And yes. I oppose the death penalty for everyone. Thanks for helping me reach that conclusion.

"I have no further use to speak with you, you've shown just exactly what kind of person you are. Good night."

Anything to deflect from your defense of the indefensible handling of the Troy Davis case. Redbaiting and ad hominems, Crazy Anglican never changes.

"And yes. I oppose the death penalty for everyone. Thanks for helping me reach that conclusion."

Except Troy Davis, apparently.

"The people are arrogant."

I found Georgia to have the politest people in the country during my stay there back in 2009 in the rural Southern end of the state (my stay in Atlanta was limited to the airport, including 5 hours on the tarmac waiting for the plane to be de-iced before take-off during one stopover) during a project that took me to over 20 states around the country . Beautiful country there - lots of green open stretches - and they had extremely well-maintained highways from my recollection (certainly compared to the atrocious pothole-strewn highways of California).

"Why would corruption not be possible?"

I thought Marxism was supposed to have all the cures to all the frailties of human nature? All the news stories I've read about Chinese officials being executed for corruption have always left me with the feeling that party politics had more to do with it than any corruption.

"There is nothing worth seeing there except Savannah."

There would be some really nice historic buildings to see in Atlanta, except for that fire they had back in '65.

Yeah like I said, you create fantasies and caricatures and then complain about caricatures. Of course, any corrupt criminal in a socialist country or former socialist country that we dislike is automatically branded a heroic dissident, doesn't matter if they're the Chinese equivalent of Bernie Madoff.

"Since when did libertarians or conservatives give a damn about human life?"

In my case, since about 1985.

"You only care about the rich."

That's a very amusing accusation, coming from a cheerleader of Goldman Sachs sock-puppet and all-around lackey of the Capitalist ruling class Barack Obama. I've got plenty of venom and anger for those who have made their fortunes through force, fraud, and coercion instead of providing valuable goods and services that people are willing to pay (trade their labor) for. The difference between us is that I realize 'the rich' and their abuses are largely a product of and protected by their control of The State, and you are still laboring under the delusion that the same State which has always served the rich and powerful throughout human history can somehow be tamed and turned on its masters.

Highways? Yes. Georgia has good highways I suppose. I'm surprised you think California has bad roads. I loved driving in California. Maybe it's different in SoCal.

If you want to see bad roads, visit Michigan. Holy christ.

"If you want to see bad roads, visit Michigan. Holy christ."

Truth

The state is the only thing protecting us from being eaten alive by your capitalist friends. And yes they do a poor job at even that. But to think that if we got rid of any protections or oversight against fraud and coercion that somehow through "consumer democracy" we'd all be saved is a big joke. We'd all be abused serfs given the choice of slavery or starvation under your utopian version of capitalism.

"I'm surprised you think California has bad roads. I loved driving in California. Maybe it's different in SoCal. "

What highways were you driving on and when? I'd like to know which ones appear well-maintained to the outside observer, because the ones I drive on certainly aren't. I wouldn't dare my worst enemy to drive on the #3/4 lane (the one the big rigs all use) on any freeway I normally use.

"The state is the only thing protecting us from being eaten alive by your capitalist friends."

Protecting us? Last I checked, The State was borrowing against future revenues (that I'm expected to provide) to give massive bailouts to the same 'capitalists' you rail against. The State exists to protect and serve the rich and powerful - always has, and always will. In our political system, it's just a matter of which set of capitalists will rule - the bankers, lawyers, and corrupt union bosses (Democrats), or the military-industrial complex and oilmen (Republicans).

"What highways were you driving on and when?"

101 and I-5. September 2009.

I found the freeways around LA to be reasonably well maintained and the drivers generally polite when I was there in August of '05. We regularly drove to Pasadena (found a great restaurant there) and headed down to Anaheim and over to Santa Monica as well as Studio City for some tapings and never had a lick of trouble.

"Since when did libertarians or conservatives give a damn about human life?"

In my case, since about 1985.


+1 Tolstoy Well said.

I'm of the mind that this is an ethical question much before it is a political one, let alone one pertaining to economical dynamics. Left, right, doesn't really matter here. The real question, I believe, is whether justice was served in his case. And that's to be determined on how one values life in an ethical system.

At the end of the day, of course, it probably boils down to how one characterizes "life" or humanity in and of itself. But again, that's just saying that "left" and "right" are not exactly what's most relevant in the debate regarding Troy Davis.

"And yes. I oppose the death penalty for everyone. Thanks for helping me reach that conclusion."

Except Troy Davis, apparently.

No him too.

"that's just saying that 'left' and 'right' are not exactly what's most relevant in the debate regarding Troy Davis."

I agree, however, being from the State that executed him. I'm not at all happy about the execution. The problem that I see and the one I've seen from the beginning is that people are going on what one camp or another says about this case. There is way too much being written in a persuasive mode and not enough fact finding. How many people have read the case file? What's being thrown around here is undoubtedly second, third, and fourth hand information. The problem is that you cannot play devil's advocate without being branded a ravening death penalty supporter.

