Little did I suspect that You waited five years to arrest this guy? would draw a spirited (and, to me, as flawed by its logic and its existence) defense of Uncle Clarence Thomas which appears to be evolving into a discussion of Black Conservatives, conservative Black folk and such-like.
There's this ritual where folks feel they have to insult you to establish their opposition to your position. God only knows why I try to get past that nonsense all the time. Almost all the time. But there's the potential for a good conversation in this one.
New topic:
I do think there's utility in the occasional wide-open discussion. And since I'm actually in programming mode more than analytical mode (which sucks because I have done any programming this week) I'm going to do something about that. So far, I've coded up restrictions on problematic comments and spam...automatically closing comments after 30 days, the devowelling filter, and a couple of tricks I will not describe. I think I need some functionality to open things up a bit.
I'm going to code up a limited loosening of restriction, the ability to allow immediate posting of comments by unregistered folk on selected posts, and maybe the ability to limit comments to registered members ONLY.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
I still find it interesting
I still find it interesting that those in our community who defend Uncle Clarence almost never discuss his decisions on the Supreme Court. Do they concur with his views in toto or do they find some of them problematic? Where do they stand on their Uncle's jurisprudence?
A few weeks ago, for example, Uncle Clarence was, once again, in the minority on a case from Louisiana where the defendant accused the prosecution of intentionally and systematically using preemptive charges to dismiss all of the potential black jurors. The defendant also accused the prosecutor of engaging in prejudicial conduct because of explicit references that were made about the O.J. Simpson trial during the prosecutor's summation to the jury.
I still find it interesting
Yes, they defend his personality. The personality that demonized his own sister as a welfare queen. Doesn't give me a lot of faith in the ethics of the defenders...
I don't know how you can
I don't know how you can move from being a black militant to believing that it is okay for the police agencies of the state to chain someone to a chair and beat them. Yes, all of our views on a variety of issues undergo changes as we grow older but Uncle Clarence's transformation seems too extreme to attribute to the ebbs and flows of life.
We should not forget too how he and Anita Hill (liberals love to ignore her role) sabotaged more than 800 time sensitive age discrimination cases while he ran the EEOC. The cases eventually became moot due to the failure of the commission to act on them within the requirements of the applicable statue of limitations.
I do not find Thomas to be an admirable character at all no matter how many nephews he looks after and frets about.
"I don't know how you can
"I don't know how you can move from being a black militant to believing that it is okay for the police agencies of the state to chain someone to a chair and beat them."
(...THAT is what blows my mind more than anything!)
It reminds me of the exchange in 'Apocolypse Now' between Willard and Kurtz:
Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.
As long as he's not called
As long as he's not called Uncle Tom, it's okay.
“As long as he's not
“As long as he's not called Uncle Tom, it's okay.”
(No, that IS his picture in the dictionary under 'Uncle Tom!)
Question: Do you find anything valid or analogous in Eldridge Cleaver’s chapter on The Allegory of the Black Eunuchs in ‘Soul on Ice?”
It struck me that this was some how like history repeating itself.
There goes my reputation
I never read Soul on Ice.