Book Description
SUPREME DISCOMFORT originated from a much-commented-upon profile of Clarence Thomas that appeared in an August 2002 issue of The Washington Post Magazine. In it, Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher, both Post staffers, both black, crafted a haunting portrait of an isolated and bitter man, savagely reviled by much of the black community, not entirely comfortable in white society, internally wounded by his passage from a broken family and rural poverty in Georgia to elite educational institutions to the pinnacle of judicial power. He has clearly never recovered from the searing experience of his Senate confirmation hearings and the "he said/she said" drama of the accusations of sexual harassment by Anita Hill.
SUPREME DISCOMFORT tracks the personal odyssey of perhaps the least understood man in Washington, from his poor childhood in Pin Point and Savannah, Georgia, to his educational experiences in a Catholic seminary and Holy Cross, to his law school years at Yale during the black power era, to his rise within the Republican political establishment. It offers a window into a man who straddles two different worlds and is uneasy in both—and whose divided personality and conservative political philosophy will deeply influence American life for years to come.
Customer Reviews:
No Division in Justice Thomas.......2007-10-02
This is a difficult book to rate. It's easy reading -- obviously written more to entertain than to inform -- and it's highly biased against the subject yet presented in such a way as to pretend to be balanced. It is character assassination in print.
The subtitle, "The divided soul of Clarence Thomas" is not proven by the discourse. It is obvious that Thomas has a very clear idea of who he is and what the law should be. He is staunch in his beliefs and true to his conscience. There is nothing divided about him.
Justice Thomas seems to have figured out what most of his peers (and definitely the authors)haven't: That affirmative action has proved to be a double-edged sword, as harmful to blacks as it has been useful. It is obvious that Thomas simply considers himself a man, neither black nor white, as he gazes at life and law through clear glasses. To many blacks (and obviously to the authors) this is the Unforgivable Sin.
Thus they portray Justice Thomas as almost manically introspective, weak and flawed. They emphasize the pain he endured over the years from racial slurs and imply that he is almost useless on the court because he can't forget Anita Hill's attacks during his confirmation trial before Congress. I use the word trial intentionally here.
I had wondered why Justice Thomas was publishing a memoir at this time since it would necessarily bring Hill to the forefront again. This book must be the reason. He knew this would be what it is when he refused the authors access to himself and his memorabilia. He was right. The prejudice against him here is almost hysterical.
One of the points the authors belabor again and again is their contention (and yes, it has been said by others) that Thomas is a lackey to or clone of Justice Scalia because they vote the same way. I believe it was Jan Crawford Greenburg (whose new book, "Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States," is just published) who said in an interview on Book TV just last weekend that she had gone through all the records specifically to determine whether there was truth in that particular assumption. She says in most cases Thomas voted first and that it might be more accurate to say that it was Scalia who followed in Thomas's footsteps. That research should have been done by these authors.
Since their prejudice against Justice Thomas is so pronounced and their indictments of his character so repetitious I can't help but wonder what material they left out from their massive second-source research. It would not be presumptuous to assume that they were highly selective in order to prove their thesis that Thomas is so flawed that he is ineffective on the Court (something that isn't said but is strongly implied in these pages).
One of the things they object to most about him is the fact that he seldom asks questions during court sessions. They don't seem to realize that when one is talking, s/he isn't learning. Justice Thomas says someone always asks the questions he would, so he just listens until the answer surfaces. That is wisdom.
What they object to most, however, seems to be that Thomas is a Constitutional originalist. That is, he believes in the Constitution as written and is suspicious of re-creating it "to fit" contemporary times. He is less inclined to use stare decisis (respect for precedent) when considering cases and he believes strongly in the rights of states to handle most social issues. That conservatism truly irks the authors and I believe these are the reasons they have chosen to emphasize the negative and present such a biased smear.
Almost every page and certainly every chapter belabors the anger and pain that Justice Thomas presumably harbors from his growing up years (in addition to the Hill episode). He would be have to be insane if he wasn't hurt and the fact that he has risen above the destiny presumed by his birth and has served so honorably at various levels of government, including the highest court in the land, shows the mettle of the man.
Justice Clarence Thomas is a great American and a noble jurist who is doing his best. We can ask no more of anyone.
DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THIS BOOK.......2007-10-02
As a person who has followed Justice Thomas'S career, I can say this book is not worth the paper it is printed on. Merida is trying to make money by slandering a wonderful man and a very honorable Supreme Court Justice. Justice Thomas is a credit to his race and his country. We need more great men like him. Men who do what is right and just in the eyes of God and man. Shame to those like to Merida who would try to destroy him. Don't buy the Merida book. It only tries to impune the integrity of a great person like Justice Thomas. Buy Justice Thomas's book instead, "My Grandfather's Son." Get the true story from Justice Thomas himself.
Justice for All.......2007-08-18
Despite conservative (and liberal) critics' naysaying, Merida and Fletcher's book is a fascinating and mostly even-handed analysis of the court's most controversial justice. The highest compliment I can give the authors is that both sides have lots to complain about. But the authors' extensive research--including first hand run-ins with Thomas--is beyond reproach.
How can the reader not be drawn to the flawed figure of Thomas? His divided soul is so much like that of the United States itself (and like each one of us). For him, and us, a deep strain of ambivalence often blinds us to the less pleasant truths of race in this country. The idea that Thomas is the savior of conservatives because of his skin color is only as offensive as the idea that Thomas must represent all blacks (tow the line on racial issues, so to speak.)
This reader was surprised in two ways: 1) I gained a healthy respect for Thomas' unique journey and 2) Despite my vociferous disagreement with the Constitutional "originalism" supported by Thomas and Scalia, I was able to separate Thomas' ethnicity from his decisions. As Scalia himself suggests, court-watchers would never intimate that he (Scalia)should give preferential treatment to Italian Americans. "Blackness" is not a monolithic state of being, nor should it be. Merida and Fletcher should be thanked for drawing a complex portrait where once only a thumb-nail sketch existed.
If Thomas and Scalia are judicial creeps (at the very least they're stubborn and their decisions are hurting this country) then they're creeps because of their backward and narrow view of the Constitution; their race and ethnicity have little to do with it.
Diificult Man and Difficult Book.......2007-08-15
Clarence Thomas is a difficult man. A black man who is defined by his race in many respects who is striking out on his own. HIs life is full of contradictions. He followed Thurgood Marshall, a leader in the fight for black rights, whose views Thomas seems to reject. On the other hand he treats the black workers at the Court with respect, which apparently Marshall never did. He inspires loyalty from his clerks to a degree which is unusual and yet does not help his nephew when he was in trouble with the law. He seems interested in his legacy and yet refuses to be interviewed by these authors.
The effort by two black reporters sets forth all these contradictions and yet it does not satisfy me in explaining Thomas. Maybe he can not be explained.
The book deals with his life well and yet does not really deal with his judicial output. We learn that he works hard and has friends on the court or at least has a congenial relationship with many. HOwever it appears tha his influence is minor. It is hard to read a long book about a Justice without making at least an effort to deal with his output. It is like writing about Jackie Robinson and leaving out how he played the game. I realize that an analysis of his work was not part of the book but maybe it should have been.
I would recommend this book but with reservations........2007-07-25
Except for a scant recollection of the Hill-Thomas Trial that aired on TV when I was a kid, I did not know anything about Clarence Thomas. My husband recommended this book after listening to a radio interview with the authors.
