Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A letter to Ginni Thomas

Dear Ginni,

Wish you were here – really, really wish you were here. You might not believe it, but even in Europe your little call to That Woman, Ms. Hill, has made headlines. Nothing like fending off questions about Coke cans and Long Dong Silver in the midst of explaining Natural Law. Thanks! Any other surprises I should know about?

Before you get weepy, you know how lucky I feel to have someone as loving and loyal as you in my corner. I couldn’t have made it through that high-tech lynching without you. But I’ve got to say, sweetheart: What were you thinking?

A voice mail message? Ever heard of plausible deniability? I’ve got to wonder, Ginni, whether you secretly hoped that the good professor would go public. But didn’t you realize this would play right into her hands? She called your message seeking an apology “inappropriate.” But what she really meant was, “Harassed decades ago by the husband and harassed today by the wife.” Back then it was her word against mine – and we knew she was lying! But now she’s got “proof” that she is the “victim.”

You’re a fine Christian woman, Ginni, and I believe you when you said you meant the call to be an olive branch. But couldn’t you have anticipated that neither Hill nor the unscrupulous press would take it that way, especially because you weren’t offering an apology – perish the thought! – but were demanding one? I’ve tried to avoid reading the coverage, but I can just imagine how the media is portraying you – unable to let go of the past, bitter, harboring resentment, etc. And you can bet they’re suggesting the same about me!! And here I thought we’d almost – almost – put this behind us.

I’ll be home soon. We can talk more later – or maybe not.

Love,

Clarence

By Eva Rodriguez  | October 20, 2010; 11:36 AM ET
Categories:  Rodriguez  | Tags:  Eva Rodriguez  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Ginni Thomas: Still angry after all these years
Next: The GM bailout's ambiguous success

Comments

Interesting to see a journalist characterize "leaving a phone message" as harassment. By that standard, I'd guess that Rodriguez harasses people every day.

Posted by: tomtildrum | October 20, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Her husband was slander by a single, uncorroborated witness, yet the Left slavishly repeats every word as gospel (while ignoring anything said by Juanita Broadrick, Paula Jone, Kathleen Willey, etc. etc. etc.).

Yes, the Thomas family DESERVES an apology.

Posted by: JustJoe3 | October 20, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse


Clarence Thomas has to sleep with disgusting woman every night.

Most people I know with rather commit a painful suicide than have that happen.

Posted by: kenk3 | October 20, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Ginni can't let it go because she has doubts about her husband's sexual misconduct and genuinely wants to believe Anita made it all up. The problem is not with Anita, dear Ginny, but with your husband who lied while under oath in contrast to Anita who told the truth under a polygraph.

Sorry, Ginny, but inwardly doubting your husband was just magnified. Now you will have to carry that burden to your grave.

Posted by: HillRat | October 20, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Ginni can't let it go because she has doubts about her husband's sexual misconduct and genuinely wants to believe Anita made it all up. The problem is not with Anita, dear Ginny, but with your husband who lied while under oath in contrast to Anita who told the truth under a polygraph.

Sorry, Ginny, but inwardly doubting your husband was just magnified. Now you will have to carry that burden to your grave.

Posted by: HillRat | October 20, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Clarence Thomas, for the rest of his unnatural life, will remain one of the 12 most powerful people in Washington, if not the entire country. That is set in stone, no matter that he publicly embarrasses himself and the entire nation with every breath he draws, and every mindless utterance and opinion that leaves his "brain".

With that in mind, do you really think he gives a krapp about this?

Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | October 20, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Let's have an investigation of Thomas' lying before congress with the witnesses that have now come forward about him and then impeach the incompetent boob!

Posted by: fingersfly | October 20, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Ginni's just being a good wife. Look, it's been 20 years, and what's the first (and sometimes only) thing everyone knows about her husband? The Anita Hill debacle. The man is a sitting Supreme Court Justice, for TWENTY years, and he hasn't done ONE thing to overshadow his hearings? I mean, Scalia defined the originalist (or whatever wacky name they give it, I say it's the lazy thought approach) view of the Constitution, Anthony Kennedy is the "swing-vote" Justice, Alito is the idiot who dishonored his post at the Sate of the Union. But Clarence Thomas, what can you say about him other than he's African-American? Nothing. He doesn't speak in court, and outside of court all he does is show he's still bitter about the Anita Hill (truth) story. The Thomas' have no one to blame but themselves. Obviously your career hasn't been that notable if the only thing people recall is how it started.

So lay off Ginni, she's trying to help her husband get past the one thing people know, not that it will help. If you haven't done one significant thing in 20 years, not sure why having this behind you will make the next 20 any different.

