But the latest, clearest example came from last night, when a Black Lives Matters activist called her out over her infamous "super-predators" comment. (More on the background planning for this to happen is here):
You know, this:
That said, Clintonistas on Facebook has already said, but Sanders voted for the 1994 crime bill, too. He did, tis true. He also caveated his vote at the time.
And, otherwise, in general, I see many Clintonistas offering up apologetics which are themselves ripe for #WhichHillary skewering.
So, on all of these stances she took, was it the Hillary Clinton brainwashed into her stance, like George W. Bush brainwashed her into the Iraq War, or was it the Hillary Clinton just following the crowd?
Was it the Hillary Clinton who wasn't elected in 1992 and therefore has no association with eight years of Bill Clinton's presidency, or was it the Hillary Clinton who said, "You buy one, you get two"?
Yes, politicians in general try to shuffle off blame and responsibility. But, nobody's done it as much, and as artlessly, as her — with the exception of her backers.
Nothing is ever her fault.
And, as they continue to say that, they dig an ever-deeper hole on the trust and responsibility issues.
Per eight years ago, do you really trust Hillary Clinton to take that 2 a.m. call?
Let's get back to that 1996 video, though.
"No conscience"? As in the drug-crazed zombies of "Reefer Madness"? It's not just whether the War on Drugs was punitive or not, it's that she's passing along stereotypes associated with it.
"Bring them to heel"? You know who you bring to heel? Dogs and uppity black folks. Yes, many in the Congressional Black Caucus supported the bill, too. And, many in the CBC were already selling out to the neolib establishment by then.
As Cenk Ugyer notes, in reality, she lobbied for Clinton's crime bill, and given that "super-predator" had already been used by Republicans before, and primarily about black youth:
What can you call this but a dogwhistle? Especially since it was part of Bill's 1996 re-election campaign (note the date stamp on the video, and note the "Campaign 96" icon), and had popped up months earlier in the pages of The Weekly Standard, by John DiIulio, who went on to be Shrub's first director of faith-based initiatives. Alternet's got the goods, with that link.
DiIulio's own piece is ... horrible. He tries to sugarcoat it by making it look like his concerns are broader than black inner-city youth, even as he then goes on to write them off.
So, even though Sanders' stance on crime issues hasn't been perfect (and let's not forget that he comes from that same rural white state where he unduly panders to gun owners), the likes of Mediate are wrong in trying to brush this off.
Worse is Clintonistas who refuse to even discuss that Hillary lobbied for the 1994 bill, that she campaigned for Bill in part based on the 1994 crime bill, and that she used the "super-predator" on the campaign trail in what can only be called a dogwhistle.
That gets back to: was it the Hillary Clinton brainwashed into her stance, like George W. Bush brainwashed her into the Iraq War, or was it the Hillary Clinton just following the crowd?
Following the crowd is the answer, I guess: She's now essentially said "Nobody asked me to show regret before."
All of this, as much of the Democratic Leadership Council/Third Way Democrats largely supported the occasional dogwhistle, is another reason why it's time to stop enabling the Democratic Party.