I believed Anita Hill in 1991. I still do. At the time of the Clarence Thomas hearings, I spearheaded an effort by more than 120 female law professors to petition the Senate Judiciary Committee to delay its vote on Judge Thomas’s nomination in order to fully investigate Ms. Hill’s sexual harassment claims against him. I remain profoundly disappointed with the results of the hearings.
But I also support Joe Biden, who was the chairman of those hearings, and who today has become the focus of much of the frustration of those disappointed by them. That focus is, I believe, misplaced.
Ms. Hill was treated badly by the Judiciary Committee, and Mr. Biden, as he admits, could have done more to assure a better hearing. He also could have issued an earlier and more meaningful apology than the one he recently made as he prepared to announce his presidential campaign. But it was not Mr. Biden who made the hearings as abusive to Ms. Hill as they were.
It was Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, who declared the proceedings a “war” and characterized Ms. Hill’s testimony as “flat-out perjury.” It was Alan Simpson, Republican of Wyoming, who suggested that Ms. Hill might be suffering from “a delusional disorder” and stated that unnamed others had told him to “watch out for this woman.” It was Howell Heflin, Democrat of Alabama, who suggested in his questioning that Ms. Hill might be a “scorned woman.” It was John Danforth, Republican of Missouri, who referred to Ms. Hill’s testimony as a “smear campaign.” (He later conceded that he had shown “no concern at all for fairness to Anita Hill.”) And it was Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, who declared that anyone who could produce allegations “so graphic and so crude and so outrageous” as Ms. Hill’s was “not a person” but a “psychopathic sex fiend or pervert.”
Compare these expressions of disrespect with statements that Mr. Biden made at the time. He described Ms. Hill as “an incredibly credible witness.” He criticized his “pontificating colleagues” for their repeated attacks on her integrity and the integrity of the confirmation process. He acknowledged that the proceedings over which he presided were “imperfect.” He expressed concern at the outset that Ms. Hill not be forced “against her will into the blinding light which you see here today.” It would be “immoral,” he said, “to push her in any way.”
Two and a half decades before the #MeToo movement, Mr. Biden demonstrated an awareness of some of the considerable barriers to reporting sexual harassment. Almost 70 percent of Americans supported Judge Thomas, in part because people believed that if Ms. Hill’s charges were true, she would have made them a decade earlier, when she said the harassment took place. In contrast, Mr. Biden said: “I wonder how many tens of thousands of millions of men in this country work for a boss who treats them like a lackey, tells them to do certain things, and stay on the job, and we never ask, ‘Why does that man stay on the job?’ I don’t know why we have so much trouble understanding the pattern of a victimized person.”
Mr. Biden voted against Judge Thomas’s confirmation. To be sure, he is hardly blameless for the failures of the hearings. But the opprobrium generated by other senators’ egregious mistreatment of Ms. Hill seems to have unfairly rubbed off on him. (Disclosure: My husband, Christopher Schroeder, was counsel to the committee during the hearings.)
I am enthusiastic about a number of the Democratic presidential candidates looking to take on Donald Trump in 2020. I’ll support whichever candidate I think has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump, who I fear poses an existential threat to our democracy. In determining who that is, I will not rule out Mr. Biden just because he could have done a better job running the Thomas confirmation hearings.
I believed Anita Hill. So did Joe Biden. The Democrats failed to prevent the confirmation of Clarence Thomas. Let’s not aggravate that failure by laying all the blame on a man we need in the running to save our country.
