Journal pudge's Journal: Child Rape Politics 15
The Washington state Republicans did a phone ad campaign in the 44th District targetting the two incumbent Democrats for their lack of support for tough child rapist penalties.
I think it is a great ad. It sticks to the facts: a child rapist is moving into their community, and the Democrats oppose keeping people like him behind bars for life. People are complaining because people are, in the words of John Lovick, one of the Democrats, "unnecessarily fearful." No, they are not. They are rightfully, justifiably, necessarily fearful. "Scaremongering" is only a reasonable claim if there is not an actual, material, imminent reason to be afraid.
The other Democrat, Hans Dunshee -- always good for a soundbite -- said, "It's that threat (of sex offendeers) that is more important than the politics of it." Right. And this ad lets people know that they refuse to take the threat seriously enough.
Dunshee caps it off with an accusation that the Republican candidates, Mike Hope and Robert Legg, of lying when they said they had nothing to do with it. I know both of them. Saw them tonight, actually, at a meeting of the Evergreen Republican Women, where one of my state reps, Dan Kristiansen, was speaking (I am in the 39th District, which is next door to the 44th).
I can't see either of them lying about this, especially Robert, who's one of the nicest and most honest people I know. He's a pastor and has served in the Air Force for almost 30 years, currently serving in the office of the Inspector General. If he says he didn't know about it, as far as I and the people who know him are concerned, he didn't know about it.
Not that I would care if they did know about it. It's a great ad. I don't care about negative ads when there's something to be justifiably, angrily, negative about. I hate manufactured rage over relatively unimportant issues, but this is an issue most voters have some legitimate outrage about: we are seeing a nearly constant release of violent rapists from prison, and little is being done about it. Frankly, I do not think it is possible to discuss this issue, and what the Democrats did (and didn't do) about it, and not be extremely negative.
Of course, Dunshee can't be taken too seriously; he is the guy who said that "Whatever we do on sex offenders, the Republicans will want to do more.
The bottom line is that if people were not so upset, the Democrats wouldn't care; and people are only so upset because there is something to be so upset about. In order for their complaints to be taken seriously, they are going to have to convince the people that a. there is nothing to be concerned about or b. the Democrats are doing a good job at keeping child rapists behind bars. As neither is true, they won't have much luck.
Something's Missing (Score:1)
While I could just become an overly-emotional ranter and fly off the handle over a two decade old heinous crime, I'd be interested in seeing the information that justifies jailing people like him for life.
Henderson may or may not still be a creep, but I'm not going to stand behind Draconian laws - for any crime - until they're justified by data.
After all, if all indications are that after twenty years in the hole, convicted sex offenders rarely or never repeat their crimes, I fail to see why he s
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
While I could just become an overly-emotional ranter and fly off the handle over a two decade old heinous crime, I'd be interested in seeing the information that justifies jailing people like him for life.
After all, if all indications are that after twenty years in the hole, convicted sex offenders rarely or never repeat their crimes, I fail to see why he should go to jail for longer than twenty years, unless you believe that the purpose of the justice system is retribution, in which case wr
Re:Something's Missing (Score:1)
Okay, if Google decides to take a position on the matter I'll consider the fact that Google retains a great wealth of knowledge on the matter. However, Mr. Pudge didn't provide any of that, even though he clearly took a position. I was merely highlighting that, based on what he provided, he really d
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
I don't know about where you live, but around here, the news is filled with reports of repeat offenders. It's not "inside" knowledge that they are a high risk to reoffend.
In fact, part of the problem is that, for example, I didn't even really feel any need to go lo
What missing? Your ignorance? (Score:2)
As indicated in the Sacramento Bee newspaper (http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/projects/preda tors/story/14187610p-15014677c.html [sacbee.com]), these offenders signed up for treatments, then relented, thus the state has no recourse but to let them go (as soon as 13 days after being assigned for treatment) with no further actions required on the state's part.
With this new loophole now available, nearly 1/4 of offenders learned of this and sta
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
The people who get the message are mostly well aware of the facts already.
While I could just become an overly-emotional ranter and fly off the handle over a two decade old heinous crime, I'd be interested in seeing the information that justifies jailing people like him for life.
He has been convicted for not one crime, but four separate counts of rape in the first degree, and is suspected of additional ones. There's no evidence he can be, or has been, rehabilitated. In 2004, he was charged with
Re:Something's Missing (Score:1)
Followed by:
He has been convicted for not one crime, but four separate counts of rape in the first degree, and is suspected of additional ones. There's no evidence he can be, or has been, rehabilitated. In 2004, he was charged with first-degree attempted kidnapping, but the prosecutor's office screwed up and so the charges were dropped.
I was unaware of any of that, it wasn't mentioned by you previously, and it was not included in the
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
So? You don't live here.
These are important facts that give your position more weight.
Facts that everyone around here already knows.
Unless you were simply "preaching to the choir", as it were, there's little reason not to mention it
No, there is little reason TO mention it, because everyone already knoews.
Indeed, to the contrary, the lack of any particulars makes it look more like you're just whining
Re:Something's Missing (Score:1)
Terribly sorry... I guess that was my mistake. Somehow.
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
I was not. But I assumed that people reading it would understand that this is all happening in a local context, and take that into consideration. And obviously I was wrong to assume they WOULD, but I am not wrong in believing they SHOULD.
Re:Something's Missing (Score:1)
Or, maybe my mistake was in assuming that there's any greater purpose here than just an assertion of bel
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
Re:Something's Missing (Score:2)
Indeed, to the contrary, the lack of any particulars makes it look more like you're just whining about "those durn democrats"
And, of course, the lack of any effort on your part to look around and see what the facts are makes it look like you're just whining.
irrationality (Score:1)
What we have hear is a politician tapping into people's irrational fears in an effort to get elected. There is no attempt to provide a rational and reasoned view of the different public policies, there is only the finger pointing and scare mongering to generate fear, hate, and votes.
Pretty much everyone around here has seen the mother of the child who he attempted to kidnap on the local news, positively identifying him -- she saw it happen -- and looking as incredulous and befuddled that he is not in pr
Re:irrationality (Score:2)
First, no one running for election had anything to do with this ad. This was made perfectly clear in the article and in my post, so unless you have additional information, you're lying: stop it. You can say you think that is what he is doing, but to assert it as fact, without additional information, is lying, and it will not be tolerated.
Second, there is nothing remotely irrational about these fears. To s