"Any doubt (of Anita Hill's testimony) should be resolved in favor of Judge Thomas."

That quote was by committee chariman Joe Biden, Democratic Senator from Delaware.

And that sums up the whole Clarence Thomas hearing, in which his qualifications and judicial record became irrelevant and his "moral character" became the only obstacle to his appointment. The fact that his name, to my mind at least, will always have a big asterisk next to it with Anita Hill's face embossed in the middle of it, smiling down upon the history book reader, will be Professor Hill's only satisfaction.

HE reopened the scar for re-examination with his bitter "My Grandfather's Son" memoir... And PS, recalling Joe Biden's behavior during the hearings, let me say that he will not be getting my vote for President....

=====

SENATOR HEFLIN: Do you know a Congressman by the name of Scott Kluge, a Republican Congressman who was defeated by Robert Kastenmeier of Wisconsin, who now serves in Congress, who back in the early 1980's, 1983 or something, was a television reporter for a channel here in Washington and that he at that time disclosed this as indicating that, after the recommendation of dismissal, that you did not move in regards to it for some 11 months and let him retire? Do you know Congressman Kluge?

JUDGE THOMAS: I do not know him. Again, remember, I am operating on recollection. There was far more to it than the facts as you set them out. His rights had much to do with the fact that he was as veteran and that we could not simply dismiss him. If we could, that was my recommendation, he would have been dismissed.

SENATOR HEFLIN: There was no political influence brought to bear on you at that time to prevent his dismissal? Do you recall if any political--

JUDGE THOMAS: There was absolutely no political influence. In fact, it was my policy that no personnel decisions would in any way be changed or influenced by political pressure, one way or the other.

SENATOR HEFLIN: Now, it is reported to me that Congressman Kluge, after your nomination, went to the White House and told this story and, I hear by hearsay, that the White House ignored his statement, that Congressman Kluge further came to the Senate Judiciary Committee and made it known here.

As far as I know, I attempted to check--I have not been able to find where it was in the Judiciary Committee, if it was, and I think the Chairman has attempted to locate it--but the point I am asking is, in the whole process pertaining to the nomination and the preparation for it, were you ever notified that Congressman Kluge went to the White House in regards to this?

JUDGE THOMAS: I do not remember that, Senator.

SENATOR HEFLIN: Nobody ever discussed that?

JUDGE THOMAS: No.

SENATOR HEFLIN: Well, that is the way it has been reported to me and it is very fragmented relative to it, but I have asked that all the records of the EEOC be subpoenaed by subpoena duces tecum pertaining to that, in order that we might get to the bottom of it.

SENATOR HATCH: Mr. Chairman, if I could interrupt Senator Heflin, I really think this is outside the scope, under the rules. I would have to object to it.

SENATOR BIDEN: I would have to sustain that objection. I do not--

SENATOR HATCH: I hesitate to object, but I just think we ought to keep it on the subject matter.

SENATOR BIDEN: I do not see where it is relevant.

SENATOR HEFLIN: Well, I think it is relevant in the issue pertaining to the period of time relative to the issue, particularly in regards to the responsibilities as head of the agency dealing with discrimination in employment.

SENATOR HATCH: Mr. Chairman--

SENATOR BIDEN: If I may say--

SENATOR HATCH: Mr. Chairman--

SENATOR BIDEN: If I may speak, let me say this is not about whether or not the Judge administered properly or improperly the agency. The only issue here relates to conduct and the allegations that have been made, so I would respectfully suggest to my friend from Alabama that that line of questioning is not in order and I rule it out of order.

SENATOR HEFLIN: All right, sir, I will reserve an exception, as we used to say.

is an outrage.

The reason they rejected bork was because of his stance on civil rights, which included his opinion that a barber should be able to refuse to give a haircut to a African American if he wanted to

They talk about activist judges, these are the ultimate, scalia, roberts, thomas, alito. All part of the federalist society used to destroy all the progress that had been made in the last 40 years

Actually we are quite fortunate because most of the justices on the court today have come from republican presidents, and that roe v wade or for that matter even a woman's right to birth control hasn't been over-ruled by the court is just pure luck

When I saw the header I figured it was Lieberman.

I do still remember a lot of the outrage I felt over the way Hill was treated at the time. I made a choice to not watch 60 Minutes this week solely because of the Thomas interview. Sadly, it appears nothing much has changed.

the final day of the purposely truncated hearings went on and on into the night, effectively filibustered by anti-Hill jackasses.

BIDEN was responsible, as chair of the judiciary committee, for allowing the same sort of whitewash that occurred during Iran contra, allowing the republicans to run out the clock by stonewalling/lying about everything, along with dems never bothering to call them on their lies, as evidenced by the Hollings/Biden confrontation cited above


http://www.aliciapatterson.org/APF1602/Graves/Graves.html

the biden staffers here are gonna fLip out.

Because I'm not a corporation. So it's a wash.