Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: uncbob
Never said I was "an authority on Thomas." I look at Thomas and Hill the same way as I'd break up a fight between my kids and I had to figure out who and what started it. It stunk, and I believe the smell comes from Thomas. Yes, there is no hard evidence, but sometimes there's no hard evidence when I sort out my kids' disagreements either. As for enlightenment, you'd have to agree that no one could expect to know everything, no matter how much they read. After tonight, I'll change my position about Thomas now from "completely ineffectual" to "largely ineffectual".

Sorry if I offended anyone here who may have particularly delicate sensibilities regarding Justice Thomas. I'm not looking for a fight, but if somebody insults me, I'm not going to walk away either.

BTW, FWIW, AFC (ret.)

70 posted on 03/19/2002 7:34:49 PM PST by USAF vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: USAF vet
I believe that if you actually spent some time reading what Thomas has written you will find that he is the second smartest Justice on the Court.

Unlike the other Justices on the Court, who all think they are the samrtest person in the world, Thomas has the humility to recognize genius when he sees it. He sees it in Justice Scalia. That is why he tends to defer to him. But Thomas is the most independent Justice on the court.

Now go read his opinions and then read his speeches. If you can name a single justice, other than Scalia, who is more intelligent or more consistently conservative, then we will accept your opinion. In the meantime don't just sit around and lazily repeat the liberal spin doctor propoganda. It won't work here.

73 posted on 03/19/2002 7:46:09 PM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

To: USAF vet
Never said I was "an authority on Thomas."

It sure didn't stop you from spouting unproven assertions about him.

Yes, there is no hard evidence, but sometimes there's no hard evidence when I sort out my kids' disagreements either.

Translation: "I'm ignorant about the facts about Thomas so I will just throw out the incredibly lame excuse about sorting out the disagreements of kids."

After tonight, I'll change my position about Thomas now from "completely ineffectual" to "largely ineffectual".

How big of you. And again you take a position with no proof.

I'm not looking for a fight, but if somebody insults me, I'm not going to walk away either.

Your self-admitted ignorance was pointed out. Instead of whining about it being an insult why don't you get your facts together? Or better yet, don't make a statement without being able to back it up with FACTS.

74 posted on 03/19/2002 7:47:00 PM PST by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

To: USAF vet
Don't have sensibilities regarding THomas . I just know when someone is parroting left wing articles about Thomas's work on the court as I have read them also . But I have also read the rebutals and you came on here making very positive statements about his performance as if your were an authority and then it was shown you weren't

Plus you now say well he is only LARGELY ineffective rather than now that I see there are facts I was unaware I will have to delve further into the matter.

And you talking about breaking up a fight between youyr kids is the typical Liberal " A pox on both their house argument" that usually occurs from the leftwing anchors on TV after the leftwing attacks somebody and they have the AUDACITY to fight back
75 posted on 03/19/2002 7:47:59 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson