If you live in America, never stand up to abuse from a man. The christian's will get ya.

Go Republicans, Go Bush!

-- Scarlet Pimpernell (ScarletPimpernell@onalert.com), February 23, 2000

Answers

Yes! Look to Bill Clinton and the democrats for support. Bill will help you just like he helped Juanita Broaddrick.

-- Z (Z@Z.com), February 23, 2000.

Judging from the tone of your brief comments, you probably reject the idea that it is "a child, not a choice" when discussing the other end of the debate.

I'll take the moral Right over the sappy, hypocritical Left any day.

Capital Punishment: JUSTICE...Regular or Extra Crispy.

-- Irving (irvingf@myremarq.com), February 23, 2000.

Last time I heard, the Juanita Broaddrick episode was an allegation, like the son he supposedly fathered with a black prostitute. Or are we now guilty until proven innocent in conservative christian america?

-- ? (@ .), February 23, 2000.

The real question is? Are we headed for a cultural war between the left and the right.

You christians have all the AK-47's. Not a fair fight!

However, you've still got to go!!!!!

-- ScarletPimpernell (ScarlettPimpernell@onalert.com), February 23, 2000.

No, you're innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Unless you're Bill Clinton, in which case you're innocent, period, end of discussion, because the law doesn't apply to you and you won't get prosecuted.

-- Markus Archus (markus@archus.com), February 23, 2000.

YOu can stand up to an abusive man...that's not illegal. You just can't kill him. THAT is illegal. If you are married to someone who is abusive, you have many options in todays world. There are MANY excellent agencies that will help a woman out of an abusive relationship,...give her a safe place to live, legal help, support... and you have to exersize these options before choosing to kill him. Self Defense IS allowed...and you don't get the death penalty for it. Killing someone is LAST POSSIBLE option.

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), February 23, 2000.

Damn! there goes that uppity female vote! Course if shrubya wins, he can do 'em in with child support and welfare reform.

Barefoot and pregnant, that's our motto. Even better if they're a little hungry.

Think we females ought to start a movement in Texas-we can begin with crditing Miss Emily for winning the Battle of San Jacinto (local history, non-Texans. They keep trying to hush her up).

Now what's the difference between Clinton and Bush?

-- little wifey (wifey@home.com), February 23, 2000.

Very enlightening discussion! The "lead" attempts to cleverly define the debate but is deficient. The governor does not do the executing. If she is executed it is because the jury and judge followed due process and convicted and sentenced her. The governor simply declines to commute. Murder and forfeit your life. The death penalty debate is always argued from the wrong perspective. It is not designed to be a deterent although it certainly is to the person executed. It is applying duly determined just punishment for murder.

-- rancherdick (cowman@meadowmuffin.com), February 23, 2000.

littlewifey,

Absolutely Nothing! Both criminals!

-- EagleFeather (eaglefeather8@yahoo.com), February 23, 2000.

You flaming right wingers, gotta have it your way, gotta pass a law.

You flaming left wingers, gotta have it your way, gotta fund a cause.

Here is a simple formula to live by: 1. Don't lie 2. Don't cheat 3. Don't steal 4. Don't hurt the person or property on another (without their consent)

5. KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF EVERYBODIES ELSE'S BUSINESS

If you think you are above this, eat s___ and die. You aren't any less responsible because your hiding behind some polical agenda.

-- older and wiser (not for sale@anyprice.com), February 23, 2000.

Hey, I don't have an AK-47...Why would I want something like that? (Did you know that Dixie Gun Works sells working canons?)

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), February 23, 2000.

Have you folks recognized the fact that this isnt a fight between Republicans and Democrats? It isnt a fight between the, so-called, right and the left. It is not a fight between the North and the South. It is not a fight between urban and rural interests. What is the fight? It is a fight over the definition of what being a conservative means. The people at Bob Jones University and the Pat and Jerry show feel that a conservative government should be intrusive. Mettle in peoples lives. Their opponents disagree. This fight will determine the future of the Republican party. Will be interesting to watch.

Best wishes

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), February 23, 2000.

This battered woman was found with the bodies of two previous husbands burried in the back yard. Perhaps she needs a government program. Throw a few million dollars at the problem.

-- fitbone (fitbone@home.com), February 23, 2000.

Sounds like she did a little battering of her own. Perhaps ScarPimp doesn't consider killing men to be abusive.

gene

-- gene (ekbaker@essex1.com), February 23, 2000.

to ?

Last I heard BC was lying under oath. Last I heard BC was in jeopardy of losing his law license. Last I heard BC was lying to the public. Got a clue? And please don't give us this 'it's all about sex'. It's the purgery stupid.

-- haha (haha@haha.com), February 23, 2000.

It seems as though the State of Texas has determined the guilt of this person and is going to carry out sentance.

Case closed.

-- (formerly@nowhere.zzz), February 23, 2000.

Z, o mighty clueless one:

Let's talk about intrusion. Who wanted to national ID card? Looks like the left did to me. Now, go get yourself a cup of coffee, and while you're at it, also get yourself a clue.

Best wishes...

-- haha (haha@haha.com), February 23, 2000.

--Ha Ha!

You are correct. Here is a link for those who truly believe in freedom and the Constitution to do something about the latest moves of the American "National Socialist" party. Be very afraid! Eight years of National Socialism and the liberals still support this nonsense.

http:// www.StopBigBrother.org

-- justwondering (justwondering@nationalsocialismisevil.com), February 23, 2000.

Sorry about the typos all (blush). Am doing a painful homework project (or at least trying). :)

-- haha (haha@haha.com), February 24, 2000.

Very interesting Just Wondering.....evidently some posters here want more intrusion into our lives...just as long as it's from the demophlegms...

-- haha (haha@haha.com), February 24, 2000.

Supposedly she's a grandmother, as if that should have something to do with it. Isn't everyone who is prosecuted for a crime someone's blood relative? If the law is waivered for just one, it should be waivered for everyone.

-- bardou (bardou@baloneyy.xcom), February 24, 2000.

Under Texas law, unless the Board of Pardons votes to stop the excution, all Bush can do legally is delay the execution for 30 days.

Since he is powerless to change the situation, why blame it on him?

-- Lynn Ratcliffe (mcgrew@ntr.net), February 24, 2000.

Every murderer is someone's mother, sister, daughter, father, son, brother, etc.

I feel sorry for her, but I feel sorrier for the victims. God instituted capital punishment in Genesis.

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), February 24, 2000.

fitbone-- I'm in agreement with you. The bodies of two previous husbands in the backyard definitly removes the sympathy I had for this woman.

-- Pam (jpjgood@penn.com), February 24, 2000.

scarlett--so one would assume that you place your loyalty with the left since you profess to hate the right so. love it.

first of all your speech is very "hateful" toward christians and republicans (but i guess according to the left's rules that is acceptable) and

secondly, you don't have a clue do you as to what a puppet you are. you have bought into the lies the socialists are feeding people like you and only after they have won (which they will because there are more sheeple like you than there are people who at least make an attempt to think outside the box) will they take off their masks and show you their totalitarian faces. they don't care a whip about people, they care about money and power.

so if you hate god so, to whom will you pray when the totalitarian's are in rule and your life is in the toilet?

-- tt (cuddluppy@aol.com), February 24, 2000.

Will some democrat tell me how Clinton has literally got away with murder.

-- Sir Richard (Richard.Dale@unum.co.uk), February 24, 2000.

... and bribery, and extortion, and some would say treason.

Lying to Congress, lying to the public. Thought they got upset when North was accused of that offence.

Covering-up evidence, stealing, and corrupting others. Conspiracy to hide evidence and to obstruct justice. Abuse of the FBI, ATF, Secret Service - have you heard how many times people have been arrested and detained by the Secret Service for "saying things" publically in their carefully orchestrated public meetings? The latest threat happened before the Letterman show....Most who were detained were later audited.)

Eyewitness accounts of drug abuse by Hillary, Bill, and Gore. The rape too was collarborated by eyewitness accounts - but the news media didn't want to cover that. Rather they wanted to "sit on it" - the hide it completely if they had their way. (Like TV, Newsweek was going to sit on the Lewinsky affair - but their coverup was exposed.)

Deliberate lies are published - rather than exposed.

But the Democratics don't want to discuss the Clintons' deliberate crimes. They'd rather you focus on alleged

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 24, 2000.

Christian Morality. Christian Compassion. Are those oxymorons?

-- Very (Grateful@Still.here), February 24, 2000.

The hatred and bigotry exist on the liberal left. Can't say as there are no errors nor hypocrisy insupposed Christians who should know better, and who should be trained better....but do you notice that the "conventional fever" of hatred is directed SOLELY TOWARDS those who express themselves in faith.

Those who claim for themselves freedom and love and free speech are those who are trampling (today!) the rights of others to say things the liberals disagree with. Yesterday, for example, liberals tore down down an pro-life table, destroying the photos and papers....but claimed those who are protecting innocent life are "using hate speech" ... but, of course, the liberals demand theright to demonstrate and protest violently for their causes.

Can't have a photograph displayed to protect life though, can we? That's "hate speech" on a college campus.

Liberal honesty? Doesn't exist. Only hatred, disgust, envy, and anger on that side. Repression, injustice, rape, theft, beatings, racially and religiously motivated murders, prejudices, and lies are most often from that side...or have you been counting lately?

Doesn't exist.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 24, 2000.

Story referenced above: www.worldnetdaily.com has the original.

< A judge finds they failed to establish a probability of more violence at a UBC display. Neal Hall, Sun Court Reporter Vancouver Sun

Mark Van Manen, Vancouver Sun /

PROTESTER: Erin Kaiser, a UBC student was offended by anti-abortion displays at the University of B.C. that compared abortion with the genocide of the Jewish people during the Holocaust.

A B.C. Supreme Court judge dismissed an application Tuesday for an injunction to stop protesters from physically interfering with an anti-abortion display today at the University of B.C.

Justice David Tysoe said three plaintiffs -- Stephanie Gray, Athena Macapagal and Michelle Laroya, UBC students who belong to the anti-abortion Lifeline club on campus -- failed to establish a probability that the Alma Mater Society would repeat the violence that took place last November during a display of the Genocide Awareness Project.

The judge viewed a video in court that showed three students -- AMS external commissioner Erin Kaiser, external commissioner Jon Chandler and AMS councillor Lesley Washington -- destroying Lifeline's anti-abortion display last Nov. 23. The video showed the students turning over tables and tearing down photos.

