The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

fountainhall
Posts: 766
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:45 am
Location: Bangkok
Liked: 79 times
Been liked: 238 times

#1 The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby fountainhall » Fri Nov 10, 2017 11:32 am

The raft of allegations against prominent figures in politics, the acting profession and others has now reached some dangerous rapids. What appears to have been common knowledge to some is now common knowledge to all. Even though most remain allegations and the period of time between the alleged actions and today covers several decades, enough facts have been revealed to lead most people to believe them. It now seems that many of the allegations must be true.

Today the net has closed in on the awful, hugely controversial, supreme homophobe and extreme right-wing Republican candidate from Alabama for the Senate, Judge Roy Moore. He is alleged to have pursued sexual relations with four women when they were between 14 and 18 and he was in this 30s. Naturally he denies the allegations in typical Trump fashion, claiming it is fake news and a Democrat conspiracy. Twice elected Chief Judge of the Alabama Supreme Court, Moore was once removed from office and more recently suspended.

Now with a huge "he says/they say" controversy surrounding his candidacy and Republicans running for cover (apart from those in Alabama!), it all reminds me of another of these "he said/she said" situations. Almost exactly 21 years ago Clarence Thomas was on the point of being confirmed as a Justice of the nation's Supreme Court when allegations of sexual misconduct were aired against him by Professor Anita Hill. Sticking to her guns about inappropriate advances and a public hair being left on a can of Coca Cola, Professor Hill was hounded and mercilessly attacked by the Republicans in open Senate hearings televised live on CNN. Thomas, called to defend his actions, refused to do so, his appearance of anger giving me for one the distinct impression of someone who had been well prepped and who did "protest too much". Since he shut his mouth after those hearings and being appointed to the Court, he has rarely opened it again.

The times being as they are, is it not time for the Clarence Thomas case to be reopened? Should this man, who was clearly very far from George H. W. Bush's description as "the best man for the job", be allowed to continue to represent the nation's top law making body with such alleged conduct in his background? What is the difference between him, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Anthony Wiener, Kevin Spacey and the two British cabinet Ministers who have been forced to resign in the last week (even though one was for breach of rules and not for sexual matters)?

User avatar
Gaybutton
Site Admin
Posts: 13739
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Liked: 1 time
Been liked: 424 times

#2 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby Gaybutton » Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:14 pm

fountainhall wrote:clearly very far from George H. W. Bush's description as "the best man for the job"

Maybe Bush should have described him as the best man available for the job. It seems that the USA does a fine job of the worst garbage ending up in positions of authority and leadership, with only rare exceptions of someone competent and decent reaching those levels.

Of course, allegations and accusations don't make a person guilty, but Roy Moore is not exactly someone I would want to see as a US Senator. I would much rather see people like him mopping floors at a McDonald's.

fountainhall
Posts: 766
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:45 am
Location: Bangkok
Liked: 79 times
Been liked: 238 times

#3 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby fountainhall » Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:10 pm

. . . in the toilet where he belongs!

User avatar
Bob
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:03 pm
Been liked: 11 times

#4 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby Bob » Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:03 am

fountainhall wrote:The times being as they are, is it not time for the Clarence Thomas case to be reopened? Should this man, who was clearly very far from George H. W. Bush's description as "the best man for the job", be allowed to continue to represent the nation's top law making body with such alleged conduct in his background? What is the difference between him, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Anthony Wiener, Kevin Spacey and the two British cabinet Ministers who have been forced to resign in the last week (even though one was for breach of rules and not for sexual matters)?

The difference appears to be the times. Nowadays, especially the last few weeks, the floodgates have opened and (right or wrong) the tendency is to believe every claim that's made. It seems that we swing from one extreme (total silence) to another. With respect to the long-term fight for true equality for women (which I personally see as a win-win for everyone of any gender or persuasion), I see the current atmosphere as clearly better; however, I also want to avoid immediately leaping to believe every claim made as some people (including some women) simply lie or at least embellish the truth.

As for Clarence Thomas, the fact that he has rarely (extremely rarely) even opened his mouth during oral argument over the past 26+ years bespeaks somebody who has decided the case long before listening to all the facts and arguments; unfortunately, he can't be removed from office and we're stuck with this right-wing dead weight for god/Buddha knows how long. I'd note that I watched all of the Anita Hill testimony and she was extremely credible [and incredibly brave for saying things that simply weren't uttered (admitted) in those times].

fountainhall
Posts: 766
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:45 am
Location: Bangkok
Liked: 79 times
Been liked: 238 times

#5 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby fountainhall » Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:42 am

Bob wrote:I'd note that I watched all of the Anita Hill testimony and she was extremely credible [and incredibly brave for saying things that simply weren't uttered (admitted) in those times].

As far as any one person can judge, I agree totally. Anita Hill was very, very credible whereas Thomas' over-reaction and his total failure to address the specific charges was not. I believed and continue to believe Prof. Hill.

Up2u
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:06 am
Liked: 192 times
Been liked: 71 times

#6 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby Up2u » Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:13 pm

I would not resurrect the Clarence Thomas case, a different era, and sexual harassment in the work place was not uncommon. Judge Moore case of inappropriate sexual conduct with underage young women is different, in fact, the Thomas case could be used in his defense, unproven accusations. Hill to my recollection took a lie detector test with inconclusive results.

fountainhall
Posts: 766
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 11:45 am
Location: Bangkok
Liked: 79 times
Been liked: 238 times

#7 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby fountainhall » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:25 pm

Up2u wrote: . . . a different era, and sexual harassment in the work place was not uncommon

But most of the cases of sexual harassment now being brought up are decades old. If public opinion accepts that such events involving other powerful figures may now be aired in public with in most cases a lot of credibility and the perpetrators named, why not the Thomas case?

Up2u wrote:Hill to my recollection took a lie detector test with inconclusive results.

Well, she took the two hour test at the request of the FBI and passed. But then a bevy of Republican senators and the President himself cast doubt on whether polygraph results were in fact even credible.

Referring to the test in hearing testimony tonight, Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, questioned the integrity of polygraphs and their operators.

"I can tell you right now that you can find a polygraph operator for anything you want them for," the Senator said.

Judge Thomas has not been asked publicly whether he would agree to a polygraph. President Bush, asked earlier today whether the nominee should take such a test, said, "I think it's a stupid idea." The President added that "if the idea is challenging the word of one over another, to use the lie detector test in that way, I reject it" . . .

Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, noted that such tests were generally inadmissible in court because they were not sufficiently reliable . . .

Critics of the tests contend that they are ineffectual when thay involve sociopaths, psychopaths and those who have learned to imitate certain stress responses to produce desired results during the test.

I doubt is Anita Hill fell into any of the categories in that last sentence!

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/14/us/th ... -test.html

Up2u
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:06 am
Liked: 192 times
Been liked: 71 times

#8 Re: The Ghosts of Clarence Thomas Reappear

Postby Up2u » Sun Nov 12, 2017 8:46 am

Lie detector tests are typically not admissible in the US court system, so it is she said, he said. I believe Hill. The bar on Moore should be set to to a higher standard or any Senate candidate. After listening to his Hannity interview, any reasonable person would conclude he is guilty as sin.


Return to “Everything Else”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests