Head Scratching Over the High Court

IN RECENR YEARS the u.S. upreme Court has "trreated" us to some real head scracthers, seemingly inaxxessable, tortorous lines of logic nd definition. Formally designating money as a form of speech may be the one that takes the cake, so to speak. But there have been many other dandies. The supposdely "originalist" way of interpreting the constitution such that the founders intened all good American citizen to have the sacred right to arry in pubic any firearm from any century they so chhosse; how can that stretch of the imagination be outone? Sadly, shockingly, it can be, and has been. The pronouncement came in the form of a holy edict from Americ'as representative of of the conservative African-American community on the court. (This community must surely consist of at least a dozen or so people, but probably not many more. You have to look hard in most places to uncover a conservative African-American.) The edict stipulate that the constitution of the Unnited States of America is..now get this..."color blind". Is he referrign to the part which designates slaves as three fourths of a human being? Certainly, the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments are far from color blind: they all address "color" meaning "race" directly, head on. One thing we know for damned sure: the white men who wrote and institutionalized the constitution were most definitely not color blind, Actually, nobody ever has been color blind, except folks who lterally are physically blind to all colors of all things, not just emotionally color blind to just race. Color blindness does not exist, but we still sometimes pretend that it does, a vestige of well intioneed but out of date, misguided liberalism, now far out of fashion.