No Wonder Libs Are Upset - The Surge Is Working

[Superlative]

It sop funny

Libs will bend over backwards to spre the life of a convicted murderer; give other criminals every benefit of every doubt, but fight like hell for a women to murder her unborn baby

Well lets spare the babies, and kill the criminals.

Let the babies grow up IMO with a more than likely unbalanced life, and the people who are already alive, **** em. They blew their chance, kill them.

This cycle of thought, would give you more adults to kill in the future. so it works doubly good for you.

 

[red states rule]

Well lets spare the babies, and kill the criminals.

Let the babies grow up IMO with a more than likely unbalanced life, and the people who are already alive, **** em. They blew their chance, kill them.

This cycle of thought, would give you more adults to kill in the future. so it works doubly good for you.

As I said, libs have no problem murdering the innocent unborn babies- but will fight like hell for convicted criminals

Only a lib would believe it is a US Constitutional right to suck a babies brain out of its head and then dispose of the body in the trash

Then libs wonder why they are sinking in the polls

 

[Superlative]

As I said, libs have no problem murdering the innocent unborn babies- but will fight like hell for convicted criminals

Only a lib would believe it is a US Constitutional right to suck a babies brain out of its head and then dispose of the body in the trash

Then libs wonder why they are sinking in the polls

NeoCon's have no problem killing a mentally retarded man.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

NeoCon's have no problem killing a mentally retarded man.

I will assume that your referring to someone convicted of a crime and put to death for it. Isn't it telling that Liberals can equate a single person put to death by the Courts of our land as equal to MILLIONS of dead babies?

But they do have that equation down in all manner of things. McVey is some how equivalent to possibly millions of Muslim terrorists as proof Christians are JUST like them. It is a tap dance Liberals pull all the time.

 

[Gunny]

I may be a vet, but my Dad was a trial defense lawyer who instilled in me a real fondness for the Bill of Rights. The point is "if and when you see or hear otherwise", will be long after the rights of citizens have been routinely and repeatedly violated.. and without any oversight from the courts, you may NEVER be made aware of what the administration is doing vis a vis monitoring the lives of citizens. Please tell me why following FISA is such an onerous burden.

I'm quite sure I have an equal fondness for the Bill of Rights. I do try to use common sense and logic though where the individual's rights are counter to the needs of society. It always bring up a question with no simple answer ...

Do you alter those rights in order to ensure their existence? Or do you stand on those rights above the need to defend them and watch them be destroyed?

In the event of the former, you at least maintain most of your rights, and when the threat is gone, all rights can be restored.

In the case of the latter, no one has ANY rights becuse they were allowed to be destroyed.

I personally have NO PROBLEM with following FISA. In reality though it's just an after-the-fact admin procedure not worth the ink and paper and notoriety it has enjoyed.

 

[red states rule]

NeoCon's have no problem killing a mentally retarded man.

It was Bill Clnton who left the campaign trail to sight the death warrent of a mentally retarded killer - the left was rather silent on that one

He was smart enough to kill - he should pay the price

 

[Gunny]

NeoCon's have no problem killing a mentally retarded man.

Start your thread. We can discuss this issue.

 

[Gunny]

It was Bill Clnton who left the campaign trail to sight the death warrent of a mentally retarded killer - the left was rather silent on that one

He was smart enough to kill - he should pay the price

Did you read this before you hit "submit."

"Smart enough to kill?" We'll let superlative start a thread on the topic, or you can, and I'll want you to defend that statement.

 

[maineman]

I personally have NO PROBLEM with following FISA. In reality though it's just an after-the-fact admin procedure not worth the ink and paper and notoriety it has enjoyed.

In fact, as flawed as FISA is, it AT LEAST gives the judicial system a chance to weigh in on the appropriateness of eavesdropping on citizens. Without FISA, a corrupt administration could listen in on anyone at anytime for any reason and no one would be the wiser.

