Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Jan 7, 2012 16:08:40 GMT -5
As for his comments on giving blacks money so they could live better - it is a fact that 60% of African Americans are on welfare of some sort while only 4% of whites are so his comments are not racist. www.topix.com/forum/afam/TFPNA50LR3837M7MMStatistics don't lie, but unsourced internet discussion forum posts do.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2012 17:01:09 GMT -5
I don't care if the stat is right or not, the phrasing belies a racist attitude. (Also, Ed, really? Sharing that stat is like believing that the US Government was spending a billion dollars a day on Obama's trip to India). Even ignoring what I think Gingrich's real motivations are behind the quote, or the general attitude (Black people are lazy and want handouts!), the mere fact that he said "Black People" and not "people on welfare" or even address the higher levels of poverty amongst African Americans and his plan to address that, well, there's racism there. I always find it funny when people think that racism is somehow a thing of the past. Speaking of candidates with racist comments littering their past: news.yahoo.com/huntsman-objects-ad-featuring-adopted-kids-154949509.html. (And yes, I know that we aren't certain that Paul has anything to do with this particular ad, but it's just a sign that racism is more than alive and well. And Paul has said plenty of racist things in the past)
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 7, 2012 20:34:27 GMT -5
Fact check from HHS stats: 4.4 million recieve TANF (federal welfare) benefits, 36% African-American, 31% white, 20% Hispanic, 13% Asian. But since only 1.4% of the population recieves this funding, it is statistically impossible for either stat above to be correct. Any comparison should note there are about 6.27 times as many whites as African Americans.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 7, 2012 20:39:46 GMT -5
Racism is when the Administration rejects South Carolina use of photo ID for voting claiming it is discriminatory to African Americans and DOJ refusing to prosecute Black Panthers. And it's those who shout racism about every thing said. It's hurled too often and it's impossible to defend one's self if it's hurled at you.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2012 21:26:40 GMT -5
Racism is when the Administration rejects South Carolina use of photo ID for voting claiming it is discriminatory to African Americans and DOJ refusing to prosecute Black Panthers. And it's those who shout racism about every thing said. It's hurled too often and it's impossible to defend one's self if it's hurled at you. It's not that hard to defend yourself if you didn't do anything racist. Here's a thought: next time someone accuses you of it, instead of responding as if they are hurling it willy nilly, think about what you said and did and see if there's something there you may not even know about. I'm not trying to be smart here or even score a point. Most racism goes un-accused, frankly. I'm European, but I have a couple of good African-American friends and the "small" stuff I see is near constant; the bigger stuff is more frequent than anyone would like. But I realize this argument isn't going to go anywhere.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 7, 2012 22:15:46 GMT -5
It is just ridiculous for any candidate or current or former official to infer that poor blacks have such awesome political power that they are bankrupting the country. Not only are many more recipients of social programs white but if you follow the money the programs are all subsidies for mostly white business owners. Food stamp program is a subsidy for agriculture and grocers and poultry processors etc. that is why it pays retail rather than negotiating bulk discounts. Medicaid is a windfall for nursing home owners and medical equipment and home health and drug companies. Housing programs are designed for developers and landlords and tax shelter investors. That is why social programs do not solve poverty. They are designed to serve business interests first and foremost. It isn't just defense that has an industrial complex. Every program has industry interests that hire guys like Gingrich and Santorum and other former officials who became lobbyists to help them rig the programs even more in their favor.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,852
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 7, 2012 22:50:17 GMT -5
Debate wrap-up: when asked what he would be doing this evening if not at the debate, Newt Gingrich answered "Watching the national college basketball championship." There's a man ahead of his time, so to speak.
Rick Perry said he'd be at the gun range. That should tell you where his campaign is right now.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,899
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 7, 2012 23:26:54 GMT -5
At least Perry's is possible.
Gingrich's answer is just awesome in that natural disaster sort of way. He's obviously not a sports fan (or at least CBB fan) in any way -- no sports fan would ever say that in January nor say it that way, so the commentary is obviously a lie cooked up by someone somewhere and Gingrich is okay with that.
What's the value there? What's he doing that he or his staff is like, we can't have him be honest, he needs to pretend to know something about sports! Was he going to crochet or something?
Ahhh, politicians. They never seem to realize every real sports fan sees through their crap in an instant.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,852
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 7, 2012 23:47:49 GMT -5
Ahhh, politicians. They never seem to realize every real sports fan sees through their crap in an instant. CNN tried some of these real-life questions in ths summer debates and it backfired tremendously, but it's a quick window to how cloistered some of these candidates are. I'm not expecting Mitt to tell us whether he prefers Jay-Z or Kanye or what Ron Paul last paid for a gallon of gas, but many of these folks are as oblivious about real life now as when the elder Bush was amazed by the bar code reader in the grocery store, and that was 24 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Jan 8, 2012 11:03:36 GMT -5
Minor point, but how could one even score points in NH for that kind of CBB reference? I can't think of a single team in the state that competes seriously in a major D1 sport.
Maybe he wanted votes from the "thuggish" elements of the Republican Party. [/sarcasm] Are we supposed to draw something from his fascination with basketball?
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jan 8, 2012 14:52:34 GMT -5
Why shouldn't states have the right to outlaw birth control since many of the means of "birth control" are actually abortion devices? Life begins before conception now?
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jan 8, 2012 15:38:26 GMT -5
Racism is when the Administration rejects South Carolina use of photo ID for voting claiming it is discriminatory to African Americans and DOJ refusing to prosecute Black Panthers. And it's those who shout racism about every thing said. It's hurled too often and it's impossible to defend one's self if it's hurled at you. I don't think that the voter ID laws (we have one in Texas, too) are inherently racist. I don't really have a problem with asking people to show a government ID to vote. However, it is difficult to argue that the application of such statutes do not have a negative impact on minority communities. For example: Devil's advocate argument: there's no requirement that individual citizens obtain a government-issued ID. Why isn't this on your list of "big brother" laws, since it requires citizens to submit to obtaining government-sanctioned identification in order to exercise a Constitutional right? Cynical thought: I wonder if the DoJ challenge has anything to do with the election year. On a national level, anything that ties the Republican party to the "racist southern party" narrative wins moderate voters for the Democrats, right?
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Jan 8, 2012 15:45:55 GMT -5
Racism is when the Administration rejects South Carolina use of photo ID for voting claiming it is discriminatory to African Americans and DOJ refusing to prosecute Black Panthers. And it's those who shout racism about every thing said. It's hurled too often and it's impossible to defend one's self if it's hurled at you. Devil's advocate argument: there's no requirement that individual citizens obtain a government-issued ID. Why isn't this on your list of "big brother" laws, since it requires citizens to submit to obtaining government-sanctioned identification in order to exercise a Constitutional right? Probably because the Constitution gives the power to regulate the "time, places and manner" of elections to the states (and lets Congress change laws as well)
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 8, 2012 19:04:34 GMT -5
Fact check from HHS stats: 4.4 million recieve TANF (federal welfare) benefits, 36% African-American, 31% white, 20% Hispanic, 13% Asian. But since only 1.4% of the population recieves this funding, it is statistically impossible for either stat above to be correct. Any comparison should note there are about 6.27 times as many whites as African Americans. But of course you won't backtrack on your poorly sourced and just generally inflammatory statement earlier.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Jan 8, 2012 19:18:54 GMT -5
South Carolina is subject to Voting Rights act preclearance of any change in election law because it has a long and sordid history as a police state disenfranchising its black citizens.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 8, 2012 19:35:46 GMT -5
Any comparison should note there are about 6.27 times as many whites as African Americans. But of course you won't backtrack on your poorly sourced and just generally inflammatory statement earlier. I do backtrack on that and I apologize. The numbers are not as high as my earlier post but are still a much higher percent for African Americans than for whites.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 8, 2012 19:54:48 GMT -5
South Carolina is subject to Voting Rights act preclearance of any change in election law because it has a long and sordid history as a police state disenfranchising its black citizens. Everything about your statement would be true if you changed has to had. It's time to recognize the South has moved on from it's earlier disenfanchisement of African Americans but continues to be punished. As an example today South Carolina has one Democratic African American Representative, Jim Clyburn and one Republican, Tim Scott who represents my district which is predominantly a white district. I believe two of the largest states in the U.S., California and New York, have four each. Our governor told its citizens that the state would provide transportation to anyone who needed it to go where an acceptable photo ID could be obtained. Does that sound like disenfranchisement?
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jan 8, 2012 20:39:35 GMT -5
Probably because the Constitution gives the power to regulate the "time, places and manner" of elections to the states (and lets Congress change laws as well) Oh, I see. So the poll tax is legal then, right? Although it's an interesting question, I didn't ask Ed whether the statute is constitutional. I asked whether, as an advocate of extremely limited government, he thinks it is advisable to pass such laws.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Jan 8, 2012 20:47:58 GMT -5
Probably because the Constitution gives the power to regulate the "time, places and manner" of elections to the states (and lets Congress change laws as well) Oh, I see. So the poll tax is legal then, right? Although it's an interesting question, I didn't ask Ed whether the statute is constitutional. I asked whether, as an advocate of extremely limited government, he thinks it is advisable to pass such laws. I know Ed doesn't like others to speak for him, but as a fan of pretty limited gov't myself, I tend to use the Constitution as a guide for where gov't should insert itself. And thinking that setting up a procedure to ensure that the elections which determine who has power are administered fairly isn't so much a matter of limited gov't but of ensuring that the elected officials are elected by voters, not by fraud. And you can't compare a poll tax to requiring an ID until you can explain how a poll tax would help prevent voting fraud (beyond raising revenue that can be used for that purpose).
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jan 8, 2012 21:00:22 GMT -5
Oh, I see. So the poll tax is legal then, right? Although it's an interesting question, I didn't ask Ed whether the statute is constitutional. I asked whether, as an advocate of extremely limited government, he thinks it is advisable to pass such laws. I know Ed doesn't like others to speak for him, but as a fan of pretty limited gov't myself, I tend to use the Constitution as a guide for where gov't should insert itself. And thinking that setting up a procedure to ensure that the elections which determine who has power are administered fairly isn't so much a matter of limited gov't but of ensuring that the elected officials are elected by voters, not by fraud. And you can't compare a poll tax to requiring an ID until you can explain how a poll tax would help prevent voting fraud (beyond raising revenue that can be used for that purpose). 1. I'm not comparing a poll tax to voter ID. I am pointing out that the blanket statement that states can regulate elections doesn't tell the whole story. There's another section of the Constitution that expressly prohibits a federal poll tax, and state poll taxes violate 14th amendment rights, which is a pretty good indication that states don't have carte blanche when it comes to regulating elections. 2. The constitution does very little to regulate the power of states to pass local legislation. If you are "using the constitution as a guide," then you necessarily approve of "big-government" policies in "big-government" states like California and Massachusetts. The vast majority of state statutes are certainly constitutional, but many are inadvisable. Again, I am asking about the latter point here. I have already stated that I do not have a problem with the idea of preventing voter fraud through ID laws as long as there is not a disproportionate impact on minority groups, so I think we're more in agreement than your post indicates.
|
|