No doubt about it, the place to be if you want to understand where the American people and the American working class are going, is on www.breitbart.com
Obama is at the centre of all of these moves against the American people and the American workers because Obama has got no respect for the great American Revolution and the great American Constitution, the great American tradion of Free Speech.
Obama is in no way of the left, not a socialist, is a raging Imperialist, but his politics chime with a disgustingly disorientated Stalinist left.
The new Fascism in the world is going to come partly out of these circles. And it will be laced with antisemitism as is seen in a recent use of an antisemitic cartoon by a section of the anti Wall Street movement.
As the world capitalist system hurls into economic crisis so the need to turn to Fascism. So the need to do away with democratic rights as contained in the American traditions.
It must be emphasised that Obama does not represent the black workers of America. He does the precise opposite. Because black workers like white workers, and even polka dot workers, need ALL their rights in order to defend themselves against dictatorship.
Obama represents the dictatorship of capital.
This story about this woman called Kagan shows how Obama had her appointed to the Supreme Court in order to do away with these basic rights of the American people and the American working class. The contempt which Obama and Kagan on the Supreme Court have for these traditional basic democratic righnts is exposed by Breitbart’s writer.
Breitbart News has discovered previously unknown handwritten notes from Elena Kagan to radical professor Derrick Bell, sent to Bell as Kagan worked on his seminal 1985 article on Critical Race Theory in the Harvard Law Review (99 Harv. L. Rev. 4).
The notes, which were not among materials presented to the Senate during Justice Kagan’s confirmation hearings, are preserved among Bell’s papers at the New York University archives.
Kagan’s work on Bell’s article was revealed in 2010 by Harvard Law School professor Charles Ogletree, after President Barack Obama nominated her to the Supreme Court. Ogletree cited her “phenomenal edits” on Bell’s “classic” article.
Bell’s article, “The Civil Rights Chronicles,” combined exposition and fiction to argue that the Constitution was–and remains–tainted by white supremacy, and that the United States awaited “a common crisis that will overcome racism” through radical constitutional reform.
Unlike then-Harvard Law Review president Carol Steiker, who corresponded with Bell via typed letter (apparently on a 1980s-vintage dot matrix printer), Kagan chose to write to Bell exclusively on yellow notepad paper. She did not explain her choice to write by hand, save to suggest in one note on Aug. 30, 1985 that she was pressed for time.
Most of Kagan’s notes to Bell concern minor editorial comments on the “Chronicles,” as she and the other editors prepared his article for publication. One interesting passage concerns a legal question that Kagan and Steiker posed about Bell’s attempt to argue for a new constitutional right–a “substantive due process right” to “racial healing”:
As Carol and I told you on the phone, we’re a little bit concerned at the focus on this part of the piece. The doctrinal section centers on the idea of creating a substantive due process right to racial healing. But the reader is left wondering: why wouldn’t the Court strike these laws down on first amendment grounds? It strikes me that the Court would indeed strike these laws down on the ground of free speech or free association.
The section of the article to which Kagan was referring was entitled “The Chronicle of the Slave Scrolls.” In it, the main character, Geneva Crenshaw (who would recur in many of Bell’s writings) tells a fable about finding parchment scrolls on the west coast of Africa inside a model of a slave ship.
The scrolls “simply taught the readily available but seldom read history of slavery in America” as related by those who had lived through it. Crenshaw relates that the discovery of the scrolls inspired black Americans to meet in “healing groups” that inspired them to compete more fiercely for achievement and respect–until a “television minister” warned that the scrolls were inciting racial hatred by teaching about old evils. States then passed “Racial Toleration Laws” that prohibited any teaching about the history of racial conflict, and blacks eventually acquiesced.
The lesson, Crenshaw says, is that “[t]he Constitution protects the efforts of black people only when those efforts leave vested interests undistured [sic].”
Bell, through the narrator, provides the solution in the form of “a substantive due process right that barred government interference with the racial healing sessions,” based on the same
right to privacy recognized in Roe v. Wade as part of a “penumbra” of constitutional protections. Bell’s narrator says a right to “racial healing” would give special protection to the idea that “the racism of whites rather than the deficiencies of blacks causes our lowly position in this society.”
Crenshaw–perhaps echoing Kagan’s note–is skeptical that the Court would grant such a right. Bell’s answer is “skillful lawyering” and “a more liberal Court”; Crenshaw later replies that only a “common crisis” will bring the needed change.
As Solicitor General, Kagan cheered when Obama seized a national “crisis” to pass unrelated legislation whose goal is to create an effective right to health care. She has not recused herself from the subsequent Obamacare case, as she has from today’s suit over Arizona’s immigration law, in which her “skillful lawyering” played an important role.
If Obama is re-elected, Kagan could be part of the “more liberal court” Bell envisioned–and great changes in constitutional jurisprudence could be the result.