Posted by: sachancp | October 20, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I am so tired of hearing people glibly say someone should move on. I suspect such people have never been betrayed, falsely accused, or stabbed in the back by someone with the result that, though innocent, their life was turned upside down. I have maybe three such things in my 58 years. I don't dwell on them, but when they come up I realize I haven't been able to forgive or forget. I understand the Thomas's in this regard. BTW, I am a liberal democrat who disagrees with most, if not all, of the Justice's positions.

Posted by: kenburnsidelj | October 20, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Rodriquez, you can't be told this often enough...you're a talent-less idiot.

Posted by: tallyhohohoho | October 20, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Her husband was slander by a single, uncorroborated witness, yet the Left slavishly repeats every word as gospel...
Posted by: JustJoe3
----------------------------------------
Hate to cut you off in mid rant, but Anita Hill was not the only person who had a sexual problem with Clarence Thomas.
Angela Wright also claimed to have been sexually harrassed by Thomas, at around the same time Hill was. Wright's problems with Thomas were cooroborated by Rose Jourdain. A third woman, Sukari Hardnett, also claims Thomas spoke to her in much the same way he spoke to Anita Hill.
Typical right winger- say what you BELIEVE, instead of checking into what really is true.

Posted by: cjbass55 | October 20, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

This is the strangest and most inappropriate thing I've ever seen published by the Washington Post. If Ms. Rodriguez can't get by on her ideas alone, then she should probably consider going into another line of business.

Posted by: dummypants | October 20, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

schancp:

Assuming he cared a rat's behind, how do you supposed Justice Thomas could convince a constitutional know-nothing like you that he has had a productive two decade run on the most powerful court in the land?

For the record, Thomas has written some of the most though-provoking dissents of the Rhenquist and Robert courts. That may not seem like much to you but then again you seem anything but a constitutional scholar.

Posted by: dummypants | October 20, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

and of course now we have another corroborating story (McKewen's) surfacing as a result of the story. what was she thinking? how do you presume to ask for an apology from someone you know perfectly well still insists she was telling the truth and has nothing to apologize for? what kind of arrogance or denial does it take to call someone and, in essence, say, "let's put this in the past and move on, by you finally admitting you're a liar and apologizing?"

Posted by: JoeT1 | October 20, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

clearly, the left hates thomas more than the right hates obama - which answers the racism question once and for all.

Posted by: dummypants | October 20, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, this sounds like the most likely reason. Ginni should just stick to the Virginia Tea Party and be grateful that in different times, before Republicans polarized the country that a Democratic Senate Judiciary Committee allowed the Thomas nomination to go to the floor (would that have happened when the Republicans controlled the Senate if Thomas were a Democratic president's nominee?)

Hillrat Wrote:

Ginni can't let it go because she has doubts about her husband's sexual misconduct and genuinely wants to believe Anita made it all up. The problem is not with Anita, dear Ginny, but with your husband who lied while under oath in contrast to Anita who told the truth under a polygraph.

Sorry, Ginny, but inwardly doubting your husband was just magnified. Now you will have to carry that burden to your grave.

Posted by: HillRat | October 20, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Prosperity2008 | October 20, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Anita Hill took a lie detector test, administered by the foremost expert in the field. She passed. Thomas lied to Congress. This information must never be forgotten.

Posted by: Slann | October 20, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Her husband was slander by a single, uncorroborated witness, yet the Left slavishly repeats every word as gospel (while ignoring anything said by Juanita Broadrick, Paula Jone, Kathleen Willey, etc. etc. etc.).

Yes, the Thomas family DESERVES an apology
Posted by: JustJoe3 | October 20, 2010 12:52 PM
---

Ah...JustJoe, take a minute and google "Angela Wright". Better yet, I'll save you the trouble - http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15113601

Posted by: notfooledbydistractions1 | October 20, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

I have to agree with HillRat. If Ginny Thomas believed deep down that her husband was innocent, she wouldn't need the apology. She would have let it go by now and chalked it up to life sometimes being unfair. Instead, she's looking for someone to assuage her haunting doubts. That in itself is compelling evidence that she doesn't believe her husband, but wishes she could.

Posted by: rosefarm1 | October 20, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

A smart, savvy political activist calls someone's office at 7:30 on a Saturday three weeks before an election and leaves a voice mail resurrecting a 20 year old issue. Turns out she actually recorded the voice mail message herself, so she would have it on hand if anyone asked. Isn't it pretty obvious what is going on here? Ginni is fund raising for her political organization.

Posted by: turningfool | October 20, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

The fact of the matter is, sexual harassment is a pattern of behavior. It's not a one time incidence. C Thomas was confirmed because there were no sexual harassment claims in his past and none since. If they could have shown a pattern, he never would have set foot in the high court. There was one accuser without any evidence or cooborating witnesses. We were supposed to believe that he was an angel right up until Anita started working at his office, then became a groping pervert, then when she left, turned back into an angel. Miss Hill lied, it was obvious then, and it's obvious now. You bleeding heart liberal Democrats are once again trying to smear a fine man. What about the President you elected who sexually harassed any woman that came anywhere near him then lied to a Grand Jury. No biggie right???

