Context is everything. And you completely missed it.
This is about remarks before the NAACP. And a hot-button issue for the NAACP is the penalties for crack possession, vs. the penalties for cocaine possession.
The penalties are/were much more severe for an equivalent amount of crack. This resulted in disproportionately higher penalties for crack addicts -- who are mostly black.
Crack was invented to provide a cheaper alternative to cocaine, and addicts are overwhelmingly black. In contrast, cocaine is more expensive and addicts are mostly white.
Maybe I’m wrong, but normally the most recent response is what’s at the top of an email, right?
I say let the Clintonista explain ‘that crack’.
I remember when black leaders were begging for more enforcement of crack dealing and usage. We had crack babies, crack whores, crack this, crack that as the scourge of black neighborhoods. Meanwhile powdered cocaine was seen as a little bit of upper and upper-middle class nose candy.
Yep - context is everything...
The “harsher” penalties were DEMANDED by black leaders at the time...some of whom are now trying to portray the sentencing guidelines as “white racism”.
You really should go do your homework.
Crack, coke powder, makes no difference to me. Execute the dealers, from street level to kingpin, no plea deals, and the problem will go away.