Harris Proposes Forgivable Loans to Black Male Entrepreneurs
Is this Harris doing damage control after Obama scolded black men for not supporting her?
Uh oh! 21 day panic! Time to promise voters everything in the world!
VP Kamala Harris unveiled the “Opportunity Agenda,” which proposes one million forgivable loans up to $20,000 for black entrepreneurs.
The agenda includes the following (emphasis mine):
(1) Providing 1 million loans that are fully forgivable to Black entrepreneurs and others to start a business.
(2) Championing education, training, and mentorship programs that help Black men get good-paying jobs in high-demand industries and lead their communities, including pathways to become teachers.
(3) Supporting a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency and other digital assets so Black men who invest in and own these assets are protected.
(4) Launching a National Health Equity Initiative focused on Black Men that addresses sickle cell disease, diabetes, mental health, prostate cancer, and other health challenges that disproportionately impact them.
(5) Legalizing recreational marijuana and creating opportunities for Black Americans to succeed in this new industry.
Man, Harris has come a long way:
As San Francisco district attorney from 2004 to 2011, Harris oversaw over 1,900 convictions for cannabis violations, the San Jose Mercury News reported in 2019. Still, only a small number of those people ended up in prison.
Mother Jones destroyed Harris in 2019 in the article “Kamala Was a Cop. Black People Knew It First.”
Camille Squires pointed out why black people don’t trust Harris. It all stems from her time as San Francisco district attorney. It also goes beyond marijuana:
On Black Twitter, calling out aspects of Harris’s record as a prosecutor wasn’t just about getting one over on a candidate. It was about holding her accountable for her past actions, which include an anti-truancy law that threatened the parents of students who skipped school with criminal charges, and various failures to hold police and prosecutors accountable for misconduct. For a long time a gross generalization had prevailed—that Harris had done commendable, hard-edged work as a prosecutor, and that this record would position her well in national politics. She’d even proudly declared herself California’s “top cop” in 2016 —two years after the Ferguson protests. Marcotte has things backward. In a climate where Democrats still felt they had to pander to the law-and-order crowd, “Kamala is a cop” was the nuance.
Is Harris doing damage control?
Former President Barack Obama recently scolded black men for not supporting Harris.
BREAKING NEWS: @BarackObama sent out by White liberals to “Blackman-splain” to get Black men to vote for @KamalaHarris. Wait, his mother and Kamala’s mother are both “WHITE.”
Obama doesn’t even have Black neighbors, and 99% of his handlers are White.
I don’t have anything in… pic.twitter.com/0cb5WEr0hs
— Vernon Jones (@VernonForGA) October 11, 2024
The scolding did not sit well with people, even those on the left.
Awful message. The party has to stop scapegoating Black men. Black men aren’t the problem. White men and White women are. No other group votes at 87-90% for Dems but Black folk. Men and women. That is a false flag. Black men voting for Trump is insignificant. This accusatorial… https://t.co/Q9jh9G973k pic.twitter.com/gifMs7nTii
— Wendell Pierce (@WendellPierce) October 11, 2024
Black men and Black women do not vote much differently, it’s wrong to single out Black men when Black men are the most loyal male voting block for Democrats.
It’s patronizing and wrong. pic.twitter.com/2OXmq9q1TW
— Nina Turner (@ninaturner) October 11, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
This crazy ass woman just stuck a hatch in her political career
How did you miss this leagleinsurrection?
Indigenous day my ass
https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1845859032743161865
Isn’t it a violation of federal law to discriminate by color?
Silly online poster, laws don’t apply to Democrats.
My thought
Of course it is; but we are missing the point. She is promising blacks money they don’t have to pay back for their votes. Let’s hope the blacks understand that they will never see any money and they are being lied to again.
There are still plenty of special programs for “minority-owned” and “women-owned” businesses. I can’t understand how these pass Constitutional muster.
Vote-grabbing legislation is exempt.
White people aren’t coloured.
Not in general; it’s a violation for certain types of businesses to discriminate in certain types of transactions.
Generally speaking (with a lot of exceptions) federal laws don’t apply to the federal government, unless they say so. Also, they obviously don’t bind Congress, which is free to pass laws that contradict earlier laws, and in such cases the later law always overrides the earlier one.
However both Congress and the federal government are bound by the 14th amendment. Congress can’t pass laws that conflict with it, and the government can’t do anything that violates it, even with Congress’s permission.
But the 14th amendment is not nearly as sweeping as the various Civil Rights Acts. The Equal Protection Project generally sues under these acts rather than under the 14th amendment. In this case any case would have to be brought under the amendment, so the government would have more wiggle room.
If you look at these items carefully you will see that they don’t seem to violate the 14th. E.g. note that phrase “and others”. That means despite the marketing the loans would be available to everyone who meets objective criteria that don’t involve race. Misleading marketing may violate Title this or that, but not the constitution.
Disregarding color, would it be unfair to describe the promise of “forgivable loans” as attempting to literally buy votes?
No more so than any other campaign promise.
Campaign promises are not literally vote buying, because the benefit doesn’t depend on how you voted. The promise is that if I am elected I will do this; not if you vote for me I will do this. The policy, if it is implemented, will benefit people regardless of how they voted.
IT would be an simple test, a nominally race-neutral loan program is targeted to white people.
Come to think of it, there was a large settlement over farm aid that was ostensibly race neutral, but not really.
