Why are we running cover for this guy? Can't we have a good decision and also not have to twist ourselves into a pretzel about someone in the majority. Two things:
Lots of white people grew up in abject poverty outside of Savannah with no running water; and
The odds of AA not having played a role in CT's ascension are pretty low.
The whole point of this decision is, or should be, that physiological fact of your race/ethnicity is not the defining characteristic of who you are. Evidence of overcoming struggle and burden is relevant, and it turns out that white people experience those things as well. GMAFB. Yale LS is a single-digit admit and from an odds standpoint the least likely place you'll get into among all American law schools. Holy Cross isn't exactly WSU either. And they're both private schools and thus pretty expensive. Nobody knows for sure, but the odds are heavy that Clarence Thomas had a helping hand along the way due at least in part to his race. And this demonstrates another negative about AA: the loss of the benefit of the doubt.
Zaid isn't the type of guy who runs cover for Clarence Thomas. The hatred that Thomas and guys like Thomas Sowell get from some on the left is what he's calling out. It's as if they're 'ungrateful' for the white saviors those same lefties think themselves to be. How dare they?
At some point, a person can overcome the stigma of doubt. Thomas clearly has. Kentanji Brown Jackson never will. Neither did Sandra Day O'Connor. In fact, today any degree, regardless of race, from an Ivy League university would leave me with a huge stigma of doubt. In the Transhauser Bush fiasco, the new marketing director has a Wharton MBA and the CEO has a Harvard MBA. Apparently understanding your product and your market was not in the curriculum, like internal controls was missing from the dazzler's mythical MBA program.
It's fun and appealing to presume that someone can overcome the stigma of doubt if they act, speak and behave as we wish. However, that's not how it works. You either got a break getting into and financing school, or you didn't. Most clear-thinking people assume that POC got the break and thus are AA babies. Nobody ever said they'll all prove to be fuck-ups later on. Just that they were gift-wrapped a chance denied others solely because of the accident of their race/ethnicity.
Charles Murray's work adds about a million tons of burden to the issue as well. Ask Bob.
Not sure what you are saying. I don't respect Thomas as a justice because he does what I want, I respect him because he is a Constitutional scholar and despite the personal blowback for his unpopular decisions with the so-called US elite, as a man of character he has remained steadfast as a supporter of the Constitution. Now compare that with Sandra Day O'Connor or John Roberts, a spineless sack of a man and possibly being blackmailed. When you read a Thomas opinion you don't get a recital of how the Euros feel about things, or the use of emanations and penumbras to create super rights out of pure cloth.
Yes, you are. IDC if you respect him, or why. I"ve already covered all that anyway. This is an AA discussion, not a deviation into all the things you care about and like. The "stigma of doubt" has nothing to do with what happens later or can be overcome by doing things that turn out to make you happy. The stigma is that you got there through means other than merit and stole a more deserving person's spot, which is dishonorable on its face, and casts a shadow over all that follows from it because of the taint on how you got your start.
In hindsight, he was the more deserving person and he stole no ones spot. You seem to denigrate a lifetime of character and intellectual achievement. You can have John Roberts.
Why are we running cover for this guy? Can't we have a good decision and also not have to twist ourselves into a pretzel about someone in the majority. Two things:
Lots of white people grew up in abject poverty outside of Savannah with no running water; and
The odds of AA not having played a role in CT's ascension are pretty low.
The whole point of this decision is, or should be, that physiological fact of your race/ethnicity is not the defining characteristic of who you are. Evidence of overcoming struggle and burden is relevant, and it turns out that white people experience those things as well. GMAFB. Yale LS is a single-digit admit and from an odds standpoint the least likely place you'll get into among all American law schools. Holy Cross isn't exactly WSU either. And they're both private schools and thus pretty expensive. Nobody knows for sure, but the odds are heavy that Clarence Thomas had a helping hand along the way due at least in part to his race. And this demonstrates another negative about AA: the loss of the benefit of the doubt.
Zaid isn't the type of guy who runs cover for Clarence Thomas. The hatred that Thomas and guys like Thomas Sowell get from some on the left is what he's calling out. It's as if they're 'ungrateful' for the white saviors those same lefties think themselves to be. How dare they?
