Skip to comments.New Blue Nightmare: Clarence Thomas and the Amendment of Doom
Posted on 08/29/2011 1:56:16 PM PDT by Da Bilge Troll
Lord of the Rings aficionados know that the evil lord Sauron paid little attention to the danger posed by two hobbits slowly struggling across the mountains and deserts of Mordor until he suddenly realized that the ring on which all his power depended was about to be hurled into the pits of Mount Doom. All at once the enemy plan became clear; what looked like stupidity was revealed as genius, and Sauron understood everything just when it was too late to act.
Jeffrey Toobins gripping, must-read profile of Clarence and Virginia Thomas in the New Yorker gives readers new insight into what Sauron must have felt: Toobin argues that the only Black man in public life that liberals could safely mock and despise may be on the point of bringing the Blue Empire down.
In fact, Toobin suggests, Clarence Thomas may be the Frodo Baggins of the right; his lonely and obscure struggle has led him to the point from which he may be able to overthrow the entire edifice of the modern progressive state.
In several of the most important areas of constitutional law, Thomas has emerged as an intellectual leader of the Supreme Court. Since the arrival of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., in 2005, and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., in 2006, the Court has moved to the right when it comes to the free-speech rights of corporations, the rights of gun owners, and, potentially, the powers of the federal government; in each of these areas, the majority has followed where Thomas has been leading for a decade or more. Rarely has a Supreme Court Justice enjoyed such broad or significant vindication.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.the-american-interest.com ...
But an excellent point. Clarence Thomas (a fellow Husker fan!) is not a small obscure being. He is one of the most powerful men in the world.
Is he Gandolf?
Thomas will outlive Zer0’s influence.
...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.
J. Scalia, concurring in Raich
Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything, and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.
J.Thomas, dissenting in Raich
Never seemed that the “ring of power” was all that powerful...the ring turned the wearer invisible. Big deal. Was there more to it?
(One of the few books of this genre that I couldn’t take reading ... got all my info from the movies)
Read for later. Thanks.
After reading his autobiography, my respect for him has only grown. I’m proud to be his son’s friend.
MUST READ. An absolutely vital article.
The Wheel of Time series by the late Robert Jordan was better, anyhow, IMO.
All in all, the Lord of the Rings trilogy provides an interesting take on the lust for, and corrupting influence of, great power, with emphasis on its application in socialism. The chapter called "The Scouring of the Shire" provides a rather eerie and prescient picture of British society. This was left out of the final movie, of course.
It gave power, and corrupted one based on his (or her, in the case of Galadriel) native power. That is why the wise, such as Gandalf or Elrond, feared to hold the
Ring, even for safekeeping.
(OK, I’m a Tolkien geek)
Hell, Zerø will outlive Zerø’s influence.
Thomas is correct, of course. I don’t understand Scalia on this...his argument is exactly the ste one the statits have used for decades to give nearly complete power to the federal government. Any idea that is distinty NOT in line with the Federalist intentions of our Founders.
Thomas is correct, and true to the original intent of the Founders.
I have always admired and respected Scalia. He has an incredibly brilliant mind, but somewhere along the road he lost his way and ended up in a statist mindset. He’s no friend of the Second Amendment either. Tragic.