U.S. Politics

Page 407 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
Here's another NSA whistleblower.

Snowden saw what I saw: surveillance criminally subverting the constitution
by Thomas Drake

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution

RT talks to Thomas Drake, a former National Security Agency executive in the US who sacrificed his career to blow the whistle on wrong-doings inside the NSA.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMy2ZbPkyvw

Thomas Drake on twitter:

https://twitter.com/Thomas_Drake1
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
And yet another one - William Binney.

NSA Whistleblower: Everyone in US under virtual surveillance, all info stored

RT talks to William Binney, whistleblower and former NSA crypto-mathematician who served in the agency for decades. Virtual privacy in US, Petraeus affair and whistleblowers' odds in fight against the authorities are among key topics of this exclusive interview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuET0kpHoyM

He told you so: Bill Binney talks NSA leaks

In the wake of multiple leaks regarding the data mining programs PRISM and Boundless Informant, whistleblowers are coming out in droves to talk about the unprecedented government surveillance on the American public. RT Correspondent Meghan Lopez had a chance to sit down with NSA whistleblower William Binney to talk about the latest developments coming out of the NSA case. Binney is a 32 year veteran of the NSA, where he helped design a top secret program he says helps collect data on foreign enemies. He is regarded as one of the best mathematicians and code breakers in NSA history. He became an NSA whistleblower in 2002 when he realized the program he helped create to spy no foreign enemies was being used on Americans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMwQSybOp9M
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Jeremiah said:
BTW, Arthur Fletcher was well to the left of Obama and Clinton.

Hmm, rich white people need financial giveaways to incentivize them but if you toss black people a few crumbs they become lazy?

Nice theory tho.:(
No, just trapped.

Maybe try and answer a few of the questions?

Arthur Fletcher served for a host of R presidents and was a republican. So much for your affirmative action theory, eh?
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Clarence Thomas is one of the single worst Justices we have ever had on the Supreme Court, and it has EVERYTHING to do with his decisions and NOTHING to do with his skin.

Michael Steele got lots of racism from your side.

I also notice you failed to mention people like EW Jackson, who said that yoga leads to satanism, and Allen West, who in reference to "COEXIST" bumper stickers said "Every time I see one of those bumper stickers, I look at the person inside that is driving. Because that person represents something that would give away our country. Would give away who we are, our rights and freedoms and liberties because they are afraid to stand up and confront that which is the antithesis, anathema of who we are."

Those people are criticized because they are fu*king crazy, and every time they are, people like Limbaugh say it is race motivated. Well, as an expert on being racist, I would generally defer to his opinion, but not this time.
Clarence Thomas is one of the single worst Justices we have ever had on the Supreme Court, and it has EVERYTHING to do with his decisions and NOTHING to do with his skin.
Ok. Funny how often (not by you) I'm accused,overtly, of racism for similar views of this president.

Michael Steele got lots of racism from your side
True. So did Herman Cain.

I'm not the biggest of Allen West fans... but I hear he may challenge Rubio.

Those people are criticized because they are fu*king crazy
And this is where you go off the rails and start sounding a lot like Velocity. Blanket statements are not serving you well. JC Watts is no more crazy than Barack Obama and so on.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Ok. Funny how often (not by you) I'm accused,overtly, of racism for similar views of this president.



True. So did Herman Cain.

I'm not the biggest of Allen West fans... but I hear he may challenge Rubio.



And this is where you go off the rails and start sounding a lot like Velocity. Blanket statements are not serving you well. JC Watts is no more crazy than Barack Obama and so on.
By "those" I was referring to Jackson and West specifically. I was not referring to the ones you listed. Sorry if I was unclear.
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,026
0
0
What most impresses me about Scott is that he can disagree with just about everyone else who posts here, and still he is absolutely convinced that he is the one that is right. I am not saying that all other posters agree at all times, but maybe questioning your believe system when it seems to run contrary to everyone else in your demographic is a gift?;)
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
What most impresses me about Scott is that he can disagree with just about everyone else who posts here, and still he is absolutely convinced that he is the one that is right. I am not saying that all other posters agree at all times, but maybe questioning your believe system when it seems to run contrary to everyone else in your demographic is a gift?;)
I used to post on a very conservative forum, and was one of two liberals who posted about politics. I never wavered in my beliefs, so I understand. That, and Scott has a reasonableness to him. I know many here do not see it, but I have seen it many times. It's tough to post against a massive tide, and it many times necessitates an unyielding attitude to not get swamped.
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
No, just trapped.

