A reader writes:

It took about, oh, under one minute to do a Google search and come up with Judge Sotomayor's dissent in Pappas v. Giuliani, 290 F.3d 143.

The plaintiff, Pappas, was fired by the NYPD when it was discovered that Pappas had regularly (but anonymously and on his own private time) distributed racist and anti-semitic pamphlets of the David Duke variety. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals voted to affirm the NYPD's actions but Justice Sotomayor dissented on the grounds that Pappas's first amendment rights were not vitiated merely because he had unpopular views.

There are two critical points to take from this. The first, and most important point to consider, is that here we have a judge, accused of entho-centric racism, dissenting on behalf of a white male police officer accused of distributing racist pamphlets. This is outside the Limbaugh/Rove/Hannity nattering nabob narrative and so has to be ignored by much of the MSM.

 The second point is the fact that despite the fact that his material is so readily available at the click of a Google button, so many people rely on ideologues to filter the information they take in and who treat that information as fact (which it is not) rather than advocacy (which it is). It is a sad pathetic sign of the times.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.