New York Times: Justice Thomas Must Talk More to Show He's Not Corrupt
A Friday New York Times editorial, “The Thomas Issue,” furthered the paper’s fevered crusade against Justice Clarence Thomas, piggybacking on Adam Liptak’s front-page Sunday story on the vital matter of Thomas’s failure to ask questions during Supreme Court oral argument.
The Times actually argued that Thomas should speak up more to ensure the public that he is open-minded, while claiming that Thomas's five-year “milestone” of silence (one first marked in the Times) “has stirred a wide conversation about his effectiveness as a justice.” Stirred up solely by the Times, by the available evidence.
When the Supreme Court hears arguments next week, it will mark the fifth anniversary of Justice Clarence Thomas’s silence during oral argument -- unless he chooses to re-enter the give-and-take. We hope he will.
This milestone has stirred a wide conversation about his effectiveness as a justice following another about his ethics. They are actually related. How Justice Thomas comports himself on the bench is a matter of ethics and effectiveness, simultaneously. His authority as a justice and the court’s as an institution are at issue.
The editorial repeated tired accusations from the left-wing Common Cause alleging Thomas's conflict of interest based on his wife’s lobbying and Thomas’s attendance at a political event sponsored by conservative philanthropists Charles and David Koch. Common Cause led a protest outside that event filled with racist and violent comments about Thomas that the paper has yet to acknowledge.
Then there was this hypocritical expression of concern:
Taking part in oral arguments would be good for the justice and the court. In a landmark article about judging, the scholar John Leubsdorf said a justice should abide by three principles: avoid basing a vote on personal considerations; avoid basing a vote on facts learned outside the case; and consider both sides’ arguments. Taking part in arguments is a way for Justice Thomas to convey that he honors the third principle. By engaging with lawyers for both sides in cases and showing open-mindedness in exchanges with them, he would show his dedication to the court’s impartiality and to its integrity as an institution.
As if the left-wing Times editorial page would respect Thomas any more if he did start to express himself.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
In other words, the totally
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 5:12pm.
In other words, the totally corrupt nyt rag wants Justice Thomas to make more public statements so they can parse every syllable in hopes of finding something they can use to slander him.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Criticizing Justice Thomas' oral?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 5:13pm.
How low can these people go?
So we should take the word of
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 5:33pm.
So we should take the word of a 'scholar' who no doubt is a left wing radical? No thanks. Was anything of value accomplished by all those liberal justices of the supreme court hectoring attorneys with their radical positions, and not listening to the heartland and traditions of this American republic? Were they hectored by the Slimes for failing to abide by constitutional principles? Not at all. It is beyond the Slimes' imaginings that a Justice could be effective without him putting his ego out in oral arguments. If the Slimes doesn't think that Justice Thomas is effectively advocating his position in his opinions, then let the Slimes print his opinions and say what is wrong based upon his legal citations and reasoning. But, like almost all leftwing demagogues, the Slimes castigates him for what he says or doesn't say, and would love to have him say something in oral argument that they could lynch him for. Thomas wisely refuses, after his public ordeal during the confirmation hearings, to give the Slimes and its malefactor confederates, any further opportunity to twist his words.
To use liberal "logic", the New York Times
Submitted by no tingly legs on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 5:59pm.
is obviously racist. Oops, my bad. If you're criticizing a conservative black (aka Uncle Tom or Oreo) then it's okay.
Let's hope justice Thomas has
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 6:34pm.
Let's hope justice Thomas has the good sense to ignore them, as ignoring them only increases their buffoonery, exposing more of their hatred and racism.
nyt vs justice
Submitted by Agnostic on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 7:20pm.
When you are right you don't have to say much.
When your the mouthpiece for socialism in America you have to buy your ink by the barrel.
Progressives should contemplate what it is they are doing.
Submitted by Ashrak on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 8:00pm.
I suppose Thomas could talk at length about the 14th. He could even go into great detail about Natural Born Citizen. How about it NYT? You gonna support cert for Hollister?
Shoot, the NYT and others are poking at Thomas because of his wife's activities because they absolutely drives leftist progressives crazy.
They should think carefully about what it is they are asking for, imho. They just might get it.
Show us Obama's Birth Certificate first...
Submitted by Slyrr on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 9:46pm.
And Obama should produce his birth certificate to prove HE'S not corrupt.
Come on libs - ya wanna be 'fair', now - DON'T YOU????
this is proven authentic.
Submitted by hayate1 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:24pm.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg
why are you so wacky?
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
No it's not. Why are you so
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:33pm.
No it's not. Why are you so dumb?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
There ya go agin Jack. It's
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 1:20am.
There ya go agin Jack.
It's not spelled 'dumb'.
It's spelled "dishonest".
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
This is one of those times
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 10:00pm.
