Clarence Thomas hates his job.
By on Dec 20th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Clarence Thomas hates his job.
Earlier this week, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke at Chapman University, revealing that he doesn’t even really “like” being a Supreme Court justice:
“There’s not much that entices about the job,” Thomas said, answering questions from the public that provided a rare glimpse of the man behind the office. “There’s no money in it, no privacy, no big houses, and from an ego standpoint, it does nothing for me.”
Thomas, 59, said the position is satisfying because he feels he’s serving the public, and he’s honored by it, “but I wouldn’t say I like it.”
“I like sports,” Thomas said. “I like to drive a motor home.”
So resign. But not until January 21, 2008.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:46 pmummmm, then do us all a favor, Justice Thomas: resign and head out in your motor home…for the good of the country.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:47 pmI don’t know why, but I get the feeling that Thomas is going to quit while Bush is still president so that Bush can replace him.
Sorry Tommy, there was no fame and fortune in this gig. Most people do it because they want to give something back to their country. But not you, you were expecting money, big houses and probably women with big tits to come with the job. Thomas leaving the Supreme Court would be no loss. I don’t think he has ever voted the opposite of Scalila so Bush would have to go a long way to appoint someone worse than Thomas.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:47 pmI’m sick ‘n tired of public officials B*TCHING about their “jobs”.
You’re an guilded cage elitist pig and should be HAPPY about the choice you made in life.
Otherwise, smoke some crack and get on with your REAL life!
December 20th, 2007 at 2:48 pmwow what a disgrace. he’s petty and pathetic.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:48 pmMalingerer.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:49 pmNow that’s interesting. Thomas says this after he is the second African-American to be appointed judge after Thurgood Marshall Jr. Certainly Mr. Marshall is rolling in his grave from Thomas’s comment. He’s got issues. Make an appointment with Dr. Phil.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:49 pm“I like sports,†Thomas said. “I like to drive a motor home. I like sexual harassment.”
December 20th, 2007 at 2:49 pmDon’t let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya then.
Bubye
December 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmThen that assh*le should freaking RESIGN — and good riddance to bad, bad rubbish.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmummmm, then do us all a favor, Justice Thomas: resign and head out in your motor home…for the good of the country.
Comment by For Truth — December 20, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
Damn you. Beat me to it.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmMake an appointment with Dr. Phil.
Comment by SP Biloxi
Why? So he can be YELLED AT?
Maybe a REAL doctor would be a better idea.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:50 pmVindictive, petty, whinyass mofo.
Geesh!!!
December 20th, 2007 at 2:51 pmplease please please resign.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:52 pmTypical reich-wingers for you…..disgusted at the thought of a “low paying’ civil service job.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:53 pmHe likens placing his pubic hair on your soft drink to a “come-onâ€.
Comment by DieNowForPeace — December 20, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Damn you! I was eating lunch!
December 20th, 2007 at 2:53 pm” I am dumb an incurious ”
” I am really a black homer Simpson ”
” I like to vote with corporations and against the common man ”
” I am sad my big judge job no gives big house “
December 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pmlooks like he’s working FOR the democrats
thanks so much for giving us the hint….we’ll be happy to accept your resignation in Feb 2008.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:56 pmI’ve got a deal for him: you take my law practice and I’ll be a Supreme Court justice who doesn’t whine.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:58 pm“…the position is satisfying because he feels he’s serving the public, and he’s honored by it, “but I wouldn’t say I like it.â€
December 20th, 2007 at 2:59 pmAs if he’s doing us a favor - thanks, but no thanks.
He exudes arrogance. Pompous to the nth degree.
RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE!
Well, at least wait until 2009. But, RETIRE! RETIRE! RETIRE!!!
December 20th, 2007 at 3:01 pmWait till January 20,2009. Quit you job as a supreme court justice and travel to your hearts content. If you don’t like a job how can you be good at it ?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KGZvQoPxhNs
December 20th, 2007 at 3:01 pmHe would rather be dominating people, raping women, and stealing.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:02 pmBush Sr. hurt US by putting this joker in the SC. And look who Bush Jr. appointed with the aid of our spineless dems in Congress that refused to truly object. The balance of the SC is in serious trouble… one reason to elect
December 20th, 2007 at 3:02 pmthe proper candidate for pres and congress.
When I first read the title of this TP article, my first thought was — “this isn’t the military — if you don’t like the job, you can always leave!”
But it appears that Thomas was merely pointing out some of the drawbacks of the job, apparently in response to a question that the article didn’t spell out.
All jobs have drawbacks — heaven knows mine does. They don’t mean I’m about to resign.
It was exciting for a brief moment to think that Thomas was unhappy enough to quit, as I think the country would be better off without him on the SCOTUS. But it seems that he just has the same work blues the rest of us have from time to time.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:02 pmsheesh, what a miserable excuse for a human being.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:05 pmWe can start impeachment hearings on the SC judges…. Jefferson did it.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:05 pmIllegally selecting a pres candidate would be a good start.
Gee Clarence if jobs were all fun then you wouldn’t need to get paid for it. That’s why it’s called “work” you dufus.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:07 pmI bet enough people would pitch-in to BUY him a motorhome if he would promise to retire in 2009.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:07 pmMaybe it’s just no fun because the other justices keep you from harassing the women in the office.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:08 pmDamn you! I was eating lunch!
Comment by LividLib
Sorry!
Oh, and Capt. Masturbastic, the NEWS would be that an esteemed member of the SCOTUS might, just might not be up to the incredibly important task of ruling on National matters????
December 20th, 2007 at 3:09 pmComment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
Thanks for admitting that he is a reich-winger and not some bullsh*t “strict constructionist”.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:09 pmthe ONLY reason he got the job was Bush the first was scared shitless to not nominate a non-white judge to replace marshall. So he picked this dumb ass, who sits bitterly and never asks one damn question.