Firstly, I don't think this is the right book to pick up coming in with little to no knowledge of Thomas. The book is based on an accumulation of interviews, speeches and Thomas' writing and court decisions. It's interesting to note that Thomas declined to be interviewed for this book.
In a nutshell here is what I learned: Thomas is a Conservative. He benefited from affirmative action but he denies that he did, except to bring it up when it suits him, and he refuses to support it. He idolized his Grandfather. He is in the group of justices who believes his job is to interpret the Constitution as the founders would have intended, rather than adjust to the attitudes of the time. He rarely participates in oral arguments. Anita Hill really hurt him emotionally. He's sensitive. If you get on his bad side he'll hold a grudge and you'll be off his list ~ FOREVER. Most black people think he's a sellout. He's really a personable guy who would love to know you - yes YOU, who are of little significance, and once you get to know him, you actually like him! (And what's not to like? He's not off spewing hatred). He's simply a man in power armed with an opinion that goes against the majority minority, which people see is in sharp contrast from his deprived upbringing, which really wasn't that bad actually, only people tend to ignore that fact. All of this is discussed in the book and become points of contentions, and to me reading about it felt like sitting on a fence where the arguments could go either way.
Personally I think there are answers to Thomas' behavior, as sited in the book, which leave little mystery for his actions. But let's just lay it out there: he's a black man sitting on a high court, having replaced Thurgood Marshall who held very different views, and therefore his actions will be judged much harsher.
Perhaps it's because Thomas is seen as an anomaly, or perhaps the book isn't well written, but this book didn't do much for me; I came away feeling neutral about the whole "controversy." I certainly don't believe the book is a liberal attack on a conservative, just a bit jumbled with too much of the same information, and at times not all together accurate (example: the "Twinkie Defense" (312) as described in urban legend form). Some sections didn't seem to carry a point. Some paragraphs had to be picked apart because they were poorly written. A note of one small, but reoccurring annoyance, is the reintroduction of people. Take for example Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Noting who he is once (141) is informative and expected. Twice (237), okay, it's later in the book and perhaps I forgot. Three times (291)?! Do the authors really lack that much faith in their reader's retention abilities?
I agree with the previous reviewer who remarked that they didn't think the book reached a greater point. I certainly plan on reading Thomas' autobiography when it comes out in October '07, and have selected other books to read that the authors noted in their book.
Book Description
Clarence Thomas, the youngest and most controversial member of the Supreme Court, could become the longest-serving justice in history, influencing American law for decades to come. Who is this enigmatic man? And what does he believe in?
Judging Thomas tells the remarkable story of Clarence Thomas's improbable journey from hardscrabble beginnings in the segregated South to the loftiest court in the land. With objectivity and balance, author Ken Foskett chronicles Thomas's contempt for upper-crust blacks who snubbed his uneducated, working-class roots; his flirtation with the priesthood and, later, Black Power; the resentment that fueled his opposition to affirmative action; the conservative beliefs that ultimately led him to the Supreme Court steps; and the inner resilience that propelled him through the doors.
Based on interviews with Thomas himself, fellow justices, family members, and hundreds of friends and associates, Judging Thomas skillfully unravels perhaps the most complex, controversial, and powerful public figure in America today.
Customer Reviews:
Inside the world of a controversial Justice.......2005-12-14
No Supreme Court Nominee's hearings have been more controversial than Clarence Thomas's were. And, we see from this biography, no life has been more interesting on the Supreme Court than Clarence Thomas. From his poor upbringing by his grandfather in rural Georgia, to Yale Law School, to his difficulty in finding a job after graduation to his contentious Supreme Court battle, Thomas's story almost seems ready made for a drama. This book is fascinating, and will make you feel for Justice Thomas. All the pain he has gone through in his life is reflected in Foskett's words. One of the most interesting biographies I have ever read.
Pay no attention to the left-wing wacko reviews...................2005-03-31
such as "For a different view than the first four I see here, November 16, 2004 Reviewer: Felix (Silicon Valley).....see the review by Randall Kennedy for the Washington Post"
Why, Felix? The WP is one of the three worst newspapers in the USA, along with the L.A. Times and the N.Y Times. These "newspapers" are no more than left wing propaganda machines. They proved themselves to be far left during the election. Every day the WP prints whatever they can think up against the President and anyone in the administration, and almost never anything good that is going on in the country, or the good that has been done in Afghanistan, and Iraq. You don't know about the good because the "People's Propaganda" machines will not print it.
Of course, the WP will find, or dream up, or twist, or misinterpret, or tell half-truths and lies about Clarence Thomas. That's what they live for; to tell all the worst things they can dream up about every conservative. Did you see these major newspapers support Clinton's accusers like they supported the lying Anita Hill? Anyone could watch Anita and tell she was a liar; it was all over her face, and was apparent in her demeanor. That woman had one objective, and every left-wing wacko, radical feminist, socialist, communist,and liar on the planet tried to support her false claims that she twisted into ugly lies about innocent events.
These "reviews" are a waste of time. The left-wingers will write bad reviews and say the good ones don't help them. The conservatives will support Thomas, but at least they aren't lying.
Watch what the man does, and how he lives, then judge from what's true, not what's jaded opinion.
I still done know Judge Thomas.......2005-01-08
I was left wanting more. I felt the book was written to achieve a certain number of pages instead of providing me information about Judge Thomas. The book often provides far to much information about the people passing through his life. I was not interested in reading so much informatin about the people who employ him or the people he met on his life journey.
The book did address some of Judge Thomas early social ideas, but the book seem to be written without much input from Judge Thomas. I did not get the sense that I knew Judge Thomas after I completed the book.
For a different view than the first four I see here.......2004-11-17
Under the link above "product details" to "see all editorial reviews," see the review by Randall Kennedy for the Washington Post
A balanced biography of an intriguing man.......2004-09-22
Several years ago, The Weekly Standard ran a cover story calling Clarence Thomas the most powerful conservative in America. He truly was at that time.
Foskett does a fair job stripping away the controversy and polemic to examine the man, his background, and his life. There is obviously the story of Thomas' confirmation to the Supreme Court, and a fair amount of time is devoted to those few weeks in the Justice's life. Far more interesting than that is his life before Washington, and before the political appointments, while he was still growing up under the stern eye of his grandfather, Myers Anderson.
Without understanding the world that incubated Thomas it is impossible to understand why he could view the world and the American judicial system as he does. To understand Clarence Thomas more fully one must understand Myers Anderson, the dominant force in his early years. Foskett accounts for the apartheid caste system of the Jim Crow south that trapped and warped so many people.
Passionate reactions about Thomas will exist for a long, long time. His ideas stand on their own merit. This book truly gives the reader a glimpse at the humanity of a man who thinks for himself and will set the judicial tenor of the court for years to come.
Customer Reviews:
They Attack Him.......2006-05-02
For a decade and a half now, Clarence Thomas has been a proverbial "thorn in the side" of liberalism. They just don't know how to take someone who goes against every fiber of their being. The American system so successfully constructed by liberal lawmakers has simply failed them, therefore, they do the only thing they know how, they attack him. With a tenaciously dogged vengeance, they attack him. A black man is suppose to stay on the plantation and be a good democrat, keeping them in office while waiting for the next handout. A black man in America isn't supposed to pull himself up out of poverty. The Democrat created and nurtured system just isn't designed for such an anomaly. So they attack him. At every venue, with every ruling, and for unfounded reasons other than shear loathing, they attack him.
