Howling Latina: Weeping for Saddam

Someone feels sorry for Saddam:

Howling Latina wept as she saw a picture of Saddam Hussein next to the rope that would soon end his life, as posted earlier this evening on the Web site of a national newspaper and thankfully taken down.

Hell, I popped popcorn and high-fived my brother when he dropped.

Saddam Hussein was the most brutal dictator of my generation. He killed 1.2 million people (!), gave cash to the families of suicide bombers, vowed to destroy the State of Israel, waged war on Kuwait and Iran, not to mention the brutal terrorism he waged on his own people and abroad (anyone remember Salman Pak?).

The world is a better place when dictators expire. I have no tears for Saddam, only his victims.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Howling Latina: Weeping for Saddam

  1. Doogman says:

    Ya know, I have to agree – the world *is* a better place when vicious dictators aren’t allowed to abuse their people.

    So… I’m still confused by these:

    Oh wait, this one explains it all:


    Happy New Year!

  2. AnonymousIsAWoman says:

    I can understand your being in favor of the execution of Saddam Hussein. He is an evil man.

    But Howling Latina is consistently opposed to the death penalty on religious grounds as are some of your own co-religionists.

    In fact, I read in WaPo that the Vatican tried to intervene to prevent the execution by pleading for mercy and issued a statement expressing disapproval of execution for any human being.

    This should not in any way be interpreted as approval of what Hussein did or stood for.

    Increasingly, Rome seems to be taking a consistent stand defending all right to life issues including opposition to the death penalty.

    I understand that not all Catholics agree with this or with the earlier “seamless garment” approach. But I think it’s getting harder and harder for conservative Catholics to criticize liberal Catholics as being “cafeteria Catholics” while they themselves reserve the right to pick and choose off the theological menu.

  3. Spank That Donkey says:

    Were you high fivin when you threw that 19 year old Party activist under the bus also?

    Any new develpments over there at ODBA? You know organizationally?

    at the Ivory Tower?

    Just curious?

  4. Shaun Kenney says:


    Issues such as the death penalty isn’t a case of “cafeteria Catholicism” for the simple point that the death penalty has been consistently taught by the Church as moral for 1950 years. The blanket opposition to the death penalty is a novel idea.

    Now this isn’t to say that EV or any of the encyclcials from JP II are off-point. But they are the theological opinions of JP II, not a mandated “all Catholics must believe this” point of doctrine.

    Is the death penalty overused? I would say so. Are there instances where the death penalty should be used? The Magisterium certainly provides for such instances. Is Saddam Hussein worthy of the most extreme form of punishment the state can mete out?

    I argue yes, others argue no.

    In addition, HL’s reasoning for “weeping” over the execution of Saddam Hussein isn’t religious in nature, but rather it is because we (I’m assuming world cultures in general, as the Americans did not kill Saddam but rather an Iraqi court of law) do not execute all world leaders in a similar fashion.

    Pinochet was a world leader she mentioned as worthy of death, though Pinochet is a rightist opposing a Communist-led government. She doesn’t list Pol Pot, Qaddafi, Assad, Motubu Seko, Castro, Kim Jong-il, Robert Mugabe, etc.

    I’d be more impressed in the James Martin position, because I know he is a pro-life Democrat who does subscribe to Bernadin’s “seamless garment” theology. HL’s position was truly a cafeteria-style preference for who lives and dies.

  5. Mark E. says:

    If you don’t know about Saddam’s support for anti American terrorism it was real and documented at and

    Those who don’t think he was involved in this should really take an honest perusing of both sites.

  6. The Squeaky Wheel says:

    Blah Blah Blah. I stayed up to here it was done and toda I was thriled to be able to see the video of his little neck snapping. I enjoyed the fact that he was sang something when he dropped, snapped and popped.

    I can only hope that someone there said, “Wait, what did you say? Oh never mind”

    I am suprised the far left has not rolled out conspiracies that this whole thing was a revenge for Sadaam’s attempt on Bush 41’a life.

  7. Charles says:

    I wasn’t crying, but I had no joy at the thought of Saddam being put to death. I even posted about it.

    You should make fun of me too if you are going to make fun of HL.

  8. AnonymousIsAWoman says:

    Thank you Shaun for your well-reasoned and well informed answer. I hope you realize that I wasn’t being snarky. I really wanted to know.

    I can’t speak for HL because I didn’t really read her post, but I know she’s pretty consistently opposed to the death penalty. And she does base it on religious princple in a lot of her posts on the subject, not just the one on Hussein.

    I don’t want to get into which tyrants deserve or don’t deserve the death penalty. All tyranny is immoral.

    I also didn’t realize that James Martin was pro-life. I do respect the seamless garment people a great deal, though it’s hard for me not to be a “picker and chooser.”

    I don’t rejoice in Saddam’s execution. And it bothers me that some hold any life cheaply. But I can see the justice in it. As you had said there is proportionalism – he killed so many. And there’s certainly no doubt about his guilt.

    My biggest problem with the death penalty usually is that it’s so final that if there is a mistake that is discovered years later, there’s no way to redress that. And mistakes have happened.

    But I also fear that use of the death penalty does often cheapen life. It’s one thing to think justice is served or that it serves as a preventative for other crimes.

    But too often, the gloating of bystanders that accompanies it is bloodthirsty. There’s a difference between justice and revenge and that line gets blurred all too easily.

    I suspect that’s why the Vatican is increasingly moving to an anti-death penalty stance. I understand your point, though, that what has been written about it has not risen to the level of doctrine that must be believed by all Catholics. Still, not only the Pope, but many of his representatives and many bishops in this country, as well as internationally, are becoming increasingly in favor of life sentences over execution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *