Apparently the U.S. Senator from New Jersey, Cory Booker, thinks American law is irredeemably evil because our founders were “misogynists” and “racists” and so we need judges who will change our laws, not judges who rule according to our laws.
Booker made his proclamation during Tuesday’s first day of deliberations for the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Indeed, Booker tried to thread the needle by claiming our founding fathers were “geniuses” yet “flawed.” But it is unmistakable that he deemed their efforts to be essentially failed and that our country is racist.
According to National Review:
After praising the Founders as “geniuses” for devising the American system of government, Booker implied that an acknowledgement of the racism and misogyny typical of the Founders’ era required a rejection of constitutional originalism.
“I love that my colleagues keep going back to the Constitution but understand this: I laud our Founders, I think they were geniuses. But I understand that millions of Americans understand that they were also flawed people,” Booker said.
“We know our Founders and their values and their ideals but we also know that they were flawed and you can see that in the documents. Native Americans were referred to as savages, women weren’t referred to at all, African Americans were referred to as fractions of human beings. As one civil-rights activist used to say ‘constitutu, constitu, I can only say three-fifths of the word,’” he added.
In the latter “point,” Booker was obviously pushing the false claim that the U.S. Constitution only rated black people as worth three-fifths of a person.
This is an outright lie and it is a lie all liberals fully believe.
The fact is, the Constitution did not rate the humanity of black people at all. The famed three-fifths clause only concerned itself with how many congressmen would be apportioned to the states. And, since at the time blacks could not vote, they were not apportioned as a “full” person.
But, the clause was actually an anti-slavery measure. How is that? Because the southern states wanted their black slaves to be “worth” a full person for purposes of apportioning how many representatives they would get in Congress — even as they denied their slaves were “people” otherwise.
But northerners realized that if slaves were deemed “full” people for purposes of assigning the number of congressmen a southern state would get, then that would mean that the slaves states would have more power in Congress. So, the compromise was that slaves were worth less for apportionment and therefore slave states would have less power.
Thus, the three-fifths clause was a measure against slavery. Not that this un-educated Booker knows anything about truth.
So, next time some un-informed, anti-American liberal throws the three-fifths clause at you, tell them that they are pro-slavery if they oppose the three-fifths clause.
Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.