Doctor Dean for the death penalty

[snyttri]

Does Dean really support the death penalty? Isn't that a little neanderthal?

[ErasureAcer]

1. yes he does...

and yes it is.

Save the future of not only America but the world, support Kucinich.
www.kucinich.us

[snyttri]

4. European counties won't even turn over prisoners to the U.S. because

we are the only civized country that has the death penalty. It is particularly outrageous coming from a doctor. Do more than a a single digit percentage of doctors support the death penalty?

[FlashHarry]

145. Actually, Japan still has the DP. N/T

[XanaDUer]

2. Yes,

for some cases, like police killers, child molesters, and I think another group.

Yes, it's Neanderthal.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. But war is just fine and dandy!

Innocent civilians compared to convicted criminals. Hmmmm, let me see.

I don't support the death penalty but at least be morally equatable.

[blm]

29. Dean is antiwar? I thought he wasn't.

Don't innocents get killed in EVERY war, or just the ONLY war that Dean SAYS he didn't support (except the Biden-Lugar version of war).

Is Dean a pacifist? Did Dean protest Vietnam? Did he speak at Iraq antiwar rallies?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

39. ******

********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Rising above.

[blm]

41. heheh....

In the interest of complete logic, of course.

poke...poke....poke.

;)))))

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

125. Yes ma'am.

[tameszu]

140. I don't get the poking

It's kind of funny...but I don't know if I get it. Are you poking a dead body? That's gross!

[blm]

143. No...RIF is alive and well.

Just banter between the two of us. He teases me, I tease back. At some point we'll both be on the same side and get each other's back.

[StandWatie]

17. why police killers?

I've never understood that at all.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[StandWatie]

31. ah..

Understood: It appeals to authoritarian types.

[Eloriel]

87. He has said

that he thinks that is one occasion -- and one only -- where the death penatly might act as a deterrent.

You know, I have trouble understanding why DUers get their panties in a knot about this issue. It's not as if Dean supports it universally, OR that he'd have that much influence over it in office because there aren't that many federal issues where he could have an impact.

Somehow, people seem to forget that Clinton was ALL for the death penalty, not for it in extremely limited circumstances.

This is not one of the things that totally delights me about Dean, but it's also not something that's a deal breaker for me. Not at all. I just think there's a bunch of hypocrisy running around here on this issue vis a vis other candidates and other presidents. (And that's not directed at you, StandWatie.)

Eloriel

[IndianaGreen]

88. snyttri said that Dean had a blanket support for the death penalty

snyttri is the poster that started this thread with this "innocent" sounding question:

Doctor Dean for the death penalty

Edited on Sat Aug-23-03 03:21 PM by snyttri
Does Dean really support the death penalty? Isn't that a little neanderthal?

The original question was even more emphatic.

[GreenArrow]

107. It tells me a lot about him

especially as a "do no harm" Doctor. Of course, he wouldn't have to flip the switch, or inject the fluid--there are functionaries to take care of that.

I agree there is a lot of hypocracy on the issue. And I do remember Bill Clinton and Ricky Ray Rector. Show 'em tough you are Bill! Kill that retarded boy! Get tough on crime! Yeah!

It's disgusting and pitiable.

[Kellanved]

22. Aren't allowed to ( and wouldn't do so anyways)

Would be unconstitutional to do so. And we do indeed think that the the D-P is medieval.

(And I still can't understand why "thou shalt not kill" is somehow ignored by self-proclaimed devoted Christians and commandments fans.)

[shockandawed]

3. He has to...otherwise, he would not exist as a candidate

AN ENORMOUS percentage of Americans support the death penalty, and most opponents I know still will make emotional exceptions for really heinous crimes. Hell, I am even tempted to support it on occasion of child murderers and such. The only truism that keeps me honest on the issue is my firm belief that a free society can never murder its own citizens.

Dean MUST support the death penalty, especially in the post 9/11 world, otherwise the freeps would frame him as a pussy for not wanting to execute 9/11 suspects (if we ever catch one).

It sucks, but just keep in mind the theory of the greater good so we do not have idealists sinking another election.


Baby steps. First we stop our quest of an unpopular global domination by the bastard who stole our country, then fight this stuff.

Dean is really reasonable about the death penalty for a national politician, openly advocating better representation of defendents, better access to DNA testing, etc.

Who besides Kucinich opposes the death penalty?

GO DEAN.

[blm]

7. Dean underfunded the public defender's office

and Appel finally quit out of frustration. What makes you think Dean openly advocates for "better representation of defendants" when he also said in 1997 that he would nominate judges that used "common sense" and did not get bogged down with "technicalities". That sounds like an advocate to you?

For the Defense

Dean chose not to reappoint Appel for a third four-year term as defender general, the state official who heads the state’s public defender program. In appointing Valerio, of Proctor, the new defender general, Dean had kind words for Appel. But Appel had clashed with Dean on numerous occasions in his efforts to secure for his office the resources necessary to fulfill his duties conscientiously.

Just two years ago Dean tried to prevent Appel from accepting a $150,000 federal grant aimed at assisting defendants with mental disabilities. For Dean to block a government agency from receiving federal money was unusual in itself. But Dean’s openly expressed bias against criminal defendants provided a partial explanation.

Dean has made no secret of his belief that the justice system gives all the breaks to defendants. Consequently, during the 1990s, state’s attorneys, police, and corrections all received budget increases vastly exceeding increases enjoyed by the defender general’s office. That meant the state’s attorneys were able to round up ever increasing numbers of criminal defendants, but the public defenders were not given comparable resources to respond.

The problem with giving a disproportionate share of state resources to prosecution and enforcement is that it throws the justice system out of kilter. A just result occurs in court only when the prosecution and defense both are ably represented. Thus, Appel felt compelled two years ago to notify the court that the Rutland public defender’s office would take no new cases unless the defendant was in jail. The Rutland office was so short of staff that case backlogs threatened to overwhelm the public defenders.

CONTINUED...
http://rutlandherald.com/Archive/Articles/Article/31792

[clar]

50. I know Rob Appel

blm, remember? We've been through this. I agreed that this was where Dean was weakest, and that he didn't adequately fund the PD's office,
but it's nowhere near as nefarious as you make out. Rob did not quit out of disgust. As you point out, Dean didn't reappoint him.

Dean's being painted as this right wing law and order type, and this just doesn't paint an accurate picture.

Remember Dean's statement about early intervention to prevent incarceration later?

I'm not going through this all again, but I do want to say that Rob Appel bears less animus towards Dean than you do.

[blm]

56. You changed my words...again.

I said out of frustration, not disgust.

If you were to read my posts accurately and not the strawmen replies that whine that I'm just smearing Dean, you might see less animus and more just a recitation of Dean's centrism than the kneejerkers imply.

Did you also note that my post is in reply to a Dean supporter who states that Dean openly ADVOCATES for better representation of defendants?

