I would cite to you the thousands upon thousands of Southern Negroes who named their children--even well into the 20th Century for prominent Whites --prominent slave holding Whites. 
Cassius M. Clay of Kentucky, was an ardent anti-slavery Whig, with a reputation for recklessness. He was elected to the Kentucky state legislature several times in the 1830s until his ardent anti-slavery views caused him defeat. Cassius Clay then started an anti-slavery publication called The True American in Lexington Kentucky, which he moved to OHIO after a mob in Kentucky burned down his office. He left the Whig party in 1850 to run for governor of Kentucky on the anti-slavery ticket. He became a Republican in 1856.
(That was why Cassius Clay changed his name, when he became a Moslem.)
No, it isn't. Sounds to me like you need to spend less time hurling aspersions and learn some basic facts about the Republican party. While you're at it, see if you can get your money back from Oberlin.
BTW, the notiont that blacks had control, on most plantations, of naming their children is itself a myth. The masters named them, and often sold them.
If I wanted to respond to a listing of individual incidents, rather than looking at the broad picture, as an argument, I would cite to you the thousands upon thousands of Southern Negroes who named their children--even well into the 20th Century for prominent Whites--prominent slave holding Whites. (That was why Cassius Clay changed his name, when he became a Moslem.) But your type of argument is not a rational one, so I will not respond in kind.I was giving this as an example of how others can use the same non-dispositive types of arguments that LS was using. I stated that I did not intend to respond in kind.
Nevertheless, you have pounced on the fact that the Cassius Clay--as opposed to most of the rest of the Clay family--was a maverick. Fine, I should not have given you the opening by selecting the former Heavyweight Champion, as an example, of the argument I had chosen not to make. As a boxing fan, I just grabbed that as something that came instantly to mind, as I was typing. But note, he repudiated not only the name of his abolitionist benefactor--the Cassius Clay you mentioned did manumit the boxer's ancestor--but the whole Clay family.
My discussion with LS had nothing to do with Republican history. It dealt with analyzing the feelings between the races in the Old South.
As for Oberlin, I got my money's worth and then some. I went there to improve my techniques for dealing with modern "liberal" types. Oberlin had been connected with all of the major Leftwing movements of the 19th Century in America--it is not generally known, but in addition to the Abolitionist and Feminist connections, the Anti-Saloon League, which put Prohibition over after World War I, was actually founded in the Oberlin College Library in 1896! While perhaps not on the absolute cutting edge of 20th Century Leftist thinking, it was well enough into it, that I learned much about irrational ways that Leftist dogma is formulated and promoted.
But I thank you for your concern for my finances.
William Flax