For fourteen years now, only Justice Antonin Scalia has joined Justice Clarence Thomas as the only consistent voices to the original intent of the Constitution. Over the fourteen year span, from 1991 to 2005, as a presiding Supreme Court Judge, Justice Thomas rendered 327 judicial opinions. Each opinion is presented in the book, THE KEEPER OF THE FLAME by Henry Mark Holzer. This extraordinary piece of work goes far beyond previous works regarding Thomas' distinguished career, and is presented in common language that those of us with non-judicial backgrounds can easily comprehend.
This is not a biography of the life of Clarence Thomas. For that, see Clarence Thomas: A Biography, by Andrew Peyton Thomas, a 600-page behemoth that chronicles every aspect of his life. No, this is a close examination of every one of the 327 written opinions Thomas rendered from appointment until the books publication. This book lends clear and concise illustration, primarily in Thomas' own words, to his methodology on rendering decisions and his positions on fundamental Constitutional questions.
Much like Ronald Reagan, Clarence Thomas will never see a national public fully cognizant of his greatness, nor willing to acknowledge his accomplishments. His continual display of an incessant desire to judiciously adhere to the principles upon which our country was founded and our laws enacted should have left Thomas with an unquestioned legacy, but because he doesn't "fit the mold" they attack him. This book is a brilliant presentation which will, hopefully, open the eyes of the masses who have bought into the character assassinations this man has endured while upholding the values our forefathers cherished.
It remains to be seen as yet, whether Justices Thomas and Scalia still stand alone as our last great hope in returning to the virtue that once was America, but we must pray that the recent, and near future appointments to the country's highest court will stand beside Thomas and Scalia as bastions of American sovereignty and freedom. This book lends critical insight to one of the two great Justices of our time and clearly illustrates the importance of future appointees.
Monty Rainey
[..]
Welcome to Constitutional Law.......2006-04-08
Henry Mark Holzer's, The Keeper of the Flame is a fascinating and enlightening examination of Justice Clarence Thomas' brilliant legal mind, his integrity and his strong moral base. Holzer brings to light the incredible purity of one of the nation's best thinkers. He does this by citing the Justice's own words and analyzing those words with the greatest degree of objectivity and clarity. Holzer reveals himself to be a master-scholar of Constitutional Law guiding us through the history of its creation by the Founding Fathers and how it has come to be interpreted by the Supreme Court. He helps us to truly understand the Constitution and its undeniable value to our free society. He takes us through the Bill of Rights so that we know and can appreciate how they apply to our own lives. Professor Holzer is not only a fine scholar-he is a fine writer and a fine teacher. His exceptional skills make this a marvelous educational text, yet a completely easy and enjoyable read.
I was especially impressed by the examples Justice Thomas' unequivocal dissents. He pulls no punches in taking on the Court's majority decision makers when he disagrees. He repudiates with unimpeachable logic and fierce moral conviction. Holzer has proven him to be not only "the keeper of the flame," but to be a man of heroic proportions. We should all be grateful that Clarence Thomas sits on the highest court in the land.
I plan to purchase several copies of The Keeper of the Flame to donate to local school and public libraries; an idea I would hope others, after reading it, might embrace.
Jeff Warren, teacher
Los Angeles
Essential Supreme Court Analysis.......2006-04-04
Professor Holzer has cleared away the cloud surrounding the jurisprudence of Clarence Thomas. In the ongoing debate between those who adhere to the idea of a "living constitution" and those who seek original meaning and intent, "The Keeper of the Flame" is essential reading for anyone who wants a better understanding of each viewpoint. This book also shines a bright light on the Justice who might be called the stepchild of "conservative" Supreme Court Justices. Preconceived notions and popular public images of Clarence Thomas are swept away with powerful and very readable text supported, always, by the only real authority on Justice Thomas' judicial philosophy, his own words.
We learn that Justice Thomas' opinions are well thought out and often eloquent. For anyone who has read, or even read of, Supreme Court opinions over the years, it is evident that the Court as a whole has often struggled and equivocated over the principles it applies. But, not Clarence Thomas. Whether you agree or disagree with his judicial philosphy, once you read this book you will never think of Justice Thomas in the same way he has often been portrayed.
Professor Holzer does a masterful job of placing Clarence Thomas in his proper place and, as an added bonus, Holzer gives us a concise and easy to read synposis of the important constitutional issues the Supreme Court has faced over the years.
Justice Clarence Thomas .......2006-04-03
KEEPER OF THE FLAME
Stanley Gray
The charge that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is an Uncle Tom "doing the white man's bidding" is so unfair and so untrue that it makes me want to cry! Thomas is definitely his own man, and it is abundantly clear that Justice Thomas truly understands what it means, and what it takes, to uphold and defend our Constitution.
Holzer's book, surprisingly easy to read, gave me a better understanding of our Constitution and of the workings of the Supreme Court. Most importantly for me, The Keeper of the Flame gave me new ammunition to use in my attempts to persuade fellow blacks that Justice Thomas's decisions in support of the Constitution should be better appreciated.
I especially found it refreshing that race plays absolutely no role in The Keeper of the Flame. Holzer wrote about Clarence Thomas the thinker, not Clarence Thomas the black thinker.
Professional or layman, butcher or baker, all Americans need to read Professor Holzer's book. I'm not sure that I wouldn't make it mandatory reading for high school seniors. And for sure, it is a must read for those entering, or already in, the legal profession.
If I were Professor Holzer I would send a copy to every member of the senate so that they would understand the proper questions to ask future Supreme Court nominees, and so that they'll be reminded of the crucial importance of their task.
__________________
Stanley Gray writes froj San Gabriel, California.
What we need are more Justices like ClarenceThomas.......2006-03-23
Yes Clarence Thomas is a very originalist Supreme Court Justice
indeed! I haven't heard justice Thomas speak much, but his
opinion writing is great, with both feet planted on the center
of a rock solid US Constitution.
This book is right on track, and we should thank the author
of "Keeper of the Flame" for producing this much needed book
which happens to be an effective `rebuttal' of the prejudice
and UGLY confirmation hearings that Clarence Thomas was
subjected to..
The mind of Clarence Thomas is very well sharpened..
A strong intellect such as he possesses garners facts..
just the facts..then it digests, develops and communicates
very consistent rulings as he has done throughout his tenure
as a modern era Supreme Court Justice.
Justice Thomas' Jurisprudential history the author has shown
clearly in this book to inform us in this most succinct and
powerful way. This book is indeed quite fascinating.
The author is very qualified to write on Supreme Court's
degree of departure from the required conformance to the
US Constitution, and Clarence Thomas' tendency to defend
the Original Intent of the Constitution in his opinions,
dissents and rulings. The Author is a long time professor
of constitutional law, and has argued on the appellate level,
including some cases argued before the US Supreme Court!
In my view, no one reading this book through should ever fail
to gain a feeling of profound respect and appreciation for
Clarence Thomas' jurisprudence, driven in the center lane
of "Constitutional Originism' -- he does his utmost to defend
the US Constitution he knows profoundly, from being trampled
upon by efforts of other justices..even judges from lower
courts, to "make laws" from the bench by judicial wordsmithing.
