Advertisement
HomeCollectionsProfessor Hill
IN THE NEWS

Professor Hill

FEATURED ARTICLES
NEWS
By DAN BERGER | October 17, 1991
Your Senate sends two messages on sexual harassment: 1. Don't make charges. 2. The best defense is a good offense.Speaking of great quotations, whatever became of, "Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never harm me."?If you believe them, Justice Thomas would never submit to this again and Professor Hill would, which makes them both crazy.
ARTICLES BY DATE
NEWS
November 14, 1994
New Attack on Clarence ThomasWill the left ever cease its slanderous attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas? Three years ago, every liberal activist group in America had a chance to take down Justice Thomas (and his conservative views) by proving that he sexually harassed Anita Hill. The American people heard both the accused testify. They viewed documents and heard testimony on behalf of both persons.Accordingly, the American people reached a verdict: an overwhelming majority believed Justice Thomas.
Advertisement
NEWS
By Andrew Rosenthal and Andrew Rosenthal,New York Times News Service | October 14, 1991
WASHINGTON -- The fierce Republican counterattack on Anita F. Hill's testimony sprang from high-level White House consultations among dispirited officials who concluded as the new hearings unfolded that the only way to save Judge Clarence Thomas' nomination was to cast doubt on the professor's character and motivations.When the hearings began Friday, the White House avoided urging the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee to attack because President Bush's aides were split.Among Bush aides who believed Judge Thomas' story, some thought the gloves should come off and some feared the political dangers of attacking a black woman's character.
NEWS
By Anna Quindlen | May 12, 1994
IMAGINE that Anita Hill had come forward with her accusations against Clarence Thomas more than a year after he had been confirmed by the Senate.Imagine that she had chosen to introduce herself to the American people at a press conference sponsored by the ACLU and NOW, accompanied by a sworn enemy of Judge Thomas who had made a cottage industry of digging up dirt.Imagine that a friend of the judge was willing to swear under oath that he had been told by an attorney for Ms. Hill that she might be persuaded not to go public in exchange for a job.Imagine that she then announced that the only way to get satisfaction was to bring a suit asking for $700,000 in damages.
NEWS
By Russell Baker | October 15, 1991
BEING A LAWYER, Anita Hill must have known from the start that the White House would have to destroy her reputation in order to save Judge Thomas'. This is the way of the lawyer with those who take such matters into court.It's why only the most hot-headed accusers refuse to cool down and take their grievances to the psychiatrist, chaplain or bartender instead of the courtroom. Prosecuting the victim is the legal tradition.With a claim that she had been a victim of sexual harassment by the judge, Professor Hill a professor of law, after all, presumably teaching these home truths to the young surely knew what she was in for. So to believe she was a deliberate, coldly conniving liar, you had to believe she had a martyr's appetite for agony.
NEWS
By Maureen Dowd and Maureen Dowd,New York Times News Service | October 8, 1991
WASHINGTON -- The bitter he-said, she-said case of Anita F. Hill and Clarence Thomas has offered a rare look into the mechanics of power and decision-making in Washington, a city where men have always made the rules and the Senate remains an overwhelmingly male club.Even with the facts of the Oklahoma University law school professor's charges of sexual harassment against Judge Thomas still in dispute, the story of how members of the all-male Judiciary Committee handled the accusations has touched off an angry explosion among women in legal and political circles.
NEWS
By Anthony Lewis | October 21, 1991
Boston -- THERE IS a lot of talk, from President Bush among others, about the need to reform the Senate confirmation process for nominees to the Supreme Court. But there is not likely to be any reform. The reason is not hard to understand.The conservatives who dominate the Republican Party today like the process as it is. They have made it a test of ruthlessness, and at that they win. They are masters of attack and smear, of slash and burn, and they have utterly intimidated the Democratic majority in the Senate.
NEWS
October 9, 1991
More out of fear than conviction, the Senate postponed its scheduled vote yesterday evening on Judge Clarence Thomas' nomination to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court. It did so mainly for the sake of appearances, not in hope that there will be any real clarification of Professor Anita Hall's charge that Judge Thomas harassed her sexually some years ago -- a charge he denies.The Senate made its decision, as Sen. John Kerry, D.-Mass., among others, said in floor debate, because otherwise many Americans, especially women for obvious reasons, would believe the Senate did not take complaints of this sort seriously.
FEATURES
By Mike Royko and Mike Royko,Tribune Media Services | October 14, 1991
DURING THEIR RAVINGS, a couple of senators vowed that the staffer who leaked the secret dirty-talk memo about Judge Clarence Thomas to the press would be tracked down and brought to justice.I don't blame the senators for being angry about the leak. Without it, Judge Thomas would have been confirmed Tuesday evening, and they would have resumed the important chore of squandering our money.But to hear them bluster, you would think that some traitor had been passing nuclear warheads to Saddam Hussein.
NEWS
By GARLAND L. THOMPSON and GARLAND L. THOMPSON,Garland L. Thompson writes editorials for The Sun | October 12, 1991
At this point, you should not have to be a woman to understand why Anita F. Hill is feeling abused. The University of Oklahoma law professor, sought out by Senate probers checking up on Judge Clarence Thomas, tried by all accounts to keep her story quiet. She did not leak the secret FBI report about her alleged ensnarement in Judge Thomas' sexual fantasies and probably does not know who did. She has little to gain and much to lose by incurring the wrath of the White House. Yet some of the most powerful men in American politics have lambasted her, not her alleged harasser.
