You're welcome.
And your not going to admit that "Supreme Court Justice Paid Off" was a bit beyond what actually happened? Come on Jim, you can do it!
Supreme Court Justice Paid Off
- Thread starter Jim Craik
- Start date
And your not going to admit that "Supreme Court Justice Paid Off" was a bit beyond what actually happened? Come on Jim, you can do it!
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Al,
I will say, at worst this is criminal activity (yet to be proven), at best this is incredably bad judjment, giving the apperance of a pay off.
I do not know about you but I do not want either of those from a Supreme Court Justice.
The words incredably bad judjment and Supreme Court Justice should never have to be used together. But in this case they must!
Yes Al, I should have worded the heading:
"Supreme Court Justice appears to be paid off"
We are yet see if it was beyond what actually happened.
I will say, at worst this is criminal activity (yet to be proven), at best this is incredably bad judjment, giving the apperance of a pay off.
I do not know about you but I do not want either of those from a Supreme Court Justice.
The words incredably bad judjment and Supreme Court Justice should never have to be used together. But in this case they must!
Yes Al, I should have worded the heading:
"Supreme Court Justice appears to be paid off"
We are yet see if it was beyond what actually happened.
Last edited:
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Al, your sense of indignation is extraordinary!
On this sight, I have heard our President called:
A Muslum
A radical Christian
A Comunist
A Natzi
A fascist
An illegal alian
A lier
A criminal
A marxist
And responsible for oil spills
We have people with avatars showing him driving USSR ship of state...............
Where was your sense of indignation? It appears that you suffer from selecive indignation syndrom.
Could it be you are only bothered by unproven criticisem of people you support?
It makes me wonder why you would support this person anyway.
Are you aware that Clarence Thomas hasn't asked a question during oral arguments in almost four years. He sits there while cases are presented and NEVER ASKS A QUESTION. As far as I know, no other Supreme Court Justice has ever acted in this way. Why does he not ask questions?
Does he not care?
Has his mind been made up before arguments?
Is he disintersted?
Are his votes predetermined by someone else (Wife, Heratige Foundation)?
Is it better to remain silent and have people think your stupid or speak and remove all doubt?
No questions in the last four years, does that not line up nicely with his wifes income from the Heratige Foundation? It may be just a coincidence.
I do not know if this is true, but I have heard that he was voted onto the bench with the lowest % of votes in the last 100 years!
His supporters and Bush I should be embarrassed!
I for one think America diserves better!
Now for a little humor.
Minority Opinion
On this sight, I have heard our President called:
A Muslum
A radical Christian
A Comunist
A Natzi
A fascist
An illegal alian
A lier
A criminal
A marxist
And responsible for oil spills
We have people with avatars showing him driving USSR ship of state...............
Where was your sense of indignation? It appears that you suffer from selecive indignation syndrom.
Could it be you are only bothered by unproven criticisem of people you support?
It makes me wonder why you would support this person anyway.
Are you aware that Clarence Thomas hasn't asked a question during oral arguments in almost four years. He sits there while cases are presented and NEVER ASKS A QUESTION. As far as I know, no other Supreme Court Justice has ever acted in this way. Why does he not ask questions?
Does he not care?
Has his mind been made up before arguments?
Is he disintersted?
Are his votes predetermined by someone else (Wife, Heratige Foundation)?
Is it better to remain silent and have people think your stupid or speak and remove all doubt?
No questions in the last four years, does that not line up nicely with his wifes income from the Heratige Foundation? It may be just a coincidence.
I do not know if this is true, but I have heard that he was voted onto the bench with the lowest % of votes in the last 100 years!
His supporters and Bush I should be embarrassed!
I for one think America diserves better!
Now for a little humor.
Minority Opinion
Last edited:
Jim......SHHHHHH! I hate to mention it, but if this thread gets googled by too many TEA partiers, it could spell big trouble for SCJ Thomas. These are all things about which the TEA Party feels very strongly (or if not, IMHO they SHOULD)....soon there will be a movement afoot within the TEA Party to demand more responsible government actions from all agents, including the Supreme Court.........some people will even go so far as to suggest you are a closet TEA Party double agent, sent here to agitate the natives....we wouldn't want that.......:stunned: .
Aaaaahhhhh....but, then you redeem yourself:
+++++++++1 on Bush I :veryangry: !!!
Cheers from Doug!!
Last edited:
Al, your sense of indignation is extraordinary!
On this sight, I have heard our President called:
A Muslum
A radical Christian
A Comunist
A Natzi
A fascist
An illegal alian
A lier
A criminal
A marxist
And responsible for oil spills
We have people with avatars showing him driving USSR ship of state...............
Where was your sense of indignation? It appears that you suffer from selecive indignation syndrom.
Could it be you are only bothered by unproven criticisem of people you support?
It makes me wonder why you would support this person anyway.
Are you aware that Clarence Thomas hasn't asked a question during oral arguments in almost four years. He sits there while cases are presented and NEVER ASKS A QUESTION. As far as I know, no other Supreme Court Justice has ever acted in this way. Why does he not ask questions?
Does he not care?
Has his mind been made up before arguments?
Is he disintersted?
Are his votes predetermined by someone else (Wife, Heratige Foundation)?
Is it better to remain silent and have people think your stupid or speak and remove all doubt?
No questions in the last four years, does that not line up nicely with his wifes income from the Heratige Foundation? It may be just a coincidence.
I do not know if this is true, but I have heard that he was voted onto the bench with the lowest % of votes in the last 100 years!
His supporters and Bush I should be embarrassed!
I for one think America diserves better!
Now for a little humor.
Minority Opinion
Well I don't thinks he's a Nazi, fascist, illegal alien, responsible for oil spills,
or a criminal, time will tell on the remainder.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Thanks Al,
I appreciate your post.
d
To tell you the truth, I listed those from memory I may have missed a few, but you get the point. Feel free to add any that come to mind.
Al, i really did not know about the 'not asking question part' until this issue cam up. I know I gave some snappy possibilities but I'm kind of at a loss for a reason. What do you make of this?
I appreciate your post.
d
To tell you the truth, I listed those from memory I may have missed a few, but you get the point. Feel free to add any that come to mind.
Al, i really did not know about the 'not asking question part' until this issue cam up. I know I gave some snappy possibilities but I'm kind of at a loss for a reason. What do you make of this?
Last edited:
I didn't know that either. Sufficient answers from questions by other Justices? Shy? Got me!
Pat
Supporter
I didn't know that either. Sufficient answers from questions by other Justices? Shy? Got me!
In an interview at a law school, Justice Thomas said that he carefully reads the briefs making questioning unnecessary. But then Justice Scalia has been criticized by the left for asking too many questions. So I'm sure someone will find fault with whatever he does and soon blame him for the Tucson shootings. I guess I shouldn't find it surprising with three conservatives on the court, the attacks from the left seem to focus on Justice Thomas. In his book, "My Grandfather's Son", he describes how he was singled out by the liberal establishment, at the behest of his civil rights enemies, not just for criticism but also for total annihilation. His sin: being deeply disturbed by the court-ordered busing of black children to white schools where came to the conclusion that liberal policies on race, especially welfare and affirmative action, were harming rather than helping blacks.
With the liberal blogosphere calling for his prosecution, his analogy from the Anita Hill days still rings true. It's nothing but a high-tech lynching.
I find it strange that the liberal elites find a black conservative justice so threatening. The attacks on this man have been unrelenting since he was nominated. It seems that liberals who have made a career out of "helping " the black race with their social reforms are truely threatened by a black man in charge of his own thoughts, especially when they don't jibe with the conventional academic "wisdom" of the socialist elites. I for one think that the busing of blacks has had a detrimental effect upon black men and women that, however great the intent, has produced unintended pain.
Garry
Garry
And now for a differing opinion :stunned: .
As a public education employee I had to have a master's degree, but I also had to satisfy other requirements, many of which required that I affirm by signature that I had completed certain trainings or met other requirements as a condition of employment. Failure to do so, or failure to report accurately on those forms, was certain to result in my dismissal.
SCJ Thomas, regardless of his political philosophy, failed to accurately complete one of the forms that was a condition of his employment. Being a Supreme Court Judge, he doesn't really have a "boss" who can bring him into an office, present him with the form, and give him a letter of dismissal, it requires an impeachment procedure.
This is nothing at all like a lynching...it is simply a matter of holding him accountable for his failure to complete accurately a form that by law he must complete as a condition of employment. Nothing more, nothing less.
...and, no, I don't read ANY of the liberal blogs, nor do I read ANY of the conservative blogs, I prefer to get my information from much less biased sources. An ex-friend mentioned that he was a member on a conservative forum and that if you didn't have conservative beliefs, well, you really didn't have any business there....do you think the information on that "blog" would have been unbiased? Surely not.......
Veek, we're all entitled to our beliefs, but this is not a case where there is some grey "wiggle room", it's all black and white. SCJ Thomas either did or did not complete the form accurately, or ensure that the form was filled out completely and accurately before he signed it. Any lawyer would simply insist on a "yes" or "no" answer to that question from a witness or defendant on the witness stand, regardless of the political leanings of the defendant, witness, judge....etc., etc., etc.
It is right that he have his feet held to the fire for this transgression. It would be equally right if he had "liberal" leanings. It's just a matter of right and wrong, so to blame the liberal bloggers is just as wrong.
Cheers from Doug!!
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Veek,
I have several thoughts about your post.