Again, Great book!! Talk about food for legal thought!!!
Average customer rating:
|
Tom Ashley, Sam McGee, Bukka White: Tennessee traditional singers
Manufacturer: University of Tennessee Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 General
| Instruments & Performers
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0870492608 |
Book Description
"...An excellent and balanced review of the justice's first years on the Court."
—National Review
"Gerber is scrupulously honest in dissecting Thomas' opinions, their legal background, and their place in the Court's jurisprudence, and he demonstrates his own excellent capabilities as an objective, fair, thoughtful, and thorough scholar."
—The Federal Lawyer
"The virture of Scott Gerber's new study ... is that it puts in better perspective Thomas's whole career."
—The Weekly Standard
"Gerber's book is a breath of fresh air, because it treats Justice Thomas and his work with respect and intellectual curiosity."
—Ideas on Liberty
"...the most comprehensive and incisive account of Thomas' political philosophy to date."
—First Things
Clarence Thomas is one of the most vilified public figures of our day. To date, however, his legal philosophy has received only cursory treatment.
First Principles provides a portrait of Thomas based not on the justice's caricatured reputation, but on his judicial opinions and votes, his scholarly writings, and his public speeches.
The paperback edition includes a provocative new Afterword by the author bringing the book up to date by assessing Justice Thomas's performance, and the reaction to his decisions, during the last five years.
Customer Reviews:
Insightful, but limited in views on civil liberties.......2006-06-28
I had one primary motivation for reading an arguably dated book: with the addition of Roberts and Alito to the Court, the Court will certainly transform itself from being the most effective institution, besides our military, in protecting the reserved rights of "We the People" to a court that will most certainly expand government power as the Conservatives on the court gain control. J. Thomas, who has written many a provocative dissent, will now become a prolific writer of opinions that will grant the government sweeping powers as our individual rights are stripped away. I wanted to better understand what to expect out of Thomas as his opinions now become binding law.
Gerber's book is considered the most fair, unbiased, and most accurate analysis of Thomas' jurisprudence though limited to the first five years of his tenure, though it also contains a short afterword that catches up on Thomas through 2000. What is most intriguing about Thomas is that Thomas claims to read and interpret our radically liberal constitution within the context of the even more radically, and revolutionary Declaration of Independence, unlike Scalia who claims to read only the Constitution from a textual perspective. Rather than yielding a solid libertarian view a la' Randy Barnett so well-espoused in Barnett's "The Lost Constitution", Thomas seems to constantly rule opposite of the original meaning or even original intent of those two documents if they deny a conservative political objective. So what gives?
Gerber not only does a great job of providing a rhetoric-free analysis of Thomas's view, he also does a fine job of comparing those views to competing views and fairly crucifying Thomas's media critics who hate the rulings without any understanding of Thomas' arguments. As fair as Gerber is in analyzing Thomas' opinions against his judicial adversaries, Gerber also does a fascinating quantitative analysis to empirically expose whether Thomas is honestly deciding cases or is driven by conservative political objectives - the results of this research contained within the Appendices is alone worth owning this book.
Some of Gerber's findings:
Gerber publishes outtakes from a Thomas 1987 speech to the Heritage Foundation where Thomas claims to support the constitutional principle of the "primacy of the individual, and establishes our inherent equality as a God-given right." Thomas ends this subject in his speech arguing that Conservatives should embrace this concept rather than have this principle continue to be conservatism's "Achilles' heel". Fine rhetoric indeed, Gerber then goes on to show how in ruling after ruling, Thomas rejects his own principles to vote firmly for sweeping government power that deprives the individual of their rights with respect to civil liberties as Thomas ignores the fact that we reserved our rights and tries to limit those rights by trying to prove they are all numerated in the Constitution, and narrowly at that.
Again Gerber quotes Thomas defending the original meaning of the 9th amendment that would "explicitly deny to the national government certain powers over various subjects would imply". And throughout the book Gerber then exposes Thomas as he tries to narrowly interpret the other Bill of Rights amendments to show preference to government power rather than use the Constitution to interpret the powers delegated to the government to, as Jefferson said in the D of I, "secure the blessings of liberty", e.g., Thomas voting with a 5-4 majority approving of government funding of religious activity in Rosenberger v. the U. of VA. (1995); an unprecedented ruling that directly opposses the establishment clause and our equal protection rights.
Not that Thomas is always on the side of non-delegated gov't power. Gerber does a very respectful and insightful analysis of Thomas views on civil rights in regards to affirmative action and Thomas' fierce defense of free speech regarding political speech, like in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission where Thomas did support the original meaning of the Constitution by limiting government power to explicitly stated delegation of powers while broadly interpreting the people's and the press' right to speech.
While the chapter on Thomas' views on Federalism, where Thomas is an active proponent of allowing states non-explicit powers to deny Americans their constitutional rights is interesting, Gerber doesn't go far enough, like Barnett has done, in analyzing whether any founding framer believed in the principle that the states could deny rights to "we the people", with the "people" being narrowly defined at that time.
Many constitutional law bloggers have easily exposed Scalia as an absolute hypocrite regarding his defense of original meaning when he often, and lately almost constantly, ignores that concept when needed to support a conservative political goal. Thomas's opinions require a much more thorough examination to expose his rationale for his rulings; Gerber for the most part is up to the task. If you are a Thomas fan, you'll get plenty of support for your position, if you are aghast at his findings, you will understand how far Thomas must twist reason to support his conservative ideology, and if you are like me, a person who thinks Thomas has unlimited potential but is also aghast at his rulings, you'll find evidence that maybe with time Thomas will begin to defend our reserved rights as time develops his jurisprudence, unfortunately the two new members will most likely have no positive influence on Thomas, providing support for narrow rulings with twisted logic to claim protection of rights while ruling in a manner that destroys those very rights.
An intriguing examination of Justice Thomas with some flaws.......2005-11-01
I applaud Gerber for avoiding yet another partisan attack upon (or defense of) Justice Thomas. Too often scholars, or politicians, respond to justices, and Thomas in particular, with partisan attack divorced from any real consideration of the substance of the justice's view. Gerber looks at Thomas's opinions in cases from three areas: civil rights, civil liberties, and federalism.
Gerber's conclusion is that Thomas is just as result oriented as any other justice, he reads his own preferences into the text he is interpreting in the same manner that "liberal activists" do. Unfortunately, Gerber at times glosses over this fact because of his pet theory of "liberal originalism" that sees all constitutional principles as derivative of the Declaration of Independence (a theory dubious on its own terms). The most obvious gloss comes in affirmative action cases. Thomas has insisted upon a colorblind interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, but he fails to give any originalist defense of this position. Instead, he uses moral arguments with a single citation to the declaration. Gerber spins from this a position that Thomas believes in his theory of interpretation, at least here since he admits that Thomas abandons this idea in other areas such as religion. But, neither Thomas nor Gerber clearly state what importance the declaration could have on the meaning of the 14th Amendment, enacted nearly a century later. In fact, the history of the 14th Amendment demonstrates a pervasive use of benign racial classifications similar to affirmative action programs, leading many to conclude that, as originally understood, affirmative action programs are constitutional. Gerber swipes aside these criticisms, stating that Thomas's affirmative action opinions rely upon moral arguments and not history. But this ignores the fact that Thomas claims to be an originalist who relies upon the intent and practice of the enactors of a provision. We should hold Thomas up to the standards he claims to live by. Another example, of rather recent development which explains why Gerber's book doesn't include it, is takings. In the recent New London decision, Thomas offered a powerful originalist critique of the broad majority opinion of the public use requirement. He uses intent, original understanding, and contemporary state practice. Yet, he joined in, and continues to support, Scalia's opinion in Lucas admitting that history failed to support regulatory takings, and describing the same history used in New London as irrelevant. This is a glaring inconsistency necessitated by the fact that history fails to support Thomas's belief in regulatory takings so he abandons these inconvenient facts. Thus, we see that originalism fails to constrain Thomas's behavior in the way he claims it does.
