Obama's non-Dukakis answer, on the death-penalty for child rapists

[jefferson_dem]

Obama's non-Dukakis answer
Posted: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:07 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Obama

Michael Dukakis, Obama is not.

On the death penalty today, Obama sidestepped a potential political land mine. Opponents could have had something recent and tangible to tag him anew as a hard-left liberal had he answered any differently than he did on the issue.

When asked about Supreme Court ruling against the use of the death penalty in instances of child rape today at a news conference in Chicago, Obama answered, “I disagree with the decision. I have said repeatedly that I think that the death penalty should be applied in very narrow circumstances for most egregious of crimes. I think that the rape of a small child, six or eight years old is a heinous crime, and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances, the death penalty is at least potentially applicable. That does not violate our constitution.”

He continued, “Had the Supreme Court said, ‘We want to constrain ability of states to do this to make sure that it's done in a careful and appropriate way,’ that would've been one thing, but it basically had a blanket prohibition and I disagree with that decision.”

Previously, The Washington Post reported that Obama is a reluctant death penalty supporter.

His answer was a sharp contrast from 1988 Democratic nominee Dukakis’ answer to a debate question about his stance on the death penalty if the crime perpetrated had been the rape and murder of his own wife.

Dukakis answered, “No, I don't, and I think you know that I've, I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don't see any evidence that it's a deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime.”

<SNIP>

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/25/1168683.aspx

[cbayer]

1. You have to be a hard-left liberal to oppose the death penalty?

Do we want to be in the club with China, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? Or in the club with the rest of the western democracies?

I like Dukakis's answer.

[JoFerret]

55. When it comes to this issue, the US is a a very backward country

.

[Blue_In_AK]

2. Dukakis was right, Obama is wrong.

But politics is politics.

[Thrill]

3. I agree with Obama. In cases like raping a child. Sorry but you should get it for that.

Obama isn't wrong. You may not agree with his position. That doesn't make it wrong

[cbayer]

4. Most child rapes are done by family members.

How do you feel about a child testifying against a parent or other family member knowing that the accused might get the death penalty if convicted?

[Not the Only One]

13. also

If the rapist knows that the punishment is death, they're probably more likely to kill their victim.

[cbayer]

19. Correct.

And the child is going to be less likely to testify against their assailant making it more likely the perpetrator will be able to continue their crimes.

This is just stupid, stupid, stupid.

[Caentor]

54. however

That refers to policy, not constitutionality.

[Thrill]

20. Raping a child is close to unforgivable in my opinion

And if I'm Obama with 2 young daughters. The person would be lucky to get to trial.

[cbayer]

27. Who said anything about forgivable?

These people suffer in prison more than just about any other prisoners.

What if it were your brother, father or son who had perpetrated the crime? I have a daughter and sons. I would want justice, but not death.

[newmajority]

32. "What if it were your brother, father or son who had perpetrated the crime?"

If they raped my children, I'd no longer consider them family, I'd consider them dead.

[ecstatic]

45. Exactly! In many ways, the DP is showing mercy for child rapists/murderers

Put them out of their misery. :mad:

[Blue_In_AK]

12. Slippery slope.

Best not to go there. My opinion.

[FourPieRun]

34. yeah, but does obama agree with obama, or is this just political expediency? nt

[JoFerret]

9. Dukakis was right. He just gave a poor answer

in that debate.

[Krashkopf]

35. Agreed. Agreed. And . . .

Agreed.

[PM7nj]

41. How did that work out for him though?

[The Doctor.]

47. Obama is not wrong for one empirical reason;

It's not unconstitutional for states to justify the death penalty.

The issue of 'right or wrong' is secondary to that.

[jobycom]

5. I liked Dukakis's answer, and the SCOTUS decision. I understand why Obama would answer thus

but I wonder what he really believes. And I'm not sure he's right politically on this issue. There is no love for child rapists, that's certain, but at a time when the opinion of the death penalty seemed to be turning against it, I wonder if Obama's reading things right.

I'd have liked a "I support the Supreme Court as the law of the land" type answer, instead. But I guess he's not ready to have a debate on that issue. Or maybe he just really supports the death penalty for non-lethal offenses. Which of course makes one ask what would stop a child rapist from killing the child afterwards, since the penalty would be the same either way, and a dead child can't testify.

Oh well. Politics is ugly. Maybe he's right.

[TBF]

44. The problem with the "what would stop them from killing the child?" argument, is that it's logical -

and criminals are not logical. They don't go into a crime thinking they're going to get caught.

Still, I agree with the Court on this one. I do agree with the death penalty in very narrow circumstances, but any of those circumstances would involve the victim being killed. Timothy McVeigh is always my example - he is the one who made me think that we should have the penalty available. Prior to that case I was against it.

So I didn't love Obama's answer, but the parent in me understands why he would answer that way.

[jobycom]

46. Don't agree. I've known a few criminals.

I've been very close to one who is much like the sort we are discussing. A ruthless sociopath, of the most heinous type short of murderer (and maybe that, though he was never caught). He seemed irrational and spontaneous to the outsider, but he was coldly calculating in everything he did. He had a Forrest Gump IQ, but an animal shrewdness at knowing just what to do and what not to do.

No, that's exactly the type of crime where the criminal will weigh all possible penalties and odds. Child abduction, molestation, and rape are often some of the most carefully planned crimes.

And as a very involved father of two daughters, and an uncle of four nieces, I think I qualify for the parental rate on this opinion. :)

[TBF]

50. I knew the head pyschologist at Lorton prison when I lived in DC -

but that was back in the 1990's. He worked just with murderers, but I didn't ask specific questions about types of murders.

I still agree with the Supremes on this in principal, but as a parent myself I would have a hard time accepting any other sentence than death if my children were in any way attacked (I have one daughter, one son, 4 nieces, and 2 nephews as far as that goes...). Like most parents I'd want to go after the perpetrator myself.

These are hard cases - it is very difficult to be objective.

[jobycom]

51. The one I knew was my brother.

And he wasn't a killer, though he may have killed people later. That's my point--there are child killers, and there are child molesters, and if the law doesn't draw a distinction, then that distinction may vanish.

I'm never moved by the "I know how I'd feel" argument. I know how I'd feel, too. More than I want to know, in fact, though it hasn't happened to one of my children. People in the worst anguish of their lives aren't really the best judges of how a functional, mature society should operate. And there are plenty of crimes that the argument will be extended to, if this one were allowed. Eventually we'd be back to capital punishment for steeling a sentimental toy because the victim was so hurt by the action.

It's a short step from "Let's kill all the horrible people we catch" to "Let's kill the people in horrible nations before they can hurt us." We need less blood lust in the this nation, not more. And make no mistake, I don't care one bit about the criminal in this. Give him a rope and turn your back if you want. I just think that when a nation's government says "It's okay to kill if you really think the other person deserves it" you wind up with a lot of people making the decision of who deserves it for themselves. You get a more violent, more warlike nation.

[TBF]

53. Yes, I understand "slippery slope" arguments, but there are shades

of gray with this topic, as there are with others. In another thread I wrote about abortion. I'm still pro-choice, but my stance on that has weakened since I saw very early sonograms of my children. As medical technology gets better and fetuses are viable at a much earlier point, then what do we do? Just an argument that things are rarely so black and white.

But I appreciate your post. It certainly makes me rethink the topic.

[Tatiana]

6. I agree with him on this.

And, I think, the majority of parents of children who have been raped by adults would agree.

[jobycom]

17. Not the ones who had thought it through.

If the rapist would get the same penalty for killing the child or letting him or her live, what's to stop the rapist from becoming a murderer and thus eliminating the main witness? Any parent who understands the mentality of a child rapist would passionately, vehemently disagree with Obama on this.

[Tatiana]

26. As one who has personally dealt with more than a few victims

as well as a parent, I disagree.

I've dealt with children, some very near babies, who had been groomed for months or even a couple of years. I've spoken with perpetrators who very carefully planned their crimes, who knew damn well what they were doing was wrong, but did it anyway because they didn't believe anyone would find out.

An adult can at least try to fight back. Children are virtually defenseless. The adults are the ones who are supposed to protect them. And every single last one of the perpetrators I have spoken with had some sort of relationship with the victim (uncle, step-brother, teacher, etc.).

Our children should be off-limits, period, and those who cross the line should know that they will pay a stiff price for doing so.

[cbayer]

23. The majority of parents of children who have been raped are married to the perp.

If you can find me anything that backs up your assertion, I would love to see it.

[Tatiana]

30. Not necessarily married. But the perpetrator is usually known.

30-40% of victims are abused by a family member.

Another 50% are abused by someone outside of the family whom they know and trust.

Abel, G. & Harlow, N. (2001). Stop child molestation book. Abel and Harlow

Kilpatrick, D., Saunders, B., & Smith, D. (2003). Youth victimization: Prevalence and implications. U.S. Depar tment of Justice, National Institute of Justice report.

[cbayer]

31. Thank you for that information.

I think that when people think of this crime, they think of a stranger. My point (overstated, I admit) is that when you know and trust the perpetrator or are related to them, things become much different.

[JoFerret]

7. Cowed into submission by the spectre

of r/w political executioners.
imo.

Unless of course he really believes it. In which case - even worse.

[jonnyblitz]

21. I read a few weeks ago somewhere that he was pro death

penalty, I forget where. I found it while searching for criticism of Obama from the left via google. this research was for my own personal edification,btw, not for posting here since we are only allowed to essentially cheerlead at this point. this was the first I had heard of this. :shrug:

[JoFerret]

38. Reminds me of when

Hillary waltzed into NY for her senate race and gratuitously declared she was pro death penalty after Cuomo had been holding the line of civilization for years. Very disappointing.

Not enough to cause a vote for Rick Lazio of course.

So - still of course wanting and working for an Obama victory in November But this is still a big disappointment. Hits home hard - especially when it seems so uncalled for. And so very illiberal.

[Balbus]

8. I agree with Obama in principle, just not execution...(pardon the pun)

Like Obama, I agree there are crimes that deserve death as the penalty. But - the justice system being an imperfect and biased system and all, and mistakes having been made - an irreversible punishment should not be an option - not by a state nor by a federal government.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. On the substance of the issue Obama is right, see here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6411393&mesg_id=6411393

[Drunken Irishman]

11. Dukakis' answer was way too political and that's what hurt him.

He didn't even miss a beat when asked. Instead, he lacked emotion when discussing the possibility of his wife being murdered.

Dukakis should have said, "I find that question offensive and the thought devastating. I could never begin to imagine and discuss the ramifications of a horrendously saddening moment like that. It's not something I want to even consider and find it in poor taste that this is how you would word your question."

Something like that could have changed the trajectory of the race. Instead, it solidified Dukakis' aloofness and unemotional presence.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. No, the correct Duakis answer was...

"No I wouldn't want to see him put to death, I would want to brutally torture and kill him myself. And that is why we have a justice system to protect the accused against our darker sides."

[Drunken Irishman]

18. Something like that would have worked too.

But damn, the answer he gave was just terrible.

[CitizenLeft]

33. that would've been an awesome response.

Honest and emotional and true.

[Hippo_Tron]

36. He may well have been President Dukakis if that was his answer

I don't know who came up with the idea of answering the question like that originally. I know that Mario Cuomo did at one point.

In an episode of the West Wing, they are drilling the President for the debate and he gives the Dukakis answer when asked about the death penalty. His Communications Director Toby then freaks out and lectures him about what the proper answer is (basically the one I just mentioned). Then it turns out it was a hoax and the President had bet everyone on the staff 10 bucks that he could get Toby to freak out.

[CitizenLeft]

56. I am embarrassed to say...

That I missed that entire show, never saw one episode *beats self upside the head*

There's always Netflix, I guess. Doh on me.

[TheDonkey]

15. They tried beating Kerry up with this too. Kerry was against the DP.

*sigh*

[cbc5g]

16. Only the far left, like a lot of us including me, support the decision...most of America doesn't

Karl Rove and McCain were PRAYING that Obama would approve this decision.

[anonymous171]

22. I disagree with Obama. I still support him though!

[Danger Mouse]

24. WTF? Being against the death penalty is 'far left'? Whatever.

[Demi_Babe]

25. I agree with Obama 100%

[Inspired]

28. The death penalty IS unconstitutional.

Some crimes are so horrible that we forget this simple truth.

Sometimes I feel that we have lost the soul of our Democratic party.

[Inspired]

29. With that said....I still support Obama.

Heck...my favorite candidate, John Edwards, also supported the death penalty.

No one is perfect.

[Hippo_Tron]

42. How do you figure the death penalty is unconstitutional?

I would argue that perhaps lethal injection is an 8th amendment violation because it can be cruel and unusual. But I'm not so sure about the death penalty itself. The founders were from an era when hangings were quite common and I don't think that was what they had in mind when they were writing the 8th amendment.

Granted I'm still against the death penalty 100%. In modern society it is not necessary.

[tritsofme]

37. If the DP is an option for child rapists, then the rapist might as well kill the child.

What other punishment could be dished out?

[mvd]

39. I am against it in all cases

Morally, and because it can never be administered fairly. But Obama did not say he supported it for child rape. He just said states should have the option. Also, his "only heinous cases" stance is probably most popular right now, and since the death penalty is not highest on my list (because I just don't have much sympathy for the worst of the worst,) I can forgive Obama.

I'd like him to be totally against the DP and especially would like him to vote against the FISA bill, but maybe he'll move left while in office.

[FrenchieCat]

40. The court already ruled.

Obama inocculated himself.

Like he told his staff in Chicago; it is up to us to win.

He's doing his part.

It may not "feel" good, but losing is not an option.

[quaker bill]

43. While I oppose the penalty, it was a good answer

I oppose the death penalty under all and any circumstances, this one of likely several reasons why I will never be President.

There is an argument to be had and I think opposition to the death penalty and its complete abolition is the right answer. However regardless of how strong an argument I could ever make, there are people whose lives and crimes make a very strong argument for the imposition of this penalty.

One will never win this argument when the discussion is premised on murder or the raping of children. The argument needs to be about who we are as a people rather than who they are as criminals and sociopaths. You can't get to that point in the context of a specific criminal case.

[fujiyama]

48. I'm not sure whether I completely agree with Obama's stance on this ruling

but frankly, I don't give a damn about anything he does between now and November if that helps him win. And especially in something so emotionally charged like the death penalty, it's worth looking at both sides of the issue. Obama does this better than anyone.

Obama has worked towards reforms in the death penalty system and he understands the problems with it. That's the most important thing and I know he would work to make the judicial system more fair overall. I'm glad he didn't get himself into a Dukakis like situation here.

[WA98070]

49. That's a good answer but as I said before, if it was my child there would be no need for a trial...

And I'm basically against the death penalty.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

52. Obama is lying.

Whoops, did I just call him a liar?

No, I'm him something worse. I'm calling him a politician.

Obama's legislative record is very progressive on the DP.

The fact that he only gave his opinion on this case AFTER the ruling, and during the stage of the campaign where he appeals to the center only shows how savvy a politician he is.