w/ Brad & Desi
NATIONWIDE STUDY FINDS ALMOST NO VOTER FRAUD
Just 10 cases of in-person impersonation in all 50 states since 2000...
VIDEO: 'Rise of the Tea Bags'
Brad interviews American patriots...
'Democracy's Gold Standard'
Hand-marked, hand-counted ballots...
GOP Voter Registration Fraud Scandal 2012...
The Secret Koch Brothers Tapes...
|MORE BRAD BLOG 'SPECIAL COVERAGE' PAGES...|
READER COMMENTS ON
"Tookie Williams Killed by State..."
(139 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
... Wilson Kolb said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:12 am PT...
What was it that Tookie did? Oh yeah: He murdered four people. And he was the founder of the Crips, a gang that has murdered, well, more people than we can count. Hundreds in South L.A., where the people in the 'hood wanted him dead. Sorry, but I ain't crying any tears.
I cried. How sad for everyone involved: for Mr. Williams and the victims he was convicted of killing and for the families of both. May his death bring some ease to their suffering. Now let's just get the death penalty abolished like the rest of the civilized world and no one will have to go through anything like this again.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
... big johnny said on 12/13/2005 @ 3:23 am PT...
Retribution is not justice. Our system as exemplified by the Williams execution is based on the satisfaction of the passions and appeals to the baser instincts of the human species. Law and justice in modern society cannot serve both passion and reason. Execution serves no purpose other than the gratification of a base emotional desire. Execution is not justice, but rather a travesty of justice which manipulates the emotions of victims families and the general public in order to make a generalized statement regarding a collective interest in exacting retribution. I say again, that is not justice, but something else - yet another symptom of the cultural psychosis of a society which claims to be based on law, but lacks a sense of justice.
Careless elisions by supporters of execution of Williams' activity as a gang member into a justification for his killing merely exemplify more clearly what it is I am talking about.
If we are going to put people to death, then it should only be in zero doubt cases, and only after many, many years.
I say this to rid our nation of the practice of killing innocent people. There is no doubt that such events take place.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
... kg said on 12/13/2005 @ 4:54 am PT...
Executed convicted killers cannot kill again. I shed no tears for Mr. Williams.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 5:46 am PT...
Where is the picture of the four people Tookie murdered?
LIFE IS PRECIOUS and if you take someone's life, you have the right to lose yours.
Tookie could have done some things to redeem himself but he did not do them. He did not help the police find other Crip leaders. He did not say he was sorry. He did not admit it.
It's about time Tookie got what was coming to him.
The Hollywood left loses again - thank you Arnold, SCOTUS, and California!
Joan Baez? Bianca Jagger? The 1960s beatnik mentality has got to go bye bye. Maybe it will by the time they are all dead.
As far as abolishing the death penalty because an innocent person might be killed, well, we now have DNA techniques and that will most likely not happen.
I am liking what I have read so far on this blog.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
... Ricky said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:10 am PT...
Killing a convicted murderer who shot innocent people in the back with a shot gun is bad.
Killing the most innocent of life, unborn babies, is just fine and needs to be legal for 14 years olds to do at will.
The modern face of liberalism.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:18 am PT...
Ricky, you are so right! Liberals are such hypocrites!
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
... supersoling said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:28 am PT...
Your comment expresses my opinion on the death penalty. But if there is no way to be certain then the DP needs to be abolished.
Get Up, Stand Up, Sit Down --- Easy Activism
Tue Dec 13th, 2005 at 09:08:59 AM EST
The Supreme Court is the prize right-wing fundamentalists have been aiming at capturing ever since Nixon's departure. The people of the USA have been distracted with useless criticism and judgement of each other. We need to work together to stop the seizure of our Constitution by fanatics and corporate slave-masters. George Bush was threatened by his fundamentalist base when he nominated Harriet Miers. Then he offered their champion, and the fanatics are mighty pleased. Just stop and think about who you're gonna call when you're down and out. The makeup of the Supreme Court is more important than the figurehead who lives in the white house.
You can help our Twelve Days of Justice group to defeat the nomination of reactionary Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. You'll find a prepared letter to Senators here on Booman Tribune in a diary called 'For Justice.'
The website Congress.org makes emailing your Congresspeople so easy. On their homepage just click on `US Congress' on the left side. Enter your zip code and you'll be shown your own representatives. At the top of the page is an alphabetical directory that will take you to the Senators on the Judiciary committee. They are: Specter- Pa, Hatch- UT, Grassley- IA, Kyl-AZ, DeWine-OH, Session -AL, Graham-SC, Cornyn-TX, Leahy-VT, Kennedy-MA, Biden-DE, Kohl-WI, Feinstein-CA, Feingold-WI, Schumer-NY, Durbin-IL. These senators will decide the fate of the president's nominee.
You can paste your letter in the contact form provided, and they will save your address and fill in the forms for you repeatedly. Try it, I wrote my two senators and the whole committee in about a half an hour.
Letters to Congress are delayed because they go through an inspection process. The best way to reach them is by email, fax or telephone. Congress has been bought and paid for by the lobbyists. It's important that they hear how their voters feel about things only from the people themselves. If you care about the direction America is going in, please help us save our last protection against plutocracy, the courts. It's not too late to join in the first days of our action for justice.
Can you please give your country an hour a day from now until Christmas?
Here is the link to Justice Da 2, focusing on Age Discrimination Laws and The Family Medical Leave Act.
The confirmation of Alito will surely have a bearing on the Death Penalty at some future point.
It can be fairly argued that liberals are hypocrites for opposing the death penalty for murderers but allowing it for innocent fetuses.
It can be argued with at least equal conviction that conservatives are hypocrites for opposing abortion in the name of the sanctity of life, but accepting capital punishment (at the known risk of executing an innocent person) and excusing innocent deaths resulting from American bombs over Baghdad.
Tookie Williams is dead. Now let the debate resume over who the greater hypocrites are...until the next bomb goes off, the next murder is committed, and the next execution takes place. Meanwhile, maybe somebody can figure out if the death penalty is really a deterrent...because if it isn't, all rational arguments for its continuation become moot.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
... HAPPY LIBERAL said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:42 am PT...
Yes just like liberals to whine about a 4 time CONVICTED KILLER who shot a member of our military execution-style and hours later joked with his buddies about the girgling noises the victim made as he choked on his own blood.
Who's the terminator here?
If this were Tom DeLay being executed for putting $190,000 into a questionable campaign account, something tells me there wouldn't be many Hollywood celebrities or crying liberals going on and on about something that again - on their part - makes no sense!
Read some of your threads about Tom DeLay here and some of the names being called to Tom DeLay (as if he was CONVICTED of Money Laundering which he has not been) and compare that to the easy ride you have given a man who has been convicted of four different deaths.
I am glad though for one thing here - #1) It tells anybody with a brain that has the capacity to use common sense knows that YOU NEVER listen to a liberal about anything. #2) It shows how liberals are at attacking Republicans and will use ANYTHING to do so.
Now if you were only so good at givng Tom DeLay the same benefit of the doubt that you give this menace - people might actually believe your interests in truth and justice.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:49 am PT...
I actually liked your comments Robert.
> maybe somebody can figure out if the death penalty is really a deterrent...because if it isn't, all rational arguments for its continuation become moot.
25 years later is not a deterrent.
Not being used at all is not a deterrent.
What we need is more of it and sooner.
Why are Californians still paying for Manson and his girls to stay alive?
As far as war is concerned, our government's main job is to protect its citizens and we are in a war right now with a worldwide enemy who wants us dead. Iraq was a great starting place. Iran and Syria are next.
I have reservations about Alito too. I think he is an idealogue. I am skeptical that the hearings will change my mind, but will listen.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
... HAPPY LIBERAL said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:16 am PT...
So, where were all of you when Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was yanked and she starved a slow 2 week death? Two differences here: #1.) Terri Schiavo had no choice. Unlike Williams who joined a gang, and did disgraceful things to earn his sentence. #2.) Terri Schiavo had to suffer 2 entire weeks and die slowly like a prison-camp detainee where this poor ole guy got a simple shot that put him to sleep peacefully and painlessly.
What the hell is wrong with this world?
Tookie Williams wasn't convicted in the court of public opinion, but in an actual court. Likewise, Tom DeLay is innocent until proven guilty, and any comparison of his case with Williams' is just plain silly. Bloggers can't send him to jail any more than hard-hats could have executed Williams. As far as I can tell, Williams' trial was fair, and DeLay's will be, also. He'll get the benefit of every doubt, because his buddies have raised more money for his defense than any Hollywood actor did for Tookie.
Charles Manson was sentenced to death, but the (Warren) Supreme Court overturned all death sentences from that era on a technicality. Manson got no special favors; he was just lucky to have been convicted when he was. As far as "paying for him and the girls" in prison is concerned, many studies have shown that it costs less to keep someone in jail for life than to execute him...that might sound impossible, but the cost of defending constant appeals (meanwhile housing and feeding the appellant) exceeds the cost of imprisonment alone, even for life.
The problem with saying that we should speed up the execution process in order to affirm the death penalty's efficacy as a deterrent is obvious...that increases the likelihood of executing an innocent person, exponentially. DNA evidence is now resulting in people being exonerated who were convicted of crimes 20 years ago; under the "let's get this over with quicker" credo, many of these people would be dead now.
I do agree that any deterrent effect the death penalty offers is weakened somewhat by the capricious nature of its use. But since I don't think the death penalty is a deterrent in the first place, that argument doesn't have currency to me. If the death penalty really were a deterrent to capital crimes, states that employ it would have fewer such crimes, not more. The empirical evidence is counter-intuitive to pro-death penalty arguments.
Here's a question for both sides: "Has any public person's opinion on the death penalty changed in the last 20 years?" Answer: Only one that I know of: Governor Ryan of Illinois, who was hounded from office (for unrelated reasons) after commuting all death sentences to life in the wake of several investigations that proved innocent men had been put to death in his state. A (Republican) governor exercised his conscience, and more people hated him for it than appreciated his act.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
... HAPPY LIBERAL said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:37 am PT...
Technicalities aside Robert that get people spared, I support the death penalty. Not to start a firestrom here, but when the same cadre of folk who are defending convicted killers' lives, are the same ones who thought it was fine to kill Terri Schiavo, and are the same who support partial birth abortions. As I said before, it's all got to do with choice. Schiavo and late term aborted babies have no choice in the matter. This man had a choice to live his life by his own judgement and by his own will. Everything up to the very end - he was granted with choices - even until his last meal. There hasn't been such a going out ruccuss since Evita or Princess Diana.
The DeLay comparison was to illustrate how liberals have basically convicted him (even though the conspiracy charge was tossed out) and are calling him the most awful names. Not one person (a liberal) has verbally executed this man who again - shot and killed a member of our military - and walked about hours later laughing with his buddies at the girgling noises that the man made as he was choking on his blood and breathing his last two breaths.
Liberals harp on what can be learned here....we are already learning...LEARN IT.....If you slaughter in this country without justification, you will pay the price! What other inspiration do aspiring gang thugs need than that? The idea that they will be more presuaded by a coloring book drawn by Williams is preposterous.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:41 am PT...
Cheers and jeers are an inappropriate response to this tragedy. Five people are dead. All five for no sensible reason. All five leave behind grief and heartache. Violence and hatred begetting more violence and hatred. For my fellow Christians posting here, remember, the lord says revenge is his. I accept this mans death as part of mans law, but you who cheer this tragedy may do well to look inside your own hearts to see why you love execution so dearly. It is one thing to accept, but rejoice?
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
... Joan said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:45 am PT...
It's alleged that Tookie joked about the killings; it's documented that Dubya joked about killing Tanya Faye Tucker.
Tookie didn't "admit it"; funny, that's the same screwy standard they used at the Salem witch trials: if you didn't admit it, you were burned at the stake.
This guy did time, then wrote children's books in prison & was nominated for the Nobel Prize a few times. I read he claimed he was innocent. I have no idea if he did the crime, but it would seem that he turned his life around in prison.
Kind of reminds one of Dubya's turnaround when he "quit drinking" (did he really? again, I've no idea) and was "born again".
But has Dubya done any time for going awol? for his dui's? for losing other investors' money? for doing coke? (oh right, he didn't "admit it")
for ignoring his own advisors? for "losing" $9 billion? for decimating the environment? for reneging on our treaties? for war-profiteering? for turning the surplus into the deficit? for lying his country into war? for his policy of rampant torture? for not arming his own troops? for stealing from the poor to give to the rich? for outing one of his own agents? for appointing incompetent cronies? for NOT protecting the homeland? for CREATING a training ground for terrorism? for allowing over 1000 of his own citizens to die in New Orleans? for alienating the world?
So, kudos, Ahnold.
So much for "erring on the side of life".
Hypocrisy? Please. These guys wrote the book.
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:49 am PT...
We have an imperfect and corruptible system of justice. Rabid dogs howl for blood, and we call ourselves civilized. Innocent people wait on death row, only to be found innocent years later through DNA evidence or other 'new' information.
Why are we the only Western industrialized country in the world that still has the death penalty? We keep company with China, Libya, Syria, Iran...nice folks, good people. And why do those other Western countries have a much lower violent crime rate than the US?
If one single innocent person is executed, our entire justice system has failed. Yet people like Saint Paul say speed it up, put the meat grinder on high. The system is racist and classist.
Capital Punishment: Those without the capital get the punishment.
Of course we have in office the president who, in his six short years as Texas governor, executed more people than any other governor in history. And he seemed to enjoy it. That's the culture we have created.
No, Tom DeLay shouldn't be executed. So silly. Life in prison would be just fine.
For Happy Liberal et al: I have four grandchildren under the age of 10. None of them understands the death penalty, but all have read coloring books. So in theory, at least, Tookie Williams could have prevented one or more ghetto kids from joining a gang through the example of his writing. Whether that represented true remorse on his part (Schwarzenegger didn't think so), I don't know.
But my grandchildren don't need Tookie Williams' coloring books or fear of the death penalty to stay away from gangs, because they're lucky to live in safe, upper-middle-class neighborhoods, supported by two loving parents. Family circumstances and economics have far more to do with keeping kids away from crime than coloring books or the death penalty do. That isn't said as a defense for ghetto crime (many kids grow up poor, with only one parent, and don't join gangs or become criminals), but as a simple statement of fact that any social scientist or criminologist would confirm.
Take this as an attack on Bush if you must, but government policies that deliberately widen the gap between rich and poor increase the likelihood that ghetto crime will increase again. And all the executions in the world won't change that fact.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
... HAPPY LIBERALS said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:00 am PT...
It's not "alleged" - his partners said this - they witnessed it!
You don't seem to understand - as most liberals do not -
Aborted babies HAVE NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER.
Tookie Williams HAD FREE CHOICE to live his life however he wanted.
NOBEL PEACE nominations are not substantial proof of anything that takes away from the fact that he was a convicted killer (4 times). First of all, the nominations came from college professors and anyone can be nominated for the prize by an eligible party and there is NO pre-selection process to being nominated for one. But in the end - of course - he never won any of them.
You're making this man (by listing his "accomplishments") sound like Mother Teresa.
What's funny is you downplayed the poor victim (member of the miltary) who was shot in cold blood by this monster, and are beefing up Williams' resume for his next life.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:02 am PT...
I consider myself a liberal - moderate but liberal leanings. I have worked in the criminal justice system or in mental health for all of my adult life. I have an MA in Forensic Psychology. I do not have a problem with the death penalty.
I DO understand that the death penalty does NOT prevent crime and that it is about revenge. What most people do not understand is that psychopaths do not think the same way we do. They are dangerous - very dangerous. They manipulate people for their own gratification. The research shows that these individuals do not benefit from rehabilitation and in fact become more dangerous as a result. They LEARN from therapy. They don't learn how to get better - they learn to manipulate better!
It is so difficult to understand if you are not involved in the system. It is like they are alien. It is almost impossible to understand they way they think - because most people are good. Most people can not comprehend how terrible psychopaths are. The world is a much better place without them in it.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:15 am PT...
Oh yeah, on the subject of Delay.....
White collar crime is done by psychopaths too. These individuals do not kill but they destroy the lives of many more people than any one killer does - again for their own gratification.
My hope is that one day we will understand that violent crime is horrible but white collar crime devastates society on a much larger scale.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:28 am PT...
Lots of people in the world comprehend how horrible psychopaths are. Most Iraqis comprehend it right about now.
For Lori: If the death penalty is about revenge, and is not a deterrent (I agree with you, but many don't, and not just trolls on bradblog), then the question follows: "Should we keep it as a component of the justice system, especially since it's applied in a capricious manner and subject to error?"
If revenge killing is justified, then Jack Ruby would not have been put on trial for killing Oswald. He'd have been applauded instead. Palestinians and Israelis would be absolved of blame for their mutual terrorism, because each act was preceded by an opposing one. Retaliatory murders among gans or organized crime families become O.K.
If everyone could agree that revenge is not a valid defense for the death penalty, all that remains is the question of deterrence. That's why I think it's important to get the heated rhetoric out of the equation and focus on the evidence. Very few of our election officials do that...instead, they look at the last poll and decide.
As you point out, the people who pass laws for capital punishment aren't themselves psychopaths and don't comprehend that kind of behavior. They say to themselves, "The death penalty would deter me from killing!" Except, they wouldn't be apt to kill someone, anyway...so their own feelings about deterrence don't matter. The death penalty is only a deterrent IF THE PEOPLE MOST LIKELY TO COMMIT CAPITAL CRIMES FEAR IT, NOT WHETHER SCHWARZENEGGER AND BUSH DO.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:41 am PT...
To those on this blog who are making comparisons between execution and abortion. I hope you will use this opportunity to reflect on what they can do to prevent these tragedies in the future. There are many babies living in desperate circumstances right now. Their mothers "choose life". Against terrible odds this child is fighting to grow to adulthood. Many, like Mr. Williams will be lost and innocent victims will suffer the consequences. It is not enough to say you are for/ against the death penalty or abortion. What are you doing to ensure that every child (planned and unplanned) has the health, education and love necessary to grow up to be a useful caring adult?
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:46 am PT...
The evidence is available. The research is out there.
I wish that we had a system that was not subject to error but we don't and we can't. As long as humans are involved there will always be error. Our CJ system is far from perfect but I do think it is one of the best in the world.
The problem is the "errors" destroy lives. We can do better, again the research is out there, it takes money and education.
This is were politics come in. The research (as liberals know) show that you spend a little money on social programs and it pays off in the long run. Republicans would rather spend the money on prisons then on a food program for needy children. The RESEARCH (you know..... science) shows that a child with good medical care and nutrician is less likely to grow up and be a burden on society. Spend $2000 a year on a program helping one child, instead of $50,000 a year to keep him in prison as an adult!
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:55 am PT...
Again, the repubs are focusing on the wrong problem! Instead of spending money on fighting abortion - spend the money on the REAL problem - how and why are these women/girls getting pregnant when they don't want children?!
Why are repubs so worried about a child having to get adult permission to have an abortion?! The real concern is why/how this child got pregnant in the first place. Why isn't she able to talk to her parents about it?
When repubs talk about abstinence I just laugh. Do you remember what it was like to be a teenager? Again, back to the SCIENCE abstinence education doesn't work!!!!!!
Spend a little money on sex education, it saves a lot more money down the road.
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:57 am PT...
So, the state having the authority to kill people. That's a little too... Big Governmenty... no?
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:08 am PT...
The STATE puts people on trial. A jury of the the defendant's peers convicts and decides the sentence. (The prosecutors, judge and the sheriff are usually ELECTED officials.)
The STATE is made up of elected legislators. We pick who we want to represent us. They make the laws that the PEOPLE want and the sentences that the PEOPLE want.
So yes, the STATE (US) do have the authority to kill people and we do. Don't like it? Then get involved and elect the officials that think the way you do!
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:21 am PT...
I have no problem with the death penalty because these leaches just continue to feed off society. I don't want to spend the money keeping the alive. They don't deserve our compassion or our tax dollars.
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:27 am PT...
So because someone is elected makes it all better? Sounds like tyranny of the majority to me.
Remember that when the big bad government wants to take your guns away.
The PEOPLE wanted it!
Secret military tribunals can order someone be executed, so long as they are labeled 'enemy combatants'.
What's an enemy combatant? Anyone the gub'ment wants to be.
But they wouldn't do that to us.
The Government loves us, right? The people we elect REPRESENT and LOVE and CARE about us right?
If we love them back, we shouldn't have any qualms about giving up rights or creating inbalances in power. It's not like the Government would misuse that right, right? right?
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
... LanceThruster said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:29 am PT...
The strongest argument against the death penalty is that mistakes are made that cannot be corrected. Second comes that it is applied unevenly.
I am not against the death penalty on any moral ground but respect the state governor who placed a moratorium on it because of the possibilty of innocent prisoners being executed.
I think the evidence clearly showed Tookie was guilty of the murders. I think that his writings were a positive factor but are they enough to stave off the carrying out of his sentence? I do not know. I do know that he got many more years of life than his victims did (and he knew it was coming as opposed to out of the blue).
I am sick of so-called conservatives screaming for blood because of the deaths of innocents but do not have the same outrage when their pWesident does it. They are also hypocrites in that if they feel abortion is murder, they do not push for laws to charge the doctors and mothers with murder. They also do not care about preventing unwanted pregnancies with education and contraception, just "abstinence".
Afterall, look how well just "just say 'No' worked for Nancy Reagan (prescription junkie in case you'd forgotten). Finally, once a child comes into the world, they could give a sh*t what happens to him or her up to and including that time that they can get them to enlist.
I saw Bush's "Culture of Life" in New Orleans. They were floating face down in the toxic muck, bloated from all the compassionate conservatism heaped upon them.
If/when the revolution comes, I hope they're the 1st up against the wall.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:32 am PT...
Hey, I wouldn't be reading this blog for the last 2-3 years if I didn't think there was a problem! There is! The repubs have manipulated our Constitution to their own selfish needs. It has to change!
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:32 am PT...
Steve Lopez wrote in the LA Times:
"I watched him die from 12 feet away. The execution team struggled to tap a vein, and Williams raised his head as if to question their competence. He also looked at supporters and exchanged final words with them before the drugs kicked in and he was gone.
Nothing I saw made me feel any differently about Williams, the Crip co-founder whose legacy is terrorized neighborhoods and a chorus of weeping mothers.
His anti-violence books and speeches were too little, too late, and the methodologizing of him was as unconvincing as the Nobel nominations.
But his execution was a macabre spectacle in a nation that preaches godly virtue to the world while resisting a global march away from the Medieval practice of capital punishment.
I would have had no problem leaving Williams locked up with his regrets and haunted by his deeds for the rest of his natural life.
I watched a man die today, killed by the state of California with institutional resolve, and wondered what we gained."
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:44 am PT...
I don't doubt that Tookie deserved to die.
It boils down to this: Is it better to kill innocent people to insure that no guilty go free?
Or is better to let some guilty escape to insure that no innocent people die?
Because out legal system is pretty flawed to favor to favorthe rich and powerful.
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:50 am PT...
"Because out legal system is pretty flawed to favor to favorthe rich and powerful."
White collar crime is mostly done by the "rich and powerful."
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:59 am PT...
That is one of the most hateful and revealing comments I have ever read.
I am speachless.
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:15 am PT...
I am able to say that because I have worked with these people. I see the destruction and horror they bring to the lives of good people. If you believe in evil these people are evil. They do not deserve your compassion.
You think that I am hateful and that my comments "reveal" something about me?
I am often made fun of by the law enforcement agents that I work for and with. They say that I am soft.
I AM a Humanist. I DO believe that MOST people are good. When I say people I include the world.
Reality is that there are "evil" people out there. If you want to believe that I am a horrible person then I hope that you never come in contact with the real thing. You won't survive.
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
... Brett said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:16 am PT...
This is the most rational comment on this blog!
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
... Brett said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:19 am PT...
Where was Cindy Sheehan last night? Didnít see her at San Quentin?
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:26 am PT...
A friend of mine pointed out (while laughing) that you may be suggesting I am racist. Please understand that by "these" people I refer to psychopathic killers. The very definition of psychopath includes leach like characteristics.
REALLY quick search found this:
ďNon-victims canít understand this, but the psychopath really does suck the life out of a caring person. I try to think of them now as a slimy suckerfish right out of the swamp, vacuum-lips out and prowling for someone vibrant and attractive to con and eviscerate.Ē
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:27 am PT...
Hey, I wouldn't be reading this blog for the last 2-3 years if I didn't think there was a problem!
You wouldn't be reading this blog for the last 2-3 years because this blog is less than two years old.
COMMENT #45 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:33 am PT...
I have a very poor concept of time. I think it comes from being an USAF brat. Everything is in 2-3 year increments for me. BUT I am willing to bet it has been a little over two years.
But okay......Hey, I wouldn't be reading this blog for the last two years if I didn't think there was a problem!!!! I love the Brad BLog! I have loved the Brad Blog for two whole years!
Does it surprise you that not all liberals think a like?
COMMENT #46 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:41 am PT...
Yes, it is rational. But our system can be abused. It is being abused. I love the Constitution. #33 may be a bit "out there" but I share the same fears.
Unlike #33 I hold "the people" responsible. We have been letting this administration get away with shit for far too long. People are died and dying.
COMMENT #47 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:47 am PT...
For Robert and Lori
> the death penalty is about revenge, and is not a deterrent
It is not about revenge. Revenge is the Lord's. It's about justice.
I like what the callers are saying on Rush today.
One said that the death penalty is a deterrent for inmates. It keeps them in line.
One said that the death penalty is not about revenge but about the victimís families being able to have justice and to forgive and to move on.
One said that the State did not kill Tookie, he killed himself with the choices he made. He committed suicide.
The death penalty is a deterrent because Tookie will never kill again.
Everything a person says and does has consequences.
It does not matter whether he wrote children's books against gangs, he still has to pay for what he did.
Tookie's son is in a CA prison and they have it locked down right now because the Crips and Bloods may unite to go after the guards. The apple does not fall far from the tree.
COMMENT #48 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:47 am PT...
There will always be pathological people who are really evil. The death penalty does not rid us of them.
Would you rather innocent people were executed to insure no guilty ones went free?
Yes or no.
COMMENT #49 [Permalink]
... KestrelBrighteyes said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:51 am PT...
A friend of mine had what I think is an interesting idea, regarding the death penalty.
She suggested that ALL PERSONS who are involved in making the decision to send someone to their death should have to sign a contract, stating that if it is ever proven that the person they sent to die was, in fact, innocent, they will agree to accept the exact same penalty ASAP.
They will, in effect, stake their own life on their certainty that someone is, without a doubt, guilty, and should die for their crimes.
Things that make ya go "Hmmmmmm....."
COMMENT #50 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:54 am PT...
I wish that this was a "black or white" issue for me. It would be so easy for me to decide that way.
Unfortunately it is not a "black or white" issue.
Of course I believe it to be wrong that innocent people may be put to death. The thought horrifies me.
I would rather guilty people were executed to insure that the innocent are no longer harmed.
COMMENT #51 [Permalink]
... slamdunk said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:55 am PT...
Osama believes in the death penalty for all Americans and other infidels.
How about saying no to killing.
And how bout those Austrians who now hate their favorite son and who want to strip Arnold of his citizenship and name the Arnold stadium after Tookie Williams.
Arnold is through and karma will dog him for eternity.
COMMENT #52 [Permalink]
... Brett said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:58 am PT...
Don't let 'em gang up on you Lori.
Since they can't win elections with their socialist rhetoric, they like to shout you down, dismiss your point of view, much as the brown shirts did in1930ís Germany.
COMMENT #53 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 10:59 am PT...
Of course most people feel that way. But you are ignoring reality.
COMMENT #54 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:01 am PT...
"One said that the death penalty is not about revenge but about the victimís families being able to have justice and to forgive and to move on."
The most idiotic thing I have read yet. The death of the killer does none of that for families.
There is no rejoicing in the death of a killer. The only benefit is that they are no longer able to harm others.
Nothing can heal the victims' than for their loved one to be alive and with them.
COMMENT #55 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:08 am PT...
Reality is grey not black or white.
I hate abortion BUT I hate the thought of someone telling a woman what she can or can not do with her body even more.
I hate killing but I hate the thought of these psychopaths manipulating the innocent even more.
Mr. Willaims continued to manipulate right up until the moment he was killed. Rumors of prison riots even after he is put to death. I am sure this man laughed at the rich celebs speaking to save his life.
COMMENT #56 [Permalink]
... owen said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:11 am PT...
The fact that you enjoy listening to Rush speaks volumes about you and your penchant for hypocrisy. I know I probably need to explain that statement to you, but you are not worth my time. One word Oxycontin.
Happy Liberal, I suggest you change your moniker. You are neither happy (just another miserable foolish pawn of the neocons who will happily trash you after they have your vote and anything else that they can suck out of you), nor a liberal. Just a troll.
COMMENT #57 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:14 am PT...
Please don't let my 1 (criminal justice) or 2 (military) right leaning ideas fool you into thinking I support the repub platform. Faaaar from it.
Communism and Socialism look really good on paper. But we are human and such concepts won't work as long as greed excists. A Federal Democracy has it's "issues" but it is the best we have so far.
Right now the repub party is so full of corruption (greed, theft, hyprocracy, lies, cheats, etc., etc. etc....) that I fear it will take a generation to clean up the mess. The admin is responsible for the death of thousands.
COMMENT #58 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:24 am PT...
I feel I should clarify. I support the death penalty, but I think it should only be applied to elected and appointed state officials.
COMMENT #59 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:25 am PT...
"IF THE PEOPLE MOST LIKELY TO COMMIT CAPITAL CRIMES FEAR IT, NOT WHETHER SCHWARZENEGGER AND BUSH DO."
It's only part of the theory that Capital Punishment will detour them from killing. It's also part of the theory that one should suffer the same consequences as the crime they committed, not only for the victims of these families, but also so that haneous criminals aren't rotting in prison costing taxpayers millions of dollars a year.
The bottom line: These criminals know the possible consequences of their actions. Bush, Schwarzenegger, Republicans as a general matter can endorse and support the death penalty to the fullest extent of their democratic existence (as I do). But I am just asking you guys to understand that in this case - Tookie Williams made his choices, he knew the possible consequences of his actions when he killed each of those four people and destroyed countless members of their families' lives. Therefore, he was fully aware of all knowledge before he made his choices. He's not a victim!
You won't agree with me now, but if this were a member of your family - you'd feel quite differently about the coloring books he wrote for children.
Lastly, I'd like to shed light on the Democrats for a moment and their obvious attempt to politicize absolutely everything. Since the beggining of the 20th Century DEMOCRATS and REPUBLICANS alike have fought to keep Capital Punishment around for various reasons. In this specific case, these trials were tried before fair and impartial juries, it was reviewed by more than 40 judges, and was appealed dozens of times in a fair manner. He got everything that the United States Justice System offers.
Now the headlines of this post are "Tookie Williams Killed by State" and not far behind - mention of Arnold (a republican) was made. In various comments of this post we've heard "Bush", "Arnold", etc. Let it be clear that Arnold did not kill Williams. Arnold refused him clemancy after a jury convicted him four times and after the judges in the case all determined the death penalty to be fit punishment. This isn't a Republican / Democrat issue in the case of itself.
The only thing that could be legitimately labeled as "politicization" is the extreme left's response to the punishment.
COMMENT #60 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:27 am PT...
LOL! See......we think a like! Didn't I say psychopaths?
COMMENT #61 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:29 am PT...
So you think it's better to take an innocent life to make sure all the guilty murderers die.
COMMENT #62 [Permalink]
... owen said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:33 am PT...
May I suggest that you "detour" on over to FreeRepublic, where you can find a more appropriate audience for your "haneous" posts.
Oh, and on the way why don't you pick up a spell checker, someone with a grasp of the English language to "detour" you from making "haneous" errors, and while you are shopping at WalMart you should look for good deals on an opinion of your own.
COMMENT #63 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 11:39 am PT...
No I don't think it is better. But it is the best we have.
Are there "numbers"/research about the innocent vs. guilty who die?
It HAS been very interesting. Thank you all for the insight. I promise to continue on with my struggle for an answer to this issue.
However, I got to go to work...... I am running late as it is. I can read the posts from work but I don't like to post while at work.
COMMENT #64 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:16 pm PT...
Sorry Owen, I do know the difference.
So replace "haneous" with "heinous" and argue the point.
Prove me wrong at which side is politicizing this.
COMMENT #65 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:30 pm PT...
By the way Owen, since you are blessed with a significant amount of intellectual capacity, I am sure that you will be able to give special examples of my "heinousness". Your post was pretty accusatory, but unlike mine, failed to explain anything.
So show me some of that liberal intellectualism and formulate an argument against one or all of my points. After all, how can you possibly suggest that I shop at WalMart for an idea after you fail to counteract my arguments with one of your own?
COMMENT #66 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:34 pm PT...
What's wrong with politicizing issues?
Is the death penalty not worthy of political debate?
I see few if any making it Republican vs. Democrat.
It's about those who support capital punishment, and those who do not.
That is a political discussion in and of itself.
Are the people free to rail against a system that puts vengeance over justice?
Or a system that lets those go free who should be executed?
Or should we just shut our fucking mouths and do what Big Government tells us?
COMMENT #67 [Permalink]
... MrBlueSky said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:37 pm PT...
To those who know me on this blog know that I am NOT a neo-con... in fact I am quite progressive.
I have actively opposed the death penalty in college in San Diego with Amnesty International.
To this day, I hate the very notion of bringing us down to the level of the killers.
I weep with the families of both the victims and those killed innocently. A statistic I have quoted from Amnesty since my college days is that up to 36% of all people executed were later found to be innocent of the crimes they were convicted of commiting. That is a good reason to get rid of the death penalty.
