2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton acknowledges 1994 crime bill led to mass incarceration of minorities,
tells Daily News editorial board the bill also did good things.
Hillary Clinton on Saturday conceded her husbands 1994 crime bill had the unintended consequence of mass incarceration.
Speaking before the Daily News editorial board, Clinton said the bill did a lot of good things like adding more cops to the streets and creating a ban on assault weapons.
But she said it also led states to enact policies that resulted in more people, especially people of color, being imprisoned for nonviolent crimes.
That was not as apparent at the time, but part of being a responsible decision maker is to keep track of whats happening, she said. And now I think its clear there were some consequences that we do have to address.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/hillary-clinton-1994-crime-bill-led-mass-incarceration-article-1.2594729
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)rofl
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)What a pair!
Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)all she needs to do is admit it was INTENTIONAL.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)New Soap Opera: As The Triangle Turns
djean111
(14,255 posts)was brought up at all.
What a pair.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...maybe we should elect him?
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)beedle
(1,235 posts)But they sure are more than capable of mowing down lots of innocent people who get in the way.
Triangulation: throwing the weak under the bus for political gain.
How do you like me now my AA firewall - Hillary 2016
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,027 posts)One of these days we will get to discussing policing that benefits and protects everybody and discriminates against no one. What a wonderful world this will be. It is not beyond our grasp.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)like a Wednesday in mid-April 1994.
Demsrule86
(70,842 posts)What should he explain?
Zira
(1,054 posts)TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...but because it was an omnibus bill that contained other things like the Violence Against Women Act and various weapon bans and bans on certain types of particularly dangerous ammunition he felt he had to vote for it.
Zira
(1,054 posts)here:
Both Sanders and Hillary Clinton, who was then serving as first lady, supported the crime bill at the time. Stephanopoulos, a former official in the Clinton White House, asked Sanders if he had any second thoughts about doing so.
Well, that bill was one of these bills that had good things in it and it had bad things in it, Sanders replied. If I had voted against that bill, you would be asking me, Bernie, why did you vote against the ban on assault weapons?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-super-predators-sanders_us_570a67a2e4b0836057a17d1e
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...and while it did have negative consequences, I don't know what I would have done in Sanders shoes and don't envy that position.
Zira
(1,054 posts)You are correct.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)beedle
(1,235 posts)Will it do her campaign any good in the immediate 2 weeks to call for the government to stop locking up people? She's not going to waste a good 'triangulation' issue of it's not going to bring about immediate positive results ... for her.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)rates they were using illegal drugs and committing robberies and murders there would have been a move to rescind many of the portions of that bill sooner. But one must still remember the many, many decent black working men and women and their elderly who were living in neighborhoods being terrorized by gangs, and yes some super predators. Clinton had pressure from both the right and the left to help curb crime and gun violence.
beedle
(1,235 posts)and pressure by someone who was against the lock ups since the bill was first introduced, to 'evolve' (like a light switch evolves from "on" to "off" to this new position?
So next big spike in crime, will she 'evolve' back to zealous imprisonment based almost entirely on race? No? How can we trust that since she 'evolves' so quickly back and forth in a (political) instance? If only we had someone we could trust not to flip-flop based on what's politicly convenient.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)timlot
(456 posts)a First Lady has no vote. No vote for NAFTA, Crime Bill, or even her own health care proposal. She couldn't vote for it.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Like saying those kids were "super predators" who must be "brought to heel":
How about you find one single instance of Bernie pushing that racist bullshit and get back to me?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)desmiller
(747 posts)each person, including Clinton, does not have to be in a position to vote to support it. n/t
Aerows
(39,961 posts)if they have a memory.
Which many of us had prior to the internet.
It has expanded post internet, but stupidity isn't a strange curse that people who have always followed such matters are afflicted with.
It only afflicts dumb people, or people who are paid to be dumb.
beedle
(1,235 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Oh please. The private prison industry feeds the Clinton's. Such liars they are when exposed. Mission Accomplished. And us Dem's have to read this shit day in and day out. Lies, lies, lies. Whenever Hillary Coattails opens her mouth, she's lying.
jfern
(5,204 posts)beedle
(1,235 posts)See ... look at the white crack dealers (and one rapist) those nice black navel officers are escorting off to prison.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)they sit on so many fences that cattle around the country refuse to charge them because they're habituated
Response to insta8er (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed