The media’s contempt for the conservative U.S. Supreme Court reached new lows this week when it used a dishonest play on words to imply that the Court was against racial diversity in public schools.
That distortion, however, paled in comparison to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, who announced on his blog (appropriately named “The News Hole”) that the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education had been overturned!
Olbermann would have you believe that the U.S. Supreme Court had returned us to the days of segregated public schools.
Under the intentionally inflammatory heading “TURNING BACK HISTORY,” Olbermann's "Countdown" staff wrote:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Two things seem certain in the wake of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision to overturn Brown v. Board of Ed., the Justices having ruled that schools can no longer use race as a factor in fighting – of all things – discrimination: That Justice Anthony Kennedy is the court’s new key swing vote, and that late Chief Justice Earl Warren is rolling over in his grave.
Allow me to give a little bit of history is required to clear up Olbermann’s delusion.
In 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Plessy v. Ferguson in which the Court made the regrettable decision to maintain segregated public facilities though its “separate but equal” doctrine. In 1954, the Supreme Court reversed its prior ruling in the famous case of Brown v. Board of Education, where the Court found that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” In the 53 years since Brown v. Board of Education, public school districts across the country have employed various policies in order to guarantee racial integration, which brings us to the Supreme Court case decided this week.
The public school districts in Louisville, Ky., and Seattle, Wash., employed elaborate integration policies which included the school district’s ability to assign students to schools solely upon the basis of race, when all the other policies failed to achieve the desired integration.
In other words, after all the students were assigned to schools, the school districts could shuffle a few white kids here, and a few “non-white” kids there, in order to achieve optimal integration.
In reviewing these policies, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority found generally that the policies allowing students to be moved around solely upon the basis of their race amounted to unconstitutional governmental racial classification.
The 5-4 majority decision was agreed upon by the five most conservative Justices, with Justice Kennedy joining the other four with a slightly watered-down concurrence.
In the plainest terms possible, the Court found that the spirit of Brown v. Board of Education was that public schools can not make classifications based upon race, and the Louisville and Seattle policies (no matter how well-intentioned) were at their core classifications based solely upon race.
The bottom line: The Supreme Court’s decision was a pure and passionate defense of Brown v. Board of Education, not a rebuke as Olbermann would have you believe.
In one of the greatest one-sentence summaries of all-time, Justice Roberts wrote: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
In essence, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority struck down a policy based upon racial discrimination, but the discrimination itself was part of the school districts’ diversity policies. And that is the basis for the media’s duplicitous reporting (particularly its headlines).
Rather than focusing on the “racial discrimination” aspect of the decision, much of the media’s reporting deceitfully focused on the Court rejecting “diversity” and “integration” policies.
In an earlier post, Ken Shepherd pointed out some of the headlines that appeared in the media: “High Court rejects public school diversity plan” (AP via Chicago Sun-Times) and “Supreme Court strikes down school integration policies (LA Times), to repeat a few of the prior examples.
CNN.com actually has a pretty fair article on the decision, but the story remains under the headline “Divided Court Rejects School Diversity Plans.”
In their ongoing assault on the John Roberts Supreme Court, the obvious intent of these headlines is to give the false impression that the newly-conservative Supreme Court is hostile to racial diversity.
It is a pretty lame strategy, but it is also telling in the sense that the mainstream media is calculating that some amount of its readership (probably most of its readership) will only read the headline, but not take the time to read the story that goes with it.
And that takes us back to Olbermann, who goes far beyond misleading headlines. By stating that Brown v. Board of Education had been overturned – and further that the “late Chief Justice Earl Warren is rolling over in his grave,” the MSNBC hatchet-man is reducing himself to the lowest form of race-baiting possible, on par with the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
The dishonest implication is that the conservative Supreme Court Justices (now including the liberals’ new whipping boy, Justice Kennedy) are bigots who want to return our country to the days of Plessy v. Ferguson and segregated schools.
