Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Cheering for State-Imposed Death
At last night's GOP debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry was asked by Brian Williams about the 234 executions of death row inmates over which Perry has presided -- "more than any Governor in modern times"-- and the mere mention by Williams of this morose record triggered an outburst of cheering and applause from the audience:
This episode is creepy and disgusting, though as both Ta-Nehisi Coates and Dahlia Lithwick point out, it's hardly surprising for a country which long considered public hangings a form of entertainment and in which support for the death penalty is mandated orthodoxy for national politicians in both parties. Still, even for those who believe in the death penalty, it should be a very somber and sober affair for the state, with regimented premeditation, to end the life of a human being no matter the crimes committed. Wildly cheering the execution of human beings as though one's favorite football team just scored a touchdown is primitive, twisted and base.
All of that would be true even if the death penalty were perfectly applied and only clearly guilty people were killed. But in the U.S., the exact opposite is true; see here to read about (and act to stop) a horrific though typical example of a very likely innocent person about to be executed by the State of Georgia. That Perry in particular likely enabled the execution of an innocent man -- as well as numerous other highly disturbing killings, of the young and mentally infirm -- makes the cheering all the more repellent. That the death penalty in America has long been plagued by a serious racial bias makes it worse still. That this death-cheering comes from a party that relentlessly touts itself as "pro-life" and derides the other as The Party of Death -- and loves to condemn Islam (in contrast to its war-loving self) as a death-glorifying cult -- only adds a layer of dark irony.
This happened at a GOP debate, involving the current GOP front-runner, and progressives are thus rushing forth to condemn it (condemnations with which I largely agree). The Philadelphia Daily News' Will Bunch called it "utterly sickening" and "a pathetic new low in American politics." Bunch added: "What you heard echoing in the Reagan Library last night was not reason. It was bloodlust, pure and simple, and it was repulsive." That's because "the cheering of executions is the hallmark of a sick society -- one that's incapable of tackling its real demons and looking for vengeance on whomever happens to be available."
I agree with all of that, and that's why this morning's orgy of progressive condemnation made me think of very similar death-celebrations that erupted at the news that the U.S. military had pumped bullets into Osama bin Laden's skull and then dumped his corpse into the ocean. Those of us back then who expressed serious reservations about the boisterous public chanting and celebratory cheering of executions were accused by Good Democrats of all manner of deficiencies.
Yes, the 9/11 attack was an atrocious act of slaughter; so were many of the violent, horrendous crimes which executed convicts unquestionably (sometimes by their own confession) committed. In all cases, performing giddy dances over state-produced corpses is odious and wrong.
Now that this issue has been vested with a partisan angle, and many Good Progressives are marching forward to condemn the act of ecstatically cheering for executions, perhaps the reservations many of us had over the joyous, chest-beating street celebrations over bin Laden's corpse can be better understood. Like drenching a citizenry with fear and keeping them in a state of Endless War for more than a decade, training them to publicly rejoice when the Government puts bullets into people's heads or injects poison into their veins -- even if that act is justifiable -- inevitably degrades the citizenry and the character of their nation.
UPDATE: Does anyone doubt that many of the same Democrats expressing disgust this morning at the Republican cheerleading for Rick Perry's executions (of people convicted of crimes after at least a pretext of due process) will be the first in line raucously celebrating the Democratic President when he finally succeeds in assassinating U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki with no due process at all?
Read more at Salon.com
64 Comments so far
Show AllGood article. Thanks, Glenn, for mentioning the display after we assassinated an unarmed man in his bedroom in front of his family.... just makes you wonder how we got here....but I guess if we could be responsible for the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children and never show a bit of national shame or remorse, anything is possible.
I am with you. It's kind of like applauding canabalism. But I'd also like to say someday down the road we're going to realize it was way more than 500,000 Iraqis killed.
the rockets red glare, bombs bursting in air...
Great point, Glen. Couldn't agree more. And, very cute dog and puppies, too (re: previous article).
Commonly in defense of murder-as-punishment someone will ask, “What if your daughter was killed: wouldn’t you rage against the cosmos and demand that someone—anyone—be killed?”
Turn the question around: what if one of the many viewers of the debate (live or televised) who cheered at this point were one day sentenced to death—even if guilty? What are the prisoners in TX thinking when they see this on TV? I think I’ll ask one of them.
We’re at the point when, just as in 1984 and the “Two Minutes Hate”, it’s no longer safe to draw attention to yourself by not reveling in the herd mentality.
I'm pretty sure that all right-thinking, good Christian Amerikan patriots think that "Vengeance is mine, saith the State" is written somewhere in the Bible.
So, killing Polly Klass would bring her back to life then?
"The point is that justice demands payment for evil behavior. The level of evil determines the level of justice."
Oh, really?
Here's a news flash. The law does not distinguish between 'good' and 'evil'. That determination is left, here in the US of A, up to right-wing types like yourself, who, unlike the rest of us, don't realize that you are full of shit.
The law focuses on actions and intentions, and a person is convicted not because he is evil, but because he has violated a statute. Moreover, the standard of proof in any criminal case is not by "a preponderance of the evidence" as you mentioned in a post above, (that standard is for civil cases), bur rather by "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".
What you would not understand because it is clear you have never tried a case in an actual courtroom and what Glen Greenwald does understand because he has tried cases in actual courtrooms, is that the system is geared to grind poor people into dust. In that paradigm, it is inevitable that innocent people will be convicted, and innocent people will be put to death. Us Bible-misquoting left-wingers might call THAT the ultimate evil were we allowed to be in the evil-determining business. But we're not, so we won't.
I know there is no way for you to 'get' this, but GG's article is nothing more than a plaintive cry for humanity. He cannot understand the callousness of those who would cheer for the putting to death of another human being in any situation, much less the putting to death of many human beings as a by-product of a helplessly flawed system. But his cry is wasted. Because those in the evil-determining business don't have time to ponder the inequities that may or may not exist within the system. You, yourself, qualified it by stating that you were talking about cases where there was no doubt. And what legal system would that be? Somewhere in fantasyland, because the safeguards do not exist here.
Were Glen Greenwald, or myself for that matter, possessed of a certitude such as your own, we might turn your unfairly emotionally charged question back on to you: "How would you feel if your innocent-of-a-crime daughter was about to be put to death because her lawyer messed up?" But we're not so we won't.
Let me leave you with one last selective quote.
"Thou shalt not kill."
Exodus 20:13
"The Commandment "Thou shalt not kill" does not mean you should kill some people and not others."
Marvin Harris
Ah, but as others have said before, which god?
Man changes his god to suit his fancy, too. Timescales might be longer than in the legislature, but your points apply equally to religious doctrine and dogma. Nothing is immutable.
K of C, you can't show disdain for God's teachings (even if disdain born of ignorance) and think you are a Christian.
And fake Christians should not make assumptions about another person's beliefs, religious or otherwise. It makes them look foolish and bigoted.
Since you're obviously a biblical scholar, you would know that among the list of "heinous crimes" which prescribe the death penalty are "cursing your mother or father". This puts an abused child in quite a quandry, wouldn't you say? Since he didn't initiate the abuse and might rightfully curse those who did, the penalty seems a bit harsh. Perhaps it is better to try to understand God's overall blueprint for love among the multitudes, than to selectively quote passages that you (erroneously) believe support your (un-Christian) right wing views. I never purport to know all the details of His plan, but I'm pretty sure killing, whether state sponsored or through illegal wars is not high on God's list of things He'd like to see us do to one another.
You are the archetype incarnate of the faux-Christian, a person who claims to love God, but hates all that God has done, such as create worthless liberals. Hell, God even created Hitler, Pol Pot, and Stalin. He may want you to hate the sins, but He doesn't want you to hate the sinners. And He doesn't want me to hate you, which I don't, though the crap you are spewing is worthy of hate.
Another of your rants above was directed at "socialists". This is of course the age old whipping boy of your ilk, and, though you don't understand this, this fear-mongering mentality has led us to the precarious position we all hold today. Let me misquote one last passage, before I put you on your own to do god's work (not capitalized on purpose).
"And the multitudes of them that believed (the early church) were of one heart and one soul; neither said any of them that ought of things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things in common."
"And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all."
"Neither was there any among them that lacked, for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold."
"And laid them down at the apostles' feet and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."
Acts 4: 32-35
It turns out that God is a socialist. Post this passage back at the lodge. But make sure all the pacemakers are working.
And look in the mirror, friend.
"The only reason I oppose the death penalty at this moment in time is because our justice system is COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY SCREWED UP!!!"
I applaud your stance, since you are at least willing to admit that the current "justice" system is deaf, dumb and blind. Supporting the death penalty is one thing, supporting it under the conditions it is actually practiced is quite another.
However, I would be very interested in learning when "Our justice system" represented otherwise; that is, when it WASN'T "totally screwed up". Certainly not during the era of Sacco and Vanzetti, and certainly not during the era of the Haymarket bombings, and certainly not during the era of slavery, and certainly not during the era of "Witchcraft". Come to think of it, has there EVER been an era when "our justice system" was fair and just?
Most people who have studied legal history understand that "the justice system" is largely a farce; therefore we should not entrust these farcical figures to kill people on our behalf. As much as we may like to see Edmund Kemper beheaded like he did all those coeds, we will probably, in the process, end up beheading a whole bunch of innocent people too. That's why the civilized world has rejected capital punishment. I urge you to watch the film 10 Rillington Place.
It's actually the right wing 99% of the time who pick and choose passages from the bible. If you believe in the teachings of Jesus then you cannot support Republicans. But that's not what I wanted to say.
The problem with Texas is that they have the worst record, even surpassing Florida, for unjustified executions. They execute the mentally handicapped, they upheld executing a man whose lawyer slept through his trial, they executed people who were convicted with no evidence against them. I find it hard to believe that the country I grew up in and love would be so ignorant that they don't understand that Perry is a moron, everything he says is a lie and his vision for America would destroy it, even worse than the damage caused by the Bushes and Reagan. It's not for nothing that Texas Republican politicians call him George Bush's dumber brother.
KnightsofColumbus wrote:
'The only reason I oppose the death penalty at this moment in time is because our justice system is COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY SCREWED UP!!! Lawyers somehow have gotten the idea that the courtroom is similar to a football field -- a contest instead of a place where they are to find out the TRUTH!!. They seem to forget, in their haste and desire to one up each other and come out a "winner" that a person's LIFE is at stake.'
No, the lawyers' jobs are most certainly NOT to find out the truth. The defense attorney should try to get an aquittal verdict, or a guilty of the least serious charge. He should then strive to make any punishment as minimal as possible.
The prosecutor's job is to do the opposite. Truth is completely absent from any considerations.
John
It's not often that someone can top one of OS's posts, but your response has provided a near perfect illustration of the point he was making.
My congratulations. I wish I could do irony like that.
Knights of Columbus -- What about justice for these Catholics whose crimes were orders of magnitude greater than any single murderer's:
http://nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
http://alamoministries.com/content/english/Antichrist/nazigallery/photogallery.html
http://www.spirituallysmart.com/nazi.html
Your pope, Benedict XVI, is a Nazi. http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/former_hitler_youth_elected_pope.htm
Death penalty for black men who kill but sainthood for Catholic Popes and bishops who sided with the Nazis. That is true Catholicism.
The Catholic Church is the biggest defender of pedophiles in the world today. What do you have to say about that?
4% of Catholic priests "were found guilty".
30% of teachers "have been accused".
Questionable statistics, but an interesting choice of comparison. How many apples make an orange?
The Bible is full of contradictions. Everybody picks and chooses the parts of the Bible they like. That's why I call it a Rorschach test.
"... it's hardly surprising for a country which long considered public hangings a form of entertainment.... "the cheering of executions is the hallmark of a sick society -- one that's incapable of tackling its real demons and looking for vengeance on whomever happens to be available."
The real shame is those cheering probably consider themselves civilized when in fact the are the worst of Barbarians. I often wonder if it's possible for a majority of humans to become Civilized as opposed to the small percentage of Civilized people that mostly live in other countries.
Two other notes: The US Empire has waged war in one form or another since the official end of WW2--66 years of constant war, not ten; and the US government has killed many of its own citizens without due process, so in reality assassinating Awlaki wouldn't be anything new.
Rampant violence and incredible stupidity.
The wild cheering for mass executions did reveal an interesting perspective on the function of the State:
The modern 'conservative' (an erroneous label) does not want the state helping you with health care, education, employment, and pensions, or providing environmental regulations, etc. because it can't be trusted to do a good job (or it leads ineluctably to totalitarianism, etc.).
The State can be trusted, however, to execute large numbers of its own citizens -- and imprison vastly larger numbers -- as well as to carry out mass exterminations, occupations, economic & social construction, etc. in other countries using its military.
As to bin Laden, the celebrations were hardly a surprise considering the decade of rather Orwellian "hate" directed at this perfidious evil-doer. In fact, the celebrations seemed rather subdued and hollow, rather like having your birthday party a day or two after you were diagnosed with liver cancer.
The news cycle moved on with remarkable alacrity after some triumphant chest-thumping, and the White House and Pentagon quickly assured us that the assassination of the 'Hitler of Jihad' would have absolutely no bearing on the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. -- despite being told for a decade that bin Laden (& his tiny network) was the necessary and sufficient cause for all these invasions.
Initially, it appeared that Obama had hit the jackpot with the killing of bin Laden and that he had probably assured himself of a second term despite the moribund economy. It turns out that the head of bin Laden now adorning the wall of the White House trophy room is less a magnificent grizzly and more a flea-bitten ground squirrel.
Amerikans appear to have joined their former magnificent leader in saying of bin Laden, "I really just don't spend that much time on him."
Of far more interest than the celebrations of his death by the public and corporate media, was the White House decision to murder bin Laden on the spot rather than to capture him alive for interrogation, trial, and eventual execution -- once his crimes of terror and mass murder had been demonstrated beyond a shadow of doubt to the world.
States normally revel in the capture, humiliation, and execution of their greatest enemies. Can anyone imagine U.S. or Soviet forces just shooting Hitler in the head (under orders) if they had been presented with an opportunity to capture him alive?
{Precisely why Hitler chose suicide rather than fall into Soviet hands as the battle for Berlin raged around him.}
One can only speculate, unfortunately, as to the interesting things bin Laden might have had to say about his former allies in the CIA, about the role of Israeli colonialism in Islamic 'jihad', about the planning and carrying out of 9/11 (and any surprising aspects he might have noted as the attacks unfolded).
He might even have proclaimed his innocence (many of his allegedly taped comments are problematic and contradictory) -- although one of his sons seems to feel he committed acts of violence. His son, Omar, along with other family members, released a very thoughtful statement on the summary execution of Osama bin Laden.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/world/asia/11binladen.html
Once again Glenn is spot on. I too was taken aback at the applause but if you think about it, the audience reaction to the death penalty goes hand in hand with the candidates overal tone regarding the president. All of the candidates totally dissed the president all night. You are probably thinking to yourself, what's new. My point is if you do not think someone is worthy of your respect, it is easy to dismiss them as irrelevant and execute (kill) them or in the case of the candidates, disrespect the president and speak of him in terms that are intended to make him appear to be inferior, all without regard to the impact of their words on the institution of the office of the president, which by the way, they all want to occupy.
f*cking animals.
"No one should CHEER an execution, but at the same time, no one should be hesitant to protect our neighbors and ourselves from those who have no conscience."
Like you?
"about that we must remove certain people from society because they are a continous threat to us"
Indeed, for example, you.
thanks for the chuckle, man...:)
LOL
Indeed I sometimes feel that the loudest supporters of the death penalty are projecting. It's similar to repressed closet-gays trashing gay rights.
Come out of the closet, thou death penalty supporters! Admit that you are murderers and support murder!
"sacred scripture?" Oh my... Where to begin.. I'll be here a week...
The practitioners of priestcraft teach us to get on our knees to talk to God. But consider how our physical parents love to talk with us face to face and all they want in return is our friendship. How much better would our spiritual parents treat us?
Religions claim that God told Abraham to kill his son. We put people in jail or asylums if they follow voices like that. A real God would be too good to ask such a thing. A real God would be too almighty to need to.
The Bible makes God say, "Kill all the Midianites, except keep the virgin girls for yourselves." Little girls owned as sex slaves? By the murderers of their families? This is the word of a God?
Or consider this decree: “No woman may teach a man.” Aside from the obvious, that we all had mothers, should a grown man go through his entire life and learn nothing from half the world?
Love and reason are the real god. (Please google Thomas Paine's "The Age of Reason.")
KnightsofColumbus wrote:
"Then God is a murderer, for He placed the death penalty in the Sacred Scriptures for a limited number of heinous crimes................."
You are correct. The fictional Abrahamic God of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is depicted as a murderer in the Hebrew Bible.
Richard Dawkins, in his work "The God Delusion", provides the following apt description of the Abrahamic god of the Hebrew Bible.
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. Those of us schooled from infancy in his ways can become desensitized to their horror."
Thomas Jefferson described the God of Moses as "a being of terrific character-cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust".
If Hell did exist, I would rather spend all eternity there rather than worship the monstrous Abrahamic god.
"...no one should be hesitant to protect our neighbors and ourselves from those who have no conscience."
and
"...we must remove certain people from society because they are a continous threat to us."
Does not require committing murder, even if it is state-sanctioned.
..
Governor Rick Perry, the Pontifex Maximus of the State of Texas, should have been asked specific questions on 3 of the 234 executions of death row inmates over which he has presided in which there was significant evidence that the men were in fact innocent.
I refer specifically to the case of Cameron Todd Willingham who was executed in 2004. Cameron Todd Willingham was convicted of capital murder for what the state alleged was the arson related death of his three daughters in a household fire in 1991.
A number of highly reputable arson investigators have questioned the forensic evidence that the State of Texas introduced at Willingham's trial that resulted in his conviction.
Attempts at getting Willingham posthumously exonerated have been thwarted by the Attorney General of Texas, Greg Abbott. Attorney General Abbott ruled on 29 July of this year that the Texas Forensic Science Committee lacked the authority to scrutinize the state fire marshal's office arson investigation that led to Willingham's 2004 execution.
Additionally, Governor Perry should have also been asked about the numerous cases of men who were wrongfully convicted of capital crimes and were subsequently released from Texas' Death Row as a result of the efforts of the Innocence Project.
Great article.
I personally would have liked to hear Brian Williams ask a more pointed question to Perry in particular.
It's obvious the man was going to feel no guilt over green-lighting 200 plus executions---so why waste the moment by asking such a ridiculous question.
Why not ask "all the candidates" instead something like "If committing war-crimes is a capital offense, would you, as president, persue an indictment against "anyone" who "openly bragged" about committing one?
Yes, the obvious lead in to Bush's order that suspected terrorists be waterboarded.
Or better yet, let's cut through the B.S. and ask pointblank "If U.S. soldiers were captured and waterboarded by terrorists, would you consider this torture?"
Some of us still remember our commander in chiefs answer when asked this question by Matt Lauer: "I'm not going to
debate the issue."
I'm sure none of the Repub's (or Dem's) would either.
My gosh, Christians are certainly blood thirsty monsters.
"Ocean"
The same assessment applies to almost all of the "major" religions.
If they worship a male deity as the highest of highest, you better watch out!
as Ghandi said: "your Christians are so unlike your Christ", but that can be said about most of the idiotic religions that have stifled the development of mankind for so long.
The warden led a prisoner down the hallway to his doom
I stood up to say good-bye like all the rest
And I heard him tell the warden just before he reached my cell
'Let my guitar playing friend do my request.' (Let him...)
Sing me back home with a song I used to hear
Make my old memories come alive
Take me away and turn back the years
Sing Me Back Home before I die
I recall last Sunday morning a choir from off the street
Came in to sing a few old gospel songs
And I heard him tell the singers 'There's a song my mama sang.
Could I hear it once before you move along?' (won't you...)
Sing me back home with a song I used to hear
Make my old memories come alive
Take me away and turn back the years
Sing Me Back Home before I die
Sing Me Back Home before I die
Merle Haggard.
I am a big fan of Merle. Everyone was a child once and everyone had a mother. When and where does it go wrong and who among us has a RIGHT to order another be murdered?
Governor Perry thinks he has that right as does Barack Obama. As does a Judge sitting in a courtroom and receiving a verdict of "Guilty".
Are these truly GOOD men or Christian men?
I think not .
Murder is not justice.
Learn the sameness, please.
>>Justice, on the other hand, is the exacting of vengence upon one who has done something evil.
You are full of crap. Take your biblical hate to another forum. Justice is NOT vengeance over evil.
>>They have taken a life, and proportionately, their life should be forfeit.
This is your opinion and one based on primitive beliefs.
