It takes power to exercise racism

Justice Anton Scalia

"I don't think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless—unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution... [T]his is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress....Even the name of it is wonderful: The Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?"

Think about this for a second, sitting United States Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia says both of the following statements are true.  If that's not scary I don't know what IS. 

 A major reason why U.S. constitutional law is difficult and American judges are powerful is that the Constitution is not a particularly precise document. The  Ninth Amendment provides that “[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,” but it provides absolutely no guidance whatsoever on what those other rights could be. The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from abridging the “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” and it prevents the loss of life, liberty or property “without due process of law.” What are the “privileges or immunities” protected by the Constitution? The Constitution doesn’t say! And the Supreme Court’s answer to this question is  rather ridiculous.

Today's Blast from the Past Must Read -please disregard the typo's in the original post, I am unable to make the corrections because I was banned from site~ RedEye

Race Relations Sunday

One  can express their belief the protection of the right to vote for black folks is  racial entitlement all they want, but if they have the power to act on that belief......