At some point, a person can overcome the stigma of doubt. Thomas clearly has. Kentanji Brown Jackson never will. Neither did Sandra Day O'Connor. In fact, today any degree, regardless of race, from an Ivy League university would leave me with a huge stigma of doubt. In the Transhauser Bush fiasco, the new marketing director has a Wharton MBA and the CEO has a Harvard MBA. Apparently understanding your product and your market was not in the curriculum, like internal controls was missing from the dazzler's mythical MBA program.
It's fun and appealing to presume that someone can overcome the stigma of doubt if they act, speak and behave as we wish. However, that's not how it works. You either got a break getting into and financing school, or you didn't. Most clear-thinking people assume that POC got the break and thus are AA babies. Nobody ever said they'll all prove to be fuck-ups later on. Just that they were gift-wrapped a chance denied others solely because of the accident of their race/ethnicity.
Charles Murray's work adds about a million tons of burden to the issue as well. Ask Bob.
Not sure what you are saying. I don't respect Thomas as a justice because he does what I want, I respect him because he is a Constitutional scholar and despite the personal blowback for his unpopular decisions with the so-called US elite, as a man of character he has remained steadfast as a supporter of the Constitution. Now compare that with Sandra Day O'Connor or John Roberts, a spineless sack of a man and possibly being blackmailed. When you read a Thomas opinion you don't get a recital of how the Euros feel about things, or the use of emanations and penumbras to create super rights out of pure cloth.
Yes, you are. IDC if you respect him, or why. I"ve already covered all that anyway. This is an AA discussion, not a deviation into all the things you care about and like. The "stigma of doubt" has nothing to do with what happens later or can be overcome by doing things that turn out to make you happy. The stigma is that you got there through means other than merit and stole a more deserving person's spot, which is dishonorable on its face, and casts a shadow over all that follows from it because of the taint on how you got your start.
In hindsight, he was the more deserving person and he stole no ones spot. You seem to denigrate a lifetime of character and intellectual achievement. You can have John Roberts.
JFC, it's like you can't or don't want to get through the most basic levels of reasoning. I'm not denigrating anybody, so put your delicate feelings away and grab your intellectual balls duck! And for Fuck's sake, read. the. post. Or just bow out with some shred of dignity. @haie is right about you guys.
In highsight? What are you magic or something? You have no idea of that at all and are now talking straight out of your butt hole. You don't know he was the most deserving, and you don't know that he didn't steal someone's spot. In fact, you even said the opposite (I'm obviously opposed to race based admissions and don't doubt that Thomas was an AA admit. )
Are you keeping track of where we are here? This isn't revisionist history day Puddles. I'm sure quite a number of recipients of AA have done quite well with their chance; I know several of them personally. If you understand the issue, however, which you don't seem to very well, the ends don't justify the means here. The issue here is the practice of AA in the first instance. THAT is what the case is about. The majority didn't say, "but if it turns out the AA baby is a good guy, then retroactively it's ok." I get it: you want to save your favorite black jurist from the scorn. Sorry ese; it don't work that way in this barrio. You either have a consistent philosophy or you just cherry pick your way through everything.
So, let me get this straight: AA ok for me, but not for thee. That about sum up your philosophy?
Why are we running cover for this guy? Can't we have a good decision and also not have to twist ourselves into a pretzel about someone in the majority. Two things:
Lots of white people grew up in abject poverty outside of Savannah with no running water; and
The odds of AA not having played a role in CT's ascension are pretty low.
The whole point of this decision is, or should be, that physiological fact of your race/ethnicity is not the defining characteristic of who you are. Evidence of overcoming struggle and burden is relevant, and it turns out that white people experience those things as well. GMAFB. Yale LS is a single-digit admit and from an odds standpoint the least likely place you'll get into among all American law schools. Holy Cross isn't exactly WSU either. And they're both private schools and thus pretty expensive. Nobody knows for sure, but the odds are heavy that Clarence Thomas had a helping hand along the way due at least in part to his race. And this demonstrates another negative about AA: the loss of the benefit of the doubt.
Zaid isn't the type of guy who runs cover for Clarence Thomas. The hatred that Thomas and guys like Thomas Sowell get from some on the left is what he's calling out. It's as if they're 'ungrateful' for the white saviors those same lefties think themselves to be. How dare they?
I totally get that and appreciate the point. The implied message of "this is a disaster" is that you, young black man, can't do it on your own without me helping you. It's horrible.
But his reasoning was garbage. He grew up poor with no running water; hence AA likely isn't what got him to Yale and the SCOTUS. GMAFB. That's new-level stupid. You can't cherry pick your AA babies and assume the one you like is the one who didn't need it, absent clear and definitive proof to the contrary. For Yale LS, I need to see a top 1% LSAT, and a near perfect GPA in a rigorous UG curriculum. Anything less than that, knowing what I know about AA programs, and I'm right in assuming you were given a helping hand.
Again, mind you, I have no problem with his vote. He's entitled to call the shot as it should be called, regardless of his personal circumstances. And Dyson is an idiot.
I'm not sure how to react to reasonable, nuanced discussion in the Tug.
Easy, you just tell him to Fuck off.
I didn't even see this. Within seconds according to the time stamp
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
Why are we running cover for this guy? Can't we have a good decision and also not have to twist ourselves into a pretzel about someone in the majority. Two things:
Lots of white people grew up in abject poverty outside of Savannah with no running water; and
The odds of AA not having played a role in CT's ascension are pretty low.
The whole point of this decision is, or should be, that physiological fact of your race/ethnicity is not the defining characteristic of who you are. Evidence of overcoming struggle and burden is relevant, and it turns out that white people experience those things as well. GMAFB. Yale LS is a single-digit admit and from an odds standpoint the least likely place you'll get into among all American law schools. Holy Cross isn't exactly WSU either. And they're both private schools and thus pretty expensive. Nobody knows for sure, but the odds are heavy that Clarence Thomas had a helping hand along the way due at least in part to his race. And this demonstrates another negative about AA: the loss of the benefit of the doubt.
Zaid isn't the type of guy who runs cover for Clarence Thomas. The hatred that Thomas and guys like Thomas Sowell get from some on the left is what he's calling out. It's as if they're 'ungrateful' for the white saviors those same lefties think themselves to be. How dare they?
At some point, a person can overcome the stigma of doubt. Thomas clearly has. Kentanji Brown Jackson never will. Neither did Sandra Day O'Connor. In fact, today any degree, regardless of race, from an Ivy League university would leave me with a huge stigma of doubt. In the Transhauser Bush fiasco, the new marketing director has a Wharton MBA and the CEO has a Harvard MBA. Apparently understanding your product and your market was not in the curriculum, like internal controls was missing from the dazzler's mythical MBA program.
It's fun and appealing to presume that someone can overcome the stigma of doubt if they act, speak and behave as we wish. However, that's not how it works. You either got a break getting into and financing school, or you didn't. Most clear-thinking people assume that POC got the break and thus are AA babies. Nobody ever said they'll all prove to be fuck-ups later on. Just that they were gift-wrapped a chance denied others solely because of the accident of their race/ethnicity.
Charles Murray's work adds about a million tons of burden to the issue as well. Ask Bob.
Not sure what you are saying. I don't respect Thomas as a justice because he does what I want, I respect him because he is a Constitutional scholar and despite the personal blowback for his unpopular decisions with the so-called US elite, as a man of character he has remained steadfast as a supporter of the Constitution. Now compare that with Sandra Day O'Connor or John Roberts, a spineless sack of a man and possibly being blackmailed. When you read a Thomas opinion you don't get a recital of how the Euros feel about things, or the use of emanations and penumbras to create super rights out of pure cloth.
Yes, you are. IDC if you respect him, or why. I"ve already covered all that anyway. This is an AA discussion, not a deviation into all the things you care about and like. The "stigma of doubt" has nothing to do with what happens later or can be overcome by doing things that turn out to make you happy. The stigma is that you got there through means other than merit and stole a more deserving person's spot, which is dishonorable on its face, and casts a shadow over all that follows from it because of the taint on how you got your start.
In hindsight, he was the more deserving person and he stole no ones spot. You seem to denigrate a lifetime of character and intellectual achievement. You can have John Roberts.
JFC, it's like you can't or don't want to get through the most basic levels of reasoning. I'm not denigrating anybody, so put your delicate feelings away and grab your intellectual balls duck! And for Fuck's sake, read. the. post. Or just bow out with some shred of dignity. @haie is right about you guys.
