Smells like something Putin would have his propaganda arm push out no?
An Open Letter Denouncing the Attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas
We, the undersigned, condemn the barrage of racist, vicious, and ugly personal attacks that we are witnessing on Clarence Thomas – a sitting Supreme Court justice. Whether it is calling him a racist slur, an “Uncle Tom” or questioning his “blackness” over his jurisprudence, the disparagement of this man, of his faith and of his character, is abominable.
Regardless of where one stands on Justice Thomas’ personal or legal opinions, he is among the pantheon of black trailblazers throughout American history and is a model of integrity, scholarship, steadfastness, resilience, and commitment to the Constitution of the United States of America. For three decades Justice Thomas has served as a model for our children. He has long been honored and celebrated by black people in this country and his attackers do not speak for the majority of blacks.
But one of the few who were blazing the trail backwards…
a couple of notes there from the editor, i see:
Ginni wrote this, right?
Citation needed (GOP/GQP shills will not be accepted).
Yes, protest politely, quietly. You know, just at the level of say, a murmur. Like your average Democratic politician.
Maybe send sternly worded letters?
If they really did that, the only thing worse than the outrage and violence that would follow would be if no outrage and violence followed.
That should keep FN freaked out for a while!
This, too! 
With Justice Thomas signaling that the court should reconsider opinions protecting same-sex and interracial marriage, codifying those protections in Federal law is super important. Any lawmaker who votes against this should be shamed for it for the rest of their lives, and beyond:
Good Riddance.
What a blow for law students hoping to hear which 16th century pamphleteers to select when reverse engineering an opinion to meet the political strategy of the contemporary Republican Party! So many screeds from Goody Hamperswithinfield will now go tragically unread when they might very well have described the Framers’ thoughts on whether comely lasses using contraception must be stoned in the town square before or after the next full moon.
…His jurisprudence is a hodgepodge of inconsistencies unified by a results-oriented approach. That’s the exact opposite of deliberation. GW’s better off going with its own Justice Roboto.
Robe Trick
