Comments on: Another logic failure

By: ymarsakar

ymarsakar — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:53:29 +0000

Justice Thomas is slow. He isn’t the intellectual powerhouse that Scalia is. It is just a fact. But there is a difference between a fact and the media using it as a tool for character assassination.

Thomas is working very hard to figure out the issues. He isn’t sharp, so he has to replace it with hard work. Which means not opening his mouth like a bunch of fake liberals, and talking up a storm while paying zero attention to the witnesses and lawyers. You’ve seen fake liberal Congressmen do exactly that, people, in investigations. A soap box, they called it.

The New York Times should get whipped in public, it is the only thing that will teach them a lesson. And that’s a moderate and lenient punishment in my book.

By: Al

Al — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 11:05:57 +0000

There is a constant behavior pattern in the MSM’s treatment of Justice Thomas. Any conservative, or anyone seen as conservative who rises to high position is labeled stupid.
Bush’s intelligence is repeatedly compared to that of a fence post. One interpretation of this multi-culti-fruitcake media behavior (love the phrase, BW)is that they are afraid of intelligent conservatives in power.But that is again stating the obvious.
Maybe that would give Justice Thomas some satisfaction.
Al

By: Marguerite

Marguerite — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 04:11:26 +0000

Chief Justice Roberts at one point said in his confirmation hearings that he would follow the law in his rulings and if that meant that the powerful won, the powerful would win. I don’t remember his exact words, but I was greatly relieved by this statement, since it signified that he was no pushover for liberal bilge and I would put Justice Thomas in that catagory.

By: Morgan K Freeberg

Morgan K Freeberg — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 20:17:42 +0000

Ah, I love that subtle quote from Grisham’s novel The Rainmaker. Nicely done.

Thomas’ written opinions tend to run long, and use lots of big words and stuff. I can’t help but notice Scalia’s opinions, the most biting and spicey ones being the dissenting ones, are on the short, snippy side of things.

If Thomas is really just a clone of Scalia, he must be a very stupid one indeed. The man wastes an awful lot of time writing about complicated things, in sophisticated, well-structured ways, which I guess none of our liberal elites take the time to read. So assuming he’s as weak of a thinker as I’m constantly told he must be, he’s in need of some time management classes as well.

Ah well, it’s the thundering din of “what all our liberals ‘know’.” No way that could be wrong, huh?

By: Danny Lemieux

Danny Lemieux — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:31:35 +0000

I guest that Justice Thomas appreciates that one can’t listen while they’re talking. I can understand why Liberals struggle with that maxim.

By: Webloggin - Blog Archive » Another Logic Failure

Webloggin - Blog Archive » Another Logic Failure — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:50:13 +0000

[...] [Discuss this article with Bookworm over at the Bookworm Room…] Share Article Clarence Thomas, Washington Post Sphere: Related Content Trackback URL [...]

By: JJ

JJ — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:13:34 +0000

The maxim, courtesy of More, is that silence implies consent.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:06:10 +0000

Hello Bookworm,

Boy howdy, the assertions made by these article is just absurd. People are making leaps toward wild conclusions based on little or no facts at all…

It’s becoming more and more common to see people being hanged on the gallows on no substantial evidence. This article reminds me of Sir Thomas Moore, who said that his silence does not speak to his opinions one way or the other. Silence is not guilt, for if we lay the laws of men low, what will stand between us and the devil once they’re hewn? Will we be able to stand in the winds that blow then?

Men unjustly construe silence as guilt nowadays and project all forms evil on that silence. Clarence Thomas does not speak, thus, he is “indifferent to suffering”? This madness is sweeping much of our discussions on the law.

Does the rule of law still exist? If so, how much of it is left? Can it be rebuilt?

By: nance

nance — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:21:10 +0000

If it is true that man speaks from the depth of their depraved hearts; it is interesting that the MSM immediately associates silence with stupidity. What is exciting is that we have an active citizenry that isn’t buying what the MSM is peddling. Republicanism always rises up to crush arrogant elitism. The MSM deserves every bit of ridicule a republican voice can dish out. Go get ‘em, Bookworm.