IF STEVE COOLEY wins the Republican primary for attorney general, on almost every issue — most visibly the death penalty — he’ll run to the right of his probable Democratic opponent, the San Francisco district attorney Kamala Harris. But on three strikes, Cooley will run to Harris’s left. (She didn’t support his 2006 proposal, though she is one of the prosecutors who, on a case-by-case basis, refrains from seeking a life sentence for some nonviolent three-strikers.) It’s a reminder of how far the prosecution of Gregory Taylor, the homeless man who broke into the church, has taken Cooley from the expected comfort zone of a prosecutor.
So writes Emily Bazelon in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine. Bazelon is the talented legal writer for Slate Magazine
Few would seriously oppose the idea that those who commit repeated violent crimes should be taken off the streets. But the problem with California’s three strikes law is that it is so broadly written, it may also be used to put petty offenders in prison for life—as some prosecutors have famously done.
Now, Bazelon writes, a criminal defense attorney and a Republican DA—namely LA’s Steve Cooley—may be the key to reform.
Read it.
An inmate at Soledad prison serving life under three strikes. None of his crimes involved violence. Photo by Todd Hido for The New York Times.
Harris is a terrible D.A. and as she’s anti-death penalty for cop killers she doesn’t deserve even one vote. I’m not the biggest Cooley fan in the world but Harris is a joke. I realize many liberals could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered, it’s all lip service, but her conviction rate is so low they should actually be pissed about that.
If she wasn’t in San Francisco she’d have been run out of town by now.
I realize many liberals could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered
This is the sort of sweeping generalization that has no place in civil discussion. My wife is liberal, opposes the death penalty and had a brother who was murdered. There is an entire organization of people who oppose the death penalty who have had family members murdered.
Reasonable people can disagree about policy, but your statement is utter ad hominem.
Her position is the same as current Attorney General Jerry Brown’s, as she points out. She would be continuity not some radical change. However, it is ironic that Cooley is the one who’s more “liberal” on Three Strikes – and to make up for it with his rightwing Republican party people, he’s got to find any other high profile issues he can to grandstand on. Polanski among them. Going now after some high-profile symbol of “Hollywood decadence,” even though he’s a Pole and European, seems clearly calculated to appeal to those who skew conservative in the Republican primary. He’s probably love nothing more than a show trial.
He also supported his protege and Denniz Zine in campaigning on a platform of overturning SO40 and Chief Bratton’s approach to policing, in favor of a law exactly like what Arizona has just passed. They supported “Jamiel’s Law” and joined the rightwing radio screamers who pointed fingers at local officials when in fact, the County prison from which Jamiel Shaw, Jr.’s murderer was released from, was under the jurisdiction of County Sheriff Baca and Cooley himself.
I wonder if Harris will try to get him to come clean on his views on this, to paint him to the right of most moderates, even those who may be sympathetic to the reasons for the law but believe it’s a bad law – anyone who doesn’t want to have to “carry papers” to prove they’re not illegal or who objects to this being an unfunded mandate for local cops. Not to mention the reasons Bratton and Beck give, as do cops in Arizona – that it reverses years of gaining the cooperation of the immigrant communities to solve crime. Cooley may find it to his benefit to join the Poizner-Whitman bandwagon for the primary, but as more people realize the full implications of the Arizona law, it could seriously hurt anyone who brushes off the legal nuances.
I didn’t say “all” liberals or that comment wouldn’t have a place in a civil discussion. I’ve been on enough sites, read enough comments and talked to enough people to be comfortable with the word “many”.
We had to put our dog of almost 14 years down the other day, he had no red blood cells in his system, a tumor on his spleen and was bleeding internally. He was a great dog and loved by many outside of our family. As he died in my son’s arms with my wife and I stroking his head and neck I watched life leave him and cried like a baby.
I would never feel that way seeing a murderous piece of scum go out, not ever. Your wife and anyone else whose had a relative murdered can handle their grief in their own way, believe what they choose to believe and I’d be the last person to deny them that.
