Posted on 07/28/2004 10:18:07 AM PDT by neverdem
BOSTON -- The Democratic party platform that will be adopted this week includes one particularly significant change from the platforms adopted by the party conventions of 1992, 1996 and 2000. During the platform-writing process, the drafting committee quietly removed the section of the document that endorsed capital punishment. Thus, for the first time since the 1980s, Democrats will not be campaigning on a pro-death penalty program.
Why the change?
Simply put, on the question of execution, John Kerry is a very different Democrat from Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Clinton and Gore, while surely aware that capital punishment is an ineffective and racially and economically biased vehicle for fighting crime, were willing to embrace it as a political tool. When he was running for the presidency in 1992, then Governor Clinton even rushed back to Arkansas during the 1992 campaign to oversee the execution of a mentally-retarded inmate.
With Clinton and Gore steering the party's policies, Democratic platforms explicitly and frequently endorsed capital punishment.
But Clinton and Gore are no longer at the helm. And, as of tonight, the party will no longer be on record as supporting the death penalty. Asked about the removal of the pro-capital punishment language, U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., the chair of the committee that drafted the document, explained that, "It's a reflection of John Kerry."
Kerry, who is often accused by his Republican critics of flip-flopping, is made of firmer stuff than most politicians when it comes to the issue of capital punishment. He opposes executions in virtually all cases -- making an exception only after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, when he said he would consider supporting capital punishment, in limited cases, for foreign terrorists.
On the domestic front, Kerry has earned high marks from death penalty critics. Last fall, when the Students Against the Death Penalty project of the American Civil Liberties Union rated the nine candidates who were then seeking the Democratic presidential nomination on a variety of death penalty-related issues, Kerry and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Dennis Kucinich were the only two who received perfect scores.
Kerry opposes the execution of juveniles, supports greater access to DNA testing for death row inmates and argues that studies "reveal serious questions, racial bias, and deep disparities in the way the death penalty is applied." Kerry was a cosponsor of the National Death Penalty Moratorium Act of 2001 and of the National Death Penalty Moratorium Act of 2003.
"I know something about killing," Kerry says, referencing his service in Vietnam as a swift-boat commander. "I don't like killing. That's just a personal belief I have."
Polls show a majority of Americans support the death penalty in at least some instances. But since the late 1980s, enthusiasm for capital punishment has been slipping. Many Americans, including some political leaders such as former Illinois Governor George Ryan, have come to question the morality of state-sponsored executions, as the use of DNA analysis has led to the exoneration of dozens of death-row inmates.
Still, the death penalty remains a divisive issue. Not since 1988 has either major party nominated a critic of capital punishment for the presidency. The 1988 Democratic nominee, former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, was attacked by that year's Republican nominee, George Herbert Walker Bush, for opposing the death penalty. Whether Kerry will face similar attacks from Bush's son, an enthusiastic backer and frequent practitioner of state-sponsored executions during his days as governor of Texas, remains to be seen. But the volatility of the issue may explain why Democrats have been so quiet about the shift in platform language.
It is notable, however, that, in addition to Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, eleven other states bar executions. Among them are a number of the battleground states that could decide the November election, including Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Maine and West Virginia.
Well, this is something the Republicans need to bring to the attention of the public.
Also, I heard O'Reilly say last night that Kerry was "pro-gun". That's another misconception that needs to be taken care of. A photo op does not a policy or principle make. Simply because Kerry has shot a gun does NOT mean he has ever voted for 2nd amendment rights, and people need to realize that.
But he suports Abortion.
The man was only brain damaged because he had blown his brains out-probably to postpone his eventual fate-not because of any congenital birth defect.
Secondly, the states that this writer mentioned-to the best of my knowledge-have never had the death penalty, at least, not since its application was ruled unconstitutional by a bunch of robed radicals on the Supreme Court during the 60s.
Finally, doesn't the fact that 'The Nation' so wholeheartedly backs this man, tell you something very important; namely, that he doesn't belong anywhere near the White House?
What a sick man running for a sick party on a sick platform.
So killers will not receive the due consequences for their actions? The lack of capital punishment devalues human life.
Compared to O'Reilly, that could be true. You have to listen to O'Reilly when he talks about the Second Amendment. He's certainly not your typical conservative, but more in line with Bill Safire, George Will and Charles Krauthammer on this matter. At least Will has the intellectual honesty to say the Second Amendment should be repealed, something that's quite unlikely to happen. That doesn't mean these pundits are wrong on other issues.
I have no problem with the death penalty....only with it's application.
The standard for receiving the death penalty cases should be "certainty" regarding the commission of the capital crime.
Some say that that's what "beyond a reasonable doubt" means, but on the surface it doesn't seem that way to me.
Certainty would be defined as "absolutely zero possibility of non-commission of the capital offense."
"I know something about killing," Kerry says, referencing [guess what].
Go to my website, where you'll find a great deal on my "NO SPIN" flip-flops, which are a steal at $39. 95. Get these puppies while they're hot, because they ain't gonna be there for long. Also, while you're there, check out genuine, gold-embossed "Factor" mouse pads. There a bargain for only $4,987.95! Be dialin' people!
