Is the Morning News Just Not Going to Cover the HUD Segregation Story?

Categories: Schutze

see_no.jpg
New motif to go over front doors of The Dallas Morning News' building?
Hey, I think I have waited about long enough for The Dallas Morning News to weigh in on the racial segregation complaint lodged against Dallas by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban development in early December. A month. Even allowing for Santa Claus and all, a month seems a bit long for the city's only daily newspaper to acknowledge the most important national story about Dallas since Larry Hagman died.

Could it be ... no! ... that the ownership of the paper is a bit chary of where this story might go, if they were to go somewhere with it? Given that the core of the HUD accusation is about downtown development, and given that top executives of the paper were major players in many of the events chronicled in the HUD complaint, it couldn't be the case ... could it ... that someone might have a big fat thumb on the scales?

To be fair, to be fair: Yes, the paper did do the unavoidable breaking news coverage the day after the HUD complaint hit the fan, with an absolutely adequate story by the new City Hall guy and former cop shop reporter, Scott Goldstein, laying out the basics. A day later in what I thought was a promising effort, Reese Dunklin did an interesting blog piece analyzing implications of the HUD investigative report in light of the city's previous history of federal litigation related to segregation.

But that's it? Oh, now, c'mon folks. You know better than that. This is a major story that cuts to the very nature of the city. Nobody quite gets where it came from. It's the sort of thing readers might gobble up.

In the old days when we had two dailies competing with each other in Dallas, they both would have assigned entire teams of editors and reporters to this thing the day it happened. And the best you can do in a month is a press release story and a blog item?

Let me tell you what I am worried about here. The four-year federal investigation that produced the scathing 29-page report released a month ago was kicked off by a set of accusations brought to HUD by a Dallas developer, Curtis Lockey. After his deal to redevelop a downtown tower was killed by the city in 2009, Lockey went to HUD and said Dallas killed his deal because he wouldn't agree to engage in racial segregation.

Since then and to this day, City Hall has maintained a united front and company line on the issue, insisting that Lockey's deal was killed because it was a bad deal, especially in its financial structure. A few days after the report came out when I spoke to former City Council member Angela Hunt about her own opposition to the Lockey deal -- a major factor in its defeat because the deal was in her district -- she was still insisting it was a bad deal.

The point here is that the federal investigators who produced the HUD report went over that accusation with a toothbrush and a microscope and came to the conclusion that it was bogus -- a pretext and a subterfuge to camouflage a policy of racial segregation downtown.

Am I saying I know who's right? No. But, look, it's pretty interesting. You've got everybody at City Hall insisting the Lockey deal was transparently bullshit. And then you've got a four-year federal investigation telling Dallas, "No, you're transparently bullshit. You killed Lockey's deal, because you wanted to keep black people, Hispanics and the disabled out of downtown while you misappropriated vast sums in federal money to build fancy condos for rich white people."

It's worth a story, what? Just to explain what got us here, which decisions put us in this position and who the people were who made those decisions? So now I get to my real concern.

On June 10, 2009, the death knell for the Lockey project was delivered by an obscure appointive board that controls downtown property tax incentives. The motion to kill Lockey's deal was made by Dallas architect Larry Good, who was chairman of the body.

Good gave his reasons that day. He said, "First is the design of the project itself. I don't believe that this is the right concept for this project at this point in time. Second I think the developers' lack of equity in the project, inability to service the note they already had, status of the project, lots of what ifs, are a concern, and I think we ought to steer clear of that. And third I think the request is simply too much money for one project at this point in time relative to the other things that are going to come before the [tax incentive board] and will be priorities for the [tax incentive board]. So I'm going to recommend that we send it on to council suggesting that they not approve this project."

Thing to know now: All of Good's justifications for killing this deal are rebutted in the HUD investigation and a related civil case. In fact the civil case presents evidence that Good's group was deliberately fudging its books to make it look like it had less money in the kitty than it really did.

Good sought a second for his motion. It came quickly from board member, Daniel J. Blizzard, a top executive of the company that owns The Dallas Morning News. The rest were all ayes and no nays. Lockey's deal was dead.

For years, Blizzard has been the executive assigned to carry out the downtown policies and dreams of recently retired Belo CEO Robert Decherd. Through Blizzard and Decherd, Belo has been perhaps the single most aggressive and important private party in a position to influence downtown development policy in the period covered by the HUD report. So we see where the sticky comes from, eh? This is a story any major daily newspaper worth its salt would jump all over, if it weren't afraid of jumping on its own tail.

