Posted on 05/07/2004 2:23:42 PM PDT by MegaSilver
One of the most respected and enigmatic senators in Washington is John McCain. A Republican, McCain nevertheless has many Democratic supporters and liberal columnist Maureen Dowd recently suggested that the Democratic ticket would be stronger with McCain in the Number 1 spot and Kerry at Number 2.
Surely a public favorite, Senator McCain blends common sense with an absolute moral dedication to do what he thinks is right. What makes him puzzling to others in Congress, of course, is that McCain acts on his morals, politics be damned. McCain's colleagues might have moral twinges about issues, but rarely let questions of right and wrong dictate their behavior. Take for example Barbara Boxer.
Senator Boxer, one of the Senate's most liberal members, has called for the Justice Department to prosecute alleged San Francisco cop killer, David Hill, under federal death penalty laws. Boxer's spokesperson David Sandretti told the Chronicle's Matier and Ross Tuesday that ''she believes the vicious murder of Officer Espinoza is a heinous crime and...when a police officer is murdered, those responsible should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.'' Boxer herself is quoted in the San Francisco Sentinel as saying, ''I've been for the death penalty in heinous crimes since 1985.'' Really?
In 2001, Boxer sponsored a bill limiting capital punishment. That bill would have placed a moratorium on executions by the federal government and urged the States to do the same, while a National Commission on the Death Penalty reviewed the fairness of the imposition of the death penalty.
Boxer's Tuesday epiphany had political underpinnings, of course. First, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein called for the death penalty at Espinoza's funeral, a rather unseemly bit of political grandstanding which earned her a standing ovation. Further, Boxer's Republican rival in the upcoming November senate race, Bill Jones, has blasted Boxer in recent days for honoring District Attorney Kamala Harris as part of a ''Women Making History'' luncheon, according to Matier and Ross. Which brings us to Harris.
Ms. Harris defeated incumbent DA Terrence Hallinan and another challenger, Bill Fazio last year for the right to serve as San Francisco District Attorney. Most people viewed Harris as being somewhere between the moderate Fazio (there really is no such thing as a right-leaning candidate in San Francisco) and District Attorney Hallinan (who was frequently confused and thought D.A. stood for defense attorney). Ms. Harris was often asked whether she would seek the death penalty in appropriate cases and she steadfastly reiterated her opposition to the death penalty and her intention never to seek it. Few cases stir the public imagination against a criminal defendant more than the cold-blooded murder of a police officer (child torture and mass murder would probably be equivalents). So when Harris was forced to make a decision whether to seek the death penalty against Hill, she was presented with the ultimate test of mettle. She chose to honor her campaign promises and apparently her moral convictions as well.
Boxer has opted for political expediency. A Field Poll in March revealed that over two-thirds (68%) of Californians favor the death penalty. Boxer may not, but why complicate politics with morals?
Patrick Mattimore is a former teacher and a former prosecutor who resides in San Francisco. He receives e-mail at: Psychout@msn.com.
That alone is enough to get under my skin.
Senator McCain blends common sense with an absolute moral dedication to do what he thinks is right. What makes him puzzling to others in Congress, of course, is that McCain acts on his morals, politics be damned.
Well, nobody said that all standards of right and wrong were equally admirable, I guess...
Well, then, Boxer should either get the needle, or just kill herself and save everyone the bother. She supports that most heinous of all crimes, murder of the innocent, since she is 100% in favor of abortion in all cases under any circumstance. Being an accessory to the murder of going on 50 million+ would likely be enough to convict in most any court (except maybe the 9th circus).
Why ruin a perfectly low-class strip joint?
Whether this is true or not I don't know, but I do know that Senator McCain helped pass a campaign "finance" reform bill that is the worst violation of the 1st amendment I've seen in my lifetime. He (and its supporters) claimed that it would keep the money out of politics. Of course nothing of the sort has happened.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he dedicate the biography he wrote with the assistance of Mark Salter to Lori Berenson? I mean, why not just go over to H. Rap Brown and give him a big, wet French kiss?
Couple that with the numerous issues he hasn't addressed in a forthright way, (can anyone say Straight Talk Express?) take illegal immigration for example, or discriminatory quotas in college admissions and you won't be scatching your head over why he lost the Republican nomination four years ago.
Even the few times that he has hit upon a genuinely noble stance-I'm thinking of his attempt to dismantle New York's arcane ballot-gathering procedures-his pomposity has ruined any claim he might have had to the moral high ground.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.