There has been a story on ABC News for a few days about Charles Hood, a Texas inmate who was found guilty of murder when the judge and prosecutor were dating. The reason: the matter of the affair was brought up too late in the appeals process.
In terms of going back to the principles of conservatism, this bothers me greatly: let us revisit the principles. Conservatives stand for a small government that guarantees law-abiding citizens the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. As part of this effort, government will strive to make itself small, keep taxes low and maintain a strong homeland defense (for national security as well as law and order)
We cannot be focused on a strong national defense where a government can decide that murder has no statute of limitations--but the appeals do.
The only answer that critics will have is that from all available evidence, Charles Hood does appear to be indisputably guilty. If so, however, that should be still determined through a fair trial. Once we let journalists and the public make these "obvious" decisions, we start going down the slippery slope of rule and judgment by media and acclamation, not truth.
The real problem is not just that there is a statute of limitations on appeals but that the justice process was flawed in this case. Since the judge and prosecutor cannot be fired or impeached (they are retired) they should have their pensions revoked. They have corrupted our democracy and as such are a burden on their constituents. Since the affair was apparently "common knowledge" at that time, all their superiors should be severely reprimanded as well.
All this only goes to show that Texas continues to be a "bad" place for criminal justice. However, it is bad not because the people are bad; not because it is conservative; but because Texas is corrupt.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Praise for Russert's objectivity only shows how pathetic most other journalists are
Tim Russert is being eulogized today as having been fair and objective and all things wonderful. The underlying truth behind this is not that Russert is a saint for having done his job. Objectivity is Journalism 101, but that we now have this multi-billion dollar industry called opinion journalism.
Russert's real impact was not that he was a good person or a fair journalist, both of which he undoubtedly was. His real impact on current history was that he was not objective enough.
On October 30, 2007, he asked Clinton the question that, in one instant, stripped her of her credibility, even her appearance of integrity: he asked her a direct question on driver's licenses for illegal aliens, which she was unable to answer. That was the time when Clinton was getting all the difficult questions first while Obama received SNL's pillows. For many months after that, he was one of MSNBC's main cheerleaders for Obama. In early May, he went one step further and declared that Clinton was done.
This is not to take anything away from the fact that Obama was clearly the better campaigner than Clinton. (If you click on the pillow URL above, you will see how she made her complaint and then promptly shot herself in the foot by saying that she had criticized NAFTA "from the very beginning".) This is also not to take away anything from the fact that the longer this race continues, the worse McCain looks, at least as of this writing.
The point is that if Russert and other journalists were not so subjective, perhaps the American people would have more of an opportunity to choose their own leaders. In this day of the Internet, we certainly have the potential to approach the ideal of direct democracy.
Russert's real impact was not that he was a good person or a fair journalist, both of which he undoubtedly was. His real impact on current history was that he was not objective enough.
On October 30, 2007, he asked Clinton the question that, in one instant, stripped her of her credibility, even her appearance of integrity: he asked her a direct question on driver's licenses for illegal aliens, which she was unable to answer. That was the time when Clinton was getting all the difficult questions first while Obama received SNL's pillows. For many months after that, he was one of MSNBC's main cheerleaders for Obama. In early May, he went one step further and declared that Clinton was done.
This is not to take anything away from the fact that Obama was clearly the better campaigner than Clinton. (If you click on the pillow URL above, you will see how she made her complaint and then promptly shot herself in the foot by saying that she had criticized NAFTA "from the very beginning".) This is also not to take away anything from the fact that the longer this race continues, the worse McCain looks, at least as of this writing.
The point is that if Russert and other journalists were not so subjective, perhaps the American people would have more of an opportunity to choose their own leaders. In this day of the Internet, we certainly have the potential to approach the ideal of direct democracy.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Safe nuclear power is critical for America's independence
Not just Energy independence but economic independence.
Monday, June 2, 2008
A Confederate Flag in Tampa should be permitted
But, just as reasonably, as we defend freedom of expression, so should an African flag right next to the Confederate one. As we celebrate Southern heritage, so should we pay homage to our African ancestors from whom a fifth of our population is descended today.
We get offended too quickly when provoked and do not respond quickly enough from our core principles: freedom of expression cannot be denied. However, speech that may be seen to be offensive can be responded to in kind: with a display of one of several African or Pan-African flags.
How can a good conservative get away from the bigotry that has hobbled the Republican party over the last few decades and Democrats and the nation as a whole for several centuries before then? Through our principles:
1. Small government: by vigorously defending the right of racists, however offensive, to offend
2. Freedom of expression: Supporting the right of the African American community to host equally large flags, not just in Tampa but all of over the country
3. Tax-neutrality: All funds for the flags would, of course, be raised privately
I bet you that good Americans and good Republicans and Democrats will quickly overwhelm the country with their choice of freedom of expression ad using it to unite us all as one nation under God, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see that right.
We get offended too quickly when provoked and do not respond quickly enough from our core principles: freedom of expression cannot be denied. However, speech that may be seen to be offensive can be responded to in kind: with a display of one of several African or Pan-African flags.
How can a good conservative get away from the bigotry that has hobbled the Republican party over the last few decades and Democrats and the nation as a whole for several centuries before then? Through our principles:
1. Small government: by vigorously defending the right of racists, however offensive, to offend
2. Freedom of expression: Supporting the right of the African American community to host equally large flags, not just in Tampa but all of over the country
3. Tax-neutrality: All funds for the flags would, of course, be raised privately
I bet you that good Americans and good Republicans and Democrats will quickly overwhelm the country with their choice of freedom of expression ad using it to unite us all as one nation under God, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see that right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)