« | »

WP: States’ Objections Equal Segregation

From a truly despicable Washington Post:

Under shadow of 1957, Arkansas stays out of health-care fight

By Peter Slevin
Tuesday, March 30, 2010; A06

LITTLE ROCK — As 14 states move forward with a lawsuit to block President Obama’s new health-care law, calling it an unconstitutional infringement on state sovereignty, Arkansas is nowhere to be found.

"They tried it here in Arkansas in ’57 and it didn’t work," Gov. Mike Beebe (D) told reporters recently. "I think you got to tell people the truth. And if I understand the law, the truth is the federal government can’t just be defied by the state governments."

There are memorials here to the events of 1957, when a previous Arkansas governor rejected federal authority and tried to prevent nine black students from attending all-white Little Rock Central High School. It took U.S. soldiers to protect the students, who made history during an epic struggle over racism and federal power.

To Beebe and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D), the lawsuits filed last week and a states’-rights measure proposed for the November ballot are unwelcome echoes. In the face of an implicit request from 33 Republican state legislators to enlist in the court fight, McDaniel remains unmoved…

The Arkansas experience in the 1950s rubbed the state raw and delivered a resounding defeat to segregationists, who made arguments similar to the ones launched by opponents of the Democratic-led health-care overhaul

In 1956, two years after the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education overturned the concept of separate but equal, every member of the Arkansas congressional delegation signed "The Southern Manifesto." It declared that the court had abused its power and encroached "on rights reserved to the states and the people."

Parents, the manifesto said, "should not be deprived by government of the rights to direct the lives and education of their own children." The changes were happening "without regard to the consent of the governed" — a mantra of tea party protesters and Republican members of Congress who voted against the Democrats’ health-care bills.

Also in 1956, Gov. Orval E. Faubus (D) was quoted as saying that "neither the state of Arkansas nor its people delegated to the federal government . . . the power to regulate or control the operation of the domestic institutions of Arkansas."

The sentiment became the heart of a series of measures, including a "resolution of interposition," that asserted a right to ignore federal desegregation orders. It was also the defining principle behind resistance to the integration of Little Rock Central High in 1957…

When Beebe, the current governor, drew the explicit comparison between this week’s events and the drama of the 1950s, it was not a surprise to University of Alabama legal historian Tony Freyer, who has written about the Arkansas desegregation fight.

"The Little Rock crisis is still a present memory," Freyer said. "It still has a long shadow."

When President Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) federalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division to protect the Little Rock Nine, he told the nation that the Supreme Court’s ruling was "the law of the land." When Obama signed the health-care bill into law at the White House, he said health insurance "is the law of the land."

McDaniel used the same phrase as he explained why Arkansas will not join the lawsuits…

Apart from the sheer ignorance of the law this article displays, it reminds us that race-baiting is the (first and) last refuge of scoundrels.

By the way, lest we forget, back in 1957, Arkansas and the rest of the states who fought de-segregation were all run from top to bottom by Democrats.

And the people who passed and tried to enforce integration were largely Republicans.

Funny how the Washington Post doesn’t mention that.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, March 30th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “WP: States’ Objections Equal Segregation”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    Equal Segregation, phooey

    How about Equal Protection Under The Law?

    Let’s start with Congressman Fleming’s petition to force Congress to participate in Obama Deathcare, then move on (I made a funny) to reviewing how many Progressive tax exempt foundations get my tax dollars to wage culture war against me. And then … and ten … and then …

    BTW – Huckabee is a (series of foul curses in obscure Chinese), and couldn’t hit the side of a barn firing 12ga ethics rounds. Because he’s got zero moral compass and doesn’t understand the Constitution anymore than my 300 boar out back.

  2. bousquem says:

    Why let facts stop a good propoganda lie/story from being told and force fed to everyone as the truth.

  3. JohnMG says:

    ……”he said health insurance “is the law of the land”……..

    If Obama said shit was peanut butter and spread some on his toast, would Mike Beebe smile and eat it? These people are absolute lunatics. How on earth can anyone with a lick of sense connect the two issues.

    But then, I’m a racist so maybe it’s beyond my ken.

  4. proreason says:

    “it reminds us that race-baiting is the (first and) last refuge of scoundrels”

    having hacked into Steve’s computer, i have the first draft of this sentence…”it reminds us that race-baiting is the (first and) last refuge of Democrats scoundrels”

    And here is some positive thinking about CommieCare:


  5. Mithrandir says:

    They also fail to understand that segregation is LEGAL. Forced integration is ILLEGAL.

    You can decide where you want to live, where your kids go to school, where you work, who you associate with VOLUNTARILY. Having the gov’t rush in telling you who you MUST associate with, what health care to buy, who your children go to school with is an abuse of gov’t for some social plan. (Yet gov’t people don’t send their kids to minority schools, not even Obama will do that)

    Gov’t says: “Hey, why are you volunteering to have all white schools and all white neighborhoods? Just because the black people don’t invest in, and destroy their own schools, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be able to ship them in from 50 miles away to destroy your own schools….”

    Government sponsored segregation is racial preference is ILLEGAL, yet today on drudgereport, you can clearly see that the Obama administration is supporting gov’t affirmative action in a case in Michigan. One would almost think that favoring whites was illegal, but favoring blacks is legal and honorable. . . you know….someone might think that.

  6. Mithrandir says:

    OH! I forgot,

    In college, some as_#*(&% came to our class to talk about how bigoted the Boy Scouts were for banning homosexuals, how our nation was garbage for the segregation of the 50s etc, how schools should be activists for social equality, quoting state and federal ant-discrimination laws etc.

    I raised my hand and said, “Now that you have admitted that it is an absolute for government not to favor 1 race over another, can you explain and justify how AFFIRMATIVE ACTION is not a violation of everything you have been lecturing us about for the last hour?”

    WOW, (Kaboom!) his face went red, he stammered, shifted his weight, looked at his talking points, “Uh (ha huh) well, you see, that is a complex issue going back many decades involving the 60s, and um, –how much time do we have here today- (deadpanning) ha, um well it really is a complex issue trying to correct another complex issue so…”

    Hypocrites, don’t believe anything they say….

  7. MinnesotaRush says:

    My gawd! The abject stupidity of some folks on this planet is just stunning!

  8. Liberals Make Great Speedbumps says:

    Considering that Walter E. Williams and Thomas Sowell were products of segregated schools, maybe segregated schools aren’t such a bad idea. I know mixing it up sure as hell hasn’t worked. If this sounds racist, tough. I can live with that.

  9. AcornsRNutz says:

    Since the end of segregation legally, we have seen it socially. Seems to work pretty much the same. The biggest failures politically since then have been forced de-segregation (school bussing comes to mind).

    I can’t say I agree with mandated segregation, but I tend to look back at the states rights arguments of those days and can’t help but think that all though the fed was morally correct, the states were correct in saying that this was setting a bad precident when it came to soveriegnity. Sometimes the fed has no right to step in, no matter how much we may personally agree with the agenda. Let the state’s citizens handle it. Oh, and if the states owned their own guard, funded by, controlled by and operating at the behest of the governers of the individual states, I am pretty certain there would be a much more timid national government in this country.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »