Clarence Thomas: Race Traitor?

Keli Goff, The Root, June 25, 2013

One of the most destructive epidemics plaguing the black community for years is the notion that there is a specific way to “act black” versus “acting white.” The destructive part is the idea that acting white is synonymous with speaking grammatically correct English and having high academic achievement, while “acting black” is not.

Speaking as someone who, growing up, was told that I “talk white” on more than one occasion, I am certainly sensitive to how toxic and ridiculous this entire concept is. No singular group has ownership of a particular language, intellect or behavior, or even taste in certain types of music. {snip}

But there remains an inescapable question: Does acknowledging that the very idea of “acting white” versus “acting black” is offensive and destructive mean that we still don’t have the right to challenge someone’s emotional racial identity, based on his own destructive efforts to purposely distance himself from his community?

I found myself considering that question a lot today after the Supreme Court’s lone black justice, Clarence Thomas, sided with the majority in the court’s ruling on Shelby County v. Holder, a watershed voting-rights case. I am not the only one. Today Minnesota state Rep. Ryan Winkler referred to Thomas as “Uncle Thomas” in a tweet, an apparent reference to the term Uncle Tom. Winkler subsequently deleted the tweet and apologized.


Black Republicans like former Secretary of State Colin Powell have long been warmly embraced in communities of color, and in Powell’s case even long before he endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president. Those black conservatives who are embraced, however, from Powell to Joe Watkins, appear to share one commonality: Their commitment to the black community was never in question.

As black Republican consultant Raynard Jackson told me at the time, “The black Republicans who receive the most favorable treatment within our community are those who are actually engaged in our community. When you look at people like Mia Love, Allen West and J.C. Watts, most of these prominent black Republicans are not engaged within the black community in a significant way.”

But in the case of Thomas, the opposite is true. Not only has he never engaged with civil rights groups in a meaningful away–unlike Powell, who has a long-standing relationship with the United Negro College Fund–Thomas has spent much of his career attacking civil rights measures, measures from which he benefited.


Thomas’ vote on the voting-rights case helped set back the civil rights of people who look like him and inhabit the community from which he comes, immeasurably. Just as legendary attorney–and Supreme Court justice–Thurgood Marshall will forever be remembered for his triumph in advancing the civil rights of African Americans with his role in litigating Brown v. Board of Education, it is likely that Thomas will forever be remembered for his role in setting civil rights back with Shelby County v. Holder.

So the question becomes, does a lifelong commitment to actively setting back one’s race mean that one’s racial identity can fairly be challenged? To those offended by the very question, I ask you to consider the case of Daniel Burros. Burros was a Jewish American who became active in the American Nazi Party and Ku Klux Klan. When his religious identity was exposed, he committed suicide. Should Burros be associated with a group of people he so despised that he worked with others seeking to destroy them?


But perhaps the greatest shame will ultimately belong to Thomas, who will find his own legacy likely relegated to that of Burros, someone so consumed with ambivalence toward and loathing of his own community that he pushed himself further and further away from it until his own identity became invisible.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Quit your whining!
    Us white folks know all about race traitors.

    • Homo_Occidentalis

      I’d wager that more than half of whites are race traitors to some degree, with a smaller and very dedicated contingent of them among the elite. The Clintons, Kennedys, LBJs, etc. are far more prevalent among our own race than pitiful few negro dissenters to the BRA (“uncle” Thomas being the only one that comes to mind).

    • What has become of this country when a Minnesota state Rep. is referring to a black member of SCOTUS as “Uncle Thomas” after a decision.

  • bigone4u

    Maybe Thomas is able to remain clinically detached from his own race when deciding cases. That’s what all judges are supposed to do. If white judges had not separated themeselves from their white identity back in 54, schools would still be segregated. The author of this piece, Keli Goff, is either crazy or a moron, or both because if white judges make decisions based on their whiteness, there would be no more preferences for blacks. Hmm. Not a bad idea.

  • Funruffian

    Judge Thomas is one guy I can’t seem to figure out. Dating back to the Anita Hill trial and till now, he remains a mystery to me. He’s often taciturn during hearings and doesn’t uphold entitlement programs like his Race-traitorous peers do.

    • Perhaps he’s just a rare honest man who understands his responsibility..