He’s just bitter because he knows he got the job as a quota, plain and simple; he took advantage of all the chances he could get from being black when he was in college, but he made sure he closed the doors behind him once he was through.
Hey Thomas, white people and black people hate you, how does that feel?
December 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pmSo, Clarence - hit the road if you hate your job that much.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pmI’d like to offer Clarence free baseball, basketball and football tickets to any team of his choosing, and a Winnebago with free gas for the rest of his life if he just resigns, after Bush is gone.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:12 pmNo one is forcing you to stay Thomas, um, except for those Right Wing Operatives who have that embarrassing info on you that they’ll let out if you ever stop voting their way.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:13 pmClarence liked his job better when Sandra was there to harass. This guy is a disaster.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:13 pmMaybe you can find a nice quiet cabin in the woods to park your motorhome, Uncle Thomas…
December 20th, 2007 at 3:13 pmPoor Baby! Boo-frickin’- hoo.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:14 pmIf you could be more successful and satisfied in the private sector, how about resigning? You’re a lousy justice anyway. We’d never miss you — in fact, just imagining the SCOTUS without you is a pleasure.
It’s quite telling that he requires a job that boosts his “ego” to make him happy. i.e. he wants to be like O’Racist, Drugaugh, savage-weiner, etc.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pmHe likes sports, driving his motor home AND appointing an undeserving corporate puppet to the highest office in the country. Do us all a favor, Clarence- Resign and go look for pubes on coke cans!
December 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pmHe’s probably getting sick of all the Edwards like attorneys he has to deal with.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:13
Please list these “Edwards like attorneys”. We are waiting….
December 20th, 2007 at 3:16 pmAnita Hill must be really scratching her head, thinking WTF?
December 20th, 2007 at 3:16 pmI think his attitude is clearly reflected in the quality of his work.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:17 pmMy advice;
In every job that must be done
There is an element of fun
You find the fun and snap!
The job’s a game
And every task you undertake
Becomes a piece of cake
A lark! A spree! It’s very clear to see that
A Spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
December 20th, 2007 at 3:20 pmThe medicine go down-wown
The medicine go down
Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
In a most delightful way
Oh, yes, southern man, those Edwards-like attorneys are certainly to be avoided — unless, of course, it’s your kid who suffered from corporate negligence or malfeasance. Yes, let’s protect those corporations and insurance companies from paying restitution to those ordinary citizens who face a lifetime of suffering.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:22 pmWhat is an Edwards like lawyer? Or is it Edwards-like-lawyer? The grammar through me.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:24 pmOops ATTORNEY sorry
December 20th, 2007 at 3:25 pmToobin (in his recent New Yorker piece) got Thomas right — he’s an angry, bitter crank driven by his resentments. No wonder he’s bored and unhappy. He’s also way overmatched by his job. All of which means that he’ll live to be 114, and remain on the job until then.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:25 pmClarence hates his job. I hate the job he’s done.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:27 pm#53, Thomas has reached his Peter Principle.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:29 pmJust whistle while you work,
And don’t be such a jerk,
And cheerfully together we can tidy up the court
So hum a merry tune
It won’t take long when there’s a song to help you not sell short
And as you sweep the room
Imagine that the broom is someone that you harass
And soon you’ll find you’re dancing to the tune
(Spoken: Oh, no, no, no, no! No questions please)
December 20th, 2007 at 3:29 pmWhen hearts are high the time will fly so whistle while you work
He could resign now - could Bush nominate anyone worse? - and get a job driving a sports team bus.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:29 pmThat’s why I come here; all the hate!
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
After 12 years of a Rethug congress and 7 years of Bush running roughshod over our rights and reputation, it is easy to offer up the disgust that we are so righteously feeling! Now we have a man (using the term loosely) who is disdainful of a job that many others have strived to attain. What a punk!
December 20th, 2007 at 3:30 pmIt seems the job doesn’t like him, either.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:30 pmIt always strikes me funny when corporate types refer to themselves as individuals. Southern man that foundation or non-profit group is not for you and me.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:31 pm“I like sports, I like to drive a motor home.â€
an epitaph worthy of the man.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pmThomas is to Blacks what Bush is to Whites
December 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pmOf course he hates his job. If you were incompetent and unsuited for your job, you would hate it, too. He, like all Uncle Toms, is quite pitiful. I can only imagine how Bush One and his cohorts laughed when the great Thurgood Marshall passed away. I can hear them now: “They want a minority on the Supreme Court, we’ll give them one. Ha Ha.” What a shame this wretched soul has helped his conservative brethren (who accurately view him only as an ignorant pawn) wreak havoc on our country, our civilization and our planet.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:33 pmwell, Mr. Thomas, we tried to not let you have the job, didn’t we? you should’ve given up in ‘91
December 20th, 2007 at 3:33 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Thanks for proving my point….reich-wingers have no facts and live by reich-wing talking points.
So, I’ll give you a second chance, please list your explicit examples and details of “Edwards like attorneysâ€. We are STILL waiting…
December 20th, 2007 at 3:36 pmUh, trial lawyers are seldom seen arguing appeals before the SC.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:39 pmYou are becoming fluent in strawmanese.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
but you’re not into finger pointing, are you captain chuck?
December 20th, 2007 at 3:40 pmSo, I’ll give you a second chance, please list your explicit examples and details of “Edwards like attorneysâ€. We are STILL waiting…
Comment by Dr. Matt — December 20, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
oh no, no, no. captain chuck’s a finger pointer. not a fact giver.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:41 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
Reich-wingers are always screeching about how health care and education should be based on a capitalist free-market system, but apparently law representation shouldn’t. You hypocritical scum.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:42 pmJust because an old lady spilled hot coffee on her lap and was awarded millions over 15 years ago some people think that it happens everyday. It is rare, and you think someone who deserves to collect damages is infringing on poor poor mega-corps’ rights.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:42 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
oh i don’t know about that sm.
seems to me you got plenty of lead in your toys when you were young.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:42 pmI’m all for attorneys doing their job. But when they get forty percent of a 1 million or 50 million dollar settlement, I have a problem. And so should you. Southern Man
Are you really too ignorant to realize that without those attorneys there would be no settlement to split?
December 20th, 2007 at 3:43 pmSo SM, you care more about an attorney getting a high fee than tobacco corporations lying and poisoning our citizens? We will need attorneys “like Edwards” for many years to come to hold the corporate criminals accountable.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:43 pmI really find it ironic that Southern Man claims to come here for the anger.
Southernerns like himself still haven’t gotten over the Civil War.
The South has been the poster child for anger throughout the world for decades.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:43 pm(Liberals in the south - you are a brave minority.)
Blame the judges, and the juries not the lawyers.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:44 pmComment by the Lone Voice of Reason — December 20, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
yeah about that “hot coffee” suit. might want to look at the facts here:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
December 20th, 2007 at 3:44 pmcompanies spend more for their products because of lawsuits
Somehow reminded of Dilbert’s shard filled giant donut…
December 20th, 2007 at 3:45 pmSorry, left out TomPaulk as a racist.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, Cap’n, but if Tom Paulk were a racist, as you claim, might not he have a difficult time proclaiming Thurgood Marshall as “great”?
I mean, Thurgood Marshall is the same racial background as Clarence thomas, right? So, if Tom Paulk’s criticism of Thomas were based on race (the defining characteristic of a racist) then wouldn’t he also hold the late Justice Marshall in similar disregard?
Just sayin’.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:46 pmThat’s why I come here; all the hate!
Comment by Southern Man
I hate you and your ilk SM. Thanks for 911 and for shredding the constitution for us. May you rot in hell.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pm#76 - the little old lady was NOT, I repeat, NOT awarded millions. A jury initially awarded punitive damages against McDonald’s for one day’s worth of world-wide coffee sales, which came to about $4 million (the idea was to get McDonalds’ attention), but the trial court judge reduced the award to 1/10 of that amount. The court did so in spite of the fact that McDonald’s admitted that it INTENTIONALLY served coffee to persons in automobiles that it KNEW would cause serious second-degree burns.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pmI humbly suggest that, if Judge Thomas isn’t that enamored of his job, ethics and civic duty demand that he give up his chair on the SCOTUS. At least then, he’d get to drive his motor home more, and we might get with a little more intellectual curiosity and enthusiasm for protecting the constitution than a pinch of poop.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pmThat’s why I come here; all the hate!
Comment by Southern Man
I hate you and your ilk SM. Thanks for 911 and for shredding the constitution for us. May you rot in hell.
Comment by bilbobaggins — December 20, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
lol, now you know why his nickname is “sm”!
December 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pmWonder if a pube left on his soda can will throw him over the edge and quit? Or scattered around his case files?
December 20th, 2007 at 3:50 pm(if anyone deserves it, it’s him.)
Grounds for impeachment
December 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pmIt’s childish to throw out inane comments that you can’t back up, Southern Man.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pmComment by greggp — December 20, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
the link greg, the link. check it out:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
December 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pmThen retire yesterday!!! PUH LEAZE!!!
December 20th, 2007 at 3:54 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
c’mon sm, you lost another one, admit it. as conservative you should be use to it by now. have a drink and relax. watch some tv.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:54 pmThanks for the info, but my point was people think companies are paying out their ass for frivolous lawsuits, and even if they are there is no relation to someone else seeking damages from negligence. Also, why so many complaints about the hot coffee and nothing was done about it.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:56 pmA lot of ridiculous anti-trial lawyer talk from our trolls. Attorneys who work on contingency have to pay a lot of upfront costs for documents and expert witness testimony, usually get 33% and not 40%, and get 0% if they lose the case. And what would happen without having attorneys willing to take on a high risk-high payoff case like these? A group of corporate attorneys would overwhelm the individual with requirements until he or she went away.
As for the “on-topic comments” from tolls accusing us of racism for criticizing Thomas - this is the exact opposite of racism. I, for one, don’t care about his race. He is and always has been less than competent for a position on the SCOTUS.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:57 pmHow about you start here Matt. And i’m not going to argue with you over Edwards, and others like him. You must live in a bubble if you don’t understand what it means to be an ambulance chaser like Edwards’ was. I know you understand and don’t need examples, it’s just your childish way to debate.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
Your root assumption is that class action lawyers do not serve anyone but themselves, as if their clients are either not getting good value or do not deserve it.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:57 pmI really like Clarence Thomas.
He’s good man who has spent the last 17 years putting up with racist crap from Leftwing bigots…and it has only made him stronger.
December 20th, 2007 at 3:59 pm“but I wouldn’t say I like it.â€
“I like toast,†Thomas said.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:00 pmIn 1994, Thomas performed, at his home, the wedding ceremony for Rush Limbaugh’s third marriage.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:01 pmI think this may be about the most significant thing he’s accomplished.
…and it has only made him stronger.
Comment by Charles James Napier
You like those strong, silent types, huh? Well go for it–a good man is hard to find.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pm“There’s not much that entices about the job,†Thomas said, answering questions from the public that provided a rare glimpse of the man behind the office. “There’s no money in it, no big houses, it does nothing for me. I want to be a Republican Congressman.â€
December 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pmHe’s good man who has spent the last 17 years putting up with racist crap from Leftwing bigots…and it has only made him stronger.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
He’s a vicious, unhappy and thoroughly unpleasant man who should never had ended up in the position of power he’s in. Your assessment of the criticism directed at him as coming from “bigots” shows our weak your story is.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pmSo full of hate, Southern Man.