NEWS
By Anthony Lewis | May 24, 1993
WHEN a partisan ideologue publishes a book that purports t expose an opponent as corrupt, would any sensible reviewer accept its factual assertions without checking, and praise it as an impressive investigative study? One would think not.But that, amazingly, is what has happened with a book called "The Real Anita Hill: The Untold Story."It is by David Brock, a right-wing polemicist whose work on the book was supported by conservative foundations. One of the foundations is headed by William Simon, who was a leader of the Citizens' Committee to Confirm Clarence Thomas.
FEATURES
By Kevin Cowherd | October 30, 1991
THERE HAS been some talk recently about why this column did not weigh in with its usual shrill and hyperbolic commentary on the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill controversy.The answer is quite simple. I wanted to see which way the wind was blowing first.If the polls had indicated overwhelming support for Judge Thomas, you can bet your bottom dollar this space would have carried a snappy piece excoriating Professor Hill, topped by the kind of shrieking 120-point headline unseen since "JAPANESE BOMB PEARL HARBOR!"
NEWS
By Anthony Lewis | October 21, 1991
Boston -- THERE IS a lot of talk, from President Bush among others, about the need to reform the Senate confirmation process for nominees to the Supreme Court. But there is not likely to be any reform. The reason is not hard to understand.The conservatives who dominate the Republican Party today like the process as it is. They have made it a test of ruthlessness, and at that they win. They are masters of attack and smear, of slash and burn, and they have utterly intimidated the Democratic majority in the Senate.
NEWS
By DAN BERGER | October 17, 1991
Your Senate sends two messages on sexual harassment: 1. Don't make charges. 2. The best defense is a good offense.Speaking of great quotations, whatever became of, "Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never harm me."?If you believe them, Justice Thomas would never submit to this again and Professor Hill would, which makes them both crazy.
NEWS
By Wiley A. Hall 3rd | October 17, 1991
This is a story about the reactions some women had to Professor Anita Hill's ordeal.Anita Hill, of course, is the law professor who claimed that Clarence Thomas, now confirmed to be a justice on the Supreme Court, had sexually harassed her when the two worked together some 10 years ago.Hill's charge sparked three days of some of the most dramatic and contentious testimony ever heard in Congress, or on television, and supposedly raised the nation's consciousness...
NEWS
By Russell Baker | October 15, 1991
BEING A LAWYER, Anita Hill must have known from the start that the White House would have to destroy her reputation in order to save Judge Thomas'. This is the way of the lawyer with those who take such matters into court.It's why only the most hot-headed accusers refuse to cool down and take their grievances to the psychiatrist, chaplain or bartender instead of the courtroom. Prosecuting the victim is the legal tradition.With a claim that she had been a victim of sexual harassment by the judge, Professor Hill a professor of law, after all, presumably teaching these home truths to the young surely knew what she was in for. So to believe she was a deliberate, coldly conniving liar, you had to believe she had a martyr's appetite for agony.
NEWS
By Anthony Lewis | May 24, 1993
WHEN a partisan ideologue publishes a book that purports t expose an opponent as corrupt, would any sensible reviewer accept its factual assertions without checking, and praise it as an impressive investigative study? One would think not.But that, amazingly, is what has happened with a book called "The Real Anita Hill: The Untold Story."It is by David Brock, a right-wing polemicist whose work on the book was supported by conservative foundations. One of the foundations is headed by William Simon, who was a leader of the Citizens' Committee to Confirm Clarence Thomas.
NEWS
November 14, 1994
New Attack on Clarence ThomasWill the left ever cease its slanderous attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas? Three years ago, every liberal activist group in America had a chance to take down Justice Thomas (and his conservative views) by proving that he sexually harassed Anita Hill. The American people heard both the accused testify. They viewed documents and heard testimony on behalf of both persons.Accordingly, the American people reached a verdict: an overwhelming majority believed Justice Thomas.
FEATURES
By Mike Royko and Mike Royko,Tribune Media Services | October 14, 1991
DURING THEIR RAVINGS, a couple of senators vowed that the staffer who leaked the secret dirty-talk memo about Judge Clarence Thomas to the press would be tracked down and brought to justice.I don't blame the senators for being angry about the leak. Without it, Judge Thomas would have been confirmed Tuesday evening, and they would have resumed the important chore of squandering our money.But to hear them bluster, you would think that some traitor had been passing nuclear warheads to Saddam Hussein.
NEWS
By Andrew Rosenthal and Andrew Rosenthal,New York Times News Service | October 14, 1991
WASHINGTON -- The fierce Republican counterattack on Anita F. Hill's testimony sprang from high-level White House consultations among dispirited officials who concluded as the new hearings unfolded that the only way to save Judge Clarence Thomas' nomination was to cast doubt on the professor's character and motivations.When the hearings began Friday, the White House avoided urging the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee to attack because President Bush's aides were split.Among Bush aides who believed Judge Thomas' story, some thought the gloves should come off and some feared the political dangers of attacking a black woman's character.
Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.