Bill Clinton, Hillary Rodham, Clarence Thomas, and I all took a course at Yale Law School together called “Civil and Political Rights,” taught by Professor Thomas Emerson. Bill was not the most reliable or disciplined attendee (he was often off working on some election), but when he was there he answered every question correctly. Hillary was always an active and enthusiastic participant. I tried as best I could. Clarence, however, sat in the back of the classroom the whole semester with a scowl on his face, never raising his hand, never answering a question, never offering a single word. That was over forty years ago but it seems like only yesterday.
And my personal favorite example of clueless race-baiting stupidity:
Here’s why I call that stupidity: Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s preached that we should judge people “not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Affirmative action does the exact opposite, it elevates certain groups over others precisely because of the color of their skin. Affirmative action is the antithesis of what Dr. King advocated.
What Michigan’s law did, and what the Supreme Court overwhelmingly upheld yesterday, is disallow colleges from unfairly admitting students to their universities simply because of what shade of melanin they were born with.
Liberals have a nasty tendency to attack any black person who disagrees with their view of what a black person should be. Instead of providing intellectual thought about the issues at hand, they go straight for the “Uncle Tom” card. That’s because for most liberals in America, what matters is not the content of your character. To them, it’s always about the color of your skin.
Even the average politico can’t be expected to remember the make up of SCOTUS from one chief justice to the next, but I can’t help believing that if there’s any modicum of true justice in the world, the Roberts court and Roberts himself will ultimately be remembered by history as having been uniquely harmful to America and democracy writ large.
Portraying one of the most polarizing women ever to testify before the United States Supreme Court? It’s handled.
Scandal‘s Kerry Washington will play Anita Hill in Confirmation, HBO’s upcoming movie about the scandal surrounding Clarence Thomas’ appointment to the nation’s highest court, per The Hollywood Reporter. [X]
MY BROTHER AND I WERE TALKING THE OTHER DAY ABOUT HOW IT SEEMS LIKE HOUSE NEGROES ARE AT AN ALL-TIME HIGH LOL I can only speak for my generation and I’m still in my twenties but the house Negroes are deep AF they running shit it seems lol .
Sometimes I listen to people I went to school with, friends, associates, and co-workers and I listen to what they have to say about issues like Ferguson and It’s really overwhelmingly disgusting. Like how fuckin blind are you? A kid got shot several times with his hands up and YOU as a BLACK PERSON are still searching for a way to justify what happened?
“What about black on black crime? Was he sagging his pants? Its rap music"
The recent racial tension because of the slaying of black men really bring these brainwashed comments out. They would rather die than to allow the white power structure to be criticized for anything.
Conservatives on the Roberts Court are judicial activists who have been thoroughly bought and paid for by big money on the far right. Consider just a handfull of recent cases before SCOTUS:
1)Monsanto – a case ruled in favor of the multinational conglomerate despite the fact that a sitting Justice, Clarence Thomas, had a severe conflict of interest as he was once employed by Monsanto as their lawyer
2)Voting Rights Act – a case brought before the court by a career conservative, professional litigant and lifelong anti-voting rights activist, Edward Blum (worth noting: John Roberts himself is a lifelong anti-voting rights activist)
3)Citizens United – a case brought before the court by a career conservative activist and lifelong professional litigant James Bopp (worth noting that the RNC, NRA and Amway billionaire, Betsy DeVos were all major funders for Mr. Bopp)
4)Citizens United part two: McCutcheon v. FEC – a case brought before the court by a career conservative activist and longtime millionaire Republican political mega-doner, Shaun McCutcheon
In a case that is bound to get the NRA and their band of merry ammosexuals up in arms (pun intended), the Supreme Court just sided with San Francisco by refusing to hear a case that featured gun owners in a tizzy over the fact that they are required to keep their guns locked up — in other words — well regulated. The case titled Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco is described as such:…
VIDEO: Harry Reid thinks Justice Clarence Thomas is white
Harry Reid told reporters today that he’s very upset that “5 white men” decided that Hobby Lobby shouldn’t be forced to pay for abortifacients. I’m not surprised Harry’s got his knickers in a wad over the Supreme Court’s decision, but either he’s forgetting that Justice Clarence Thomas was in the majority on the decision or he’s forgetting that Justice Clarence Thomas is black.
here’s the video:
Just to make sure, let’s double check that Justice Clarence isn’t a white man…
Ohhhh….I get it. Harry Reid thinks that all black people are liberal Democrats. What a racist!
Around 11:45 on Monday morning, Justice Clarence Thomas broke almost seven years of silence during Supreme Court arguments. But it was not entirely clear what he said.
The justices were considering the qualifications of a death penalty defense lawyer in Louisiana, and Justice Antonin Scalia noted that she had graduated from Yale Law School, which is, by some measures, the best in the nation. It is also Justice Thomas’s alma mater.
Justice Thomas leaned into his microphone, and in the midst of a great deal of cross talk among the justices, cracked a joke. Or so it seemed to people in the courtroom.
The official transcript confirms that Justice Thomas spoke, for the first time since Feb 22, 2006. It attributes these words to him, after a follow-up comment from Justice Scalia concerning a male graduate of Harvard Law School: “Well – he did not —.” That is all the transcript recites.
Though the transcription is incomplete, people in the courtroom understood him to say that a law degree from Yale may actually be proof of incompetence.
What follows in the transcript supports that view. First, there is a notation indicating laughter in the courtroom. The stray set of four words attributed to Justice Thomas are in no sense a joke or other occasion for laughter.
And the lawyer at the lectern, a Louisiana prosecutor named Carla S. Sigler, responded, “I would refute that, Justice Thomas,” indicating that the justice had articulated a proposition capable of refutation. Ms. Sigler had said earlier that the Yale lawyer was “a very impressive attorney.”
It is not unusual for Justice Thomas to exchange banter with the members of the court who sit next to him, Justices Scalia and Stephen G. Breyer. But those communications are inaudible in the courtroom. This remark seemed meant for public consumption.