Anita Hill, the feminist whackjob whose torpedo narrowly missed sinking Clarence Thomas’s appointment to the Supreme Court, has gone public about a phone message that Thomas’s wife left. In the message, Mrs. Thomas says:
I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. OK, have a good day.
Hill had a hissy fit and called the cops after getting that message. Well, the campus cops at Brandeis, where she works as a propagandist in the “womens’ studies” department, whatever the hell that is. The campus police reportedly called her hissy and upped the fit, and called the FBI.
Most people seem to be focusing on why in the world would Mrs. Thomas make such a phone call? I’m going to guess the proximate cause was that fourth glass of Chardonnay.
I’ve also heard quite a few people wonder why the Thomas’s don’t just get over it after 20 years. Now, that’s a stupid thing to wonder. Because it’s not over.
You hardly ever see anything written about Thomas that doesn’t reference Anita Hill. Thomas’s reputation has been as thoroughly and permanently soiled as Monica Lewinsky’s. The snickers are never going to stop–unless, perhaps, Anita Hill recants or at least admits that she went psycho-bitch and it was wrong and people, please leave the judge alone.
But that isn’t going to happen because she’s obviously still a psycho-bitch, as her behavior on getting the phone message demonstrates. Oh, and the campus cops at Brandeis are psycho-bitches too. Actually, I’m pretty sure that Anita Hill, the campus cops at Brandeis and every single member of the womens’ studies department have psycho-bitchitude in common.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that phone call didn’t come soon after Mrs. Thomas endured yet another snarky encounter at a party or restaurant, and she went home to brood about what that psycho-bitch did to her life, bottle of two buck chuck in hand.
Let’s assume that everything Hill said in her testimony about Thomas were true. She said:
- His conduct did not in fact rise to the level of sexual harassment, though she kinda thought he wanted to date her.
- That he about porn movies, explicitly talking about rape and bestiality scenes and mentioning Long Dong Silver.
- That he bragged about how good he was in the sack.
- That he joked once about there being a pubic hair on his coke can.
That’s it. Maybe I’ve forgotten another similar allegation, but that’s really about all she says happened, in several incidents scattered over several years. Ok, so Thomas has kind of a crude sense of frat-boy humor. What do you think innocent little girls have been subjected to while interning or working in Rahm Emmanuel’s office? Or Bill Clinton’s? Or a Kennedy’s? Or Joe Biden’s? Well, you get the point. This is NOT a BFD.
Three other psycho-bitches scurried out of the woodwork briefly to support Hill’s allegations, but all three chickened out and wouldn’t testify. If that qualifies to you as where there’s smoke, there’s fire, then you probably would have said the same thing in Salem in 1620, where there sure as hell was smoke and fire.
There’s one more incontrovertible fact that shows Hill didn’t think it was a BFD: She used Thomas as a career stepping stone, following him to another department to continue working with him, long after many of the incidents she claimed happened.
Except for Hill and her closet coven, nobody else supported the characterization of Thomas as this kind of bawdy, horny guy. He sure seems pretty serious, doesn’t he, and let’s remember that the department he ran where he took Hill with him was the Effing EEOC!
Given everything we know about Anita Hill, especially after this week, and everything we know about Clarence Thomas, the best you can say about her is that she’s an ungrateful, prototypical, resentful feminazi psycho-bitch who repaid a mentor who greatly advanced her career and treated her very well in general by ruining him with vicious gossip about minor private peccadillos that become capital offenses only in the bizarro world of feminist ideology. There is no way around that conclusion once you recognize the implications of the fact that she attached herself to him like a limpet.
Perhaps Thomas was so nice to her because he was still hoping to someday get into her crazypants. If so, that makes her worse, doesn’t it? The righteous feminist deliberately trading on her sexuality for unearned career advantage?
Personally, I think she’s lying. Were I to meet her, I’d say so to her face and give her a taste of the shit the Thomas’s have been taking for 20 years.