Thread: Senate Approves $4.6 Billion for Claims by Black Farmers, American Indians

Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain

No

They hate the current economic conditions and are blaming the current party in power for it

What both sides keep doing is over-reading their mandate and turning independents off. You watch, if Republicans try to shut down government or start talking impeachment, they'll turn independents off again.

You can't with without independents and independents largely want things done and want them done quickly and efficiently.

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

So you think that everyone should be able to bring any claims at any point, no matter how long ago the incident was?

I think that when you systematically use the power of government to effectively screw and entire race of people that the gravity of that matters a whole hell of a lot more than the statute of limitations.

but thats just me... or maybe it isn't since justice was done here.

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

There's a reason why there are statutes of limitations.

I'm sure that at some point in the last 500 years, one of my ancestors was ****ed over by some government. That does not mean that that government owes me a check.

What is the statute of limitation on the Indian claim in this case?

Here. Does this seem like something worth looking into? Or are we going to keep turning a blind eye to possible corruption? I hope the Republican's really do put a new face on Washington. The one it's wearing now is really ugly.

.Zombie » Pigford v. Glickman: 86,000 claims from 39,697 total farmers?

Originally Posted by Barbbtx

OK.... Who's going to be the first to slam me for using Breitbart as a source? At least he's a lot more believable than Media Matters.

No, he's really not. At least Media Matters gets stuff right some of the time.

Originally Posted by haymarket

I think that when you systematically use the power of government to effectively screw and entire race of people that the gravity of that matters a whole hell of a lot more than the statute of limitations.

but thats just me...

So like I said, if one of my ancestors was part of a group that was systematically screwed by a government 500 years ago, I should get a check in the mail?

Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain

What is the statute of limitation on the Indian claim in this case?

Depends on what claims we're talking about. If the Indians are getting paid out for the same discrimination claims that the blacks are (discrimination in the USDA in the 70-90s), then it probably hasn't run. If they're complaining about discrimination in the 1800's, it's run.

Originally Posted by RightinNYC

So like I said, if one of my ancestors was part of a group that was systematically screwed by a government 500 years ago, I should get a check in the mail?



Depends on what claims we're talking about. If the Indians are getting paid out for the same discrimination claims that the blacks are (discrimination in the USDA in the 70-90s), then it probably hasn't run. If they're complaining about discrimination in the 1800's, it's run.

The Indians claim is not discrimination, but missappropriation of royalties owed to them by the Federal government (money the government handled due to use of Indian lands for mining, agriculture use dating back to the late 1800's

RightinNYC

Did you ever see a comedian named Kevin Meaney who was mildly big about a dozen years ago? He used to do this routine on stage where he would talk about the concerns some folks had about certain things that sounded legit and had merit. Then he would say something like "and you know how i feel about that?" And the band would break out into tune and he would sing the old song I don't care, I don't care, I don't care I don't care I don't care". And he would repeat that poking fun at the objections to an otherwise solid idea or point.

I guess that is how I feel about the whole statute of limitations thing and the Native Americans. When you consider what was done to them, I really don't care about the statute or if it was honored or not.

Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy

What both sides keep doing is over-reading their mandate and turning independents off. You watch, if Republicans try to shut down government or start talking impeachment, they'll turn independents off again.

You can't with without independents and independents largely want things done and want them done quickly and efficiently.

Well, although we can't be 100% sure what is going to happen in the future, I don't think impeachment is on the table. However, investigations into how, or why certain things done, and passed may not be constitutional, and have those righted is a good thing.

If Repubs get back to following the constitution before trying to pull fast ones like the current set of clowns, then they will be rewarded with longevity in their positions.

j-mac

Originally Posted by j-mac

Well, although we can't be 100% sure what is going to happen in the future, I don't think impeachment is on the table. However, investigations into how, or why certain things done, and passed may not be constitutional, and have those righted is a good thing.

If Repubs get back to following the constitution before trying to pull fast ones like the current set of clowns, then they will be rewarded with longevity in their positions.

j-mac

Michelle Bachmann: "Whether or not this is an impeachable offense is one that the Congress would have to make a determination on."

That's impeachment talk, ain't it?

US Faces 'Disaster' from Financial Reform Bill, Bachmann Warns

If you guys keep electing people like that, I don't think it will good for you long-term at all. This is, after all, one of the Tea Party darlings who also goes on national television and lies about the cost of a presidential trip.