gads, Clarence Thomas is getting a beating this week. What did the guy do, anyway? Sending the lapdog back to the fields seems pretty harsh, but "stringing him up" is beyond the pale. What is this biz about avenging Anita Hil, where did that come from?Originally Posted by bae
The ignorance and hate demonstrated in this video is as racist as anything I've seen.
Cut off his toes, one by one!!!! Would that be torture? Can't we all just get along?
Poor Clarence, he just doesn't get any respect.
Peace
What Zig said. "Here" as in this country, not here-here. We've gotten beyond that. Haven't we?
Nope, we haven't.......and there will always be people, who, rather than discuss facts, will reach into their bag of prejudices and say stupid, ignorant and racist stuff. Racism really is often not connected to politics in the sense that both progressives and conservatives can show plenty of it.
But to say that people dismiss him just because he is a conservative, when no one is dismissing the intellect or ability of Justice Scalia or Justice Roberts, who are easily just as conservative, is disingenuous in the extreme.
The sort of ugly and racist attacks against him are not defensible in any way and should be deplored by everyone. Just as the ugly and racist attacks against President Obama should be deplored by all, whether supporters or not.
And, Alan, if you want to generalize about liberals from this video, you'd better start examining some of those tea party videos if you don't want folks to generalize about conservatives from those very racist folks. Seeing some of those conservative folks up close was interesting as well. I'd hate to judge all conservatives by them, and I'd hate to judge progressives by that video. But, please yourself.
Last edited by loosechickens; 2-4-11 at 2:22am.
Loosie, I honestly don't believe that anyone dismisses Justice Thomas because he's a conservative. I think it's fairly apparent that many are dismissive of him because he's a black conservative of humble origins.
There is a popular belief that he lacks the intellectual capacity of his peers on the court and follows along on the coattails of Justice Scalia. Several here have even mentioned it recently!
Now why do you think that is? Is it because of a thorough review of his 300 plus written opinions during his tenure on the Supreme Court? Is it because of his tendancy to rule in agreement with the next most conservative member of the court? By that same reasoning, would you imply that Justice Ginsburg makes up for a lack of intellectual ability by voting in alignment with Justice Breyer a majority of the time? Could we also reason that Justices Alito and Thomas' voting alignments are based on one's intellectual deficit?
No, I don't think we'd make that leap. There must be something else at work here, don't you think?
From a Wikipedia article on Justice Thomas:
It simply appears to me that many people allow their prejudices to influence their reasoning, whether they're aware of it or not. As I alluded to in my previous post, it's interesting to see them bring those prejudices to the forefront for all the world to see, whether it's at an organized demonstration or on a small internet forum. It wasn't meant as a generalization but rather as an interesting bit of irony since the one demographic which consistently accuses others of racism seems oblivious to their own racist/classist tendanciesThe conventional wisdom that Thomas's votes follow Antonin Scalia's is reflected by Linda Greenhouse's observation that Thomas voted with Scalia 91 percent of the time during October Term 2006, and with Justice John Paul Stevens the least, 36% of the time.[97] Statistics compiled annually by Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog demonstrate that Greenhouse's count is methodology-specific, counting non-unanimous cases where Scalia and Thomas voted for the same litigant, regardless of whether they got there by the same reasoning.[98] Goldstein's statistics show that the two agreed in full only 74% of the time, and that the frequency of agreement between Scalia and Thomas is not as outstanding as is often implied by pieces aimed at lay audiences. For example, in that same term, Souter and Ginsburg voted together 81% of the time by the method of counting that yields a 74% agreement between Thomas and Scalia. By the metric that produces the 91% Scalia/Thomas figure, Ginsburg and Breyer agreed 90% of the time. Roberts and Alito agreed 94% of the time.[99]
Last edited by Alan; 2-4-11 at 8:28am.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Sure, they think he is ignorant. An ignorant you-know-what who is only where he is as a token representative of his race. Because he can't see what whitey and the party of progressives have done for him. He doesn't appreciate their work in his behalf.
Some attitudes never change. But what's astonishing in this video is how many people are coming out as racist. I stopped watching it halfway through, got the message, didn't need to hear another half dozen spouting off the same BS.
The data about Ginsburg is interesting. Wonder if anyone will take that in.
To get back to the original post I hear Gifford is doing really good. I sure hope so.
I'm sure there is some of that, Alan, just as there is certainly a segment of the population that will dismiss the accomplishments of President Obama as "he was nothing but a community organizer", ignoring every other of his accomplishments, many of which required considerable ability, merit, scholarship and intellect.
I am not qualified to judge Justice Thomas on the basis of his legal opinions. I am not a legal scholar. I also admit that throughout the hearings, Anita Hill struck me as far more of a credible person than did his defense (his leaning heavily on "lynching"), and the fact that several other women in his life have come forward with similar stories of his addiction to pornography, inappropriate behavior, etc. Thank goodness nothing like that has happened since he has been on the court, which would have been a huge embarassment to that august body.
I also feel very queasy about his wife's activism in areas and about questions which are very likely to eventually come before her husband.
He just does not seem to be up to the caliber of many others on the court, to me. And since I have no difficulty in seeing intellect and ability in many people who happen to be African-American, regardless of their political persuasion, you're not going to convince me that my view has anything to do with his antecedents, upbringing or color.
Hey, I had a terrible opinion of George W. Bush and he had a wealthy upbringing, was white and had come from a prominent family. Was it because he was conservative? Hardly, since I admired his father.
Playing the race card that people are against someone because they are black and conservative, is just the other side of the coin from playing the race card of portraying the President as an African witch doctor, to me.
Well I tried to get the thread back on the subject of Gifford but it did not work. Gifford's health is far more important to me than how bad or good judge Thomas is.
As for Anita Hill, although I well remember the hearings, there was so much political subterfuge going on at the time I could never get a good feel for what was truth or what was not. Although there is one person who I admire very much for his common sense approach to complicated subjects, his stellar reputation among his peers and his unwavering stance on all things reasonable. Perhaps you've heard of him, his name is Thomas Sowell. Well, Mr Sowell had this to say about the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill incident. He brings out several points that I find to be of great interest. You might enjoy it as well.
I can appreciate your opinion that Justice Thomas "does not seem to be up to the caliber of many others on the court" as I feel that way about several of our current elected officials, but I'm still not sure what brings you, and others, to that conclusion. And I simply don't understand the constant refrain that he lacks intelligence. Is it something in his educational background or his written opinions or something less tangible?
I only ask because I really don't see anything that would make him stand out in a negative way among his contemporaries, and given the widespread negativity his very name invokes, I'm surely missing something.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