[blm]

102. I also took you at your word

in your earlier post in regard to Appel.

You said:

clar (310 posts) Wed Aug-20-03 03:51 AM
Response to Original message
11. Sorry folks

Although I haven't yet decided who to back, I have consistently defended Dean against the many egregious attacks here at DU. In this case I feel compelled to note that Dean really didn't stand up for the right thing. How do I know? During the period in question I had frequent contact with Robert Appel. He did a good job as Defender General, particularly championing rights of defendants with mental disabilities. I don't know the particulars of why Dean turned down the grant Nicholas J mentioned.

The Rutland Herald is not a partisan hack paper. Two years ago the editor won the Puliter Prize for editorials for the pro-civil union pieces he wrote. Tracey Schmaler, who recently became Jim Jefford's Press Secratary is/was a fine journalist.

Robert Appel is now the head of the Vermont Human Right Commission. I don't know if he supports Dean or not. I ran into him a couple of months ago and we did talk about the Governor's run in general political terms. He does not, I think, bear any personal animus towards Dean. I don't know if he supports him or not.

It should be obvious to anyone that I'm not flaming Dean. I liked him as Governor. He's not some conservative in liberal fleece. Nor is he a DK type liberal. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; he's not an easy guy to label. Comparing him to Bush or Ashcroft is merely hot and heavy-and empty- rhetoric. However Dean's got his warts, and in eleven years as Governor he took positions I disagreed with. This one happens to be the one that bothered me the most.

[dsc]

61. I have asked a half dozen times

for an original source for that clipped quote. If you persist in posting that clipped quote in light of all of the following:

a) the place he alledgedly said the quote shows no sign of existing

b) the originator of that quote has an axe to grind

Then I will post one similarly clipped qoute about Kerry for each time you do this. You refuse to give a citation for this despite repeated requests. Either stop using it or be prepared for similar crap on Kerry. Either prove Dean really said this, find a decent source, or stop using it.

[blm]

70. go ahead....complain to Thom Hartmann.

Then go board nanny every post that screams Kerry = Bush and Skull and Bones.

I think some of the others need defending, too.

[dsc]

146. How dare you

I have defended Kerry time and again on his board. I defended him on the skull and bones nonsense. I defended him on the get over it nonsense. I defended him on the not Irish nonsense. I have defended him, Lieberman, Gephardt, and Kucinich several times on several differnt issues. I have no thought you are ignorant of that fact. I am not allowed to call your post what it is but anyone who has spent anytime here knows full well what it is.

[ErasureAcer]

8. Braun and Sharpton

http://www.vermontindymedia.org/newswire/display/1422/index.p

The Death Penalty is immorally wrong. What does this teach our children? Someone kills someone so they are killed. Someone steals from you...so you steal from them. Someone lied to you so you lie to them. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind...this is NEANDERTHAL under any circumstances!!!!

People have the the right to "life" according to our declaration of independence. And killing someone is "cruel" and very "unusual" punishment considering we're the only western 1st world country that still commits such atrocities!

Really now, the death penalty must end and Kucinich is going to put a moratorium on the issue.

It is a sad fucking day when a Republican Governor from Illinois puts a moratorium on capital punishment...yet Democratic "frontrunners" for President twiddle their thumbs and do jack shit to solve this injustice and cruelty.

For the love of anything people...PLEASE...support Dennis Kucinich. He has a vision to make America and the world a better and more peaceful place.

Join the grassroots effort.
www.kucinich.us

[Ein]

9. Plus

our justice system sucks.

[blm]

38. Kerry against death penalty in criminal justice system.

For it only for terrorists who bring their battlefields with them and classify themselves as combatants.

[snyttri]

11. Sharpton, at least

who, if Dean supporters were a lttle objective they would have voted for in the who is most opposed to Bush poll.

Dean supporters also are overly defensive about some speaking mistakes Dean has made. Isn't it better to acknowedge them?

[Rose Siding]

14. You and Dean are about where I'm at on the issue

(here's what Dean says)

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_civilrights_capitalpunishment

In the case of terrorism charges especially, consider the alternatives the public might demand- war or the death of one.

My personal belief has led me farther and farther from support in any instance. My main reasons are three- One, the justice system itself is so class/ethnicity oriented.

Two, if the people recognize that taking a life is wrong, how can it be condoned by the state in this instance?

And thirdly, if there is anything, psychologically or physiologically, to be learned from a murderer, for example, then I say STUDY them. Give society a chance to benefit from what can be gleaned from each one.

Dean's position on thie issue isn't exactly in line with my own, but it certainly isn't a deal breaker.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. Would the people who tell pollsters they support

the death penalty vote against a candidate who supported life without parole for those convicted of "capital" crimes? Polls don't always get at the complete truth, due to poorly phrased questions and not asking follow-up questions.

[MoonGod]

23. "AN ENORMOUS percentage of Americans support the death penalty" ???

Actually, that's a pretty common myth. Only a moderate majority support the death penaly... and the last time I saw poll numbers, they also showed that a majority favor a moratorium on the death penalty.

Either way, I don't buy the idea that one must be pro-death-penalty in order to be a viable candidate. The majority of Americans are pro choice and pro gun control. Yet that didn't stop Bush or his father from becoming president after campaigning on the wrong side of both of those issues.

[hippywife]

28. It's not necessary to exist as a candidate.

Anyone who thinks they have to be pro-death penalty, even in certain cases, to remain a viable candidate doesn't gain my confidence. Kerry was actually the first person I heard speak against it last winter when he declared his exploratory committee. This was before I decided on Kucinich.

And as I think has been clarified before, the president only has influence over the federal death penalty. States control their own death penalty laws. However, the president that is able to place a moratorium on the federal death penalty takes great strides in changing the thinking behind the practice in general.

The death penalty doesn't do anything for anyone really. It doesn't relieve the loss of the families of the victims. It is akin to something like the Iraelis and the Palestinians tit-for-tat conflict brought down to a smaller scale. Doesn't solve the problems that brought the conflict into being and doesn't prevent further conflict.

As Kerry so adeptly pointed out, the offender only knows the fear of death in the moments leading up to their execution and then their suffering is over with a shot in the arm; the families of the victims of these crimes have to still live with their loss for the rest of their natural lives.

It is my belief that is far more punishing in most cases that the offenders be made to live with their crime day in and day out until their natural deaths. I think it would be much more satisfying to alot of people if, in less than comfortable living conditions, it was a part of the punishment that every single day, someone would present them with reminders of their acts.

[hedda_foil]

5. Only in very rare circumstances.

Child killers, cop killers and terrorists, with extreme attention to the possibility of false convictions. In other words, he's much less pro-death penalty than Clinton was.

[Ein]

6. If he says

hes going to look into the merits of medical marijuana before supporting it... Maybe he should check the medical merits of capital punishment.

[DemBones DemBones]

10. Pretty funny, Ein, pretty funny. n/t

[ant]

12. at the risk of bringing on the wrath...

...I've never understood the arguments against the death penalty. I understand arguments against the way the death penalty is used in the US - problems of racism in the justice system, a lack of good public defenders, etc. - but I don't see these as arguments against the death penalty itself. I can buy that human beings being the way they are means we can never have a truly just system and so we shouldn't use the death penalty - I completely agree that even one innocent life lost is not worth it - but again, that isn't necessarily an argument against the death penalty itself. I guess I just don't get, or just don't agree with, the argument that it's "uncivilized" or whatever to eliminate certain people from society.

That being said, I don't really get the arguments FOR the death penalty, either. It's not a deterrent, and really if the point is to remove someone from society then life in prison works just as well. I do think that for most supporters it's just the element of revenge. It's obviously a very emotional issue, especially for people who have been victims of violent crime, but on that point I would object to the death penalty. At least, I would hope that no matter what someone does to me or a member of my family, he would never infect my soul to the point where I would want to see him killed. And if he did, I would hope our society wouldn't help me act on those feelings.

I don't know. I'm not anti-death penalty. If I could be assured that it was never applied unfairly I wouldn't mind it. At the same time, though, I have no objections at all to its elimination. I don't really see the point of having it, but I also don't see an inherent problem with having it.

[KaraokeKarlton]

13. Quick Question...

Morally speaking, why is abortion acceptable and the death penalty not? I see an arguable use for both under certain circumstances but feel both are overused. I'm sorry, but it's my opinion that anyone who opposes one and not the other is being hypocritical in the worst possible sense.

[ErasureAcer]

19. women can do whatever they want to their bodies...

that is the difference!

I guess you're one of those people who thinks males shouldn't be allowed to masturbate for they're killing "potential life"

give me a break dude...people can do whatever they want to, to THEIR bodies.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. Isn't that a personal attack?

I thought that was against the rules. Maybe I misread the TOS when I joined here. But I digress...

The point I'm making is that both situations involve someone decided who gets to live and who doesn't. It IS similar. I've already said that I see merit in both things and that I also see problems with both things. I"m neither for nor against, per se. The argument here is that both procedures involve someone else making the call on who can live and who can't. One is no more right or wrong than the other. I just don't think you can say one is wrong and one is right without coming off as being hypocritical.

[ErasureAcer]

42. funny how you didn't answer my question...

what is male masturbation considered then? Do you think that is killing? It is the building blocks of life and all...sperm that comes out from ejaculation.

and no it isn't a personal attack...it is a question attacking the logic of your statement, not you.

YOU can't have it both ways...you say abortion is murder once a women has been inciminated.

I say, you must think male ejaculation is murder as well using that logic that abortion is murder.

If you think male ejaculation is fine and abortion is wrong...you're being a hypocrite on this issue!

So if you believe male ejaculation is murder, do you believe every male who masturbates should go to jail?

And if you don't believe it is murder...tell me how male ejaculation is different from "murder" of a woman's abortion...

seems to me your logic is flawed...and I win this arguement either way...but please, answer the question.

[KaraokeKarlton]

96. This is ridiculous

But fine...I'll play.

"what is male masturbation considered then? Do you think that is killing? It is the building blocks of life and all...sperm that comes out from ejaculation."

With this reasoning every menstruating woman would be a murderer. It's nonsense and an utterly nonsensical argument you made to attempt to change the subject. This has nothing to do with when life starts. It is about taking an honest look at why some consider it wrong to pull the plug on the life of someone who has been convicted of committing a heinous crime but okay to do the same thing to a new life that would be born if someone didn't choose to snuff it out.

"and no it isn't a personal attack...it is a question attacking the logic of your statement, not you."

If it were attacking the idea you would not have started your comment with "Then I guess you...". Furthermore, my "statement" was more of a question...so what made you feel so compelled to attack the question? Perhaps because I have a point and you hadn't looked at things that way before? With that kind of reaction, perhaps you need to think about this a bit. Just a suggestion.

"YOU can't have it both ways...you say abortion is murder once a women has been inciminated."

What is with the "YOU" bit? I'm not debating abortion or if it's right or wrong here. I am asking why someone can support abortion yet become downright indignant at the idea of capital punishment. Abortion, indeed, is the interruption of life, just as execution is. Without an abortion, there would ultimately be a life spared. Without an execution, there would ultimately be a life spared. What, exactly is the MORAL and ETHICAL difference between the two? It doesn't matter what is right or wrong about either...only why one is okay and one isn't.

"I say, you must think male ejaculation is murder as well using that logic that abortion is murder."

If it didn't take a woman's egg to create a child that line of reasoning might float...and see my comment about menstruation.

"If you think male ejaculation is fine and abortion is wrong...you're being a hypocrite on this issue!"

Where did I say abortion is wrong or that anything is wrong or right? You're putting words in my mouth, and quite frankly, are sounding a tad bit hysterical. Instead of responding to the question I posed you have gone way off into left field defending abortion instead of explaining why someone can be for abortion and against capital punishment from a moral and ethical standpoint.

"So if you believe male ejaculation is murder, do you believe every male who masturbates should go to jail?

And if you don't believe it is murder...tell me how male ejaculation is different from "murder" of a woman's abortion...

seems to me your logic is flawed...and I win this arguement either way...but please, answer the question."


Blah, Blah, Blah...My GOD! What I DO think is that you are sounding mighty obsessed with masterbation and avoiding the question. And my logic is flawed?

[Shanty Oilish]

134. Calling someone 'hysterical'

Resorting to code rather quickly aren't we?

[KaraokeKarlton]

138. Well...

Anyone who stretches that far to talk in circles without even answering the question posed and repeatedly talks about masterbation does come off a bit hysterical. That's really the most polite way I can say it. It was clearly a very emotional reaction. But it's a touchy subject, so it doesn't surprise me.

It's pointless to posture towards me as if I am against abortion. I've already said that although I don't like either capital punishment or abortion, that I feel there are situations where it should be available. It really isn't a procedure that should be celebrated and championed. It's not a nice, pretty thing, afterall. It's a necessity in society, just like some other less than pretty things. It's perfectly alright to find it both sad and unfortunate while realizing it must be legal. I'd seriously worry about the humanity of people if they felt abortion is a wonderful thing to be praised. I think understanding it's role is quite sufficient.

[Shanty Oilish]

135. Neither for nor against abortion or capital punishment?

Tell me, are you non-opinionated on any other issues? Or perhaps consistently non-opinionated on all of them?

ps: I'd best add that these are rhetorical questions, since you didn't recognize ErasureAcer's "I guess you're one of those people who thinks..." as a rhetorical device, not a personal attack.

