Backdrop: The NYTimes chews on ‘objectivity’ bone again.
Virginia ‘Ginni’ Thomas has been a conservative activist for around 30 years now, so why is her conservative activism being brought up now? Oh, wait. May I assume it’s because recently she’s put much of her expertise into play, like setting up a fairly useful non-profit group and created a pretty savvy website, Liberty Central? Or, more to the point, because she’s an advocate of the newly formed Tea Party? Woo Woo! Crikey Roos! As though her husband, the Justice, can be unduly influenced by her activities and conservative principles enough to cloud his judgment on the Supreme Court. As though he isn’t capable of independent thought. As though she wasn’t involved in conservative activism before she met the Justice. As though it wasn’t her beliefs that attracted her to him. So, I guess it’s because Mrs. Thomas opposes the “..leftist “tyranny” of President Obama and Democrats in Congress and to “protecting the core founding principles” of the nation.” As if no one else has used the words Prez-O and ‘tyranny’ in the same sentence. Oh, puleeze! GROW UP!
However, I do agree with the NYTimes writer questioning of Thomas’s large, unidentified contributions to Liberty Central. This can pose some serious questions and raise some intelligent brows. Especially since Liberty Central is a 501(c)(4) non-profit group that is supposed to make sure less than half their activities are political. I sincerely don’t know how she can achieve this since it seems the whole of the organization could be classified as “political,” however, I’m open to enlightenment on other ways it would not be considered political. Anyone?
As for Justice Thomas, a federal law requires that justices recuse themselves in instances where real or perceived conflicts of interest could arise and in cases where their spouses have any kind of financial interest in the case. Slippery slope?
“It’s shocking that you would have a Supreme Court justice sitting on a case that might implicate in a very fundamental way the interests of someone who might have contributed to his wife’s organization,” said Deborah L. Rhode, a law professor and director of the Stanford University Center on the Legal Profession.
“The fact that we can’t find that out is the first problem,” she said, adding, “And how can the public form a judgment about propriety if it doesn’t have the basic underlying facts?” (Emphasis mine)
Good point. How is the public able to form judgments about propriety if we don’t have the basic underlying facts?” But why start with Justice Thomas? o,o *evil laugh*
- For instance, how do we form a judgment about the propriety of Rep. Barney Frank’s (D-MA) involvement in deregulating Fannie Mae throughout the 1990’s at a time when Frank’s partner, Herb Moses, was Fannie Mae’s assistant director for product initiatives, 1991-1998, while Frank was
on the House Banking Committee which had jurisdiction over Fannie Mae?(S)
- How do we form a judgment about Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ties to the natural gas industry? Pelosi invested in T. Boone Pickens Clean Energy Fuels Corporation that ties into the Clinton Global Initiative, Clean Skies Television Network, and Al Gore. Anyone remember Pelousy complaining about those two oil men in the White House (Bush&Cheney)? She stands to benefit by steering legislation through the House. (S)
- How do we judge the propriety of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s $1.5M to ABC News to help fund a yearlong project on health? (S) If ABC News is the mouthpiece of the White House, will this health project be independent or propaganda? (S)
- Sourballfully, how do we judge the propriety of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State knowing her husband, former president and creator of the Clinton Global Initiative won’t result in conflict-of-interest? It’s ludicrous to expect Americans to think there’s no conflict. Oh, wait. I seem to recall Hillary Clinton saying she’d make sure they were transparent about their comin’s and goin’s and, BY GOD, we all know her word is good. *rolling eyes*