Reader comments
White frustrations embodied by fireman at hearing

Ted | 5:20 p.m. July 16, 2009

Time to form a NAAWP. Or is that politically incorrect??

Grant | 5:31 p.m. July 16, 2009

Stop talking about the economy, partisan elections and Sotomayor. The point is reverse discrimination and that was present in New Haven. They would have created exams until they got the racial preference they wanted and that's no exactly color blins.

Anonymous | 5:43 p.m. July 16, 2009

This country is going to hades in a handbasket.

Comments continue below

hello? | 5:43 p.m. July 16, 2009

now that it's so politically incorrect to say anything negative against any group or minority, regardless of whether it's true or not, we're going to get to a point where we can't even defend ourselves in open forums because it's deemed "incorect".....kind of serves us right for becoming so apologetic as a society as opposed to being for something and standing up proudly to speak the truth.

other side | 5:47 p.m. July 16, 2009

It's awful to be on the other side too. Wondering if you were only accepted because of your ethnic last name.

"I dream a dream" | 6:03 p.m. July 16, 2009

Why can't they do as Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed. Judge a man on the content of his character, not the color of his skin. If it's all black or hispanic that are most qualified, they get the jobs, if it's all white, they get the jobs. Just because someone is white, black, purple or green doesn't make them better or worse that anyone else.
Affirmative action is racist if it only considers the color of someone's skin.

Anonymous | 6:25 p.m. July 16, 2009

I do judge people by the content of the character, and I don't like most people.

Survival | 7:33 p.m. July 16, 2009

It's no longer the survival of the fittest, smartest, most deserving. It's survival by race (minorities getting the upper hand even if they are not qualified) and gender (Title IX discriminates against men in college/high school sports).

I have Hispanic heritage from my dad's side, and caucasian from my mom's side, so I have a Hispanic last name. I don't want to be given something just because I'm a "minority." I want to be given something I earn. It's pathetic to deny someone something just because they are not part of the minority. Our nation's leaders give the lazy whatever they want, and get mad at anyone that doesn't agree with their policies. It's getting out of hand.

Idahoan | 8:01 p.m. July 16, 2009

"But Blake Ziegler, a white graduate student from Nebraska who stopped to talk while on vacation in Kansas City, Mo., said affirmative action still has a role to play."

Why? Why does affirmative action still matter, at least according to some people? Aren't we supposed to focus on such things as work ethic, strengths, and accomplishments for job and education openings? We've got it all wrong when we think that someone's ethnic background should be the main concern, or one of the main concerns. I think affirmative action is class warfare when race is involved. That does no one a favor.

Lame Article | 8:22 p.m. July 16, 2009

The problem is the same and we haven't learned a darn thing. The problem is discrimination. It is so frusterating and wrong. It was against people of color and now it is against people who are not of "color" but make no mistake about it, it is discrimination. It is when we look at external things that none of us can control instead of objective merit that we can have some control over. I am outraged at quotas, at looking at the color of skin instead of the content of character (or test scores!) As a "minority" because of my skin color or surname, I think it is crazy to think you will solve discrimination by reverse discriminating! I am not surprised though because the idea came from politicians. Reminds me of going into more debt to get out of debt. Reigning in spending and the budget by spending out of control. Definitely "politician" level thinking and not intelligence and wisdom making those decisions. Reverse discrimination to solve discrimination. Hmmmmmmm... sounds like some political "genius" or better said political stupidity (status quo).

Observation-ist | 10:36 p.m. July 16, 2009

I hope we all dream of a day when the content of ones character and their capabilities and skills relative to the job at hand are the only consideration.

If people want to scrutinize the test questions given the firefighters to ensure they are not racially bias, I'm good with that. But if the questions and qualifications are not biased, then those who are more qualified should get the job, regardless of the color of their skin or the heritage of their parents.

From what I understand, no one has said the questions were bias. These men simply worked harder and were denied a promotion because they weren't the right 'color' for the quotas. That's discrimination and it's wrong.

I'm glad the US Supreme Court finally got it right.

Jim D. | 11:29 p.m. July 16, 2009

Anyone know the four senators who have already said they will vote "no" for sotomayor?

Grimble | 12:46 a.m. July 17, 2009

This article left out one important and ironic detail: Ricci originally failed the firefighter test, and passed it only after he sued the fire department for discrimination because he claimed to have dyslexia.

And please, people, get your facts straight. Some black or hispanic firefighters didn't automatically get the white guys' promotions. Rather, the city was worried, when they saw the results, that maybe the test had been prejudicial after all, in ways they hadn't first discerned. Whether that was right or wrong, the question was whether or not the city acted legally in doing that. Sotomayor and three other judges said yes. The conservative supreme court said no.

Forming your opinion of Sotomayor based solely on this is simply irresponsible.

Oh, dear. I see this Ricci guy becoming the next opportunistic Joe the Plumber for the angry white right.

Anonymous | 5:45 a.m. July 17, 2009

There is no such thing as 'reverse' discrimination.
Discrimination is discrimination...to prefix 'reverse' to it is just another redundant and divisive way to stir the pot. Its way past time to drop being politically correct...cant we see as a people anytime 'politics' gets involved in anything...including using the word 'politics' ('politically' correct) just screws things up. Lets get rid of the politicians who keep these issues alive just to give them a box to stand on and legislate on. Lets solve our problems as a people, as a nation, and quit relying on the government to do it...

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

2 photos

Charles Dharapak, Associated Press

New Haven, Conn. firefighters Frank Ricci, left, and Ben Vargas, right, testify on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 16, 2009, before the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

Gallery (2 photos)