NY Magazine Disapproves of Clarence Thomas and His Interracial Marriage

Clarence and Virginia Thomas: American Heroes Defying the Odds

To tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of Americans, Clarence and Virginia Thomas are American heroes with a real-life Hollywood storyline. Justice Thomas is a living legend who has magnificently shattered the usual trajectory of people born in devastating circumstances, including an absent father, racism, and abject poverty.

Unlike for every other Supreme Court justice, the Constitution is Thomas’ unfailing judicial North Star. Even when it’s painfully unpopular in D.C., he does not flinch at faithfully applying the actual text of the Constitution to every case. Every time justices disagree about a case, Thomas is right and the others are wrong. He’s a moral and legal giant, almost single-handedly keeping fidelity to our nation’s chief law aflame in our nation’s top court.

This is really why the left hates him and his wife, Ginni. Justice and Ginni Thomas stand boldly in the way of the left’s 150-year campaign to turn Americans into the serfs of an almighty bureaucracy that knows no checks on its appetites.

So it’s no surprise to see yet another venomous article about the pair from New York Magazine, wildly alleging, without actual evidence, they’re involved in everything nefarious from race betrayal to insurrection. It’s part of a recent coordinated effort among corporate media to delegitimize fidelity to the Constitution in the U.S. judicial system, and to get America’s best Supreme Court justice to recuse himself from as many cases as possible.

Discredited Harpies Amplify Rumors and Innuendo

Apparently no level is too low for this magazine to stoop in its effort to defame the Thomases. The article repeats half-century-old claims from smear operators Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson that Thomas looked at pornography in college. Author Kerry Howley calls their long-discredited collection of unverified dirty stories “astonishingly well sourced.”

The idea is to prep minds to accept Anita Hill’s unverified sexual harassment accusations that nearly derailed Thomas’ confirmation. Even if this unsubstantiated gossip happens to be true, if every person who ever looked at pornography is disqualified from public service or to be convicted as a sex maniac, almost nobody gets to be in any public office. That means these claims aren’t concerns about sexual propriety; they’re a politically motivated smear job.

Safe Childhoods and Yacht Rides Are Racist

If she supported the destruction of America, Ginni’s all-American childhood would be praised instead of savaged by jealous white Jezebels in New York Magazine. We’re supposed to both believe it’s terrible that Clarence Thomas’ childhood home was next to open sewage pits and it’s terrible for Ginni Thomas to have grown up in an upscale suburban development in apparent peace and comfort. Safe childhoods, which every mother of every color wants for her children, are racist, you see — if a conservative enjoys one.

Here are just a few quotes from this indulgently long article that illustrate the “Mean Girl” innuendo campaign underway in the guise of “reporting”:

• “Bonnie and Clyde were performing intimacy; every line crossed was its own profession of love. Refusing to recuse oneself and then objecting, alone among nine justices, to the revelation of potentially incriminating documents regarding a coup in which a spouse is implicated is many things, and one of those things is romantic.” Yes, the author describes a Supreme Court justice and his wife as the murderous criminals “Bonnie and Clyde.”
• “Here is a story about the way legitimate racial grievance and determined white ignorance can reinforce one another, tending toward an extremism capable, in this case, of discrediting an entire branch of government.” Project much?
• “In the spring of 1986, Clarence was a 37-year-old divorced single father and one of D.C.’s most eligible bachelors according to Jet magazine, which we can be fairly certain Ginni did not read.” Nice little racial dig there from… another white lady who probably also does not read Jet magazine.
• “Clarence and Ginni Thomas have, for decades, sustained the happiest marriage in the American Republic, gleeful in the face of condemnation, thrilling to the revelry of wanton corruption, untroubled by the burdens of biological children or adherence to legal statute.”

What a savage way to describe a couple the article later admits is so generous they volunteered to adopt the three children of an incarcerated family member. They eventually did adopt one of the three, and cared for him as their own child. Oh yes, “untroubled by the burdens of biological children.” That description is just sick.

Justice Thomas Is Really an Inner White Guy

The article also drips with what, if it were directed at a leftist black man, would result in the writer’s very public cancellation within about six seconds.

“It took the marriage of a Black man’s not unjustified fatalism with the boundless white impulse to build walls against unpleasant knowledge; what the late philosopher Charles Mills called ‘the management of memory.’ It took the marriage of a man who needed adulation as shield [sic] against self-doubt and a woman who needed a guru to shield her from ambiguity,” Howley writes. Catch that? Justice Thomas is married to a “boundless white impulse.” Sounds a lot like calling him an Oreo.

NY Mag also complains loudly about a family friend, a billionaire named Harlan Crow, who occasionally takes the Thomases on yacht rides, bought Justice Thomas’ mother a home, and sent the Thomases’ adopted grandnephew to private school. What a nefarious use of wealth!

Crow also forms the basis for Howley to allege that Thomas thinks like a white man (whatever that means; ideas have no race). Again, sickening.

If these people’s political affiliations were switched, NY Mag would be sucking up to Crow and inviting him to all their parties, even if he happened to have an alleged habit of weirdly kissing hot women on the lips at social events, like a former senator the magazine defended.

But notice that it’s only when a black man marks himself as highly capable of independent thought and action that New York Magazine treats him as worthy of racialized analysis, discounting both his skin color and personal experiences with Jim Crow. Only a black man who thinks the way they want him to counts as racially legitimate to them.

Notice how these white people set themselves up as the arbiters of black identity and the parameters in which black Americans are allowed to function. Transgress their limits on black people, and the racist knives come out immediately.

The entire article only verifies Thomas’ perspective on white liberals, as quoted in the article itself:

…Thomas has in countless speeches articulated the motives of white liberals disrupting Black life: They act to assuage white guilt, to improve the aesthetics of the ruling class, to stoke the delicate self-conception of those who would never willingly cede power, all of it in service to a supremacist status quo. He prefers, he has said, the directness of southern racism to the subtlety of northern condescension.

Can’t Argue His Points? Defame His Family

The NY Mag article quotes Justice Thomas as saying: “I was among the elite, and I knew that no amount of striving would make me one of them.” The only thing he’s wrong about there is calling these credentialed America-destroyers “elite.”

Clarence Thomas sets the standard for elite Americans, and not one of these excrement shooters is worthy of licking his boots. That’s why they really hate him: because he’s very publicly outpaced them, morally, patriotically, and mentally, for half a century.

Thomas is the greatest living American, and it’s not even close. Without his wife, as he says himself, this colossus would lack a vital support.

They can’t stop him, and they can’t compete with him, so they lie about him. But their lies aren’t fooling the rest of us, to whom Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni will always be the greatest Americans of our lifetimes.