The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, reporting on Barack Obama’s speech plus Q&A session with cheering minority journalists, lifted the following quote from the candidate:
“I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it’s Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds.”
A HotAir headline asked whether this was an endorsement of reparations. A look at the full transcript shows that it was not.  After Obama made the above-quoted comment, this exchange followed:
SUZANNE MALVEAUX: When it comes to reparations, would you take it a step further, in terms of apologizing for slavery or offering reparations to various groups?
SEN. BARACK OBAMA: You know, I have said in the past, and I’ll repeat again, that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed. And I think that strategies that invest in lifting people out of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, but that have brought applicability and allow us to build coalitions to actually get these things done, that, I think, is the best strategy.
Not to mention a strategy that Obama believes will cost billions of dollars and involve universal healthcare. But it apparently will not involve reparations [as such are typically defined – K], which is a point worth clarifying.
Update: HotAir-lanche!
Update: Moreover, at the CNN/YouTube debate, Obama gave a similar answer. Anderson Cooper then asked if anyone on the stage was for reparations for slavery for African-Americans. The only candidate who said he supported reparations was Dennis Kucinich.
Ah, nice try, but that context, while important, hardly gets the Messiah off the hook here. He does NOT come CLOSE to saying he is against reparations and, in fact, specifies which TYPE of reparations (those that will cause him the smallest political headache) that he thinks are BEST. Saying that one is in favor of a type of reparations that might not fit the standard definition is hardly a condemnation of the concept. I am amazed that we are still falling for this guy and his transparent political tactics and abilty to have it both ways that makes Bill Clinton seems like an amateur.
I certainly hope you are being tongue in cheek with your post. After all nowhere in that update does Barrack say he is against Reparations. Instead he merely shifts the conversation to those bits of payment that seem innocuous to guilty white folks.
Everywhere I go in the right-side of the blogsphere I am running into folks writing apologies for Obaman…is everyone in the tank for this guy?
Screw him…that fucker is more dangerous than FDR, Clinton and Carter wrapped up in naked love fest.
When I lived in the ghetto, looking around at my neighbors’ miseries, I always thought what they needed was some applicability.
ENDORSED.
Y’all are supposed to wait til tomorrow.
hf is correct, of course.
#’s 1, 2: The question posed at HotAir was whether he endorsed reparations with the first quote. It’s pretty clear in context he does not. That is a different question than whether he opposes them, but it is clear he’s not willing to openly endorse reparations, as that term is commonly understood.
Here’s more from the transcript, as I think people are not clicking-through:
Universal healthcare is not reparations. Universal college education, employment and retirement benefits are not reparations (though they begin to look bit like cradle-to-the-grave socialism). Even affirmative action — which Obama does not mention — is not reparations as commonly defined — if it was, no one would be having a discussion about reparations.
And if you think I am falling for Obama’s tricks, or spend my time writing apologies for Obama, you need to visit here more often. Or just type “Wright” into the site search. Or “black liberation theology.” Or “undistinguished.” Or “Milken.” See what pops up.
We’ve already paid reparations: they were called the Great Society programs. Trillions of dollars have been transferred from whites to black since the enactment of these programs. We have seen four generations living off the public dole under these programs.
If one is black and lives in an impoverished area, one will have more opportunities than almost anywhere else in America. Free job training of your choice. Free remedial education for college. Preferential admissions to almost every career or educational institution in America. Preferential treatment in hiring. Blacks have more opportunity than almost any other group. But they don’t use it.
The problem is not a lack of opportunity for blacks, as Nobama thinks, but rather the fact that so few blacks take advantage of available opportunities. There can be no government program to fix that.
Nobama is still mired in the “white man’s greed runs a world in need” vision of America. The problem with Black America is Black America. It’s time we openly state this fact.
“Even affirmative action is not reparations as commonly defined  if it was, no one would be having a discussion about reparations.”
Of course affirmative action is reparations. In fact, we had to twist and abuse our entire legal system to get it through, since it was racially-biased (for the most part) and would not have passed muster under Equal Protection in anyone’s universe. But we all agreed to publicly lie about it – you remember all those “AA is not a quota system” arguments – when there was no question that it was quotas, and then some!
Everyone I know, on the right and the left, considers AA to be for reparations. Those on the left just think it is OWED and don’t think it’s been enough. Those on the right figure it was a guilt-payment that the left forced out of them, for reparations. The fact is, the whole “reparations” debate was not even of public interest until fairly recently. Most people didn’t even know anyone was demanding “reparations”. It might have been spoken about in certain circles, but no sane person actually considered it or thought it would ever even rise to a level of debate as we are at now. Not too long ago, if one didn’t laugh at the notion of reparations (if they even knew what it referred to) one was out of it. My, how times have changed, and not for the better. The first post-racial candidate is the only one who can’t say that the idea of reparations is nutty, which it is.
unbeliever on 7/30 @ 2:22 am
Good post. Which is why, for once, we should take control of the language, tell them they’ve already had their reparations, and not only are they not getting more, but we’re getting rid of the previous race-based nonsense as well. But we won’t, having already accepted the lines of battle.
As a general rule, our victories are temporary, their’s permanent.
Once upon a time family members took care of, and responsibility to provide for those who had fallen on hard times. Today, the government does, hence “The Nanny State”. I see people living in large houses collecting Social Services funds. Some of them drive new cars. Then they apply for SSI disability. Time to make a lifetime on-the-dole a bit less comfortable. Anyone seeking “reparations” only need apply. America has been paying “reparations” for over 45 years.
Based on past practice, taking Obama at his word leads any reporter/commentary to eventual embarrassment. His statements re reparations should be looked at more closely for who is behind his education philosophy. Two key advisors of Obama’s, Bill Ayers (see Annenburg Challenge) and Linda Darling-Hammond (current policy advisor) are both advocates of race based, reparation solutions to education. Again, I would caution anyone from taking Obama solely at his word and look further into his past behavior and associations. Within this context, he could very well be a proponent of reparations.
When Barack Obama points to education as ‘the’ starting point to a better America, he’s on the right track. But you can’t educate a populace that doesn’t want or care enough to take advantage of today’s depth of educational opportunity, especially if you give them everything they want without expecting commensurate return.
David Brooks columnizes thusly…
The rest of that column is just another BHO whistle stop recital, but Brooks gets the date of the start of our decline just about right…without mentioning the cultural/liberal revolution that started here in the U.S. in, oh, about 1968, with the the widespread acceptance of the drug culture (and hippies) and the unhinging of morality (AKA ‘free love’) (and hippies) and did I mention that social revolution was magnified and focused by the anti-Vietnam war crowd (and the rise of the hippie-dippy leftist culture?)
It’s not that our educational system has failed. We are now living in a remarkable age when education is as easy as clicking a mouse (just sit in on one of Jeff G’s lectures on semiotics or identity politics; you’ll learn much). What’s going on is many are believing and are so expectant of the easy life here in America, and we fail to emphasize that hard work and effort is still involved, starting at a very early age, to attain that promised easy life. My question to Barack and his supporters is, should we just give a cradle-to-grave ‘easy life’ to everyone, or is a modicum of effort still required? The promise of easiness will get him votes; asking for a return effort won’t.
Solutions to re-achieving higher education participation should start with a proper well-grounded family, then an emphasis by our public schools on attaining educational rigor in the first five years of formal education, and for God’s (and our children’s) sake, ask parents to turn off the damned TV.
Because to return to the levels of educational attainment we enjoyed prior to 1970, we need to emulate or re-create the social structures that made those attainments possible, and expected.
You rightwingnuts simply refuse to face the reality of America in the 21st century. Hell, if you can’t even acknowledge the need to “bring applicability” then we have nothing to talk about.
So here we have Barack actually saying that government created jobs are not responses to the free market, but are merely a form of “reparations” (payback).
If only McCain had a killer instinct, he would hammer away at the marxist idiot on this. Obama has absolutely no clue how economics work, as the American people may sadly find out the hard way.
Everywhere I go in the right-side of the blogsphere I am running into folks writing apologies for Obaman…
How many socks do you have, thor?
