Coakley’s death penalty chameleon act unimpressive (Liberal Media turning on Coakley)

Boston Globe ^

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

But some on FreeRepublic are saying he is not nearly conservative enough!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

New thread:

Michael Meehan, Weekly Standard Assailant, Works For PHRMA as Lobbyist

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Fast forward to Monday’s US Senate debate. Republican nominee Scott Brown asked Coakley whether she would favor the death penalty for Khalid Shaikh Mohammed if he is found guilty for the September 11 attacks.

“He will get the death penalty if he is found guilty,’’ she said. Brown then asked whether she agreed that he should get the death penalty. “Yes, because that is what the federal law says right now,’’ Coakley replied.

When Brown noted that she had come out strongly against the death penalty, Coakley said she didn’t support it personally and wouldn’t vote for it. Still, she said, US Attorney General Eric Holder had decided to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in federal court and “it’s their decision to make.’’ If found guilty, “he will face the death penalty,’’ she concluded. “That’s what the law of the land is and I would support the law of the land, even though I disagree with it personally.’’

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Reading the comments:

So that makes two, count 'em two, "principled" positions on which Martha Coakley has changed her views in this campaign: voting against a health reform bill that restricts abortion funding and the death penalty for terrorists. Hmmmmm. Is this really the sort of principled Senator we need in Washington? We already have John Kerry.

[steve in DC]

"Conservative magazine reporter arrested for malicious damage after hitting railing with his face outside Coakley event"

"You better put some ice on that."