The good thing about Klansmen and skinheads is that they are easily identifiable as “the enemy”; if a minority member of society sees these goons coming, he will prepare himself for flight or fight. (As for either of the former groups having any inherent good, all things contain some good; no flower is so evil that it does not contain some seed of goodness, e.g., Hitler was a dog lover or God’s use of Nebuchadnezzar to have the Hebrews return to a path of righteousness. But this is a theological or philosophical argument for pages other than Slates.) Limousine Liberals, Ivory Tower academics, social service pimps and those who love blacks (as long as they know their place) are more dangerous; they are invisible or worse: they are the smiling faces that wait for an opportunity to stab people in the back to get ahead. They are the “Pusherman” of which Curtis Mayfield warned. They seem to be friends, having “what you need”, but they only want to use the very people they ostensibly represent.

The Clintons are champions of African-American rights as long as they don’t get too uppity or in the way. From Her Royal Clinton’s view point, Obama is both presumptuous and in her way. Didn’t he get the memo that ’08 is her year? What did she do to deserve to be the presumptive heir? She did “stand by her man” all through all of his indiscretion. HRC has been a fair Senator for New York, but she is far from seasoned and experienced in office. Few can miss the irony that she and The Boy President are questioning Obama’s experience; as the point been well recorded elsewhere, stating again that BJC had a similarly brief record of national experience is superfluous. The Clintons represent the worst of Liberals; they claim to be colorblind in the best ways, but they are the first to demand that “people of color” are in need of special considerations. One cannot have it both ways.