The Mean Spirits From the Clarence Thomas Hearings Never Left

October 26, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (10)

Virginia Lamp Thomas stirred the boiling cauldron of national memory from 19 Novembers ago, with on-cue Halloween timing. The wife of Clarence Thomas, a member of the Supreme Court, called up Anita Hill, unbidden, and demanded an apology for "what you did you my husband." That's a lot like the wife of a Salem witch trial judge asking an apology from a young woman drowned in the town duck pond.

Warning: This column is a very strong brew. For me, the issue is more what Clarence Thomas did and does to all of us and the nation's constitution. He gave new meaning to "one man, one vote" in the 2000 Bush vs. Gore case, which passed 5-4. Always sitting like a stone, silent and sullen, during oral arguments, he does not advance American jurisprudence on the job. Appointed by President George H.W. Bush, he took Thurgood Marshall's seat in 1991.

Let's not forget that recently ousted NPR commentator Juan Williams was Thomas's most vocal defender. It's strange how the hobgoblins of that public square nightmare are surfacing this season.

Mrs. Thomas, you awakened the sound and fury of your husband's 1991 confirmation hearings with your weird ramblings. Thanks for that, a flashback to the single most polarizing event for many a full moon. Listening to the proceedings from my San Francisco soccer team's game, we women were all agape, cast under a spell, by the haunting voices from Washington that autumn weekend. The clear voice of Hill, telling her truth under oath of her sexual harassment at the hands of Thomas, her former boss, rolled like thunder and lightning across the land. She gave specific examples that connected to the pornography of the day.

Responding to this ugly private portrait of a 41-year-old man, some senators on the Judiciary Committee rushed to judgment. The Republican trio of Arlen Specter, Orrin Hatch, and Alan Simpson were scarier than the three witches in Macbeth as they tried to break Hill with wild talk of pubic hairs on Coke cans. They suggested Hill was a "scorned woman." The Democrats lacked coordinated high dudgeon of their own. They decided Thomas was probably unfit for the highest court, but were tongue-tied and flat-footed in the face of their colleagues’ spooky tricks.

[See where Specter gets his campaign money.]

The American people were treated to political theatrics that revealed character in action. Sen. Joseph Biden, the chairman at center stage, lit up like a jack-o’-lantern when he wielded the gavel. He tended to talk too much (shocker) and repeated: "You have the benefit of the doubt, Judge." A criminal standard of guilt should not be applied to such a lofty realm of justice, but Biden brought an ordinary touch to the ornate setting. Thomas refused to listen to Hill's testimony at all and withdrew from the drama, not before denouncing it as a "high-tech lynching."

As soon as Thomas turned the airy room hurly-burly, it was effectively over. Thomas's wife Virginia was right there as living proof we were not in the Jim Crow South anymore. But no matter no mind. Race trumps gender every time. While investigative reporters were turning up evidence that Thomas was in fact a consumer of pornography, the vote and the oath of office were taken hurriedly. The stories never saw the light of day, according to Strange Justice: The Selling of Clarence Thomas, by Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson.

So Thomas got to the Supreme Court after all by a slim margin: 52-48. Yet one senator rose to declare that he believed Hill: the late Robert C. Byrd. Since most American women believed Hill and resented her reception, they let Congress know it with the "Year of the Woman" in the 1992 election. But things haven't been the same since. I've come to believe the truth didn't matter much in the hearing. Thomas's White House and Senate supporters wanted to win more than they cared a fig about sexual harassment. That was the first time the term ever entered the national conversation.

Nineteen Novembers ago, mean spirits afoot were meaner than anyone could remember. And they never left town.

Tags:
Robert Byrd,
Clarence Thomas,
Al Gore,
Democratic Party,
Arlen Specter,
2000 presidential election,
Orrin Hatch,
George W. Bush,
Congress,
Republican Party,
Joe Biden,
George H.W. Bush,
Supreme Court

Reader Comments Read all comments (10)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Anita Hill came forward to testify because the government asked her to (during a routine check) give a character reference. It was clearly illegal for Congress and the government to retaliate against Hill, an American citizen, for testifying. There were also witnesses that verified that Hill was being truthful. There are many citizens of this country who do not feel comfortable that a justice to the highest court in the land has associates that are Anti-Government and extremely partisan. Thomas should be impeached for perjury and for being morally unfit to serve.

FairyTinkerbell of CA 3:14PM November 11, 2010

I despised Clarence Thomas in 1991 ... and I despise him Now! He and Roberts should be Impeached!!

I watched the hearings back in 1991. And as a woman who has suffered through several instances of sexual harassment on the job, I can relate. Before Anita Hill, it wasn't uncommon for men to take advantage of female employees. As a young female.. I didn't know how to deal with the situation, and I also was fired from several jobs because I would not comply with my abusers. Nobody ... particularly employers talked about it or had policies in place to discourage that type of behavior before 1991. In fact, it was Hill's testimony which prompted many companies to implement HR policies against sexual harassment.

HopeforAmerica of WA 10:28PM October 27, 2010

If Anita Hill were telling the truth, why did she wait until the hearings to complain. She was an educated woman who worked with Thomas for years. Why would she tolerate it for that length of time? I thought it rather convenient that the allegations would surface only after he was going through confirmation hearings.

The fact that Hill would turn over the phone message from Mrs. Thomas and then play it for the media and give interviews instead of just deleting it like most people would have done lends credence to the woman scorned theory.

Dar of FL 1:19PM October 27, 2010

Jamie Stiehm

Jamie Stiehm

Jamie Stiehm is a weekly Creators Syndicate columnist. Her op-eds on politics, culture, and history have appeared in newspapers across the nation, including The New York Times and The Washington Post. She previously worked as a reporter at the Baltimore Sun and The Hill. Jamie's first journalism job was as an assignment editor at the CBS News bureau in London.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Political Enemies: Good vs. Perfect

In politics the perfect is often the enemy of the good.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement