Today on the show, Taren Bragdon, CEO of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, called in to talk about Gov. John Baldacci's $80 million in budget cuts.
Attorney Mary-Anne Martell comes in on the third Thursday of every month to dispense legal advice to audience members who call in with questions about the law and their rights.
State Senator Bill Diamond, chairman of Maine Criminal Justice Committee, called in to talk about a couple of crime-related issues, including the ongoing legal fight over the sex offender registry, and also the controversial sign hung at a store in Standish encouraging people to bet a dollar on the date of President-Elect Obama's assassination, along with other racist responses to Obama's election.
Finally, FOX News Radio Chicago correspondent Jennifer Keiper called from Chicago, where she was reporting from the scene of the Chicago Toy and Game Fair, the largest toy fair in the country.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
Ray, you really are a piece of work.
You call the Standish sign "inappropriate" wow pretty strong condemnation.
And then you have to drag the people of the Muslim faith into this. Your religious bias comes through loud and clear.
I have not seen the word Muslim come up in any discussions in any news report. Why do you feel you have to use them as an example?
There are many other groups out ther you could attack.
I did listen to the whole video clip twice.
As for mandatory sentencing. You who has such distrust of our legisalture want them to decide how long someone gos to jail instead of a judge. Applying a mandatory sentence to any crime is the easy way out for a society and it makes for good headlines for politicians.
I doubt that Diamond and his committe ever take the time to read any of the sentencing decisions passed down by our judges. They might be surprised at how thoughtful and well reasoned they are.
Why is it you seek ill when none exists?
I used the Muslim reference, not for religious bigotry, but to make a point.
I cannot call on them to denouce actions and when they don't, say that their silence implies condoning the action and then be silent when it is in my own backyard.
I invited Bill on this morning to talk about his effort, which I completely support on this issue.
Further, he does follow the sentencing, as do I. We talk about it.
I talk with the DAs about the sentencing.
In your world, there may be circumstances which mitigate a sexual assault of a child, but in my world, if they are guilty of sexually abusing a child, there are never any circumstances which make it less heinous.
I know you all are feeling real empowered right now, but you still do not have the power to insert ill intent where none exists.
By the way, what should I say about the Standish event.
I do not even want to think about such a possibility or the idea that any human being could find a game in such a miserty placed upon his family or our nation.
I think about his little girls a lot. How proud they must be of their Daddy. How he must seem like the most powerful man and most important man in the world. Everyone wants to think that about their Dad.
The idea that someone would bring physical harm to their Father sickens me or even worse, take delight that such a thing might happen.
I pray for those children and that family.
I do not want to see Obama fail. If he fails, our nation fails.
I disagree with him on some big issues, but he is about to be our President, my President. I believe in this nation, what we stand for and how we operate. I have witnessed firsthand the peaceful transfer of power. It is awe inspiring.
You can have real and passionate disagreements with people and not wish them harm.
I thought you understood that.
By the way, Bill stands with me on mandatory sentences for sexual predators. The rally I organized at the Capitol, Bill was a featured speaker.
I figured you knew that.
Number 1 I did not refer to sex offense sentenecing. iwas talking about all sentencing.
As for seeking il
Give me a break. You compare Obama to Hitler and then bring up muslims. You could have said any other group, but you chose Muslim, maybe because Fox and the RW are still trying to convince peole Obama is Muslim?
Following sentencing is not reading the actual sentences (not in the newspaper) i am talking about the transcripts of the judges thought ptocess in handing down the sentence which is in the parameters as layed out by law.
Judge should be given leeway, because we hopefully appoint them for their knowledge and reasoning skills. Something you are always faulting the leg for not having.
"By the way, Bill stands with me on mandatory sentences for sexual predators. The rally I organized at the Capitol, Bill was a featured speaker".
Now What is the sentence to be?
Give us your sentence please.
I know he is a proponent of mandatory sentences . It is not new for him. Of course he must have a detailed outline somewhere for each class of sex offense, what the sentence will be. I would like to hear it.
I am sure it would change depending on the election cycle we are in.
Back to your Muslim comment. You said it not I. Based on other things you have said during the election season. I am not surprised.
The rhetoric spewed by the right wing media has a result of encouraging guys like the Standish store owner.
Did you call on your fellow rww's to denounce the Oklahoma bombings?
Oklahoma bombings?
Please explain.
Are you refering to McViegh?
Got to keep up Bruce. You know, if you are going to accuse me of bad things, at least have the facts.
Diamond was on this morning talking about sex offenders. The mandatory comment was in the context of sexual offenses. Please keep up.
Bill and I both believe that anyone who sexually assaults a child under the age of twelve should have a mandatory jail sentence.
Looking at the sentencing by judges actually means reading what they have based their decision on and then confering with the DAs who prosecuted the person to see if they are okay with the outcome. That is what is meant by following the sentencing. It takes a lot of time to do these things. I spend the time because it is important to me.
Hi Ray. A few days after elections, the Gov announced that one of the first tasks would be to make budget cuts. I sent an email asking why we dont have state offices operating four days at ten hours each day. This would save heating costs. I received a reply from someone on his behalf stating that state employees have the opportunity to work from home as much as possible, and be flexible with the work schedule to reduce their gasoline costs. The e-mail also said we will not inconvenience the people of Maine by doing the ten hour work day thing.
I say cuts in services is an inconvenience, and that lack of security at courthouses is more than a inconvenience. Also how is staying open later an inconvenience?
People could go to these offices before or afer work instead of taking a day off fromg work to get to Motor vehicle etc...
The truth in my opinion is that it is inconvenient to change everything and negotiate with the union.
I tried to call in but the lines were busy.
I think everything has to be on the table as we move forward. Changing to a ten hour, four day work week would be an inconvenience in the beginning but the truth is, we would adjust and as you rightly point out, there are some tangible benefits for the average citizen.
Again, we could take a look at this through a "priority lens" and determine if certain departments need to stay open five days to not inhibit commerce.
Our government is closed sat and sun. We adjust.
I don't know whether this is a good idea or a bad idea, but it should be fully vhetted as yet another way to look at creating government efficiency.
Bill and I both believe that anyone who sexually assaults a child under the age of twelve should have a mandatory jail sentence.
What is the sentence?
You would have the legislature who you have no faith in,( you have made that fact well known) come up with mandatory sentence rather than a judge working within guidelines?
Here is an example for you
The military guy in Brunswick last wek who was arrested for possesion of Child porn.
Oh wise one Give me a mandatory sentence for him. You must have some in mind, being wiser than any judge.
So Ray Free speech rights protects the store owner from being prosecuted for having a pool encouraging an illegal act?
Would that apply to any topic of any such pool in your mind? Just wondering if any betting pool topics are off limits to you.
Bruce,
I realize rational thought is difficult these days in the euphoric state you are in, but you have to at least try to listen to keep up.
I am not for mandatory sentences in every situation, only the most heinous.
Judges do a decent job, but they are not perfect and we have seen sentencing from around the country where people have gotten slapped on the hand for very heinous crimes because of judicial discretion and the want to send some sort of message. Ohio and Vermont are two places where Judges have exercised very poor judgement in child sex abuse cases. Not all cases, but in some.
I have said that I support a mandatory sentence for sexual assault against a child under the age of 12. I have spent a lot of time on this issue, have gotten over 11,000 emails from families who either themselves were victims, their spouse was a victim or their child was a victim.
The letters had two common themes. One, why didn't society care enough about me to protect me from such monsters and put them away. Two, these folks never feel completely safe, no matter where they are.
This sex registry case currently before the Court will have a big impact on mandatory sentencing. Some who have opposed such sentencing have said that if the Court invalidates the registry, they will support mandatory sentencing because if you cannot keep an eye on sexual predators while they are outside of the jail system, then maybe you have to simply keep them locked up.
As far as Standish goes, if the Secret Service determines their is no direct threat to the President-elect, then their is no crime.
Free speech does not mean protecting only the things you agree with. Free speech is a much greater test of our liberty because it means we have to be willing to protect the right of one who we disagree with to have their ability to say what they believe.
I find the Obama pool disgusting. I found it disgusting when those who opposed President Bush said "cut off his head," or put targets over his face.
I am consistent. If it was wrong for one it is wrong for both.
My understanding is the situation is Standish was not advocating the death of the President-elect or inciting it, they were taking bets on the day it would happen.
If this actually occured, as you probably know the store-owner says it did not, then I think this guy will pay a heavy price for being so careless. Many people have said they will not shop there in protest.