The plaintiffs claimed the student leaders conspired with the AMS, which has 33,000 student members, to stifle freedom of speech and rational debate on the abortion issue.

Lawyer Craig Jones, acting for the plaintiffs, noted that the AMS has funded a pro-choice "shadow organization" called Students for Choice, whose members include the three students who tore down the display last Nov. 23.

"The AMS, by our submission, was caught with their hand in the cookie jar," Jones said.

Kaiser, 20, a third-year political-science student, told the judge Tuesday that she found the display offensive because it compares abortion with the genocide of Jewish people during the Holocaust and lynchings of black people by the Ku Klux Klan.

The display juxtaposes photographs of dead and emaciated Holocaust victims with dead fetuses.

Kaiser said she finds the display offensive because she is Jewish and had relatives die in the Holocaust. She also noted she had an abortion a month before the Lifeline display was destroyed.

"I was absolutely outraged, absolutely upset, and I did absolutely the wrong thing," she told the court.

She promised to never do it again, noting she had helped organize a counter protest at 12:30 p.m. today.

Outside court, Kaiser said she plans to file a complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Commission against Lifeline's display.

"I think it is hate literature," she told reporters at the Vancouver Law Courts. "I believe in free speech, but when you start to compare women who want abortions with Nazis, you've crossed the line."

She added she feels the display destroys the dignity of survivors of the Holocaust and demeans the victims.

Kaiser was satisfied that the judge rejected the application for an injunction to keep protesters away from the anti-abortion display, which she noted would have stifled her freedom-of-expression rights.

The Lifeline plaintiffs had argued the AMS and four student leaders were trying to stifle freedom of speech.

Members of the Lifeline club have filed a complaint with UBC administration about the Nov. 23 incident. A hearing will be held in March.

AMS president Ryan Marshall, who attended court Tuesday, said he was pleased with the judge's ruling. >>

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 24, 2000.

Robert and haha -

Clinton lied about consensual sex. Your man Ollie (and George Bush) lied about a far ranging conspiracy to subvert the US Government.

Now I realize in your small bigoted minds the two are equivalent, but please explain how you would staff the US and contain its prison population (already the largest in the world) if you jailed everyone who lied about who they had sex with.

You Republicans really amaze me with your repressive BS reasoning abilities.

-- ? (@ .), February 24, 2000.

Hey Scarlet either you are a troll or you are a sandwich short of a picnic. Your hero was a serial killer. Please give us a break!

Updated: Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2000 at 18:04 CST

Texas parole board rejects reprieve request from woman on death row

By Michael Graczyk Associated Press

HUNTSVILLE, Texas -- The fate of a 62-year-old woman on death row now rests with Gov. George W, Bush, a death penalty supporter who has permitted 119 executions since taking office five years ago.

The state parole board Tuesday refused to halt the planned execution of Betty Lou Beets for the shooting death of her husband, a Dallas fire captain.

Since the parole board did not recommend that Beets' sentence be commuted, Bush's only option under Texas law is to grant a one-time, 30-day stay of execution. Beets is to die by injection Thursday.

She would be only the second woman executed in Texas since the Civil War and the fourth in the nation since the Supreme Court allowed capital punishment to resume in 1976.

Death penalty opponents have said cases like Beets' are a test of Bush's "compassionate conservatism." Since Bush took office in 1995, he has spared only one prisoner, citing flimsy evidence.

Bush, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, was campaigning in Michigan on Tuesday. A spokeswoman has said he would not make a decision in the Beets case until all legal action was over.

The fairness of the death penalty has received renewed attention since Gov. George Ryan of Illinois suspended executions until the state's death penalty procedures are examined. Thirteen inmates have been released from death row in that state since 1987.

Beets was convicted of murder for the 1983 shooting death of Jimmy Don Beets, her fifth husband, in what prosecutors said was a scheme to collect his life insurance and pension. She also was convicted of shooting and wounding husband No. 2, and charged -- but never tried -- in the 1981 shooting death of her fourth husband.

Her lawyer, Joe Margulies, said that while there wasn't evidence of physical abuse by Jimmy Don Beets, there was severe "emotional torment" in their relationship.

"All my momma's life, she's been abused," Beets' daughter Faye Lane told the parole board Tuesday. "I've seen it with my own eyes. And I know that if the jury heard the truth about my momma, she only could have done something like this if she'd been very scared or threatened."

The last woman executed in Texas was Karla Faye Tucker in 1998. She was put to death in the same chamber in Huntsville after being convicted of killing two people with a pickax in 1983.

Texas authorities are already preparing to execute Cornelius Goss tonight. He was convicted for the bludgeoning death of 66- year-old Carl Leevy during a house burglary in Dallas almost 13 years ago.

Distributed by The Associated Press (AP)

http://www.startext.net/news/doc/1047/1:STATE41/ 1:STATE410223100.html

-- PA Engineer (PA Engineer@longtimelurker.com), February 24, 2000.

HaHa:

I think that Flint dealt with you quite well. Go to:

Flint's Answer

This is approximately, answer [or rant, your preference] 17. He deals with you specifically in a later answer.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), February 24, 2000.

Do you want someone as president who protects wife-beaters and kills innocent 62 year-old great grandmothers? Shrubya is sick!



-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 24, 2000.

Folks:

I am neither an Bush hater or a Bush supporter. In addition, I don't consider myself an expert on Texas law. But, it was my understanding that the gov. [who has no power in Texas] could do little more than delay the execution for 30 days.

Best wishes,,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), February 24, 2000.

Hawk - She murdered her husbands - yes, plural; and was convicted of these murders legally, accurately, and fairly.

With more justice than that she gave her victims.....she hasn't been tried yet for the other bodies of her other husbands found buried in her yard.

Yes - it is "compassionate" to carry out a sentence properly judged in a court of law.....the ONLY ones claiming now (without evidence, without nothing but your hatred of Bush to push the issue!) are her lawyers.

It is far more compassionate to the remaining citizens of TX and the rest of the world to execute a serial killer, than to fall sway to emotion-ridden lies from a defense attorney. You are letting your hatred of Bush sway your response to a serial killer's desperate attempt to avoid the same fate she gave her victims.....or do you despise them too?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 24, 2000.

As I read all these posts on this thread, and so very, very many like it in recent weeks, I can only think that the NWO leaders are having the last laugh. If any of you have read the Hegelian thesis in which one divides and conquers by raising a thesis, then an antithesis, then creating a synthesis that resolves the two, and in so doing obtains power...the theory used by Karl Marx to teach his followers how to dominate a segment of the world's population...and encouraged by the NWO leaders that have been with us for centuries...then you would know that this is exactly what is happening in America right now, as demonstrated on this very thread! It's the "us" versus the "them."

We have Republicans versus Democrats, liberals versus conservatives, non-Christians versus Christians. By setting us up against one another, "they" can then provide the "solution," the synthesis.

Why are we common folk at war with one another, when we should be banded together, regardless of specifics of ideology, against the Big Threat to us all?

Read Ron Brown's book "Empower the People," and his "Black Lies/White Lies" for starters, and use his extensive bibliography to pursue the subject(s) further, if you prefer.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), February 24, 2000.

Scarlett, you obviously have an axe to grind, which many do with Bush and Gore too...but why use such a LAME non-example of his faults and foibles? This woman has murdered more than one husband, and Bush cannot do anything other than what he has done in this case.

There is so much venom on this forum lately...brrrr...hate to think what it will be like all year long. Wishing November were OVER....

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), February 24, 2000.

Cook,

You are lying just like a typical right wing conservative again. I think the facts need to be presented here, so that everyone can see that Cook is using his typical Rush Limbaugh strategy of stating his deceptive opinions as if they were truth. I swear, we can't trust you right-wingers to say a single word without twisting the facts into your own agenda-motivated package of lies.

Texa s executes Betty Lou Beets for husband's murder

February 24, 2000 Web posted at: 9:13 p.m. EST (0213 GMT)

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (CNN) -- Despite her pleas that she was a battered spouse who killed in self defense, 62-year-old Betty Lou Beets was executed Thursday night by the state of Texas.

Beets, who was convicted of murdering her fifth husband in 1983 to collect his life insurance and pension, was put to death by lethal injection at 6:18 p.m. CST at a state prison known as The Walls Unit in Huntsville, Texas.

She did not make a final statement.

A reporter who witnessed the execution said Beets "seemed to die peacefully" with almost a smile on her face, dressed in prison whites and with the chaplain by her side.

Beets' attorneys exhausted their last legal recourse about an hour before the execution, when Gov. George W. Bush declined to stop it.

Under Texas law, Bush could have granted Beets a one-time 30-day reprieve. He decided instead to follow the recommendation of his 18-member Board of Pardons and Paroles and let the execution take place. Bush has never gone against the board's recommendation.

His decision came just minutes after the U.S. Supreme Court declined a request by Beets' attorneys to step into the case.

"She's very scared," Beets' attorney Joe Margulies had told CNN earlier in the day. "She doesn't want to be strapped down to that gurney all alone."

A federal appeals court on Thursday afternoon denied a motion to stop the execution. In its ruling, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld a lower court ruling issued Wednesday rejecting a plea from Beets' attorneys that her case be re-examined by Texas officials because she was a battered wife.

Beets is only the fourth woman executed in the United States since the Supreme Court allowed capital punishment to resume in 1976. Karla Faye Tucker was the first woman executed in Texas since the Civil War, when she was put to death on February 3, 1998, for a 1983 pickax murder.

Beets, who had five children, nine grandchildren and six great-grandchildren, is the oldest person put to death in Texas since the state resumed executions in 1982.

Texas, which leads the nation in capital punishment, has now executed 208 people since then.

Beets was convicted of murder for the 1983 shooting death of Dallas fire captain Jimmy Don Beets, her fifth husband, in what prosecutors said was a scheme to collect his life insurance and pension.

She also had been convicted of shooting and wounding her second husband, and charged -- but never tried -- in the 1981 shooting death of her fourth husband.

'All my mama's life, she's been abused'

In Austin, U.S. District Judge James Nowlin said the motion to stop the execution, filed as part of a lawsuit seeking to have Beets' case reviewed because she was a battered wife, was "yet another example of a prisoner attempting to delay execution just prior to the execution date."

The judge also dismissed the lawsuit, which argued that Beets' civil rights were violated because she was not given a chance to present evidence that she suffered years of domestic abuse in her five marriages.

On Tuesday, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, dominated by Bush appointees, rejected Beets' pleas for a 180-day reprieve and commutation of her sentence.

Beets' legal team and a coalition of supporters including domestic-violence awareness groups and Amnesty International USA wanted her death sentence commuted to life in prison.

They said Beets, who has been in jail since 1985, was damaged both physically and psychologically and that she had poor legal counsel because the jury that sentenced her to die was not told about the abuse.

"Betty's daughters went to (a previous defense attorney) ... and gave him pictures of Betty taken after she had been beaten up, horribly battered," Margulies said. "Had he looked, he could have amassed the information that we eventually got ... and asked the (parole) board to review, but they declined.

"What we're saying is, 'Give us the opportunity to present our evidence on battering that the jury didn't hear.'"

Beets' daughter, Faye Lane, told the parole board Tuesday: "All my mama's life, she's been abused. I've seen it with my own eyes. And I know that if the jury heard the truth about my mama, she only could have done something like this if she'd been very scared or threatened.

"I'm not saying that my mother should go free, but to be allowed to live out her remaining years in prison."

Letters to Bush

Two U.N. experts on human rights had appealed to Bush in a letter Thursday to spare Beets from execution.

Asma Jahangir and Radhika Coomaraswamy of the U.N. Commission on Human rights expressed their concern that "abuse and extreme violence" suffered by Beets were not considered by the investigating authorities or the courts when convicting and sentencing her for murder.

The two U.N. officials urged Bush to consider the specific circumstances of the crime, "and in particular the violent abuse which Betty Lou Beets suffered at the hands of her spouses and the effect of this abuse on her state of mind and her actions."

In another letter Wednesday, the group Human Rights Watch had called on Bush to grant Beets a 30-day reprieve, with senior researcher Allyson Collins citing "a perfect opportunity for Governor Bush to display his much-touted conservative compassion."

Bush, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, had said he would not decide what action to take until the matter had run its course in the courts.

"The question I'm going to ask is, 'Is she guilty of the crime?'" said the governor, who returned to Austin late Wednesday.

Texas has carried out 120 executions since Bush took office in January 1995 -- the latest on Wednesday night when Cornelius Goss, 38, was put to death for a 1987 murder.

Bush has never granted a 30-day reprieve, but he commuted one death penalty to life in prison, citing flimsy evidence against the inmate.

'I don't remember what happened '

The bodies of Beets' fourth and fifth husbands were found under a wishing well in the yard of her mobile home at Gun Barrel City, Texas. They had been shot in the head, execution-style.

Prosecutors say she murdered Jimmy Don Beets, a Dallas fire captain, but she says she doesn't know how her husband was killed.

"I wouldn't willingly do that," Betty Lou Beets said in a death row interview. "But I don't remember what happened then ... it's just a blank to me."

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 24, 2000.

Forgot to highlight this very revealing tidbit of information...

"On Tuesday, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, dominated by Bush appointees, rejected Beets' pleas for a 180-day reprieve and commutation of her sentence."

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 24, 2000.

No one has greater contempt for the current administration than the far left.

The following is from R.U. Sirius (who is running for President under the party of his creation, The Revolution.) R.U. Sirius was former co-founder and editor of the magazine Mondo2000.

On Clinton and using execution as litmus for electibility-

http://www.disinfo.com/prop/diss/prop_diss_revolution4.html

"You even sent a retarded boy to his death in Arkansas, lest you appear soft on the death penalty. Anything less would have meant instant death for your ambitions, because the Moron Majority considers the death penalty a litmus test that proves that you're part of their angry and fearful mob. And so you killed.

They say the first time is the hardest."

On the issue of consensual sex not being the point at all:

http://www.disinfo.com/prop/diss/prop_diss_revolution5.html

Do I Dare To Eat Impeach? Or How Mr. Clinton Got Caught in his own Police State

"Most of my friends and compatriots seem to feel that Starr is instituting a right wing coup d'etat against a popular president, so it's time to put aside any disagreements we may have with Bubba, and oppose the impeachment proceedings. A few others whisper in my ear that we're all equal under the law, and this President, who has been no friend of justice, should pay for perjury and witness tampering with his Presidency. They are all correct.

I will neither advocate nor oppose the impeachment of President Groovy. But today, my derision will be aimed specifically at him. After all, I ain't running for Special Prosecutor. But hear this campaign promise: If elected, I will do everything within my power to see that these two assholes get adjoining cells...

... The reality is that Mr. Clinton has been our "right wing" inquisitor (right wing here meaning authoritarian), the man who has--according to the ACLU--"crippled... the Bill of Rights."

...Of course, when you can't pass legislation, you can always do maximum damage via executive order. As you may recall, the American Revolution was fought largely over warrantless searches by British enforcers. In the name of national security, Clinton's Executive Order 12949 authorized physical "foreign intelligence" searches of homes and other places without a court order and without probable cause. In essence, there now needs be no evidence of criminal wrongdoing for law enforcement organizations to ransack your home.

And since everybody's talking about Watergate, it's worth noting that under Executive Order 12949, Tricky Dicky's minions might have gotten away with searching McGovern headquarters. They certainly would have been able to excuse their third-rate burglaries against that threat to national security, Daniel Ellsberg. Of course, the mainstream American press would probably be too chickenshit now to publish The Pentagon Papers anyway, since they were illegally obtained (see Chiquita Banana).

The secret police are out there. It's known that several warrantless searches have already occurred under Janet Reno's watch, although the numbers and specifics are clandestine, known only to certain White House and Justice Department officials. Martial Law was declared, quietly, on April 24, 1996 when our horny president signed the Anti-Terrorism Bill. In the straight-forward and heartbreaking words of the ACLU, " With the stroke of a pen, President Clinton today crippled the century-old authority of the federal courts to enforce the Bill of Rights." Please let that sink in.

The Secretary of State can now label any foreign-based organization he or she pleases as "terrorist." There is no legal recourse for removing the assignation. Banks are authorized to freeze assets of American citizens and organizations suspected of being agents of one of these declared terrorist groups. Again, there is no legal recourse to challenge such an act. Law enforcement can also now easily investigate individuals suspected of terrorism based on activities protected by the First Amendment.

The bill also guts prisoners' right to habeas corpus. Prisoners can no longer challenge the constitutionality of state court convictions, since this law requires federal courts to defer to state court interpretations of constitutional issues, even when the state is wrong. The bill also prevents consideration of innocence unless they are "backed by clear and convincing evidence," something nearly unattainable by current legal standards. In other words, let's show how tough on crime we are by keeping innocent people in jail too!

...The bill also denies undocumented aliens, including those seeking political asylum, the right to challenge deportation. If the government declares that an alien is suspected of association with "terrorist groups," then they can use secret evidence that need not be disclosed to the suspect. In other words, the government need not even prove that the person is, in fact, in any way associated with a "terrorist" organization. After all, how would you know whether they've proved it or not.

If that isn't enough, there's also been:

Several cases of the Clinton Administration intervening in the judicial process against the constitutional rights of the accused. Limits placed on anti-abortion protesters that would have had us screaming *fascist pig* had they been tried against us ...and civil rights movements ... "Overenthusiastic" gun law enforcement. However you feel about the second amendment's protection of citizens' rights to unlicensed access to the varieties of modern armaments, the Clinton Administration's anti-gun zeal has unleashed the fury of the BATF, most memorably in the slaughter in Waco Texas... Dress codes that would have made Chairman Mao smile. I doubt if Clinton, in his youth, would have sat still for mandatory school uniforms, but we understand that new uniforms will come pre-XXX-stained to symbolize Mr. Clinton's commitment to youthful abstinence...

The report goes on to delineate specific as well as general systemic abuses by police, prison guards, and immigration officials, American hypocrisy on human rights issues, and the creation in the United States of weapons of torture and death that are used internationally by other abusive regimes, as well as by our own.

This devastating report, which flies in the face of America's official rhetoric and self-image, should have knocked George Clinton vs. Ringo Starr off of the front pages. But widespread torture, false imprisonment, racist cops running on a rampage, are apparently of little import to the mainstream media. I've yet to see a columnist even deal with it.

TRUE JUSTICE: A MODEST PROPOSAL

America is a police state. Most Americans like it that way, so long as they--or somebody close to them--don't fall victim to its caprice. People fear crime and politicians have fed that fear unto frenzy, until the point where freedom is naught but a rhetorical device.

The Revolution. would like to suggest that we get tough on crime. First of all, we would get tough by punishing only crimes for which there are victims. That will give us lots of focused toughness. We would punish crimes of violence with greater severity than crimes of property. We would punish crimes of the privileged -- the dumping of toxins that leave entire communities to cope with cancer and other illnesses, Savings and Loans scams, and insurance and bank policies that clearly constitute usury -- more severely than the crimes of the destitute. And we would punish the crimes of the institutionally powerful more severely than those of the powerless. To that end, we would have the Justice Department put several billion dollars towards making an example of 10,000 power abusers, putting them into a prison system far kinder (and less crowded) then the one they have presided over. From government officials to DEA agents to police officers to prison officials, let the word go out: if you have been abusing your power, if you have been ransacking the homes of innocents, if you have been dropping bombs in foreign lands, if you've been shooting black men down in the street for traffic violations, your time is gonna come. And Mr. Clinton and Mr. Starr, adjoining cells await you."

On the economy http://www.disinfo.com/prop/diss/prop_diss_revolution6.html

"Finally, at the bottom of the cake is a layer that may be as large as the one just above it, it's hard to tell. Economically marginalized people with inadequate incomes come in the widest variety of flavors and many, if not most, are invisible. Aside from low-wage earners and part-timers, consider those who have dropped off the radar and out of the unemployment and welfare statistics completely: couch surfers and street crawlers, prisoners, low level drug dealers, barely-surviving freelancers (sound like *you*?), permanent college students, unemployable over-50s, and can't-get-started young adults. This group is not merely unaccounted for in the economic statistics. We are unpolled, unconsidered by politicians and pundits, and-for the most part-unregistered. I will bet my nascent political career, a tub full of Cheez Whiz and a six pack of Robo that this group is at least close to 50% of the population. * In 1998, most mainstream economists had to acknowledge a worldwide depression. They called it the Asian flu, but Russia, Mexico, Brazil... most of the world was sinking. Even the US stock market got briefly rattled. Beneath the surface-where mass media gave us bread and circuses -- economists and politicians were making the startling admission that their entire post-Cold War strategy of corporate capitalism had failed...

This strategy, ironically named neo-liberalism, basically said that all you have to do is open up "free markets" globally (Free? Actually operating under strict rules advantaging those who already control the wealth) to corporate expansion, consumerism, and touristry, while limiting the "waste" involved in government intervention and social welfare, and soon there would be bright and shiny middle-class centrist democracies all over the world, filled with sophisticated global citizens of all races and genders buying cell phones, cappuccino frappes, and watching *Allie McBeal.* Repeat after me:

While the news media was parsing Monica Lewinsky's every blowjob, the entire post-Cold War strategy of global capitalism was declared a failure in the year 1998 at the expense of hundreds of millions-if not billions-of downsized starvers. I want to make something clear here. I'm not an apocalypse monger. I don't believe the Bible. I don't need the realization of the Book of Revelations so I can self-righteously wave my hands and shout, "I told you so." I'd rather see good times. Hell. I don't even have a huge moral hard-on for seeing Capitalism go down (or Communism, for that matter). I can even have a good time in a mall. I'm easy. If things were going swimmingly, I'd be the first to let you know.

There's only one good thing I can say about the Helter Stupid that seems to be coming down fast in the next couple of years-as weather catastrophes, the collapse of the global market, and biological horror hits home. In the chaos and confusion, people might actually elect me President. And as the world burns, and the seas rise, at least you won't have to hear a lot of pompous horseshit about "the honor of the office of the presidency" and the sanctity of the Constitution, as if Congress and six different administrations haven't wiped their asses with the Constitution-for one instance, every time a President bombs a foreign country without submitting to the War Powers Act and they all just sit back. As if anybody in the last three generations with half-a-brain has any more respect for our elected officials than they do for Mariah Carey."

If you'd like to know more about The Revolution and R.U.Sirius, here's the site: http://www.the-revolution.org/documents.shtml

The same scathing criticism can be found at the far right site belonging to Alamo-Girl, who posts the Downside Legacy on FreeRepublic.com, meticulously documented. Alamo-Girl has petitioned Urban Legends to find errors in the Clinton "body count" also on her site. So far, they have only found ONE.

http://www.alamo-girl.com/

I apologise for the length of the post, and for any formatting errors while cutting and pasting. I thought posting excerpts from self-described far left would serve a larger purpose in dispelling myths that one need be a Bible-believing, gun-toting, pro-life member of the far right to be outraged about- and disagree with- the path the Democrats have taken under the current administration. It is not about Most Powerful Leader of the Free World, who has usurped the system of Checks and Balances with Executive Orders ("Stroke of the pen- Law of the Land, kinda cool!"-Paul Begala)and who has the authorization to unlease Weapons of Mass Destruction against whomever for purposes of obfuscation when his own personal, political power is at stake having "consensual sex" with an UNPAID intern half his age who, as an unpaid intern did not even get health care benefits while on the job. Do you think perhaps the imbalance of power in THAT relationship might have been more obvious had the woman been a minority? The whole issue smacked of a "master-slave" relationship. Furhermore, the "consensual sex" took place in a room off the Oval Office, on the job, NOT in the private quarters within the White House complex. Had it happened in the private quarters it would have been none of our business.

Also, regarding Clinton "most ethical administration in history" the candidate not stopping the execution of the retarded boy, one of the saddest details of this travesty is the boy set aside his dessert from his last supper to enjoy after his own execution, believing he could "save it for later."

How did he get away with everything? His first political act after assuming office was to fire every single federal attorney general in the U.S. and replacing each with personal cronies more sympatico-- kinda makes firing the Air Traffic Controllers pale by comparison, doesn't it.

For those of you inclined to believe that the progress made under this administration in furthering Gay Rights, Abortion Rights, stock market gains, gun control, education reform, etc. makes the sacrifice "worth it"--consider this, the laws are in place and precedent established. How will YOUR life be effected should the next elected official to sit behind that Oval Office desk not be sympathetic to the causes you hold dear...indeed, should he (or she) prove to be quite totalitarian, how may these laws be used against YOU, in the interest of "national purification?"

Neither side has a monopoly on compassion or justice. In the simplest of terms, right wing, left wing, what's the difference? It's still the same turkey.

-- Mellowdog (mellowdogusa@hotmail.com), February 24, 2000.

Yeah, and how come there was no evidence at any of her trials that she was a battered wife. That defense was only brought up recently to try to gain support to commute the sentence.

Furthermore, even if the people on the Board of Pardons were appointed by George Bush, that does NOT make hime responsible for their decisions. Those people on the Board could have voted to commute the sentence.

-- Lynn Ratcliffe (mcgrew@ntr.net), February 24, 2000.

ONCE AGAIN, in Texas, the governor has very little power, the board recommended that she not be stayed/commuted. SHE BURIED HER HUSBANDS IN THE BACK YARD "UNDER A WISHING WELL", THEY WERE "SHOT IN THE HEAD EXECUTION STYLE". Every serial killer is someones loved one, they make a choice to put their family through hell. The judge and jury found her guilty and sentanced her to death. The death penalty is legal in Texas because a majority of Texans believe it is right. PERIOD. G.W. is following through on TEXAS LAW, in every execution that is carried out while he is in office.

Why do you personalize everything? Why is everything so EMOTIONAL with you people? THERE IS BLACK AND WHITE, RIGHT AND WRONG. Had she called the police after shooting her husband, say, in the gut, while he was charging her, and the police arrived to see her severely beaten, there IS NOT A JURY IN TEXAS that would have convicted her, she probably would not have even been indicted. She MURDERED those men and buried them to try to get away with it. What she did was wrong, murder, whether you believe it or not. Just like abortion is murder, whether legalized or not, whether you believe it or not. BLACK AND WHITE, WRONG AND RIGHT.

-- Just Curious (jnmpow@flash.net), February 25, 2000.

just curious, Very well said. It seems to me that the dead bodies speak for themselves. What about the families of the murdered men? Or don't they count?

It seems to me that many murderers certainly have a knack for coming up with new ways to get out of the charges against them. Most get new found religion. Of course it would never have occurred to them, had they not been on death row. And my wasn't Karla Faye Tucker just radiant in her new spirituality. And why doesn't Granny Beets have any pictures or verification of her beatings.

I'm not a Bush fan, but I support him for upholding the jury's verdict.

At least Texas isn't burdened with a Governor like the one in Missouri; the second the Pope shuffled into town, he pardoned the current death row inmate.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), February 27, 2000.

Although I have always been a supporter of capital punishment those who oppose this, for whatever reason, have my respect. However, to suggest that Ms. Beets is innocent is so ludicrous as to be without comment. Hawk has once again shown himself to be a first class fool. You are your own worst enemy boy..Never leave your nest!

-- Ra (tion@l.1), February 27, 2000.

I never said that Ms. Beets was innocent, Ra the idiot. If you want to let the government fry everyone who kill someone in self defense, then I hope you will someday get the pleasure of this experience. Unless the rules have changed in the state of Texas, I think it is still legal to defend yourself if you feel your life is in danger. The court system never gave Ms. Beets a chance to present her evidence, and THAT is the part that is WRONG. But what does Ra know about right and wrong, from what I've seen in his posts thus far, he is nothing more than an antagonistic asswipe troll.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 27, 2000.

Hawk, you are a lying piece of trash. This is what you said further up this post, is it not?

Do you want someone as president who protects wife-beaters and kills innocent 62 year-old great grandmothers? Shrubya is sick!

You think nobody can read your pathetic bullshit? What a low life you are.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), February 27, 2000.

Innocent UNTIL proven guilty! It is POSSIBLE that she killed her husband for no reason, and I'll concede that, but since she was not allowed to present her evidence we'll never know. As usual, the ignorant piece of shit troll Ra refuses to address the real issue here, and just calls people guilty without any proof. I hope that happens to you some day. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 27, 2000.

Wellll, shut my mouf and call me Honey, Rancher Dick (is that a pun?) and Eagle Feather (sounds like fun). Y'all talkin about Shrubya and The Black Widow as Criminals or Emily and the Black Widow as criminals or Emily and Shrubya as Criminals? I think we need to have the five pointed star (y'all into Witchcraft, Boys?) *and* a little black triangle for Emily on the Texas flag. That Up-pointed star on our seal and flag looks a little lonely. Might be a franker expression of where the power in this state really resides if we added that triangle, Boys.

Now y'all be good, you hear? We Texas Ladies do keep a close eye on what goes on here!

By the way, Sweet Thangs, I'll vote for just one criminal, but being real discrete I won't post that candidate's name. March 6 comin' up real soon- be thinkin' about y'all. (For non-Texans- history note, seems Texas is forgettin its origins, at least in Austin).

-- little wifey (littlewifey@home.com), February 27, 2000.

Hawk you ignorant asshole, you have once again missed the point. I AM addressing the REAL issue here, which is your continued posting of bullshit and YOUR spin on the truth. This woman was properly convicted and this recent battered woman defense didnt come up until recently. Why do you always seem to have this special insight into these situations that nobody else possesses? You alone seem to have knowledge where none exists. The bottom line is quite simple: you are just a stupid asswipe with a twisted attitude. By now your credibility on this forum is non-existent save for some other brain- dead morons that would agree with anything a dipshit like you would post. Hawk my ass! Slug is more like it.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), February 27, 2000.

Hawk is an ignorant asshole.

Go Ra!

-- (shooting@birds.for fun), February 27, 2000.

Sysops, the fact that you would allow the this type of posting to stay on the board speaks poorly of your values. Hawk, trust me when I tell you it is impossible for you to offend me with words. But I do appreciate you showing the rest of the forum what a low-life you really are. Ciao!

[E-x-c-u-u-u-s-e me but we just got flagged on this thread--trash deleted--your mouth could use some soap too--Ciao, Sysop]

-- Ra (tion@l.1), February 28, 2000.

Could this possibly be the same Hawk that is whimpering to the sysops to have people removed from the forum? When its time to take out the trash make sure that Hawk is at the top of the list.

-- Sifting (through@the.rubble), February 28, 2000.