Hillary Clinton has thoughts on white supremacy

The Washington Post published an opinion piece by Hillary Clinton this morning. Like nearly every other Hillary pronouncement in the past four years, this feels like an attempt to surf the wave of strong feelings within her party in a way that makes her seem relevant once again. In 2020, that means talking like a woke diversity trainer:

Wednesday’s attack on the Capitol was the tragically predictable result of white-supremacist grievances fueled by President Trump. But his departure from office, whether immediately or on Jan. 20, will not solve the deeper problems exposed by this episode. What happened is cause for grief and outrage. It should not be cause for shock. What were too often passed off as the rantings of an unfortunate but temporary figure in public life are, in reality, part of something much bigger. That is the challenge that confronts us all…

But it is not enough to scrutinize — and prosecute — the domestic terrorists who attacked our Capitol. We all need to do some soul-searching of our own.

She says “we all” but she really means “you all.” If you have any doubt, check the hundreds of comments left on this piece by progressives who all agree every person and policy on the right is responsible for what took place at the Capitol. There’s very little soul-searching going on here just more partisan blame. The underlying problem, according to Hillary, is white supremacy but her plan to deal with it sounds incredibly vague.

Removing Trump from office is essential…But that alone won’t remove white supremacy and extremism from America. There are changes elected leaders should pursue immediately, including advocating new criminal laws at the state and federal levels that hold white supremacists accountable and tracking the activities of extremists such as those who breached the Capitol.

New criminal laws? What are they? How will new laws end white supremacy anyway? Also, I’m pretty sure extremists are already being tracked by the FBI. What specifically could they do that they aren’t already doing? Her analysis here is, dare I say it, skin deep:

The Biden administration will need to address this crisis in all its complexity and breadth, including holding technology platforms accountable, prosecuting all who broke our laws, and making public more intelligence and analysis about domestic terrorism.

I agree we should arrest and prosecute everyone who stormed the Capitol. That’s already starting to happen and it should continue. But what is Hillary really adding to this debate? Is she really on board with some of the demi-religious talk about white supremacy as a kind of original sin that is currently popular on the left. She doesn’t really go that far but she isn’t ruling it out either.

We’re now in an era when the left is championing efforts to “defund the police” but it was the Clinton administration that poured money into police departments and, at the time, Hillary supported all of that.

When Clinton left office in 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. Human Rights Watch reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison, even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal drugs. Prison admissions for drug offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level in 1983. All of the presidents since 1980 have contributed to mass incarceration, but as Equal Justice Initiative founder Bryan Stevenson recently observed, “President Clinton’s tenure was the worst.”

Some might argue that it’s unfair to judge Hillary Clinton for the policies her husband championed years ago. But Hillary wasn’t picking out china while she was first lady. She bravely broke the mold and redefined that job in ways no woman ever had before. She not only campaigned for Bill; she also wielded power and significant influence once he was elected, lobbying for legislation and other measures. That record, and her statements from that era, should be scrutinized. In her support for the 1994 crime bill, for example, she used racially coded rhetoric to cast black children as animals. “They are not just gangs of kids anymore,” she said. “They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘super-predators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.”

Clinton now says she regrets all of this including the super-predators remark but she remains an odd choice as a spokesperson against white supremacy. In fact I think a case could be made that she’s an example of the “white mediocrity” the left likes to talk about.

I don’t think Hillary really cares much about the details. She cares about positioning herself before the public using whatever platitudes make her seem relevant at the moment. The real question is why she still bothers. Is she looking for a job in the Biden administration? There have been reports she’s been considered for UN Ambassador but she didn’t get the job. Then again, she’ll be 77 in four years, one year younger than Joe Biden is now. I wonder if she’s thinking the third time is the charm.