Will Del. Mathieson open his mouth?
|
|
Thought everyone would like to see a picture of Del. Bobby Mathieson with his mouth open. The picture obviously wasn’t taken since Gov. Tim Kaine imposed a moratorium on the death penalty and broke a promise that became the highest profile promise in his race. Mathieson, who spent his campaign answering every question with “As a former police officer” hasn’t opened his mouth yet about this great question from Scott’s Morning Brew.
“As a retired Master Police Officer from the Virginia Beach (VA) Police Department, how do you feel about Democratic Governor Timothy Kaine’s recent ruling on the death penalty (generally) and specifically, the reprieve from execution of Edward Bell, the convicted and sentenced cop killer who murdered Sergeant Timbrook of the Winchester Police Department?
on 
Ridiculous Brian…once again. It is irrelevant what Mathieson’s stance is; no member of the general assembly or any one else for that matter has the authority to impede the Governors prudent decision. You know that of course, but press the issue anyway. Shameful
Ian says Mathieson’s irrelevant? That’s a keeper!
Shameful?
What’s shameful about asking a public servant a question about a public issue that relates directly their experience?
You express opinions all the time on VBDems that we know you have no idea about, Ian.
We’re simply asking an experienced police officer how he feels about an issue that relates to the murder of a police officer.
“Prudent”?????? To stay the execution of this killer who did not think twice about shooting this police officer in a premeditated fashion?
If this had to be done, the Supreme Court could have stepped in and done it. Kaine did not need to go easy on this cop killer.
Of course Brian twists my words. He interprets them about as well as he acts (now thats a keeper).
J.R., it is much broader than the unfortunate murder of a police officer. You know that. But instead, you chose to tie a complex legal issue to the intense emotion of one example. An example that is in the vast minority. An example of how republicans continuously use red herrings to distract from the issues.
I wonder why you even respond to my comment. According to you I have no clue what I am talking about.
I’m sure that murdered officer’s family loves being called a “red herring”
Hang on a second. Governor Kaine only posed the moratorium until the Supreme Court decision is decided.
Personally I think this is a pretty complicated subject. I am in favor of the death penalty under certain circumstances. Timothy McVeigh had to die for example.
However I do believe that the death penalty is often wrongfully applied to innocent human beings. Look at all those who were on death row who were proven innocent by DNA evidence.
It is not wrong that an innocent man we have condemned to death (say it isn’t so) is guaranteed a painfree journey to meet his maker. Let’s hear what the Supreme Court has to say. From what I have heard, Veteranarians are not saying it can not be done (pain free chemically induced death) it just can be done better.
Little David, no one is even hinting that the death penalty is wrongfully applied in this cop-killer case.
When the Court decided to hear a case, should we stop everything? If the Court hears an abortion case, should we shut down all abortion clinics until they issue an opinion?
Ian,
Don’t get all pouty on me. I’m just saying that everyone, especially on emotional issues, has an opinion. Often they don’t really know or understand the nuances of the subject.
However, here is a great opportunity for a lawmaker, with personal experience in the field of police work, to provide the public his philosophy on the subject.
Quite frankly, I believe he already has by his silence.
Little David — Often wrongfully applied? Please, back that up with statistics. I want to see percentages.
By the way, Brian is right and I will remember this argument. Next time there is an abortion case, I will be demanding the governor, whoever it is, put a moratorium on abortions in the commonwealth until we know with certainty the final outcome of the case.
I’m sure it’s not painful at all for the little innocent baby at the nascent stages of its life to suddenly be sucked out of the womb and indiscriminately destroyed.
If and when the SCOTUS rules that any particular method of execution is unconstitutional, the governor should act accordingly. Could somebody please point to a source where the SCOTUS has so ruled?
Ian, I look forward to your clarification of this governor’s “prudent” action. Thanks in advance.
Oh please…Here we go with the abortion issue… What does that have to do with the execution of a criminal?
Personally I’d like to execute the criminals. However in our society, we have to take the high road and give even the death row criminals a fair chance to prove they are innocent. I think what the Governor decide to do is pause and give the Supreme Court’s Conservative Judges a chance to rule before moving forward. What Bobby or any of the GA think really doesn’t matter as they are not the decision makers on this issue.
JR: Big leap going to the abortion debate…I have to ask the anti-abortion folks how many children they have adopted? Normally the reply is none… As I see it, they just complain and do nothing to help address the problem.
It is easy to “talk the talk” but alot harder to “walk the walk” and actually do something about the problem of unwanted pregnancy. Put your principles into action and adopt a kid-Save a life!
Exactly Will Bailey. ONCE AGAIN, the republicans pull out an emotional issue, this one not even remotely relevant to this conversation, to distract from the real problem. Classic RED HERRING.
Brian: You characteristically are dumbing down the issue. Just because a particular issue is being debated doesnt mean the issue should be shut down. However, since a particular practice of the death penalty is called into question, it should be stopped until ruled on. If the court hears about a particular practice about abortion, then yes it should be stopped until over.
DSBAF: My response to you is the same as it was to the academy award winning actor above. It is prudent to stop the practice until this cloud is removed over it.
Ok, Ian…how many kids have you adopted?
So, is that the litmus, William?
It’s o.k. to kill babies because they won’t be adopted? Bailey’s philosophy: Since these kids are unwanted, might as well get rid of ‘em!
William, you got an uncle in Germany?
Red Herring — not even. I want a moratorium on all abortions until we can prove that it’s not cruel and unusual!
JR: Sorry but I’ve no family in Germany…
You made the subject comparison jump. I didn’t make the jump from death row to abortions. And I never suggested a litmus test either.
I mentioned my comments to anti-abortion folks who always seem to project their position on others. Personally, I don’t care for either position. Those are personal decisions that should be made by individuals and not by governments playing politics with the private lives of its citizens. I’ve never been pregnant nor been in a situation with an unwed pregnancy so I don’t presume to know how others might feel or act under those circumstances. Last time I heard an abortion was legal in some situations and in some cases a medical necessity to protect the life of the woman. I don’t condone abortions but I’m not willing to force my view on others in a situation I’ve never experienced.
As for your suggested litmus test: I have a lot of respect for those who go the extra step to put their principles into action and not leave it in simple words that are meaningless. Others are likely to feel differently… My 2 cents.
“give even the death row criminals a fair chance to prove they are innocent.”
Bill, the Supreme Court is doing nothing about “a fair chance to prove they are innocent” Zero. Zilch. Nada. They are deciding if lethal injection is being administered in a cruel and unusual fashion. That’s it. So, your argument means really nothing. Thanks for playing, though.
“I have to ask the anti-abortion folks how many children they have adopted?” Hey Bill! Wanna know the waiting list for newborns? It’ll sound familiar. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The backlog is in older children, which means for your logic to make any sense, we’d have to be aborting kids who are about six years old. Boy, when you stretch beyond firefighting, are you exposed!
Ian, if you have a problem with “emotional issues,” I expect you to withdraw from the Democratic Party by morning. Listen to a speech about health care, minimum wage, anything by a Democrat. Then talk to me about “emotional issues.”
By the way, where’s Mathieson?
No, JR, i have not adopted kids. But I am in favor of abortion. YOU want a moratorium? Who the hell are you?
I would hardly call protecting innocent life “playing politics”.
As a family, my wife and I had to face the abortion decision. Today, that potentially aborted fetus is a gifted student, fantastic musician, and talented athlete whose birth-defect has long been corrected.
Additionally, another family member had an abortion — an agonizing decision for her.
So, I speak with a bit of experience on the subject, but I resent your insinuation that you have to have experience just to hold an opinion.
Whether or not I or others face decisions on the subject is totally irrelevant to advocating for the protection of life.
But as for the subject…it was brought up in a previous thread and merely continued here.
It’s a natural comparison. If the death row opponents, who so often are abortion proponents, feel so strongly about the cruel and unusual aspects of lethal injection, then I would hope they would feel the same about the cruel and unusual aspects of aborting a baby.
It’s not a jump at all.
Ian,
Who the hell am I?
I’m a concerned citizen who is interested in public policy. I’m exactly who the feel-good, sugar plum fairy left is always so hopeful for…unless you don’t want citizens to participate after all.
But the question is not who am I, but where is your public servant Mathieson on this issue?
Still waiting.
He doesn’t answer this crap. He answers substantive questions about policy and his vision for the work he others can conduct in the general assembly. This is beyond his professional capacity. There is your answer.
So now you can stop waiting.
JR: You wrote: “So, I speak with a bit of experience on the subject, but I resent your insinuation that you have to have experience just to hold an opinion.” I insinuated nothing. I expressed my opinion. FYI: The key words in my post would be “my opinion and my lack of personal experience on that issue” as I stated it. I believe knowledge and personal experience is very important to forming a position on any issue. That would be my opinion… I don’t want to push “my views” on others. You might not have a problem pushing your views and experiences on others but I do.
Your opinions or experiences are personal views and contribute to your position on the issues debated here. However, that doesn’t mean you are any more correct than any others who express their opinions here. But of course it is your board so; you get to be the supreme judge of right and wrong opinions… Please forgive me for expressing a “wrong” opinion. That will not happen again…
It seems this is an opinion board that really only wants to hear from those who agree with your views. What a shame…
Where is Bobby? I’d guess he’s home sleeping soundly…
The only real relationship between abortion and the death penalty is the ending of a (potential) life (unless you subscribe to this theory). I say potential, as that is the underpinning upon which many peoples pro-choice beliefs are built. Cruel and unusual don’t come into play if you don’t view an unborn child as a unique living being.
Other than that, capital punishment is just that, punitive in nature, unlike abortion. Its also done through and by the will of the state and our justice system, where abortion is usually at the will of an individual. The fact that the majority (i would guess) of people in the US tend to hold inverse postions in the two issues just goes to show how unrelated they really are. I suppose the argument could be made they are actually inversely related, but i think its more likely the influence of other external beliefs that drives anti-DP folks to be pro-choice, and the inverse.
Jeremy, hate to break it to you, but 72% in the Pilot’s poll thought Kaine’s decision was wrong.
But even if capital punishment was as unpopular as you pretend it to be, is that the Supreme Court standard? Again, the Court will not decide if capital punishment - just whether lethal injections are being administered Constitutionally.
As far as Del. Mathieson sleeping, it’s nice to know some things never change.
William,
If this was a comment thread only for sycophants, I regret to say there would probably be no comments.
And, if any of the commenters, myself included, aren’t aiming to be correct, why offer arguments defending a position? Isn’t that the whole point?
Brian - you misinterpreted my response. By “inverse positions” i meant the general tendency of pro-life supportrters to be pro-DP and pro-choice to be anti-DP. I make no statement as to which view on each subject is more prevalent/popular. The purpose of my post was just to point out that, even though there seems to be some inverse relationship between the two topics in the way they play out, there is very little similarity between the death penalty and abortion. So, trying to use an opinion on one to argue an opinion on the other (as Jim’s earlier post had done) isn’t really useful. My mistake for going off on a tangent again. Always happy to be your straw man though.
Jeremy, gotcha. I misunderstood that point. Sorry.
But here’s the similarity. Both are legal today. If the principle is to stop the activity while the Supreme Court deliberates, then both activities should be stopped.
If an abortion case was going to the Supreme Court, there should be a moratorium on all abortions until the Court issues its opinion. If you think that’s extreme, then you should think a moratorium against the death penalty prior to a ruling is extreme.
The problem is some folks who favor a moratorium or elimination of the death penalty are applauding Kaine’s decision simply because they oppose the death penalty.
If the Court so rules, so be it. But to enact a moratorium in hopes that the Court might rule a certain way would cause an outrage among the pro-abortion ranks that you and I could barely comprehend if it was tried in the abortion realm.
I’m just being consistent.
So Brian has twisted someone elses words now, eh? Surprise. Funny you would site a very non-scientific poll ONLINE.
Ian, it’s “cite” - go back to school.
I’m going to be out of town when Delegate Mathieson is at his Town Hall Meeting. Anyone care to go and ask him for me?
I’ll buy you lunch at the Roach Coach…
Jeremy,
The two issues aren’t as unrelated as you think. For many people, myself included, the right position is founded upon basic legal principles.
For abortion, the issue is when does a human being qualify as one of the class of persons protected by the law? The moment of birth? The moment before birth? Two months before birth? I’ve asked this question many times, and have yet to hear a reasonable argument for where that bright line lies — and it MUST be a bright line.
For capital punishment, the issue is whether a society may lawfully execute a person for committing heinous crimes. I believe that it may, though the bar should be set exceedingly high, which it is, given the number of automatic appeals and other procedural hurdles.
Ian — we knew two and a half years ago that Candidate Kaine would look for ANY excuse to break his campaign vow about capital punishment. You remember, don’t you? — “I will enforce the rule of law in Virginia.” FYI, until the SCOTUS changes it, the rule of law in Virginia (and everywhere else) is the same as it’s been since before he made that promise. But then, we expected this from Kaine, just like we expected his immediate reversal on raising taxes.
Typical. Focus on the distraction of a TYPO, versus the topic at hand. This seems to remind me of something…A red something. Anyway i’m done enjoy taking this issue no where.
Ian, if you want to see someone “taking this issue no where(sic again),” check out Mathieson.
He spent an hour talking at a CCO forum last night without bringing it up, and then bolted early before audience members could ask a question about it.