Posted by: Wilbonsucks | October 20, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Sigh. Another celebrity seeking, gold-digging conservative wing-ding. Go Away, Virginia. You and your tea party friends are making Americans look like real idiots to the rest of the world. It wasn't enough that you remained silent while Bush dragged America's reputation through the dirt?

Posted by: Chagasman | October 20, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Great letter. Although in Clarence Thomas speak, the wording would be more profane.

turningfool is right: Ginni Thomas's twisted mind thought this would help her fund raise... All it's done, if she has a shame gene, is embarrass her.

Posted by: Victoria27 | October 20, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Everyone is missing the point. This is a classic misdirection move by Mrs. Justice Thomas. She and her husband are coming under scrutiny over how her political activities are financed, and all of the sudden, out of the blue, she brings this up. She'd much rather fight about Anita Hill than her own sleazy political activities.

Posted by: attyrrb | October 20, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Clarence Thomas: portrait of a lazy black man.

Posted by: danw1 | October 20, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

I watched the entire Thomas/Hill 'side-show' - there was only one liar, Clarence Thomas. There were other witnesses ready and willing to corroborate Anita Hill's claims, but the Senate Committee refused to call on them. Anita Hill voluntarily took and passed the lie detector test. Mr. Thomas had the 'crap' scared out of him, for fear that he might also be obliged to take one. Perhaps now it is time to investigate Mrs. Thomas and her 'Tea Party' fund raising activities. Although the Hatch Act affects Clarence Thomas, I suppose it does not affect his spouse - but as the spouse of a Supreme Court Justice the black cloud hangs low over them both.

Posted by: rbsher | October 20, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

I remember watching the nomination confirmation hearngs of now Justice Thomas with it's vulgar, unsubstantiated innuendos, and less than credible witnesses, and I remember being forewarned by the Robert Bork hearings preceeding them that the Democratic Party had adopted a strategy of Personal Attacks against Conservatives to block Conservatives from the court. To me it was as close as we got to show trials like the Soviets. Troubling to see this defended.

Posted by: almorganiv | October 20, 2010 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Lets just say that old Ginny has again opened up that proverbial (coca cola) can of worms!

Posted by: jrussell1 | October 20, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Something tells me Mrs. MacBeth is hoping her husband can rise to the position of Chief Justice--maybe someday soon, maybe she's heard something--but to so rise, the Anita Hill thing would have to disappear.

Posted by: HookedOnThePost | October 20, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"clearly, the left hates thomas more than the right hates obama - which answers the racism question once and for all." said dummypants (fine name, that).

How so? We've never seen obscene signs picturing Thomas as Hitler or a witch doctor; heard Glenn Beck or Limbaugh raving against a black man on the Supreme Court; in fact, Thomas was largely ignored for years until his wife did this.

And all you people claiming it was just her word against his -- look at it the other way: it was just his word against hers. Ignoring, of course, that there were actually other complaints against him, and that she passed lie detector test.

Posted by: MaryCan1 | October 20, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Better yet, read this about David Brock, the writer who, back then, got up on the soapbox to throw more stones at Anita Hill. He was a reporter on the Far Right; now like some others, he is trying to atone for his sins. In this article, he makes it clear that he knew Hill was telling the truth, even back then.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,167355,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebar

Posted by: MaryCan1 | October 20, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Why now? Could be a couple of things: Distract the media and the public from her political activities ( though I doubt she thinks she is crossing the line here); or she really needs closure to that bad time twenty years ago. Both rather lame - must be something coming down the pike?

BTW - Ms Hill volunteered, took and passed a stringent lie detector test. For his own veracity, Mr Thomas should have done the same, but due to his candidacy for an exalted position, he was not asked to do so. The Mrs should have let sleeping dogs rest (lie).

Posted by: robinx | October 20, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

This is clearly a pre-emptive strike by the Conservatives. The extreme rightwing elements on the SCOTUS are about to do something even more heinous that installing GW Bush in the White House. Something more outrageous than granting (by their creator?) inalienable rights of free speech to State-created Corporate entities. By cranking up this issue, the next criticism of the The Court can be deflected as that "same old anti-Thomas lynch mob".

Mrs. Thomas wouldn't be the first wife who thought that her successful, loving, church-going husband was incapable of being a philandering louse. Ginny, he lied to you. Deal with it!

Posted by: thebobbob | October 20, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Wonder what Ginny Thomas's views are on Loving vs. VA? If she and Justice Thomas are really originalists would she refer to the Warren court as activist or render her marriage invalid. How do her and her teabaggers reeally think about liberty?

Posted by: MerrillFrank | October 20, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Not long after Washington's most eligible Bachelor, Henry Kissinger, was married, a Woman trapped Mr and Mrs in an elevator and berated Kissinger for messing with young Boys.

To the best of my recollections, Mrs Kissinger popped the Woman once or twice then the couple left the elevator.

I wonder what became of that case.

Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com

Posted by: mchaun | October 20, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Anita Hill was a Blessing in disguise for Thomas. His Resume was crap, a distinctly undistinguished record and the Confirmation was in trouble. He was probably the weakest of the sorry specimens that the Bushes et al have packed the Supreme Court.

His Friend Sen. Danforth said that Thomas was so angry that he lay on the floor writhing in fury, calling his sanity into question, in the opinion of some, yet his Friends floated blather about how serenely he had borne the abuse.

Judicial Distemperment, indeed!

And a religious opportunist to boot. He was a life-long Roman Catholic, but by the time of the Hearings had switched to, "A charismatic Anglican (Episcopal) Sect associated with Pat Robertson", but after confirmation, returned to Catholic.

When asked what He thought caused Hill to make Her accusations, he said, "Because I married a lighter colored Woman?"

Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com

Posted by: mchaun | October 20, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Anita Hill and the American people now deserve apologies from *both* of the Thomases.

Posted by: HydeParker | October 20, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Come on, he's a dog. You know he did it. And good for Anita Hill, turning everything over to the police. Mrs. Thomas, shut up and tell your husband he needs to aplogize to you. Too bad you think denial is a river in Egypt.

Posted by: raca1234 | October 20, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Clarence Thomas is a complete embarrassment to the United States. I had the privilege of attending arguments in the Supreme Court and he sat the entire time reared way back in his seat, totally uninterested. I couldn't tell if he was napping up there. I'm sure some ignoramus will accuse me of being racist, but I'l call it like it was: He looked exactly like a gorilla dozing in the zoo. It was disgusting.

Posted by: Runeer1987 | October 20, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Clarence Thomas is a complete embarrassment to the United States. I had the privilege of attending arguments in the Supreme Court and he sat the entire time reared way back in his seat, totally uninterested. I couldn't tell if he was napping up there. I'm sure some ignoramus will accuse me of being racist, but I'l call it like it was: He looked exactly like a gorilla dozing in the zoo. It was disgusting.

Posted by: Runeer1987 | October 20, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Mrs. Clarence Thomas is to be pitied. She obviously needs medical attention and soon before she physically hurts herself...or worse someone else.

Posted by: hfaulk01 | October 20, 2010 9:37 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure some ignoramus will accuse me of being racist, but I'l call it like it was: He looked exactly like a gorilla dozing in the zoo. It was disgusting.

Posted by: Runeer1987
==========================
I don't think that person has to be an ignoramus to call you a racist. He just has to read the racist garbage that you wrote just above.

Posted by: rohit57 | October 20, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Okay, Rodriguez, how about penning a letter to Ted Kennedy? Wait....too late.

Posted by: chatard | October 20, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

T-Baggers always act like victims and want revenge and apologies. It said on TV that Hill took a lie detector test and passed. Did Thomas and his wife take one? I think we know the answer.

Posted by: jimbobkalina1 | October 21, 2010 4:31 AM | Report abuse

Dear Ginnie-
Thanks so much- I have been suffering because I have no TV and I'm missing "real housewives of..."
You have rescued me from total boredom!!! This ploy is a diversion and tactic to get her peeps all riled up- again! He did it/ get over it and move on.

Posted by: hjeanne47 | October 21, 2010 8:55 AM | Report abuse

While we're at it, how about an apology from African-Americans for setting off that whole Civil War thing?

Posted by: Ralphinjersey | October 21, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

to all,

the TRUTH is that Anita Hill LIED under oath. there was NOTHING factual in her testimony, beyond her providing her name to the committee.

personally, i'm really tired of the LEFTISTS/nitwits/extremists & hate-FILLED idiots of the "main-SLIME press" being both DISHONEST & "PC". - fyi, LIARS can make more accusations than anyone has the time/money/resouces to debunk & that FACT is why the press gets away with their KNOWINGLY FALSE accusations.

yours, TN46
coordinator, CCTPP

Posted by: texasnative46 | October 21, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Ginni Thomas has whigged out, obviously. First, she makes an inappropriate call to Anita Hill, practically demanding an apology for her own husband's sexual misconduct. Now, Politico.com reports that she is leading the charge to have the healthcare law declared "unconstitutional." And if the fight ends up in st SCOTUS, da judge will have to recuse himself, or will he?

Posted by: mad1026 | October 21, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

last time we read about Mr footlong they were playing his films between breaks of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. The attorneys made a lot of money the year after looking for Hairs on Coke Cans. Just think by xmass Time Life will reissue all of this in a gift pack.

Posted by: bankalchemist | October 21, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company