Clarence, Anita, and Joe
Pandering Joe $crew$ Women
From Anita Hill’s testimony at the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearing.
My working relationship became even more strained when Judge Thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. On these occasions he would call me into his office for reports on education issues and projects, or he might suggest that because of the time pressures of his schedule we go to lunch to a government cafeteria.
After a brief discussions of work, he would turn the conversation to a discussion of sexual matters. His conversations were very vivid. He spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes.
He talked about pornographic materials depicting individuals with large penises or large breasts involving various sex acts. On several occasions, Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess.
Because I was extremely uncomfortable talking about sex with him at all, and particularly in such a graphic way, I told him that I did not want to talk about this subject. I would also try to change the subject to education matters or to non-sexual personal matters, such as his background or his beliefs.
My efforts to change the subject were rarely successful …
For my first months at the EEOC where I continued to be an assistant to Judge Thomas, there were no sexual conversations or overtures. However, during the fall and winter of 1982, these began again. The comments were random and ranged from pressing me about why I didn’t go out with him to remarks about my personal appearance. I remember his saying that some day I would have to tell him the real reason that I wouldn’t go out with him.
He began to show displeasure in his tone and voice and his demeanor and his continued pressure for an explanation. He commented on what I was wearing in terms of whether it made me more or less sexually attractive. The incidents occurred in his inner office at the EEOC.
One of the oddest episodes I remember was an occasion in which Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office. He got up from the table at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, “Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?”
On other occasions, he referred to the size of his own penis as being larger than normal, and he also spoke on some occasions of the pleasures he had given to women with oral sex. At this point, late 1982, I began to feel severe stress on the job.
Women, liberals, Democrats, and other people of all political persuasions are righteously upset about the recent SCOTUS’ overturn of Roe v. Wade. They are also upset with Justice Clarence Thomas, but some people need to be reminded, and others need to learn that the only reason Thomas is wearing the black robes of repression and regression can be traced straight back to Joe Biden.
In 1991, many of us were glued to Professor Hill’s testimony. Even I, a busy mother of four young children (two girls), could tell that Professor Hill was telling the truth and Clarence Thomas was a Fiend.
As the chair of the committee in 1991, Pandering Joe allowed U.S. Senators, like Arlen Specter (R-Pa) to publicly shame and rake Professor Hill over the coals, while treating the Fiend with relative kid gloves. Biden also blocked at least two other women from testifying who also had first hand information about The Fiend’s inappropriateness towards women. As late as 1998, Biden was calling Anita Hill a “liar.” Biden has never apologized to Anita Hill for his actions saying on the insane shot The View in 2019: "I'm sorry for the way she got treated.” Not for the way HE treated her. He had complete control over the committee hearings and allowed testimony impugning Professor Hill’s mental state. The entire episode is/was shameful and now Thomas wrote the decision on overturning Roe.
Isn’t it “weird” the way the past keeps fucking up the present, and how many are just as glad to forget that past?
Many abortion rights’ activists at the time were opposed to the confirmation of Thomas and did not consider Pandering Joe Biden an ally—up until he ran for POTUS in 2020, his statements were very flexible on abortion rights. He had this to say in 1991:
“I do not share the certainty of some who are voting against Judge Thomas that he will be as extreme as some of his statements could lead one to believe he might be.”
- Sen. Joe Biden, 1991
Your commentary so profound, and so precise in its brevity. Thank you for keeping the facts about how we 'got here' alive.
It is, after all, the duty of those of us who were 'there' to bear witness.
What's strange is that she said she forgave Joe and supported his run...frigging war mogerscum . Empire Falls