Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words Solar Movies megavideo 123movies gomovies

20 de febrero de 2020 - 22:30

⟱⟱⟱⟱⟱⟱⟱

Alternative Server

⇪⇪⇪⇪⇪⇪⇪

About The Author: CBN News
Bio: Christian Broadcasting Network, bringing International Christian Inspired 24-hour News.

country - USA
runtime - 1 Hour, 56minute
Genre - Documentary
brief - Although Clarence Thomas remains a controversial figure, loved by some, reviled by others, few know much more than a few headlines and the recollections of his contentious confirmation battle with Anita Hill. Yet, the personal odyssey of Clarence Thomas is a classic American story and should be better known and understood. His life began in extreme poverty in the segregated South, and moved to the height of the legal profession, as one of the most influential justices on the Supreme Court. Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words tells the Clarence Thomas story truly and fully, without cover-ups or distortions. The documentary will open in movie theaters nationally on January 31, 2020, followed by a national broadcast on PBS in May 2020. Educational use is forthcoming
Actors - Ginni Thomas

I see Biden has a history of using a whole of words to say a whole lot nothing. It is seriously comical. Watching this movie just made me realize how the church lives a lavish life. This to me is wrong. What is the purpose of living such a lavish life? Jesus never did.

This man is guilty. of murder. Murdering that entire panel with his sharp rhetoric and devastating truth. Old Joe Biden probably wanted to put him back in chains after this.

The label of “racist” is only a tool to keep people in line, to shut down debate, to freeze out any opposing views. Its no different than calling people “unpatriotic” because they may find some portion of a war drive questionable. Labels are weak, vulgar replacements for a logical argument. With the use of demonizing labels, you dont need a good argument, because the conversation will never get to the part where your argument (or lack of one) will be challenged. Name calling is the ignorant mans oblivious admission of defeat.
Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words meaning.
Same trick used on Kavanaugh. lol.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words printable. Not a bad film, good argument, reasonable position, but the shackles of the RC church are too tangled to undo in a court of justice. Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words and pictures. Who's the cute babe seated behind Amtrak Joe. Watched it through to the end only because the male lead (aaron tveit) has star quality. very corny. YouTube.

He shoulda been the 1st black President. 😏❤🇺🇸👍

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words images. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words pictures.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words pdf

Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own wordstream. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own wordswn words. Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words of love. Every time I watch this - I fall in love with him all lover again. | Posted: Nov 16, 2019 12:01 AM The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of There’s a moment in the new Clarence Thomas documentary, “Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words, ” following the harrowing confirmation hearing that saw the gentle man, loving husband, and legal genius from Pin Point, Ga., accused of sexual harassment and smeared as a lecherous monster, that sticks with you long after the 2-hour film ends. It’s the look Thomas has on his face at his swearing-in ceremony. He’s not elated by the prospect of joining the Supreme Court. He looks tired and maybe more than a little concerned for his safety. And it’s an indictment of the people — one of the most prominent in the person of then-Senator Joe Biden who came across as something of a grand inquisitor — who put Thomas through what he called at the time a “high-tech lynching for uppity blacks. ” "This is a circus. It is a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, as far as I am concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity-blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that, unless you kow-tow to an old order, this is what will happen to you, you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U. S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree. " Filmmaker Michael Pack conducted hundreds of hours of interviews with Thomas and his wife Virginia to create this stunning documentary, which will see a wide release in May 2020 on PBS. And while it covers Thomas’ impoverished upbringing in Pin Point and later Savannah, Ga., as well as his college days as a left-wing angry social justice revolutionary, it is most moving when it covers those days of the Anita Hill allegations when Thomas’ opportunity to sit on the highest court in the land was very nearly stripped from him by allegations he still unequivocally denies. In his 2008 memoir, “My Grandfather’s Son” — a grandfather that is a looming presence over the film and, indeed, everything Thomas does — the Justice known for his quiet analysis (which he says is part of judicial philosophy that rejects the idea of judicial activism) recounts that by the end of the confirmation hearing he no longer cared about being a Supreme Court Justice. He cared only about fighting back. "I didn’t care whether I ever sat on the Supreme Court, but I wasn’t going to let what little my family and I had cobbled together to be so wantonly smashed. My enemies wanted nothing more than for me to go quietly. I, on the other hand, owed it to my family and the memory of my grandparents and forebears not to self-destruct but to confront them with the truth. " It’s a sentiment now Supreme Court Justice Bret Kavanaugh repeated at his own hearing where, he, too, was confronted with what were surely drummed up charges of sexual impropriety intended to smear him and ruin his life. “You may defeat me in the final vote, but you’ll never get me to quit, ever, ” Kavanaugh said. Which is to say the Democrats’ dirty tricks haven’t changed in 30 years. And the real shame of it all is that, as “Created Equal” showcases, Thomas had been through more than most in order to overcome his challenges to find himself on the threshold of a SCOTUS seat. He should have been rejoicing in his achievement. Instead, as he told Pack in the film, he feels now about being on the Court exactly the same as he did when he was confirmed. “Whoop-dee-doo, ” Thomas says in the film, without a hint of a smile behind his eyes. Perhaps the ability to remain unaffected by the glamor of the position makes Thomas a better Justice. It likely does. It almost certainly keeps his attention on the cases at hand and on his own interpretation of them as a constitutional “originalist. ” But it’s a little heartbreaking that this is what the politics of personal destruction, led by liberals and progressives, do to the good men of this country. Fortunately, there’s much more to Thomas’ story, happier anecdotes about meeting his wife and making his grandfather proud, that shine through in Pack’s film. But that look on his face at his swearing-in ceremony stays with you long after the film ends. Sarah Lee is a freelance writer and policy wonk living and working in Washington, DC.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words lyrics. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words song. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words quotes. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words youtube. Imagine the courage this man had to go forward after being slandered and attempted railroading. hes a national hero. Sadly the democratic playbook is unchanged and still on display today.

Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words on the page

As a democrat, I watched the debacle of the Anita Hill accusations. I felt uneasy with the way my party was handling the lynching back then. I was so stupid, I thought the accusations must be legitimate if the leaders of the party said it was so. Thanks god for legitimate news without an agenda. I have been able to watch the hearings and make my own decision on the Ford allegations. I must walk away from the Democratic party. I just hope more Democrats will come to their senses and vote with their minds and not just because you are a democrat. Get out and vote and I hope your state does not go the way of mine, California.

Thomas is a TRAITOR see the real video truth here. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words online. Story highlights High court's lone African-American justice ruled against civil rights pillar Conservative majority's decision strikes at heart of 1965 Voting Rights Act Questions about Clarence Thomas persist even after two decades on the Supreme Court Among them: Why does he condemn affirmative action if he benefited from it? He wore a black beret and Army fatigues, warned people that a revolution was coming and memorized the speeches of Malcolm X. "I now believed that the whole of American culture was irretrievably tainted by racism, " he once said, describing his reaction to the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. On Tuesday, that same man helped dismantle a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, one of the pillars of the civil rights movement. If he had his way, he would bury another pillar: affirmative action. There may seem to be a contradiction between the Clarence Thomas who was the angry campus radical in the 1960s and the conservative hero who sits on the U. S. Supreme Court today. But some legal observers say Thomas sees himself as a "prophetic civil rights leader" who is still fighting for the same cause -- a colorblind America. "A lot of people who are what I call professional Negros have ridden white guilt and socialism to very lucrative lives, " says Holzer, who uses the term "Negro" because he says he doesn't classify people by skin color. "Thomas didn't, " Holzer says. "He made a very deliberate and gutsy decision to go where his intellect and his study took him, and that's heroic. " One man's hero, though, is another man's sellout. During his nearly 22 years on the nation's highest court, Thomas has been called a self-loathing "Uncle Thomas. " His impact, though, cannot be ignored. His judicial opinions have transformed America. And no other contemporary Supreme Court justice has spoken with such raw emotion about race or has embodied the subject's complexities. Yet he is still a mystery to many. There are questions about Thomas that have persisted even after two decades on the Supreme Court as its lone African-American justice. Here are three of them: Question 1: Why does Thomas condemn affirmative action if he benefited from it? On Monday, the Supreme Court sidestepped a sweeping decisio n on the use of race in college admissions, throwing a Texas case back to the lower courts for further review. The high court had been asked to decide if the University of Texas violated the constitutional rights of some white applicants by considering race in the admissions process. Thomas, in issuing a concurring opinion with the 7-1 majority, left no doubt as to how he would have ruled had the court not found that lower federal courts failed to apply the appropriate standards in the Texas case. "Just as the alleged educational benefits of segregation were insufficient to justify racial discrimination then, " Thomas wrote, "the alleged educational benefits of diversity cannot justify racial discrimination today. " "The university's professed good intentions cannot excuse its outright racial discrimination any more than such intentions justified the now denounced arguments of slaveholders and segregationists. " Thomas has consistently voted against affirmative action policies because he says they're divisive, unconstitutional and harmful to their recipients. He cites his own experience as an example. Thomas was born in poverty in rural Georgia but managed to gain admittance to Yale Law School. He acknowledges that he made it to Yale because of affirmative action but says the stigma of preferential treatment made it difficult for him to find a job after college. In his memoir, "My Grandfather's Son, " Thomas says he felt "tricked" by paternalistic whites at Yale who recruited black students. "I was bitter toward the white bigots whom I held responsible for the unjust treatment of blacks, " he wrote, "but even more bitter toward those ostensibly unprejudiced whites who pretended to side with black people while using them to further their own political and social ends. " Some observers, though, counter with one question: If affirmative action is so bad for its recipients, how come you've done so well? "His entire judicial philosophy is at war with his own biography, " said Michael Fletcher, co-author of "Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas. " "He's arguably benefited from affirmative action every step of the way. " For many blacks, affirmative action is "the contemporary equivalent of the Emancipation Proclamation, " Fletcher explains in his book. It's one of the most important legacies of the civil rights movement. The expansion of the black middle class was driven by affirmative action policies, he says. Some blacks detest Thomas not because he's conservative, Fletcher says, but because he rules against affirmative action policies, closing the door that was opened for him. The black community has accepted conservatives as varied as Booker T. Washington, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Many members of the community dislike Thomas for another reason. "Some say he's a traitor and hypocritical, " says Fletcher, an economics correspondent with The Washington Post. Thomas first attracted public attention in the early 1980s when President Ronald Reagan asked him to lead the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which enforces federal discrimination laws. Thomas' opposition to affirmative action and criticisms of civil rights leaders during his tenure made headlines. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush appointed Thomas to the powerful U. Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit, a traditional steppingstone to the Supreme Court. Would Thomas have risen so far so quickly had he not been black? CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin doesn't think so. In a biting 2007 New Yorker magazine review of Thomas' memoir, Toobin wrote that Thomas had never tried a case or argued an appeal in any federal court and had never produced any scholarly work when he made the D. appeals court. "Yale and Reagan treated him the same way, but he hates one and reveres the other, " Toobin wrote. "Thomas never acknowledges, much less explains, the contradiction. " When Bush selected Thomas in 1991 to replace Thurgood Marshall, the court's first black justice, the questions about Thomas' qualifications intensified. Bush said he picked "the best qualified" nominee, but Thomas questioned that in his memoir, saying even he had doubts about Bush's "extravagant" claim. "There was no way I could really know what the president and his aides had been thinking when they picked me, " he wrote. Thomas' defenders say his performance on the high court has removed any doubts about his qualifications. They call him the most consistent conservative on the court, a man who won't sacrifice his principles to eke out a short-term judicial victory. Holzer, author of "The Supreme Court Opinions of Clarence Thomas, " says he doesn't think Thomas "benefited from affirmative action at all. " Thomas' legal acumen is well-known, says Holzer, a retired law professor from Brooklyn Law School. Thomas is the court's leading "originalist" -- he says he interprets the Constitution based on what the framers meant, not on any partisan policy preferences. "This may be hard for Toobin to swallow -- Clarence Thomas would have been appointed were he white, yellow, brown, beige, even blue or green. " Scott Douglas Gerber, an Ohio Northern University law professor and author of "First Principles: The Jurisprudence of Clarence Thomas, " says Thomas is on the verge of cementing his judicial legacy with the civil rights cases before the court. Thomas' constitutional philosophy is simple, Gerber says: All Americans should be treated as individuals and not as members of a racial or ethnic group. Gerber says Thomas has ruled against the Voting Rights Act in the past because he believes that laws based on the "proportional allocation of political powers according to race" should be overturned. The Voting Rights Act is considered one of the crown jewels of the civil rights movement. Its passage, which came about after King led a dramatic campaign in Selma, Alabama, is responsible for the expansion of black political power in the last 30 years. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court's conservative majority issued a ruling that essentially strikes at the heart of the Voting Rights Act. The court voted 5-4 to limit the use of a key provision in the landmark law, in effect invalidating federal enforcement over all or parts of 15 states with a past history of voter discrimination. Thomas isn't the only Supreme Court justice whose life has been shaped by affirmative action. One of his colleagues is grateful for the role it played in her life. Sonia Sotomayor told "60 Minutes" that affirmative action helped her gain admittance to Princeton University. (She also graduated from Yale Law School. ) She is the first Hispanic justice on the Supreme Court. "It was a door-opener that changed the course of my life, " Sotomayor said in the January interview. Question 2: How does Thomas embrace an "originalist" view of the Constitution when the framers would have considered him a slave? A lot of