The answer is, if no crime were committed by this store in Standish, as bad as it is, it is protected speech. No different than the Nazis in Skokie, the leftist in Monument Square, or the KKK holding public meetings.
Those of us who disagree with their ideas must not be silent. We must speak out, but we must also never silence them.
Today, our society as a whole finds the actions of these groups to be disgusting. There may come a time when those who protest the actions of these groups may be held in contempt.
Keep in mind, the civil rights marches of the sixties were possible because of the First Amendment, yet in many communities around America, they were seen as a threat to society.
Had their words and actions been silenced, Barack Obama would not be President-elect today.
Glad i gave you the opportunity to make another long winded response and still not answer my question about sentence. Is the mandatory sentence life imprisonment with no parole. If so come out and say it.
If not , what is your sentence?
Since you say you pay really close attention to what I say, I assumed you knew since I have talked extensively about this throughout the last five years.
In the case of 1st degree murder, personally I believe they should receive the death penalty. Since Maine does not allow that sentence, I think those convicted of 1st degree murder should have a life sentence without the possibility of parole.
In the case of one convicted of sexual assualt of a child under the age of tweleve, I believe the person should have lifetime probation with restrictions about where they can be with regard to children for the balance of their life. I also believe they should be listed on the sex offender registry for life.
I believe they should have a jail sentence that does not allow them out of jail until at the very least the time that the victim reaches the age of 21, with the minimum time served be ten years with no time off for good behavior.
As an example, if a child is assaulted at age 7, the assailant would be in jail for at least 14 years.
In the case of rape, I believe the sentence should be at least 15 years with no time off for good behavior, lifetime probation and lifetime sex offender registry.
Any questions?
So there
Thank you for sentencing according to Ray.
By the way. you said "As an example, if a child is assaulted at age 7, the assailant would be in jail for at least 14 years".
What a softie you are. I believe anyone who rapes a 7 year old should be put away for life period.
But that is why i am not a judge.
The last time Sen Diamond was talking to the press in a big way ( about a year and half ago ) about mandatory sentences it had nothing to do with child rape. He was responding to a particulary high profile case involving internet child pornography possession and disemination.
Bruce,
I cannot keep up with every uttering of every politician.
Bill and I agree on GSAs against a child.
Personally, I would like to see them dead, but our government does not allow for that practice.
I think the difference between you and me is this.
You put a lot of faith in government, government people, judges and so on.
I do not. I recognize they are flawed human beings, just like me, no better and no worse. They are as able to be influenced as anyone else and as susceptible as any other human being to being swayed.
Ray said about me "You put a lot of faith in government, government people, judges and so on"
Ray you are making me laugh. You are putting your faith in the legislature to come up with the sentencing rules. You who distrust our leg and say so all the time.
i am putting my faith in a learned judge to work within parameters. Judges may be flawed individuals like you and me, but they have a better education in the field of law to help them handle this.
Do you want Bill Diamond et al to dictate how a Dr does an appendix removal?
Besides are you going to pony up the money to pay for the mandatory sentences? i think not . Mandatory sentences have caused financial havoc in some states regarding incarceration.
.
And what are the costs to society for the repeat offenders who ruin lives and whose offense can end up destroying a person?
It is humorous to me that we have money to give to some, regardless of how small or large, who will not contribute to society as a cost of providing services to those in need, yet suddenly we have no money to keep society safe from monsters. Of course, if we had the death penalty for heinous criminals, that problem would be solved.
On the race question ... I have not figured it out because I do not care. I do not now nor have I ever cared about a person's color. I care about who they are.
Had I been an adult when interracial marriages were illegal, I would have spoken out against the ban. People fall in love with whomever for whatever reasons.
Prior to being married, I was attracted to all sorts of different women, some white, some not.
I can have some influence on the Legislature in terms of mandatory sentencing.
DA Fowle said our constant pressure during the Jessica's Law battle led to the deal that was struck. As you may recall, the Legislature tabled the bill "un-assigned" which essentially means it was dead, but because we and our audience made literally several thousand phonecalls and sent several thousand emails, they brought it back and the ball was moved down the field.
There is very little influence that can be laid upon a judge prior to a sentence.
That's the answer any good christian like yourself would have Kill em all
Sounds like Islamic law.
Do you want to start with cutting a hand off for stealing?
No Bruce, taking innocent life through abortion is wrong.
Punishing a heinous criminal for murder, sexually assaulting a child and so on is not anti-Christian.
Amazing to me how your crowd loves to kill innocent babies but believes giving the death penalty to heinous criminal is immoral.
Oh well
Ray we do not kill "innocent babies'
Babies are the result of a pregnancy brought to term.
Colorado just shot down an amendment that would have called a fertilized egg a baby.
You call them babies I call them fetuses. You believe it is a baby at conception. I do not and evidently the majority of Americans do not.
Your view is based on a religious principle and that should not be forced on others.
My view is based on allowing the mother to have control over her own body.
At least Catholics are consistent with their view on abortion and the death penalty.
Are you ready tto arrest pregannt women for engaging in any behavior that is condidered harmful to the development of a fetus? i e drinking, smoking, eating unhealthy foods. I think not.
It's the conservatives who were against car seats. Not surprising since your concern for :babies" generally ends at birth
"So, in the eyes of both proponents and opponents of the death penalty, the case is closed. Jesus would be against it. After all, most theologians agree."
Quote from a conservative leader.
How does the death penalty fit in with a "christians" philosophy?
Mine is less religious and more a practical and economic matter. The death penalty is expensive and it is not something an imperfect judicial system should impose.
You yourself have disdain for judges rulings. How can you give them or a jury control over such a final decision. I guess you are willing to kill an occasional "innocent" to advance vengence.
Where do you get the "majority of Americans" do not agree?
Abortion was legalized by the Supreme Court, not a national vote or through legislation.
The polls show two things consistently.
One, an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose abortion personally.
Two, the country is split almost fifty-fifty as to whether the practice should be legal.
Being self-righteous about the treatment of children is not very attractive Bruce, especially when you have chosen not to have any.
You think throwing money at a government program shows compassion.
I think it shows apathy. Oh look, we spent money on a government program to take care of kids. What, its not working? Oh, well we better give it more money until it does and by the way, keep the little monsters away from me.
Yes, the compassionate left.
More government, no matter how much it fails, at least it makes us feel like we did something.
So why are you against the death penalty for people who are guilty of first degree murder? You say it costs money to keep them in jail. Do you think they should just be let out to roam the streets like Willie Horton and kill and rape again?
Oh, I know, it was a nasty ad, but every word .... every single word of it was true.
Horton was a murderer, was let out, raped and killed again.
Of course, Bush was a bad guy for pointing it out. It made the liberals look bad.
The bad wasn't that he was let out to rape and kill again. The bad was that someone pointed out that yet another dumb liberal idea failed.
If someone harms one of mine, I am prepared to deal with God for my actions. Until this society decides that people who do heinous things should be punished in a harsh manner, if one of mine are harmed, I will settle the score with that person and then God can settle the score with me.
I realize that you who want to remove religion from mankind seek to point out every inconsistency that a flawed human being has with regard to their faith.
You, who do not understand, see that as somehow invalidating what a person believes.
Having faith in God and his son Jesus does not make you perfect. It does not mean that you will never make a mistake, never fail, never fall or any other such idea. It does not preclude you from doing the wrong thing.
It only means you are forgiven and you are saved.
It does give your life meaning and it also gives you a path to try to walk.
Being Christian does not make you perfect. We are still flawed human beings who are susceptible to the same frailties as anyone else.
I put my faith in God.
You apparently put your faith in government.
Not hard to see why we disagree.
so is that why you are willing to put the occasional innocent to death?
Life without parole is good and it gives them time to think about their crime. and if a mistake was made it is easier to undo. Only jesus was able to raise lazarus, so the tale goes
"Being self-righteous about the treatment of children is not very attractive Bruce, especially when you have chosen not to have any".
I was wondering when you would get to that. You have the market cornered on self righteousness.
I would put my record of working with kids and volunteering against yours any day.
As for the abortion issue. You know that when qualifying questions are asked, it changes the outcome of the surveys, You guys just like to paint the broad stroke to advance your pro life before birth agenda.
The majority of Americans while not liking the concept of abortion, still support the women's right to make the decision.
You do not and you are in the minority. Unfortunately the conservatives do not even want to advance birth control to make abortion less frequent. it is all about control with you guys.
You said "
So why are you against the death penalty for people who are guilty of first degree murder? You say it costs money to keep them in jail. Do you think they should just be let out to roam the streets like Willie Horton and kill and rape again?
Once again you do not pay attention. Are you adhd ?
I said the death penalty is expensive.
It costs less to keep someone in prison for life than to execute them. Your answer is to streamline the appeal process or none at all.since adult human life is not so precious to you as that of a fetus.
Really Bruce, you would match your time involved with kids against mine?
Okay, so tell me about my time involved with kids? What exactly do you know about my time involved with kids?
Obviously, you must have done some extensive research to make such a comparison, right? You would not blindly make some statement like most liberals without at least having some knowledge of my time involved with kids, would you?
At the end of the day, you liberals are all alike.
You are not bad people, you just don't have a clue.
That's okay though, I am sure you feel just the same about me.
I don't have a clue as to how much time you spend working with kids and I do not mean your own either I just know how much time I have spent. I feel confident that I can blindly make the challenge.
Since you mr self righteous keep saying because you have kids it makes your opinion more valuable.
Maybe about your own, but not necessarily others.
No one is stalking you,Don't flatter yourself,I am just rebutting the crap you spew all the time. You have a clue, but it is a warped one.
email is not as much fun for you is it, as you can't shout down the caller.
Bruce,
I don't shout down the callers. I don't know who reads this, but if they follow my show, they know I treat the callers with respect.
I am not self-righteous. That is the problem in America. When someone is self-confident and self-assured because they have spent the time necessary to develop and informed opinion, others are threatened by it.
I know what is right for me. I know what I believe. I have spent considerable time developing these ideas because they are important to me.
I would never tell you how to live or that your life is right or wrong. That is not for me to decide.
When, however, a person gets into the arena of public policy, that is when the value judgements come in.
If a person advocates a policy or position in the public policy arena that I disagree with, of course, I judge that policy and object to it.
I assumed everyone else did as well.
Unfortunately, they do not.
Same-sex marriage is a good example.
I seek to preserve the status quo.
The Gay Rights Movement seeks to change the status quo.
I am not imposing my values on others as the policy pre-dated me. I simply support the policy and seek to preserve it.
The Gay Rights Movement seeks to impose their values on society.
For some reason, preserving my values is wrong, but the Gay Rights Movement imposing their values on society is somehow noble.
Liberals are okay with the imposition of their values on society but they want to cry foul when others seek to preserve their values, they cry out with terms like homophobe and demagogue(spelling).
It is a crock and more importantly, it is inconsistent.
I do not wish to support the culture-of-the-moment mentality to prevades our nation.
The gays are not imposing their values on you. Whether they marry or not will not affect you in any way. Unless you count that you would lose sleep over the thought.
You are using your religious views to keep them from attaining what they want. Just as some religous people justified slavery and segragation and not allowing women to vote. The bible, the koran or the talmud is not our constitution.
You do tell gays how to live. Just as you want to tell women what they can do with their bdoies. regarding pregnancy.
That is bull I have seen you drown out callers and not let them finish sentences. i really like it when your face gets all red though
I hope ted knows cpr.
As for wanting revenge on someone that harms your family. That is a natural instinct, if you did not feel that way I would be surprised. But that is why society has courts etc.
I am not self-righteous. That is the problem in America. When someone is self-confident and self-assured because they have spent the time necessary to develop and informed opinion, others are threatened by it.
Believe me I am not threatened by your feelings of self confidence.
I find it entertaining.
Bruce,
I do not drown out callers. Ted runs the board and if pods them down, that is his decision as that is his job.
I am paid to give my opinion. I love the debate.
You see me as telling gays what to do. I see them as seeking to redefine an important institution that has real meaning for our society.
If this was about equality, my contractual proposal would work. It offers all the benefits, rights and legal protection of marriage but it offers it to any two people who choose to enter into the legally binding contract.
This is about the Gay Rights Movement seeking to force traditional society to accept their lifestyle as equal and therefore accept it.
The equal rights arguement I completely buy. The forced acceptance of one's lifestyle because today it is cache' will not work with me or apparently most Americans based on the vote in 30 states.
For a guy you disagree with so fiercely, you sure do spend a lot of time with me.
I appreciate it, I just can't figure out why.
It must amuse you greatly.
It does
have a great Thanksgiving
Besides Why would i spend time online with people who agree with me?
We would all be just nodding at one another like Rush's dittoheads
Post a Comment