Anita Hill Did Not “Speak Truth to Power”


I’m not even talking about whether Anita Hill’s allegations were true. It’s the ‘power’ part that I’m concerned with.

The poster for the new Anita Hill doc carries the tagline, “Speaking Truth to Power”. Some of the women who accused Bill Clinton of abusive behavior spoke truth to power. Anita Hill did not.

Those women were dragged through the mud by the media and the political establishment orchestrated by Hillary Clinton. They were powerless and remained powerless.

Anita Hill had the entire liberal establishment at her back. Standing behind her was the media in its massed voices, the Democratic Party and the entertainment industry.

The power that Hill was confronting was a weak Republican one term president. It wasn’t much of a match. Justice Thomas barely squeaked through the process.

It’s possible to believe that Hill was telling the truth, but it’s blatantly dishonest to present her as one woman challenging “power”. The documentary is yet another reminder that Hill was part of a propaganda effort targeting a Supreme Court Justice that liberals were threatened by because he was a black conservative. Behind Hill was all the power of a political movement.

There will never be a documentary about any of the women who accused Bill Clinton. Because when you really do speak truth to power, power doesn’t celebrate your story. It silences you.

  • Veracious_one


  • alicia bailey

    Anita Hill needs to let it go. She was mad because, he did not want her. I am glad he is in the supreme court. Nothing she states will change anything.

  • Sonnys_Mom

    “Vengeance is mine!” sayeth the Left! They keep re-staging the same fights and raising the same issues, hoping that this time around we’ll be vulnerable to “re-education” efforts.

    • No RNC

      Same technique was used by the Alenskyites on Herman Cain…

  • catherineinpvb

    Never believed Anita Hill. . .compare her accusations to those who write racist graffit; on their door; and claim they are target of racism. She and Al Sharpton; a match. . .’a racism; that ‘could’ have happened; is reason enough; when they need the publicity.

    • Doobee

      Remember that she made the allegations 10 years after she had last seen or spoken to CT.

  • Ginger Li

    Anita Hill was a fabricated leftist fraud from start to finish – a sort of female prototype B. Hussein.The motivation behind her smear of Justice Thomas, she says, was her need to inform the public. What BS. It was a purposeful hit job (Thomas called it a ‘high tech lynching’) on a fine and decent man simply because the left did not want him on the SCOTUS. It was done in the same vein as Kennedy’s vile trashing of Robert Bork when he was nominated.

    Whoever would waste money on self-serving, fantasy trash like ‘Speaking Truth to Power’ (1) distributes this dues paid tripe to union members, (2) is uniformed and lives in a cartoon world or (3) needs a mental evaluation.

  • herb benty

    The Democrat progressive use of lying, “for the greater good” was on full display at the Hearings. She was ridiculously unconvincing, Obama: “not a smigion of corruption” is another example. Lies are necessary for their Anti-American policies.

  • Mike Wilson

    A man of Clarence Thomas’ prowess would certainly not be wanting of candidates should he have wanted to indulge in extra-marital activities. There is no logical reason why such a (shall be put it kindly) plain woman like Anita Hill would even be noticed by Thomas let alone be allowed to succeed in any beguiling arts.

  • Jihan McDonald

    this & all of the commentary below here celebrating rape culture is literally insane. so just because she actually had support it is somehow not incredibly courageous for her to sit in a senate committee hearing telling people you know don’t believe you about something horrible that has happened to you? that is complete bullshit. that’s like saying that your average sexual assault survivor isn’t actually brave if she goes to court & her family is there, she’s only brave if no one’s in her corner. this kind of “analysis” does absolutely nothing for the cause of civil rights & liberties. this is nothing but victim blaming, pure, simple & ugly. without writing a full on dissertation about the flaws in your “logic” everything i see written here is a perpetuation of rape culture, from insinuating that because you individually are not attracted to her that clarence thomas also wouldn’t be, to saying that its a lie because she didn’t report it immediately; look at what happened when she did!! if you already know you’re coming up against the kind of willful denial & explicit malice that she knew she would going against a supreme court judge what’s the smart thing to do, try to fight it out against the fucking u.s. government on your own, or get support. you’re mad at her success in making sound decisions about the best course of action for her own well-being, right, that makes sense…

    • Daniel Greenfield

      There’s an important distinction between speaking truth to power and speaking truth FOR power

      Liberals routinely blur this distinction in a way that makes them the victim

      • Jihan McDonald

        that’s absolutely ridiculous. if someone shoots you, you’re a victim of a gunshot; if someone stabs you you’re a victim of a stabbing; if someone rapes you, you’re a victim of rape. its not adroit political maneuvering its the definition of words. are you as equally distrustful of people who believe global warming is real and say so? because those people also have support behind them and many of them are people in power speaking about it because they know its the truth. the truth doesn’t give a shit about human politics, it is what it is no matter how we think, feel or see it. its not about What the truth is as much as its about what our relationship to that truth is.

  • roccolore

    Anita Hill was the Crystal Mangum of her time: Making bogus rape allegations and still being praised by Democrats.