originalist judges rhapsodize about the wisdom of the Constitution's framers, but Thomas approaches the Constitution with a different racial history. Blacks were enslaved by many of the founding fathers who talked about liberty and freedom. How does a black judge become an originalist when the "original intent" of the Constitution was to preserve slavery and classify slaves as three-fifths of a human being? Thomas addressed that question in part in one of his most cited opinions, a 2007 school integration case, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. Thomas joined a conservative majority that ruled 5-4 that race cannot be a factor in assigning children to public schools. In a concurring opinion, Thomas cited one of the Supreme Court's greatest judges, John Marshall Harlan, known as the "great dissenter. " Harlan issued a thunderous dissent in the notorious 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case, which sanctioned the separate but equal doctrine that provided the legal foundation for the brutal Jim Crow era. Plessy is considered one of the high court's lowest moments. Thomas invoked another landmark Supreme Court decision, the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling, which declared segregated schools and the separate-but-equal doctrine of Plessy unconstitutional. Thomas wrote in the Seattle decision: "My view of the Constitution is Justice Harlan's view in Plessy: 'Our Constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. ' And my view was the rallying cry for the lawyers who litigated Brown. " Thomas embraces an originalism that is rooted in the principles of the founders rather than their practices, wrote Hannah L. Weiner, author of an article in the Duke Law Journal on Thomas titled "The Next Great Dissenter. " Weiner said Thomas believes that history will hail him as a "prophetic leader of civil rights" who honored the civil rights movement by fighting for its ultimate goal: a colorblind America. "He says the same framers who saw him as three-fifths of a man wrote the Declaration of Independence that allowed us to dream of having a President Obama in the White House, " says the Post's Fletcher. Marcia Coyle, author of the "The Roberts Court, " a look at the contemporary court's battle over the Constitution, says Thomas believes that Reconstruction -- a brief period after the Civil War when the federal government strove to make full citizens of freed slaves -- purified the Constitution. "He believes the Reconstruction amendments purged the Constitution of the taint of slavery and rendered the Constitution colorblind, " says Coyle, who provides Supreme Court analysis for the "PBS NewsHour. " The Reconstruction amendments are the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. They abolish slavery, empower newly freed slaves and protect their right to vote. For anyone who follows matters of race in America, the 14th Amendment is vital. The amendment, with its emphasis on equality, has become the epicenter of a fierce legal battle over what the Constitution says about race. Thomas and other conservative judges believe the 14th Amendment bans any preferential treatment of minorities because the Constitution is colorblind. It doesn't matter if a person is white, black or green, they say, dividing people up by race is unconstitutional. They cite Harlan's "colorblind" dissent in Plessy in which he invoked the 14th Amendment. Others say judges such as Thomas are engaging in clever semantics, commandeering language that was originally used to help racial minorities to argue for policies that now exclude them. Doug Kendall, founder and president of the Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington, says Thomas is a "faux" originalist who ignores the "original intent" of the 14th Amendment framers who were trying to create laws to address the legacy of slavery. "They were the first proponents of affirmative action, " Kendall says of the Reconstruction amendment lawmakers. "They passed a whole series of laws that were designed to help the freed slaves realize the promise of being a full and equal citizen in the U. " But Gerber, the Ohio Northern University law professor, says Thomas bases his originalist vision in the Declaration of Independence. "He knows that most of the framers were racists, " says Gerber. "He rejects those personal practices but as (Abraham) Lincoln pointed out, the framers committed the nation to the idea of equality that is articulated in the Declaration. " Question 3: Why doesn't Thomas follow his own advice about not playing the victim? When he worked for the Reagan administration, Thomas once told a reporter that all civil rights leaders did was "bitch, bitch, bitch, moan and moan, whine and whine. " Thomas has long preached that blacks should be self-reliant and stop complaining about racism. He traces that philosophy to his childhood in Georgia, where he was raised by a stern grandfather who told him he had to "play the hand" fate dealt him. "I'd long believed that the best thing to do was to stop