Common Dreams, a Progressive media outlet, published a commentary Friday by Susan Lenfestey entitled "Miers and Bush: Pro-Death" (HT: WorldNetDaily). In it, Lenfestey makes many unsubstantiated claims as support for her position that Bush (and by association Miers) promotes a culture of death. Here are some of her claims:
As governor of Texas, Bush earned the nickname Governor Death for overseeing 152 executions in six years. Although Texas is notably lax in its lab work and defense attorneys occasionally slept through their clients' trials, this compassionate conservative chose death again and again, reportedly even mocking the pleas of Karla Faye Tucker shortly after he refused to commute her death sentence.
From whom did Bush earn the nickname "Governor Death?" From people opposed to the death penalty? From Al Gore's campaign staff? From Lenfestey herself? She doesn't say, and personally, I don't remember hearing that nickname. But then again, I don't travel in Progressive circles.
Lenfestey claims that Bush's nickname was earned because he oversaw 152 executions. But on the website of Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (CUADP), on the page about George W. Bush (c. 2000), there is this statement: "It must be said that George W. Bush is not responsible for the increased pace of executions, nor did he create Texas' arcane clemency procedures." Yes, Bush had the opportunity to commute many (I don't know the exact numbers) death sentences, but there were other cases that Texas law took out of the Governor's hands.
Lenfestey then says, "Texas is notably lax in its lab work." How notable is this laxity? Is it 20% error-prone? Or 75%? And it is lax in the entire state of Texas? This is a sweeping attack on the quality of forensics in a major state of the US, and Lenfestey offers no sources for this statement.
Her next statement, "defense attorneys occasionally slept through their clients' trials," is easier to find source material. The aforementioned CUADP page on GW Bush states: "This is pointed out so clearly in the September 1999 issue of Harper's, in the Index: 'Number of death sentences upheld by Texas courts since 1990 for men whose lawyers slept during their trials: 3.'"
So, out of 152 executions, three had defense attorneys who fell asleep during the trial. And though Lenfestey places the blame for these three convicted murderers' executions at Bush's feet, Harper's clearly states that it was the courts that upheld the death sentences. The sleeping apparently wasn't at times in the trial that would have affected the verdict, or the courts would not have upheld the sentences.
The reports of Bush "mocking the pleas of Karla Faye Tucker" all go back to one interview. Tucker Carlson, in 2000, interviewed candidate Bush for Talk Magazine. Wikipedia provides the salient text of Carlson's article:
In the weeks before the execution, Bush says, a number of protesters came to Austin to demand clemency for Karla Fay Tucker. "Did you meet with any of them?" I ask. Bush whips around and stares at me. "No, I didn't meet with any of them," he snaps, as though I've just asked the dumbest, most offensive question ever posed. "I didn't meet with Larry King either when he came down for it. I watched his interview with Tucker, though. He asked her real difficult questions like, "What would you say to Governor Bush?" "What was her answer?" I wonder. "Please," Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, "don't kill me." I must look shocked--ridiculing the pleas of a condemned prisoner who has since been executed seems odd and cruel--because he immediately stops smirking.
Note the emotionally loaded wording Carlson uses throughout this paragraph: "whips around" "snaps" "whimpers" "mock desperation" "smirking." From reading this paragraph, it looks as though Tucker Carlson wasn't very fond of Bush to begin with, so his characterization of Bush as "mocking" Karla Faye Tucker may not have been an accurate portrayal, though it actually may have. Wikipedia ends this entry with, "Bush denied that he had intended to make light of the issue." While denials run rampant during a presidential campaign, Lenfestey does not allow for the possibility that Tucker Carlson misread Bush's intent.
To her credit, Lenfestey doesn't remain mired in the 2000 campaign. She has this to say about Bush's presidency:
As president, George Bush continues to err on the side of death. Not only has he brushed aside health care and environmental protections that value life in the broadest sense, he has sent our troops into a war that they cannot win on a pack of lies as thin as their armor.
President Bush has not "brushed aside health care and environmental protections that value life." He may have brushed aside the health care and environmental proposals that extremists on the left hold sacred, but that doesn't qualify Bush as "err[ing] on the side of death."
As far as sending our troops into Iraq, well that debate has run its course, and you're on one side of it or the other. Lenfestey has simply revealed which side she's on about Iraq. Because soldiers (who are trained for war) have been sent to war, she interprets this as a pro-death action.
One statement Lenfestey makes is an amazing display of chutzpah: "Putting abortion aside for a moment -- if anyone can," and then she proceeds to put it aside, other than to say that it doesn't matter where Harriet Miers stands on abortion, because Miers is unfit for the Supreme Court since her policies are intertwined with President Bush's policies.
In Texas, during Bush's time as governor (1995 - 2000), there were 502,684 abortions reported (compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston from TDH data) . But Lenfestey wants to "put that aside" and focus on the 152 executions of convicted murderers.
This is an article on "pro-death" policies. That Lenfestey, who appears to be representative of the hard left, will not include abortion in her discussion of death is very telling. But her side would not come out ahead on that topic. Instead, she either refuses to acknowledge that abortion involves death, or she is so wrapped up in tearing apart President Bush and his policies, that she has no room left in her mind for analyzing non-Bush issues.
5 comments:
Nice commentary.
It's like saying "Guns kill people", rather than "guns save lives".
It always amazes me, also, how those against capital punishment think there's an inconsistency or hypocrisy that conservatives are pro-life on abortion yet believe in executing criminals. Absolutely amazes me! It's apples and oranges, you moonbats! In one circumstance you have innocents who have not done a damn thing to anyone; and in the other, you have career criminals who have destroyed lives. The Left often feel compassion for the criminals...seldom for the victims.
Its unfair to take the measure of George Bush by examining one interview. But if what was reported is true, then I'll agree it wasn't his finest hour. I won't judge because I've had several of [those] hours myself.
I'll never forget Carla faye. You could not witness one of her interviews from death row, hear of her ministry, hear of her faith... and not be touched. If there ever was an example of how Jesus changes lives...
I don't think George W could have legally stepped in and changed the outcome. The question is: Should he have? In the end, the law was followed and justice was served. But seeing and hearing this Christian woman made it a very hard thing.
Wordsmith said:
The Left often feel compassion for the criminals...seldom for the victims.
You're absolutely right. I can't even begin to understand this kind of misguided "compassion."
Chris,
I talked to some friends about this yesterday, and one remembers hearing Karla Faye say that of course she wanted to live, but that she understood that justice had to be served. He didn't think that she actually asked for her sentence to be commuted, that it was the people around her who were asking for her to get life in prison (I did not fact-check this comment).
Christian faith doesn't mean you get to avoid the consequences of your crimes (or sins), just that you're forgiven in Heaven, and apparently Karla Faye realized that.
I don't know if hers was one of those cases where Texas law left the governor no options, but in the end, justice was served.
You're right that this was hardly Bush's finest hour, whether he actually mocked her as Tucker Carlson described or not. But mockery doesn't make a person "pro-death."
I don't know if any of you have read in the new testament where there was a woman who was caught in the act of adultery, according to the LAW such a crime was to be punishable by death-stoning.
I believe that Jesus said to the people who were about to stone her according to the "law", "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." Jesus, the only one standing there who had never sinned, could have cast the first stone at her, didn't. Jesus, the perfect, sinless, spotless lamb of God, the living word, who knows the thoughts and intentions of the heart, He did not cast a stone at her.
What is amazing to me is that, it doesn't even say in the Bible that she said,"I'm sorry" or "I was wrong, please forgive me", before Jesus said what He said. He forgave her. He saved her life!
Jesus knew the law of Moses, but He also knew what was in the hearts of those standing there with the stones clenched in their fists. He knew their sins, those hidden thoughts, the jealousy, the hatred, the lust. Jesus knew their sins and that they did not have a right to stone her! Because they were just as guilty! They may not have been caught in the act of adultery, but their sin was just as rotten in the eyes of a Holy and righteous God.
The pharisees knew the "law", but they didn't know grace and mercy.
I believe that there are consequences for our sins, but I don't believe that people who have sinned and broken God's commandments,have the right to kill someone else who has sinned, just because that person's sin seems so much worse than ours. Sin is Sin.
We must realize, that we all deserved the death penalty, but Jesus died on a cross, shed His blood, and rose again, so that we would not die in our sins, so that we could have fellowship with God, and so that we would not go to hell.
How can I inject someone with a lethal poison or stone someone, when I myself have sinned? Broken God's Holy commandments. In the new testament, hate for your brother, is murder. Looking upon someone to lust after them, is adultery.
Moses killed an Egyptian man. The Bible doesn't really say exactly how he did it, but he did it.
Saul, who became Paul, oversaw the deaths of innocent Christian people BEFORE his conversion and he stood by and watched Stephen, a Godly Christian man, being stoned for his faith in Jesus.
King David commited adultery with Bathsheba and then had her innocent Husband Uriah killed.
I am saying all of this, because Jesus did not promote the death penalty. How can people who say they are Christians- people who have been forgiven of so much. People who have recieved the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ, how can a redeemed, forgiven, blood washed, saint of God, believe in the death penalty?
It's by the mercy and grace of God that we are alive today. It is by the Lord's mercies that we are not consumed.
I believe that when Jesus did not throw a stone at the woman caught in the act of adultery (who according to the law of Moses, was to be stoned, He was showing us how we are to treat people who break the law and sin today.
I am against the death penalty, because I believe that Jesus showed that it was not right to do, especially if you have ever sinned. I also really am against the death penalty in a case when the person has recieved the forgiveness and mercy of God, really repented for their sin/crime, when someone has completely changed and there are so many people who can testify that this person has changed, I don't believe that person should be executed. I don't believe that the people who injected Karla Fay Tucker's body with lethal poison, were worthy to do it. How can someone who has broken the Ten Commandments have any right to kill another human being who has broken the Ten Commandments?
Vengeance belongs to God, not us. He is the one who will deal with each and everyone one of us. Our job is to forgive as He has forgiven us.
When you sin, you don't want God to strike you with a lightning bolt do you? You want to recieve mercy and grace, don't you? Well, that's how we are supposed to treat others who have sinned.
He who has been forgiven much, loves much, He who has been forgiven little, loves little.
Anonymous,
You said, "I am saying all of this, because Jesus did not promote the death penalty."
Jesus Himself submitted to the death penalty that was in effect at that time. He needed the death penalty to be in place so He could use it in order to save us from our sins.
You mentioned Moses. But even though Moses was used by God after murdering the Egyptian, still Moses was the one who delivered to the people God's requirement of the death penalty for certain crimes.
Jesus never promoted the death penalty, but He never spoke about abolishing the death penalty, either.
You've mixed up the death penalty with individual "justice" killings. The death penalty--which is to be carried out by the government--is not done on behalf of the individual official carrying it out. It is done on behalf of the state. And God not only permitted that, He commanded it through Moses.
Post a Comment