After providing the above credentials in my firm opposition to the death penalty, I decided last night that, for once, Governor Schwartzenegger was correct.
Tookie got exactly what he deserved.
And, here in Seattle, the Green River killer stays alive due to a plea deal. He needs to be killed too... regrettably, he still has a pulse.
Tookie received justice... and the Green River killer successfully evaded it.
I oppose the death penalty, except in the most extreme of cases.
COMMENT #68 [Permalink]
... des said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:38 pm PT...
actually, happy lib (#59), the first grenade of politics in this discussion was thrown and mashed around by the right-wing trolls. #8 called liberals "hyprocrites", directly contradicting your assertion that Dems are the ones who "attempt to politicize absolutely everything." so there!
seems like everything gets politicized these days, and it ain't just the Dems who are doing it. be fair. look to your own when you make inflammatory accusations about what the so-called other side thinks and feels. tell us what you DO know, which is your own opinions, thoughts, etc. pull your own partisan helmet off your eyes and ears, and let's talk as plain ol' Americans.
that said, i want to thank RLM, Jo and Lori for articulating so well the issues that i think are really at work here. i agree --- just like the old adage, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
i understand Lori's position, emotionally and intellectually, and it has much credence for me because she says [well, claims but i believe her] that she has a great deal of personal experience in this area.
Lori, i understand your position, but i do not necessarily agree that psychopaths should be executed. in your experience, is there no benefit to studying them, their motives, their psychological makeup? and, in keeping with the valid argument that it costs a lot more to execute an inmate, guilty or innocent, than it does to incarcerate, would it then also follow that the same goes for the psychopaths and others who are beyond rehabilitation?
and for the pro-death penalty folks (please note, not labeling libs or cons) --- here's a question about which i am deeply curious --- do you believe that redemption or rehabilitation are even possible, or worthy of consideration after x many years?
beyond the arguments of retribution, revenge, innocence, deterrence, and what constitutes appropriate punishment --- it would seem that one could be rehabilitated, one could be redeemed over a lifetime of inprisonment, but the punishment does not change. is it that redemption should have no bearing on the original sentence? why?
thanks in advance for all cogent, articulate, well-thought-out responses that are not politicized or inflammatory.
COMMENT #69 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 12:39 pm PT...
"Or should we just shut our fucking mouths and do what Big Government tells us? "
BVAC, if it's liberals - that would be a great start, yes.
Politicizing to demonize Republicans like Bush and Arnold is wrong to do. It shows a weak ego on the part of Democrats!
COMMENT #70 [Permalink]
... Steve said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:10 pm PT...
Lori #31- Obviously, you trust our electoral system more than many regulars on this blog.
Brett #42- Cindy Sheehan is in Great Britain trying to serve the cause she believes in. Bringing her up in the context of the execution of Tookie Williams is typical of how you right wingers like to make whipping-"boys" out of anyone who opposes anything in your agenda. And #52- If you want to compare people to brown shirts I'll have to say that you wouldn't recognize brown shirts if you saw them. Otherwise, you wouldn't be supporting many of the policies of this administration. That fact that you are given the opportunity to spit out your ideas on this blog is what you should be noticing. Do you actually think that if many of the people that frequent this blog decided to troll your right wing blogs they wouldn't get shouted down. (Actually, probably not because more likely their comments would not even see the light of day). You don't even know what a hypocrit you are.
Happy Liberal #59- Sure Democrats politicize. You're the one who brought up "politicization" on this thread. The difference between you and many people here is that you would imply that the Republicans don't. There is NO one currently politicizing more than the this administration and their minions are. As Owen suggested in #62, try and step out of your hard right shell for even an instant, if you can, and search for and independent thought or opinion!
COMMENT #71 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:11 pm PT...
The case of Tookie Williams has been used to demonize those against capital punishment as well.
It happens all the time, to everyone.
Get used to it.
Stop being a fucking crybaby, and cut it out with the cult of personality crap.
This isn't Soviet Russia. Bush and Schwarzenegger are political figures, not glimmering bronze idols.
COMMENT #72 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:25 pm PT...
"You're the one who brought up "politicization" on this thread."
Of course I did! Because that's what they're doing! It's not a Con vs Lib issue. Dems and Reps alike have voted pro Death Penalty for decades now.
This thread describes Arnold as a killer and then liberals bring Bush into the mix as well. Have you been reading?
All I did was pointed out that it was not Arnold. It was a court, jury, judges, that convicted and decided it. All Arnold did was decline clemancy.
By the way Steve, all of this insinuations of "my own thoughts?". Would my thoughts be "my own thoughts" if I agreed with leftists on this issue? I bet your thoughts are not much different than any other right-wing basher in here.
My thoughts are MY OWN, they just don't agree with yours.
COMMENT #73 [Permalink]
... Savantster said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:40 pm PT...
Well, with much ignorance spewing over from the wing-nuts, I'll not bother commenting on how bringing up abortion in this debate is a distraction (go trolls!), or how trying to avoid talking about one man killing 4 deserves death, but one man killing 10s of thousands becomes "politicizing", or any of the blatanyt hypocracy by the wing-nuts (having liberal in your moniker when you are clearly as red as a pomegranate).. there's just no point.
As far as -my- opinions.. I, for one, support the death penalty.. BUT, only in a system that isn't broke to hell..and only for those that "deserve" it. Does someone that murdered 4 people in gang-land style killings "deserve" to be put to death? I think it would depend, and based on the Tookie case, I'd say NO.. Why? He's -contributing- positivly to society.. and at the same time, he's being "punished" because he would have never been outside of that prison. The only people I can think of off the top of my head that "deserve" to be put to death would be people who engage in acts that destroy "someone's life" or a an ongoing threat to the general population in general.. serial rapists, serial killers, those types. Tookie wasn't a "serial killer", he wasn't a "menace to society in general", he was a menace to his neighborhood.. a menace CREATED by our own people, and therefore a problem that COULD be fixed by our own people.. if we wanted to.
With all the innocent people going to jail, and being executed in some cases, the death penalty is a bad thing. If (and that's a huge if) we could ever root out the corruption in our society, then the death penalty in rare cases I could condone. Prosecutors looking for conviction counts, or trying to "look good" for when he runs for office are -very- suspect. Inadequate defense is a HUGE problem for poor people (and one that the wing-nuts like to trivialize). The scales are horribly slanted AWAY from Justice in this society.
Which brings me to the word "Justice".. I don't think putting someone to death is strictly "vengence".. Let's look at the concept of Karma, and how it brings solace to people.. The entire idea of Karma is that "what goes around comes around".. or, "Justice will be served".. We have the saying "I hope they get their just deserts".. Justice, like Marriage, is a 2-pronged word.. it has a "legal" meaning and "spiritual" meaning. In the legal sense, Justice is what's supposed to happen in courts.. the "facts" interrogated and the "right" or "just" descision made. On a "grander" scale, a spiritual scale, Justice means "deserving".. In that context, when people say "justice is being served by the death of that person", they are talking about the "spiritual" or "emotional" context.. the one that seems to float just below the surface of all things, that is just out of sight but you can kind of feel it. Justice in the context of "life isn't fair", that's the untouchable bit..
In any event, the fact that people are "happy" and "excited" about death is what's scarry.. those are the exact kind of people that would BE Tookie Willams if they were living in Poverty.. and the irony is, Tookie seems to have realized the error of his ways while those rejoycing in his death probably never will.
COMMENT #74 [Permalink]
... Steve said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:41 pm PT...
Happy Liberal #69- Forget about my question to you in #70. I hadn't read your #69. That comment (#69) pretty much says it all about you and your ability to look outside/beyond your hard right ideology. NOT gonna happen!
COMMENT #75 [Permalink]
... dancindog said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:55 pm PT...
Whats all this aborted baby crap. I think abortions should be mandatory for many people, most especially for politicians and religious nutballs.
COMMENT #76 [Permalink]
... Bob Bilse said on 12/13/2005 @ 1:58 pm PT...
Like many issues, I would hate to have to be the one to decide what's ultimately right or wrong.
I submit these quotes as food for thought, not as answers to the dilemma:
This is called the 6th Commandment:
(1)"Thou Shalt Not Kill"
...another quote from the Bible is:
(2)"'Vengeance Is Mine' Sayth The Lord"
... These ancient quotes don't have any "ifs", "ands", or "buts" included.
When one tries to counter that with this type of an alternative quote:
(3)"An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"
... the quote makes no reference to Man being designated to carry out this "edict"...In fact, The full quote is recorded by Matthew from Christ's Sermon On The Mount:
(4)"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
As I say, food for thought. I'm not attempting to apply any dogmas. I have no answers, only questions.
My only comment to those of you above who think you have answers - you don't, either.
...and to imply that this is a liberal/ conservative issue is pathetic, and does not serve the debate at all.
COMMENT #77 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:02 pm PT...
"but one man killing 10s of thousands becomes "politicizing""
Yes, we could agree that politicizing Saddam Hussein is inevitable. Oh and by the way, it wasn't 10s of thousands, it was 100s of thousands. Hey, good thing we removed him, huh?
"bringing up abortion in this debate is a distraction"
not when it points out that the same leftists who support partial birth abortion, are indeed the same nuts that are crying over this jokester being executed.
Be careful - Owen might scold you on misspellings.
"having liberal in your moniker when you are clearly as red as a pomegranate"
This is known as sarcasm. I'm glad you brought it up. It sort of makes a point that it seems liberals have become closed minded and conservatives are now the only ones producing ideas or opening their minds. We are the only ones happy right now - therefore the fact that I am, theoretically, more liberal than you these days, AND HAPPY, would support my "moniker"
He did no good! The crime was fitting for the punishment. He got a fair trial, was convicted by impartial juries...APPEALED THOUSANDS of times, the case was reviewed by over 40 judges! Writing a children's book does not get you out of it. I'm sorry.
Savanster, I have seen some of your words describing Tom DeLay in previous threads. He has not even been convicted, but you have managed to hang him to the cross verbally because he's a Republican that you want to be in trouble.
In the end....endless blathering like yours is done for only one reason at all.
To Bash Republicans! Ever since Bush beat Gore in 2000, it has been "Gee, what can I bash Republicans for today?"
Hurricane Katrina, The War, Dookie Williams, Social Security....blah blah blah. Whatever it is, it's just a new thread with made-up facts and distortions of truth.
What's sick is that liberals portray this as if they were a cadre of folk that care about minorities, criminals, and aborted fetuses (oh, wait), Arab terrorists....when indeed all they care about is to use these people as martyrs to justify bashing Republicans without evidence or common sense.
If I truly thought any of you gave a damn about justice or Dookie Williams to begin with, I might believe 1/10th of what you were saying. But, we all know - it's just more opportunity to flap your jaws pointlessly.
I'm the one who is happy, clearly it's you that is not.
COMMENT #78 [Permalink]
... lori said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:11 pm PT...
I'm an atheist.
COMMENT #79 [Permalink]
... Ian Herold said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:13 pm PT...
HL, you're a fine one to be referring to anyone flapping their jaws pointlessly
COMMENT #80 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:26 pm PT...
"HL, you're a fine one to be referring to anyone flapping their jaws pointlessly"
Argue something, like Republicans do.
Come on, try it! Who knows? Your party may even win an election someday.
COMMENT #81 [Permalink]
... Steve said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:44 pm PT...
