Georgetown University Takes Unprecedented Steps to Address and Atone for Its Roots in Slavery


#1: You know that your words are the equivalent of the "wah wah" noise adults make in Peanuts cartoons, right?
Frankly both parties have exploited blacks but in different ways.
The Stranger likely won't report on this, but here is a minor example of the democratic party exploiting blacks (or at least taking their votes for granted while offering nothing):…

Basically, the DNC instructed its members to meet with select BLM representatives, pretend to listen to them, but NEVER to offer any policy or to support any concrete policy suggestions. It also outlined the empty platitudes to use in order to not "anger BLM activists."
From its inception the Democrat Party was the party of slavery.
Remember Jefferson, and the children he begot with his slaves?

In the Civil War the Confederate government consisted of the Democratic Party in the Southern States.
In the North the Democrats opposed the war, and in 1864 the platform of the Democratic Party was to end the war and leave the slaves in slavery.

Over the next century the KKK and Jim Crow were institutions and products of the Democratic Party.

In the 1960s Democrats implemented social policies that gutted African-American society, destroyed the African-American family and created a dependence on (Democratic) government hand-out programs that persist to this day.
For example, acquaint yourself with the rate of African-American children raised in a home with both parents in the 1950s, compared to today.
Likewise consider the skyrocketing rate of foodstamp usage among African-Americans now compared to when Obama took office (during a time of supposed economic recovery…)

Democrats have made it their policy to enslave African-Americans;
with literal chains the first century of the nations history,
with the chains of terror, lynching and Jim Crow the second century,
and the chains of dependence and destruction of social structure in the third century.
@6, Finish your thought: And black people in 2016 vote overwhelmingly for Democrats because...

It beats us.
We can't find one benefit that comes to African-Americans in return for their slavish support of the Democraps.

Trump is an inarticulate ham-fisted boob,
and his railing on about blacks getting shot just walking down the street was cringe inducing,
and of course all the smug Leftist commentators mocked him;
but damn if just a few days later
Dwyane Wade's cousin was gunned down JUST WALKING DOWN THE STREET (in Chicago, naturally...)


We see you ignored your assignment.
Is the Truth too painful to admit?

82% of African-Americans households with children are on welfare.

But as a Leftist you are totally fine with that; right?

What benefits have come to African-Americans as a result of voting Democrap for 50 years?

Did you know that 100% of people who try to make the "black pathology" argument are racist?
@10: I Googled your 82% claim, because it seemed oddly coherent compared to your usual drivel, and guess what came up? That sentence is lifted nearly verbatim from American Renaissance, a white nationalist organization. And they give their source for the figure as the Center for Immigration Studies, an anti-immigration think tank cofounded by a racist nativist named John Tanton, who has ties to the eugenics movement. Tellingly enough, the statistic you claim doesn't appear in any documents other than those citing that report.
If you're repeating the claims of white supremacists based on their own internal "research", how do you expect anyone to believe that you're fighting against the REAL racists?

Also, Alleged, I love your reasoning. Basically goes like this:
You: Tell me, what have Democrats ever done for black people?
GermanSausage: well, civil rights legislation, for starters. it's not welfare, that dog don't hunt.
You: aHA! couldn't even guess what it is? it's WELFARE, bub!
You've got quite the habit of demanding that other people do your homework for you. Remember that time you were trying to convince me that men and women shouldn't be equal in the workplace, and I was arguing against it? And your response was to tell me to go find examples to prove your point for you? I know you're just a dumb twerp who needs some hobbies, but sooner or later you'll need to start doing your own honest work instead of riding on the coattails of people smarter than you.

We are always eager to learn something new.
If the 82% figure is incorrect (and you don't say it is, you just whine about where you found it) please tell us the correct figure.
Please note, we are not asking you to do our 'homework', but if you reject the figures we dug up you must have some more accurate ones yourself. Right? What are they?

We would love to learn that African-Americans are not mired in poverty, and dependent on government handouts, at much much higher rates than other demographic groups.
Please show us if that is so.

From where we sit it appears that the economic and social plight of African Americans has dropped steadily since they started voting Democrat.

Please show us we are wrong.
@14: Nah bro, before you tell me to prove some number wrong, it's your responsibility to prove it right. Go ahead and cite a source; for all I know, you may have just pulled it out of your ass. But demanding that I do your work for you...fits the pattern quite nicely.
Moreover, it's not really possible to definitively say what the true figure it, because it depends on how you define "welfare". Of course, your claim that the fortunes of blacks have declined in America since they became reliable Democratic voters...THAT claim is demonstrably false. Hey look, black Americans used to have sky-high poverty rates, but then things got much better for them in the 1960s. Gee, I wonder what Democrats could have done for black Americans around that time that might have helped them...
nice graph.
nice try.

The overall poverty rate is down, but the black poverty rate remains twice the national average.
and improvements in the measured rate since 1960 represent government handouts,
not improvement in the economic status of blacks.

anything else?

@16: Okay, this really isn't that hard a question to answer, so let's see if you can manage it: have poverty rates gotten
A. Better, or
B. Worse,
for blacks in America since they became a reliable Democratic voting bloc?

"improvements in the measured rate since 1960 represent government handouts,
not improvement in the economic status of blacks."
Poverty thresholds measure income, not total resources. Benefits given to someone with a poverty income don't suddenly make them no longer counted as impoverished. So yes, a decline in the poverty rate literally is "improvement in the economic status".

But wait, you say that lower incidence of poverty is the result of government handouts? Sounds like you just made the argument that welfare programs work...

Anything else?
You're right, not hard at all.

The poverty rate for blacks remains twice that of white Americans,
and that disparity has not improved since they started voting Democrat.

Other areas of black "progress" under Democraps include:

incarceration rates:
(from the NAACP)
Racial Disparities in Incarceration
"African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population
African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites
Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population
One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime"

Out-of-Wed Birthrates
In 1965, 24 percent of black infants were born to single mothers.
Currently over 74 percent are.
Seventy. Four. Percent.

Poverty, Prison, Broken Families.
To call this "Progress",
to pretend this is acceptable,
is the vilest form of racism imaginable….
@18: It's not that hard, but apparently you somehow manage to fail at it. Let's review our graph-reading skills. In 1959, 55% of blacks and 18% of whites lived in poverty. The poverty rate among blacks was 3.06x that of whites. In 2011, 27% of blacks and 13% of whites lived in poverty; the poverty rate among blacks is now 2.11x that of whites.
So leaving aside the drastic arithmetic decrease in poverty and focusing on the multiplicative difference between white and black poverty rates, even using your preferred metric, you're STILL wrong, and embarrassingly so. You are literally unable to read numbers off a graph. Wow.

Now, you don't need to convince me that black people still get the shit end of the stick today. However, you seem to just assume that things were somehow happy and shiny in the past, when any civil rights activist of the '50s and '60s can tell you that life for racial minorities has improved drastically in the past few decades. Just because things are bad now doesn't mean they haven't gotten better.

Two more quick points:
You're happy to point a finger at Democrats over mass incarceration, but you completely ignore the fact that it happened almost entirely under Reagan and Bush 41. Let's see, which party did those Presidents belong to...?
Statistical analysis shows that the increase in out-of-wedlock birth rate is due primarily to the decrease in shotgun marriages. (Oh and also, by your bizarre metric of only caring about the racial disparity in rates, things have actually gotten better for black people in that regard. After all, in 1965, the OOW birth rate in blacks was 7.74x that of whites, but in 1990 it was only 3.56x that of whites, and nowadays it's only 2.51x. That's an improvement, by your bizarre logic.)
"The poverty rate for blacks remains twice that of white Americans"
"the poverty rate among blacks is now 2.11x that of whites"
OK. Sure. We stand corrected…..

Actually the file:///U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png">File:U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwar…">Increase in the rate of incarceration started under Carter and was greatest during the presidency of the SUPER PREDATOR Clintons.

Your statistical analysis is 20 years old;
what difference does it make what the cause is,
we still end up with 74+% black out of wed birthrate
yes, you make a good point that out of wed birthrate for all demographic groups is up greatly,
Exhibit A in the Fall of American Civilization
maybe not

the rate of incarceration graph link is


(but you know that, it is from the same wiki article as the one you linked…)
we give up.

the wiki article is…

third graph down
@20: Nice dodge.
"The poverty rate for blacks remains twice that of white Americans, and that disparity has not improved since they started voting Democrat."
versus "The poverty rate among blacks was 3.06x that of whites....the poverty rate among blacks is now 2.11x that of whites."
It's not really so much that you're too stupid to read a graph, though, just that you don't want to believe anything that proves you wrong. You'll have a fun time in the real world, I suppose...

I mean, look at this next great example regarding mass incarceration. Any fool (or statistical analysis) looking at the graph can tell you that while prison population had been rising slowly for a while, things really took off in the 1980s. (It's even clearer if you look at the incarceration rate per 100k instead of just the gross prison population.) Sure, there's an upward blip shortly before the start of the trend, and you might plausibly claim that it really started which case mass incarceration would be the doing of Gerald Ford, not Jimmy Carter.
And yet you have decided that it's the fault of Democrats, and so you ignore the actual data and pull some revisionist history out of your ass. Some observers would look at your statements and think you're a moron, but I give you full credit for just being a liar.
I dunno, to be perfectly honest. It's hard to know what to say to a kiddie who's too stupid to make HTML work. It's not really all that difficult.

We get that quibbling about decimal points and such is your thing.
Have at it.

However if one stands back and takes a Big Picture look at it they can not help but notice that African-Americans as a group are (by far) the most afflicted demographic group in the country by any and all measures of quality of life and security.

Wave after wave of other groups have come to the country, been despised outsiders, overcome obstacles, made the American Dream work for them, and passed African-Americans by.

At some point one might start to wonder if there might be a better alternate path for African-Americans .

Because giving virtually all of their votes to the Democrats hasn't been a winning move.

What do Republicans offer African-Americans?
The same thing they offer everyone else.
There is no patronizing "Black Agenda".

It is not a coincidence that the group that votes Democrat the most is also the most suffering.

(It is interesting that African-Americans living in families with both married parents do experience the American Dream, and have a poverty rate in the single digits...)

yeah, pretty embarrassing, for sure

one advantage of having lived in the 50s and 60s is that we don't have to ask anybody what life was like back then.
but a disadvantage is that a lot of the tech stuff doesn't come quite as easy.
@28: In other words, "never mind that evidence showing that I'm wrong on these details, let's look at the big picture, which is conveniently too vague to quantify!"
You say "quibbling about decimal points", I say "being factually accurate". Hey, it must suck to make a direct and specific claim and then be immediately proven wrong by the very evidence you cited in your own support, huh?

@29: My dad lived in the 1960s, and he's even better with computers than I am. Your age is no excuse for being an idiot who can't properly format his input.
And hey, you know who else lived in the '50s and '60s? Representative John Lewis (D-GA 5). He's a civil rights activist on a level with Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and I'd say he knows a little more about the plight of black America than you do. And he's said on many an occasion that things have gotten better for black people in America over the years he's been around. Maybe you're just unaware of how bad things were for nonwhites back then, since in the 1950s it was mostly just swept under the rug and ignored.

Things can get 'better' but still not be good.

Things can get 'better' but still not be good enough.

Things can get 'better' and you can still be losing ground relative to everyone else.

But if African-Americans are satisfied languishing at the bottom then they should certainly keep voting for Democrats.

Wow, he sounds like quite a guy.

No doubt you look like the Milkman.
@31: "Things can get 'better' but still not be good.
Things can get 'better' but still not be good enough."
Aaand your solution to that problem is to fire the people who made the improvements in the first place, and hire instead the people who have fought TOOTH AND NAIL against those improvements at every step of the way. Yeah, I'm not buying it.

"Things can get 'better' and you can still be losing ground relative to everyone else."
And unfortunately for your delusional viewpoint, but fortunately for black Americans, that's not the case. As we've already established, the poverty gap between black and white Americans has closed immensely since the 1960s. The educational achievement gap has narrowed considerably as well. The employment gap hasn't improved noticeably, but neither has it worsened; it's held remarkably steady. And, of course, segregation in housing has been on the decline since at least 1970.
Your persistent naysaying goes against the reality, which is common knowledge among African-Americans and which is confirmed by statisticians: things have gotten much better for racial minorities in this country. And the policies responsible for those improvements, as incremental and incomplete as they may be, have been consistently advanced by Democrats and opposed by Republicans, ever since the Civil Rights Act and the Southern Strategy.

So, do you have any actual facts to back your argument up with? Or are you just going to continue the delusional ramblings of an ignorant old man whose disdain for liberals is matched only by his fear of empiricism?

Compare and Contrast:

Murder rate of African-Americans in New York City during Mayorship of Republican Giuliani
Murder rate of African-Americans in Chicago during Mayorships of Democrap Mayors since 2005;

with an emphasis on which city's African-Americans' experience is better
@34: So let me get this straight:
You think that the best way to determine which party is better for African-Americans is to compare two entirely different cities across two entirely different timespans, and to attribute all differences solely to the political affiliations of the mayors of those cities over those timespans. (Because the nationwide drop in crime during the Clinton years surely had nothing to do with any of that, nor could longstanding differences between the two cities affect differences in crime rates.) While we're at it, let's compare crime rates of Jacksonville (Republican mayor) and Orlando (Democratic mayor), two otherwise-similar cities in Florida, with comparable median income, poverty rate, and demographic breakdown. It's amazing what you can "prove" when you cherry-pick your comparisons.

Though the funny thing is, I can't seem to find the statistics to which you refer. Only overall homicide rates seem to be published, not those breaking down victimization by race. So, I'm going to ask you again: do you have any actual facts to back your argument up with?

And for that matter, what's your response to the evidence laid out above? Contrary to your claims, things HAVE gotten better for black people under the programs Democrats have pushed for (and which Republicans have opposed). How do you explain that, in light of your claim that Democrats only make things worse for black people?
Don't worry, I'm sure that if you just stick your fingers in your ears and hum REAL loud, it'll all go away.
Dan HinkelContact Reporter
Chicago Tribune
Chicago's per capita homicide rate climbed over the last decade, and the chances of an African-American being killed in the city spiked drastically, according to a new report.

From 2005 to 2015, the city went from 17.3 homicides per 100,000 residents to a rate of about 18.8, according to a report from the Injury Prevention and Research Center at the Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago.

But the report held particularly troubling news for African-Americans. The rate for blacks in Chicago jumped from 36.1 homicides per 100,000 residents in 2005 to 46.5 a decade later. Other studies have shown steep drops in the city's African-American population in recent years, but crime figures remain stubbornly high in many largely black neighborhoods.
Aamer Madhani,
5:15 p.m. EDT April 1, 2016

CHICAGO — Murders in the nation's third-largest city are up about 72%, while shootings have surged more than 88% in the first three months of 2016 compared with the same period last year, according to data released Friday by the Chicago Police Department.
hopefully these can get you started...
Oh wow, two uncited data points from one of the two cities spoken of. Nothing about New York, nothing about actual trends, and certainly no citations.

Also, nothing about Orlando and Jacksonville? And nothing about the gradual rise in prosperity of black Americans? Typical, you chickenshit. Keep those fingers in your ears, and hum the tune of your choice!
For crying out loud we gave you half the answer.
the lack of initiative and gumption in kids these days is alarming…..
@39: You want to talk about initiative? Take a little initiative and explain why things have gotten better for blacks since they began to vote overwhelmingly with the Democrats, despite your claims that the Dems are bad for black people. You want to talk about gumption? Show a little gumption and defend your ideas instead of just ignoring any and all evidence against them.