Thursday, February 21, 2013

Detroit, City On The Move

So you think you have problems, huh? Just be thankful you don’t live in Detroit. Imagine this. You live in a dirty city known primarily for being the armpit of the Earth. The locals burn the city to the ground every Devil’s Night and every time one of their sports teams win some tournament. The city and workforce are heavily unionized and bureaucratic. . . a veritable liberal utopia, so they don’t really want to do anything to fix their problem and they’re too lazy to try. Naturally, they’re all Democrats.

The city has bled more than a million residents since its heyday, falling from 1.9 million people to 700,000 today due to white flight. It’s $14 BILLION dollars in debt (about $23,000 per resident) and has a $900 million per year deficit. Its unemployment rate is 16%. Its top eight employers are governments, hospitals, or universities.

Between 2006 and 2010, Detroit was the most dangerous city in America. The city is awash in crime, having the sixth highest violent crime in the US today. 2/3 of all murders in Michigan happen in Detroit. The violent crime rate is double the national average. The property crime rate is triple the national average. Even their ex-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was a mini-crime wave unto himself. He’s currently doing five years and is on trial again for 38 felony racketeering charges involving some of Detroit’s most prominent officials.

Let’s face it, Robocop turned out to be an eerie look into the future.

And don’t forget, it’s friggin cold.

Things have gotten so bad that the city is trying to tear down parts of the city which have been all but abandoned so they don’t need to provide services to those areas anymore. They also tried to solve their problem by creating three casinos, the usual last refuge of the inept. . . “hey, let’s drain money from people who are even dumber than we are!”

Unsurprisingly, none of this is working.

Detroit is the paradigm of what happens when liberals get to run a place for generations. Liberalism strips people of what they call “the ownership society.” It teaches dependence and reliance. It teaches selfishness and creates an attitude that if nobody else cares, then why should I? It allows crime and corruption to run rampant because it never holds people to account. It destroys the worth ethic, the human need for self-improvement, and it offers destructive solutions (like casinos or more of the same with even more money) as placebos. Liberalism is soul destroying. You are better off being hit by a comet than a Democratic administration.

People really should study Detroit and teach the lessons of its failure.

So out of curiosity, what would you do to turn Detroit around?


** If you haven't seen this, check these stunning photos Koshcat found of the way Detroit has deteriorated: LINK. It's like something out of an apocalypse film. **

61 comments:

AndrewPrice said...

BTW, I'm not actually suggesting that we help Detroit. This is one liberals messed up and I think we should let them solve it. Elections have consequences (especially generations of elections).

I am curious though what you all think about how to fix this because there are many other cities facing falling populations.

Patriot said...

Andrew...I think Detroit is going the way of Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, etc., in that once industry moves out and/or dies there, for whatever reasons, the city diminishes to nothing like it was. The only exception to this rule is Pittsburgh when steel left. What they did to recover was focus on banking and the health sector, pharmaceuticals I believe.

So, maybe that's how we fix Detroit (assuming we want to). Offer banks, services, a package of tax breaks that would be too enticing to turn down. Auto there is dead, killed by the government and unions. All the plants have moved south into union free territory.

And don't think liberals will take any responsibility for their mess, in Detroit or elsewhere. If Det used to be the murder capital, now it's Chicago. Both illustrative of the awesome positive power of liberalism.

I say we let them both rot away and let kudzu smother the cities.

BevfromNYC said...

Andrew - So, first of all, where's the auto industry in Detroit? Or is that just a urban legend. Anyhoo, you know how in "ancient times" our ancestors would to just cover over ruined cities and rebuild on top of them? Maybe they should do that in Detroit. Just use it as a giant landfill for the 20 years, since it looks like they have a really good headstart anyway. Every state can just truck, barge, or ship all of their waste and we should have it covered up in no time at all! Then in that time, we can figure out how to retore it.

Koshcat said...

The only fix for Detroit is through Bankruptcy protection. It can be saved but needs to re-negotiate all contract and significantly decrease overhead. They are rapidly getting to the point where nobody will carry the debt any more. Eventually it will fix itself. but the next 5-10 years will continue to be very ugly.

Koshcat said...

Slightly off topic but related to previous discussions.

