150 years ago today

… the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the Dred Scott decision.

[Chief Justice] Taney’s “Opinion of the Court” stated that Negroes were not citizens of the United States and had no right to bring suit in a federal court. In addition, Dred Scott had not become a free man as a result of his residence at Fort Snelling because the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional; Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in the federal territories. . . . Because Dred Scott was not free under either the provisions of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 or the 1820 Missouri Compromise, he was still a slave, not a citizen with the right to bring suit in the federal court system. According to Taney’s opinion, African Americans were “beings of an inferior order so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” . . . Taney returned the case to the circuit court with instructions to dismiss it for want of jurisdiction.

Above from the Missouri State Archives, which has an extensive report on the case.

Scott and his wife Harriet, also a party to the case, were freed shortly after by their new owner, but Dred Scott died the following year and his wife and daughter not much later.

Before the ruling, many of those moderately opposed to slavery felt the institution would die out soon enough if it wasn’t allowed to expand. The 7-2 decision of the Court seriously undermined the effort to limit the expansion, however; indeed, some feared that under its precedent even the free states would soon be unable to outlaw slavery. The Scott decision eliminated the middle ground in the debate.

Best line of the day, so far

Word going around the internets is that the real reason the U.S. attorneys were fired is because they forgot the new cover sheets for their TPS reports.

50 States in 10 Minutes

Following up on naming the countries, here’s a chance to name all 50 States in 10 Minutes.

NewMexiKen did it in 4 minutes, but the last minute was spent frustratingly trying to remember the one state I’d forgotten.

Best line of the day, so far

“How well do you think a guy named ‘Scooter’ is going to do in prison?”

FunctionalAmbivalent

Eh, eh, what’s up doc?

Email, god love it

Here for you on the internets, an Email from U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins Concerning Conversation with DoJ Official. It’s interesting enough for its own sake as part of the whole controversy over the firing of the U.S. attorneys, but what I love is the end of this two-week old message:

“I would appreciate maximum opsec regarding this email and ask that you not forward it or let others read it.”

And there it is on the internet.

Cummins himself made it available today.

(NewMexiKen has read some of his own emails out loud on the witness stand. Trust me, they never, ever go away.)

Faggot

NewMexiKen is not a fan generally of Andrew Sullivan, but his essay on the Coulter-faggot thing is impressive.

March 6th is the birthday

… of Ed McMahon. Johnny’s sidekick is 84.

… of Alan Greenspan. He’s 81.

… of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, 79.

He was in law school in 1948, when a prominent Liberal Party politician was assassinated, and the event triggered a civil war that lasted for more than 10 years. García Márquez stayed in the city to write about the violence, but a riot in his neighborhood started a fire that burned down his house, and all his manuscripts were destroyed. So he moved into a tiny room in a four-story brothel called “the Skyscraper.” Márquez knew he wanted to write fiction, but he wasn’t sure what to write about. Then in 1950, his mother showed up and asked him to travel back to his hometown to help her sell the family home.

The trip filled him with nostalgia and flooded his mind with memories of his childhood and the stories told to him by his grandparents. A fictional town began to take shape in his mind, based on his memories, and he knew he had to write a novel about that town. That novel became One Hundred Years of Solitude (1967), which begins, “Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendía was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice.”

One Hundred Years of Solitude is now considered one of the greatest novels of the 20th century.

The Writer’s Almanac

… of Mary Wilson. The Supreme who is neither Diana Ross nor the one Dream Girls is about is 63 today.

The members of the Supremes - Diana Ross, Florence Ballard and Mary Wilson - first came together in a quartet, the Primettes, that had been recruited by singer Paul Williams as a sister act to his locally popular Detroit group, the Primes (later known as the Temptations). After persistently showing up at Motown’s “Hitsville” headquarters after school, the Supremes were signed to the label in January 1961. The group was slow to find its footing, enduring several years of flop singles before finally clicking with “When the Lovelight Starts Shining Through His Eyes” (#23) in early 1964. After that, it was off to the races for the Supremes, who amassed a dozen Number One hits between 1964-69. In addition to the aforementioned singles, the Supremes’ other chart-toppers were “I Hear a Symphony,” “You Can’t Hurry Love,” “You Keep Me Hangin’ On,” “Love Is Here and Now You’re gone,” “The Happening,” “Love Child” and “Someday We’ll Be Together.”

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

… of Rob Reiner. “Meathead” is 60.

… of Shaquille O’Neal. He’s getting up there — 35.

Michelangelo Buonarroti was born on this date in 1475.

Detail from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Elizabeth Barrett Browning was born on this date in 1806.

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.
I love thee to the depth and breadth and height
My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight
For the ends of being and ideal grace.
I love thee to the level of every day’s
Most quiet need, by sun and candle-light.
I love thee freely, as men strive for right.
I love thee purely, as they turn from praise.
I love thee with the passion put to use
In my old griefs, and with my childhood’s faith.
I love thee with a love I seemed to lose
With my lost saints. I love with the breath,
Smiles, tears, of all my life; and, if God choose,
I shall but love thee better after death.

Bob Wills was born on this date in 1905.

You can see the Grand Ole Opry in Nashville, Tennessee,
It’s the home of country music, on that we all agree.
But when you cross that ole Red River, hoss,
that just don’t mean a thing,
‘Cause once you’re down in Texas,
Bob Wills is still the King.

(’Bob Wills Is Still The King’ by Waylon Jennings)

Bob Wills was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame in 1968 and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1999.

Remember the Alamo?

It fell to Mexican forces on this date in 1836.

Say Heather, wasn’t your whole campaign last year about character and ethics?

Mr. Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney in Albuquerque, New Mexico, has stated that, in mid-October, two members of Congress from New Mexico pressured him about an ongoing corruption probe of state Democrats. Apparently, Rep. Wilson called Mr. Iglesias first and Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) called a week later. After Sen. Domenici admitted calling Mr. Iglesias, Rep. Wilson finally admitted yesterday that she too had called the U.S. Attorney.

Rep. Wilson’s call to Mr. Iglesias violates chapter 7 of the House ethics manual, which prohibits members from contacting executive or agency officials regarding the merits of matters under their formal consideration. House rules also state that if a member wants to affect the outcome of a matter in litigation, the member can file a brief with the court, make a floor statement, or insert a statement into the Congressional Record. Directly calling officials to influence an ongoing enforcement matter is not an option.

House rules also state that a member may not claim he or she was merely requesting “background information” or a “status report” because the House has recognized that such requests “may in effect be an indirect or subtle effort to influence the substantive outcome of the proceedings.”

Rep. Wilson’s conduct may also violate the requirement that members conduct themselves in a manner that “reflects creditably on the House.” In a precedent cited by the House ethics committee when it admonished former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), the House has held that members are prohibited from asking an executive branch employee to engage in an activity having an impermissible political purpose.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington