Am/was

You could argue the case for either but it makes a lot more sense to me to use 'was' as this agrees with the past tense 'were'.
While you could say that '...I am...' as you are still blind to their qualities, the fact remains that you were blind to them at the time you were initially talking about.

But if am still blind to these qualities. What, then, will I say? You were right I am blind to your good qualities.

You're quite right - it's perfectly reasonable to argue the case as you say it.

If you wanted to stick with past tense throughout, you could add '...and I still am.'

Right but confusing. Once in a movie I heard the sentence "what did you say you're name was?" Why your name was? His name is still his name.

It wouldn't seem out of place to mix tenses given that either version is justifiable but I'd still stick with agreeing past with past as it's the more natural way to speak.

Hmmmm! Thanks. But one last thing. A said to B,"My father is a doctor." Now the question about the text is. What did A told B about his father's profession? Answer to the question would be "A told B that his father was a doctor." Even if his father is still a doctor. Because we must be careful about the tense agreement. Right?

sundarnazWhat did A tell B about his father's profession?

Yes, this is natural but it's often said with the mixture of the two tenses.

Like?

You sometimes hear people say things like 'A told B that his father is a doctor' and I don't think you could argue that there's anything wrong here. Reporting speech is rarely straightforward and the average English speaker will not be too concerned about whether you mix the tenses or maintain past throughout.

Hmmmm! English is knotty, rather naughty.