I want to note a few things:
(1) A strong correlation does not imply necessary causation. Most of us are familiar with the dreaded LSAT, so this should be standard knowledge. Thus, even if one's presently held belief strongly correlate to actions inspired, it does not follow that they direct certain actions. Moreover, it is debatable that this claim applies to everyone. It might be the case that some people act in accordance to their presently held beliefs. But, again, it does not follow that all people will act. More importantly, it does not follow that they will always act in conjunction with their presently held beliefs. I'm not arguing that beliefs do not affect actions. Yet, I'm arguing that it does not necessarily follow...
(2) Even if I committ a similar fallacy (which is debatable), it does absolve you of the fact that you still committed the fallacy.
I trust that this isn't your argument is not as follows:
P1: You commited fallacy X, therefore your reasoning is flawed
P2: Well you committed fallacy X at time t, therefore your reasoning is also flawed
P1: However, you still committed the fallacy, so how will you fix your logic
P2: Well, you still committed the same fallacy, so how will you fix your logic too!
...ad infinitum
Invoking that I committed the same fallacy isn't a defense; it is a fallacy (see tu quoque fallacy). Pointing out fallacies can be annoying and fastidious. However, it is something that must be done to ensure reasonable and responsible discussion.
(3) I concede that we will probably gain little from this discussion. I'm sure I've done little to convert any of you to my position. And,suffice it to say that much has not changed on my side of the park as well. However, in due time, one must admit that AA will become obsolete for some. I think this applies to middle class blacks, just like it applies to middle class white females. But, only time will tell. In the end, however, I appreciate the discussion; and perhaps, I'll see you (meaning all) down the road.