Posted on 02/13/2016 10:58:22 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
'I know you're scared to say 'black,' I know you're scared to say 'reparations,' one panelist told him
An audience member shouted at him, 'We were promised reparations! We were told we were going to get it!'
Sanders does not support reparations and said tonight he doesn't have a magical solution to the problem when it comes to Native Americans, either
Senator has been plagued by the issue since he was asked about it at a forum in Iowa last month, where he said there's no way it passes Congress
Leader of the group sponsoring the event spoke before Sanders and told the audience they shouldn't feel 'ashamed' for asking for reparations....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I believe taxpayer reparations are in order!
“Regarding American Indians, they were given land that they control and their tribes are making hundreds of million dollars (if not billions) from their casinos and cigarette sales...all tax free.’
Actually the Indians were driven from their land in many cases and had to settle for a very reduced range they have a better case for reparations than blacks ever did.
That said; the Blacks were luckier they got to pick their reservation it is called Detroit
Neither Dem candidate can agree to reparations publicly (because they’d sink their chances in November), but you can bet both are quietly promising the moon to the unassimilated descendants of the slaves.
We can clearly see what kind of country we will have with president bern at the helm. Give me, give me, give me, thats all you hear from these ingrates. 388,000 slaves were dumped off in the new world millioms were dumped in south America and the carribean go bother them!
IOW, more dirty tricks from Hitlery's astroturf.
I could support reparations as they were enshrined in the Constitution so that a court couldn’t undo them in 50 years.
Reparations would consist of a one-time $250,000 per person (man, woman, child) payment in the currency of the recipient’s choice...accompanied by a permanent disavowal of any future payments by a federal, state, or local government. In order to complete the repair three other things would need to be done:
1) DNA testing to determine country (or countries) of origin. In my book, just to keep it from being “racist,” let it apply to any citizen who is dissatisfied.
2) A one-way plane ticket back to that country of origin for the person being repaired and any minor children born of that person.
3) Renunciation of US citizenship and immediately being placed on a permanent do-not-enter list so that even tourism to this country is not permitted, much less re-immigration. That renunciation and ban would also apply to any minor child who received the payout and plane ticket.
Personally, I think that the above would be cheap in the long run.
i’m all for reparations.
where do I send my $0.02?
This what I notice the ones from Africa like my boss who are smart enough to come here to go to college and work they do not care to go back but instead make a life here, these rabble rousers for some reason they are stuck on the fact they are here and cannot accept that they are lucky not to be born into a hellhole and do not wish to admit that though deep down inside its true.
” I thank god my great granddaddy got on that boat”
- Muhammed Ali
If any many-generations-here (provable) black Americans can do their genetics (23 and me, etc) and find only African blood, maybe we should talk about it. But if they have any white demon blood in them, they can choose their own reparations amount and then pay themselves that amount. Seems fair.
I will go bankrupt paying myself for all the things done to my ancestors. By my other ancestors, no doubt.
We’ve already paid blacks trillions in welfare. They still cannot act civilly.
Sixty years of welfare and section 8, plus preferential hiring were reparations enough.
Can't ship someone "back" to a place they've never been. Besides, Africa doesn't want 'em.
By Heather Mac Donald
Feb. 11, 2016 7:08 p.m. ET
A television ad for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign now airing in South Carolina shows the candidate declaring that “too many encounters with law enforcement end tragically.” She later adds: “We have to face up to the hard truth of injustice and systemic racism.”
Her Democratic presidential rival, Bernie Sanders, met with the Rev. Al Sharpton on Wednesday. Mr. Sanders then tweeted that “As President, let me be very clear that no one will fight harder to end racism and reform our broken criminal justice system than I will.” And he appeared on the TV talk show “The View” saying, “It is not acceptable to see unarmed people being shot by police officers.”
Apparently the Black Lives Matter movement has convinced Democrats and progressives that there is an epidemic of racist white police officers killing young black men. Such rhetoric is going to heat up as Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders court minority voters before the Feb. 27 South Carolina primary.
But what if the Black Lives Matter movement is based on fiction? Not just the fictional account of the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., but the utter misrepresentation of police shootings generally.
To judge from Black Lives Matter protesters and their media and political allies, you would think that killer cops pose the biggest threat to young black men today. But this perception, like almost everything else that many people think they know about fatal police shootings, is wrong.
The Washington Post has been gathering data on fatal police shootings over the past year and a half to correct acknowledged deficiencies in federal tallies. The emerging data should open many eyes.
For starters, fatal police shootings make up a much larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths than black homicide deaths. According to the Post database, in 2015 officers killed 662 whites and Hispanics, and 258 blacks. (The overwhelming majority of all those police-shooting victims were attacking the officer, often with a gun.) Using the 2014 homicide numbers as an approximation of 2015’s, those 662 white and Hispanic victims of police shootings would make up 12% of all white and Hispanic homicide deaths. That is three times the proportion of black deaths that result from police shootings.
The lower proportion of black deaths due to police shootings can be attributed to the lamentable black-on-black homicide rate. There were 6,095 black homicide deaths in 2014—the most recent year for which such data are available—compared with 5,397 homicide deaths for whites and Hispanics combined. Almost all of those black homicide victims had black killers.
Police officers—of all races—are also disproportionately endangered by black assailants. Over the past decade, according to FBI data, 40% of cop killers have been black. Officers are killed by blacks at a rate 2.5 times higher than the rate at which blacks are killed by police.
Some may find evidence of police bias in the fact that blacks make up 26% of the police-shooting victims, compared with their 13% representation in the national population. But as residents of poor black neighborhoods know too well, violent crimes are disproportionately committed by blacks. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, blacks were charged with 62% of all robberies, 57% of murders and 45% of assaults in the 75 largest U.S. counties in 2009, though they made up roughly 15% of the population there.
Such a concentration of criminal violence in minority communities means that officers will be disproportionately confronting armed and often resisting suspects in those communities, raising officers’ own risk of using lethal force.
Read at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myths-of-black-lives-matter-1455235686
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.