Furthermore, Karl, Pierre seems to be pining not so much for specific words but for the proper tone. Anything that hints at agreement with this fucking douchebag or defense against specific criticisms just sounds like the same crap we see in every single MSM piece.
Sarcasm as a tool in ridiculing HRH Prince Baracky (The Blithering) is the only tone that has found widespread acceptance among the faithful at HotAir. If one hasn’t sarcasm, what has one?
“…but that have brought applicability…”
Of course affirmative action is reparations.
It’s traveled beyond that and morphed into a racial spoils system. Why else would universities fulfill affirmative action plans by awarding student and faculty positions to individuals born in Ethiopia, etc? What allows those individuals access into the affirmative action pool is the color of their skin. And that goes far beyond reparations.
Those are not the reparations that I knew.
I feel this thrill going up my wallet whenever I read posts like this.
Karl is technically correct that Obama does not, in the given speech, endorse reparations. But while this is important for the sake of accuracy, it’s a minimal standard, and doesn’t tell us much. He doesn’t say, “I endorse reparations.” But he definitely tries to have it both ways, and evades answering the question that he knows is being asked.
The follow-up question (if this had been a responsible journalist) should have been, “Mr Obama, I’m sure you understood the meaning of my question. Are you or are you not in favor of monetary reparations for African Americans?”
Here in Cincinnati, when the administrators of a public housing program were found to have looted it, their response was “it’s our turn”.
I wish someone had a camera to capture the look on my face when I found out my veterans preferences count less than affirmative action preferences when applying for a government job.
I have long ago concluded that I would be in favor of monetary reparations if (1) those demanding it were honest and (2) it was set up so that that’s it.
That is, we need a quasi-reliable genetic test, applied to everyone. We then cut a check to every man, woman, and child in the United States for, say, half a billion dollars multiplied by that individual’s fraction of black African ancestry. For one thing, it’d be the damnedest Keynesian economic stimulus ever attempted. Think of the business Lost Dog and thor would get!
The catch being, that’s it. Disband the EEOC (its employees would all quit, anyway, after cashing their reparations check. Repeal the Civil Rights Act(s) and depend entirely upon equal protection under the law. Eliminate any and all racial preferences, even (or especially) where euphemized as “diversity”. Set it up so that any person taking steps to learn the racial or ethnic background of applicants, etc., has made a prima facie attempt to apply racial preferences and gets hammered. It would take days, months, for teams of lawyers to winkle all the bits and pieces out, but squash them all.
Of course it wouldn’t last, which is why I am not seriously proposing it. Within six months the media would be full of sob stories telling how all these poor people are holed up in their McMansions with nothing to eat and no way to pay their bills, and the whole thing would start up again. Within five years the whole damned preference structure would be fully back in place, as if the reparations payments had never been made. That’s assuming, of course, that the Republic survived the financial and economic hit, which isn’t certain.
Regards,
Ric
“…the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed…”
We are already doing that – just look where the taxes are being spent in ANY school district.
The jobs? Just look at ANY government office!
“…lifting people out of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow…)
PLEASE can we move on? I am all for giving an equal chance and even extra opportunities to the disadvantaged people (of all races, religions, nationalities, genders), but this is getting ridiculous. What ELSE do you want?
I have long ago concluded that I would be in favor of monetary reparations if …
I know you’re in jest, Ric, but an interesting fact is that millions of Americans who look whiter than Prince Harry would qualify. I spent about 10 years researching and writing a family genealogy and was astonished at the “racial mixing” that’s gone on for hundreds of years down here in the South. If you start with biracial children in the 16 and 1700’s and trace some of those lines out to where they become “white,” you are looking at millions of people who look like Owen Wilson lining up for their checks — including me.
Italics — see, it’s a fact that African blood makes you do italics.
[…] Obama doesn’t think reparations are a good idea but as Karl notes, he’s all for socialism: SEN. BARACK OBAMA: You know, I have said in the past, and I’ll […]
Oh, I’m very aware of that. And people like Pierre can go around with that attitude to a smashing defeat in November by completely blowing their credibility with the mushy middle. Particularly because conflting aid to the poor with racial reparations can be painted as smacking of racism — except when O! does it, natch. Double-standard? You bet. Welcome to politics.
I guess I am waiting for someone to describe exactly what being “disadvantaged” or “homeless” entails. Is this some sort of disease, disability or syndrome? Or are these conditions self created by poor life choices and dare I say then manifested in trashy behavior?
Reparations – Affirmative Action – a rose by any other name stinks as much …
“The problem is not a lack of opportunity for blacks, as Nobama thinks, but rather the fact that so few blacks take advantage of available opportunities.”
…but taking advantage of available opportunities is such an Oreo thing to do..
Ric –
“I have long ago concluded that I would be in favor of monetary reparations if (1) those demanding it were honest and (2) it was set up so that that’s it.”
I’ve said the same, except about the drug war.
Nothing illegal. Everything taxed. Unobtanium grade liability shield for employers AND organizations who mandate drug-free status for employment/education/rental housing. Not a federal dime for rehab. Enhancements on all federal sentencing guidelines for crimes committed under the influence.
Won’t ever happen, either, of course.
Comment by Tim on 7/30 @ 6:51 am #
Karl is technically correct that Obama does not, in the given speech, endorse reparations.
No. Technically, BHO certainly endorsed reparations:
“the best reparations we can provide are …”
If someone did not endorse reparations then he would have said, when asked directly about reparations, “I do not endorse reparations, but I do endorse spending on schools to help lift …”
I don’t see how anyone can twist it into anything else.
All of this and other discussions of Obama’s “position” on any issue is, to me, like discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
There is a minimal standard that must be met for such discussions to be relevant. Can the man’s word be trusted to mean anything?
Since Obama, like all recent Democrat Presidential candidates, will say anything to get elected then what he says can only have meaning in terms of it’s role in getting him elected. It can not have any meaning related to what he would actually do when and if he gains the power he so desperately seeks.
The very fact that his words are only there to help him gain power and do not bind him in any way to any position means he flunks the minimal standard to be a serious candidate for office.
Showing that that is the case is the only reason to discuss his words. What he would do can only be judged by what can be known of his actions in the past.
In all other parts of life someone who would say anything to gain your trust would immediately be disallowed from gaining that trust as soon as that fact was discovered about them.
Con-men do what con-men do and should be shown to the world that they are indeed con-men so that precautions can be taken. That is the only purpose of discussing their words, not to divine the real positions behind them as there are no such real positions, only the lust for power.
“…where they become “white,†you are looking at millions of people who look like Owen Wilson lining up for their checks  including me.”
Whoaaaa… Just a minute there, pardner.. You’re saying I might even qualify for a taste of this reparation money ? (..butt white as I am.. family from the south..)
That puts this whole monetary reparation thing in a whole new light.. I feel myself warming up to it… hell, if ward Churchill can be an American Indian I’m pretty sure I can make a case that I’m black.. Think they’ll give me enough for that new pickup I’ve been lookin at?
unbeliever,
Of course, had Obama stated it the second way, the people criticizing me here would still argue that he is supporting all sorts of spending or affirmative action that is — in their view — reparations, and that Obama was being disingenuous about it.
And me! I need a new pickup, like, bad… Like I said, in proportion — and watch out for phraseology; if they just say “African ancestry” Kim du Toit gets the full payout.
It’d be the damnedest scramble you ever saw, which is part of the point — to make the whole thing as ridiculous as possible.
Regards,
Ric
Seems to me reparationists are somewhat akin to M. A. Zarqawi, lobbing (rhetorical) bombs to instigate and inflame sectarian strife, whereby they seek to make a tidy profit and if all goes well, see their political programs seize the reins of power. Extremely unitey in the endgame, if not in the opening gambits and interim play.
BTW, I should also note that to argue that the big, universal programs Obama cited to the UNITY journos are tantamount to reparations is necessarily based on the notion Obama identifies — i.e., that such programs miay disproportionately benefit blacks, Native Americans, etc.
