I would be very interested in hearing someone articulately explain that viewpoint - how is Gov Ryan being self-serving with this? I am not arguing that he is not - I simply don't see how it helps him, as the public in general seems to disapprove of the decision, and he is not expected to be charged with a capital crime himself (is he?), so he would not be avoiding the death penalty himself, and certainly his party is more pro-death penalty than the opposing party - I have not seen anyone explain (in a calm, reasoned manner) how this is self-serving, but I would be interested to understand that argument.
As far as I'm concerned, to each his own opinion. I do not, however, tolerate people putting forth lies in an effort to boost a point of view. My intention isn't to persuade anyone here, but to be sure that the debate is honest.
SCOTT,
I will be happy to fax you the 327 page report on death penalty cases in america which happens to highlight the Illinois situation. I cannot post a link for you since it's not available online, however I would be happy to get it in your hands.
For the record, it was prepared as apart of a joint task force of Attorney General's in 17 states. It wasn't prepared by Amnesty, or any other PAC.
And for the record, I would just like to apologize for calling you dumb. Okay, I didn't say it like that, but I have implied that it was my opinion of you. I would like to point out that many of my posts are done at very late hours - which also accounts for spelling errors.
Anyway, I still firmly believe that you are wrong about many of the facts, and about the situation in Illinois, but that doesn't make you an idiot, or mean you can't read.
I will try and find you a link to the current situation in Illinois.
One more thing. For the record, regardless of what Gov. Ryan may/may not be charged with, his decision has no legal effect on future criminals/inmates. It has no effect on whether or not someone in the future can be sentenced to death and/or executed. The only impact it could have in the future would be if it influenced some sort of legislative action.
Yeah, good point OBJ. And I was just giving you grief - I, too, have been drawn into arguments on these fora (usually creation/evolution debates, which I KNOW are a waste of time).
They were covered. You're just not reading or thinking or both.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But they've both been refuted.
"THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS."
That's just a silly argument. The old governor should not pass something of this magnitude along. The situation these inmates were in was unjust. It's unjust under Ryan and unjust under Blago. Ryan fixed it. He can't trust the next governor to do the right thing. He shouldn't when the next Guv. is from the opposition party. Ryan is supposed to trust his own instincts, make decisions and remain responsible for his actions. No one willing to pass the buck when innocent lives are at stake should be in public office.
And it doesn't help him in the least. It didn't his first year in office and doesn't now.
"THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS."
That's just a silly argument. The old governor should not pass something of this magnitude along. The situation these inmates were in was unjust. It's unjust under Ryan and unjust under Blago. Ryan fixed it. He can't trust the next governor to do the right thing. He shouldn't when the next Guv. is from the opposition party. Ryan is supposed to trust his own instincts, make decisions and remain responsible for his actions. No one willing to pass the buck when innocent lives are at stake should be in public office.
And it doesn't help him in the least. It didn't his first year in office and doesn't now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. If it's so important why not give it the careful consideration rather than a rash blanket pardon for everyone? You can't give me a single good reason not to hand it over to the next governor. He?s a democrat, he?s a smart guy despite the fact that I don?t agree with his politics and he was ready to take on this very important tasks.
OBJRA10 has been proven wrong on several important points wrt handing it over to the next governor. I could say he was a liar but that would be cutting to close to the truth. Lying to "prove" a point is always in the arsenal of the unthinking left. Facts don't matter when you can make them up. Ends justify the means. It doesn?t matter that the crook of the governor denied the people of Illinois justice. All that matters is that the left gets what it wants. Stalin would be proud
Is that your cogent argument? Stalin, the liberals, etc?
Wow.
And what ARE these "several important points" on which he was wrong? I only see one (that the incoming gov was going to stop the moratorium). Where are the several?
"OBJRA10 has been proven wrong on several important points wrt handing it over to the next governor."
First of all... who has proven me wrong on anything? Secondly, this arguement hasn't been about handing it over. You made it an arguement that he did it because he was corrupt. No one has proven me wrong?!
" I could say he was a liar but that would be cutting to close to the truth. Lying to "prove" a point is always in the arsenal of the unthinking left"
This is quite a bold statement for you to make without backing it up at all. You don't bother to point out what I've said that makes me a liar. What have I said that is untruthful? Remember that just because you are opposed to something I say doesn't mean it is not truth.
The second thing seriously wrong about this statement is that you assume something about me that is completely untrue. How on earth do you think you have the right to classify me as part of the "unthinking left." My personal and political views are not even close to liberal. I may be opposed to the death penalty, but that doesn't make me a liberal. And it certainly doesn't make me "unthinking."
You should be careful to assume things about people. Especially when doing so, and stating such makes you guilty of what you are accusing me of.
"Facts don't matter when you can make them up."
Again, what are you talking about?! If you're going to make a statement that I"m making things up, you sure better back it up. If you're going to accuse me of making statements that have no foundation in reality, you certainly can't make the same sort of statement and not expect to be challenged on it!
"Ends justify the means. It doesn?t matter that the crook of the governor denied the people of Illinois justice. All that matters is that the left gets what it wants. Stalin would be proud"
Again with the leftist crap. And again with the personal attacks. The greatest indicator of weakness of arguement is a personal attack. You apparently feel that in order to make yourself feel better in this conversation you need to attack me since you can't make an argument based on reality.
No one here was denied justice. And again - no one denies that these men were guilty. That wasn't what this decision was about. And for the LAST TIME - THEY WERE NOT PARDONED!!!!! You're ignorance to this fact, and your continual use of this term are a clear indication of your level of intelligence. A pardon is a legal document that has the SAME EFFECT AS A NOT GUILTY VERDICT AT TRIAL. Double Jepordy is attached. They were granted CLEMENCY. That has to do with their sentence, but has nothing to do with their guilt.
Additionally, you obviously aren't reading my posts, because you continue to confuse "justice" with "punishment." How has anyone been denied justice in Illinois? Just because these men will die in prison of natural, or unnatrual causes, instead of on a table with a needle in their arm doesn't mean any less of sense of justice. You want vengence on these individuals.
That just goes to show that you are no better than the men you wish to have executed.
Look OBJRA10. The argument that Ryan had to do this before he left office because he could not be sure that the next admin would continue the moratorium is false. Ryan and Blagojevich did not campaign of ending the moratorium until after the review was complete. There was no danger of Blagojevich using the death sentence until after careful consideration of each case. You stated that as fact and it was wrong. Oh and I'm the one who "doesn't know what he's talking about" Then you said that Blagojevich already ended it. False also. Like there's anyone left to execute anyway He could end it now and it would be meaningless.
Nope. All the reasons for Ryan to do this shot down. No one can give me a good reason why this important task couldn?t be left with Blagojevich. A state doing a complete review of its capitol cases shouldn?t rush into anything and should take its time to do a complete and through review before acting. The people of Illinois were denied this.
So why did he do it? Anyone ? anyone ? Bueler? (a chicago movie bty). Save his own skin or at least try. Justice is not server when a governor abuses his powers to save his own skin.
So why did he do it? Anyone ? anyone ? Bueler? (a chicago movie bty). Save his own skin or at least try. Justice is not server when a governor abuses his powers to save his own skin.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You must be insane.
He was the governor, it was his responsibility. With your line of reasoning no governor would ever sign a bill into law because it could just wait for the next governor. Waiting when he knew the right course of action would be irresponsible. Waiting when he knew there was a chance an innocent person would be killed would be unjust. Ryan's action was the only just course to take. You can ignore that fact as much as you like but ignoring it doesn't make it untrue.
How does this save his skin? How could this even be seen as him saving his skin? You continue to ignore the point that he began this process years ago, years before it could have had an ulterior motive. Now you're trying to fit it into your blind world. It doesn't fit though.
When he first put a moratorium on the death penalty, was he doing to as a preventative measure for his own career? You don't believe that, I don't believe that, no one here believes that because it's not true. It's an impossibility.
If Ryan knows that the justice system in Illinois was corrupt, why would he wait for the next governor to make the crucial decision? The burden of proof is on you to show that waiting was the correct course of action even though he knew the system to be corrupt.
1) Gov. Ryan was clearly within the limits of his powers to do what he did. So, it's rhetorically dangerous to use the phrase "abuse of power" if you're not specific as to how that differs from its legal usage. Although somehow I think you fully understand that yet proceed anyway. No one here is buying.
2) Just for our enjoyment, I would like to see your reasoning concerning how each "reason was shot down." From the looks of things, I'm going to call your bluff. Let's see your hand.
Just how much time did the state need? It had well over three years to conduct these reviews. That's a little more than a solid week for each case on the books.
Additionally, it's completely ridiculous for Ryan to have "passed the buck" as you suggest. That would be setting a pretty lousy precedent. Besides, Ryan had the knowledge of 3 years + of investigation. He knew the system was corrupt and had failed. He made the right decision. There was no need to review each case. This wasn't a statement about each prisoner, it was a statement about an entire system.
Also, I'm just curious. What if Ryan hadn't done what he did, and Blago went on TV and made the same announcement. According to you, this would make you much happier since Blago isn't under investigation. I'm curious how you would react.
Remember, a right decision is right no matter who makes it.
I can't believe how dumb you people are being on this. He should finish it all up before his term ended because ... I would rude not to? It was his job and he had to finish it. I don't think anyone expected this to be finished before Ryan left office. This was a long term review by the state and the governor but not Ryan as and individual. The "Governor", whoever s/he might be, would have finished this important job.
It's all just too dumb. You people can't reason on your own. Go read the NYT or mother jones or what ever liberal rag you read to tell you what to think about this.
2) Just for our enjoyment, I would like to see your reasoning concerning how each "reason was shot down." From the looks of things, I'm going to call your bluff. Let's see your hand.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were "shot down" (if you read the fscking thread you'd know) because it was claimed that Ryan and Blagojevich campaigned on ending the moratorium. That was false. So much so I'd call it a deliberate fabrication aka a lie. Or weren't you reading?
And please SPJ read the thread before posting. You're a bore.
It's all just too dumb. You people can't reason on your own. Go read the NYT or mother jones or what ever liberal rag you read to tell you what to think about this.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh don't be so bitter tonight Scott. I think for myself, thank you very much. Yours is the dogma to be wary of.
I just happen to disagree with your thoughts. Ryan started this process and it was his to finish. If it were important enough to him, yes it was his job to finish. And yes, since the legal system that lead to the sentences was corrupt, they should have been commuted.
Why can't you acknowledge that? You keep avoiding that point.
You're just so wrong you're being stupid. Ryan didn't have time to finish it so he should have left it for the next guy. It happens all the time in government. No one can give me a good reason why the issue shouldn't have been left for the next governor.
Rather than doing that Ryan used the issue to try to make himself into a hero before the Feds swam in.
How much more review of the system do you think there's going to be now that everyone is off death row. None! Thanks a lot Ryan. Hope to see you die in jail!
<strong>No one can give me a good reason why the issue shouldn't have been left for the next governor. </strong><hr></blockquote>
BECAUSE IT IS THE SYSTEM THAT IS FLAWED, NOT THE INDIVIDUAL CASES. NO MATTER WHO REVIEWS THE CASES THE SYSTEM THAT PLACED PEOPLE ON DEATH ROW IS FLAWED. WHEN THE UNDERLYING SYSTEM IS FLAWED ALL OF THE OUTPUT OF THAT SYSTEM IS SUSPECT AND NOT RELIABLE.
RYAN KNEW THIS. RYAN TOOK AN UNJUST SITUATION AND MADE IT JUST.
Sorry about the caps but I've said that like 47 different ways and you keep ignoring it.
There's always a risk that an innocent person will get wrongfully convicted. That's no reason to toss out every death sentence. In Illinois there were a hand full of cases where the cops acted in a way that forced confession BUT THERE WAS NO SYSTEMATIC FLAW IN THE STATES DEATH PENALTY LAWS OR PROSECUTION METHODS. Please find one if you can.
That?s why every case should have been looked at one by one. Many of those people have cases that can?t be refuted. They shouldn't have been pardoned.
1) Gov. Ryan was clearly within the limits of his powers to do what he did. So, it's rhetorically dangerous to use the phrase "abuse of power" if you're not specific as to how that differs from its legal usage. Although somehow I think you fully understand that yet proceed anyway. No one here is buying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's an abuse of power when you use your pardon power for your own personal gain. In this case Ryan trying to remake himself as the hero of the state before he gets indicted by the Feds. You weren't reading the thread again were you. Tisk tisk.
Comments
Fish
As far as I'm concerned, to each his own opinion. I do not, however, tolerate people putting forth lies in an effort to boost a point of view. My intention isn't to persuade anyone here, but to be sure that the debate is honest.
SCOTT,
I will be happy to fax you the 327 page report on death penalty cases in america which happens to highlight the Illinois situation. I cannot post a link for you since it's not available online, however I would be happy to get it in your hands.
For the record, it was prepared as apart of a joint task force of Attorney General's in 17 states. It wasn't prepared by Amnesty, or any other PAC.
And for the record, I would just like to apologize for calling you dumb. Okay, I didn't say it like that, but I have implied that it was my opinion of you. I would like to point out that many of my posts are done at very late hours - which also accounts for spelling errors.
Anyway, I still firmly believe that you are wrong about many of the facts, and about the situation in Illinois, but that doesn't make you an idiot, or mean you can't read.
I will try and find you a link to the current situation in Illinois.
One more thing. For the record, regardless of what Gov. Ryan may/may not be charged with, his decision has no legal effect on future criminals/inmates. It has no effect on whether or not someone in the future can be sentenced to death and/or executed. The only impact it could have in the future would be if it influenced some sort of legislative action.
Fish
<strong>
They were covered. You're just not reading or thinking or both.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But they've both been refuted.
"THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS."
That's just a silly argument. The old governor should not pass something of this magnitude along. The situation these inmates were in was unjust. It's unjust under Ryan and unjust under Blago. Ryan fixed it. He can't trust the next governor to do the right thing. He shouldn't when the next Guv. is from the opposition party. Ryan is supposed to trust his own instincts, make decisions and remain responsible for his actions. No one willing to pass the buck when innocent lives are at stake should be in public office.
And it doesn't help him in the least. It didn't his first year in office and doesn't now.
<strong>
But they've both been refuted.
"THE NEW GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE REVIEWED THE CASES AND ACTED IN THOSE WERE THERE WERE FLAWS."
That's just a silly argument. The old governor should not pass something of this magnitude along. The situation these inmates were in was unjust. It's unjust under Ryan and unjust under Blago. Ryan fixed it. He can't trust the next governor to do the right thing. He shouldn't when the next Guv. is from the opposition party. Ryan is supposed to trust his own instincts, make decisions and remain responsible for his actions. No one willing to pass the buck when innocent lives are at stake should be in public office.
And it doesn't help him in the least. It didn't his first year in office and doesn't now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No. If it's so important why not give it the careful consideration rather than a rash blanket pardon for everyone? You can't give me a single good reason not to hand it over to the next governor. He?s a democrat, he?s a smart guy despite the fact that I don?t agree with his politics and he was ready to take on this very important tasks.
OBJRA10 has been proven wrong on several important points wrt handing it over to the next governor. I could say he was a liar but that would be cutting to close to the truth. Lying to "prove" a point is always in the arsenal of the unthinking left. Facts don't matter when you can make them up. Ends justify the means. It doesn?t matter that the crook of the governor denied the people of Illinois justice. All that matters is that the left gets what it wants. Stalin would be proud
Wow.
And what ARE these "several important points" on which he was wrong? I only see one (that the incoming gov was going to stop the moratorium). Where are the several?
