{"id":5920,"date":"2011-09-23T00:38:37","date_gmt":"2011-09-23T07:38:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=5920"},"modified":"2011-09-23T00:38:37","modified_gmt":"2011-09-23T07:38:37","slug":"a-battle-lost-but-the-struggle-goes-on","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2011\/09\/23\/a-battle-lost-but-the-struggle-goes-on\/","title":{"rendered":"A battle lost, but the struggle goes on!"},"content":{"rendered":"

During my trip to the state penitentiary where I do volunteer work, I talked so several men about the murder of Troy Davis.  They felt devastated and frustrated that they could not sign petitions, make phone calls and do other things to fight for his life  They knew that I have advocated for Troy\u2019s life for over two years, and asked me how the frustration would effect me.  I told them this was a battle lost, but the struggle goes on until the US abandons this barbaric practice.  Below you will find a couple right wing reactions, a compelling argument from Keith Olbermann, and an introduction to a case that may be the next one to capture international attention.<\/font><\/p>\n

There was no shortage of InsaniTEA.  Tea Party Nation said the real injustice is that Troy was not executed sooner<\/a>.<\/font><\/p>\n

The following is about the delay in the last hours before the murder.  Apparently Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia objected to any consideration whatsoever.  Here is Scalia\u2019s twisted rationale from Freakout Nation<\/a>.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

The Supreme Court today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an <\/font><\/font>opportunity to challenge his conviction<\/a><\/font>. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia <\/font>criticized his colleagues<\/a><\/font><\/font> for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:<\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is \u201cactually\u201d innocent.<\/font><\/strong><\/span>  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged \u201cactual innocence\u201d is constitutionally cognizable<\/font><\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u2026 [emphasis original<\/em><\/span>]<\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/font><\/p>\n

How absurd!  What better evidence could there be of the need to keep a Democrat in the White House until Injustices Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy have been replaced with Justices.<\/font><\/p>\n

Keith Olbermann and Liliana Segura provided a compelling argument opposing capital punishment on Countdown<\/a>.<\/font><\/p>\n