[KaraokeKarlton]

139. I didn't say I don't have opinions on them

I said that I'm neither arguing for or against them. If you must know, I don't personally like either. At the same time, I understand the need for both. Basically, I'm acknowledging that there are some very unpleasant and ugly things in society that despite their negatives, do still serve a purpose. That is called fairness and being impartial and balanced. It's a good thing. It also means that you realize that sometimes you have to accept things you don't necessarily like simply because what is wrong to you isn't wrong for everyone else, and that yours is not the only opinion and feelings that count.

[StandWatie]

20. in order to be confused..

you would have to think that life begins at conception, if not there is nothing there to compare the two.

[KaraokeKarlton]

36. Sure there is.

In both cases you have someone else deciding who lives and who doesn't. I'm not arguing for or against either issue here. I just find it very, very odd that someone who is okay with one can be so against the other. It's just rather bizarre in my opinion. Playing God is playing God, whether it's with a criminal or an unborn child. Right, wrong or indifferent, I just don't see how anyone can see it differently.

[StandWatie]

40. bacteria is "life"

I don't believe in a soul and I believe it's wrong to kill humans because they are self-aware. A biological entity without that ability isn't to me life and you aren't "playing god".

[KaraokeKarlton]

101. The family of the child killed by the death row inmate

don't see the killer of their child as much more than bacteria, either. And many people consider an unborn child a life. It's all a matter of perception and opinion. These varying views is also what makes the situations very similar. Out of curiosity...do you feel that the same kind of recklessness in the implementation of the death penalty exists in the implementation of abortions? I mean, it's true that there are too many executions that don't need to happen. But couldn't the same be said of abortions? It's not that difficult to use a condom or other form of birth control...yet the bulk of abortions are the result of sexual carelessness and irresponsibility.

[roughsatori]

21. "why is abortion acceptable and the death pnealty is not?"

Who said that they are? And who are you asking that question?

I do think that it would make for a very interesting General Discussion if you posted it there and then responded to other members comments.

[KaraokeKarlton]

37. It was just a thought more than a question.

I don't see them as very different, yet many people do. It doesn't make sense and I guess I just wanted to make people stop and think for a second. I don't particularly like either, but see a need for both in society. It probably would be a good discussion. Feel free to start one if you'd like and I'll undoubtedly put in my two cents.

[Capn Sunshine]

60. well not to start a flame war

But the Torah and most religious scholarship not opposed to controling women seems to arrive atthe conclusion life starts with the first breath outside the mother's womb.

So in the case of abortion, you aren't killing something that is not alive. Up until it leaves its mother it is a part of the mother.

The decision whether to bring life to that part of the mother is not taken lightly,but does not belong to the state. Then again I suppose you have adopted as many children as you could possibly afford and seen to it that sex education is available at an early age to all to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

Morally speaking, that should be de riguer I would think.

[KaraokeKarlton]

109. "Sigh"

You seem to have missed the point. My question isn't about whether abortion is right or wrong. And again, there's another needless comment that sounds like a veiled insult. That's just not necessary.

In order to take an HONEST look at this question people need to turn off the emotional reactions in defense of abortion and be objective. Without intervention, both the death row inmate and the unborn child would live. I'm not criticizing anyone supporting or being against either, I simply am curious why some people use different standards to judge both procedures. They really are quite similar in a lot of ways. I'm asking what makes them morally and ethically different. This can't be done by simply talking circles about ejaculation during masterbation or when life starts arguments or the "women can do what they want with their own bodies" stuff. What are the specific differences between the two procedures and why is the snuffing out of one life okay and the other isn't? Why is a criminal who has killed someone more valued by some than an unborn child? These are the kinds of answers I'm looking for.

[Trek234]

108. Wrong

A an early fetus/embryo is NOT a person. It has not even developed anything close to being sentient at that point.

Abortion is NOT killing a life. It is eliminating a potential life, but it is highly different than the death penalty in that regard.

[KaraokeKarlton]

116. And what is wasting away in a cell on death row?

Is that a life or has that life already essentially been legally eliminated? Many people are of the belief that execution is more humane than letting someone rot and die on death row.

[REP]

142. Quick Answer: Apples and Oranges

Abortion is about bodily resources: know one can be compelled to donate the use of their body against their will. Just as convicts cannot be compelled to be organ donors to save the life of another, women cannot be compelled to continue pregnancies and have the fetus removed from her body, even though that removal means the fetus cannot survive. The death penalty is not. You are comparing apples and oranges, and the comparison shows a lack of much thinking on either subject.

As for abortions being, in your opinion, "overused": may I ask where you obtained your degree in medicine, and for how long you have been practicing?

[KaraokeKarlton]

144. I'm speaking morally and ethically...

The ending of a life (regardless of how far along in the development it is) is still the ending of a life.

A person doesn't need a medical degree to know that abortion is overused. It's right there in front of you if you open your eyes. In the last year alone I personally know of not less than 10 abortions that were done that could have been easily avoided with the use of a condom. That is just in rural Vermont among people I know or know of. How many executions have taken place in the last year? I've actually only known of two abortions that were done that were not done as after the fact birth control. One was because the girl could not safely give birth because of her health. The other was a severe problem with the baby that would have turned out with a still birth.

Again...I'm not suggesting that abortion shouldn't be legal. I'm not saying it isn't something that is necessary in society. What I'm saying is that if someone opposes the death penalty on moral and ethical grounds, it makes zero sense that they don't also oppose abortion on moral and ethical grounds...regardless of whether they support either being legal or not. The debate of when life starts or what people can or can't do with their bodies isn't the issue here. The issue I'm trying to examine is why on earth anyone finds the value of a convicted criminal any more important than the value of an unborn child. Also...why is the snuffing out of the life of a criminal any more tragic than the snuffing out of the life of an unborn child?

By the way...I'm not doing this to get anyone angry. I'm doing it because I'm guessing not a lot of people have really thought about the comparison. I think it's good to sometimes examine one's thinking and consider other sides of arguments. Out of curiosity...has anyone ended up putting serious thought into questioning their opposition to the death penalty as the result of what I've said? That doesn't mean changing of views, but just putting more thought into it.

[roughsatori]

15. I think you support Clark what is his stance on the DP?

I like Dean and Clark but have moved to favoring Kucinich, his views seem to be closer to my own.

[ErasureAcer]

26. thank you for looking at the issues and not "electability"

Dennis has proven that he is electable against Republican incumbents. He defeated an incumbent republican mayor, an incumbent republican state senator and an incumbent republican US representative.

He can beat a republican president as well.

Dennis's issues resonate with the people. He is what america has been waiting for...remember 60% of this country doesn't vote...for his healthcare plan, his educational plan, his peace plan...they'll have a reason to show up to the polls come November 2, 2004.

Dare to Dream
www.kucinich.us

[DealsGapRider]

32. No way

Dennis Kucinich is not electable. Christ, they're calling Dean a far-left liberal who will bring the Dem party back to 49 state losses. And he isn't really even that liberal. If Dean is a far-left liberal, Kucinich is a raving radical in the eyes of the pundit class, who, for better or worse, shape many people's images of candidates. I think Kucinich is too far out there for most people. Just his Department of Peace proposal will be ridiculed incessantly by people who are eager to paint Dems as pansies on the national security front.

Why shouldn't we be concerned about electability?

[ErasureAcer]

44. reasons why.

1. 60% of americans don't vote...most just because the candidates suck...remember the boring ass "I agree" debates of 2000. Where the hell was the choice? Oh yes, it was Nader...thank you ralph for giving me something to believe in. :)

2. If you believe what the republican controlled media is telling you, you have problems. Dean isn't "liberal" at all. He said it himself!!!! Do I have to get the link for you?

3. Dennis Kucinich has a vision for the future that resembles that of Martin Luther King Jr. Really now, are you going to argue against the ideology of Martin Luther King Jr and Dennis Kucinich? Really, now...if you have no love for King's vision I'd question your stance on your claim to be a liberal.

4. Dennis Kucinich has plenty of support and he'd have even more if the media gave him coverage. Don't you see they're afraid of him and what he stands for? Dean is acceptable to the media...he really offers no solutions giving the states way too many rights while ignoring civil rights for humans, ignoring the patriot act, ignoring the pentagon budget, ignoring the right for workers to retire at the age of 65 and not living a slave life!

Really now...Dean isn't an alternative to Bush co. The media knows this!

Kucinich is the biggest threat to George W. Bush...and that is why he is electable.

[DealsGapRider]

53. Kucinich

I don't believe what the media tells me. But many people do, which is the point I was trying to make.

"I'd question your stance on your claim to be a liberal..."

I never said I was one. (Actually, I am on some issues -- perhaps most, even -- but national security is not one of them.) Sorry, but Kucinich will be painted as weak-kneed and soft on defense, war on terrorism, etc. May not be right, but that's what will happen. C'mon, can't you just hear the belligerent right laughing up the Department of Peace? Look, is it a good idea? Yes. Would the world be a better place if more people like Kucinich were in office? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that he will be painted -- and I think effectively so -- as a far-left radical whose ideas do not comport with the majority of the American people.

[ErasureAcer]

71. if you're not a liberal...

why the hell are you here?

As far as I'm concerned only liberal people are welcome here...this includes dems, greens, socialists, communists, etc...

if you're not liberal...please leave.

[DealsGapRider]

78. This site is called Democratic Underground, not Liberal Underground

Why am I here? Because I'm a Democrat. The Democratic Party is full of moderates, liberals, progressives, hell even some conservatives. If the party closed its doors to everyone by dyed-in-the-wool liberals, we would lose every presidential election from now on.

As I said, I'm liberal on many issues (gay rights, abortion rights, environmental protection, etc) but I don't walk around bearing the label "liberal."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

122. Communists Aren't Liberals

[IndianaGreen]

123. And where did the idea for social security come from?

Reds were at the forefront of child labor laws, workplace safety, right to unionize, national pension plan (FDR's social security was a watered down version of it), 8-hour workday, etc.

But it is nice to know that 150 years of anti-socialist conditioning took hold of you. Congrats, you've been "educated"!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

128. Otto Von Bismarck - A Reactionary German

created the model for social security.


I am not knocking communism . I am just saying to call a communist a liberal rips both words from their historical moorings.

edited for spelling

[IndianaGreen]

130. Wrong! Bismarck from trying to stave off the Marxists

in pretty much the same way the New Deal was designed to prevent a Bolshevik revolution in America, by giving us enough socialism to prevent it from happening:

Germany became the first nation in the world to adopt an old-age social insurance program in 1889, designed by Germany's Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck. The idea was first put forward, at Bismarck's behest, in 1881 by Germany's Emperor, William the First, in a ground-breaking letter to the German Parliament. William wrote: ". . .those who are disabled from work by age and invalidity have a well-grounded claim to care from the state."

Bismarck was motivated to introduce social insurance in Germany both in order to promote the well-being of workers in order to keep the German economy operating at maximum efficiency, and to stave-off calls for more radical socialist alternatives. Despite his impeccable right-wing credentials, Bismarck would be called a socialist for introducing these programs, as would President Roosevelt 70 years later. In his own speech to the Reichstag during the 1881 debates, Bismarck would reply: "Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me."

http://www.ssa.gov/history/ottob.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

132. Let Me Understand This

I have nothing against communism.

John Locke is a liberal

John Stuart Mill is a liberal

Karl Marx is not a liberal

Marx was scathing in his critique of bourgeois liberalism

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/maxpages/classes-s97/psc753/bentham.htm

Liberalism and Marxism/Socialism are competing philosophies.

P.S. You confirmed what I said. Otto Von Bismarck created the model for social security. You didn't ask me why he did it. I do buy into the theory that a little socialism is a good thing.

edited for spelling and addition of postscript

[hippywife]

76. Actually, Dean also talks about

a Department of Peace on his website as a part of the State Department. But it is Dennis who was one of the original authors of the idea and the co-sponsor of the bill to create one. Also, Dennis' idea of the Dept of Peace addresses the threats caused by domestic violence (child abuse, spousal abuse, gang violence) as well as threat from abroad so it is wider in scope.

Weak on defense? As far as cutting the Pentagon budget, Dennis also addresses the fact that it can and needs to be cut due to the exhorbitant amount of money (billions) that the Pentagon has yet to account for by matching it to any expenditure items at all. That is wasteful and the many people that are unemployed will no doubt be reassured that while they scrape by, the Pentagon is still possibly buying $500 toilet seats. That went over like a lead balloon when these spending practices were made public years ago, how much more so will the Pentagon over-financing resonate when they can't account for WHAT they spent the money on?

In exchange for healthcare, education benefits and jobs programs, I can imagine the average American wouldn't cry too hard and too long about a smaller Pentagon budget.

[roughsatori]

45. I think you should re-read EraserAcer''s post

You ask "Why shouldn't we be concerned about electability (sic)?" EraseAcer never said we shouldn't. The post claimed that Kucinich is electable. That you could debate. But the points you use against Kucinich sound like right-wing talking points. (I am not saying you are a Freeper, just that the language is the kind they use.)

I just realized you used the word "pansies." That honestly is the exact language of the Rush L. crowd.

[DealsGapRider]

55. I know...

...that's why I used it. I said, "people who are eager to paint Dems as pansies on the national security front." I know that's the language they use. They try to paint us as pansies. And frankly they do it effectively because of people like Dennis Kucinich. People forget that the Democratic party is full of Kerrys, Kerreys, Inouyes, McGoverns, Murthas and a slew of other decorated combat veterans.

[snyttri]

30. Clark and the DP

He doesn't have a position yet that I know of. I'd be surprised if he isn't for it. It would be very impressive if someone who kills professionally was against the death penalty. Opponents would have a field day with the apparent contradiction.

