# SCOTUS Wife Virginia Thomas asks Anita Hill to apologize - WTF? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 20, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798 "2010-10-20T16:56:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/41 "2010-10-20T18:04:52Z")
If if if if if if … The only reason to assume that Anita Hill’s testimony was “made them up out of whole cloth, in an effort to derail Thomas’ nomination, without caring what effect her lies might have on Thomas personally, or on Thomas’ family,” is because you want to believe it. If she lied, she should have been charged with perjury instead of receiving a demand for an apology 20 years after the fact by Thomas’s wife. Chrissakes, if assumptions are the criteria we need to judge this story, why don’t we just assume Anita Hill eats babies and be done with it. ---
**Author:** ![BubbaDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bubbadog/32/333_2.png) [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/42 "2010-10-20T18:04:56Z")
Assuming that somebody told a big lie 20 years ago in front of a national audience and during a legal proceeding - Why in the world would anybody believe that the person would want to say ANYTHING contrary to their original position? I gotta score it “Tone Deaf” ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/43 "2010-10-20T18:06:16Z")
Mrs. Thomas didn’t extend an olive branch. She requested that Ms. Hill do so. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/44 "2010-10-20T18:06:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why not? “Extend an olive branch,” means generally an offer of peace or good will. If in fact Ms. Hill completely fabricated her testimony, than why is it unreasonable to ask that a predicate for peace and good will be her admission of that fact? Because she is not offering any goodwill in exchange. No compromise is offered. No peacemaking is being extended. She called to demand an explanation and apology. That in and of itself is not an olive branch. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/45 "2010-10-20T18:06:49Z")
> [@MsWhatsit](#): > > Ha. Yes, I missed that bit. Yeaahhhh, good luck with that. > > As for **Bricker** ’s increasingly contrived scenarios, I will just say that if Jesus Christ came down from on high and personally affirmed that Anita Hill was a big lying liar from Liarville, then sure, I suppose that would change my opinion about things. But since I am operating in reality instead of the land of bizarre hypotheticals, my opinion is not in fact changed. I think Mrs. Thomas is acting like a crazy person who is obsessed with something that happened two decades ago, and needs to let it drop. Again let me draw your attention to the fact that the OP’s commentary is predicated on “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” If your position is, “Look, I know what happened, and I’m not changing my opinion of what happened,” that’s fine, but you can hardly claim your position is held REGARDLESS of politics or your personal beliefs about that past event, can you? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAleq](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smartaleq/32/163_2.png) [@SmartAleq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAleq)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/46 "2010-10-20T18:07:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why not? “Extend an olive branch,” means generally an offer of peace or good will. If in fact Ms. Hill completely fabricated her testimony, than why is it unreasonable to ask that a predicate for peace and good will be her admission of that fact? Again, because Ms Thomas has zero, nada, zip, zilch reason to assume (aside from her own personal prejudice in favor of her husband) that Ms Hill did any such thing, and therefore is putting out a shot in the dark which is extremely tone deaf. I mean, if my auntie had a dick she’d be my uncle, but if I’ve never seen her with her pants off I have no call to leave her a voice mail message demanding she admit that she’s got the dangler she’s always maintained she doesn’t have. My auntie would consider me to be rude at best and delusional at average if I were to do so, and she’d be absolutely right to think it. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/47 "2010-10-20T18:08:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why not? “Extend an olive branch,” means generally an offer of peace or good will. If in fact Ms. Hill completely fabricated her testimony, than why is it unreasonable to ask that a predicate for peace and good will be her admission of that fact? What is being offered? An opportunity to ruin my career by admitting I deliberately fabricated testimony to the Senate in an effort to destroy someone’s chance to join the Supreme Court? There’s nothing wrong with asking for an apology, but there’s really nothing being offered, so there’s no conceivable reason Hill would admit anything. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/48 "2010-10-20T18:09:43Z")
No, I still think the lady is a nutjob even if Anita Hill IS a big lying liar from Liarville. The event in question is twenty years in the past, and calling and demanding a public apology now just makes her look insane. I get that having your husband lied about in public would be upsetting. Asking for a public apology _at the time_ would seem like a reasonable thing. But out of the blue, 20 years later? It looks crazy. There is no context in which this does not look crazy. It makes her look like she has been spending her days and nights silently, quietly fuming, and plotting how best to make this Anita Hill person _pay, damn it, PAY!_, and finally couldn’t take it anymore and picked up the phone. It seems like something a stalker would do, not the wife of one of the highest public officials in the country. ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/49 "2010-10-20T18:10:35Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > I just have to wonder, why _now_? There doesn’t seem to be anything significant about the date. > > Unless, you know, this is more political shit-stirring before the midterms. Then it makes loads of sense. I’m guessing that maybe the Thomases were having an argument, somehow Anita Hill’s name came up, accusations flew, the argument escalated, Clarence insisted he didn’t do anything wrong, and in an attempt to settle the matter once and for all (and to sort of prove to herself that she really does believe that her husband isn’t the sexual harasser that the evil MSM makes him out to be) Ginny called Hill and asked for the apology. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/50 "2010-10-20T18:11:20Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > Because she is not offering any goodwill in exchange. No compromise is offered. No peacemaking is being extended. She called to demand an explanation and apology. That in and of itself is not an olive branch. Here is the message she left: > [@Virginia Thomas to Anita Hill's answering machine](#): > > Good morning, Anita Hill, it’s Ginni Thomas. I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay have a good day. That doesn’t strike me as a demand, but a request. Why do you say that’s not an olive branch? Is there some essential element of olive branchiness that it’s missing? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/51 "2010-10-20T18:12:30Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > If if if if if if … > > The only reason to assume that Anita Hill’s testimony was “made them up out of whole cloth, in an effort to derail Thomas’ nomination, without caring what effect her lies might have on Thomas personally, or on Thomas’ family,” is because you want to believe it. If she lied, she should have been charged with perjury instead of receiving a demand for an apology 20 years after the fact by Thomas’s wife. > > Chrissakes, if assumptions are the criteria we need to judge this story, why don’t we just assume Anita Hill eats babies and be done with it. Again let me draw your attention to the fact that the OP’s commentary is predicated on “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” Did you miss that part? If your position is, “Look, I know what happened, and I’m not changing my opinion of what happened,” that’s fine, but you can hardly claim your position is held REGARDLESS of politics or your personal beliefs about that past event, can you? ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/52 "2010-10-20T18:13:07Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > I’m guessing that maybe the Thomases were having an argument, somehow Anita Hill’s name came up, accusations flew, the argument escalated, Clarence insisted he didn’t do anything wrong, and in an attempt to settle the matter once and for all (and to sort of prove to herself that she really does believe that her husband isn’t the sexual harasser that the evil MSM makes him out to be) Ginny called Hill and asked for the apology. I opened the thread just now to post pretty much this theory. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/53 "2010-10-20T18:14:27Z")
> [@SmartAleq](#): > > Again, because Ms Thomas has zero, nada, zip, zilch reason to assume (aside from her own personal prejudice in favor of her husband) that Ms Hill did any such thing, and therefore is putting out a shot in the dark which is extremely tone deaf. I mean, if my auntie had a dick she’d be my uncle, but if I’ve never seen her with her pants off I have no call to leave her a voice mail message demanding she admit that she’s got the dangler she’s always maintained she doesn’t have. My auntie would consider me to be rude at best and delusional at average if I were to do so, and she’d be absolutely right to think it. No, she wouldn’t. Because in fact she has the dick, in this hypothetical. ---
**Author:** ![BubbaDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bubbadog/32/333_2.png) [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/54 "2010-10-20T18:14:36Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > If if if if if if … > > The only reason to assume that Anita Hill’s testimony was “made them up out of whole cloth, in an effort to derail Thomas’ nomination, without caring what effect her lies might have on Thomas personally, or on Thomas’ family,” is because you want to believe it. Why? It pretty much came out to be a He said - She said issue. All I got out of it was that it was a stalemate. No strong evidence either way and pretty much a mud slinging contest. > [@](#): > > If she lied, she should have been charged with perjury instead of receiving a demand for an apology 20 years after the fact by Thomas’s wife. One of them was obviously lying. Yet no charges were filed. > [@](#): > > Chrissakes, if assumptions are the criteria we need to judge this story, why don’t we just assume Anita Hill eats babies and be done with it. She may have to pass the salt to Clarence so he can season up his bowl of blind kittens. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/55 "2010-10-20T18:14:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That is an extremely offensive comment. I agree. First, because whatever one thinks of Thomas’ jurisprudence (and I think he’s way, way out to lunch) - the man is a Justice on the United States Supreme Court, extremely intelligent, a fine legal writer, and he is very much _not_ Scalia Jr. He and Scalia often vote together, yes - but they come to their conclusions from very different places. Second - I’m really, really trying not to see a racist subtext to that post. And, well, I’m not pulling it off. What’s wrong with you? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/56 "2010-10-20T18:16:04Z")
**villa** , thank you. You are, so far as I can tell, the one person in this thread to this point with a reading comprehension past, say, sixth grade. I appreciate you more every day. ETA: No offense to Bubbadog, whose post wasn’t there when I started typing. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/57 "2010-10-20T18:17:12Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > I agree. First, because whatever one thinks of Thomas’ jurisprudence (and I think he’s way, way out to lunch) - the man is a Justice on the United States Supreme Court, extremely intelligent, a fine legal writer, and he is very much _not_ Scalia Jr. He and Scalia often vote together, yes - but they come to their conclusions from very different places. > > Second - I’m really, really trying not to see a racist subtext to that post. And, well, I’m not pulling it off. What’s wrong with you? Agreed, on both counts. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/58 "2010-10-20T18:17:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If in fact Ms. Hill completely fabricated her testimony Again, why do you consider it reasonable to make that assumption and not the contrary one? :dubious: The rest of us do all know, actually. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/59 "2010-10-20T18:19:09Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Whats Thomas supposed to do ,tell his wife the truth after lying in front of America repeatedly? It is good that he got on the court, so Scalia did not have to carry his own golf clubs these last few years. > [@Bricker](#): > > That is an extremely offensive comment. Totally. Carrying golf clubs is what law clerks are for. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/60 "2010-10-20T18:21:36Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Again, why do you consider it reasonable to make that assumption and not the contrary one? :dubious: > > The rest of us do all know, actually. Because this is the assumption that Ms. Thomas probably holds - and so if we want to understand her behavior, it’s logical to start from that premise. That doesn’t mean the premise is _true_ - but it’s not silly to ask “is Ms. Thomas’ behavior reasonable if she holds this belief?” That being said - as has been established, one could go either way in answering that question. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798.md?page=4)