Washington State's New Home Loan Program EXCLUDES White Buyers

[RaceBannon]

The case is made. Discrimination based on race is illegal and unconstitutional

You democrats never learn. 1964 you were voting against the Civil Rights Act. I guess that still matters today. Vote for Trump

 

[PurpleThrobber]

Washington State law already allows homeowners to affirm restrictive covenants are illegal and noted in closing documents related to the property.

Not many people actually do it. Why? Because it’s illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and they can buy the house they want

 

[HHusky]

The case is made. Discrimination based on race is illegal and unconstitutional

You democrats never learn. 1964 you were voting against the Civil Rights Act. I guess that still matters today. Vote for Trump

Incorrect. Strict scrutiny is applied, to be sure.

 

[HHusky]

Washington State law already allows homeowners to affirm restrictive covenants are illegal and noted in closing documents related to the property.

Not many people actually do it. Why? Because it’s illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and they can buy the house they want

That's really beside the point. We've seen past wrongs remedied before, however imperfectly. That's the argument for this one.

 

[RaceBannon]

The case is made. Discrimination based on race is illegal and unconstitutional

You democrats never learn. 1964 you were voting against the Civil Rights Act. I guess that still matters today. Vote for Trump

Incorrect. Strict scrutiny is applied, to be sure.

Democrats just don't get it

 

[RaceBannon]

It's an unconstitutional argument Gladys

 

[HHusky]

50 USC Ch. 52: RESTITUTION FOR WORLD WAR II INTERNMENT OF JAPANESE-AMERICANS AND ALEUTS (house.gov)

 

[HHusky]

It's an unconstitutional argument Gladys

Assuming the truth of a proposition you seek to prove is a lot easier than doing the hard work, isn't it?

 

[RaceBannon]

Now we are back to the 40s and another democrat who discriminated by race
Defend racism all you want H its on brand. And unconstitutional

Bigot

 

[PurpleThrobber]

Washington State law already allows homeowners to affirm restrictive covenants are illegal and noted in closing documents related to the property.

Not many people actually do it. Why? Because it’s illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and they can buy the house they want

That's really beside the point. We've seen past wrongs remedied before, however imperfectly. That's the argument for this one.

The Japanese Americans interned were clearly identifiable and incurred actual damages

The “my dead grandma wanted to buy a house in xxxx” don’t fly.

The Throbber has already gone on record as stating negotiate a price and then STFU about reparations.
Nobody ever wants to surrender their victim/virtue signaling status

 

[HHusky]

Washington State law already allows homeowners to affirm restrictive covenants are illegal and noted in closing documents related to the property.

Not many people actually do it. Why? Because it’s illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and they can buy the house they want

That's really beside the point. We've seen past wrongs remedied before, however imperfectly. That's the argument for this one.

The Japanese Americans interned were clearly identifiable and incurred actual damages

The “my dead grandma wanted to buy a house in xxxx” don’t fly.

The Throbber has already gone on record as stating negotiate a price and then STFU about reparations.
Nobody ever wants to surrender their victim/virtue signaling status

That's not how the reparations worked and I attached the bill so that you could easily see that for yourself.

 

[EverettChris]

The story of this debate outside of the echo chambers is the clear bias of the two ABC moderators. Leftists are loving it but Kamala hasn’t really said anything of note and it’s making the moderators work hard for her.
It’s a joke how bad our media is when this garbage is supposedly the standard.