Trump's top black campaign surrogate says blacks were better off under Jim Crow

[IM2]

They didn't just teach it
They mandated it.
Destroyed what had been a culture with strong familial ties.

Actually that's not what happened.

Funny how whites like you said nothing about the 60 years of mothers aid checks white women without men were getting before LBJ.

 

[IM2]

President Trump created Opportunity Zones.

And like I said, Clinton created Enterprize zones. Opportunity zones were mostly rural.

 

[Billiejeens]

And like I said, Clinton created Enterprize zones. Opportunity zones were mostly rural.

That's racist.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

So like I said, Clinton created Enterprise zones.

Clinton was laughed at for midnight basketball.

 

[IM2]

You right wingers really need to stop posting this inaccurate ignorant racist crap.

ALL RISE!

Tonights lesson:

How the Government Financed the White Male Harem

The problem with people talking about how LBJ's Great Society Program damaged the black famility is that it is a lie. So let's start with the fact that the no man in the house rule which was blamed on Johnson was created by conservatives. That rule lasted from 1964 until 1968. A black woman took that to court and it was ended by the Supreme Court. So the Great Society has nothing to do with anything. But as I have posted before welfare started long before LBJ. So let's look at how the government taught white males, that they could go out and create a harem, and taxpayers would pay fot it. :

Mothers' pensions​

Mothers' pensions, also referred to as mothers' aid or widows' aid, were cash payments distributed to impoverished single mothers in the United States during the first three decades of the 20th century. Introduced during the Progressive Era, they were among the earliest components of the modern American welfare state and were the first public cash assistance programs targeted to single mothers.

Mother's pensions were aimed at family preservation, intending to provide the means for poor single mothers to care for their children in their own homes. While primarily targeted at widows, they were also sometimes authorized for women whose husbands had deserted them, were confined to mental hospitals or prisons, or were physically or mentally incapacitated. They were financed and administered by state and local governments, and served as a precursor to the federal Aid to Dependent Children program created by the Social Security Act of 1935

The assistance to single women with children or Title IV of the Social Security Act.provided grants to states as Aid To Dependent Children. Eventually the name of the program was changed to Aid to Families with Dependent Children. This was welfare, assistance for single moms with children and no daddy at home. In 1935. Blacks were excluded from the program. Aid to Dependent Children functioned mainly to provide federal grants to help the states with mothers’ aid laws mentioned in the first 2 paragraphs.

The goal was to provide aid to all children whose mothers had no support from a husband no matter how they got into that position. From the Mothers Pension Program in the early 1900's until 1965, no one talked about the welfare state destroying the white family. I read none of the claims aboout white men creating harems onthe taxpayer. The program was not dissed or said to create dependence on government. For 65 years what is now welfare was seen as necessary o help white single parent families without fathers. Only when the law required that others besides whites be included did the story change.

“According to economic research, race has been the single most important predictor of support for American welfare programs. In other words, black poverty has been viewed as a moral failing, whereas white poverty had been viewed as a systemic problem.”
-Mehrsa Baradaran- The Color of Money, Black Banks and the Racial Wealth Gap

Mothers' pensions - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Man-in-the-House Rule​

In 1968 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the regulation as being contrary to the legislative goals of the Aid to Families of Dependent Children (AFDC) program.

In King v. Smith, 392 U.S. 309, 88 S. Ct. 2128, 20 L. Ed. 2d 1118 (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court entertained a challenge to the man-in-the-house rule brought by the four children of Mrs. Sylvester Smith, a widow. These children were denied benefits by Dallas County, Alabama, welfare authorities, based on their knowledge that a man named Williams was visiting Smith on weekends and had sexual relations with her.

The children of Smith filed a CLASS ACTION suit in federal court on behalf of other children in Alabama who were denied benefits under Alabama's "substitute father" regulation. This regulation considered a man a substitute father if (1) he lived in the home with the mother; (2) he visited the home frequently for the purpose of living with the mother; or (3) he cohabited with the mother elsewhere (King, citing Alabama Manual for Administration of Public Assistance, pt. I, ch. II, § VI). Testimony in the case revealed that there was some confusion among the authorities over how to interpret the regulation. One official testified that the regulation applied only if the parties had sex at least once a week, another official testified that sex every three months was sufficient, and still another placed the frequency at once every six months.

According to the High Court, Congress did not intend that the AFDC program require children "to look for their food to a man who is not in the least obliged to support them." The Court maintained that when Congress used the term parent in the SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, it was referring to "an individual who owed to the child a state-imposed legal duty of support." Ultimately, the Court struck down the man-in-the-house rule by holding that under the AFDC provisions in the Social Security Act, "destitute children who are legally fatherless cannot be flatly denied federally funded assistance on the transparent fiction that they have a substitute father."

Man-in-the-House Rule

The claim of black families being incentivized by government to have children out of wedlock is another untrue claim because that "incentive" was killed in 1968. So stop repeating that racist lie.

 

[IM2]

That's racist.

Wrong.

 

[IM2]

Clinton was laughed at for midnight basketball.

Midnight basetball was part of the 1994 Crime Bill. Right wingers laugh at anything that isn't a draconian solution.

 

[Billiejeens]

Midnight basetball was part of the 1994 Crime Bill. Right wingers laugh at anything that isn't a draconian solution.

I'm not giving up on the send yall home option.

 

[IM2]

I'm not giving up on the send yall home option.

Since this ain't your home European, you don't have that option.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

President Trump created Opportunity Zones.

Yea, for white folks.

 

[Billiejeens]

Since this ain't your home European, you don't have that option.

Not giving up

 

[IM2]

Not giving up

You don't have a choice. You can go back to YOUR home if you don't like it.

 

[cnm]

The Dimocrats destroyed the family unit with their 'Great Society' programs.

They taught black males, that they can go out and create a harem, and taxpayers will pay for it.

Clinton taught Black males they didn't deserve to stay around as fathers.

 

[cnm]

"If the goal was to get rid of poverty, we failed": the legacy of the 1996 welfare reform

Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology, culture, science, the climate crisis, money...

www.vox.com

​

[...] By 1960, DeParle notes, the program was 40 percent black, and while the program initially targeted widows to the exclusion of divorcées and unwed mothers, almost two-thirds of recipients by that year fell in the latter category. ADC was renamed the Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC) program in 1962.​

​

The purpose of these programs, from the beginning, was to deter women from work. After all, it was originally designed for white widows, a population deemed deserving of aid and one expected to stay home and raise children rather than enter the workforce.​

​

But work by black mothers was more common, and more expected, especially in Southern states that relied on black women's labor as maids, nannies, and agricultural workers. That fed an expectation that black women should be working even if they had children, which in turn fed an anti-welfare backlash.​

​

The backlash was worsened by rapid increases in the rolls, beginning as racial discrimination eased in the 1950s. It was also aided by the rise of the "welfare rights movement" in the 1960s, which organized to enroll poor people then cut off from the program and won important legal victories like King v. Smith, which established AFDC as an entitlement that all eligible people must be allowed to receive:​

 

[OKTexas]

If you are an American, it is your history. Democrats were not the only ones that practiced Jim Crow. And it was a Republican, Rutherford Hayes, that made Jim Crow possible. It was 4 Republican supreme court justices who voted in the affirmative out of the 7 affirmative votes for separate but equal that made Jim Crow national law.

Not possible since I've never practiced it and it was abolished long before I had any say in my own affairs. Don't expect people to assume ownership of things they had no hand in.

.

 

[IM2]

Clinton taught Black males they didn't deserve to stay around as fathers.

Clinton didn't teach black males anything.

 

[IM2]

Not possible since I've never practiced it and it was abolished long before I had any say in my own affairs. Don't expect people to assume ownership of things they had no hand in.

.

Stop celebrating the 4th of July or end the excuse making. Your family benefitted from the policies and that affected you. You are an American and you have ownership in the history of this country.

 

[IM2]

It's not the same
Nobody gives a flying or ground level fuck about what yall say.

Yes you do.

 

[OKTexas]

Interesting. I'm curious, tell me, what of Texas' history before your birth is yours?

None, the Idea of Texas started with your birth?

Actually I've lived in multiple States and one territory, TX is just the latest. I wasn't born in TX, although I visited a couple of times as a kid.

.

 

[IM2]

President Trump created Opportunity Zones.

The majority of Trumps opportunity zones were located in rural white towns. Unlike you , I looked at the program. And those zones did nothing but offer rich people a chance to invest by giving them tax breaks. They did not incentivize minority business development.