Reparations: Quarterback Sneak

District of Corruption

The Obama administration has used the lame duck session of the 111th Congress to sneak reparations to black farmers and Indians through the Senate. This was completely off the radar screen. I haven’t heard anyone talking about this.

WASHINGTON – The Senate has approved almost $4.6 billion to settle long-standing claims brought by American Indians and black farmers against the government.

The money has been held up for months in the Senate as Democrats and Republicans squabbled over how to pay for it. The two class action lawsuits were filed over a decade ago.

The settlements include almost $1.2 billion for black farmers who say they suffered discrimination at the hands of the Agriculture Department. Also, $3.4 billion would go to Indian landowners who claim they were swindled out of royalties by the Interior Department. The legislation was approved in the Senate by voice vote Friday and sent to the House. . . .

I’m about to search for the voice vote on the bill. Louis March has written a book about this ripoff. I got of copy when I will still in Virginia.

Voice Vote: A vote in which the Presiding Officer states the question, then asks those in favor and against to say “Yea” or “Nay,” respectively, and announces the result according to his or her judgment. The names or numbers of Senators voting on each side are not recorded.

About Hunter Wallace 11875 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

26 Comments

  1. How are they going to tell who has a valid claim, and who has a bogus claim?

    Sounds like a giveaway to any darkie, and or injun who can fill out the papers.

  2. This fraud is old, but has been given fresh oxygen. Finally, those five million yeoman, gentry black farmers are going to get their justice!!! Business is going to pick up for a certain priesthood, as applications are filled across America.

    Guys, the system is broken. We need to work on separating the wheat from the chaff.

    Mike

  3. They’re using their preferred technique at the policy level now. HW has pointed many times how the communists broke their agenda into pieces, then pursued their agenda under the name civil rights activists, and so on. They started calling affirmative action affirmative “equal opportunity” long ago. It looks like they’ve decided reparations will be called compensation for “discrimination by the federal government.”

  4. I don’t think the system is broken. It is the same system that we have always had in America.

    This just goes to show that elections have consequences. Democrats control the Senate. Harry Reid was reelected in Nevada. He promised to hold another vote on the DREAM Act and make an attempt (this was reported over the summer) at reparations for black farmers.

    The people who wanted to empower the Democrats got their way. This is the result. Now it is time to see if “worse is better” holds true and Americans flock en masse into vanguardist groups. I predict they won’t.

  5. “It also shows that negroes (a mere 13 percent of the population) are better at organizing and gaming the system than White Nationalists”
    Hunter, if they are better at it, it is only because they have been coached by the masters of ripoffs (yes, I’m going to point to Jews again) ever since the NAACP was organized in 1909 by a group of Jewish lawyer-“activists”. If Negroes are good at anything other than sports, it is only because they have been led by the hand by someone competent. For a good look at how Negroes fare when on their own: look to any black governed country in Africa today. Zimbabwe (former Rhodesia) is an excellent example.

  6. It doesn’t seem to dawn on Hunter that the Congress
    is controlled by Democrats (until Jan. 2011) because people lost faith in the do-nothing Republicans. Mr. “elections have consequences” needs to realize if the conservative screwballs actually did their job and carried out the wishes of the grassroots then maybe they would still control Congress and this wouldn’t be happening.

    When a racial group has numerous allies in the government and media it’s not very difficult to get what you want. If any open WN’s ever do get elected to congress I guarantee some of the first people to denounce them will be those god fearin’ Christian conservatives like Sarah Palin.

  7. Shameful, of course, but not that important, Just another scam, and not nearly so large as the Wall Street bailouts. What matters is how can this be used as another stick to beat the Multi-cults. White farmers know all about this kind of thing from articles in Tomato Growers Monthly and other trade magazines. (I’m serious. That’s where I first read about militias, 25 or so years ago.) But do small town Whites in rural counties, the farmer’s nearest neighbors, know about it? And can the new Congress be persuaded to refuse to pay up, and force a confrontation?

  8. WN if to exist within present day government will exist in the House, not the executive, and it will be implicit. Control of the House is no small thing while we await Heaven’s mandate, which is to say destiny.

  9. Discard,

    Exactly. In dollars and cents terms, this isn’t a huge deal. A few billion here and few billion there.

    Recall the amount of conservative media play a single kooky Black Panther at a polling station got compared to his actual direct impact. Items like this can and should be used as weapons by us. Get some popular conservative radio/blog to pick up this story, and all of a sudden, regardless of what actually happens, a black president is sneaking billions of dollars to black scammers at a time when ‘real Americans’ (i.e., white working class) are hard up.

  10. The worst abuses in these lame duck sessions usually come around the holidays, especially Thanksgiving and Christmas. Maybe they will go after retirement accounts after all. Alex Jones said that a while back.

  11. “What are your tactics? Voting for Jewish backed candidates like Sarah Palin and hoping things turn around?”
    Hunter’s suggested tactics ARE better than waiting for the destiny that the American Oligarchy has planned for us. Obviously, whites voting as a unit can (and did) have an impact on this last election and it was a setback for the elites. I have no faith that whites are going to rise up in a show of force (at least not until desperation has struck the majority of us, and then it will have been too late anyway), but to try to organize into a cohesive political force to make inroads is NOT a waste of time at all. Better to act in some way (that hopefully makes a difference) than to sit back and moan about our powerlessness and simply await the same fate as the ethnic Ukrainians under Stalin.

  12. What are your tactics? Voting for Jewish backed candidates like Sarah Palin and hoping things turn around?

    I’m going to keep voting for NumbersUSA “true reformer” candidates. There are now twice as many of them in the House after this election as there were before. We also have Lamar Smith and Steve King in charge of immigration policy in the House.

    In the Senate, we can work to elect more Senators like Jeff Sessions. We can continue to knock off Republican incumbents like Arlen Specter and Bob Bennett who do not serve our interests. We almost got John McCain this time.

    As for the presidential election, I am going to wait to see who the candidates are. I’m positive that I won’t be voting for Barack Obama. On the Republican side, I think Sarah Palin will run with a tough position on immigration, even if her record as Governor doesn’t reflect this.

    As for the Jewish Question, there is nothing stopping us from knocking off Jews in the Senate like Specter and Feingold or Jews in the House like Klein in Florida. If we were properly motivated and had a realistic strategy, we could start winning important races and reducing Jewish power.

    The only way to take down the Israel Lobby is to organize Whites around a similarly powerful institution. Unfortunately, White Nationalists are unwilling to organize around anything. That’s just the sad reality of our situation.

  13. I’m positive that I won’t be voting for Barack Obama. On the Republican side, I think Sarah Palin will run with a tough position on immigration, even if her record as Governor doesn’t reflect this.

    Give us some facts on why you think that. Bear in mind that we’ve already read your Sarah Palin article and are looking for some concrete reasoning, not wishful thinking.

  14. Give us some facts on why you think that. Bear in mind that we’ve already read your Sarah Palin article and are looking for some concrete reasoning, not wishful thinking.

    Sarah Palin has made numerous statements as of late that suggests she will run on a tough immigration platform. Her strong endorsements of Tancredo and Angle come to mind.

  15. “Sarah Palin has made numerous statements as of late that suggests she will run on a tough immigration platform. Her strong endorsements of Tancredo and Angle come to mind.”

    That’s certainly a change from her position during the presidential campaign when she supported McCain’s amnesty.

  16. Endorsements? Are you kidding? Ok. What about her endorsement of McCain over Hayworth who was more hard line on immigration?

  17. Let me jump in with my two cents…

    maxsnafu writes, That’s certainly a change from her position during the presidential campaign when she supported McCain’s amnesty.

    She was second fiddle. She wasn’t calling the tunes. One could argue she sold out. On the other hand, it’s better to play second fiddle then not play at all.

    ==============
    alex writes, What about her endorsement of McCain over Hayworth who was more hard line on immigration?

    He had just picked her for veep on his presidential run. She owed him that whether she liked him or not. Personally, I think anyone who wouldn’t have done is much isn’t someone I wouldn’t want around.

    PS – I’m no fan of Palin. But fair is fair.

  18. Fred writes:”He had just picked her for veep on his presidential run. She owed him that whether she liked him or not. Personally, I think anyone who wouldn’t have done is much isn’t someone I wouldn’t want around.”

    I absolutely agree Fred.

    Plus, don’t forget Palin really did try to bring some of the more sordid details of Obama’s past to light during the campaign. McCain and his crew of idiots shut all that down.

  19. Palin really did try to bring some of the more sordid details of Obama’s past to light during the campaign

    That’s a good point. If it had been up to her she would have been screaming Jeremiah Wright all the way to the White House. You can’t get much more explicit than that. I’ve never thought Palin cost McCain the election. Rather, it was McCain that cost Palin the election.

  20. “He had just picked her for veep on his presidential run. She owed him that whether she liked him or not. Personally, I think anyone who wouldn’t have done is much isn’t someone I wouldn’t want around.”
    This has got to be an example of what is essentially wrong with a lot of (if not most) white people. So McCain did her a favor, gave her a SHOT at a possible job, and in return she has to sell out her race? And we expect this kind of support for being picked as a co-runner for office and call that a “virtue”? And at our level of “common citizen” we consider this laudable? If you are expecting real political change to occur you cannot approve of “business as usual”.
    If nothing else, this only proves that at that stratospherically high political level, “candidates” are vetted beforehand and expected to do the bidding of the Plutocracy that admits them to the club. Example; didn’t Obama run on the promise of “ending the war” as soon as he got into office? Did he not express outrage at the bankers swindling the nation? How long did it take for him to pull some troops out of Iraq? Was any banker indicted and convicted of fraud?

  21. So McCain did her a favor, gave her a SHOT at a possible job, and in return she has to sell out her race?

    Yeah. Anyone who isn’t standing on the courthouse steps with a bullhorn screaming “white power” is a sell out.

  22. @ Fred;
    “Personally, I think anyone who wouldn’t have done is much isn’t someone I wouldn’t want around.”
    A person who exhibits the kind of situational ethics or moral relativism that you are endorsing is someone who I would not want to have around. It is not about “standing at the courthouse steps with a bullhorn and screaming white power” but anticipating the candidates likelihood to do what is right for her people down the road.
    Don’t be saddened Fred, knowing the Republicans, Ms. Palin will be their nominee in 2012 and you will get to see first hand what a shill for Israel and Zion she will be when and if she wins the election.

Comments are closed.