Dems and reparations: a few questions

Like lemmings, Democrats are rushing toward a cliff.  The spectacle of many of the Democrats running for president prostrating themselves before race-hustler and pogrom-inciter Al Sharpton is disgusting. Bonchie at Red State reviews the sordid history of Sharpton, if you are unfamiliar with it. Why they would embrace this horrible man is not too hard to guess: Sharpton is an expert at implying threats of demonstrations and demonization as a racist. His organization that sponsored the event attended by the Dems, the National Action Network, has prospered with contributions from corporations cowed by the fear of such retaliation.

But worse than mere association with such a man is the promise that seems to have been required: support for a commission to “study” reparations for slavery.

Watch (only a couple of minutes) as Sharpton frames the question to Robert Frances O’Rourke as support for reparations, who responds with a pander of epic degradation:

John Hinderaker of Powerline can barely contain his glee at the prospects of a Democrat nominee defending the concept.   

I think there is plenty of public awareness of the issue, and the public is right. Reparations would be an outrageous injustice, as pretty much everyone who won’t be cashing a check recognizes.

Which leaves one wondering, whatever are the Democrats thinking? Is Al Sharpton–a notorious extortionist, perpetrator of fraud, and anti-Semite who is complicit in murder–so powerful in the party that presidential candidates are forced to walk the plank by supporting an issue that will be a millstone around the neck of the eventual nominee? Or do they assume that after getting the nomination, the Democratic candidate will be able to tack furiously toward the center, with the collusion of the press, so that reparations never get mentioned after the Democratic convention?

I don’t know what they are thinking. All I know is, the more the Democrats talk about reparations, the better.

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit sees the disaster ahead for Dems:

Republicans want the Democrats talking about reparations because it will energize Republican voters, and push a bunch of independents away from the Democrats. But the issue could also explode the Democrats’ coalition. All the other minority constituencies will wonder why they aren’t getting the same goodies, especially when they realize that they are being taxed to fund the money going to black people. There’s plenty of racial animosity among the various minority groups, and this would seen to exacerbate it dramatically. I wonder if the Dems have a plan for that? The GOP certainly should have one.

An online friend who must remain anonymous because of the danger of retaliation in this era of low-grade terror has put together a list of questions which reparations would require answers for. He jokes around with the numbers, but they are not that inaccurate as an estimate of the number of questions that need answers:

1) If your ancestor owned a slave do you pay less than if your ancestor owned two slaves?

2) If your ancestor was a free Black and owned a slave do you owe reparations?

3) If your ancestor came to America after slavery do you owe reparations or are entitled to reparations?

4) If your ancestor died fighting against slavery in the Civil War do you get reparations yourself?

5) If your ancestor lived in a slave state but owned no slaves at all, do you pay reparations?

6) If your ancestor lived in a free state but voted for John C. Breckenridge, do you pay reparations?

7) How do you prove just who your ancestor was?

(snip)

452) How shall the government deal with individuals who are part Black and part White? What if you’re only 128th Black?

453) What if you’ve been pretending to be Black (the “Dolezal Paradox”)?

454) Will a DNA test be required to qualify as Black?

455) Do you still qualify for reparations if you have a book at home by Shelby Steele or Frederick Douglass?

456) What if you’re Black but married a White person?

457) Are reparation taxes to be progressive?

458) Will there be a deductible on the Reparations Tax form?

458) Are reparation taxes to be paid annually or just once?

459) Are reparation payments to be paid annual or just once?

460) Are women also due reparations?

461) If so, how shall the Department of Racial Justice treat a white woman? Does she pay herself?

462) Who will be appointed as the first Secretary of Racial Justice?

Democrats should be encouraged not just to come out in favor of reparations, but also explain how they’d administer them.

Graphic credit: YouTube screen grab

Like lemmings, Democrats are rushing toward a cliff.  The spectacle of many of the Democrats running for president prostrating themselves before race-hustler and pogrom-inciter Al Sharpton is disgusting. Bonchie at Red State reviews the sordid history of Sharpton, if you are unfamiliar with it. Why they would embrace this horrible man is not too hard to guess: Sharpton is an expert at implying threats of demonstrations and demonization as a racist. His organization that sponsored the event attended by the Dems, the National Action Network, has prospered with contributions from corporations cowed by the fear of such retaliation.

But worse than mere association with such a man is the promise that seems to have been required: support for a commission to “study” reparations for slavery.

Watch (only a couple of minutes) as Sharpton frames the question to Robert Frances O’Rourke as support for reparations, who responds with a pander of epic degradation:

John Hinderaker of Powerline can barely contain his glee at the prospects of a Democrat nominee defending the concept.   

I think there is plenty of public awareness of the issue, and the public is right. Reparations would be an outrageous injustice, as pretty much everyone who won’t be cashing a check recognizes.

Which leaves one wondering, whatever are the Democrats thinking? Is Al Sharpton–a notorious extortionist, perpetrator of fraud, and anti-Semite who is complicit in murder–so powerful in the party that presidential candidates are forced to walk the plank by supporting an issue that will be a millstone around the neck of the eventual nominee? Or do they assume that after getting the nomination, the Democratic candidate will be able to tack furiously toward the center, with the collusion of the press, so that reparations never get mentioned after the Democratic convention?

I don’t know what they are thinking. All I know is, the more the Democrats talk about reparations, the better.

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit sees the disaster ahead for Dems:

Republicans want the Democrats talking about reparations because it will energize Republican voters, and push a bunch of independents away from the Democrats. But the issue could also explode the Democrats’ coalition. All the other minority constituencies will wonder why they aren’t getting the same goodies, especially when they realize that they are being taxed to fund the money going to black people. There’s plenty of racial animosity among the various minority groups, and this would seen to exacerbate it dramatically. I wonder if the Dems have a plan for that? The GOP certainly should have one.

An online friend who must remain anonymous because of the danger of retaliation in this era of low-grade terror has put together a list of questions which reparations would require answers for. He jokes around with the numbers, but they are not that inaccurate as an estimate of the number of questions that need answers:

1) If your ancestor owned a slave do you pay less than if your ancestor owned two slaves?

2) If your ancestor was a free Black and owned a slave do you owe reparations?

3) If your ancestor came to America after slavery do you owe reparations or are entitled to reparations?

4) If your ancestor died fighting against slavery in the Civil War do you get reparations yourself?

5) If your ancestor lived in a slave state but owned no slaves at all, do you pay reparations?

6) If your ancestor lived in a free state but voted for John C. Breckenridge, do you pay reparations?

7) How do you prove just who your ancestor was?

(snip)

452) How shall the government deal with individuals who are part Black and part White? What if you’re only 128th Black?

453) What if you’ve been pretending to be Black (the “Dolezal Paradox”)?

454) Will a DNA test be required to qualify as Black?

455) Do you still qualify for reparations if you have a book at home by Shelby Steele or Frederick Douglass?

456) What if you’re Black but married a White person?

457) Are reparation taxes to be progressive?

458) Will there be a deductible on the Reparations Tax form?

458) Are reparation taxes to be paid annually or just once?

459) Are reparation payments to be paid annual or just once?

460) Are women also due reparations?

461) If so, how shall the Department of Racial Justice treat a white woman? Does she pay herself?

462) Who will be appointed as the first Secretary of Racial Justice?

Democrats should be encouraged not just to come out in favor of reparations, but also explain how they’d administer them.

Graphic credit: YouTube screen grab