Happy Liberal #72-
I have read every comment on this thread (have you?). I was writing my comment #74 when you posted #72, so I'll respond to #72. Many people have stated their opinions on this thread. I have stated some, as you have. That's what this blog and this country are supposed to be about. You cry about right wing bashing here. Guess what pal, this is a progressive blog. You're welcome to come here but don't do so if you don't expect to have your opinions critiqued. I'd certainly expect that if I took my thoughts to a right-wing blog. Only problem is, the few times I've tried I've experienced instances where my comments were simply removed and I was told I wasn't welcome there. I have even gone to right-wing blogs that wouldn't even let me onto the site and stated that I wasn't allowed there. Since I mainly post on this blog, I can only guess how they would know they would want to exclude me.
You are the only one I have read on this thread who has advocated that people you don't agree with should have their voices stifled (see your comment #69:
"'Or should we just shut our fucking mouths and do what Big Government tells us?'
BVAC, if it's liberals - that would be a great start, yes."). Maybe you should look at yourself and how much YOU politicize and how you would advocate excluding opposing viewpoints before you criticize ANYONE else.
COMMENT #82 [Permalink]
... des said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:58 pm PT...
Hey! can we stop with the "you started it nyahh nyahhh" and get back to the discussion now?
Bob B (#76) says it in a nutshell --- none of us has the real answer to these questions, just our thoughts and opinions.
i am honestly, sincerely interested in y'all's thoughts on the questions i posed in my previous comment (#68).
COMMENT #83 [Permalink]
... Savantster said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:59 pm PT...
Happy Liberal, there's nothing "liberal" about you, other than the liberal amount of crap coming from your mouth.. Things like "therefore the fact that I am, theoretically, more liberal than you these days," shows that you have NO clue how to use the language properly.. There's nothing liberal about your position, at least nothing you've presented here. You come across as 100% Bush (well, cept maybe when he had the audacity to suggest a woman to the Supreme Court, right? what was he thinkging? a woman??
"Yes, we could agree that politicizing Saddam Hussein is inevitable. Oh and by the way, it wasn't 10s of thousands, it was 100s of thousands. Hey, good thing we removed him, huh?"
First, I was talking about your retarded Chimp.. HE'S killing 10s of thousands with his illegal, immoral, unjustifiable war.. Saddam was doing what all the nut-jobs in 3rd world countries do that the U.S. doesn't care about.. until that 3rd world country happens to be sitting on the [currently] second biggest deposit of oil.. and is run by some group that is seen as religiously inferior by "those in charge". Second, explain to me how, -despite- all the killing Saddam did to his people, some 65% of Iraqis believe they were better off under him than they are now? Hmm.. Demcracy.. when the majority imposes it's will ..
"not when it points out that the same leftists who support partial birth abortion, are indeed the same nuts that are crying over this jokester being executed."
Again, abortion isn't the issue, and your trying to use the "extreme" as a coat for "average" is pathetic too. I, personally, don't support partial birth abortions, but you don't care about that (nor is it pertinant to this discussion). Bringing it up ( and in a false accusation, at that) IS distraction.
"he got a fair trial, was convicted by impartial juries"
So, when the same is said of DeLay, you won't whine about "partisan prosecuters" when he goes to prison? Of course, if he's innocent he won't, right? Innocent people never get convicted? And, you say "he got a fair trial", yet that's the -same- thing said about the 36% of the innocent people WRONGLY executed, right? "fair" is only as true as the system allows, and in this system, it's far from certian that a "fair trail" was fair. I've seen trials where people would say it was "fair", and the judge told the jury "I don't care what you think, this is the only verdict I'll accept". fair? Your saying it's so doesn't make it fact. I'll concede for the sake of argument that he "had a fair trial", but that doesn't change the "debate".. not that I'd expect you to be able to open your liberal mind enough to understand that.
And, any ill have toward Rethugs and/or DeLay is irrelavant to this discussion, yet, you wing-nuts can't accept that. You insist on making everything "partisan", which is "politicizing" things.. they accuse the "left" of doing it? Man, your hipocracy (sic) knows no bounds.. well, it seems to know the bounds of that steel box of a mind you have..
COMMENT #84 [Permalink]
... Savantster said on 12/13/2005 @ 3:21 pm PT...
Des, to your #68..
I'm of the opinion that if someone does something "so bad" that it's decided they need to be removed from society "for ever", chances are they will never change enough to be let back on the streets.. And, the question becomes, how do you know they changed and aren't just faking it?
The legal system in this country has become a joke. People are freaking out and over reacting about all kinds of things, not thinking, not being rational about things. Have you heard about the guy that grabbed some girls arm after she ran out in front of his car? He got riled from almost hitting this kid, grabbed her by the arm and yelled at her, asking her what her problem was.. he's not a registered sex offender because of that incident. WTF? Sex offender? for yelling at a kid for being stupid enough to run into the street without looking and almost being hit by a car? Judges in our system don't seem to be of very high caliber anymore. Social hot-button issues drive policy in a knee-jerk reactionary way, and it's BAD for society.
The -point- of prisons is to "reform". Sentencing is designed to allow "enough time" for someone to make a change for the better, and reinforce that change with a suitable punishment.. That is, it's a time-out grown up style. If you steal a car, sitting in prison for 10 years (and being educated, I would think) should convince you that you don't want to do anything like that again. But, you can't "reform" people if the reasons they are committing crimes trump the "punishment".. that is, when you have a culture of Poverty and have people living in a world where they have "nothing to lose", putting them in prison is pointless. In fact, you give them a chance to eat healty and have a warm place to sleep.. If they had less than that on the outside, why would they "reform" and never come back? If you put them into a situation worse than that when they get out, why would they stay out?
What our prisons -are- today are useless and cruel. People being raped and beaten.. There are some who figure "eh, so what, they are criminals, they deserve it"... I can't understand that. If I stole a car, I deserve to be beaten and raped for 10 years? How does that figure? And, if you beat and rape someone for 10 years, do you really think you didn't just create a totally disjointed monster and are now putting them out on the streets? So, to comment to those that I think likely have that mindset, does DeLay deserved to be beaten and raped for 30 years for his conspiracy (only one of the 2 charges were dropped.. not that I'd expect accurate accounting from one of his supporters) and money laundering? Cause, if he's guilty, he's going to prison.. Personally, I don't think -anyone- deserves that kind of treatment, ever. Not even rapists themselves (though, shooting them in the head is fine by me).
I see our country as having 2 kinds of crime. One is a set of things that happen as a result of society crapping on various segments of the population because it's profitable (and the white collar criminals on the other end.. like the Enron guys, Worldcom Guys, etc etc).. Those people need to be taught a lesson.. but to teach one side of the first group (the crapped on segment), you have to stop crapping on them.. Otherwise, what's their incentive? The "second group" of criminals I see in our society are the violent types.. not like Tookie Williams who was a product of Poverty, that's in the first set.. punish, sure, but let's change the circumstances to prevent more.. but more like Ed Gein, Jeffery Dhamer, Manson, and the serial rapists and guys who rape and murder children.. ThOSE people I don't think can -ever- be "redeamed"... There's something totally screwed up in their heads and I don't think there's ever anything you can do to "fix" them. And, personally, I don't think "all life is sacred", so I don't think we, as a people, have to try and "save everyone".. at some point, you are responsible for your own actions.. and when you rape and murder and eat people for sport/fun, the world -will- be a better place without you.
Sorry for the long-winded response, Des.. But, it's not an easy issue to "sound bite", not if you want to actually discuss it. Most don't care to discuss, just laugh and dance on the corpse of another dead gangster.. they don't want to look at the facts, and the science, at the nature of it all and see that those gangsters are our own creation through our own greed and neglect.. Course, those that refuse to look at it and see the truth are the ones profitiing from it.. it's also in the nature of animals to be self-serving.. It's a shame, actually.. that so many humans want to devolve to shit-flinging monkies when we could be doing so much more.
COMMENT #85 [Permalink]
... Geesh! said on 12/13/2005 @ 3:58 pm PT...
Oh Boo Hoo! He did't have a happy childhood and his daddy did not take him to the circus. How many times have I heard that excuse. All of these guys find Jesus or become do-gooders when their time is short.
He got what he deserved. The more of these types we get rid of, the better it will be for the rest of us.
COMMENT #86 [Permalink]
... Savantster said on 12/13/2005 @ 4:15 pm PT...
"He got what he deserved. The more of these types we get rid of, the better it will be for the rest of us."
My point exactly.. instead of "let's rid our country of racism, oppression, discrimination, poverty.. ", it's "HANG THEM BASTARDS! WOOOOOHOOOOOO! YEEEEEEHAAAAAA!"
Makes me sick to be part of this species some days.
The debate over capital punishment is bigger than Tookie Williams. I hope everyone here can agree on that, regardless of pro or con.
Tookie Williams' case is high profile because of two factors: his (apparent) rehabilitation during 25 years on death row, and the celebrities who rallied to his cause. There will be other death penalty cases in the future, but there will be many more that don't engender his notoriety.
I'm an opponent of capital punishment because I believe no rational (as opposed to emotional) case can be made for it. I concede that none of my loved ones has ever been murdered, and that I might feel differently if that were the case. But should emotion govern our justice system?
I emphasize deterrence because all other arguments for the death penalty are emotional ones. "Someone who kills deserves to die." Oh? If someone burglarizes my home and steals my wife's jewelry, do I get to steal his wife's jewelry in response? If someone beats my kid up, does the law allow me to assault his children? And if my daughter is raped, well...you get the idea. Justice cannot be tit for tat, but if the death penalty can be shown to be a deterrent, I'd favor it as the lesser of two evils, because I'd rather have a criminal die than an innocent victim.
I'm 64 years old, and I've lived through a full cycle of death penalty arguments. What strikes me is that proponents of capital punishment as recently as 30 years ago had limited their advocacy to the belief that it deterred crime. Other arguments that followed the Old Testament model of "an eye for an eye" had been rendered invalied, it seemed. Now they're back in force, as evidenced by recent arguments that one who kills deserves to be killed, period.
If that's the case, then Tookie Williams deserved to die. That's a forward step for the Old Testament, but a backward step for the New Testament model of love and forgiveness. What an irony that the strongest advocates of capital punishment are at once devout Christians!
COMMENT #88 [Permalink]
... Geesh! said on 12/13/2005 @ 4:29 pm PT...
People like Sananster invariably change their tune when their family is devestated by violent crime and murder.
While there is no "woohoo" or "yeeha" on this end (whatever that is). Some people do not deserve to be on this planet. I'll never shed a tear for people who are executed for committing these crimes.
COMMENT #89 [Permalink]
... Happy Liberal said on 12/13/2005 @ 4:35 pm PT...
"My point exactly.. instead of "let's rid our country of racism, oppression, discrimination, poverty.. ", it's "HANG THEM BASTARDS! WOOOOOHOOOOOO! YEEEEEEHAAAAAA!"
LOL Racism is not an issue here. Poverty is not an issue here.
You are the one with the closed mind and have absolutely no idea what you are talking about if you can say something like that. My mind is open to allowing people to better themselves, but NOT after they have slaughtered people.
Read up on the Capital Punishment stats and compare whites to blacks. See for yourself - this isn't a race issue.
I knew you were talking about GWB, I was being sarcastic again. Saddam slaughtered people. GWB took us to war when it was needed and as a result - casualties have occured. There's a difference.
Just like every other middle eastern leader? Like whom?
I bet you're praying for the Elections to fail today, aren't you?
Just like Dookie, the Insurgents and Terrorists need to be killed to clean this world up.
Can you imagine? Liberals are crying about mercury.
COMMENT #90 [Permalink]
... Kira said on 12/13/2005 @ 5:04 pm PT...
Excuse me, #89 --- slaughter is slaughter, no matter how you try to whitewash it. Maybe Saddam called his victims "casualties," too.
80% of the Iraqis want us to leave. GWB says he's instilled DEMOCRACY in Iraq (haha) --- so, if they got a democracy - we need to leave. Pure & simple.
GWB took us into this illegal, illegitimate war in Iraq based on lies, so the "casualties" are in reality the slaughtered. Many of them with CHEMICAL weapons!!! Ahem. What are you gonna whine next? Saddam used CHEMICAL weapons on his own people !! ?? !!
COMMENT #91 [Permalink]
... owen said on 12/13/2005 @ 5:41 pm PT...
I was going to apologize for my inflammatory comments earlier, but now I see that I was in fact correct in my assessment of you "happy liberal".
A few points that you should think about for a while before consulting your right wing talking points sources for a canned response. I am putting them in a numbered bullet point format so they are easier for you to digest.
1) I am not a Democrat. I vote for Democrats in some cases because I see them as the lesser of two evils.
2) You came here to a Progressive blog to tell us how "liberals" think and act. You are not an authority on such matters. You do not even know what a liberal is, you only know what the word means to your ilk. True liberals do not have a guidebook that we follow. I do not watch TV for my news (no not the "Clintoon Network" as I am sure you call it, nor Faux News). I believe that one of the biggest problems concerning intelligent (and otherwise) discourse in America today is that most people form "their" ideas by listening to the talking heads screaming at each other. I prefer to read facts and information from various sources (including traditionally Conservative sources), digest the information for a bit, and then form MY OWN opinion about the issue.
3) Did you really just state that "Liberals are crying about mercury"? That was one of the most ignorant remarks I have come across in a LONG time--congratulations. If you don't believe that mercury is a huge problem, then you are beyond help, and have completely bought the party line. You probably also do not believe in global warming. I am a scientist. Please do not try to "inform" me about these issues.
4) I can understand when somebody spells a word incorrectly in their haste to make their point. However, you said "It's only part of the theory that Capital Punishment will detour them from killing". Your incorrect use of the word detour here (you obviously meant to say 'deter'), reflects ignorance, not haste.
5) This is my last point, and the last thing I will ever address towards you. If you expressed contrarian views on FreeRepublic or any number of Conservative blogs, you would be banned immediately. Here we let you have your say, regardless of whether there is any merit to your opinions. We try to correct your narrow and ignorant worldviews for your own good (albeit none to gently I must admit), but we let you express yourself regardless. That, my friend, is what liberals do.
COMMENT #92 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/13/2005 @ 5:57 pm PT...
I am a Christian and I do not advocate for the death penalty. I am neither for or against it. It seems to me that it only compounds misery and grief. It is not in line with the teachings of Christ. Still, the world has it's laws and they will be enforced whether they are in line with the teachings of Christ or not.
I wonder if those who ridicule the plight of the poor and lost, yet still call themselves Christians have ever contemplated how misguided those feelings are. It is not about who takes you to the circus, it's about not being strong enough to survive oppressing despair. This does not excuse people like Mr Williams or even explain his actions, but gives us an opportunity to find the next Tookie Williams before it is too late to change his course. Rather than cheering his demise, look inside your heart for something greater than hate and vengeance. Look outside yourself for opportunities to change the world into something better and pure. Go to a neighborhood such as the area he grew up and volunteer to help another un cared for child succeed. This is the only way to change this into a story with a happy ending.
COMMENT #93 [Permalink]
... colleenmilitarymom said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:04 pm PT...
Go Owen. Welll said.
COMMENT #94 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:10 pm PT...
Thou Shalt Not Kill -
Translated correctly means - "thou shalt not murder."
We can kill to protect our family and others. That is legal and lawful and Biblical.
We can kill an animal to eat it.
A nation can protect itself from its enemies by forming an army to kill its enemies.
Jesus and the two guys beside him got the death penalty. One became a believer and it is Heaven today. If Tookie became a Christian, he is in Heaven now. Great!
Liberals are hypocrites because Tookie would not be a topic of conversation today if he was aborted.
Liberals politicize everything because everything is about Bush and Republicans being strung up - they are all corrupt and killers - right?
The Death Penalty is about the guilty while abortion is about the innocent. Liberals do not get that at all and never will.
More people in California are for the death penalty than against it. Hollywood celebrities tend to hurt the liberal causes they support. And I like that!
Thanks Des for calling me a troll - you know I love you and especially your hot sister.
COMMENT #95 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:24 pm PT...
One more comment
> (4)"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
That is correct! But a strike on the cheek is not murder. Do I let the guy kill me? Or do I have a right to protect myself?
And, many things in the Bible are about the individual while other things are reserved for the state. I cannot kill Tookie, but my government can. They didn't of course - Tookie killed himself.
A co-worker killed a woman when she ran a red light. He corrected me and said that she killed herself. He is right!
I have a question for liberals -
Does evil exist (I mean besides Bush and the Republicans)?
COMMENT #96 [Permalink]
... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:32 pm PT...
Rightwing Fascist take away a woman's right of choice and Reverse Row vs. Wade? Humans fck. That's what they are good for. Humans are multiplying and using up all the land on this planet. Woman will get pregnant with unwanted pregnancy because of uneffectively used or no contraception used at all and decide not to keep the baby. The rich can affort to abort out of this country like they did before it was legal in the United States. The other women will turn to coat hanger back street abortions instead of a surgical proceedure in a hospital like environment.
This guy Tookie was a convicted killer? Was it necessary to kill him last night? Well George Bush is a lying murderer. He bombed Iraq killing innocent Iraqi civilians based on lies. Lies he told the robots in Congress and the American people collectively. I believe 9/11 was an inside government job and can still be proven with a proper investigation even though most evidence has been destroyed. The Bush admininstration used the anger from the 9/11 attackers long since proven to be completely unrelated to any ties in IRAQ to take over their country. So we now know the President used our military, the strongest fearless most advanced military in the world to attack a country that did not have WMD . I am still waiting for these lying murderers to be charged in any U.S court for the murder and injury to all the people of Iraq and killed and injured U.S. soldiers.
The people in the Bush admininstration call themselves Christian but they really like playing GOD. Bush cheated to take his Federal power just ask Waldo under oath with a lie detector attached to a shotgun pointed to his head. If he tell the truth he lives. Bush, well Bush can go on to write children's books telling kids not to grow up to be a world loser and pollute and destroy the western wildlands and the environment for the benefit of the corporate elite.
COMMENT #97 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:40 pm PT...
Somewhere in the the slums of LA, there is an un-aborted child whose mother chose life. She is poor, uneducated and unprepared to parent a child. That child's future can still be saved. We have an opportunity to act now. Speaking of serving the least among us, I invite all people of faith to join us in this vigil:
"There are moments in every generation when a society must decide on its real moral principles. This is one of those points in history: When our legislators put ideology over principle, it is time to sound the trumpets of justice and tell the truth.
Later this month, Congress will decide whether to pass a morally bankrupt budget that cuts food assistance, health care, and other services to families already struggling to make ends meet. Then Congress will decide whether to give a Christmas bonus of tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans (bah, humbug). Now is the moment when we as people of faith and conscience must stand together for what is right.
Here's our plan... In two weeks, on the evening of Dec. 14, we envision prayerful vigils happening outside the district offices of senators and representatives across the country with one common message: As the holidays approach, Congress must reject an immoral budget that hurts America's poor."
COMMENT #98 [Permalink]
... Grizzly Bear Dancer said on 12/13/2005 @ 6:58 pm PT...
Hey Paul #95 - Can someone put a quarter in your ear so your gumball size brain pops out of your mouth? This would hopefully stop your hands from typing in these amazing bits of wisdom?
COMMENT #99 [Permalink]
... Truth Seeker said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:54 pm PT...
All executions are barbaric. America will be viewed as immature and uncivilized as long as this practice continues. What could be more "cruel and unusual" than state-sanctioned execution?
I question the maturity of all who support the death penalty.
COMMENT #100 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:21 pm PT...
Thanks Mizzly Bare Prancer #96 for proving me right again about liberals!
Here is a partial list of where some liberals fall into:
Conspiracy theory nuts (#96)
Earth worshippers (#96)
Pro-population control (#96)
Hate big business and the rich (#96)
Holy sacraments are gay marriage and abortion
Class warfare (#96)
Want to just feed the poor a fish instead of teach the poor to fish (socialism/communism)
Dope smokers [several bloggers have confirmed this)
Think the government is the answer to problems
Don't really support the military because they are the terrorists (i.e. Gitmo, Abu Graib)
COMMENT #101 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:36 pm PT...
You sure formulate one hell of an argument!
COMMENT #102 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:36 pm PT...
> What could be more "cruel and unusual" than state-sanctioned execution?
Shooting a guy in the back of the head and laughing about it?
God supports the death penalty because he struck people dead. He used Israel to destroy nations. He destroyed the earth by water and the next time by fire. He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. He created it and all of us and he has that right.
He used America to destroy Germany and in the process fulfilled Biblical prophecy by bringing Jews back to their homeland. They have not had a home since 70 AD.
Perhaps he is using the coalition to destroy radical Islam or evil that exists in our world. It is all in his hands anyway and a part of his final plan!
"There will be war and rumors of war, earthquakes, famine, etc., this is not the end, only the beginning of the end" (paraphrased)
COMMENT #103 [Permalink]
... JWilliams said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:45 pm PT...
I myself am personally torn as to if the death penalty is just. One thing I know for sure though, is that Tookie was an unremorseful liar till the day he died. Also, his "childrens books" were a joke; he sold 303 books as of Jan 1, 2005. The liberal media pomped him up as this urban hero when he was in fact a cold-blooded killa. Oh, and for the most rediculous item of the decade....Tookie gets nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize! By college professors! wow...this makes me sick to think that naive American students are exposed to these "progressive" thinkers
COMMENT #104 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/13/2005 @ 8:51 pm PT...
God sounds a lot like a Big Government loving Commie warmonger. Keep Big Brother out of my life, thanks!
COMMENT #105 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:15 pm PT...
Saint Paul is good about proving things about liberals. I wonder what Bible he reads, because I thought Jesus was a liberal. I don't think Jesus would agree with premeditated goverment murder (either in prisons, or in Iraq.)
COMMENT #106 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:20 pm PT...
Whoa! That should get em in the pews! :0)
I worship a loving God. My God is nice.
COMMENT #107 [Permalink]
... God said on 12/13/2005 @ 9:54 pm PT...
Note to Paul:
When The Rapture happens you will not be invited.
Leave the liberals alone. They are my children.
Don't make me smite you.
I have spoken.
For Soul Rebel: I'm sure you're right that Jesus wouldn't approve or Iraq, or of capital punishment.
But I also suspect he wouldn't like abortion, either.
Humility is a good word, Soul Rebel. Only people who lack it are able to ignore the glaring truth that innocent people have been executed. That was merely suspected as recently as ten years ago, but the Illinois cases have removed all doubt.
Kestrel Brighteyes has an interesting angle on this. She suggests that prosecutors and judges who insist on a convicted criminal's execution sign a paper agreeing to be put to death themselves if it's later proven the executed person was innocent.
That's certainly "an eye for an eye," isn't it? Kill on purpose, and you get killed yourself. K.B. is surely right that it would eliminate death sentences, but as a practical matter any legislature that would pass such a law would simply outlaw capital punishment first. Much simpler.
Still, I love the idea in concept, because those who favor the death penalty are fond of saying, "He killed, so he must take responsibility for his act." Fair is fair, right? Then the standard should apply to all killers, including those who execute without a 100%, absolute assurance of the person's guilt.
You said "I have a question for liberals" and went on to ask "Does evil exist".
While I am not certain that I would fit your definition of a liberal, if you will permit, I will address your question.
Evil exists if it has an origin, a beginning. Can you explain the origin of evil pointing out where it originated?
Did your God create evil as this verse, it is argued by some, suggests:
"I am the LORD, and there is none else ...I ... create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (Isa 45:6-7).
COMMENT #111 [Permalink]
... Ricky said on 12/14/2005 @ 6:21 am PT...
Its Sad how Brad blames The governor for Tookies death and not tookie. Its the same pandering he gives to terrorists so no surprise here.
COMMENT #112 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/14/2005 @ 6:26 am PT...
Note to Jo #106
A god of "love only" is a New Age god and is a false god (Unitarian, Unity)
A god of "wrath only" is a false god (Islam)
God (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) is both loving and wrathful. Don't forget that there will be a Judgment Day. Jesus came to save but the next time he comes it will be to judge.
Robert, although I like your comments above, an "Eye for an Eye" and a "Tooth for a Tooth" is not the same as murder.
Life is "precious," a tooth is not. Therefore, the "eye for an eye" and "tooth for a tooth" argument is no longer valid.
Yes, turn the other cheek when someone smites you but that does not mean that you let them shot you. And a gun is the great equalizer. You libs tend to be anti-gun too.
I do not believe in the death penalty except for those who are "guilty" of "murder only."
COMMENT #113 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/14/2005 @ 6:46 am PT...
Ricky #112- you are right again!
The left kook fringe has seething hate for Bush and this administration and Republicans in general but don't seem to hate Tookie or terrorists.
They hate guns more than the killers that use them.
COMMENT #114 [Permalink]
... miss yani said on 12/14/2005 @ 7:15 am PT...
i think that was real fucked up how they killed my dawg. he was a g! everybody makes mistakes, and its not like he was a straight cold blooded killer. that man did turn his life around . yall couldve gave that man some slack! that's cappin. come on now, he wrote chilrens books n' shit! and Bush jokin. i dont know why they gave arnold swartzeneger the benefit of the doubt. he aint do shit. he aint (doing) shit. man that's some boss ass shit. i really dont appreciate them killing ol dude. he even tried to help teens out by turning their life around. true enough he did start a gang that is like thousands strong now but he did change.and this happened like 50 years ago. why they just now killing this dude! man this is crazy im out.
COMMENT #115 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 7:59 am PT...
My church is not "new age", I am a Methodist (same as the President). It is a fun, loving and serviceful church. Many (including myself and my husband) are veterans. We use the model of Christ's life to live by. Since he was a liberal (preaching peace and service to others) I think that will be the standard we are "judged" by. I don't think Jesus is a gun toting, gas guzzling, screw the poor,greedy, warmonger, but hey, thats just me. I don't know what flavor of Christianity you practice but with all the hells fire and brimstone talk, they must be a fun bunch. I suspect you are worshipping at the alter of Rush Limbaugh rather than the alter of Christ. Think about it.
Seeting hate for Bush? Here's one liberal (not a pejorative word in my usage, only in yours) whose feelings toward Bush in 2000 were as follows:
"A harmless nincompoop...not qualified to be president, but he'd be a nice next-door neighbor."
My view of Bush now is as follows:
"A very harmful nincompoop, and I wouldn't want him living anywhere near me."
That isn't the same as "seething hate." Utter contempt? Yes. Disgust? Yes. Anger at the fact that he stole two elections? You bet. Broken-hearted about 2,100 needless deaths in Iraq? Yep.
But "seething hate" is a gross overstatement (a common habit of right-wingers). Hate diminishes the hater...there are more than enough reasons to oppose Bush without hating him, too.
COMMENT #117 [Permalink]
... Ricky said on 12/14/2005 @ 8:10 am PT...
How does Jesus feel about your liberal abortions?
COMMENT #118 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 8:20 am PT...
I am not having liberal abortions.
COMMENT #119 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/14/2005 @ 9:31 am PT...
Many Methodists churches no longer teach the Gospel. My wife used to be a Methodist. Is your church a conservative or liberal Methodist church?
I have played drums in many a Methodist church and like any church, some are liberal and some are conservative. Some teach hardly anything because they are afraid to offend. Some are performing gay marriages. Jesus said marriage is between a man and woman only. What do you say?
Jesus did preach peace. He did feed the poor. He did heal the sick. He did those things to show He was God, how to treat others, and so that they would listen to His message. Jesus also got very upset and threw out the money changers from the temple.
We are to feed the poor, the ones that cannot feed themselves. However, many are poor because they do not work. Many are poor because they got pregnant out of wedlock. Many are on drugs. God is not pleased with that.
The bible talks a lot about working. Adam and Eve worked in the Garden. God worked and rested on the 7th day. We are to do the same today. If one cannot work, then yes, they need to be taken care of. But people that could work and do not work is not pleasing to God.
I'd rather see a welfare system that teaches the poor to fish than just give them a fish. Cutting welfare has worked because it has forced people to go to work which is better for everyone in involved.
Liberals want the government to tax the rich and feed the poor while others feel it is best to let other organizations feed the poor. This is where conservatives and liberals differ. I think faith based organizations are better to deal with these issues. Liberals tend to not agree.
COMMENT #120 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 9:44 am PT...
Ricky, in reviewing your question, I believe I was terse with you and suspect your question was about abortion in general and not specifically me. So out of courtesy, I will elaborate on this matter.
Jesus does not mention abortion however my guess is that he would not favor it. He also does not mention torture but I think he is opposed (since he was tortured to death). I also don't get a sense in the gospels that he favors the death penalty (what this thread is about). As you can see in my many posts above, I make a distinction between mans law and God's law concerning execution and one could argue the same with abortion. This is that separation of church and state thing everyone argues about.
I am a nurse. Personally I favor restrictions on abortion, as a medical procedure, that takes in to account the mental and physical health of the mother. Preformed at the discretion of a licensed physician within guidelines enforced by the AMA and state laws. I would like to see the abortion mills shut down and this issue placed into the hands of family physicians who are better able to assist and counsel for optimum patient care.
I am not an advocate for abortion but I am an advocate for children,the sick, the poor and the infirm. I would favor making abortion illegal IF we as a society will be willing to provide the health,education and welfare necessary to bring this un-aborted children up to healthy adulthood.
In closing I would say I am in favor restricting abortion and doubling the budget for healthcare, education and services to needy children.
COMMENT #121 [Permalink]
... Paul said on 12/14/2005 @ 10:13 am PT...
Good answer Jo
> Jesus does not mention abortion
Correct! Jesus did not condemn homosexuality, abortion, child abuse, wife beating, incest, etc.
Why not? Well, because He came "not to change the law, but to fulfill the law."
He did not have to speak against these things because they were already a part of God's Moral Law. You have to take God' Moral Law from both Testaments.
Read Psalms 139 and let me know what it says about the unborn.
Why does the government need to take care of the poor? Is government the most efficient way to do this? Can non-governmental charities do a better job? Can churches do a better job? I think so.
Are you willing to have 50% more of your money taken out of your paycheck so that the government can increase services for needy children? Money that may go into the back pockets of politicians. Money that may go to "crack" instead of housing, food, and clothing.
There are plenty of people who can adopt that unwanted child and un-aborted child. That is a better choice.
Abortion is Big Business and the #1 money maker for Planned Parenthood.
COMMENT #122 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 10:26 am PT...
Faith based organizations are great! I work with many. They can not provide the big ticket services (well childcare, hospitalization, dental care,medications, education[ preschool through college], job training, rehabilitation, housing, school lunches etc etc that the government can.
Many of the working poor are in need of these services because they do not make enough money and do not qualify for employee benefits. Remember the guy who cleans the rest room at the gas station may well be receiving these benefits. Is his job important? yes! Does it pay well?no! I I would not deny a child a school lunch and healthcare just because his mother had him out of wedlock. Drug abuse is a public health issue and can happen to anyone, rich or poor (Rush Limbaugh is an example). Public health (detox) is costly but is in the best interest of public health. I would love to continue discussing liberal vs conservative Christianity but I need to go to work. Have a good day.
COMMENT #123 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/14/2005 @ 12:44 pm PT...
RLM: Agreed. Sure is a good thing we don't base our laws on what some person - who may or may not have lived 2000 years ago, who had some things written about him decades and centuries later by various people who may or may not have had first hand credible information about his existence - may or may not have said.
My point, entirely, is that it matters not in either case what Jesus would have agreed with. I don't even want to level a charge of hypocrisy at Saint Paul, because it's all interpretation of a text that has been through how many - five at least - language translations, and numerous corrections, editings, omissions of text, etc., based on politics and power. He's welcome to his own personal realtionship and interpretation and whatever else he gets from it. I'm not trying to change that.
I don't begrudge anyone their personal faith. Act upon it as you will. But it ain't law, nor is it the basis for law. That doesn't mean there aren't good ideas that rational and reasonable men can't bandy about and decide if they should be law or not. But the simple fact that such ideas are "written" gives them no merit. That's a point that is missed by those who simply say "this is what the Bible says, therefore..."
I do not argue against the death penalty because I have sympathy for Tookie. I argue against it because I believe it is not civilized. That comes from me weighing what I believe to be the pros and cons of a death penalty system, and the value that I put on human life. Life without parole is not a problem for me. It allows for the possibility of human error. The death penalty does not, and when it is applied, we are saying "I am God." I prefer humility.
COMMENT #124 [Permalink]
... Savantster said on 12/14/2005 @ 1:04 pm PT...
Telling.. Paul said "God supports the death penalty because he struck people dead.", so that means, in his pea-brain, that he is more Godly than us for "supporting" what "God did".. I get it now..
This ties in with all the other -irrelavant- crap in this thread about Jesus, God, Scripture, et al. Guess what.. this IS a Secular country, -despite- what the wing-nuts want it to be. Getting away from religious persecution is part of why we came here, and now the right-wing-psycho-christians want to persecute us here? Don't you nut-jobs realize that the BULK of the Christians here don't agree with your extremist view? To say "God is wrathful only is an Islamist view", then say that it's a "false understanding of God to think he's loving only", while professing "God is loving and hatefull.. and I believe the 'right' bits about God, so what ever -I- do is right" SHOWS just -why- religion is supposed to be REMOVED from LAW and GOVERNMENT.
This discussion could happen with no mention of religion at all.. what's funny is, some people's -entire- position seems to be tied to their religious beliefs and nothing more.. Knowing the -fact- that it's not enough to make "laws" with, they turn the entire debate into a religious debate to see which religious perspective is "best" which would imply the "best" should become law (another flawed logical progression being presented by your wing-nuts in action).
It's even more telling that the -bulk- of the argument for -any- position the right has is based on "liberals are just bad".. nothing else, no fact, no discussing points, just "fuck you, I'm right, my God said so!".
For Geesh at #85 and #88..