I have a call in to Blizzard, but I think Belo may do one of those Park Cities things where they shut down for about a month in honor of Santa. I will let you know what I hear.

I'm not saying who's right, who's wrong. I am just saying, c'mon. You're not going to cover it? Are you kidding me?

My Voice Nation Help
57 comments
gordonhilgers
gordonhilgers

Dear Jim:  Do you remember the big court decision in which John Fullinweider led the city's homeless to court only to learn the City of Dallas had been banking HUD money slated to help homeless people transition from homelessness into an SRO?  It's been so long that I worked with HUD's Fort Worth regional director on clearing up in FIVE FREAKING MINUTES what it took the City no less than three entire hours of "bob and weave" tactics to avoid even mentioning the issue, not that I am angry at those people, but I've seen CYA tactics many times, and yes, that one did take the cake.  In fact, that one even ate the paper plate.  And the spork and then moved on to other people's slices. 

About eight years ago, I had a friend with schizophrenia named Bobbie.  She had been moved to the Westmoreland projects because, she said, her housing program had ended.  So I called the HUD Fort Worth regional representative again, and discovered, no, the program had not ended, but rather that the permanent housing help for those of us who suffer from mental or emotional illnesses (not fun!) who have been rendered homeless due to those illness...had a five-year funding cycle. 

I'm not tooting my horn here, but likely my short e-mails and telephone calls saved hundreds of absolutely defenseless people from being forced into living where the crack gangs rule.  It took about five minutes--kind of like Grecian Formula 14.  Why in the world would anyone send someone with schizophrenia into a stress-ridden area like Westmoreland? 

Who knows? 

In 2001, my DMN tag-team partner wanted to continue telling stories that would have helped to educate Dallas readers on issues surrounding the condition of homeless men, women and children--but she got vetoed time after time.  She finally left.  I don't blame her.  It was the old "keep it short" cattle crap.  It was the "nobody wants to read that stuff" cattle crap.  It was every excuse under the sun.  Moneyed interests may like to help ghettoized populations, but they don't want "the cat" out of the bag. 

I'm not firebagging the DMN.  It is a Conservative newspaper, one for Conservatives, even though no one there will admit this plain-as-day fact.  The DMN has always been a Conservative newspaper.  Even though the metroplex has gone blue, it has not done so due to lack of oxygen, the lack thereof that does tend to turn red blooded Americans into blue-veined Americans.  Then there is "the white blood". 

I will not go into the leukemia, but it is out there.  While I do understand special interests want to cash-in on natural gas, people are made out of fragile cells that do not respond well to benzene or radiation.  That kind of reasoned "backlash" is not about politics; it is about human rights in the U.S.  All of us have the human right to clean water and a dearth of small earthquakes. 

I have long felt a little blackballed by "The Big Snooze" because I had the moxie to get out there and protest the nuke in Glenrose, quite an ironic name for a host to a nuke.  I couldn't have given a flip about the so-called politics.  I am not surprised, however, how so-called "private interests" in media would rather go for the greenbacks than pay attention, especially in a mass media environment (what? Did I use THAT word?) that has been pummelled by the bean counter nation for around 33 years. 

Private interests v public responsibility. 

I think that little v has more to do with reactionary and revanchist politics in Dallas than anything else. 

roo_ster
roo_ster

Perhaps socially engineering neighborhoods from the federal level is a bad idea.

jtothejizzle
jtothejizzle

Jim: Dallas Morning News responded to you:


http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/12/my-2014-wish-more-gap-closing-in-dallas.html/


"But back to yesterday’s event … DMN reporter Scott Goldstein also asked the mayor for an update on where things stand with the HUD investigation of what seem to be troubling city practices. Weeditorialized on the accusations just after the news broke; this weekend we will have have an interview in our Points section with lawyer Mike Daniel, who has fought previous racial-segregation battles in court.

Here’s the latest on the city’s response to HUD, from Scott’s blog post:

Rawlings said he spoke last week with Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan. Despite the city’s disagreement with HUD on some of the findings, Rawlings said the goal is to do what the agency requires and come into compliance.

“We’ve got to get this behind us and that’s what he and I spoke about,” Rawlings said.

