Clarence Thomas Wife Virginia Thomas Launches Tea Party Linked NonProfit?

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia Thomas, launched Liberty Central Inc. in January, which is referred to by the LATimes as a "tea-party-linked" organization. I don't see her specifically connecting her nonprofit to the "Tea Party"movement in the LATimes piece. Mrs. Thomas, known as "Ginni," says her organization is a nonprofit lobbying group formed to organize activism around a set of conservative "core principles."

Clarence and Virginia Thomas

Listen to this from Ginni, who certainly has some spunk. In an phone interview with the LATimes, she was asked if she had "discussed the effects" of Liberty Central on her husbands "perceptions of ...impartiality."

"I don't involve myself in litigation. Are you asking that because there's a different standard for conservatives? Did you ask Ed Rendell that question?" she said, referring to the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania, who is married to a federal appellate court judge.

Ginni says "she adores all the new citizen patriots who are rising up across this country." She and Justice Thomas will be excoriated by the Left for this new venture, but  there is little doubt that she has looked at every possible objection and found nothing illegal or inappropriate.

The Liberty Central website shows it's plan to Educate, Motivate and Activate. First on their list is understanding core founding principles and their foundations. The organization will issue score cards for members of congress, and plans to be involved in the November election:

 She said it would accept donations from various sources, -- including corporations -- as allowed under campaign finance rules recently loosened by the Supreme Court."

Virginia Thomas has worked for the Heritage Foundation and former Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX).

Read more at Memorandum

Check out Hot Air for commentary from Ed Morrisey

Linked by
 ReTeaParty
The Lonely Conservative: Oh the Scandal! Justice Thomas's Wife is a Conservative




Virginia Thomas at CPAC (video)

The Tillman Act and Clarence Thomas: The Tillman Act The Rest of Story?

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke to students at Stetson Law School this week and made some comments that have caused some fireworks. He spoke of the striking down of some of the Nation's campaign finance laws, and the conservative Justice just happened to mention "race."

Thomas said the Tillman Act, which banned campaign contributions from Corporations, had a "dark side."

“Go back and read why Tillman introduced that legislation,” Justice Thomas said, referring to Senator Benjamin Tillman. “Tillman was from South Carolina, and as I hear the story he was concerned that the corporations, Republican corporations, were favorable toward blacks and he felt that there was a need to regulate them.”

It is thus a mistake, the justice said, to applaud the regulation of corporate speech as “some sort of beatific action.”

Since Justice Thomas made the comments, I've been looking for information on the Tillman Act and trying to piece it together. The Center for Competitive Politics has republished their own article from December 1, 2006 by Brad Smith.

Smith points outs that Senator Benjamin Ryan "Pitchfork Ben" Tillman "was one of the most despicable men ever to serve in the Senate, and "did more to put in place the Jim Crow system in the South than any other single person. Here are some highlights:

--) Tillman was a leader of the "Red Shirts," "a terrorist paramilitary group,"  who attacked and intimidated Republicans and Blacks

--) While Governor of South Carolina, he "pledged" to "personally lead a mob in lynching a negro."

--) Tillman is quoted saying "the negro" was "a fiend in human form.

--) He worked thoughout the South for the "suppression of Blacks."

According to Smith's analysis, one of the purposes of The Tillman Act was to:

"cut the power of northern industrialists, whom Tillman hated in part because of their more liberal attitudes on race."

Thomas suggested we go back and study the Tillman Act. I think you will find at least a portion of that "story" at the Center for Competitive Politics: Ben Tillman, The Forgotten Founding Father of Campaign Finance Reform.

Linked by Doug Ross and Larwyn's Linx - Thank you!

Clarence Thomas Benjamin Tillman: Campaign Finance Laws Designed to Hurt Blacks

Justice Clarence Thomas spoke to law students at the Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport, FL. yesterday and gave the Court's Constitutional reasoning for the controversial striking down of some portions of the country's campaign finance laws. His explanation is dissimilar from any other you've heard, and guess what? It has to do with "race." He also paints a picture of what it is like to sit with the Supremes in a State of the Union address - a picture you and I do not see or hear. He wanted no part of it. See a video below.

 If you need background on campaign finance laws and why it is in the news today, read this, which in short, has a former FEC chairman, Bradley Smith, defending the Supreme Court's ruling, saying unequivocally, the law after the ruling "continues to forbid election spending by foreign corporations. Smith also said the President's decision to reprimand the Court in the middle of a SOTU address was "pure demagoguery."

The remarks of Justice Thomas are always devisive, because he is a conservative Black man, and Lord knows, we can't have that. Just wait until you hear this, which boils down to Democrats trying to restrict the free speech of those favorable (Republicans) to our Black neighbors back to 1907. Source: New York Times:

He added that the history of Congressional regulation of corporate involvement in politics had a dark side, pointing to the Tillman Act, which banned corporate contributions to federal candidates in 1907.

“Go back and read why Tillman introduced that legislation,” Justice Thomas said, referring to Senator Benjamin Tillman. “Tillman was from South Carolina, and as I hear the story he was concerned that the corporations, Republican corporations, were favorable toward blacks and he felt that there was a need to regulate them.”

It is thus a mistake, the justice said, to applaud the regulation of corporate speech as “some sort of beatific action.” 

Justice Thomas said the First Amendment’s protections applied regardless of how people chose to assemble to participate in the political process.

“If 10 of you got together and decided to speak, just as a group, you’d say you have First Amendment rights to speak and the First Amendment right of association,” he said. “If you all then formed a partnership to speak, you’d say we still have that First Amendment right to speak and of association.”

“But what if you put yourself in a corporate form?” Justice Thomas asked, suggesting that the answer must be the same.

Asked about his attitude toward the two decisions overruled in Citizens United, he said, “If it’s wrong, the ultimate precedent is the Constitution.”

In other words, Justice Clarence Thomas chooses to be a servant of Constitutional Law. God Bless this man, Amen.

It was odd to see the Supremes gathered at the SOTU and note the absence of Clarence Thomas. Here is his explanation:

I don’t go because it has become so partisan and it’s very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there,” he said, adding that “there’s a lot that you don’t hear on TV — the catcalls, the whooping and hollering and under-the-breath comments.”

“One of the consequences,” he added in an apparent reference to last week’s address, “is now the court becomes part of the conversation, if you want to call it that, in the speeches. It’s just an example of why I don’t go.”

Others talking about Justice Clarence Thomas and Campaign Finance Laws:

Hot Air -take a look at who did and did not vote to affirm Thomas to SCOTUS

Weekly Standard Blog - suggests Supremes should refuse to attend SOTU in the future:

The presence of the justices is purely a courtesy to the president; there is no statutory requirement or historic precedent which obliges them to sit in the audience. However, as long as their presence is a factor in the executive/legislative "conversation," as Thomas calls it, the justices, en masse, would be to wise to uphold the constitutional principle of the separation of powers, and stay away.

Conservatism with Heart

I also didn't realize that he has stopped attending the State of the Union Addresses all together. He said the latest incident with Obama attacking their decision and Alito's response was a great example of why.

TundarTabloids

Here is Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, setting the record straight, and by doing so, inadvertently reveals the depth of support by traditional Republicanism for the African American community.

Linked by:
The Anchoress - 90 Minutes with Clarence Thomas
Doug Ross and Larwyn's Linx
Linked by teresamerica