 

[mattskramer]

It sop funny

Libs will bend over backwards to spre the life of a convicted murderer; give other criminals every benefit of every doubt, but fight like hell for a women to murder her unborn baby

As governor of Texas, Bush signed off on 152 executions. As president, he has maintained his support for the death penalty.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0404872.htm


But look at this small list of innocent people who managed to barely avoid execution.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6

I guess that you can call me pro-life on both issues. I’m against abortion except to save the mother’s life and perhaps in cases of rape and incest. I’m against the death penalty. I’d rather have 1000000 murderers spend life in prison than take the risk of executing an innocent person.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

As governor of Texas, Bush signed off on 152 executions. As president, he has maintained his support for the death penalty.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0404872.htm


But look at this small list of innocent people who managed to barely avoid execution.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6

I guess that you can call me pro-life on both issues. I’m against abortion except to save the mother’s life and perhaps in cases of rape and incest. I’m against the death penalty. I’d rather have 1000000 murderers spend life in prison than take the risk of executing an innocent person.

Then there is this....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/death_penalty_deterrence

Society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members.

 

[red states rule]

Then there is this....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/death_penalty_deterrence

Society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members.

The left has a long history of being soft on crime - no it is carrying over to the war on terror

Libs 08 slogan can be

Hard on Bush - Soft on Terrorists

 

[mattskramer]

Then there is this....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/death_penalty_deterrence

Society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members.

I agree that society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members. I think that “life in prison” should be life in prison – put him away and throw away the key - unless irrefutable proof surfaces that the convict did not commit the crime. I think that criminals should serve hard time. I also think that the wrongfully convicted should be compensated – perhaps minimum wage (minus room and board expense) for the unwarranted time that he spent in prison.

 

[maineman]

I agree that society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members. I think that “life in prison” should be life in prison – put him away and throw away the key - unless irrefutable proof surfaces that the convict did not commit the crime. I think that criminals should serve hard time. I also think that the wrongfully convicted should be compensated – perhaps minimum wage (minus room and board expense) for the unwarranted time that he spent in prison.

or the wage he or she was making at the time of the unwarranted incarceration - whichever amount is greater

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I agree that society has a right AND a responsibility to protect its members. I think that “life in prison” should be life in prison – put him away and throw away the key - unless irrefutable proof surfaces that the convict did not commit the crime. I think that criminals should serve hard time. I also think that the wrongfully convicted should be compensated – perhaps minimum wage (minus room and board expense) for the unwarranted time that he spent in prison.

Someone that kills and has no reason to fear dieing would have little reason NOT to murder guards or other inmates in prison.

 

[red states rule]

Someone that kills and has no reason to fear dieing would have little reason NOT to murder guards or other inmates in prison.

The death penalty assures that wil not happen

 

[mattskramer]

Someone that kills and has no reason to fear dieing would have little reason NOT to murder guards or other inmates in prison.

I would recommend that those inmates that kill while in prison receive harsher physical punishment such as caning, AND loss of any and all privileges, AND harsh physical labor without any financial compensation, AND solitary confinement in a very small cell when he is not working his a** off. The very fact that if one kills someone he might face a killer in prison might serve as a deterrent. In addition, if one realizes that if he causes trouble while in prison, he will face all of the above punishments, combined, for the rest of his life, he may think twice about killing again. I am tough on crime but I am still opposed to the death penalty.

 

[mattskramer]

The death penalty assures that wil not happen

There is no 100 percent guarantee that no would-be murderer would ever commit murder. On the “down side” there is a high probability that someone who did not actually commit murder would be executed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I would recommend that those inmates that kill while in prison receive harsher physical punishment such as caning, AND loss of any and all privileges, AND harsh physical labor without any financial compensation, AND solitary confinement in a very small cell when he is not working his a** off. The very fact that if one kills someone he might face a killer in prison might serve as a deterrent. In addition, if one realizes that if he causes trouble while in prison, he will face all of the above punishments, combined, for the rest of his life, he may think twice about killing again. I am tough on crime but I am still opposed to the death penalty.

Wait? You mean you DO think death is a deterrent?

 

[mattskramer]

Wait? You mean you DO think death is a deterrent?

Yes.

The fear of any negative outcome for your body, including death, serves as a deterrent. The thought that if you go to jail, you might be mistreated, abused, assaulted, and even killed might deter people from engaging in activity that may result in going to jail.

That still does not alter my opposition to capital punishment.