      • David Ashton

        Your kind exception to organised mass-extinction by flamethrowers?

  • These elements of Clarence Thomas’s judicial philosophy aren’t a function of his being black, they’re a function of his being a lamestream conservative. Anything he could write, Scalia and Alito could also write. And that’s not just an idle hunch on my part, because there have been many big decisions where Thomas has written either the majority or dissenting opinion, and Scalia, Alito and the late William Rehnquist have signed on without adding anything more.

    Interestingly, in yesterday’s decision set over Shelby vs Holder, Thomas issued a very short concurring opinion to the majority, in which he stated that if he had his druthers, he would have thrown out all of Section 5 of the VRA.

    • jane johnson

      I’ll bet Eric Holder thinks that Justice Thomas acts WAY too white.

    • Romulus

      Very astute as we’ll. People are like onions, with many layers and can surprise us with their actions not necessarily following their words. In other words, humans are exceedingly GOOD at deception. The tribe, for example, have elevated it to an artform

    • Charles Lincoln

      To be sure you are absolutely correct: Clarence Thomas for a long time and on a great many issues has lived and acted in Scalia’s shadow, but Thomas’ concurrence in McDonald v. City of Chicago was radical fire-breathing statement of Second Amendment rights which leaned very heavily on his “Radical Republican” perspective on the racial status quo in the South after 1865.

      I guarantee you, neither Scalia and Alito would have written that concurrence OR Justice Clarence’s dissent in Virginia v. Black. If Clarence Thomas is, as you say, a “lamestream” conservative, he is filled with racial consciousness whenever he can express himself on the point. I imagine he is for and to the black race what (former Judges) Strom Thurmond or George Wallace would have been to the white race if either of them had ever, in some pleasant alternative universe, been appointed alongside William Rehnquist (sole law clerk to oppose the 1954 Brown v. Board decision) to the Supreme Court.

  • David Ashton

    Burros gloated over psychopathic material including atrocity photos. The comparison with a educated lawyer like Thomas is especially sinister, with the implication that he too deserves to die.

  • NorthernWind

    Clarence Thomas is probably one of the most honorable Justices on the Supreme Court. He isn’t a race traitor, not even close. He simply is principled. If you want to see race traitors look in the White population, there are tons of them. If you want to find race traitors among Blacks look at Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, two creeps who have hurt the black community by pushing for scapegoating Whites and by making excuse after excuse for the failures of Blacks. Not to mention that their living consists of exploiting Black people; getting their money.

    • Camielle Belle Poole

      I was actually just debating this VERY point with a friend last night regarding Rachel Jeantel and the way many black people in social media are upset that her STUPIDITY is being pointed out and criticized by many blacks as embarrassing. They are saying that pointing out her “issues” is self hatred among blacks, and I countered that I believe it is self hatred to sit by and allow such ignorance to pass through school, all the while making excuses for great failure as a people. It’s self hatred to bully people for wanting more and getting an education. Hip Hop culture and many black leaders that SO many put their trust in is extremely detrimental to black people as a whole.

  • shawnmer

    Of course, “setting one’s race back” is defined here as the end of privileges, carveouts, entitlements, lowering of standards and dual test scales … Preaching to the choir here, I know.

    The “civil rights” movement MIGHT have once been about equality under the law. For about an hour and a half in 1964. Then it occurred to someone, “Hey, let’s see how far we can play this one out!”

  • sbuffalonative

    Thomas’ vote on the voting-rights case helped set back the civil rights of people who look like him and inhabit the community from which he comes, immeasurably.

    The hyperbole surrounding this decision is on par with black sensationalism. Next step, chains, slavery, and picking cotton.

    Nothing much is going to change other than some states will ask for proof of identify. It’s no big deal.

    And don’t give me the ‘my mother was born when they didn’t give out birth certificates to blacks’. Elderly blacks have all the ID they need to get government benefits. They can certainly get proper ID.

  • jane johnson

    I’m of Italian descent, and feel more loyalty (and respect) for Carlo Gambino than I do for Leon Panetta. Scalia puzzles me.

    • Can you shoot a rifle fairly well, Jane?

      • jane johnson

        Fairly well. Used to plink a lot when we had the property for it. I’m much better with a pistol, though. My dad taught me when I was very young.

  • connorhus

    I was going to say the same thing but decided to look to see if anyone beat me to it. And you did!!!

  • connorhus

    It’s OK if the Black Male SCOTUS is a race traitor. There are at least two White Females who are race traitors as well.

    At least I think they are females…. They have Female names.

    • IstvanIN

      There are no white females on the Supreme Court. Race traitor Sandra O’Connor retired years ago.

  • Romulus

    Excellent analysis of Thomas. I completely agree, having followed his career with interest.

  • Archimedes_777


    These are the only 2 good honest judges on the Supreme Court. They think for themselves and use common sense. It is a shame the rest are just corrupt puppets.

    These libbarbarians are denigrating Thomas because he can think for himself and the libbarbarians do not like that. All this baloney about “race-traitor”, etc. is just a scam of the Demogangsters. As sociopaths, which Demogangsters and libbarbarians are, they hate those who come in the way of their scams and so they tell lies against them.

    That’s all it is. Do not be fooled by the Demogangsters’ specious arguments. They are just scammers.

    Good scam, Kelli Goff (is that really your name?) You are already relegated to liars and scammers.

    • SFLBIB

      Why not Scalia? Who is he a puppet for?

  • Archimedes_777


    The libbarbarians are attacking one of the few good Judges on the Court–Justice Thomas. They are not satisfied with 90% control of the Court, they want 100% total control!!

    But the most lawless, amoral, dishonest, corrupt and morally bankrupt woman on the Court is Ginsburg.

    She is a disgrace to the Court, to the rule of law and she has made the USA the laughing stock of the world.

  • brengunn

    I didn’t know too much about these voting systems in the US but having read up on it in recent days it does seem like a hell of a lot of people are being denied the right to vote, whether black or white. In any case, I don’t think it matters what colour they are, the people should have the right to vote whether they are illiterate or ex felons or whatever the reasons are, they should be give the right to partake in society and suffrage is the most basic and important part of being a citizen of any free country. There have been concerted efforts to try and inhibit the black communities ability to vote in the US, and in my opinion this is just not fair or right, despite my personal feelings about blacks, they should be given the same rights as us.

    • IstvanIN

      Universal suffrage, the death of democracy.

      • Charles Lincoln

        We need to restore the poll tax and literacy tests. I have this pet project that a high school diploma should also be required, and that nobody should be able to receive such a diploma without passing at least one solid course on the Constitution of the United States of America. At one time, together with a couple of colleagues (Jon Roland of Austin, TX, and Jerry O’Neil of Kalispell, MT) I drafted a proposal to fund an innovative curriculum that would teach the entire first year of law school in High School, but that went nowhere. Education in the law used to be one of the primary purposes of education for anyone. Now they want everyone just to be young, dumb, and ugly-illiterate, or so it seems.

    • WR_the_realist

      You are correct — you don’t know much about the U.S. voting system. There is no place in the U.S. where you will be denied your right to vote just because you are black. In many places you can vote if you’re an illegal immigrant or dead. In some states it is wise to avoid being convicted of murder, assault, rape, drug running, or theft if you want to vote. If blacks find it especially difficult to avoid meeting those criteria, well, cry me a river.

    • Charles Lincoln

      I’m telling you, the blacks need a state of their own where they can govern themselves without competition or interference from whites. At least one and possibly two states should be offered as “black sovereignty zones”. THAT would be a guarantee of “one man, one vote.” I think we should give them Florida. And we should announce it to the world as “reparations for slavery”—a room of their own.

      • jane johnson

        If you lived in Florida, as I do, you would understand why that is a horrible idea. Our state is far too valuable, both economically and strategically, to hand over to the undertow. Why not Illinois, Michigan, or even Georgia where BRA is already entrenched in the big cities? Personally, I would rather give them a territory than a contiguous state. Guam, perhaps. If we can send them ALL there, maybe it really will tip over, as Hank Johnson so astutely predicted.

        • Charles Lincoln

          I’ve spent a great deal of time in Florida and spent a great deal of time thinking about the situation. It is precisely because of Florida’s VALUE that I think it would work as a bargain—“give us Whites back our safely segregated world and we’ll give YOU what many consider the most desirable real estate in North America.”

          What I want to see is a political proposal which actually has at least tiny chance of working in the real world—dominated as it is by liberals, socialists, and communists. You know perfectly well the liberals won’t ever agree to giving blacks a marginal territory like Guam. They might give WHITES the option of having Guam as their preserve…. but it would be crowded.

          So no, I’m not looking for miracles. I’m looking for people willing to give real “valuable detrimental consideration” (meaningful sacrifice on our part) for “valuable detrimental consideration.” If I had my choice of miraculous solutions, I would propose an exchange of all the U.S. Black and mulatto populations (“coloureds” as they used to be called back in the days of Apartheid) for every South African White who wanted to come here.

          In such a miraculous world I would suggest giving all the South African whites’ real property and mineral interests to U.S. Blacks as reparations for slavery AND colonialism all at once. But I know that it’s nearly an impossible dream to build a political consensus for excluding blacks entirely from the U.S.—and it’s only a minor solution to our race problems anyhow because we are invaded by Asians with money who want our high paying jobs and colleges and Latin Americans who want our labor and lower-middle class jobs.

          We’re in DANGER. We who want to preserve the white race are a tiny minority right now. We have to come up with BOLD and CREATIVE proposals and policies to get even 10-25% of the population to listen to us. If we could get such a tenth or a quarter of our fellow Americans, black and white, to listen to us, we might have a chance of effecting real change.

          They do say that only 5% of the population, maybe even less, were ever in favor of the American Revolution. We know that most people didn’t favor legalizing gay marriage—but it is now pretty much a fait accompli. WHY? Because the squeaky wheel gets the oil and you have to be BOLD and AGGRESSIVE and PUSHY to get what you want in this world.

          I don’t exactly see what the majority got in exchange for Gay Marriage. I have heard horror stories about Gay Pride celebrations in San Francisco and I doubt they will tone down now. But I think that a bargain to resegregate our country where we offer them a state which is “far too valuable”—that is an offer the liberals (and the blacks) would be hard pressed to laugh at or reject. Florida is an appropriate state for blacks because the climate is close to the Caribbean, and most of the Caribbean is black and mulatto dominated, and the climate is much like Tropical Africa.

          I took the final step in deciding to advocate Florida as the North American African and Mixed Race Preserve after seeing the movie “Spring Breakers” with James Franco & Selena Gomez. Florida may be valuable—but its modern culture and status as a cultural symbol are dangerous to the American, European, and White-Christian Soul. I do not say any of this lightly. My son was born in West Palm Beach at St. Mary’s Hospital during Hurricane Andrew in 1992 and I have visited every single county in Florida and lived in about five of them, on both the Atlantic and Pacific Sides.

          So far as strategic value goes—in the modern world with nuclear warheads? Nowhere is safe….

        • Jefferson

          If the state of Florida was given to the Bantus, tourism would drop there big time.

          Why go to Universal and Disney in a Bantu dominated Florida, the chances of a White tourist being raped, violently attacked, and or murdered in those parks would be extremely high if they were run by Blacks.

          • jane johnson

            When I said that Florida was too valuable, I wasn’t even thinking of tourism. Deep water ports, military installations, the intracoastal waterway, and natural resources like citrus and seafood would all be wasted. And how on earth would the USCG defend over 1300 miles of coastline if the entire state was populated by blacks. It would become a mecca for every kind of Caribbean detritus that we don’t want. Then there’s the little matter of Miami. What would we do with the huge numbers of non-black third-worlders and Cubanos down there?

    • SFLBIB

      Re: the right to vote for ex felons

      There is a good reason they are not allowed to vote. Take a look at the homosexual movement, for example. They are a very small minority, but have a large clout. This is because they are part of a much larger coalition of liberal/Leftists. That is why you will see homosexuals counter-demonstrating in front of abortion clinics. [Think about that: why does a homosexual need abortion?]

      If felons ever got the right to vote, they would do the same, and before long, would be working on eliminating their activity being a crime [think child molesters].

      However, there are provisions in the law that allow an ex-felon to petition the court to have his franchise restored.

  • Archimedes_777


    Here is a partial list of the more than tens of thousands of white “race traitors” the Left and the Democratic party are full of. At least Thomas uses common-sense and national interest and the law in his rulings; most of the ones below are just race-traitors for the sake of it:

    Bill Clinton.
    Harry Reid.
    Abraham Lincoln.
    All the white men and women in the Democratic party, the Labor party, etc.
    All the white men on the US Supreme Court and other courts who have ruled in favor of blacks at one time or the other, etc. etc.

    All the white women who have ever dated a black or a brown man, etc. etc.

    The total probably exceeds several million.

    And the Left worries about just one on the other side!

    It is like the pot calling the kettle black. This proves the Left is mentally deranged.

    • Alexandra1973

      Lincoln was against blacks voting and serving on juries. He was also for repatriating blacks back to Africa. And he recognized the differences between blacks and whites.

    • Wethepeople

      Don’t forget about all the white men who associate with and who believe that blacks are their friends.

      All the fathers who disgrace their families and ancestors by allowing their daughters to date and marry ‘our nations diverse resources.’

  • WR_the_realist

    Clarence Thomas is actually one of the better Supreme Court judges, although that’s not a high bar to meet. (Cue in someone reminding us that he is married to a white woman, which is irrelevant to how he does his job.) From a white person’s perspective, nearly every politician in Washington, D.C. and nearly every federal judge is a race traitor, So, Keli Goff, welcome to my world.

  • Anna Tree

    Hey Keli Goff, if Clarence Thomas is a traitor to the blacks because he allegedly sided with a white, can the likes of Kennedy, Clinton, Bush etc be called traitors to the whites for siding ad nauseum with the non-whites?

    • MikeofAges

      Thomas is considered a traitor because he threatens the concept of social reality which feeds the liberal-leftist machine. If voting rights supervision is eliminated and nothing happens, who is the enemy then?

  • hastings88

    We need a catchy phrase for white race traitor, the white equivalent of Uncle Tom. That would be a useful weapon. Anyone?

    • connorhus

      Let’s call them Winklers…

      Like the rep who called Justice Thomas “Uncle Tom”

    • David Ashton

      Uncle Bill (Clinton)?

    • jane johnson

      How bout “malwhites”?

    • Wethepeople

      ‘Blight’ – Amalgamation of black and white
      Blight – to cause whither or decay; to destroy, ruin or frustrate.

    • Anonymous White


  • That’s fine. I believe whites have the right to make blacks extinct.

    We can actually do it.

    • David Ashton

      And so say any of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Is this now AmRen policy?

      • I speak only for my self.

        They’re saying “Shoot Whitey” is “sexy”.

        For World War Three, I would like a
        full-auto 12-gauge as a trench gun.

        The only thing better than this is a
        flamethrower or an auto coilgun.

        • David Ashton

          Self-defense is legitimate.
          Genocide is not, whoever the perpetrators or victims.

          Never mind such minor nuisances as ADL reports saying: “AmRen now publishes advocacy of mass-murder of everyone born with black skin.”

          • Wethepeople

            War, especially when their actions have been hurtling us towards it, is not genocide. Just the logical result of their ethnogenocide forced upon our race.

    • Camielle Belle Poole

      Oh really?

  • Perhaps I should be on SCOTUS instead? I’m glad they got 5-4 on the Second Amendment, because they avoided Civil War Two that way.

    • WR_the_realist

      Roe vs. Wade was a 7 – 2 decision. So Supreme Court justices are more certain that we have a constitutional right to kill fetuses, even though the words abortion, fetus, trimester, and synonyms for those words don’t occur in the constitution, than they are they we have an individual right to keep and bear arms. The argument that the 2nd Amendment applies only to state controlled militias is a curious one — why would the founding fathers have bothered with it? After all, every government that has ever existed has given itself the right to use deadly force, without having to have that written into its constitution.

  • Micks are good. They’re as easy to teach to shoot as Japanese, and I don’t mean that in a bad way.

  • Guest

  • Yale2001

    One of the hottest topics right now regarding Clarence Thomas is his discussion of Affirmative Action, and I agree with him. No one will ever consider the black community EQUAL as long as its easier and less is expected from them. I know the black community does not like to hear this, but you can’t have it both ways. As long as someone walks into a business, attorneys office, physicians office, etc… and met by an African American that carries that title through Affirmative Action, they will NEVER be equal.

    • Camielle Belle Poole

      I am extremely ambivalent about AA. On one hand, I worry that many institutions might discriminate based on race if it weren’t for AA. On the other hand, AA is annoying because as a POC (Person of Colour), it is often assumed that anything you achieve, you’ve gotten because of AA and then you get resentment from whites. It becomes a hassle to have to explain that you actually performed better. (I went to predominantly white school. The other kids swore I was just diversity and miffed when grades and SATs came back). You’re stuck having to work twice as hard to earn half the respect. That said, I feel like I would rather just get rid of AA and those who qualify for a position, get the position. Maybe then black professionals/high achievers can be RESPECTED.

      • WR_the_realist

        Today very, very few institutions would discriminate based on race if AA were abolished (other than historically black colleges, which would continue to discriminate against whites). But two things would happen:

        1. There would be fewer blacks and Hispanics admitted to universities overall, and especially fewer in the more elite institutions. In businesses and government there would be fewer blacks and Hispanics hired, particularly to high level positions.

        2. Those blacks and Hispanics admitted to universities would on average do better than they do now, because they would on average be more competent. In universities a larger fraction of them would major in the more difficult subjects, such as math, the natural sciences, and engineering. Today about the only non-whites you see in those subjects are Asians. In business and government those blacks and Hispanics hired and promoted would be more likely to be as competent as their white peers, and there would be less racial resentment in the workplace. Blacks might even take their studies more seriously in grade school and high school if they knew there was no longer an affirmative action ticket to college.

        While the results in (2) would be seen as laudable by all liberals, the results in (1) would be seen as so catastrophic that the left will never give up AA.

        • Camielle Belle Poole

          Well that’s fine. I think REAL racial equality can only be met when there is REAL equality. There can’t be a special bag of gifts for one group over another.

  • Wethepeople

    Of course he doesn’t hate her white privilege, he’s violating her ‘white privilege’ every night. Disgusting. Wile they might view him as a race traitor, justifiably. He’s just another anti-white genocide-practitioner.

  • jane johnson

    He’s an enigma in many ways, and seems impervious to cognitive dissonance. I agree about the grudge, but believe that it started way before his nomination to the high court. From what I’ve read, he was studious, and even pious, as a boy, considering a life as a Catholic priest, which would’ve made him an object of derision by other blacks.

    Still, at Holy Cross, he was active in civil rights and the anti-war movement, only becoming conservative at Yale Law School (YALE!?), and working for Monsanto after graduation.

    He chaired the EEOC for awhile (appointed by Reagan), and became a federal appeals court judge under Bush the elder. Dubya would nominate him to the Supremes, and the rest is history. Tough guy to figure out but, for our purposes, I think he’s the best of the current Nine.

    • His first state bar membership was in the Missouri bar, and his first legal job out of law school was working for then Missouri Attorney General John Danforth as an assistant AG. After Danforth was elected to the Senate, Thomas went to work as an attorney for St. Louis-based Monsanto. Then he left to be on Danforth’s Senate staff, and later Danforth sweet talked Reagan onto putting him on the Federal judiciary.

      Point is that John Danforth is the archetype of the RINO-establishment blue blood Republican liberal-moderate, and Clarence Thomas’s judicial philosophy from the point Danforth first hired him as an assistant AG to the point that Bush 41 appointed him to SCOTUS (also mainly due to Danforth’s begging), was very much a moderate, nothing like his reputation today. Personally, I interpret his veering “so far to the right” (quote-unquote) as his pure personal visceral reaction to the way black civil rights groups turned on him when he was nominated to SCOTUS.

      While Danforth as MO AG, he tried to sue a Kansas City area neighborhood that was trying to resist the onslaught of the black undertow by converting itself to a country club and charging its “members” a $10/year membership fee. Danforth actually said in court that “$10 a year is too low a yearly membership fee to be a real country club.” (He should know, all the Danforths are members of Old Warson.) Well, the Citizens Councils in both St. Louis and Kansas City put up billboards of him saying that and circulated flyers with the same when Danforth first tried to run for the Senate in 1972, and he lost. Unfortunately, four years later, he tried again and won. I don’t know for sure, but I think Thomas was on board the AG’s office at the time Danforth sued this “country club,” and may have done a whole lot of the legal grunt work on behalf of Danforth.

      • jane johnson

        Just a minor point, but I thought his first gig as a judge came through Bush, not Reagan. Also, why do you suppose he veered right at Yale, of all places? Was it that different back then, or did he just rebel against all the liberal dogma so prevalent on campus?

        • I don’t think he veered right at Yale at all. He veered right once he got on SCOTUS, purely as a reaction to the way the NAACP and civil rights gang stabbed him in the back. If they never did, Thomas as a SCOTUS judge would be more like Sandra Day O’Connor or David Souter than Antonin Scalia or Samuel Alito.

          • jane johnson

            Fair enough, but if he wasn’t already somewhat conservative, why was Reagan so fond of him? And why did the race pimps hate him so much? He’d done some civil rights stuff, and even started the black student union at Holy Cross, so why all the animus? Did they recognize that he was no Thurgood Marshall?

          • Why did Reagan love him? Because he was black and just non-liberal enough not to be comfortable in the other party. It’s the same reason why black speakers at Tea Party Movement functions go to the front of the line and on stage. (Though the TPM is really starting to put the pedal to the medal on immigration in terms of stopping the bill and punishing traitors that vote for it, so I guess I can ignore that foible of theirs for awhile.)

            Why did the kook left come unhinged when he was nominated to SCOTUS? Because he was black and not a dyed in the wool left wing kook.

          • jane johnson

            Off the plantation, and able to think for himself. They HATE that!

  • Charles Lincoln

    If I were in a trial with only one Judge, I would chose Clarence Thomas over Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan in a heartbeat. If it were a choice between Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor, I guess I’d just shoot myself, and save them all the trouble (and that’s one third of the Court we’re talking about now—so maybe it is all a lost cause).

    I would certainly agree, though, that Obama is much worse for the United States than any single Justice of the Supreme Court could ever be, and the damage he’s done in five going on six years as President is really only comparable to the damage the Warren-Burger-Roberts courts have done in the past fifty-sixty years. The decline slowed under Rehnquist—it didn’t stop, but it slowed down. Our country is rapidly becoming a very sad nightmare.

  • Camielle Belle Poole

    Since the commenters on this site seem to be overwhelmingly White (I must have missed the sign on the door), I’m just going to throw my two cents into the till:

    I’m not sure I agree with the author of this article fully. I was 100% with her in the beginning when she mentioned the whole notion of “talking/acting white” being detrimental to the black community. As the saying goes, “I don’t talk white, I talk RIGHT.” (which isn’t grammatically correct either, but I digress) She lost me in suggesting that Thomas is some sort of race traitor for not doing things to better the black community. That’s not what his job is about. As a member of the SCOTUS, he is obligated to maintain an unbiased opinion. Should his personal opinion of homosexuals have skewed his ruling on DOMA? No. Absolutely not. Why should blacks be an exception? He cannot play favourites. Every black person who gets a position of power isn’t obligated to make concessions. The unwillingness to do so doesn’t spell out a loathing for one’s own race. Additionally, I’m not sure I subscribe to the idea that skin colour should have anything to do with political ideology. I’m socially liberal and fiscally conservative (libertarian). I don’t care that people who look similar to me believe in something else. That’s not my concern.

    Besides that, I’m not sure about the phrase “race traitor”. I think it promotes a sort of Us vs. Them mentality. It’s a little bit icky.


    “Ginsberg has the qualifications to be on the supreme court.”

    The only qualification I can find in the constitution is “good Behavior”. So any upstanding citizen is qualified. Any other qualifications are pure fantasy.

    • Really, you don’t have to be a lawyer.

      But the Senate Judiciary Committee is 100% lawyer and heavily Ivy League Law alum.

      • SFLBIB

        I thought so. They are free to make up anything they want and call it a required qualification.

        Appears that in addition to “good behavior” you have to be a liberal and an Ivy League law grad. So where is the diversity so desperately sought after?

        I propose that to be a SC judge, you have to spend five years as a cop on the beat, ten years as a lawyer, and another ten as an ordinary judge.

        In addition to that, the SC should be expanded to 50 justices, one from each state, who have to have a lengthy state residency requirements [no carpet bagging].

