I've always found it more than a little ironic that two of the three Democrat strongholds have the death penalty, one of them is BO‘s home state. At least there's some consistency in The Golden State and The Land of Lincoln being firmly pro-choice and down with the "off with their head" mentality.

The GOP's catch and release program is a different story.

telcoman wrote:I just love watching Fox after the election trying to explain what just happened.

The funny thing is that today, some 6 days after the election the Red team is still sitting there looking at the polls and wondering why Nate Silver saw what they didn't see.

My problem with the death penalty isn't the death of the person convicted of the crime, but the certainty of the guilt of that person. Regardless, a killing sanctioned by society according to it's laws isn't murder, and never will be. One could argue that killing Osama was an act of murder. I'll never buy that either. Society has the right to protect itself and it's members. There is no malice in the death penalty, and malice is an element of murder.

BusyBadger wrote:The GOP's catch and release program is a different story.

R/T Hemi wrote:My problem with the death penalty isn't the death of the person convicted of the crime, but the certainty of the guilt of that person. Regardless, a killing sanctioned by society according to it's laws isn't murder, and never will be. One could argue that killing Osama was an act of murder. I'll never buy that either. Society has the right to protect itself and it's members. There is no malice in the death penalty, and malice is an element of murder.

You are killing the person not to protect society, life in prison does that. You are "killing him back" coldly, on a predetermined day. That's pure malice.

R/T Hemi wrote:My problem with the death penalty isn't the death of the person convicted of the crime, but the certainty of the guilt of that person. Regardless, a killing sanctioned by society according to it's laws isn't murder, and never will be. One could argue that killing Osama was an act of murder. I'll never buy that either. Society has the right to protect itself and it's members. There is no malice in the death penalty, and malice is an element of murder.

Here is what is wrong with the death penalty

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/opini ... ce.html?hp

“Sam Millsap, a former Texas prosecutor, now crusades against the death penalty because a man he prosecuted — on the basis of a single eyewitness — was put to death. He later learned that the witness had been wrong. “I’d love to be able to tell you I am the only former elected prosecutor in the country who finds himself in the position of having to admit an error in judgment that may have led to the execution of an innocent man, but I know I am not,” he said in a talk he gave a few years ago.”

We saw during the campaign the brilliance of the Texas governor.

Telcoman

Dealth penalty should have exacting evidence in place. Im talking about a restaurant full of impartial people who all say "yep that sicko gunned down half the place" sort of evidence. Honestly, case like that should be a pretty much open shut trial. If you've got any kind of reasonable doubt, death penalty should be off the table. Jury's should be made to report their deliberations, and anything less than a unanimous verdict should take the death penalty off the table. If even one juror says at any point, ehhh I dont know maybe he's not guilty, even if he's later convinced the vote guilty, should speak to the circumstantial nature of the evidence provided.

Honestly though, after watching the "Through the Wormhole" episode where they go into what drives psychopaths and what not, I'm fairly convinced the whole "jury of your peers" thing is on the way out. They go into how even the jury members can't be trusted due to varying circumstances, varying empathy capabilities and what not. If we don't see the "jury of peers" go away at first, we'll at least start seeing alot more hardcore juror screening, especially in high profile cases where money for litigation is sufficient enough to warrant different sorts of testing, like brain scans, empathetic testing. Watch the episode if you wanna get a better feel for what I'm talking about.

s0m3th1ngAZ wrote:The death penalty does not deter crime...gulags and tortuous conditions however, might. We need more sodomy, less basic human needs, and more psychological torment.

So, you like the French jail system, eh?

Z

I've got to add my 47 cents worth here.
I was pretty proud of my President yesterday when he took McCain to task for his comments on Susan Rice. He showed strength and tenacity. Those are qualities Romney lacked. We're headed in the right direction.

I think Graham got it right on the rebuttal though. Yes Obama is to answer for this mess, but we don't need to be promoting anyone involved just yet either.

R/T Hemi wrote:I've got to add my 47 cents worth here.
I was pretty proud of my President yesterday when he took McCain to task for his comments on Susan Rice. He showed strength and tenacity. Those are qualities Romney lacked. We're headed in the right direction.

Couple things...

He said she wasn't involved...um...she got involved when she lied to America on national TV. No need to argue this point, they had a live feed of the attack and the information has been released shows that they ALL knew it wasn't any sort of protest gone bad. Yet 5 days after the event, she was sent out to push the anti terror message.

If Obama was worried about her character being assaulted he shouldn't have made her the Sunday talk show spokesperson.

When you let others speak for you, you get them into trouble. Hence the position Susan Rice is in.

Also...we're headed in the right direction? We haven't had a single change yet or any substantial anything and you've determined we're heading in the right direction? Because of what...a fvcking press conference?

WDRacing wrote:Also...we're headed in the right direction?

Yup!

Taxes on the rich are finally going up

Telcoman

telcoman wrote:

WDRacing wrote: Also...we're headed in the right direction?

Yup!

Taxes on the rich are finally going up

Telcoman

At the expense of a -.5% GDP bump, so says the CBO

EDIT - Sorry I forgot, its not about creating growth, its just about fairness

WDRacing wrote:Also...we're headed in the right direction? We haven't had a single change yet or any substantial anything and you've determined we're heading in the right direction? Because of what...a fvcking press conference?

Yes. I saw a much stronger Obama, more resolute, more willing to call it as it is. And the fact is simple with respect to the direction we're headed. Obama has made it clear what he stands for in the campaign. The American public bought it, realizing the other option was a trip down Bush lane. Yes, things are already looking up.

4 years from now when our budget isn't balanced and our debt is still the fastest thing growing in our economy, I'm going to expect you to admit you were wrong.

Don't count on it.

themadscientist wrote:Don't count on it.

QFTMFT

This makes me smile.

themadscientist wrote:This makes me smile.

If he would fill up in New Jersey he wouldn't have to pump his own gas.

One of the 47% low paid gas station attendants would do it for him

Telcoman

Yeah, f that. I was shocked to discover that silly Jersey BS.

We always point and laugh at the NJ idiots just sitting in their cars scratching their heads when they visit here and cant pump gas.

We had both is Mass where I grew up. Don't knock having your gas pumped for you when the weather sucks.

WDRacing wrote:We had both is Mass where I grew up. Don't knock having your gas pumped for you when the weather sucks.

I prefer to pump my own but technically it is illegal in NJ. I get out of my vehicle and politely ask them not to drip gas on my G when they remove the nozzle.

It does provide jobs (low paying) for college students and others that do not speak good english

themadscientist wrote:Yeah, f that. I was shocked to discover that silly Jersey BS.

Same for Oregon.

telcoman wrote:

WDRacing wrote:We had both is Mass where I grew up. Don't knock having your gas pumped for you when the weather sucks.

I prefer to pump my own but technically it is illegal in NJ. I get out of my vehicle and politely ask them not to drip gas on my G when they remove the nozzle.

It does provide jobs (low paying) for college students and others that do not speak good english

So we are twisting reality through law to create unnecessary work, nice. It's a liberal's dream.

Yahoo!Answers wrote:The ban on self-service gas stations is a highly combustible issue and makes for some heated debates. New Jersey passed the law making it illegal to pump your own gas in 1949. At the time, legislators felt it was too dangerous to have untrained people dispensing such a flammable liquid.

No, we're leaving reality twisted because we want to create work. Difference. Note it.

The ban on self-service gas stations is a highly combustible issue and makes for some heated debates.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... government

In the wake of the GOP's election losses, media mavens and party elders inevitably express deep concern that the party has become "too conservative" to win elections. The party, we are warned, must moderate its positions to better appeal to voters in the "middle." Results in nine different races, however, suggest that the GOP needs to reaffirm its commitment to conservative values. In two Senate races, one Governors' race and six House races, libertarian candidates won enough support to potentially cost Republicans victory. The votes won by libertarian candidates far exceeded the Democrats' victory margins.

The GOP is most successful when it embraces limited government and individual responsibility. It fails when it is merely a slightly more cost-efficient version of the Democrat party. The party forgets this at their peril.

No s***, eh?