So it is OKAY for his quality of life to suffer? And that he may be tortured in prison by inmates? And we can afford to pay $100,000 a year (sure to rise) for the rest of his life?
SOMEONE is lying about a lot of different things here.
(A) "Quality of life" would mean that anyone not in the top 50% of society should die (they are below average and "suffering"). It is a feel good expression to cover some bad ideas.
(B) The outrage over Abu Ghraib was BS. Saddam did FAR WORSE things and CNN knew of abuses under Saddam's regime but kept quiet to keep their Baghdad bureau. They saw more worth in protecting Saddam than in protecting the war effort. The guards were ALREADY on trial. Exposing the abuse (which senators had been notified about months prior) was a tactic designed to sour the public on the war in Iraq (and win the 2004 election for the Democrats).
(C) The death penalty opponents who cheered when Moussaoui's life was spared showed him a kindness he would not show his victims. It is idiotic to believe that he will be abused in prison (A) because the 1993 WTC bombers are kept in a similar maximum security prison and have not suffered any reported abuse, (B) the 1993 WTC bombers lived to see their work completed "jihadist victory dance", and (C) they continued to plot attacks from inside the prison, aided by a treasonous attorney. Some "suffering".
Don't forget the uproar over Tookie on the left coast... and nothing for the disabled blind inmate who was put to death after him... I guess they thought he wouldn't have an appropriate life anyway, after all 'they' wouldn't want to live that way. s/
>>>>(A) "Quality of life" would mean that anyone not in the top 50% of society should die (they are below average and "suffering"). It is a feel good expression to cover some bad ideas.
The database at the CDC has a database that will be tracking everyone's quality of life.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563271/posts
Healthy People 2010