How are they either “ignorant” or “self serving”?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pmLiberals are allowed to live wherever they please.
How exclusionist of you. Very telling, Southern Man.
According to Anita Hill he is merely suffering from the Pe(nis)ter Principle.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:02 pm“but I wouldn’t say I like it.â€
“I like toast,†Thomas said.
Comment by shoeless — December 20, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
“I like the tin man.”
December 20th, 2007 at 4:03 pmThese trolls probably only like Clarence Thomas because he knows his place - following the rulings of Scalia and the other white conservative men and having virtually no questions or comments of his own to make on cases before SCOTUS.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:04 pm…and it has only made him stronger.
Comment by Charles James Napier
You like those strong, silent types, huh? Well go for it–a good man is hard to find.
Comment by Menehune
If Charles is lucky, maybe Thomas will put a pubic hair in his Pepsi.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:04 pmLiberals are self-serving? I didn’t know that being favorable to progress and reform is being self-serving.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:06 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
SM, in other words, facts and reality are not on your side….just a blaring rant based on fantasy and reich-wing propaganda. You brought up Edwards, and Edwards-like-lawyers. So, back-up YOUR claim. So far, the only child is YOU unless YOU can list your explicit examples and details of “Edwards like attorneysâ€. Again, we are waiting……
December 20th, 2007 at 4:07 pmLiberals are self-serving? I didn’t know that being favorable to progress and reform is being self-serving.
Comment by the Lone Voice of Reason
It’s not. S& M was projecting his own sad personality flaws onto an ideology he cannot understand.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:09 pmgummitch,
Yesterday you made the comment that my not voting for Jimmy Carter proved that I was lying about having spent most of my voting life as a Democrat.
The only reason that I did not vote for Carter is because I was only 16 years old in 1980.
My Presidential voting record, I’m embarrassed to say is as follows:
‘84 - Mondale
‘88 - Dukakis
‘92 - Clinton
‘96 - Dole
‘00 - Bush
‘04 - Bush
And I only became a member of the Republican Party in 2001.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:09 pmComment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
but you’re not into finger pointing, are you captain chuck?
Comment by joe cantwell — December 20, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Do me a favor. Find one of my racist posts and copy it here. Don’t limit yourself to this thread, go back as far as you like.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Do us all a favor. Find where joe cantwell suggested that you were making racist comments and when you can’t, then go take a course in logic or maybe you should start with simple reading comprehension.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:10 pmThese trolls probably only like Clarence Thomas because he knows his place - following the rulings of Scalia and the other white conservative men and having virtually no questions or comments of his own to make on cases before SCOTUS.
Comment by PatrioticLiberalChristian
——————————————————————–
Someday I hope you Lefties will learn to see beyond the color of a man’s skin.
…but I won’t be holding my breath.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:11 pmIn 2000, I got kicked in the head by a mule.
And I only became a member of the Republican Party in 2001.
Comment by Charles James Napier
December 20th, 2007 at 4:12 pmMy Presidential voting record, I’m embarrassed to say is as follows:
‘84 - Mondale
‘88 - Dukakis
‘92 - Clinton
‘96 - Dole
‘00 - Bush
‘04 - Bush
And I only became a member of the Republican Party in 2001.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
I don’t blame you for being embarrassed, especially for those last three votes.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:12 pmShoeless, I really believe that some egos are too big to admit they are that wrong.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:12 pmSouthern Man, we are waiting for you to list your explicit examples and details of “Edwards like attorneysâ€. Step up and be a man for ONCE in your life. You made the claim about Thomas having to deal with “Edwards like attorneys .we want to hear about these “Edwards like attorneysâ€.
We are waiting…..still…..
December 20th, 2007 at 4:12 pmMaybe he’d be happier driving John Madden’s motor home. He could take Scalito with him, too. Stock it with Pepsi and bam!
December 20th, 2007 at 4:13 pmChuck JImmy , these lefties just might go beyond that and actually elect color, not just talk about it.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pmComment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
chuck, go ahead, hold your breathe.
we’ll wait.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pmSouthern Man, you’ve been called on the carpet, coward. Step-up, little “man”.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pmSomeday I hope you Lefties will learn to see beyond the color of a man’s skin.
…but I won’t be holding my breath.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
Riiiight. It’s the Left who has traditionally been racist. You’re utterly delusional.
People on the Left dislike Clarence because he’s a hidebound, small-minded, hypocritical, totalitarian pig, not because he happens to be Black.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pmOr, Cap’n, you could explain why Tom Paulk is racist, when he treats Clarence Thomas and Thurgood Marshall differently? Looks to me like his criticisms were based on behavior rather than race.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:14 pmJust about all of you on here sound a little bit angry. Let me give a different perspective.
“Like” is in the eye of the beholder as to its definition. Most of you here are ignoring his definition. To “like” something is ephemeral. For Clarence Thomas, it’s much deeper than that. Justice Thomas says his job is satisfying, and that’s much more important in the long run than simply “liking” it. I hate the crap out of my computer programming job on some days, but I am very satisfied by it.
He says he is honored by the job. But, he says, from an ego standpoint, he doesn’t “like” it. That’s exactly the kind of people we need in public office–people who aren’t so stuck on themselves that they think they are God’s gift to the world, but that find it satisfying to serve.
Based on my study of his life and opinions, I think Clarence Thomas is a man of great integrity, that he is one of the best justices ever to serve on the High Court, and that people should apologize to him for dragging his good name through the dirt.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:15 pmDr. He doesn’t have it, trolls just like to hear their own head rattle.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:15 pmComment by the Lone Voice of Reason — December 20, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
that’s right. chuck forgot about obama. wish he could look beyond the color of a man’s skin, don’t you?
but he’s not a racist, are you chuck?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:16 pmAhhh, well vetted.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:16 pmgummich he’s making it too easy for you, but I’m having fun watching.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:17 pm…people should apologize to him for dragging his good name through the dirt.