government-sanctioned segregation, then concentrate on education and equal employment opportunities, " he wrote in his memoir. "The rest I thought would take care of itself. " Yet critics say Thomas doesn't follow his own advice. They say he regularly portrays himself as a victim even though he sits on the nation's highest court. Fletcher called him "the most successful victim in America. " He says Thomas holds grudges against old college classmates, black critics and "elites. " He often equates his plight to that of slaves when he compares critics to "overseers" and talks about blacks who expect him to be an "intellectual slave. " "He has a lot of slights that he catalogs carefully throughout his life, " Fletcher says. Slights against the U. Supreme Court also affect Thomas. While speaking to a bar association in Georgia in 2011, Thomas said critics of the Supreme Court's decisions were illiterate or lazy. "You don't just keep nagging and nagging and nagging, " he told the Augusta Bar Association. "Sometimes, too much is too much. " Thomas recently used an occasion of great joy for the black community -- the election of the nation's first black president -- to complain about persecution. When he was asked if he was surprised that a black man became president, he criticized the "elites" and "the media. " "The thing that I always knew is that it would have to be a black president who was approved by the elites and the media, because anybody they didn't agree with, they would take apart, " Thomas said during a C-SPAN interview at a Pittsburgh law school in April. Thomas' behavior at his confirmation hearing in 1991 soured some critics as well. When he was accused of sexual harassment, Thomas publicly told a Senate panel that he was the victim of a "high-tech lynching" reserved for uppity blacks. Thomas flashed the race card to get on the Supreme Court, says George Curry, a commentator, media coach and speaker who once placed Thomas on the cover of a now-defunct black political magazine called Emerge with the title, "Uncle Thomas. " "He used race when it was convenient to him, " Curry says. "That was designed to put an all-white panel on the defensive. " Thomas, though, says it's not persecution if it's real. In his memoir, he wrote about his confirmation hearing: "As a child in the Deep South, I'd grown up fearing the lynch mobs of the Ku Klux Klan; as an adult, I was starting to wonder if I'd been afraid of the wrong white people all along. My worst fears had come to pass not in Georgia but in Washington, D. C., where I was being pursued not by bigots in white robes but by left-wing zealots draped in flowing sanctimony. " Horace Cooper, an attorney and commentator, says Thomas was only telling the truth when he invoked a "high-tech lynching. " He says many people haven't accepted that Thomas isn't the liberal crusader they think the successor to Marshall, the court's first black justice, should be. "The law isn't about helping oppressed and downtrodden people get justice in a system tilted against them, " says Cooper, whose columns appear on, a conservative online magazine. "Justice Thomas has been reminding people that it is not the role of the court to undo unfairness but to literally use the rules: Call a strike a strike and a foul a foul. " Thomas' pugnacious public image doesn't jibe with his personality, others say. He is the warmest and most accessible Supreme Court justice, they say, a man with a booming laugh who mentors young people. In a 1998 address to a group of predominantly African-American lawyers, Thomas showed a more vulnerable side. "It pains me deeply -- more deeply than any of you can imagine -- to be perceived by so many members of my race as doing them harm, " he told the National Bar Association, the nation's largest group of lawyers, during a meeting in Memphis, Tennessee. "All the sacrifice, all the long hours of preparation were to help, not to hurt, " he said. "I have come here today not in anger or to anger. " Thomas' speech was greeted with scattered boos and little applause, news reports say. Thomas' latest decisions may receive the same hostile reaction from his own community. But that won't stop Thomas from issuing his fiery opinions on race, in court and out of it, some say. "It seems as if he's accepted the fact that he's out there alone and he's writing for the future, not today, " says Coyle, author of "The Roberts Court. " The goals of that future aren't that much different from those of the past, Thomas suggests in his memoir. At the end of his book, Thomas wrote that he was visited by Marshall, now considered a civil rights icon, in 1991 shortly after Thomas was confirmed to the court. Thomas tells him he would have marched with civil rights demonstrators if he had the courage. "I did in my time what I had to, " Thomas says Marshall told him. "You have to do in your time what you have to do. " Whether people agree with Thomas or not, one thing is apparent from the direction of this Supreme Court: Thomas is not so alone anymore. This is his time.

Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words to eat.

Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words without.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words book

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words full. U. S. | THE SUPREME COURT; Clarence Thomas In His Own Words THE SUPREME COURT Credit... The New York Times Archives See the article in its original context from July 2, 1991, Section A, Page 14 Buy Reprints TimesMachine is an exclusive benefit for home delivery and digital subscribers. About the Archive This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996. To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them. Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems; we are continuing to work to improve these archived versions. On Civil Rights Much of the current thinking on civil rights has been crippled by the confusion between a "colorblind society" and a "colorblind Constitution. " The Constitution, by protecting the rights of individuals, is colorblind. But a society cannot be colorblind, any more than men and women can escape their bodies. It would destroy limited government and liberal democracy to confuse the private, societal realm (including the body and skin color) and the public, political realm (including rights and laws). Obscuring the difference between public and private would allow private passions (including racial ones) to be given full vent in public life and overwhelm reason.... Thus the "quest for racial justice, " as opposed to justice per se, is doomed, because American justices by definition cannot be race- or group-oriented.... The tragedy of the civil rights movement is that as blacks achieved the full exercise of their rights as citizens, government expanded, and blacks became an interest group in a coalition supporting expanded government. From a book review of "And We Are Not Saved: The Elusive Quest for Racial Justice" by Derrick Bell, The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 12, 1987. On Affirmative Action I firmly insist that the Constitution be interpreted in a colorblind fashion. It is futile to talk of a colorblind society unless this constitutional principle is first established. Hence, I emphasize black self-help, as opposed to racial quotas and other race-conscious legal devices that only further and deepen the original problem. From a Letter to the Editor of The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 20, 1987. On African-Americans Blacks are no less pluralistic than the rest of society. Just as no one really speaks for white America, no one really speaks for black America.... The argument that the views of the black leadership are consonant with those of black Americans misses the point, since most blacks are not represented by black politicians. Nor are most blacks members of organizations that claim to represent them.... The real issue here, however, is not who represents black America.... Rather, the real issue is why, unlike other individuals in this country, black individuals are not entitled to have and express points of view that differ from the collective hodgepodge of ideas that we supposedly share because we are members of the same race. There seems to be an obsession with painting blacks as an unthinking group of automatons, with a common set of views, opinions and ideas. Anyone who dares suggest that this may not be the case or has a viewpoint that disagrees with the "black viewpoint" is immediately cast as attacking the black leadership or as some kind of anti-black renegade.... We certainly cannot claim to have progressed much in this country as long as it is insisted that our intellects are controlled entirely by our pigmentation, with its countless variations, even though our individual experiences are entirely different. From an Op-Ed piece in The Los Angeles Times, Nov. 15, 1985. On Surviving Racism Of course, I thought my grandparents were too rigid and their expectations were too high. I also thought they were mean at times. But one of their often-stated goals was to raise us so that we could "do for ourselves, " so that we could stand on our "own two feet. " This was not their societal policy, it was their family policy -- for their family, not those nameless families that politicians love to whine about. The most compassionate thing they did for us was to teach us to fend for ourselves and to do that in an openly hostile environment. In fact, the hostility made learning the lesson that much more urgent. It made the difference between freedom and incarceration: life and death: alcoholism and sobriety. The evidence of those who failed abounded, and casualties lay everywhere. But there were also many examples of success -- all of whom, according to my grandfather, followed the straight and narrow path. I was raised to survive under the totalitarianism of segregation, not only without the active assistance of government but with its active opposition. We were raised to survive in spite of the dark oppressive cloud of governmentally sanctioned bigotry. Self-sufficiency and spiritual and emotional security were our tools to carve out and secure freedom. Those who attempt to capture the daily counseling, oversight, common sense, and vision of my grandparents in a governmental program are engaging in sheer folly. Government cannot develop individual responsibility, but it certainly can refrain from preventing or hindering the development of this responsibility. From"Why Black Americans Should Look to Conservative Policies, " The Heritage Lectures, No. 119.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words movie

Scalia was murdered just like so many others. These killings are connected to the FBI, watch and see. Democrats don't change. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words video. I was around and following the Clarence Thomas confirmation, and it really was a high tech lynching. Liberals pretend to be color-blind, and they are. But only in the sense that if you disagree there is no story too low or depraved or nonsensical they will not use to destroy you no matter whether you are a black Thomas or a white Kavanaugh. Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own wordsmith. I have always had a great deal pf respect for Justice Thomas. I hope he is blessed with good health and remains on the bench for a long long time.

Black History Month should be a celebration of African Americans who have helped transform our nation. Sadly, that is not the case. To be included in the Black History Month celebration, one must be a “progressive” or, at the very least, not conservative. No doubt that is why Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, one of the most influential black men in America, is routinely ignored, even marginalized instead of celebrated as a man who has played a decisive role in American history as well as black history; and serves as an inspiration to the African American community. The recent release of the documentary " Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words, " gives the American people a chance to finally become acquainted with Justice Thomas’ life struggles and accomplishments — it’s a story exemplifying the spirit of Black History Month. Trying to erase history However, since Thomas’ confirmation to the Supreme Court, many liberals have pretended Justice Thomas does not exist. One of the most blatant examples of such behavior occurred when the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D. C. opened in 2016 with no exhibit mentioning Justice Thomas. Smithsonian officials faced intense backlash over the decision to snub the second black Supreme Court justice in history, when they granted exhibit space to Black Panthers, hip-hop and Black Lives Matter activists. Eventually, the museum gave in to public outcries and installed an exhibit honoring Thomas and former Justice Thurgood Marshall. But, to this day, click on the museum’s homepage and you won’t see an image or mention of him. Try clicking on the exhibit titled, “ Making a Way out of No Way ” — an exhibit dedicated to African Americans who “… created possibilities in a world that denied them opportunities. ” You won’t find a mention of Justice Thomas, even though the man’s life story represents the very essence of this exhibit. Clarence Thomas is right: Here's why Supreme Court should revisit libel law overreach Time and time again, Thomas is ignored because he is a conservative black man who unabashedly supports limited government and defends the Constitution. Carrie Severino, who clerked for Justice Thomas at the Supreme Court, writes that he “often makes his calls for constitutional fidelity alone, like a biblical prophet crying out in the wilderness. But that doesn’t bother him, first because he didn’t take an oath to try to create coalitions, to make friends on the Court, or to please the chattering classes. He took an oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution. ’” The release of “Created Equal” shines a much-needed light on Justice Thomas’ inspiring story and hopefully will help educate the American public about this great man. Thomas' story is one of incredible perseverance The justice grew up in poverty in rural Georgia and experienced racial discrimination as he tried to better himself by attending predominantly white schools. The hate he experienced caused him, in his own words, to become “ an angry black man. ” After participating in a particularly violent protest at Harvard University during the turbulent 1960s, he wandered into a church on the campus of the College of the Holy Cross, where he was attending. He asked God to take the anger out of his heart. After this experience, he let go of his bitterness and embraced love and acceptance as his guiding principles. Thomas has maintained his faith and commitment to love, even when he has labelled the “ wrong black guy ” by powerful progressives. He has faced nonsensical questions and brutally racist attacks but has never given in to the urge to hate his opponents or stoop to their level. Unlike those who ignore and marginalize the justice, "Created Equal" lets Thomas speak for himself, as the bulk of the film consists of director Michael Pack interviewing Thomas and his wife Virginia about their journey. Listening to Thomas will likely stun viewers when they hear his compelling and emotional story. 25 years later: Clarence Thomas still dissents Thomas’s life trajectory, which took him from a broken family and brutal poverty in the segregated south to the United States Supreme Court — where he is now the longest serving justice — is exactly what we should celebrate this month and all year long. Every American, young and old regardless of race, should hear and learn from Thomas’ story of overcoming seemingly insurmountable obstacles all while maintaining his faith, his courage and his personal integrity. His life has been an inspiration to countless African-Americans like me, and that will be his legacy. Ken Blackwell, a policy board member of the American Civil Rights Union, is a former mayor of Cincinnati and the first African-American to be elected to statewide office in the state of Ohio, as both secretary of state and state treasurer. Follow him on Twitter: @kenblackwell.

Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words 2017. Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words worksheet. Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words of wisdom. Download Full Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own words to say.

Download full created equal: clarence thomas in his own words first. Democrats project on others what they do themselves. pagans do that in the devils world : John 3:3.

Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words Rated 4.6 / 5 based on 346 reviews.