Why can someone say that Barack Obama has "poisoned the well" for future black politicians? Did GWB poison the well for future white ones?

It is statements like these that DO indicate underlying sentiments that are not in keeping with the dream of Dr. King. If the one black president we have is now representative of all future minorities who aspire to the office, then certainly the previous occupant did little to suggest that whites have presidential timber.

So how about this - judge each person according to their character, an idea Elder ostensibly supports...although it doesn't help when Elder cites "jokester" Fuzzy Zoeller's remarks as an example. My recollection of that event was that Tiger Woods didn't find the...

Michael Steele is the most qualified for that job, as was Sarah for VP. It is just the oddest of coincidences that Steele and Palin were named after Obama and Hillary's primary contest.

Akagi, just what are the qualifications to be SoS, other than to be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate?
It's good to know that you now view Colin Powell as unqualified to hold any appointed office he ever held. Incidentally, Bill Clinton offered him the Sec. of State in 1996, and Powell declined. So in a way, Powell got what he deserved: the SoS job under a Republican adminisrtation who used his reputation to garner support for the Iraq War and discarded him when they were done.

And although Reagan did sign the...

Akagi - you're not suggesting that Thomas was picked just because he was black, are you? Why did Bush pick him over the "more qualified" jurists?

n:

"Doesnt PC diversity DEMAND that I NOT make assumptions about a persons race?????

Seems like your hands typed faster than your brain could think. Making assumptions about which race a person belongs is quite different than making assumptions about someone's abilities based on race.

"No matter what isee who am I to decide what a person's race is". Again, you're not deciding, you're assuming. And as long as that comes with no preconceived notions, there is no issue.

"IF being white is so advantagous why wouldnt gates calim to be white NO MATTER what he...

So then if Thomas was being honest then he should resign from the Supreme Court, because why should someone who has benefited from AA be on the Court?

But here's the larger point...most - if not all - of the opponents of AA assume that its beneficiaries have to do nothing but show up. I'm guessing that Clarence Thomas had to work just as hard - if not harder - than his peers to get to a point where he could be considered for the Supreme Court; in fact I would posit that it was more difficult for Clarence Thomas to become a Supreme Court justice than it was for Bush II to become president.

You might have to see documentation to determine if Ward Churchill were Indian. Henry Gates does not look like a white guy. Is this what we're really dealing with here?

When you see a picture of Gates, is "white guy" the first thing that comes to mind? I'm trying to find a logical basis from which to present the obvious.

You're right, he does have more to gain by saying he's black. For starters, almost everyone would agree with that assessment. He might have a slightly more difficult time being taken seriously if he claimed to be white.

n hit the nail on the head, and described the logic absolutely perfectly. Heres part A again..."ANY beneficiary of affirmitive action cant honsetly say they achieved any success on their own" (sic). Part B goes...all blacks - except for Sowell, Williams and Clarence Thomas - who have succeeded are beneficiaries of affirmative action. Thus, no blacks can say that they have succeeded on their own.

Sometimes they'll qualify it by saying "many" or "most" instead of all, but since no one bothers to outline any distinctions between many, most and all, just assume that all is what they mean. And of course we all know that AA is not about opportunity, its about results. Obama didn't win the election because he ran a better...

Does Gates look identifiably white to you? If he walked up to you and claimed he was white, what would your response be to him? Implied in your question is the assumption that Gates has the option of claiming either one and that he only chooses "black" because of some perceived advantage.

Akagi mentioned the "one drop" rule of the antebellum plantations. The one drop rule was designed to prevent those who looked white but had black genes from having the same privileges as "pure" whites. Those rules certainly didn't apply to those whose pigmentation and other features was sufficient to identify them as having black ancestry. But the big secret is that only if your ancestry was known could those rules be enforced. That is why...

Was Gates arrested before or after the ID was presented? Was he arrested for not presenting ID? If he had not presented identification, your point would be valid - and then he sould have been arrested. But identity was already established. So what was left to do?

a hearty thanks to Ben, who apparently knows Gates' and Obama's backgrounds so well that he is absolutely certain that only preferences could have gotten them in. And further, he insists that their guilt over being unqualified leads them to justify such placement as an "entitlement".

While this sounds great, it does raise a question: entitlements are things that one generally does not have to work to get - so how does classifying their receiving "opportunities that vastly exceed their qualifications" as an entitlement make them feel any less guilty about not obtaining it through their own work?

*And finally, here's an example of the logic displayed earlier this month in several TH columns. When Michael Jackson died,...