The 2nd Amendment Lives! Shot Heard Round The World. FREEDOM WINS.

[Michael Tee]

<<There is no such requirement.>>

I never meant to imply that there is an express Constitutional requirement.  I figured that would be understood by everyone.  The fact is, dummies and schleppers are not expected to apply.  This is the highest court in the most powerful country on earth and hopefully still governed by the elected representatives of a people who demand excellence in many things, their courts being among them. 

When you  look at the records of virtually every judge who has sat on that bench in living memory, they are stellar.  You don't and you shouldn't get on that court for making campaign contributions or because you're the President's chauffeur's nephew.

That some 18th century hillbilly got on the court and didn't turn out so bad, or that the Constitution doesn't actually post the job requirements (holy shit imagine that Batman!) are completely irrelevant.  We all know there are no Constitutional job requirements for SCOTUS judges, and we all know that there aren't too many judges in modern times who were born in log cabins. 

Can we not focus on the issues?  Or better yet, just admit the obvious, that Thomas is an unqualified schmuck who just doesn't belong on that bench and barely wormed his way in by Tommin' for the Republicans, and that Ruth Bader Ginsburg richly deserves her spot and earned it with a 97-3 vote confirmation?

[Michael Tee]

I thought the barb that it was surprising who was bringing up affirmative action as a disqualifying factor against Thomas was aimed at ME.  Sorry, I gotta read these things more carefully.  I know I've said that before, but time is one thing they ain't making any more of.

<<This is a good example of Affirmative action haveing a negative consequence , I can't pass that by.>>

I agree with you but affirmative action is bound to have some negative results.  AA is usually justified not because it produces uniform 100% good results but because the undeniable harm done is greatly overbalanced by the redress of past injustices and their lingering after-effects, which are still considerable.  I would have to agree that if anyone were to look for the worst consequences of AA, the elevation of that Tommin' jackass to the Supreme Court probably tops the list.

[Michael Tee]

<<Yeah, that's an unbiased article. Let's look at the first line: "The most blatant and unashamed African American-hater on the U.S. Supreme Court - and probably on the national scene - is Clarence Thomas, a psychologically damaged ally of the worst sections of the white ruling class." >>

Yeah, they really nailed it.  So?

<<I'm sure they had lots of good things to say about him, not.>>

Too bad you didn't read the rest of the article. 

<< . . . he took a class from a law professor that every black on campus had been told "hated blacks" and would "fail every black" in his class. Justice Thomas insisted on taking a class with this professor because it dealt with his preference for law later in life (an aspect of corporate law) and he ended up with the highest grade in that professor's class that semester.>>

THAT'S a huge surprise.  Racist white prick falls in love with Tommin' black.  What're the odds, eh?

[hnumpah]

Can we not focus on the issues?  Or better yet, just admit the obvious, that Thomas is an unqualified schmuck who just doesn't belong on that bench and barely wormed his way in by Tommin' for the Republicans, and that Ruth Bader Ginsburg richly deserves her spot and earned it with a 97-3 vote confirmation?

I'm not fighting that battle. I'm simply pointing out the facts to you and whoever else might be interested. If you don't like 'em, tough. I could give a shit.

[Amianthus]

<<I'm sure they had lots of good things to say about him, not.>>

Too bad you didn't read the rest of the article. 

I did. And other than a statement that he made "middle of the pack" grades, it had absolutely no other support for your position that was not a simple anti-white rant. Even a respected "60 Minutes" interviewer was denigrated merely because he was white.

The article wasn't some scholarly work, it was an anti-white agenda piece, purely and simply.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The allegation that was made at the time that Thomas was the best qualified judicial candidate in the entire nation  seems to be quite bogus.

He has not distinguished himself in any way on the bench, but there haven't been any scandals, either, about how he likes to make jokes about pubic hairs on cans of cola, either, or how he has invited the gang over for judicial watchathons of Long Dong Silver porno flicks.

[Michael Tee]

"Too bad you didn't read the rest of the article" was a joke, and indicated as such by the smiley icon.  The meaning of the joke is that the article trashed Thomas from head to foot, utterly.  The irony was in the idea that if you didn't like what the first sentence said about Thomas, you'd like even less what the rest of the article had to say.  The "too bad" was ironic.  He's just a self-hating Uncle Tom who sold out to the white racist Republicreeps at the expense of poor blacks who could have benefited from the same program that he himself did.  Probably one of the most despicable men who ever sat on that bench.  And NO, it was not a scholarly article.  The life and works of Clarence Thomas do not need any legal scholar to interpret them and never will.

[Michael Tee]

<<I'm not fighting that battle. I'm simply pointing out the facts to you and whoever else might be interested. If you don't like 'em, tough. I could give a shit.>>

They were facts that everyone already knew and added nothing to the arguments on either side.  But thanks anyway.

[hnumpah]

Everyone already knew about Woodbury and Curtis?

Seems to me more likely they were facts that were rather inconvenient to your argument and you'd rather not have seen posted. But you're welcome anyway.

[Michael Tee]

<<Everyone already knew about Woodbury and Curtis?>>

No, of course not.  Not specifically, not by name.  I think everybody knew that 18th and 19th century standards for judicial office in America were necessarily laxer than they are today and that it was inevitable that some naturally intelligent and naturally able men without formal education would become elevated to the bench, just as a man like Andrew Jackson could become President.  America then was not one of the leading lights of civilization, it was groping its way towards greatness and along the way there were plenty of bumps in the road, but the democratic principle was alive and well, and leaders could spring forth from the people with or without formal education.  the complexities of modern law and life today demand something more than native ability (which Thomas in any case is completely lacking) and as an inspection of the careers of any of the other SCOTUS judges would show, distinction of some form in the legal field (including but not limited to academic distinction) is a virtual necessity.

[Plane]

Robert Bork would be Cheif justice by now if great qualification was the cheif consideration.

[Amianthus]

And NO, it was not a scholarly article.

They could have saved the long diatribe and done "Whitey is bad. Clarence Thomas is a whitey."

That's pretty much what they said anyway.

[sirs]

    Yep

[Michael Tee]

<<They could have saved the long diatribe and done "Whitey is bad. Clarence Thomas is a whitey.">>

That's ONE way to misinterpret what the article said.  Thank you for your opinion.

[Plane]

I thought the barb that it was surprising who was bringing up affirmative action as a disqualifying factor against Thomas was aimed at ME.  Sorry, I gotta read these things more carefully.  I know I've said that before, but time is one thing they ain't making any more of.

<<This is a good example of Affirmative action haveing a negative consequence , I can't pass that by.>>

I agree with you but affirmative action is bound to have some negative results.  AA is usually justified not because it produces uniform 100% good results but because the undeniable harm done is greatly overbalanced by the redress of past injustices and their lingering after-effects, which are still considerable.  I would have to agree that if anyone were to look for the worst consequences of AA, the elevation of that Tommin' jackass to the Supreme Court probably tops the list.

All right , you deserved the barb even if I didn't know it at the time.