Tough On Crime has been a perennial favorite tagline for conservative politicians since Nixon, and 50 years of that shit has resulted in the US having the highest incarceration rate in the developed world. But now, in a tiny drop of sanity and rationality which is certain to bring out panicky screeching calls for his head, Eric Holder is
I truly do not want to get into a flamefest, but I have to ask: Were you one of the folks who thought Obama was a liberal back in 2008? The reason I ask is that you seem to be taking the fact that he's not one pretty hard.
In 2008, I'll admit that I thought of him as center-left, and he maybe turned out to be center-right. But, you know, a one-dimensional political scale doesn't really work anyhow. My biggest disappointment (and here, perhaps, we agree) has been in his failure to live up to his promises regarding the 4th Amendment and the Patriot Act. On the other hand, we do have the ACA, which in my opinion was nearly as good as was actually possible to achieve. It's a wedge. It'll probably take another thirty years to get Medicare for all, but this was a necessary first step.
The mediocre financial-system reforms, and extensive bailout, were predictable. Bamz is clearly an incrementalist, not a revolutionary. And his unrequited passion for bipartisanship has become rather sad.
But, on the positive surprise side, he has (belatedly) gotten on board with civil rights for LGBT folks. Maybe, this latest blip from Holder represents an opening move towards rationalizing our peculiar drug policy. Maybe not. We'll see.
If I have a point, it is that it's probably a mistake to view everything that comes out of the Administration as somehow part of a connected scheme to manipulate the Left. This is the 11-dimensional chess metaphor turned on its head. (I don't believe in 11-dimensional chess, either).
I prefer to model the Administration as a center / center-right radioactive isotope. Every so often, it emits a policy. On average, the policies are center / center-right, but instances may be one or two standard deviations either way. The best we can do is to try to foster the ones that go the left way, and extinguish the others.
If any single politician is to be credited for the high incarceration rate in the US during the last 40 years, that honor should go to NY Governor Nelson Rockefeller. The draconian "Rockefeller Drug Laws" that his administration pushed for and got passed were widely imitated in other states across the country. They resulted in a massive increase in first-time non-violent offenders serving long prison sentences for simple possession of small amounts of illegal street drugs. They had a massive, disproportionate impact on blah and Hispanic communities and neighborhoods, most especially impacting young blah men.
The so-called "War On Drugs" was in practice within the US a war on a whole generation of African-American males. Discrimination based on race may no longer be legal in the US, but there are far fewer restrictions on discrimination against people with criminal records and a history of lengthy incarceration. So you replace one illegitimate basis for discrimination with another, still widely accepted one, while targeting the same people.
Actions by the AG and the Federal Department of Justice can have some effect, but in reality the vast majority of the incarcerated were convicted under individual state laws and are serving sentences in state penitentiaries, where the Federal DOJ has no jurisdiction. So there isn't a whole lot that the US Attorney General can actually do about it. The bulk of the reforms have to take place at the state level, via the legislatures and governors' offices.
HOW old are you?
Yeah, Old Handsome is pretty much Old Hardline on teh drugz.
I truly do not want to get into a flamefest, but I have to ask: Were you one of the folks who thought Obama was a liberal back in 2008? The reason I ask is that you seem to be taking the fact that he's not one pretty hard.
In 2008, I'll admit that I thought of him as center-left, and he maybe turned out to be center-right. But, you know, a one-dimensional political scale doesn't really work anyhow. My biggest disappointment (and here, perhaps, we agree) has been in his failure to live up to his promises regarding the 4th Amendment and the Patriot Act. On the other hand, we do have the ACA, which in my opinion was nearly as good as was actually possible to achieve. It's a wedge. It'll probably take another thirty years to get Medicare for all, but this was a necessary first step.
The mediocre financial-system reforms, and extensive bailout, were predictable. Bamz is clearly an incrementalist, not a revolutionary. And his unrequited passion for bipartisanship has become rather sad.
But, on the positive surprise side, he has (belatedly) gotten on board with civil rights for LGBT folks. Maybe, this latest blip from Holder represents an opening move towards rationalizing our peculiar drug policy. Maybe not. We'll see.
If I have a point, it is that it's probably a mistake to view everything that comes out of the Administration as somehow part of a connected scheme to manipulate the Left. This is the 11-dimensional chess metaphor turned on its head. (I don't believe in 11-dimensional chess, either).
I prefer to model the Administration as a center / center-right radioactive isotope. Every so often, it emits a policy. On average, the policies are center / center-right, but instances may be one or two standard deviations either way. The best we can do is to try to foster the ones that go the left way, and extinguish the others.
If any single politician is to be credited for the high incarceration rate in the US during the last 40 years, that honor should go to NY Governor Nelson Rockefeller. The draconian "Rockefeller Drug Laws" that his administration pushed for and got passed were widely imitated in other states across the country. They resulted in a massive increase in first-time non-violent offenders serving long prison sentences for simple possession of small amounts of illegal street drugs. They had a massive, disproportionate impact on blah and Hispanic communities and neighborhoods, most especially impacting young blah men.
The so-called "War On Drugs" was in practice within the US a war on a whole generation of African-American males. Discrimination based on race may no longer be legal in the US, but there are far fewer restrictions on discrimination against people with criminal records and a history of lengthy incarceration. So you replace one illegitimate basis for discrimination with another, still widely accepted one, while targeting the same people.
Actions by the AG and the Federal Department of Justice can have some effect, but in reality the vast majority of the incarcerated were convicted under individual state laws and are serving sentences in state penitentiaries, where the Federal DOJ has no jurisdiction. So there isn't a whole lot that the US Attorney General can actually do about it. The bulk of the reforms have to take place at the state level, via the legislatures and governors' offices.
Have the folks over at FOX begun screaming about 'weak on crime' yet?
everybody knows the only people who voted for Obummer were ACORN and the choom gang
we're gonna need a bigger buffet
this is just Obummer pandering for the cantaloupe calf vote