From: lbaum@bcsaic.boeing.com (Larry Baum)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Americans believe Anita Hill
Date: 12 Oct 92 04:36:31 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle

In article <ART.92Oct10113101@world.std.com> art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
: In article <84638@bcsaic.boeing.com> lbaum@bcsaic.boeing.com (Larry Baum) writes:
: 
:    In article <1992Oct7.021019.4598@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
:    : In article <1992Oct6.201554.19629@tamsun.tamu.edu>, enbal@aeroj.tamu.edu (James L. Heilman) writes:
:    : 
:    Another factor:
: 
:    Despite Thomas' bland asurances in his hearings that he was
:    open-minded and had no particular ideological axe to grind,
:    his opinions during his first term reflect quite strong
:    ideological views.  His opinion in the case concerning the
:    beating of prisoner's (e.g. that severe beatings were
:    unfortunate but not precluded by the "cruel and unusual
:    punishment" clause) are quite disturbing to many people, even
:    non-liberals.  Several conservative SC justices expressed
:    revulsion at that particular decision.  Since it is clear to
:    many of us that he lied about his judicial philosophy, in
:    order to get confirmed, we have no trouble believing that he
:    could very well have lied about the Anita Hill matter.
: 
: This does not follow.  I have seen the argument in many circles that
: says, since Thomas voted with the minority on Casey he must have had
: "discussions" about Roe v. Wade.  Suppose he'd voted the other way.
: Would then the liberals be saying he'd lied?  After all, he took a
: position.  The fact is that the only way Thomas could get off this
: particular hook is to adopt whole cloth the liberal position.  Well, he
: ain't gonna do it, good for him.

Be that as it may, I suspect that there are very few people
who believe that he was telling the truth when he portrayed
himself as the open-minded fellow he pretended to be.  My
point is that this hurts his credibility vis-a-vis Anita Hill.

By the way, I have a genuine question: WHen he was being
confirmed, much was made by some of a particular Court of
Appeals case that Thomas was a party to.  I forget the
details, but the point was that the decision in that case was
held up so that at the time of confirmation, no one knew how
Thomas had voted on the case.  Does anyone know how that came
out?
: 
: In the beating case he argued, unpersuasively, that there were existing
: laws the prisoner could have used for redress without resorting to the
: eighth amendment.  He did not argue, as some twisters of the truth
: maintain, that it was permissible to beat prisoners.  Indeed, one poster
: on this net contorted the story so far as to claim that Thomas said it
: was alright to beat a confession out of a prisoner.  What a lie.

Note that I did not say that, so please do not associate me
with the "lie".  It is true that Justices such as Sandra Day
O'Connor stated that they were appalled by his argument.  Such
opinions do little to arouse much sympathy for the man.


-- 
Larry Baum
Computer Science Organization
Boeing Computer Services     uucp:       uw-beaver!bcsaic!lbaum
(206) 865-3365               internet:   lbaum@atc.boeing.com       
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:50681 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6598 alt.politics.elections:15956 talk.abortion:41772 alt.sex:32507 alt.politics.clinton:9510 alt.politics.bush:8507 soc.singles:27437 alt.politics.homosexuality:6403 talk.bizarre:33506