Death in Texas: Rick Perry and George W. Bush Both Eager Executioners
Asked the biggest difference between himself and George W. Bush, Texas governor and new Republican White House front runner Rick Perry answered, "I went to Texas A&M. He went to Yale." Which isn't far from the truth. After all, their pronouncements on policies and personal beliefs are eerily similar. And when it comes to donning the executioner's hood in the death penalty mecca that is Texas, Rick Perry and George W. Bush are almost indistinguishable.
As the Washington Post documented, Governor Perry is America's reigning death penalty champion, exceeding the body count of his predecessor in Austin:
In his nearly 11 years as the state's chief executive, Perry, now running for the Republican presidential nomination, has overseen more executions than any governor in modern history: 234 and counting. That's more than the combined total in the next two states -- Oklahoma and Virginia -- since the death penalty was restored 35 years ago.
Perry's apparent enthusiasm for Texas' popular death penalty process doesn't end there:
He vetoed a bill that would have spared the mentally retarded, and sharply criticized a Supreme Court ruling that juveniles were not eligible for the death penalty. He has found during his tenure only one inmate on Texas's crowded death row he thought should receive the lesser sentence of life in prison.
If this all sounds hauntingly familiar, it should. During the 2000 campaign, Americans were introduced to another Texas governor who was unapologetic about condemning his state's residents to death.
George W. Bush carried out 152 executions during his days as Governor of Texas, sparing only one death row inmate after his routine 15 minute clemency review. Even those similarly adopting Jesus as their favorite philosopher could expect no leniency from Bush. When his allies on the religious right pressured him to spare murderess turned jailhouse born-again Christian Karla Faye Tucker, Governor Bush displayed his trademark resolve - and compassion. As Time recounted in 1999:
Tucker Carlson of Talk magazine described the smirk Bush wore as he mimicked convicted murderer turned Christian Karla Faye Tucker begging, "Please don't kill me," something she never actually did.
Bush's seeming bloodlust towards criminal defendants almost derailed his 2000 presidential campaign. During his second debate against Al Gore in October 2000, Bush was asked about his position on hate crimes laws in the wake of the brutal dragging death of African-American James Byrd in his home state of Texas. His disturbing response - accompanied by a sickening grin - produced gasps among the audience:
"The three men who murdered James Byrd, guess what's going to happen to them? They're going to be put to death. A jury found them guilty. It's going to be hard to punish them any worse after they get put to death."
Even the tone-deaf Bush sensed he had crossed the line. In the third debate, he wisely retreated, acknowledging he was "not proud" of Texas' number one ranking in executions.
As President, George W. Bush maintained his hard line towards criminals and upholding their punishments. His administration argued - unsuccessfully - before the Supreme Court that developmentally-disabled and under-18 death row inmates too deserve their chance at the gallows. Attorney General Gonzales announced that the Bush department of Justice would push for new, harsher mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines in the wake of the Supreme Court's Booker decision. Shortly before his resignation, Gonzales unveiled new federal regulations enabling the Attorney General to "fast-track" executions in state capital punishment cases.
If anything, Rick Perry has been even more zealous than George W. Bush when it comes to flipping the switch on Texas' death row inmates. While President Bush sought to intervene in 2007 on behalf of Jose Ernesto Medellin and 50 other Mexican citizens facing execution in Texas, Governor Perry took the other side and won:
Still, Perry has been an aggressive advocate. He battled the Bush administration in the Supreme Court when the president tried to force state courts to review the death sentences of 51 Mexican nationals who had not been allowed to consult Mexican authorities.
The court ruled in Perry's favor, 6 to 3.
More disturbing still, Perry's dead men walking has apparently included innocent men. As the Post reported, "death penalty opponents say 12 men on Texas's death row have been exonerated." And as Mother Jones detailed:
He refused to stay the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, and, after the fact, when the evidence began to overwhelmingly suggest that Willingham had been innocent, he replaced three members of the commission that had been reviewing the case. (Perry stands by the execution, insisting that Willingham was a "monster.") After two decades on death row, Anthony Graves was released only after a lengthy investigation from Texas Monthly showed that he had been wrongfully convicted.
For Perry, the Graves case was a feature and not a bug. "He's a good example of, you continue to find errors that were made and clear them up," Perry told the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal. "So I think our system works well."
George W. Bush couldn't have said it better.
(This piece also appears at Perrspectives.)




What is the penalty for treason?
What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow? In America today, the two questions are equally meaningless.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
....or European Swallow?
WWFSMD?
...or I shall be forced to taunt you again.
WWFSMD?
The penalty? For what... average citizens, or the political elite?
BTW - the corporate media would have us believe that Cheney is politically controversial, but does not deserve our/their ire.
Cheney is not politically controversial. Cheney is a criminal.
The corporate media will treat Perry exactly the same way.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
...reminds me of Greg Stillson, a character from the old "The Dead Zone" movie. Let's hope that Perry meets the same ultimate fate as Stillson. I could SO see Perry using a toddler as a shield from an assassin's bullet.
is a carbon copy of Greg Stillson.
Scary.
For all that the critics sneer at him as a "popular" writer, King has more on the ball than most of the literati that get lionized. He knows people.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
In a movie? Or was that Josh Brolin? Definitely two peas in the same pod.
Rick Perry can proudly brag that he killed living baby Sun Hudson.
Americans are eager executioners. Killing doesn't faze us a bit.
I wonder whether it really doesn't faze us, or whether we're just too many steps removed from its reality.
We hear of deaths. We read reports of individual killings, executions and mass slaughters. But we don't experience any of it. Not really. Not up close.
Our veterans, once hungry for war, return traumatized by what they have been ordered to do.
How eager would the average American really be if s/he were forced to carry out an execution him- or herself? To have to hold the gun up, and blow someone's brains out. To have to stick the needle in another person's arm, and inject the lethal dose.
Our wars since 9/11 are entering their second decade. This does not happen because we love death. It happens because we don't even feel like we're at war.
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
executions used to be local, public affairs, entertainment for the entire family. it was then decided that they should be moved inside, to rid them of the party atmosphere, and treat them like the sobering events they are: the greatest example of the state's power over you. of course, it didn't help that many executions were botched affairs (decapitations masquerading as hangings, etc.). moving away from execution as public spectacle to almost private affair returned some solemnity and dignity to the occasion, but the public wasn't more or less forced to witness the handiwork they had authorized. we lost the immediacy of knowing we were a party to it.
personally, i think executions should be public, and the executioner public as well. if we as a society, think execution a fitting punishment, we should be willing to witness it in person.
our wars since 9/11 lack the engagement of the entire country, because the republicans refused to re-instate the draft, knowing if they did, their party was almost certainly toast.
. . . and war contributes little to that condition. Rather, it's a reflection of what we are, and provides us with the opportunity to make manifest those tendencies.
The most alarming thing in this whole mess is that Perry knows he will be immunized for his crimes against humanity, the same way Cheney is, the same way Bush is.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
WWJD?
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
What do you believe Jesus would do, Exelsior? Can you make an argument? Are there counter arguments to be made?
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
I ask this question not rhetorically, but sincerely. I welcome any thoughtful answer.
I am sure there are those who view it as the ultimate form of just desserts, the perfect retribution. I decry retributive justice.
I am sure there are those who believe it offers a murder victim's loved ones satisfaction. I am skeptical that it serves even their well being, especially in a society that does not know how to grieve.
I imagine there are those who consider it the only fool-proof mechanism for deterring the executed individual. While I accept the theoretical possibility that some individual could be so dangerous that the death penalty becomes a legitimate exercise of societal self defense, but find it difficult to believe that modern technology is not sufficient to hold such a person captive indefinitely.
Moreover, we lose out on understanding the human mind and its capacity for evil if we kill those who kill. The death penalty damages us all.
But I will listen to anyone who disagrees.
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
I'm not against the death penalty, as I believe that there are, on occasion, some people who simply must be hauled off the stage. However, I'm vigorously opposed to the death penalty as it is meted out in this country. There's far too much prejudice and racism in the way it's carried out. If it cannot be used fairly, then we've no business using it at all.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
Again asked in all sincerity, when does such an occasion rise to the level of moral imperative? Can you give an example in which the death penalty is better than studying the mind of the person on death row?
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
Ted Bundy's execution did not make me feel all that bad. He terrorised women of my then-age in Seattle, my dad knew the parents of the first (known) and last (known) Washington state victims. And it happened on my 35th birthday, IIRC, about 14 years after he was known to have murdered his first Seattle victim.. He was so dangerous, escaping CO to murder several more women on the way to the FL executioner.
There another I was not sad to see go, Charles Campbell and had David Lewis Rice received the death penalty, I would not have been too sad about that, for his murder of a family (friends of my dad again) he believed were Jewish Communists. I am happy with him rotting in jail w/o the possibility of parole.
I would rather people who get the DP spend the rest of their lives in prison. If it turns out they weren't guilty, then there's no embarrassing "Ooops" for the state committing pre-meditated first degree murder on the wrong person. Also, if there is a DP, it gives the criminal something to do in prison-fight the sentence at a great expense to the state. It's costly. But most of all, I consider it murder.
me-oww!
on Death Row are some of the least problematic in prison. Loners like them have few friends on the outside, save the groupies and psycho women who want to marry them, and even fewer inside.
The ones that are bigger threats to society, of course, are hardcore gangbangers with life terms who call shots from their cells.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Rick Perry and other Republicans.
The reason why serial killers are not problems is because they are generally isolated and subject to special precautions instead of being housed in the general population. Where are they going to go? What are they going to do?
What Possible Good Comes from the Death Penalty?
NONE. I repeat, None. Ban it. It's barbaric.
far left loon >.<
The Willingham case was a disgusting travesty of justice. The evidence that condemned Cameron Todd Willingham to death has been completely discredited, along with the bogus arson 'experts' who testified for the prosecution. Willingham's execution was nothing less than a judicially sanctioned murder by the state of Texas:
Trial by Fire
by David Grann
Sept. 7, 2009
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07...
I will always view this country as barbaric as long as we execute people. Who the hell does Perry think he is? Pontius Pilate?
I don't believe in God. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.
-Andrew Carnegie
Poor, deluded sociopathic soul.
Perry is the worst type of goper, he looks like Reagan and sounds like bush and thinks like bachman...
Best summary of the POS I've seen.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
in another career went on to set an American record for the number of soldiers killed by a single illegal act, 4,000 and counting as well as a global record for the most expensive non-war ever fought.
Perry, if elected would "do his durndest" to eclipse that record. He has instructed his aides to search for heavily populated countries of "brownish" people with a propensity to not fight back well. (New Mexico doesn't yet count)
Costa Rica is the leading candidate because they evidently have "socialist" health care, no army and are "fairly close".
Other candidates under consideration: Canada -"not brownish but pretty socialist but durn cold. I'll ask Sarah if we could get 'er done - Isn't it sort of near Russia?" Mexico - "I'd like to but my wife's maid has family there, and you know, Happy Wife-Happy Life" California - "Nothing but socialists there, and besides God says they'll soon be dropping into the sea, just like the Pharoh's folks did. We'd be doin 'em a favour"
Stay tuned
I was taught by my father to appose the death penalty not because of effect on the executed, but because of the effect on the executioner(s). The person who is performs the execution is profoundly effect both mentally and spiritually and not for the better. Killing a fellow human is a terrible thing to do and what it does to you is life altering. Executing a criminal is not enough of a good reason to ask anyone to take on such harm. My father felt that only self-defense was reason to kill someone an that because you have no other option.
And how about the family, friends and acquaintances. What about their mothers?
far left loon >.<
execute you, whether you're guilty or not. they do not discriminate. of course, when the USSC renders an opinion claiming that "actual innocence is no bar to execution", one shouldn't be at all surprised that at least one state (that we know of) would gleefully hop on board that train.
Comments are closed on this entry