According to this New York Times article, Ward Connerly is in financing trouble and is being accused of financial mismanagement. His chief accuser is Jennifer Gratz, the lead plaintiff in the University of Michigan anti-affirmative action case. One of the alleged financial irregularities is Mr. Connerly's pay, which by one calculation is about six times more than some others in similar positions. Roger Clegg appears to justify the discrepancy in pay on the grounds that Mr. Connerly, as the black face and leader of an anti-affirmative action movement is singularly invaluable. This is the key excerpt from the piece on this score:
One reason Mr. Connerly has been a particularly effective advocate is that he is black. Mr. Clegg said there were “few people who can do or would do what he does,” adding that it is hard to set a salary on a job that requires enduring racially charged name-calling from fellow blacks.
I'm confused. I thought these folks were supposed to be colorblind?