It’s the oldest play in the liberal playbook – when all else fails, smear the conservatives as bigots.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Citing Olbermaniac's falsehoods
June 30, 2007 - 05:05 ET by Jack BauerUnfortunately Citing Olbermaniac's falsehoods is the classic dog bites man story (i.e.: it's so common as to be a non-story in journalism terms.)
But someone has to do it as long as he's on air, so thanks for drawing that short straw Ken!
Now when the repulsive premature exclaimator actually gets something right, that would be a man bites dog angle, and therefore worthy of extreme note.
Did anyone read "Bathtub
June 30, 2007 - 11:01 ET by ZoneDaiatlasDid anyone read "Bathtub Boy" blog about the London Terror Bombing plot? Basically saying it was scare tactics by the Bush Administration to scare people and that the bomb wouldn't do anything... Even the Olberlosers actually believe that bomb wouldn't hurt anybody that it was a ploy for the Bush Administration to keep control of power....
These people are so crazed
June 30, 2007 - 11:15 ET by Jack BauerThese people are so crazed that nothing you can say makes any difference. It literally is a waste of time.
I would love to stick the fuckers in a car packed with thousands of nails, gas canisters, and gasoline. Oh, and a trigger device.
Seriously, why do innocent people have to die when so many a-holes are available.
BE FAIR< fellas
June 30, 2007 - 11:28 ET by BigDaveDEMNJBigDave DEMNJ, Oberman hit this one out of the park! The Supreme Court is now on the road to Berlin! Overturning Brown vs the Board is just the beginning, and its time to get your 'Hannitized heads' out of your collective arses and stand up and be MEN!
In one of the greatest one-se
June 30, 2007 - 11:34 ET by botgIn one of the greatest one-sentence summaries of all-time, Justice Roberts wrote: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
In case you missed it there's the reasoning and this does not overturn Brown.
In the plainest terms possible, the Court found that the spirit of Brown v. Board of Education was that public schools can not make classifications based upon race, and the Louisville and Seattle policies (no matter how well-intentioned) were at their core classifications based solely upon race. The bottom line: The Supreme Court’s decision was a pure and passionate defense of Brown v. Board of Education, not a rebuke as Olbermann would have you believe
Time to step away from the bong, and next time READ the post.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
There there, did the collec
June 30, 2007 - 11:49 ET by Jack BauerThere there, did the collective voices in your head tell you to say that?
In the immortal words of Mark Levin
Jack toward the top right han
June 30, 2007 - 12:01 ET by botgJack toward the top right hand corner of this link is the soundboard, in this version it's "Get off the phone ya big dope"
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
thanks botg -- actually I'm
June 30, 2007 - 12:10 ET by Jack Bauerthanks botg -- actually I'm listening to a replay of last night's show right now. The great one is on great form.
One great line, his brother emailed in wondering whether along with his AIDs test, did Joe Biden have an IQ test.
And are the results in yet.
along with his AIDs test, did
June 30, 2007 - 12:17 ET by botgalong with his AIDs test, did Joe Biden have an IQ test.
Probally postponed the second one until he could have his staff give him the proper answers and position statement
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
moron?
June 30, 2007 - 13:54 ET by BigDaveDEMNJMark is the moron. I've never heard such angry talk every night at 6 on the radio. All you right wingers have a really good point about liberals hating and crushing any, all, and even perveived opposition. Air America makes me embarrassed to be liberal leaning. But come, on...Mark on WABC? He is way over the top. I just passed your bong back.
Dave, You haven't even app
June 30, 2007 - 14:05 ET by botgDave, You haven't even approached reality yet, here you go again, now focus, focus:
In one of the greatest one-sentence summaries of all-time, Justice Roberts wrote: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
In case you missed it there's the reasoning and this does not overturn Brown.
