Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Say it Ain't So...Even if it Is

Howling Latina has been struck by a bolt of outrage once again. Something Barky said; something unimaginable.

After the Supreme Court ruled that states can't execute someone who has not done any killing, well, Barack Obama chimed in to the media and expressed his disapproval with the ruling.

That's right. It seems the United States is not killing enough people.

My Way reports that "Obama told reporters Wednesday that he thinks the rape of a child, ages six or eight, is a heinous crime. He said if a state makes a decision, then the death penalty is potentially applicable."

Yep, he's on the record against the "court's blanket prohibition."

Now ain't that special. Please tell me again why the howler should vote for this man???

Obama was one of the leading voices in banning the Death Penalty in Illinois. What Obama is saying makes plenty of sense Constitutionally: the Death Penalty is a state issue, as only states can decide whether or not they apply it. Therefore, if the state's decide IF they apply it, they should also decide WHEN they apply it.

Obama has read the Constitution, it seems. His reasoning here actually just makes me like him more. love for Obama helping to pay off Clinton's debts.

I mean, what the hell is it going to take for you to get behind the Democratic nominee?
I'm an abolitionist; read my profile. This is an issue that ignited my political advocacy.
Oh and Dan, then I take it Barack Obama thinks it should be up to the states whether blacks can vote? You know, states rights and all that crap!
Most child rapes are committed by males in the victim's own family.

Do you really think O would advocate sentencing a girl's father, brother, uncle, stepfather or grandfather to death?

Not likely. The death penalty for child rape would be as selectively applied as the death penalty for murder is now. What's that average sentence for the murder of a woman again? Oh yeah, six years, not an eternity, and the men just keep on killing.

The death penalty right now protects white men and a select few of their property from everyone else.
It's useless as justice.
Yeah, but leave it to an ambitious prosecutor like the idiot Paul Ebert of Prince William County orChuckie Rosenthal of Harris County, Texas, one, and voila, daddy's gone.

And by the bye, why shouldn't daddy pay the same penalty as ANYONE else. If anything, the betrayal is that much more outrageous.
I totally agree - the research shows that daddy is indeed worse, and if anyone deserved to pay an eternal penalty it would be the daddies, step-daddies, uncles, brothers, etc.

My point, obviously not very well made, was that these worst offenders are precisely who would be let off, because lawmakers, judges, lawyers, juries and the media identify with them far more than they do with any female child. Freud retracted his discovery of the prevalence of incest in Victorian times because of the outrage that so many "good family men" were being accused, however accurately, of such a horrible crime.

If the death penalty for rapists were enacted, the powerful would continue to excuse the vast majority of perpetrators and punish only the few with whom they did not identify, same as they do now with those who rape, beat and murder grown women.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?