Posted on 10/04/2007 9:00:06 AM PDT by presidio9
The long-awaited publication of Clarence Thomas's memoir, "My Grandfather's Son," out Monday, makes you wonder: how come none of the presidential candidates have said a word about the Supreme Court in any of their debates? Three sitting justices are expected to resign in the next four years--and they're all on the liberal side: John Paul Stevens, David Souter, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The publication facts behind Thomas's book ought to be discussed by all the candidates: he received an advance of $1.5 million in 2003 from HarperCollins, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch. If you thought the Court dealt with any issues of relevance to Murdoch, you might call it a conflict of interest for Thomas to accept that payment--far more than any sitting justice ever received from any single source. At least you might mention the fabled "appearance of impropriety." You might call the $1.5 million a thank-you gift from Murdoch for services rendered. You might even wonder if it might be a subtle suggestion to other justices who will be ruling on Murdoch-related issues in the future.
Of course Thomas could avoid that "appearance of impropriety" by recusing himself for the rest of his career from any case raising issues concerning Murdoch, Fox, the First Amendment, copyright law, libel, or any other issues in media or communications law. That would give him a lot of time off.
Yes, it was the first President Bush who nominated Clarence Thomas to succeed civil rights legend Thurgood Marshall - but it was Democrats in the Senate who put him on the court. The teeth-gnashing facts about Clarence Thomas's confirmation can be found in the new book by Washington Post reporters Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher, "Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas." The vote in the Senate on Thomas was 52-48 - the smallest margin for any justice in more than a century. A shift of three votes would have kept Thomas off the court.
Here's the horrible part: at least four senators who voted for Thomas came to regret their vote within a year or two. Merida and Fletcher report that the senators who changed their mind about Thomas after voting for him include David Boren, Democrat of Oklahoma; John Breaux, Democrat of Louisiana; Fritz Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, and Warren Rudman, Republican of New Hampshire.
Even some of Thomas's most avid defenders stopped saying he told the truth about Anita Hill; Orrin Hatch told Merida and Fletcher that, even if Anita Hill told the truth, what she said about Thomas sexually harassing her wasn't really all that bad.
As for Thomas's memoir, it's a long howl of outrage against the liberals who opposed his confirmation 16 years ago. The book was treated by HarperCollins as if it were the next Harry Potter - "embargoed" until Oct. 1, the first day of the Supreme Court's fall term -- a total clampdown that made it impossible for anyone to buy the book until Monday morning. I tried to buy it at my local Barnes and Noble Sunday night at 10 pm, and was told by a nervous manager that if they sold it to me even two hours before the "embargo" ended, "the publisher would see it on the computer and we'd be fined."
Yet somehow Rush Limbaugh managed to get hold of a copy - Thomas appeared on his show for a full ninety minutes Monday morning. (Maybe the fact that Thomas presided at Rush's wedding was a factor here - an unprecedented act for a sitting Justice.) Murdoch's Fox News was next in line, with a Sean Hannity interview Tuesday.
On the other hand, Nina Totenberg, NPR's Supreme Court reporter, who broke the sexual harassment story during Thomas's confirmation hearing back in 1991, did a piece on the book on Saturday. She's one of Thomas's nemeses; somebody will definitely be in trouble for the fact that she beat the embargo.
One word. Medication.
Nice courage at the Nation — no byline.
I get a kick out of the damnation that he won’t ask questions or grant many interviews and then when he writes a book giving all the back ground information that the ink-whores could want, he is still damnned.
After Bill Clinton, the Left has lost the authority to ever again MENTION sexual harassment.
Liberals are losers.
They are also whiners.
What’s sweet about this story is that Thomas can make them whine about a 16 year old loss.
Nominating conservatives to the bench is one thing, but getting confirmation is yet another. For whatever reason, Republicans in Congress don’t have the fight in them that the Democrats do. With the support of the MSM, the Democrats will control future appointments unless something changes.
No, I call it what it is, an advance. It can't be a "gift" if it's for "services rendered." What an idiotic assertion.
I wonder if The Nation had their panties in a twist when Hillary got an $8 million advance from Simon & Schuster, which is based in New York.
And how did The Nation feel about the book by Clinton appointee Justice Stephen Breyer? ("Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution")
Going by The Nations logic, shouldnt Breyer recuse himself from any cases dealing with Democracy?
http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dynamic/News.php?NewsID=214715&lang=fra&NewsRubrique=2&pageliste=3
I bought this book on Monday morning at the Borders on the corner of Broadway and Wall Street. That morning it was displayed prominently on top of the table by the front door. It just so happened that I also bought a book for my nephew, which I had to return yesterday. Yesterday, Justice Thomas' book was nowhere to be seen. I spent a while looking for it, and I finally found it underneath the same table, and in the back, away from the door. The spot that it formerly occupied was now taken by Bill Clinton's book on charity. Above Justice Thomas' book, on top of the table in the back, was Jimmuh's book on who know (and who cares) what. This is par for the course for NYC liberals who can't do better than minimum wage jobs. It's too bad for Borders, of course, because the newest book, which is currently appearing on 60 minutes and Hannity is going to be the hottest seller. I thought about pointing this out to the manager, but then decided to spare myself the attitude and the aggravation. If these liberal bookstores insist on driving customers to the internet, just like the dinosaur media before them, that's their problem, not mine.
I hope Ruth Buzzi recuses herself any time the ACLU files a brief.
Hillary Clinton received an $8million advance from Viacom's Simon & Schuester in the brief window between the time she was elected and the time she was sworn in, neatly avoiding any "conflict of interest" in accepting such payment as a sitting senator.
Hillary Clinton Book Advance, $8 Million, Is Near Record (NY Times Published: December 16, 2000)
The writer of this article needs to lean back now and then and wipe the froth from his quivering lips.
Clarence Thomas had the wrong political view on Abortion.
Bill Clinton has the correct political view on Abortion.
Rape, sexual harassment, get oral sex from an aide, etc. were not an issue to NOW. Abortion was.
Do these jerks really want to open this can of worms?
From the article: “makes you wonder: how come none of the presidential candidates have said a word about the Supreme Court in any of their debates?”
One has.
Duncan Hunter.
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) declared that judicial nominees should be given a sonogram test before being confirmed. “If we have a judicial applicant…who can look at a sonogram of an unborn child and not see the value of human life,” then “he will not receive a judicial appointment,” Hunter announced. “I tell you what you he will receive, he will get an appointment with an optometrist so he can get a pair of eye glasses.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/23/hunter-sonogram/
You are welcome to get your useless Duncan Hunter plug in if you like, but all of the Republican candidates have talked about SCOTUS justices quite a bit. As a matter of fact, it was a debate question.
? I saw several copies of this book on sale in San Jose Airport om Friday September 28th.
So The Nation is engaging in a fairly low tech lyniching of an uppity black man.
Do your homework, you lazy excuse for a reporter.
State laws empower sitting or retired Justices to perform wedding ceremonies.
Journa-twit !
Leni
Leni
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.