A Just Indignation

James Tarranto has an excellent discussion of the current theme of much left wing media discussion of Clarence Thomas' biography. Mr. Tarranto finds the charge that Justice Thomas is "bitter and angry" to be unwarranted. In addition to his thoughts, I would add the following.

Those who call Justice Thomas by these names partly do so because, though they don't say so and they lack adequate evidence, they still consider him to have been guilty. If he were innocent of the charges made by Anita Hill, who really could blame him for holding some ill will? Indeed, one might suggest that the justice has demonstrated remarkable restraint. Those who say that Justice Thomas should just get over it since his nomination was subsequently confirmed simply pass over the rather natural response that one would have to having his name sullied in the most public way before an entire nation.

Mr. Tarranto quotes from the justice's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee to that effect. Reading it reminded me of the surprise I felt when Justice Thomas appeared before the committee on that eventful evening. Most expected him to reply cautiously to the charges that Ms. Hill had made earlier in the day. There was an audible gasp in the room when the nominee declared that he had not watched her testimony earlier in the day. His testimony was both eloquent and fiery, and believing him to be innocent, I admired it.

To forgive may be divine, but one can hardly blame Justice Thomas for being rather human with regard to those who have never asked forgiveness for attacking him in that most personal way.