I'll watch or skim those. Probably. But for now, I noticed an op/ed by Anita Hill in (you guessed it) the New York Times.
I know little of that whole thing, as it just narrowly preceded the beginning of my awareness of current events (I was 9). But her letter to the Times has some interesting replies to comments made in his book and the 60 Minutes segment:
Justice Thomas attacked my religious conviction, telling “60 Minutes” this weekend, “She was not the demure, religious, conservative person that they portrayed.” Perhaps he conveniently forgot that he wrote a letter of recommendation for me to work at the law school at Oral Roberts University, in Tulsa. I remained at that evangelical Christian university for three years...
I saw the Hill op-ed too. Ann Althouse picked up on that same section of text and she had this to say:
"I don't think Thomas's quote connotes that she lacks religious belief. Take the word "religious" in context, between the adjectives "demure" and "conservative." I think he's using the word "religious" to connote a certain type of demeanor -- perhaps someone who forgives, turns the other cheek, and judges not. (Under my interpretation, you can criticize him for stereotyping religious people.)"
I don't know if anyone but Thomas really knows what he meant by "religious" in that sentence. Speculating is fun, but it would probably be best to ask him. Hell, he's doing enough appearances and interviews for somebody to get the question to him.
Funny that you should mention your age at the time of the whole mess. All of this talk about the Thomas hearings brought back my limited memories of the whole affair. I have vague memories of my mom watching the whole confirmation drama on the tiny black and white TV in our kitchen. I also remember that she was angry. But that's pretty much all that I can recall.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences."
P.J. O'Rourke
I'll watch or skim those. Probably. But for now, I noticed an op/ed by Anita Hill in (you guessed it) the New York Times.
I know little of that whole thing, as it just narrowly preceded the beginning of my awareness of current events (I was 9). But her letter to the Times has some interesting replies to comments made in his book and the 60 Minutes segment:
Justice Thomas attacked my religious conviction, telling “60 Minutes” this weekend, “She was not the demure, religious, conservative person that they portrayed.” Perhaps he conveniently forgot that he wrote a letter of recommendation for me to work at the law school at Oral Roberts University, in Tulsa. I remained at that evangelical Christian university for three years...
Good stuff,
NAP
PS Welcome Back.
Posted by
nap |
9:34 PM
I saw the Hill op-ed too. Ann Althouse picked up on that same section of text and she had this to say:
"I don't think Thomas's quote connotes that she lacks religious belief. Take the word "religious" in context, between the adjectives "demure" and "conservative." I think he's using the word "religious" to connote a certain type of demeanor -- perhaps someone who forgives, turns the other cheek, and judges not. (Under my interpretation, you can criticize him for stereotyping religious people.)"
I don't know if anyone but Thomas really knows what he meant by "religious" in that sentence. Speculating is fun, but it would probably be best to ask him. Hell, he's doing enough appearances and interviews for somebody to get the question to him.
Funny that you should mention your age at the time of the whole mess. All of this talk about the Thomas hearings brought back my limited memories of the whole affair. I have vague memories of my mom watching the whole confirmation drama on the tiny black and white TV in our kitchen. I also remember that she was angry. But that's pretty much all that I can recall.
Posted by
Steve |
9:59 PM
Thank you for the find.
Posted by
steveegg |
11:18 AM