Table of Contents

Brian the Writer

Anita Hill for Supreme Court

Brian McCorkle

President Bush lost a great opportunity for associate justice nominee when Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement.

Bush has slipped gears by shifting John Roberts jr. as a nominee for associate justice to chief justice. Now he can provide a nominee for associate justice that will make many happy.

When Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, President George W. Bush missed a great opportunity for his choice for a replacement. There were many who felt he should choose a woman. There were many who felt he choose a minority. He did neither. He instead chose John Glover Roberts Jr., A man with a rather long history of working for Republican administrations, but with barely more than two years bench experience.

In the flux of every day life, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died. President Bush changed direction. Roberts is now nominated to the position of Chief Justice leaving the replacement for Justice O’Connor open. The way is now open for President Bush to make a lot of people happy with a judicious choice.

The choice would be Anita Hill. She is the accuser of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas. Hill, known to many because of her testimony in October, 1991 in regard to the nomination of Clarence Thomas by President H.W. Bush. She put forward claims that Thomas had sexually harassed her when she worked for him at the EEOC. She has a following even after all these years. Thomas was approved by the Senate with a vote of 52 to 48. She is a woman. And she either is or could pass as black. Her vote would no doubt counter that of Thomas on most issues which would make more people very happy.

And, this would lighten the court’s proceedings by providing a bit of comic relief.

“Chief Justice, Clarence is peeking up my robe again.”

“Am not.”

“Am too.”

Chief Justice rolls his eyes. “Stop it you two, Am I going to have to stop this court session?”

Justice Thomas retrieves his pencil, “She should wear slacks under that robe instead of a short skirt. You know how us men are.”

David Letterman would have a “Top Ten” on why Hill and Thomas don’t get along. Jay Leno would find physical attributes of each to find fault with. Other late night jokesters will add their own spin.

Misandrist members of NOW (I guess that is all members of NOW) would come forward to claim this as proof that males are inherently evil, but responsible for their evilness while women are simply oppressed, but not responsible in any way for their actions.

Self-appointed strong women will pontificate that this shows how much they are needed to save all of the other women in the world. Young self-serving super-feminists could use any of the goings on as evidence that women prior to their generation were wimps.

Finally, the President can use this as an example of how democracy works for all those balking at embracing becoming an american client. He could point out that the Supreme Court used to an activist court, even influencing the outcome of elections. And then say, “Now it is an active court. Those two uppity blacks give me stitches with their antics.”

From Convoluted Brian's weblog