I have been a long critic of many of Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinions which often reject basic individual rights while embracing police and national security powers. However, I believe that Thomas is often treated unfairly for being a black conservative on the Court. While others like Justices Alito, Scalia, and Roberts routinely vote along the same lines, Thomas’ race is commonly cited in commentary while that is not a factor in the other justices on the right of the Court. This unfairness was vividly shown by the comments of Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) that Thomas is an “Uncle Tom” and suggested that he was not an authenticate black person. He has refused to retract or apologize of the attack. In the meantime, Democrats are uniformly silent in the face of this uncivil and outrageous attack.
In an interview with CNN, Thompson said that Thomas apparently “doesn’t like black people, he doesn’t like being black.” After raising votes in areas like voting rights, he added that “All those issues are very important and for someone in the court who’s African American and not sensitive to that is a real problem.”
Let’s be clear, I did not view Thomas as someone who was well-suited for the Court. However, many of these justices and their predecessors were on an the top lists of legal experts. They were selected for their lack of prior controversy or other more political factors. What concerns me is that his race is constantly raised by critics. He has every right to be a conservative and has shown a consistent and committed jurisprudence supporting those views. I do not agree with those positions but I fail to see why he should be defined by his race. Indeed, I thought that one of the key objectives of the civil right movement was to allow African Americans to be judged not by the color of their skin. Thomas follows the same interpretive approach as his colleagues — an approach mind you that is not supposed to be based not on a jurist’s personal desires or association with any group. He is not supposed to show loyalty to a particular group or fulfill expectations due to his race. I have no problem with criticizing Thomas for his votes in the same way as we often criticize his colleagues, but he should not face a race test by critics.
Thomas deserves better. I have always been moved by his life’s story. His father was a farm worker and his mother was a domestic worker. They were poor and both descendants of American slaves. The family spoke Gullah as a first language. His mother literally worked for pennies a day and his early life was spent in a home without indoor plumbing. The second of three children, he later lived with his grandparents when they became homeless. Thomas was the only black person at his high school in Savannah and yet was able to remain an honor student. He went on to attend college and Yale Law School. While few seem to want to admit it, that is a remarkable and inspiring life. He developed conservative principles and values in his life. Some find that incomprehensible but his incredible struggle produced a strong personality and will that can be admired even if you strongly disagree with his views.
What concerns me most is the virtual silence from Democrats to denounce this type of race-based attack. Being called an Uncle Tom is obviously deeply offensive to African Americans. Thomas and his family have gone through too much suffering and struggle to be treated so unfairly in my view. The suggestion is that being genuinely black requires you to reach the right conclusions and support the right positions. However, the very struggle that Thompson is describing was a fight to allow black men and women to be treated as individuals and not categorized by the color of their skin. Thompson should apologize and Democrats should show that they are not selectively outraged by race-based attacks.
What do you think?
Source: Washington Post
Nobody would want this state. We have Milwaukee and Madison. Take them out of the equation and well, then there would be no recession crazy talk.
Where would all the cheeseheads go? And they do have a couple of decent breweries, but I am sure they could become import beers.
Keep digging. You own Brett Hulsey now. He bullies kids, takes pictures of kids in bathing suits, does this KKK stuff and you defend him. He is ALL yours. We non ideologues will call out despicable people no matter their cloth, ideologues double down on Brett Hulsey. Perfect.
Karen, it’s foolish, but he was trying to make a point as I said. What is dangerous and stupid is a secession resolution. This state is pretty equally divided and there are many who would not take a Wisconsin secession without a fight, just what are Republicans playing at? Do they WANT a civil war?
Annie – if the US allows WI to secede there will not be any war. They will probably just join Canada.
Feynman:
“Those are your core values. Swell. But it needs an addendum – no tax dollars are to be withdrawn from any precious Republican pocket an order to promote that success, but by golly, we wish you all the success in the world.”
Where in the world do people get the idea that Republicans don’t want to pay any taxes? Claiming that we need to stop wasting money, that we need real results for our spending, live within our means, reign in debt, or that we are taxed too high does not in any way say that Republicans don’t want to pay any taxes.
And who came up with the idea that balancing a budget makes no sense for government? Project this multi-trillion dollar debt outward. We have made astronomical exponential growth in our debt. At some point, we’re going to get into figures like googolplex, reserved only for counting atoms. Does anyone honestly think that the amount of debt per capita has absolutely no bearing on a nation’s credit rating, or its ability to sustain itself?
Karen, Hulsey showed up dressed as a Confederate. He carried 2 signs, one w/ his name on it and the other w/ a list of alleged Rep racist policies. That this is about the whacky Rep secession talk is horseshit lie is trying to salvage something out of this debacle. Even Hulsey states it was about racism and that’s the sign he carried, nothing about secession, only about racism. Hulsey, a man who bullies children, mentioned secession, that was all. His words and actions was it is about racism. And, if he thinks the KKK is about secession, well he has some other people ignorant of the facts right here he can join. It is disturbing. I don’t know if people read what is in the comments and articles, if they willfully misrepresent, or if they have reading issues.
randyjet – I never said I had no problem with secession. Where did you get that idea? There are black Republicans. How do you think they would have felt being handed a KKK hood? Why excuse such despicable, sickening behavior?
Karen, I doubt that there would be any black GOPers there by the way. If there were, then I would expect them to act like Justice Thomas who had a Confederate battle flag in his office. He would not mind it a bit. The KKK after all is part of southern heritage. I seriously doubt he or any black GOPer would have a problem with secession either, as yourself have said. You stated it is not a problem since you think that such resolutions mean nothing. How you get to that is a bit beyond me, since it makes no sense. So any vote or law the GOP supports means nothing!
randyjet – when are you going to disavow the racist black Congressmen who called Justice Thomas an Uncle Tom? I don’t think you have the creds to talk about anyone else’s racism until you do that.
Karen said:
The Republican and Libertarian core values are that everyone deserves a chance of success, regardless of race, creed, or ethnicity.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Those are your core values. Swell. But it needs an addendum – no tax dollars are to be withdrawn from any precious Republican pocket an order to promote that success, but by golly, we wish you all the success in the world.
Annie:
I oppose secession. A country that breaks up cannot support itself. This secession talk is a means to express frustration, in my opinion.
Am I to believe that you are excusing the distribution of racist paraphernalia to a Republican Convention? Because I am of the opinion that there is no reason on this planet that can excuse that kind of behavior.
Feynman:
“Trains promote the general welfare. Citizens need them. Small towns need them.”
Why? I live in a small town and we passionately oppose a vacation train to San Francisco. How does the likelihood of depleting a small town’s wells help?
Trains were vital lifelines between small towns a hundred years ago. The only way that trains would promote general welfare is in areas where there is low car ownership, such as extremely expensive NYC.
Why do small towns need trains? I have family that live in several rural small towns, and none of them travel by train or support a vacation train for rich riders.
I am curious to know exactly how small towns benefit, or how trains promote the general welfare. Can you give examples?
And as for the murder term, do you think it is unfair to ask Amtrak to hold to its agreement to survive without subsidies 12 years ago? If it can’t, I’m certainly open to discussion, but to call it “murder” to expect a huge corporation to live up to a contract seems to disregard the facts.
You asked how I felt about subsidies. We do have farmers and ranchers among our friends, so I hear both sides. There is an old saying, “If you want more of something, subsidize it.” One way to look at farming is to say, if you agree not to plant corn this year, I will subsidize you. Another way is for the farmer to say, corn is not doing well, I think I will grow something else instead.
There is more to it than that, but I do not support all subsidies just because they exist. I have to study all the data and the pros and cons of each.
Don’t we often complain about “subsidizing big business?” Is it only OK to subsidize some businesses, and if so, what are the criteria? Wind farms are loud (I have heard them), they must drive wildlife nuts, and they kill thousands of birds a year, including endangered species. And yet we subsidize them.
The US government makes more on oil than the oil industry. Were you aware of that? There is some debate over how much oil companies actually make per gallon of gas. We all know they rake in a tidy profit overall, but that is due to volume. The tax breaks are an attempt to lower gas prices for consumers. It has been predicted that removing these tax breaks will cause at least a slight increase at the pump. Recall that businesses pass on costs to consumer, so what is done to a company is done to the consumer. My point is that, although Big Oil makes a lot of money, it is false that they pay low or no taxes.