Another annoying thing is that Gerber seems to find it necessary to vocalize his opposition to Thomas's opinion, almost as if he is afraid of being labeled a Thomas-defender. I think this is unnecessary and he should have simply presented Thomas's thoughts without his subjective opinion as to the correctness of those positions. All told, I think Gerber's book is a fine one, presenting Thomas's opinions and thoughts themselves. In the end, we see that Thomas is just as likely to join in activist policy-making as any other justice. This should hardly be surprising and we should encourage it because it adds another important voice to constitutional issues, particularly in affirmative action cases where he is the only justices to experience it first hand. We should encourage this diversity of opinion while removing the illegitimate claim that it is the requirement of history rather than Thomas's personal policy preference.
An exceptional book.......2002-06-11
This is an exceptional book. What Gerber has done is to avoid the political panderings of both the left and right wing and given us an objective, unbiased consideration of Justice Thomas'opinions. What a pleasure to read a book based in data not political philosophy. Plus the book is very well written. Kudos to Mr Gerber
a remarkably intelligent-and courageous-study........1999-06-29
While it is true to say that Clarence Thomas is one of the most vilified men to sit on the Supreme Court, it must also besaid that he has also often suffered from having the wrong kind of defenders. With the lonely exception of Senator John Danforth, practically none of Thomases defenders has taken the time to understand his thought or character. Finally, an inteeligent book has been written about Thomas, by someone who comes neither to glorify or condemn Clarence Thomas, but to UNDERSTAND him. Scot Gerber is one of the fastest rising stars in American constitutional thought.In this fine study, he analyzes Thomases opinions, and concludes that Thomas is not simply a tail to Antonin Scalias intellectual kite. Instead, Clarence Thomas ins a thoughtful, highly principled jurist, with a much deeper undrstanding of our Constitution and its foundations than many of his colleagues on the Court,(And the entire Democratic membership of the Senate Judiciary commitee, for that matter.)While Gerber is critical of many of Thomas' opinions,he is never crudely dismissive. Instead, he shows just how scholarly and intelligent this very misunderstood justice is.Why do I call this book 'courageous'.For one reason, and one reason alone. As I have already said, Scott Gerber is a rising star of constitutional theory.He is also a Liberal, in the classical, libertarian sense. However, in defending Thomas, he has risked prevoking the wrath of some very influential people. He has several hair -raising anecdotes in this book about how reputable law reviews have refused to print anything favorable to Clarence Thomas, and it is indeed doubtful that this fine book will meet with the respect it deserves.Even now, it has only been reviewed in 'conservative' magazines, while such organs of "liberalism" as The New Republic ,The New York Review of Books,and The New York Times have greeted it with silence.One can only hope that Americas leading law reviews will not follow in their footsteps,and instead show the same maturity and courage as Scott Gerber.Both he and Justice Thomas deserve respect.
A fair and balanced portrait of Justice Clarence Thomas........1999-06-14
In writing "First Principles," Scott Douglas Gerber has done something that few, if any, members of the media or legal cognoscenti have even contemplated: giving Justice Thomas a "fair shake."
Mr. Gerber should be commended for presenting a balanced portrait of Justice Thomas's jurisprudence. Gerber dispells the myth that Justice Thomas is merely Justice Scalia's second vote.
Mr. Gerber also does a good job of exposing the intellectual dishonesty of Thomas's critics. The picture he paints is clear: the current civil rights movement hates Thomas because he fails to tow the liberal, collectivist line. He actually thinks for himself. How remarkable!
After reading this book there can be no doubt that Thomas is his own man. Of course those of us who have taken the time out to actually READ HIS OPINIONS already knew this to be the case.
The only fault that I can find with this book is Mr. Gerber's mischaracterization of originalism. On page 183 of his book Gerber writes that conservative originalism is a flawed method of constitutional interpretation, musing "Why that document? Why that framer?"
Originalism is not that simple. As noted by Justice Scalia is his recent book, A Matter of Interpretation, "It is curious that most of those who insist that the drafter's intent gives meaning to a statute reject the drafter's intent as the criterion for interpretation of the Constitution. I reject it for both. I will consult the writings of some men who happened to be delegates to the Constitutional Convention--Hamilton's and Madison's writings in The Federalist for example. I do so, however, not because they were Framers and therefore their intent is authoritative and must be law; but rather because their writings, like those of other intelligent and informed people of the time, display how the text of the Constitution was originally understood. Thus I give equal weight to Jay's pieces in The Federalist, and to Jefferson's writings, even though neither of them was a Framer. What I look for in the Constitution is precisely what I look for in a statute: the original meaning of the text, not what the original draftsmen intended." (see page 38)
It is interesting to note that Gerber's definition of "originalism" closely parallels the above-referenced quote by Justice Scalia. In a footnote on page 47, Gerber defines "conservative originalism" as maintaining that "the Constitution should be interpreted as the Framers themselves would have interpreted it."
The documents and Framers consulted by judges, or legal scholars, to interpret the Constitution are ONLY IMPORTANT to the degree that they shed light on how the words used in the text of the Constitution were understood by the men who drafted and ratified it. Originalism is not perfect, and it does not answer all constitutional questions or inquiries. But this method of constitutional interpretation works 95% of the time. The problem is that most judges are NOT looking for the answer to a constitutional question, they are looking for a way to justify their agenda. After writing this book and evaluating the superficial jurisprudence of other Supreme Court Justices (e.g. Stevens, Souter, etc.), I have a feeling that Mr. Gerber understands this reality all to well.
With that small criticism noted, I highly recommend this book. A job well done!
Book Description
In this unauthorized biography, the most authoritative ever written about the controversial Supreme Court Justice, Andrew Peyton Thomas (no relation) explores Clarence Thomas' remarkable rise from a childhood of poverty in segregated Georgia to the nation's highest court. In his attempt to understand what drives the elusive and sometimes enigmatic Justice, the author located and conducted the first-ever interview with Clarence Thomas' father, as well as interviews with his mother, sister, and other relatives and friends. He follows Thomas up from Jim Crow and traces the important decisions of his youth-why he chose not to become a Catholic priest; why he engaged in radical protests as a college student. We see Clarence Thomas in the full as a young lawyer in Missouri and then as a rising star in Washington. Published to coincide with the tenth anniversary of Thomas' confirmation hearings, this dramatic biography offers new insights into the conflict with Anita Hill that made Clarence Thomas a household name-and inflicted deep scars on him that endure to this day. The author draws on insights supplied by former Supreme Court clerks and interviews with Washington insiders like former President George Bush and Court colleague Antonin Scalia in his exploration of Thomas' life and jurisprudence over the last decade. "Clarence Thomas" peels away all the clichés about its subject in giving us a vivid and balanced account of a remarkable American life.