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/on_the_issues.htm

[roughsatori]

33. So it is OK if Clark supports the Death Penalty, but not Dean?

Makes me wonder about your sincerity in starting this topic.

[snyttri]

43. It looks inconsistent if Dean supports death, but not if Clark does

I raised a negative about Dean that I think should be considered. I will be spending a lot of time campaigning for him if he is nominated and am more concerned about his effectiveness as a general election campaigner. Issues can be compromised, but shouldn't you get effectiveness in return?

[AnnabelLee]

47. I'm not sure I understand

Are you questioning Dean's stance on the death penalty because you think it is inconsistent, or because you are opposed to his stance?

[JustJoe]

49. But in the meantime, you're leaning toward Clark,

right? And you're critiquing Dean on an issue
when you dont even know how Clark stands
on the same issue?

[roughsatori]

51. I am against the DP in ALL cases but

That is an issue that I WILL compromise on. I will support either Clark or Dean regardless of their stand on this issue if they win the nomination. Then I will work on trying to change their stance after they are elected.

I now am in favor of Kucinich. I do like Dean very much. And Clark has much that is impressive about him. I am angry about his being a "closet case" Democrat. I understand that some think that stance will get him the moderate Republican votes needed for election. If he is nominated I hope they are correct, and will be happy to have been wrong myself.

[sfecap]

24. What is General Clark's position on the death penalty?

Better yet...what is his political party affiliation?

[snyttri]

46. I wish he would declare too and think he will in a week, Donna Brazile

says so. Howard Fineman of Newsweek says he's in the race. As it is he is the most effective critic of Bush in Iraq, partly because he's military and partly because he can't completley be dismissed as just another partisan.



http://wesleyclarkweblog.com/

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. Too bad.

I'm not ready to write him off because of this, but it doesn't help. I've moved from tepid backer of Dean to undecided because of some of his positions. My first choice would be Sharpton, followed by Mosely-Braun and Kucinich. Unfortunately, I don't believe any of them have a chance of being nominated, though I'll vote for one of them in the primary. The four who supported the fratboy warriors invasion won't get my vote in the primary or the general if they are nominated. Clark remains a puzzle.

[IndianaGreen]

48. Trolling? Why don't you go to the Dean website and read it yourself!

Capital punishment is an emotional issue, but supporters and opponents can agree that the death penalty should only be imposed after a fair trial. In recent years more than 100 death row inmates have been exonerated in the United States. The Bush administration has ignored this crisis but my Administration will address it.

George Bush and John Ashcroft have carried out the federal death penalty in a reckless and overzealous manner. For example, Ashcroft has:

overruled the judgment of local U.S. Attorneys who believed that the death penalty was unwarranted in specific cases.

insisted on the death penalty for a defendant who had negotiated a plea to life without parole in exchange for the defendant’s cooperation, thereby discouraging future defendants from cooperating.

abandoned efforts by Janet Reno to root out racial and geographic disparity in the federal death penalty.

Ashcroft is bringing so many questionable death cases that federal juries consistently overrule him. The New York Times reports that juries have rejected Ashcroft’s request for the death penalty in 15 of the last 16 federal capital trials.

Meanwhile, capital punishment is carried out unfairly in many states, but the Bush Administration has taken no steps to improve these state systems. Bush has ignored the Innocence Protection Act, proposed by Senator Leahy with wide bipartisan support, which would expand access to DNA testing and strengthen the quality of lawyers for defendants facing the death penalty.

I believe the death penalty should be available for extreme and heinous crimes, such as terrorism or the killing of police officers or young children. But it must be carried out with scrupulous fairness. I applaud former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, who imposed a moratorium rather than administer a system in which 13 innocent men were released from death row. In contrast, George Bush presided over a Texas court system in which dozens of men were put to death without adequate representation. Some had been represented at trial by lawyers who were sleeping or drunk.

As President, I would:

Promptly instruct my Attorney General to evaluate the federal death penalty system, take steps to ensure that it is applied fairly and reliably, and reverse Ashcroft’s overzealous policies.

Push for passage of the federal Innocence Protection Act to strengthen protections against unjust imposition of the death penalty.

Establish a Presidential Commission on the Administration of Capital Punishment to analyze the causes of wrongful convictions around the country and recommend additional reforms at the federal and state level.

First in Texas and now as President, George Bush has carried out the death penalty in a careless and negligent manner. I will handle this important responsibility very differently.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_civilrights_capitalpunishment

[ErasureAcer]

52. repost of #8...you should read it

The Death Penalty is immorally wrong. What does this teach our children? Someone kills someone so they are then killed. Someone steals from you...so you steal from them. Someone lied to you so you lie to them. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind...this is NEANDERTHAL under ANY circumstances!!!!

People have the the right to "life" according to our declaration of independence. And killing someone is "cruel" and very "unusual" punishment considering we're the only western 1st world country that still commits such atrocities!

Really now, the death penalty must end and Kucinich is going to put a moratorium on the issue, he isn't going to think about it...he is going to do it! 100% clear answer on the issue, THE END OF THE DEATH PENALTY...Dean offers only promises to "look into it".

It is a sad fucking day when a Republican Governor from Illinois puts a moratorium on capital punishment...yet Democratic "frontrunners" for President twiddle their thumbs and do jack shit to solve this injustice and cruelty IMMEDIATELY!

For the love of anything people...PLEASE...support Dennis Kucinich. He has a vision to make America and the world a better and more peaceful place.

Join the grassroots effort.
www.kucinich.us

[IndianaGreen]

54. The flip side of the "right to life" applies to abortion, don't you agree?

If one is to oppose the death penalty on the grounds that humans have a right to life that no state can take away, one must also oppose abortion for it too involves the taking of a human life, albeit an innocent one.

The flip side of opposing the death penalty under the "right to life" principle applies to abortion, don't you agree?

[ErasureAcer]

68. nope...

fetus's aren't alive...yes "a heart beats within 3 weeks"...blah blah blah. One could argue that my semen is alive as well...each one is UNIQUELY INDIVIDUAL containging DNA and whatnot...so if I masturbate I am murdering these potential people? Should we lock away all male masturbaters?

You aren't human until you're born...before that you're a bunch of goo and not much else...you're a person in waiting.

furthermore, there is the issue of doing something to your own body which a person should control at all times...and doing something to someone else's body(murder).

Really now. If you think killing a fetus is wrong...you would object to me masturbating as well...and if you do that...then you have a problem with 99% of all men in the world. And if you were to lock us all away for doing that...how would humanity survive? 50% of the women would have 1% of the free men to have sex with.

[IndianaGreen]

73. Red herring

Comparing an 8-month child still in the womb to spermatozoa, and coupling it with your sudden obsession with masturbation, speaks volumes as to your true intentions.

I doubt that you are even a Kucinich supporter!

[ErasureAcer]

92. haha...

yeah...I just gave him money and showed up to his rally and took my picture with him and keep telling everyone about him because I hate him soooo much...

that makes sense.

And "sperm" and "baby fetus" are synonymous with unborn entities that make life.

Jacking off is the same "destruction"(as some would say) of having an abortion on the scale of "life".

If you have a problem with abortion and think it should be illegal...you also have a problem with masturbaters and think the practice of that should be illegal as well.

Anything else is hypocritical.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

131. Norman Mailer

thought masturbation was one of the greatest human failings.


What if the masturbator is impotent?


Is he off the hook?


What if the masturbator is gay?


He's not going to be impregnating anybody.


Is he off the hook?

What if you have a nocturnal emission?

Are you responsible for an act of the unconscious or do we blame that on Incubus?

[sfecap]

86. What would Kucinich do to abolish the death penalty?

How would he go about it?

[ErasureAcer]

93. he would put a moratorium on it

he woudln't investigate the situation...the research is widely available with all the injustice in the courts now. Dean would try fixing this injustice...which in fact just doesn't work...and in the end is immoral, unpatriotic, and unconstitutional.

There would be no "exceptions" to the rules...there wouldn't be an attorney general investigation...it would be over and done with, with executive order.

the end of a dark page from american history.

[sfecap]

95. Another "executive order"?

That can't be done, legally. (Except for the Federal DP statute.)

But it sounds nice...

[ButterflyBlood]

106. yep

this is a state issue. the states is where it needs to be handled. the federal government can't interfere in states' use of the death penalty, unless they were to withold federal funds if a state were to use it, which would require congressional passage which would never happen.

[IndianaGreen]

99. That would not do anything about the people on death row

The death penalty is usually carried out by the States, not the federal government. Kucinich's executive order would nothing more than a PR ploy having no impact whatsoever.

On top of all that, Kucinich would be continuing the bad precedent that previous Presidents have followed in undermining our federal system of government by fiat.

[hippywife]

141. Kucinich recognizes

that he can only change the federal death penalty. We all change the little piece of the world that we can. As I have stated before on this, if the president places a moratorium on the fed DP, it could influence states to examine their own practices. He will lead by example on this issue.

[snyttri]

57. Why does questioning Dean's stands on the issues result in personal

attacks? "trolling" "read it yourself!"

Is this a place to discuss the candidates' stands on the issues or a place to supress discussion?

[gully]

59. As a Dean supporter I welcome this discussion...

:)

[IndianaGreen]

63. The poster distorts Dean's position on the death penalty

and the poster has taken a "principled" position on the death penalty that can only be justified if one were to apply it equally to abortion.

It is hypocricy to oppose the death penalty on the grounds that human life is sacred, while denying the same right to life to the innocent in the womb.

This is the same thing the rightwingers that oppose abortion do when they support the death penalty, and also support the war in Iraq.

Howard Dean has his positions on the issues posted on his website. If you have a question, go there and find out yourself, instead of pretending to be someone you are not.

[snyttri]

67. Who is pretending to be someone they are not and why are you trying

to supress the discussion? The website stand has been posted here and it raises legitimate questions.

[IndianaGreen]

77. Right to life is a legitimate question

Whether you apply it to the death penalty, to abortion, to the war, or to nuclear weapons.

To argue that a child murderer and rapist like John Wayne Gayce should not have been executed because he had a "right to life" while denying that same right to the unborn defies logic, sanity, and common sense!

[gully]

58. Here is Deans stand on the death penalty...

http://deandefense.org/archives/000668.html

"I believe the death penalty should be available for extreme and heinous crimes, such as terrorism or the killing of police officers or young children. But it must be carried out with scrupulous fairness."

Neanterthal? Not quite...

Though I'm personally opposed.

Sorry IndianaGreen, didn't we cross posted :D

[snyttri]

62. Sounds like pandering to me. Why place more value on the taking of

some lives than others? If that's an effective elective strategy it's OK with me, but it's hard to imagine that his sincere beliefs on the death penalty and so compartmentalized. Ages 10 and under? Guerilla war terrorists? Firemen and police officers?

[gully]

66. Then don't vote for him...

Simple really.

[IndianaGreen]

69. Isn't abortion the death penalty for the unborn?

I am trying to gauge how sincere you are in your position on the death penalty, or whether you are merely posturing on behalf of your preferred candidate for President (a former right-to-lifer).

[gully]

72. *LOL

[Capn Sunshine]

74. Shor answer: Life begins at birth.

No birth, no life, ipso facto; death is not a part of the equation...........

I really wish those so concerned about "the unborn" would put an equal amount of passion into the "born" .

There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of children already born into the lowest social rung of this country who need IMMEDIATE attention and assistance.

[gully]

80. Awesome post...

Right on capn sunshine!

[Capn Sunshine]

65. It's a politital question twisted into a moral one

I was going to say "most liberal" but I really can't speak for them. Many are opposed to the death penalty because of demonstrated inequality of application. We all know only the porrest of the porr and the screwiest of the nutjobs reside on death row.

From a political standpoint, this is wrong.
From a societal standpoint, killing someone for murder just seems counterproductive to me. I've never seen any stats that supportthe deterrence argument.

I may be personally opposed to the death penalty but realistically I'm more opposed to the DEATH PENALTY VISITED UPON THOUSANDS of innocents BY THE BFEE STRATEGY OF WAR WITHOUT END

I think I can give Dean a pass on this.

[dsc]

64. He supports it in three cases

Terrorism (where Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman, Graham, and Edwards all do as well)

Murdering a child (where Gephardt, Lieberman, Graham, and Edwards do as well)

Murdering police officers (where Gephardt, Lieberman, Graham, and Edwards do as well)

I would be willing to bet that at most 5% of all death row cases fall into those categories. Under Bush, who is about as pro death penalty as humanly possible we have executed precisely two people (McVeigh, and one other). If you are that much of a single issue voter then vote for one of the pure three and God be with you. If you support anyone else then you are an utter hypocrite to bring this up.

[snyttri]

75. It's a slightly bigger problem for a doctor. Discussing the weaknesses

of the leading candidate is a very appropriate topic since there's a good chance we'll have to defend them in 7 or so months when the nominee is determined. Are there any other issues that are taboo?

[gully]

79. Where did you get the idea that it was "taboo?"

:shrug:

[snyttri]

81. You are complaining that I brought it up.

[gully]

82. Who is? n/t

[snyttri]

84. Sorry. I meant to respond to post #64. I don't support one of the

anti-death penalty candidtes, but I need to know how Dean will deal with this. (And in another thread, gun control)

[gully]

85. I think he's dealt with it already...n/t

[JustJoe]

89. Who *do* you support, snyttri? Thanks. n/t

[snyttri]

91. Clark--I hope criticizing Dean doesn't turn people off Clark, but some of

the Dean supporters seem awfully defensive. I might be campaigning for Dean in a primary myself if he looks like the most effective general election candidate. So far I think he's clumsy, but at least he's not boring.

[gully]

94. What ARE Clarks positions. Where ARE they listed?

I have no idea where we can find out more... Thanks

[snyttri]

98. Some Clark info--encourage him to run whu don't you? It will make the

race more interesting at the least.

http://www.draftwesleyclark.com/on_the_issues.htm


http://www.digitalclark.com/


http://www.theclarksphere.com/

http://wesleyclarkweblog.com/

[JustJoe]

112. Again--how can you ask if Dean is a "neanderthal" on the DP

whilst you are in the dark as to the position
of your own candidate on the same issue?
Do you see no, eh, *clumsiness* a little closer
to home? Will you see Clark as a neanderthal if it
turns out--as it likely will--that Clark himself
supports the death penalty in certain cases at least?

[snyttri]

121. Clark will not look as bad as Dean on death because it will be consistent

with preconceptions about him. With Dean, it seems to conflict with the hippocratic oath and undercuts the compassionate image being a doctor gives him. It makes Dean look inconsistent, just as Clark being aginst the death penalty would make him look inconsistent.

I think both are probably privately against it but will lie about it to get votes. I was disappointed that Gore supported death (and considered him neanderthal on it) but there are no deal breakers against Bush and I'll be supprting a neanderthal pro-death candidate against him no matter how the primaries turn out, in all likehood.

[JustJoe]

127. So, Clark will likely prove to be *consistently* neanderthalist

(professional soldier plus pro-death penalty)
whereas Dean is *inconsistently* neanderthalist
(a doctor saving lives versus pro-DP).
And that's why you favor Clark on this issue,
seeing as how you're anti-death penalty.
OK. What did somebody say about consistency
being the last hobgoblin of a small refuge?

[snyttri]

133. Inconsistency is a campaign problem--the whole Clark v Dean debate is

about who has a better chance to beat Bush. They have even been working together (see below). Death is less of a problem for Clark. From what I have seen so far Clark is better able to handle the inherent inconsistencies that must be smoothed over. Dean will be the first candidate to have to answer Dr. death questions. Will he be able to handle them? If Dean was proud his performance under pressure so far, wouldn't Meet the Press and debates be on DeanTV?

"What started as a point-by-point review of his economic and health care policies turned quickly into his dissertation on foreign affairs in Cuba, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and Iraq. Dean has been getting tutored on foreign policy by numerous experts, including retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar. He has also had several private conversations with retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander who some Democrats see as an attractive running mate for Dean if Clark does not join the race himself."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34389-2003Aug22.html

[Rose Siding]

136. OMG You know the Dean TV line ups? lol

You must be TERRIBLY interested in Howard!

[snyttri]

137. Yes I'm interested. I was referred to DeanTV after one of many

complaints about Meet the Press. There are supposed to be debates in 2 weeks. I'll see how he's improved then.

[IndianaGreen]

83. The American people overwhelmingly support the death penalty

and they also believe in fairness, which is why most Americans support using DNA testing to ensure that people on death row really belong there.

Howard Dean is in the mainstream!

Should we have a death penalty at all? Change the law! Bring America to the 21st century and abolish the death penalty altogether, but while you are at it, don't forget to extend the right to life to the unborn. Unlike people on death row, they have no lawyer fighting for their life. They have no one filing appeals to a higher court. They have no one asking for another trial, or presenting new exculpatory evidence.

[ButterflyBlood]

105. Bush has executed 3 people

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=463
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=464

[Jacobin]

90. I disagree with him on that, but I still support him

If he is "soft on crime" he will be toast.
I know that the death penalty is idiotic and barbaric and needs to end and doesn't stop crime.

I've been against it since the 1960's. Back then, you could get elected since most americans were not in favor of it then (can you believe how much this fucking country has changed?)

However, getting the warmongers out of the WH is my personal first step.

[mandyky]

97. Dean is for it in THREE cases

Mass Murder/Terrorism
Kidnap and Murder of a child (ala Polly Klaas)
Killing a cop

He is not for the death penalty across the board.

[Ein]

100. You're either for it or against it. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

103. Sorry, but the people have spoken through their legislatures

and have established a system in which the death penalty is not automatic.

If you are against the death penalty under all circumstances, including in the murder of a pregnant woman and her unborn child, then you should work to change the laws in your state.

Blaming Dean for what is essentially a state issue is nothing but a smoke screen!

[Ein]

104. Sorry, did I blame Dean?

Thought not.

[ButterflyBlood]

111. exactly

people need to understand, this is a STATE issue. the fight needs to be state by state, not across the board.

[mandyky]

113. That is not true, and it sounds a lot like

Bush's "you're for us, or against us".
On some issues there really are gray issues.

[Ein]

114. Where is the grey are on this?

If you support it in any instance, you are pro-death penalty. I'd like to see where someone is standing when they plant thier flag in the grey area of an issue like this.

[IndianaGreen]

117. Should Hitler had been executed had he been captured after the war?

Shouldn't the Israelis had refrained from prosecuting, and executing, Adolf Eichman for his role in the Holocaust?

Shouldn't war criminals be tried in court and if convicted, shouldn't they receive the maximum sentence that the law allows?

Shouldn't the States have a say so as to whether or not there is to be a death penalty and if so, under what circumstances it should be applied?

Shouldn't Osama bin Laden be tried for mass murder?

[Ein]

118. They should all be tried.

Definately. But I don't think anyone should be executed.

Where is the grey area?

[IndianaGreen]

119. The gray area has been set by law

Killing someone during a fight at a bar is treated differently from murdering a child, or killing a police officer.

This is the same difference between accidentally killing some civilians when bombing a military target, to deliberately targeting the civilians, or to deliberately accepting a percentage of civilian casualties on a bombing mission. The former is a tragic accident, the latter examples are war crimes.

[Ein]

120. That's not a grey area.

Thats a pro-death penalty stance.

[IndianaGreen]

124. That's your opinion

which is one of many on this thread, including my own.

[ButterflyBlood]

110. It really doesn't matter

Clinton was way way more pro-death penalty than him and yet there were no federal executions while he was in office. The Texecutioner has only executed 3 people. Get anyone less rabidly pro-death penalty than Bush in office and there are no more federal executions if you look at the rate. The President can't interfere with states' use of the death penalty, which is where the vast majority of executions take pace. Getting an anti-death penalty President would be little more than a symbolic victory. It's a state issue, and that's where it needs to be fought.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

115. It's A Republican Wedge Issue

Why should Dean take the bait?

[DJcairo]

126. Dean is a closet conservative

Dean also has a %100 A rating from the NRA. He is a bug supporter or 'state's right's' as far as gun control and lord knows what else.

[ComerPerro]

129. Consider the size of Vermont

Its crime rate, and the amount of hunters.

Why wouldn't he have a good rating from the NRA?