Gingrich Now Says He Should Not Have Called Sotomayor A Racist

By Mark Memmott

Source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/06/gingrich_now_says_he_should_no.html

He agrees with critics who say he should not have called Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor a "racist," former House speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., writes on his website this morning. Here's what he now says:

Shortly after President Obama nominated her to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, I read Judge Sonia Sotomayor's now famous words:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

My initial reaction was strong and direct -- perhaps too strong and too direct. The sentiment struck me as racist and I said so. Since then, some who want to have an open and honest consideration of Judge Sotomayor's fitness to serve on the nation's highest court have been critical of my word choice.

With these critics who want to have an honest conversation, I agree. The word "racist" should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable (a fact which both President Obama and his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, have since admitted).

But, Gingrich adds:

Sotomayor's words reveal a betrayal of a fundamental principle of the American system -- that everyone is equal before the law.

Several of Gingrich's fellow Republicans, including Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, were sharply critical of both the former speaker and radio host Rush Limbaugh for calling Sotomayor a racist.

Limbaugh has not backed away from the characterization.

Gingrich is tweeting here. On his blog last week, Gingrich says that a "Latina woman racist" should be forced to withdraw as a nominee.

Bravo Newt. Sir, I may disagree with nearly all your politics, but I applaud you for this admission.

A chicken in every pot and a handgun in every purse

A powerful pro-gun lobby group in the United States has filed legal challenges to handgun bans in San Francisco and Chicago.

The lawsuits come a day after the US Supreme Court ruled that a ban on the private possession of handguns in Washington DC was unconstitutional.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) says it wants similar bans in other states and cities overturned as well.

San Francisco's mayor says he plans to fight the NRA challenge.

The NRA lawsuit in San Francisco challenges the city's handgun ban in public housing; while in Chicago it challenges a ruling that makes it illegal to possess or sell handguns in the city.

"In Washington DC, or in any state, whether you live in the housing projects or a high end suburb, you have the right to defend yourself and your family at home," said Chris Cox, from the NRA.

"These laws all deny that right."

Self-defence

The NRA is joined in the San Francisco suit by a gay man living in a government-owned housing development who says he needs a gun to protect himself from potential hate crimes.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said the city would "vigorously fight the NRA" and said the ban was good for public safety.

"Is there anyone out there who really believes that we need more guns in public housing? I can't for the life of me sit back and roll over on this. We will absolutely defend the rights of the housing authority," Mr Newsom said.

The Supreme Court's ruling says that the constitution "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defence within the home".

The ruling enshrines for the first time the individual right to own guns and limits efforts to reduce their role in American life.

"The Supreme Court's decision was very encouraging, but it is just a start," NRA lawyer C D Michel said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7478832.stm

Damn it, this is exactly what I was afraid would happen. I don't get this ruling at all. Prohibiting a class or category of guns in not a violation of the Second Amendment. Otherwise, the court should have ruled that the assault weapons ban and the ban on sawed off shotguns was a violation. I am starting to think that I know stray dogs that would make better decisions that Justice Asinine Scalia. Anyway, the point being, I am a gun owner, and I support the right of American's to own guns. But I also support significant constraints on these rights. For example, why is it that one must have a license to drive a car but not to shoot a gun? People that are wishy-washy on gun control seem to be misinformed about the laxity of current gun laws. I like to encourage all of my students to visit a gun show someday just for the cultural experience. I like to go myself, but it is always a little frightening (the scary conspiracy theory militia folk are an added bonus). Most people are shocked to learn how fucking easy it is to get a gun--last year I purchased a ticket to a gun show walked right up to a table and paid 100 dollars cash for a surplus military rifle--no id check, no signature, no questions asked. I also bought 50 rounds of ammunition at the next table. I am glad I am able to purchase the weapon, I love target practice. But I would also feel way more secure if I had had to show some official idea, maybe prove that I had taken a safety class, or had my info logged into some database.

Lastly, for those on the blog who disapprove of the court's recent ruling on executing child rapists because it overturned a state law approved by voters, how does this sit with you? If a state or municipality votes to ban some weapons or all weapons why should the court get to overturn it? (For the record I don't agree with that logic. People vote for all manner of retarded and vile things, and it is only the rule of law that prevents democracy from turning abysmally foul).

Death Penalty for Child Rape Is Fought

By CAIN BURDEAU

Original AP Story location

SLIDELL, La. (AP) — When the news broke last month that a janitor had been arrested and accused of raping boys in the bathroom at an elementary school, the issue of justice and retribution became the talk around dinner tables and baseball fields.

Castrate him, some said. No, let the other inmates deal with him. No, execute him.

Castration and jailhouse vigilantism are out of the question, but putting a child rapist to death is within the bounds of Louisiana law.

For how much longer?

That's a question the U.S. Supreme Court takes up Wednesday when it hears arguments on whether a state can impose the death penalty for the rape of a child, or whether that would amount to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution.

Supporters of Louisiana's law argue that child rape is so evil and so utterly traumatizing that justice cries out for death. But others warn that the law will further traumatize youngsters and make rapists more likely to kill their victims.

In 1977, the Supreme Court said states cannot execute anyone for the rape of an adult. But the high court did not address the rape of a child.

The last time someone in the U.S. was executed for something other than murder was in 1964, when a man went to the electric chair in Alabama for robbery. That same year, a man in Missouri went to the gas chamber in what was the last time someone in this country was put to death for rape.

Louisiana is the only state with someone on death row for rape of an adult or child. In fact, it has two people awaiting execution for child rape. At least five other states — Georgia, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas — have similar laws.

"These are the only two men on any death row in any Western democracy for this offense," said Billy Sothern, a lawyer with the Capital Appeals Project, a nonprofit law firm that represents the Louisiana man at the center of the Supreme Court case, Patrick Kennedy.

Kennedy, a 43-year-old man with an IQ of 70, was convicted and sentenced to death for raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter in 1998 in Harvey, a New Orleans suburb.

The Louisiana law — which applies to anyone found guilty of aggravated rape of a child 12 or younger — breezed through the state Legislature in 1995; members got sidetracked only over whether to castrate child rapists.

"That's one of my proudest pieces of legislation," said former state Rep. Pete Schneider, a Slidell brick manufacturer and Republican.

The other man on death row in Louisiana for child rape is Richard Davis, convicted of repeatedly attacking a 5-year-old girl he looked after with his girlfriend in 2004 and 2005. The man who prosecuted him, Brady O'Callaghan, said child rape deserves the death penalty.

"It is so evil. There is no justification for it," he said. "This isn't a heat-of-passion killing. It's not about money."

Opponents, including the National Association of Social Workers and the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, warn that the prospect of the death penalty could give child rapists a powerful incentive to kill their victims. They might figure they have nothing to lose by killing the lone witness.

Also, child advocates warn that children, in many cases, are raped by people they know, and executing a relative could traumatize a youngster. Also, the law might make it harder to prosecute such cases by making children afraid to speak up for fear of what might happen to a relative, said Dr. Scott Benton, a pediatric forensic physician.

The debate has flared anew in Slidell, where 41-year-old janitor Dino Jay Schwertz was accused last month of child rape. Police say he confessed to the crimes.

His voice rising over the clang of baseball bats and clapping from the crowd at an after-school game, mortgage-company loan officer Cedric Bayone said he might support the death penalty in a child rape case.

"We've got to send a message to all these sex offenders: We're not playing when it comes to our children," he said.

But Penny Robertson, a mother of three, opposes the death penalty for a child rapist: "He's going to get it either way it goes. God's going to get him in the end. Death is the easy out for him, and I don't think he deserves an easy out."