Reparations for slavery: pro or con?

[john_galt]

This is going to be a hot topic with the nomination hearings for Goodwin Liu who is on record for supporting the idea of reparations. So now it is time to separate the folks with common sense from those...

In a civil action blame is determined when there are multiple defendants. So do we remove anyone who's ancestors came to this country after the Civil War? Black, white, or anything? What about people of color (this is an important point) who were free prior to the Civil War? There was a major slave owner in Louisiana who was a former slave herself and owned hundreds of slaves when she died. Under which authority did the slavery occur? The first slaves into English controlled territory came in 1637 at Jamestown, VA. Prior to that there were many indentured servants (slaves with an expiration date). The Spanish had taken hundreds of thousands of slaves from the indigenous population since the early 16th century. (note the person of color comment now). Let's narrow our focus to the just the territory called the United States. From 1637 English law and English authority ran the country until 1776. The United States was not formed until 1781 and our constitution did not authorize slavery or recognize slavery other than the 3/5s rule about SLAVES, not freemen. Many states in the north did not recognize slavery though it was not codified legally. The only government organ to recognize slavery was the Confederacy from 1861 to 1865 (it was in their constitution). More on people of color; the Chinese immigrants were in many cases treated worse than slave because at least slaves had value whereas a "free" man or woman from China had no value except to themselves.

There is much more to this question but now I want to hear your comments and that even includes you know who.

[MsElena]

The Chinese probably felt the same way my ancestors (Native American Indians) did before them.

So, to answer your question..........Nope, the government has to make good with my ancestors first.

[Guest121212]

Originally Posted by MsElena

So, to answer your question..........Nope, the government has to make good with my ancestors first.

Hey, we gave you gambling and tax free cigarettes, you give us cheap beaded trinkets made in Singapore and full drunk tanks - what more do you want? Scalps???

LMAO.

Kisses,

- Jackie

PS - Elena will know I am just messing with her, let's not make more of this little joke than it really is . . . If I wasn't so close to her I wouldn't have ever considered the joke or the subject, she knows my true heart . . . it is just funny because we were talking about reparations the other day. So, I had to bust her chops - LOL. --- I actually agree that reparations are owed the American Indians (along with one hell of an apology, other than the lame resolution that was approved by the Senate in 2009).

[MsElena]

Actually, I would take a few scalps and I know where just to start.

[CuteOldGuy]

Scalped by Elena, hmmm, it has possibilities.

As far as reparations for slavery goes, my family lost a number of people in the Civil War. We paid already.

[ez2plz]

I would agree to pay reparations to any civil war era citizen who is still living.

[JT]

Why should it be up to me to pay for something that I had no part in?

[thorough9]

Originally Posted by john_galt

This is going to be a hot topic with the nomination hearings for Goodwin Liu who is on record for supporting the idea of reparations. So now it is time to separate the folks with common sense from those...

In a civil action blame is determined when there are multiple defendants. So do we remove anyone who's ancestors came to this country after the Civil War? Black, white, or anything? What about people of color (this is an important point) who were free prior to the Civil War? There was a major slave owner in Louisiana who was a former slave herself and owned hundreds of slaves when she died. Under which authority did the slavery occur? The first slaves into English controlled territory came in 1637 at Jamestown, VA. Prior to that there were many indentured servants (slaves with an expiration date). The Spanish had taken hundreds of thousands of slaves from the indigenous population since the early 16th century. (note the person of color comment now). Let's narrow our focus to the just the territory called the United States. From 1637 English law and English authority ran the country until 1776. The United States was not formed until 1781 and our constitution did not authorize slavery or recognize slavery other than the 3/5s rule about SLAVES, not freemen. Many states in the north did not recognize slavery though it was not codified legally. The only government organ to recognize slavery was the Confederacy from 1861 to 1865 (it was in their constitution). More on people of color; the Chinese immigrants were in many cases treated worse than slave because at least slaves had value whereas a "free" man or woman from China had no value except to themselves.

There is much more to this question but now I want to hear your comments and that even includes you know who.

What a douche? John Galt wants to about about reparations. John Galt wants to bring up a racially divisive and polarizing issue. Goodwin Liu is a UC Berkeley law professor niominated to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. WTF does the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco have to do with reparations? As far as I remember, the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and the one that would be sure to make or break a final decision concerning reparations. John Galt want to raise to arms the good white people on this board with claims of "they want to give those other people stuff that they're not giving us". What a crock. John Galt reminds me of the people in southern towns and cities who would run around the city "harmlessly" raising the subject of race relations to a fever pitch from which lynch mobs sprang. John Galt is a race-baiter. Reparations my ass...... And all of the rambling "examples" of what you consider to be history from your racially distorted POV - and most of them are incorrect or just irrelevant. Were you home-schooled out on ye ole' compound? You must have run out of dumb shit to say about Obama.

[CuteOldGuy]

I think Galt made a good point. Someone who believes that African Americans are owed reparations for slavery, which ended about 150 years ago, has faulty reasoning capability and probably wouldn't do a good job handling judicial appeals. Appellate court judges need to have a keen analytical mind with the ability to separate opinion from fact. Professor Liu does not appear to exhibit that quality.

[john_galt]

First, Ms Elena; the ancient Egyptians used to keep count of their fallen foes by collecting foreskins. Think about it.

For thorough9; you said a lot of stuff that I didn't say and didn't come close to saying. You are a demagogue and I think it is clear who the racer is.
Why is Liu important? Try to follow; cases don't go directly to the Supreme Court. They have to find a judge that will advance it, enter Liu. Also it would look good on Barry's resume to appoint an Asian Supreme Court justice so any candidate has to be groomed and appointed to a lower court first.

How about getting back to the topic because Barry believes in it, Eric Holder believes in it, and now we might have a federal appeals court judge who believes in reparations.

[Seomon]

I do think thorough9 has one point, galt, the issue you raised is racially sensitive. You might want to Google all the other ethnic groups that are or have petitioned the US government for reparations for past wrongs - some of them have succeeded, which is why Native Americans (I am cherokee) have the right to have casinos on sovereign native land (and the US and State governments are trying to screw us out of that by taxing us to death). Out of all the ethnic groups, don't you think it's kinda fishy to include just one, if your issue is just reparations for people injured that are no longer among the living??? By the by, American law does provide remedy for people even if they are not among the living as long as the statute of limitation has not run out.

[thorough9]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I think Galt made a good point. Someone who believes that African Americans are owed reparations for slavery, which ended about 150 years ago, has faulty reasoning capability and probably wouldn't do a good job handling judicial appeals. Appellate court judges need to have a keen analytical mind with the ability to separate opinion from fact. Professor Liu does not appear to exhibit that quality.

So let me get this right: A posible candidate believes that the nation should redress some of its pass crimes and because of that belief - no, because that belief differs from your POV, they are not qualified to serve as an appeallate judge? When did this become about black people? Case in point. Galt stirs the pot and gullible people, like yourself, jump face-first into some divisive bullshit. And what's faulty reasoning: Hobbying, if you're married is adultery. Besides you talk as if you know the man personally. How many insightful and analytical conversation have you had with Professor Liu. Just because his opinion differs from yours, he is neither keen, nor analytical. Faulty and self-rightous reasoning. Typical small minded BS. The inability to separate one thing from another. There are no perfect people in the world, but so many of you are so quick to condemn the actions of others. It might be different if you formed your own opinion rather than having it fed to you by right wing TV and Radio.

This is some shit that gault dreamed up. Everyone knows, black people included, that they will never get reparations due to the passage of time and this country's system of unassigned responsibility. So why the "debate"? Typical, coded, race-baiting at its best. You don't have to worry about someone taking "your" money for reparations. By the time that the Republicans and Big Business are finished with you, you won't have two nickels to rub together any-damned-way.

[thorough9]

Originally Posted by john_galt

For thorough9; you said a lot of stuff that I didn't say and didn't come close to saying. You are a demagogue and I think it is clear who the racer is.
Why is Liu important? Try to follow; cases don't go directly to the Supreme Court. They have to find a judge that will advance it, enter Liu. Also it would look good on Barry's resume to appoint an Asian Supreme Court justice so any candidate has to be groomed and appointed to a lower court first.

How about getting back to the topic because Barry believes in it, Eric Holder believes in it, and now we might have a federal appeals court judge who believes in reparations.

So you're saying that President Barack Obama and Eric Holder believe in reparations? You read too many of the pamphlets that float down from the sky while you listen to Tokyo Rose on the loudspeakers. Eric Holder and President Barack Obama can do nothing about court decisions. I thought that I'd already given you a refresher course in the American political system. Try and keep up: The judicial branch decides court cases, not the president or the attorney general. And the Supreme Court has the final say - and it's loaded with Bush- appointed Conservatives. Not to mention, Appeal judges preside over cases - they don't initiate cases.....

The fact that this man approves of reparations (OMG, more free shit for Black People and others) is enough reason for you, and your kind, to oppose him, nevermind what-else he opposes or supports - and that's what Republicans are counting on - you getting played like a fiddle. I hope that you know an old rebel jig so that you can dance along....

[koolman]

WTF I thought Welfare IS Slavery Reparations! shit you mean we gotta pay MORE?!?!

[catnipdipper]

This is just a bunch of crap to justify a Republican filibuster.

I wish this had been done to Thomas who thinks anyone that complains is only interested in the case itself and is usually ignorant of the topic.

If we don't get some diverse points of view in this country we will speed backward to the 50's based on fear and hateful soundbites and puckered ass hole Republican leaders.