Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for January 30, 2009

Don’t be an idiot, Garry. Thomas didn’t lose the respect of conservatives.

Anyone, male or female and regardless their political persuasion, who has a modicum of human respect, should question C. Thomas’s track record for respecting others.

Yay Bilson! You got it right! I don’t care who Limbaugh respects, I don’t read or listen to him, but the comments and stories about him show him as a doofus and quite crazy!

JDG, can’t you think for yourself?

Thomas never had the respect of liberals anyway. They enlisted help from fellow members of the Victims’ Coalition to sink his nomination.

About Thomas: If you define “conservative” as “anti-liberal” (whatever that may mean) then Thomas probably came through with flying colors [heh]. However, it was true that those political conservatives who actually stood for something were less than impressed with Thomas. However, Clarence (as Bush 41 incessantly called him, not as Judge Thomas, when first introducing him at the White House, with Thomas standing at Bush’s side) was black and not Thurgood Marshall, and that’s all that seemed to matter.

Why is it that a successful black conservative is so frightening to liberals? Supreme Court Justice Thomas has engendered widespread respect from conservative thinkers. His opinions are well written, deeply thought out and usually part of the majority. Garry, you lost the Thomas battle and the war many years ago. I suggest you read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights very carefully and then read the Thomas opinions. If you don’t like our Constitution change it democratically.

Trudeau must be talking about real conservatives, not the wingnuts who have hijacked the party in recent years.

GNWachs says “If you don’t like our Constitution change it democratically.”

There was very little democratic about the Founding Fathers. They knew their history and recognized that rule by the majority was as dangerous as rule by a minority, so they built a very non-democratic system: the Electoral College, Senators elected (originally) by state legislatures, a non-elected judiciary with a Supreme Court appointed for life, and a very difficult process for amending the Constitution. They were sincere in thinking that a free government required the consent of the governed, so they made the House the most democratic part and gave them the sole right to initiate spending bills, but in total, the Constitution is purposefully tilted toward slow, deliberate rule by (hopefully) thoughtful leaders and not by the easily inflamed, easily duped majority.

Compare this to California with their ballot referenda which on any given election can allow the majority of voters to violate almost any rights by direct amendment of their constitution. No, democratic amendments to a constitution are NOT a good idea.

Can anyone name a specific conservative who doesn’t respect Clarence Thomas?

The statement in the toon is that he lost the respect at the time of the hearings, you would have to check with the c’s at the time…. but honestly who really cares? The point is, Clyde is a jerk

By definition, our government is a “Republic”, not a “Democracy”. <:-)

I would trust Trudeau’s memory for what the reactions were to Thomas’ playing the race card over and above anyone commenting here who thinks a black conservative scares liberals. But then, the wingnut right has a perfect track record of projection as a substitute for thought.

progan1-methinks you know not who you mess with. I am neither a little man nor are you capable of crushing my windpipe. USAF made sure of my abilities re self-defense. However, if that was all said in jest, then I say that the Empire has found its court jester!

“Some people tried to discredit Thomas a few years back said he could barley even wright.”

Love the irony, babe.

number one redskins fan says:

By definition, our government is a “Republic”, not a “Democracy”. <:-) What, exactly does that mean in your interpretation Red?