It cannot be said enough... Paul Ryan is just a slightly smarter Bundy
Last edited Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:42 PM - Edit history (1)
Bundy made an argument for a proposition.
His argument for that proposition was made with socially unacceptable terms, overtly racist examples and hyperbolic conclusions, thereby making his argument dysfunctional on the national stage.
Paul Ryan, and almost ALL conservative Republicans, make the same proposition. Routinely. As a standard part of the Republican theory and message.
The Proposition: Seeming improvements in the lives and prospects of black people have actually harmed black people and their lives and prospects were actually better before a series of what are widely considered advances and benefits. And that government "subsidies" have created a deformed black culture with no concept of gainful work. And that black people, who overwhelmingly support these seeming advances, are not competant to assess whether these advances and benefits help them.
That is what Bundy said. It is what Paul Ryan says.
There are a thousand ways to state that proposition. Some ways will get you thrown out of places, others will get you elected to Congress. But it is the same proposition.
Ryan, unlike Bundy, is a professional politician and thus knows not to rant about cotton and instructional slavery when making the same claim... that black folk were better off "before..."
Before the Civil War? Before Brown v. Board of Education? Before the Civil Rights acts? Before 1970s inner city programs? Before Obamacare? Before Common Core (opposition to which is becoming a conservative litmus test)? Before increases in SNAP or extending unemployment benefits?
That part varies, based on the sophistication of the audience.
But the argument is always that black people were better off "before."
= new reply since forum marked as read
