Turning of tables may prove interesting
While Mona Charen scores President Obama for not raising human rights issues with China, I guess she conveniently forgets the scorn heaped on Jimmy Carter when he tried to make human rights a part of his legacy. If and when there is a Republican in the White House, it will be interesting to watch the glory heaped on their president. And it will really be interesting to see what right-wingers say if and when the Democratic Party uses the same tactics the GOP used for six years.
PHIL DAVIS, POWDER SPRINGS
Life sentence is cruel too
Leonard Pitts’ “What is death penalty” (Opinion, Dec. 21) insists that the execution of murderers constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. He calls it frontier barbarism and puritanical morality, leaving us all guilty with the blood of the damned. Wow.
He reminds us of Scott Panetti, on the brink of execution for the 1992 murder of his parents-in-law. With a long history of schizophrenia, Mr. Pitts alludes that Panetti’s mental illness should disqualify him from facing a state-induced death. He nevertheless insists “there is no question Panetti deserves punishment.” If Scott Panetti doesn’t have the mental wherewithal to comprehend the heinousness of his crime, then why would he deserve any punishment at all? Restraint and mental health treatment for the rest of his life, yes. But not punishment for what doesn’t even resonate in his reasoning capabilities.
On the other hand, if Panetti understood his violent deed, what, after all, is cruel or unusual about exacting retribution?
One could easily make a better argument against life imprisonment. How is placing a person in a small cage for the remainder of their life not cruel and unusual? Come on. Plus it inflicts additional cruelty to the poor taxpayer who must pay for this endless stay in the human “zoo.”
Mr. Pitts, you can’t have it both ways. Either Panetti doesn’t comprehend what he did. Or he does. If the former, he needs treatment while being compassionately and permanently sequestered from anyone else to whom he might ever again do harm. If the latter, his life should be ended swiftly rather than torturing him for decades in a cage of squalor.
ALAN FOSTER, ACWORTH
Politics needs third party
At this time of year, we tend to reflect on the last 12 months and ask “have we improved as a nation”? Although there are some notable positives, we can say without much fear of contradiction that this year has been dismal for politics. The evidence includes a totally frustrated president who feels he must resort to executive orders to get anything done and two do-nothing parties locked in Washington gridlock. When the public had the opportunity to make changes in November, we chickened out and re-elected the ineffective incumbents. To be fair, there was little choice at either the state or national level. One solution to shake the status quo, would be a third party. The Republican Party is run by the top 10 percent of wealthiest Americans who don’t care about the rest of us, and the Democrats by the national unions, Wall Street, Hollywood and minority interests who resist change and improvement. So there is a case for a new, third, center party which champions the middle class, the American Dream and fair distribution of wealth and opportunity. Third parties in other counties do work and serve to keep the other two parties “honest” and on task.
IAN SHAW, CUMMING