[ 01-19-2003: Message edited by: fishdoc ]</p>
First of all... who has proven me wrong on anything? Secondly, this arguement hasn't been about handing it over. You made it an arguement that he did it because he was corrupt. No one has proven me wrong?!
" I could say he was a liar but that would be cutting to close to the truth. Lying to "prove" a point is always in the arsenal of the unthinking left"
This is quite a bold statement for you to make without backing it up at all. You don't bother to point out what I've said that makes me a liar. What have I said that is untruthful? Remember that just because you are opposed to something I say doesn't mean it is not truth.
The second thing seriously wrong about this statement is that you assume something about me that is completely untrue. How on earth do you think you have the right to classify me as part of the "unthinking left." My personal and political views are not even close to liberal. I may be opposed to the death penalty, but that doesn't make me a liberal. And it certainly doesn't make me "unthinking."
You should be careful to assume things about people. Especially when doing so, and stating such makes you guilty of what you are accusing me of.
"Facts don't matter when you can make them up."
Again, what are you talking about?! If you're going to make a statement that I"m making things up, you sure better back it up. If you're going to accuse me of making statements that have no foundation in reality, you certainly can't make the same sort of statement and not expect to be challenged on it!
"Ends justify the means. It doesn?t matter that the crook of the governor denied the people of Illinois justice. All that matters is that the left gets what it wants. Stalin would be proud"
Again with the leftist crap. And again with the personal attacks. The greatest indicator of weakness of arguement is a personal attack. You apparently feel that in order to make yourself feel better in this conversation you need to attack me since you can't make an argument based on reality.
No one here was denied justice. And again - no one denies that these men were guilty. That wasn't what this decision was about. And for the LAST TIME - THEY WERE NOT PARDONED!!!!! You're ignorance to this fact, and your continual use of this term are a clear indication of your level of intelligence. A pardon is a legal document that has the SAME EFFECT AS A NOT GUILTY VERDICT AT TRIAL. Double Jepordy is attached. They were granted CLEMENCY. That has to do with their sentence, but has nothing to do with their guilt.
Additionally, you obviously aren't reading my posts, because you continue to confuse "justice" with "punishment." How has anyone been denied justice in Illinois? Just because these men will die in prison of natural, or unnatrual causes, instead of on a table with a needle in their arm doesn't mean any less of sense of justice. You want vengence on these individuals.
That just goes to show that you are no better than the men you wish to have executed.
Nope. All the reasons for Ryan to do this shot down. No one can give me a good reason why this important task couldn?t be left with Blagojevich. A state doing a complete review of its capitol cases shouldn?t rush into anything and should take its time to do a complete and through review before acting. The people of Illinois were denied this.
So why did he do it? Anyone ? anyone ? Bueler? (a chicago movie bty). Save his own skin or at least try. Justice is not server when a governor abuses his powers to save his own skin.
I am sincerely trying to understand that argument, but I don't see any evidence that this will somehow "save" him.
Fish
<strong>
So why did he do it? Anyone ? anyone ? Bueler? (a chicago movie bty). Save his own skin or at least try. Justice is not server when a governor abuses his powers to save his own skin.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You must be insane.
He was the governor, it was his responsibility. With your line of reasoning no governor would ever sign a bill into law because it could just wait for the next governor. Waiting when he knew the right course of action would be irresponsible. Waiting when he knew there was a chance an innocent person would be killed would be unjust. Ryan's action was the only just course to take. You can ignore that fact as much as you like but ignoring it doesn't make it untrue.
How does this save his skin? How could this even be seen as him saving his skin? You continue to ignore the point that he began this process years ago, years before it could have had an ulterior motive. Now you're trying to fit it into your blind world. It doesn't fit though.
When he first put a moratorium on the death penalty, was he doing to as a preventative measure for his own career? You don't believe that, I don't believe that, no one here believes that because it's not true. It's an impossibility.
If Ryan knows that the justice system in Illinois was corrupt, why would he wait for the next governor to make the crucial decision? The burden of proof is on you to show that waiting was the correct course of action even though he knew the system to be corrupt.
1) Gov. Ryan was clearly within the limits of his powers to do what he did. So, it's rhetorically dangerous to use the phrase "abuse of power" if you're not specific as to how that differs from its legal usage. Although somehow I think you fully understand that yet proceed anyway. No one here is buying.
2) Just for our enjoyment, I would like to see your reasoning concerning how each "reason was shot down." From the looks of things, I'm going to call your bluff. Let's see your hand.
[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: ShawnPatrickJoyce ]</p>
Just how much time did the state need? It had well over three years to conduct these reviews. That's a little more than a solid week for each case on the books.
Additionally, it's completely ridiculous for Ryan to have "passed the buck" as you suggest. That would be setting a pretty lousy precedent. Besides, Ryan had the knowledge of 3 years + of investigation. He knew the system was corrupt and had failed. He made the right decision. There was no need to review each case. This wasn't a statement about each prisoner, it was a statement about an entire system.
Also, I'm just curious. What if Ryan hadn't done what he did, and Blago went on TV and made the same announcement. According to you, this would make you much happier since Blago isn't under investigation. I'm curious how you would react.
Remember, a right decision is right no matter who makes it.
It's all just too dumb. You people can't reason on your own. Go read the NYT or mother jones or what ever liberal rag you read to tell you what to think about this.
[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>Scott,
...
2) Just for our enjoyment, I would like to see your reasoning concerning how each "reason was shot down." From the looks of things, I'm going to call your bluff. Let's see your hand.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
They were "shot down" (if you read the fscking thread you'd know) because it was claimed that Ryan and Blagojevich campaigned on ending the moratorium. That was false. So much so I'd call it a deliberate fabrication aka a lie. Or weren't you reading?
And please SPJ read the thread before posting. You're a bore.
[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>
It's all just too dumb. You people can't reason on your own. Go read the NYT or mother jones or what ever liberal rag you read to tell you what to think about this.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh don't be so bitter tonight Scott. I think for myself, thank you very much. Yours is the dogma to be wary of.
I just happen to disagree with your thoughts. Ryan started this process and it was his to finish. If it were important enough to him, yes it was his job to finish. And yes, since the legal system that lead to the sentences was corrupt, they should have been commuted.
Why can't you acknowledge that? You keep avoiding that point.
Rather than doing that Ryan used the issue to try to make himself into a hero before the Feds swam in.
How much more review of the system do you think there's going to be now that everyone is off death row. None! Thanks a lot Ryan. Hope to see you die in jail!
[ 01-21-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>No one can give me a good reason why the issue shouldn't have been left for the next governor. </strong><hr></blockquote>
BECAUSE IT IS THE SYSTEM THAT IS FLAWED, NOT THE INDIVIDUAL CASES. NO MATTER WHO REVIEWS THE CASES THE SYSTEM THAT PLACED PEOPLE ON DEATH ROW IS FLAWED. WHEN THE UNDERLYING SYSTEM IS FLAWED ALL OF THE OUTPUT OF THAT SYSTEM IS SUSPECT AND NOT RELIABLE.
RYAN KNEW THIS. RYAN TOOK AN UNJUST SITUATION AND MADE IT JUST.
Sorry about the caps but I've said that like 47 different ways and you keep ignoring it.
That?s why every case should have been looked at one by one. Many of those people have cases that can?t be refuted. They shouldn't have been pardoned.
<strong>Scott,
1) Gov. Ryan was clearly within the limits of his powers to do what he did. So, it's rhetorically dangerous to use the phrase "abuse of power" if you're not specific as to how that differs from its legal usage. Although somehow I think you fully understand that yet proceed anyway. No one here is buying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's an abuse of power when you use your pardon power for your own personal gain. In this case Ryan trying to remake himself as the hero of the state before he gets indicted by the Feds. You weren't reading the thread again were you. Tisk tisk.