Today\’s paragraphs come to us from Carrie Lukas, writing for instapundit.com. They bring up an angle about mainstream media\’s desperate attempt to ignore Bill Clinton\’s ugly sexual history, thus the fact that it has always been enabled/defended by Hillary Clinton – presumably to maintain her status as a fighter against the “War on Women”.
Ms. Lukas juxtaposes the treatment afforded Mr. Clinton with that of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:
Liberal women\’s groups are supposed to frown on men whosmear women and undermine the legal process of sexual harassment suits, andtake accusations of sexual assault seriously. Yet President Clinton-a goodDemocrat who supported abortion rights and other feminist sacraments-waslargely given a pass. Sure, some feminists murmured their disappointment withClinton\’s behavior and mouthed platitudes about Paula Jones deserving her dayin court. But their criticisms were perfunctory at best. Mostly, they stood byClinton\’s side, defending him and remaining silent as he lied and slandered thewomen who accused him.
Compare this to the treatment of Justice Clarence Thomas.Even if one assumes that every accusation made by Anita Hill is true, JusticeThomas would at most be crass and a little boorish, but very minor-league interms of sexual harassment compared to Clinton. Yet women\’s groups and theliberal media pounded Thomas, almost derailing his Supreme Court nomination,and to this day ensure that his name is synonymous with sexual harassment.
Truer words were never spoken.
Clarence Thomas was accused by Ms. Hill of….talking about sex acts and referencing pornographic movies, after she had turned him down for a date. That is the sum total of her charges…which, let\’s remember, were completely unproven, and were made years and years after they allegedly occurred – during which time Ms. Hill maintained contact with Mr. Thomas and used him as a job reference. The relationship ended and the allegations came, “coincidentally”, only after Mr. Thomas met and married another woman – a White woman, for you “race uber alles” fans.
At no time did Anita Hill ever accuse Clarence Thomas of laying a hand on her. Want to compare that with Hubby Bubba\’s behavior – the behavior that was countenanced, rationalized and defended by Hillary Clinton?
But there was more than that. There was an even bigger more important difference between Bill Clinton and Clarence Thomas: Bill Clinton was a Democrat who, publicly at least, supported the “women\’s issues” of the left, while Clarence Thomas was the trifecta of horror shows for them, Black, conservative and pro-life.
Think that might have had something to do with the media disparity?
Ms. Lukas wins Paragraphs Of The Day honors not only for bringing up the Clarence Thomas angle, but for so clearly demonstrating the media bias that pervades “journalism” these days, and is sure to carry through the 2016 electin cycle…and well beyond.