| Big Govt | Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election |
0 |
| Politico | 0 | |
| Ras. Reports | 0 | |
| Patterico | L.A. Times Columnist Uncritically Quoted Star of Latest ACORN Video |
0 |
| ABC News | Major Hasan’s E-Mail: ‘I Can’t Wait to Join You’ in Afterlife |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
New media bloggers get the chance to meet Justice Clarence Thomas
Just got done reading Captain Ed’s recap of a Heritage Foundation dinner event featuring Justice Clarence Thomas.
It should go without saying that Thomas is a remarkably calm and self-assured man which he, of course, would need to be considering the position he’s in. But with the constant stream of attacks on him by the far left, which started from the moment he was nominated for the Supreme Court, you’d think he’d come across as an incredibly angry man – however, from what I’ve read about his meeting last night with new media bloggers like Captain Ed, Richard Miniter, and Paul Mirengoff at Powerline, he’s someone very at ease with who he is, and who has few regrets in life. And he has a keen sense of humor, too.
Though not an angry person by any stretch, that’s not to say that he doesn’t feel any bitterness towards how he was treated in his confirmation hearings, and beyond. Part of the reason for this meeting was to promote his memoir My Grandfather’s Son, which was released yesterday, in which he talks about, among other things, the vicious unsubstantiated attacks waged on him by Anita Hill and other liberal Democrats during his confirmation hearings. ABC News did an extensive series of interviews with Thomas and his wife Virginia in advance of the release of the book, which you can read here (h/t: Patterico).
In response to his comments about Hill in his book, Ms. Hill herself has written an opinion piece that was published in today’s NYTimes in which she accused Thomas of unsubstantiated attacks. I’m with the Captain on this one:
It’s worth noting that Hill followed Thomas to the EEOC despite having purportedly been harrassed by Thomas at Education. Why did she do that, if Thomas made her workplace miserable? She could have stayed at the DoE when Thomas left and been rid of his supposedly creepy behavior. As she takes great pains to point out, she had plenty of other career opportunities without Thomas’ assistance.
And why didn’t Hill — who takes great pains to review her CV in this essay — ever file a complaint against Thomas at the time of the harrassment? She waited almost ten years to say anything, despite being a Yale grad who could and did make her own way in the world. She worked at the EEOC, after all, and would have had knowledge of how to address the kind of debilitating harrassment that Thomas supposedly directed at her. Yet she said nothing at all about Thomas’ behavior until it became convenient for those Democrats looking to derail Thomas’ confirmation to the Supreme Court.
Yep. She had all the right connections, and had other opportunities above and beyond the EEOC, so it’s not exactly like her career would have been in peril had she lodged her “complaints” with people in positions to do something about them. That she never did say anything about them until Thomas’ confirmation hearings solidified in my mind that she wasn’t telling the truth. And in the end, thank goodness, the smear campaign didn’t work, as Thomas was confirmed October 15, 1991.
—-
Memeorandum has many more links to blogger commentary on the release of Thomas’ memoir.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
11 Responses to “New media bloggers get the chance to meet Justice Clarence Thomas”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Yes, the story doesn’t add up…but that doesn’t bother some people.
I got no further than Anita Hill’s characeriaztion of Clarence Thomas as angry. The left consistently charge that Thomas is angry. Yet it quite apparent that Thomas is anything but angry.
You listen to Thomas and he quite clear that in his college days he was angry. I don’t think Thmaas liked what he say in himself as angry man. Having been angry, not liking it, Thomas appears to have vowed not go back to being angry.
Thomas is determined man and his made the determinatin not be angry. Anita Hill would do well to do likewise.
Perhaps Hill had a crush on Thomas, and he never reciprocated? Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned they say, that itself could go a long way towards explaining the facts and the venom.
Clarence Thomas is a class act. Anita Hill? No so much. She’s been shown for what she is.
Once again, you see from all this that Thomas presents the classic history of a person that the liberals/leftists all despise, he started out life with problems, including attitude and behavior, and he overcame them to improve himself rather than whine and play victim. He was angry, he realized that wasn’t helping, and got himself under control, discipline is something leftists seem to hate with a vengeance. He drank, but stopped (hmmm…just like Bush, someone else they hate, he recognized his weakness and instead of becoming a victim and a poor me I’m addicted he overcame it), and he has religion and feels it’s important in his life.
Gad, how DARE he! Use traditional religion and American values such as self reliance and discipline and self control to become a better person! How dare he not blame it all on race and repression and wallow in it!
This is the sin that cannot be tolerated by the modern leftist. Of this Thomas is guilty, and more power to him. I respect him more after reading this, and his consistent judgments that support strict constructionism are what made me respect him in the first place. But, he’s wandered off the liberal Democrat “plantation” in that he’s thinking for himself, not playing victim, not blaming others, and is, gasp, a conservative and believer in the Constitution as written. Therefore he must be destroyed.
Bah. The man has my respect.
As I have watched and listened to all of these interviews, yes I even forced myself to watch “60 minutes” /shiver, I really have had a new sense of this man whom I have never really known much about. In all of these interviews, I was completely at awe at how he was so kind and generous, not distant, and not angry. Also, a thought keeps reoccuring in my mind, and that is he truly did fulfill the divine call on his life when he became a judge. I am looking forward to reading his book. I hope it does well. – Lorica
The Anita Hill controversy is old news. She testified under oath and the Senate opted to confirm Clarence Thomas anyway. It’s done. The more interesting story is Mr. Thoma’s judicial opinions. No one, however, seems to care that Mr. Thomas’s track record is anything but that of a consistent conservative that respects judicial restraint. Mr. Thomas’s voting record is one of a radical with no respect for precedent. He consistently votes to overturn laws passed by the Congress if they do not meet Mr. Thomas’s “set in stone” radical ideology. Moreover, unlike a traditional conservative who believes in federalism and, therefore, more power to the states, Mr. Thomas consistently votes to aggregate more and more power in the federal government.
Clarence Thomas is a great person who has stood up to bigotry from the left like the Rock of Gibraltar. Nothing creates a target for liberal rage like individuals who refuse their prescribed stereotype.
Sister Toldjah, you are another. I don’t know where you get the courage but thank you for the inspiration. In spite of our disagreements on immigration “reform”, I learn something every time I drop by your blog or read what you have written.
Best comment I’ve seen yet on the Anita Hill controversy comes from G. Will:
“Anita Hill and her allies blazed the path subsequently trod by Crystal Gail Mangum and her fans in the university/media establishment in the Duke non-rape case last year.”
But Thomas has an even better last word:
Once I got on the Court, I vowed I would never do my job as poorly as journalists do theirs.
Bravo! You’ve risen far far above the abysmal bottom-feeding standards of ink-stained hacks & political media-whores like Hill.