Thomas seen as role model

The Washington Times ^ | 10-3-07 | Carleton Bryant

[JZelle]

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has lived a life that should serve as an example for today's youth — one of hard work, self-discipline, academic achievement and moral conviction, conservative blacks say.

"We need more Clarence Thomases, quite frankly," says Donald E. Scoggins, president of the think tank Republicans for Black Empowerment.

"He's an African-American who has achieved greatness," says Michael S. Steele, Maryland's former lieutenant governor. "He's an example of success and leadership ... personal achievement and perseverance."

Radio talk-show host Mychal S. Massie says that Justice Thomas "perfectly exemplifies the character and morality I share [with] my son and young people as a whole."

"Just think of the damage done to our youth by pronouncing Snoop Dogg and Tupac Shakur [as being] good and representative of the black culture," Mr. Massie adds.

[snarks_when_bored]

Justice Clarence Thomas is a fine man and a credit to America. When he was younger, perhaps he uttered a few sentences that he wishes he hadn’t, but there’s not a human being alive who’s never done the same.

[MJemison]

And just lately he has dealt with lesser human beings with enormous grace.

[snarks_when_bored]

Indeed.

[Slapshot68]

He’ll of course be demonized by the black community. We can’t have people coming from humble beginnings succeeding...it cuts into the victimization gravy train.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Since it is pertinent to the thread, will opine that there should be more such role models of 'minority' ancestries in high levels of government.

This is racist, and biased on the side of those of non-European descent, and would be against 'minorities' having an advantage for all occupations. Just high level governmental ones--and actors in television shows and movies.

While the government--along with the country--should be solely a meritocracy, the thing is that there's bound to be some guy out there more qualified for the job than the one picked, whether or not race is a factor. i.e. If the most deserving candidate for a government position is of European descent, there is bound to be at least one citizen out there of non-European descent who would be more qualified. So, if a potential nominee of European descent is overlooked for an equally qualified candidate of non-European descent, would--to emphasize: in these rare cases--support picking the non-European one; and even in cases where the European descendant might be slightly (slightly) more qualified, could envision giving the post to the non-European descendant. (Just look at incompetents such as Paul Bremer or the intelligence officials who, post-September 11, could not distinguish between Sunni and Shiite Islam, nor did they have a basic understanding of Islam or the Muslim world; obviously, meritocracy was not in play there--this would be an curtailing of meritocratic principles that could actually serve a good purpose rather than just cronyism).

This is because 'minorities' seeing people who look similar to them and of similar ancestry with them having 'successful' occupations is a good thing, and could make them believe that they could be similarly 'successful'. They would be less inclined to feel disenfranchised by the United States, and would feel more integrated into American society. They would see leaders with some similarity to them. (Suspect that this point has not been sufficiently explained in this post, but have tried).

Which brings up the TV and movie roles. Having some more 'minorities' in leading roles would also be helpful in fostering a sense of oneness (paradoxically) with the greater American population. As it is now, the leading roles on almost all major television shows and movies are of European descent. This is even more accentuated if movies (and television shows) set outside of the United States are excluded. If there are 'minorities', they are given second or third string roles. This gives the impression that the United States is made up of people of many ancestries--but those of European ones are in the forefront; those of non-European descent just support them.

This opinion could be hard to stomach, and as have already typed in this post, this view is a racist comment.

However, in the long run, of the opinion that these measures could help unify the American people and make Americans of all ancestries feel not lesser than other Americans merely based on their descent.