Clarence Thomas is finally coming out of hibernation. He is speaking out for the first time since his confirmation hearings. Of course, he is doing so because he is promoting a book! I am not a fan of Thomas and I think he got out of trouble during the hearings by using the race card. Nevertheless I watched his interview of Sixty Minutes and I found that I agree with some of the things he said.
Thomas was brought up by his grandfather, a no nonsense guy who would not accept excuses for failures. Thomas graduated from Holy Cross near the top of his class. Then he was accepted at Yale Law. Thomas described himself not as a liberal but a radical in his early years. This gradually changed after he got into Yale. He thought the white liberal establishment believed that given the chance blacks can succeed as well as whites. What he found out was that he was treated as a token under the affirmative action program. Even though he believed that he got in based on merit, he felt that others believed that he was not qualified. He had trouble getting a job even with a Yale diploma. I believe that Thomas was right on this. When I went to college there was a strong push to recruit more blacks with the idea that leveling the playing field was the reason. But I got the sense that the powers in the universities were just trying to fill quotas so as to not make their institution seem racist. I don't think that they truly believe that blacks had the ability to compete academically on their own. I mean if they truly believe that they are just trying to even the playing field, then they should do it by economic standards. There is no reason why a black doctor's child should have preference over a poor white kid. By using race it makes people believe that all blacks at the school were not qualified. In reality some were excellent students and should be recognized just as that. There were others who did get in by affirmative action only and they would have been better off at a lowere level school. By admitting these students the school was reinforcing the stereotype of the unqualified black.
Thomas was also right in that his critics had no business saying he is an uncle Tom for being on the conservative side. When he couldn't get a job it was a Republican, Senator Danforth of Missouri, who helped him find one. Danforth was his mentor in Washington and introduced him to the powers of the Republican party. Thomas was also comfortable with the change because he was brought up by his grandfather to be self-reliant and not accept the victim's mentality. These certainly are values closer to the conservative side than the liberal side. So it is understandable that he switched parties. He should not be vilified for that. Afterall, Hilary Clinton swithced from Republican to Democrat.
While it is all right for Thomas to be against affirmative action, it is undeniable that he benefited from it. Sure he was a good student but it is unlikely that if he was white and graduated in the middle of his Yale class, he would have caught the eye of Danforth. He certainly would not have moved up in Washington so quickly. And there was no chance that a white man would have been nominated to the Supreme Court after one and half year of undistinguished service on the Appeals Court. To replace Thurgood Marshall at that. There were many more candidates that were more qualified and Bush was not being honest when he said that he picked the best man and it had nothing to do with his color.
Thomas also would have more trouble getting confirmed if he was not black. While the whole Anita Hill situation probably was leaked illegally, once it was leaked, the Senate had no choice but to investigate. By using the word lynching, Thomas was using the race card that many liberals have used. By using the word lynching, Thomas insulted all those blacks who suffered that fate. It was not a lynching. If a white man was accused of the same thing, the senate would have acted the same way. Well, except once Thomas used the word, all the liberal senators, in particulary Ted Kennedy, shut up right away. White guilt or liberal doctrination had made little boys out of these supposedly powerful men.
So I agree with Thomas on somethings and disagree with him on others. Usually I do that with liberals also. I think it is good to listen to all side and make judgment on each issue based on its merit. That's why I think dangerous and crazy men like Ahmandinejad should be listened to. I probably won't change my mind but usually I learn something. I don't think I would learn much if I only listen to people I agree with. Someday maybe America will even listen to dangerous and crazy men like Lawrence Summers! What do you think, liberals?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Use the following html code to make a clickable link in your comment (instructions in the sidebar). You can test the link by previewing your comment.
<a href="http://angryyellowman.blogspot.com">Angry Yellow Man</a>
The above example will display as Angry Yellow Man