Comment by fstaheli
————————————-
Here, here.
Well said.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:17 pmSomeday I hope you Lefties will learn to see beyond the color of a man’s skin.
…but I won’t be holding my breath.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
Perhaps you and CaptainMantastic can get a group going for reading comprehension tutoring. No where will you find me making my judgment on a person on the basis of his or her race, color, creed, gender, or sexual identity. And I’m sure that you will neither hold your breath or your tongue.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:17 pmComment by fstaheli — December 20, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
i guess you missed the point. here it is, (if you can handle it.)
“I like sports, I like to drive a motor home.â€
you see it now?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:18 pmSomeday I hope you Lefties will learn to see beyond the color of a man’s skin.
…but I won’t be holding my breath.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
I would think that criticizing a black man for his actions IS looking beyond the color of his skin, to the quality of his character.
The fact that wingnuts hear criticism of Clarence Thomas and automatically assume that it’s because of his reveals that you guys are the ones with racist attitudes.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:18 pmBut, he says, from an ego standpoint, he doesn’t “like†it.
Comment by fstaheli — December 20, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
Like a typical small-minded reich-winger, he must have his little ego stroked to like his job. How telling….
December 20th, 2007 at 4:19 pmComment by PatrioticLiberalChristian — December 20, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
he can’t because he is the captain. they’re the same person. it’s a cold_hard_left/jason m. hendler kind of thing.
don’t mention to him though, it gets him upset.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:20 pmHis salary= about $203,000 a year plus bennies.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:21 pmComment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
but you’re not going to giving up trying, are you sm?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:23 pmThis is crackin’ me up. First So. Man thinks repugs like Thomas stand up for individual rights, now Charles thinks the Right is the defender of civil rights. WOW these guys need a serious history lesson.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:23 pmI don’t like him in his job also. Please, Clarence, take the keys to the motor home and hit the road.
Bush/Cheney
Impeachment ‘08/Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
December 20th, 2007 at 4:23 pmRe the comment by Joe Cantwell:
This argument between you and me can go into an infinite loop, but I’ll try this one more time: “Liking” sports and driving a motor home are completely different than something being satisfying. Sports and motor homes come and go (and before we know it, they’re gone). But a job well done–that is a great love that is very SATISFYING.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:24 pmThey get paid to much!
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
So, you don’t believe in a capitalist free market system, you communist.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:24 pmComment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
chuck, a new age dawned when you finally learned how to “copy and paste”. i think you’re ready for “spell check”, i really do.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:25 pmRiiiight. It’s the Left who has traditionally been racist.
Comment by gummitch
————————————————-
It’s the Democrats who have, through American history, been more racist than have Republicans.
And it is the Left in general that cannot see past race. The reason that Thomas has been so vilified by the Left is because he is a BLACK man who dares to be conservative. This is why fools like Harry Belafonte call him a “house slave” and ebony Magizine portraay him as a lawn-jockey.
Leftists don’t see men, they see groups and they become angry when some people refuse to play their part in the Leftist narrative.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:26 pmI could use his health care.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:26 pmLet me simplify what I am trying to say: They get paid to much! And if you can’t understand that, which I know most of you do, then you haven’t been paying attention.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
Oh, I guess you’re not one of them “free market conservatives”, huh? You want to regulate how much someone earns.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:27 pmComment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Harry Belafonte has more integrity in his little toe than you and Clarence and the combined GOP ever dreamed of having.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:29 pmComment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
people who have switch from liberal to conservative thanks to chuck: 0
people who have switch from conservative to liberal thanks to chuck:
2008
December 20th, 2007 at 4:30 pmIt’s the Democrats who have, through American history, been more racist than have Republicans.
And it is the Left in general that cannot see past race. The reason that Thomas has been so vilified by the Left is because he is a BLACK man who dares to be conservative. This is why fools like Harry Belafonte call him a “house slave†and ebony Magizine portraay him as a lawn-jockey.
Leftists don’t see men, they see groups and they become angry when some people refuse to play their part in the Leftist narrative.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Your first point is true, but outdated. Yous ee, all those racist Southern Democrats left the party in the late 1960s when Lyndon johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. They all became Republicans, which is why Republicans now control the South.
As for your other points, you’re off your rocker. “The reason that Thomas has been so vilified by the Left” is because he’s a buffoon who filled a quota for Bush I even though he is unqualified. His opinions and voting record in his tenure of the Court demonstrate this. His reace is mentioned in criticism, of course. It’s part of who he is. But the criticism of him has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with his ACTIONS.
You must have a weird definition of “racist”.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:32 pmLook at yourselves with an open mind and see the racism that’s latent to only you.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
start with the man in the mirror, chuck. who do you see when you look at yourself? don’t caste the first stone till you’re without sin partner.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:32 pmralph the wonder llama,
Have you read his recent book.
No?…I would suggest that you do so; I think you may have a different opinion of him afterwards.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:35 pmClarence Thomas’ laziness and intellectual small-mindedness have nothing to do with his color, even though he happily used it to get where he is. Now that he’s there, he’s whining abut the money and the lack of fun, while ignoring the fact that he hasn’t the qualifications for the office in the first place. A sexist pig, a pervert; a perfect Republican. Given the history of the Republican party since the 1930s, none of you rightard trolls has a leg to stand on. Napier is cherrypicking from over a century ago, and mantastic is just an idiot. The treason brought to the table by the right wing is what’s at issue here, and Thomas is an important cog in that filthy wheel.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:36 pmLook at yourselves with an open mind and see the racism that’s latent to only you.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Actually I have to agree with the Captain on this one, the racist remarks are a bit overboard.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:36 pmI’m so used to reading his legal opinions as a law student, that it’s nice to see how funny he is and how optimistic,†Hernandez said. “Now that I know his philosophy in life, I respect him even more.â€
Comment by good_golly — December 20, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
he has no business speaking to a crowd of antiAmerican traitors. of course they applaud him, they, like he, hate America.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:37 pmClarence Thomas’ laziness and intellectual small-mindedness have nothing to do with his color, even though he happily used it to get where he is.
Comment by Lefty Patriot
———————————————-
You are one foul creature.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:38 pmNow the tax-payers want to build these new homes and apartments for the poor, and they would rather live in the old run down projects. IGNORANT!
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:37 pm
jesus, you can lie with the best of them! just so everybody can see the real facts, you lying sack of shit, only 10% of the number of apartments is going to be built. That leaves 90% without homes. you’re a real scumbag.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:39 pmCalling him an uncle tom?
If conservatives described a black man as crack smoking, or stealing, or raping, or as ignorant; you don’t think they would be (rightly) accused of using negative sterotyping?
Look at yourselves with an open mind and see the racism that’s latent to only you.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 20, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Jeebus, Cap’n, you are thick.
Yes, “Uncle Tim” is a racially charged epithet and, like most name-calling, usually serves to short-circuit any rational discussion. (Not that there’s much chance of that with you involved, anyway).
But the fact remains that Thomas is criticized FOR HIS ACTIONS.
If the Left were truly racist, as you charge, then it would not be the party with the support of 90% of the black population in this country.
If the Left were truly racist, as you project, Barak Obama would not be a front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president.
yes, I’ve seen some racially-charged ugliness thrown in Thomas’ direction. But I haven’t seen anyone on the Left claim that Thomas is unqualified BECAUSE HE’S BLACK. THAT, to me, would be racist.
You see, when I use the term “racist” I refer to someone who judges based on race first — sometimes solely.
What do you mean by the term?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:39 pmYou trolls really ought to come up with some different shit to sling at us.
Dayum, it’s the same crap, day in and day out: haters, bigots, unpatriotic, America-haters, socialists, blah-blah-blah-effing-blah.
You’re all so damn bloody BORING.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:40 pmYou are one foul creature.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
You always say that when faced with the clear truth. You are the creature, less than human, and stupider than a rock. Truth hurts the rightwing, which is why they avoid it so well.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:40 pmClarence had no problem selling his soul to the Republican party knowing he wasn’t qualified for the job. Now that he sees dead people namely his grandfather and his Mother he’s wants out. Look Clarence has been told how to vote since he got the job. Gonzales isn’t the only none lawyer to get the top
spot by the White House. It’s always good to hire a person who doesn’t know what their doing then to hire a smart educated person.
Now Mark the shark will send Mikie into retirement if he’s appointed. All hail our new Corrupt AG Mark Filip the Pillsbury Dough Boy.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:40 pmYou’re all so damn bloody BORING.
Comment by Leftside Annie — December 20, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
That’s what happens when imagination and truth are left out of the equation. The right, as always, marches in lockstep to their own doom.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:42 pmOh, well you got me there So. Man, all the the liberals live in NOLA. That is pathetic, you’re listening to too much Rush.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:42 pmYou trolls really ought to come up with some different shit to sling at us.
Dayum, it’s the same crap, day in and day out: haters, bigots, unpatriotic, America-haters, socialists, blah-blah-blah-effing-blah.
You’re all so damn bloody BORING.
Comment by Leftside Annie — December 20, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
Well said, Annie.
*applauds*
December 20th, 2007 at 4:42 pmPlease tell me you understand that companies spend more for their products because of lawsuits bad and good? And that get’s passed on to us, the consumer.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
You only have to pay for these lawsuits when you lose the case, because you violated the law, get it. Of course you have no problem with the $60 million bonuses the ceos take. Don’t you think that goes towards the cost of goods and services?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:44 pmMaybe the Thomas defenders could provide us with a point-by-point comparison with Thurgood Marshall ?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:44 pmLeftists don’t see men, they see groups and they become angry when some people refuse to play their part in the Leftist narrative.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
rightists don’t see people, they see profits, and willl gladly massacre as many people as it takes to raise profits. rightists become angry when humans insist on being treated like humans. the “leftist narrative” is one that the Founders stated very clearly. You don’t belong in this country if you can’t see that.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:45 pm“… now close your eyes and picture Thomas as a black man” Ok enough with the race thing, Thomas was a sleazeball and shouldn’t be upholding justice in the highest court when he couldn’t even keep nasty ass comments to himself around co-workers.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:47 pmPlease tell me you understand that companies spend more for their products because of lawsuits bad and good? And that get’s passed on to us, the consumer.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
in a nutshell, a perfect example of the inhumanity of the shortsighted, greed-driven, unevolved right. the more you deregulate, the more people get injured and killed by faulty design and manufacture. Either way, you’re going to pay. The left prefers to pay before people are killed or injured, the right prefers not to pay at all. The right has the morals of 2-year-old boa constrictors.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pmcan we have an adult conversation/debate here?
Comment by good_golly — December 20, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Yes, see #172.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pmNo wonder Clarence Thomas doesn’t like his job.
Here’s an excerpt from a letter bashing the U of GA for inviting him to speak at their graduation…
He believes that the role of the courts in protecting individual
rights is very limited. He not infrequently expresses an inclination to
overrule landmark pro-human rights Supreme Court precedents. He
doesn’t think much of the writ of habeas corpus. Indeed, in O’Neal v.
McAninch, 513 U. S. 432, 447 (1995), in a dissenting opinion, he went
so far as to assert: “We have ample cause to be wary of the writ [of
habeas corpus!].†I can recall only one case where Justice Thomas has
ever voted in favor of granting relief to a habeas corpus petitioner, and
in that case Justice Thomas, along with Justice Scalia, took a narrower
view than the Court of the petitioner’s rights and only concurred in part
and in the judgment. Lynce v. Mathis, 519 U. S. 433 (1997). He is
shrilly pro-death penalty. He “expresses little sympathy for the plight of
the incarcerated.†Note, Lasting Stigma: Affirmative Action and
Clarence Thomas’s Prisoners’ Rights Jurisprudence, 112 Harv. L. Rev.
1331, 1341 (1999). He is “the first justice to criticize, even indirectly,
the ruling in Brown [v. Board of Education] . . .†Id. at 1348 n. 50.
Furthermore, some of Justice Thomas’s opinions rejecting claims of
violations of rights are written a mocking, scornful tone inappropriate in
a judge but typical of a right-wing extremist.
He’s more suited for punditry than the Highest Court in the Land.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:48 pmComment by good_golly — December 20, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
what is a “yo mama” joke?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:50 pmYou are one foul creature.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
but that’s an insult, right?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:51 pmCharles, aren’t there some heathens in India that need some perfecting? What are you waiting for?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pmLet me simplify what I am trying to say: They get paid to much! And if you can’t understand that, which I know most of you do, then you haven’t been paying attention.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
If it was too much money they wouldn’t get it. People who use their services obviously disagree with you, which is how the market works. Agents make 40% from their clients; why does this number disturb you?
December 20th, 2007 at 4:57 pmSomeday I hope you Lefties will learn to see beyond the color of a man’s skin.
…but I won’t be holding my breath.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
We already have nimrod. We don’t like him because he’s another incompetent picked by a republican because he’d do as he was told. You are the idiot suggesting we don’t like him because he’s not white. Especially heinous is his legislating against his own people. Racists like you obviously wouldn’t care about that.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:57 pmSouthern Man makes another strong case for his campaign to be named ThinkProgress Stupidest Troll of 2007.
He’s got a lot of competition, though.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:57 pmAre you retarded? You agree that attorneys should take half of a large settlement? I know we need attorneys, I question their ethics in taking forty percent of settlements.
Comment by Southern Man
Nope, but you probably are. In my neck of the woods attorneys get about 30% not 40% and they work very hard for it. And, as mentioned earlier, quite often they get nothing for their efforts.
You would much rather that lawyers sat idly by while corporations screw the little guy. You are a corporatist through and through. You are the kind I deplore and I question your ethics. I suspect that your ethics are very situational like most Republiscums.
December 20th, 2007 at 4:58 pmSo your saying that jurys are always right and never wrong? That they are never swayed by emotion instead of fact? Please!
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Oh no! The court system is flawed! Grand juries indict a ham sandwich for the DA. Juries convict in capital cases while the defense attorney snoozes in his chair. . .
Yes, dummy. Humans and their systems are imperfect. So what?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:01 pmYou are the idiot suggesting we don’t like him because he’s not white.
Comment by Shayne
——————————————
I suggested no such thing. I said you don’t like him, or at least you especially dislike him, because he is a black man who is also a conservative.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:03 pmLet me simplify what I am trying to say: They get paid to much! And if you can’t understand that, which I know most of you do, then you haven’t been paying attention.
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
Two things. They don’t get paid 40% or 50% they get paid 30%. And second if they don’t take the case as many times they don’t if it’s a frivolous case or if they don’t win they get paid NOTHING. Get it. And if you want to find a lawyer taking less than 30% you can probably do that of course you’ll then be getting a lawyer who graduated in the bottom of his class but you go with it, loser.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:03 pmRe #172-I thought not.Also, notice the thread has been derailed to tort reform.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:04 pmYeah, so what, GG?
Some Democrats voted for the Iraq War, to confirm Mukasey and in favor of that stupid resolution against Iran.
Being a Democrat doesn’t necessarily preclude someone from being wrong - or stupid.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:04 pmI said you don’t like him, or at least you especially dislike him, because he is a black man who is also a conservative.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
Are you suggesting that we have treated Clarence Thomas differently than we would treat a white conservative?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:05 pmDon’t forget that 11 out of 57 Democrats voted to confirm Thomas. The Democrats had a solid majority of the Senate back then and could have kept him out if they wanted to.
Comment by good_golly — December 20, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
the word “racist” as we’ve seen here today, is a two edged sword. still there is hope of civility. i’m sure that chuck will post his apology soon. that will get things started in the right direction.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:05 pm190 - Charlie, yer splitting hairs. I think we’ve been absolutely clear on why we don’t like Clarence Thomas: he’s a whining, petty, malicious and vindictive man who does NOT deserve to be where he is.
None of us give a damn about what color his skin is. Get that through your thick skull, pinhead.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:07 pmIt’s also worth noting that a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:07 pmAre you suggesting that we have treated Clarence Thomas differently than we would treat a white conservative?
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — December 20, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
he is ralph but please don’t ask him to back that charge up. he can’t.
i think chuck should a break and go see the new film “the great debaters” it may change his mind about a great many things.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:08 pmSo, Charlie? That was 33 years ago.
Your modern-day Republican heroes tried to KILL the Voting Rights act.
Are you proud of that fact…?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:09 pmNone of us give a damn about what color his skin is. Get that through your thick skull, pinhead.
Comment by Leftside Annie
———————————————————–
Then why is there so much more hatred towards him than there is towards the white conservatives on the court?
Why the “house slave” comments by Belafonte, the lawn-jockey caricatures, the Uncle Thomas remarks…we’ve all heard them.
Why?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:11 pmIt’s also worth noting that a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
DUH! That’s because, as I pointed out earlier, the South was dominated by racist Democrats. Those “Dixiecrats” switched parties over the next decade and helped remake the GOP into the glorious organ it is today.