That is a consistent position for BO, who buys into the notion that any practice that statistically burdens minorities is evidence of racial discrimination. The Supreme Court buys that also. However, I would bet that most of the people criticizing my position here do not buy that premise. So to embrace the logical negative in arguing that Obama supports reparations would be inconsistent.
Shorter Karl – though I’ve been disingenuous and slanderous of Obama in the past, I’m not doing so here. And you’re not, for which I congratulate you on taking the high road.
Obama is hitting on successful, albeit tired, political themes used by his immediate predecessors, Bush and Clinton, namely, campaign themes of increasing spending on education and job opportunities for lower income Americans and minorities. Nothing new, just same old, same old, worn out campaign politics.
Universal healthcare is not reparations. Universal college education, employment and retirement benefits are not reparations (though they begin to look bit like cradle-to-the-grave socialism). Even affirmative action  which Obama does not mention  is not reparations as commonly defined  if it was, no one would be having a discussion about reparations.
It is a transfer of wealth. It is a payment and it is a payment that would have ceased long ago if it were not a form of conscious salve.
Furthermore, Karl, Pierre seems to be pining not so much for specific words but for the proper tone. Anything that hints at agreement with this fucking douchebag or defense against specific criticisms just sounds like the same crap we see in every single MSM piece.
Exactly…fuck him. Let HIM explain what he means, why carry water for this fucker? Allow him to twist in the wind.
Oh, I’m very aware of that. And people like Pierre can go around with that attitude to a smashing defeat in November by completely blowing their credibility with the mushy middle. Particularly because conflting aid to the poor with racial reparations can be painted as smacking of racism  except when O! does it, natch. Double-standard? You bet. Welcome to politics.
Certainly that is a point to consider but there is absolutely no reason for the Right to “explain” this fuckers idiocy. Let HIM explain what he means. Politicians are judged on the sound bites that stick fair or not. Welcome to Politics. McCain is going to say something idiot-like…(we can count on it) you can be sure that the left will not be spending any quality time explaining what he really meant to say. The press and the left, hmm is there a difference, will simply twist his words into the worst possible meaning and run with it. The mushy middle will not hold it against the press, or perhaps they will witness the presses low ranking, but the mushy middle will also subconciously accept their version of events.
Take a trip through the NRO Corner which I do less and less often these days and you will spot plenty of folks “explaining” Obama…Ramesh spends the most time.
Karl: “Of course, had Obama stated it the second way, the people criticizing me here would still argue that he is supporting all sorts of spending or affirmative action that is  in their view  reparations, and that Obama was being disingenuous about it.”
Maybe, Karl. I would certainly have made that case for AA, as I already have. But, AA aside since it wasn’t mentioned by BHO, that would be a different debate that had good arguments on both sides (with respect to education spending, at least). As BHO actually did answer, the technical case of whether he endorsed reparations is not open to doubt. The only doubt is whether he is in favor of cash payments. He didn’t mention them, but he only talked about what sort of reparations would be “best”. I mean, that IS what he said.
I don’t want you to think that I am concentrating solely on his exact words (not that there would be anything wrong with that) but I am taking what he said and examining it by comparison to other things he has said and what they meant to me. I also weigh it against what I imagine a normal response would be (like the one I offered) and try to figure why he didn’t take that route.
I’m sorry, Karl, but I just can’t agree with your assessment of his meaning – either literally or figuratively. That’s okay, his newer comments about “becoming the symbol” are even better, as are the defenses that some are trying to raise for the new statements. BHO doesn’t even give us time to digest anything!
Yikes…”presses” dumbass…press’s
Carry on with the regularly schedule rants
By the way, Karl, Obama’s plan shouldn’t be described as “universal healthcare” since it isn’t mandatory. For mandatory state-run healthcare you’d have to look to the designs of “moderate” white Liberals, such as Hillary.
Hey, you’re trying, credit dat!
thor, is there an inverse relation being set up here? Karl behaves, in your view, as fair to Obama while you bemoan “…Nothing new, just same old, same old, worn out campaign politics.”
I liked Obama PopStar better.