In highsight? What are you magic or something? You have no idea of that at all and are now talking straight out of your butt hole. You don't know he was the most deserving, and you don't know that he didn't steal someone's spot. In fact, you even said the opposite (I'm obviously opposed to race based admissions and don't doubt that Thomas was an AA admit. )
Are you keeping track of where we are here? This isn't revisionist history day Puddles. I'm sure quite a number of recipients of AA have done quite well with their chance; I know several of them personally. If you understand the issue, however, which you don't seem to very well, the ends don't justify the means here. The issue here is the practice of AA in the first instance. THAT is what the case is about. The majority didn't say, "but if it turns out the AA baby is a good guy, then retroactively it's ok." I get it: you want to save your favorite black jurist from the scorn. Sorry ese; it don't work that way in this barrio. You either have a consistent philosophy or you just cherry pick your way through everything.
So, let me get this straight: AA ok for me, but not for thee. That about sum up your philosophy?
Uh, no. I pointed out that your view of Thomas's AA admit is the original sin that can't be redeemed. Redemption plays a big part in historical Western and Christian thought. When the people wanted to stone the prostitute, the Pharisees and any wannabe Muslim's would have said go for it and by the way do you have spare rocks. Jesus said something else and Christianity is based on redemption. I like my view of Thomas a lot more than yours coug.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
You got everything you have because you're white
Certainly not merit
You don't know shit about Thomas' psychological condition. You're just a cracker. A fat one
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
You got everything you have because you're white
Certainly not merit
You don't know shit about Thomas' psychological condition. You're just a cracker. A fat one
Yes, I'm remembering vividly how those 1970s Ivy League recruiters were all seeking out white children of school teachers.
Thomas told interviewers that he's retained his post-Yale rejection letters. Nothing to see here!
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
Lol. This is exactly the kind of unhinged screed that I was talking about earlier. If only he had followed along with whatever his white saviors had told him, you'd be writing a hagiography instead.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
Lol. This is exactly the kind of unhinged screed that I was talking about earlier. If only he had followed along with whatever his white saviors had told him, you'd be writing a hagiography instead.
Thomas got into Holy Cross and Yale as a result of affirmative action. He has a lot of psychological baggage connected with that. He doesn't owe it to anyone to keep an unconstitutional practice in place even if he benefitted from it.
This is what the President of Holy Cross wrote recently:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
That sounds pretty sinister. Please keep crying and projecting more about this.
CT is pretty scarred by getting opportunities in part because of his race. Every professional job he's had and both his higher educational opportunities all came in part because of it. He knows it and resents it. He wants to have deserved his breaks. I find it interesting; if you don't, please remember that your participation here is voluntary.
Lol. This is exactly the kind of unhinged screed that I was talking about earlier. If only he had followed along with whatever his white saviors had told him, you'd be writing a hagiography instead.
unhinged
sure
Just like all your takes. As for 'participation' here, you can fuck off right now and no one will miss you.
Comments
In highsight? What are you magic or something? You have no idea of that at all and are now talking straight out of your butt hole. You don't know he was the most deserving, and you don't know that he didn't steal someone's spot. In fact, you even said the opposite (I'm obviously opposed to race based admissions and don't doubt that Thomas was an AA admit. )
Are you keeping track of where we are here? This isn't revisionist history day Puddles. I'm sure quite a number of recipients of AA have done quite well with their chance; I know several of them personally. If you understand the issue, however, which you don't seem to very well, the ends don't justify the means here. The issue here is the practice of AA in the first instance. THAT is what the case is about. The majority didn't say, "but if it turns out the AA baby is a good guy, then retroactively it's ok." I get it: you want to save your favorite black jurist from the scorn. Sorry ese; it don't work that way in this barrio. You either have a consistent philosophy or you just cherry pick your way through everything.
So, let me get this straight: AA ok for me, but not for thee. That about sum up your philosophy?
But as the Harlan Crowe episode shows, he is also dishonest and eager to curry favor. His dishonesty is long-standing: https://greensboro.com/thomas-sister-is-no-welfare-queen/article_b0ec5042-0ac7-583b-94df-4771404be433.html
Sigmund Dazzler. Achtung, baby.
I'm going to need Oregon bros to confirm myself.
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
Certainly not merit
You don't know shit about Thomas' psychological condition. You're just a cracker. A fat one
Thomas told interviewers that he's retained his post-Yale rejection letters. Nothing to see here!
sure