There's a fascinating article in the today's Macon Telegraph, that illustrates into just what absurd logical knots those who advocate racial politics must tie themselves.

On one side, we have the US Justice Department which, following recent policy dictates and law, claim that districts must be created to ensure that minorities are represented by members of those minorities. In the other corner, we have Democrats arguing that minorities are best represented not by minority representatives but by...(three guesses)...Democrats. Yup, gotta make sure we keep 'em on that liberal plantation.

Thus, it is claimed that it is more important to blacks to have a Democratic state legislature than for them to have blacks represent them. What's going on here, of course, is that the Dems are recognizing that districts gerrymandered for minority candidates are concentrating Democratic votes that could otherwise go to other swing districts, thust swinging them from Republican to Democratic. If they don't fix this problem, they're going to have difficulty holding on to, or regaining, representative majorities in the South.

The Republican lawyers who represent the four intervening voters will have a chance to question Epstein today, but they used opening statements to attack his methods.

"I think this testimony is a slippery rock," said Mark Braden, attorney for the voters.

I'll be curious to see how the judge rules in this case. I don't see how the judge can buy the Dems argument without making the supposedly-judicial, justice-is-blind decision blindly partisan. On the other hand, I hate racial gerrymandering as well. It's a slippery rock in both directions. It's too bad that both sides can't lose...