"Lack of moral character", that is such a broad statement, against an entire "race", meaning "color" group (not even a party or political system; which are things people choose to hold, or even a generation, in which morals can change from one to the other). And among people who insist "race" should be irrelevant and is only made into a thing by the other side. (Also, the insinuation that all who are shot by the police simply didn't obey the law).
(All have sinned, and the Christ-rejecting Israelites of New Testament times thought they had a stronger "moral character" than the lowly gentiles, half-breeds such as the Samaritans, etc. They could look at those other groups' sins, compared to them upholding the Divine Law. —at least on the surface. They too thought their nation was being "cursed" because of everyone else; both the immoral "others", as well as traitors and compromisers within).
Its good to see the need for entrepreneurialism encouraged (and there are those in the community who advocate for this). But if the pre Civil Rights period was so good, and it was liberal "handouts" afterward that ruined everything, then what about things such as "Black Wall street", where in places in the South, they were starting to build their communities and create independence. The rioters who burned them down weren't black looters or liberals; but people upholding the "old values". You can go back even further, into the 19th century, where you even were starting to get as much as black governors in the South, but in that post-Reconstruction period, people rose up and ended all that, and found new ways to recreate slavery-like conditions (often driven by stereotypes of black crime and immorality ["lack of moral character"]; e.g. "Birth of a Nation", which would ruin their nation, so for God and for country, they had to suppress these people. This, even back when their "families" were stronger. They were still seen that way, so that's not where these judgments originally came from. And yet the stuff being done is what would slowly chip away at the strength of the family; not just the liberal attempts to remidiate it, generations later).
So whatever one thinks of the benefit or problems of "social programs", (which have been greatly overrated as it is, as to the extents of the effect on the economy, and who has been getting the most of it; and why are people still harping on this now, given all the othe rpressing issues), you cannot blame all of these problems only on one side, and ignore all of these other factors.