Like The Death Penalty? Vote Republican

Well....The Democrats have definitely locked up the child rapist vote! Good for them!

[edit on 27-6-2008 by lost in the midwest]

The issues with gun control are much deeper than 28,000 deaths a year. Once the government disarms its citizens (which it eventually will) we are helpless. As the saying goes- a democracy only works when the government is scared of the people. So why you liberals sit there and say 'guns cause 28,000 deaths a year, this is a travesty'. Well, I'll let you in on a little secret- the real travesty will happen when the government disarms the populace.

I think the Death Penalty is a very valid form of punishment. It offers a semi-deterrent to criminals while also allowing those who would normally sit on death row for decades to be punished more quickly and thus relieve the financial burden placed upon the citizens of this country.

But, that doesn't mean I'm going to vote democrat or republican.

How about I choose who I think is the best candidate and I'll vote for that person, regardless how inmates are punished. I think this sounds much more logical than voting Republican because I like the death penalty.

reply to post by tyranny22

I think the Death Penalty is a very valid form of punishment. It offers a semi-deterrent to criminals while also allowing those who would normally sit on death row for decades to be punished more quickly and thus relieve the financial burden placed upon the citizens of this country.

I’m sure I could think of a half dozen ethical, moral or humane reasons for not employing the death penalty. But ONE reason stands out. The legal system from investigation to prosecution to trial to verdicts is FLAWED. We cannot be assured we have the right man. At least, we’re not sure enough to kill the man. Something we cannot undo when we learn of a mistake.

No one has ever offered a response to the Illinois Death Row matter:

Illinois Republican Gov. George Ryan gained national attention in the area of capital punishment when he declared a moratorium on his state's death penalty in 2000. "There is a flaw in the system, without question, and it needs to be studied." Illinois had already executed 12 people since the re-institution of the death penalty but it had also been forced to release 13 [innocent] people on Death Row based on new evidence.

Gov. Ryan called for a commission to study the issue, while noting, "I still believe the death penalty is a proper response to heinous crimes, but I want to make sure ... that the person who is put to death is absolutely guilty."

The issue had garnered the attention of the public when a death row inmate, Anthony Porter, who had spent 15 years on death row and was within two days of being executed when his lawyers won a stay on the grounds that he may have been mentally retarded. He was ultimately exonerated with the help of a group of student journalists at Northwestern University who had uncovered evidence that proved his innocence. In 1999 Porter was released, charges were subsequently dropped. Another person, Alstory Simon, confessed and pleaded guilty to the crime Porter had been erroneously convicted of.

On January 11, 2003, just days before leaving office, Ryan commuted to "life" terms the sentences of everyone on or waiting to be sent to Illinois' Death Row - a total of 167 convicts - due to his belief that the death penalty could not be administered fairly. [That works out to 7.7% INNOCENT men on Death Row. On that basis Bush43 has ordered 11 INNOCENT men executed in Texas during his 6 years as gov. Not good.]

Gov. Ryan pardoned four inmates, Aaron Patterson, Madison Hobley, Leroy Orange and Stanley Howard. These were four of ten death row inmates known as the "Death Row 10," due to widely reported claims that the confessions that they had given in their respective cases had been coerced through police torture.

Ryan won praise from death penalty opponents, and was nominated for the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize. [He did not receive the prize. Edits in brackets.]

Ryan is not the first state governor to have granted blanket commutations to Death Row inmates during his final days in office. Arkansas Governor Winthrop Rockefeller also commuted the sentence of every Death Row inmate in that state as he left office after losing his 1970 bid for a third two-year term. en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 6/27/2008 by donwhite]

You raise a good point. There's definitely no "fixing" a mistake such as a false verdict. Maybe supplement the "execution" sentence with definitive proof for such a sentence ... such as DNA proof positive that the correct suspect is being sentenced to death?

I dunno. There's really no answer.

But, that doesn't change my stance on the death penalty. I think any loss of life is a very sad matter. But, as for moral or ethical reasons for not issuing death sentences? Well, a death sentence isn't handed out for stealing candy from the candy store. Most death sentences are handed out for violent acts against others .. such as rape or murder. Certainly, I would think to have any moral conscious in dealing with whether you're to consider the death penalty or not, I would take into consideration the moral or ethical conscious that the perpetrator had at the time of the crime.

There's no black and white with this matter. There's many shades of gray with many more things to consider when issuing a death sentence. Certainly I do not think it has anything to do with being a liberal or a conservative.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by tyranny22]

But, you know ... after re-reading your initial post I think I may have to reconsider.

I was going to vote for Obama. But, now that you've made your point, I think I will vote for McCain.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by tyranny22]

Im all for the death penalty.

Ill let you be the one that tells a mother that her little girl was murdered by someone and because you felt it was unethical to excute him, you decide to give him a prison sentence. And when he gets paroled, ill let you tell the next mother of the next little girl he kills the same thing. but this time, the mother is going to say, didnt you have a chance to rid the earth of this person and you chose not to? And then she will say that her little girl would be alive if it wasnt for your decision not to execute him the first time. do you want to live with that? does that little girl get a second chance at life? why should the guy that killed her? I would rather an evil person die, than a good person who did nothing wrong.

see the following link for stats:

www.ojp.usdoj.gov...

here are some highlights for you

-Fifty-three percent of jail inmates were on probation, parole or pretrial release at the time of arrest.
-Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
-The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers
(this is an average of 17 arrest charges per person)
-Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide
-The median age of the victims of imprisoned sexual assaulters was less than 13 years old; the median age of rape victims was about 22 years


I could list more, but I think thats enough stats. The point im trying to make is if you do something bad enough to go to prison for, once you get out, there is a good chance you will be in there again. I dont want these people back on the streets.

Think if someone killed your son, daugther, mother, father, wife, etc. How would you feel? would you ever want them to even have the slightest chance of getting out?

Ok, now after my rant, I do agree with you on some points. The death penalty should not be used for every crime obviously, and not every violent crime either. I believe that it should only be used on cases where there is conclusive proof (dna, etc) that the person did the crime.

reply to post by donwhite


Why do you bring up Democrats vs. Republicans when it comes to the death penalty?

I refer to myself a republican and have no problem with the death penalty as long as it is handled in the right way. Most of the people I know refer to themselves as democrats, and a lot of them seem to think the same as I do. (It makes me wonder what the difference really is between the two.)

Everyone is an individual. We all have our own thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Just because someone calls themself a Republican or Democrat doesn't mean that they think the same things as all the others who do so.

Vote for whatever you feel in your heart is the right thing, but never try to change someone else's mind. Leave it up to them to decide what they feel is right.

"Untill you know absolutely everything about something, say nothing whatsoever about it." M. Warner.

reply to post by donwhite


Like the death penalty?...vote Republican? OK

But how about this one...Like child rapists?....vote Democrat.

By your own reasoning....it fits. That good ole Blue state reasoning?

reply to post by donwhite

A society is best known by how it treats the helpless among it. To be magnanimous - to show magnanimity - means to be kind towards a person who cannot reciprocate.

In your Face, America!!!

If we are going to use death as a penalty than do it quick. Making a man (other than a child killer) wait is inhumane. Convict with hard core evidence and hang them out back like the old days. That penalty only works if the community can come out and see what happens when you really mess up. That was kind of the point. This medical injection thing is not just useless but does not scare the way a rope around the neck does.

reply to post by RRconservative


its no secret that im voting for obama

but i am 100% for the death penalty

infact, i think they outa speed things up a bit. Make it fast. WTF is the point of prolonging it?

If you've ever heard george carlins ideas on criminal incarseration (spelling?) you'll know what i mean.

"they actually SWAB THEIR ARM WITH ALCOHOL, before giving a lethal injection" he was so good at pointing out the idiocies like that


down with child rapists and all other forms of brutal and vulgar crime. Like the woman who was feeding her child to her cannibal friends?
Put that *snip* in the chair and let her ride ol' sparky.

Why do Americans prefer such long, draconian sentences? I assert in most "civilized" countries this misdeed would have been dealt with in an administrative hearing. Back to America. I would have thought 3 to 7 years with parole eligibility after 6-8 months would be sufficient for the mastermind of these crimes. For the others, probation for any without prior records and 1-3 years for those with prior records. Eligibility for parole after 90 days incarceration.

In NY, you can figure it runs $45,000 a year to keep each prisoner. Here we go again, shooting ourselves in the foot! For keeping four prisoners NY will be spending $180,000 a year. Who is learning a lesson? I’d have to say I think this violates the 8th Amendment to our Con. “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Their crime is equal to the old grave robbing days when medical doctors bought cadavers for anatomical study. Which was a misdemeanor in most places. And who are the fanatics?

NY - The mastermind behind a multimillion-dollar scheme to loot hundreds of corpses and sell bone and tissue for transplants was sentenced Friday to 18 to 54 years in prison after he apologized to the horrified families of the deceased. I'm sorry for all the emotional pain I've caused," Michael Mastromarino told a Brooklyn judge in a soft voice before he was led to jail.

Mastromarino, 44, a former oral surgeon who owned New Jersey-based Biomedical Tissue Services, pleaded guilty earlier this year to charges of enterprise corruption, body stealing and reckless endangerment. The body parts were sold around the country for dental implants, knee and hip replacements and other procedures.

Authorities say about 10,000 people received parts supplied by BTS. Some now claim they were infected by the tainted tissue, including an Ohio mother of three who appeared in court on Friday to demand a harsh sentence for Mastromarino.

Three others who worked with Mastromarino also were charged in the case, as were funeral home directors in New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Chris Aldorasi, who worked as a so-called cutter for Mastromarino, was sentenced earlier this month to nine to 27 years in prison. Another cutter, Lee Cruceta, who pleaded guilty and testified against Aldorasi, is facing up to 20 years in prison. The cutters removed parts from the bodies. By Tom Hays, Associated Press Writer
news.yahoo.com...

[edit on 6/28/2008 by donwhite]

Here's my two cents on the issue of the death penalty.
First, I want to point out the simply psychological pattern of victims becoming victimizers. That said, I obviously don't think all victims are so, but everyone when considering their stance on this should also consider questions of free will and what makes us us. These criminals do not come from some loving upbringing where their illegal acts are simply "out of place" and cannot be explained psychologically - no, they can, and for that I think we should to a degree not justify but instead understand. After this understanding, I'm sure these criminals would seem more human.

I'm against the death penalty for humanitarian and spiritual reasons as well. Since life is sacred, beyond our understanding and powers: nothing gives anyone the right to control and take away life as they please. Along with life being sacred, you're also taking away any chance of this criminal repenting for his actions, especially if there is an afterlife of consequence awaiting us.
I agree with what some of you have said about life imprisonment being much worse than a death. I think it's if someone abused the freedom given to them, then it's only right for it to be taken away. Freedom is, after all, an idea, very abstract, unlike life which definitely belongs to the realm of a higher being and whatnot.

I don't like the death penalty, and I did not vote plan on voting for Republicans in the election. However, given your disgusting attitude, I just might now.

Originally posted by donwhite
Red state versus Blue state. Cruel versus kind. Backwards looking versus forward looking. Strident versus compassionate. Gloomy versus cheerful. Stingy versus generous.

Some problems with your opening statement. First, debates should not be cast in terms of red state v. blue state; the idea that you think a certain way because of the state you happen to be in, or that all thought in a certain state is monolithic, is condescending and insulting. A look at the facts on a state-by-state basis shows thinking and voting are not monolithic. For instance, my own state of Kentucky is considered a "red state," yet Democrats control the state government.

Second, all forms of punishment are cruel, whether they be the death penalty or simple imprisonment, because they take away the free will and rights of men.

Third, considering many of the progressive ideals where born in the early 1900s and even further back in Socialism and Communism, you can hardly making the case that you are "looking forward."

Fourth, considering your tone and attitude, you can also hardly claim you are the cheerful one here.

Originally posted by donwhite
The Red Blue divide. A book I was reading recently argues this divide first appeared in the Sacco - Vancetti case in 1927. Two men most likely innocent but mob-ruled into the death sentence by unscrupulous projectors and a stacked anti-anarchist jury.

You fail, and we can only presume this is purposeful, to mention that Sacco and Vanzetti were tried, convicted and executed into the reddest of red-states, Massachusetts. Why is the Sacco - Vanzetti case cast in light of the red state v. blue state debate?

Originally posted by donwhite
As usual, the REPUBLICAN Hard Core Four voted FOR DEATH! You know who they are. CJ Roberts, AJ Alito, AJ Scalia and the wayward mongrel AJ Thomas.

Why do you save the only insult for the only African-American justice on the bench? Why do you not only insult him, but use an insult that suggests you are attacking his breeding?

What we see here is a case of the very special racism possessed by some progressives, that is a special hatred and venom reserved for black men who are not behaving the way progressives believe they should.

Originally posted by donwhite
Assuming that was true then, surely we have now reached GUN NIRVANA with 303 million guns, ONE per person, on average. Say thank you, NRA.

This is silly. The NRA did not invent guns, they did not write the Second Amendment.

Originally posted by donwhite
California - largest state - has the most people on Death Row. But I believe it has executed on 7 or 8 since the Death Penalty was re-instituted by the Supreme Court.

In another post you mention that the prison system needs to be reformed. I mention this in relation to your statements on California, because there is something standing in the way of prison reform, and it is not stringent draconian Republicans or Red States (indeed, California is a blue state) as you believe. It in the Prison Guard Union...that's right, a union, the first love of the progressives. Please see an article called "The Black KKK" in last month's issue of Playboy for more on this.

Originally posted by donwhite
Texas OTOH has executed more than 400 people in the same time frame. Bush43 did 154. Recall Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger LOST his Austrian citizenship, had his name removed from a hometown stadium and was asked to return a signet ring when he ordered his FIRST execution?

Remember though, you blame governors for "ordering" executions, but while they sign the execution warrants, they are not the ones that order the execution. That is done by a judge or jury.

Originally posted by donwhite
All I can say about those 2 states is TX has much more deterrence than CA. But not less crime.

The argument that the death penalty does not work is a deterrant is a false argument, because no penalty is a deterrant to crime. If we should get rid of the death penalty because it is not a deterrant, we should get rid of all punishments for all crimes because they do not serve as deterrants either.

reply to post by Manar

Here's my two cents on the issue of the death penalty. First . . everyone when considering their stance on this should also consider questions of free will and what makes us us. These criminals do not come from some loving upbringing where their illegal acts are simply "out of place" and cannot be explained psychologically . . “

Free will is the antithesis of pre-destination. Predestination is a logical outcome of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent GOD.

Freud opened the door to the id, ego and super-ego. But he went off into dreams. You’re walking in deep do-do when you try to read dreams. Especially other peoples. Count me out of that.

I suppose in extreme cases of child abuse that subsequent criminality can be traced back in a straight line as causation but never as justification. IMO.

To a considerable extent crime is defined by cultural norms. Those who occupy superior positions - usually due to wealth and or military power - frequently seek to impose their cultural standards on those of less wealth or power. The winner get to write the history.

I'm against the death penalty for humanitarian and spiritual reasons as well. Since life is sacred, beyond our understanding and powers: nothing gives anyone the right to control and take away life as they please. Along with life being sacred, you're also taking away any chance of this criminal repenting for his actions, especially if there is an afterlife of consequence awaiting us.

It is hard for me to accept that any well informed person with pretensions of spirituality can assert LIFE is sacred. "Where" I would ask, is that the case? And "to whom" is LIFE sacred? Americans, perhaps the most religious of the worlds people, have killed 800,000 by our count, 3,000,000 by the Vietnamese count and so far as I know, no one here has as much as said “I’m sorry” about that. I can only conclude as a people we are not sorry. We are sorry we lost the war, but not that we killed those people in vain.

We have already killed 30,000 to 120,000 people in Iraq. And 15,000 to 50,000 in Afghanistan. I’m not talking total deaths in either place. I’m talking just about the ones we have killed. More than I stated have died in Iraq and Afghan. Again, I hear no one over here say “I’m sorry to have killed your parents, your spouse, your children, your friends, your neighbors.” So why do you suggest that LIFE is sacred?

It is counter productive to BELIEVE an absurdity. To say LIFE is sacred is absurd. Want a better word? A truthful word? Try EXPENDABLE.

I agree with what some of you have said about life imprisonment being much worse than a death.

Hmm? How about asking a man on death row? I’ll betcha he’d not treat life in so cavalier a manner.

Your instincts are good, Mr. M, but I don’t agree with how you arrived there. How about “it is demeaning to any civilized society to intentionally kill anyone?” How about “I cannot be 100% sure in 100% of the cases that we have the “right’ (or wrong?) man, and because I cannot undo this, I will not do it.”

Leave LIFE to GOD.

[edit on 6/28/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by donwhite
Texas OTOH has executed more than 400 people in the same time frame. Bush43 did 154. Recall Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger LOST his Austrian citizenship, had his name removed from a hometown stadium and was asked to return a signet ring when he ordered his FIRST execution?

Remember though, you blame governors for "ordering" executions, but while they sign the execution warrants, they are not the ones that order the execution. That is done by a judge or jury.

My compliments on your dispassionate redress of my hard hitting assertions. Aside: Yes, KY is a so-called Democratic state but this is an historical anomaly. The state has always been conservative in its outlook and in its governance. I am unaware of a single kY governor who would qualify as a LIBERAL. KY was in the RED column 1960, '68, '72, '80, '84, '88, '00 and '04. End.

Background. The power of pardon is part of the “checks and balances” and “separation of powers” concept that permeates American political life. To reign in a rambunctious legislature, the Chief Magistrate of the state is given the power of veto. To prevent judicial excess the governor is given the power of pardon.

Indulge me. Under that division of powers, the legislative branch writes the laws, the judicial branch determines breaches of the law and the punishment, and the executive branch carries out the sentence.

In the case of the death sentence, the state legislature has provided that the governor shall order the execution by signing a death warrant. IMPLICIT in that provision if not explicit, is the underlying assumption the governor will sufficiently review the case to satisfy an independent and hopefully objective mind that the accused has had 1) the benefit of a FAIR trial as defined by the courts, and that 2) the accused meets all the legal criteria for execution. IF ALL THE LAW REQUIRED WAS A SIGNATURE, ANY CLERK COULD DO THAT. Or just use a rubber stamp.

I do believe Arnold Schwarzenegger did that. I do not believe George W. Bush ever has. Laura has to read him the Sunday comic strips so I know he did not do any heavy lifting in the 154 times he put his name to the DEATH Warrant. And based on the Illinois Death Row - 7.7% innocent - George W. Bush ordered the execution of 11 innocent men. But that’s Texas.

We know from others that Bush43 does not read more than the first page of the National Security Estimates. uh uh, Bushr3 is NO reader. If Bush43 had done a conscientious job in Austin, he would have spent much of his time reading about crime. He didn't. He did not do his job. Maybe that is why he turned to alcohol?

[edit on 6/28/2008 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
Free will is the antithesis of pre-destination. Predestination is a logical outcome of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent GOD.

Freud opened the door to the id, ego and super-ego. But he went off into dreams. You’re walking in deep do-do when you try to read dreams. Especially other peoples. Count me out of that.

I suppose in extreme cases of child abuse that subsequent criminality can be traced back in a straight line as causation but never as justification. IMO.

To a considerable extent crime is defined by cultural norms. Those who occupy superior positions - usually due to wealth and or military power - frequently seek to impose their cultural standards on those of less wealth or power. The winner get to write the history.

For your information, the concepts of free will and an omnipotent God are not mutually exclusive. It is very well possible that we have choice in our actions while the higher being is knowledgeable of everything to come.
I believe this is a misconception of many, how since God is responsible for our upbringing and our place in life, then he'd control what we become. But still, that doesn't add anything to whether or not there is free will. Who knows where the line is drawn of "what I choose to do" and "what I cannot help but doing"?
And yes I do agree with you - as I said before, our attempts to understand why criminals are so is not a method to justify their actions at all.

It is hard for me to accept that any well informed person with pretensions of spirituality can assert LIFE is sacred. "Where" I would ask, is that the case? And "to whom" is LIFE sacred? Americans, perhaps the most religious of the worlds people, have killed 800,000 by our count, 3,000,000 by the Vietnamese count and so far as I know, no one here has as much as said “I’m sorry” about that. I can only conclude as a people we are not sorry. We are sorry we lost the war, but not that we killed those people in vain.

We have already killed 30,000 to 120,000 people in Iraq. And 15,000 to 50,000 in Afghanistan. I’m not talking total deaths in either place. I’m talking just about the ones we have killed. More than I stated have died in Iraq and Afghan. Again, I hear no one over here say “I’m sorry to have killed your parents, your spouse, your children, your friends, your neighbors.” So why do you suggest that LIFE is sacred?

Why are you fusing different topics? My conclusion of life being sacred has nothing to do with our flawed politics, our flawed perception, and ofcourse, our flawed actions all together. I am talking about the natural basis of life as sacred and how it is initially so - that is explained in how it is something above us.

Life is, sadly, sacred to many according to ethnicity, like you pointed out. The question of "where" is present in our view of who deserves life and who doesn't. This can be seen in how 1 American = 1,000 Arabs, or so. It's ridiculous.

When it comes to this issue, I am not concerned about how many Americans have killed so far. America is committing (and did) immoral actions, however, why should it have the right to define "right" and "wrong"? This in no way makes life any more or less sacred than it truly is.

Hmm? How about asking a man on death row? I’ll betcha he’d not treat life in so cavalier a manner.

Your instincts are good, Mr. M, but I don’t agree with how you arrived there. How about “it is demeaning to any civilized society to intentionally kill anyone?” How about “I cannot be 100% sure in 100% of the cases that we have the “right’ (or wrong?) man, and because I cannot undo this, I will not do it.”

Leave LIFE to GOD.

[edit on 6/28/2008 by donwhite]

Ask yourself - would you rather spend 60 years in prison, or just die?
I don't necessarily disagree with your ideas. However, the main reason I find the death penalty wrong is because then we are taking the role of God.

reply to post by Manar

Why are you fusing different topics? My conclusion of life being sacred has nothing to do with our flawed politics, our flawed perception, and of course, our flawed actions all together. I am talking about the natural basis of life as sacred and how it is initially so . .

I don’t accept that life is “sacred.” I am a secular person. I see life as being spontaneous and having evolved. We are getting to the same destination but arriving via different routes.

Ask yourself - would you rather spend 60 years in prison, or just die? I don't necessarily disagree with your ideas. However, the main reason I find the death penalty wrong is because then we are taking the role of God . .

I suppose no one not sitting on Death Row can really answer that question. I’d suspect there is as much variation in opinions there as here. I sometimes think it is death penalty advocates who have made up that URBAN legend to salve their own consciences by convincing themselves the people they are about to execute REALLY want it that way. That - wanting to die - is counter-intuitive. Example: the desperate drive for life is what makes a drowning person so dangerous to approach in the water.

But in the final analysis it is OUR responsibility for taking THEIR life, which makes it moot what they think about it one way or the other.

Factoid. The lengthy time a convicted person spends on death row before the final act is played out, is not due to any smart shenanigans by the convict’s lawyers. Instead it was partly a matter of too many cases and too few judges. It was also partly due to the rules the courts applied. One claim at a time.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) has changed all that. Before this Act of Congress became law a prisoner was allowed to bring up ONLY ONE grounds for appeal at a time. It was generally believed that method would make for better reviews of the claims.

Pro death penalty advocates were vocally dissatisfied with what seemed to be interminable time spent making one appeal after another. But that situation was not of the inmates choosing although I’m sure 99.44% of them did not mind the long delay.

Under the AEDPA inmates get ONE appeal which must include all their claims for altering the sentence. I personally think this statute is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Conservative judges say it is not, liberal judges say it is.

In criminal law the ban of NO ex post facto laws means all the men on death row in 1996 are still under the old rules. Only crimes committed after the date of the law are under the new law.

The first man executed after the re-introduction of the death penalty was Garry Gilmore in Utah in 1977. He refused to make further appeals. A couple others have done so but they are the exception that proves the rule.


Here follows from the movie “Breaker Morant,” one of my favorites. “The Last Rhyme and Testament of Tony Lumpkin -

In prison cell I sadly sit,
A damned crest-fallen chappie!
And own to you I feel a bit-
A little bit - unhappy!

It really ain't the place nor time
To reel off rhyming diction -
But yet we'll write a final rhyme
Whilst waiting cru-ci-fixion!

No matter what "end" they decide -
Quick-lime or "b'iling ile," sir?
We'll do our best when crucified
To finish off in style, sir!

But we bequeath a parting tip
For sound advice of such men,
Who come across in transport ship
To polish off the Dutchmen!

If you encounter any Boers
You really must not loot 'em!
And if you wish to leave these shores,
For pity's sake, DON'T SHOOT 'EM!!

And if you'd earn a D.S.O.,
Why every British sinner
Should know the proper way to go
Is: "ASK THE BOER TO DINNER!"

Let's toss a bumper down our throat, -
Before we pass to Heaven,
And toast: "The trim-set petticoat
We leave behind in Devon."

First published in The Bulletin, 19 April 1902.

[edit on 6/29/2008 by donwhite]