Katharine Bartlett is a professor at Duke University School of Law, of which she was dean from 2000 to 2007.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: email@example.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.B:
新版跑狗A超轻【顾】【承】【看】【着】【许】【柔】【温】【创】【建】【的】【微】【信】【上】，【写】【着】【随】【便】【两】【个】【大】【字】，【脸】【上】【透】【着】【嫌】【弃】，【问】【许】【柔】【温】，“【你】【的】【叫】【什】【么】。” “【喏】，【这】【个】。”【许】【柔】【温】【掏】【出】【手】【机】，【点】【开】【自】【己】【的】【微】【信】【页】【面】，【将】【自】【己】【的】【昵】【称】【递】【给】【顾】【承】【看】。 【承】【心】【承】【温】，【愿】【其】【一】【生】。 “【承】？”【顾】【承】【勾】【了】【勾】【唇】，【意】【味】【深】【长】【的】【看】【着】【许】【柔】【温】。 “【干】【什】【么】？”【许】【柔】【温】【脸】【色】【一】【变】，【一】【把】【将】
【男】【子】【汉】【大】【丈】【夫】，【说】【出】【来】【的】【话】，【自】【然】【要】【算】【数】。 【赵】【浮】【生】【可】【没】【什】【么】【兴】【趣】，【欺】【骗】【两】【个】【小】【女】【子】。 【尤】【其】，【小】【一】【点】【那】【个】，【很】【明】【显】【没】【成】【年】。 “【阿】【泽】【西】【您】【好】，【我】【叫】【崔】【真】【理】，【姐】【姐】【们】【都】【叫】【我】【雪】【球】。” 【见】【赵】【浮】【生】【的】【目】【光】【看】【向】【自】【己】，【崔】【真】【理】【连】【忙】【站】【起】【身】，【恭】【恭】【敬】【敬】【的】【对】【赵】【浮】【生】【鞠】【躬】【道】。 【毕】【竟】【人】【家】【今】【天】【救】【了】【自】【己】，【这】【点】【礼】【貌】【她】【还】新版跑狗A超轻【四】【川】【新】【闻】【网】【宜】【宾】11【月】9【日】【讯】（【余】【知】【行】 【王】【耀】【苹】）11【月】9【日】，【浙】【川】【屏】【山】·【平】【湖】【时】【尚】【产】【业】【园】【开】【工】【奠】【基】【仪】【式】【在】【宜】【宾】【市】【屏】【山】【县】【浙】【川】【纺】【织】【产】【业】【扶】【贫】【协】【作】【示】【范】【园】【举】【行】。【宜】【宾】【市】【政】【协】【主】【席】【吕】【晓】【莉】【宣】【布】【项】【目】【开】【工】；【宜】【宾】【市】【政】【府】【副】【市】【长】、【屏】【山】【县】【委】【副】【书】【记】(【主】【持】【工】【作】)【廖】【文】【彬】，【宜】【宾】【市】【政】【府】【副】【市】【长】【张】【平】【致】【辞】；【屏】【山】【县】【委】【副】【书】【记】、【县】【长】【李】【川】【主】【持】【奠】【基】【仪】【式】；【屏】【山】【县】【委】【副】【书】【记】【王】【坚】【出】【席】【奠】【基】【仪】【式】。【奠】【基】【仪】【式】【上】，【平】【湖】【市】【政】【府】【向】【屏】【山】【县】【政】【府】【捐】【赠】50【万】【元】【东】【西】【部】【扶】【贫】【协】【作】【帮】【扶】【资】【金】。
【世】【人】【笑】【我】【太】【疯】【癫】，【我】【笑】【世】【人】【看】【不】【穿】，【今】【生】【前】【世】【无】【穷】【路】，【偏】【走】【黄】【河】【一】【线】【天】。 【郑】【广】【达】【提】【笔】【研】【磨】，【笔】【下】【墨】【成】，【洋】【洋】【洒】【洒】【写】【下】【两】【排】【诗】【句】，【向】【榕】【虽】【识】【字】，【下】【笔】【却】【原】【形】【毕】【露】，【他】【看】【完】【后】【禁】【不】【住】【赞】【美】【道】：“【前】【辈】【写】【的】【一】【手】【好】【字】。” “【你】【也】【爱】【好】【书】【画】？”【郑】【广】【达】【饶】【有】【兴】【趣】【的】【扭】【头】【看】【向】【向】【榕】。 【向】【榕】【尴】【尬】，“【晚】【辈】【惭】【愧】，【只】【跟】【着】【师】
“【我】【说】【的】【你】【都】【听】【懂】【了】【吗】？【盖】【姆】【奇】【奇】？”【邦】【奇】【冲】【着】【盖】【姆】【奇】【奇】【说】【道】。 【盖】【姆】【奇】【奇】【瞪】【着】【小】【圆】【眼】【睛】，【歪】【着】【脑】【袋】【想】【了】【一】【下】，【然】【后】【快】【速】【地】【点】【了】【点】【头】： “【要】【去】【找】【彩】【色】【的】【石】【头】，【很】【多】【的】【彩】【色】【石】【头】，【黑】【色】【的】【石】【头】、【红】【色】【的】【石】【头】、【绿】【色】【的】【石】【头】！”【盖】【姆】【奇】【奇】【复】【述】【了】【一】【遍】【重】【点】。 【盖】【姆】【奇】【奇】【加】【入】【邦】【奇】【的】【部】【落】【之】【后】【表】【现】【不】【错】，【这】【个】【土】【著】【地】【精】