Why is Clarence Thomas supporting Rush Limbaugh by appearing on his show after Rush said troops are "phonies"?

Submitted by lambert on Fri, 2007-09-28 14:52.

It’s almost enough to give the impression that Thomas is a political justice, just like Petraeus is a political general, and Gonzales was a political attorney general. Odd. Or not. As I’ve been saying:

Scalia et al have long wanted to impose their jurisprudence on the country. But they didn’t have the votes on the Court to get that done. They knew they’d only get get the votes with a Republican President. So they wrote Bush v. Gore with that outcome in mind. (Which is why they were careful to make it a “good for one time only” decision. Wouldn’t want to make the case a precedent, in case a Democrat ever wanted to use it.)

And so they got what they wanted: They selected Bush, and in due course Bush put Roberts and Scalito on the Court.

But Roberts and Scalito on the court wouldn’t have happened without Bush v. Gore to begin with.

To me, that means we don’t have a Supreme Court. We have a Bush Court. And every decision they’ve made since Bush’s first nominee, Roberts, was installed, is fruit of the poisonous tree that was Bush v. Gore, and hence illegitimate.

Sadly, when Thomas furthers Big Pharma’s grotesquely Conservative buffoonery—sorry for the redundancy—he only reinforces the view the Court is yet another aspect of government that the Bush regime has trashed and delegitimized.

NOTE Via Benedict, the married man.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

lambert's blog
Login or register to post comments

Next up

Submitted by FeralLiberal on Fri, 2007-09-28 15:06.

Thomas on O’Reilly’s show.

Of course he does!

Submitted by Woody--Tokin Librul on Fri, 2007-09-28 15:30.

he only reinforces the view the Court is yet another aspect of government that the Bush regime has trashed and delegitimized.

Yeah. That’s his job. These are his orders: to whatever extent possible, act so as to alienate the People from any and all Instruments and Institutions of their own legitimate self-governance such as might assist them in the preservation of the democratic, republican government of, for, and by the People…

For whom do you think Thomas is working?

Clearly, not the “People.’

A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner

wingnut family values

Submitted by the famer (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 17:27.

for the same reason clarence thomas performed the marriage ceremony at Limbaugh’s third attempt at upholding that 1inviolable and sacrosanct institution.

it’s all in the wingnut family

Reach me that bucket, wouldja hon?

Submitted by lambert on Fri, 2007-09-28 17:55.

I thought farmer’s comment had to be parody. Just not possible! But no. I forgot the “aerobics instructor” story!

And check out the guest list:

Mr. Limbaugh, 43, who is twice-divorced, married MARTA FITZGERALD on Friday at the Virginia home of CLARENCE THOMAS, the United States Supreme Court Justice, a spokesman for Mr. Limbaugh, Kit Carson, told The Associated Press. Justice Thomas performed the ceremony.

Ms. Fitzgerald, who has also been divorced twice, is a former aerobics instructor from Florida. The couple met through the computer bulletin board Compuserve.

In attendance were the bride’s and groom’s mothers and Ms. Fitzgerald’s two children as well as the former Secretary of Education, William J. Bennett, and his wife, Elayne, and the political advisers James Carville and his wife, Mary Matalin.

I’m finding it hard to maintain my cranial integrity…

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

Perino Praised with faint condemnation

Submitted by Dee Loralei (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 19:01.

Reme,ber Bush said the MoveOn ad was “hideous”.

Today Ms Peroxide said ” phony was not a word the President would use”. Sure she said a bit more, but nothing was a searing condemnation.

Rather than damning with faint praise, methinks the inverse is more true.

clarence thomas

Submitted by montag46 (not verified) on Sat, 2007-09-29 08:17.

We could keep all this talk about Clarence Thomas in proper perspective if we would only remember that Justice Scalia, upon being asked what the differences were between his and Clarence Thomas’ judicial philosophies were, ended his response by saying the he ( Justice Scalia ) was conservative, BUT he was NOT a nut!

We may infer anything we wish from this remark.

Well, the REAL reason Uncle Thomas Was On Rush's "Show"

Submitted by Woody--Tokin Librul on Sat, 2007-09-29 09:32.

was to pimp his book, some kinda fony fucking autobiography, sponsored by the Federalist Society and published by Heritage…

Called “My Life: From Pubes to Pukes”

A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner

Nina Totenberg said his new

Submitted by hobson on Sat, 2007-09-29 11:58.

Nina Totenberg said his new book just opens up all that stuff over his nomination again. But he seems not to have gotten past it. It also sounded rather vitriolic. Strange, because I saw him in some interview where he really seemed to want to be liked.

Maybe, he wants to be something other than be a Supreme. Could we do something to get him a talk show?