POLL: Did you know before this post that Barack Obama supports the death penalty?

I didn't know this until today. I probably would have bet money he was against it.

I also didn't know he voted for the Patriot Act before it was exposed in the last debate.

I also didn't know he once said he didn't know how he would have voted on the IWR until Bill Clinton said that yesterday.

has so cleverly manipulated...

(Thanks for the link, btw.)

nt

Why did you chose to only Obama's name in the subject line?

.

Post Bill's in Arkansas. Oh that's right, Bill rushed off the campaign trial to execute a retarded man.

If we're gonna compare capital punishment, let's not forget that.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2646813&mesg_id=2647124

And odd that the poll doesn't admit the other candidates are pro-death penalty, as well.

Honestly, this one-trick pony is getting boring.

to stand up against the abhorrent practice of state executions.

nt

support of the death penalty too.

because he's supposedly different

were pro death penalty.

Especially in those small hometown meetings with voters.

n/t

Nice try, though.

And no thanks to the Op for conveniently obscuring that fact...

from ontheissues.org

That just strikes me as a little odd. Granted the other candidates support it, but damn.

that is weird

While the evidence tells me that the death penalty does little to deter crime, I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment. On the other hand, the way capital cases were tried in Illinois at the time was so rife with error, questionable police tactics, racial bias, and shoddy lawyering, that 13 death row inmates had been exonerated

Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58 Oct 1, 2006

Why don't you read what Obama wrote instead of inserting your bullshit?

Then what is the point of asking the question with regard to any of them? It's downright ridiculous isn't it??

Drag out stuff that is similar to Hillary's, and then say they're all the same so why not get this coronation back on track. They don't look at the details, the work Obama has done to end racial profiling and protect defendants' rights. They just smear and muddy the waters, and then any time anybody says a word about Hillary, cry sexism. Most pathetic campaign I've ever witnessed. It will not play in mainstream America.

That's quite strange.

The Clinton supporters have just tried to pretend they do to prove there's no reason to support anybody else.

If we can't get rid of the vile thing, can we at least vote to rename? Say, The Turn-Your-Country-Into-A-Pile-Of-Shit Act?

nt

Here's part of his floor statement to the Senate on that:

Let me be clear: this compromise is not as good as the Senate version of the bill, nor is it as good as the SAFE Act that I have cosponsored. I suspect the vast majority of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle feel the same way. But, it's still better than what the House originally proposed.

This compromise does modestly improve the PATRIOT Act by strengthening civil liberties protections without sacrificing the tools that law enforcement needs to keep us safe. In this compromise:

* We strengthened judicial review of both National Security Letters, the administrative subpoenas used by the FBI, and Section 215 orders, which can be used to obtain medical, financial and other personal records.

* We established hard time limits on sneak-and-peak searches and limits on roving wiretaps.

* We protected most libraries from being subject to National Security Letters.

* We preserved an individual's right to seek counsel and hire an attorney without fearing the FBI's wrath.

* And we allowed judicial review of the gag orders that accompany Section 215 searches.

The compromise is far from perfect. I would have liked to see stronger judicial review of National Security Letters and shorter time limits on sneak and peak searches, among other things.

Sen. Feingold has proposed several sensible amendments - that I support - to address these issues. Unfortunately, the Majority Leader is preventing Sen. Feingold from offering these amendments through procedural tactics. That is regrettable because it flies in the face of the bipartisan cooperation that allowed the Senate to pass unanimously its version of the Patriot Act - a version that balanced security and civil liberties, partisanship and patriotism.


ENTIRE SPEECH HERE:

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statement_2/

Why let a little thing like the truth get involved.

eom

:shrug:

from Obama's floor speech:

This compromise does modestly improve the PATRIOT Act by strengthening civil liberties protections without sacrificing the tools that law enforcement needs to keep us safe. In this compromise:

* We strengthened judicial review of both National Security Letters, the administrative subpoenas used by the FBI, and Section 215 orders, which can be used to obtain medical, financial and other personal records.

* We established hard time limits on sneak-and-peak searches and limits on roving wiretaps.

* We protected most libraries from being subject to National Security Letters.

* We preserved an individual's right to seek counsel and hire an attorney without fearing the FBI's wrath.

* And we allowed judicial review of the gag orders that accompany Section 215 searches.

The compromise is far from perfect. I would have liked to see stronger judicial review of National Security Letters and shorter time limits on sneak and peak searches, among other things.

Sen. Feingold has proposed several sensible amendments - that I support - to address these issues. Unfortunately, the Majority Leader is preventing Sen. Feingold from offering these amendments through procedural tactics. That is regrettable because it flies in the face of the bipartisan cooperation that allowed the Senate to pass unanimously its version of the Patriot Act - a version that balanced security and civil liberties, partisanship and patriotism.

?

impossible without a MUCH larger majority in Congress.

But, yes, the "reauthorized" version is better.

Why wouldn't he be using that special gift to eliminate it if he wanted to

Words do inspire people get involved, which is why I'm voting for Obama. He needs to be heard.

since I have come to find out they ALL support it to some degree.

Not pissed at the candidates as much as the OP--and how many will vote without informing themselves, hmm?

He's a run of the mill moderate Dem

:crazy:

Ricky Ray Rector

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Ray_Rector

Who here knew that!

On edit:

:shrug:

in Illinois, making it more difficult:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/12/obama.death.penalty.ap/

Barack Obama can honestly claim to have made a difference on a matter of life and death.

While an Illinois state senator, Obama was key in getting the state's notorious death penalty laws changed, including a requirement that in most cases police interrogations involving capital crimes must be recorded.

The changes enacted in 2003 reformed a system that had sent 13 people to death row, only to have them released because they were later determine to be innocent or had been convicted using improper methods.

"Without Barack's energy, imagination and commitment I do not believe the very substantial and meaningful reforms that became law in Illinois would have taken place," said author Scott Turow, a member of the state commission that recommended many of the changes.

-snipped-

Obama saw the issue of police interrogations as key.

Among the men released from death row "a consistent pattern was the faulty confession," argued Obama. "It struck me that this was the hardest piece of the puzzle but the one that would ultimately make the most difference and have the most long-lasting effect."

And here's the full quote from his book:

While the evidence tells me that the death penalty does little to deter crime, I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment. On the other hand, the way capital cases were tried in Illinois at the time was so rife with error, questionable police tactics, racial bias, and shoddy lawyering, that 13 death row inmates had been exonerated

Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58 Oct 1, 2006

Instead of the wrong ones

nt

Battles legislatively against the death penalty

Obama's most significant contribution has been his legislative battles against the death penalty, and against in the criminal justice system. In Illinois, it's been a series of shocking exonerations of innocent people who are on death row. He was involved very intimately in drafting and passing legislation that requires the video taping of police interrogations and confessions in all capital cases. And he also was one of the co-sponsors of this very comprehensive reform or the death penalty system in Illinois, which many people say may trigger the retreat on the death penalty in many other states.

Source: Salim Muwakkil and Amy Goodman, Democracy Now Jul 15, 2004



Five years later, Obama waded into a complex capital-punishment debate after a number of exonerations persuaded then-Gov. George Ryan (R) to empty death row.

Obama wrote in his recent memoir that he thinks the death penalty "does little to deter crime." But he supports capital punishment in cases "so heinous, so beyond the pale, that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment."

In proposing changes, Obama met repeatedly with officials and advocates on all sides. He nudged and cajoled colleagues fearful of being branded soft on crime, as well as death-penalty opponents worried that any reform would weaken efforts to abolish capital punishment.

Obama's signature effort was a push for mandatory taping of interrogations and confessions. It was opposed by prosecutors, police organizations and Ryan's successor, Democrat Rod Blagojevich, who said it would impede investigators.

Working under the belief that no innocent defendant should end up on death row and no guilty one should go free, Obama helped get the bill approved by the Senate on a 58 to 0 vote. When Blagojevich reversed his position and signed it, Illinois became the first state to require taping by statute.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_2.html

a kill is a kill

antiquated system in Illinois so there'd be less capital punishment.

Thank you!

I didn't know about the death penalty, I am glad to know I think some people deserve it. If he changed his mind on the Patriot Act that's good but Hillary still supports it. I saw the clip where he said didn't know how he would have voted on the IWR, that was back during the 2004 election cycle where he didn't want to go against John Kerry a fellow Democrat who was running for President at the time. Although Hillary isn't my favorite choice I had come to the decision to support her if she gets the nomination. Now I am not so sure, it's dirty cheap shots like this from her supporters that gives me second thoughts on it.

nt

Myself Edwards would be my first choice. But posts with crap like this from the Clinton suporters are pushing me to Obama as my second and maybe sitting it out if Hillary is nominated.

Here's some more ideas for your next post his father was a Muslim, he attended a Madras and he belongs to a black supremest church.

on Edit: Oh, his middle name is Hussein don't forget that one.

:shrug:

Why does the 'state' get a reprieve to kill someone?

Lock 'em up and throw away the key, but how can you condone state sponsored murder?

So much for intelligent discourse. :dunce:

:shrug:

none of the Dem candidates are truly progressive - except for Dennis - (and maybe Gravel if he could be considered a candidate)- I'm not the least bit surprised and I bet the vast majority of Dems in Congress support it to....

John Edwards is talking progressive - and I at least sort of trust that he means it - unlike my trust for Obama and Clinton - don't believe them for a minute - they will do whatever is politically expedient....

I'm thinking very evil thoughts right now, but I refuse to post what they are. :evilgrin:

Judging from the entry that someone posted from Audacity of Hope, I have the exact same position on the death penalty that he does.

but I never really thought that

That's one reason why I'm for Kucinich. :patriot:

One of the many! :toast:

it's one issue that moves at a snail's pace. But it will move never less if all who seek the abolishment of capital punishment keep our noses to the grindstone and continue pushing forward despite the opposition. Only those who attempt the absurd can achieve the impossible.

That's all.

support this barbarism. The sad truth is, a Presidential candidate who opposes the death penalty will not win an election.

Nt

I am staunchly pro-death penalty.

Push poll, along with limited choices.

From a link further up the thread:

Obama says the death penalty "does little to deter crime" but he supports it for cases in which "the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage." While a state senator, Obama pushed for reform of the Illinois capital punishment system and authored a bill to mandate the videotaping of interrogations and confessions.

How? Obama supports the death penalty just like the other two Democrats. He's not different.