Clarence Thomas has always been a man of honor and high intellect in my book, but I’ve taken no small amount of abuse and ridicule from liberals for it. They believed Anita Hill while I pegged her as a bald-faced liar and opportunist from the get-go.
My admiration for Justice Thomas was increased by reading his excellent book, My Grandfather’s Son. Thomas is the ultimate poor kid who made good against great odds, without any help from the race establishment of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al. He didn’t need their help because he was well equipped with the values of honesty and hard work thanks in no small part to his grandfather’s guidance.
I recently suffered a liberal friend and house guest refer to Thomas as “a pig.” She swallowed whole the fiction of the fabulist Anita Hill, it seems.
Clarence Thomas is still driving liberals crazy as he continues to gain stature on the Supreme Court. His influence on Constitutional jurisprudence is strong and growing. This is disturbing to liberal writer Jeffery Toobin who has a long article on Thomas in the August 29th edition of The New Yorker.
Toobin is grudgingly admiring of Thomas’ undeniable talent but also takes the opportunity to slander him as well. While praising Thomas, sort of, for his commitment to upholding the right of anonymous speech Toobin can’t resist throwing this in:
Like his intellectual heirs in the Tea Party, Thomas has a special hostility for government attempts to level the playing field in the political arena. For this Justice, the Constitution mandates the law of the jungle.
No Jeffery, it’s not the law of the jungle that Justice Thomas believes is mandated in the Constitution. The law of the jungle is rule by the strongest. Justice Thomas believes the Constitution mandates a special Rule of Law that establishes limits to the actions government may take against any citizen. Liberals tolerate limits only when it helps them get something they want. Thomas is right to be hostile to government attempts to level the playing field because that’s never the outcome and probably not even the intent. It is basic logic that one is presumed to intend the foreseeable and inevitable result of their actions. Government attempts to level the playing field never helps those it is purportedly intended for; it never makes everyone equally prosperous but invariably makes everyone equally poor and miserable.
Walter Russell Mead weighs in on Toobin at New Blue Nightmare: Clarence Thomas and the Amendment of Doom.
Mead pays Thomas this high compliment:
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.
I highly recommend both Toobin’s New Yorker piece and Walter Russell Mead’s article. You’ll learn a lot about current Constitutional jurisprudence and how one remarkable and much maligned Justice on the Supreme Court is helping to shape a new order, being the restoration of what the founding fathers intended.
See also, Michael Barone, Clarence Thomas: Liberal Nightmare on Obamacare