MaxedOutMama

If I am ever falsely accused of crime and stand trial for it, I would want three black people on the jury. I think the experience of being black in America has led to a skeptical attitude which would be highly useful. My three black jurors would be more likely to listen to what the prosecutor said without the innate belief that the prosecutor and the police must be right, and would listen to my testimony fairly.

If I were guilty of the crime, I'd want all whites on the jury, preferably rich ones from Massachusetts. They'd be most apt to listen to my excuses for why I did it.

I'd also want a good defense lawyer, of course.

The reason this came to my mind is that I do read the Washington Post pretty regularly, and I have noticed that several of their black columnists seem to speak with a more independent and skeptical voice. This may be coincidence, or it may be the effects of fighting color prejudice in America. Perhaps the experience of having to overcome the insidious effects of hundreds of years of denigration and discrimination has induced a habit of fixing one's mind on objective fact. Perhaps these two men have a deeply embedded trait of lifting their eyes away from the present tide of opinion and orienting themselves by focusing on a horizon of fact.

William Raspberry wrote this column about Michael Moore's film. Mr. Raspberry actually does live up to those standards of journalism to which Mr. Broder referred. Mr. Raspberry identifies his own stance, and takes care to distinguish fact from opinion, and propaganda from skeptical reporting. It's opinion, but it's fair opinion:

"I thought from the beginning that the Bush administration was wrong to launch its unprovoked war on Iraq. "Fahrenheit" makes it easier to believe that the war was not simply a horrible mistake based on over-extrapolation from slim evidence. I've long had my doubts about the president's intellectual gifts. Moore tempts me to doubt his basic competency."

"And it is an overwrought piece of propaganda -- a 110-minute hatchet job that doesn't even bother to pretend to be fair."

Mr. Raspberry also asks a very intelligent question:

"But why did the mostly liberal crowd at last week's Washington premiere -- people who like to think of themselves as thoughtful and fair-minded -- applaud so unrestrainedly?"

I will leave you to read his column to find his answer, which seems to me to have been made even more relevant by recent events. If I am accused of a crime I didn't do, I would very, very much like Mr. Raspberry on the trial jury, even if I disagree with him about the identity of the devil.

Mr. Raspberry's columns are worth reading. Mr. Raspberry has worn out a little shoe leather recently trying to figure out what can be done with the schools; I recommend that series particularly.


Colbert King writes on many topics. Contrast this column on Zell Miller's convention speech to Cohen's, and you will see the difference between propaganda and perspective. Before you read Mr. King's column you should know that Zell Miller was accused of being a racist after his speech; accusations of racism are routinely leveled at politicians from the south who do not agree with politicians from the north.

I will not quote from Mr. King's column because I would not want to adulterate your reading pleasure. This is one of the cleverest columns I have read in a long while; do not deprive yourself of it. Read it three times, and each time you will uncover another layer of irony.

I admire this man. Not only would I want to have him on the jury deciding my case, if I were ever stuck on one of these sequestered juries I would want him to be on it as well. He'd be good company.


Thomas Sowell doesn't write for the Washington Post. You can read his columns at Townhall. Try this one, for starters. He has written a number of books, and is one of the few people in America who could actually make me want to take a college economics course. He is a professor of economics, and in his hands economics changes from a dismal science to a lens through which to contemplate the sweep of history. I suspect I'd flunk if I took one of his courses, but it would be a character building exercise.

This coolly intellectual man is one of the most fascinating thinkers writing today. There is something about the way he looks at the world that causes him to see things that other people do not, and perceive patterns of human behavior that are rarely observed. You will get the best of him through his books; he is a careful and measured thinker.

If I were on trial for my life, and innocent, I would pray to have this man on the jury. If I were guilty, I'd fire my attorney unless he could keep Mr. Sowell off the jury. Once I were stuck with him on the jury I'd just give up and plead guilty. No appeal to emotion would sway this man.