He said that he is attacked from the left, I think that his family receiving the better part on a million dollars from a politically motivated organisation and then lieing about it should get you attacked by everyone.
He may be disturbed about afirmative action, but as I understand it he made good use of it during his younger years.
This seems to be a pattern with concervatives, both Mr Thomas and RonR use liberal programs to get ahead (affirmative action/student loans) then once they have "theirs" they want to pull up the ladder and cut those lazy poor folk off from this type of help!
Finally, Veek, it seems to me that carefully reading briefs, with apposing views would lead me have a lot of questions. Unless of course my mind was made up before I read them.
It seems to me that he does what ever he can to make life harder for minorities and the poor in gereral, then when called on it he pulls the "Lynching card" it's because I'm black.
From what I have seen, he got the gig because he is black. He was replacing a black Justice and Bush need a concirvative "black" to replace Justice Thurgood Marshal.
Unfortunatlly, the Concirvative Black pool was very shallow.
I have several thoughts about your post.
He said that he is attacked from the left, I think that his family receiving the better part on a million dollars from a politically motivated organisation and then lieing about it should get you attacked by everyone.
He may be disturbed about afirmative action, but as I understand it he made good use of it during his younger years.
This seems to be a pattern with concervatives, both Mr Thomas and RonR use liberal programs to get ahead (affirmative action/student loans) then once they have "theirs" they want to pull up the ladder and cut those lazy poor folk off from this type of help!
Finally, Veek, it seems to me that carefully reading briefs, with apposing views would lead me have a lot of questions. Unless of course my mind was made up before I read them.
It seems to me that he does what ever he can to make life harder for minorities and the poor in gereral, then when called on it he pulls the "Lynching card" it's because I'm black.
From what I have seen, he got the gig because he is black. He was replacing a black Justice and Bush need a concirvative "black" to replace Justice Thurgood Marshal.
Unfortunatlly, the Concirvative Black pool was very shallow.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Gary,
Thats a joke right?
Are you really telling us the Liberals don't like Thomas because he is an educated black person?
You mean Like Dr King & Thurgood Marshal?
Are you saying the majority of Blacks hate him because he is Black?
The left do not like Thomas because of his views and actions.
Gary, please explain who the Liberal "elite" are and how they differ from regular Liberals?
Thats a joke right?
Are you really telling us the Liberals don't like Thomas because he is an educated black person?
You mean Like Dr King & Thurgood Marshal?
Are you saying the majority of Blacks hate him because he is Black?
The left do not like Thomas because of his views and actions.
Gary, please explain who the Liberal "elite" are and how they differ from regular Liberals?
Pat
Supporter
He didn't state public information on a form. He subsequently corrected it. So do you want him lynched? You certainly are entitled to believe whatever you wish. But do I blame liberal media and bloggers for the hate and distortion that's followed, you bet!
Bill Clinton lies to a grand jury, that's fine "it's a family matter". Sandy Berger stuffs classified documents from the National Archives down his pants and that's called "careless" by the media. That's ok too.
But the left can't stand an "uppity" conservative intellectual black man and the demands for prosecution of Thomas and the vitriol of the liberal blogs have been reprehensible.
The news reports that he did not list his wife's income of $680,000 but somehow omitted the fact (except for ABC) THAT HE DIDN"T HAVE TO. In doing so the media and blogs skillfully painted the omission on a form failing to cite his wife’s employer to hints of graft and a $680K bribe. (Which is Jim’s unfounded assertion in the title of this blog.) Justice Thomas incorrectly filled out a form, none of us know why. He corrected the error. There is no evidence whatsoever of bribe, graft or corruption but that's not how Justice Thomas is being smeared. This is Anita Hill high-tech lynching part II.
Do me a favor, before you react to any more about Justice Thomas read this:
Native Son - Reason Magazine
Then come to your own conclusions about the man and the hate that targets him.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Damian,
No one was talking race until both Veek and Gary made points about "race".
You say....
Jim and others.........excuse me!!!!!!
Gary and Veek brough up the Lynching, Affirmative action, busing and that we fear educated blacks. If you have a beef about that, do not start your post "JIM"
No one was talking race until both Veek and Gary made points about "race".
You say....
Jim and others.........excuse me!!!!!!
Gary and Veek brough up the Lynching, Affirmative action, busing and that we fear educated blacks. If you have a beef about that, do not start your post "JIM"
I only used your name first as you were the last to mention race when you stated that he got the job because Bush needed a black man to fill a vacancy. "From what I have seen, he got the gig because he is black. He was replacing a black Justice and Bush need a Conservative "black" to replace Justice Thurgood Marshal". From that I got from that was that he was nominated not because of his credentials but because he was black (obviously he had cred. to be considered but it was his skin color that got him the job). If I misunderstood than I apologize.