In short, Chuckie, those racist Democrats in 1964 are NOW REPUBLICANS.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:11 pmhttp://www.law.uga.edu/ academics/ profiles/ dwilkes_more/ 41thomas_2d.html
Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U. S. 1 (1992),
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U. S. 719 (1992),
Herrera v. Collins, 506 U. S. 390 (1993),
Graham v. Collins, 506 U. S. 461 (1993),
Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619 (1993),
Withrow v.Williams, 507 U. S. 680 (1993),
J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U. S. 127 (1994),
Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U. S. 154 (1994),
McFarland v. Scott, 512 U. S. 849 (1994),
Holder v. Hall, 512 U. S. 874 (1994),
Schlup v. Delo, 513 U. S. 298 (1995),
O’Neal v. McAninch, 513 U. S. 432 (1995),
Kyles v. Whitney, 514 U. S. 419 (1995),
M. L. B. v. S. L. J., 519 U. S. 102 (1996),
Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U. S. 320 (1997),
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott, 524 U. S.
357 (1998),
Mitchell v. United States, 526 U. S. 314 (1999),
City of Chicago v. Morales, 527 U. S. 41 (1999),
Dickerson v. United States, 530 U. S. 428 (2000),
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U. S. 32 (2000),
Shafer v. South Carolina, 532 U. S. 36 (2001),
Ferguson v. City of Charleston, 532 U. S. 67 (2001),
Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U. S. 318 (2001),
INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U. S. 289 (2001),
Lee v. Kemna, 534 U. S. 362 (2002),
Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U. S. 654 (2002),
Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U. S. 304 (2002),
Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U. S. 730 (2002),
Board of Education v. Earls, 536 U. S. 822 (2002),
Above are a few of Clarence’s judicial rulings that I’d like to debate with any troll who cares to.
Not to mention
December 20th, 2007 at 5:11 pmBush v. Gore, 531 U. S. 98 (2000), Justice
Thomas, along with Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O’Connor,
Scalia, and Kennedy, all of whom are Republicans appointed by
Republican presidents, joined in the per curiam opinion for the Court
which delivered the presidency to Republican candidate George W.
Bush. Justice Thomas was one of the five justices who voted to hear the
case in the first place, then to grant the infamous stay of the Florida
presidential vote recounting, and finally to forbid any further
recounting. Bush v. Gore, as I have noted elsewhere, “is the most
egregiously partisan ruling in the Supreme Court’s history,†in which
“the court’s majority let its desire for a particular partisan outcome have
priority over legal principles.†Wilkes, A President by Judicial Fiat,
Flagpole Magazine, at 8 (Dec. 11, 2002).
It’s also worth noting that a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
chuck those “democrats” (strom thurmond, jesse helms, et al.) later became republicans thanks to a tactic known as “the southern strategy”.
you’ve heard of that, haven’t you?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:12 pmShould we just continue on with a series of juvenile insults, and maybe throw in a few “yo mama†jokes? or can we have an adult conversation/debate here?
Comment by good_golly — December 20, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
There is no WE here goof-bally. You want a peer group you’re in the wrong effing neighborhood.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:13 pmComment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
harry belafonte? a man who has done more for civil rights in one minute than you have in your entire life?
chuck, hang your head in shame.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:14 pmThen why is there so much more hatred towards him than there is towards the white conservatives on the court?
I don’t hate the man. I despise his rulings, his lack of judicial competence, his replacement of stare decisis with his own set of political opinions. His reticence to hear “questions” during arguments before the high court.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:16 pmDoesn’t matter if he’s green or purple, he’s unfit to serve on the highest court in the land, and he’s proven it over and over.
So your saying that jurys are always right and never wrong? That they are never swayed by emotion instead of fact? Please!
Comment by Southern Man — December 20, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Just like your saying the defendent is never wrong. Big corporations don’t make mistakes, don’t cut corners, don’t hire incompetent. Just like the toy companies haven’t really imported tons of lead tainted toys from China while keeping their prices higher than ever, right.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:16 pmThen why is there so much more hatred towards him than there is towards the white conservatives on the court?
Why the “house slave†comments by Belafonte, the lawn-jockey caricatures, the Uncle Thomas remarks…we’ve all heard them.
Why?
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Is there any more animosity shown towards Thomas than towards Bush,m who is similarly unqualified for his office? Or Alberto Gonzales, who is Latino?
All are unqualified for the responsibilities the right-wing dumped on them, and all have been rightly lambasted for their incompetence.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThen why is there so much more hatred towards him than there is towards the white conservatives on the court?
Why the “house slave†comments by Belafonte, the lawn-jockey caricatures, the Uncle Thomas remarks…we’ve all heard them.
Why?
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 20, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
The first statement is bullsh!t. Liberals and progressives are also hostile toward Scalia and the other arch-conservatives on SCOTUS. Pay attention.
The “house slave” comment was made by one person, a Black man, not “liberals” or “progressives.” One person. Weren’t you the one claiming that Bill O’Reilly didn’t speak for conservatives? Why should one entertainer speak for liberals? Pay attention.
If you don’t like what Harry Belafonte said, take it up with him. I’m sure he’s got a much different perspective on Clarence Thomas than you do.
December 20th, 2007 at 5:17 pmCharlie - I hate them, too. However, Chuckie, THIS THREAD WAS ABOUT CLARENCE THOMAS.
I’m more than willing to trash that idiot Scalito - or any of the other so-called “conservative” justices up one side and down this other.
And why do you expect ME to be responsible for the comments of Harry Belafonte? Or anyone else, for that matter. I have never made a comment like the examples you gave - EVER.
Are you responsible for every single bit of the filth that flies out of Ann Coulter’s mouth?
December 20th, 2007 at 5:18 pmIn short, Chuckie, those racist Democrats in 1964 are NOW REPUBLICANS.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama
————————————————————
The fact is that the country as a whole is far, far less racist than it was in’64…