www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/803541/posts?page=1,50
Black conservative ping If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. People have accused me of forgetting that I am black, and I respond to them by telling them "yes I have forgotten that I am black, because it makes no difference to me or to my behavior. Christian 69 Post Reply | 70 Private Reply | 71 To 5 | 72 View Replies To: anechoic He is most definitely NOT dumb. But he writes quite a number of opinions - and very well-written opinions they are. There's not been a justice in the last 60 years I admire more, and that includes Scalia. It is essentially a power issue, however, in that the 'soft-spot' of which you speak means they want Thomas to exercise his power on their behalf or in their perceived interests. And indeed, putting a black or a woman or Jew on the Court specifically because of the 'group attribute' invites that assumption on the part of group members. Where the black leadership is concerned, I think the issue comes more directly to power: Thomas' approach to the law, if widely adopted, would strike at the heart of their power, as they presently understand it. The other criticism of Thomas, which you did not mention, is that a fair number of left-leaning and liberal legal commentators do not think Thomas particularly bright. Possibly because one couldn't be part of WEBD's 'talented tenth' if one held views such as those Thomas has? There has been quite a bit of questioning of black people's intellectual abilities on these boards over the past few weeks. But instead of flaming you, I'll ask one simple question: Can you present any empirial evidence that supports your claim that Justice Thomas "follows the lead" of anyone other than himself? The justice who record is most like his own is Scalia - but he disagrees with Scalia from time to time. Thomas just isn't a man who needs to hear his own voice and read his own writing to affirm his intellectual abilities. If what you were saying is true, the dullards path is one that would receive no censure from the left and politically correct. Thomas, in my estimation, is probably the most intellectually rigorous of all the justices. He listens carefully, makes up his mind according to his vision of the responsibilities of the position, and refuses to engage in the verbal gymnastics the others are so fond of, simply to satisfy you and others like you that he is reasonably intelligent. Doesn't matter what the lie is, anyone spreading one who get's found out and has a majority view will pummel you half witless with semantics to shut you up if you betray their lie. One doesn't have to look very far to see this stuff in other places. Without taking away any of your own observations, I would like to add a slightly different perspective. Clarence Thomas is not only a strict Constitutionalist (though this is certainly true), he is also informed by his Catholicism. Speaking as a Catholic myself, I have been impressed with how well Justice Thomas has demonstrated proper Catholic teaching on justice and law. Justice Scalia, though also a Catholic, does not seem as influenced by Church teachings in his own legal thought. I do not at all mean Thomas lets his Catholicism trump the Constitution. I mean Justice Thomas properly applies Catholic teaching within the framework of the Constitution. The most interesting examples I have found are the cases where Thomas and Scalia disagree - sometimes by voting on opposite sides of an issue, sometimes by voting the same way, but offering differing opinions on their vote. I find myself almost always prefering the legal vision of Thomas in these cases, and I suspect this is largely because of the way Catholicism has shaped both of our thinking. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and others do not want their herds to understand that they can knock down the liberal intellectual fence with little effort and find greener pastures that Jesse and Al do not control. Clarence Thomas has done just that, therefore he must be condemned so the cattle do not realize that his pasture is much nicer than the one they are in. So, of course, with a black man on the court who does not do his very best to redirect decisions toward the disproportionate benefit of other black people. That view of government has subtly taken over the philisophical underpinnings of the entire Democratic party. It is a profoundly collectivist, class-based view of power sharing that has a good deal of academic theory backing it in the postmodern movement, the idea that politics in general and political office in particular, exist only to function as a means of transfer of exploitation from one class to another. There is no room in this theory for an officeholder who attempts to serve all of the people, not simply whatever identified power groups to which he or she belongs. Women getting the vote was one example of an entrenched power group opening that up for the benefit of all, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being another - examples to the contrary abound, but rather than consider that invalidation of the whole theory, the theorists consider it proof that that power group is made up of stupid people. They, of course, do not intend to behave that way when they attain power, and in fact, have not done so when it comes to the political makeup of university faculties and tenure committees. That, writ large, is their view of national politics, and the reason they must be kept from office. The debates in the court room are essentially grandstanding. Real debates between the Justices take place in private. He only (rarely) asks for clarification when a point germane to the case is truly not clear. He speaks in public about them too, in case you're inclined to think others write his opinions for him. They must have REASON behind their principles, not just emotion (like many on the left). Usually the results are the same, but when he and Scalia disagree, that seems to be the pivot upon which they disagree. Thomas educated himself and has proven that anyone in America white black or otherwise can achieve whatever they put their mind to. This puts the ball back in the hand of the "victim" who was feeling pretty good about themselves and there community who enjoy doing nothing and getting something in return for it because they feel they are owed. Thomas is a threat to the black community, still realing from Slavery. They are afraid no matter what face they put on it to move forward out of bondage and see their community as the agent that got them through their struggle lo these many centuries. That feeling of connection which opens them up to manipulation in terms of groupthink. Also, that feeling of having to stick together will not go away at the drop of a hat, so Thomas, Condoleza, Powell must all be demonized to show others in the group what they can expect if they leave. Those that are willing to drop this insanity and realize their dreams, their full potential in America are pressured to remain trapped on the Liberal Plantation by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Quasi Infumae (sp) et al who fuel that hate for the purpose of dividing and conquering American political power. The true answer to your question is contained in the understanding of "Groupthink" and the dysfunctional behaviors it breeds. And more importantly how Groupthink is used by charlatans on the left to keep the plantation razer wire firmly in place. Eddie01 "Liberals Lie About Everything All the Time" 183 29 posted on 12/09/2002 12:23:00 PM PST by 184 The Real Eddie01 185 Post Reply | 186 Private Reply | 187 To 1 | 188 View Replies To: jdege Nice Thomas opinion choice. He votes well because he follows the lead of the other conservative Justices. Why does he seem dumb to you - because in the public sessions he is content to observe and allow others to voice questions? Because he doesn't get into verbal altercations with the other justices (at least not in public)? And what makes you think that he does not provide a lead? Who's to say that the others are not following his lead? From where did you determine that he does not write opinions? You may not be as familiar with Justice Thomas a...
|
http://csua.com/feed/