Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) said a lot of wild things during his Sunday morning media blitz. But one of his comments has received far less attention than the others: Vance described a federal program that has distributed nearly $2 billion to mostly Black farmers who experienced discrimination as “disgraceful,” suggesting that it is racist against white people.

And now, the head of the largest group of Black farmers across the country is condemning Vance’s assertions.

“He owes us an apology,” John Boyd, Jr., founder and president of the National Black Farmers Association, told me. The remarks, Boyd added, were “disgraceful, deplorable, dumb, degrading, and disrespectful to the nation’s Black farmers, the oldest occupation in history for Black people.”

75 points
*

I don’t know whats more surprising.

The fact that Vance said it.

or the fact that theres still black Americans who support people like him and the republicans, then have the audacity to act shocked when conservatives go full racist against them again

permalink
report
reply
27 points

Single issue voters are just mind-blowingly dumb.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

But…but…. the leopards wouldn’t eat MY face!!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

I frankly think that unfortunately, a lot of people on the left have leaned into this by trying to categorize people by skin color and then give special benefits or special amounts of discrimination. The Harris Administration, for example, handed out farm benefits to people based on skin color. I think that’s disgraceful. I don’t think we should say, you get farm benefits if you’re a Black farmer, you don’t get farm benefits if you’re a white farmer. All farmers, we want to thrive, and that’s certainly the President Trump and JD Vance view of the situation.

But Vance’s assertions here are an inaccurate portrayal of the Discrimination Financial Assistance Program, the federal program established through the Inflation Reduction Act. Contrary to Vance’s claim, applicants were not limited to Black farmers; Any farmer who had experienced discrimination by the US Department of Agriculture—including based on sexual orientation or gender identity, religion, age, or disability—was eligible to apply.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

The best part comes before this, when the author asked the Vance campaign for a comment. They didn’t give one, but specifically Asked Mother Jones to quote his entire statement.

Which they did, and then the author explained exactly why the statement was bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

You see a feral cat injured in the road so you rush over to see if you can help. Despite your good intentions, it delivers a deluge of deep scratches and medically significant puncture wounds from a few well-placed bites.

Perhaps you feel the cat owes you an apology since your intentions were good and you had hoped to be its friend. I would argue if you expected an apology then you were clearly delusional or willfully ignorant, either way not a good thing.

I suppose what I’m saying is, good luck on getting a sincere apology National Black Farmers Association.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

A spokesperson for Vance also did not respond to questions from *Mother Jones *beyond requesting that we include the senator’s full remarks . . .

I frankly think that unfortunately, a lot of people on the left have leaned into this by trying to categorize people by skin color . . . All farmers, we want to thrive, and that’s certainly the President Trump and JD Vance view of the situation.

Ruh roh, Rhaggy! If you’re putting out statements putting yourself on-peer with Donny Two Scoops . . . that’s a paddlin’.

Somebody’s gonna be receiving a burnt ketchup steak frisbee soon.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I understand the black farmers here.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 470K

    Comments