Clearly you aren't reading posts.. Or, you are uneducated (or just a heartless prick, either way). This statement "Oh Boo Hoo! He did't have a happy childhood and his daddy did not take him to the circus." shows you have no clue about human nature, and no ability to empathize. Let me try to educate you, just in case you simply don't get it.
Poverty is a condition where by human beings are subjected to constant hardship. The brain, in order to deal with the prolonged hardship, will start to shut down various processes that people who aren't subjected to those same hardships have access to. That is, the thoughts about consequences for actions no longer functions as it would in a "normal" person because consequences implies "something to lose". From an early age, most humans are taught that they will "lose something" if the "misbehave". When you live in a culture of Poverty, you have precious little to "lose".. How is it that we expect someone with "nothing to lose" to behave "decently"? How can we expect "punishments designed to deter" to work if the bulk of the "punishment" is simply "taking away things"? When the person being punished (or who would be punished if they did something wrong) has nothing (perceived, at least) to be taken away, how can punishment work as a deterant? The answer is, it can't.
Tookie was a founder of a Gang, right? Do you know anything about the psychology or sociology of gangs? Do you understand that they are serrogate families for it's members and are comprised of people who never had a "reasonable" chance at an education? The -same- education that Bush and the rest of the Republicans are trying to -diminish more- is what we're talking about. No Child Left Behind ends up being a NET DRAW on the resouces of public schools.. systems that are already struggling desperately to function (though, not in your 'middle class' neighborhoods, so you can't understand or relate to, or even likely believe that statement).. Children aren't being educated, and when you live in squaller all of your life, your values and morals are different than someone who grew up with new clothes, ample food, warm houses, and a distinct lack of violence in their daily lives.
To say "Boo hoo, his daddy never took him to the circus" is to (as wing-nuts love to do) grossly overstate things. How about painting a valid picture.. He likely never knew his daddy and the string of men that were in and out of his house likely dismissed his existence (at best), or beat/abused him on a regular basis. Try thinking of how mean a dog would be if you beat it all the time. Then add the constant exposure to violence.. It's likely that people in the poorest parts of our country hear gunshots several times a week, if not daily. They have to worry about being beaten while walking down the street, playing in the local playground (if it's not a drug-dealer's outpost), at school, walking to the store, all the time.. again, think of how mean a dog would be if it was always feeling threatend with aggression. Now, put that picture in your mind and immagine living like that for 15 - 20 years.. and think of what a "gang" offers you at that point.. protection.. and a way to "get back at those who hurt you".. Seems to me that it's -understanable- (not to be confused with acceptable) that people in that situation are violent.. uncaring.. discompassionate.. disconnected from "reality" in a main-stream context.
Now look at yourself. How do you think you'd respond to someone trying to beat you daily? I'm sure you'd say "Bull shit! I'd kick their ass!".. Ok, so now you have the same attitude as the gang-bangers, yet they have the expierence and pain and lack of "things to lose" that you don't have.. they, unlike you, are action, not talk. They are, as we all know, dangerous.. simply because society refuses to fix their problem. Paul would love for you to believe that "it's their own fault", yet our economic model demands unemployment.. and as things go these days, more and more people are unemployed.. Decent jobs are disappearing and more service jobs are opening up (like McDonalds). Ask yourself this.. would you rather bust your ass 14 hours a day and -still- barely survive working several fast-food jobs, or take what you want and have a LOT more "stuff"? Given that the gauge of "individual importance" is "how much stuff you have", I'm guessing that you would want "stuff".. and, if you lived in a culture of Poverty (with all of it's dysfunction associated with it), you'd be happy just to take it. Life has no meaning in a place where death and pain and misery are common..
What it boils down to is this. Some people feel they deserve "what they can take", others feel we should all try to make the world a better place. Most wing-nuts I've ever met fall into the first group.. which, ironically, is exactly the SAME group the "poorest criminals" fall into. The difference between the groups is, the well off group passes laws they can live with that lets them take more at the expense of the poor, the poor don't care about laws because they have nothing to lose. The -sick- thing is, the well off, despite having "stuff" and "access" and "laws" on their side, STILL engage in illegal activity to get "more". Now I ask you, who's worse in the grander scheme of things? The poor, who have nothing and no hope of getting anything, or the well off who keep the poor down so the can have more and then aren't satisfied and steal anyway? I know who I have more respect for, and I know what changes would make things "safer" for more people, and would be more "compassionate".. yet, Repugs refuse to accept reality and "stay the course" of "I'm gonna get mine, fuck everyone else".
*shrug* You can't talk to someone that won't listen.. and from my expierence, the worst offenders are right-wingers.. when you show them a fact, they don't concede, they change the subject. That's not open-minded, that having an agenda and wanting to push it no matter what.. Kind of like a gang members and other social misfits.
COMMENT #125 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/14/2005 @ 1:29 pm PT...
Sav. You rock. I've been trying to make the point about religion and law to Saint Paul for a couple of days now. It's not working. I've done some PhD work (not completed) in Multicultural Education (somepeople think that this is simply study of different races/ethnicities, but it covers a huge spectrum of differentiation in human populations: religion, gender, economics, language, disabilities), and the things you say about poverty and gang mentality really hit the mark. Especially the part about wing-nuts also having a "gang mentality" - what's interesting about that observation is that we are really looking at two competing gangs (wingnuts vs. street gangs) which I believe is why there is so much unbridled animosity from the wingnuts to the street gangs. Very interesting from a psychological analysis perspective. Thanks for your post.
COMMENT #126 [Permalink]
... bluebear2 said on 12/14/2005 @ 3:55 pm PT...
God wants us to grow spiritual fruits. He does not want us to become religious nuts!
COMMENT #127 [Permalink]
... Medium Right said on 12/14/2005 @ 4:13 pm PT...
I hate people that the and play the middle of the Abortion issue.
Its always: Im pro choice, but anti-abortion. What you would vote for is where your heart is. An essay length post doesnt change that.
COMMENT #128 [Permalink]
... Truth Seeker said on 12/14/2005 @ 5:02 pm PT...
The only value of the death penalty is the mindless revenge of an immature populace.
Who is responsible for 30,000+ deaths in Iraq? Who is the most hated man on Earth? Ricky, Paul, MR, you know the answers. And that is the side you have chosen.
Donít we criticize other countries and leaders when they kill their people? I mean Stalin killed a lot of people, but by our own definition, some of them probably deserved it. If we can decide who has the right to live and die, why couldnít Stalin and Hitler? Not everyone they killed was innocent.
If we are going to execute people, why do we complain about Hitler and Stalin? Some of their victims were guilty. We donít call our leaders murderers and they kill people. Whoís a murderer and who simply executes trouble makers?
COMMENT #131 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 9:02 pm PT...
On the subject of adoption. As an adoptive parent of several "waiting" children I encourage others to join me in bringing all of our waiting children home. Today 117,000 are waiting for adoptive parents. If you are pro-life here is a good place to start making a difference.
From the adoption statistics website:
Based on current AFCARS estimates released January 2000, there are approximately 520,000 children currently in foster care in the United States. Of these, 117,000 are eligible for adoption. (US HHS, 2000)
The federal cost of foster care was almost $3.1 billion in fiscal year 1995, and is expected to increase to almost $4.8 billion in fiscal year 2001. The 1995 estimated total State and federal cost for foster care was $4.485 billion. (US HHS)
what are the outcomes for children in foster care?
After aging out of foster care, 27% of males and 10% of females were incarcerated within 12 to 18 months. 50% were unemployed, 37% had not finished high school, 33% received public assistance, and 19% of females had given birth to children. Before leaving care, 47 percent were receiving some kind of counseling or medication for mental health problems; that number dropped to 21% after leaving care. (Courtney and Piliavin, 1998)
COMMENT #132 [Permalink]
... Jo said on 12/14/2005 @ 9:09 pm PT...
Sorry, my post was in response to the following statement.
"There are plenty of people who can adopt that unwanted child and un-aborted child. That is a better choice."
I agree! I encourage everyone to open their home to a waiting child.
COMMENT #133 [Permalink]
... bvac said on 12/15/2005 @ 7:34 am PT...
Abortion is Big Business and the #1 money maker for Planned Parenthood.
Amen brother! 'Big Abortion' runs this country like a racket and Planned(forced) Parenthood(socialism) is the mafia!
Just like the Prison-Industrial complex in collusion with the Big Trial Lawyers are milking the system down to the last dollar to keep these crooks in their jail cells while their death penalty cases are on appeal! 25 years and millions of dollars to put someone to death, when they could have rotted in jail for the rest of their lives in solitary, for much less taxpayer money!
Stop Big Government, down with capital punishment!
You asked a question which I responded to in my post #111.
Why have you not answered?
Ricky, could you answer for Paul?
COMMENT #135 [Permalink]
... Soul Rebel said on 12/15/2005 @ 8:22 pm PT...
Clarence Elkins was released from prison today after spending six years behind bars for a rape-murder conviction. New DNA evidence shows that they got (and convicted) the wrong guy.
This is why we don't execute people. This could have easily been a death penalty case, and we could have killed another innocent AMERICAN.
you see i may olny be 16 but i beleave that i have an opinion also.
althought i am not gang realted at all i think that he shoulnd have not been killed because he was a nobel peace prize winner, he convinced many littel kids to not join any gangs and how bad it is to be in them and bout the mastakes he made.
i mean come on he be came a man of god and he wrote so many good children books.
if they were ganna kill him he shoulnd of done it soonere than wat was it 27 years on death row witch is bull shit.
COMMENT #137 [Permalink]
... brian said on 12/23/2005 @ 11:43 am PT...
Im sorry for how it came to an end. My only wish was that I could have played an important part in your outcome. How much I would have paid to watch you die or to strike as much pain upon you as possible. I hope your last moments were full of pain and misery. Enjoy burning in hell. May you continue with the all the pain in the world for the remainder of your journey.
COMMENT #138 [Permalink]
... Angel Pantoja said on 1/9/2006 @ 11:38 am PT...
who the hell wanted toookie dead i am going to murder the guy wo wanted tookie dead.
COMMENT #139 [Permalink]
... Angel Pantoja said on 1/9/2006 @ 11:43 am PT...
i am going to fucking murder the mother fucker who was scared of tookie williams and wanted him dead. i am only tellin you guys once and only once am going to fucking murder that little pussy
A Few Great Blogs
· Baghdad Burning
· Brilliant at Breakfast
· Crooks and Liars
· Dan Froomkin
· Fired Up! Missouri
· Freedom's Phoenix
· Freeway Blogger
· Glenn Greenwald
· Huffington Post
· Jesus' General
· Juan Cole
· Washington Monthly
· Media Matters
· Nashua Advocate
· Oliver Willis
· RAW STORY
· Sanoma State's
Project Censored Sites:
· Daily Censored
· Media Freedom
· Project Censored
· Scholars & Rogues
· Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
· Talking Points Memo
· Think Progress
· Tom Tomorrow
· TV Newser
· Ben Sargent
· Bill Deore
· Bob Gorrell
· Cagle's Index
· Chan Lowe
· Don Wright
· Doug Marlette
· Glenn McCoy
· Jeff Danziger
· Joel Pett
· Mike Luckovich
· Non Sequitur
· Not Banned Yet
· Pat Oliphant
· Paul Conrad
· Ted Rall
· This Modern World
· Thomas Burns
· Tom Toles
· Tony Auth
· Stuart Carlson
Or by Snail Mail
Make check out to...
7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594
Los Angeles, CA 90028