So now their "my human rights standards"; you don’t agree that state sponsored murder is wrong? No, they're the human rights standards put forth in a worldwide campaign to end the death penalty. I'll tell you what I am not trying to do, though. I’m not trying to impose a double standard in which it's okay to impose the death penalty here and not there. You're trying to hide behind a paper thin shield if you want to say that China is only executing white collar criminals and corrupt officials. If you'd like I can produce a list of capital crimes in Chin, if you’d like me to expose that lie. That's not to slam China, but to point out that you are trying to gain something politically from this man's death, namely a boycott of a State that you particularly dislike. As stated in your own words:

“And yeah Georgia is a hellhole, for a lot more reasons than just capital punishment. Although if that's what leads people to boycott them, so be it.”

Sounds to me like you’re using this man’s death to strike at your opponents. You may very well feel sympathy for Troy Davis but the important thing is that this controversy is expedient and exploitable. Let’s drum up anger against Georgia.

"Except Troy Davis, apparently.

No him too."

Right, you're another one of those people who talk out both sides of your mouth. Give all the talking points for the Georgian paroles board, and then claim that you're opposed to the execution.

"Let’s drum up anger against Georgia."

There has to be a point when people say enough is enough. This is the straw that broke the camel's back.

"Give all the talking points for the Georgian paroles board, and then claim that you're opposed to the execution."

Really? Which 'talking points' would those be. I dare you to quote them since everything I've really said was nothing more than a critque of your sloppy thinking. It the entire discourse I never stated that I believed him to be guilty, I said clearly that I didn't have the facts and was trying to sort out the propaganda from both sides. Pointing out sincerely that this case would probably be the determining factor in my decision to embrace or reject the death penalty. I've chosen to reject it. I told you that I was serious and you didn't believe me.

"There has to be a point when people say enough is enough. This is the straw that broke the camel's back. "

Perhaps, but your not the one to lead them. There are good people who oppose the death penalty on principle, but you just want it imposed on another group. Pointing to the worst offender in the world as an example of how to properly carry out the death penalty doesn't help you.

You want to attack me while claiming we're on the same side issue and expect me to believe it. A true sign of total immaturity if you can't even agree to agree because of your petty personal vendettas.

You repeated verbatim the unproven assertions given by the prosecution about Troy Davis having supposedly "shot" someone prior to the incident with Young. My "sloppy thinking" was providing a laundry list of reasons why Troy Davis shouldn't have been executed, including a point by point description of each of the recantations. Either you're dishonest or you can't construct a coherent argument.

"Perhaps, but your not the one to lead them. There are good people who oppose the death penalty on principle, but you just want it imposed on another group."

Thanks for missing the point. The problem with Georgia is larger than the death penalty. The problem is social inequality. I know, I know, we can't talk about that. Commence with your usual personal attacks.

"You want to attack me while claiming we're on the same side issue and expect me to believe it."

I'm not claiming to be on the same side of the issue with you. I'm anti-death penalty. You're not. You tried to defend the China's use of capital punishment by saying that they execute people for white collar crimes and corruption. That's a half truth at best since they execute people for other types of crimes as well, rape and murder being among them. Remember it was a matter of proportionality, you said, the rich screw up much more and richly deserve death.

"Perhaps, but your not the one to lead them. There are good people who oppose the death penalty on principle, but you just want it imposed on another group."

It's supposed to escape our notice that you didn't deny this?

You're a dishonest little troll. You were advancing arguments in favor of executing Troy Davis, and you are using a comment that I made much later in that discussion in response to the usual redbaiting bs as a cover. You're not anti-death penalty. And you're just like Fulham in that you prefer to engage in irrelevant sidebars than address any actual arguments.

"It's supposed to escape our notice that you didn't deny this"?

And it's supposed to escape our notice that you can't address any actual argument, ever.

No you've missed the point. I was absolutely serious in everything that I said. If you would actually read what I have said rather than trying to distort it for your own purposes, you'd see that. I actually did listen to the arguments and make a decision. I didn't see you utter any skepticism at all about anything being said upon the side of the protesters. I did express skepticism about both sides. That's the sloppy thinking you were exhibiting. You are so convinced that everything one side has said is true and the other is totally false that you will not consider both. I told you point blank that I reject both versions and would prefer to see the facts for myself, rather than making up my mind and looking for only the facts that bolstered my position.

"There are good people who oppose the death penalty on principle, but you just want it imposed on another group."


Another evasion? You're not anti-death penalty at all. The only problem you have with it is that the wrong people are being executed.

So you're not anti death penalty. You treat it as a grey area in which each case needs to be "studied", and by "studied" you mean reasserting unproven assertions about the guy who was just executed under conditions of great doubt. And yet you condemn me for having a case by case approach to the implementation of the death penalty. Hilarious.

No, Putin, he's saying that he agrees that Davis shouldn't have been executed. He's also saying he rejects the notion that the execution was motivated by a bunch of racist bloodthirsty old rich white men deciding to kill a poor black man, which is the narrative you've pushed in here. How this is difficult to understand honestly perplexes me.

"The only problem you have with it is that the wrong people are being executed."

Yes, I don't favor kicking people when they're down and deprived of any privileges or benefits in society. You apparently think it's an open question. The rich have all the legal privileges in the world, so if they're found guilty, then they're usually guilty. When the judicial system is stacked in your favor and you still lose, you deserve the penalty you get. That's a common sense position.