Conservative Judges: Chief Rehnquist and Justices Kennedy, O'Connor, Scalia and Thomas
made Bush President. The American people should not and probably will not
forget this fact.
Recall the post about the thousands of Americans wrote letters of protest to The
Supreme Court. Many even mailed in their voters registration's card.
Also, it has been noted that O'Connor and Rehnquist think of retirement, but they
wanted to make sure their seats were filled with Conservatives, according to
news report. What better way than to make BUSH PRESIDENT!
And TP, do recall the that ASHCROFT AND SCALIA sat next to one another
at the Inaugural Luncheon!
"Thus, John ASHCROFT, the attorney general-designate, was seated with
Justice Antonin SCALIA of the SUPREME COURT and Representative Tom DeLay, Republican of Texas
and the majority whip Chief Justice William H. REHNQUIST WITH Senator Jesse Helms, Republican
of North Carolina……"
Excerpt from Hot Meal Prepared in a Hurry for Bush
By MARIAN BURROS
From The New York Times
nytimes.com
TP, Chieft Justice REHNQUIST sat next to JESSE HELMS at the Inaugural Luncheon. I wonder
what they might have discussed.
Could they have discussed the following case?
U.S. Sues Charleston County, S.C., Alleging Violation of Black Voting Rights
January 19, 2001
"Samuel W. Howell, the county attorney, said he believed that lawyers in the
Justice Department's civil rights division filed the suit in the last days of the
Clinton administration because they feared that George W.BUSH and
his choice for attorney general, John AShCROFTT, would be far less aggressive in
pursuing voting rights cases".
By DAVID FIRESTONE
From The New York Times
ATLANTA, Jan. 18 The at-large voting system in Charleston County, S.C., deprives black
voters of representation and should be dismantled, the Justice Department maintains
in what willmost likely be the last civil rights case brought by the Clinton administration.
All nine members of the Charleston County Council are elected by residents
of the entire county, where whites are a majority of the 300,000 people.
As a result, the Justice Department said in a suit filed there on Wednesday,
black voters have been unable to elect black representatives, a dilution of
voting strength that the department says violates the Voting Rights Act.
About 31 percent of the county's voting-age population is black. But the Council
has only one black member, Tim Scott, a Republican who, the suit notes,
was rejected by voters in the county's black precincts.
County officials, who pointed out that voters approved the at-large system
in a 1989 referendum, said they would fight the suit.
"Single-member districts are the worst thing that could happen to good government,"
said Barrett S. Lawrimore, the Council chairman, a retired university extension agent
who lives in the city of Charleston. "I've seen it happen time and again that single-member
representatives get too parochial and only care about their districts, not the common good.
"And we've already got a minority on the Council," he said of Mr. Scott.
Samuel W. Howell, the county attorney, said he believed that lawyers in the
Justice Department's civil rights division filed the suit in the last days of the
Clinton administration because they feared that George W. BUSH and
his choice for attorney general, John ASHCROFTt, would be far less aggressive in
pursuing voting rights cases.
"The first we ever heard about this case was on Nov. 14," Mr. Howell said.
"You would think they would at least wait until the 2000 census figures for the county
come out in April, because you can't possibly redesign the system until then.
But they wanted to file this suit before the administration changes this weekend."
Justice Department officials would not discuss the suit, but in a prepared
statement Bill Lann Lee, the acting assistant attorney general for civil rights,
said it had been filed to protect minority rights
"The Voting Rights Act guarantees that minority citizens have the opportunity
for meaningful participation in the democratic process," said Mr. Lee, who is
certain to be replaced in the new administration.
"We believe today's lawsuit will help bring down the barriers preventing
Charleston County's black citizens from having an equal opportunity to elect
representatives to their county government."
The statement said the department had conducted an extensive
investigation of the county's voting system. That inquiry ended on
Nov. 14, and subsequent efforts to pursue a negotiated settlement
with county officials were unsuccessful, the department said.
Since the Voting Rights Act was adopted in 1965, the Justice Department
has filed many lawsuits, under presidents of both parties,
to end at- large voting in cities and counties with large minority populations.
In 1991, the administration of Mr. Bush's father sued the City of Houston, saying its
at-large voting violated the rights of Hispanics; that suit was ultimately settled.
The current suit says there are enough black voters living in compact areas
of Charleston County that blacks could well be a majority in three of nine
single-member districts there. Black and white precincts consistently support
different candidates for the Council, the suit says, adding that "white
bloc voting usually results in the defeat of candidates who are preferred by black voters."
Although Council candidates run countywide, they are required to live in specific districts
of the county, and their terms are staggered. The result is that black and white candidates
run head to head, the suit says, with the outcome usually victory by a white candidate.
Mr. Scott, the only elected black Republican in South Carolina, said he preferred
the at-large system.
"I don't like the idea of segregating everyone into smaller districts," he said.
"Besides, the Justice Department assumes that the only way for African-Americans
to have representation is to elect an African- American, and the same for whites.
Obviously, my constituents don't think that's true."
Voting for the Charleston County school board is also at large, he noted,
and five of its nine members are black.
School board members, however, run in nonpartisan elections;
County Council candidates run with party affiliation, and Republicans dominate the county,
where most black voters are Democrats".
nytimes.com
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************************************************
AND HOW ABOUT SPECULATION ON ASHCROFT AND SCALIA'S CONVERSATION!
TP, do you think Mr. ASHCROFT and JUSTICE SCALIA might have chatted about
ASHCROFT's article in the pro-confederacy magazine, SOUTHERN PATRIOTS?
Perhaps, Mr. ASCHCROFT will persuade JUSTICE SCALIA to contribute
an article to SOUTHERN PATRIOT.
Considering the way they voted, it would not surprise me if JUSTICES REHNQUIST, KENNEDY,
O'CONNOR and THOMAS also contributed articles. -Mephisto
****************************************************************************************************************************
"Southern Partisan is a sick magazine. It giddily celebrates the
assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Joyful references to his murder can be
found in issue after issue. Of John Wilkes Booth, one writer said, "His
behavior was not only sane, but sensible." Another writer referred to the
Emancipation Proclamation as "an invitation to the slaves to rise up
against their masters."
Leaders of the Ku Klux Klan are praised. And a wide range of ethnic
groups are slurred.
One contributor wrote: "As the genetic racial pool in the United States
from which the democratic government originally derived is dissipated in
successive tides of immigration, our country is being overwhelmed."
So what does John ASHCROFT have to say about this publication? I quote:
"Your magazine also helps set the record straight. You've got a heritage
of doing that, of defending Southern patriots like [Robert E.] Lee,
[Stonewall] Jackson and [the Confederate president, Jefferson] Davis.
Traditionalists must do more. I've got to do more. We've all got to stand
up and speak in this respect, or else we'll be taught that these people
were giving their lives, subscribing their sacred fortunes and their honor to
some perverted agenda."
Questions about Bob Jones and Southern Partisan came up at Mr.
Ashcroft's confirmation hearing yesterday. He said he rejected racial and
religious intolerance. But the man who should be called to account for
this appallingly divisive nomination is George W. Bush, whose inaugural
festivities get under way today — at the Lincoln Memorial.
Excerpt from Unseemly Alliances
IN AMERICA
From The New York Times
January 18, 2001
By BOB HERBERT
George W. Bush is a nice guy, right?
nytimes.com
Copyright 2001 The New York Times |
