Butting Into California's Affairs & Arnold's Stones

As a firm believer in our Tenth Amendment's state's rights, M.E. makes it his general policy not to comment on matters specific to one state, especially states with a death penalty law. Exceptions arise only when others with no voting rights try to assert their influence (Hurricane Katrina, Kansas "minister" at Idaho military funeral, etc.) in a particular state.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson has now weighed in with his two cents against California's scheduled execution of Crips gang founder, Tookie Williams on Tuesday. Rev. Jackson (and others), I have voted in California's gubernatorial elections, have you?

Brother in arms, OSAPIAN at Patriotic Rants asks, "If Crips founder, mass murderer and Jamie Foxx's new best friend Tookie Williams is a Prince of Peace, as we are told by the usual suspects, why are his ganster followers threatening to kill correctional officers and parole agents in his name if Arnold Schwarzenegger has the stones (granted, a really big IF) to deny his clemency application and execute him on Tuesday?"

OSAPIAN (California) also provides an interesting Tookie Williams, an anthology here.

UPDATE: Writer Gus Van Horn tackles the issue well from a different perspective in his Clemency for a Terrorist? here.

The world needs examples, good and bad for guidance purposes. If you are against the war in Iraq, you probably argue Saddam is not a bad example. Unless you live in Iraq, your vote does not count.

If, however, you think the war in Iraq is an appropriate military reaction to global terrorism, you probably could not come up with a better example to be made (proximity to al-Qaeda, propensity to scoff at UN security resolutions, history as defiler of women and children, etc.) than Saddam. History will soon judge whether Iraqis agree with you. Who cares if all the terrorists and some lawyers disagree?