Mayor Lightfoot practices racial discrimination in Chicago and is apparently getting away with it.

Quote:

---

Chicago’s mayor declared that she would only grant one-on-one interviews to minority journalists to protest the lack of diversity in the Windy City press corps.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot, the first black woman and openly gay person elected to run that city, confirmed the move Tuesday after members of the local press took to Twitter saying they had been denied interviews based on their skin color.

“By now, you may have heard the news that on the occasion of the two-year anniversary of my inauguration as Mayor of this great City, I will be exclusively providing one-on-one interviews with journalists of color,” Lightfoot said in a letter to local media provided The Post.

---

https://nypost.com/2021/05/19/chicag...ite-reporters/

An announced in advance narrow and specific policy action would be more a protest than an action of racism.

So if Trump had announced in advance a narrow and specific policy of only giving interviews to white journalists, it would have been merely a protest rather than an act of racism? In other words, does that principle apply to everyone, or only to a small portion of the population?

Maybe the mayor of Chicago should concentrate on being a good example of racial fairness and equity.

I'm surprised Mayor Beetlejuice is answering any reporter's questions at all. She does have a lot to answer for . First she promoted defunding police .But now she is asking for Federal assistance to deal with Chi-town's crime wave .
We cannot continue to endure the level of violence that we are now experiencing
Mayor Lori Lightfoot calls on more federal help to fight crime - Chicago Tribune

Yep. We MUST print more money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So if Trump had announced in advance a narrow and specific policy of only giving interviews to white journalists, it would have been merely a protest rather than an act of racism? In other words, does that principle apply to everyone, or only to a small portion of the population?

Maybe the mayor of Chicago should concentrate on being a good example of racial fairness and equity.

---

Not a peep from the right about the dufus stolen election lie he perpetrates to this day, with red state repubs echoeing daily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I'm surprised Mayor Beetlejuice is answering any reporter's questions at all. She does have a lot to answer for . First she promoted defunding police .But now she is asking for Federal assistance to deal with Chi-town's crime wave .
We cannot continue to endure the level of violence that we are now experiencing
Mayor Lori Lightfoot calls on more federal help to fight crime - Chicago Tribune

---

Couldn't find Lighfoots defunding cops policy...please help.

I think Trump lost the election because of his big mouth. Sadly, I doubt he has learned that lesson. I haven't dismissed the "stolen election" narrative, but it doesn't seem to have made any progress in multiple court cases.

Still, does that principle of racial prejudice employed by Lightfoot apply to everyone, or only to a small portion of the population?

Lightfoot did propose some significant and yet relatively modest cuts to police funding, but it does seem she was not a major proponent of defunding.

https://www.injusticewatch.org/news/...unding-police/

https://nypost.com/2021/08/11/chicag...ng-cop-murder/

I guess an $80 million cut is not technically complete defunding or as draconian as other Dem cities tried . But at a time of rising crime rates ,it was imprudent . That was October 2020 . By October this year she changed her mind.

I agree completely with you. I was just pointing out that she was not as knee deep in the defund mire as many others were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I guess an $80 million cut is not technically complete defunding or as draconian as other Dem cities tried . But at a time of rising crime rates ,it was imprudent . That was October 2020 . By October this year she changed her mind.

---

Between covid and the weather cuts even temporary ones to non essential stuff was indicated. 80M of a 1.2B budget seems like a lot but every big city is dealing with budgetary decions not just Chitown. Rural areas are too, though less scrutinized. Been moving money around at my house like a nut to keep up.

Quote:

---

Between covid and the weather cuts even temporary ones to non essential stuff was indicated. 80M of a 1.2B budget seems like a lot but every big city is dealing with budgetary decions not just Chitown.

---

That is a valid point. Agree or disagree with cutting police funding by about 7%, at least there can be the appeal to needed budget cuts. One can only wonder in amazement how it is that states and cities see the need to cut spending to match revenues, but the feds in D.C. just continue to print and borrow in a completely irresponsible manner. It's amazing.

You do that when you own the printing press, and the table you pile the "fresh" money on. Would love to see how much the Fed has banked the last 4 years.

Are you enjoying the inflation that is accompanying this printing of money?

Quote:

---

Would love to see how much the Fed has banked the last 4 years.

---

it's called a liquidity injection . it is one of the many reasons I opposed the 2008 bail out and later stimulus printing .

lacasa de papel money heist professor explains liquidity injection - YouTube

Being unwilling to be outdone by Chicago in the area of racist government policies, New York increased the ante.

Quote:

---

The state of New York said it will prioritize non-White people in the distribution of COVID-19 treatments in short supply.

New York’s Department of Health released a document detailing its plan to distribute the treatments, such as monoclonal antibody treatment and antiviral pills.

The plan includes a section on eligibility for the scarce antiviral pills that people must meet to receive the treatment, including a line stating a person needs to have "a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness."

One such "risk factor" is being a race or ethnicity that is not White due to "longstanding systemic health and social inequities"

"Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19," the memo reads.

---

"...longstanding and systematic health and social inequities have contributed to increased risk of severe illness and death from covid 19." I'm sure you didn't mean to leave that out.

I noted that no specific, "...longstanding and systematic health and social inequities..." were noted, so I didn't think it worth mentioning. Even at that, racial discrimination is wrong, even when it's merely white people being discriminated against.

So how do we balance current and past discrimination? Covid has shined a bright light on all our imperfection.

Quote:

---

So how do we balance current and past discrimination?

---

That's a great question. I don't see it as a need to "balance" anything. Trying to balance past discrimination with some current discrimination is foolish. We should correct the law where it discriminates against any particular ethnic group. I would think that has largely been accomplished but I'm open to any examples of that not being done. The government should be color-blind, and that's why I object to the mayor's policy.