Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

Michelle Alexander, author of the seminal  The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness wrote this article for the Nation. I thought it was worth a share, because it pinpoints some of the issues with Clinton (and also Sanders' non-commitment to reparations and the Democratic Party's failures):

What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans? Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities? Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?

No. Quite the opposite.

Continuing Reagan's legacy:

 On the campaign trail, Bill Clinton made the economy his top priority and argued persuasively that conservatives were using race to divide the nation and divert attention from the failed economy. In practice, however, he capitulated entirely to the right-wing backlash against the civil-rights movement and embraced former president Ronald Reagan’s agenda on race, crime, welfare, and taxes—ultimately doing more harm to black communities than Reagan ever did.

Increasing federal and state prison inmates:

 Bill Clinton presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history. Clinton did not declare the War on Crime or the War on Drugs—those wars were declared before Reagan was elected and long before crack hit the streets—but he escalated it beyond what many conservatives had imagined possible. He supported the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack versus powder cocaine, which produced staggering racial injustice in sentencing and boosted funding for drug-law enforcement.

Clinton championed the idea of a federal “three strikes” law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who “were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.”

When Clinton left office in 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. Human Rights Watch reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison, even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level in 1983. All of the presidents since 1980 have contributed to mass incarceration, but as Equal Justice Initiative founder Bryan Stevenson recently observed, “President Clinton’s tenure was the worst.”

Judging Hilary:

Some might argue that it’s unfair to judge Hillary Clinton for the policies her husband championed years ago. But Hillary wasn’t picking out china while she was first lady. She bravely broke the mold and redefined that job in ways no woman ever had before. She not only campaigned for Bill; she also wielded power and significant influence once he was elected, lobbying for legislation and other measures. That record, and her statements from that era, should be scrutinized. In her support for the 1994 crime bill, for example, she used racially coded rhetoric to cast black children as animals. “They are not just gangs of kids anymore,” she said. “They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘super-predators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.”

Despite claims that radical changes in crime and welfare policy were driven by a desire to end big government and save taxpayer dollars, the reality is that the Clinton administration didn’t reduce the amount of money devoted to the management of the urban poor; it changed what the funds would be used for. Billions of dollars were slashed from public-housing and child-welfare budgets and transferred to the mass-incarceration machine. By 1996, the penal budget was twice the amount that had been allocated to food stamps. During Clinton’s tenure, funding for public housing was slashed by $17 billion (a reduction of 61 percent), while funding for corrections was boosted by $19 billion (an increase of 171 percent), according to sociologist Loïc Wacquant “effectively making the construction of prisons the nation’s main housing program for the urban poor.”

[...]

Perhaps most alarming, Clinton also made it easier for public-housing agencies to deny shelter to anyone with any sort of criminal history (even an arrest without conviction) and championed the “one strike and you’re out” initiative, which meant that families could be evicted from public housing because one member (or a guest) had committed even a minor offense. People released from prison with no money, no job, and nowhere to go could no longer return home to their loved ones living in federally assisted housing without placing the entire family at risk of eviction. Purging “the criminal element” from public housing played well on the evening news, but no provisions were made for people and families as they were forced out on the street. By the end of Clinton’s presidency, more than half of working-age African-American men in many large urban areas were saddled with criminal records and subject to legalized discrimination in employment, housing, access to education, and basic public benefits—relegated to a permanent second-class status eerily reminiscent of Jim Crow.

It is difficult to overstate the damage that’s been done. Generations have been lost to the prison system; countless families have been torn apart or rendered homeless; and a school-to-prison pipeline has been born that shuttles young people from their decrepit, underfunded schools to brand-new high-tech prisons.

The current state of the Clintons:

 To be fair, the Clintons now feel bad about how their politics and policies have worked out for black people. Bill says that he “overshot the mark” with his crime policies; and Hillary has put forth a plan to ban racial profiling, eliminate the sentencing disparities between crack and cocaine, and abolish private prisons, among other measures.

But what about a larger agenda that would not just reverse some of the policies adopted during the Clinton era, but would rebuild the communities decimated by them? If you listen closely here, you’ll notice that Hillary Clinton is still singing the same old tune in a slightly different key. She is arguing that we ought not be seduced by Bernie’s rhetoric because we must be “pragmatic,” “face political realities,” and not get tempted to believe that we can fight for economic justice and win. When politicians start telling you that it is “unrealistic” to support candidates who want to build a movement for greater equality, fair wages, universal healthcare, and an end to corporate control of our political system, it’s probably best to leave the room.

On Bernie Sanders:

 This is not an endorsement for Bernie Sanders, who after all voted for the 1994 crime bill. I also tend to agree with Ta-Nehisi Coates that the way the Sanders campaign handled the question of reparations is one of many signs that Bernie doesn’t quite get what’s at stake in serious dialogues about racial justice. He was wrong to dismiss reparations as “divisive,” as though centuries of slavery, segregation, discrimination, ghettoization, and stigmatization aren’t worthy of any specific acknowledgement or remedy.

But recognizing that Bernie, like Hillary, has blurred vision when it comes to race is not the same thing as saying their views are equally problematic. Sanders opposed the 1996 welfare-reform law. He also opposed bank deregulation and the Iraq War, both of which Hillary supported, and both of which have proved disastrous. In short, there is such a thing as a lesser evil, and Hillary is not it.

On the failures of the Democratic Party:

 The biggest problem with Bernie, in the end, is that he’s running as a Democrat—as a member of a political party that not only capitulated to right-wing demagoguery but is now owned and controlled by a relatively small number of millionaires and billionaires. Yes, Sanders has raised millions from small donors, but should he become president, he would also become part of what he has otherwise derided as “the establishment.” Even if Bernie’s racial-justice views evolve, I hold little hope that a political revolution will occur within the Democratic Party without a sustained outside movement forcing truly transformational change. I am inclined to believe that it would be easier to build a new party than to save the Democratic Party from itself.

http://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/

 

[Infinite]

This is going to be a good read thanks for bringing this to me my attention

 

[SliceSabre]

Hiliary is getting my 'black vote' because I feel she has done enough to appeal compared to Sanders who comes from a state in which black people, hell minorities et all are a novelty and he's never had to appeal to them in the first place.

There is no 'lesser evil' choice here. She is the only real choice to me.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Bill Clinton presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history. Clinton did not declare the War on Crime or the War on Drugs—those wars were declared before Reagan was elected and long before crack hit the streets—but he escalated it beyond what many conservatives had imagined possible. He supported the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack versus powder cocaine, which produced staggering racial injustice in sentencing and boosted funding for drug-law enforcement.

Clinton championed the idea of a federal “three strikes” law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who “were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.”

Clinton very begrudgingly signed a lot of what the Gingrich congress sent him, some of this stuff after two attempted vetoes. This is not really a fair charge.

 

[params7]

The nomination might just be nail biter on the Democratic side.

 

[Volimar]

The nomination might just be nail biter on the Democratic side.

I don't think it will be but I wouldn't mind being wrong.

 

[Cat]

I just finished reading it, and it was really good, I thought. I read The New Jim Crow last year, and it was very upsetting, informative, and enlightening. I'm going to subscribe to this thread.

I also recently finished reading Fatal Invention by Dorothy Roberts this past weekend, which is also very good and important, for anyone interested.

 

[Slayven]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

 

[Black Republican]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

lol, sad but true

 

[Eidan]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

Honestly the first thing I thought.

 

[Slayven]

lol, sad but true

That is why I say the black voter is the most pragmatic voter out there.

 

[AlteredBeast]

That is why I say the black voter is the most pragmatic voter out there.

Maybe in the primaries...

 

[Dreams-Visions]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

church

Maybe in the primaries...

that's because it becomes a very easy decision after the primaries. the other candidate is likely not even an option in the first place in the same way that a Muslim worth his salt wouldn't bring himself to vote for Donald Trump even if they liked his fiscal policies. Too many social and societal implications to ignore to accept voting for such people.

 

[AlteredBeast]

church



that's because it becomes a very easy decision after the primaries. the other candidate is likely not even an option in the first place in the same way that a Muslim worth his salt wouldn't bring himself to vote for Donald Trump even if they liked his fiscal policies. Too many social and societal implications to ignore to accept voting for such people.

That's what I meant, just forgot to elaborate

They only need to be pragmatic in the primaries, because afterwards the shit sandwich they are given is better when it has a D next to it than an R. I long for the day when a president has the balls to treat all minorities with respect and equailty.

 

[Slayven]

A presidental candiate that really came out and spoke on some rteal issues effecting black people and stuck with it wouldn't make it to the primaries.

They would get roasted by the right for being race baiting and by left for being divisive, which is pretty much the same thing.

Hell remember when Obama said if he had a son he would look like Trayvon? He caught hell from right and liberals a like.

There won't be a revolution until "Black Issues" are seen as "American Issues".

I don't see that happening too soon because a gunman killed a bunch of white kids, and we still can't talk about gun control. That is when you know shit is engargined in America's DNA, like it is to see Blacks as the others and they don't matter.

 

[lednerg]

I love Michelle Alexander and will check this out.

 

[atr0cious]

So after reading this. Is it saying abstaining is a viable option for blacks?

This game has gone on for decades. W.E.B. Du Bois, the eminent scholar and co-founder of the NAACP, shocked many when he refused to play along with this game in the 1956 election, defending his refusal to vote on the grounds that “there is but one evil party with two names, and it will be elected despite all I do or say.”

Coates seems where I'm at, on hope and message Sanders is bringing, but I'm a little less bullish about Sanders ability to win based on a couple of the whitest states in the country.

 

[Chichikov]

Great read, I love Michelle Alexander.

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

She pretty much makes that point in the article.
That article is more of a "fuck you" to the modern Democratic party than a ringing endorsement of Bernie Sanders.

So after reading this. Is it saying abstaining is a viable option for blacks?

Not quite, at least I don't think it does.
But she does clearly states that "Even if Bernie’s racial-justice views evolve, I hold little hope that a political revolution will occur within the Democratic Party without a sustained outside movement forcing truly transformational change. I am inclined to believe that it would be easier to build a new party than to save the Democratic Party from itself".
I wholeheartedly agree (as I do with most of that article).

 

[ant_]

Great read. Michelle Alexander is a good scholar and I hope this is pretty widely read or understood by people. What happened under Bill Clinton's presidency is absolutely despicable and was supported by H.R.C.

Here's Bernie fighting against those very things at the time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTn3jUoMdVI

 

[WhiskerFrisker]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

I just don't vote honestly. However, I love seeing how batshit insane the GOP nominees are.

 

[Infinite]

So after reading this. Is it saying abstaining is a viable option for blacks?



Coates seems where I'm at, on hope and message Sanders is bringing, but I'm a little less bullish about Sanders ability to win based on a couple of the whitest states in the country.

No that isn't exactly what she's saying. Focus on the part before that.

I am inclined to believe that it would be easier to build a new party than to save the Democratic Party from itself.

 

[Bel Marduk]

Hiliary is getting my 'black vote' because I feel she has done enough to appeal compared to Sanders who comes from a state in which black people, hell minorities et all are a novelty and he's never had to appeal to them in the first place.

There is no 'lesser evil' choice here. She is the only real choice to me.

Pretty shallow reasoning there

The most shallow reasoning I've heard yet from a Clinton supporter

 

[Macho Madness]

Pretty shallow reasoning there

The most shallow reasoning I've heard yet from a Clinton supporter

Really? That's shallow? I know people who didn't vote for Kerry simply because he was ugly. Ugly. Voting for a candidate because they want to work on your issues (or at least say they will) is pretty not shallow.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

This article gives me a berning sensation

will continue to read, thanks OP

 

[atr0cious]

No that isn't exactly what she's saying. Focus on the part before that.

So, not voting.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Skipped over the title quickly and read as "Michelle Obama"; nearly shat bricks.

 

[ivysaur12]

I like Michelle Alexander, but I think she's being particularly handwaving about this:

Some might argue that it’s unfair to judge Hillary Clinton for the policies her husband championed years ago.

While also reading into this in a way that is a bit of a head scratcher:

But what about a larger agenda that would not just reverse some of the policies adopted during the Clinton era, but would rebuild the communities decimated by them? If you listen closely here, you’ll notice that Hillary Clinton is still singing the same old tune in a slightly different key. She is arguing that we ought not be seduced by Bernie’s rhetoric because we must be “pragmatic,” “face political realities,” and not get tempted to believe that we can fight for economic justice and win. When politicians start telling you that it is “unrealistic” to support candidates who want to build a movement for greater equality, fair wages, universal healthcare, and an end to corporate control of our political system, it’s probably best to leave the room.

I don't think it's fair to attack a woman for what her husband did or signed, and I think the role of the FLOTUS is uniquely positioned (and Hillary's position) as someone who was used, albeit by her own volition, as a way to sell third wave policies to the left and to placate them. A lot of this is some less-than-interesting hindsight without the context from the 90s, which seems to be the par for the course for the left since Obama's election.

I also think we're getting into very messy territory when we talk about "The Clintons", as if they are one monolithic entity, or if every action that Bill takes as president is reflective of his wife's beliefs.

 

[LegendofLex]

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To be fair, the argument here isn't that Bernie Sanders deserves the black vote. Just that Hillary Clinton doesn't deserve it more (or, alternatively, fail to deserve it less) when compared to Bernie Sanders.

 

[Infinite]

So, not voting.

If that's what you got from that okay.

 

[atr0cious]

If that's what you got from that okay.

You must not live in the US if you think a black led third party is doing anything in this country. And even if it became the minority party and other people of color joined, the elections would just be the whites battling it out, and Republicans will win that every time.

 

[Dr_LucienSanchez]

This is a really great piece, thanks for sharing.

 

[Infinite]

You must not live in the US if you think a black led third party is doing anything in this country. And even if it became the minority party and other people of color joined, the elections would just be the whites battling it out, and Republicans will win that every time.

Huh? Michelle Alexander didn't say anything about a black led party. This what she said:

The biggest problem with Bernie, in the end, is that he’s running as a Democrat—as a member of a political party that not only capitulated to right-wing demagoguery but is now owned and controlled by a relatively small number of millionaires and billionaires. Yes, Sanders has raised millions from small donors, but should he become president, he would also become part of what he has otherwise derided as “the establishment.” Even if Bernie’s racial-justice views evolve, I hold little hope that a political revolution will occur within the Democratic Party without a sustained outside movement forcing truly transformational change. I am inclined to believe that it would be easier to build a new party than to save the Democratic Party from itself.

 

[Damerman]

This isn't even mentioning that wierd shady shit the clintons are doing in my native country, Haiti. I don't like the clintons, and i don't like the democrat party. Its only natural that i gravitate towards sanders.

 

[RatskyWatsky]

That was a very interesting and enlightening read - thanks for posting.

 

[atr0cious]

Huh? Michelle Alexander didn't say anything about a black led party. This what she said:

Again, this is america. A socialist party is going nowhere. But thats besides the point, because this country's main problem is its laziness in the face of tradition. You really think the "establishment" will allow a third party to do anything in this country? What happens if we do get a president but have two other parties in the houses? Why do you think bernie had to become a democrat? I wouldn't say its not for a like of trying. We can't even get simple gun control or healthcare, but you want to ask the american public to go through a full on voting overhaul, regardless of how much it needs it? I'd rather just vote for hillary and see if we can work with what we have. Common sense doesn't rule this country, so I'll hedge my bets with someone who understands this.

And I wish people would stop with the political revolution, bernie is getting less turnout than obama in 08 and 12, and less than the republicans on the whole in his strongest states.

