So Justice Scalia thinks the Congress voted to re-authorize the Voting Rights Act without dissension, only because not a one of the Congress people were willing to be considered "racist" if they voted no.
But he explained, it's perfectly ok and socially acceptable for them to vote their consciences, that is to vote no, on women's rights, LGBT rights, poor people's rights - I mean entitlements.
But voting against black people, they only do that, because they fear ostracism. Not because voter suppression still exists, not because black people are still disenfranchised. No, every thing is peachy keen now. Jim Crow is dead and all people are equal. Amen.
Here is Justice Scalia's reasoning: In the beginning, only a few Republicans voted for the original act, then a few more voted for the first re-authorization, and a few more after that, until today when they all voted for it. Why? Because they feared the delicate sensibilities of - Who? fill in the blank - would be offended, and gentlemen that they are, they would not want to offend anyone.
No sir. Even though they have no problem denying women their reproductive rights or to be free from violence; it bothers them not one wit to find gay people getting married an abomination and as for poor people - Are there no prisons, no workhouses?
OK, we get it. Republicans are scardy-cats, on certain issues. It's hard to play Supreme Court Roulette, because you never know whose head the pistol is pointed at. Never mind where the bullet is.
And that reminds us, voting against gun safety laws is also just jim dandy. Not wanting to look like a sissy in front of their peers is all the excuse the pro-gun Congress dudes need.
