Anita Hill

[sandyg]

At the beginning of the Duke case I took no "position" because there was only a charge and a denial, without evidence of any investigation. As the investigation proceeded, it became increasingly clear that there was still no evidence. Eventually, it clearly turned into a witch hunt and I was happy to see the prosecutor disbarred and jailed (even if only for one day). If you search for my posts, you will find that. In fact, there were no posts about the incident at Duke until the case approached its end reflecting, I believe, a willingness to let the fact come out first.

With respect to my question concerning the hearings, I asked because I did and it was hard to come away feeling that either party was unsullied. The attitude that Thomas evidenced toward women was about as modern as his views on the Constitution. By today's standards his behavior would generally be viewed as condescending and inappropriate. Had he worked in the accounting firm where I worked at that time, he would have certainly been fired for his behavior. However, that does not necessarily translate to harassment. Hill's testimony seemed to fall into some of the same gray areas and none of her claims of sexual misconduct were ever substantiated. However, that does not mean that she was not mistreated.

I don't believe that Thomas should ever have been confirmed because he was and is a second or third rate constitutional scholar and jurist. He has fallen into a role of unequaled obscurity while putting forth radical re-interpretations of the law that run counter to almost everything the court had decided over the last 200 years.

I'm sorry, all I read was "blah, blah, blah, I hate everything and everybody conservative but I'll use fancy language so that I don't come off as a dim-witted lib."

[YardleyLabs]

I'm sorry, all I read was "blah, blah, blah, I hate everything and everybody conservative but I'll use fancy language so that I don't come off as a dim-witted lib."

Maybe you should try some remedial reading classes if you are having that much difficulty.

[Cody Covey]

I'm sorry, all I read was "blah, blah, blah, I hate everything and everybody conservative but I'll use fancy language so that I don't come off as a dim-witted lib."

I first off fail to see where he used any fancy language. Secondly you accuse him of taking a certain stance on something that happened like 4 years ago...aka way before you were around. And when he explains that in fact as a best case scenario you're only ignorant of the facts, you begin to call names and act like a child. If you take the time to read through other threads on this forum i have probably only agreed with Jeff maybe 3-4 times so you can't exactly call me his biggest fan but you are a child and have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

[road kill]

I'm sorry, all I read was "blah, blah, blah, I hate everything and everybody conservative but I'll use fancy language so that I don't come off as a dim-witted lib."

Excellent post, but it went over his head.



RK

[sandyg]

I first off fail to see where he used any fancy language. Secondly you accuse him of taking a certain stance on something that happened like 4 years ago...aka way before you were around. And when he explains that in fact as a best case scenario you're only ignorant of the facts, you begin to call names and act like a child. If you take the time to read through other threads on this forum i have probably only agreed with Jeff maybe 3-4 times so you can't exactly call me his biggest fan but you are a child and have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

Calling names, acting like a child, no clue what I'm talking about?

Oh dear, you got me; I'm a closet lib.

[Gerry Clinchy]

Virginia Thomas is extremely active politically, to the point of raising concerns of Judicial Ethics. The timing of her phone call in the heat of this election cycle smacks more to political manipulation than any sort of heart felt remorse or desire for reconciliation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/09/us...larence_thomas

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/11..._activism.html

Yes, I've read the articles about the inappropriateness of her political activity since she is the wife of a jurist. That can certainly be a valid concern, but really has nothing to do with this incident.

If Mrs. T ever imagined that Hill would play the tape for the media, then she isn't very politically savvy. If she didn't believe that Hill would go to the media, then you must suspect that Mrs. Thomas intended to do something political with any apology tendered by Hill. If anything, she would have been naive to think Hill would admit to wrongdoing.

The only thing left is that Mrs. Thomas cannot put the whole mess behind her, and it is an emotional thing for her. Still doesn't explain to me why Hill would choose the media route. It would appear that Hill also has trouble putting the incident behind her.

[road kill]

Yes, I've read the articles about the inappropriateness of her political activity since she is the wife of a jurist. That can certainly be a valid concern, but really has nothing to do with this incident.

If Mrs. T ever imagined that Hill would play the tape for the media, then she isn't very politically savvy. If she didn't believe that Hill would go to the media, then you must suspect that Mrs. Thomas intended to do something political with any apology tendered by Hill. If anything, she would have been naive to think Hill would admit to wrongdoing.

The only thing left is that Mrs. Thomas cannot put the whole mess behind her, and it is an emotional thing for her. Still doesn't explain to me why Hill would choose the media route. It would appear that Hill also has trouble putting the incident behind her.

Because Hill is using page 2 of the liberal playbook, the "Victim" card!!


Nothing new........

RK

[dnf777]

Calling names, acting like a child, no clue what I'm talking about?

Oh dear, you got me; I'm a closet lib.

No, you're just very impulsive and immature, and showing it.
You were completely wrong about anyone's stance on the Duke case.
Like Yardley, I also waited until the facts came out, however I have to admit, when I heard the case was based on testimony of a prostitute/dancer against a roomful of young men, and the DA was facing re-election, I had a gut feeling this was crap. Call me prejudiced. Better yet, don't call me.

[road kill]

No, you're just very impulsive and immature, and showing it. You were completely wrong about anyone's stance on the Duke case.
Like Yardley, I also waited until the facts came out, however I have to admit, when I heard the case was based on testimony of a prostitute/dancer against a roomful of young men, and the DA was facing re-election, I had a gut feeling this was crap. Call me prejudiced. Better yet, don't call me.

That's pretty funny coming from someone who posted this;

I'd apologize.

"I'm sorry you married a pig.....Bee-otch!"

Not sure if that's what she's looking for.

ROFLMMFAO!!!!!!


RK

[dnf777]

Glad I could make you laugh. That's what jokes are supposed to do.

Unlike your girl in the Delaware senate race, I was *trying* to be funny when people laughed!

I'm still laughing at big gibby's Clintonesque explanation of how he would have won a FT, and I don't think he was trying to be funny.