Yeah. I’m sure this was to provide context, but WTF does ones political persuasion have to do with one’s feelings about crimes such as this.
Are we ever, I mean ever, going to see an article such as this:
Yeah, I’m sure that’s exactly what we* think :rolleyes:
Wellll… Coeur d’Alene was home to the Aryan Nations for, what, 20 years?
Quite a lot IMHO, especially among the more extreme. Conservatives tend to be soft on rape ( cause the bitch shouldn’t have dressed like a slut, you know ), wife beating and child abuse ( the Bible says it’s OK ! ), crime by the rich ( God must love him, or he wouldn’t be rich ), crimes committed in the name of Christianity, the murder of doctors who perform abortions, the assault and murder of gays, and so on. Liberals ( who don’t matter as much, being rare ) tend to be soft on . . . well, actually I’m not sure, having seen so few. I’m sure they are soft on something.
It’s very unfortunate that you have chosen to post something that is even partially true, because it puts me in the uncomfortable position of at least partially affirming something you’ve said. However… you’re partially right here.
It’s not all rape that, in my experience, conservatives tend to be “soft” on. But there is a category of rape that did fit your description, and in my old line of work we called it the “Bad Victim” problem.
Conservatives would never have trouble coming down hard on the rapist when his victim was a Good Victim. By that I mean she didn’t know her assailant; she was in a good occupation, like homemaker, teacher, or minister’s wife; she fought enough to receive injuries; and she acted appropriately traumatized on the stand.
Bad Victims, in contrast, knew their attackers, perhaps even consented to accompany them to a bedroom or playground or car’s backseat before things got out of hand. Bad Victims had jobs like Hooters waitress, exotic dancer, or something along those lines. Bad Victims submitted without any struggle or injury to show the jury. Conservatives have a much tougher time finding rapists guilty when the victim is Bad in some way.
It’s possible that what the author was going for was that wanting to kill him, i.e. the death penalty, is often associated with conservative views. But yeah, it was very poorly worded, and as written implies non-conservatives wouldn’t be against the guy.
The classic case is found in the town in which all the popular kids got together to rape a mentally challenged girl with foriegn objects for kicks. This place was where I grew up, conservative as hell, the perfect WASP community. Of course the town rallied around the boys and basically hounded the girl’s family out of town.
Of course, liberals are soft on sexual harrasment and murderous dictators, at least when it’s a Democratic President or might involve military force. It all works out.
I am failing to see the relevance of this, in this situation.
You are usually very careful with your language. So, as I note the lack of qualifiers as you describe this POV shared by conservatives, I infer that you believe it is quite widespread. Perhaps an absolute majority or even more of conservatives, do you think?
I also sense this is not a set of assumptions you share with your fellow conservatives. Would you care to comment on that?
Bricker -what you describe is sickening, amoral and disgusting. I do not say (and do not believe) that you hold these views.
blech.
Look Ludovic I think you’re missing the point of your cite and quote. The bumper stickers say it all. Its been my impression that American conservatives generally believe in the value of the death penalty whereas liberals are opposed to it. Not true? I actually find the desire to adorn such a sticker, well, sickening. You shouldn’t feel slighted as a liberal. You may be pissed off as a conservative.
FREE HAT! FREE HAT! FREE HAT!
Of course it is not his view. Not to jump in and speak for Bricker but anyone who would feel this is his opinion has not read his presentations on this board.
Exactly. Even by this one post, there is nothing Bricker says that indicates that he approves of this mindset…he is obviously only stating reality as he has observed it.
He’s not even pro-death penalty.
On the other hand, there is a tendency among some liberals to believe in someone’s innocence for no other reason than that they have been sentenced to death.
Regards,
Shodan
Name one. Just one.
Name a liberal who believes this or name a convicted felon who is believed innocent?
I can’t name either.
Mumia. The guilt of that guy was never reasonably questionable. Even my anti-death penalty father, who is resoundingly left wing as they come, even said “Anyone who examines the court record can only conclude that the guy got a fair trial and is guilty as hell.” Nonetheless, plenty of leftys rallied to his cause. As a lefty myself, it put my teeth on edge - defense of Mumia made those of us on the left look like, well, like we would irrationally defend anyone who got the death sentence and proclaim then innocent when they clearly were not. It was one of those things that made me ashamed to call myself a liberal.
That was self defense. Hat was attacked.
This is the kind of phenomenon that defies any sort of rigorous attempt to quantify it. It’s more widespread in certain geographical areas than others, for example, notwithstanding the fact that those same two areas may both be strongly conservative when you look at a voting map. So I hesitate to jump on board and talk about “most” or “many” or any such qualifier.
I will say, however, that I didn’t see it in liberals, ever.
No, I don’t. It didn’t stop me from cynically exploiting it when it came to picking juries, but you’re right that it’s not something I share.
Bricker can speak for himself, of course, but in the past I believe he has spoken of this double standard specifically in the context of his experience with juries.
Posted without previewing. I see my observation was unecessary.