The “settlement” you refer to was a giant scam. Yes, there was discrimination against black applicants for those loans, and the small number of actual victims deserved to be compensated, but they ended up giving “compensation” to pretty much anyone with dark skin who stuck his hand out.
Buying drug supplies is the obvious application.
Sounds like something the LI Foundation would go after.
It’s not even slow-pitch softball – it’s T-ball.
I can hardly wait until she says if elected she will ensure my head will be on a pike.
It is her logical next step.
LOL, forgivable loans to black borrowers, exclusively, doesn’t sound patently racist and unconstitutional, at all.
“Forgivable” loans; aren’t those the kind you make to your deadbeat son-in-law because you know he’ll never pay them back anyway?
Read it again. They’re not to black borrowers exclusively. She just wants black voters to think they are.
I don’t care what the fine print is to make this scheme pass legal/constitutional muster. It’s a noxious idea, on its face, and, it deserves to be characterized as racist in intent.
The only racism in the intent is that its premised on assuming blacks to be gullible. The proposed program doesn’t discriminate, but the idea is that if you tell black voters it does they’ll believe you and vote for you.
‘fully forgivable loans’ … they’re usually called “grants” or “gifts”.
Who are these “and others”??
You can be reasonably certain “and others” doesn’t include white men.
Actually you can be reasonably certain it does. Because they wouldn’t want it struck down.
Go ahead and apply for a loan if this piece of crap actually becomes law, Milhouse. Let me know how it goes.
I’m unlikely to qualify for any such program, regardless of my skin color. I’m not about to start a business.
And to the taxpayers, they are known as theft.
“Forgivable” doesn’t mean “forgiven”. It means that at some time in the future, if you follow the rules, you can look forward to it being forgiven.
‘Forgivable loans’ is newspeak complete bullcrap.
It’s just straight up giving them money.
No, it’s not newspeak, and it’s not a straight-out grant. They’ve been around for a long time, and they’re loans that have to be repaid, but there’s the prospect that if you follow the rules they may be partially or fully forgiven in the future. If you don’t stick to the program, whatever it is, then you don’t get forgiven and you have to pay it back.
Q. “Who are these ‘and others’??”
A. Not you and me.
This is a straight bribe for a vote. This woman is depraved, but what should expect from a woman who used her sex to get ahead in politics?
It’s Democrat 101. When all else is failing, hand out bribes like water bottles.
“Black men and +Black women do not vote much differently, it’s wrong to single out Black men when Black men are the most loyal male voting block for Democrats.”
This reminds me of black Pell Grants, where they were registering for minimal classes, getting a free computer ($500), then collecting whatever the balance was on the grant, and never going to class again. The community college changed the rules to no dispense excess funds until much later.
This is really just more useless welfare. Competent black entrenpeurs will not have a problem getting funding.
Fully forgivable loan = Gift.
Dear Kamala. Everyone knows you wouldn’t be promising this stuff if you thought you had a chance of winning.
You’ve lost. Give up.
Irv, I have the vision to be expected of an elderly man. Sans Serif type like used here causes me to sometimes see an “m” as “rn”. I could have sworn you typed K a r n a l a.
(I have an eye exam next month.)
The problem is that there are a great many voters who either can’t see her for who she is, or don’t care and are interested in freebies.
Now she is promising to give black men millions that don’t have to be paid back. I am sure the taxpayers are all in. At least they will have to pay it.
Millions? That’s $20 Billion she is talking about.
As I remember, Trump loaned black businessmen start up money for their ventures. He had them meet with him at regular intervals to see how they were doing and give advice. In the end he forgave the interest on the paid loans.
She might win on this tactic
In an admittedly hasty scan of her Opportunity Agenda I did not see under what conditions the loans would become forgivable. In the absence of any such conditions being listed my working assumption would be that either the fact that you are a black male would suffice, or conversely that the loan would be forgiven if a significant portion [1/2? 1/3?] be donated to the Democrats.
Subotai Bahadur
You have to hand over a signed 2028 proxy ballot made out to her.
Can anybody self identify as “black” ??
harris also added:
ANYONE ELSE WHO DOESNT LIKE ME IS ALSO BEING OFFERED
money /house/food/and a migrant as a gift
she was not liked and was promoted her whole life
so she is paying it back
and forward
lefty is scum
“Harris Proposes Forgivable Loans to Black Male Entrepreneurs”
Wow! That’s a SURE way to bring back the lost white male union-man vote!
Maybe she meant “Harris Proposes Forgivable Loans to Blackmail Entrepreneurs”?
“fully forgivable loans” …
Those are those things that Biden family members pass between each other back and forth and back and forth and all around, through shell companies and false fronts, to brother to father to granddaughter to niece … for no discernible “purpose” …
It’s amazing how they are all getting away with the most blatant and obvious crimes. Amazing.
Detroit has already returned 50% of its absentee ballots and is on pace for 90% voter participation. This is either voter fraud or Harris is exceptionally popular with Black voters.
Did someone take the bar exam for her? You can’t do that, it’s unconstitutional.
Yes, you can, because if you look closely at the items listed you’ll see that they don’t actually discriminate by a prohibited category, they’re just misleadingly worded to appear that way. Misleading political advertising is not unconstitutional, or even illegal.
another blatant freebie/bribe–again, with no consequences
and at the expense of the american taxpayer
lord