Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 146

Thread: Biden's America

  1. #31
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    9,133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    431 Posts

    Biden cancels Elon Musk's adventures in space



    New president is making his space policy increasingly clear: America will remain grounded for the time being

    The United States is in a titanic struggle with the People’s Republic of China for the dominance of space.

    Although the Americans have been to the moon and sent multiple, advanced probes to the surface of Mars, since the end of the Cold War, U.S. space policy has languished in neutral. Due to this, new competitors, namely China, have arisen to challenge the dominance of the Americans in the ultimate strategic high ground of space.

    China has grand ambitions for space. Not only does China plan on beating the Americans to the Martian surface by the end of the decade, but Beijing wants control of the vital orbits around the Earth. By controlling these orbits, China’s military would enjoy significant advantages over the American military. Beyond that, China plans on strip-mining the moon for valuable resources.

    The Americans, though, have always had a silver bullet in its competition with China for space dominance: a vibrant and innovative private sector. Specifically, the growing number of private space start-ups, such as Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

    Thanks to his reusable rocket design, Mr. Musk’s company has already cut down on launch costs by a staggering 40 percent. SpaceX insists that it can cut those costs down further. What’s more, SpaceX rockets are entirely indigenously produced. And as the ongoing race to Mars between the United States and China intensifies, Mr. Musk’s new deep space reusable rocket Starship, might just be the vehicle that gets American astronauts to Mars before China can get its taikonauts to the Red Planet.

    Certainly, the Starship reusable rocket is unproven. In another America, this experimental craft would elicit wonder and its development would be encouraged. The Trump administration exhorted SpaceX to vigorously move ahead with its Starship program.

    The United States, however, has a new president. And President Joe Biden is making his space policy preferences increasingly clear: America will remain grounded for the time being.

    Washingtontimes

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Winterland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Last Online
    19 Hours Ago @ 05:26 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German; Scot-Irish; Scandinavian
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Coastal region
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Free Lance
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    410
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    319
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    237
    Thanked in
    173 Posts

    No Stars

    I remembered the Star Wars project and its "pro" argument back in the 80's, but the public did not support it much due to the lacking acknowledgement that other countries will eventually "catch up" with their own technologies to surpass the US space program and defense. China and Russia do not obsess over their poor in the millions and continue to give handouts for no labor exchange unlike the US. US should have only built an alliance with Europe to keep advanced technologies a secret. I wonder how much information came from the US through leaks and stolen information literally to build China's space station. In addition, the Chinese does not receive an emotional beating from the press and government when they move ahead with their plans; as a result, China gets what they want at the end.

  3. #33
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    KYAnglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 03:23 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    England/Britain
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R1b>U106>L48
    mtDNA
    H3af
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    The Pennyrile
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Paying the bills
    Politics
    Confederate
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    934
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    340
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    451
    Thanked in
    298 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Theunissen View Post
    Is that a good thing or is that a bad thing?

    On face-value it is of course bad. But all the cucks that didn't want to believe the "doom sayers" in the past and laughed them off as "conspiracy theorists" will feel a bit uneasy now. After all, what all those righties and conspiracy nutters were talking about now shows more and more its ugly face.

    Let's see whether that changes more minds.
    The "worse is better" in the long run idea. To a certain extent it is a good thing to ultimately force a choice on my fellow white Americans: resistance or subjugation. I just despise having my own family's existence and rights affected by hordes of morons in other parts of this dystopian zoo of a "country" and the tyrant "elite" that exploit them.
    And yeah, I was a "conspiracy nut" to my family for years, but even my "Boomer" parents now admit I've been on to something all along.
    "Almost every name belongs to well-known families of English stock....these soldiers were of ancient American lineage"- Prof. N.S. Shaler on the 1st Kentucky "Orphan" Brigade, Confederate States Army

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Winterland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Last Online
    19 Hours Ago @ 05:26 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German; Scot-Irish; Scandinavian
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Coastal region
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Free Lance
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    410
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    319
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    237
    Thanked in
    173 Posts

    Changing Ways

    Quote Originally Posted by KYAnglo View Post
    And yeah, I was a "conspiracy nut" to my family for years, but even my "Boomer" parents now admit I've been on to something all along.
    I've seen the effects of "brain washing" in the USA much like post-war Germany among the older generation, mainly Silent Generation. In some way, the government and media stripped us of our heritage by intimidating us by saying, "You are UN-American" or "German sympathizer." To prove some ethnic discriminatory bias, to this day, older Neo-cons who get pissed in a political argument will still cause us a "Hun." Many Americans went through some type of "de-powering" and "de-Anglicized" identities. Our more Right-centered political groups are really Neo-cons or conservative evangelists who support mostly open borders. An European equivalent would be Merkel's Christian Democrat Union. Paleo-conservatives or populists do not fit in typical American modern politics due to neo-con's stronger religious link. Mitt Romney is an example of why the Republicans lose support and votes. If I spoke these thoughts years ago, I'd be openly accused of being anti-American, but the government and media have been for years to their White audience. Most older seniors to this day can't understand or grasp, "What has happened to their Nation." Well, you passed legislation in the 60's and flooded USA with non-whites who don't support your ideologies or sense of independence as you deny your own ethnic make-up and apathy. My Dad who came from the Silent Generation said that they "sold us out" starting with cheap retirement packages and SS services for the old. Hence, see our baby birth-dearth rates across all of our White countries below replacement rate with the passing of social security and modern birth control.

  5. #35
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Kriegersohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    Monday, March 1st, 2021 @ 10:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Colorado Colorado
    Location
    Front Range
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Independent
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    138
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KYAnglo View Post
    The "worse is better" in the long run idea. To a certain extent it is a good thing to ultimately force a choice on my fellow white Americans: resistance or subjugation. I just despise having my own family's existence and rights affected by hordes of morons in other parts of this dystopian zoo of a "country" and the tyrant "elite" that exploit them.
    And yeah, I was a "conspiracy nut" to my family for years, but even my "Boomer" parents now admit I've been on to something all along.
    Given the state of education over the past 20 years, if not more, it looks like more and more seem to have the subjugation herd mentality. People don't seem to want to research beyond looking at wikipedia or what google wants to show them or what they've been told by activist professors. The question becomes "How do we wake people up again?"

    BLM activists pushed that line around 5 years in Canada. Didn't Ohio try that last year with teaching history?

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Theunissen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 11:01 AM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    North Western Europe
    Country
    South Africa South Africa
    State
    Transvaal Transvaal
    Location
    South Africa
    Gender
    Posts
    1,021
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    392
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    651
    Thanked in
    401 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Winterland View Post
    I've seen the effects of "brain washing" in the USA much like post-war Germany among the older generation, mainly Silent Generation. In some way, the government and media stripped us of our heritage by intimidating us by saying, "You are UN-American" or "German sympathizer." To prove some ethnic discriminatory bias, to this day, older Neo-cons who get pissed in a political argument will still cause us a "Hun." Many Americans went through some type of "de-powering" and "de-Anglicized" identities. Our more Right-centered political groups are really Neo-cons or conservative evangelists who support mostly open borders. An European equivalent would be Merkel's Christian Democrat Union. Paleo-conservatives or populists do not fit in typical American modern politics due to neo-con's stronger religious link. Mitt Romney is an example of why the Republicans lose support and votes. .....
    Those that did the "brainwashing" a la 'Re-education' in Germany often became acclaimed academics in the US. They did have Allies in many of the "progressive era" college liberals, who were mostly big-staters (as academics tend to be, since only gov and regulations can assure them of incomes for their 'work'). Did hit through in the 60s and also had Allies in the cultural fields of movies and music. Via the educational system they could slowly transform the values and attitudes of each school generation. This didn't affect everyone in the same way of course. The persuasion would be more successful within urbanite kids were both parents are working or divorced, than e.g. with kids from a middle class family in a more rural setting with a stay at home mum and a strong father figure. Some ideological tenets are however so omnipresent this will also influence them. As far as more conservative folks are concerned. I think what their churches teach has also influence on them. And there it's commonly "Christian Zionists" that aren't "racist" and "love America". This explains the appearance of all kinds of kosher conservatives and cucks in those circles.