Customer Reviews:
The Man, Not Just the Controversy.......2007-04-24
Finding a good biography is hard to begin with. This is even more true if the subject is the human lightning rod of Clarence Thomas, quite possibly the most polarizing figure out there. Indeed, Thomas Sowell once wrote something to the effect that one can tell a white liberal's level of commitment to his beliefs by how much he despises the man. I am therefore happy to say that CLARENCE THOMAS: A BIOGRAPHY is a true joy to read.
A major reason for this book being so good is because the author Andrew Peyton Thomas (no relation to the Justice) is so balanced. Other writers would either disparage Justice Thomas or act as little more than a literary cheerleader for the man based on ideological disposition. While the author A.P. Thomas obviously is an admirer of Justice Thomas, he nonetheless portrays the Justice warts and all. In fact, one of my friends, a white liberal who cannot discuss anything related to race without wallowing in white guilt and who simply cannot grasp the fact that blacks are responsible for their own lives, upon hearing that I was reading this book, asked me, his voice dripping with condescension and even hostility, whether the author goes over Justice Thomas having benefitted from affirmative action only to try to end such policies now. I was able to respond that, yes, indeed the author does cover this. In fact, quite extensively, while placing Justice Thomas' change of direction in the proper context and discussing the man's turmoil that others would focus on him rather than on the issues themselves (if my friend caught the irony, he did not let on).
CLARENCE THOMAS covers the Justices' early life extensively. I was initially hesitant that so many pages were devoted to what I considered to be basically an introduction. I was wrong. Thomas' early life and the influences upon him by his relatives, nuns and others with whom he came into contact is absolutely captivating.
As the book enters Thomas' adult years, the book loses none of its steam. Again, it is not just the facts of Thomas' life that are so captivating (though that is true), but that the author presents a vivid portrait of a man determined to stay true to himself in a context in which others want to use him for their own purposes and in the face of often seemingly insurmountable odds. We also get a focused picture of really just what kind of man Thomas is, as we read about his determination in the face of frustration after frustration. The author is not so much a fan of the Justice as to fail to acknowledge that Clarence Thomas, like many of us, has not always been able to live up to his ideals and that in some circumstances, subtle truths gave way to expediency.
The reader also understands how Thomas was able to rise so high so fast. This is a man, after all, who came to the helm of the EEOC when it was the worst run administrative agency of the federal government only to turn it into the crown jewel by the time he left, all the while laughing, having a good time and without the heads-will-roll attitude others would have brought to the task. And while others voiced the opinion that the cloistered life of a federal judge would not suit Thomas' personality, Thomas proved them wrong as well.
But again, CLARENCE THOMAS is not a paint job with a happy face. The author also writes powerfully not only of Thomas' rough spots, but of the effect these had on the man and his approach to others. Justice Thomas was, not surprisingly, deeply seared by the attacks upon him during his confirmation hearing and with the insight that others would destroy every scrap of his good name simply for ideological purposes. Given the controversy surrounding the man, this book is probably the best source a reader could ask for to gain a good insight into Clarence Thomas, one of the more interesting figures to grace the American public stage.
The liberal that liked it!.......2005-07-22
Okay, there are several books on Thomas out there. This is my first. That said, the author is a gifted writer. This book is as accessible as a novel. Really. Non-lawyers don't have to beware.
Liberals need not beware, either. Is the author sympathetic toward his subject? Well, I suppose so. This book is MOSTLY free of editorializing, though. Mostly, the author just relates what happened in a pretty impartial manner. Most of the editorializing is done when the author is criticizing his subject.
The author recognizes that his subject has a strain of bathos, self-pity and exagerration. He includes several anectodes that portray Thomas as socially awkward, constantly seeking love and approval from EVERYONE, but unexpectedly lashing out at co-workers with cruel and unwarranted comments or intentionally setting subordinates against each other.
All in all, he portrays a hardworking, reasonably smart politician who acended to the Supreme Court through an odd combination of luck, affirmative action, political connections, gladhanding, politicking, genuine administrative ability, and a Puritan work ethic. I don't think anyone will walk away from this being impressed by Thomas as a genius, a trendsetter, or a role model in particular. For those liberals that are predisposed to hating him, however, just by virtue of his politics, this book will likely engender a feeling of understanding and compassion for Thomas. After all, how can you hate someone for being socially awkward. How can you ridicule someone for being competent, hardworking, and able, even if that person isn't a genius? How can you blame a guy for coming from literally nothing and rising so highly even if he's not one of the 9 best legal minds in the country? So he's just "a man." That's okay, right?
The book does make a case against Anita Hill.... I'm not the type to assume I know "what happened" in cases like that. Suffice it to say that the case against Hill is pretty convincing and it rings true.
Despite the length of the book (like 600 pages!), it's a quick and enjoyable read.
My one huge criticism is that you don't get to the court years until like page 450. I'd rather the background constitute a 1/3 of the book than 3/4s. I bought it to read about JUSTICE Thomas, you know?
One of the best biographies I've read.......2005-04-24
From page 1 to the last you won't be able to put down this book. If you are interested in reading something that will lift your spirits and give you back some faith in individual honesty you need to read this.
It should be a genre of its own. I mean, it's the ages-old odyssey of a person who makes it through all the obstacles of his environment to the top of that society. Not without scars. It's the story of a modern hero, the only kind that subsists today: the ignored one. A person who fought for his ideals, his beliefs, against all odds (economic, social, whatever).
Mr. Thomas is a living monument to faith in a Divine Author against the tendency to idolize social and liberal causes.
This is also a worthy reading for growing Christians.
Shame for those who want to use God for their political persuasions, like those who blame the Pope for not being liberal. They can't admit being atheists, they prefer to destroy His Kingdom from inside.
Thanks Clarence.
Buy this book in spite of the biased review Amazon provides.......2002-06-10
It is quite simply a masterpiece. Justice Thomas is portrayed as a real human being who has survived the castigation of the far Left... with a dignity that speaks loud and clear above the wailing of the extreme left Liberals who cannot believe a man of color exists who they cannot control. Read how this man of incredible intellect and courage overcomes all odds to become the first black intellectual to occupy the bench. Unlike Thurgood Marshall who knew political correctness before it became the defacto "law of the land", this biography portrays a true independent thinker and voice for judicial freedom that will not be silenced. The depths to which the Left will sink in its outrage when anyone escapes from the plantation is well documented. The viciousness of the Left and NOW during the Hill debacle is nicely contrasted with their mute impotent silence during the Clinton impeachment proceedings. It is well written and well researched, and most importantly unbiased unlike other competing biographies. Somehow this bio was allowed to be published. Do not forgo the opportunity to read and own your own copy.
Riveting.......2002-06-04
At first I was worried that I would not be able to get through Thomas' early life to get to his Supreme Court years, by about 75 pages in, I wondered how the Supreme Court years could be as good as the first part of the book was turning out to be. This book is great and, amazingly, a quick read, not to mention well researched and very unbiased. The author takes Thomas to task for his occational self-indulgence, and yet paints a picture of Thomas that leaves me hoping I just read a biography of the next Chief Justice.
