Bitch-slapping the keyboards over kiddie-executions

Right-wingers have been bitch-slapping their keyboards in rage over the Supreme Court's recent ruling, which ended the death penalty for crimes committed by minors. Thoughtful as always, Town Hall thematically grouped selected columns so readers could enjoy one-stop shopping for fury and vengeance, with a special sale on screaming for blood and spitting on anything not exclusively American in origin (excluding the 10 Commandments, of course).





I can't do justice to them all, so I'm going to focus on European Justice Rules Top U.S. Court, by Debra Saunders. And you can just tell that Debbie is furiously stamping her feet as she types:

So now the U.S. Supreme Court is writing decisions based on what Our Betters in Europe think is best.

Don't misunderstand. Debbie's not angry over what the Supreme Court decided:

Let me stipulate. The outcome -- an end to executions of those who committed crimes as minors -- isn't what bothers me here….

(Among conservatives, Debbie could be considered almost "englightened." She better be careful.)

No, Debbie is furious about the way in which the decision was reached. Some members of the Court actually considered how other countries deal with serious offenses committed by minors. And if you want to get a right-winger's blood boiling, just let them know you're actually interested in how anything is done anywhere outside the United States.

Continue reading

[T]he court didn't limit its guidance to the US Constitution. [Justice] Kennedy wrote that the court can and should consider "the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty," including opposition among "leading members of the Western European community." ….Be afraid, America. Be very afraid."

Despite Debbie's warning about the impending euro-conversion of the Supreme Court, I have much more pressing things to worry about than the fact that some justices actually took into consideration international opinion on killing kids.

Real important things like WTF is Bush trying to do to Social Security? And will my young nephews be subject to "National Service" (the new brand name for what was formerly known as "the draft") once they reach 18? And how much are my property taxes going to go up this year? And how much will gas cost this summer? And how much will heating fuel cost next winter? And will Medicare even exist by my 65th birthday?

If you're wondering who died and made Justice Kennedy -- or Western Europe -- king, consider that Kennedy also referred to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child that prohibited the execution of minors -- even though the United States failed to ratify that treaty.

That bastard! Imagine referring to something as hideous as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In Rightwinglandia, that's grounds for impeachment right there, no questions asked. No trial needed.

And just why did the US fail to ratify the treaty? Well, it wasn't due to insufficient postage on the Express Mail envelope.

This site has an excellent rundown on why the United States has refused and continues to refuse to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Surprisingly, it doesn't involve condoms and sex ed, which was my first guess. It does involve child labor, child soldiers, and the execution of minors, among other things. Let me be clear: the official international stance of the United States is that it isn't against child labor, child soldiers, and the execution of minors.

Michael Rushford of the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation…. noted, "The Supreme Court has now said we're all going to wear the same socks and we're going to decide what a jury can decide."
That is the European Union model. Same socks.

Socks? Dress sheers… Argyle… Cashmere? Please don't tell me they wear plain white tube socks in Europe. The mystique would be gone forever.

Individual rights? They're not high on the EU list.

Can't you almost hear the snear? But Debs, dear, you might want to check out what your colleague Mark Levin (Men in Black) has been saying about individual rights (as in: there is no right to privacy--even in your no doubt pastel-painted bedroom) under the US Constitution. Don't you people ever listen to each other?