    Also, if you typify the 'right' and the 'left'. You'll find that the typical leftists gets income from the government or something that is tax benefitted. They tend to have some 'social studies' background, but that may differ. The rightists will mostly be artisans, engineers or entrepreneurs, with other managerial fields in between. Essentially this is parasites versus producers. But given that this is within one territory and within the same jurisdictions the lines are blurred. Actually, given leftist hegemony in the cultural fields the blurring is to the disadvantage of the rightists most of the time. This makes the left a more formidable block, although I don't really believe that Biden really got majority of votes. The bad expectation of Biden may have mobilised also many non-Voters that tend to be rightists.

    Well, now Biden is in the White House and this may be the first act of Finis America.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Theunissen For This Useful Post:


  8. #37
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    9,133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    431 Posts

    House Dems Hold Hearing on Slavery Reparations Bill That Could Cost Trillions



    America was urged to take a deep and shameful look backward before reaching into its pocketbook Wednesday as a congressional panel discussed reparations for slavery.

    “How can a nation truly heal if it takes no action toward acknowledging the full scope of pain and addressing the punctured wounds of racism?” Dreisen Heath of Human Rights Watch said, according to USA Today. “We are at a defining moment in U.S. history and reparative justice for the legacy of slavery demands facing the fierce urgency of now.”

    “The highest standard of reparations is needed to adequately address over 400 years of atrocities and compounded and concretized injuries that this community endures,” said Kamm Howard, national male co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America.

    “No quick fix, no singular action or tweak here or there in existing policy will do. America must engage in full reparations.”

    The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties hearing was held to discuss H.R. 40, the “Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act,” a proposal from Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas to convene a panel of experts to find out how best to compensate black Americans for slavery, according to the Washington Examiner.

    Jackson said reparations are part of what she called “reparative justice.”

    That bill for reparations could run to around $13 trillion, according to an estimate by historian Kirsten Mullen and economist William Darity of Duke University. That would dole out between $300,000 to $350,000 per person. For comparison, the current federal budget is $5.8 trillion.

    Forming a panel to decide what form reparations will take has the support of President Joe Biden, according to White House press secretary Jen Psaki.

    Biden “continues to demonstrate his commitment to take comprehensive action to address the systemic racism that persists today,” she said Wednesday, Reuters reported.

    Reparations have had the support of congressional Democrats since 2019, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came on board. When the Republicans controlled the Senate, then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s opposition to reparations doomed the idea.

    Even now that Democrats can push anything through the Senate that requires a majority vote, forming a reparations committee would likely require 60 votes to deal with the expected filibuster.

    National support has been cool. Even amid the summer of riots last year, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found in June that only 20 percent of those surveyed favored using “taxpayer money to pay damages to descendants of enslaved people in the United States.”

    Football great Herschel Walker on Wednesday told Democrats gung-ho for reparations that he opposes the idea, according to the New York Post.

    “We use black power to create white guilt. My approach is biblical: How can I ask my Heavenly Father to forgive me if I can’t forgive my brother?” he said at the hearing.

    “America is the greatest country in the world for me, a melting pot of a lot of great races, a lot of great minds that have come together with different ideas to make Americans the greatest country on earth. Many have died trying to get into America. No one is dying trying to get out,” he said.

    “Reparations, where does the money come from? Does it come from all the other races except the black taxpayers? Who is black? What percentage of black must you be to receive reparations?” Walker went on.

    “Do you go to 23andMe or a DNA test to determine the percentage of blackness? Some American ancestors just came to this country 80 years ago, their ancestors wasn’t even here during slavery. Some black immigrants weren’t here during slavery, nor their ancestors. Some states didn’t even have slavery.”

    Republican Rep. Burgess Owens of Utah, also a former NFL star, who said his great-great-grandfather was a slave who used the Underground Railroad to reach freedom, called slavery an “evil practice,” but argued that “reparations is not the way to right our country’s wrongs,” according to Fox News.

    “It is impractical and a nonstarter for the United States to pay reparations,” Owens said during the hearing.

    “It is also unfair and heartless to give black Americans the hope that this is a reality. The reality is that black American history is not one of a hapless, hopeless race oppressed by a more powerful white race. It is instead a history of millions of middle- and wealthy-class black Americans throughout the early 20th century achieving their American dream.”

    He also summed up reparations as “redistribution of wealth, or socialism.”

    Westernjournal

  9. #38
    Senior Member
    Astragoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 09:57 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Posts
    1,094
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,126
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,130
    Thanked in
    620 Posts
    Good piss off more white people. See how well that works for you.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Astragoth For This Useful Post:


  11. #39
    Senior Member Verđandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgĺrd
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    9,133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    657
    Thanked in
    431 Posts

    Incitement is the New Terrorism



    You can only make up your own definition of “incitement” in the movies and at presidential impeachment trials. Otherwise the actual law is going to have to do.

    The picture is becoming clearer now: 1/6 will be sold to frightened Americans as a new 9/11, the prime mover for a whole new range of “crimes.” Incitement will become this generation’s version of “material support to terrorism,” meaning the complex legal definition will be massaged in the name of safety so that it will become a not-real crime based on the flexibility of a word that will mean whatever the Dems/MSM/FBI want it to mean in a particular scenario.

    So the kid in his bedroom chatting online will be talking to a Fed pretending to be a white supremacist instead of pretending to be ISIS. The kid’s arrest for incitement (those social media messages supposedly about white supremacy) will be played across the news and, like post-9/11, add fuel to the fires calling for more censorship, more surveillance, more arrests. It is literally the exact playbook from 2001.

    Only better. The upgrade to the old playbook is that incitement scales well. So instead of just being pointed at naive kids online, it can be a death ray aimed at a conservative writer, a Congressperson, anyone with a platform. It is a way to eliminate an opinion, take out a rival, even impeach a president. That is why incitement is not aimed at stopping violence but alongside big tech censorship, a tool aimed at thought, at unpopular ideologies, a tool to crush free speech. All in the name of preserving democracy.

    What stands in the way is current law, which following the evolution of free speech over the decades, has created increasingly specifics test on when speech becomes such a danger it must be stopped. And there’s a lot more to it than just that old bit about not being allowed to shout fire in a crowded theatre.

    From its earliest days concerns existed about the interplay between the 1A and the ability of speech to incite violence to the point where words should be censored or criminalized. It sounds easy to sort out, until you consider almost any political viewpoint, passionately expressed, has the potential to incite. But a democracy can’t exactly lock up everyone who says aloud “abortion is murder” or accuses the president of murdering young boys sent into an unwanted war. Speech which inspires, motivates, stirs up the blood is not incitement, and in fact is an important part of a rugged democracy. Can every speaker be held responsible for what people who hear him talk do later? A finer line was needed.

    The Fire! quote from the Supreme Court decision in Schenck v. United States is often cited as justification for limiting free speech. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger.”

    Words in these decisions have hyper-specific legal meanings, often defined through multiple cases, which is why simply Googling a term and passing judgment on its vernacular via Twitter usually is wrong. The Fire! line is actually a kind of inaccurate shorthand. The full decision says the First Amendment doesn’t protect speech that meets three conditions: 1) the speech must be demonstrably false; 2) it must be likely to cause real harm, not just offense or hurt feelings, and 3) must do so immediately.

    But Schenck was what jurists call bad law, in that it sought to use the Espionage Act against a Socialist pamphleteer opposing WWI to stop free speech, not protect it. The case was eventually overturned, and Holmes’ statement is better understood not as a 21st century test but to simply mean that while the First Amendment is not absolute, restrictions on speech should be narrow and limited. It would be for the later case of Brandenburg v. Ohio to refine the modern standard for restricting speech.

    Brandenburg v. Ohio (Clarence Brandenburg was an Ohio KKK leader who used the N-word with malice) precludes speech from being sanctioned as incitement to violence unless 1) the speech explicitly or implicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action; 2) the speaker intends their speech will result in the use of violence or lawless action, and 3) the imminent use of violence or lawless action is the likely result of the speech, a more specific definition than in Schenck. Brandenburg is the Supreme Court’s final statement to date on what government may do about speech that seeks to incite others to lawless action. It was intended to resolve the debate between those who urge greater control of speech and those who favor as much speech as possible before relying on the marketplace of ideas to sort things out.

    Intent as included in Brandenburg is purposely hard to prove. A hostile reaction of a crowd does not automatically transform protected speech into incitement. Listeners’ reaction to speech is thus not alone a basis for regulation, or for taking an enforcement action against a speaker. The speaker had to clearly want to, and succeed in, causing some specific violent act. The reliance on intent exposes the danger of the 1A not applying to corporate censors. Twitter suppressed the speech of 70,000 users simply for retweeting material with “the potential to lead to offline harm” under its Orwellian named Civic Integrity Policy, no intent required. They made up their own version of the law.

    The law is similar for (incitement to) sedition, seeking to overthrow the US government by force. It is intimately tied to the concept of free speech in that any true attempt at overthrow, as well as any legitimate criticism of the government, will include persuasion and stirring up of crowds. The line between criticizing the government and organizing for it to be overthrown is a critical juncture in a democracy. Current law requires the government prove someone conspired to use force. Simply advocating broadly for the use of violence is not the same thing as violence and in most cases is protected as free speech. For example, suggesting the need for revolution “by any means necessary” is unlikely to be seen as conspiracy to overthrow the government by force. But actively planning such an action (distributing guns, working out the logistics, actively opposing lawful authority, etc.) could be considered sedition.

    A 1982 case, Claiborne v. NAACP, not only made clear the Court’s strict standards on blocking speech for incitement but also how such suppression can strike any view, not just conservative ones. In the 1982 Claiborne v. NAACP the Court ruled NAACP civil rights leaders were not responsible for a crowd which, after hearing them speak, burned down a white man’s hardware store. The state of Mississippi had wanted to charge the NAACP leaders with incitement on the grounds their speeches urging a boycott of white-owned stores incited their followers to burn down a store. The state’s argument was that the NAACP leaders knew their inflammatory rhetoric would drive the crowd to violence.

    The Supreme Court rejected that argument, explaining that free speech will die if people are held responsible not for their own violent acts but for those committed by others who heard them speak and were motivated in the name of that cause. The Court wrote “there is no evidence — apart from the speeches themselves that [the NAACP leader] authorized, ratified, or directly threatened acts of violence… To impose liability without a finding that the NAACP authorized — either actually or apparently — or ratified unlawful conduct would impermissibly burden the rights of political association that are protected by the First Amendment.” They concluded instead the NAACP “through exercise of their First Amendment rights of speech, assembly, association, and petition, rather than through riot or revolution, sought to bring about political, social, and economic change.”

    All of this may soon change, however. Joe Biden and the Democratic Congress are actively considering new laws (“Patriot Act 2.0”) against domestic terrorism which will likely draw from and enlarge the current definitions of incitement and sedition, with the Trump impeachment as their philosophical touchstone. The new laws may seek to define beliefs such as “whites are a superior race” not as bad science or an unsavory opinion but as an actual threat, an illegal thought. Proposals include prohibiting people with such beliefs from joining the military or law enforcement.

    The groundwork is already in place. Don’t forget Biden often claims credit for writing the original Patriot Act. The MSM has been priming Americans to believe they have too many rights for their own safety. The NYT is opening soliciting stories about “right wing extremism” in the military.

    It is necessary to say it again. America at present, on paper at least, legally holds apart from some very narrow exceptions free speech exists independent of the content of that speech. This is one of the most fundamental precepts of our democracy. There is no need for protection for things people agree with, things that are not challenging or debatable or offensive. Free speech is not needed to discuss the weather or sports. The true tests for a democracy come at the edges, not in the middle.

    Ronpaulinstitute

  12. #40
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    KYAnglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 03:23 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    England/Britain
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R1b>U106>L48
    mtDNA
    H3af
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    The Pennyrile
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Paying the bills
    Politics
    Confederate
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    934
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    340
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    451
    Thanked in
    298 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Verđandi View Post


    America was urged to take a deep and shameful look backward before reaching into its pocketbook Wednesday as a congressional panel discussed reparations for slavery.

    “How can a nation truly heal if it takes no action toward acknowledging the full scope of pain and addressing the punctured wounds of racism?” Dreisen Heath of Human Rights Watch said, according to USA Today. “We are at a defining moment in U.S. history and reparative justice for the legacy of slavery demands facing the fierce urgency of now.”

    “The highest standard of reparations is needed to adequately address over 400 years of atrocities and compounded and concretized injuries that this community endures,” said Kamm Howard, national male co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America.

    “No quick fix, no singular action or tweak here or there in existing policy will do. America must engage in full reparations.”

    The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties hearing was held to discuss H.R. 40, the “Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act,” a proposal from Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas to convene a panel of experts to find out how best to compensate black Americans for slavery, according to the Washington Examiner.

    Jackson said reparations are part of what she called “reparative justice.”

    That bill for reparations could run to around $13 trillion, according to an estimate by historian Kirsten Mullen and economist William Darity of Duke University. That would dole out between $300,000 to $350,000 per person. For comparison, the current federal budget is $5.8 trillion.

    Forming a panel to decide what form reparations will take has the support of President Joe Biden, according to White House press secretary Jen Psaki.

    Biden “continues to demonstrate his commitment to take comprehensive action to address the systemic racism that persists today,” she said Wednesday, Reuters reported.

    Reparations have had the support of congressional Democrats since 2019, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came on board. When the Republicans controlled the Senate, then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s opposition to reparations doomed the idea.

    Even now that Democrats can push anything through the Senate that requires a majority vote, forming a reparations committee would likely require 60 votes to deal with the expected filibuster.

    National support has been cool. Even amid the summer of riots last year, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found in June that only 20 percent of those surveyed favored using “taxpayer money to pay damages to descendants of enslaved people in the United States.”

    Football great Herschel Walker on Wednesday told Democrats gung-ho for reparations that he opposes the idea, according to the New York Post.

    “We use black power to create white guilt. My approach is biblical: How can I ask my Heavenly Father to forgive me if I can’t forgive my brother?” he said at the hearing.

    “America is the greatest country in the world for me, a melting pot of a lot of great races, a lot of great minds that have come together with different ideas to make Americans the greatest country on earth. Many have died trying to get into America. No one is dying trying to get out,” he said.

    “Reparations, where does the money come from? Does it come from all the other races except the black taxpayers? Who is black? What percentage of black must you be to receive reparations?” Walker went on.

    “Do you go to 23andMe or a DNA test to determine the percentage of blackness? Some American ancestors just came to this country 80 years ago, their ancestors wasn’t even here during slavery. Some black immigrants weren’t here during slavery, nor their ancestors. Some states didn’t even have slavery.”

    Republican Rep. Burgess Owens of Utah, also a former NFL star, who said his great-great-grandfather was a slave who used the Underground Railroad to reach freedom, called slavery an “evil practice,” but argued that “reparations is not the way to right our country’s wrongs,” according to Fox News.

    “It is impractical and a nonstarter for the United States to pay reparations,” Owens said during the hearing.

    “It is also unfair and heartless to give black Americans the hope that this is a reality. The reality is that black American history is not one of a hapless, hopeless race oppressed by a more powerful white race. It is instead a history of millions of middle- and wealthy-class black Americans throughout the early 20th century achieving their American dream.”

    He also summed up reparations as “redistribution of wealth, or socialism.”

    Westernjournal
    I would suggest negroes wanting "reparations" for something their grandparents never experienced visit cemeteries and demand it from west African countries since their slave ancestors were first captured and sold by fellow Africans. It is surreal that this is an actual story and not satire.
    "Almost every name belongs to well-known families of English stock....these soldiers were of ancient American lineage"- Prof. N.S. Shaler on the 1st Kentucky "Orphan" Brigade, Confederate States Army

Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •