General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDear BLM, I just discovered there is an old, white, tough on crime millionaire
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by petronius (a host of the General Discussion forum).
who advocated the exact polices that NAACP says has been destructive to Black lives.
Hillary Clinton is nearly 70 years old, white, with an estimated net worth of $31,195,006 in 2010.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/summary.php?CID=N00000019&year=2010
A supporter of conservative economic, law enforcement and military policies, in 1994 she proclaimed:
"We need more police, we need more and tougher prison sentences for repeat offenders...
"We need more prisons..."
"three strikes... has to be part of the plan."
Here's what the NAACP says:
Racial Disparities in Incarceration
African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population
African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites
Contributing Factors
"Get tough on crime" and "war on drugs" policies
Mandatory minimum sentencing, especially disparities in sentencing for crack and powder cocaine possession
"Three Strikes"/habitual offender policies
Zero Tolerance policies as a result of perceived problems of school violence; adverse affect on black children.
http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet
Ms. Clinton, an older, white, multi-millionaire said the solution to the economic injustice against Blacks is...
CORPORATE TAX BREAKS AND PROFIT SHARING
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-propose-incentives-corporate-100002119.html
Seriously. She said that.
So, all you need is a job at a profitable corporation. Like Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan.
Ok, perhaps now you can see that Hillary Clinton's ideas for helping the Black community aren't helping, they are hurting.
There is a middle class civil rights leader whose career has been spent not being a multi-multi-millionaire, or Walmart director, or Wall Street lobbyist at $250,000 a pop, not advocating sending jobs to Asia, but as someone who advocated for civil rights for over 40 years.
Not only that - this person believes sending jobs from the US to low wage workers in Asia harms non-rich people as evidenced by the devastation in Black communities around the country.
Bernie Sanders has an estimated net worth of $429,004 in 2010.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/summary.php?CID=N00000528&year=2010
Here's what Sanders is proposing to support the Black community:
Invest in our crumbling infrastructure with a major program to create jobs by rebuilding roads, bridges, water systems, waste water plants, airports, railroads and schools.
Transform energy systems away from fossil fuels to create jobs while beginning to reverse global warming and make the planet habitable for future generations.
Develop new economic models to support workers in the United States instead of giving tax breaks to corporations which ship jobs to low-wage countries overseas.
Make it easier for workers to join unions and bargain for higher wages and benefits.
Raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour so no one who works 40 hours a week will live in poverty.
Provide equal pay for women workers who now make 78 percent of what male counterparts make.
Reform trade policies that have shuttered more than 60,000 factories and cost more than 4.9 million decent-paying manufacturing jobs.
Make college affordable and provide affordable child care to restore Americas competitive edge compared to other nations.
Break up big banks. The six largest banks now have assets equivalent to 61 percent of our gross domestic product, over $9.8 trillion. They underwrite more than half the mortgages in the country and issue more than two-thirds of all credit cards.
Join the rest of the industrialized world with a Medicare-for-all health care system that provides better care at less cost.
Expand Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and nutrition programs.
Reform the tax code based on wage earners ability to pay and eliminate loopholes that let profitable corporations stash profits overseas and pay no U.S. federal income taxes.
If we are going to address the issue of crime in low-income areas and in African-American communities, it might be a good idea that instead of putting military style equipment into police departments in those areas, we start investing in jobs for the young people there who desperately need them, Sanders said.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/215648-sanders-ferguson-shows-need-for-black-unemployment-bill
By BLM's words and actions, it seems like there is obvious confusion between these two people:
- Bernie Sanders, a humble, civil rights leader pushing for jobs
- Hillary Clinton, a Wall Street promoter and millionaire who pushed for-profit prisons.
I'm obligated to point this out to you.
Thank you for your time and here is more reading for your interest:
The Clinton dynastys horrific legacy: How tough-on-crime politics built the worlds largest prison system
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/13/the_clinton_dynastys_horrific_legacy_how_tough_on_crime_politics_built_the_worlds_largest_prison/
Why Hillary Clinton Lacks Credibility On Criminal Justice Reform
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2015/04/30/why-hillary-clinton-lacks-credibility-on-criminal-justice-reform/
mmonk
(52,589 posts)and I'm a Bernie supporter.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)about the whole BLM thing, it was clearly organized by those who want to do harm to Clinton's political rivals.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Clinton camp. There is legitimacy to the movement.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)represent the problem as rich white men as opposed to Clinton, only makes sense in upside-down land.
Had there been a statement holding Clinton accountable along with these two men, that would have done everything in the world to patch things over.
That hasn't happened and the Clinton groups are shoving it Sanders face.
So much for positive. It is now smells like the shit it is.
While Clintonistas are crying for civility, that is just a way to hold back the MASSIVE backlog of horrible policies she advocates.
But at the first opening, we see what that really means.
BLM may think this is win-win, but it's too late now to claim they were innocently protesting.
Damage is done.
I should have listened to some of the very wise members of this website who were sounding the alarm that this wasn't right.
I didn't want to believe it. But now I see what Clinton and her team will do to smear her rivals.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)in the movement is a Clinton supporter? If not, your job is to realize the reasons behind the attraction of the movement is real and work them towards our side or someone similar.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)1. Hillary should have come to defense of Sanders and O'Malley. Immediately.
2. BLM should have made it crystal clear that even Hillary is part of of the problem.
Those two very simple things would have healed this over faster than 3x antibiotic. Instead, I now see that Clinton and her team took great pleasure at the infection which developed.
Meanwhile, every other word from Bernie is defending his running mates.
There is no simple "win them over". That time has past.
Now - if anyone at BLM and Hillary's team who is reading this post will issue the two statements I have outlined above, then I will be happy to credit them for doing the right thing.
Let's see.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)That is not the argument I am making. Forget the Third Way'ers for a moment. We need to blaze our own trail if there is to be change. We need not alienate anyone, even if someone misjudges us. Be above the fray and fight for the truth. It wouldn't take that many adjustments to your message.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)It will probably get locked as off topic here.
Good piece though. Thanks/
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)This post has a scent o' pine to it.
Sid
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)... I'm going to HAVE to send your name to these guys:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6990793
They're "taking notes". (And NAMES, I think. That's the implication, anyway.) (Psssst: don't worry: DU says it's OK)
Sorry.... but you don't want to corrupt the body politic w. these politically incorrect observations. Do You?
Or DO you!
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)No. It's real life. On DU. At the present time. July 20, 2015.
(Relax: I was kidding about turning you in.)
But DU is NOT, it appears.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)besides, NSA is waaaay ahead of them.
pnwmom
(110,321 posts)You think they need a lecture from you?
Or do you think they're insincere -- they're really part of a huge pro-Hillary conspiracy?
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)Hang on while I find Hillary's defense of Sanders and O'Malley, it's here somewhere, hang on
.
.
.
.
.
still looking...
.
.
.
.
.
.
little help here...?
.
.
.
.
Hmmm, well I'll keep looking.
Anyway, I'm sure BLM mentioned Hillary as one of those people ignoring their concerns... let's see
.
.
Internet is slow today, I guess
.
.
.
hmmm, did I pay my bill?
.
.
.
.
it must be here, surely they'd try to show they aren't biased or organizing with a large well funded, political group...
.
.
I give up, maybe I need windows 8?
pnwmom
(110,321 posts)initiative, that was anything but progressive and had negative effects on the African American community?
Both O'Malley and Sanders had seen how Hillary was previously criticized by BLM people and others for saying "all lives matter." So I was astounded that at Netroots O'Malley one-upped Hillary by saying "white lives matter" and even Sanders didn't make the most of his opportunity to connect with that audience. Instead, he threatened to leave.
It isn't fair to blame Hillary for the way these two flubbed their opportunity to make themselves look less tone-deaf than she had been.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Who is shooting up black churches, arresting and killing black people in police stations, arguing in favor of keeping the Confederate flag?
Is it
A) Racist cops?
B) White supremacists?
C) Socialists?
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Obama wants all their names in the national instant criminal background check system, cuz they are dangerous.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-gun-law-20150718-story.html?ref=yfp#page=1
bigtree
(94,656 posts)...with what was her husband's policy of 'building more prisons' locking up more people (including nonviolent offenders) for longer stretches, opposing parole, expanding the death penalty, putting more cops on the street, and implementing a comprehensive anti-drug strategy.
The December statement the article referred to doesn't appear to advocating 'both' as the article claimed, but actually a repudiation of her husband's administration's crime policies.
I think that the results not only at the federal level but at the state level have been an unacceptable increase in incarceration across the board, and now we have to address that .There were reasons why the Congress wanted to push through a certain set of penalties and increase prison construction, and there was a lot of support for that across a lot of communities because the crime rate in the early 90s was very high. And people were being victimized by crime in their homes, in their neighborhoods and their business. But weve got to take stock now of the consequences, so thats why I want to have a thorough review of all of the penalties.
This article and this post is dishonest and misleading as to her own views.
pnwmom
(110,321 posts)petronius
(26,700 posts)from GD, and should be posted in General Discussion: Primaries.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10134641
Please feel free to re-post in GDP. Thanks!