Racism on the high court

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | June 30, 2007 | Jonathan Krive

[JKrive]

When I am in California, I enjoy visiting Chinatown, that part of San Francisco dominated by Chinese shops, foods and language. The food is fresh, you can barter at stores, and if you're fluent, you can practice your Chinese. The population in this area is not diverse, but this concentration of Chinese culture is what makes Chinatown so enjoyable – the same with Japantown or any other ethnic area. Yet, the four dissenting justices in the recent Supreme Court decision on race would probably rule that each of these "towns" may contain a maximum of 41 percent of the concentrated ethnicity, and must contain 59 percent "everyone else." That is the logic the four dissenting justices purported in Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education and Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District.

School districts in Seattle and Louisville both had programs to ensure a racially diverse school population. In fact, the program in Seattle attempted to create schools where 41 percent of students were white and 59 percent were nonwhite. The court struck these programs down. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

Wait, did he say to prevent discrimination one should stop discriminating? What a novel idea.

[JKrive]

I also have other commentaries posted on my blog, Critical Mass

[Lurker]

Already posted.

L

[PAR35]

Racism on the High Court
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1858889/posts

Racism on the high court
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858888/posts

Racism on the high court: Krive blasts 4 justices upholding color-based school policies
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858714/posts

[Cowboy Bob]

Last time I read the Constitution, I didn’t notice the part about “Diversity.” Perhaps one of the four descenders can point it out for me.

[vetsvette]

Sandra Day O’Connor sure was sold on the “diversity” crap. So sold that, with no evidence of its value presented to the Court, she believed we should continue to violate the constitution — something she easily acknowledged we do with affirmative action programs — to achieve the objective of diversity for at least another 25 years.

O’Connor became a liberal in her latter years, but she was a unique liberal in that, at least, she didn’t feel it necessary to lie about her thought processes. (or lack of thought processes as it were)

[Cowboy Bob]

Affirmative Action cannot be legal as long as the Equal Protection Clause exists. I’ve been saying this for over 25 years. Maybe now we have a Supreme Court that agrees with me.

[Turret Gunner A20]

To the author who said, Wait, did he say to prevent discrimination one should stop discriminating? What a novel idea.

Of course he said that -- remember he was tryiing to get the point across to liberals.

You know, it's like giving them the recipe for Fried Chicken:

First get a chicken -- preferably a dead one.

Remove the feathers.

Etc., etc., etc.

[rockrr]

I think they found it lurking under another one of them penumbras that provide a nice hiding place for trolls, warts, leprechauns, and other make-believes...

[Publius6961]

...but this concentration of Chinese culture is what makes Chinatown so enjoyable – the same with Japantown or any other ethnic area.

This is so not true; it may be even fatally misleading.

No elaboration is possible on account of the abusers of the abuse button, and the mods who empower them...

[ContraryMary]

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

LOL! Simple, but elegant.

[Repeal 16-17]

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

So easy even Liberals can understand it. Not that they will want to believe it.