The mayor plans to visit with Donovan or one of his aides while he is in Washington for a conference in January. The city is also still working on a formal written response to be sent to HUD in the coming weeks.

For my part, I can’t wait to get former DMN city hall reporter Rudy Bush on board (he joins our department Feb. 3) and Tod Robberson back from his Texan of the Year assignment so we can redouble our efforts on all things “Bridging Dallas’ North-South Gap,” including how many of those HUD accusations are true."

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

I think Texans should be "encouraged" to buy hot sauce made in (gasp!) New York.  Maybe a 25% tax on locally made hot sauce will do it?  Particularly if publicly-funded infrastructure was used to facilitate the manufacture of the local hot sauce.


After all, they didn't build that.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

Texas is applying a new and improved tax on mixed drinks next year - 15% (actually 14.95%).  Why?  For your own good of course.  

So we move to shots.  Why?  People don't like being told what to do.

Young affluent people populate downtowns across the nation.  Here in Dallas, the average age downtown is 37 and they make $95,000 a year.  Why do the downtowns attract this age and income group?  Because developers have found a demand they are filling with supply.

But those damned old people (empty nesters) are also piling in.  Hey, they already got their (retirement) communities with their own laws to keep out the young.  You have to be 55 or older to get in.

The utes are tolerant but HEY!  Not too many grandmas please.  This is our neighborhood!  It's why we moved to downtown (if you can afford it) or Deep Ellum and The Cedars (if you can't) in the first place.  I don't want my mother-in-law living next to me.  Besides.  They all have that distinctive smell - death.

And what's up with all these ethnic neighborhoods?  Italians, East Europeans, Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese?  Hell, they even have their own radio stations!  Why don't you go bust them up?  And within those neighborhoods they have their own affluent sections.  What's up with that?

So why does ANY neighborhood form in the first place?

Because humans are tribal.

Somewhat tolerant but still tribal.  

And as the Youth are want to say, "You aren't the boss a me, man!"

I want to live around people I want to live around.  

E Pluribus Unum is a fine thing indeed, but enough is enough.

Federalizing (engineering) neighborhoods in the name of fairness runs counter to human nature so, good luck with that man.  We'll put up with a little bit of that however, if you degrade or destroy the reason why I showed up in the first place, the hive will just buzz away.

In the case of downtown, where the queens go I go.  So don't push out the babes.




bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

I gotta disagree with the statement that it's interesting.  It's not.  It's a tempest in a tea cup. 

Both the white and the black leaders agree that they should segregate.  And the communities they lead want it that way, too.

It's only a few outsiders who say it should be otherwise.


Personally, I think they need to grow up - but integration is not an option at this point and this is what it takes to get the two, inbred communities to coexist side by side.


The solution is education - not legislation.

makinshade
makinshade

Here is the Dallas Architect Larry Good we are talkin' about:


http://www.gff.com/ 


I wonder if he is a racist or if he was just carrying out orders from Angela Hunt?


I also wonder if he receives architecture fees from downtown clients (developers) that have projects that are funded by the downtown connection TIF? I would bet so! 


If so, that would have to violate ethical standards with the American Institute of Architects: http://www.aia.org/ at the very least. 


At the worst, there might be something illegal about that? 

puppetmaster09
puppetmaster09

Angela Hunt appointed every TIF Board member that carried out the lynching of this project, except Myron Mims, who was appointed by then mayor, Tom Leppert.  


Her district........her appointees........14:1...........you think she had her hand on the scales???? Come on, no way!?!?!?!?! Not the princess of District 14.

TheCredibleHulk
TheCredibleHulk topcommenter

Lockey's deal could have been, at the same time, on the right side of the HUD requirements but still not a great idea for downtown Dallas.

I suspect that is the very distinction that the DMN is not interested in clarifying.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

You'll have to wait for the New York Times piece that will appear in the Dallas Morning News.

Then the Ed Board will weigh in.  A balanced piece no doubt, and leaving no doubt they are all over all sides of the issue.  It will tee off with their big chagrin, hitting hard in the middle with multiple "on the other hands", and winding up with a blazing "we'll just have to wait and see".



dallasuto
dallasuto

I get that a DMN executive had a big hand in what has happened here, but doesn't the family that owns DMN have most of their holdings in Downtown Dallas? 


If so, they probably believed blacks downtown would bring down their asset values. 

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@gordonhilgers

That's a pretty good rant - very factual and all.  But there's a reason they want to "keep it short" - because everyone's already aware of the issues, so restating it at length doesn't really educate anyone.

As your bipolar friend can probably attest to, conservatives don't see mental illness (or any other illness) as a legitimate handicap... and despite being "blue", Dallas is still overwhelmingly conservative.

So the problem isn't about educating officials, it's about changing people's values.

The way we can best do that is by recognizing religious extremism as a legitimate mental illness.  Because the only way to get conservatives to have sympathy for the handicapped is to handicap them.


gordonhilgers
gordonhilgers

@roo_sterI understand your concern.  Actual truth is, the federal government has a lot of experience under its two wings, and attempts to keep things local is only a controlling manuever. 

Detroit, for example, did not collapse because of the Democrats; Detroit has had serious economic problems for over 50 years, including unions that inappropriately ask hard-bitten auto industry CEOs and owners for too much; the process of tax devolution, in which federal losses in revenue kick needed responsibilities to the states, which, in Texas especially, then kick the responsibilites to the counties and cities. 

It could be Detroit is the "space kitten" in the coal mine.  After the War on Poverty began in 1964, big problems arose in the U.S. because we had never undertaken such a big responsibility before.  We've had to try many different tacks here, but being denied tax revenues only turns the keys to the big yellow bus to the banks, which in turn, decide to conduct class war from above.  Interesting book: Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites", published in the late Eighties, tells how the very wealthy in the U.S. are now far too removed from the day-to-day realities of an ever-expanding underclass. 

When too-big-to-fail banks don't lend, the obvious reason is that it is more profitable to manipulate inflation than to lend.  Inflation is a new term for an old phenomenon: gas. 

I really do not see how the federal government can do much of anything to provide for "the general welfare" without money, and with jobs stimulus packages refused by Congress no less then 19 times since 2009, it is up to the market solutions crowd to take-on some responsibility--even if it is not profitable.  That's why the government does these things: keeping the trains running--not profitable; helping the downtrodden--not profitable; building affordable housing for poor people--not profitable. 

Meanwhile the gentrification drivers continue to waste old, traditional neighborhoods and beam, "This is an exciting situation!" 

For whom?  Surely not the poor who are being bandied out to the fringes by the lunatic fringe. 

Antisocial "freedom" is getting to be a big problem: We need publically responsible actions from the private sector.  How can we "privatize" if the private sector is deluded by profit over every little other thing? 

jtothejizzle
jtothejizzle

@roo_ster 


The feds are not "social engineering" neighborhoods; this is just a right wing talking point.  

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@jtothejizzle 


Just read the Ed Board's take.  Right down the pike - initial chagrin, basic reporting of the facts - then milquetoast big finish but wait!

The reason got clean past them.  Dispirit Impact is the new measure.

and the hammer.

On the upside - GO MIKE RAWLINGS . . . BABY!

Let's just get this behind us and move on.

The only problem is, there is new sheriff in town and he is in no mood to cut a deal.

jobe3
jobe3

We know who is a Rush Limbough / Sarah Palin student!!!

MaxNoDifference
MaxNoDifference

@holmantxThe Mixed Beverage Tax has always been there.  It was 14% of the gross sales price and was hidden in the price of your drink (be it a cocktail, shot, beer wine, etc).  Now HB 3572 changes the formulation a little.  As of 1,Jan.2014, an alcoholic beverage served in most establishments will have a 8.25% add on sales tax and a 6.7% hidden tax.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@bvckvs 

And yet when I look at the burgeoning Dallas suburbs I see integration everywhere I turn -- black with white, native  born with immigrant, Christian with Muslim, a crazy-quilt of integration that seems to work out quite well. It's only when you look backward,k back in time and back into the city, that you see the stubborn motif of segregation and ethnic tension. If you think white people and black people are really fundamentally unable to be comfortable together, I would suggest you need to talk to more people under 50. 

makinshade
makinshade

@bvckvs 


HUD dollars are "legislated" to reduce segregation, not increase it as City Hall did................so, the "solution is" not to commit fraud! 

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@TheCredibleHulk 

Yeah, that was part of the HUD analysis. They sized up the Lockey deal compared to a series of other deals that City hall treated very favorably and decided Lockey's deal was at least as good as those, maybe better, except that it included the amount of affordable housing required by law. By the way, HUD's definition of affordable is a sliding scale that includes X amount of truly low income but other amounts of  moderate income. A lot of the people kept out of downtown by City Hall's policies were working people who are not poor but also not affluent. The profile City all was going for was fancy-schmancy, paid for with federal housing dollars. You can see where that might get us into a tight corner.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@dallasuto 

Big thing there, if you really and truly believe that black people and white people can't occupy the same real estate, is not to take hundreds of millions in federal desegregation money, sign an affidavit every year swearing you are spending it for desegregation, and then spend it instead to increase segregation. Put another way: why should the federal government subsidize segregation?

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@JimSX @bvckvs 


My sister came to visit with her 9 year old.  She gets on my computer and asks "where's 2929 Hickory?"  

"down the street . . . its the Austin Street Shelter."

There are 12 registered sex offenders living there.

I said, "Piker."

She wouldn't live in my neighborhood. 

she . . . discriminated.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@JimSX @bvckvs


I didn't say that stuff about whites and blacks being fundamentally unable.. blah, blah, blah.   That's just something you pretended I said so that you'd have something to disagree with.

As far as needing to talk to folks under 50, most of the folks I deal with are under 18 - so that's just another delusionary statement - something you told yourself so that you could rationalize the disagreement..

But your point about integration working in the burbs is fairly true.  MS13 and the Cryps get along darned well here in Lakewood.  The white supremists don't like it, but they've pretty much been cowed and shamed into keeping their racist mouths shut about it - outside of church.

The fact is that the South Dallas Evangelicals (young and old) hate white people, and the North Dallas conservatives (young and old) are scared shitless of non-whites.  So when they elect officials, they elect officials who are willing keep the segregation going.
I'm not saying it's right - it's not.  But there's no denying that it's the status quo - or that trying to change it through housing regulations isn't working.
The way to change it is through education and time.  That means making sure the upcoming generation gets good information and that, if their families won't allow them to be educated, that they be removed from those families.  That's how we got the Indians to integrate.  It was brutal - but it was the only way.


The lesson we can take away from that is that forced integration is every bit as destructive as forced segregation.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@makinshade No, HUD was created to ensure housing for all Americans, without regard for race.

Sure, there are some liberal outsiders and race-baiters who want to expand it into something more.  But, that's why it's such a mess.


bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@JimSX@dallasuto

Calling on folks to just not take money as some kind of moral protest doesn't ever actually work out in real life.

CelebrateDivershitty
CelebrateDivershitty

@JimSX - all good white "progressive" libtard bloggers have faith in their hearts that every place is improved when you add a bunch of blacks. 

dallasuto
dallasuto

@JimSX @dallasuto 


Good point. This is why Dallas is so much trouble, they used HUD's money to "perpetuate segregation." HUD cannot allow that, now that they have findings confirming same. If they did, HUD would be held liable for allowing it.  

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@MaxNoDifference @holmantx 


B-b-b-but, the drink ain't mixed!?!  


It should be taxed at the 6+% rate like beer and wine.  The big sin tax is on mixed-drinks, as defined.

MaxNoDifference
MaxNoDifference

@holmantx   The actual increase in drink prices for the consumer will be 8.25% in most cases.  I doubt that many bars or restaurants will lower their prices to account for the sales tax impact on their patrons.  The net result will be a 7.3% increase in profits on each drink sold in most cases.

  As far as the loophole goes, I used to have to calculate the Beverage Gross Receipts Tax every month and have sat through too many TABC and State Comptroller tax audits.  The state really doesn't care what is being served as long as they get every tax dollar.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@MaxNoDifference @holmantx  


http://tinyurl.com/l3w2d67


I like my loophole.


Sec. 183.021. TAX IMPOSED ON MIXED BEVERAGES. A tax at the rate of 14 percent is imposed on the gross receipts of a permittee received from the sale, preparation, or service of mixed beverages or from the sale, preparation, or service of ice or nonalcoholic beverages that are sold, prepared, or served for the purpose of being mixed with an alcoholic beverage and consumed on the premises of the permittee.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@holmantx@bvckvs

re:  "If race is the culprit...".


Race is never the culprit - and can't ever be.  Race takes no sides and commits no offenses.  It's just an idea - it's not a person.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@bvckvs @holmantx  


In March of this year, HUD introduced into the Federal Register a new rule that "enhances" Disparate Impact as the measure to secure quotas based on race. 

http://www.huduser.org/portal/affht_pt.html

They have gone nationwide with its enforcement.  It is race-based quotas on a grand scale, and it is outcome based on racial mix.

If race is not the culprit then the measurement device is not valid.

If it is Income and class that moves the needle then no community can advance under Disparate Impact as a measure.

We should settle with HUD in the cheapest way out we can.

and don't take any more monies, but that no doubt is problematic from the local politicians' standpoint, no matter their race.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@holmantx

No, the HUD rules are not based "solely" on race.  In truth, economic status is the primary consideration.  You know that.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

@makinshade @holmantx @JimSX @bvckvs 


The morale of the story is that HUD is using racial composition statistics solely to determine whether a neighborhood is "fair" in its local housing policies when race may not be the prime motivator in neighborhood formation.

If this is true, then no city can take the money without violating the unit of measurement.

Particularly when politicians of all races are accepting the monies to enhance their local power base.  

makinshade
makinshade

@holmantx @JimSX @bvckvs 


holmantx -  you need to really do your homework, cuz your really off point, and missing the mark. Your just going off on wasteful rants.....................

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@JimSX@bvckvs

Yeah-  this isn't about slavery. This is about what the people choose for themselves.  That's the exact opposite of slavery.

It's a particularly ironic statement since MOST of the demands for segregation are coming from the overwhelmingly black, South Dallas Evangelical community.

Like our Mexican brothers and sisters, they say they want to preserve their heritage - and there's not a damn thing wrong with that.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@JimSX

That, of course, ignores the fact that the government and the people are one and the same.  So, when you say "city hall", I hear "the people of Dallas".
To accurately direct your outrage, you should name names - instead of blaming the building.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Dallas was integrating naturally from 1980 to 2000 until City Hall adopted a policy of forced segregation.

Sotiredofitall
Sotiredofitall topcommenter

@JimSX  You missed a key point "forced integration is every bit as destructive as forced segregation"    

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@bvckvs 

"Education and time" worked really well with slavery, too.

bvckvs
bvckvs topcommenter

@JimSX@bvckvs@makinshade

Ignores is the correct word.  I am no more interested in favoritism towards blacks than I was in favoritism towards whites.

I used to believe in affirmative action.  Then one day when I was in the Navy, I saw a borderline retard promoted over a highly qualified petty officer - and it wrecked my ship's supply department... as well as my belief in affirmative action.


Now, I'm a big believer in the right to free association.

MaxNoDifference
MaxNoDifference

@holmantx@JimSX@bvckvs@makinshadeThey are neighbors who ran afoul of the law or don't care about it.  They became neighbor-hoods.
  Neighbors who wear jackets with head coverings are neighborhoodies and shouldn't be caught carrying iced tea & Skittles.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@bvckvs @makinshade  

Your point of view ignores or is ignorant of Title VIII of the 1968 Civil Rights Act amended in 1988, subsequent executive orders and case law, all of which establish a mandate to end racial segregation as the law of the land. No one ever created a federal agency in this country "to ensure housing for all Americans." The mission of HUD is to  "build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination." http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/about/mission


TheCredibleHulk
TheCredibleHulk topcommenter

@puppetmaster09 

*chuckle*

Are you under the impression that I am defending the city? I should have used my "cynic" font.

puppetmaster09
puppetmaster09

@TheCredibleHulk @JimSX 


Nice argument: "Wide scale systemic segregating policies by City Hall to keep this kind of housing out of downtown (with an excellent track record), but this project had legitimate reasons to kill it."  Good luck with that one!!! You should submit your application to the City Attorneys Office, you'd fit right in. 

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@hurleypic 

Don't try to argue with this guy. He has a meat cleaver permanently lodged in his frontal lobe.

hurleypic
hurleypic

How bout Larry Good or Dan Blizzard?

CelebrateDivershitty
CelebrateDivershitty

@if6were9 - No.  Apparently you believe that increased numbers of blacks improves a place, though.  That's why I call people like you naive and uninformed.

jobe3
jobe3

I would much rather have the US Treasury paying/owing me than the City of Dallas. Regardless, that Dallas has a 3 billion dollar annual operating budget.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...