Thor almost got nuked as comment spam again, but he does at least concede that Obama is just being a tired old pol here, so I’ll leave it up, despite his mischaracterization of my posts on his beloved O!
As for his point about universal healthcare (#45), I am aware of the details of the BO plan, but I am referring to how BO puts it in the transcript — “how do we get every person healthcare” — which is not a nuanced policy statement.
The question that needs to be asked is “Why are you owed today for that person’s misery long ago?”
I doubt it will ever be answered.
“Why are you owed today…?” To a lot of people, it looks like the answer is, “Because I think I can get it.”
And if that is the answer, poppa (and i think you’re correct) then it can never be said out loud.
Let me take a stab at it too.
I am owed because you have more than me and I resent you for it. My ancestors misery is used as a tool for me to not feel responsible for my actions, and to make you feel guilty about your present circumstances. Hopefully it makes you guilty enough to take actions or tolerate actions that benefit me at your expense. If you are not guilty enough to tolerate those actions you are teh racist or (ala Whoopie Goldberg) “you can not understand my plight”.
I think the best, and perhaps only truly workable form of AA that we should have is in higher education, and then only if the standards aren’t reduced to make it possible. As I have said before, I am for vouchers in poor school districts as a means to offer a hand up to those who are willing to work for it.
My response, Mr. Pink is “It isn’t that I cannot understand your plight; it is that I do not give a shit about your plight.”
Okay, that’s good for a stamp on my aspiring evil overlord club card, right?
By the way, Karl, Obama’s plan shouldn’t be described as “universal healthcare†since it isn’t mandatory.
How can I opt out of paying for it, thor? Seriously, I suspect I am not the only one interested.
Here’s what I think.
If we give people reparations for something that existed a hundred and fifty years ago (and my great grandparents didn’t even get to America until the 1890’s), then I want an ironbound guarantee that they will shut the fuck up!
I am not any kind of “-ist”, but I have been through a circumstance that evolved from this kind of infantile thinking, and it was no fun. It cost tons of money, pain, and heartbreak to all concerned, and came to be because a junkie from Harlem thought that my family’s money was meant to be hers. She came to work for my parents with the premeditated intention of suing them for discrimination. Unfortunately for her, my parents were pretty awesome (and had gone out of their way to hire a couple from Harlem). The ACLU wouldn’t even touch her “case”. No good deed goes unpunished.
Please don’t take me wrong. She was a jerk, but had been taught all of her life that she deserved whatever the fuck she wanted, and that the “whites” had stolen her God given money!. Sometimes I wish I was a hardcore leftist, so I could steal other people’s stuff without guilt.
BZZZZZZZZZZT!
Obama answer!
Reading these different comments about this topic is very interesting to say the least. Comments by Jeff Y are ridiculous and without fact.
I for one am against reparations because if it was given now to the black population it would not really help because of the way society is know structured. It would only serve as a platform for reverse racism. It was a terrible thing that reparations were not given during the period it was supposed to be given, because if it were, we all would not be having this conversation, nor would blacks as a whole be so behind as a race. If I recall most of the social policy that exists in America today is not a smoke and mirrors deal to conceal reparations for blacks. Most of the social policy spurned from the great depressions and stock market collapses of the early 20th century. They ended up helping a number of different groups that came through Ellis Island. There are many poor whites, Hispanics, blacks and other foreign groups that have benefited from these programs. The pigeon hole effect comes because blacks have a larger number of their population on these programs. The reason why is should have been enacted during the Civil War is because it would have really addressed the blacks who helped to build this country at the time but did not get any credit because of the color of their skin. Blacks were the only race at that time and this time that were enslaved. Not Italians, not Irish, not even Native Americans. That payment was thought of by Lincoln to pay back the race so that it could catch up with the other races in America because of its wrongful treatment. Since it was not done at the time it needed to be done, to do it now, a century and a half later would not be a good balancing effect. As one of the posters above put it there are whites and other ethnic groups that would get reparations because they do have black blood due to interracial mixing. So over half the country could possibly apply and we do not have the resources to handle that now. The population during the civil war was vastly smaller than the possible target population now and we could have set things right at that time.
To Jeff Y I do not know of any black that is successful and from the inner city that received free job training of their choice. They don’t provide free job training to become an engineer or computer programmer.
Affirmative action which lets in less than 10% African American in larger Division 1A schools population base, is hardly considered preferential treatment. Without affirmative action what would the population of most Division 1A schools really be, not counting the African American athlete that helps these schools win national championships in football and basketball, which in turns brings millions of dollars and a huge number of applicants based on success?
Only about 10%-15% of these schools (depending on location) have AA population. Did not know that 10% was preferential treatment, learn something new everyday!! I for one have never nor has anyone in my family ever received public assistance, gotten help from some government program including job training, etc. I know some people who did but not me. My family is too proud for that plus we did benefit as a family by just being lucky. Most Americans, white or black don’t seem to realize that what ever family you are born into is simply by the luck of the draw or by God’s grand design. You have no control whether the family you are born into is rich, mediocre or poor, black or white. You benefit or don’t benefit based on what your family is when you are born into it. My family, thank God, had decent slave owners who did give them some land of their own, which we farmed and gave many generations of my family a decent life. Each generation of my family was able to do better than the next. So when I was born my family was not rich but we were not poor either. I think that was the thinking behind what Lincoln was trying to do with reparations but it did not turn out that way. That is why doing it now is too late. Most of you guys are not racist but you are prejudiced. I am lucky to have a good circle of friends; white, Asian, and Hispanic that do understand the background and the pros and cons of this topic and of race relations. My kids play with their kids; we all have big gatherings and see each others as brothers and equals. The way everything should be. My problem as is theirs is with people like Jeff Y who say things like Black America’s problem is Black America. I would like to correct Jeff, “Some of Black America’s problem is Black America the rest is the domino effect of society from slavery to today.” I benefited from the luck of the draw and when times were tough never took a handout and now I am a very successful business man with my own consulting firm. No one made me who I am but me and my family, not the government, me. But what if I was born into a family that all lived in a one room apartment in a disadvantaged neighborhood where no one had a stable income and a color TV was considered unattainable. Would I have been able to overcome those odds whether I was a poor black or white person?? I don’t know honestly and the question is, do any of you know if you could have overcome that as well?
I think half of you would have folded just like the people of today that are folding as well. Mr. Jeff Y I looked for those ample opportunities you claim are falling from the fruit trees and I did not find them. Correction, I found them only they were training programs so that I can learn to be a secretary or a person doing data entry making $10.00 an hour. What a great educational opportunity!! Through the help of my family: aunts, uncles, grandparents I was able to get money and attend college prep courses on the weekends while I was in a public high school that taught from ten year old books. Those courses helped me get prepared for college and compete and compete well against other students, those courses my family and I paid for helped me get a great score on the SAT which allowed me to get into any school in the country and without as Jeff Y put it “Preferential treatment”. Now I can take out my wallet and crush many people who would make insulting statements like the ones I have heard. I made me because truth be told there are no super programs that helps blacks become a nice middle income citizen, there is just the greatness of America and a little luck from the man upstairs. Unfortunately not all of us are as lucky as the next person so the question is, can you successfully deal with the hand you were dealt??
The next question is if the deck was fixed a long time ago for some people can you honestly think that they will be able to catch up at an acceptable rate?? If you were born black and impoverished how would each of you turn out?? Honestly, how would you??
Great discussion. To Brodereck,I say you are experience challenged.My experience is a good example;born in poverty in Appalachia,educated in poorly funded grammar and high school,got EGD after I dropped out,at age 24 I went to Community college,graduated associate degree in Nursing,saved money went to univerity and then to graduate school,now have Doctorate degree.I did this while raising 2 children, dealing with unsupportive husband and worked nights at hospital.That is one of the ways to move up and out.
I say if they are going to get reparations,stipulate they be have white attorneys. That way most of the money stays in the white pockets.Of course attorney must have some distant AA genetic marks.
Hey, found your site by accident doing a search on Google but I’ll definitely be coming back. – The lion and the calf shall lie down together but the calf won’t get much sleep. – Woody Allen Born 1935