Obama raises valid concerns about the mindset of voters

In a recent column, Armstrong Williams takes former President Barack Obama to task for for implying that Black men who may be considering just sitting out the election in November are in reality acting on latent or overt distaste for having a female president (“Armstrong Williams: Racism is the currency of power,” Oct. 16). This is a valid concern since the support for Donald Trump by Black men has increased during this election cycle. Because he is a thinking man, Obama was not intending to be sexist or racist in his comments but trying to get to the root of their reasoning.

Perhaps Williams is not familiar with the concept of “misogynoir,” an aversion to, or prejudice against, Black women. This most often refers to the misogyny experienced by Black women at the hands of Black men. As the plight of the Black man in America remains at the forefront of society, the issues facing African American women are often erased and ignored. Columnist Jamilah Lemieux writes that misogynoir “can come even from those who are Black, who were raised by Black women and profess to value Black people.” Can it be that Obama has hit the nail on the head? Maybe. But it is just as important to note that Vice President Kamala Harris is not using either her race or gender in her campaign.

Williams also cites the infamous “Plessy v. Ferguson” decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1896, which resulted in the “separate but equal” doctrine that led to the horrific Jim Crow laws that kept most African Americans from full participation in our “free” society all the way up to the 1960s. In many cases, it cost them their lives. The eloquent Justice John Marshall Harlan was the “lone dissenter” in what should be emphasized was a 7-1 decision that the 14th Amendment did not preclude consideration by states that there were distinctions to be made in the treatment of the races. The legacy of Jim Crow remains with us today.

In closing, I am quite dismayed that Williams would equate Obama’s speech and intent to the racist rantings of Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Bilbo. Based on the history of race relations and sexism in this country, Obama’s question and comments were right on — and righteous food for thought for his intended audience.

— Deborah Couzantino, Glen Burnie

Honor Americans who fought to save democracy: Vote!

Do we ever wonder what our American democracy looks like to other nations?

While traveling in Europe over the last few weeks, I met an older gentleman from Great Britain. He had one message to the American people and I promised to share it with as wide an audience as possible. He recalled how young American soldiers sacrificed their lives on D-Day and the days after to save Europe from the hands of Adolf Hitler. They fought to keep democracy and liberty alive.

If we don’t do the same on this presidential election — and do not choose freedom and democracy — it would be as if these soldiers had died again (“Make your vote count: No excuses. Not this year.” Oct. 20).

— Brigitte Dubois, Cockeysville

Pick judges on qualifications, not adherence to party platforms

Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Aisha Braveboy lectures us that judges appointed by former President Donald Trump, particularly U.S. Supreme Court justices, appear to have betrayed public trust and follow political agendas rather than faithful interpretation of the law and the Constitution (“Braveboy: Let’s protect our justice system from the MAGA agenda,” Oct. 22).

Braveboy complains that rulings have overturned decades of legal precedent to advance agendas.

This claim ignores the fact that half of the Supreme Court’s decisions are unanimous. Further, a common theme of the court is that policy decisions are to be made by Congress, not the courts. Thus, claims by federal agencies to create rules beyond their statutory authority have been rejected and liberal litigants attempting to create law when they can’t get Congress to adopt it are also rightfully rejected.

Simply put, Braveboy doesn’t like the rulings and wants all courts to have judges who follow the Braveboy agenda. This criticism is part of a general pattern by Democrats to badmouth the justices and then turn around and claim the public is losing respect for the Supreme Court. Our judiciary should reflect the whole makeup of the public, including diversity of opinions.

It is my hope that whoever is elected will seriously evaluate judicial appointments and make decisions based on the qualifications of the candidate and not following party platforms — including Braveboy’s.

— Robert C. Erlandson, Lutherville