Ogletree trashes Clarence Thomas

[writersblock26]

Thank you for posting this, ogletreevideos.

[qw2589]

Another moron black who hates seeing his people being successful, I can guarantee he got to where he is because of his skin color and nothing else, just like his student Obama

[hapz3000]

@qw2589 you call that clarence thomas legacy success. even clarence himself didn't believe bush when he nominated him and he himself felt that he was needed to because of his radical views

[midterngrades]

He should be thanking Clarence Thomas, not critizing him! Thomas has done more for the black cause, than Ogletree has. Check the record, it's public information. I did not support Anita Hill!

[BrotherAtticus]

2:18 Self-respecting black man can't take anymore of this, gets up and leaves. Good for him.

Whether Anita Hill was lying was never *really* a question, save for a few white liberal politicians desperately trying to force a successful conservative black man back into the noose. All but three of Hill's hundreds of former colleagues and co-workers claimed she was a total kook.

[blacksncommercials]

Clarence thomas is a happy coon with a fat pink sow as a wife!

[doolittle633]

We need to get rid of uncle thomas,...notice I did use a capital T....

[PacSmash]

look at this doosh knuckle SO JEALOUS of clarence thomas it's not even funny. . .

[whiteliberal1]

@PacSmash "Jealous?" Bwaahahahahahaha

As a mentor to the President and FLOTUS, this man would be a 'shoe-in' for the SCOTUS if he wanted to go that route. Now his former colleague, Leah Ward Sears is the total opposite of him. She's brilliant! She worked her way up to Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme court.

Look for her to fill Justice Ginsburg seat before the President leaves office.

Again, "Jealous?" Muwahahahahahahahaha

[naumanjaymalik]

All you Uncle Thomas supporters here, read his concurrence in us v Lopez and then tell me if you honestly think he is fit to be on scotus in 2011.

[Omnicronimous]

What a hypocrite! Sexual Harassment transcends race, gender, etc... it's a universal issue... When it comes to attacking a Conservative African American Supreme Court Justice sexual harassment is a universal issue... However, somehow Clarence Thomas being what he is bothers this guy to no end... What a scum.

[jpschubbs]

This man is an idiot.

[ricland]

The amazing thing is this civil rights hack makes astonishing statements like he faults everyone for not "investigating Thomas' record."

What is he talking about? The FBI investigated Thomas' record FOUR times during his career and each time came back with clean bill of health.

Then he talks about how AA males didn't SUPPORT Hill, as if we were supposed to drop everything we were doing and support her over thomas.

Does evidence mean anything to this guy?

Hill didn't present a whit of it.

[ricland]

What a blowhard.

They say law professors are lawyers who can't make it on the outside this little clip is proof enough of that.

Not a whit about the lack evidence supporting Hill's claims. Instead, he just goes on and on as if her unsupported claims are established fact.

As a black man I find this character reprehensible.

[drbayoms]

@ricland

And as a white man I find your existence reprehensible. Thomas figured out his place along time ago. Too bad some of you all still have not. We never would have allowed that monkey to be on the Supreme Court if he did not know his place. Trust me!

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms Wow, an HONEST racist, not many of them left these days!!

[hapz3000]

@nutblast23 i had you wrong man! i hear ya

[hapz3000]

@drbayoms as a black man i thank you for not calling me a racist because i think thomas is a pussy while pretending you are not. im getting tired of whites doing that....you keep your place as a retarded bigot and i will keep my place by saying that clarence thomas is a fucking bitch and you can have him he deserves to be with people like you..pasty nasty filth

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

1.)You are barking up the wrong tree. I think Clarence Thomas is a disgusting scum bag. Yes, I am white. But I am neither a Conservative White or a Liberal White. Call me a political atheist, so to speak. I assume you read my back and forth with that idiot? Trust me, Thomas is a big part of what is wrong with your community. Blacks do not need an apologist, but they also don't need a self-loathing alarmist like Thomas.

[hapz3000]

@drbayoms i had you wrong man i hear ya

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

3.)That is why you heard me using that type of syntax (albeit racist) when I was responding. Conservatives and Liberals both have wonderful aspects of their philosophies, and they also have some disgusting traits in regards to those same philosophies. Ann Coulter clearly showed how she feels about Conservative blacks. "Our Blacks are better than their Blacks" she exclaimed. Clearly ignorant and bigoted. But Conservative Blacks support her.

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

4.)That was intrinsically "plantation speak". Where the "house nigger" (excuse my language) was ALWAYS more desirable than the "field nigger". The "House Nigger" was thought to be more "intelligent" and "a few steps above" the "Field Nigger". Some of those so call House Niggers (in the face of CLEAR bigotry) still defended the plantation owner. Sometimes they were more deadly than the plantation owner themselves.

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

5.)The obvious problem with that (Ann Coulter, Nuevo-Conservative, Clarence Thomas) thinking is that you still only see those people as NIGGERS. So essentially this thinking suggest that all NIGGERS are bad. But there are a few that we as whites can "clean up, dust off and teach the right way" to live. We can show them how following policies that continue to enrich a small few (which are not usually black) benefits them. That is the thinking I was "poking a stick at".

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

6.)The idiot I was arguing with (whose comments I no longer see) was a defender of Thomas. I believe he was suggesting that Thomas was more "free" as a result of his Conservative views. I simply wanted to have a little fun with an idiot who does not realize that the Cain's & Thomas' of the world are not as 'free" as he thinks. A little Youtube anthropology. Call it wicked, lame, ineffective, poor use of time, etc. It was my little Youtube experiment with the issue of Clarence Thomas.

[drbayoms]

@hapz3000

7.)Yes, I think Clarence is a no good rat. But I am far from a bigot. Although I do know how to play one on Youtube

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms I find racist ignoramuses like you to be menaces to humanity. People like you will never be happy with any society because you'll always be looking for "someone to hate" or feel superior to; it is your own insecurities that drive your bigoted ambitions. If you were to achieve a world of pan-European "whiteness" as you aspire to achieve, you would then go after whites with brown hair, non-Christians, brown-eyed people, short people, etc. etc. You're a cancer to global love and peace.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

I am glad you got that off your chest. Breathe in through your nose, now blow the air out through your mouth. Do this 5 times, slowly.

...............good. Now, go back to the page and read the 7 paragraphs I typed to 'hapz3000'. To help you out. They are labeled 1-7. And ironically my comments are sitting just 3 responses below your response to me. Your anger controls you. Do not let it ultimately consume you.

Read 1-7 and then get back to me.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms The "house negro" you're referring to excepted his role as a lower-level of human being, set to serve the "mighty white man" and all his desires. The "house negro" was also sometimes the undercover homosexual lover of the slave master. Don't hear much about that, do you? Also, the "house negro" knew that he was in an advantageous position in comparison to the others and this was his opportunity to exercise a sense of superiority over the others; he was complicit in the inhumanity.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

Nice try. You simply exposed yourself as a reactionary fool who did not read my explanation below because you were so incensed by my previous postings. Now you are attempting to save face by nitpicking the "monkey" comment. Had you relaxed after reading my initial words and screened through my postings to get a FULL understanding, you would have understood. You simply made yourself look stupid and now you are looking for an "out". But I won't give it to you. I accept your apology

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms Don't flatter yourself; you know that the "monkey" reference was unnecessary. So who's looking for an "out?" To refer to it as "nitpicking" is trying to downplay the heinous and symbolic history behind that term. It's hypocritical for you to accuse someone of looking for an "out" when you didn't even bother to address the substance of my statement. Lastly, you can call me "reactionary" all you want but a fool? I am far from that. I don't have time to read every blog. Do you?

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms If you want to have a intellectual debate, bring it on. You surely don't intimidate me and your weak use of psychology is undaunting. You might want to take some of the responsibility for the miscommunication since you initiated it with the role that you assumed without any proper transition.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms If you find our existence "reprehensible" as you like to espouse, BLAME YOUR GOD, NOT US. FURTHERMORE, PEOPLE LIKE YOU ACT AS IF THERE WAS A LINE IN THE SKY WHERE GOD ASKED PEOPLE, "WHAT COLOR DO YOU WANT TO BE?" AND THEY PICKED THE WRONG ONE!! YOUR RACE IS ONLY A SOCIAL ADVANTAGE IN CONTEXT WITH CONTEMPORARY TIMES AND CULTURE; IN NO WAY ARE YOU SUPERIOR BIOLOGICALLY BECAUSE IF THAT WERE THE CASE, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO BEEN TAUGHT YOUR RACIST VIEWS; THEY WOULD BE INTRINSIC.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms If you were rebutting ricland and you wanted to make the claim that his views were ignorant, the "monkey" reference was still uncalled for. You can articulate a point without being racially derogatory or perpetuating stereotypes; it kind of defeats the point you set out to make.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms And by the way, I decided to go back and read your previous comments (which I normally don't bother with going over every blog) and I don't see how attacking ricland the way you did conveyed the point that you're making now. I'm not saying you didn't mean to but I don't think most people reading that would have understood. If a stranger was swinging a punch at you, would you wait to see if they hit you before you defended yourself? Oh no, that's right, you're not a "reactionary fool"

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

1.)"Stranger throwing a punch"? Wow, what a great analogy. But personally I would rather wait a second and maybe see if the person throwing the punch is doing so because he is attacking someone, as opposed to defending himself. But then again you must have a certain level of discernment and intelligence to do that. Which you obviously lack. That is why you exposed yourself as nothing more than a benighted jerk.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

2.)The miscommunication was on your part. You are simply not bright nor humble enough to read ALL OF the comments and then make an INFORMED opinion/response. Again, your retort was nonsensical and now you are a little embarrassed. Just a few comments below your initial comment to me. One other person ALSO felt the need to "set me straight". After I sent him a (long winded) response explaining what I was doing to the other idiot. He sent me a reply stating "I had you wrong".

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

3.)You simply are an arrogant person. And that hubris placed you in a position (of your own volition) that made you look stupid. Once hapz3000 read my explanation he/she simply stated "I had you wrong". The only one who continues to look imbecilic in this whole back and forth is you. Because after the explanation, he/she got it. Whether they agreed with it or not. Your ass is a little chafed because you did not see the explanation and you are attempting to save face.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

4.)But attempting to "save face" does not work when you continue to fall flat on it. The owness is on you to further read all comments involved so you can make an informed and coherent rebuttal. Here, you just established yourself as nothing more than a feckless clown. Your reckless response is the problem here, not my comments.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

5.)The "House Negro" indeed WAS complicit to the inhumanity. No shit sherlock. Aren't you simply echoing what I already said in reference to Thomas? That is the reason Thomas is derided by most blacks and some whites. I have already stated that this is the reason Thomas is accepted by conservative whites and hated by others. Thomas fits perfectly into this statement. So, what exactly are you criticizing?

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

6.)Actually you are not criticizing anything I said. You are trying to rewrite the narrative here because you overreached and made yourself look foolish. If taking a few extra seconds to read through the debate/argument is too much for you. Maybe it's not very smart to comment in the first place. Just some food for thought. Again, I accept your apology. Even if you are too arrogant to give one.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms That is your opinion which you are entitled, but your assumptions seem a little self-important. You should try to get a job at FOX News because you are skilled at spin. It is somewhat farcical and ironic that you accuse me of arrogance.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

No spin needed. I achieved what I set out to do.

That "self-important" label just might fit you better than me.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms Self-importance is not achieved by expressing your opinion; it is achieved by the presumption that your own opinion is the most credible and that others are "foolish" who believe otherwise; fits you like a glove.

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

Self-importance is not achieved by expressing your opinion; it is achieved by the presumption that your own opinion is the most credible and that others are "foolish".........."

Nah, If you truly believed that you would not have attempted that initial "cap-locked dressing down" of me in the first place. This just continues to be a way to quell your ego so that you can find that perfect "out". Sadly, I am too cold hearted to allow you to have it. Even though I know you need it.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms Your arrogance knows no bounds. You do not control me, validate, or invalidate me. I don't need an "out" from you nor do I need to waste my fingers on you. I was trying to make a point which is not well-taken by you since you see your comments to be impeccable; your opinions are highly durable and ignorance has to be overcome by the ignorant themselves. I have wasted enough time listening to your self-flattery. You accuse me of being trivial about your "monkey" comment but seriously...

[drbayoms]

@nutblast23

I'm just "flattered" that you keep responding.

[nutblast23]

@drbayoms Good. Because I'm done with you. Bye Bye.

[maumaucommie]

He thinks he is an intelectual. Yuri Bezmenov on YouTube explains where this man is from.

[Zachw2007]

Ogletree is a hack and a joke. Nobody ever appointed his ass to anything local, state, or federal. Just a jealous SOB.

[nutblast23]

@Zachw2007 It might just be that Ogletree didn't bend over and spread his cheeks like Clarence Thomas did, where Thomas said, "Yes massa, I'ze be an originalist judge even though that goes against my own social reality."

