Flashback: George H.W. Bush On Clarence Thomas' 'Great Empathy'
Conservatives have curiously decided that one of the best ways to battle Obama's first Supreme Court nominee is by declaring a war on empathy. When he described his criteria for selecting a replacement for Justice David Souter, Obama said, "I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook, it is also about how are laws effect the daily realities of peoples lives.... I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with peoples' hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes."
This is, apparently, a bridge too far for conservatives, and, at least in the minds of some on the right, political gold. But while they continue to mock the idea--and while the media by and large passes their objections along uncritically--they seem to have forgotten that one conservative Justice was also sold to the public as a man of great empathy.
"I have followed this man's career for some time," said President George H.W. Bush of Clarence Thomas in July 1991. "He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great empathy and a wonderful sense of humor."
The Thomas confirmations ultimately became the stuff of legend--but not because Democrats decided to go all in on attacking Thomas' "empathy."
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Great catch!
May 27, 2009 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
None of those turned out to be true, though. Thomas seems to have become the grumpy old man of the court, when he speaks at all.
Empathy? Only for the already-powerful.
Humor? Haven't heard much of that.
Warm? You'd have to ask his friends. It's not evident otherwise.
May 27, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Too true. Despite holding one of the most powerful and prestigious positions in the world he seems to have embraced the demeanor of the stereotypical "angry black man" while voting like a stereotypical "angry white man".
Were someone with his demeanor nominated from the left Pat Buchanan's head would explode. Poor Pat is already crying about how Sonya will discriminate against the down trodden class of wealthy white men who apparently are under represented by the current 5 white men on the court, plus Clarence.
May 27, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Humor? He made those delightful Long Dong Silver jokes and about pubic hairs on his Coke can.
May 27, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans are hypocrites? Who knew?
May 27, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poppi Bush was using the Republican definition of empathy to describe Thomas. What he meant was "he understands what we want him to do, and he will do it."
May 27, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
2009 GOP: "Read my lips: no new minorities."
May 27, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pfft...big deal. That doesn't prove anything since, ya see, H. W. wasn't a true conservative anyways.
May 27, 2009 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah; after all, he appointed that flaming liberal David Souter.
May 27, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right wing radio and Fox have decided they are going to paint Sotomayor as a racist hammering at the point when she stated "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
I'm surprised they are going to go this route but hey, Republicans did just get trounced in the last two cycles and it seems the same bozo's are still running things.
Rush began the charge with the reverse racism charges, Fox has been hammering this, Grandy and Andy right wing radio spoke of it and Joe Scarborough this morning on talk radio repeated right off the bat 4 or 5 times in the first couple minutes how she thinks a Latina judges better than a white man.
But, I guess they have decided to paint her as a racist because of this comment. Oh well. Good luck losers.
May 27, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Using the word empathy to describe Thomas is one of the greatest oxymorons of all time.
Let's hope the stupid Republicans go all out to try and block Sotomayor's (emphasis on last syllable) confirmation. They won't ultimately succeed. I cannot imagine Collins, Snowe and Martinez voting against her, especially in a cloture vote, and what about Kay Baily Hutchinson who is planning to run for Gov of Texas? (Although she may be more concerned with the primary than the general election.)
In any event, all they can do is delay and look like asses in the process, and be the nail in the coffin for the Republican party ever winning back the Hispanic vote. But then a lot of them cannot help themselves. It's in their DNA.
May 27, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe just as in Rush "Oxy-contin-moron" Limbaugh?
May 27, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about the fact that Scalia and Kennedy have "empathized" with many litigants and even non-litigants in their rulings: Conservative Judicial Empathy? You Betcha!
May 27, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a good point, but using the bushies as an example for anything feels really wrong. The lady's record stands on it's own. We need not defend her against the latest all-in nay by the minority. Again they intentionally miss the point & attempt to remake the context, then inject a meaning that suits their objective.
They've been rejected, they are a dying breed & this latest foul move will only help to expedite their fall. Defiant, pigheaded & stay the course are the mantras of their choice.
They can follow the will of the people or remain in the dungeon of their own creation.
May 27, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
This typically cynical RW campaign, to go after Obama's "empathy", is based on something I haven't really heard mentioned by the major progressive voices:
The right is premeditatively attempting to confuse the word "empathy" with the word "sympathy"... knowing fully well that their, shall we say, less bright sycophants do not know the difference in the two definitions.
"Sympathy" is a buzz word to the right, evoking sissy, weak sister understanding, and "coddling", of those who might harm us, like criminals... and Hispanics.
I once personally heard Rush Limbaugh inform his audience that we needn't be overly sensitive about attributing wrongdoing to Blacks and Hispanics, and things like racial profiling when it comes to brown-skinned people, "because THAT'S who's doing all the crime!!"
Really. He said that. I heard it, and would swear it under oath (I'd give my left nut to hear that sound byte today, in a saturation-campaign radio commercial. Bye-bye Republican Hispanic demographics!)
One of the big fairy tales of the right wing has always been that "liberals are permissive". "Sympathy" (as in, for those crime-doing minority types) is something a two-fisted, All-American ("white") conservative would not suffer from, if he were manly enough to be a conservative.
The fact that "empathy" does not mean "sympathy" requires only a simple remarketing of the word "empathy", to mean what they need it to mean. They appear to have succeeded, given the fact that our trusty MSM has done nothing to disabuse Dumbfuckistan at large from believing it means what the right is deliberately spinning it to mean.
May 27, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great catch! Wonderful rebuttal!
May 27, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every time I see the face of Thomas ,empathy doesn't come to mind.He has a face that could stop a clock.
May 27, 2009 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
An 8 day clock, for those of us old enough to remember such things.
May 27, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not the first time.
Reagan nominee Anthony Kennedy was accused of both compassion and empathy at his confirmation hearing in 1987. See pp. 3 - 4 of http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate/judiciary/sh100-1037/458-461.pdf
May 27, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, c'mon. Everyone knew Poppy was kidding.
And if we didn't then, we sure as hell do now.
.
May 27, 2009 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Republicans want to turn "empathy" into a dirty word, will they have any positive words left to use? I am wondering whether being "human" is still a desirable trait for judges, according to conservatives?
http://www.hopeandchange.net/2009/05/since-when-is-empathy-bad-thing.html
May 27, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
From Bush's point of view, Thomas WAS empathetic.
Empathy means being able to understand or identify with those whose experience you have not shared.
Bush probably believed, given what he knew about his nominee, that Clarence Thomas, although he was born poor and black, would in fact identify more with Bush's own class of elite white men of inherited wealth and power.
And of course he was correct.
We can only hope that Sotomayor does not take empathy that far, LOL.
May 27, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm having difficulty with the transcription of president Obama's statement about his criteria in this article. Specifically, this quote:
"... it is also about how ARE laws effect the daily realities of peoples lives.... " (emphasis mine)
Shouldn't the word "are" be replaced with the word "our" in the sentence above?
Otherwise, I completely agree with the idea that the GOP's fatal flaw is an inability to recognize irony. (too many lies told to, and believed by, oneself)
May 27, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just goes to show that being a poor judge of character seems to run in the Bush genes. Poppy thought Clarence Thomas was empathetic and that David Souter would be a reliable conservative vote on the Supreme Court. Junior thought Vladimir Putin was a swell fella and that Brownie and Gonzo were the epitome of competence...
May 27, 2009 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink