European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - October 19, 1991, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Saturday october 19, 1991 the stars and stripes a Page 13 commentary James j. Kilpatric confirmation ordeal will Handicap Thomas nothing that transpired changed the question at Issue is judge Clarence Thomas qualified to sit on the . Supreme court he is. If Thomas had been voted Down it would have been a worse stain on the Senate than the rejection of judge John j. Parker in 1930 and the rejection of judge Clement f. Haynsworth in 1969. Parker was brought Down by spurious charges of racism. Haynsworth lost to a Cabal of labor unions. Both were . Circuit court judges As is Thomas and both continued to serve with distinction for Many years. Thomas will be handicapped for years by the ordeal he has experienced. The High court is hearing one Case after another involving women in some capacity. Names Spring to mind Elizabeth Anderson Hishon a lawyer who charged sex discrimination Brenda Patterson a bookkeeper who charged racial harassment Sha Ron Russell a nurse Ann Hopkins an accountant Mary Craig who chose to be sterilized rather than lose her Job making Lead batteries. How will Thomas Rule in such cases from what i know of Thomas and from what i have Learned in recent Days i know the Man has the character the integrity and the self discipline to apply the Law without letting the ordeal color his judgment. He has suffered an agony of the spirit but in time the pain will diminish. The Puzzle that will continue to fascinate observers goes to the bizarre tales told under oath by Anita Hill. Why did she say these things her defenders of course will answer a because they Are True a but that Loyal assertion fails to convince. A dozen inconsistencies expose a monstrous lie. The critical facts have to do with Hills unbelievable pattern of behaviour after the alleged incidents of sexual harassment at the department of education. By her account Thomas was an evil Man obsessed by sex. He described to her How women had sex with animals. I be boasted of his own sexual prowess. He Dweller upon hard Core pornographic movies. He pressed her for dates. She was repelled by his conduct made uncomfortable cruelly embarrassed. That was what she said. But what did she do when Thomas moved to the equal employment Opportunity commission she went with him she was under no compunction to leave education. She had a non political schedule a position. When she says she did not know this and made no attempt to find out she lies. At the Leoc she says Thomas continued the harassment. But Hill made no complaint to anyone in the office. She told her tale to four outsiders but All they knew was what she told them. Curiously though Thomas foes moved heaven and Earth to dig up dirt about him they could not find one single woman co worker at education or at Leoc who would come Forward to corroborate Hills Story. The phone Calls. Long after Hill left Washington when she was completely beyond any Power of discipline or retaliation he might have exercised she telephoned him repeatedly. The messages she left were damning a Anita Hill called just to say  it wont do. The most elementary common sense tells us that Hills Story is false. Here is a woman who has been painfully insulted. Her employer is a disgusting revolting sex crazed lecher. She is repelled by his filthy advances. Common sense tells us she would never want to see or hear from the creep again. But what does she do when she is in town she a Calls just to say  nothing adds up. A Man who does the things Thomas is alleged to have done is a Man of coarseness. Such a Man is profane a locker room Casanova a peddle of dirty jokes. Most of us know the Type. But Clarence Thomas is not such a Man. He is a Man of dignity. Every witness to his character has denounced Hills charges As patently unbelievable. I believe the judge was cruelly snared by a Young woman who name dropped her sexual fantasies in order to get attention. 1 am sorry for this woman for what she has done to herself and her career. 1 am More deeply sorry for what she has done to Clarence Thomas. C a Versal press Syndicate   Buff Ofcar amp i Ramcke meizenbaumabcrt1cus Ciani Brishc known be eat cum snug . Chaf9fluidjcus Clarence Thomas inhabits  Modem Mito ongar Eft amerte Gnu Winner Likht  William Safir Ereal Issue obscured in male female shootout suppose you chair the Senate judiciary committee considering the nomination of a woman to be a Justice of the supreme court. You receive a complaint from a Young Man apparently an anti abortion activist opposed to the nominees Liberal views charging that the woman chosen for the court has slept her Way to the top in her political Legal career worse that the nominee used her position of Power to seduce him when he was her Law clerk. The accuser demands anonymity. What is your proper response you cannot ignore the charge which May be True and the suppression of which will one Day surely come out. Nor can you publicly air the charge which May be useless vindictive and a political manipulation. Your responsibility is to Contact the accuser and say if you Are prepared to come Forward and make your charge we will investigate. The nominee will be asked to refute your allegation and will be told the source she May provide us questions to ask you in deciding if your accusation is credible. That a essentially what sen. Joe Biden did when Law professor Anita Hill sent in her accusation against supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas but wanted her identity concealed. If anything Biden was too solicitous seeking to a get permission from Hill even to have the Fri look at this  but no ambush is allowed. The Senate should say if we determine your Story has weight we will make it Public along with your identity the accused has the right to know the source of defamation come be Cross examined. The purpose of changing the circumstances around in my opening fictitious example is to focus on the principle that was obscured in what became a male female shootout. Many women especially those who work in offices took up Hills 76-trombone accusation a and the Senate a unwillingness to dig into it so Long As she Clung to anonymity a As evidence that a male conspiracy continues to treat women As sex objects. They will transform the decision on confirmation into a vote for or against sexual harassment in the workplace now almost equated with rape. Many men see this As what you get when you try to be a Mentor to a manipulator. After the alleged dirty talk Hill left a secure Job to follow Thomas to another Agency received his help in getting a University Job called him a dozen times in Hopes of getting to see him got him to speak at her school and repaid him by secretly seeking his ruination. When Anonymous character assassination failed she went Public. But both sexes missed the Point. This was not a male female fight nor a vote on insensitivity or ingratitude this was a rights of the accused fight against the ambush of the Anonymous accuser whatever the sex and whatever the charge. The argument is made that society blames the victim and the victim of Power leering is a helpless Little person fearful of the spotlight in taking on a big shot. But in today a environment of burning hostility to nominees and candidates it is the famous political figure who is most helpless a his or her reputation vulnerable to the Little person Allied to the interests of a powerful publicity hip opposition. The managers of presidential candidates who have been bracing their Han Lees for the expected marital Fidelity interrogation must now be making lists of every female employee and Campaign worker Over the past decade. Will one complain of the Many a dirty jokes or what of a preemptive strike can a source in the front runners Camp he found to complain of the leers and winks of a hostile environment in the candidate s presence a decade ago we Are taking a Good vehicle of cultural shift a an overdue Mutual respect in the workplace a and driving it Over the Cliff. When it comes to subordinating a movement to the rights of an individual of either sex some activists just done to get it an attempt to shoot from ambush and a refusal to complain until the perfect moment suggest unreliability. In next year s Campaign we should Bottom our judgment on individualism a Bedrock every person has the right to face his or her accuser each of us is presumed innocent until proven guilty and the Burden of proof is on the accuser. C Tho new York times the opinions expressed in the columns and cartoons on this Page represent those of the authors and arc in no Way to be considered As representing the views of the stars and stripes or the United states government