Maybe try and answer a few of the questions?

Arthur Fletcher served for a host of R presidents and was a republican. So much for your affirmative action theory, eh?
Trapped? Like Clarence Thomas was trapped? He just made sure he pulled up the ladder after him.

Arthur Fletcher served for Nixon, Ford and GHWB who weren't complete lunatics like Reagan, who was fortunately asleep much of the time. After all GHWB correctly labeled Voodoo economics and raised taxes.

White millionaires get huge handouts and that's ok. They'd lose their incentives if they didn't. Blacks get a bare sustenance, and this traps them? Nice theory....
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
What most impresses me about Scott is that he can disagree with just about everyone else who posts here, and still he is absolutely convinced that he is the one that is right.
Self interest is a very strong force.

ChewbaccaD said:
I used to post on a very conservative forum, and was one of two liberals who posted about politics. I never wavered in my beliefs, so I understand. That, and Scott has a reasonableness to him. I know many here do not see it, but I have seen it many times. It's tough to post against a massive tide, and it many times necessitates an unyielding attitude to not get swamped.
As to the bolded, NO!
 
Apr 20, 2009
1,190
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Oh, I dunno.

I'm guessing that if a R presidential candidate had a relationship with someone of Bill Ayers caliber that candidate never, ever would have made it out of the primaries.

That the press virtually ignored this relationship is interesting enough. That Bill Ayers is given a platform to suggest that BO should be tried for war crimes is so rich with irony that I find the idea and story completely irresistible.
not true. the press talked about it extensively. i read a ton about it at the time. the voters ignored it.



oh, and i seem to recall reading that both george bush and rick perry are friends and have fundraisers members of several texas secessionist militias. this was ignored by the media. i read about a fundraiser that bush had before his second term. there were some names mentioned that were unfamiliar, so i googled them and was surprised to learn that they were texas independence people and had been linked to kidnapping and violence. i remembered the names when rick perry had a fundraiser with the same people.

the point is EVERYBODY has associations that don't look good when taken out of context. politicians have this more than most, because everybody wants to be seen with them and they will take money from anyone.
 
Of course the radical activism of Ayers needs to be contextualized within the Cold War imperialistic and ideological worldview in which the US party leadership and its military was engaged at the time.

There were thus a series of conditions that eventually exploded in a fatal catastrophe, which was the response to another one in Vietnam, when the forms of legitimate and much justified protest deformed into ferocious acts of terrorism. Yet the responsibility and fault cannot be placed solely on the shoulders of the activists, since the actions of the government and military were far more criminal and deadly in Vietnam.

The problem is when the mere voices of protest become the hands which ignite the bombs, for which one passes from being in the right to being wrong. At the same time when there is a conservative political class that sent an agent to make deals with the “devil,” only later to then go to war against him on trumped up charges and under a false ideological pretext – or the financial market blows up and workers are told they simply need to be more “flexible,” while there’s a public bailout of the banks - it becomes more intriguing to ponder why radical activism isn’t making a comeback today.

In part this is surely do to the end of the ideological rivalry that distinguished capitalism vs. communism during the Cold War, to then have only set in a sort of social and political anesthesia among today’s lethargic emerging youth, who have been rather weaned on hyper-consumerism a myopic self-interest. The Ayers generation of today doesn’t exist thus in the comfortable, if declining, West, but on the streets and squares of the Arab world.

