Prager writes:

“The Gang of Four — trial lawyers, handpicked jurors, fortune-seeking litigants and like-minded judges (themselves often former trial lawyers) — have created an environment of mistrust that blankets our society.”

He forgot one very important member of this rogue’s gallery…the press. Which makes it a Gang of Five. You see, without the sympathetic press to grind out stories of “injustice” fed to the public mainly through television, few would know about these cases. And without a public moved to pity by a constant barrage of bleeding heart stories, you couldn’t get a sympathetic jury. Nice arrangement they have here.

Mr. Prager is exaggerating for satiric effect, I hope everyone realizes. I can’t figure out why trial lawyers have become so powerful. One guess is the jury system, but some perpetual defendants, Allstate for example, routinely ask for jury trials in one of the worst possible venues, New Orleans, because the New Orleans elected-judges are even worse. (But of course they are choosing the lesser of two evils.) Another guess is tradition: McCullough v. Maryland, in which about two-hundred years earlier, a single Justice declared the U.S. Supreme Court could negate any act of the other two “coequal” branches of the U.S. Government.

Democratic principles cannot be the sole reason because we lack a pure democracy.

To paraphrase James Carville, “it’s the judges, stupid!” The judges create case law, and case law defines who has a duty towards whom in tort (injury) cases.

This is why the legal community hates Bush so much. They know he’ll put judges on the bench who want to roll back a lot of the legal principles of the 20th century.

Dannis Prager on the ACLU’s attack on the Los Angeles county seal.

A Jew Defends the Cross:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41478

Abercrombie and Fitch must pay 40 million for being too white. Litigation is also the way to a transformed society.

“This agreement promises to transform this company, whose distinctiveness will no longer stem from an all-white image and workforce,” said Thomas A. Saenz, vice president of litigation at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.”

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041116/ap_on_bi_ge/abercrombie_lawsuit_8

I read the story. It’s impossible to make any sense of the underlying facts from this story. All we really know is that there was a suit and that the company surrendered.

Mr. Auster,

Abercrombie & Fitch has been involved in a lawsuit initiated about 2 years ago on behalf of minorties which charged the company of discrimination based on the fact that an overwhelming number of whites were presented in their catelogs.

Also, the suit charged that this fault seeped over into their hiring practices and claimed hiring discrimination. I believe the article states that they must pay minority workers AND applicants who never were hired, for damages suffered.

But the important thing as I recall is that the suit was BASED on the lack of minority representation in their catelog.

As a sidebar, the disgust is complete by noting that they must hire a person of “diversity” as VP and hire 25 diversity recruiter who will presumably discriminate against whites.

It sounds like a Jessie Jackson corporate shakedown that A&F knew they would lose. Thank you 1964 Civil Rights Act!

Abercrombie & Fitch got what they deserved. It was a very liberal corporate establishment. Let them wallow in their own excrement.

Mr. Griffin,

I wouldn’t welcome the victory of legalized racial extortion. This represents the continued drumbeat march towards the complete erasure of our heritage.

Yes, but don’t you see? It is only when the white supporters of this hideous doctrine start to go down with it that they will realize their danger. It’s the old adage about hitting the mule in the head with a two by four to get his attention. Let this contagion continue to bite liberals in the posterior. Conservatives don’t need to say a thing.

I’m reminded of all those teachers back 30 years ago who embraced integration so enthusiastically. Talk to them now.

Mr. Griffin,

I see your perspective. But think of the forces unleashed by the 1964 Act as the Blob. Once contact with the creature is made you become absorbed into it and the blob only grows bigger and bigger. The is no outrage big enough to break the cycle of insanity, the monster only will get bigger until the entire country is absorbed. The only last ditch effort would be scuttling the law, surefire political suicide for anyone who dare try.

The law can be overcome by contempt for the law. And that is where liberalism is leading us. Yes, it means anarchy at some point (we’re already there in inner cities), but the beast has to be fed until it gets bloated. It is precisely at the point where the beast believes it has universal superiority that it also realizes that it is universally despised. This occured in the Soviet Union and the results were predictable.

Mr. Griffin,

Demographics show Americans are being displaced by migrating Third Worlders. American identity is being rewritten to fit a flawed view. Mass media is currupting what’s left of society to adopt a culture than can only lead to death, certainally a spiritual death.

The laws created to smash America have done in 40 years what took America two nearly centuries to build. We are becoming extinct and the only way to prevent total destruction is immediate immigration reform and a return to honoring what America was, not what it can be, which is what most Americans do not want.

You’re being a little too alarmist about immigration, Andrew. It’s going to be a while before the number of immigrants from third world nations, mainly Hispanic, will be able to control elections. And well before that happens, I believe this present government will fall of its own weight. The tensions are being felt now in the cultural wars. The skeletons are out of the closet. The old media no longer has a monopoly. Patience, my friend.

