Justice Clarence Thomas has not said a word in over 8 years! (lawyers, suspected)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I always knew that he only got to be justice because of the color of his skin. This just proves it. To think that he was supposed to replace the great Justice Thurgood Marshall. It's such a shame.
I always knew that he only got to be justice because of the color of his skin. This just proves it. To think that he was supposed to replace the great Justice Thurgood Marshall. It's such a shame.
He's taciturn, but I don't think that's relevant to his competency.
Yes, he got the nod because of a cynical ploy by Bush to be cute by daring black organizations to come out against him so as to look like hypocrites. It failed because they didn't bite...NAACP took no position on his nomination. Then Anita Hill came out and made Bush and Danforth look like imbeciles. It backfired.
Thomas got his robe anyway...But the process still embarrasses him and the taint won't go away. His wife sending Anita Hill that dumb letter a few years ago is proof of that.
He acts a judge and jury and does not have to ask anything. He can decide on what sides present .Black organizations did come out against him; where you been.
He acts a judge and jury and does not have to ask anything. He can decide on what sides present .Black organizations did come out against him; where you been.
isn't it reasonable to expect him to ask questions of the plaintiffs and defendants? That is a sign of a sharp intellectual mind. This has been the way that the SCOTUS has always done it since the beginning of the country. Everybody knows that he's just a carbon copy vote of Scalia. It wouldn't surprise me much if Scalia writes the opinions that Thomas claims as his own.
He acts a judge and jury and does not have to ask anything. He can decide on what sides present .Black organizations did come out against him; where you been.
No they didn't. The only organization that mattered at the time was the NAACP...and they took no position on his nomination.
No they didn't. The only organization that mattered at the time was the NAACP...and they took no position on his nomination.
I wonder if the NAACP ever dreamed how big of a disappointment he would become? Honestly, he looks downright mean and bitter in most photos, he may be the next one to go.
I wonder if the NAACP ever dreamed how big of a disappointment he would become? Honestly, he looks downright mean and bitter in most photos, he may be the next one to go.
They suspected it...that much I know. But they smartly refused to play into Bush's hands. Of course, in hindsight they regret not standing up against his nomination, but he was so judicially nebulous at the time that they couldn't have known what type of justice he'd be.
Not that it matters. Bush would've still nominated a conservative although chances are, it would've been a far less doctrinaire right winger than Thomas.
Thomas is still seething over his nomination process. It's one of the reasons why he maintains a very low profile.
I always knew that he only got to be justice because of the color of his skin. This just proves it. To think that he was supposed to replace the great Justice Thurgood Marshall. It's such a shame.
Thomas gave a perfectly acceptable reason for that silence: he wants to listen to the lawyers and wants less interruption and chatter from his colleagues.
The New Yorker declares Thomas's reason "nonsense" and "a disgrace."
In other words, the typical name-calling, hyperbolic response of liberals and leftists when they can't argue cogently.
The New Yorker used to be non-partisan if slightly liberal. It was thoughtful and subtle, not a name calling cousin of the Nazi Julius Streicher's "Der Sturmer."
Now it is just a hate rag that attacks conservatives.
It is at about the level of MSNBC.
The only "disgrace" here is the New Yorker itself.
Thomas was right when he called the Anita Hill put-up job a "high tech lynching" concocted by the left.
I quote from his testimony at his Senate confirmation hearing:
Thomas: "This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters [unproven and false sexual harassment allegations] privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to a [liberal democrat] order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree."
Thomas gave a perfectly acceptable reason for that silence: he wants to listen to the lawyers and wants less interruption and chatter from his colleagues.
The New Yorker declares Thomas's reason "nonsense" and "a disgrace."
In other words, the typical name-calling, hyperbolic response of liberals and leftists when they can't argue cogently.
The New Yorker used to be non-partisan if slightly liberal. It was thoughtful and subtle, not a name calling cousin of the Nazi Julius Streicher's "Der Sturmer."
Now it is just a hate rag that attacks conservatives.
It is at about the level of MSNBC.
The only "disgrace" here is the New Yorker itself.
Thomas was right when he called the Anita Hill put-up job a "high tech lynching" concocted by the left.
I quote from his testimony at his Senate confirmation hearing:
Thomas: "This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters [unproven and false sexual harassment allegations] privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to a [liberal democrat] order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree."
The attemped lynching continues....
It's stupid to compare what he went through the horror and tragedy of lynching. Thomas, a native Georgian should know better.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