 

[kirblar]

Again, this is america. A socialist party is going nowhere. But thats besides the point, because this country's main problem is its laziness in the face of tradition. You really think the "establishment" will allow a third party to do anything in this country? What happens if we do get a president but have two other parties in the houses? Why do you think bernie had to become a democrat? I wouldn't say its not for a like of trying. We can't even get simple gun control or healthcare, but you want to ask the american public to go through a full on voting overhaul, regardless of how much it needs it? I'd rather just vote for hillary and see if we can work with what we have. Common sense doesn't rule this country, so I'll hedge my bets with someone who understands this.

The national system is inadvertently designed to impede progress, from the filibuster to the over-represented rural areas. Dubya/Obama not busting the filibuster is going to go down as a missed opportunity for both.

 

[Bruce Springsteen]

I don't like the concept of the "the black vote" as if they're just all one giant vote

 

[atr0cious]

The national system is inadvertently designed to impede progress, from the filibuster to the over-represented rural areas. Dubya/Obama not busting the filibuster is going to go down as a missed opportunity for both.

Inadvertently, lol. Let's dispel this notion.

 

[Angelus Errare]

She nails why I laugh and belittle everyone who says "Clinton was the first black president". Like yea okay bitch ass, okay.

No presidential candidate has ever "deserved" black vote.

To vote in the United States as a black person is to vote for the candidate least likely to fuck us over, or if both sides going to fuck us over the one that will at least buy us Red Lobster afterwards.

Pretty much.

 

[foxtrot3d]

Do people forget that the black community supported tougher crime laws in the 90's after being ravaged by gang violence for years? Did we forget how big the Blood v. Crip wars were and people screaming that something had to be done? In hindsight, those policies have come back to hurt us in the long run but to act like the Clintons just up and capitulated to right wing forces by enacting harsher crime statues which they knew would disproportionately affect the black community is utter nonsense.

At least Hilary is able to come out and recognize that there is a problem and is ready to make changes to roll back those policies.

Clinton very begrudgingly signed a lot of what the Gingrich congress sent him, some of this stuff after two attempted vetoes. This is not really a fair charge.

This too. It's like context doesn't matter.

 

[Infinite]

Again, this is america. A socialist party is going nowhere. But thats besides the point, because this country's main problem is its laziness in the face of tradition. You really think the "establishment" will allow a third party to do anything in this country? What happens if we do get a president but have two other parties in the houses? Why do you think bernie had to become a democrat? I wouldn't say its not for a like of trying. We can't even get simple gun control or healthcare, but you want to ask the american public to go through a full on voting overhaul, regardless of how much it needs it? I'd rather just vote for hillary and see if we can work with what we have. Common sense doesn't rule this country, so I'll hedge my bets with someone who understands this.

And I wish people would stop with the political revolution, bernie is getting less turnout than obama in 08 and 12, and less than the republicans on the whole in his strongest states.

I think power, real power comes from the group.

 

[kirblar]

Inadvertently, lol. Let's dispel this notion.

Filibuster evolving into what it is today wasn't a deliberate design choice by the people who initially drew up the rules.

Do people forget that the black community supported tougher crime laws in the 90's after being ravaged by gang violence for years? Did we forget how big the Blood v. Crip wars were and people screaming that something had to be done? In hindsight, those policies have come back to hurt us in the long run but to act like the Clintons just up and capitulated to right wing forces by enacting harsher crime statues which they knew would disproportionately affect the black community is utter nonsense.

At least Hilary is able to come out and recognize that there is a problem and is ready to make changes to roll back those penalties.

You can't forget what you were never around to see.

 

[Septimus Prime]

There won't be a revolution until "Black Issues" are seen as "American Issues".

What does this mean? Doesn't Sanders' rising tide lifts all boats paradigm jibe with this?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Inadvertently, lol. Let's dispel this notion.

When the country was founded, there wasn't such a large discrepancy between urban and rural areas. The majority of the country was rural. Now the overwhelming majority is urban, but the system was set up for rural populations, making them over represented. Why should a state with a fraction of the population and influence of New York, Texas or California get the exact same say in the Senate? And yet the senate treats them exactly the same.

The filibuster also wasn't designed to be as abused as it has been the last few decades. The much, much larger amount of Senators doesn't help either, making the votes needed to overrule the filibuster harder to get as there's more people to convince. And because of the first issue, those people often just end up representing large pieces of farm land and very few actual people.

Senators also weren't always elected, they used to be appointed by the state legislature, not voted in by the people directly. So the process has changed a bit.

 

[AlphaDump]

I understand the intent of the article, however from a risk perspective, why ask for a revolution or new party now when the GOP is against the ropes? Why make Democrats the enemy too? It is dangerous considering how hard the democrats have fought to get to this point.

I'd make the argument towards voting in midterms more than anything else.


Just my two cents.

 

[atr0cious]

I think power, real power comes from the group.

What does this mean? If this is another sending a message, America has already heard it. BLM is a terrorist group, our visible public leaders are either political caricatures, or living representations of what the cultural eye deems unacceptable. Beyonce was accused of attacking police based on her appearance.

Besides, MLK did this. He died just to give blacks a little respite, but the people from that day overwhelmingly thought that blacks were just yelling about their own made up issues. If they can't even see how bad it was during the time when riot control was a fire hose and dogs, what do you think they're gonna say now? Especially with media able to pull the no angel card a lot of the time for high profile cases.

I'm just being realistic here, exactly what this paper is doing, but I know that a white guy yelling hope and change at my group, especially when it's wildly out of the current political climate, historically its been bullshit. Bill vs Bernie, Bill never promised on the scale that Bernie did.

What does this mean? Doesn't Sanders' rising tide lifts all boats paradigm jibe with this?

Government welfare programs historically have not been for blacks, so there's already one hurdle. On top of this, whites just don't see our problems as theirs: unemployment, education, healthcare, and more, blacks have it worse. The justice systems rules on punishment for drug offenders is just now getting looked at because of white parents starting to feel it too.

 

[Drek]

I seem to recall the Congressional Black Caucus supporting all those tough on crime laws. Instead of looking back over 20 years and inferring intent based on today's understanding of the repercussions maybe focus on what their legislative agenda is currently.

 

[Infinite]

What does this mean? Doesn't Sanders' rising tide lifts all boats paradigm jibe with this?

Not at all. What Slayven means however is black issues not being treated as secondary or a political chess piece

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I loved New Jim Crow, and I think Alexander is a very effective persuasive writer. I would have to say I agree with a lot of what she's saying in this article, including the critiques of Bernie's platform. Alexander phrases her arguments very specifically, though, and it seems like they're easily misinterpreted going by some of the responses here.

 

[Chichikov]

Do people forget that the black community supported tougher crime laws in the 90's after being ravaged by gang violence for years? Did we forget how big the Blood v. Crip wars were and people screaming that something had to be done? In hindsight, those policies have come back to hurt us in the long run but to act like the Clintons just up and capitulated to right wing forces by enacting harsher crime statues which they knew would disproportionately affect the black community is utter nonsense.

At least Hilary is able to come out and recognize that there is a problem and is ready to make changes to roll back those penalties.

Some people do, some people don't, Michelle Alexander definitley does, from the article -

It is absolutely true that black communities back then were in a state of crisis, and that many black activists and politicians were desperate to get violent offenders off the streets. What is often missed, however, is that most of those black activists and politicians weren’t asking only for toughness. They were also demanding investment in their schools, better housing, jobs programs for young people, economic-stimulus packages, drug treatment on demand, and better access to healthcare. In the end, they wound up with police and prisons. To say that this was what black people wanted is misleading at best.

This too. It's like context doesn't matter.

Context does matter, and it's true that Clinton vetoed a few house bills, but at the same time it's important to remember that Clinton campaigned on "ending welfare as we know it" that he happily pronounced in the wake of the passage of that bill that "the era of Big Government is over" that he said during the signing of the bill that it "gives us a chance we haven't had before to break the cycle of dependency that has existed for millions and millions of our fellow citizens, exiling them from the world of work. It gives structure, meaning and dignity to most of our lives" and that Hillary Clinton supported that bill.