Stealth Reparations via Pigford

Status
Not open for further replies.

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Another day, another scandal in Obama's America. He's got his teflon suit on so he may just be able to hold this one at bay for a while.

Notice the claims for compensation with nearly the exact same wording and in the same handwriting.


STEALTH REPARATIONS: New York Times confirms Obama administration behind billions in fraudulent payments

That lawsuit is such a fucking scam. so many people came out of teh woodwork to file claims it's insane.

anything from kids (a full family mother, father and 3 kids each FILLED) to people who have lived in huge towns like Chicago with no knowledge or family history of farming. From what i read there were so many claims that there were NOT enough farmland or possible for all to do.

if you are black, Hispanic or female you could get in on it.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I think the original lawsuit had merit; black farmers who were just as qualified could not get loans as did their white counterparts, which in some cases were necessary (depending on what and where one farmed) for survival. As Boomerang says, it turned into just another entitlement program, where people of the correct skin tone and/or sex could get free money first on the flimsiest of justification and eventually on no justification at all.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Just imagine the lawsuits in a few decades over affirmative action!
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,055
31,013
136
The original lawsuit was valid, and if you would do some research you would also know that most records were systematically destroyed so "proof" for many who had problems would be difficult to come by. That being said the bar should have been higher and more documentation required such as location of farm, crops raised or attempted to raise etc.

BTW OP what do you mean by reparations? Stealth reparations for what in your opinion?
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
BTW OP what do you mean by reparations? Stealth reparations for what in your opinion?
I didn't write the article, you'd have to take that question up with the author. Without a subscription to the NYT, I can't read the article this one was based of off. But having said that, I think it was a poor choice of words intended to sensationalize the authors article. Here at P&N, if you choose a title for a post that is not closely related to what you link to or, if you don't use words for a title that are in what you link to, you will bear the brunt of "the man". So, I saw this as a potentially inflammatory topic and was careful to use words for the title that were in the article.

To summarize, those are not my words and my thoughts related to your questions are of no importance because the article was about yet another huge fuck up by Obama and his bunch of malcontent misfits for which there will more than likely be no repercussions. The media as a whole certainly isn't going to talk about it.

If the thread is to continue I would prefer it be about whether there are legal implications centered around the way this program was administered that could have an effect on the Obama administration. I feel they may have broken the law and I think elected officials should have to answer to someone for their misdeeds regardless of the color of their skin or their party affiliation.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,055
31,013
136
I see the trick now.....find an outrage blog post and then hide behind it and claim ignorance of what the author is trying to say while using it as an inflammatory headline for your post. If you don't understand the author's meaning should you really be parroting the words?
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
I see the trick now.....find an outrage blog post and then hide behind it and claim ignorance of what the author is trying to say while using it as an inflammatory headline for your post. If you don't understand the author's meaning should you really be parroting the words?

because the guy used "reparations" does that make rest of the article wrong? is there not a ton of bs going on with the lawsuit? are thousands that do not and will not farm trying to cash in?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
I see the trick now.....find an outrage blog post and then hide behind it and claim ignorance of what the author is trying to say while using it as an inflammatory headline for your post. If you don't understand the author's meaning should you really be parroting the words?

Better to just defend a lawsuit as valid even though, as you said, there is zero proof to back up a lot of the claims? Gotcha.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
30,055
31,013
136
because the guy used "reparations" does that make rest of the article wrong? is there not a ton of bs going on with the lawsuit? are thousands that do not and will not farm trying to cash in?

I already said I thought the bar for payments should have been higher. What I don't agree with is the idea the original suit was completely without merit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.