Yet in the US and Europe the globalization of finance and the work market, with the consequent diminishing of workers’ rights and salaries, and the end of the class struggle, has enshrined a pacification that has witnessed as its principle victims this same young generation and the middle class. Only a diffuse social conflict can wake up a history that’s fallen asleep. At the present moment this conflict seems limited to the Arab world, though perhaps will extend to China in the near future. The US and Europe seem to be the most anesthetized right now, because, for now at least, still the most well off, though in any case the dreams of history never last for long.
 
rhubroma said:
Of course the radical activism of Ayers needs to be contextualized within the Cold War imperialistic and ideological worldview in which the US party leadership and its military was engaged at the time.

There were thus a series of conditions that eventually exploded in a fatal catastrophe, which was the response to another one in Vietnam, when the forms of legitimate and much justified protest deformed into ferocious acts of terrorism. Yet the responsibility and fault cannot be placed solely on the shoulders of the activists, since the actions of the government and military were far more criminal and deadly in Vietnam.

The problem is when the mere voices of protest become the hands which ignite the bombs, for which one passes from being in the right to being wrong. At the same time when there is a conservative political class that sent an agent to make deals with the “devil,” only later to then go to war against him on trumped up charges and under a false ideological pretext – or the financial market blows up and workers are told they simply need to be more “flexible,” while there’s a public bailout of the banks - it becomes more intriguing to ponder why radical activism isn’t making a comeback today.

In part this is surely do to the end of the ideological rivalry that distinguished capitalism vs. communism during the Cold War, to then have only set in a sort of social and political anesthesia among today’s lethargic emerging youth, who have been rather weaned on hyper-consumerism a myopic self-interest. The Ayers generation of today doesn’t exist thus in the comfortable, if declining, West, but on the streets and squares of the Arab world.

Yet in the US and Europe the globalization of finance and the work market, with the consequent diminishing of workers’ rights and salaries, and the end of the class struggle, has enshrined a pacification that has witnessed as its principle victims this same young generation and the middle class. Only a diffuse social conflict can wake up a history that’s fallen asleep. At the present moment this conflict seems limited to the Arab world, though perhaps will extend to China in the near future. The US and Europe seem to be the most anesthetized right now, because, for now at least, still the most well off, though in any case the dreams of history never last for long.

Increased measures and techniques--even the basic condition of subjectivity--for "security" have much to do with this. As does the criminalization of far more dissident behaviors and social activities, the normation of most every aspect on individual existence. Distinctions between criminal acts and civil disobedience have been significantly erased--taken out of the body politic and organized around property, private space and an increasingly tightened set of boundaries as to what constitutes the prerogatives of the state (as distinct from nation in this sense), not to mention the city. That amounts to a literal impasse in that, understandably, quite few are willing to actualize their political positions when faced with the prospect of much lengthier amounts of time in the dehumanizing space of US prisons. Material comfort (and the threat of its lack) has significantly diminished any sustenance to be taken from political engagement in any remotely idealized sense. Also in the West, again, there's the question as to how much radical politics belonged to the age and value-sets of the age, common sense notions and contested terms of politics and rights to life during the imperial eras of accumulation. (Or sedition to various overt stages of sovereignty?)

And then there's the virtualization of reality. After all the discourse and rhetoric about the digital and technological revolutions, people like Assange, Manning and Snowden (and Swartz) achieve new visibility as radical activists--two of whom at least had the capability to act at a distance. The weak example that provides for many western youth is to remain physically passive and nonconstructive in ambition and vision while believing themselves otherwise. As you know, the relative role of social media in social dissent has been repeatedly debated and criticized over the past two and a half years and it seems likely that until its use is subordinated (rather than substituted) to actual and ongoing goals not much is likely to happen.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Jeremiah said:
Trapped? Like Clarence Thomas was trapped? He just made sure he pulled up the ladder after him.

Arthur Fletcher served for Nixon, Ford and GHWB who weren't complete lunatics like Reagan, who was fortunately asleep much of the time. After all GHWB correctly labeled Voodoo economics and raised taxes.

