Clarence Thomas (1 Viewer)

saintsfan said:

Did anybody catch this?? I thought it was a good interview. I learned a lot of things I didn't know about Justice Thomas.Sad how he is hated by the black community for being a conservative. I would think a black Supreme Court Justice would be a source of great pride. I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

saintsfan said:

Sad how he is hated by the black community for being a conservative.

Click to expand...

[scooter] said:

saintsfan said:

Sad how he is hated by the black community for being a conservative.

Click to expand...

They don't hate him for being a conservative -- they hate him for denouncing the very programs that helped him get to where he is today.

Click to expand...

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound. Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

laniquity said:

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaultingharassing her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Highly insightful, gives me some inclination as to your ability to comment. But I wasn't talking to you, and you don't know me, so please refrain from further discussion, not that you've participated yet.

Click to expand...

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound. Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Highly insightful, gives me some inclination as to your ability to comment. But I wasn't talking to you, and you don't know me, so please refrain from further discussion, not that you've participated yet.

Click to expand...

I didn't think there was much more that could have been said that the emoticon didn't imply. You called him out on making a broad generalization about liberals and then did the exact same thing about conservatives. I wasn't taking a personal shot, just pointing out the irony.And you're right, I don't know you. I'm avoiding injuries, how are you doing this morning.

Click to expand...

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Highly insightful, gives me some inclination as to your ability to comment. But I wasn't talking to you, and you don't know me, so please refrain from further discussion, not that you've participated yet.

Click to expand...

I didn't think there was much more that could have been said that the emoticon didn't imply. You called him out on making a broad generalization about liberals and then did the exact same thing about conservatives. I wasn't taking a personal shot, just pointing out the irony.And you're right, I don't know you. I'm avoiding injuries, how are you doing this morning.

Click to expand...

That's fairly accurate, except that I called him out for making a ridiculous statement, not a generalization. Because of this, I categorized him as a tool.

If you're a conservative, I'm sorry if this hurt your feelings, but Slinger really is a tool, and makes you all look bad.

And if you think I was making a broad generalization, I invite you to visit a few threads on this board, and I think you'll see what I'm talking about. If you want to, that is. I'm not saying all conservatives are brain dead, just some of them.

Click to expand...

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Highly insightful, gives me some inclination as to your ability to comment. But I wasn't talking to you, and you don't know me, so please refrain from further discussion, not that you've participated yet.

Click to expand...

I didn't think there was much more that could have been said that the emoticon didn't imply. You called him out on making a broad generalization about liberals and then did the exact same thing about conservatives. I wasn't taking a personal shot, just pointing out the irony.And you're right, I don't know you. I'm avoiding injuries, how are you doing this morning.

Click to expand...

That's fairly accurate, except that I called him out for making a ridiculous statement, not a generalization. Because of this, I categorized him as a tool.

If you're a conservative, I'm sorry if this hurt your feelings, but Slinger really is a tool, and makes you all look bad.

And if you think I was making a broad generalization, I invite you to visit a few threads on this board, and I think you'll see what I'm talking about. If you want to, that is. I'm not saying all conservatives are brain dead, just some of them.

Click to expand...

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

avoiding injuries said:

TexanFan02 said:

Slinger said:

saintsfan said:

I commend him for having the guts to think for himself and not getting all of his personal views from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Click to expand...

Now if only the FBG's Liberals could do the same.

Click to expand...

Do you just exist to be a complete tool in every thread you reply in? Or is it just schtick?

I'm going with option A, that you're just another brain-dead conservative tool.

But maybe it's schtick. If so, please cease and desist, it's not funny.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Highly insightful, gives me some inclination as to your ability to comment. But I wasn't talking to you, and you don't know me, so please refrain from further discussion, not that you've participated yet.

Click to expand...

I didn't think there was much more that could have been said that the emoticon didn't imply. You called him out on making a broad generalization about liberals and then did the exact same thing about conservatives. I wasn't taking a personal shot, just pointing out the irony.And you're right, I don't know you. I'm avoiding injuries, how are you doing this morning.

Click to expand...

That's fairly accurate, except that I called him out for making a ridiculous statement, not a generalization. Because of this, I categorized him as a tool.

If you're a conservative, I'm sorry if this hurt your feelings, but Slinger really is a tool, and makes you all look bad.

And if you think I was making a broad generalization, I invite you to visit a few threads on this board, and I think you'll see what I'm talking about. If you want to, that is. I'm not saying all conservatives are brain dead, just some of them.

Click to expand...

I'm confused as to why you think it hurt my feelings or that I took it personal. Thanks for the invite though.

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound. Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

:X

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound. Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

:X

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound. Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

:X

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

On The Rocks said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

I am sorry. I didn't mean to misquote. I misread your post. However I would say even to state that he is "one of the least" would be too general of a term to use.

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

I am sorry. I didn't mean to misquote. I misread your post. However I would say even to state that he is "one of the least" would be too general of a term to use.

Click to expand...

What he has done? What has he led on? He is pretty much a yes man for the conservative side of the court.

Click to expand...

saintsfan said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

I am sorry. I didn't mean to misquote. I misread your post. However I would say even to state that he is "one of the least" would be too general of a term to use.

Click to expand...

What he has done? What has he led on? He is pretty much a yes man for the conservative side of the court.

Click to expand...

You left out "house slave" and "Uncle Tom"

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

I do find your take on asking questions about a case you are supposed to be judging a bit odd.

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

I am sorry. I didn't mean to misquote. I misread your post. However I would say even to state that he is "one of the least" would be too general of a term to use.

Click to expand...

What he has done? What has he led on? He is pretty much a yes man for the conservative side of the court.

Click to expand...

CletiusMaximus said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

vnel8tn said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

On The Rocks said:

laniquity said:

Thinks for himself? The man doesn't ask questions during oral arguments, rather he sits there like a lump on the wall and then writes dissents that come out of left field and oftentimes have no bearing on the case. Someone should check him to make sure that he doesn't have a head wound.

Liberals disagree with Scalia and Salito on their understanding of the Constitution but at least those two present arguments that are rationally based however misguided. Thomas is so delusional that he wouldn't know a rational argument if it jumped up and bit him on the ###.

And what's with the Anita Hill nonsense? He was accused, by the victim, of sexually assaulting her and there was no investigation or inquiry in to the issue. I'll buy you argument tho but I doubt you were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton and Paula Jones nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You can do roll eyes all you want but there is nothing there that isn't common knowledge. Thomas rarely, if ever, asks questions during hearings. And his dissents are not up to the standard we see from any of the other judges on the court. And they are sometimes a bit out of left field. He will go down in the courts history as one of the least significant judges to ever sit the Supreme bench.

Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. He doesn't ask questions during oral argument, but honestly most of the questioning during oral argument is for show. I don't think it's any indication of his mental faculties. His opinions are clear and rational (and lately he hasn't been in dissent all that often, so I think you guys are talking about concurrences). I don't agree with his opinions, but I feel he's been unfairly maligned by liberals as some sort of mental midget. I see no evidence that is the case.

Click to expand...

Wow...FGIALC and I agree on something. Figured I would note it, if for nothing more than posterity.

Click to expand...

FGIALC is like NCCommish in that I hardly ever agree with them but they make me think before I post and I appreciate that. There isn't a lot of nonsense in what they say. (NCC comments about Thomas being the least significant judge to ever sit on the bench aside).

Click to expand...

One of the least.

Click to expand...

I am sorry. I didn't mean to misquote. I misread your post. However I would say even to state that he is "one of the least" would be too general of a term to use.

Click to expand...

What he has done? What has he led on? He is pretty much a yes man for the conservative side of the court.

Click to expand...

Thomas does not strike me as a yes man for other justices and I think it clear that he is not a Scalia lap dog as is the popular opinion. I do not consider his lack of questioning at oral argument to be relevant. I would never consider myself to have the legal mind Thomas has, but would say I disagree with the notion that he is a principled originalist and that principle guides his decisions. From what I've read, he is just as prone as any other justice to bend his principles and his unique if not bizarre form of originalism to engineer the result he wants.

Click to expand...

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

I do find your take on asking questions about a case you are supposed to be judging a bit odd.

Click to expand...

Why?

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

fatguyinalittlecoat said:

NCCommish said:

I do find your take on asking questions about a case you are supposed to be judging a bit odd.

Click to expand...

Why?

Click to expand...

Because when I want to know about something I ask questions. How do you do it? Can you see yourself ruling time after time and never asking a question? I don't think I could.

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

saintsfan said:

You left out "house slave" and "Uncle Tom"

Click to expand...

No I didn't. Because I have never called him or any other African American conservative that. I said what I meant. Edit for someone else.

Click to expand...

saintsfan said:

NCCommish said:

saintsfan said:

You left out "house slave" and "Uncle Tom"

Click to expand...

No I didn't. Because I have never called him or any other African American conservative that. I said what I meant. Edit for someone else.

Click to expand...

You may not have called him that, but your suggestion that he is a "yes man" for the conservative side of the court suggests that you think the man is incapable of thinking for himself which is exactly what most of his critics in the black community say. The words "house slave" and "Uncle Tom" are usually thrown in as well.In other words, it's OK to think what you want, as long as it agrees with the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world.

Click to expand...

the rover said:

statistics don't necessarily agree with the premise that Thomas is nothing but a follower:

Code:

2006 Term: Percent in Majority in 5-4 DecisionsJustice 	PercentageKennedy 	 100%Alito 				  71%Roberts 	   67%Scalia 				58%Thomas 			 58%Breyer 			  46%Souter 			  38%Ginsberg 	 33%Stevens 	 29%

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

Find out what percentage he voted with the conservatives. Bet it's higher than 58%

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

BTW I find it very interesting that Scalia and Thomas have the exact same percentage in the majority here. I wonder what that says.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

NCCommish said:

Find out what percentage he voted with the conservatives. Bet it's higher than 58%

Click to expand...

I don't understand your point here. Does anybody deny that Thomas is a conservative? If not, why is it news that he generally votes with like-minded justices?

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

IvanKaramazov said:

NCCommish said:

Find out what percentage he voted with the conservatives. Bet it's higher than 58%

Click to expand...

I don't understand your point here. Does anybody deny that Thomas is a conservative? If not, why is it news that he generally votes with like-minded justices?

Click to expand...

It's not. My point in the very beginning here is that he comes off as a lightweight

Click to expand...

that follows the main conservatives lead. And that he never deviates from that.

Click to expand...

In fact the figures quoted pretty much show as goes Scalia so goes Thomas.

Click to expand...

I just don't think much of him as a Supreme Court justice. Scalia is a conservative but I think it's obvious what he brings to the table same with Alito and Roberts. Thomas not so much.

Click to expand...

IvanKaramazov said:

NCCommish said:

IvanKaramazov said:

NCCommish said:

Find out what percentage he voted with the conservatives. Bet it's higher than 58%

Click to expand...

I don't understand your point here. Does anybody deny that Thomas is a conservative? If not, why is it news that he generally votes with like-minded justices?

Click to expand...

It's not. My point in the very beginning here is that he comes off as a lightweight

Click to expand...

FGILC seems to dispute that he's a lightweight. I don't read SCOTUS opinions and I lack the background to be able to evaluate what's a good opinion and what's not, so there's not much I can contribute to that point.

that follows the main conservatives lead. And that he never deviates from that.

Click to expand...

So what? Scalia rarely deviates from the conservative line. You could say the same about Reinquist. How often does Ginsberg side with Scalia and Thomas against Breyer? Does that make her a lightweight or a yes-man? I think most of us would agree that justices have a particular ideology/philsophy that they bring to the table, and broadly speaking they tend to rule in accordance with their philosophy. So of course certain justices will tend to vote together a lot. What a silly thing to criticize someone for. You're basically attacking him for being principled. Ginsberg and Breyer tend to vote together a lot because they're both liberals. Scalia and Thomas tend to vote together a lot because they're both conservatives. I'm not seeing the problem.

In fact the figures quoted pretty much show as goes Scalia so goes Thomas.

Click to expand...

Maybe Scalia is just copying off of Thomas. Or maybe their votes are correlated in the same way that AD and YF23 and I tend to end up on the same side of most threads.

I just don't think much of him as a Supreme Court justice. Scalia is a conservative but I think it's obvious what he brings to the table same with Alito and Roberts. Thomas not so much.

Click to expand...

If you want to say that Thomas is stupid, that's your perogative, but simply showing that he votes in a manner consistent with the principles he espouses does nothing to prove your point.

Click to expand...

saintfool said:

Andy>link

Click to expand...

NCCommish said:

I don't think he should have been a Supreme Court justice. ***And it should be remembered I am not the only one. Most judges that go up for the SC are rated as well qualified by the ABA. Thomas' rating was split between qualified and not qualified.

Click to expand...