You think whatever you want Randy, I could care less, but if you’re claiming there isn’t “many liberals” that “could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered” than you not only don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re just posting to the crowd that thinks like you and not debating what I said.
My statement was valid.
Another good reason not to support Brown, same postion as Harris. Your dislike of Cooley is noted SBL but some of your comments are silly. Cooley’s actions regarding Polanski’s current situation is to appease the “rightwing Republican party people”? Does that mean the liberals don’t care about child rapists that flee the country? Is it just “lip service” when they act as if they do?
Harris’s office has a pathetic conviction rate but to “many” liberals that just doesn’t seem to matter. You would apparently be one SBL since you avoided that part of my post. Look at the murder conviction rate alone and than tell me what a bang up job she’s doing.
We need the Arizona law here, no doubt about that.
You think whatever you want Randy, I could care less, but if you’re claiming there isn’t “many liberals” that “could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered” than you not only don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re just posting to the crowd that thinks like you and not debating what I said.
You’re making a generalization that is unsupportable with a vague term (many). What defines many? Five? Ten? Two? The underlying effect is to smear a group with whom you disagree. That’s not an intellectually honest debate and it’s not something you would see me use.
Please spare me the condescension by claiming that I don’t know what I’m talking about. I know the difference between rhetoric and fact. You’ve displayed only the former with that statement.
George Orwell said it best:
NB I have responded to you without insult; I trust you’ll respond in kind.
Sure Fire, there you go again as always, making sweeping wacky generalizations like that “liberals don’t care about child rapists that flee the country,” overlooking the timing of this just as Cooley’s running for office and having to look “tough on crime” to appease Eastman and others getting him over Three Strikes; coming several decades after the facts now when he’s an old man and stably married and a father, a “productive citizen” in every sense who is so far from being a danger on the streets of LA or anywhere it’s laughable. While due to budgetary constraints and it not being a glamorous issue until Human Rights Watch shamed the BOS into paying attention (including in a je’accuse piece in HuffPo), Baca and Cooley sat on way more DNA backlogged kits than did the LAPD – but the media got on the LAPD’s case and ignored the wealthier ocunty.
Based on your “logic” I can point out that it’s conservatives like yourself who “don’t care about illegal immigrants who murder American teenagers,” since it’s Cooley and Baca who released Espinoza from THEIR custody based solely on his say-so, despite his previous rap sheet, after just 4 months in prison, without doing an immigration check, only to have him commit murder the very next day. THEN he was hypocritical enough to implicitly support his protege Trutanich campaign ON the very issue, knowing full well that doing so was just political grandstanding.
I can just imagine what you’d say about that if Harris did it.
Aside from the discussion (which I am enjoying following), SureFire I’m very, very sorry about your dog. And I so understand.
I know a similar situation is looming for me with my wonderful, gentle, soulful, intelligent wolf-dog in the not terribly distant future and I dread it more than words can express.
How completely appropriate that good dogs should occupy the common ground between Conservatives and Liberals.
SBL/ Sure Fire, there you go again as always, making sweeping wacky generalizations like that “liberals don’t care about child rapists that flee the country”,…I posed that as a question SBL I didn’t say they felt that way so spare me the indignation. The rest of your response plays to that silliness and neither Baca or Cooley are individually responsible for who does or doesn’t get released from county.
If you want to be truthful about who might be best suited for the AG job SBL, go to the record Harris has compiled as the D.A. in San Francisco as compared to Cooley’s here and debate me with only that as a basis. We’ll stay away from the side issues that really don’t matter (even though with another accusation of child rape being tossed at Polanski and you deciding to make light of his crimes and prop him up as some type of modern day man of the year).
Understand though that I am not, as I said, a big Cooley supporter but more anti-Harris.
You’re right Randy, “many” is a vague term, but I think I can back up my words. I have to go now but will post back to you later tonight or early tomorrow. SBL kind of makes my point about liberal thought with her running to the defense of a convicted pedophile. There isn’t a conservative I know that thinks Polanski paid for what he did many years ago, SBL does though and she’s one from your camp.
More gratuitous garbage from SF by way of “argument.” That am “making light of his crimes and prop him up as some type of modern man of the year.” That unlike EVERY conservative who I “think Polanski paid for what he did many years ago…and she is one from your – Randy Paul’s – camp.” I never said or implied any of that in pointing out Cooley’s cynical timing and lack of interest in testing DNA kits of those who ARE on our streets now: it’s about displaced priorities, grandstanding for personal political gain, his and his protege’s, when he knows HE is responsible for what he’s blaming his opponents for, goes to lack of character.
(Nor am I in Randy Paul’s “camp,” whatever that is, unless it’s the “camp” which points out logical absurdities of conservatives like YOU who continually attribute to me and anyone who’s NOT a conservative, things we do not say or believe. In fact, I’ve often disagreed with progressives on many issues — I just happen to think that the brand of conservatives we have locally in Zine, Trutanich, Cooley are a hypocritical bunch who have behaved cynically to get elected and do so in part, by doing what YOU do, attributing to opponents views they don’t hold and blaming them for things that are figments of their imagination OR as in the case of Shaw’s killer Espinoza, what THEY are responsible for.)
But YOU brush that off as saying he and Baca are “not personally responsible for who does or doesn’t get released from county.” REALLY? They’re not responsible for their staffs, which make those decisions? BUT it was fine for them to blame a local city councilman and mayor and police chief of the CITY of L A as being personally responsible?
If i were to say that “many cops are racist”, you would excoriate me and you would be right to do so. It’s a generalization.
What really offended me was this part of your comment was that statement that “many liberals don’t care if anyone gets murdered.” Do you honestly believe that there are liberals who don’t care if anyone gets murdered? Based on what? Opposition to the death penalty??
Elie Wiesel opposes the death penalty and most of his family was murdered in the Holocaust. Coretta Scott King’s husband and mother-in-law were murdered and she opposes the death penalty. Bud Welch, whose daughter was murdered by Timothy McVeigh opposes the death penalty.
All of us who oppose the death penalty do so for reasons that we consider important and meaningful to us. I have no doubt that those who support the death penalty do so for reasons that are important and meaningful to them.
How about your side affording us the same courtesy>
Apologies for the unclosed tag.
I wouldn’t scream about your comment about many cops being racists Randy, it’s absurd at it’s root. My comment is different, I didn’t attach a percentage to my claim that “many liberals don’t care if anyone gets murdererd” because I don’t know it. I do know this though, there are many. It’s the same type of person who inhabits the entertainment industry and doesn’t care how many young girls Polanski had his way with or that Jack Abbott murdered, again, after being released from the joint. Did you think none existed, be real now?
The vast majority of prison support groups, anti-cop groups, and anti-death penalty groups are filled with liberals. These people are not only anti-death penalty but anti mandatory sentencing laws, gang injunctions and many other tools used by law enforcement to combat crime. When you come out against just about all the efforts of law enforcement to combat crime than you really don’t care about the victims or crime and if you claim you do it’s “Lip Service”.
I saw a 2007 poll which showed that there were 54% of Democrats that supported the death penalty as compared to 82% of Republicans. That would mean “many” more conservative types support it compared to liberal types. From my own experiece with debating liberals on the issue it has become obvious to me that if it doesn’t come into their life on a personal type basis (a murder), it just doesn’t matter to them.
Conservatives, on the other hand, by and large feel much more offended by these crimes than liberals do. I was able to have a chat with Mike Farrell one time, regarding the Mumia Abul Jamal murder case ( I called into a show he was on). For years Farrell has bitched about Jamal’s trial and conviction. When I asked him the name of the officer Jamal murdered (Daniel Faulkner) he didn’t know it or really anything at all about the trial. He didn’t care, all he knew was he was anti-death penalty. “Lip Service”, Randy by a supposed brilliant anti-death penalty mainstay.
