All the Presidents’ Justices

Dahlia Lithwick's characterization of Chief Justice Taney???s opinion in the Dred Scott case as "rant[ing] that blacks were 'beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect,'" is a base and scandalous libel, of the sort that Roberts and his ilk routinely incorporate into their ideologically-motivated opinions (details up­on request) ("All the Presidents??? Justices", Jan. 26). Lithwick omits the critically important ma­terial preceding and following the text she quotes:



It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race, which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the De­cla­ration of Independence, and when the Con­stitution of the United States was framed and adopt­ed. But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken.

They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics, which no one thought of disputing, or sup­posed to be open to dispute; and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.

60 U.S. 393, page 407.

Dahlia Lithwick???s characterization of Chief Justice Taney???s opinion in the Dred Scott case as ???rant[ing] that blacks were ???beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect,?????? is a base and scandalous libel, of the sort that Roberts and his ilk routinely incorporate into their ideologically-motivated opinions (details up­on request) (???All the Presidents??? Justices???, Jan. 26). Lithwick omits the critically important ma­terial preceding and following the text she quotes:

It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race, which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the De­cla­ration of Independence, and when the Con­stitution of the United States was framed and adopt­ed. But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken.

They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics, which no one thought of disputing, or sup­posed to be open to dispute; and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.

60 U.S. 393, page 407.

test

Nicely said, footballmom! One of the biggest inequalities in education today derives not from race, but from economics. The vast majority of funding for public schools comes at the local level in the form of property taxes. In other words, the resources available in a given district are influenced mostly by the economic status of its residents. Education, what ought to be a truly equal-opportunity experience, depends on how wealthy your family is. This is a crying shame. What we really ought to do is nationalize educational resources, so that kids in back-country West Virginia or inner-city New Orleans can get as good an education as children in more affluent areas.

How, exactly, would Obama prevent his daughters from benefiting from Affirmative Action? Statements like this are more than opaque; they are deceptive.

What if white people behaved the same way back when they were in control? What if they said, well, I wouldn't WANT my kids to benefit from Jim Crowe, but they do, just coincidentally, benefit just like every other white kid does, I won???t do anything to stop it.

If Obama sincerely thinks that Affirmative Action should not benefit wealthy and upper-middle-class minorities, then he needs to take some concrete steps to prevent it. This will basically dismantle the policy, because very privileged minorities are around 80% of the beneficiaries.

And I wonder what all the black lawyers and engineers who voted for Obama will think when they find out they aren't eligible for race-based promotions anymore because they most definitely aren't poor.

The fact is, the group who most solidly voted for Obama--the group he is most akin too and most beholden too--is privileged minorities who don't need Affirmative Action, but still get it. People like his daughters, only a few years older. I highly doubt he is truly going to do anything to malign this group no matter what he says.

But...there is always the possibility...he could prove me wrong.. I'm hoping that he does.