<< The ACLU has defended the American Nazi Party's right to march on streets before.
Does that make them closet right-wing extremeists?
>>
Let's not get organizations confused with the people who comprise them. I have no problem with the ACLU or its causes per se, but rather with some of the people in the organization and their own words. Again, let me repeat, i have no problem whatsoever with people disagreeing with Justice Thomas, or feeling that he should not be extended an invitation to an ACLU debate. They are a private organization, free to invite or exclude whomever they wish as a guest debater.
However, what i think is completely wrong and deserves scorn, is that they framed their opposition to Justice Thomas with what i feel is a racist undertone. Obviously, holding that AA is a bad policy does not serve as an automatic disqualifier from attending, as Justice Scalia's appearance shows. It is only if you are a black man, and hold the same views, that you are unwelcome. You can couch it in all the nice ways you want, saying it's a simple difference of opinion and such, but the clear intent is there, IMHO.
Let's turn the situation around. Let's say instead of an ACLU invitation to Clarence Thomas, it was a Heritage Foundation invitation to Louis Farrakhan. You're telling me that if Heritage members agitated against Farrakhan's appearance, and used similar statements (change "black Uncle Tom" to "black apologist for the Holocaust", 'anti-Christ', Hitler) would you not say that was inappropriate and racial in nature? I would, and in this case, i do.