I’m not claiming some conservatives don’t think that way, but they seem to me to be harder to find. The main focus for the groups I spoke of is always on the bad guy, never on the victim and little is ever said by these groups about the victims of violent crime. Faith based groups that are anti-death penalty are understandable, even those active in tending to the incarcerated. I understand where they are coming from and as for the relatives of murder victims, I can’t say I truly understand the feelings they have (unless again faith based) but I won’t put them down for them, I really have no standing on that.
That being said there are still “many” liberals who could care less about the crime, victim or cost to society. I also believe many not only don’t care about the murdered, they don’t want to hear about it at all. I don’t think you’re one of them but to me it’s a given there’s lots of them out there.
Again you refuse to post about Harris’s record as a D.A. SBL, why is that?
Everything you ever wanted to know about Harris. It looks to me like she’s liar an idiot or both. There is no way she should be AG of this state.
http://www.kamalafailedoncrime.com/faq
Interesting SF that your link is paid for by Kelly for AG, the rich dude whose got $10 million available for his own campaign. So he’s doing Cooley’s dirty work for him by this hit site on Harris, something Cooley doesn’t have to pay for himself. Lucky him. To consider any of it factual is absurd: interesting, though, that a main allegation against her there is she “did nothing to stop” the cocaine-skimming at the S F meth lab – because OF COURSE she should have been personally responsible, right, even though Cooley and Baca are not only NOT responsible according to you for their own staff’s ongoing and vital procedures for processing inmates, but they also did nothing wrong in THEN blaming their mistake on the local city ocuncilman who just happened to be running against his protege, who along with Zine was screaming to overturn SO40 in favor of an Arizona type law. (Kinda silent on the issue now, aren’t they? I’m not the biggest fan of Harris by the way but she seems to be consistent at least, and very articulate, unlike Steve Cooley – or Trutanich or Zine. They all even look the same, in that overweight, pasty older-white guy way, which combined with their manner of speech helps them play to the Joe Six-pack crowd and feign simplicity and contempt for “elitism” while in fact, they’re clearly as ambitious, crafty and obsessed with more and more power and wealth as they come.
At least as of now, I’ve seen no evidence that Harris is also a two-faced, hypocritical liar who knowingly falsely maligns opponents, and she’s an impressive speaker. (The only thing that does concern me from that silly site is the allegation that S F’s crime rate went up significantly under her watch – if so why, did S F cut its police force, did the cops have low morale before the current chief took over, or what? But relevant to HER job is, what was her conviction rate?)
Again, I point out that opposition to the death penalty does not equal not finding murder a horrific crime.
I wouldn’t scream about your comment about many cops being racists Randy, it’s absurd at it’s root.
As is yours. There’s a term for what you’re doing: nutpicking.
SBL/ “To consider any of it factual is absurd”, ha ha you don’t want the truth in your little libby world SBL. The facts comes from other sources than Kelly, you’re so far left though that the truth is secondary to your beliefs.
Who cares where the link goes if the facts are accurate? Google Harris’s record and go to the SF Weekly article and check that out, I wouldn’t want to lead you on.
Harris lied when she said not one murder that’s been presented “so far” to her office was worthy of going after the death penalty. She was as dishonest as a person can be with that statement and on the first link I gave you she says exactly that, go to the video or is that expecting too much? After that I’ll show you some SF murders that are death penalty cases that any other DA in the state would go for the death penalty on.
I could go on and on about what a repugnant leftist failure of a DA she is but you’d just scream about Cooley because that’s all you can do. By the way you show what a true bigot you are with your comments about the “appearances” of Zine, Cooley and Trutanich. Typical bigot drivel, much like what we see with the statements of those who support SO40 and are against the Arizona law. Just play the race card when the facts don’t support your nonsense, that’ll work. I don’t play that, Harris is as hot a D.A. can be, but it’s nota “looks game” to me like it obviously is to you.
“Many” nuts to pick from Randy, just like I said. I already explained myself in detail, I don’t need to do anything more to make my point.
You haven’t made a point; you’ve merely bloviated on a precious few examples.
We grown-ups call it confirmation bias.
It is intellectually dishonest nonsense for someone to claim that opposition to the death penalty means one doesn’t care about people getting murdered
Just for the record, I could easily do the same: picking a few examples to make sweeping generalizations about the attitudes of those with whom I strongly disagree. But it’s not the way I operate. Instead, I would prefer to engage with some cogent discussions.
For example, given that justice is imperfect and that once the death penalty is implemented it cannot be reversed, what is an acceptable number for you of innocent people to be executed?
Would you support the death penalty for rape? If so, why? Do you feel that if you did, would there be any unintended consequences for the death penalty being applied to convicted rapists who did not murder?
I really don’t understand why you feel the need to constantly vilify those whose views you oppose. I have a number of conservative friends even here in New York. One of my bosses with whom I am close is very conservative, a big fan of Sarah Palin and still believes George W. Bush was a good president. We discuss politics often without rancor and respect the fact that each of us has strongly held views.
Your words Randy/ You haven’t made a point; you’ve merely bloviated on a precious few examples.
We grown-ups call it confirmation bias.
It is intellectually dishonest nonsense for someone to claim that opposition to the death penalty means one doesn’t care about people getting murdered
——————
So let me get this straight. You believe that I vilify people and yet you post weak ass crap like “We grown ups call it confrontation bias” because you don’t agree with my manner of posting? No vilification there huh Randy?
In fact, you even resort to lying about what I’ve said (typical of arrogant leftists like yourself when attempting to make someone look bad, doesn’t fly though) to make your point. Or maybe you could point out where I ever claimed …”…that opposition to the death penalty means one doesn’t care about people getting murdered”.
I in fact mentioned I understood how a person could be against it when that opposition is faith based didn’t I? I also showed where people, usually liberal people like yourself were also against some tools used by law enforcement to combat crime, lengthy prison terms and rarely put the victims first. Maybe you should look at post #14.
When you resort to b.s. claims that live only in your imagination it’s not hard to show them to be “intellectually dishonest nonsense”.
Now that I’ve cleared that up I’ll answer your questions.
1) There is no acceptable number, it happens, safeguards need to be in place to insure it’s as rare as can be but it will happen. Would I ever want to see an innocent person executed, of course not, but the system isn’t perfect. You think a judge needs 25 years or so to actually put someone to death or are you smart enough to recognize the system has been taken over by people who care nothing about the rule of law and whose only purpose is to subvert it?
How many lies are you willing to let a defense attorney bring forth to attempt to save a “guilty” suspect who murdered a cop in cold blood to avoid the death penalty? Does that type of a defense get your approval? I expect 100% honesty from victims, witnesses, cops and D.A.’s.
2)I’m against the death penalty in rape cases.
Would you be for it in child rape cases? Pedophiles, true pedophiles don’t get fixed Randy, the most violent of them should be given what type of penalty?
We grown ups call it confrontation bias” because you don’t agree with my manner of posting?
No, because you use an unsourced poll that you claim to have seen in 2007 that “that there were 54% of Democrats that supported the death penalty as compared to 82% of Republicans. That would mean ‘many’ more conservative types support it compared to liberal types.”
Those are your words. If you believe that the above comment of yours does not mean that you believe that those who oppose the death penalty do not care about murders, then you are being coy at best and IMHO intellectually dishonest.
I opposed the death penalty before I became a Roman Catholic. What convinced me was the case of Timothy Evans.
What further strengthened my resolve against it was the following experience my mother had:
She was the foreperson in a retrial granted on appeal for a rape case in Madison County, Alabama. The accused was a prisoner on a work furlough program who happened to be in the same general area as the victim when she was raped. The victim insisted that she was a virgin prior to the rape and had contracted gonorrhea. That fact was withheld from the defense by the prosecution and was critical as the accused did not have gonorrhea. They acquitted after about one hour of deliberations. My mom’s first reaction when she looked at the victim was to say to herself that the poor woman now realizes that the man who did this to her is still out there. So while defense lawyers may lie, prosecutors also commit misconduct and witnesses lie. When the punishment is death, there’s no reversing the outcome.
