Looks like Anita Hill was telling the truth and Clarence Thomas was lying. Surprise!

It’s the central non-surprise in a surprising turn of events.

When Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, Virginia, a leading figure in Tea Party circles, left an early morning voice mail message of Anita Hill asking her to consider apologizing for testimony Hill had given to Congress about two decades ago that damaged but did not stop the appointment of her former boss, Virginia’s husband, Clarence Thomas, to the highest court, that voicemail started a peculiar chain of events that has not yet played out.

The testimony was wide-ranging but largely focused on Thomas’ behavior toward female staff members and subordinates, which, according to Hill (and others who did not testify before Congress), ran long on sexual innuendo and inappropriate, sometimes aggressive comments of a sexual nature.

Now, the woman Thomas had been dating at the time (before his marriage to Virginia), Lillian McEwan, who Thomas referred to in his testimony, has stepped forward  with her first public comments on the matter.

In his own testimony, Thomas had suggested that Hill  was jealous of Thomas’ relationship with the light-skinned McEwan, seeming to suggest that the dark complected Hill was envious of Thomas’ frequent companion’s light complexion. (No, really.)

McEwan, now retired after her own long and prestigious law career, has written a memoir, and she has come forward to seemingly corroborate Hill’s characterizations of Thomas as conversationally obsessed with sex, large breasts, and suggesting that he was constantly sizing up young, black, female  subordinates as possible sexual conquests. Saying that it was the call to Hill  by Thomas’ wife Virginia asking Hill to consider apologizing for her long-ago testimony that provoked her to finally come forward, McEwan recently gave a 30 minute interview to the New York Times.

According to the Times:

For Ms. Thomas, [McEwan] said, the accusation of sexual harassment made by Ms. Hill “still has to be a mystery, that he is still angry about this and upset about it after all these years, and I can understand that she would want to know why, and solve a problem if she could — I mean, acting as a loyal wife.”

But Ms. McEwen said she knew a different Clarence Thomas, one whom she recognized in the 1991 testimony of Ms. Hill, who claimed that he had repeatedly made inappropriate sexual comments to her at work, including descriptions of pornographic films.

Ms. McEwen said that pornography for Justice Thomas was “just a part of his personality structure.” She said he kept a stack of pornographic magazines, “frequented a store on Dupont Circle that catered to his needs,” and allowed his interest in pornography to bleed into his professional relationships.

More:

Ms. McEwen, speaking with ABC News

And the original coverage  from the Washington Post, which broke the story.

Advertisements

NOT a witch… more like a Satanist

Christine O’Donnell was not a witch…

From her descriptions of her experiences, it’s clear to me that O’Donnell was not a witch. But I’m not at all sure she even knows what a witch is.

I’m not a Wiccan, but I’ve known some Wiccans and know more than a bit about the philosophies which guide Wiccan witchcraft: respect for nature and all life and a disavowal of using special knowledge for personal gain.

When O’Donnell talked about being on a “Satanic altar” where there were signs of blood, she would appear to be describing a very different — even diametrically opposed — form of practice.

Satanism, in the few of many, is not so much rooted in ancient practice but is, rather, a defiant perversion and twisting of Christian monotheism, upending Jesus’ teachings of charity and compassion — teachings in concordance with many of the principles of Wicca — and replacing them with an exaltation of selfishness and greed. “Greed is good,” Satanists will tell you.

Just like some other folks…

Just how nutty are Tea Party leaders?

How about nutty enough to claim — as Tea Party darling Christine O’Donnell did on Fox News in 2007 — that “American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains”?

That’s a real live quote from the real live GOP candidate for the U.S. Senate in Delaware, the most notable rising star in the Tea Party movement.

Obviously, these are people who cannot absorb and retain simple facts, cannot deal logically with basic arguments, and who subscribe to elaborate conspiracy theories that defy any sort of reasonable credulity, such as the notion, widely held among Tea Party types, that there is a nation-wide conspiracy reaching back to the early 1960s in order to promote the supposedly false idea that President Obama was born in Hawaii, and not in Kenya or Indonesia, as several competing conspiracy theories favored by Tea Party partisans suggest.

Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle hints at armed revolt

Speaking on a conservative talk show, Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle, running for Senate in Nevada and hoping to unseat Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, suggested that — if Congress doesn’t get the Tea Party message — that some will be looking to what she called “Second Ammendment remedies.”

Here are some of her comments, quoted here by ScrippsNews:

She said the purpose of the right to bear arms is to check the federal government. But she stopped short of saying that she would support an armed uprising.

“Our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason, and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government,” Angle told conservative talk show host Lars Larson in January. “In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it’s good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that’s not where we’re going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies.”

Nev. Senate hopeful Sharron Angle talks of armed revolt

Tea party poll: tell me something I don’t know…

The New York Times and CBS pooled their allowances and bought a little public opinion survey targeting the media’s favorite population sector of the moment: those who identify with the various tea party movements — which turns out to be about 18% of Americans in this poll.

What did they find out?

That those who identify themselves as tea party members or sympathizers are richer, older, and whiter than most US citizens. They are no more afraid of losing economic position than other Americans. Surprisingly, perhaps, they mostly think they are taxed fairly.

Yet they are fervent in their demands for smaller government — even though they are equally dead set against giving up the entitlements of age: Social Security and Medicare. Two of the most expensive non-military items in the US budget — but don’t try to take them away, because then they’ll get really mad.

Tea party folks consider themselves conservative — they are considerably more conservative by most any measure than most Republicans — and they consider President Obama very liberal.

They also — in large part — either believe Obama was not born in the United States — despite everything from the assurances of Hawaiian state government, the Hawaiian paper that printed Obama’s birth announcement nearly a half-century ago, the news division of Fox News, the conservative Annenberg Foundation’s FactCheck.org — who have investigated the issue up one side and down the other, even going so far as to inspect the actual physical certificate — or they are uncertain(My favorite frequent quote from the tea partiers who flood the news blogs and newspaper comment sections: “Well, if he’s a citizen, why doesn’t he just show us his birth certificate?” It boggles the mind.)

So… most tea partiers are well-off, white, selfish, willfully ignorant, logic-challenged, and just a wee bit irrational.

Tell me something I don’t know already, huh?


Right wing anti-government activist who threatened Pelosi lived in federally subsidized housing.

The conservative, anti-government activist who attended tea party events and protests and who was recently arrested for a long series of threats to US Senator Barbara Boxer was plenty mad at free-spending big government — but that didn’t stop him from taking advantage of federally subsidized housing intended for the disadvantaged.

Turns out that 48 year old Gregory Lee Giusti wasn’t just mad at the liberal California Democrat.

In fact, it was another victim of his tirades and threats that helped authorities get the goods on Giusti — or rather victims, plural. In this case, it was the Baptist Church Giusti joined in 1999 but was asked to leave in 2005 because of menacing behavior. He’s apparently been harassing them in a series of anonymous phone calls over the last five years. So when the feds were looking into at least four dozen calls to Pelosi’s home and offices and found numerous calls from Giusti to officials with the church, they discovered yet another faced of the complex Mr Giusti’s activities.

Oh yeah, and he was also arrested in 2004 for threatening to kill a conductor after being removed from a train in San Mateo.

But, really, the cherry on top has got to be that Giusti, railing bitterly about big government, was the recipient of federal housing aid.

Sweet.

Get the whole ludicrous — but scary — story at the San Francisco Chronicle.