WordPress database error: [INSERT,UPDATE command denied to user 'mnp1233108443444'@'' for table 'h5bbf2eggs_options']
INSERT INTO `h5bbf2eggs_options` (`option_name`, `option_value`, `autoload`) VALUES ('_transient_doing_cron', '1500986976.9554390907287597656250', 'yes') ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE `option_name` = VALUES(`option_name`), `option_value` = VALUES(`option_value`), `autoload` = VALUES(`autoload`)

WordPress database error: [INSERT,UPDATE command denied to user 'mnp1233108443444'@'' for table 'h5bbf2eggs_wfLeechers']
insert into h5bbf2eggs_wfLeechers (eMin, IP, hits) values (floor(unix_timestamp() / 60), '911253119', 1) ON DUPLICATE KEY update hits = IF(@wfcurrenthits := hits + 1, hits + 1, hits + 1)

WordPress database error: [INSERT command denied to user 'mnp1233108443444'@'' for table 'h5bbf2eggs_wfHits']
insert into h5bbf2eggs_wfHits (ctime, is404, isGoogle, IP, userID, newVisit, URL, referer, UA) values (1500986977.129044, 0, 0, '911253119', '0', 1, 'http://mnprogressiveproject.com/tag/clarence-thomas/', '', 'CCBot/2.0 (http://commoncrawl.org/faq/)')

Clarence Thomas

Recent Posts

Clarence Thomas

StrasWebPr*sident Donald Trump has nominated Minnesota Supreme Court Justice David Stras for a seat on a federal appeals court. This is part of his first step in packing the federal courts with right-wingers. There is nothing to stop him from doing so, and it will remain one of the worst aspects of the Trump legacy probably for decades.

Corporate news outlets have been going out of their way to try to portray Stras, a former clerk for SCOTUS Associate Justice “Corrupt Clarence” Thomas, as really just a pretty harmless moderate. That seems to be based mostly on comments from retired Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page to the effect that they agreed more often than one might think. I’m presenting a couple of reality checks, that should be clicked on and perused in their entirety if you want to actually be legitimately informed about this.

Mr. Justice Carpet Bagger (The Cucking Stool)

With Stras’ Appointment the Minnesota Supreme Court Lurches Right (MN Progressive Project, and note the oracular foresight displayed in the final paragraph.)

Yeah, Governor Mark Dayton will get to pick Stras’s successor, and that’s some consolation for those of us who live here in Minnesota. But rulings from federal appeals court justices potentially affect all Americans – decidedly for the worse, if those rulings are made by the likes of Stras.


Women who claim sexual harassment are lying

by Eric Ferguson on November 3, 2011 · 0 comments

UPDATE: what I heard on the radio tonight that indicates they really don’t get the problem

Or at best misconstruing, and if you don’t believe that, just ask the conservative propaganda machine, where women are guilty until proven…well, they’re just guilty. TPM put a bunch of examples together For a couple examples:

Many conservatives believed Anita Hill was, at best, out for craven political gain. And at worst, she was nuts. Even as details are scant and sketchy about what happened during Cain’s tenure at the National Restaurant Association, conservatives are already casting the same aspersions on Cain’s accusers. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told the National Review that there were similarities between the Cain allegations and those leveled at Clarence Thomas. “There are some parallels here, and to the extent that they played a role in this, it’s very, very offensive, and it’s going to backfire severely,” he said.

Right-wing talk show host Laura Ingraham, a former Thomas law clerk, was also ready to blame the women. “We have seen this movie before and we know how it ends. It always ends up being an employee who can’t perform or who under-performs and is looking for a little green,” she said on her show.

We don’t know what Cain was accused of, let alone if the charges were justified. We also don’t know that the women misconstrued. We don’t know that the women were lying. We do know that when a conservative is under attack, no such niceties matter.

I STILL believe Anita Hill.*

*20 years ago, during the controversy over Clarence Thomas’ nomination to the Supreme Court, after Anita Hill’s story became public, a popular button on the left said “I believe Anita Hill”. If the right can pull their nonsense out of history’s dustbin, we can sure reach into the old button collection.
UPDATE: While driving tonight I turned on a local conservative talk station. Yes, I do hit myself with bricks because it feels good to stop, why do you ask? It was Neil Bortz and a caller going on about Cain’s problems being liberals’ fault, because we’re endeared — I think that’s the word he used — to Bill Clinton even though he raped a woman. And harassed her. And we felt the same about Ted Kennedy even though he left a woman to suffocate.

First, Kennedy, really, still going there? Well, I guess when you haven’t had anything new to use since 1969. Second, Clinton, so beloved of liberals that we used to call him the “best Republican president ever” until we got a load of a real Republican, had a tawdry affair, but affairs are consensual. Harassment is non-consensual pretty much by definition, and rape — that needs explaining, really? You do understand what these words mean, right?

Look folks, for you conservatives poking around to see what the liberals are doing in their blogs, we almost surely didn’t give Politico the dirt on Cain. I say “almost” because I don’t know where the story came from, but I’m pretty close to certain that if we had the information, we’d have saved it for the general election. What’s the point of knocking out Cain now? He was clearly a goofball even before his scandal broke, no Democrat thinks he’s got a serious chance to be the nominee, and we’d love to run against him. It would make no sense to go after him now. Who would it make sense for? Apparently someone thought his flavor-time (as in “of the month”) was going on too long. Every rival has something to gain by knocking him down. Some of us might be enjoying a bit of schadenfreude, but this is your fight, and we have nothing to do with it, much as you wish we did. What you need is for an Agatha Christie detective to go into the greenroom when your candidates gather for the next debate, close the door, and announce the source is in this room. And no blaming the butler!

My guess, it was Cain himself, as a plot to make himself look sympathetic and put all his rivals under suspicion. Nah, I don’t really beleive it, but it would be fun to get the conservative conspiracy theory impulse pulsing.


Clarence Thomas: Ethically Challenged, And More

by Dan Burns on February 9, 2011 · 0 comments

There is a growing web-based movement calling for the investigation and, if warranted (believe me, it looks to be warranted), impeachment, removal, and subsequent criminal prosecution of US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.  He’s been trying to hide income derived from his wife’s right-wing political activities.  A quite detailed article is here.  (The image is also from the Brad Blog.)  A more general overview is here.  Here is a Take Action page.  “Justice” Thomas appears to be far gone into the “I’m above the law” mindset so distressingly prevalent among high-ranking government, and corporate, players.

As noted by NYU law professor Stephen Gillers in the LA Times’ report, “It wasn’t a miscalculation;  he simply omitted his wife’s source of income for six years, which is a rather dramatic omission…It could not have been an oversight.

…additional disclosures reveal that Thomas withheld such information not just for six years, but for as many as twenty, even while he was deciding cases such as Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which had a very direct impact on the fund-raising ability of organizations such as The Heritage Foundation and his wife’s Liberty Coalition.  In short, they stand to make hundreds of thousands, even millions, as based on the decision in the case, in which Thomas supported the majority decision.

Thomas’s appointment to the court, in 1991, by George H. W. Bush, was as cynical a political maneuver as you’ll see.  The “black” seat on the court was open, and Bush’s people promptly identified a reactionary whose overall socio-political views are representative of those of less than 10% of African-Americans, and perhaps 27% of the US populace as a whole.  And of course he voted with the majority in sticking us with the horrific failure that was the conservative Bush II presidency – an impeachable offense, in and of itself, to say the least.