"(that) is what happens when Negroes don't read...(he) is the token Negro"

nan said:

Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  

 Anyone who was made aware of this by Sanders must have just awakened from a very long coma.

RealityForAll said:

drummerboy said:

jamie said:

nan said:Except for Bernie Sanders, no other major presidential candidate made prison reform a major part of their platform.  Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  Mass incarceration started growing under Reagan and continued until the present time through many presidents, including Democratic (especially Clinton--his crime bill was devastating).  They all had an "overzealous lust for punishment." Obama did a few things to reduce the prison population during his second term, but no major reform.  So, given your take on this, were the American people being used through all those Presidents pretending to care?

 https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/
Looks like Hillary had a lot of info on this.  Why would you say it was only Bernie?  Are you going to argue the "major part" or will you concede that Hillary had some strong ideas as well?  This is really getting ridiculous!
(And I will not cut and paste the entire page to prove my point)

 What's really ridiculous is that Hillary's campaign probably had more defined policy proposals than any Prez candidate in history, yet she is continually lambasted for having practically none.

 Were those "defined policy proposals" of HRC, her public policy positions or her private policy positions?

 did you ever go to her website during the campaign?

nan said:

drummerboy said:

nan said:

 You ignore The Intercept article and go to the New York Time for insight?  Where is the insight?  Trump sucks, for sure, but he did not cause the problem of mass incarceration.  Also, to say he claims he does not know. . . .  Of course he knows, but he does not give a crap.  But neither does the mainstream media.  How much is this problem covered by the New York Times and mainstream media  in general?   Except for occasional mentions, it is hardly a priority.  Except for Bernie Sanders, no other major presidential candidate made prison reform a major part of their platform.  Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  Mass incarceration started growing under Reagan and continued until the present time through many presidents, including Democratic (especially Clinton--his crime bill was devastating).  They all had an "overzealous lust for punishment." Obama did a few things to reduce the prison population during his second term, but no major reform.  So, given your take on this, were the American people being used through all those Presidents pretending to care?

Is the crime bill you mention the one that Bernie Sanders voted for? (yeah, I think it is.)
Did you know that crime bill only affected federal prison rates?  Whereas the frightening rise in our prison populations has happened almost entirely at the state and local level? Where the federal govt (and the crime bill) has no power or effect over?

Here's a picture.
The question is - will this data cause you to re-consider your demonization of the crime bill, and maybe turn your attention to the actual causes?
Experience says - probably not.

 Are you trying to say the crime bill brought down crime?  Cause that's not been proven.  Correlation is not causation.  The crime rate was already going down. Read the book, "The New Jim Crow."  You need to.
Bernie may have voted for it--but he was campaigning against it heavily in 2016.  It was mentioned in all of his speeches.  He repeatedly talked about how we have more people in prison than anyone else in the world.  This was a big part of his campaign.  Hillary may have had some stuff written on it somewhere but if she mentioned it on the campaign train few or no one remembers. Did not seem like a priority to her.

 oy.

no. I am not trying to say the crime bill brought down crime. Overall crime rates had already started a long term declining trend by that time. (probably due to decreasing blood lead levels)

I'm saying that the crime bill had nothing to do with increasing incarceration rates. It's a red herring and to keep on talking about it is a terrible waste of time.

The graph I posted can't be any clearer.

drummerboy said:

RealityForAll said:

drummerboy said:

jamie said:

nan said:Except for Bernie Sanders, no other major presidential candidate made prison reform a major part of their platform.  Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  Mass incarceration started growing under Reagan and continued until the present time through many presidents, including Democratic (especially Clinton--his crime bill was devastating).  They all had an "overzealous lust for punishment." Obama did a few things to reduce the prison population during his second term, but no major reform.  So, given your take on this, were the American people being used through all those Presidents pretending to care?

 https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/
Looks like Hillary had a lot of info on this.  Why would you say it was only Bernie?  Are you going to argue the "major part" or will you concede that Hillary had some strong ideas as well?  This is really getting ridiculous!
(And I will not cut and paste the entire page to prove my point)

 What's really ridiculous is that Hillary's campaign probably had more defined policy proposals than any Prez candidate in history, yet she is continually lambasted for having practically none.

 Were those "defined policy proposals" of HRC, her public policy positions or her private policy positions?

 did you ever go to her website during the campaign?

You don't get it. Based on Wikileaks, HRC stated that she had both public positions and private positions.  See https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

Which would lead most to believe that HRC positions on her website were her public positions.  And, as  a result, such positions could not be trusted as they were merely cover for HRC's private positions.  

===========================================================

Relevant Wikileaks excerpt (see link above):

CLINTON: You just have to sort of figure out how to -- getting back to that
word, "balance" -- how to balance the public and the private efforts that
are necessary to be successful, politically, and that's not just a comment
about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history,
and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and
working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite
predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from
New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need
your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends
who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean,
politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been
that way, but we usually end up where we need to be [emphasis added]. But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position [emphasis added].

Your interpretation of that quote suggests you don't understand how politics works. I don't believe that to be the case, however.

Every politician has public and private positions.  It's the nature of the business.

yahooyahoo said:
Every politician has public and private positions.  It's the nature of the business.

Most people have public and private positions.

I was thinking it wasn't appropriate for news network CNN to have this sort of chat on a national show.   I am going to sum up the responses by saying that generally it sounds like people in Maplewood think it is ok.   Fair?  

yahooyahoo said:

On paper, Hillary was the most qualified presidential candidate in modern times.  The irony is that she lost to the most unqualified candidate in modern times.  
A classic case of style over substance.

 And what style!

notupset said:
I was thinking it wasn't appropriate for news network CNN to have this sort of chat on a national show.   I am going to sum up the responses by saying that generally it sounds like people in Maplewood think it is ok.   Fair?  

 if you're going to come to that conclusion, how about you quote all the responses that said it was ok.

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  

 Anyone who was made aware of this by Sanders must have just awakened from a very long coma.

Seriously, that’s been a known fact for as long as I can remember...

Scully said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  

 Anyone who was made aware of this by Sanders must have just awakened from a very long coma.

 
Seriously, that’s been a known fact for as long as I can remember...

 I guess nan assumes that if she doesn't know something, no one else does either.

drummerboy said:

Scully said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  

 Anyone who was made aware of this by Sanders must have just awakened from a very long coma.

 
Seriously, that’s been a known fact for as long as I can remember...

 I guess nan assumes that if she doesn't know something, no one else does either.

You guess wrong.  The mainstream media does not spend a lot of time talking about prison reform.  Therefore, it is safe to assume that most people don't know a lot about it.  I know a lot about education, so I was aware of the "school to prison pipeline" but found most people had not a clue.  Sanders was the first candidate I can remember in my adult life to make statements like that. If you know about other presidential candidates who made prison reform a major part of their campaigns, then please share, Oh, so "well-informed" and brags about it CNN viewer.  

nan said:

South_Mountaineer said:

nan said:I appreciate Sputnik New's mention of Kanye's interest in prison reform, which I think his wife also discussed in her less controversial visit to the White House.  The focus on prison reform, not covered much (or at all) in the mainsteam media is a good thing, although Kanye's mental state  makes it hard to notice the positive.  

 From mainstream media, with more insight than Sputnik News -- 

It was all just as sad and tragic as one might have imagined. But, for me, too much of the focus afterward was placed on Kanye’s spectacle and not nearly enough on the callous way Trump tried to use and exploit that moment, and the degree to which we have every right to be incredulous about Trump’s manufactured concern for the criminal justice system’s propensity to chew up black lives and destroy them.

But it is disingenuous for Trump to claim he doesn’t know the criminal justice system mistreats and over-penalizes black people for drug crimes. This happens specifically because of an overzealous lust for punishment, the kind that Trump himself has long harbored and is now implementing.

The spectacle wasn’t really Kanye. The spectacle was watching Trump pretend to care about remedying a problem that he is consciously continuing to not only cheer but worsen. Kanye was just being used.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/opinion/trumps-callous-use-of-kanye.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=sectionfront

 You ignore The Intercept article and go to the New York Time for insight?  Where is the insight?  Trump sucks, for sure, but he did not cause the problem of mass incarceration.  Also, to say he claims he does not know. . . .  Of course he knows, but he does not give a crap.  But neither does the mainstream media.  How much is this problem covered by the New York Times and mainstream media  in general?   Except for occasional mentions, it is hardly a priority.  Except for Bernie Sanders, no other major presidential candidate made prison reform a major part of their platform.  Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  Mass incarceration started growing under Reagan and continued until the present time through many presidents, including Democratic (especially Clinton--his crime bill was devastating).  They all had an "overzealous lust for punishment." Obama did a few things to reduce the prison population during his second term, but no major reform.  So, given your take on this, were the American people being used through all those Presidents pretending to care?

 Glenn Greenwald's column in the Intercept, which you cited, talks about some comments on CNN and criticism of the comments.  I didn't see much insight about the event in the Oval Office.

The Charles Blow column from the New York Times discusses the events in the Oval Office and gives some historical background on Trump's real positions.  If you read the whole column, I'm sorry you are dismissive of his point.  Not only that, but he's one of the writers at the Times who has addressed the issue you say the "mainstream media" doesn't address.

nan said:
If you know about other presidential candidates who made prison reform a major part of their campaigns, then please share, Oh, so "well-informed" and brags about it CNN viewer.  

In 2016, apparently Rand Paul and Martin O’Malley. As for Sanders, The Washington Post found:

Sanders’s “Issues” page makes no mention of criminal justice at all. For the candidate widely described as a socialist, and who is probably well to the left of anyone else in the field (at least among the two major parties), discussion of criminal justice is surprisingly hard to find.

nan said:

drummerboy said:

Scully said:

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:

Sanders made us all aware that the US has more people in prison than any other country in the world.  

 Anyone who was made aware of this by Sanders must have just awakened from a very long coma.

 Seriously, that’s been a known fact for as long as I can remember...

 I guess nan assumes that if she doesn't know something, no one else does either.

You guess wrong.  The mainstream media does not spend a lot of time talking about prison reform.  Therefore, it is safe to assume that most people don't know a lot about it.  I know a lot about education, so I was aware of the "school to prison pipeline" but found most people had not a clue.  Sanders was the first candidate I can remember in my adult life to make statements like that. If you know about other presidential candidates who made prison reform a major part of their campaigns, then please share, Oh, so "well-informed" and brags about it CNN viewer.  

 I count three, and with me four, people on this post who were aware of the issue before hearing about it from Bernie.  Personally, I don't recall ever hearing or reading of Bernie discussing it, and if I had it wouldn't have been a revelation to me.

May I ask why so many find the need to continue to re-litigate the 2016 campaign?

LOST said:
May I ask why so many find the need to continue to re-litigate the 2016 campaign?

I don't understand when people say this. We're not "re-litigating". We're trying to understand how such a disaster as Trump's election happened. It seems to me understanding how an advanced society can elect such a monstrosity of a human being is kind of important.

drummerboy said:

LOST said:
May I ask why so many find the need to continue to re-litigate the 2016 campaign?

I don't understand when people say this. We're not "re-litigating". We're trying to understand how such a disaster as Trump's election happened. It seems to me understanding how an advanced society can elect such a monstrosity of a human being is kind of important.

 I knew I should have clarified. I was really thinking about the Primaries and the selection of Clinton as the nominee. That's what some seem to want to discuss ad infinitim. 

notupset said:
I was thinking it wasn't appropriate for news network CNN to have this sort of chat on a national show.   I am going to sum up the responses by saying that generally it sounds like people in Maplewood think it is ok.   Fair?  

I didn't think the discussion (as quoted in the op) was appropriate.  Kanye West certainly deserved criticism but it wasn't done in an appropriate way.

LOST said:

drummerboy said:

LOST said:
May I ask why so many find the need to continue to re-litigate the 2016 campaign?

I don't understand when people say this. We're not "re-litigating". We're trying to understand how such a disaster as Trump's election happened. It seems to me understanding how an advanced society can elect such a monstrosity of a human being is kind of important.

 I knew I should have clarified. I was really thinking about the Primaries and the selection of Clinton as the nominee. That's what some seem to want to discuss ad infinitim. 

Well, that's because some take the delirious position that the primaries were stolen from Bernie - and it's fun to take pot shots at such easy targets.

Never mind. Today on Twitter -

https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1057382916760707072?s=21

"My eyes are now wide open and now realize I’ve been used to spread messages I don’t believe in. I am distancing myself from politics and completely focusing on being creative !!!"