“fredvh- The man was not tortured. Torture implies that the pain inflicted was done for the specific purpose of inflicting pain.. The method is one that has been used many times before. His reaction was not the anticipated one. As for the governor and separation of powers are you also so outraged at the same abuse of power from Washington where many more lives are affected than some lowlife murderer? If the governor is found guilty of such an action the people of Oklahoma will have the authority to remove her from office. I get it you don't like the death penalty, we agree to disagree. I don't find your argument strong enough to change my mind.”
fredvh on May 2, 2014 at 08:57:00
“this was a new method with new drugs
he struggled for almost 10 minutes and seemed in pain until they closed the blinds.
read the documents the state released yesterday.
they blew a vein, and didn't have more drugs. he was sitting with half the regular dose behind the closed curtains until he finally died.
the doctor told prison officials he didn't have enough drugs in him to kill him due to a blown vein.
but somehow he died after a half hour of torture.
it's all in the state documents released yesterday”
“Ferrariqx- Nice list of human rights violators you have there. You are comparing our system of justice with the same ones that cut the hands of thieves because we exact justice for those who have committed the most heinous of crimes. Sorry but I don't agree. As for the mistakes I have admitted that it has happened and that is why I said that all avenues should be examined before this is carried out. But if all those possibilities have been exhausted there is no reason not to carry out the execution. You don't like it and I have no problem with it. As for what to say to those families, that is why you cover all possibilities.”
“ferrariqx- sorry about the typos in the first response. What I was saying in the first lines was. Was Capital Punishment in use when The Constitution was written? Why hasn't it been specifically included then or since? The rest is as it reads.”
“ferrax- Tell me was Capital Punishment in use when The If it is wrong then was it not put into The Constitution then or since? It is because we as Americans believe in punishment fitting the crime. You sound like some left winger who believes that only someone with a left leaning point of view is worthy of any thought or consideration. What would you tell the family of the victims? Where is the justice for them? Why is no consideration put out for them? Maybe just maybe it is true justice that any fear or pain he felt mirrored what he inflicted on his victim.”
Ferrariqx on May 1, 2014 at 12:49:03
“Virtually every western country on the planet Earth has banned capital punishment. The US is one of the few western countries that still carries out government sanctioned brutality. Other countries are:
and many 3rd world nations.
What do you tell the victims? That the person responsible for killing their loved one will spend the rest of their life in prison. The same as in other enlightened countries that have an elevated sense of morality.
I have a question for you? What do you tell the families of inmates who have been executed by the government only to be found innocent of the crime later? "Oops, our bad?"”
“fred- To answer your questions. Yes the Constitution was followed. The LEGAL APRROVED METHOD of execution was followed. Have there been occasions where there was a mistake, yes, and I am all for exhausting the burden of proof to prevent such a mistake. As for women being put to death, if they have done the crime there is no reason not to make them pay the ultimate price. I believe that there is a social stigma that we have about wanting to put a woman to death and that has made it more difficult to for judges to mete out this sentence. As for minorities making up a larger percentage of those sentenced to death, if you look at the prison population you will find that minorities make up a larger percentage of that group. That has more to do with the socio economic reasons for criminal activity that escalates to crimes with capital Punishment consequences. Personally I have no racial or gender bias towards who is executed as long as it is warranted. I feel that you and I will continue to disagree with the death penalty, but I agree that you have your right to feel that way and I do not denigrate you or your belief. I just disagree.”
fredvh on May 1, 2014 at 13:54:07
“actually no the constitution was not followed.
the man was tortured.
mistakes should not be allowed when it comes to the constitution.
oh, and the state constitution was not followed either. the governor ignored the supreme court.
igonring a balance of powers”
“fred- You have it wrong. The law was followed to the letter. I get the sense that you disapprove of Capital Punishment. The fact that this man suffered is of no consequence to me personally because the law was followed. There have always been instances where sanctioned punishment didn't go as planned. There have been times where a prisoner didn't die immediately from firing squad or hanging. It isn't the process it was a circumstance. The Constitution protects us from such punishment being the norm not the exception.”
fredvh on May 1, 2014 at 11:45:42
“actually the constitution was not followed.
yes, i am against the death penalty for multiple reasons.
1-if a person is later proven innocent or there are huge questions about guilt....tough luck for the guy put to death. that has happened before on multiple occasions.
2-it's not handed out evenly.
women who are eligible rarely get it.
minorities get it on a much higher percentage than whites.”
“"The White House says a botched execution of a death row inmate in Oklahoma fell short of the humane standards"...Execution shouldn't be humane. The actions of those who deserve to die should be carried out as savagely as the act that put them in that position in the first place. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the murderer who "suffered" during his execution. If that upsets some people or they feel it isn't right I don't care what they think.”
Ferrariqx on May 1, 2014 at 12:02:05
“So, what you're saying is that the government should ignore the 8th Amendment. I know, I know, I know. You're a right winger and the only Amendments you have a VAGUE understanding is the 1st and 2nd. Read up!
“frankath- No other president has blamed his predecessor like Obama has blamed Bush yet he has very purposely ignored his promise to his fawning followers to close Gitmo or stop the interrogation techniques used by the previous administration because it gave him the information used to get bin Laden. Bush and Reagan never used the rhetoric nor the number of times Obama has invoked Bush's name for blame of his own lack of progress . Sooner or later you need to step up and take the blame for things that don't get done the same way you do for things you claim to have done(you know like Obamacare which has helped so many who thought they could keep their healthcare, doctors etc.). Yet, Obama seems to be the epitome of Teflon, maybe because the media continues to live in his hip pocket. By the way Reagan used economics to beat the Soviet Union. He made it so expensive for them to keep up with America that the people forced the change. So whether you give him credit or not the wall came down.”
“nohpiano= obviously you have never had someone stick a gun in your face and rob you. I have and have no wish to be in that position again. Oh yeah before you ask 2 people were shot and 1 was pistol whipped. I am sure they will disagree with you too.”
“nohpiano- You obviously never had a criminal with a gun point it at you and rob you. If you had you might have a different opinion. BTW yes I have had that misfortune and I wish I had been able to defend myself.”
“karaoke- You just don't like his agenda because it doesn't go along with the rest of the far left agenda espoused by the rest of NBC News hosts. As for snarky jerks you have no further to look than pretty much any host on MSNBC.”
“I haven't watched MTP in quite a while but it seems that as soon as a host strays from the far left agenda he needs to be replaced. As for not asking hard questions NBC News in any form has not done that since Obama announced his candidacy in 2006, unless they are attacking a Republican so it seems irrelevant that Gregory might not be asking that type of question, he probably forgot what a real question is since he hasn't heard one in years.”
“You can say all you want about what kind of man you want Obama to be but the fact is that around the world those who would do evil things respect only one thing, FORCE. And you can say you will not trade blood for oil or whatever, but the fact is that people like Assad and Putin will not back down if they do not believe that you will use force to back up what you say. For all the talk that occurred during the Cold War there was never conflict between Russia and America except for Russian "advisors" in Vietnam. From the end of WW II until Reagan helped bring down the old Soviet Union there was no conflict with boots on the ground because Russia knew that America was strong enough and willing enough to back up what it said. And I really do not want to hear about bin Laden and Ghadaffi being killed because bin Laden was found using the methods of former President Bush (which Obama railed about during the election) and Ghadaffi was really done in by his own people and the Muslim Brotherhood.”
frankath on Apr 22, 2014 at 23:28:44
“Of course you don't want to hear anything that doesn't jive with your skewed version of history. Bush would have gotten bin Laden, if he ONLY could have...and hadn't lost the determination to do so - HIS WORDS, not mine. Sorry, you can't blame Pres. Obama for everything that goes wrong, but not give him credit when things go right. That is dishonest. Pres. Reagan had little or nothing to do with the fall of communism in the Soviet Union. Their own PEOPLE stood up,and shut the thing down. Yet, I don't have a major problem with him taking credit, because it did happen under his watch. That is the way it works, with positive things and it also applies to Pres. Obama.”
“Rumor- Why not ask the author of the story? I didn't see where that question was asked, let alone unanswered. By the way do you know every story she ever covered? Do you know for a fact that she ignored stories from the Bush administration? Where are your facts?”
“Seki- To answer point 1. Tell me, do you believe that failing to enforce a law(DOMA- whether you like it or not) or furthering a case of voter intimidation (The Black Panthers in Philadelphia) or hindering an investigation (F&F, IRS, Behngazi- take your pick) is as bad as breaking a law or just ignoring your oath to the Constitution. As for points 2 and 3 even if the Republican were to vote on an impeachment do you think Harry Reid would even let it be discussed never mind voted on. No I think they will have to settle on having him subpoenaed and possibly held in contempt. Maybe after the November elections the Republicans may have more options. That would make life a bit different for Holder unless he pulls a Sabelius, but even then they will probably go after him. Holder's best bet will Presidential protection.”
“mace- I agree Ruby Ridge was a fiasco and I have also admitted that I got my year wrong so I had Janet Reno and she wasn't the AG involved. My point has been though that Reno was a bad AG and still better by comparison to Holder who I find despicable.”
“Seki- I have already said to another poster that I was wrong about RR. The fact is though Janet Reno is almost universally acknowledged as a terrible AG and even so Holder makes her look like she was a legal genius. That plus the fact his partisanship to Obama and the democrats shows in every decision he makes. As the highest legal authority in the land he of all people should base his decisions on the Constitution and yet that document only seems to be a distraction to his agenda. That is a fact.”
sekigahara on Apr 9, 2014 at 20:41:56
“As legal decisions are made from the foundation of law, of which the Constitution is the bedrock, explain:
1) These "decisions" which you suggest are unconstitutional or otherwise outside of a legal framework, and
2) With such supposed unconstitutionality in mind, how could a Republican House fail to vote on articles of impeachment, have the Senate hold an impeachment hearing, and follow with a Senate vote to remove the AG?
3) If these supposed facts are so clear to you, how are they apparently so muddy in the eyes of your elected Representative and like-minded colleagues and your Senators and their like-minded colleagues?
There are mechanisms for removing an AG. Is the Republican Majority in the House going to fish or cut bait?
Or is it the dearth of actual facts where the rubber meets the road the ACTUAL problem inconveniently holding things up?”