Average customer rating:
- Ok if looking for a short favorable biography
- A Superficial Biography of a Deep Man
- Superb Portrayal of Nimitz the Man and Admiral
|
Chester W. Nimitz: Admiral of the Hills
Frank A. Driskill , and
Dede W. Casad
Manufacturer: Eakin Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Historical
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
History of Sports
| Miscellaneous
| Sports
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sports
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Sports Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Nimitz
ASIN: 0890153647 |
Customer Reviews:
Ok if looking for a short favorable biography.......2007-09-27
I suggest anyone serious about reading on Nimitz skip this and go to Potter's work. It appears to be primarily drawn from Potter... not sure what the author intended to accomplsih here. We could sure use a new Nimitz biography.
A Superficial Biography of a Deep Man.......2001-11-10
Driskill pays tribute to E.B. Potter's official biography of Admiral Nimitz in the credits section of his book. Unfortunately his shorter biography adds little of substance to Potter's. Potter shows his admiration for Nimitz by showing many small incidents of the man's humanity, tactical intelligence, and quiet perseverance that let the reader conclude on his own that Nimitz was a great man. Driskill tries to achieve the same goal in less space by glossing over details and just _telling_ readers that Nimitz was a great man. At several points he resorts to one of my pet peeves, narrative sentences ending in exclamation points. That is! Such a lame way! Of trying to make a story more dramatic! The best parts of Driskill's book are the passages where he talks about Nimitz's Texas boyhood and later visits to the state. There, he brings up vivid local detail that invokes the real Fredricksburg and surrounding Texas hill country. (The Museum of the Pacific War in Fredricksburg, built in the old Nimitz family hotel, is well worth a visit.) Driskill clearly had the best of intentions in writing this shorter account, but I'm afraid a reader would be better served by biting the bullet and launching into Potter's longer biography.
Superb Portrayal of Nimitz the Man and Admiral.......2000-05-30
Chester Nimitz, remembered most for his victories at Midway and the Central Pacific, is portrayed in a commendable fashion in this well-written and well-researched book. Beginning from his birth, the book discusses the development of the Admiral and the formation of his ideologies and ideals as he rose through the ranks to the top of the naval hierarchy, all of which is indispensable for the student who truly wishes to understand the command of the United States in the WWII Pacific Theatre. The portrayal of the admiral in both a personal and professional military light is superb, and one cannot help but be captivated by the truths presented in this book about the commander who has long been overshadowed by MacArthur despite the fact that Nimitz himself may deserve more credit for the American victory than his flambuoyant counterpart in the army. The relationship described in the book between these two is especially admirable, and Driskill does quite a job demonstrating how the Pacific Campaign was actually commanded.
I would highly recommend this book for anyone interested in WWII reading or modern naval history as this book doesn't present Nimitz as a ficticious hero of the seas like Nelson or Jones, but rather as a modern hero in the modernizing navy who held in his disciplined character the key to allied victory in the Pacific.
Customer Reviews:
"Right is Right, Even Over a Penny" .......2007-10-20
Justice Thomas's book, "My Grandfather's Son", was to me an enthralling and incredibly introspective story on how one of the most enigmatic public figures in our nation's recent history got to where he is today.
For a long time, Clarence Thomas has been a mystery to me (and I am sure to many others as well). In "My Grandfather's Son" though, Justice Thomas opens the shutters to his life (his words, not mine) and bares his soul. He talks openly about what it was like to be abandoned by his father and raised by his "Daddy" (his maternal grandfather). It was illuminating to read Thomas's feelings about his grandfather as he contemplated and compared his strict almost loathsome upbringing juxtaposed agianst his grandfather's affection for Thomas's own son, Jamal.
Thomas talks about his collegiate radicalism and the anger and rage that fueled his politics. Most impressively though, Thomas dicusses in detail the evolution of his ideology. He states that he had been "sneering at the simplemindedness of his [grandfather's] philosophy of self-reliance, but now it was making sense to [him] again." He also asked, "If I was truly serious about helping other people, I'd have started by helping myself, and the first thing I had to do was chain the beast of rage and resentment that threatened to wreck my acedemic career and my life. Of course I had every reason to be outraged by the experience of blacks in America, but I had no right to confuse their collective sufferings with my own personal experiences."
Maybe that is why I enjoyed reading about Justice Thomas's life ... I realized just how much of an individual he truly is. He talked about reading "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" and how Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism (radical individualism) seared him to his core. He realized how hollow the leftist's "Do-Your-Own-Thing" mantra truly was, labeling it superficial and strictly limited. Thomas himself stated, "Merely because I was black, it seemed, I was supposed to listen to Hugh Maskela instead of Carole King, just as I was expected to be a radical, not a conservative. I no longer cared to play that game ... The black people I knew came from different places and backgrounds - social, economic, even ethnic - yet the color of our skin was somehow supposed to make us identical in spite of our differences. I didn't buy it. Of course we had all experienced racism in one way or another, but that did not mean we had to think alike."
Thomas's consevrativism does not make him an "Uncle Tom". In fact, his conservativism is an informed and thoughtful reaction to the true problems facing the African-American community. As far as I am concerned, the black community ought to revere Justice Thomas as a hero as well as other African-American individualists such as Thomas Sowell, Jay Parker, and even Juan Williams and Bill Cosby.
Some have viewed Justice Thomas's book as a personification of his bitterness. However, I believe it is much more complicated than that. It is clear from the last couple chapters that what Anita Hill did was despicable. But even more contemptible are those who put her up to it, the lefist special interest groups and women's groups. Simply put, the Anita Hill allegation was about abortion rather than sexual harassment. It is clear to me now that Thomas's assessment of Hill is undoubtedly true ... she was/is an ambituous woman marked by immaturity. Thomas states in his book that Ms. Hill touted her Yale Law degree as reason enough to qualify her for a promotion. This is noteworthy because in an October 2, 2007 editorial in the NYT written by Anita Hill she again refutes Thomas's claim that she was a below-average employee by balllyhooing again that she "had gone to Yale Law School" - as if that alone makes someone a qualified employee.
Bravo to Justice Thomas!!! He is an American Treasure. If I am ever in a Wal-mart parking lot late one night and I see a larger custom-built RV in the back corner of the lot, I may just knock on the door and shake his hand and tell him thank you to his face.
Boy, was this puppy ever mis-named!.......2007-10-19
Full disclosure. I have a visceral disliking for Justice Thomas. But I'm honest enough to know that as well as acknowledge that most of my perception is based on the vitriolic confirmation hearings that preceded his elevation to the Supreme Court, and that, essentially, meant my perceptions were based on a caricatures of the man propelled by activists on the far right and left.
This book gives us a real person to digest. That's the good news. The bad news is that it turns out Justice Thomas is a bitter and vengeful person, little better in any significant way from the caricatures I once relied on for judgment.
This essentially is two separate books--a paean to the grandfather who raised him and an exercise in getting even. Neither side works especially well. The first suffers from the fact that the Grandfather--indeed, a formidable, engaging and appealing figure anyone should admire--had, if fact such a minor effect on his grandson. Other than an ethic of working one's behind off, Justice Thomas apparently inculcated none of the grandfather's ethics. At one point Just Thomas writes of his hero, "Despite the hardships he had faced, there was no bitterness or self-pity in his heart." In the second part of this book the Justice commences to display that he in fact harbors more than enough bitterness and self-pity to suffice for a small city.