In the plainest terms possible, the Court found that the spirit of Brown v. Board of Education was that public schools can not make classifications based upon race, and the Louisville and Seattle policies (no matter how well-intentioned) were at their core classifications based solely upon race. The bottom line: The Supreme Court’s decision was a pure and passionate defense of Brown v. Board of Education, not a rebuke as Olbermann would have you believe
Time to step away from the bong, and next time READ the post.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Another half-brained hyporcri
June 30, 2007 - 11:52 ET by contraryAnother half-brained hyporcrit is tricked into the abyss that is leftist group think. A wake will be held in your honor.
Jack -Are we permitted to use
June 30, 2007 - 14:46 ET by drillanwrJack -
Are we permitted to use Marine language here at NB when posting???
`cause, I've been biting my fingers to hold back my usual patdollard.com language. While I wouldn't let myself just run amuck with it, there are times when no other word seems to fit . ... Ya know?
drill -- well I wouldn't no
June 30, 2007 - 15:10 ET by Jack Bauerdrill -- well I wouldn't normally use expletive deleted in my posts, but I've truly had with these people who I have come think are actually evil.
Not just wrong, not just that I have a reasonable disagreement, but people who I think would be happy to see thousands dead from islamo-terrorist attacks.
People who won't lift a finger to help, but who will be the frist to shriek as to why the "government" or the "President" or whoever didn't do something to prevent it. And who, in the end, will blame America anyway for "provoking" the attack in the first place.
I've had a bellyfull of these amoral shits.
As you say, there are times and situations when that is the only response.
Thank you, Jack. I have bee
June 30, 2007 - 15:19 ET by drillanwrThank you, Jack. I have been briefed.
Agree with everything you just said, by the way.
People who won't lift a finger to help, but who will be the frist to shriek as to why the "government" or the "President" or whoever didn't do something to prevent it. And who, in the end, will blame America anyway for "provoking" the attack in the first place.
Not to mention these are the same damn people who demand the government does not "profile" at airport screenings, not wire-tap terrorist phone calls, leak vital secret practices and information via the NYTimes, and scream that we shouldn't be holding anyone at Gitmo.
Ya.
Hey drill -- well you never
June 30, 2007 - 15:29 ET by Jack BauerHey drill -- well you never know, that 100 year old Jewish grandma may really be planning a suicide bomb attack.
Always remember: segregati
June 30, 2007 - 06:27 ET by motherbeltAlways remember: segregation on the basis of race is inherently evil. Unless a group of blacks decide that they want their own school, dormitory, social group, fraternity, or whatever else. Then it's a "cultural" thing. A good thing.
It has been 53 years since Br
June 30, 2007 - 06:49 ET by Gat New YorkIt has been 53 years since Brown v. Board of Ed and 43 years since the Civil Rights Act. The young kids of that period are now middle aged or older and have grown children of their own. Blacks have been running our foreign policy for the past 7 years, are CEOs of major corporations and on the Boards of all, Chair some of the most important Congressional committees, and are leading academics and theologians. At what point in time do Blacks stop being victims and we stop legislating for that? At what point in time do they take personal responsibility. Roberts did NOT kill Brown v. Bd of Ed. but he did indicate that these measures are too limiting and do not address the real issue.
Keith Olberman is the #6 or #
June 30, 2007 - 06:50 ET by jonathanandersonKeith Olberman is the #6 or #7 antichrist in the country right now. What else would he be doing BUT inspiring hatred, resentment, and frustration against Republicans, conservatives, and Christians?
1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last time [eschatos hora - the lowest, or trying, hour] : and as ye have heard that [the spirit of] antichrist shall come, even now are there MANY antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time [eschatos hora - the lowest, or trying, hour].
Which leads to this question ...
Psalms 2:1
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
And the answer (beside the fact that legion has consumed them) ...
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
(11) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion [i.e. He turns them over to devil spirit possession], that they should believe a lie:
(12) That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Here's more insight on the spiritual corruption of the Keith Olberman's of the world ...
Mark 5:8-13
(8) For he [Jesus Christ] said unto him [the unclean spirit], "Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit."
