Clarence Thomas drank heavily, watched porn

[Chris]

(CNN) -- Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker who had a pornography habit or fetish in the 1980s, then changed radically when he stopped drinking alcohol, his former girlfriend told CNN on Monday.

Lillian McEwen, who dated Thomas for several years before he was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1991, provided CNN's "Larry King Live" program with a harsh depiction of Thomas. She said when they first met, he might have been a "raving alcoholic" who used pornography to help fulfill sexual fantasies, but then gave up drinking and transformed into an angry, obsessive man who bullied his son.

Former girlfriend says Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker, porn user - CNN.com

 

[California Girl]

Do you also read the National Enquirer?

 

[Flaylo]

Do you also read the National Enquirer?

Do you make it you fucked up obsession to deny everything and Republicans and dumbass conservatives? If you're against misogynists and men who defame women why are you defending Clarence Thomas? Fucking idiot.

 

[Madeline]

I ♥ this thread. Let's have another "high tech lynching" and impeach his ass.

 

[Flaylo]

I ♥ this thread. Let's have another "high tech lynching" and impeach his ass.

The dipshit loves porn.


Clarence Thomas - Conservapedia

Justices Thomas and Scalia differ on the issue of free speech and pornography. Thomas provided the crucial fifth vote in United States v. Playboy Entm't Group, 529 U.S. 803 (2000), which rejected indecency regulation of cable television in part because "[t]he question is whether an actual problem has been proved in this case. We agree that the Government has failed to establish a pervasive, nationwide problem justifying its nationwide daytime speech ban."[7] Scalia dissented, expressly his view that the government has broader powers under the First Amendment to regulate indecency on cable television.

Thomas again provided the key fifth vote in Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656 (2004), which invalidated as unconstitutional a federal law criminalizing the posting on a commercial website of pornography harmful to minors unless there were protections against access by minors. The 5-4 Court placed the burden on parents to keep their children away from pornographic sites, rather than allowing Congress to place the burden on pornographers to limit access to their sites. Scalia, Justice William Rehnquist, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justice Stephen Breyer dissented.

 

[California Girl]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

 

[Ravi]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

 

[Flaylo]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Its gossip only when its about conservatives dipshits and Tea Bastards but if its the left its believable, just fuck off and knock off the fake objective shit. he does apparently support pornography based on his SCOTUS votes on the issue, thats not gossip.

 

[California Girl]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

Bless your heart, you don't know the difference between gossip and fact. I know understand you better. That's helpful.

 

[Flaylo]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

CG is just in denial against anything thats anti to Tea Bastards and conservative. She calls me a misogynist and this defends Clarence "pubic hairs in the Coke can" Thomas.

 

[California Girl]

Do you also read the National Enquirer?

Do you make it you fucked up obsession to deny everything and Republicans and dumbass conservatives? If you're against misogynists and men who defame women why are you defending Clarence Thomas? Fucking idiot.

Jeeez, you are one dumb fuck, Fail. I didn't defend anyone. I just don't form opinions based on gossip. I prefer facts. This is a possible explanation of why you are stupid and I am not. You cannot differentiate between the two.

 

[Madeline]

I ♥ this thread. Let's have another "high tech lynching" and impeach his ass.

The dipshit loves porn.

Clarence Thomas - Conservapedia

Justices Thomas and Scalia differ on the issue of free speech and pornography. Thomas provided the crucial fifth vote in United States v. Playboy Entm't Group, 529 U.S. 803 (2000), which rejected indecency regulation of cable television in part because "[t]he question is whether an actual problem has been proved in this case. We agree that the Government has failed to establish a pervasive, nationwide problem justifying its nationwide daytime speech ban."[7] Scalia dissented, expressly his view that the government has broader powers under the First Amendment to regulate indecency on cable television.

Thomas again provided the key fifth vote in Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656 (2004), which invalidated as unconstitutional a federal law criminalizing the posting on a commercial website of pornography harmful to minors unless there were protections against access by minors. The 5-4 Court placed the burden on parents to keep their children away from pornographic sites, rather than allowing Congress to place the burden on pornographers to limit access to their sites. Scalia, Justice William Rehnquist, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justice Stephen Breyer dissented.

