# Both Thomas and Kagan face pressure to recuse **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2011, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077 "2011-11-16T00:32:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/161 "2011-11-21T01:21:04Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > I suppose you have a credible cite for this, no? > **[obamas\_2005\_tax\_return.pdf](https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/obamas_2005_tax_return.pdf)** > > 4.82 MB About 2/3 of the way down: U of C Hospitals salary for Michelle Obama: $316,962 She was “Vice President for Community and External Affairs” at the University of Chicago Medical Center. After she left, the job position was eliminated. There is no more “Vice President for Community and External Affairs”. From Chicago Tribune: [http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/02/top-u-of-c-medical-center-doctor-steps-down.html](http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/02/top-u-of-c-medical-center-doctor-steps-down.html) "Last month, Madara would say only that the hospital is eliminating 15 senior executive jobs, including vice president for community and external affairs, a position that had held been by First Lady Michelle Obama, a former medical center vice president. Her duties have been taken over by Dr. Eric Whitaker, a friend of her husband, President Barack Obama, and executive vice president for strategic affiliations and external affairs." ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/162 "2011-11-21T01:25:18Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Probably for the half dozenth time, the arrangement the Thomas’ had makes me question his impartiality, not conclude any wrong doing. And, as I’ve said numerous times, I don’t think any decision was changed nor was there a change in impartiality. But that is beside the point. The point is avoiding not only impropriety, but the appearance of it. Taking money from interested parties for little more than influencing decisions whiffs of impropriety. For you it “whiffs”. For me it’s irrelevant. I suspect it’s the same for anyone who has followed Thomas’ rulings. Reminds me of the old Russian joke about a guy who calls his friend who visited him recently, and tells him that last week, after he left, they missed a few sterling silver spoons. Then he says: “Of course, two days later we found them, they were just misplaced. But that whiff of suspicion still remains.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/163 "2011-11-21T02:36:07Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Yes, yes true. > > It’s already been cited in this thread. No, it hasn’t. You provided a link to a dead page. Again: _Thomas’ wife is getting paid specifically for her contacts with people in power, which may or may not include her husband._ Prove that assertion. Provide some evidence for it. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/164 "2011-11-21T02:55:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it hasn’t. You provided a link to a dead page. > > Again: _Thomas’ wife is getting paid specifically for her contacts with people in power, which may or may not include her husband._ > > Prove that assertion. Provide some evidence for it. [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48812.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48812.html) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/165 "2011-11-21T03:05:09Z")
A link which, as you note, has already been cited in this thread. Some things **Bricker** “pretends” not to see. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/166 "2011-11-21T06:46:11Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > And as I pointed out above, anyone who thinks that a President or a SC justice could be bought for something piddly like $150K, that’s just stupid. Twice now you’ve said this, but I’m not wiling to concede. People can, will and do do stupidly criminal things, sometimes for almost no reason. Throw in a nice car or 1/10 the cost of a summer mansion (or whatever else even US$50k will get you), and I think we have more than enough cause to worry that things are not proper. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/167 "2011-11-21T14:03:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it hasn’t. You provided a link to a dead page. > > Again: _Thomas’ wife is getting paid specifically for her contacts with people in power, which may or may not include her husband._ > > Prove that assertion. Provide some evidence for it. > [@treis](#): > > [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48812.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48812.html) That link says: > [@](#): > > Now, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, has recast herself yet again, this time as the head of a firm, Liberty Consulting, which boasts on its website using her “experience and connections” to help clients “with “governmental affairs efforts” and political donation strategies. And as I said in [this very thread:](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14471574&postcount=45) > [@Bricker](#): > > I’d like to know something more beyond those three words. Did the next sentence talk about her experience lobbying, or did it hint at her husband’s job? > > Every lobbyist presumably sells his or her experience and connections. I daresay that experience and connections were in part what led to the ACLU to offer the director’s job to Ramona. I’d like to see just how those connections were mentioned before I conclude that there was anything remotely improper. I can hardly expect Ms. Thomas, or any lobbyist, to say, “Hire me, even though I have no experience and no connections.” To emphasize that point: every single lobbyist has the same basic message. To expect Ms. Thomas to advertise as a lobbysit without claiming she has effective connections and experience is akin to demanding that McDonald’s stop talking about their food and quick service. I want to know where you get the “may include” her husband part of your claim. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/168 "2011-11-21T15:11:07Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Twice now you’ve said this, but I’m not wiling to concede. People can, will and do do stupidly criminal things, sometimes for almost no reason. Throw in a nice car or 1/10 the cost of a summer mansion (or whatever else even US$50k will get you), and I think we have more than enough cause to worry that things are not proper. Here is the problem with that. Even if you are a criminal with a mindset to bribe a Supreme Court Justice, you would be a fool to spend 2 bucks to bribe Clarence Thomas to vote AGAINST the Obama Health Care bill. That vote is in your pocket. Why would a lobby group against the health care law feel the need to spend money to get Thomas on their side? ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/169 "2011-11-21T16:05:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That link says: > > And as I said in [this very thread:](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14471574&postcount=45) > > To emphasize that point: every single lobbyist has the same basic message. To expect Ms. Thomas to advertise as a lobbysit without claiming she has effective connections and experience is akin to demanding that McDonald’s stop talking about their food and quick service. > > I want to know where you get the “may include” her husband part of your claim. You want me to explain the logic behind the possibility that Thomas’ might lobby her husband, or act as a conduit for illicit donations? Really? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/170 "2011-11-21T16:35:17Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Here is the problem with that. Even if you are a criminal with a mindset to bribe a Supreme Court Justice, you would be a fool to spend 2 bucks to bribe Clarence Thomas to vote AGAINST the Obama Health Care bill. That vote is in your pocket. > > Why would a lobby group against the health care law feel the need to spend money to get Thomas on their side? Well, that’s why I said upthread that to some of the people posting here, apparently it would be fine for any SCOTUS justice to receive unlimited cash from people they are already politically aligned with; after all, the cash isn’t influencing their vote, right? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/171 "2011-11-21T16:39:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Every lobbyist presumably sells his or her experience and connections. **I daresay that experience and connections were in part what led to the ACLU to offer the director’s job to Ramona**. I’d like to see just how those connections were mentioned before I conclude that there was anything remotely improper. I can hardly expect Ms. Thomas, or any lobbyist, to say, “Hire me, even though I have no experience and no connections.” bolding mine Since you are hung up on Mrs. Thomas’ qualifications and what she will be doing, I’ll ask you for a cite or a statement of “talking out your ass” with regards to Ramona’s director’s job. Do you have any evidence that her connections were part of what got her the job, or are you just throwing mud at the wall hoping that something will stick? And as others have already noted in this thread, your attempt to draw a parallel between these 2 is absurd; the two jobs are different. For one thing, Ramona’s job doesn’t entail “influencing” people except in public forums, while Thomas’ job involves influencing people behind closed doors, away from the harsh spotlight of reality. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/172 "2011-11-21T19:16:03Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > bolding mine > > Since you are hung up on Mrs. Thomas’ qualifications and what she will be doing, I’ll ask you for a cite or a statement of “talking out your ass” with regards to Ramona’s director’s job. :rolleyes: Yes, I suppose it’s possible that unlike every other executive position within the ken of mankind, the ACLU offered Ms. Ripston her position without regard to her prior experience. And I suppose that for a job that involves contacts with many people in the legislative and judicial communities, it’s possible that the ACLU decided to disregard Ms. Ripston’s qualifications there. Possibly they put all the candidates’ names in a hat, and just drew one. But since that practice would fly in the face of our common sense and our knowledge of how every other freaking organization in the world works, I would say that it’s not for me to provide a specific cite that it happened. The person with the extraordinary claim must shoulder the burden of proof. The idea that the ACLU selected their executive director without regard to experience or connections is an extraordinary claim. > [@](#): > > And as others have already noted in this thread, your attempt to draw a parallel between these 2 is absurd; the two jobs are different. For one thing, Ramona’s job doesn’t entail “influencing” people except in public forums, while Thomas’ job involves influencing people behind closed doors, away from the harsh spotlight of reality. I disagree, and suggest you don’t know much about the ACLU. Much of their work is done well before the courtroom, for example. A letter from the ACLU, or a meeting with an ACLU lawyer, is the usual beginning to ACLU representation and often ends the matter without any harsh spotlights. That disposes of “for one thing.” What are the other ways in which the jobs are different? Why don’t you just come out and say what you really mean? The ACLU are the good guys. Their influence is benign. The lobbyists are bad guys; their influence is malevolent. Correct? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2011, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/173 "2011-11-21T19:18:25Z")
> [@treis](#): > > You want me to explain the logic behind the possibility that Thomas’ might lobby her husband, or act as a conduit for illicit donations? Really? No, no, I get that. I want you to explain what language on her website suggests that among her potential targets for influence are her husband. ANd if your answer is, “It’s just something everyone would already know,” then I would point out that Ms. Ripston’s employers were also already aware that her husband was a circuit judge. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/174 "2011-11-22T00:17:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > :rolleyes: > > Yes, I suppose it’s possible that unlike every other executive position within the ken of mankind, the ACLU offered Ms. Ripston her position without regard to her prior experience. And I suppose that for a job that involves contacts with many people in the legislative and judicial communities, it’s possible that the ACLU decided to disregard Ms. Ripston’s qualifications there. Possibly they put all the candidates’ names in a hat, and just drew one. > > But since that practice would fly in the face of our common sense and our knowledge of how every other freaking organization in the world works, I would say that it’s not for me to provide a specific cite that it happened. > > The person with the extraordinary claim must shoulder the burden of proof. The idea that the ACLU selected their executive director without regard to experience or connections is an extraordinary claim. A claim that no one here has made, but that you are eager to find someone to defend. > [@Bricker](#): > > I disagree, and suggest you don’t know much about the ACLU. Much of their work is done well before the courtroom, for example. A letter from the ACLU, or a meeting with an ACLU lawyer, is the usual beginning to ACLU representation and often ends the matter without any harsh spotlights. > > That disposes of “for one thing.” What are the other ways in which the jobs are different? > > Why don’t you just come out and say what you really mean? The ACLU are the good guys. Their influence is benign. The lobbyists are bad guys; their influence is malevolent. Correct? Ah, another thing that no one here has said but that you are eager to see defended. Do you have any other tricks besides “oh look at the liberal hypocrisy”? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/175 "2011-11-22T01:39:40Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > A claim that no one here has made, but that you are eager to find someone to defend. You bolded this line of mine: " I daresay that experience and connections were in part what led to the ACLU to offer the director’s job to Ramona." And you demanded a cite for it. Now you say that no one here is claiming the contrary. If no one here is claiming the contrary, then why do you want a cite for it? ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/176 "2011-11-22T02:58:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, no, I get that. I want you to explain what language on her website suggests that among her potential targets for influence are her husband. I never said there was any language to suggest that her business improperly lobbied her husband, or that it was set up to funnel money to Justice Thomas. > [@Bricker](#): > > ANd if your answer is, “It’s just something everyone would already know,” then I would point out that Ms. Ripston’s employers were also already aware that her husband was a circuit judge. I’ve explained the difference between the two situations several times in this thread. Feel free to choose any of those as your answer to this post. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/177 "2011-11-22T04:11:31Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > [http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/obamas\_2005\_tax\_return.pdf](http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/obamas_2005_tax_return.pdf) > > About 2/3 of the way down: U of C Hospitals salary for Michelle Obama: $316,962 > > She was “Vice President for Community and External Affairs” at the University of Chicago Medical Center. > > After she left, the job position was eliminated. There is no more “Vice President for Community and External Affairs”. > > From Chicago Tribune: [http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/02/top-u-of-c-medical-center-doctor-steps-down.html](http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/02/top-u-of-c-medical-center-doctor-steps-down.html) > > "Last month, Madara would say only that the hospital is eliminating 15 senior executive jobs, including vice president for community and external affairs, a position that had held been by First Lady Michelle Obama, a former medical center vice president. > > Her duties have been taken over by Dr. Eric Whitaker, a friend of her husband, President Barack Obama, and executive vice president for strategic affiliations and external affairs." So, you’d be total cool with Michele taking a consulting gig now for a couple hundred k, right? you missed this part of the quote: “And though the hospital has not disclosed the number of layoffs, they are expected to be massive. Sources close to the situation say they are be between 500 and 1,000. The medical center would not comment Saturday night.” and “Sources also say there could be changes to the program Obama was once involved in, which includes outreach to the South Side community and relationships with community hospitals, including Holy Cross Hospital and Mercy Hospital and Medical Center, to which less seriously ill patients are referred.” So, yes, \*one \*possible explanation is that Congressman Obama was overtly getting bribed through his wife. \*Another \*possible explanation is that Michele Obama actually was pretty good and her position eliminated along with the “massive” job cuts. Here’s the Wiki [take](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Obama#Career)on Michele Obama in case you are intersted, and to compare and contrast how about [Ginny](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginny_Thomas)Thomas. I still say the appearch of impropriety is damning for Judge Thomas. You think he has fuck you money, then fine, his little woman (your words no mine) should engage in something the fires her passion and doesn’t involve the appearance of impropriety. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/178 "2011-11-22T04:19:34Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > So, you’d be total cool with Michele taking a consulting gig now for a couple hundred k, right? Sure. Why not? Do you think Obama is for sale for 200K? > [@](#): > > So, yes, \*one \*possible explanation is that Congressman Obama was overtly getting bribed through his wife. \*Another \*possible explanation is that Michele Obama actually was pretty good and her position eliminated along with the “massive” job cuts. Yes. Her $300K/year job just became superfluous when she left. Coincidence I am sure. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/179 "2011-11-22T04:41:08Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You bolded this line of mine: " I daresay that experience and connections were in part what led to the ACLU to offer the director’s job to Ramona." > > And you demanded a cite for it. > > Now you say that no one here is claiming the contrary. > > If no one here is claiming the contrary, then why do you want a cite for it? **WOW!** That has to be the most willfully oblivious thing I’ve ever seen you post. You completely twisted my words, my quoting of your words, and the very thought behind my entire post in order to make that post I just quoted. What you said that no one else here is saying was clearly quoted, as it is the last line of the quote box in my previous post: > [@Bricker](#): > > The person with the extraordinary claim must shoulder the burden of proof. The idea that the ACLU selected their executive director without regard to experience or connections is an extraordinary claim. That’s the straw man you’ve built and now want someone to defend. But you are the only person saying it. No one has made that claim, AFAIK, except maybe you. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077/180 "2011-11-22T04:42:47Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Sure. Why not? Do you think Obama is for sale for 200K? > Yes. Her $300K/year job just became superfluous when she left. Coincidence I am sure. In this forum, assertions without factual cites are known, I think, as “bullshit”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/both-thomas-and-kagan-face-pressure-to-recuse/603077.md?page=10)