Hearings on Clarence Thomas

I have just finished reading the Barbara Jordan interview (Opinion, Sept. 8). It renewed my misgivings about the nomination of Clarence Thomas, whose chief claim to fame appears to be his belief in self-help. He and President Bush loudly proclaim that he pulled himself up by his bootstraps. Neither of them has explained why Thomas failed to help his welfare-dependent sister who reportedly had to forsake a job when she was young to care for a relative in failing health. It seems that Thomas did not reach out to help his sister, much less the relative, preferring to let the state take care of their needs.

I find it repellent that a man should be so selfish as to fail to help his family when he lives in comfort himself. Having this in mind, it is apparent why he is so intolerant of the misfortunes of others and why he should not serve on a body that has to decide cases of man's inhumanity to man.

How much better a candidate would be Barbara Jordan, a woman of high intellectual and firm convictions, possessed of incisive logic. Her four handicaps--she is a black, female Democrat and has a physical impairment--could be rather viewed as enhancements for the Supreme Court.


San Diego

Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times
EDITION: California | U.S. & World