The second half of the book is set aside for "setting the record straight" which, in this case, means settling old scores through the written word. I won't detail all the old wounds here--read the book--but it's clear that vengeance, not forgiveness, drives this man.
In the end we have the portrait of an actual human being, though not a particularly noble, enlightened or sympathetic one. It is undeniable that Justice Thomas built himself up from nothing to hold a seat of great power and influence. In many ways his story should be one to admire. But the inability to see anything but inherent, vehement, destructive evil in those who disagreed with or opposed him every step of the way color this man far more--infinitely more--than the grandfather he so admires. The Justice has in fact had a hard life--and, given who he is and where he sits, it seems all Americans are now destined to pay the price for every slight and every insult he has ever borne. That is a tragedy twice over.
A briliant story.......2007-10-19
Calrence Thomas is a controversial figure and this book is sure to add to controversy regarding his politics and history. Usually known as the quietest justice on the Supreme Court he has been accused of being Antonin Scalia's sidekick, and the lesser of the two at that. However this book tells a very different story, one of a man who rose up from hardship and discrimination and against all odds defied those who wanted to meld him into a clone of Al Sharpton. Instead he struck out on his own like Booker T. Washington and forged his own way of self reliance. This book paints a picture of his very honest and clear beleifs regarding hard work and America and has a scathing report when it comes to those who have bashed him for years. He dares to take on his accusers, not only those who tried to bring him down over Anita Hill, but also those 'well meaning' leftists who hate his tough love beleifs and his conservative views.
An uplifting and inspiring book.
Seth J. Frantzman
An inspiring story that the liberals don't want you to read........2007-10-19
I had already read Ken Foskett's book on the life of Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas so I was familar with many of the details. My review of that earlier book was captioned, "Divine Intervention" and I stand on that point.
How Clarence Thomas ended up at Holy Cross, meeting his wife Ginny Lamp Thomas and literally running into President Bush's attorney at a charity run all have a touch of something out of the ordinary.
In addition to the lies of Anita Hill and her backers, the thing that angered me so much from the outset was the attempt to attack him as not qualified. Everyone knew at the time he was a sitting Federal Circuit Court judge. In my experience, one doesn't get to that high-level job without being extremely qualified.
But Justice Thomas fills in more of the details: Alpha Sigma Nu at Holy Cross, acceptance to Harvard Law School, graduating from Yale Law School, passing the bar on the first attempt (unlike one candidate for President), then two very rigorous jobs with the Missouri Attorney General and the Department of Revenue. Running - and fixing - the EEOC was no small achievement.
That was the first attempted smear. The last-second one was far worse.
Some reviewers claim this book is about "settling scores." If that includes exposing Joe Biden for the two-faced hypocrite he is, then so be it.
And don't miss his mother's comment after the hearings!
The reader has got to be amazed at the work ethic of Clarence Thomas; taught to him from an early age by Myers Anderson. The story of Myers Anderson alone is worth the price of the book.
As disgraceful as the confirmation hearing was in 1991, it hasn't gotten all that better with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. It is a marathon and personal inquiry that well exceeds whatever the Founders intended.
And so, so partisan! How could any Senator not vote for Sam Alito? How was that even close?
The worst part of the confirmation process is that the people who run it know better. But we - the voters - now can see in real-time the true nature of some senators.
The only problem with the book (which should be corrected in later editions) is that the Justice's wife is a graduate of Creighton University. Ginny Lamp was in both my undergrad and law school classes. Her husband's description of her as, "an old-fashioned idealist whom Washington's cynics had not yet managed to spoil. ... She believed in freedom and free enterprise. She wanted good to prevail over evil. She wanted America to live up to its principles, not parcel out benefits based on self-interest."
That's the Ginny Lamp I knew at Creighton.
So go ahead and bash this review. I'm biased.
I don't think so!.......2007-10-18
This book should more aptly have been titled, "Being Black in Georgia". I wonder how many times the word "black" is
used
in this book? So he grew up poor, that happens to a lot of
people. He went on to become a supreme court justice. Did
he deserve it? No. The book is full of contradiction's in this man's life. A priest,, no, he gets a divorce and says little about it. He only had ten dollars a month to spare and yet he goes out drinking after work! Earlier in the book he says, "The only good thing about not having any money to spare was that it helped to keep my consumption of alcohol under control... Which is it?"He marries a white woman! The list goes on. I think Anita Hill had this guy pegged.
Average customer rating:
|
Clarence Thomas: Fighter With Words
David R. Collins
Manufacturer: Pelican Publishing Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
People of Color
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Political
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Law & Crime
| Reference & Nonfiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ages 4-8
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Civil Procedure
| Procedures & Litigation
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 1565548620 |
Book Description
Clarence Thomas grew up in segregated Pinpoint, Georgia. Though children at school teased him for his appearance, he soon learned that hard work, a good education, and faith would take him into a world where true fighters never raise a fist.
As the only black student in boarding school, he was called names behind his back and cruel words were slung in his face. He fought back with words and by excelling in both academics and athletics. When he graduated in 1967, he enrolled in seminary with the aim of becoming a priest. When Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated the following year, Thomas set out on the path that eventually led to his appointment to the Supreme Court in 1991. Though the road from Georgia to the Supreme Court was not an easy one, Clarence knew that his greatest strength lay not in the power of his fists, but in the strength of his words.
Average customer rating:
|
Anita Hill (Everyone Contributes)
Bob Italia
Manufacturer: ABDO & Daughters
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Library Binding
Law & Crime
| Reference & Nonfiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Politics & Government
| Reference & Nonfiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ages 9-12
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Civil Procedure
| Procedures & Litigation
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
Civil Procedure
| Procedures & Litigation
| Law
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 156239259X |
Books:
- Surviving Hitler: A Boy in the Nazi Death Camps
- Teach Yourself Italian Complete Course Package (Book + 2CDs) (Teach Yourself Language Complete Courses)
- Temples of Sound: Inside the Great Recording Studios
- The Autobiography of Malcolm X : As Told to Alex Haley
- The Buddha Said...: Meeting the Challenge of Life's Difficulties
- The Complete Collected Poems of Maya Angelou
- The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty
- The Fear of the Lord: Discover the Key to Intimately Knowing God (Inner Strength Series)
- The Grove Centenary Editions of Samuel Beckett Boxed Set: Contains Novels I and II of Samuel Beckett, The Dramatic Works of Samuel Beckett, and The Poems, ... of Samuel Beckett (Grove Centenary Editions)
- The Lover
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- The Hidden-Hand Presidency: Eisenhower as Leader
- Real Parents Real Children
- Confessions of Felix Krull, Confidence Man: The Early Years
- Cavalier King Charles Spaniel
- Dragon Ball Z, Vol. 7
- History: Fiction or Science
- Harry Potter Paperback Box Set
- Agency, Democracy, and Nature: The U.S. Environmental Movement from a Critical Theory Perspective
- Broken Toy: A Man's Dream, A Company's Mystery
- Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, Volume 17 : Frank H. Knight and Thornst
The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court
My Grandfather's Son: A Memoir
Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court
Twice as Good: Condoleezza Rice and Her Path to Power
The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America
