New York's most famous fish-wrapper wasted no time in mocking the reading of the Constitution aloud on the House floor by republicans, now in the majority.....
"In any case, it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act, suggesting that they alone understand the true meaning of a text that the founders wisely left open to generations of reinterpretation. Certainly the Republican leadership is not trying to suggest that African-Americans still be counted as three-fifths of a person."
I've heard this red-herring argument many times before and I'll bet that every single person who's ever used it thinks that each black person was actually counted as 3/5ths of a person during pre-Civil War census taking. Well, here's the truth.....
In the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, the northern(anti-slave) states struck a compromise with the southern(pro-slave) states regarding the census. Northern states didn't want any slaves counted and southern states wanted all slaves counted. It was called not surprisingly the "Three Fifths Compromise". It was designed to reduce the congressional representation of slave states and increase the relative representation of northern states by counting all the non-free people in the slave states and then multiplying that total number by 3/5ths.
It was not, as race hustlers, craven democrat politicians, and NYT op/ed writers like to tell you, that the Constitution viewed each black slave as 3/5ths of a person. It was about enumeration and nothing else.
That the NYT would trot out this tired, false argument shows what despicable excuses for journalists are employed there, why nobody reads it any more, and fully explains why the stock price is below junk status. What a rag! I wouldn't line a litter box with the NYTimes.
"In any case, it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act, suggesting that they alone understand the true meaning of a text that the founders wisely left open to generations of reinterpretation. Certainly the Republican leadership is not trying to suggest that African-Americans still be counted as three-fifths of a person."
I've heard this red-herring argument many times before and I'll bet that every single person who's ever used it thinks that each black person was actually counted as 3/5ths of a person during pre-Civil War census taking. Well, here's the truth.....
In the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, the northern(anti-slave) states struck a compromise with the southern(pro-slave) states regarding the census. Northern states didn't want any slaves counted and southern states wanted all slaves counted. It was called not surprisingly the "Three Fifths Compromise". It was designed to reduce the congressional representation of slave states and increase the relative representation of northern states by counting all the non-free people in the slave states and then multiplying that total number by 3/5ths.
It was not, as race hustlers, craven democrat politicians, and NYT op/ed writers like to tell you, that the Constitution viewed each black slave as 3/5ths of a person. It was about enumeration and nothing else.
That the NYT would trot out this tired, false argument shows what despicable excuses for journalists are employed there, why nobody reads it any more, and fully explains why the stock price is below junk status. What a rag! I wouldn't line a litter box with the NYTimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment