Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
Welp, I won't be sleeping tonight.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
Welp, I won't be sleeping tonight.
speculawyer
Member
Meh. That is a district so Red that the Dems didn't even have anyone run against him last time. Instead, people had a write-in campaign for Charles Darwin to make fun of his stupid anti-evolution statements.
http://onlineathens.com/election/20...rly-4000-write-votes-athens-against-rep-broun
WayneMorse
Banned
I was talking about the Georgia Senate primary, a crazy GOP candidate makes it more likely for a moderate like Nunn to win.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah none of the Georgia GOP candidates for Senate come from winnable districts for the Democrats. They'll just be replaced by other crazies.
Obama kept Georgia surprisingly close though and promised Nunn OFA support apparently.
Obama kept Georgia surprisingly close though and promised Nunn OFA support apparently.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Mitch is just so goddamn CREEPY looking.
Christ.
Christ.
I usually just lurk around in this thread for the political commentary. Getting a 90s sitcom nostalgia dump was the last thing I expected, but it is immensely enjoyed. I'd suggest somebody slip him into the credits for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, but I think it'd be too subtle.
cooljeanius
Member
I thought Republicans preferred American Hustle, as it showed an American capitalist pulling himself up by his bootstraps and outsmarting the government.
from what i've been able to gleam with a quick google search: this candidate ran on cutting social security and didn't push for raising the minimum-wage
why do democrats never campaign on issues that are actually popular and instead set themselves up as socially liberal republicans? I'd expect the southern working class vote could be drawn much more effectively if they flipped those labels.
WayneMorse
Banned
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...na-gay-rights-and-arkansas-medicaid-expansion
Democrats and Liberals tend to only campaign on winning issues, mainly social ones. They're far too timid to campaign on more controversial pieces of legislation like Obamacare and other progressive economic policies.
Apparently this is B-roll for Mitch's SuperPacs to utilize in their ads supporting Mitch. You know, since they can't coordinate and all!
Orbis Tabula
Member
I'm trying to find pictures of a young Mitch McConnell to see what he looked like when he was a young man. It is not easy.
but...raising the minimum wage and protecting/expanding social security are winning issues. they're not like obamacare. Even with whites, strengthening social security is hugely popular.
it's why you sometimes get the bizarre display of seeing republicans attack democrats from the left on social security, which seems to have happened here too.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
You're making it much more conscious than it really is.
It's more like the psychological free word association test where you say the first word to come to mind. It's a common technique in marketing to do various tests to find out how exactly people interpret various words emotionally despite their technical definition. That's how you get a red bull energy drink with a slogan of "it gives you wings". There's nothing in the dictionary that says the words red, bull, or wings represent energy, but in reality people do interpret it that way.
So here, in a free word association test, the first thing to come to mind when you say "inner city" is "black people", even though the dictionary definition isn't that. So when Paul Ryan says the inner city has a culture of laziness, people do interpret it as black people have a culture of laziness, even though there's the technical definition to fall back on.
The beauty of it is that no one wants to logically think of themselves or be seen as racist, so the double think of emotionally racist while logically non-racist gets absorbed pretty easily, though it is certainly a lot easier to decode it to the racist root when talking to an average republicans than it is talking to a career politician.
Edit:
Just felt we needed to strike fears in the hearts of everyone on the new page as well.
speculawyer
Member
Oh yeah . . . I spaced out and forget that clown was running for Senate. Holy crap, how can people vote for people who are so amazingly anti-science? And that is not an anti-religion thing . . . you can be very religious and still respect science. But Paul Broun doesn't. He's just loopy.
WayneMorse
Banned
No but you see libruls are the reat anti-science people because Obama cut funding to NASA and fracking!
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, I've heard that one brought up. And often within a few seconds on how Obama is a bad big government guy who is driving up the deficit and debt.
No matter what the topic, Obama is doing it wrong .. . even if those views contradict each other.
Hobbestetrician
Member
Well some turtles can live to be well over 100 years old so photography was still in it's infancy when Mitchy was young.
Black Mamba
Member
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/20...ith-obamacare-as-opposition-burns-bright.html
And it ain't even last march yet. I'm telling you, come November the anti-obamacare stance won't be popular in places that matter.
Whoa. So that's 64% of people who (for all intensive porpoises) support Obamacare? The number's always been under 60% for the past 4 years, so this is pretty good news.
Have you guys seen Jon Stewart interview Andrew Napolitano on his anti-Lincoln comments?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
(Stupid flash sites won't let you link correctly. Someone really needs to work on that..)
I'm less than 3 minutes in and the lols just keep coming.
"Slavery is the worst thing in the history of mankind and if I were alive back then I would totally support a slave revolt a la Spartacus, but Lincoln's just as bad if not WORSE (which he totally is) for not reasoning with the confederacy!"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
(Stupid flash sites won't let you link correctly. Someone really needs to work on that..)
I'm less than 3 minutes in and the lols just keep coming.
"Slavery is the worst thing in the history of mankind and if I were alive back then I would totally support a slave revolt a la Spartacus, but Lincoln's just as bad if not WORSE (which he totally is) for not reasoning with the confederacy!"
I saw it on TV last night. Jon made a great point about his hypocrisy for supporting the American Revolution. Using Napolitano's logic, since independence was going to come naturally regardless (like it did in Canada, Australia, etc.), why fight a war over it? Just wait for colonialism to reach it's natural end or hell, try to buy the colonies from England.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Their new site looks great and lets you do that (you can on the old site if you click link in the video)
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/mzbmx4/exclusive---andrew-napolitano-extended-interview-pt--1
But jeez that the video. I'm only in the first part but he thinks Lincoln could have just stopped enforcing the fugitive slave act? First of all, that's the same thing they'd yell at Obama for and secondly, THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE CIVIL WAR! they in their statements of independence said the North wasn't living up to their end of the bargain by returning slaves. This is just part of this fallacy and wishful thinking libertarians have. I didn't know austrians' problem problem with empiricism and facts also applied to recorded history. Can't trust that either. They can't be bothered with reality or facts. Literally his hypothetical solution for avoiding the civil war was the very reason for the civil war.
Aaron Strife
Banned
It's like repealing the Civil Rights Act. Don't worry, the free market will take care of restaurants that don't serve black people! I can name ten states where that wouldn't harm anyone's business and they're all south of Iowa.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Looks like an outlier poll to me. We'll see.
It goes to show you that too many people were hung up on doom and gloom when the website was not working.
Skiptastic
Member
Also an acceptable answer.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Isn't that the same poll showing Obama at 48%? Seems high.
My anecdotal evidence would point to 50-50 but those opposed much higher and those supporting very lukewarm about it. The issue is a looser for the dems if the focus on it, at least at this point in the game. I think things might change in 2016 if they keep the Senate.
Also guys, McConnell won't lose
NYCmetsfan
Banned
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/13/3399441/ryan-research-lazy-inner-cities/
I really want to know what his mental image of 'inter city men' looked like.
He's also using research to claim things the research never claimed.
I swear there is not another politician that annoys me as much as Ryan. At least others in his party just spew lies based on ignorance. Ryan is smart enough to do research but intentionally mislead about its conclusions. I wish the media would stop their fawning over him. There is no reason one should have to go to a partisan outlet like ThinkProgress (though a fair one IMO) to see that his statements are based on selective quoting and outright lies. Why can't the New York Time reporters or Washington Post or the AP do the same research?
Another stat. Historical use of "inner city"
http://pando.com/2014/03/12/what-do...phrase-inner-city-google-ngram-offers-a-clue/
You're never going to find 'proof' that its 100% definitively racial because it has the luxury of an alternate definition but when you have open statements like this and studies like the book I linked last page its hard to deny unless your trying to provide cover for its continued use. You're also divorcing it from him quoting a known racist, Murray, and the racist cliche blacks don't want to work.
Paul Ryan said:
I really want to know what his mental image of 'inter city men' looked like.
He's also using research to claim things the research never claimed.
I swear there is not another politician that annoys me as much as Ryan. At least others in his party just spew lies based on ignorance. Ryan is smart enough to do research but intentionally mislead about its conclusions. I wish the media would stop their fawning over him. There is no reason one should have to go to a partisan outlet like ThinkProgress (though a fair one IMO) to see that his statements are based on selective quoting and outright lies. Why can't the New York Time reporters or Washington Post or the AP do the same research?
Another stat. Historical use of "inner city"
http://pando.com/2014/03/12/what-do...phrase-inner-city-google-ngram-offers-a-clue/
You're never going to find 'proof' that its 100% definitively racial because it has the luxury of an alternate definition but when you have open statements like this and studies like the book I linked last page its hard to deny unless your trying to provide cover for its continued use. You're also divorcing it from him quoting a known racist, Murray, and the racist cliche blacks don't want to work.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I think the automatic negative response to Ryan's comments are ridiculous and miss the point. They also miss the fact that he also mentioned the same culture and systematic poverty existing in rural America - which is as much code for "white Americans" as inner city poor is code for "black Americans."
There's always a mixture of white guilt and automatic accusations whenever comments like this come up. The fact of the matter is that there is indeed a "culture" of inactivity in economically impoverished areas. Places where there are no jobs, no hope, and generations of people (specifically young men) who have not worked. Obama spoke on this in 2008 when he described rural (ie white) communities that have been so devastated by global economic shifts/death of manufacturing that they distrust politics, and "cling" to cultural ideals that cannot be outsourced/taken away like guns and religion. Go to Flint, Michigan and tell me work, life, or just about anything is valued. It's a war zone and vicious cycle of violence and poverty. Likewise you can find white Appalachian areas in other states that don't have violence but are also deeply entrenched in poverty.
When I say "culture" I am not blaming them or suggesting they're universally lazy - although obviously lazy people do exist. And while you can find people who have escaped horrible conditions and become successful (Richard Sherman going from Compton to Stanford to the NFL, for instance), the fact is that such conditions are rigged to ensure people fail. It's hard to blame people for not trying to find jobs when there are no education opportunities, no jobs, no transportation, no family support, etc.
I'm not going to defend Ryan's political views. Some people need help more than others, and he would knock that support out from under them while offering their communities to the wolves of big business. He pretends to be Jack Kemp but I just don't buy it. To me, Ryan is best summed up by that photo op he did during the 2012 campaign where he pretended to clean pots that were already clean.
There's always a mixture of white guilt and automatic accusations whenever comments like this come up. The fact of the matter is that there is indeed a "culture" of inactivity in economically impoverished areas. Places where there are no jobs, no hope, and generations of people (specifically young men) who have not worked. Obama spoke on this in 2008 when he described rural (ie white) communities that have been so devastated by global economic shifts/death of manufacturing that they distrust politics, and "cling" to cultural ideals that cannot be outsourced/taken away like guns and religion. Go to Flint, Michigan and tell me work, life, or just about anything is valued. It's a war zone and vicious cycle of violence and poverty. Likewise you can find white Appalachian areas in other states that don't have violence but are also deeply entrenched in poverty.
When I say "culture" I am not blaming them or suggesting they're universally lazy - although obviously lazy people do exist. And while you can find people who have escaped horrible conditions and become successful (Richard Sherman going from Compton to Stanford to the NFL, for instance), the fact is that such conditions are rigged to ensure people fail. It's hard to blame people for not trying to find jobs when there are no education opportunities, no jobs, no transportation, no family support, etc.
I'm not going to defend Ryan's political views. Some people need help more than others, and he would knock that support out from under them while offering their communities to the wolves of big business. He pretends to be Jack Kemp but I just don't buy it. To me, Ryan is best summed up by that photo op he did during the 2012 campaign where he pretended to clean pots that were already clean.
But that's all Ryan and Republicans do isn't it? The idea of the takers vs. the makers BLAMES the takers for taking. It doesn't say "the privileged vs the underprivileged who need and deserve help by simply being American Citizens"
That's how you would describe the takers vs. makers argument if you weren't blaming people when there are no education opportunities, no jobs, no transportation, no family support - i.e. underprivileged.
Progressives don't argue that there's a problem that exists in inner city america. We argue that it's not generations of "not wanting to work", laziness, genetic inferiority, an entitlement mentality, or any other dog whistle words used. It's at the very least partly systematic.
I believe, with 100% conviction, that the vast majority of inner city kids who had in their core being an unwavering belief that if they just did well in school they would have countless opportunities, a college education, and acceptance in society - they would do these things.
Every suburban kid believes these things. They know, one way or another, if they do well in school they can have a college education. They can choose to forgo it, but it's there. it's practically guaranteed.
People who feel like the system is rigged against them, who feel like there's no way they can afford to go to college or be accepted in society, lose hope in those ladders of opportunity. And it's not a racial thing, people in the backwoods and in trailers in white communities who are living in abject poverty feel the same way.
100% agreed. It's fine to address the "culture of inactivity" if you acknowledge that these issues are largely a result of poverty and lack of opportunity. If you claim the reverse, that the culture of inactivity in inner cities is the cause of poverty, then your essentially saying "lazy blacks."
I mean, if you refute that there are systematic disadvantages that harm minorities and poor communities (or worse, actively draft legislation that causes even more disadvantages for the poor as Ryan does), and that it all comes down to personal responsibility/culture, then the only way to rationalize poverty statstics for minorities is that they are inferior to whites.
PhoenixDark
Banned
In short Ryan's language is correct, but his policy solution and actions are wrong. I'll give him credit for at least pretending to care, I suppose - he actually goes to inner cities and discusses these issues, unlike most republicans. But as I said, his policy is simply bad.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall during a discussion between Ryan and Obama, specifically with respect to the idea of government help in inner cities and rural communities. Ryan says the war on poverty hasn't worked, but the question I'd love to see him answer is whether these people - who he has admitted are more underprivileged than most - would be better off if the rug was pulled from underneath them. You cut food stamps with the intention of compelling people to work...but what if that person can't find jobs because there are no jobs? What if that person can't afford to take the bus 30 minutes away to find a grocery store he can apply at. These are the real life consequences of cutting aid. And for every 1 person who takes advantage of government aide there are far more who are working hard but don't have the opportunities other people have.
speculawyer
Member
Nice to see The Daily Show get in on the "bash the loopy Libertarians" game.
Black Mamba
Member
Shocking to see you defend Ryan!
In reality land, here's an article tearing that position to shreds.
http://www.salon.com/2014/03/13/pau...o_save_face_why_hes_still_an_overrated_fraud/
Avon Barksdale
Member
I love how all of these suburban white guys all have an opinion on Black America.
Ryan's language isn't correct at all. I don't think his policies are relevant, in the sense that his attitude about black people is the reason he has the policies he has.
If you think "Generations of Men Don't Want to Work" - then you think they don't deserve help because they are irresponsible amoral scum. He doesn't see the government programs as programs designed to help provide opportunity for poor people. But as schemes that these people have globbed on to and suck at for sustenance because they don't value work.
40% of white people in this country vote democrat. 60% vote republican. At least since Reagan, these numbers have been relatively consistent. I think there's NO SINGLE BIGGER reason for why someone makes this decision then their ATTITUDE towards minorities. Not spending totals, not tax policy, not foreign policy hawkishness, not even abortion.
What you think and how you feel about non-white, non-christian people in this country is I think the single biggest determiner of whether you're a white Republican or a white Democrat.
Jon Stewart on Fox News Sunday said something very poignant. I'm paraphrasing but it was essentially:
"You can't tell, because of the soup you swim in, that there is no liberal bias in my show or in the mainstream media. Because you're a 24/7 conservative propaganda delivery system, you think that every other news outlet must be the reverse of that"
It's a similar thing here. Ann Coulter routinely says Democrats USE blacks and hispanics for votes. She recently talked about Democrats pushing immigration forward to get more "warm bodies" for votes. I've heard this kind of talk from the right many times before.
Because they're so fundamentally racist and xenophobic in their core, they can't understand how liberals can be so fundamentally driven to fight for minority rights as a matter of sincerely held belief in equal opportunity and justice for all. This must be a tactic in their eyes because no one can actually care about giving people a pathway to citizenship or gay people equal rights or minorities and women increased opportunity, or poor people social safety nets. These must be nothing other than carefully constructed policies designed to stitch together majority constituencies from various but increasing demographic groups.
So Paul Ryan doesn't advocate good policies for poor people, or black people, or Hispanic people because Paul Ryan doesn't give two shits about these people. It's not his job to care or to fight to make their lives better. It's their job to take personal responsibility. That's why when Obama passes health care, or student loan forgiveness, or cash for clunkers, he's not doing it because he wants to help people, he's essentially "giving gifts to win votes"
"You can't tell, because of the soup you swim in, that there is no liberal bias in my show or in the mainstream media. Because you're a 24/7 conservative propaganda delivery system, you think that every other news outlet must be the reverse of that"
It's a similar thing here. Ann Coulter routinely says Democrats USE blacks and hispanics for votes. She recently talked about Democrats pushing immigration forward to get more "warm bodies" for votes. I've heard this kind of talk from the right many times before.
Because they're so fundamentally racist and xenophobic in their core, they can't understand how liberals can be so fundamentally driven to fight for minority rights as a matter of sincerely held belief in equal opportunity and justice for all. This must be a tactic in their eyes because no one can actually care about giving people a pathway to citizenship or gay people equal rights or minorities and women increased opportunity, or poor people social safety nets. These must be nothing other than carefully constructed policies designed to stitch together majority constituencies from various but increasing demographic groups.
So Paul Ryan doesn't advocate good policies for poor people, or black people, or Hispanic people because Paul Ryan doesn't give two shits about these people. It's not his job to care or to fight to make their lives better. It's their job to take personal responsibility. That's why when Obama passes health care, or student loan forgiveness, or cash for clunkers, he's not doing it because he wants to help people, he's essentially "giving gifts to win votes"
PhoenixDark
Banned
Ryan's argument is that government programs make people more dependent on government, and thus harm them by helping to perpetuate inequality/hardship while providing an incentive. I'm not going to call Ryan racist or suggest he believes blacks are inheritance lazy - that strikes me as a dishonest argument.
Nothing Ryan said in that clip is inaccurate, and in fact it's similar to Obama's argument about rural America. The difference lies in how to fix it. Ryan's plan would make things worse and benefit companies that move into bombed out communities for tax breaks. You could argue democrat solutions don't work much either, but that's another discussion.
Aaron Strife
Banned
It must be tough being in politics when you have no set of guiding principles.
I can't imagine many of the pundits are as anti gay or bigoted as they put on, ffs Rush Limbaugh had Elton John play at his wedding. What they all have in common are being selfish greedy bastards who are all looking out for number one.
As a straight guy whenever I defend gay marriage I almost invariably get the question "Why do you care? You're not gay so it doesn't affect you". From both supporters and opponents (mostly the latter group). Like I can't have any fucking beliefs that aren't predicated on how much I personally stand to gain from something.
Paul Ryan is in it for himself. So was Romney and every other goddamn Republican in this country. The Ryan plan would have cut Romney's income tax to 1%. I'm sure Ryan would stand to similarly benefit.
Black Mamba
Member
Ryan cited Charles Murray, a man who argued blacks were genetically lazier than whites.
Stop letting his ass off the hook.
"Our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress. When there's no evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they've gone through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations...I think that what you'll find is that people of very background. They're going to be a mix of people...lunch pale folks where you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into a places where you think I'll be strong and people will be skeptical"
There is nothing remotely racist there, he talked about the diversity of "people of every background" and blamed the failures of government and broken promises over decades for why rural Americans don't believe in progressivism or effective government.
That's essentially the same argument I made about people in the inner city losing hope that the systems in place and the opportunities that exist will work for them. The challenge of getting people in the inner city to go through the education/college/career path of life when there's no evidence that this works for them i.e. they will be discriminated against and can't pay for college anyway.
Ryan's argument is that inner city - code word black - people are inherently lazy. They don't have the drive or value of work. I'm sure you're well aware the same argument was made for slavery right? These people don't like working, aren't smart, can't survive on their own. They need overseers and masters to be productive in society. I'm not attempting to belittle your knowledge of history, just pointing out these same tired arguments have been used in the past. There isn't a single new conservative argument for anything they do, same arguments been used by pro-slavery groups and pro-segregation/jim crow groups for why they enact those policies.
By the way, the obvious answer to your characterization of Ryan's argument, which really is the best light possible is - great put in a huge government program that gives college degrees, improves inner city schools, and pays for any training or schooling for anyone on public assistance. They will never do this because they don't care about helping these people.
It's like what we saw with Health Care. Obama took their plan and they rejected it. They said they're for states solving it themselves and zero states enacted plans in the last 5 or 50 years to solve it at the state level themselves, They never addressed health care because they didn't think it should be addressed. They didn't help people with pre-existing conditions like myself because they didn't care to address it.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Ryan specifically mentioned rural communities having the same problem. Now, unless you're going to pretend "rural communities" doesn't mean "white people" I think it's time to address his comments seriously. And I'd argue Obama was speaking specifically about white people, just different types - be they "lunch pale" or poor whites. But of course, he has made similar comments about urban communities.
empty vessel
Member
Can somebody link to text of what Ryan said?
Let's gloss over the fact that he's clearly citing a pretty well known racist guy in his remarks, and let me just say that Paul Ryan doesn't care about helping any poor people. They're lazy, entitled, takers, moochers, and don't value the dignity of work.
I don't know whether he's racist, but I know when he lies (like for example his marathon time) he should be called out. And when he says racist things, he should also be called out. Lastly, let's not pretend these are the only comments he's made that have sounded or have been racist.
As for policy provisions, I did argue them albeit briefly. Investing in job training and education and improving inner city neighborhoods to give them the faith and hope in belief that these ladders of opportunity are tangible and accessible to them. Whether in rural america or in inner cities. Both communities have lost faith in the government and the society as a whole to make their lives better by providing them real opportunity and a means to cover costs for training and education that they can't cover on their own.
Paul Ryan believes in lower taxes for rich people because like most conservatives, he believes in a flat tax. As a moral question. Taxing one set of people to give to another is theft and not the role of the government. Taxing rich people more is punishing the wealthy and therefore is morally wrong. It's important to understand why Republicans believe what they believe. That's why no matter how many studies are shown that progressive tax systems improve income inequality and investment in education is one of the greatest ways to improve quality of life for lower income and middle class folks - they don't buy them. Because these positions are outside their ideas of what is and isn't moral. The effects are irrelevant.
If we had a flat tax for 10 years and income inequality widened, as it obviously would, they wouldn't for one second care to go back to a progressive tax system. If poor people get help from their policy provisions, great. If not, whatever. Their policy provisions are matters of ideological principle on the role of government and taxation in general, not on caring about helping the poor, or minorities, etc. etc. Republicans spend the budget on war and tax cuts for the wealthy because those are, in their eyes, the primary functions of government. Tax as little as possible and as flatly as possible, and have a strong military to is always ready to fight any time and at practically whatever cost.
Sorry for the string of long posts, I'll reiterate one last idea: Paul Ryan doesn't care about poor people. His prescription for helping poor people is like his prescription for helping people with pre-existing conditions - "remove the current programs that help those people because they don't help them enough and i don't like them" - There's nothing to replace them with. Everything positive he said about government programs and social safety nets is the practical equivalent of "I don't like this __________________ (insert social program) and it doesn't work because _______________________ so get rid of it" No different then any other argument that side has ever made.
Black Mamba
Member
California will have over 1 million before march 31st, it seems. 15-20% of the nation's total.
Over $2 mil medicaid, too.
We've over 5 million in the nation with California's update. Trying to get to 6 million by March 31st (it's really higher when you include all the off-exchange purchases)
NYCmetsfan
Banned
All I can find is audio http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/03/12/3394871/ryan-poverty-inner-city/
Where? His original comment made no mention of Rural Poverty. His follow up said this
I do think his rural poverty means white but can't you see the difference? When he talks about 'inner city' the people have no value of work its a culture problem, they're lazy. When he mentions rural poverty the problem is the lack of jobs, not culture that is the problem. They problems seem almost passive, poverty happens to them. Inter city people on the other hand contribute to their own poverty, the need to learn how to value work, stop being lazy, stop using welfare.
Whites: Deserving poor, we need to help get them jobs.
Blacks: Undeserving poor, we need to take away their help so they can help themselves.
I don't think paul is an overt racist and I wouldn't even call him a secret racist, I don't think he is. But his ideas, proposals, ideology is based in racist ideas and racist sterotypes, he even quoted one to support his ideas!
Aaron Strife
Banned
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked