According to a piece in the Los Angeles Times today, being married to Clarence Thomas should really prohibit a woman from being involved in politics. They even include a shocking photo of Clarence and Ginni in public together at a conservative event. “How can this happen in America?!,” it seems to ask.

The piece opens suggesting she misrepresents herself:

As Virginia Thomas tells it in her soft-spoken, Midwestern cadence, the story of her involvement in the “tea party” movement is the tale of an average citizen in action.
“I am an ordinary citizen from Omaha, Neb., who just may have the chance to preserve liberty along with you and other people like you,” she said at a recent panel discussion with tea party leaders in Washington. Thomas went on to count herself among those energized into action by President Obama’s “hard-left agenda.”
But Thomas is no ordinary activist.

I don’t know about the Los Angeles Times, but I’ve heard Ginni talk about tea parties and her new effort and I’ve never known anyone in her audience to be in the dark about who she is, and where she’s worked, and who she is married to.

Does the fact that she’s married to a Supreme Court justice give her an unfair advantage in politics? Maybe sometimes it does give her an advantage. In some crowds — like the Los Angeles Times – it probably does just the opposite. Either way, it is a free country. We’re allowed to be married and still have careers, even careers involving politics. Ginni wants to do what she can to preserve freedom. And the Supreme Court, mercifully, doesn’t stand in her way.

Justice Thomas, by the way, has the absolute best laugh in America. And I suspect it was heard when he read the Los Angeles Times piece.