I see that Gov. Christie has a 74% approval rating. While I disagree with some of his positions and think he is a bit bombastic, conservatives may be able to learn something about how he does it.

tryanmax said...

I'm not sure how to prescribe it, but frankly, I would love to see a Detroit Renaissance--an honest to goodness one, not one of shell games* they're always cooking up--b/c I know the only way it could come about: through solid conservatism.

Is that a medicine Detroiters and Michiganders are willing to take? It's doubtful, but if they ever did, they would become the model for how cities should run overnight.

*see next comment

tryanmax said...

One of the ideas getting a lot of attention right now as a way to save Detroit is to make it an "elastic city." Let me tell you what that is and why it won't work for the city of Detroit or the state of Michigan in the long haul.

The concept is not new to me, thought I never before had a name for it. My hometown of Omaha is what you would call an elastic city. Under state law, the city enjoys practically unlimited annexation power within the county. I'm told in other states, county lines don't even matter. In states like Michigan, however, once a city bumps up against another town--a suburb--it must stop.

In all frankness, I think the elastic model is a better one overall--not that it doesn't have flaws--but that doesn't make it a solution for Detroit's woes. One advantage I find in the elastic model is that it eliminates the "city vs. suburb" rivalry which dominates much of leftist social theory which, in turn, informs leftist political policy. But suddenly changing the landscape will not immediately eliminate the mindset. To the contrary, suggesting this change right now is the nuclear option in the "city vs. suburb" confrontation--and the suburbs are Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The thinking behind the suggested maneuver is pretty transparent when you understand that urban leftists believe many, if not all of their problems come from people "fleeing" to the suburbs. Just as communists like to build walls and fascists like to dictate everyone buy a health insurance plan, leftists everywhere agree that all of their schemes would work brilliantly if it weren't for the opt-out. And what is Detroit if it has not been a leftist city?

The "elastic Detroit" proposal, therefore, is a proposal to shut and bar the doors. Give those greedy free-marketers nowhere to run. This is especially clear from the fact that several of the proposal's advocates want to see cross-county annexation and envision a sprawling mega-city. (Apparently urban sprawl is no problem when a Democrat jewel is on the line.) Such a move might give some short-term gains to Detroit, but in the long run it's a loser as it will only create encouragement for people to flee further from the city and from the state of Michigan altogether.

rlaWTX said...

Is nuking it from space an option on the table??

I actually thought that razing the abandoned buildings sounded like a good idea. If the owners aren't keeping them up and they are a hazard, then tear 'em down. Not only does this reduce the services needed, it also gives some bored city workers something to do, as well as let the landscape truly show the desolate nature of the modern Detroit.

Unfortunately, until Detroitians/ers/ites decide to put on their grown-up britches and suck it up, there is no hope.
And who is giving the city credit for them to be that far in debt at this point??????

Commander Max said...

"I'll buy that for a dollar."

Detroit will be all fixed if they build a statue to Robocop. Or start building the 6000SUX.

Typical of lib policies(or lack there of), means this kind of result. Honestly I think there really isn't any solution to the situation that was created. It would require strong measures, something most politicians would not be able to implement, much less carry out.
It should be left as an example to future generations.
Or walled off and turned into a prison.
So Kurt Russell can run around the place in "Escape from Detroit".

AndrewPrice said...

Patriot, I agree. This is the fate of any city that relies on an industry that dies. The real key is diversification LONG BEFORE it comes to this. At this point, who would want to move to Detroit?

I think the only thing that could save Detroit now is to completely reinvent themselves in a seriously unique way. They need to find ways to bring yuppies back from the suburbs, to make it really cool to live in the city again. That means a total makeover. They also need to change their laws or offer money or whatever to get new industries. It's not like they won't have a lot of help with the University of Michigan (a pretty good school) nearby.

But the real difference between a Pittsburgh and Buffalo is that Pittsburgh found new industries, Buffalo clung to the past.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, The auto industry are 9th and 10th, and if I'm reading my data right, they only employ around 10,000 people in total.... not many given the population size of 700,000. The thing is that unionization and lazy workers have slowly driven the auto industry to places like Alabama and Indiana. So not only was Detroit a one industry town, but they killed the brass goose.

Interesting, burying the town is actually the plan for large parts of it. They're demolishing homes and planting trees and trying to return it to nature so they don't need to deal with it.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, Bankruptcy is only a temporary fix. Even if their debt was entirely gone today and city wages were slashed to make the city stable, the problem still remains that there are no jobs, crime is out of control, and there's no reason to live there.

Honestly, I would consider: (1) trying to attack every large employer they could, (2) dealing with U. of Michigan to create a start up/tech center, (3) doing something interesting like sponsoring architecture contests and giving permits for everything crazy, (4) selling whole neighborhoods out to investors and letting them do whatever they want with them, and (5) ???.

AndrewPrice said...

On Christie, there is a LOT I don't like about him and I would not want him as President, BUT I agree completely. He's not only gotten northeastern moderates to vote for him, they've supported him over time. It would be very helpful to study what he's done and to see what we can learn.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, It's the only way to be sure. :P

it also gives some bored city workers something to do ... LOL!! Bravo!

I think the real problem with Detroit really is an attitude problem. Everyone there is going to need to realize that their government can't save them. If they want the place to change, they will need to work harder, take risks, and find new opportunities.

BevfromNYC said...

Interestingly, Dallas has had it's own urban renaissance in the past 25 years. What was otherwise desolate "downtown" area 25 years ago has been transformed in an urban-living boom ala NYC. While developing a really great mass transit commuter train system. Well, even down to the names of the "areas" - West Village, Midtown, etc. Soon the hip and cool started flowing into these areas and voila! Dallas transformed! Okay, Dallas has always suffered from NYC-envy, so it didn't surprise me when developers went all "NYC-ish" with the names. But it worked.

AndrewPrice said...

Max, I doubt anyone will buy Detroit for a dollar! LOL!

I agree completely. This is the result of liberal policies that chased away businesses, told people they could freeze time by government fiat, that unions could take everything they want without affecting the company, and that living on the government is a valid choice.

Unless their attitudes change, this isn't going to get any better, and I see no reason why their attitudes will change. I think they've hit a tipping point where people with motivation know it's best to flee the area and those who are left are the worst of the worst.

So truthfully, no matter what answer you come up with, I doubt Detroit can be saved. Even a bailout just delays the inevitable.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, DC did the same thing and Baltimore is trying. If you saw DC in the early 1980s, it was a mess through and through. But then people started moving back into neighbors in NW DC and now it's an ultra rich areas. There are still some lines of demarcation, but a big chunk of the city is really nice right now.

In Baltimore, a friend of mine moved in near the stadiums by he inner harbor and that area too was becoming very yuppie. I have been there in 10 years so I can't say how it all turned out, but it appeared very promising. You could actually buy row houses for a couple thousand dollars and then rebuild them and people were selling them $200k.

Actually, now that I think about it, Denver did this too when they cleaned up their downtown.

I think the key is attracting yuppies.

tryanmax said...

Detroit for a dollar!? Only if you throw in a can of Coke!

Koshcat said...

I disagree about bankruptcy as temporary fix. Where are they going to get the money for what you are planning? Would you invest in a mutual bond from Detroit?

What will happen is tax revenue will continue to decline as well as services. It will become a complete ghost town. It will get so bad that something really bad will happen. A building will burn down killing dozens, etc. The state will then have no choice but to take over. The other thing that will happen is the money will completely run out and all of the pension plans will go immediately to zero. That's when the riots will start. It will be older people so we can call it the Detroit Walker Riots.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, The "elastic city" idea sounds like a way to let Detroit pillage the suburbs. It sounds like they just want to grab the suburbs so they can live off of those people.

I think the only way to fix Detroit is a genuine renaissance as you say. They need to do something to make people want to live there, no try to force people to live there. And it's not like they don't have a lot going for them. They've got a beautiful lake and some great scenery. They could be a gateway to Canada -- heck, they could offer medical care to Canadians. They have a lot of brain power and energy in nearby colleges.

BUT they will need to break their unions, lose the welfare mindset, end the crime, break the gangs, and lose the liberal mindset that if they could just find some new "revenue source," then everything will be fine.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Don't buy Detroit! It's a bad deal, even if you get the coke!

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, Let me clarify: bankruptcy is necessary (unless Michigan wants to bail them out). There is no other way.

BUT... it will only delay the inevitable. There is no economy and they will be in the same problem within a few years again because just getting rid of the debts won't change the mindset that "someone needs to help us."

This is the same mindset which wiped out East Germany -- the idea that someone else needs to come fix things.

Koshcat said...

I'm trying to think if there is any other city that was in as much trouble as Detroit but were able to re-emerge from the ashes. Pittsburgh?

AndrewPrice said...

Let me also add, I saw something very similar in Wheeling, WV, a city that was one a steel town but which lost 90% of its population in 100 years and is still bleeding people.

The people who are left there simply aren't willing to take their own future into their own hands -- they want someone to come save them. What's more, this is a venomous attitude which leads to them fighting over the scraps that are left like animals. Whenever a company proposed moving there, the locals weren't grateful, instead each of them tried to get "their share." They tried to impose taxes to milk the owners. They jacked up real estate prices (all the real estate there is tied up in feuding family trusts and is insanely expensive because of it). They tried to impose unions before the company even got there. In the end, they chased everything away. They even tried to sue companies who opened stores out in the county instead of the city with no basis at all except that "we wanted it here."

Basically, they are their own worst enemies and anyone with any motivation flees the city at their first chance. So eventually, you end up with a city full of slugs who live on welfare and disability and lawsuits.

If Detroit hits that level (and they may already be there for all I know), then forget it. Nuke the place.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat, I would say Pittsburgh is the only one that comes to mind.

Koshcat said...

I get it. We are talking about the same thing.
Bankruptcy followed by Renaissance.

AndrewPrice said...

Yes. The problem is that too many people out there are talking about Bankruptcy without the Renaissance. Bankruptcy alone solves nothing.

tryanmax said...

Andrew, Koshcat, Michigan already tried the "someone else needs to come fix things" approach and rejected it. It was called Public Act 4, a.k.a. the Emergency Manager Law, and it was repealed last November. It lived less than a year.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, That's because nobody wants to pay for somebody else's refusal to fix their own problems.


(I'll be back soon... work calls.)

Commander Max said...

I would buy it for a dollar.
Then make millions on the scrap metal.

There are a few problems, will there be any metal left? I would have to give most of what I make to unions/Dems. So they can run around and say how good a job they did on/for/to Detroit.

There is one thing, if one really wants to live in anarchy that's the place to go.

K said...

Commander Max: LOL. :)

T-Rav said...

What I would do if I had the power: enact a very tough law-enforcement policy with lots of jail time for offenders; loosen up gun laws (being Detroit, I'm just assuming those rights are pretty restricted); and encourage the establishment of private and charter schools. Beyond that, I would try to get small businesses into the city and start gentrification programs, so that people would begin to have more civic pride and therefore civic responsibility. And also, cut back drastically on the welfare programs, and let the complainers know they are welcome to go somewhere where there's more of a dole to live on.

This isn't just abstracting. St. Louis is in some ways going down the same rabbit hole, and has been for a while; and while I don't care so much about Detroit, I do about STL. I would love to see these measures put in place.

Koshcat said...

Did a little googling and found this site. Kind of eerie.

http://www.marchandmeffre.com/detroit/index.html

tryanmax said...

What's really sad is you can still imagine how beautiful many of those places once were. You take away a people's reason to care and everything goes to shambles. LINK

AndrewPrice said...

Max, LOL! Good thing. We could sell Detroit for scrap.

Actually, now that I think about it, why don't we give it to the unions? They got GM, let them have Detroit too. Here's their chance to prove they can really make a city work! LOL!

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, Good program. In terms of St. Louis, I think that a lot of cities are going through these problems. Some have turned around or are trying to turn around, others just keep wallowing and waiting for "somebody to do something!"

On St. Louis specifically, that city is HUGE! It's so much bigger than the first time I went through there in the 1980s it's unbelievable. But I guess that's mainly suburbs too.

BevfromNYC said...

I know - Send Mayor Bloomberg! He'd love to save the city. I can vouch for him. NYC, though in the throws of major budget issues right now, has really blossomed under Bloomberg's reig...er, mayoralty. And he will be available come Dec. 31, 2013 at 11:59:59pm! I will send them his resume and a few hundred bucks to get the process started...

In all seriousness, they need a Koch, Guiliani and/or Bloomberg-type character to helm the city. A tough character with a strong ego and knows what works and is not afraid of anyone. NYC was much like Detroit in '60-'80's.

AndrewPrice said...

Koshcat and tryanmax, That's really sad. I love great architecture and you can see where they definitely had some beauty there. It would be a shame if they couldn't save it.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, You can vouch for him! LOL! :)

When I wrote this article, the first name to come to mind actually was Guiliani and his police chief. Detroit doesn't have the advantages of NYC, but it has enough that it should be able to turn things around if they got smarter about urban renewal and putting an end to the liberal mentality that's allowed crime and unemployment to fester.

As for Bloomberg, however, I would like to send him to Los Angeles. They need a dictat... er, great mayor!

T-Rav said...

Andrew, even though he's a Democrat, I think a lot of these cities could benefit from a Cory Booker type.

As for St. Louis, yeah, it goes on and on, even though most of it is suburbs. And since it's an independent city (which it ironically asked for to keep the county from interfering in its affairs), it can't annex those suburbs, which has probably made the "white flight" problem worse.

AndrewPrice said...

I've been looking at those images at Koshcat's link and wow! Stunning.

AndrewPrice said...

T-Rav, It does go on and on. When I first drove through in the 1980s, the "city" started right around O'Fallon. Now it stars miles out and you can take the beltways which were distant farmland. It's stunning.

I think you're right about Booker. A lot of these cities need someone, Democrat or Republican, who doesn't put up with garbage and tries to get things fixed. What I'm not sure about with Booker though is if he's actually improved Newark (a real murderous sh*thole) or if it's just for show?

BevfromNYC said...

Oh, my Lord, those pictures are depressing. How beautiful some of those interiors must have been in their heyday. It reminds me of 42nd Street in NYC before Guiliani cleaned it up and made it a desirable place to "renew". The photo of the old decaying theatre is exactly what some of the old Broadway theatres look like in 1989. Now they have been restored.

And really? A decaying library with books still on the freakin' shelf?? That is a crime against logic. Were all these people just too lazy to even steal them??

rlaWTX said...

yep, Andrew, "it's the only way to be sure"

Those photos are --- horrifying...

It looks like the next upswing could seriously be in the demolition and recycling businesses, but they'd have to be out-of-area companies with non-union labor to make it profitable...

We need housing around here; it's too bad we can't jut beam some of those apartment buildings down here.

One of the good things about this boom down here is that many of the old or abandoned building have been demolished and replaced or refurbished. When we started booming, I was afraid we would soon have a bust and have our own WTX version of Detroit - but with all of the advances in drilling, they are predicting another 10 years on this boom... and the boom "area" is growing.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Isn't it? You can see real beauty in a lot of those buildings and it's shocking to see how badly they've decayed.

It also shows the kind of potential the place would have if they did restore the city.

LOL! Too lazy to steal books, yes. Actually, I don't understand why they didn't sell them? There must be a 1,000 libraries out there who would have bought them.

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, I agree - horrifying. It really is like a plague or something wiped out the world.

I think the key to avoiding the bust part is diversification. Never be reliant on just one industry. Unfortunately, that's a lesson few people learn when times are good and by the time the bust happens, it's usually too late to attract new industries.

EricP said...

Excellent question about turning around Detroit, AP, but I haven't cared ever since they tore down Tigers Stadium for that cavernous ballpark downtown. Oh, the city remaining fire/destruction-less after the Red Wings win the Stanley Cup. Fill in your own blanks on that, and/or recall Nat X's SNL bit on why blacks don't play hockey.

Commander Max said...

Giving Detroit to the unions?
There is one problem with that.

Nothing would be any different.

AndrewPrice said...

Eric, I find the stadium thing to be frustrating. Cities that are deep in debt and going the wrong way still always seem to find money to pay for massive stadiums -- welfare for billionaires.

AndrewPrice said...

Max, The difference would be that it would be fun to watch they try to run the city and it fall apart even quicker. Plus, it could become a giant black hole for union money.

I think it's worth doing! :D

BevfromNYC said...

