The Last Supper

JP's confusion of Armstrong Williams and Walter Williams wouldn't be so bad if there weren't clear pictures involved. It's not like I am requiring JP to know every prominent black cnservative exactly by name, although there are so few of them that might not be impossible to do.

Looking at a picture of Armstrong Williams thinking it was Walter Williams was not so bad, because it is possible that JP had only read the writings of Armstrong Williams and Walter Williams and had no idea what either man looked like.

But when JP went to the Wikipedia and brought up the bio page of Walter Williams, read it, quoted from it, and then linked to it in his response, it is impossible to believe that he did not see the picture of Walter Williams right at the top of that very page. And yet it still did not hit him that he was looking at an entirely different black man than the one Snood included in his post.

Now that's bad.

And such a blunder also blows out of the water any pretense white Republicans have to be in tune with the needs of the black community. They claim to be concerned. They claim to care. But then they can't tell the difference between one black person and another.

And this is the year 2006. Unbelievable.

By the way, it really wouldn't be a hugh task to become familiar with all the blacks considered prominent conservatives. there reall ain't that many of 'em.

You keep bringing up the same tired point, but continue to, obviously, avoid the issue. Even if I did mistake Armstrong for Walter (which I still assert did not happen), so what? People are fallible. Have you never made a mistake before?

Whether I can tell the difference between two people isn't the issue. The issue is the lefts demonizing of African Americans that don't agree with the mantra of the left... the party that supposedly cares for minorities.

No matter what you think of Condi's (or others) politics, they have worked hard and accomplished much and should be considered good role models for people of all races. Instead you demonize, chastise, ostracize and write them off as irrelevant because they don't fit into some standardized template for how blacks are supposed to act. They have faced discrimination just as other blacks have and continue to face it today from people like yourself. The hypocrisy absurd.

That's all I have to say, so you can have the last word in this thread if you want. Of course I'm sure it will only be the same tired reasoning you have been going on with for 2 pages now.

The hypocrisy is amongst those Black politicos for whom money and power is more important than equality and hope for their people. How are they supposed to feel about them?

Cycloptichorn

That simply isn't true, cyc. Sowell, Walt Williams, Shelby Steele, etc. all work towards equality. They just have different ideas about how to get there. They all talk about inequalities in black education and what can be done about it. They see the destructiveness of past policies that destroyed families, education and awarded irresponsible behavior, and all speak out against them.

Because you do not agree with them does not mean that they think "money and power is more important than equality."

Sure they do. They support the party that places money and power above equality and hope for their people. Therefore, they place money and power above hope and equality for their people.

Like modern day Uncle Toms, really. Call it the Transative Property of Politics: if you support a party that supports something, you also support that policy. Same reason that Gay Republicans are reviled by their counterparts, and perfectly logical as well.

Cycloptichorn

It did happen, obviously. That is why I quoted the part which included your praise and bio of Walter Williams and said that I am only dealing with people Snood pictured without labels.

Your response, "So am I", can only mean that you thought Walter Williams was the person pictured in Snood's post.

Which would not be bad except for the fact that Snood gave you a picture of Armstrong Williams, the bio page you read and referred to had a picture of Walter Williams right at the top, the two black men do not resemble each other in any way and you STILL thought they were the same person.

If you are still at the same stage where all black men look alike, which you apparently are, any comment from you on any racial subject is obviously null and void. How can it be otherwise?

Cyc,

I don't have time for a proper response to your post right now, but will be back later to discuss.

cool

Cycloptichorn

You say that as if Democrats don't place money and power about equality and hope for their people. Wrong.

On a socio-economic level, the Dems have made equality and hope for the poor/disadvantaged far more of a priority than the Reps. have, for quite some time now.

Cycloptichorn

Here is the thing I don't get... if socio-economic equality is a goal that the Dems support but Republicans don't, then why are you singling out those that have already succeeded in overcoming the socio-economic obstacles, that you claim to give hope to, by calling them Uncle Toms?

It can't be just their level of income. There are a ton of African american pro-athletes, buisness people, entertainers and so on and so forth that make just as much, if not more than the politicos that you claim don't care. Are these peoiple also uncle toms? Do they not care or give hope to socio-economic equality? Are they part of the problem or part of the solution?

If income level is not the reason for them not caring, then the animosity for these people, must be simply because of their political beliefs. In which case you claim they don't care for their race and only sell out to the white republicans.

But these so called Uncle Toms have succeded in life in the very ways in which they preach to others. Many of them overcame obstacles by working hard and doing for themselves what government has failed to do for the masses. They educated themselves and took advantage of opportunities that they often created themselves.

In the mean time, years of failed policies have created a welfare system that, while it does help some, has also created a whole generation of broken families dependant on welfare and a broken school system that consistently fails urban african american youngsters. If these folks don't agree that this is the way to create social economic equality, why should they be forced to conform to how other people think they are supposed to act? Can they not speak out against the ills that they see and offer solutions without being ostrasized from the very group that claims to care for them?

Now I'm not advocating that people don't need help and that hard work is all you need to make it. There are social programs that do work that conservatives do support. Job programs that teach usable skills and Investment in education are two examples that I firmly support. Here in Wisconsin, it is conservatives that are fighting to lift the ban on school choice, which has proven to work here and in other states, while the democrats (and the teachers union) fight them the whole way. How backwards is that? They claim they want equal opportunity, and then block any chance for poor urban minorities to attend the same privileged schools that they are complaining the white suburbs have. How is that supporting equal opportunity?

To say that conservatives do not care for minorities is disingenuous on your part, imo, and not truthful. We may differ on how the equality is to be reached and even what equality means (equal opportunity as opposed to equal outcome), but it simply isn't true to state that conmservatives do not care and that only the democrats forward social economic equality.