You know what they did for Timothy Evans? They pardoned him posthumously and reburied him in consecrated ground.
Another thing that strengthened my opposition was the case of Cameron Willingham, which I won’t link to, but it’s recently in the news and you can google it.
As I indicated before, I have a brother-in-law who I will never meet because he was murdered. One of my wife’s cousins who was one of our witnesses at our wedding ws murdered. We both still oppose the death penalty. I remind you that I linked to an entire organization of murder victims families who oppose the death penalty.
I would most certainly be against the death penalty for child rape and if you give it some more thought you can understand why people who support the death penalty should be opposed to the death penalty for child rape. If a child rapist knows that he will face the same fate for rape as he will for murder, then you can virtually guarantee the child will be murdered. If you don’t believe that, give some thought to the Onion Field case. Gregory Powell thought that he would be executed for kidnapping Ian Campbell and Karl Hettinger, so he killed Campbell and attempted to kill Hettinger.
I favor life without parole for child rapists.
“Harris is as hot a DA can be, but it’s not a looks game.” NO but you’re the one who’s bringing up her looking “hot” as an implied negative, as though that’s all she’s got, when she’s far more articulate than the whole bunch of Republican club older, overweight white guys who rep that party here in LA, from Knabe and Antonovich to especially, since we’re talking law enforcement, Trutanich-Zine, but mostly her opponent, Cooley. Your ranting about my “bigoted drivel” is more lack of self-awareness, since what I pointed out was how they have used it consciously to try to appeal to the Joe Six Packs, and have attacked their opponent(s) who are more well-educated, articulate despite having a solid career in public service, as “elitist” and out of touch with “the people.” (That whole “people’s lawyer” farce with Trutanich, for example.) Actually, it’s your “bigoted drivel” which implies that a woman espcially one who’s “hot” is just playing a “look’s game.” Nonsense.
BTW, a recent profile on Cooley in the Daily News, a one-sided glorification of him as “cool” and so on, (4/4) nonetheless acknowledged the obvious: “By going after fugitive film director Roman Polanski, medical marijuana dispensaries and Michael Jackson’s doctor in the past year, Cooley’s stepped into a wider spotlight. The glare has brought some criticism, but also the attention needed for his run for state attorney general.” The article however, emphasizes that Cooley’s tended so far go give his deputy DA’s the more high-profile cases.
Then, another example of HIS looks being singled out as some sort of reflection of character as an authority figure: a man “whose stately profile bears a slight resemblance to the late Alfred Hitchcock…” “Stately” is hardly a casual choice of words, and is arguably very “bigoted” as a way to infer the qualities associated with that type of “stately” appearance, transferred to his work. Versus what an attractive, much smarter, younger and more physically fit woman of color brings. (I noticed a number of such biases in the LA Times’ exposes on him, not coincidentally, he’s being heavily promoted by the Times’ editorial Board, including Jim Newton, who slammed Polanski in a recent editorial for suggesting that the timing of going after him just might have to do with a run for AG.)
This peon to Cooley from the Daily News is especially curious in that their previous piece on him just a month earlier (3/3, Troy Anderson), was titled “Judge Orders Injunction Against Cooley: DA Must Stop Discriminating and Retaliating, based on union membership…”
“U. S. District Court Judge Otis D. Wright II wrote the allegations made by the prosecutors union (ADDA) in a lawsuit are ‘largely undisputed.’ The ADDA have established a course of explicit retaliation by (Cooley’s office) that is both striking and rampant.”
This is HUGE but something we did NOT see in the LA Times, nor can we expect to. Not only is it extraordinary that the fledgling union of DA’s in his own office sued him and did so, so convincingly, but it puts a very different spin also on his selecting certain favored ADA’s to get the high-profile, plum cases. WHILE cleverly managing to make it look that he’s done it all out of modesty.
http://pewforum.org/Death-Penalty/An-Enduring-Majority-Americans-Continue-to-Support-the-Death-Penalty.aspx
First off there’s my numbers source. No matter which way you spin your “we grown ups” comment it was weak and arrogant. It was what I see from the left constantly, the idea that you feel you are superior to those on the right. It is monumental b.s and nothing more. It’s a disply of the same type of thinking that now sits in the White House and runs our Congress.