The Dems don't to kill potential voters. The lowlifes in our society are THEIR VOTER BASE!
Whatever you said, I'm in full agreement.
I like that one.
I always thought it's interesting that so many will show
up to protest an execution, but as I recall, none did when
Tim McVeigh was.hmmmm. Apparently some people are good (or bad )enough to fry.
Or that DNA is used to free people from death row, so why
can't we execute people immediately after DNA proves them
guilty?
capital punishment is absolutely necessary. Tax payers should not need to pay for criminals to eat 3 healthy meals a day, excercise, watch cable TV, get college degrees all the while families of victims mourn their losses. How much justice is letting someone sit in prison for the rest of their life?? They don't have to worry about anything, they get fed and clothed and live better than people on the streets. LIBERAL NONSENSE
if DNA is good enough to loose ya,
it should be good enough to fry ya.
I'm for 3 appeals or 5 years, whichever comes 1st.
None of this lollygagging around on death row. when opponents of the big DP claim it's cheaper to have people in
prison for life compared to the cost to execute, it's a red
herring. Sure that's true:because you get unlimited appeals
and "death sentence" means 20 years on "death row"; or about the equivalent of a "life sentence". Furthermore, how do you punish someone who's in for life and kills a guard/prisoner, take away their ice cream and cable?
Kerry has flipped flopped on every issue of importance, before 9/11 he was against the death penalty for terrorist who kill Americans. Now he's for it.
One thing he has been steadfast on is his stance on the death penalty for non-terrorist killers of Americans even killers of children. He says he supports a moratorium on the Federal death penalty. http://talkleft.com/new_archives/004987.html .
Which means there would soon be a national moratorium on the indivudal state death penaltys, because of the liberal social engineering judges and Supreme Court Justices he'd appoint. Stroke of the Pen, Law of the Land.
A moratorium on the Federal death penalty means that under a Kerry administration Osama won't be getting the justice he deserves, but would be sitting in comfort in the Super Max prison at taxpayers expense.
This is much like his vote on the $87 billion that would have provided body armor for our troops. "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it," Kerry says. Straddling the fence once again to gain a few votes.
He is OPPOSED to the death penalty for non-terrorist who would murder an American child, even a 5-year-old. What the heck is the difference between a non-terrorist killer and a terrorist killer? This is twisted, illogical thinking.
As the mother of a murdered 16 year old son, Jeremy Peter Flachbart http://keasl5227.tripod.com/, who was brutally murdered by a sociopath wanting to see what it felt like to kill, I am alarmed and APPALLED by this man who would be our president soft attitude toward crime, who would eliminate a form of punishment for a horrific crime.
He says HE FEELS MY PAIN.
Horse Feathers! he can't feel my pain, he hasn't had a child brutally murdered. He was only a junior prosecutor from 1976-78. He didn't loose a Loved One to a sociopathic killer. There is a hole in my heart and in my life created by the brutal murder of my beloved child.
While Kerry himself had already moved on to the senate before Willie Horton was released he defended Dukakis from GOP attack about the furlough program. Thus nominally giving support and approval to such a stupid program which puts violent offenders back on the streets after serving only small fractions of their sentences. More do gooder, feel good pandering...i.e. SOFT ON CRIME.
"Presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Kerry is irresponsible in blindly accepting the fraudulent claim that 111 innocents have been released from death row. As has been repeatedly proven, this innocent claim is a fraud pushed by the anti death penalty movement."
"Kerry say '111 were found innocent from death row via DNA.' If so, that is even more absurd. It is 12. But, for solid evidence of actual innocence, my evidence and that from others indicates its from 17-30. I use 30 to be on the safe side." says Dudley Sharp, former Resource Director with Justice For All.
Sincerely,
In memory of Jeremy Peter Flachbart
Gail Keasling
KING: I've done a lot of shows recently dealing with the death of little children. A person who kills a 5-year-old should live?
KERRY: Larry, my instinct is to want to strangle that person with my own hands. I understand the instincts, I really do. I prosecuted people. I know what the feeling of the families is and everybody else. But we have 111 people who have been now released from death row -- death row, let alone the rest of the prison system -- because of DNA evidence that showed they didn't commit the crime of which they were convicted.
After spending -- I myself worked to get a person out of jail who had been there for 15 years for a murder that person did not commit.
Now, our system has made mistakes, and it's been applied in a way that I think is wrong.
Secondly, I don't believe that, in the end, you advance the, sort of, level of your justice and the system of your civility as a nation -- and many other nations in the world, most of the other nations in the world, have adopted that idea, that the state should not engage in killing.
(APPLAUSE)
Because they have very bad memories of what happens when the state engages in killing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10722-2004Feb26_2.html
RUSH has a great clip on Hanoi John flip flop on the DP http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_020404/content/truth_detector_3.guest.html
Not surprising at all.
Uh....I'll take a stab at that: "Because they're spinless p^$$#@s"
Given that there are unethical prosecutors along with other characters in the chain of custody, I would prefer the state to corroborate cases in which the death penalty is sought with DNA evidence. Any malicious prosecutions, e.g. withholding of exculpatory evidense or evidence tampering, deserve the same penalty given to those unjustly convicted.
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.