Democrats’ desperate ‘Django’ smear of Clarence Thomas
The efforts to smear Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas with a barrage of bogus ethics complaints hasn’t really worked out for Democrats.
So Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has gotten back to basics, denigrating Thomas the old-fashioned way.
In an interview with Michigan Chronicle, the former deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee likened Thomas to Samuel L. Jackson’s character in “Django Unchained.”
For those who haven’t seen Quentin Tarantino’s movie, Stephen Warren is the sadistic house slave who not only assists his captors in murdering and torturing fellow captives but mourns the passing of his master.
Of course, racist attacks on Thomas have been the norm since the first scurrilous allegations of sexual misconduct were leveled at him under the watch of Joe Biden’s Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991.
There’s a reason the man is constantly in the left’s crosshairs.
And as the court dismantles many of the left’s most cherished unconstitutional policies, Democrats have heightened the ferocity of their attacks.
Not long ago, Jackson himself called the justice “Uncle Clarence,” as did MSNBC’s Joy Reid.
Both spread the conspiracy theory that Thomas was working to overturn the legality of interracial marriage (odd, not least because no one in America opposes it, including Thomas, who is married to a white woman himself).
These attacks are nothing new.
Democrats like Rep. Bennie Thompson have been calling Thomas an “Uncle Tom” for years.
Thomas “doesn’t like black people,” the congressman once said; “he doesn’t like being black.”
Now that Thomas is part of a majority that has upheld both the 14th Amendment and Civil Rights Act in finding affirmative action illegal, the frustration is growing.
Ellison maintains Thomas is “abdicating his responsibility” and thus needs to be impeached.
“He has abdicated it a long time ago,” the former congressman went on. “When he got in office, he was this way, he’s this way now, maybe he’s worse now.”
Does Ellison even understand what a Supreme Court justice’s job entails? It doesn’t seem so.
Because nowhere in his slander does the he even bother mentioning the Constitution or the rule of law. Ellison wants congress to impeach the man for following the law.
To be fair, for most progressives, the judicial system functions as little more than a means of implementing policy and expanding power.
The lesson Ellison takes from Thomas’ stubbornly consistent efforts to uphold the Constitution sounds like something a white supremacist might say.
“We all thought, well, he’s a black man raised in the deep south. He knows what racism, segregation is,” Ellison explained. “He knows what affirmative action is. He’s gonna come around one day. Understand that it’s not a matter of pigment. It’s not what’s on your skin, it’s what’s in your mind.”
Alas, Thomas’ sin is that he never came around to dismissing the ideals of the American founding or treating them as inherently racist.
It is, however, blatantly evident that Ellison believes the “pigment” rather than “mind” defines a person.
Otherwise, his statement makes absolutely zero sense.
And those who believe our immutable characteristics dictate our thinking and actions are, by the purest definition of the idea, racists.
Perhaps it’s unsurprising that a former local spokesman for the bigoted Nation of Islam — then known as “Keith X Ellison” — would smear a man as the moral equivalent of a murderous house slave over a disagreement on policy.
It is, though, regrettable that such a person holds any power over his fellow citizens.
Ellison, who grew up in the comforts of the middle-class suburbs, might have had the luxury of cosplaying revolutionary.
Thomas did grow up in Georgia during the Jim Crow era.
It is almost surely the case that he understands both racism and his job better than Ellison.
Indeed, the chasm between Thomas and Ellison as men offers even more evidence that our skin color doesn’t determine our abilities or our decency.
