dagblog - Comments for "In praise of Dr. King and Bernie Sanders"

At the end of the day,

rmrd0000 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:50:38 +0000

In reply to Michelle Alexander and RMRD

At the end of the day, Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill. Full stop. Sanders has voted against legislation that put pressure on gun manufacturers and sellers. Like a typical politician, he flip-flopped on his position when it became politically uncomfortable. He has tried to cover up his flip-flop.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/17/hillary-c...

There was 40 years of support for draconian drug laws by black politicians. Shirley Chisholm compared crime in the black community as akin to the bubonic plague.

http://prisontime.org/2013/08/12/timeline-black-support-for-the-war-on-d...

In hindsight those black leaders were wrong.

Sanders could have stood with the 11 members of the Congressional Black Caucus who voted against the 1994 crime bill, but he did not. John Lewis, JohnnConyers, Maxine Waters, and Charles Rangel were among those who had the courage to vote against the bill, Sanders did not have that same courage.

http://www.crewof42.com/cbc-2/the-11-in-the-black-caucus-who-voted-no-on...

Who knows. 70,000 more voted

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:31:53 +0000

In reply to He got many more votes than

Who knows. 70,000 more voted on the GOP primary than in 2008 and far more than Hillary vs Bernie. Whatever bump in the youth vote wasn't near enough to be impressive or point to impending success later like Obama's get-out-the-vote. May happen, but unlikely.

How do you combat violence

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:24:45 +0000

In reply to Michelle Alexander and RMRD

How do you combat violence against women without combating super high crime in general? You ignore other parts of the Clinton platform include large job increases, home ownership, SCHIP to give kids Healthcare, etc.

Michelle Alexander and RMRD

HSG — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:13:37 +0000

In reply to So Hal puts up a link

Michelle Alexander and RMRD criticize Sanders for voting for Clinton's 1994 Omnibus Crime bill which included the notorious 3 strikes and you're out legislation. They leave out crucial context. PP defends the Clintons on the ground that we were facing unprecedented crime rates at the time.

In response Sanders spoke out passionately and humanely against the increase in incarceration to which the bill would lead and offered an alternative to the massive increase in police and prison spending.

Sanders prescient remarks:

In a similar way, Mr. Speaker, a society which neglects, which oppresses and which disdains a very significant part of its population—which leaves them hungry, impoverished, unemployed, uneducated, and utterly without hope, will, through cause and effect, create a population which is bitter, which is angry, which is violent, and a society which is crime-ridden. This is the case in America, and it is the case in countries throughout the world.
Mr. Speaker, how do we talk about the very serious crime problem in America without mentioning that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world, by far, with 22 percent of our children in poverty and 5 million who are hungry today? Do the Members think maybe that might have some relationship to crime? How do we talk about crime when this Congress is prepared, this year, to spend 11 times more for the military than for education; when 21 percent of our kids drop out of high school; when a recent study told us that twice as many young workers now earn poverty wages as 10 years ago; when the gap between the rich and the poor is wider, and when the rate of poverty continues to grow? Do the members think that might have some relationship to crime?

Mr. Speaker, it is my firm belief that clearly, there are some people in our society who are horribly violent, who are deeply sick and sociopathic, and clearly these people must be put behind bars in order to protect society from them. But it is also my view that through the neglect of our Government and through a grossly irrational set of priorities, we are dooming tens of millions of young people to a future of bitterness, misery, hopelessness, drugs, crime, and violence. And Mr. Speaker, all the jails in the world, and we already imprison more people per capita than any other country, and all of the executions in the world, will not make that situation right. We can either educate or electrocute. We can create meaningful jobs, rebuilding our society, or we can build more jails. Mr. Speaker, let us create a society of hope and compassion, not one of hate and vengeance.

[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 39 (Wednesday, April 13, 1994)]

Here's what Hillary Clinton had to say at the same time when she campaigned for the bill:

I think as more Americans focus on the fact that this bill would have put more police on the street, would have locked up violent offenders so they could never get out again,” she said. “Would have given more prison construction money available to the states as well as the federal government. But also would have dealt with prevention, giving young people something to say yes to. It’s a very well thought out crime bill that is both smart and tough.

Hillary also praised the bill to cops saying:

“We will be able to say, loudly and clearly, that for repeat, violent, criminal offenders — three strikes and you’re out. We are tired of putting you back in through the revolving door.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/times-change-heres-hillary-clint...

So why did Sanders ultimately vote for the bill. Here's what he said at the time:

I have a number of serious problems with the Crime Bill, but one part of it that I vigorously support is the Violence Against Women Act. We urgently need the $1.8 billion in this bill to combat the epidemic of violence against women on the streets and in the homes of America.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/29/1476873/-Why-Sanders-gets-a-pass-o...

He got many more votes than

HSG — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:54:06 +0000

In reply to If the slightly lower turnout

He got many more votes than the previous winner. Facing only Bernie, she got fewer than she did in 2008 when she had two opponents. Seems strange to attribute a very slightly lower turnout to him doesn't it?

Well of course I'd pay

ocean-kat — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 07:45:51 +0000

In reply to Not paying attention is what

Well of course I'd pay attention to the details if I lived in a caucus state. And I hope her campaign is paying better attention than they did in 08. Looking in from another state I just follow the issues discussed, meaningful gaffs, the horse race, just the flow of events.

So Hal puts up a link

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:21:15 +0000

In reply to In praise of Dr. King and Bernie Sanders

So Hal puts up a link comparing MLK & Bernie Sanders and trashing Clinton - rmrd notes that Bernie voted for the referenced draconian anti-crime bill; I note the huge entrenched crisis going on at the time and what was being done to try to cure structural issues - including 3 in-your-face graphs.

And Hal ignores both comments, preferring to discuss 2016 voter turnout instead.

Thus goes our modern non-personal debate focused on the issues.

Not paying attention is what

barefooted — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:09:34 +0000

In reply to Really? I thought I read

Not paying attention is what doomed Clinton in 2008. There are many caucus states to go, including Nevada, and their delegates matter. Ask Obama.

Edit: There's a big difference between candidates and observers! ;-)

If the slightly lower turnout

barefooted — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:00:14 +0000

In reply to 2015 NH Democratic Primary

If the slightly lower turnout on the Democratic side resulted from a lack of enthusiasm, it was Mrs. Clinton who failed to generate the requisite amount of buzz.

I see. Yuuge turnout is due to Bernie, lower turnout is Hillary's failure.

Really? I thought I read

ocean-kat — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 05:57:00 +0000

In reply to The caucus in Iowa begins at

Really? I thought I read somewhere differently. Maybe it was some caucus in a different state or maybe I misread it entirely. I'll take your word for it since I don't care much about caucuses in general and don't pay all that much attention to the details.