[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats

Texas Flood

Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas

Tucker Carlson Interviews President of Iran Mosoud Pezeshkian

PROOF Netanyahu Wants US To Fight His Wars

RAPID CRUSTAL MOVEMENT DETECTED- Are the Unusual Earthquakes TRIGGER for MORE (in Japan and Italy) ?

Google Bets Big On Nuclear Fusion

Iran sets a world record by deporting 300,000 illegal refugees in 14 days

Brazilian Women Soccer Players (in Bikinis) Incredible Skills

Watch: Mexico City Protest Against American Ex-Pat 'Invasion' Turns Viole

Kazakhstan Just BETRAYED Russia - Takes gunpowder out of Putin’s Hands

Why CNN & Fareed Zakaria are Wrong About Iran and Trump

Something Is Going Deeply WRONG In Russia

329 Rivers in China Exceed Flood Warnings, With 75,000 Dams in Critical Condition

Command Of Russian Army 'Undermined' After 16 Of Putin's Generals Killed At War, UK Says

Rickards: Superintelligence Will Never Arrive

Which Countries Invest In The US The Most?

The History of Barbecue

‘Pathetic’: Joe Biden tells another ‘tall tale’ during rare public appearance

Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials

Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy

Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher!

They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness

Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona

For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented

The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call

Marandi: Israel Prepares Proxies for Next War with Iran?

"Hitler Survived WW2 And I Brought Proof" Norman Ohler STUNS Joe Rogan

CIA Finally Admits a Pyschological Warfare Agent from the Agency “Came into Contact” with Lee Harvey Oswald before JFK’s Assassination


(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: Obama says he opposes slavery reparations, apology
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92A5GCG0&show_article=1
Published: Aug 2, 2008
Author: Chris Wills
Post Date: 2008-08-02 10:15:47 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 627
Comments: 54

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama opposes offering reparations to the descendants of slaves, putting him at odds with some black groups and leaders. The man with a serious chance to become the nation's first black president argues that government should instead combat the legacy of slavery by improving schools, health care and the economy for all.

"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," the Illinois Democrat said recently.

Some two dozen members of Congress are co-sponsors of legislation to create a commission that would study reparations—that is, payments and programs to make up for the damage done by slavery.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports the legislation, too. Cities around the country, including Obama's home of Chicago, have endorsed the idea, and so has a major union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Obama has worked to be seen as someone who will bring people together, not divide them into various interest groups with checklists of demands. Supporting reparations could undermine that image and make him appear to be pandering to black voters.

"Let's not be naive. Sen. Obama is running for president of the United States, and so he is in a constant battle to save his political life," said Kibibi Tyehimba, co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America. "In light of the demographics of this country, I don't think it's realistic to expect him to do anything other than what he's done."

But this is not a position Obama adopted just for the presidential campaign. He voiced the same concerns about reparations during his successful run for the Senate in 2004.

There's enough flexibility in the term "reparations" that Obama can oppose them and still have plenty of common ground with supporters.

The NAACP says reparations could take the form of government programs to help struggling people of all races. Efforts to improve schools in the inner city could also aid students in the mountains of West Virginia, said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau.

"The solution could be broad and sweeping," Shelton said.

The National Urban League—a group Obama is to address Saturday—avoids the word "reparations" as too vague and highly charged. But the group advocates government action to close the gaps between white America and black America.

Urban League President Marc Morial said he expects his members to press Obama on how he intends to close those gaps and what action he would take in the first 100 days of his presidency.

"What steps should we take as a nation to alleviate the effects of racial exclusion and racial discrimination?" Morial asked.

The House voted this week to apologize for slavery. The resolution, which was approved on a voice vote, does not mention reparations, but past opponents have argued that an apology would increase pressure for concrete action.

Obama says an apology would be appropriate but not particularly helpful in improving the lives of black Americans. Reparations could also be a distraction, he said.

In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."

Taking questions Sunday at a conference of minority journalists, Obama said he would be willing to talk to American Indian leaders about an apology for the nation's treatment of their people.

Pressed for his position on apologizing to blacks or offering reparations, Obama said he was more interested in taking action to help people struggling to get by. Because many of them are minorities, he said, that would help the same people who would stand to benefit from reparations.

"If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured," Obama said. "If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get—should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college."

One reparations advocate, Vernellia Randall, a law professor at the University of Dayton, bluntly responded: "I think he's dead wrong."

She said aid to the poor in general won't close the gaps—poor blacks would still trail poor whites, and middle-class blacks would still lag behind middle-class whites. Instead, assistance must be aimed directly at the people facing the after-effects of slavery and Jim Crow laws, she said.

"People say he can't run and get elected if he says those kinds of things," Randall said. "I'm like, well does that mean we're really not ready for a black president?"

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 25.

#1. To: christine (#0)

I actually can't help but like this guy. That's why I DO NOT want him to be President. I was relieved when Hillary was winning because of this.

He doesn't deserve to be hated for anything he has actually done to date in his life, as far as I can tell. He is hated because of what people fear he might do.

So I say give the White House to McThuselah and then everyone REALLY WILL see their worst fears (or most "wargasmic" desires, in the case of the Judeocons) realized.

Sam Houston  posted on  2008-08-02   10:28:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Sam Houston (#1)

I actually can't help but like this guy. That's why I DO NOT want him to be President. I was relieved when Hillary was winning because of this.

He doesn't deserve to be hated for anything he has actually done to date in his life, as far as I can tell. He is hated because of what people fear he might do.

So I say give the White House to McThuselah and then everyone REALLY WILL see their worst fears (or most "wargasmic" desires, in the case of the Judeocons) realized.

I think you're trying to find something deep and wonderful in a blank slate. What's to like about Obama? There's lots to dislike about McCain, I'll agree with you there, but otoh what little Obama has shown thusfar imo is not very likeable. The world tour made me want to kick the teevee screen. His game playing with the "lost and found" note at the Wailing Wall and his devotional visit with yarmulke on his head to the Holocaust Museum and meeting with BoomBoom Netanyahu ( who btw gave the thumbs up re: Obama after their tete-a-tete about eeevil Iran) was enough to make me gag. His current bill to up the ante to the UN Third World thugocracies using our tax $ as our economy nose-dives is nothing short of ludicrous. His stupid advice to fill tires more as an answer to rising fuel prices is beyond laughable. His flip flopping about off shore oil drilling is a preview of what will come to be re: his position on reparations. The guy is an empty suit and a phony. I would not trust him as far as I could throw him. Read his book called "Dreams of My Father" - he says he wished he could get rid of the white blood coursing through his body. What does that tell you? He is so conflicted about his own personal situation - how could he possibly be an unconflicted head of state when the question of reparations will come and surely it will if Conyers has any say in the matter. Reparations would tear this nation apart - I have no doubt about it. There is alot of resentment as it is about affirmative action - reparations would be the final blow and cause racial hatred and back biting for years to come. Here's who your "likeable" Barry hangs with:

www.pr-inside.com/a-presi...ma-would-force-r85048.htm

scrapper2  posted on  2008-08-02   15:16:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: scrapper2 (#6)

I didn't say I was going to vote for him. I'm in "Red State" Texas, so I'll vote Libertarian as always. I just said I couldn't summon up any hatred for him. I couldn't care less who he "hangs with." Couldn't be any worse than some of McInsane's associates. "Hanging with" Lieberman is enough for me to write him off forever.

I see classism as the key issue in this era and not racism. Barack Obama is from a higher class than I am or ever will be. So is McCain. Obama's stated policies on the economy are more favorable to the middle class than are McCain's.

I can't trust either one of them to follow through, but if Obama actually is able to get enacted the tax policies which are in his platform, I will come out ahead compared to what McPain is proposing. If my vote were for sale, Obama has just made me a better offer than McStrangelove did.

A country without a middle class, which is where we're headed, is going to be so doomed that racism will be one of the least of our problems.

BTW, I wish I could get rid of my English blood and be fully German. We can all wish a lot of things, to pass the time of day, but it doesn't change who we are.

Sam Houston  posted on  2008-08-02   15:39:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Sam Houston (#7)

Obama's stated policies on the economy are more favorable to the middle class than are McCain's.

I can't trust either one of them to follow through, but if Obama actually is able to get enacted the tax policies which are in his platform, I will come out ahead compared to what McPain is proposing. If my vote were for sale, Obama has just made me a better offer than McStrangelove did.

I think you are confused about which candidate would do more damage to the middle class.

Obama is considering raising the capital gains class from 15% to 28%. Middle class taxpayers typically have their $ tied to owning homes in nice middle class neighborhoods, pension plans that are invested in a variety of stocks, commodities, etc - so under Obama's plan, profits from increased values and sales of any of the aforementioned would be subject to almost double the tax rate that exists now.

Obama also does not want to allow the death tax to sunset, so middle class people who want to give their children a leg up in life since affirmative action gov't programs put them at a disadvantage, will have their legacies taxed and sent to the US Treasury. Middle class under Obama's plan will have saved their legacy for FedGov's use not for their children/grandchildren's use.

Obama has waffled on what his definition of "rich" is - at first it was supposed to be those eeevil Marie Antoinette-Sun King people earning lotsa $. Then Obama began spouting salary figures defining "the rich" to be $150,000. Depending on what state you live in, a married couple earning $150,000 or more are mainstream, not "the rich" - a firefighter married to a teacher would qualify as "rich" in many states under Obama's grand plan.

Furthermore, with regards to Obama's SS plan - raising the 6% payroll tax level to $250,000 is not exactly striking out at "the rich." At that level, it's small fry - small business owners, doctors, lawyers. All it means is that the small business owners professional partnerships will hire more part-timers with no benefits. As we have already seen - "the rich" - the real ones know how to hide their $ abroad - Halliburton took its corporate head office to Dubai to diminish its US corporate tax burden. Count on this happening more frequently if Obama wins the Oval Office and the Dimwits win a majority in the House - off shore flight of capital. As it is "the rich" - the top 1% of US taxpayers support 60% of Fedgov's programs - do you honestly believe they'll allow their $ to be seized to a greater degree than now only to support the growing of a useless gov't bureaucracy and an expansion of a dependent underclass? I don't think so. The rich didn't get that way being stoooopid with their finances.

Until and if ever Obama starts talking about CUTS TO GOVERNMENT SPENDING, he's not giving any credible solutions to what ails our nation's economy. The likes of Obama only will exacerbate the problems.

scrapper2  posted on  2008-08-02   17:26:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: scrapper2 (#8)

I can tell you and I do not have the same definition of "middle class."

From where I live, you are describing the "wealthy."

I live in a rural area and anyone with a six-figure income is very, very well off to me. Hardly ANYONE has a pension plan. Lots have bass boats, F-150s and SUVs. These remain parked the majority of the time these days.

Many, perhaps the majority, have negative net worths.

I own two homes free and clear, but they weren't in a "bubble" and are not equal to one of your so-called "nice" homes.

There are more than just "two Americas," to paraphrase John Edwards. There are dozens of them and it's why I say, almost every chance I get, that Lincoln was BY FAR the worst president in our history, because he prevented these dozens of new countries from flourishing, each with its own set of policies.

So if I am not even in the middle class, I even more can say that if my vote were for sale, I'd have to give it to the guy so many on this site seem to love to hate.

Sam Houston  posted on  2008-08-02   19:22:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Sam Houston (#15)

I can tell you and I do not have the same definition of "middle class."

From where I live, you are describing the "wealthy."

Middle class by my definition, wealthy by your definition - who cares - none of the people who have more than you have owe you anything. Why do you believe you are entitled to more of the income earned by those who are in an economic class above you? What do you bring to the pot? The middle class and the wealthy pay way more than their share to keep Fedgov afloat. The worker bees are maxed out in income taxes.

Re-distribution of wealth, punishing hard work and success did not benefit the Soviet Union and it will not benefit America.

scrapper2  posted on  2008-08-02   19:40:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: scrapper2 (#24)

Concentration of wealth through bailout of Wall Street bankers is not going to work either.

I owed them nothing either, but look who "won" in D.C. the other day.

Sam Houston  posted on  2008-08-02   19:42:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 25.

#29. To: Sam Houston (#25)

Concentration of wealth through bailout of Wall Street bankers is not going to work either.

I owed them nothing either, but look who "won" in D.C. the other day.

No offense but it doesn't sound like you have much to worry about your modest income tax contributions being what is used to bail out Wall Street bankers. Fyi, the Dems were just as much on board with the bail-out as the Gopers.

scrapper2  posted on  2008-08-02 19:48:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 25.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]