"'The storm didn't discriminate, and neither did the recovery effort,' he said, adding: 'The rescue efforts were comprehensive, and the recovery will be comprehensive.'"
Ok. The storm did not discriminate. The recovery effort may had been comprehensive, but it was incompetently slow. And, as slow and inefficient as it was, you were pleased with it, and even congratulate 'brownie' for his 'heck of a job'.
And, What about the officials who treated surviving victims like criminals at gun point? Did being black or poor had anything to do with that? Would people be as complacent if the same acts had been performed on a predominantly white and affluent population?
Would it be the same if it had been white and affluent constituents who were suffering the consequences of a policy that seems to have tried to ride the storm on the cheap side? You want us to believe without question that it just so happened that the worst response of the federal government to a crisis affected a poor, underclass and democrat population just because..., without reason.
And you want us to close our eyes while your administration once more favors the Haliburton's while minimizing the wages of the workers in the reconstruction? And that is not discrimination?
If it is not discrimination on the basis of race or class, please tell us what it really is. But do not just deny it. Reality does not change because you dare not name it by its appropriate name.
1 comment:
For us that be here looking out it's clear that exist discrimination.
We remember that eleven how the mobulization and we can see the diferences!
Post a Comment