“In a February 2011 report called “What’s Up with Gas Prices?” the American Petroleum Institute reported that on average oil and gas companies earned about “6 cents for every dollar of sales” — not every gallon — in the third quarter of 2010. Rayola Dougher, API’s senior economist, said she arrived at that figure by dividing net income by total revenues for about two dozen integrated oil companies and independent producers. By her unofficial calculations, Dougher said, the average so far in the first quarter of this year is 7.6 cents per dollar of sales. “If you are a producer and getting more money for a barrel your profits go up,” she said.
But energy experts say the API method is also flawed, as we detailed in a 2008 article on this very topic. As we said at that time, the Energy Information Administration does not attempt to calculate how much oil companies earn on a gallon of gasoline. EIA economist Neal Davis told us in 2008 that trying to calculate a per-gallon average profit for gasoline would be “heroic at best” and “sadly misinformed … at worst.”
There is certainly debate about making Big Oil pay higher taxes. I do not have a position yet because I do not have enough information. But if they make 6 cents on the dollar, it does put things into perspective.
randyjet – why don’t you object to the racist comments of the Congressmen (at this point there are two of them). Would love to see you walk it back.
Samantha, is it necessary to get personal here? I could respond in kind to you, but Professor Turley has requested we abstain from such activity.
Annie – I think you are being too sensitive. She is just making an example.
*Secession*
Karen, he was trying to highlight the absurdity of the secession resolution. Let’s be real here, why would it even be suggested? Do Republicans and conservatives not know what they are playing with here? I can tell you as a Wisconsinite, if this state would ever secede, there would be a civil war, no joke. I don’t understand why these dolts would want a succession resolution except to stir up trouble, which they did.
Any election is a serious undertaking, the outcome of which is self-determination for the electorate. Contamination of this process with fraud that sways the outcome is nothing less than gross violation of the collective civil rights of every legal citizen. In better times, people were able to take each other at face value. I know people who, a generation older than I am, remember a time when they could land a job on the strength of their resume, alone, without the potential employer needing ID, education credentials, a credit report, etc. But that was a time when one’s word and handshake were valued as much as your own children (maybe an exclusion for politicians). But today the climate is far different. You can no longer write a check to anyone, because in doing so, you reveal your bank account number, exposing yourself to the risk of account take-over fraud or identity theft.
If we have dispensed of IDs for voting, why don’t we just get rid of them for everything else, pretend its a generation or two ago when your handshake and word meant something? That way, Annie could pose as a medical doctor, apply for a new job at a hospital, confident she will get the position using fraudulent credentials because SCOTUS has outlawed the use of IDs, patient prognosis no more valid than an election with voter fraud.
Nick – you’re right. The candidate was contemplating a stunt using racist paraphernalia and he gets applauded as being brave. What is wrong with people?
Paul, please don’t take this personally, but I do not find any of your instructions or comments or insults interesting.or informed.
I am unconcerned about anything you say.
Trains promote the general welfare. Citizens need them. Small towns need them. It is a national system. And it’s a pleasant way to travel. All civilized countries have them.
We’ve already had an extended conversation about the folly demanding a balanced budget. You cannot run a country that way. We are not a household. We are a nation. Used to be a basic responsibility? Not when running the nation.
I trust you are for ending all oil subsidies, farm subsidies. etc? Who knows, maybe you’re against school and university subsidies. Is an educated citizenry no longer necessary?
And I find the use of murder entirely appropriate. If you cut off all the subsidies you will end Amtrak.
As to rhetoric? Re-read what has been said during the last two feet of the comments and tell me about divisive rhetoric. Also, it’s pretty divisive to post partisan propaganda from Popper.
Nice alliteration, but not to the point.
Karen, Thanks for the news. It seems everyone interviewed agreed this was a despicable idea. Too bad the folks here who abide it can’t see it. Madison is where I have to deal w/ this haters all the time.
Neil Young is indeed part of a group that bought Lionel in 1995.
Karen, This hater Wi. Dem guv candidate comes from the echo chamber of Madison. When there is no opposition to hate, it grows and then manifests itself like this.
Karen, “Haters gotta hate.”