore, inherently assumes racial disparity in intellect."

Oh my God. Did you intentionally misread my comments or are you actually that stupid? Yes, both race and some range of IQ are, from what science can tell, biologically pre-determined. Not everyone is the same skin color. Also, not everyone is of the same intellect. Certain skin colors give you more advantages. Certain IQ ranges also give you more advantages. Some who has both (i.e., advantageous skin color and advantageous IQ range) will be better off than someone who has only one (e.g., advantageous IQ range). So the reference to the commenter's "intellect," clearly misplaced, was to point out that it is not due to "merit" that anyone was born with a higher IQ range (a statement I now retract). It is also not due to merit that anyone had the advantages and options at his fingertips to move closer to the high end of that range than the low end (if, in fact, this happened). So someone with only one advantage (e.g., IQ range) and no or few other advantages (e.g., whiteness, maleness, American citizenship, rich parents, propensity to health, etc.) will almost always APPEAR not to have that advantage to the same extent as the highly advantaged individual, due to the other factors OVER WHICH NEITHER OF THEM HAD ANY CONTROL. And yet, that person has to work harder than the other -- much, much harder -- to get anywhere near where he is, while he wallows in his racist confirmation bias and assumes that ANY of this has much of ANYTHING to do with "merit.." It sure must be nice to have been born with so much "merit."

"You did not argue within limits previously. Now you are. I suppose you have a Richard Dawkins-type model for proving within what limits their are and which races are smarter. Once again, you argue for racial superiority."

Again, you betray your laziness, ignorance, and/or poor intellect. I would have thought that it would be obvious that "intellect" meant "IQ range," but I guess I overestimated those of you who actually thought, apparently, that I meant "someone can be born with an IQ of exactly 134, and this is biologically predetermined." I loathe Dawkins for many reasons. Once again, that you and your buddy AUTOMATICALLY tie in intellect with race demonstrate only that YOU are the racists.

"AA is about race. The fact that 4:16 talked about race is perfectly logical, given this context. To attack him/her for the statement about race shows you're chasing your own tail on this issue."

Actually, AA is about a lot of things, of which race is one. My original post mentioned several, and, um, I even said I'm a woman. Like, duh, bright red target for something else I'm obviously thinking about when I talk about affirmative action. And I can't believe that in 2008 you aren't aware of the fact that the largest beneficiaries of AA have been white women. Actually, given the rest of your comment, I can.

4:35 = 4:04's co-clerk

THE MEETING IS OPEN TO ALL IN CHICAGO....

1.5 CREDITS OF CLE

yes, but remember 4:43, they're the victims of racism/oppression in 90% of the television shows.

Reminds me of a TV writer who once opined that white males made up 75% of all the criminals shown on fictional cop shows.He felt like he was being stereotyped.

Hooray for diversity potluck - biglaw to ponsit and adobo!
Boohoo to diversity forums which make everyone grouchy.

4:32 If I wanted to plug my credentials, I would not post as a guest. You missed my point entirely, showing an inability to grasp any subtlety. 4:18(2) got it and I do appreciate him/her not pointing out the grammar error in my fast typing. Read his/her post. Very truly yours, 4:04.

I am still scared of minorities. I am convinced they want to take away all my worldly possessions at gunpoint and then go to town.

4:32 If I wanted to plug my credentials, I would not post as a guest. You missed my point entirely showing an inability to grasp any subtlety. 4:18(2) got it and I do appreciate him/her not pointing out the grammar error in my fast typing. Read his/her post. Very truly yours, 4:04.

It's so cute how the racists have found a name-calling tactic that makes them feel superior and justified in not addressing any actual arguments. "Limousine liberals" -- did you guys think that up all by yourselves? And it's an alliteration too! You guys get a gold star in your coloring books!!

4:46, what exactly is wrong with providing preferences for those born with superior intellectual abilities (biologically predetermined) so they and society can better harness that advantage? Why should a school reject an Einstein simply because he didn't actually earn his smart genes?
There is no equivalence between schools giving a boost for being born smart and giving a boost for being born black.

Why don't you ask the NBA to not give preferences to those born with superior physical abilities (biologically predetermined), especially as the racial balance is a bit skewed.

"... why women and minority lawyers always get staffed on matters for certain clients. (Answer: It's because the clients demand it, which explains pretty much everything in Biglaw.)"

That excuse won't hold water for Wal-Mart or Wendy's, and it shouldn't for Biglaw either.

There is nothing wrong with disliking AA and being against it. As a latino, I know many minorities who are against AA as they believe it clouds their personal achievements. But I cannot stand white folks who talk about how race shouldnt be a consideration or we are all people or racism isnt a problem in this country. You cant CREATE a problem, allow it live on for centuries, grudgingly give it up some time later, where the institutions of wealth and privilege have been cemented making it harder for new comers to join, and all of a sudden say all is FAIR now lets allow pure me