I was good with Mona’s slap back until she got to her “admiration” of Thomas. Le sigh.
There is nothing to admire about Clarence Thomas, the justice. He is a weak legal mind and a poor writer. He professes an adherence to “originalism” (an artificial concept created to hide a multitude of sins and dodges), but only when it suits him, and …
I was good with Mona’s slap back until she got to her “admiration” of Thomas. Le sigh.
There is nothing to admire about Clarence Thomas, the justice. He is a weak legal mind and a poor writer. He professes an adherence to “originalism” (an artificial concept created to hide a multitude of sins and dodges), but only when it suits him, and he’s mean as a snake. Witness last Friday’s dissent to the mifepristone stay. Good God.
Personally, he’s repulsive. He’s a sexual harasser (three more witnesses waited in the wings back in 1991), married to a lunatic, and now we find he’s a deceptive freeloader.
A lot of us who subscribe to the Bulwark respect Clarence Thomas, admire some critical aspects of his jurisprudence, and have compassion for what we feel has been 32 years of what he accurately described as a "high-tech lynching", and an unparalleled one for its unremitting mercilessness, and its lack of justification. I'm not going to debate Clarence Thomas's character and history with you or anyone else: everyone's opinions are set in stone after 32 years, and hurling them at each other will only detract from the total happiness in the world. I'm just reminding you who some of the people to whom you're opining are.
I agree with everything that Mona said. In addition, through the years I've become more and more concerned at the way that Justice Thomas has seemed to cling to all the attacks, smears, slurs, and slights that he's received, to cherish his grievances instead of letting them go, and to have become so embittered that he treats the world as an enemy and the rules as not applying to him, because they're unjust by definition. Good men and women MAY do that; GREAT men and women never do. That's a bad position for anyone, and a deadly one for a judge.
As for his wife, Tolstoy got it wrong: all happy marriages are NOT the same. No matter how good their relationship may be when they're at home, her activities are damaging to his professional life, and she doesn't seem to care. His extrajudicial actions, her political actions, and the way both of them fail to react to the consequences of them indicate to me that it's time for him to retire.
I appreciate your opinion and agree strongly with your last sentence. As for the rest, we must agree to disagree, and while I recognize that there are subscribers who will not agree with me, I don’t feel that it’s my obligation to make them happy.
Mona, you accuse Joe Biden of lying when he says he will protect Social Security and Medicare from Republicans when you know there is a minority among them that want to do just that. The remaining scared sheep had to be tricked by Joe into endorsing SS and Med at the State of the Union address. Now the sheep are going to vote for McCarthy's abhorrent debt ceiling bill even though they know it is a blackmail attempt and is loaded with savage spending cuts. It is not partisanship to ask what the hell is the matter with these people.
And who was the woman who didn’t pay into SS for her housekeeper? She had to withdraw from consideration while Clarence Thomas sucks down somebody else’s money like a Hoover.
I was recently thinking about that nominee - Kimba Wood. An interesting juxtaposition with Thomas’s hearings. It reminds me of a saying, that misogyny is more openly acceptable than racism.
I think miers would have been very similar to Sandra day O'Connor and therefore not my cup of tea, but no, I don't see her as anywhere close to Thomas in temperament and unsuitability.
Depending on how you define "nominee," you could say she wasn't a nominee, since she was withdrawn, prudently, before being subjected to confirmation hearings. She had absolutely no business being in the conversation for SCOTUS, though. And I think she knew that as well as anyone.
Even as a devoted Republican in the early 1990s I felt leery about Thomas, as someone chosen seemingly more with an eye toward checking off boxes than for actual ability. It only has gotten worse over time. Thanks, George H.W.
Former Senator, John Danforth is another one to thank. He is an affable, moderate, Republican from a highly respected family in St Louis, think Purina animal food, his brother is/ or was Chancellor of Washington University. All this, and the worst ability to judge character in the country. He put Thomas forward and supported Josh Hawley. He has publicaly regretted his support of Hawley but remains mum about Thomas.
Agreed, Mona has horrendous judgment. I guess she also thinks Kavanaugh was properly appointed? Pervert and serial harasser of underlings? Mona say yeah!
I was good with Mona’s slap back until she got to her “admiration” of Thomas. Le sigh.
There is nothing to admire about Clarence Thomas, the justice. He is a weak legal mind and a poor writer. He professes an adherence to “originalism” (an artificial concept created to hide a multitude of sins and dodges), but only when it suits him, and he’s mean as a snake. Witness last Friday’s dissent to the mifepristone stay. Good God.
Personally, he’s repulsive. He’s a sexual harasser (three more witnesses waited in the wings back in 1991), married to a lunatic, and now we find he’s a deceptive freeloader.
What a guy, Mona. But you call POTUS a “liar.”
