The New Yorker has a lengthy profile of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni. Not surprisingly, It’s a left wing piece of centering around the right wing “activism” of Justice Thomas and his wife, especially as it relates to ObamaCare. But it’s still an interesting piece with fairly in-depth analysis of Thomas’s views of the Constitution and the law. It’s worth reading.

This is odd. Ginny Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, phoned Anita Hill the other day and left her a voicemail. In the message Thomas asks Hill to finally apologize for trying to destroy her husband years ago.

Here’s a transcript of the voicemail:

“Good morning, Anita Hill, it’s Ginny Thomas,” said the voice. “I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. OK, have a good day.”

Anita Hill says she thought it was a prank when she first heard it. She couldn’t believe it was actually Ginny Thomas. She notified campus police about the phone call.

Hill says she has no intention of apologizing and stands by her lies and smears.

It’s odd that Ginny would come out of the blue asking for an apology. I agree she’s owed one, but why now?

The Clarence Thomas SCOTUS confirmation hearings are among the most famous in US history. Thomas was viciously smeared and maligned by Democrats and the media. Since Thomas is a black Conservative, the usual race hustling and grievance mongering groups stood by silently and let him be torn apart.

Had Thomas been a black man of the Left I can promise you things would’ve turned out differently. The media would’ve protected him like a premature newborn baby.

Andrew Breitbart credits the Thomas hearings for turning him into a Conservative. In his defense, Clarence Thomas gave what I think is one of the most powerful speeches ever uttered inside the US Senate. It will make your hair stand on end.

You can watch Anita Hill give her despicable testimony after Thomas’s speech…

Notice any familiar faces on the judiciary committee? Term limits anyone?

In light of the recent Kagan confirmation I thought folks might be interested in seeing some of the more memorable (and shameful) moments in SCOTUS confirmation history.

Here’s Clarence Thomas giving one of the most powerful and heartfelt speeches I’ve ever seen. It’s beyond shameful what left-wing thugs like Joe Biden put this great man through. He’s one of the greatest Supreme Court justices that has ever served this nation. He is an honorable man with more integrity and intellect than all the pompous blowhards on that committee combined.

Can you imagine a black democrat with his credentials being treated that way? It’s unthinkable. Rodney King style riots would probably break out in the Capital. The NAACP, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and every poverty pimp between here and Oakland would be howling about the second coming of the Klan.

It just shows the two-faced hypocrisy of groups like the NAACP. Even though Thomas is black they left him twisting in the wind while arrogant white politicians accused him of vile and reprehensible acts on national television. Unless you’re a hard left person of color they don’t give fig about you.

Justice Clarence Thomas on Tuesday forcefully defended the Supreme Court’s recent campaign finance decision, and in so doing addressed President Obama’s falsehoods about it during last week’s SOTU.

He spoke to a group of students at a law school in Florida and fielded several questions about the ruling and the controversy surrounding President Obama’s criticism of the decision, and Justice Alito’s reaction.

“I found it fascinating that the people who were editorializing against it were The New York Times Company and The Washington Post Company,” Justice Thomas said. “These are corporations.”

The part of the McCain-Feingold law struck down in Citizens United contained an exemption for news reports, commentaries and editorials. But Justice Thomas said that reflected a legislative choice rather than a constitutional principle.

He added that the history of Congressional regulation of corporate involvement in politics had a dark side, pointing to the Tillman Act, which banned corporate contributions to federal candidates in 1907.

“Go back and read why Tillman introduced that legislation,” Justice Thomas said, referring to Senator Benjamin Tillman. “Tillman was from South Carolina, and as I hear the story he was concerned that the corporations, Republican corporations, were favorable toward blacks and he felt that there was a need to regulate them.”

It is thus a mistake, the justice said, to applaud the regulation of corporate speech as “some sort of beatific action.”

Justice Thomas said the First Amendment’s protections applied regardless of how people chose to assemble to participate in the political process.

“If 10 of you got together and decided to speak, just as a group, you’d say you have First Amendment rights to speak and the First Amendment right of association,” he said. “If you all then formed a partnership to speak, you’d say we still have that First Amendment right to speak and of association.”

“But what if you put yourself in a corporate form?” Justice Thomas asked, suggesting that the answer must be the same.

Asked about his attitude toward the two decisions overruled in Citizens United, he said, “If it’s wrong, the ultimate precedent is the Constitution.”

Justice Thomas went on to say he no longer attends State Of The Union addresses, because they’ve become too partisan. He said there’s a lot you don’t hear on TV and it’s very difficult for a judge to sit there unable to respond and listen to catcalls, heckling, and under-the-breath comments.

Justice Thomas has more intellect and integrity in his finger than the vast majority of the a-holes on Capital Hill — the president included.

President Obama showed breathtaking ignorance of the Constitution when he criticized the campaign finance ruling during his SOTU. The fact that he taught constitutional law for 10 years makes it all the more troubling.

If anything it shows the sorry state of our law schools. The Constitution as it’s written is no longer taught. Instead, leftist professors indoctrinate students with left-wing legal theories and phony case law.

-Chris Jones

One of the most revealing things said during Saturday night’s Saddleback forum, was when Barack Obama was asked which Supreme Court justices he would not have nominated.

Obama wasted no time in naming Clarence Thomas, because “I don’t think that he, I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation.”

It’s impressive that Barack Obama is able to keep a straight face while criticizing anyone for lack of experience, given the fact that he’s the most unqualified lightweight to run for President in our nation’s history.

Putting aside that irony, Obama is also just flat wrong about Thomas. As The Wall Street Journal points out, Clarence Thomas had far more experience than Obama does.

By the time he was nominated, Clarence Thomas had worked in the Missouri Attorney General’s office, served as an Assistant Secretary of Education, run the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and sat for a year on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation’s second most prominent court. Since his “elevation” to the High Court in 1991, he has also shown himself to be a principled and scholarly jurist.

The fact of the matter is that Clarence Thomas has proven to be one of the most respected members of the of the entire court.

Black people have always loathed Thomas because even though he’s the first African-American elected to the Supreme Court, he’s said publicly that he doesn’t think that means he owes anything to the black community.

In other words, just because he’s black doesn’t mean he’s going to pretend the constitution says something it does not just because a particular ruling would benefit the black community.

Barack Obama of course finds that offensive and would expect his supreme court nominees to legislate from the bench and inact socialist policies the founding fathers never intended.