Clarence Thomas: Affirmative Action = Jim Crow

Clarence Thomas compares affirmative action to Jim Crow laws​

My Take​

This discussion on affirmative action continues to spark a heated debate in the whole debacle and quite frankly, I don't believe that Affirmative Action will die out, nor it will no longer be needed. I don't really have a lot to say about this except that at least they didn't cut it out entirely and still allow it in any given entries. I think opponents of it tend to overlook some crucial factors as to why it's still necessary, and it's much more linked to the whole populace as we speak. In other words, the idea of a merit-based construct is merely an illusion.

 

I predicted this coming - (the reexamination of the need for affirmative action and other civil rights era legislation) - with the coming of a black man in the white house.

Why would a "post-race" america need affirmative action? heh heh. :roll:

Clarence Thomas is obviously a dullard. He has a reputation for not saying much about most legal issues, likely because he's not much of a thinker and doesn't want to be found out or put on the spot. Mainly what he has to say is stuff that got him his position on the court - advancing by being the "conservative"black guy who's as disgusted with black people as white bigots want everyone to be.

He reminds me of Herman Cain - mr. "don't make trouble" during the civil rights era, yet his whole career was likely founded on affirmative action policies. (That is, if herman cain was indeed serious with his stuff. I have a sneaking suspicion that this guy was just making a fool of his fans.)

 

He's actually an affirmative action baby, which is pretty ironic since the same people who lambasted those like Sotomayor, they are giving him a pass because "he deserved it."

 

yeah, its typical if people like him......I can do this or that but you can not....

 

Clarence Thomas should drop from the bench, and give it to a "more qualified white person." Honestly Thomas should put up or shut up.

 

Excellent point. Or give it to a more qualified person in general. Shouldn't be too hard to find.

 

.......How can we isolated and malign the man when he was just one vote making-up a majority vote on the issue......Tell the truth,... the real problem you have with him is that he is a black conservative republican...right ?

 

wrong. though you're right, I don't like black "conservative" "republicans".

"Unfortunately for the University, the educational benefits flowing from student body diversity– assuming they exist"

That's why I don't like him. He got his, yet he doesn't care if every other black person is on stuck, at the back of the bus, eating unhealthy "free market" food, on the way to a glass ceiling job, for slave wages, breathing unclean air, no prospects for advancement, living in segregated societies, with no equal protection under the law, being bullied by cops, etc., etc.

He's basically consistently against any societal progress, as a political principle.

The dude's impresses me to be a psyched-out dullard, like most black "conservative" republicans.

 

that can be said very easily but here is a dude that took full advantage of affirmative action and now....really. This is the same guy screaming high tech lynching (trying to claim to be black) when he was in a hearing for his present position for sexual harrassment

nepotism is a large for of affirmative action....is that illegal ? no. why not?

is unemployment status discrimination illegal? meaning if you are unemployed they dont want you.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/16/news/economy/unemployed_need_not_apply/index.htm

 

The House Slave has also voted against Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Talk about hating your own race.

 

And this is a man who was a Black Panther in his youth. He was very militant upon entering university, but was traumatized by the white students' consensus that he was less intelligent and an affirmative action admission. His autobiography spells out a lot of the anxiety this caused him.

 

It's less to do with him being a conservative Republican, and more with the fact that, as a product of Affirmative Action, one would think he would be a bit more sympathetic towards the whole issue. Now, given his "enlightened" stage, would it make more sense for him to leave the bench and allow somebody else who, by his definition, is more qualified than him?

After all, he has to maintain consistency with his judicial philosophy, right?

 

Thomas just hates his race and thinks it is payback. House slaves of his ilk talk so much jive of that conservative claptrap. Plus he want to burn the bridges for future Blacks on AA saying there is no racism and guilt tripping some Blacks on "merits".

 

This all day!!!! Repped

 

LOL. Most WHite students in college think this about Black classmates anyway, excluding close friends.

They thought you were a dumbass BEFORE affirmative action, they think you're still a dumbass AFTER affirmative action.

I heard the woman who filed this discrimination suit against UT Law wouldn't have gotten in even if there were no affirmative action policy.

Maybe some of the minorities she believes were admitted over her would not have been accepted, but she definitely would not have been under any circumstance.

Clarence Thomas benefited from Affirmative action getting into Holy Cross, Yale Law AND his appointment on the Supreme Court.
He was far from the most qualified minority to fill the vacant Thurgood Marshall seat.


It's like he doesn't understand the purpose of affirmative action or that college admissions aren't a science. On some level all student bodies are admitted on a subjective standard.

Whether or not you meet an 'admission standard' has nothing to do with whether or not someone is capable of graduating from that institution.

 

Clarence got issues.......a whole lot of issues.

On today's reading of Gay Rights, observers in the court say he was sitting there chewing gum and making it clear he was chewing while the decision was being read.

 

I think we've established Justice Thomas is a megalomaniacal freak.

 

I wanted Clarence Thomas to be appointed to the Supreme Court. It wasn't because of his views or that he is a republican. The Anita Hill incident was a real cliffhanger. Looking back at that incident, I was afraid that this incident, now made public, would add more salt on the wound in terms of relationships between men and women. I recall Thomas officiated Rush Limbaugh's wedding. In terms of Affirmative Action, I believe some people do need it while others do not. That said, Affirmative Action will not go away. Thomas had been saying for years since sitting on the bench how Affirmative Action had ruined his life and how he wanted to be there on his own merits. I believe everyone needs a boost here and there, every now and then. That's your business and not anyone else's. Thomas wants to prove to everyone that he is a true conservative and all it entails. He picked his side and is content. This is his path to what ever journey he is on.

 

I was against that House slave being selected for the Supreme Court. I wanted Leon Higgenbottom who was a Republican and no house slave experience. Mr.H God Bless His Soul would had been a better justice than Thomas. I never forgot when that mention of a "high tech lynching" from Thomas the conservative who is against victimhood. The only person I had known who was high tech lynched was O.J.Simpson.

 

Wow, I read his book as well.....I have a "Know thy enemy" mentality which is why I read books like his, scalia, and Marco Rubio

I remember him saying how he was at harvard when MLK was killed and how he overheard white students overjoyed.......

however, as much as I disagree and even dislike him....I kind of see why he is the way he is. Clarence grew up like most blacks did in that time...however his answer/solution to all of it is DRASTICALLY different