White millionaires get huge handouts and that's ok. They'd lose their incentives if they didn't. Blacks get a bare sustenance, and this traps them? Nice theory....

Trapped? Like Clarence Thomas was trapped? He just made sure he pulled up the ladder after him.
His is an interesting story. Condoleeza Rice might be even more interesting. There are successes from long odds all the time. What's your point? Do you want to take a stab at the questions I asked you now, or would you like to keep ducking them?

Arthur Fletcher served for Nixon, Ford and GHWB who weren't complete lunatics like Reagan, who was fortunately asleep much of the time. After all GHWB correctly labeled Voodoo economics and raised taxes.
I'm guessing you never heard of Arthur Fletcher before yesterday. Nixon not being a complete lunatic will come as a surprise to many on this thread.


White millionaires get huge handouts and that's ok.
Only white millionaires?:rolleyes:

Do you have even a cursory understanding of the tax code, how it works and who actually pays taxes?

Blacks get a bare sustenance, and this traps them? Nice theory....
Why don't you take a little time and look into foundational problems in the black community... particularly inner-city blacks and get back to us. I'm interested in your take on the questions I asked you earlier.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Jeremiah said:
Self interest is a very strong force.



As to the bolded, NO!
Really? You do realize this makes you part of the problem, right?

Welcome back to he thread, Jeremiah. You aren't the only one here who thinks they know everything already.
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
So what? Arthur Fletcher was a republican.

Got any explanations as to why the out-of-wedlock birthrate is so high in the black community? Why the marriage rates are so low? Why the unemployment rate is so high? The education level so low? Incarceration rate so high?

Do tell.
Maybe a couple hundred years of slavery, 100 more of institutionalized racism, and 50 years of the Southern Strategy might have something to do with the problems of the "black community."

Scott SoCal said:
No, just trapped.

Maybe try and answer a few of the questions?

Arthur Fletcher served for a host of R presidents and was a republican. So much for your affirmative action theory, eh?
The questions aren't a challenge except to those who are in denial.

Scott SoCal said:
His is an interesting story. Condoleeza Rice might be even more interesting. There are successes from long odds all the time. What's your point? Do you want to take a stab at the questions I asked you now, or would you like to keep ducking them?



I'm guessing you never heard of Arthur Fletcher before yesterday. Nixon not being a complete lunatic will come as a surprise to many on this thread.




Only white millionaires?:rolleyes:

Do you have even a cursory understanding of the tax code, how it works and who actually pays taxes?



Why don't you take a little time and look into foundational problems in the black community... particularly inner-city blacks and get back to us. I'm interested in your take on the questions I asked you earlier.
Condoleeza Rice was/is a success story? Maybe in the "great job Brownie" sense.

The greatest national security blunders in US history took place on her watch.

Then she cried wolf on WMD..

What a success!

And Clarence Thomas?
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Bob Herbert, a New York Times columnist, reported a 1981 interview with Lee A****er, published in Southern Politics in the 1990s by Alexander P. Lamis, in which Lee A****er discussed politics in the South:


Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?


A****er: You start out in 1954 by saying, "N*gger, ******, ******." By 1968 you can't say "******" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N*gger, ******."[4]

Herbert wrote in the same column, "The truth is that there was very little that was subconscious about the G.O.P.'s relentless appeal to racist whites. Tired of losing elections, it saw an opportunity to renew itself by opening its arms wide to white voters who could never forgive the Democratic Party for its support of civil rights and voting rights for blacks."[1]
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Jeremiah said:
Maybe a couple hundred years of slavery, 100 more of institutionalized racism, and 50 years of the Southern Strategy might have something to do with the problems of the "black community."



The questions aren't a challenge except to those who are in denial.



Condoleeza Rice was/is a success story? Maybe in the "great job Brownie" sense.

The greatest national security blunders in US history took place on her watch.

Then she cried wolf on WMD..

What a success!

And Clarence Thomas?
Maybe a couple hundred years of slavery, 100 more of institutionalized racism, and 50 years of the Southern Strategy might have something to do with the problems of the "black community."
Black out of wedlock births we at a rate of 24% in 1970. Today it's about 73%. In 1970, about 65% of black women and 75% of black men were married. Today those numbers are about 30% for black women and 42% of black men. Drug offenses have contributed heavily to the black incarceration rate... almost 7 times that of whites.

There are trends that suggest that the great society and war on poverty has been even less effective than the war on drugs. The unintended consequences of the creation of a dependency class has been devastating particularly in the black community.

If you look at what happens to kids born without fathers, statistically, it's devastating. When Dad get replaced by the Feds you get what we see. So, feel free to bury your head in the sand if you want but things started to really go off the rails when the role of Dads in the black community became acceptably reduced to sperm donors.

Condoleeza Rice was/is a success story? Maybe in the "great job Brownie" sense.
So you have no idea of her story.

The greatest national security blunders in US history took place on her watch.
So 9/11 was her fault?:rolleyes:

Then she cried wolf on WMD..
As did Bill and Hillary Clinton, blah, blah, blah.
 
Scott SoCal said:
Black out of wedlock births we at a rate of 24% in 1970. Today it's about 73%. In 1970, about 65% of black women and 75% of black men were married. Today those numbers are about 30% for black women and 42% of black men. Drug offenses have contributed heavily to the black incarceration rate... almost 7 times that of whites.

There are trends that suggest that the great society and war on poverty has been even less effective than the war on drugs. The unintended consequences of the creation of a dependency class has been devastating particularly in the black community.

If you look at what happens to kids born without fathers, statistically, it's devastating. When Dad get replaced by the Feds you get what we see. So, feel free to bury your head in the sand if you want but things started to really go off the rails when the role of Dads in the black community became acceptably reduced to sperm donors.



So you have no idea of her story.



So 9/11 was her fault?:rolleyes:



As did Bill and Hillary Clinton, blah, blah, blah.
So you're saying democrats are responsible for the black incarceration rate, proportionately inferior education, lack of institutional infrastructure, long- standing denial of representative political access and equally historical lack of multiple positive role models?

Or that 80s policies against blacks were a liberal affair?
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
As did Bill and Hillary Clinton, blah, blah, blah.
As has been established far beyond any reasonable doubt by now Scott, all the people (including Dems) who jumped on the 'let's stick it to Saddam' bandwagon, did so on the basis of information that the gang of war criminals (Bubba, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet et al) KNEW was at best unreliable, at worst completely false and fabricated.

In plain language, people were conned into supporting the war against Iraq by deliberate LIES.
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Black out of wedlock births we at a rate of 24% in 1970. Today it's about 73%. In 1970, about 65% of black women and 75% of black men were married. Today those numbers are about 30% for black women and 42% of black men. Drug offenses have contributed heavily to the black incarceration rate... almost 7 times that of whites.

There are trends that suggest that the great society and war on poverty has been even less effective than the war on drugs. The unintended consequences of the creation of a dependency class has been devastating particularly in the black community.

If you look at what happens to kids born without fathers, statistically, it's devastating. When Dad get replaced by the Feds you get what we see. So, feel free to bury your head in the sand if you want but things started to really go off the rails when the role of Dads in the black community became acceptably reduced to sperm donors.



So you have no idea of her story.



So 9/11 was her fault?:rolleyes:



As did Bill and Hillary Clinton, blah, blah, blah.
Well, the Southern Strategy and the concomitant rise of Conservatism was a huge "success."

Scott, tell me what Condoleeza's title was on 9/11. What happened on 8/6/01?

This could be enlightening but I have doubts about it penetrating.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/

Bottom line is yes, 9/11 was Rice's and GWB's fault.

aphronesis said:
So you're saying democrats are responsible for the black incarceration rate, proportionately inferior education, lack of institutional infrastructure, long- standing denial of representative political access and equally historical lack of multiple positive role models?

Or that 80s policies against blacks were a liberal affair?
Hard to believe but yes, that's what he's saying. :eek:

Amsterhammer said:
As has been established far beyond any reasonable doubt by now Scott, all the people (including Dems) who jumped on the 'let's stick it to Saddam' bandwagon, did so on the basis of information that the gang of war criminals (Bubba, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet et al) KNEW was at best unreliable, at worst completely false and fabricated.

In plain language, people were conned into supporting the war against Iraq by deliberate LIES.
Yes, they were induced by fraud, and as we all know, fraud vitiates consent.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud+in+the+inducement

http://books.google.com/books?id=BwzukKczhSwC&pg=PA92&lpg=PA92&dq=fraud+vitiates+consent+george+w.+bush&source=bl&ots=naIaBPCw-_&sig=okLY7iQCo4WnEmG-KkHZoqP1IYo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WP3FUe_0Noa29gST_ICgAg&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=fraud vitiates consent george w. bush&f=false
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,279
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Black out of wedlock births we at a rate of 24% in 1970. Today it's about 73%. In 1970, about 65% of black women and 75% of black men were married. Today those numbers are about 30% for black women and 42% of black men. Drug offenses have contributed heavily to the black incarceration rate... almost 7 times that of whites.

There are trends that suggest that the great society and war on poverty has been even less effective than the war on drugs. The unintended consequences of the creation of a dependency class has been devastating particularly in the black community.

If you look at what happens to kids born without fathers, statistically, it's devastating. When Dad get replaced by the Feds you get what we see.
Funny. To measure poverty you use marriage and incarceration rates (for which you provide no sources). Why not just go straight to the source?

The us census provides poverty figures (persons (figures also available for households) below federal poverty line), even by race (although I think a racialized discourse on poverty leads to bad decision making and bad policies; poverty in the US is the great equalizer, see the small sample below)

1980 all 13% 2009 14.3%
1980 Whites 10.2% 2009 12.3%
1980 Black 32.5% 2009 25.8%
1980 Hispanic 25.7% 2009 25.3%

Note that whites have the highest absolute number of poor, and they are also the only group that has significantly grown since 1980.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
aphronesis said:
So you're saying democrats are responsible for the black incarceration rate, proportionately inferior education, lack of institutional infrastructure, long- standing denial of representative political access and equally historical lack of multiple positive role models?

Or that 80s policies against blacks were a liberal affair?
I kinda figured your comprehension skills were better. I was wrong.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Amsterhammer said:
As has been established far beyond any reasonable doubt by now Scott, all the people (including Dems) who jumped on the 'let's stick it to Saddam' bandwagon, did so on the basis of information that the gang of war criminals (Bubba, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet et al) KNEW was at best unreliable, at worst completely false and fabricated.

In plain language, people were conned into supporting the war against Iraq by deliberate LIES.
Boring. Real boring and covered over and over right here on this thread.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Bala Verde said:
Funny. To measure poverty you use marriage and incarceration rates (for which you provide no sources). Why not just go straight to the source?

The us census provides poverty figures (persons (figures also available for households) below federal poverty line), even by race (although I think a racialized discourse on poverty leads to bad decision making and bad policies; poverty in the US is the great equalizer, see the small sample below)

1980 all 13% 2009 14.3%
1980 Whites 10.2% 2009 12.3%
1980 Black 32.5% 2009 25.8%
1980 Hispanic 25.7% 2009 25.3%

Note that whites have the highest absolute number of poor, and they are also the only group that has significantly grown since 1980.
Thanks Bala, for proving my point. Looking back a bit further and the black poverty rate was at about 32% in 1970. Sooooo, something on the line of 15 Trillion spent on government programs....and how are we trending?

The great society, eh? War on poverty? Fail and fail.

All people in poverty today is higher than 1970. All families in poverty today at a higher rate than 1970. What are we doing?

Time for a new course... a new idea? Nahhhhh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MarieDGarzai Non-Cycling Discussions 2
Similar threads
The Politics of Sport

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS