I've been reading Founding Brothers by Joseph Ellis. One chapter describes a debate in the House of Representatives in 1790 over two petitions which had been presented asking Congress to do away with the slave trade and slavery in the new republic. Ellis notes that this was the first discussion in public over the issue and that a compromise had been reached in private during the constitutional convention which would prohibit the new government from interfering with the importation of slaves for 20 years. Those who argued for ratifiying the new constitution then downplayed its failure to abolish slavery in the South with a specious claim that it would not last that long in any event, because it was not economically viable. The irony is gutwrenching, considering what the nation paid 70 years later when the string of similar compromises broke down.

Imagine my shock at reading Justice O'Connor's remark that she expects that in 25 years, affirmative action will no longer be "necessary." Necessity was one of the original justifications for slavery in the South. Now it is claimed as supporting reverse discrimination. You'd think that one civil war was enough for us. Let's hope we come to our senses before that.