On May 27, the Governor declined to intervene in the execution of Kevin Greene. Statements from AG and 2009 Republican candidate for governor Bob McDonnell along with LG Bill Bolling were dutifully reprinted throughout the right side of the Virginia political blogosphere, with most of the posts reflecting the sentiment that Kaine had kept his word to uphold the law. Blogs on the left, though, weren’t so happy with the decision and took Kaine to the proverbial woodshed.
Percy Levar Walton was scheduled to die last night. Governor Tim Kaine intervened and commuted Walton’s three life sentences to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Right on cue, McDonnell and Bolling reacted with their own opinions on the governor’s actions, and, once again, the right side of the Virginia blogosphere dutifully reprinted those statements, this time saying that Kaine went back on his word. Of course, I don’t expect anything different from them; after all, they are consistent in their belief that the death penalty should always be carried out. I don’t agree with them, but I have to respect their consistency.
The left? Well, let’s just say that the outrage expressed two weeks ago hasn’t been matched with kudos this time around. As I have perused the various blog aggregators, I’ve only seen one post applauding Kaine for his action. And that’s just wrong.
I suspect part of the reason for the silence is that some of these folks are mad at Kaine for endorsing Gerry Connolly over netroots favorite Leslie Byrne in the 11th CD primary. But that shouldn’t have anything to do with this situation. If you are going to savage the guy when he does something that you disagree with, you should be as strong in your message when he does something that you agree with.
And folks wonder why blogs lack credibility.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
I, too, have changed my mind on capital punishment. While the studies showing its effects in reducing crimes that merit capital punishment are convincing, the current inequities of the criminal justice system outwiegh that benefit. I have nothing against public defenders, but one cannot expect an indigent defendant to receive the same representation as OJ Simpson.
The inequities of the system are perhaps worth addressing, but the criminal justice system will never ever be perfect.
There is a slogan that I occasionally hear that leaves my eyes rolling heavenward. “Good enough is not good enough.” When I hear that silly piece of nonsense, I always want to add: “Yes, but if we wait for it to get any better, nothing will ever get done.”
There is adage that expresses that thought more concisely. “Better is the enemy of good.”
Ask yourself a question. With the growth of government, isn’t almost inevitable that the primary functions of government will and must suffer? In their campaigns to control the trillions spent by government, what priority do politicians give to our criminal justice system?
We have no choice except to make the system work today. We must elect people willing to focus on the primary functions of government work. So that they can properly focus, we must also elect people willing to divest government of functions best performed by the private sector. But so far, we are losing those battles.
First off, Vivian, because of your family, I highly respect your opinion on this. But I disagree.
The biggest issue I have with this is Kaine’s referral in 2006 of this case to the courts for the specific purpose of studying and examining the mental competency of Walton.
When the judiciary bodies have studied the case, examined the evidence and provided Walton with the opportunity to present new evidence regarding this and they rule in a way that is against what Kaine believes, he disregards their notations and overrides them.
Yes, it is his right and a option as the governor to do what he did. I am not questioning that. But I believe, when you defer to the various judicial bodies to rule, then completely reject their ruling its a slap in the face to the families of the victims, the victims (such that they can receive justice) and the entire judicial system.
“[The] criminal justice system will never ever be perfect.”
Of course. Capital punishment is an extraordinary situation. It is, literally, a matter of life and death. I do not have any desire to force everyone to use a public defender if accused of a capital crime, so the only alternative is to eliminate capital punishment.
I do not have a major problem with capital punishment in theory. I do not think there is a Christian basis for it, based on my reading of the Bible. (Others may disagree with my reading and say the Bible requires it.) I am convinced that it does reduce the murder rate. In my mind, the inequities of the system outwiegh that benefit. Others will disagree with that, too. It is a judgement call.
Scott, as was pointed out earlier, the court’s decision was a razor fine split. Perhaps if the court had been split 10-3, instead of 7-6, Kaine would have decided differently.
Scott – he didn’t “defer” to the courts, he looked to them as a means for gathering additional information in order to make his own decision. If you agree that the executive branch is an equal branch of the government, then how can you call it “overriding their decision” and “a slap in the face”?
Isn’t this government working the way the founders have intended?