(9) And he [Jesus Christ] asked him [the unclean spirit], "What is thy name?" And he [the unclean, or foul, spirit] answered, saying, "My name is Legion: for we are many [around 10,000]."
(10) And he [the foul spirit] besought him much that he would not send them [Legion] away out of the country.
(11) Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
(12) And all the devils besought him, saying, "Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them."
(13) And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they [the swine] were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.
Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities [daimon - ruling devil spirits], against powers [daimonion - devil spirit minions], against the rulers of the darkness of this world [against antichrists], against spiritual wickedness in high places.
2 Timothy 2:26
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
1 John 4:1-3
(1) Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
(2) Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
(3) And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that SPIRIT OF ANTICHRIST [the Bible does not teach that there is a single antichrist, but that there is a spirit of antichrist and that there are many antichrists], whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
Luke 11:24-26
(24) When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, "I will return unto my house whence I came out."
(25) And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.
(26) Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.
Let's see how many liberal bloggers on Newsbusters we smoke out with this post, ladies and gentlemen.
johnathan the sad part is the
June 30, 2007 - 09:30 ET by tkeefejohnathan the sad part is they could only respond with hatred. They know nothing else.
And by the way thanks for my
June 30, 2007 - 09:31 ET by tkeefeAnd by the way thanks for my morning Bible read.
More lies from the left.Wha
June 30, 2007 - 07:02 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsMore lies from the left.
What else is new?
D
I don't support our liberals or their mission.
Take a step back...
June 30, 2007 - 09:29 ET by c5thenThe left-wing liberals are the ones who want to classify everyone into pigeonhole groups so as better to pre-judge people. They want to know all about your race, your religion, your income, your sexual preferance, etc.
Meanwhile, when the SCOTUS decides that race should not enter into any school grouping decisions, they cry racism. Conservatives, on the other hand are saying that this takes us closer to the vision of Dr. M.L. King where race is not concidered at all and we have a society that is "color blind".
So which is the racist group? The democrats who want to classify everybody by their race to see what % are doing what or living where, or the republicans who could care less what color or race someone is.
It has been my experience that those who are pre-occupied whith someone's color or race even for the "purpose of showing that they like them" are generally racist and prejudiced.
And Keith Olberman's implication that those people who have black skin can't get a propper education unless the government makes sure that they go to schools where they are mandated to be between 15% and 50% of the population is demeaning, racist, bigoted and just plain condescending.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
"The left-wing liberals
June 30, 2007 - 19:28 ET by Galvanic"The left-wing liberals are the ones who want to classify everyone into pigeonhole groups so as better to pre-judge people. They want to know all about your race, your religion, your income, your sexual preferance, etc."
It's even worse than merely pigeon-holing based on race. Once the Left has so placed an individual into his/her pigeon hole, that individual is expected to profess the political and social ideas the Left has proscribed for those in that hole. Thus, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Thomas Sowell, and Clarence Thomas are scorned and ridiculed for not really being 'black,' but Bill Clinton is hailed as the "First Black President."
This form of discrimination --- the refusal to accept that individuals are free to think for themselves --- is as degrading as overt racism, because it denies the independence of the human being, and relegates him/her to pre-assigned collections of thoughts and conditions. Your Olbermann anecdote is a clear example of this.
Is anyone really surprised
June 30, 2007 - 12:30 ET by happyuscitizenIs anyone really surprised that these moonbats would come to this conclusion?
As Chief Justice Roberts co
June 30, 2007 - 12:41 ET by GregEAs Chief Justice Roberts correctly stated, and to which all the race-based discrimination groups and backers cringed....
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
It's odd that the government creates laws to supposedly stop discrimination, yet doesn't actually apply those laws to itself. And, it forces those laws on society in the same manner, in that if a person or organization wants to discriminate in favor of a minority group, then discrimination, which they want us to think is so bad, is perfectly fine. But, if discrimination favors a non-minority group, then that actually is defined as discrimination and is illegal under their hypocritical laws.