DemocRATs' Kenyan-American presidential nominee, the Great Uniter, the World Citizen, the Messiah, called Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas not smart enough for the job.
This is from the Saddleback Church forum:
"I WOULD NOT HAVE NOMINATED CLARENCE THOMAS. I DON'T THINK THAT HE. I DON'T THINK THAT HE WAS A STRONG ENOUGH JURIST OR LEGAL THINKER AT THE TIME FOR THAT ELEVATION. SETTING ASIDE THE FACT THAT I PROFOUNDLY DISAGREE WITH HIS INTERPRETATION OF A LOT OF CONSTITUTION. I WOULD NOT NOMINATE JUSTICE SCALIA ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT ABOUT HIS INTELLECTUAL BRILLIANCE BECAUSE HE AND I JUST DISAGREE, YOU KNOW. HE TAUGHT AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO AS DID I IN THE LAW SCHOOL.
Q. HOW ABOUT JOHN ROBERTS?
A. JOHN ROBERTS I HAVE TO SAY WAS A TOUGHER QUESTION ONLY BECAUSE I FIND HIM TO BE A VERY COMPELLING PERSON, YOU KNOW, IN SERVICES INDIVIDUALLY. HE'S CLEARLY SMART, VERY THOUGHTFUL. I WILL TELL YOU THAT HOW I'VE SEEN HIM OPERATE SINCE HE WENT TO THE BENCH CONFIRMS THE SUSPICIONS THAT I HAD AND THE REASON THAT I VOTED AGAINST HIM AND I'LL GIVE YOU ONE VERY 1 SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND THIS IS NOT A STUMP SPEECH."
So, out of three conservative justices he would not nominate, Clarence Thomas is the only one he has no respect for. He does not agree with any of these justices but he thinks Justice Scalia is brilliant, Justice Roberts is smart and Justice Thomas is flat out unqualified and dumb.
Justice Clarence Thomas is black. If a white politician made the exact same comment, he would be accused of being racist. DemocRATs' Kenyan-American Presidential Nominee Barack Hussein Obama, who is no way qualified to clean Justice Clarence Thomas' office, can get away with making these statements.
In his fifteen years as an associate justice of the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas has written nearly 350 opinions. Thousands of Thomas's eloquent and thoughtful words are thus available for Americans to examine. Yet much of the public still bases its opinion of Thomas on the words of the American media, going as far back as the bruising confirmation battle of 1991. Widespread, uncritical acceptance of glib assumptions has greatly distorted the record and even the character of this formidable justice. This book offers readers the opportunity to consider the real Clarence Thomas-the formidable intellectual and defender of the Constitution, amply represented by his writings. It analyzes his most important majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions from 1991 through 2006. The author argues that Thomas's opinions reveal a consistent adherence to the principles of federalism, separation of powers, limited judicial review, and regard for individual rights as contemplated by the framers of the Constitution. An appendix contains a list of every opinion Thomas has written and notes whether it was a majority, concurring, or dissenting opinion.
Where are Obama, the brilliant, intelligent liberal messiah's
Columbia Thesis paper (He says he can't find it)
Harvard College records (have been sealed)
Illinois State Senate records (He claims he did NOT keep records??? )
Law practice client list (not available)
Any and all Harvard Law Review articles that were published (Says he never wrote anything as the PRESIDENT of Harvard Law Review, but what about BEFORE)
His University of Chicago scholarly articles (Claims he can't locate any)