Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/20/scotus.thomas.hill/index.html?hpt=T1" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/...l?hpt=T1</a> Clarence Thomas's wife is demanding an apology from Anita Hill. Hill said nope. Sounds like Virginia Thomas had too much to drink.
Originally Posted By queenbee Drunk dialing- almost never a good idea. I am also really surprised at V. Thomas' policitcal activism. If you listen to her speak she sounds like a member of the tea party.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Virginia Thomas is calling that message an "olive branch." I don't think she understands what that term means.
Originally Posted By Mr X ...If you listen to her speak she sounds like a member of the tea party... sounds like???
Originally Posted By Mr X k2..lmao. "I don't think that means what you think it means", Indigo Montoya
Originally Posted By Mr X Anita Hill apparently understands what an "olive branch" means (and what it doesn't)... "For her to say otherwise is not extending an olive branch, it's accusatory," she said. "I don't apologize. I have no intention of apologizing and I stand by my testimony from 1991."
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>"I don't think that means what you think it means", Indigo Montoya<< LOL! That's exactly what i was thinking.
Originally Posted By mawnck Anita Hill? In 2010? This must be one slow news day! So ... how are those miners doing? ;-)
Originally Posted By mele I think Thomas is just trying to get some press because she is heavily involved in Tea Party politics. Really disgusting way to do it, too.
Originally Posted By FaMulan Ms. Hill is standing by her sworn testimony. Good for her!! From the msn article, attributed to Mrs. Thomas: "I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband," the voicemail said in part, according to NBC News. "So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did." Somehow, that just doesn't sound like extending a verbal olive branch to me. Besides, what Ms. Hill did in no way hindered the confirmation of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. This is beyond a non-issue.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Anita Hill? In 2010? This must be one slow news day! So ... how are those miners doing? ;-)" Tell you what. Go find 32 people, get all of you buried a half mile underground with no way out with little food or water, make sure no one knows where the hell you are for the first 17 days, then try and tough it out while somebody else tries to figure out how to rescue you all before you die or kill yourselves. Then get back to us on how big a deal it was.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I wonder what kind of bee got into Mrs. Thomas's bonnet? Her husband was appointed to the supreme court and they had the last laugh. What more does she want?
Originally Posted By gadzuux What crust. And I agree with mele - this is a woman who's becoming addicted to the limelight and will seek it out in whatever fashion she can. In a way it's a good thing that she's married to Clarence Thomas, quite possibly the most ineffectual supreme court justice ever. Since her actions are so damaging and undermining to his credibility and objectivity, it couldn't happen to a more deserving judge.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 What did she think Hill's response was going to be? "Oh, okay - you got me. Made it all up! My bad!" My guess is that she (Virginia) probably actually believes her husband when he says he said and did nothing untoward with Hill. He's probably told her so countless times, and she believes him. She pretty much needs to. Hey, *I* would have bought it if he'd said "Look - I said some things that I thought were innocent or jokes, that I didn't realize were offending her, because she never told me I was offending her. If she doesn't say something, how was I to know? I took her silence on the matter as a tacit okay." That I could have bought. And he would have come off as crude, but I would have thought "okay - lack of communication, crossed wires - fine." But he didn't say that. He said that he never said ANYTHING to her that could POSSIBLY be construed as sexual in nature or offensive, and that she was (for some unknown reason) making it all up. That's when I knew he was lying through his teeth.
Originally Posted By markymouse "That's when I knew he was lying through his teeth." Excuse me. But are you going to trust your own judgment, or a random off the wall phone message from Mrs. Thomas who just might conceivably not be in total denial and who could well have been sober? I think Mrs. Thomas has made a clear and thought out statement of her views on the matter. Which is more than Clarence Thomas has done on any issue in almost two decades on the Supreme Court. Go crazy Mrs. Thomas! Go! America is ... SQUIRREL!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Lol. I think mrs. Thomas probay believes the guy. She probably really thinks he was wronged. Hill knows better, of course.
