I have to shrug and admit I just don't understand their reasoning. When I look at Clinton's policy record as President and compare it to W's record, I see far more reforms that directly harmed African Americans during the Clinton regime. Granted, W's nicely feathered the nest of the upper class, but has he actually gotten any laws passed that directly and negatively impacted African Americans? (Serious question;
I may have missed something.)
Miles
^^^^^
CB: Wasn't much left for him to do after the earlier phases of Reaganism. He doesn't have to be actively racist. He can work by omission, indirection and just staying the course of the last 30 years, subtlety even.
There was the sort of malign neglect of New Orleans which disproportionately impacted Black people. Cutting the taxes on the rich and spending on war allows no "housing and urban development" , even less of it. Appointing right wing judges shores up the racist legal direction ( the opposite of the Warren Court) well into the future. The whole anti-terrorism legal structure can be used against urban riots of the future. I suppose this is "subjective" and personal, but his whole good ole boy/Howdie Doodie persona just signals and feels racist. Excessively declaring Americanism is inherently racist , particularly in an acquired Southern accent ( his parents don't have a Southern accent). To most Black people, I don't think there is any doubt he's down with those racist white youth in Jena, and other places. So do those racist , white youth. That's why they feel ok jumping off into this ole time racism with white trees and nooses. I think Black people and white racists get his implicit message.