"Too lazy to steal books"

It really is appalling and upsetting. And it just illustrates so clearly how little education is valued in Detroit which is also a big key as why they are in the situation they are in.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, It is pretty shocking and I'll bet you there were some very valuable books there. I think it shows how little the people in charge cared that they just walked away from these things.

Tennessee Jed said...

A very interesting post, Andrew. And, thanks to Kosh for the link to the pictures. :) These large urban centers all have problems, but as was mentioned earlier, the cities that have made it have had something other than manufacturing to pull them through. Detroit makes me think of the Clint Eastwood commercial accept Detroit is down 44-0 at the 2 minute warning.

And, though it is hard to have a fair and honest discussion about race, I sometimes think there is a racial component to this situation. By that I mean we all understand the sad history of blacks in this country. For a variety of reasons, too many blacks have not gotten the necessary support at home to not fall into a complete dependency mode with an entitlement mentality. I just don't see the same degree of that with Asians and some other ethnic groups that have assimilated a bit more.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, 44-0 is right.

Honestly, I think there is a race-culture element in this. Blacks as a group are too reliant on government and are too quick to allow their leaders to rape their communities on the basis of racial solidarity -- look at how often black politicians scream racism when they get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar and how quick so many in the race industry are to defend them. What this gets you is a lack of accountability, which you see played out in places like Detroit.

AndrewPrice said...

And to be clear, by "race-culture" I don't mean there's anything different about blacks based on race, but large parts of the black community in the US have adopted cultural values that are deeply destructive.

rlaWTX said...

Seriously??? I guess we should be glad that the majority thought a job was better...

From the Rasmussen links:
"Suppose someone lost his or her job and has been looking for work for a full year without success. Should state governments offer such workers a minimum wage government job instead of welfare payments?"
" Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely U.S. Voters think state governments should offer minimum wage jobs instead of welfare payments to those who have lost their jobs and been unsuccessfully looking for work for a year.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 21% don’t like this idea. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure about it."

AndrewPrice said...

rlaWTX, I actually don't find that shocking. Consider the two key elements:

1. Work instead of welfare. In other words, rather than giving you something for free, we want you to earn it.

2. Minimum wage. We don't want to give you much.

I would be more upset if a huge percentage didn't like this idea and instead said, "no, just give people money."

T-Rav said...

Thanks for those pictures, Kosh. I don't remember where to find it now, but I saw a video once where a guy sent a model plane on a fly-by of Detroit, and it was just dilapidated, crumbling lot after dilapidated, crumbling lot. What a shame.

tryanmax said...

In all honesty, I would be in the "not sure" camp on the gov't minimum wage job instead of welfare. I suppose if those are the only two options, I'd rather the job. At least the gov't would be getting something in return for the payout. On the other hand, I can think of better solutions off the top of my head, such as relocation programs to get people from where the jobs aren't to where the jobs are. Oh, but I can just hear the cries of racism that would accompany such a move as that. "Trail of Tears all over again!" at the very least. Besides that, I've never been able to figure how, in the country with the greatest freedom of mobility, so many of its citizens are loathe to exercise even to improve their situation.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, You must be part commie and part right-winger! Bah!!! ;P

Actually, I don't think it's a good idea either, but I do like the fact that people are thinking that if the choice is between paying somebody to do nothing (long term unemployed) or making them work for their money, I like the fact people want to put these people to work. I think that bodes really well for the idea that the public has not bought into the idea that the government should be taking care of people long-term.

As for moving people, this may interest you. Last year, 31 million people moved in the US -- about 10% of the population. This was the lowest number in generations. So we are very mobile. I think the thing is that the slugs don't move because they are comfortable... looking at you Wheeling. I don't know anyone who is a success who hasn't moved around to find better opportunities.

In terms of the things we should do, there are a lot, but we can't do them. :(

Kit said...

"Blacks as a group are too reliant on government and are too quick to allow their leaders to rape their communities on the basis of racial solidarity -- look at how often black politicians scream racism when they get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar and how quick so many in the race industry are to defend them"

I've noticed that. Whenever a black politician is caught doing something he shouldn't be doing such as embezzling, voter fraud, etc. he always claims that the "racist white power structure" is trying to frame him.

Post a Comment

Post a Comment