Clarence Thomas is a "clown in blackface."

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

Pardon just a sec, are you a residing US of A citizen?

do you represent anyone other than yourself?

0 Replies

@Ragman,

My memory of affirmative action at the time I was paying attention re UC schools was that just like always, people had to have a certain grade point to get in. I think I remember it as 2.5 up to what back then was a 4.0. I think that AA allowed people with grades on the lower side of that range (not under it) to be accepted as part of rounding out the student body's diversity, not every admission being at super SAT and highest levels of grade points. I don't know if this was true for sure, but do remember reading that.

0 Replies

The man replaced Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court, folks.

I wouldn't care if his skin color were purple with green polka-dots.

Clarence Thomas replaced Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court!!!

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Quote:

Perhaps because he saw the injustice and inherent problems of abuse in the affirmative action program on a first hand basis that made him want to oppose it.

He said he opposed it because it made hard for him to get a job afterwards. A bit ironic considering the job he currently has right now.

Quote:

Thomas was born in poverty in rural Georgia but managed to gain admittance to Yale Law School. He acknowledges that he made it to Yale because of affirmative action but says the stigma of preferential treatment made it difficult for him to find a job after college.

In his memoir, "My Grandfather's Son," Thomas says he felt "tricked" by paternalistic whites at Yale who recruited black students.

"I was bitter toward the white bigots whom I held responsible for the unjust treatment of blacks," he wrote, "but even more bitter toward those ostensibly unprejudiced whites who pretended to side with black people while using them to further their own political and social ends."

Some observers, though, counter with one question:

If affirmative action is so bad for its recipients, how come you've done so well?

"His entire judicial philosophy is at war with his own biography," said Michael Fletcher, co-author of "Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas." "He's arguably benefited from affirmative action every step of the way."

source

1 Reply

@revelette2,

An excerpt from your "source."

Quote:

"He acknowledges that he made it to Yale because of affirmative action but says the stigma of preferential treatment made it difficult for him to find a job after college."

If Thomas experienced problems getting a job (and I believe him) it might be simply because he was left wanting intellectually. Thomas appears so self-absorbed with himself that he's unable to observe his problem objectively.

Thanks for posting the article from Thomas' memoir, Revelette2. Since Thomas grew up in a very poor area of Georgia with sub educational standards for African Americans, he needed all the help he was offered. Today, he seems ungrateful! He did get help but thinks he did it all on his own and to this day refuses to acknowledge that help. Senator John Danforth (R-MO) was the senator who brought Thomas to the attention of the first President Bush who was looking for a black to replace the former associate justice, Thurgood Marshall, of the U.S. Supreme Court 1967–91. There is no way in hell Clarence Thomas would have been in a position to be selected to the highest court on the land without that preferential help.

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

Although, you could look at this as a case of allowing the existence of a lesser degree of injustice to correct centuries of a major injustice. The admittance of a minority group say into law school just gives an opportunity that didn't exist without it. It's up to the individual to make the most of the opportunity, isn't it? To graduate and/or excel? AA doesn't tilt your grades...you have to earn them.

So equal protection doesn't apply to everyone, right? I can ask for it, but the door will be shut in my face. Nice.

0 Replies

Star Trek star George Takei apologizes for calling Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas a 'clown in blackface' and a 'disgrace to America'

Star Trek legend George Takei has apologized for calling Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as 'a clown in blackface' and a 'disgrace to America' during an interview on same-sex marriage.

The actor and gay activist was criticized following his scathing outburst to a reporter while discussing the Justice's dissent in the landmark ruling.
Sitting alongside his husband Brad, he told Fox 10 Phoenix: 'He is a clown in blackface sitting on the Supreme Court. He gets me that angry. He doesn't belong there.'

Takei married his long-time partner in 2008 and has been a fervent campaigner for sexual equality in the United States.
Justice Thomas was among the dissenters in the landmark five to four ruling, claiming the decision was unconstitutional.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3149378/George-Takei-apologizes-calling-Supreme-Court-Justice-Clarence-Thomas-clown-blackface-disgrace-America.html#ixzz3f4AHNgfH

0 Replies

I thought it was a lovely statement. I guess it was an apology.

1 Reply

@Lash,

racism in the theatrical arts...
what did I say, it being a reference to that. Well, similar.

0 Replies

@foundednotlost,

foundednotlost wrote:

Barack Obama voted against Thomas.

No he didn't.

2 Replies

@foundednotlost,

foundednotlost wrote:

Thomas is well renown for not saying anything when court is in session; how can he rationalize his getting an annual salary of $213,900? He sits there like a bump on a log.

Justices don't have to ask questions during oral argument. I think Thomas's position is that a lot of time is wasted during oral argument on questions when the justices asking them already know the answers -- or should know the answers if they bothered to read the briefs. And I think Thomas is correct in this regard: oral argument is a time for the justices to clear up points that the briefs left unclear. If there are no unclear points, there's no need to ask any questions. Of course, many of the legal issues that reach the supreme court are hotly contested. Thomas's habit of not asking questions, then, isn't so much a dereliction of duty as it is a sign of a mind that is not terribly inquisitive. That's a problem in itself, but it goes deeper than just sitting there like a bump on a log during oral argument.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Good catch, Joe.

He wasn't even a Senator.

0 Replies

@foundednotlost,

How could Barack Obama have voted against Thomas when he wasn't in the White House when the SCOTUS nomination occurred? He was appointed by George H. W. Bush in 1991.

1 Reply

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

How could Barack Obama have voted against Thomas when he wasn't in the White House when the SCOTUS nomination occurred? He was appointed by George H. W. Bush in 1991.

Huh?????

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

foundednotlost wrote:
Barack Obama voted against Thomas.

No he didn't.

My bad! You are correct. Thank you for correcting me. President Obama said he "would have voted against Clarence Thomas."

Obama: I Would Not Have Nominated Clarence Thomas
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../obama-i-would-not-ha...
The Huffington Post

"Back on the campaign trail, Sen. Barack Obama declared on Saturday that, had he been president at the time, he would not have nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. The crowd of predominantly evangelical voters clapped with approval

"Speaking at the values forum at the Saddleback Church, the Illinois Democrat raised objections to several of the more conservative Supreme Court Justices and argued specifically that Chief Justice John Roberts (whom he voted against) had been too willing to grant powers to the Executive Branch. Obama's harshest critique, however, was saved for Thomas.

"I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas," said the presumptive Democratic nominee. "I don't think that he..." the crowd interrupted with applause. "I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don't think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree."

0 Replies

Clarence Thomas is a "clown in blackface."

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know