I haven't done any research on this...but it does seem ridiculous that the plaintiffs don't have to have proof...just a feeling they were discriminated against.
RUSH: It's from Chatsworth Osborne Jr.'s website, The Daily Caller.
"As part of 'a new era of civil rights' at the Department of
Agriculture, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced Monday that
Hispanic and women farmers and ranchers who believe," simply believe,
"USDA discriminated against them can file claims to get a piece of at
least $1.33 billion in cash awards and tax relief payments and up to
$160 million in farm debt relief, beginning this week.
"Women and Hispanic ranchers and farmers..." You know, there gobs of
'em out there. There are women ranchers all over the place and Hispanic
ranchers everywhere out there. "Women and Hispanic ranchers and farmers
who feel the agency denied their loan or loan servicing applications
because of their race or gender at various periods from 1981 to 2000 can
file claims alleging discrimination from Sept. 24, 2012, to March 25,
2013, for a slice of the payout. ...
"In February 2011, Vilsack announced the historic 'path to justice
for Hispanic and women farmers' to offer them an outlet to receive
compensation for past wrongs without having to go to federal court,"
without having to prove discrimination. All these people have to do is
say they think they were discriminated against and they get some money.
This is buying votes during the election from Obama's stash.
Now, this is all part of the Pigford settlement. You remember the
black farmers were the first bunch to be able to claim this. Remember
what was her name, Shirley something or other? I forget her name. This
was a big cause celebre of Andrew Breitbart's, if I recall. Breitbart
proved that there were a bunch of people that had never been farmers who
were claiming they were discriminated against as farmers. Shirley
Sherrod. That's right. So these people...
It's reparations, in a disguised way. All of this stems from Ronaldus
Magnus having done away with the civil rights division in the loan
office of the USDA in 1981. The laws against discrimination were still
on the books, there was still a civil rights division in the Department
of Justice, but because there was no civil rights division present at
the agriculture department, it's assumed that there was discrimination.
Nothing has to be proved!
Honestly, folks, nothing has to be proved. It was just assumed that
there was discrimination. "If there was a black farmer, he had to be
discriminated against." Now, if there's an Hispanic farmer, he had to be
discriminated against. We don't need any proof. We just know it
happened because America's a rotten country. A female rancher? Don't
have to prove discrimination! We know it happened because she was a
woman. America's unfair to women, and so, here's your money.
That is what the Pigford settlement is all about. It's just the
assumption that America is unfair and discriminatory. There was never
any proof that there was discrimination in the USDA. It was just
assumed. So this suit, the Pigford suit, goes back to Reagan taking the
civil rights division in the loan office out of the USDA. Now,
apparently there were hundreds of thousands of farmers from all walks of
life who were discriminated against by the loan department of the USDA
in those 18 years between 1981 and 1999.
Now, if that's true, who was doing the discriminating? The
government! Government bureaucrats. Who knew they were so damn bigoted?
And what was the USDA doing giving out loans, anyway? Were there no
banks to do this? So this is outrageous to me. The agricultural
department under Obama is opening up a new line of giveaway money, this
time to Hispanic and women farmers and ranchers who "believe" that USDA
discriminated against them.
I'm not making this up, folks. They don't have to have any proof.
There isn't any. It was just assumed. That's what the whole Pigford case
was about. It was just assumed that there was disc'imination.
(interruption) Well, if you think you were discriminated against, can
you claim it? No, 'cause you weren't a farmer, Snerdley. Well...
(laughing) You grow fruit? In your backyard, you grow crops? Well, for
all I know, you could make a claim! Well, no. No. No. 'Cause it's 1981
to 1999, when Reagan shut it down. It's '81 to '99. That's when this