        If there are any better ways of busting up this ivory tower, I’d like to hear it.


    From the on-line encyclopedia:

    … His [Thomas’] grandfather Myers Anderson had little formal education, but had built a thriving fuel oil business that also sold ice. Thomas calls his grandfather “the greatest man I have ever known.” When Thomas was 10, Anderson started taking the family to help at a farm every day from sunrise to sunset. His grandfather believed in hard work and self-reliance; he would counsel Thomas to “never let the sun catch you in bed.” Thomas’ grandfather also impressed upon his grandsons the importance of getting a
    good education.

    Perhaps this has something to do with his record.

  • Camielle Belle Poole

    Okay. The issue is that they don’t want their kids to feel stupid. Point blank. They don’t want kids who are simply more intelligent to have opportunities their children don’t have. Every time a group fails to meet the standard, we lower the standard. It’s depressing.

    Last year I had an internship in a special ed program in a “disadvantaged” middle school in my area, and it’s worse than the regular classrooms. My friends who teach can attest to this. In NYS (at least in my county) there is a push to mixed special ed kids in with regular kids for some classes so that they aren’t separated for everything. The problem is that special ed kids often aren’t what you’d think of special ed as. True enough, some of them really were just very behind, but many of them simply had behavioral problems. They had to be told to sit down multiple times. They would get up and run around the classroom. One kid brought a razor blade to school. These are the kids they are trying to put into regular classes with everyone else. I’m not sure there even WAS a Gifted program.

    The problem in the black community is that for the most part, education is severely undervalued. There is this IRRITATING blame Whitey mentality. Even if we were to concede that many problems with poverty in the black community are due to racial injustices, many immigrant groups come to America and excel. You can’t blame all the problems on white people. If you are deliberately being skipped over for promotions even though you are on the same level as other people, then fine. Complain all you like. But when you have 8 kids with 6 different dudes, and you are living on welfare, that’s your fault.

    • SFLBIB

      A couple of observations.

      First, radical egalitarianism. The idea of equality has run amuck. Everyone must be made equal, but as Pareto observed, if equality is to be achieved, it will be achieved at a low level. No two individuals are equal. Some are taller, some are smarter, some are better looking, and some are more talented. These differences all translate into unequal incomes. Don’t blacks realize that if it weren’t for natural inequality, there would be no Michael Jordans nor Tiger Woodses?

      Second, defiance of authority, be it legitimate or illegitimate. Since human nature naturally defies an oppressor, and blacks see whites as the oppressor no matter how much is done for them, it is never enough because it must always be rejected. Education is largely an invention of the white man [at least in America] and must be resisted as a product of the oppressor, hence a black student who studies is “acting white”. If he doesn’t have a strong adult like Clarence Thomas did, it won’t be long before he joins his peers.

      Anyway, those are my two cents.

      • Camielle Belle Poole

        I think the problem is cultural/class rather than biological. All of the black people I grew up around are college educated, own their own homes, etc. I don’t personally know the ghetto ones that seem to be the only type any of you have met. Do I have family that didn’t go to school and just never left their home towns? Yes. But doesn’t everyone? It’s just that you often have to be self motivated or motivated by your family to work hard and get ahead.

        • SFLBIB

          I didn’t say it was biological nor do I believe it is.

          You say you don’t know the “ghetto ones”, but you wrote about them in your internship experience. So, I’m a little confused about what you are saying.

          • Camielle Belle Poole

            Knowing and having met are two very different things. I don’t have them as friends. Do you KNOW every person you interact with on a daily basis?

          • SFLBIB

            “Knowing and having met are two very different things. I don’t have them as friends.”

            I assumed, perhaps naively, you met the students in your internship; otherwise, how could you write about them? And you don’t have to be friends to observe them.

            “And I didn’t suggest that you said it was biological, …”

            Since you were responding to my post and not “many others on this site,” it was only natural for me to think that you were.

            This has become too confusing. Let’s just drop it.

  • Ngati Pakeha

    I think you have totally hit the nail on the head. The fact that he doesn’t kowtow to the likes of Sharpton means he receives a tough time from the black community. Justice Thomas can see past the grievance machine and he in turn furnishes a lot of well reasoned rulings. Imagine who we might have got if as Anita Hill had her way back in the 90s!