T. B. - "The Left in this country is not enamored of Rice either, giving her that special scorn they reserve for minorities who stray from the plantation of left-wing philosophy."

B. - "Find one."

What you found is a list of blacks who are conservative, right-wing. So far, so good.

Now, which of those are receiving "that special scorn" liberals "reserve for minorities who stray from the planation of left-wing philosophy".

(Nice comment - "plantation".)

For instance, leading the list, Clarence Thomas. If he is scorned, and I for one don't hold him in high esteem, it may be because the rationale that even dumb people need someone on the Supreme Court doesn't seem rational, and that I find Anita Hill more believable than a man who plays the Johnny Cochran race card to get confirmed.

(I do not believe the persistant rumor that Clarence Thomas clerks for Scalia's clerk.)

I don't know anyone who scorns Colin Powell.

I know my attitude toward Condaleeza Rice would be the same if I had just read her remarks and didn't know she was a black woman. As a matter of fact, when I first heard about her I felt as positive as I did about Colin Powell. "Here's a person who bucked the odds, and made good." Changed that to "here's a person who bucked the odds, still has a screwy view of the world and the way nations, leaders and people work, and still got a good job."

The list is too long to go into in further detail. Suffice it to say that it's bigotry to claim that a person cannot view these folks in a governmental arena on their merits, and that a disagreement, that so-called "special scorn" must be based on race.

To finish the this job, find that "special scorn". Not "scorn" for being hypocritical, not "scorn" for narrow-mindedness, not "scorn" for an unbalanced view of the world, but that "special scorn" which liberals "reserve for minorities who stray from the plantation of left-wing philosophy."

Let's see what that looks like.

Or, in this conservative view, are we not allowed to disagree with minorities? Without being called prejudiced?

Not even on the merits, on the statements and actions of the people?