Discussion for article #222875
Cue John Roberts whitesplaining race to Eric Holder in 3… 2…
4 Likes
Race isn’t the only thing Roberts is wrong on. An absolute literalist reading of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, seems to be another (see Citizens United).
5 Likes
Every white person, including John Roberts, knows racism still exist and we all know when he says shit like this it’s total bullshit. Why does he, or any other white guy, keep repeating this shit?
Interesting that racism is allegedly so nonexistent that we no longer need laws to combat it, but in-person voter ID fraud, an example of which people can barely find, is supposed to be so prevalent that we need lots of laws to deal with it. Ironic that the latter may be one of the best current examples of the former.
10 Likes
You took the words out of my mouth. Roberts has been wrong about almost everything since he took the bench
2 Likes
Roberts’ sophistry demeans the position he holds.
2 Likes
Never mind, Holder, that what you speak against was upheld by 6 justices against 2, so this is not just Roberts opinion but SCOTUS in it’s almost entirety. Someone should explain to you the difference between rights and privileges.
In an article this week there was a discussion of how the rise of charter schools and educational voucher programs had re-created segregation in the public school systems legally, circumventing Brown v. Board of Education. Arne Duncan, a staunch white advocate of these programs, can take thanks for that subtle discrimination along with George W. Bush. That Eric Holder would use this anniversary to point out that racism still exists in this nation, both blatant and subtle, is admirable. That our Supreme Court would find it not to be the case shows just how detached they are from the real world in which the rest of us live, Libs.
Martin Luther King, Jr. was planning on marches and protests in the Northern half of this nation just before his death in part to protest income inequality and the Vietnam War, as well as racism. He was doing so to call out the subtle discrimination that people in these states as being just as heinous as the open discrimination of the South. Such discrimination is practiced by Bill Clinton and his group within the Democratic Party (see the Clinton speeches in the Carolinas in 2008 and their unjustified attacks on Rev Wright, a black minister who quoted a white US Ambassador). Eric Holder is doing that now. Roberts, his GOP cohorts on the bench, and the older members of the Liberal side of the bench all think that because there are no race riots that discrimination is at a low point. It isn’t - it is just underground and subtly practiced in our Congress on both sides of the aisle these days, in our education systems, and in our societies at all levels.
I am white, 61 years old, and I can tell you from living in the North, the South, the Midwest, and the West, that racism is alive and well, and just as ugly as it ever was. And I also know that until we discuss it openly and honestly in this nation, it will never be put to rest. Income inequality, poor education, and all the other ills that plaque so many in our society all stem from this nation’s refusal to address race. It is the scapegoat of the GOP/Tea Party crowd and it is crutch of the Democrats.
Until we accept that this nation was founded on the horror of slavery and we have over the centuries refused to adequately address its natural results regardless of skin color, we will never get past the degrading racism that plagues all races in this nation, because racism comes in all forms – whites against any person of color; brown against black; yellow against most other people of color; red against whites; black against white and brown. Racism is multi-hued and it is ugly in all its forms. Add in ignorance and fear, and you have a potent poison for any nation such as ours.
We forget that when we are asked to defend this country, we all bleed the same red and we all stand as Americans (see 9/11 photos for proof). Maybe it is time to look past the color of a person’s skin (or their religion, ethnicity, gender) and realize that we can be better than SCOTUS or Eric Holder or Arne Duncan or the GOP/Tea Party or the Clinton Democrats. We can be Americans.
WE ARE AMERICANS!
Rev. Devon J. Noll
New Word Universal Fellowship Church
http://www.newworduniveralfellowship.org
3 Likes
It is not possible to be so thoroughly naive – and so thoroughly wrong – about so many matters so often without actively trying. Chief Justice Roger Tanney, under whose misleadership the Supreme Court of the United States rejected the universality of the Declaration of Independence, sent Dred Scott and numerous other free men and women back to slavery, and set in motion numerous other actions that led to the Civil War, at least had the “excuse” of being a creature of his time. John Roberts and his fellow corrupt justices on the Supreme Court are earning a comparable place in history – without any plausible justification.
Purportedly Jesus on the cross said, “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.” John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas, plus the Republicans in Congress whom they actively enable, know perfectly well what they are doing – and they are doing it anyways.
2 Likes
A 6-2 decision where the recusing judge agreed with the minority but could not rule on the specific case due to ties to the specific case. A 2/3rds decision is not iron-clad, being just one judge away from a swing decision. It is a far cry from “almost entirety”, which would be an 8-1 decision and could hardly even apply to a 7-2 decision.
That said, yes, this is a radically conservative bench, which has given radically conservative opinions disregarding prior rulings from the Court as well as claiming non-precedence. A 5-4 majority for all but the most radically conservative rulings is guaranteed, so the difference between that and a 6-3 ruling is just a single judge.
It is funny how quickly you defend 6-judge decisions which agree with your views; how vehemently do you declare that earlier 6-judge decisions which had a more progressive bent to them are “settled law”?
And explain to Holder the difference between rights and privileges? What an arrogant asshole you are. Please explain to the rest of us how “rights” and “privileges” are at play here. Is not being treated as a subhuman because your skin is too dark a “privilege” in your world? Roberts’ decision was predicated on the nonexistence of racism as a driving force in the US today. He is demonstrably, horrendously, and grievously wrong on that count. It has nothing to do with “privilege”. It is all about if a law meant to protect human rights is still needed, which Roberts decided it was not. Roberts never tried to argue that freedom from racism is a “privilege”. He only argued that freedom from racism was already universal so no other rights needed to be abridged to continue to protect it.
1 Like
Roberts was right: The South has changed: it no longer stands alone as the region of widespread vote suppression. So if eveybody’s doing it, it must be OK, right? WRONG.
2 Likes