This is one of those times where the founders made a good decision making SCOTUS apart from politics. Sometimes I think SCOTUS should be replaced but now I am glad they are appointed for life.
Clarence Thomas wrote the
Submitted by jdhawk on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 3:20am.
Clarence Thomas wrote the book, My Grandfather's Son: A Memoir. It is well worth reading. It can be purchased on Amazon's web site used for about $5 including shipping. Here is what one African American wrote as a critique of the book on Amazon's web site: Often we make judgments based upon preconceived views and ideology. I, too, had misconceived notions about Clarence Thomas. I heard that he was a traitor to his race. However, by reading this book, I gained insight into one of the most misunderstood people in our society. As an African American, I can say that his message of self-reliance is very pertinent and needed. The irony of this "so-called traitor"--is that his message of self-reliance is similar to the views held by Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey and Frederick Douglas. This is a must read for all Americans, especially African Americans. Now, let's see? Read and align one's self with the NYT or read Justice Thomas' own words. I just can't decide - NOTHey, Cool!
Submitted by DemsRFascists on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 1:35am.
So does that mean that the NY TImes must stop 'speaking' (or in their case, printing and posting) to show that they are not corrupt?
I could live with that! [:-)
Instead of attacking the messengers
Submitted by hayate1 on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 10:24pm.
one should consider the message's content. A supreme court justice has cheated on his taxes for years, attends and speaks at political events sponsored by people who have directly benefited from SCOTUS court rulings and whose wife works for political groups that are fighting for the repeal of Obamacare, an issue likely to be before him soon. Does that concern anyone? Or is it all about what is said by liberals on the issue? Are there any ethical issues that are bigger than what some wacky liberals claim?
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
You're a liar who makes
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:42pm.
You're a liar who makes accusations based on -- sweet FA. Sounds kinda racist to me.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
How is it you know a Supreme Court Justice has cheated---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 10:37pm.
on his taxes? Or are you mistaking Charlie Rangel for a sitting Justice? The messenger is always in danger of being attacked when he continually brings messages full of BS.he wrote a letter to Holder saying so
Submitted by hayate1 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:20pm.
well, at least admitting to the fact that income wasnt reported. he claimed it was inadvertent. Liar. Great person for the SCOTUS.
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
Did you get the information
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:38pm.
Did you get the information that Thomas lied the same place you got the birth certificate? LOL
No, let's go shove the messengers in the dirt
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 10:41pm.
Really? If Clarence talks more everything will be okey dokey? It's not possible they want to twist his words? Has his "tax evasion" been proven? You know, the way it was with Timothy Geitner and Charlie Rangel? Is Thomas's wife not allowed to work or have positions on issues because she's married to him? Why was this o.k. for HRC?
When libs attack conservatives for the same actions (that Thomas has allegedly committed) that liberals have been proven to have done, but the liberals have been given a pass, they have no credibilty.
So What Are You Saying?
Submitted by hayate1 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:14pm.
That it is ok to be unethical, dishonest and partisan bc someone else is too? this is a sitting justice of the SCOTUS! He is not a politician and should be doing his job solely based on the application of the Constitution to the law of the land. This guy is taking clear political positions and/or putting himself in a position to be influenced thereby. Saying that Rangel cheats on his taxes or Hillary influenced bill is hardly an excuse for what Justice Thomas might be doing. The former 2 are politicians and that is what politicians do. They lie, cheat and otherwise do whatever it takes to accomplish their given political objectives. Thomas is a JUSTICE in the highest court on the land! he is part of the tripartite system geared to be the arbiters of truth,justice and the constitutional way so as to be a check to the politicians. He is not just another politician, or shouldnt be anyway. The very fact that the liberals are attacking him and th conservatives are defending him is a clear indicator that he is pl;aying in the political arena. if the court cannot be above the politics of the issues then how can it be counted upon to be objective and focused on the relevant legal, constitutional issues in any case?
I mean, Thomas voted in favor of Citizens United while his wife was working for groups that backed it and while he himself was attending events sponsored by backers of that fight. What kind of bull is that?
As to his cheating on taxes, he admitted it himself!! He called it an inadvertent oversight. I guess the fact that his wife earned $700 k working for political groups is something that is easily overlooked.
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
There's a huge difference
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:28pm.
There's a huge difference between being a tax cheat and making a mistake on your taxes.
Why do you accept that it's o.k. for our representatives to be liars and cheats? Is it because they're democrats? I haven't researched it but i would imagine the other justices have conflicts too. None of them live in a bubble.
Is it possible that the conservatives supporting Thomas and the liberals attacking Thomas isn't his fault? That this is what always happens?
By the way, do you get this excited at the corruption of Obama and his administration? Just wondering.
good points
Submitted by hayate1 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:51pm.