A lot of us who subscribe to the Bulwark respect Clarence Thomas, admire some critical aspects of his jurisprudence, and have compassion for what we feel has been 32 years of what he accurately described as a "high-tech lynching", and an unparalleled one for its unremitting mercilessness, and its lack of justification. I'm not going to debate Clarence Thomas's character and history with you or anyone else: everyone's opinions are set in stone after 32 years, and hurling them at each other will only detract from the total happiness in the world. I'm just reminding you who some of the people to whom you're opining are.
I agree with everything that Mona said. In addition, through the years I've become more and more concerned at the way that Justice Thomas has seemed to cling to all the attacks, smears, slurs, and slights that he's received, to cherish his grievances instead of letting them go, and to have become so embittered that he treats the world as an enemy and the rules as not applying to him, because they're unjust by definition. Good men and women MAY do that; GREAT men and women never do. That's a bad position for anyone, and a deadly one for a judge.
As for his wife, Tolstoy got it wrong: all happy marriages are NOT the same. No matter how good their relationship may be when they're at home, her activities are damaging to his professional life, and she doesn't seem to care. His extrajudicial actions, her political actions, and the way both of them fail to react to the consequences of them indicate to me that it's time for him to retire.
I appreciate your opinion and agree strongly with your last sentence. As for the rest, we must agree to disagree, and while I recognize that there are subscribers who will not agree with me, I don’t feel that it’s my obligation to make them happy.
Mona, you accuse Joe Biden of lying when he says he will protect Social Security and Medicare from Republicans when you know there is a minority among them that want to do just that. The remaining scared sheep had to be tricked by Joe into endorsing SS and Med at the State of the Union address. Now the sheep are going to vote for McCarthy's abhorrent debt ceiling bill even though they know it is a blackmail attempt and is loaded with savage spending cuts. It is not partisanship to ask what the hell is the matter with these people.
Clarence Thomas is more ideologically aligned with Roger B. Taney than Thurgood Marshall.
Alito is Roger Taney. Thomas just votes however Alito votes.
I always tell colleagues that the Roberts Court”l will be remembered throughout history as the 21st century Taney Court.
The Roberts court will be remembered as the Alito court.
Perhaps, although the CJ is always the one praised or blamed, even though they’re herding cats.
I’d be just as happy if Alito were consigned to the dustbin of history as the hack he is.
Insulting Thurgood Marshall??? ok whatever. My point was he replaced Marshall, but ended up like Taney. And Mona admires him, isn't that special.
George HW Bush’s lasting legacy.
You nailed it, Kim.
Even with the typos?🤣
Thomas was the least qualified nominee since Harrold Carswell and no nominee since him has been remotely as unqualified.
And by unqualified, I don't mean didn't go to Harvard law, I mean someone whose temperament is such that he shouldn't be a judge of any sort.
Don’t forget Harriet Meirs.
And who was the woman who didn’t pay into SS for her housekeeper? She had to withdraw from consideration while Clarence Thomas sucks down somebody else’s money like a Hoover.
I don't remember her name, but I believe she was Clinton's first nominee for AG
There were two. Kimba Wood and Zöe Baird. Both had undocumented help. Wood paid SS taxes but Baird did not.
I was recently thinking about that nominee - Kimba Wood. An interesting juxtaposition with Thomas’s hearings. It reminds me of a saying, that misogyny is more openly acceptable than racism.
I think miers would have been very similar to Sandra day O'Connor and therefore not my cup of tea, but no, I don't see her as anywhere close to Thomas in temperament and unsuitability.
Depending on how you define "nominee," you could say she wasn't a nominee, since she was withdrawn, prudently, before being subjected to confirmation hearings. She had absolutely no business being in the conversation for SCOTUS, though. And I think she knew that as well as anyone.
I agree. Thomas is in his own category of awful.
So you're saying that Cavanaugh said, "Hold my beer" but failed to attain that title?
Yes, he immediately came to my mind as belonging on that list.
Kavanaugh is an ethical morass and an anger addict who shouldn't have been approved but he actually has an idea about what being a judge is all about
When next I look up, 'Damning with faint praise', I will find these words by howard in the dictionary. ;)
Even as a devoted Republican in the early 1990s I felt leery about Thomas, as someone chosen seemingly more with an eye toward checking off boxes than for actual ability. It only has gotten worse over time. Thanks, George H.W.
Former Senator, John Danforth is another one to thank. He is an affable, moderate, Republican from a highly respected family in St Louis, think Purina animal food, his brother is/ or was Chancellor of Washington University. All this, and the worst ability to judge character in the country. He put Thomas forward and supported Josh Hawley. He has publicaly regretted his support of Hawley but remains mum about Thomas.
I grew up in STL. He’s an ordained priest as well, and somehow the Lord led him to Thomas and Hawley. I think he was ignoring that still, small voice.
If the supreme court strikes down affirmative action, he needn't write a opinion.
He can just submit a selfie.
I have! I thought JBU was about Tucker! Then I got sucked in.
Agreed, Mona has horrendous judgment. I guess she also thinks Kavanaugh was properly appointed? Pervert and serial harasser of underlings? Mona say yeah!