Mr Griffin,

I do not think I am being any more alarmist than absolutly necessary. Look at the former Republican stronghold state, California to draw inspiration. in less than a few decades in became the first state where the minority is now the majority. Look at individual counties within that state and you will see thaey resemble parts of Nevada, Arizona and Texas, that is mini “Hispanic” fiefdoms. The daily flow of one million people annually is catastrophic.

Yes, I agree that unfettered immigration is damaging. But look closer. Most of these immigrants are never going to be a part of our electoral system. They’re isolated culturally. That’s to our advantage. And don’t forget that California lost millions of conservative white people who are now living in red states. I’m one of them. And there are assimiliable Hispanics who will make fine, conservative citizens. So this is not the Goetterdaemerung you are describing, Andrew. As I said, have patience. Immigration reform is coming whether the political elites like it or not. It’s hard to turn an ocean liner. At the moment, it is crawling to a halt. Now to get it turned around. Remember what I said about feeding the beast above.

Mr. Griffin raised a couple of interesting points as regards the AF case. He is absolutely correct that the AF corporate honchos are notorious leftists. They were the ones who’d basically changed their catalogue into a porn sheet a few years ago.

I’d be willing to bet that the AF corporate elite were big supporters of the 1991 Civil Rights act, which is the real culprit here over and above the 1964 act. During the 1980s, the SC made a series of decisions which basically pulled the rug out from under the racial preference industry. Those filing suit had to actually prove discrimination in court. Thanks to the ultimate empty suit, George Herbert Walker Bush, a Democratic congress, and a gang of corporatist Republicans who signed on, the 1991 Civil Rights act was put in place to override these SC rulings.

The standard of proof for “discrimination” is now simply an insufficient number of minority employees relative to their number in the population. In other words, it is now basically impossible to defend oneself against the charge. Corporate America signed onto the program enthusiastically, just as they supported Grutter. On the surface, this would seem illogical for the Fortune 500 club. The truth is that the big fish can afford the Jesse Jackson Shakedowns, the Diversity apparachiks and deadwood racial preference hires, while their smaller up-and-coming competitors (or potential competitors) can’t. They can also afford the members of congress to get such legislation passed.

Mr. Griffin’s point about contempt for the law is likewise an interesting one. We are heading towards anarchy because it becomes more apparent with each passing day that those who enact laws (like the one mentioned above) are utterly corrupt, as are the courts who interpret them. As more and more realize this they develop a contempt for the ruling elite with their endless reams of corrupt laws, which is the beginning of a potential change.

Mr. Griffin,

Than you for your reply and a needed dose of optimism which I unfortunately do not share. I disagree though with your point on politically isolated immigrants. Think of the 55 electorial votes in California or the Cuban Community in Florida. Politics in these cases is very influential. The worst case is Muslim political activism which is the greatest threat we can imagine. Deerborn, Michigan is lost to Muslim immigrants but on a nation wide scale Muslims are going to the heart of our republic by inserting themselves deeply within our political and educational structure.

You relocated to a red state I relocated overseas only to come face to face with what I think is a clear example of what Islam will effect soon in America.

I invite you to read this disturbing article by Frank J. Gaffney Jr. of Frontpage Magazine:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11209

Carl,

Why would they sign on to a law designed to overide the Supreme Courts descision to make it more difficult to claim discrimination without merit?

Andrew, The big players suport this type of thing for the same reason they supported racial preferences in the Grutter decision, refuse to resist extortion from Jesse Jackson, etc. They can afford it. Their competitors (or potential competitors) cannot.

Carl,

Yes, but why do in in the first place? How was it in their interests to allow racial extortion and cultural redistribution or more correctly, cultural reinvention?

The diversity police like the ss are real, they been inserted into A&F’s corporate structure where their actions will remake the companies image from a yuppy white image to the correct darker shade of pale.

Are you saying this is accepted as a cost of doing business, but why and why not fight?

Andrew asks:
“Are you saying this is accepted as a cost of doing business, but why and why not fight?”

It is my impression that successful businessmen tend to accept the political order as what it is and work within it to achieve their financial and operating goals. It is rather like the weather. Sometimes that means greasing some political palms as a way of building a roof to keep off the rain, but don’t expect businesses to initiate a risky counterrevolution that is not in their immediate best interests. The immediate best interests of most businessmen are tied to _benchmarks_; and benchmarks are generally a comparison of _relative_ performance.

Thank you for that fascinating insight. I guess Lassie Faire was, like most economic theories, only a part of the puzzle and would certainly have opposed this sort of governmental intrusion.