Hillary: Yet Another Poll-Driven Policy

[ihavenobias]

Hillary And The 20,000 Felons: Yet Another Poll-Driven Policy
By Celeste Fremon

Why are so many progressives unhappy with the thought of Hillary Clinton becoming the Democratic nominee? Here's a perfect case in point:

This past weekend all the Democratic presidential wannabes spoke at what is known as the Iowa Brown & Black Forum. (The Republican wannabes were also invited but they declined.)

The candidates were asked all the usual questions and, for the most part, gave all the expected answers. But on one issue in particular Hillary differed markedly from her colleagues--and that had to do with the recent recommendation by the federal sentencing commission that people caught with crack cocaine should have sentences more in line with those for powder cocaine. This was an issue of interest to the forum because powder tends to be a drug favored by those whiter and wealthier than those who favor crack.

When asked about her own policy, Clinton said she agreed with the feds' recommendation for equalizing the sentences, but she opposed making the sentencing changes retroactive.

"I have problems with retroactivity," she said. "It's something a lot of communities will be concerned about as well." Obama, Edwards, Richarson, Dodd, Kucinich said they were in favor of the sentencing change being applied to those already serving time.

Now before we get to the reality of how such a sentencing change would play out, let's parse what Clinton said: Although she agrees that disproportionate punishments for crack versus cocaine are wrong for the future, she doesn't feel that past disproportionate punishments are wrong.

To show this POV for the whacked logic that it is, let's use an absurd example...

For the rest: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/celeste-fremon/hillary-and-the-20000-fe_b_75207.html

[MannyGoldstein]

1. She For And Against Everything At The Same Time

That's just her schtick.

[journalist3072]

2. Yawn...yet more B.S. from the anti-Hillary contigent here.

[ihavenobias]

3. Be Fair About It

There *is* a difference between real criticism and simply being "anti" a particular candidate, right? Or does that standard only apply to candidates *you* like?

Are people who disagree with Hillary (or Edwards, Obama, Kucinich, Biden or Richardson) supposed to stay quiet and pretend they like a particular candidate so as to avoid being tagged with an "anti" label?

If you think the piece in question is irrelevant or factually incorrect, by all means, please tell us!

[JTFrog]

4. Any criticism of her actual policy

and stances will be met with the same disdain as criticizing her laugh or her inevitability. Any criticism of her at all will earn you some label or another amongst her supporters.

The cognitive dissonance is deep... but fortunately it isn't nearly as widespread as it was with Bush.