O for fuck's sake, Flayglo. I despise Thomas and not even I would suggest he votes with his dick.

Grow up.

 

[Annie]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

Bless your heart, you don't know the difference between gossip and fact. I know understand you better. That's helpful.

This would fit in nicely with the Democrats in Meltdown thread. Recycling their old canards. When the violent rhetoric fails, the race card fails, then the Blame Bush card fails, time to take out the visions of Rosa Parks and kicking the Republicans to the back of the ... then images of race wars with Hispanics to 'punish your enemies,' now bring back Clarence Thomas and maybe if we kick him around some more...

 

[L.K.Eder]

1. drinking heavily and watching porn
2. ??????????
3. SCOTUS justice

 

[California Girl]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

CG is just in denial against anything thats anti to Tea Bastards and conservative. She calls me a misogynist and this defends Clarence "pubic hairs in the Coke can" Thomas.

You are a misogynist, I call you one because you are. And you have no concept of the difference between dismissing a 'source' and 'defending' the subject. You dumb.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Like you and your George Soros gossip.

Bless your heart, you don't know the difference between gossip and fact. I know understand you better. That's helpful.

This would fit in nicely with the Democrats in Meltdown thread. Recycling their old canards. When the violent rhetoric fails, the race card fails, then the Blame Bush card fails, time to take out the visions of Rosa Parks and kicking the Republicans to the back of the ... then images of race wars with Hispanics to 'punish your enemies,' now bring back Clarence Thomas and maybe if we kick him around some more...

the irony of your own post is surely lost on you.

 

[Madeline]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Uh, character, remember that?

Seems to me you are mighty quick to allude to someone's private life when news breaks of a leftist being an ass.

 

[Madeline]

Gossip.... at least to me..... isn't worth the effort to read, yet alone discuss. If stupid people want to indulge in gossip, that's fine.

Its gossip only when its about conservatives dipshits and Tea Bastards but if its the left its believable, just fuck off and knock off the fake objective shit. he does apparently support pornography based on his SCOTUS votes on the issue, thats not gossip.

Thomas does not "support porn" as a Justice, Flayglo. He supports freedom of speech.

And his decisions were correct.

 

[Flaylo]

I ♥ this thread. Let's have another "high tech lynching" and impeach his ass.

The dipshit loves porn.

Clarence Thomas - Conservapedia

Justices Thomas and Scalia differ on the issue of free speech and pornography. Thomas provided the crucial fifth vote in United States v. Playboy Entm't Group, 529 U.S. 803 (2000), which rejected indecency regulation of cable television in part because "[t]he question is whether an actual problem has been proved in this case. We agree that the Government has failed to establish a pervasive, nationwide problem justifying its nationwide daytime speech ban."[7] Scalia dissented, expressly his view that the government has broader powers under the First Amendment to regulate indecency on cable television.

Thomas again provided the key fifth vote in Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656 (2004), which invalidated as unconstitutional a federal law criminalizing the posting on a commercial website of pornography harmful to minors unless there were protections against access by minors. The 5-4 Court placed the burden on parents to keep their children away from pornographic sites, rather than allowing Congress to place the burden on pornographers to limit access to their sites. Scalia, Justice William Rehnquist, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justice Stephen Breyer dissented.

O for fuck's sake, Flayglo. I despise Thomas and not even I would suggest he votes with his dick.

Grow up.

So why would anyone vote against a federal desgned to hold webmasters accountable for having porn on their sites that might be harmful to children? I'm just staying on topic, I have not begun to unload on Thomas' dumbass.

 

[Annie]

Bless your heart, you don't know the difference between gossip and fact. I know understand you better. That's helpful.

This would fit in nicely with the Democrats in Meltdown thread. Recycling their old canards. When the violent rhetoric fails, the race card fails, then the Blame Bush card fails, time to take out the visions of Rosa Parks and kicking the Republicans to the back of the ... then images of race wars with Hispanics to 'punish your enemies,' now bring back Clarence Thomas and maybe if we kick him around some more...

the irony of your own post is surely lost on you.

It surely is.