The New York Times’ Pro-Murderer Mentality

I have a new article at American Thinker: “Pro-Murderer Mindset of The New York Times.” It critiques a recently posted 7900-word article highly sympathetic to a double-murderer and advocating his early release from prison while still a young man. I discuss the huge gulf in values between murderer advocates and victims of barbaric crimes.

Having long pretended merely to oppose capital punishment, the real goal of those who champion the cause of murderers is to minimize any punishment for murder, period. The Times punctuates one more time what has always been realized by capital punishment supporters: the "life without parole" alternative is a sham. Murderer advocates seek to save not only the lives of their idols, but also their freedom.

The media and courts, especially the U.S. Supreme Court, have promoted and furthered the minimization of punishment for murder, while unspeakably compounding the torture suffered by victims.

The Times asserts that there is a “national debate over just what is accomplished by sentencing juveniles to long prison sentences." I dispute that and point out:

The public strongly supports severe sentences for severe crimes. The only debate is in the minds of pro-murderer elitists who have a disproportionately dominant influence in the media and with five justices of the Supreme Court, who have defied the public by imposing their own values on everyone else… On June 25, the Court abolished mandatory life sentences for convicted premeditated murderers almost 18 years old, seven years after abolishing the death penalty for them and two years after abolishing life sentences for nearly 18-year-old non-homicide predators.

I conclude that “all too often, the elite media and elite judges eagerly identify with brutal murderers at the expense of their long-dead victims and the tormented souls left behind.” Nevertheless, an overwhelming public majority identifies and sympathizes with victims rather than their tormentors.

Obviously: “The 2012 election will determine whether anti-victim values will be entrenched on the Supreme Court for another generation.”