 |
| Anita calls on the FBI to protect her. |
Mrs. Thomas had called the Brandeis professor to see if she would consider making a statement about her actions nineteen years earlier and correct things that possibly spun out of control and ended up disparaging the good name of her husband.
Virginia Thomas is a 53 year old woman who lives 440 miles away, and is the wife of a sitting US Supreme Court Justice. How much harm does Ms. Hill think is going to befall her from Mrs. Thomas? This paragon of courage who fearlessly came out to speak the 'truth' that the nation needed to hear put this information together and concluded her life was in such jeopardy that she needed to notify the University and bring in the FBI.
If ever there was an indication that Anita Hill was not the possessor of reasonable judgment, this would be it. Mrs. Thomas on the other hand has showed herself to be hopeful, forgiving, and open to the possibility of people gaining perspective and maturity from their life experiences.
ABC News listened in on the recording and wrote down all the gory details. According to their report, Mrs Thomas came at Ms. Hill in the following manner:
Wow, that is chilling.
"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."
What exactly was in the mind of Ms. Hill with all the commotion she has brought upon herself over a simple phone call?
Yeah, right.
"I certainly thought the call was inappropriate," Hill, who worked for Clarence Thomas in two federal government jobs, said in a statement released Tuesday night.
"I have no intention of apologizing because I testified truthfully about my experience and I stand by that testimony," she added.
Contacted by the press, Virginia Thomas disclosed her ill begot plan:"I did place a call to Ms. Hill at her office extending an olive branch to her after all these years, in hopes that we could ultimately get past what happened so long ago. That offer still stands. I would be very happy to meet and talk with her if she would be willing to do the same."
Sexual crimes and sexual misconduct are known to have an exteremly high rate of recidivism. Now, with the wisdom of time at our disposal, what has been revealed about Justice Thomas and his accuser Anita Hill?
Prior to Miss Hill, there were no claims of sexual misconduct against Clarence Thomas. Since Miss Hill's claim ninteen years ago, there have been no claims of sexual misconduct against Clarence Thomas.
The only thing you can wonder is why anyone would ever place any responsibility in the hands of this ungrateful, nutbar, tool of the left.
For a woman to falsely accuse a man of a sexual crime is one of the most heinous things a woman can do. She subverts her smaller stature and gender's reputation of nurturing and gentleness and uses those as weapons to assassinate the character of her victim. It is disgraceful behavior, and I am sorry that it occurred to such a fine man as Clarence Thomas.
ReplyDeleteOnce you cry wolf you have no choice but to cry wolf again. And again. And again. Apparently. The Left is always teaching me something.
ReplyDeleteThe key parts of those hearing were televised in the wee hours of that Monday and few saw it. I did. There was a parade of witnesses that made an airtight case that the charges were BS to begin with. Crocodile tears. Faux outrage. The alpha and omega of the Left.
Darrell, calling security? Getting the FBI involved for Pete's sake?!!
ReplyDeleteWhat in the world is going on in the mind of this woman? Would not a normal person just politely decline? She had to make a national news item out of it? One more chance to be in the spotlight?
Disgraceful behavior.
You see Azmat pulling the same thing on me over at LMA. Why are you surprised?
ReplyDeleteYeah, well....
ReplyDelete: )
It ain't called the Lyin' Left for nothing.
ReplyDeleteAnita Hill has made a career out of her "victimhood" as a public speaker and "women's studies" jobs. Staying away from her would be my primary concern. This isn't a difference of opinion, it is war.
So of course, in her mind this innocuous message left on her answering machine asking if after all this time she had a change of heart... this then was harassment. She is being harried, stalked, threatened by ... the wife of a sitting US Supreme Court Justice.
ReplyDeleteIt would be like Jimmy Carter claiming he was being harassed by Barbara Bush or Nancy Reagan. As nutty as that guy is, he isn't so off his rocker to make a national spectacle of himself making outrageous claims of supposed threatening from the wives of people he has attempted to undermine.
ReplyDeleteThere was no harassment this time. There was no harassment last time. Victimhood is forever, though.
ReplyDeleteThings might be different today with all the cameras around us, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Democrats try their old trick of attacking their own campaign offices to try and paint any opposition to them as dangerous extremists before election day. Misuse of official public resources, like the FBI, is far down on the list when acquisition and retention of power are your only concerns. Anita Hill won't give an inch, because that weakens her initial claim and subsequent fame and public recognition. As you stated, the Left will gather around her once more and defend her action and rehash her intial claims, and I expect a boost in future jobs and awards as a result.
Yeah, well....
ReplyDeleteYou find merit? He made the claim out of whole cloth after being ignored. The comments are all there to read. Do you think asking him if he is an agent of destruction on the other thread is a threat? It's the least I could ask for anyone thinking that taking down the American economy is a good idea in any way, shape or form.
Yeah, well... you're right.
ReplyDeleteYeah, well ... the guy is an absolute nutjob. Ponce is a tool, sure enough. A partisan hack... but that guy Hazmat looks to be unhinged. Where does he come up with this stuff?
ReplyDeleteSeriously, he strikes me as mentally ill.
Now take it one step further and wrap your head around the fact that he is a teacher in America.
ReplyDeleteScary, isn't it?
What?!!
ReplyDeleteGood grief.
Do you have a source or link for that Macaca story, where the Webb staff guy had entered Allen's campaign office multiple times introducing himself as Macaca, thus setting Allen up? I don't doubt the story, just wondering if a source backing it was readily available.
ReplyDelete*incredulous voice* "Wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Demands Apology From Anita Hill. Why Now? What's This All About?"--teaser for 10 o'clock news on my local TV station.
ReplyDeleteAbout that story. It was from Allen's staffers, and I read it on a blog at the time, probably Ace of Spades or LGF. If LGF, it's gone down the memory hole by now. I'll look, but no promises.
It sounded right because they made themselves look juvenile with their "caca" (euphemism for feces) take and the humor that seemed to derive from that. He probably used "Macaque" or some other similar homophone.
"Why Now? What's This All About?"
ReplyDeleteThese guys are hopeless.
Thanks for looking in to it. It sounded like the perfect set-up, and just like the Dems to even be thinking it up - so foreign in concept that the target never sees it coming all through the set up period.
I couldn't find the exact thing I read back then. It made more sense than the stuff you can find with a Google search now, about it referring to the mohawk haircut doesn't make sense. In what I read, they related that the "caca" part came from what they took from the name he gave them and the "mo" part came from his haircut, which looked like a mohawk to them because the sides of Sidarth's head were shaved. That makes some sense to me. Examine Allen's exact quote--"This fellow over here with the yellow shirt -- Macaca or whatever his name is -- he's with my opponent," Allen said. "He's following us around everywhere."
ReplyDeleteIt's clear to me that Allen thought his name was Macaca (Mocaca)[remember it's a transcription]
Use a slur in your mind that you are familiar with. Would you say to someone [slur] or whatever your name is? You know the slur you just lashed out with is not that person's name.
It was a long con that worked. Allen bumbled the explanation. The Left was ready to go immediately with long explanations about the history of the word and the story about it's use in Allen's mother's homeland. 'We now know that not only is 'macaque' a French language slur used to describe North Africans but Allen has a dizzyingly direct way of being familiar with the word. His mother is French Tunisian. Given that it would be amongst the French colonial population in North Africa that the word would have the greatest currency (even if only by familiarity rather than use), it seems close to impossible to believe that Allen didn't become familiar with the word growing up....
[A]ll sorts of things come out of your mouth when you're speaking extemporaneously. Ask anyone who's spent much time on TV or radio. Not things that weren't in your mind somewhere to say, but some things you might have thought better of if you had a few moments to consider it. If you're not a racist, in most cases racial slurs don't come pouring out or, like one conservative yacker, fantasies about sterilizing African-Americans.
I suspect that Allen started off with a pretty crude effort to make fun of Sidarth as an immigrant, an outsider, perhaps by snidely but in his mind jocularly mispronouncing his name. Who knows? But in the moment, when he was looking at this kid who was clearly getting on his nerves, and amongst a lilly [sic] white crowd, this is the word that came to his mind and he used it. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2006_08_13.php#009422
Nice that everybody had stuff like this ready to go. And that trolls were at the ready to spring up on blogs everywhere to report it in tears.
Thanks Darrell. Yeah, that all looks right, and is corroborated by this Washington Post article. All that is missing is the time Sidarth spent at the Allen campaign, and the dialogue he had with the staffers. Certainly he was one of the most ready to be offended people you will ever read about, and he made every effort to make as much of his 'hurt' feelings as possible.
ReplyDeleteThat guy Webb was pretty sick as well.
It doesn't matter: It worked. The interaction between Sidarth and the Allen staffers will always be a he said/they said deal.
ReplyDeleteSame with how the media covered Bush I seeing the grocery scanner. He saw technology at a trade show that is still not on the market. They made him look like an out-of-touch boob. People like Ted Koppel--who showed on several occasions that he knew the real story--allowed guests to go on and on without ever interjecting the truth.
Anita Hill's actions today fit with her actions from yesterday. She sees danger and hostile intent where none exists, and then compounds the error by making a public spectacle of the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteIn light of the harm this woman brought to the life of an innocent man, she should be heavily fined, go to jail, or both. It is not justice to allow such actions to go unpunished.
However, as we all come to learn eventually, justice is a rarity in this world in which we live.