I take it you support the execution of HS Truman and that of every soldier in the US Military. I take it you support Lyndie England being executed. There are people filling the prisons of Gitmo that were kidnapped and committed no crime. Will you offer your head to the hang mans noose given this done in your name using monies collected from you by way of taxes?
How many babies do you think died when the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and why are you not calling for Justice for all the Children murdered in Vietnam and iraq by your Government?
Why is it... the only organized religion that does not condone capital punishment is
the Catholic??? Why are other religions so OK with it?
We Quakers are not OK with it.
The Catholic Church "SHE"?
I can only guess you are assuming that since the catholic church ADORES dickishness, that it is female or that the pope is a she-male because he does LOVE to play dress-up!
Also, "a very limited circumstance"?
I guess that means anyone who isn't a fascist. Franco, Mussolini, and their girlfriend Adolf were the pope's f*#k buddies.
"She", my ass.
Because they (including the phony catholic church) are actually intolerant of those without POWER.
This is related to how they all adore the male above all else and they only use women for male-enhancement.
Buddhism is not OK with killing. Catholicism is an avid supporter of killing throughout history.
"Kill all! God will know his own!" -Arnold of Amalric
You need to read books, DRACULA. or maybe you need to learn to read.
Thanks for your consistency, Mr. Greenwald. I too am tired of the announcements that our forces killed this or that "top al Qaeda operative" in Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or wherever. I find nothing to cheer about...least of all the "collateral damage" surrounding the "surgical strikes."
We have become like the Romans in a decaying empire, boisterously cheering the blood in the arena. A big thumbs down for the debauched condition of our society. Stealing from the poor is a sport, killing a diversion, and sanctimonious excuses are asymptotically ubiquitous.
I find the ReTHUGliKKKlan mentality to be "primitive, twisted and base."
There is a difference between justice and vengeance.
Are Americans too stupid to know what that difference is?
When a society can not tell the difference, it is not worth continuing.
This was a good article, but Glenn and the rest of us need to focus on the role of religion in the death penalty and war. It is no accident that almost all executions in America happen in the Bible Belt. The great anti-death penalty lawyer, David Wymore, teaches in The Life Penalty (DVD in how to defend death penalty cases), that religious jurors almost always will vote for death and that you must eliminate them from your jury.
America is a very religious country, which makes it a very cruel and oppressive country, because that is the primary purpose of religion -- to control and oppress the masses, the pie in the sky when you die.
Religion hardens the heart and softens the mind.
Knights of Columbus demonstrates this point.
deleted
deleted
The problem is the right: Islamic, Christian, Jewish, economic.
While their cultures vary, there is something fundamentally broken in people that lust for murder.
What's to be done? People without empathy need to be made to wear tracking bracelets 24x7 and to be legally barred from power.
Pretty extreme, huh? Well, you see what Bush did? What the sociopathic Obama is doing? What Perry is going to do?
Ankle tracking bracelets for sociopaths and psychopaths - it's the only solution.
Glenn Greenwald is right on the mark. But if the GOP puts up Rick the Perry Dog, then the party will be just be making a statement which is what it wanted to do in q1963 and in 1964. Barry Goldwater even said that. He said he knew John F Kennedy would beat by about 55/45, but he just wanted to put his ideas out there. This time the GOP isn't after making a statement, the party is out to take back the presidency. The main guarantee for that is Ron Paul with Jesse Ventura as a running mate from right here in Minnesota. If this president could carry one state against them that would be something in itself. He knows it. The press is just afraid of Paul as he won't let them force him to abandon his agenda of no more foreign policy of endless war, end torture, and shredding of civil liberties. Now that may not be all every progressive wants, but when we aren't getting one thing but hot air from this president, let's stop believing in the tooth fairy theory of politics and public affairs in the USA. That's getting more than a bit tiresome. We've never seen progressive movements in such a morbid state as they are today. It's the worse. We can only get better by dropping this slime, Daley machine politician. I've had it with all the scare tactics. It will surely get worse if this president gets reelected. Maybe it won't get a lot better if he doesn't, but progressive movements will thrive again. We have to stop looking someone in the White House as a great savior. Abortion rights is likely going to end before 2012. This court has been moving more and more in that direction. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if just that happened with this president still in the White House. Then what will be the big scare be? Will it be we might not have peace in this world? Gee! That's "awful," but it so "wonderful" that we have such a peacenick" in the White House now-- "great job" Barakus.