646
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
646 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19090 readers
2060 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Gosh, it sure would have been nice if someone had tried to warn us about Clarence.
Instead Hillary hired the asshole who went after Anita Hill to run her presidential campaign. David Brock is useless. One of many idiot moves Clinton made to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
This prompted me to go look up the whole "Long Dong Silver" nonsense again, and I noted a few interesting things....
Thomas was nominated by George HW Bush. The Senate was controlled by Democrats at the time, though. Rather than sit on the nomination and be petulant about it, though, this Judiciary Committee held hearings, like they were supposed to. Those hearings were where we all found out about the public hairs on his coke can.
The Judiciary Committee voted on whether to recommend the nomination to the Senate, and that vote failed. The the committee held a vote on whether to send the nomination to the Senate with no recommendation, and that passed. Thomas ended up being confirmed in the Senate by a very slim majority. Even after that disaster of a hearing, and the vote of "No Confidence" by the committee, a bunch of Democrats decided that Thomas should get their approval anyway.
So, compare the actions of this Judiciary Committee to what Lindsay Graham did to Merrick Garland, where they didn't even have the hearing.
Who was that committee chairman in 1991, anyway? None other than Dark Brandon! (Only he had not taken that form then, and was known simply as that guy who liked Amtrak, and was too gaffe-prone to ever be President.)
Whereas I didn't feel the need to look at a wiki, because I watched it in teal time. Biden was chair and didn't do anything other than what he was supposed to do per Senate procedure. However, in retrospect he could have tried to control Arlen Spector, an old school prosecutor, who tore Anita Hill and testimony apart. Thomas went on the stand and let go with "high tech lynching" and the dye was cast. Hillary Clinton later convinced Spector to become a Democrat, and since Republicans didn't want to run him, he did.
Is teal time the opposite of rose tinted glasses?
Or like if anyone in Congress actually gave a shit before this hit the news.
Don't know about that but it was evident that Spector browbeating Hill and Thomas mentioning lynching got the the committee to pass him through. The same sort of thing happened with Brett Kavanaugh