Kerry Healey vs. the U.S. Constitution
Here in Massachusetts, our absentee governor, Mitt Romney, has decided to move back to Iowa officially, and terminate his residency in the state after one term of padding his résumé by serving as our nominal governor. He's leaving his hand-picked successor, Lieutenant-Governor Kerry Healey, as his heir apparent. She's running against Democrat Deval Patrick. Healey has been launching increasingly shrill attacks on Patrick, and it's only getting worse. In case there are any errant Kerry Healey supporters cruising through this site (and I know you're out there!) I've got something to point out to you about her attacks on Democrat Deval Patrick, whom she regularly says "defended murderers and rapists."
Notice how the Healey campaign is making a big deal over how Deval Patrick "defended" murderers and rapists? When you hear that, what do you think? That Patrick is for murder and rape?
If you do, then you're doing just what Healey wants you to think. What she won't mention, of course, is that as a defense lawyer, it was Patrick's job to defend them. In fact, the Constitution guarantees that everyone has a right to a lawyer to defend them.
When Kerry Healey complains that Deval Patrick defended these criminals, she's complaining about the U.S. Constitution. Now we don't have to like the Constitution, but it's the law of the land, and the governor of Massachusetts doesn't have the right to change it. If you want to change the Constitution to deny everyone the right to a trial by jury, it's better to talk to your congressional representatives. If you think you can get the Constitution changed and deny these people their rights by voting for Kerry Healey, you're going to be disappointed.
But if you do manage to change the Constitution so that not everyone has a right to a laywer or to a trial by jury, well... you'd better hope no one ever falsely accuses you of some crime...
Me, I don't support changing the Constitution. I support Deval Patrick.