There is a huge difference. to assume that he is telling the truth about making mistakes is to buy the idea that he didn't know that his wife earned almost $700,000 over those years. To me that means that he is either lying or stupid. Given that he is lying then he had purpose. what purpose? to hide the political work of his wife bc he knew that it would appear to be somewhat improprietous. which then leads us to believe that he knows it is bad bc he was influenced by it. afterall, if he had no connection to those activities nor any communication with his wife about same then he would have no issue with properly disclosing that income and it's source.
Or maybe he is just stupid. could be. has anyone ever heard him utter a peep about the cases before the court?
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
Don't hold back. Call for a public lynching.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 10:19pm.
Show some balls.
That is so funny*
Submitted by cajun2 on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:32pm.
A judge makes a mistake on his taxes, writes a letter to ERIC HOLDER, who sends a copy of the letter to TIMOTHY GEITNER.....rofl
hayate1,When will you stop being just another drive by troll???
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 10:09pm.
There are 70,000 pages of tax law. EVERYONE cheats on their taxes.
Rest assured you will never have to worry about any of that. Lofty things like Financial audits of any kind will never happen to you, unless some trust fund hurls in your direction.
Ya know .../gotta to cover the cost of the jet rides.../rental cars/...office staff to make one of them visits personal.
Tax Doctors on call.
Sometimes they hit gold...
Justice Clarence Thomas, Is a great American.
Why does the total number of verbiage units matter?
You Didn't Build That.
Everyone Cheats?
Submitted by hayate1 on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 3:07am.
Maybe, but how and to what degree? Adding a few bucks to your schedule A or C is one thing. It is quite another to completely omit reporting of a six figure income for years. While sitting as the ultimate arbiter of justice and law one must expect some sort of higher standard I think. Are we a nation of dishonest scofflaws whose illegal behavior is commensurate with our power and wealth? Justice Thomas is a great man except for the fact that he is dishonest?
I dont cheat. Is that bad while cheating is ok if you are a republican, bad if your are a democrat or is it of equal measure for all?
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
Maybe, but how and to what degree? That IS THE ISSUE
Submitted by upcountrywater on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 12:48pm.
You Didn't Build That.
hayate's posts---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 3:48am.
resemble what I think those of a junior high school student who had just learned to cut and paste would look like.
A student who lives in a commune fondly named Haight-Ashbury, with his parents, grandparents, and great grandparents; worshipers all at the shrine of JFK, Woodstock, Timothy Leary, ganja, and LSD; and who read a chapter every night before bedtime from "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance".
I think the whole clan might well be leftists.
MD
but what about the issue at hand?
Submitted by hayate1 on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 4:37pm.
the elite and powerful in this country are now above the law as we can see more clearly than ever with Justice Thomas. he broke the law and then repeatedly lied about the fact, which btw is a crime. clinton was impeached and disbarred for lying so why is Thomas getting a pass? the new america, the rule of men, not law. for the rich and powerful anyway. murder, torture, lying on federal forms, no problem for those few lucky members of the new oligarchy.
forget liberal or conservative or whatever. this is about the foundation of this country. when the term 'justice for all' is meaningless then we need to push back as a people. bush, obama, repubs, dems are all allowing this to happen and we all sit back and argue about what? name calling anytime a fact that needs to be dealt with is just doing what they want us to do. why should Thomas or clinton or obama or bush or any of these dogs get away with crimes?
is it liberal to believe that everyone must be equal under the law?
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
Subject: Tell Clarence
Submitted by hayate1 on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 9:42pm.
Subject: Tell Clarence Thomas: Recuse yourself
Dear Friend,
A case challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform bill passed by Congress is headed to the Supreme Court, and Justice Clarence Thomas has a supreme ethical conflict.
It's been widely reported that the Thomas family has financial ties to the conservative organizations leading the campaign to bring down our new health care law -- the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Rep. Anthony Weiner and 73 other members of Congress have signed a letter detailing the appearance of ethical conflict and asking Justice Thomas to recuse himself from deliberations on the constitutionality of health care reform.
I just signed a companion letter that Rep. Weiner -- a champion of progressive issues -- will deliver to the Supreme Court along with the letter signed by members of Congress.
I hope you'll join me and sign the letter as well. There's more information about it and an easy way to sign it at the link below.
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/thomas_recuse/?r_by=-3892349-tlobsdx&rc=paste2
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
The Repubs should do the same
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 9:52pm.
Sign a paper saying Weiner is an a$$!
Tell me
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 9:53pm.
Have you sent similar letters regarding Jeffery Imelt and the employees/lobbyists for Goldman Sachs?
Any paper carried by Anthony Weiner---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 9:47pm.
is not even worth using as toilet tissue.
Whether pronounced Weeeener or Whiner, it fits the persona.
He is a dick, and a cry-baby.
He is also a despicable piece of flesh.
MD