I’m not being “coy” about anything and stand by my original statement. You can take it and run with it in whatever direction you want to take it and nothing will change my meaning. I said, “I realize many liberals could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered, it’s all lip service”, and answered in detail what I meant. What you think I meant means zero Randy, they were my words.
One case won’t change my mind Randy, and I read all types of articles on Willingham, much of it here. I’m not convinced he’s innocent, you believe what you want. I also think it’s pretty naive to believe every child rapist would be thinking of The Onion Field when engaged in his crime.
Think what you want, I’m done with this thread.
http://www.middletownpress.com/articles/2010/03/30/news/doc4bb1641e1641d073060723.txt
http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html
http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2010/02/oldest-us-death-row-inmate-dead-at-94-in-arizona.html
You can go to every state, Randy, and the fed site and read the true facts of what types of crimes and behavior put people on death row. The second link shows people who did time for murder and were let loose only to murder again. I think the first one is a link to an attack by a death row prisoner on a correctional officer. There’s no justification for anyone sitting on death row for more than 5 years, it’s crazy how long appeals go on for.
I don’t know why the site here didn’t post my response to SBL. In a nutshell SBL, you seem to me to be borderline psychotic with your hate of Cooley. It drips from your posts like blood from Dracula’s fangs. You need a drink before posting.
I commented about Harris’s looks, which were only an implied negative to you (a person who lives at the far left end of the universe) only in response to your bigoted remarks about all those “overweight white guys” you can’t stand. I never said she wasn’t smart, I said she was a liar, which the one video I linked to proved and worthless as a D.A.
Lily Burk and so many others would still be alive but for Steve Cooley’s disgraceful failure to follow the three strikes law. Their blood is on his hands.
I’m not a big Cooley fan but stste parole could have put Samuel back in the joint instead of a program. That wasn’t Cooley’s fault so I can’t agree Burk’s blood is on his hands.
I repeat, you have provided zero factual evidence that anyone who opposes capital punishment “could care less about cops or anyone else getting murdered.”
Zero.
One case won’t change my mind Randy
I don’t believe one hundred would.
I also think it’s pretty naive to believe every child rapist would be thinking of The Onion Field when engaged in his crime.
I didn’t say they would, I merely used that as an example to bolster my argument.
In a nutshell SBL, you seem to me to be borderline psychotic with your hate of Cooley. It drips from your posts like blood from Dracula’s fangs. You need a drink before posting.
Pure ad hominem.
Not my problem you run from the obvious about SBL’s posts Randy, she’s only gone after Cooley about a million times, what would you call it?
That she’s now brought looks and race into the picture is OK with you?
what would you call it?
I’d leave the ad hominem elements out of it, but based on the general tone of your responses to people you disagree and your ad nauseam vilification of those who don’t share your views, with respect, I just don’t think it’s in your DNA.
She hasn’t called you borderline psychotic, nor has she likened you to a vampire and suggested to you that you need to self-medicate with alcohol. Her comments about Cooley are not as vicious as yours about Harris and the mention of his looks was in quoting a magazine profile about him.
SureFire, I missed your personal attacks on SBL. That’s nowhere in the realm of okay here.
Dial it back or I start deleting.
FACT CHECK ALERT: Winny, the possible third strike for Lilly Burk’s killer, Charlie Samuel, was in 1997 in San Bernardino County not LA. Samuel tried, unsuccessfully, to steal a bottle of liquor from a Food 4 Less store in Barstow. It may or may not have been a third strike, depending upon how the DA charged it. His previous two strikes were for a single crime in 1987, but they were misclassified in the paperwork as one strike.
SF’s right. It is parole who missed the chance to lock Samuel up on a parole violation. He had a more violent and volatile record than initially meets the eye and should have been more high control than he was. But he wasn’t a gang member, so I guess they didn’t pay attention.
Randy, I understand, long as someone is a “liberal bigot” you’re not bothered, cool.
Celeste, my description of SBL’s attacks on Cooley can be backed up by looking at her postings about him here and under her prior posting name. It’s obvious she’s fixated on trashing him every chance she gets, what’s wrong with talking about that?
The tone here has been dialed downed but Randy is only thin skinned when a conservative uses terms he doesn’t like, than he cries about it. ( By the way, I never used the term “self medicate”, that’s Randy’s sensitivity getting in the way again)
Saying someone is fixated on an issue is one thing. Saying that someone is, “borderline psychotic with your hate of Cooley. It drips from your posts like blood from Dracula’s fangs. You need a drink before posting…” is quite another. The latter is a personal attack.
Obviously. I don’t need to tell you that.
I take issue when someone comes at you like that as well.
Listen, it doesn’t matter whose transgressions I’m flagging at the moment. Everyone needs to quit it. This isn’t complicated.
Have a good night.
Randy, I understand, long as someone is a “liberal bigot” you’re not bothered, cool.
Again, spare me the condescension and I will do my best to afford you the same courtesy. Deal?
“I could go on and on (and you DO) about what a repugnant, leftist failure of a DA she is,” SF says about Harris in #19, but of course, and in another post call her “a liar…and worthless as a DA.” And more, with “proof” a nasty hit site put up by an opponent. Which is “everything you need to know about Harris.”
And you regularly attack me and attribute to me attitudes I don’t hold because you insist I’m on “the far left of the universe,” which to you includes anyone not on the far right. For holding views like – I guess, since you can’t refute any of them – that when a Superior Court judge (a male with a very waspy name, not some one you can write off as “playing ethnic politics” or “the looks game”) slaps an injunction on Cooley in such strikingly harsh terms for “retaliation and discrimination” that HE calls “striking, explicit and rampant” directed against Deputy DA’s solely for the crime of organizing a union to protect themselves from precisely such behavior, while giving plum cases to those who DO play along, it speaks to the core of character. (As for choosing this time to go after high-profile people like Jackson’s doctor and Polanski, and the medical marijuana dispensaries – whose supporters he and Trutanich milked for money during the latter’s campaign and actively cultivated to get out their vote, posed for photos with etc. – to elevate his own campaign profile, that’s something that is simply obvious to anyone, even the Daily News writer I quote who otherwise chooses to ignore all criticism of him, and doesn’t even reference his own paper’s scathing report regarding the Deputy DA’s.)
The only one who mounts nothing but personal ad hominum attacks against me AND Randy Paul as “liberal bigots” is YOU; if anyone can be said to have “hate dripping from your posts like blood from Dracula’s fangs (a metaphor only YOU could think up),” directed against ANY “liberal bigot” commenter here – because to you, the two words are synonymous – AND to Democrats in general, it is YOU. It’s so obvious I don’t even acknowledge it, letting you bury yourself.
I’m big into horror movies, spent much of last weekend at the Fangoria Convention, horror type descriptions flow from me because I also review horror movies on line. It seemed a fit.
There are people in the middle of the universe, you’re just not one of them, I’m way closer than you are. Harris lied in the video of her claiming not one murder case sent to her office fit the standards of going after the death penalty. She lied and she knows it as dome anyone with an ounce of integrity. There have been many presented to her but Harris is putting her own well known and stated ideology before the law.
Spin that any way you want to, claim that because it comes from an opponenets website it’s false, but those are the facts and not once have you even attempted to show otherwise.
I’ve said before I’m not some big Cooley supporter yet you keep coming back using terms that speak to ethnicity and appearance, which to me doesn’t matter. If Cooley screwed up he’ll be dealt with, you can believe anything you want about the guy and why he went after certain people or anything else. To dispute the facts bout Harris though without providing some others to show I’m wrong is weak.