Comments on: The death of penalties

By: Roderick Reilly

Roderick Reilly — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:28:18 +0000

I just read an account of the rape in question at Michelle Malkin’s blog.

What the child rapist, saved today by Supreme Court liberals, did to his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

It was so horrible I felt faint from reading it.

Here’s the thing:
Just as in the Guantanamo ruling, the Justices have an utterly surreal notion of what the issues are. What this “Patrick Kennedy” did to his stepdaughter amounted to attempted murder; she likely would have died had he not called 911 (at which time — and for some time thereafter, he lied about being the rapist). Whether this warrants the death penalty may still be argued, but it wasn’t just about rape in the usual sense of these kinds of crimes against children. I am increasingly appalled by the clinically limpid standards that judges — right up to the Supreme Court — apply to horrible crimes. Is this what Kennedy means by “evolving standards of decency?” Isn’t he the same twit who thinks we should be influenced by Western European jurisprudence?

By: David M

David M — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:47:37 +0000

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 06/26/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:21:19 +0000

Kennedy talks about evolving standards of decency.
Volokh has some survey stats. Seems the evolution is going against Kennedy.

By: someone

someone — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:17:01 +0000

“Where does “Lilith” get off on issuing flip, obviously sarcastic remarks about the Levitican code?’

Fred, she’s a lesbian. They are what they are.

By: The Wobbly Guy

The Wobbly Guy — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:47:12 +0000

There are fates worse than death. We should think about legalizing them. Castration, for one.

By: fred

fred — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:36:24 +0000

Nothing surprising about Muslims raping kafir women. One tried to do it to my wife many years ago before I met her. But my wife was a smart one and gave him a good shove out the door and then used the bolt lock right away. Instead of a Turk sailor, he was a son of a wealthy Arab in Washington, D.C.

Next to murder, rape is the most serious crime. Raping adult women is bad enough. Raping CHILDREN is horrific. In fact, I consider crimes against children the most reprehensible. Anyone who does not “get” that has some wires crossed in the brain.

By: Tamquam Leo Rugiens

Tamquam Leo Rugiens — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:29:04 +0000

Many moons ago, when I was just a lad serving in the Navy, a Turkish destroyer moored outboard of us at the Long Beach Naval Station. She was in for a refit and training, it seems. One day, quite unexpectedly it seems (there were no tugs), she cast off and sailed away. That evening she came back again and tied up as before. Shortly after Rumor Control had it as definitive from Scuttlebutt Central that one of her sailors had raped an American woman in the town. She then got underway, steamed out beyond the 12 mile limit and hung the perpetrator from the yard arm and his body cast into the sea.

It made a lot of sense to my shipmates and I, we approved the sentence and the execution. For raping a child, it seems to me, a perp should be not just hung, but drawn and quartered as well.

By: Peterike

Peterike — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:12:45 +0000

Fred, Kennedy hasn’t “changed.” Oh no no. He’s “matured.” He’s “grown.” He’s…. going to be the winner of many “Strange New Respect” awards from the media. Start the countdown until his flattering profile in the Washington Post and Kennedy making the cover the NY Times magazine. And oh, the parties he’ll be invited to now! And how the socialites will fawn.

Anyone without strong Conservative ideology inevitably moves Leftward when they hit the court and realize what’s to be gained by it. You know, something about gaining the world… I forget the other part.

By: fred

fred — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 02:02:57 +0000

NahnCee,

On the Court there seems to be two blocks. On one side, ideologically-speaking, is Antonin Scalia and his conservative instincts, backed up by the strict-constructionist Roberts. The other side is led by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the liberal-Left former ACLU bigwig. Kennedy, a Reagan appointee, has gone fully over to the liberal camp. Souter was a stealth liberal who got into the court because a former Senator from my state named Rudman advanced him to George H.W. Bush and from thence on to the bench. When Clinton appointed Ginsburg, everyone knew what they were getting. She never hid her views or her leanings. Kennedy clearly changed over the years. Souter deceived everyone.

By: NahnCee

NahnCee — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:41:51 +0000

But *why* is the supposedly conservative-majority Bush-hand-picked Supreme Court suddenly giving us all these progressive leftist rulings?

Has anyone checked their bank accounts recently to see if there’s been a sudden influx of oily-smelling or soros-tainted dollars?

And if so, what can be done about it, since I’m not sure there is any such thing as impeaching a Supreme Court justice.

Although it’d be fun to try. (Right after we re-elect Bush for the third time.)