Wholeheartedly with the 6th and 7th paragraphs. It was the simple fact that you cannot "undo" an execution that pushed me into the anti-death-penalty camp to stay...

On the larger topic, while I disagree 90% of the time with the dye-hard conservatives, I remain mindful that they represent the other half of my conscience.

I have recently concluded that I was wrong and Mr. Pot was correct on the question of whether Hillary in private lied to the Benghazi family members. Given Hillary’s  public statements that the film caused “the embassy protests” without distinguishing that the Benghazi compound was not an embassy, and no public statement blaming the attack on Al Qaeda, I thought the family members who accused her of lying in private had simply misunderstood her.

       I had previously  read a report on the family member who kept notes who described Hillary as saying “we are going to have the film maker arrested who was responsible.”  Well, that is consistent with him misunderstanding her. But after the recent Town Hall where Hillary was pressed on whether she claimed the family members had lied, I read reports of the full statement in the notes – her exact words were “we are going to have the film maker arrested who was responsible FOR THE DEATH OF YOUR SON.”

          That kind of language rebuts the notion that she simply repeated the confusing public statement in private. And when coupled with her generic denial and inability to explain how this guy got it wrong, I have now concluded that she did lie about it as Mr. Pot contended

but I have MANY issues where I break with the right, as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal it might even be a fifty fifty split on the number of issues I am on the right or the left. Usually my wallet wins out and I vote GOP, but not always.

so lets stick with your topic of choice, the death penalty. I am and always have been for the Death Penalty with a couple of caveats, the main one being "Absolute certainty" of guilt. I don't mean "beyond a reasonable doubt" I am talking beyond any shadow of a doubt. You can not undo capital punishment and too many people convicted under the threshold of a reasonable doubt have been put to death only to be proven innocent years or even decades later.

IMO, some people aren't worth "saving" and the recidivism rate of criminal put to death is 0%. Baby rapers, serial killers, people like the terrorists in San Bernardino, or the right wing whackos like Timothy McVeigh, these people deserve no mercy and should be put out of their misery in an expeditious manner to give their victims closure without putting the family through literal decades looking for justice.

On the media front, I have hard time thinking of anyone from either side of the aisle I am actually a fan of, the only one that comes to mind is now retired and that is Neal Boortz. It's much easier for me to list the ones I simply can't stand. Hannity is toward the top of that list, along with Michael Savage who probably is at the top of that rather long list.

Fair enough!

I don't know if he qualifies as a TV personality, other than I use to see him a lot on one of the Sunday News Magazines, before I switched over to GPS with Fareed Zakaria, but it would be George Will. I always felt he did a good and honest job at presenting a true conservative's point of view, and there was often a lot of it I could agree with.  I still read his column. But, on many issues the devil is in the details, like when it comes to abortion. Most on the right would consider me to be pro-abortion, but that's not the case. I am against abortion. I think all stops should be implemented to stop abortion, including money and resources to educated young people about contraception and how to use it. I have no problem with having a reasonable waiting period before a woman can implement an abortion with the recommendation of her doctor. I find many who say they are pro-life could care less about preventing conceptions, hence possible abortions. That leaves them being only pro-birth. I very much understand and feel with deep regret the loss of potential life, yet I can not stomach someone who claims to be pro-life, yet will not put their money where their mouth is, in preventing unwanted pregnancies.  

Sorry I’m late. No doubt most people perceive my “side” to be Republicans but that’s only partially true. . .  

I find the vast majority of them to be on my side only because the lesser of two wrongs (I won’t use the term evil) is better than the larger of two wrongs or half a loaf is better than none. However one looks at it (and already being in the minority most of the time) not voting is truly a vote for the majority. Having said all that “my side” gets a lot of things wrong. In recent years their biggest two “wrongs” are spending too much money and not standing up to the media for what they claim are their principles. There are too many Progressive Republicans in positions of power and our political system has become too efficient at generating oligarchs. The lure of power and money seems to eventually corrupt almost everyone invited in.

So having failed you regarding your question, I’ll choose instead to tell you what I’ve recently come to realize what I’ve gotten wrong. Not my main point but I agree about capital punishment. My viewpoint has softened. It needs to be reserved only for instances that are provable beyond any doubt, not just reasonable doubt. But I don’t totally agree with your post. In particular you say “It just doesn't make sense to me at least for government to tell others they cannot kill but the government can.” Killing people is not the only example you could offer up as potentially fitting your hypocritical paradigm regarding government vs. the general public. For example, an individual is forbidden to imprison another against his will but I’m sure you agree it’s OK for the government to do so. Other constitutional rights can be stripped or restricted after due process by government but not by an individual. “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?” What elevates Life above the other God given rights?  

Now for my epiphany.

I used to believe that abortion exceptions should be provided in cases of rape or incest. I’ve now come to the realization that this previously held stance was quite hypocritical. A taking of a life is just that, regardless the circumstances. It’s clearly justifiable when done in self defense, to save the life of the mother, if that’s her choice. But just because a terrible and violent crime was committed upon someone, that does not give them the right to take another’s life. People suffer even more horrible physical pain in other types of crimes. People become disfigured. People are injured that causes them all sorts of pain both physical and mental, yet they are not allowed to go take another life, not even the life of their attacker let alone a purely innocent one. As terrible as it is, the victims of crime are expected to live with the outcome. They can’t take another life simply for their own betterment or convenience. Obviously if one thinks abortion is not the taking of a life then all my reasoning goes out the window, but if they do believe it is the taking of a life then my reasoning is the only rational line of thought.
 
BTW, as far as honest and reasonable liberal media figures that I even admire from time to time include Kirsten Powers, Camille Paglia, Michael Kinsley and Andrew Sullivan (although he still considers himself to be a conservative so maybe he doesn’t count.