# 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:** 5
**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, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/81 "2010-10-20T18:40:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s a pretty detailed definition about olive branches. To me, the phrase simply refers to peace, and I still fail to see why an offer of peace cannot be predicated on a request for an admission of the truth. She wasn’t requesting an admission of the truth. She was requesting an admission that events played out the way she believed them to have played out. Accusing someone else of lying is not “extending an olive branch.” ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/82 "2010-10-20T18:43:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > 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? If Cindy Sheehan left a message on George Bush’s answering machine inviting him to admit that he lied about going into Iraq and inviting him to apologize to her, would you think this is equally reasonable? How about a Swift Boater asking John Kerry to admit he lied about his war record? Mrs. Thomas’ knowledge and state of mind is what is at issue here, not the truth or falsity of the claim. Unless she has a smoking gun, as it were, there is no reason for her to think Dr. Hill will apologize or change her story - no matter if it is wrong or right. ---
**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, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/83 "2010-10-20T18:44:22Z")
> [@emmaliminal](#): > > It may have been phrased as a request, but stripped of semantic sleight-of-hand, I honestly think the content is demanding. And insulting – as if Hill would have apologized by now if she’d ever thought about it (or prayed about it), and needs to be prompted to think. > > The missing essential olive-branchiness is intent. What of “goodwill” is there in suggesting Hill needs to publicly apologize for lying, however nicely put? It might have been olive-branchy, if still deluded, if Virginia had said something like “I called to say that I forgive you for lying all those years ago.” OK, you’re right about that. Even “I called to say that I would forgive you for lying all those years ago if only you told the truth now,” would qualify. But you’re right - she didn’t actually offer forgiveness or the hint of it. I agree that her message is not fairly described as an olive branch. And thus, to the extent that the OP meant Ms. Thomas was tone deaf to describe it as an olive branch, I have to acknowledge that’s correct, “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” ---
**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, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/84 "2010-10-20T18:45:54Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > If Cindy Sheehan left a message on George Bush’s answering machine inviting him to admit that he lied about going into Iraq and inviting him to apologize to her, would you think this is equally reasonable? How about a Swift Boater asking John Kerry to admit he lied about his war record? I wouldn’t call either of those “tone deaf.” ---
**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, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/85 "2010-10-20T18:47:25Z")
Of much greater concern should be Ms. Thomas’ partisan activism and how that might affect her husband’s decisionmaking. Has he ever recused himself from any decision in which his party’s fortunes might be affected? Should he? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/86 "2010-10-20T18:50:03Z")
“consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did to my husband”. That is an olive branch? Bull. it accuses her of lying in public and says her husband deserves an apology for her lies. That is an insult. That is saying you are a liar and lied in front of congress about my porn loving husband. Hill did the right thing, but should have expressed the insult more firmly. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/87 "2010-10-20T18:50:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s a pretty detailed definition about olive branches. To me, the phrase simply refers to peace, and I still fail to see why an offer of peace cannot be predicated on a request for an admission of the truth. I don’t see an offer of peace. I don’t see an offer of _anything_ in return, not even a kind word. Just a passive-aggressive (and really snotty) accusation and demand. I also think you know good and well that your hypothesis that Anita Hill completely fabricated this is wildly implausible. I know you’re trying to create an alternative theory for the jury, but this juror isn’t buying it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/88 "2010-10-20T18:51:50Z")
Trouble with that answer, as with so many of your answers, is your faith in the power of positive parsing, your inclination to define words to your own satisfaction. If not “tone deaf”, then what, perzackly? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/89 "2010-10-20T18:52:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I wouldn’t call either of those “tone deaf.” Would you call it “showboating” or “political grandstanding”, considering that the outcome is designed to do nothing but further publicity? ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/90 "2010-10-20T18:52:35Z")
> [@zamboniracer](#): > > Not so. The vote was not on the veracity of the testimony, but on whether Thomas should be a SC Justice. The vote was a narrow “Yes.” > > Speaking for myself only, I thought both Thomas and Hill were really shading the truth so that i didn’t believe either of them fully. I would’ve voted no. Sorry, but I disagree with you here. _By the end of the hearings, polls showed the vast majority of Americans believed Thomas and disbelieved Hill._ > **[Clarence Thomas: A Silent Justice Speaks Out](https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3665379&page=1)** > > Clarence Thomas: A Silent Justice Speaks Out ---
**Author:** ![Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/91 "2010-10-20T18:52:39Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Of much greater concern should be Ms. Thomas’ partisan activism and how that might affect her husband’s decisionmaking. Has he ever recused himself from any decision in which his party’s fortunes might be affected? Should he? Does it really matter? It’s not like he’s a swing vote or anything. You can pretty much guarantee he’s going to come down on the batshit crazy conservative side of any issue anyway, with or without his batshit crazy wife. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/92 "2010-10-20T18:59:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That is an extremely offensive comment. Good. Please pass it along to Justice Thomas should you happen to run into him. ---
**Author:** ![emmaliminal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7bcc69/32.png) [@emmaliminal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emmaliminal)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/93 "2010-10-20T19:02:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I wouldn’t call either of those “tone deaf.” OK; how do you define"tone deaf" in this colloquial sense, then? I think of it as meaning something like “unable to predict that this will sound bad to most of the public, and therefore have the opposite result to what was apparently intended.” Which I \*would \*call this. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/94 "2010-10-20T19:05:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, if the OP had said, “Regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event, how self-serving can an individual be?” I don’t think I’d have any complaint about it. Antics with semantics. Sorry I didn’t allow for your \*reductio ad absurdem \*scenario. My conclusion stands. ---
**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, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/95 "2010-10-20T19:07:20Z")
> [@emmaliminal](#): > > OK; how do you define"tone deaf" in this colloquial sense, then? I think of it as meaning something like “unable to predict that this will sound bad to most of the public, and therefore have the opposite result to what was apparently intended.” Which I \*would \*call this. The tone deafness I have conceded relates not to the message left for Hill, but to Ms. Thomas’ later characterization of that message as an olive branch. You have convinced me that it’s not fair to call the message an olive branch. But as to the message itself, it’s not clear to me that Thomas ever intended the message to become public; it seems pretty clear that it was intended only for Hill’s ears. So we’re back to what I was arguing before: if indeed we start from the assumption that Hill deliberately and consciously lied, what makes that message tone deaf? Your definition of “sound bad to most of the public” is not workable, since the message was intended NOT for the public, but for Hill alone. ---
**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, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/96 "2010-10-20T19:10:22Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > Antics with semantics. Sorry I didn’t allow for your \*reductio ad absurdem \*scenario. My conclusion stands. Semantics is the study of the meaning and significance of words. It is rather odd that you hand-have away my point as “semantics” and fail to acknowledge that the problem arises because the OP tried to gain a rhetorical advantage by claiming this belief would be shared “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” In fact, that’s not true. ---
**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, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/97 "2010-10-20T19:11:24Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Would you call it “showboating” or “political grandstanding”, considering that the outcome is designed to do nothing but further publicity? I don’t agree the message is meant for publicity at all. ---
**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, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/98 "2010-10-20T19:12:25Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Trouble with that answer, as with so many of your answers, is your faith in the power of positive parsing, your inclination to define words to your own satisfaction. If not “tone deaf”, then what, perzackly? Define words to my satisfaction? What does “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” mean to you, then? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/99 "2010-10-20T19:13:31Z")
Well, of course not! Why would anyone imagine that such a communication between two private citizens of no particular notoriety would ever become a public matter? ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798/100 "2010-10-20T19:13:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Semantics is the study of the meaning and significance of words. It is rather odd that you hand-have away my point as “semantics” and fail to acknowledge that the problem arises because the OP tried to gain a rhetorical advantage by claiming this belief would be shared “…regardless of politics or one’s personal beliefs about that past event…” In fact, that’s not true. No, we are apparently choosing to disagree. I assert that even within your _reductio ad absurdem_ scenario, her actions would still be tone deaf. You disagree. Upthread (Post #84) you also state that you wouldn’t find those situations tone deaf, either. I will repeat what I posted in Post #20 - and which you did not previously address, near as I can tell: > [@](#): > > If Person A obviously holds a set of strong beliefs and Person B asks Person A to acknowledge a wholly different point of view, and does so saying “no offense!” then, regardless of what actually happened, that is tone deaf. QED. This had NOTHING to do with that specific situation or previously-held beliefs about the situation - it is generic. It is still tone deaf. We clearly have different definitions of tone deaf. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-wife-virginia-thomas-asks-anita-hill-to-apologize-wtf/557798.md?page=6)