Go Mobile

  • Bookmark the mobile version of First Draft HERE!

Donate

to First Draft

Tip Jar

Ads

Blogads

Ad Network

  • advertise_liberally

Paying the Bills

Blog powered by Typepad

First Draft Krewe in NOLA


  • Click above image for our Hurricane Katrina coverage, including photos and stories from our recent First Draft New Orleans trip.

Lower 9th Ward: March 2006

  • 23
    These are stills captured from video shot March 2006 in the Lower 9th Ward of New Orleans specifically the area between N. Claiborne, Florida Ave, Tupelo and Tennessee.

Lower 9th Ward: August 2006

  • 9th_marking_side
    These are photos and stills captured from video taken August 2006 of the Lower 9th Ward specifically the area between N. Claiborne, Florida Ave, Tupelo and Tennessee.

Paying The Bills

« Your Mom, Available Anytime on HBO On Demand | Main | Less of the Willing »

October 02, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c5ced53ef00e54eee487f8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Anita Hill responds:

Comments

I think you're right on the we've-come-a-long-way (no thanks to Arlen). Just this last week, the Chron has been following the disciplining of Judge Kent in the Texas Southern District. This would never have happened in the 80's. Kent is as about as untouchable a judge as they have in this District.

Based on my observations of the past decade of Republican scandals around sex, sexual identity, etc. I'm not sure they've yet gotten a grasp on what sex is, never mind harassment.

Whatever sex is, they're only certain that it's nasty, that it will bring hellfire and brimstone on the heads of those who practice it, unless you're married. And then, that legalizes rape.

And no, I don't mean this as snark. I really think that's how bizarre they truly are. And under those circumstances, the only harassment they can recognize is rape outside of marriage, so long as the woman is not provocatively dressed.

They remain a strange bunch.

Thomas actually made quite an admission in that 60 minutes interview when he was smearing Anita Hill. When he was sleazily remarking about how Ms. Hill was not as "prim and proper" as she appeared to be in public (a disgusting remark, implying that since not "prim" she deserved to be harrassed) he added "let's just say she could defend herself."

DEFEND.

So, in other words, there was something going on against which she was defending.

And of course it's more insight into his sickeningly sexist world view. Like the woman who gets called a bitch for successfully fighting off a rapist.

"ugh" is right. I think I need a shower with industrial grade brain bleach.


Based on my observations of the past decade of Republican scandals around sex, sexual identity, etc. I'm not sure they've yet gotten a grasp on what sex is, never mind harassment.

or domestic violence against women. There's a sickeningly large number of those folks who believe that DV survivor/victims should stay with their batterers so that the all-holy nuclear family remains intact.

i so hope he dies young.

Best comment I've seen yet on the Anita Hill controversy comes from G. Will:

"Anita Hill and her allies blazed the path subsequently trod by Crystal Gail Mangum and her fans in the university/media establishment in the Duke non-rape case last year."

But Thomas has an even better last word:

"Once I got on the Court, I vowed I would never do my job as poorly as journalists do theirs."

Bravo! You've risen far far above the abysmal bottom-feeding standards of ink-stained hacks & political media-whores like Hill. But this slacker and loo-zer has a perfesser job she'd never have gotten had she not sold her soul to left-wing racists---collectivists who hate blacks who think for themselves.

then why, daveinboca, does even Scalia doubt Thomas' constitutional bonafides, leaving aside the fact he is apparently very incurious, asking not one question during last year's oral arguments.

Hill is wrong about Thomas' right to be on the bench. He, and Scalia and Kennedy, violated his reponsibility to recuse himself in Bush v. Gore.

The three of them need to be impeached for installing the coup, and none of the three deserves more respect than it takes to spit on them.

Agreed, Paul - agreed.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Contact Info

  • Adrastos
    adrastos at bellsouth.net
  • Athenae - Allison Hantschel
    athenae25 at yahoo.com
  • Jude
    jude_t at live.com

Athenae's Books

Stats