I figured it would take quite a bit to get me out of my workload induced exile from blogging but it only took a four column article in the other day’s Houston Chronicle for me to be unable to contain myself.
So the Hon. Clarence Thomas, one of conservative Fab Four in the Supreme Court in his book, My Grandfather’s Son, seems to think that Yale did him a disservice by letting him in to its law school via its affirmative action program. The icing on the cake or rather the spit in the face of Yale is that he stores his degree in his basement with a 15-cent sticker from a cigar package on the frame.
A quote from the article is rather revealing:
“I’d graduated from one of America’s top law schools but racial preference had robbed my achievement of its true value.”
I’m sorry Justice Thomas but I don’t buy your logic. It’s one thing to suggest that you might not have gotten into Yale if you weren’t black, casting aspersion on your own academics but it’s another thing to suggest that Yale’s letting you in did you harm. Racism does the harm. Denial of opportunity does the harm. And very silly things like suggesting you’re worse off because Yale let you in and ,perhaps a poorer decision on their part, let you out, suggests that the prejudice that preceeded you was correct.
In the words of Lady MacBeth, Fie! Justice Thomas Fie!
I would urge J. Thomas to reconsider his position because someone who was head of the EEOC and now a member of the Supreme Court cannot in all truth be said to be harmed. What’s that in Constitutional Law? To have standing the plaintiff must demonstrate an injury. I see no injury here to Justice Thomas. I do however see an injury, a tarnish, on a hardworking Grandfather’s repute because of the ills of a prodigal son.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/5233265.html
P.S.: I suppose there goes one vote, if I ever go up for appeal to the Supreme Court.
October 23, 2007 at 10:00 pm
As far as I’m concerned, Yale did the *whole* country a disservice by letting that guy in. If they hadn’t, that douche-bag wouldn’t be sitting on the Supreme Court. I am proponent of of affirmative action, but CT is right. This is an example where good intentions truly went awry.
November 12, 2007 at 5:28 pm
So, because Justice Thomas overcame discrimination, the fact that he faced discrimination is now unimportant? Certainly, by now, the harm that he suffered in his early years has been offset - but that doesn’t mean that it never happened.
And I’m saddened by the nasty epithets hurled at Justice Thomas, likely because of the political leanings of the commentator. I’m not a fan of Ginsburg, but it would lessen me as a person to refer to her in a like fashion.
November 12, 2007 at 6:01 pm
I will agree that calling someone d*****-bag isn’t perhaps, how shall we say, bringing more light to the discussion.
Again the thing that bothered me is J. Thomas disparaging his school in such a fashion when all they did was try to help him.
November 30, 2007 at 1:11 pm
“when all they did was try to help” - This is exactly what should be disparaged.
It appears to me you agree with him, yet despise his political perspective. I assume by your comments, you think he is unfit to be a Supreme Court justice. Perhaps he is. I find humor in your blog when you criticize his position yet solidify his point. If he was in fact an applicant worthy of acceptance, then Yale robbed him of his own accomplishment. If, however, Yale had not propped up an otherwise undeserved applicant, he probably would not have achieved the position you find him so unworthy of. Worse yet, Yale may have accepted Justice Thomas over a modern day Holmes (an affluent Caucasian with no closed doors destined to become the most influential justice to date).
I generally agree with Justice Thomas’ positions. You disagree with one of his positions and disparage a very accomplished man. Don’t define a man by reducing him to his worst moment, and don’t define Clarence Thomas by his position on affirmative action.
I would also suggest you read his book rather than comic book styled criticisms in your local newspaper.
November 30, 2007 at 1:24 pm
My notion of saying all they did was try to help was pursuant to the fact that I think Thomas probably would have made it to Yale on his own academics but the racism of the time did not afford him that opportunity. I think Yale by admitting him disregarded his race. I don’t think they allowed in a student that wouldn’t otherwise fit their criteria. From the tone of J.Thomas’ comments it seems he seems to have not comprehended the difference of denying someone admission based on race and considering admitting someone based on race. It’s a fine and very tedious line.
January 7, 2008 at 11:44 pm
I cannot follow your logic. It appears to me that he understands your very tedious line and is attacking it head on. Why is the stamp on his diploma? To remind him of the stacks of rejection letters he received upon graduation. Why was he rejected? Per Justice Thomas, the affirmative action program was a hindrance on his ability to compete. I think Justice Thomas is perhaps overreacting to this singular issue at Yale. However, I applaud his using it as a vehicle to advance his position. While I try to appreciate the historical significance of slavery, I think it is about time to hold each other accountable individually. We should all intellectually grow up and not victimize ourselves based on our God-given individualities. The Lord knows I developed more than enough ‘qualities’ all on my own that kept me out of Yale…