[RadarGuidedVermin]

@ElWiiTard Nowhere did I say that the President does not appoint Supreme Court Justices. In fact, I said: "Obama-appointed Sotomayor." This is proof of how fucking stupid you really are. Thomas was the only judge to correctly argue bringing back the Privileges and Immunities Clause in McDonald v. Chicago. That same case has exposed Sotomayor as a liar. Try again, crybaby.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

Richard Roundtree = cool

Charles Ogletree = fool

[RadarGuidedVermin]

All Ogletree does is incite racism and whine about reparations. These are the types of idiots ElWiiTard worships.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

@ElWiiTard No matter how much you cry like a little girl, Thomas will still be a vastly superior judge to Obama-appointed Sotomayor. Deal with it.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

@ElWiiTard  Sorry, crying isn't an argument. Try again.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

Ogletree continues to try and fan the flames of racism and hate. Without it he is nothing.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

Sorry, ElWiiTard, crying like a little girl isn't a valid argument. Try again.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

@ElWiiTard That's why Clarence Thomas is a respected Supreme Court Justice and you are garbage.

[richfisherman]

It's little wonder Martin Luther King was a Republican.

[HerrSchenkel]

@ElWiiTard I'm not too familiar with Peterson, but I can understand how he can be seen as trying to make a name for himself by being the black man that stands up in defense of white people. But I have not seen anything close to that from Clarence Thomas. Can you point me to something?

[HerrSchenkel]

@ElWiiTard I'mm just curious; how do people kneel and beg to Clarence Thomas and for what reason(s)?

[MondoBeno]

Uncle Clarence was grossly unqualified for the Supreme Court. But few in the Black community came out to oppose him.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

@MondoBeno Turns out it is Obama's appointment, namely Sotomayor, who is unqualified to sit on the high court. She's been on the bench only for a short time now, and already she's been caught lying.

[phippsed]

@ElWiiTard . The 3/5 provision was put it as a compromise so that the southern states would ratify the constitution. Many of the founding fathers were apposed to slavery but they were pragmatic about their beliefs. Eventually the constitution was changed via a constitutional amendment (the 13th amendment). This is the proper way of changing the constitution. Activist Supreme court rulings, on the other hand are an improper and unconstitutional way of changing the constitution.

[selfrealizedexile]

I like that complicated equation on the board. Gonna need some crazy partial differential equations to solve that one. Thank God I actually chose to study something worth a damn.

[XammBeaux]

ERiiitard, the founding fathers never heard of 3/5. Are you a misinformed yet mouthy negro, or a klansman posing as one? I'd believe either, but I'd give the klansman points for originality.

The tedious negro windbag in this video is rushing to a well-deserved obscurity we can all be thankful for.

Anita Hill sucked me off in the bus station last week (fitty cent). The doctor said my genital rash was from her not flossing. Go figure. Teeth like Chiclets and all.

Carry on, Harvard Law Skoo..

[phippsed]

Indeed Clarence Thomas is a reactionary. He reacts to people writing their own personal prejudices into the constitution. I thought it was very revealing when Ogletree talked about who Thomas does and does not care about. Clarence Thomas makes decisions based on the law, not on his own personal feelings.

[DrRJohnson]

I wonder what he would say of Clinton's moral ineptitude but, of course, according to him, Clinton was a phenominal president. Thanks for your parochial insight once again. We all know where you stand!

Partisan hack.

[mrboast]

more "I" 's than I could count.

[magdamagda999]

Ugg! what a cookie-cutter mind! oh yes, "reactionary," that marxist term for trying to to turn back the progress towards socialism. hitler HATED "reactionaries," even more then he hated capitalists.

[dmlauffer]

Teach some real law and not hate of people who think different from you.

[RadarGuidedVermin]

The spirit of the law is lost on this Bozo.  Ogletree is 100% partisan hack and 0% academic scholar.

[qlaw04]

Criticizing the Renquist court .. well shit Ogletree you're a liberal he's conservative ... duh!!! You oppose him beacuse you both disagree with him and don't understand him.

Now this poor attempt at social commentary?

You know what they say ... those who can do, and those who can't teach.

Enjoy your tenure Professor Ogletree.

[denovo09]

Ogletree is a hack. Ogletree is the disgrace.

[oldboldcold]

Clarence Thomas, sadly continues to represent his mediocre intellect for all to see. His absolute refusal to ask even a single question in session derides his legacy, a slap in the face of the extensive and impressive legacy of Marshall and all supreme court justices.

Thomas is a disgrace.

[AntiAntiAmerica]

Plenty of great judges in our history chose to not ask questions.

Your criticism is lacking, in light of the historical record.