OT Clarence Thomas: The Justice Nobody Knows

Worth your time reading this.

"(CBS) Most Americans know very little about the workings of the U.S. Supreme Court or its members, but mention Justice Clarence Thomas, and you are likely to start an argument.

He is the court's only African American, and it's most conservative member. He is arguably the most influential black man in the country, yet he is reviled by many in his own race for his opposition to government programs intended to help minorities.

Most people know very little about him, their opinions shaped by his bitter confirmation battle in which he was accused of sexually harassing a former employee named Anita Hill. Now, 16 years later, he has written a memoir called "My Grandfather's Son," which lays bare a remarkable life and the events that shaped it."

Reply to
dbu`
Loading thread data ...

The Justice's "remarkable life and the events that shaped it," shows why so many of us black men believe the set-asides and quotas are demeaning to us. We don't want a handout or a hand up, we know we can make it on our own when the barriers are not placed before us.

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

I'm happy to see he is being so outspoken. He's exposed the liberals for what they are. I'll look for the book.

Reply to
dbu`

Interesting that Hill took and past a polygraph test after her testimony but Thomas refused to do the same. Kinda makes one wonder why he refused.

Reply to
Roy

I saw him on two interviews in the past few days. I was impressed with his credentials back during the hearings but these interviews proved how outstanding a person he is.

As for Anita Hill passing a "lie detector", there have been failures with the machine, which is why it is inadmissable in most if not all courts. My main problem is why did Anita Hill suddenly have this "recall" after 10 years? Did she find a check where Hillary found the Rose Law Firm billing records?

He seems to me to be a hell of a lot better jurist than Souter (he of "confiscate" private property for tax increase reasons only). You are right on Mike!!

Ron in Ca

Reply to
ron

Clarence Thomas is a hypocrite who was accepted by Harvard only because of a racial quota system in effect at the time, and he became a mediocore student there. Because he was accepted by Harvard, another person who was more deserving and better qualified was not.

My FIL had a harder time than Thomas but still managed to get into Mr. Bean College without the help of any affirmative action, and unlike Thomas he graduated with a First Class degree and doesn't believe in pulling the ladder of opportunity away from the needy after he reached the top.

Clarence Thomas is amazingly mediocore for Supreme Court justice.

Reply to
Johnny Hageyama

You can tell which side is right by their tactics, such as when they resort to guilt by association.

Polygraphs are highly accurate in the hands of good examiners, such as those trained by the FBI or US Army, and Anita Hill was only one of several women who had accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment.

Reply to
Johnny Hageyama

You mean Yale. For christs sake at least get part of your story right.

Reply to
dbu`

What recall? The fact that she passed a polygraph and he refused has been known for years. I find it more than just a little odd that he refused the test. If one is truly innocent I'd think one would use everything to prove it. He didn't, I wonder why.

Reply to
Roy

She never passed a polygraph.

Reply to
dbu`

Yup, she did. Search it out.

Reply to
Roy

I just did. You are right. However, lie detectors are not admissable in many states courts because they are unreliable and can be fooled, intentionally or not intentionally.

How reliable do you think polygraphs are? Do you think she was telling the truth?

I watched much of the testimony for his confrmation, it was ugly, very ugly.

Reply to
dbu`

I still find it questionable that he didn't take one to substantiare his position. If he was in fact being truthful.

I really don't know. I figure that if you are telling the truth what's the problem with taking one.

Actually I do, I've known people that have gone through the harrassment process, it isn't a fun deal. And it wasn't on a national stage.

Agreed, it was.

Reply to
Roy

I believe Anita Hill stayed silent for so long because she wanted to advance her career up the political ladder and thought a that complaint would stall it and be fruitless in a male-dominated world anyway. Also remember that Anita Hill didn't come to the investigators but the investigators came to her, and several other women made the same complaint against Thomas.

Everybody remembers Clarence Thomas lying to Congress about his acts of sexual harassment, but nobody remembers that he lied when asked about the Roe vs. Wade abortion decision and replied that he hadn't thought about it. That was a ridiculous answer because the ruling was such a legal landmark, and certainly discussed by every law professor for years.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

dbu` wrote to Roy:

About 70-95%, or 2-10 times better than random chance, according to the better polygraph examiners, i.e., those who've gone through much more than a 1-week course taught by a polygraph machine manufacturer. The longer the time between the exam and the incidents in question, the more likely the subject will pass, and it's said that OJ Simpson today would likely pass any exam about his murders but that his chart would look odd, not like that of a person innocent of killing. The examiner for the AZ state police said only one person he tested was innocent but seem to have lied, a teenager who was arrested for arson, but it turned out that when he was a child he had been tortured with fire.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

And look what they did to Robert Bork. I think the libs are STILL mad at him for what Nixon had him do in Watergate. Why does it look like 'the cult of personality' has reemerged in Russia and is starting to show up over here, too?

Charles of Schaumburg

Reply to
n5hsr

Didn't kennedy lead that charge too, against Bork?

Reply to
dbu`

You certainly are entitle to your opinion. Apparently the Congress did not agree with your personal opinion of events however, since he was confirmed as a Justice LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Larry-moe the pin-head ain't doing too good. You're battin' zero larry-moe

Reply to
dbu`

It's not an opinion but a fact that Thomas lied about Roe vs. Wade.

It was another example of Democrats wimping out to a Republican President.

Reply to
larry moe 'n curly

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.