No. I believe in wealth redistribution but there's no magical one-time solution (which is basically what "reparations" would be) that would solve anything.
I think the best solution in generous amounts of class-based (not race-based) affirmative action. By its nature it would be supporting the underprivileged only as long as they remained underprivileged -- and it would not further racial divisions, as it would target all the poor not just the black poor.
If I accept blood-money from a mobster grandfather, knowing full well well that money came from, can I consider myself innocent? Isn't "accepting stolen property" considered a crime in most countries?
Most systems don't create the systems that benefit them, no matter how unjust those systems are. Maria Antoinette was a nobody, anyone born in her place would be treated the same. Was it unjust that they chopped off her head?
We must treat other people like innocents, because an endless river of blood would be the only other way if we kept arguing about the sins of other people's ancestors: but that doesn't mean we must consider ourselves innocent for the benefits WE have accumulated by our ancestors' sins.
No, I'm not "defending him" from anything other than accusations of racism.
Pfleger was judgmental towards Clinton -- even if he his judgement was accurate (which I'm not sure it was) he had no right to it, Jesus Christ forbid his followers from judging. Pfleger was theatrical, not merely forthright. He appealed not to the best but to the worst of his audience.
For all those things I condemn him.
But he was not being a racist, and he was 100% on the money when he said that people must fight to remove from themselves the benefits they accumulated from their ancestor, if they want to consider themselves innocent of those ancestors' crimes.
That's not an "identity crisis", that's merely fighting white privilege, something we should all be doing regardless of our race.
Certainly am bitter pver somethings -- e.g. I remember receiving an official "warning" in this site that I had to "acknowledge" when I dared bash Hillary Clinton for showing flawed judgement by being married to an adulterer.
This was in direct response to people that were bashing Obama's judgement by going to Wright's church -- but I somehow doubt you gave a few hundred warnings to them. Bashing the divine Clinton during the primaries was a no-no -- bashing the democratic nominee is perfectly allowed now.
So, basically yeah. I think that it's ludicrous how hard people had to push to make this site even remotely fair to Obama's supporters back in primary season, and it's ludicrous how hard we have to push so it's NOT fair to Republicans right now.
What's moderation about if not to remove the Republican trolls? But if you want to make sure Republicans and Democrats have equal representation here, it's your site: I just wish you were sincere and upfront about it.
Oh, such surprise Jerome. It's not as if Democrats were wasting their money for months in a primary that Hillary Clinton prolonged atleast two months past the point where she could have won it, when Republicans were saving their own money for McCain.
It's not as if Democrats are still asked in this very site to waste their money in putting to rest Hillary Clinton's debts, instead of contributing to the actual Obama campaign or other downticket campaigns?
And yet here you are, and after you've all been asking Democrats to waste their money in order to support Hillary, you talk about your concern about Obama.
BTW, when you will bloody prove that this place is still meant for Democrats and bloody well ban all the Republican trolls??
But perhaps you want MyDD to become McCain Central. Is that your ambition, Jerome?
If Obama takes a position that polls like, you accuse him of pandering or folding to the Republicans or whatever. "Just a politician" the PUMAs and trolls say.
If Obama takes a position that polls don't like, you are all doom-and-woe about his chances in November. "He's gonna lose, his numbers will be like McGovern's" the PUMAs and trolls say.
Still haven't seen you oppose ANY of McCain's positions. Haven't you found anything of McCain to dislike yet?
Of course you don't. If you claimed you cared that would mean you would prefer him not to have done so -- which would mean that you'd have been opposing Republicans on an issue. And that would not only mean no paycheck for you, it'd also mean it'd be criticism from the left, a criticism with a progressive perspective.
But like always you have the exact same position as Republicans, so you don't bash Obama for "folding", you bash him for supposed dishonesty or whatever instead.
And you also add the "adult" codeword in there, to again trivialize, ridicule and insult all his supporters.