Clarence Thomas' wife is a fucking retard and asshole

[Carson]

Yeah, ol' Lillian must have been a real prize to have dated that long and still no ring.

So that's TWO women with bitch-management issues. What else ya got?

[Screw_Michigan]

Yeah, ol' Lillian must have been a real prize to have dated that long and still no ring.

About 18 months? You must have married your wife after four months.

[Carson]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 06782.html

Lillian McEwen, a retired administrative law judge who said she dated Clarence Thomas from 1979 through the mid-1980s, told The Washington Post: "The Clarence I know was certainly capable of not only doing the things that Anita Hill said he did, but it would be totally consistent with the way he lived his personal life then."

Try reading your cut-and-paste, asswipe.

[The Seer]

Mrs Thomas Mudshark is pretty damn naive thinking a whore like Anita Hill would, for no monetary gain, admit that she lied and sold herself to the democRATS. Hill would have nothing to gain.

[Cuda]

l to r: Screwey

[Q, West Coast Style]

All I remember about Anita Hill was something about a Coke can and a pubic hair.

[Cuda]

i'll bet that coke can smelled pretty bad

[Bizzarofelice]

Mrs Thomas Mudshark is pretty damn naive thinking a whore like Anita Hill would, for no monetary gain, admit that she lied and sold herself to the democRATS. Hill would have nothing to gain.

Hill was pretty unhappy cause there were three other chicks who were going to testify on her behalf but the committee wouldn't hear them.


probably because the committee were actually in the company of the big silverback and anita when the offenses supposedly occurred. mvscal was in attendnce, as well.

[Bizzarofelice]

Personally, and in the name of diversity and all, I think it is probably a good thing that we have a least one Supreme Court justice that is a bit randy now and then. That way, we can be sure we'll have at least one person on the bench who can feel things oozing from the "living document" that the rest of the dead, dried up, corpses can no longer feel.

whatever. i hear ruth bader ginsberg fucking gets at it on the weekends. neighbors can't open their windows without hearing the loud buzzing and moaning coming from her townhouse.

[Terry in Crapchester]

[In essence, he was the ultimate affirmative action hire. Ironic, then, that he so bitterly opposes affirmative action.

Are you this stupid, Terry? Check this man's upbringing as a child before you start spouting off about affirmative action. He's the poster child for someone who never made excuses.

Thomas even acknowledges that he benefitted from affirmative action within his career. Unfortunately, he doesn't acknowledge that his appointment to the Supreme Court was based on affirmative action. And if you bothered to quote my entire post, you'd see that the "affirmative action" component of his nomination goes far beyond race.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Of course, Dems took their eye off the ball on the Thomas hearings. They should have focused on his qualifications, or more correctly, lack thereof.

EASILY the most qualified member of the SCOTUS.

He's the only one that does his job on a consistent basis, and upholds the rights of the People. Doesn't try to "legislate from the bench." Doesn't JSC up the Constitution.

In such dark times of the fed taking over and trampling the Laws of the Land with impunity, Justice Thomas has been an American hero. If we had 8 more like him, we'd be in much better shape today.

If you like Thomas, you must LOVE this guy:



ERRR, this guy:



I get the two mixed up. Separated at birth, and whatsuch.

Btw, you could have gotten the same result by merely giving Scalia a second vote.

[Terry in Crapchester]

It is abundantly clear that it was a political hatchet job to anyone with at least two or three functional neurons.

Considering that she previously had worked for the Reagan Administration, and previously had been on the faculty of Oral Roberts University . . .

[Terry in Crapchester]

Kagan was nominated notwithstanding a complete lack of judicial experience. She'll probably perform as expected by Obama.

Presidents have fucked this political calculation up many times over the years. . . . John Paul Stevens was appointed by Gerald Ford.

Right-wing handwringing to the contrary notwithstanding, there's nothing in Kagan's record so far to suggest that she'd even be as far to the left as the Justice she replaced. But your point is taken -- there's always a certain crapshoot element to all of this.

And the female hispanic appointee was selected because she was most qualified?

You can make a better case for her than you ever could have made for Thomas. Thomas and Souter were part of a strategy by Bush 41 to try to sneak a few ideologues past Democrats. They failed with Souter, they succeeded with Thomas.

Since you brought it up (sort of), a little bit of Supreme Court trivia . . .

When Brennan retired and Poppy Bush was considering a replacement, among the finalists for that position were then-Solicitor General Ken Starr. In the end, Souter was selected over Starr because Souter was considered the "safer" (read: more easily confirmable) pick.

Fast-forward a few years. Poppy Bush lost his re-election bid to Clinton. Clinton then made two Supreme Court nominations in his first term -- the latter of whom (Stephen Breyer) had been a finalist the first go-round but ultimately lost out to Ginsburg.

Then Starr was appointed as IC over the Whitewater matter. Under the circumstances, only reasonable for a person in Starr's position to wonder about what might have been, had Poppy Bush been re-elected. Considering that a prosecutor has an ethical duty to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, then, shouldn't Starr have refused the IC appointment?

[mvscal]

ERRR, this guy:



I get the two mixed up. Separated at birth, and whatsuch.

Btw, you could have gotten the same result by merely giving Scalia a second vote.

Scalia has a pretty mixed track record when it comes to being an originalist. He talks a good game, though.

[Bizzarofelice]

so, back to the task at hand, the big silverback loves titties and pron but he has convinced mvscal and his Miss Conduct lookin' wife that he loves Jesus and would never accost a bitch about her sexuality.

I don't care that he loves titties. i like them, as well. it is funny that so many are defending the silverback and acting like he doesn't love titties.


props to the gullible

[mvscal]

props to the gullible

Take a long look in the mirror, dumbfuck. Anybody who can fire two brain cells can look at the timing of these allegations and divine their purpose as well as their authenticity even accepted at face value the substance of the allegations were thin gruel.

I'm not really even so sure that the intent was to tank his nomination so much as it was intended to provide cover for Senate Democrats to vote against him without having to answer for their votes in racial terms. In that respect the smear was a success. Dems voted 46-11 against him.

[Bizzarofelice]

[Terry in Crapchester]

I have no idea what "ethical duty" you are referring to with that one.

A prosecutor (which, as IC, Starr clearly was) has an ethical duty to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

I think everyone expected Starr to get a Supreme Court nomination at some point in the near future back then.

Only if the Republicans maintained control of the White House. Which brings me to the next point . . .

What is it about Ken Starr accepting an appointment from a three-judge panel to investigate the Perjurer-In-Chief that would give rise to any appearance of impropriety? What would the impropriety be?

That Clinton's win in '92, combined with the makeup of the Supreme Court at the time (after Clinton made two Supreme Court appointments in his first term, there were no changes in the Supreme Court lineup for over a decade) pretty much eliminated any possibility of Starr becoming a Supreme Court Justice. I have to think that Starr would have been aware of that, and would have had a difficult time putting it out of his mind, in the course of performing his duties as IC.

I suppose you could argue that the only reason Starr never got a look from GWB for the Supreme Court was that he was pretty radioactive in a political context after his stint as IC. And we'll never know what might have happened had he never been IC, of course. But the two GWB appointees both were considerably younger than Starr.

Timing alone can be a factor in eliminating an otherwise reasonable candidate from Supreme Court consideration. As an example, on the other side of the aisle, Laurence Tribe was mentioned for awhile as a possible Supreme Court nominee by a Democratic President. Of course, he never got either of the nominations that came up during Clinton's Presidency, and as things turned out, that pretty much sunk any chances of him ever winding up on the Supreme Court. Obama has had two Supreme Court vacancies to fill so far, but even though Tribe was his Constitutional Law professor in law school, his name never came up. And why should it? Tribe will be 70 years old next year. Of course, Obama is looking for someone younger than that to appoint to the Supreme Court.