I kept reading and reading, waiting for him to get to the point. He never actually tries to refute Moynihan's central thesis, that destruction of the black family and black men (by slavery, Jim Crow, and other things) is the central problem facing black Americans, and the ideal issue to target for a solution. Instead, it's mostly a bunch of meandering and frequently confusing anecdotes [1], emotional descriptions of (awful and disturbing, let me not dispute) white racism over the years, and pointing and sputtering at Moynihan's conclusions [2]. Ultimately, he throws up his hands and says, "Forget it! We just need reparations! Read this other article I wrote!" Well, we happen to be in agreement. How does affirmative action not constitute reparations? Because it's also provided to modern-day Somalian immigrants? There's a pretty simple solution to that.

[1] Odell Newton...shot and killed the driver...Odell had the very bulwark that Moynihan treasured-a stable family-and it did not save him from incarceration. One guy with a stable family committed murder. Forget about it, and just keep subsidizing single-parent households through TANF and WIC.

[2] Discussing what he’d do about the problem among blacks in cities, Moynihan said, “When these Negro G.I.s come back from Viet Nam, I would meet them with a real estate agent, a girl who looks like Diahann Carroll, and a list of jobs. I’d try to get half of them into the grade schools, teaching kids who’ve never had anyone but women telling them what to do.” Everything about this quote is wrong. It's just wrong? That's it? You don't think kids should have positive male role models, or you don't think veterans should have help with housing and employment?