I think today's editorial in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "Death penalty still wrong," was prepared well in advance of Saddam Hussein's execution.
The Editorial Board may have had it ready for print as soon as Saddam was captured in December of 2003.
We all knew this was coming. The board knew that the death of Saddam would provide a perfect opportunity to slam the Bush administration and supporters of the death penalty.
(Unlike the Editorial Board, let's not forget that some Dems are pro-death penalty. For example, Oscar shoo-in, superstar Al Gore is FOR the death penalty. He believes in killing criminals. Just don't melt the polar ice caps.)
I'm not endorsing the death penalty here. I'm pointing out that the Editorial Board's reasoning is weak.
Saddam Hussein was a monster. His execution by the Iraqis he cruelly governed will understandably be cause for celebration in many quarters and perhaps cause for more insurgency in others. And, yes, the world is better off with one fewer tyrant.
But this in no way changes one central truth: Capital punishment remains a bad idea even for really bad people. People like Hussein, for instance. The problem is not so much that such people don't deserve to die as it is that a nation debases itself by stooping to the level of a killer.
The execution of Saddam was not an eye for an eye.
For that to be the case, Saddam would need hundreds of thousands of eyes.
Furthermore, does a nation debase itself when it excuses atrocities and disrespects life by coddling monsters?
...The virgin Iraqi government, designed to be a shining example of democracy in the largely autocratic Middle East, went astray by adopting capital punishment, a practice democracies have shed worldwide as unbefitting them.
"Virgin Iraqi government"?
What does that mean?
Unfortunately, Iraq got no good guidance on the issue from its mentor, the United States, one of the last holdouts against this trend. The Bush administration backs capital punishment enthusiastically.
Remember, Dems enthusiastically back capital punishment, too.
That helped them win control of the House and Senate, acting like conservatives to appeal to mainstream American voters.
I knew a lib media outlet like The JS would blame Bush for Saddam's execution.
The buck always stops with Bush. I wonder if The JS blames Bush for its declining readership as well.
Iraq's use of the death penalty has already drawn criticism from world bodies such as the United Nations, the Vatican and Amnesty International, which considers the punishment a human rights violation. But these organizations are doubly critical of the penalty in Hussein's case because they say his trial failed to meet standards of fairness. The groups cite interference in the judicial proceedings from the executive branch and other problems.
Criticism from the corrupt, genocide-ignoring UN and the politically driven AI is a joke.
Criticism from the Vatican is valid because it's based in teaching that is morally consistent. The Vatican is against the death penalty, but it doesn't trumpet the murder of millions of babies via abortion.
However, to suggest that the trial was unfair is ridiculous. Whatever minor problems there may have been, the evidence against Saddam is clear and overwhelming. How many thousands of people need to be exhumed from mass graves?
His execution also robs the Kurds of some modicum of justice. They first wanted a second trial for Hussein to conclude. The deposed dictator is charged with genocide against the Kurds in the 1980s.
Huh?
Saddam is dead.
Do you think the Kurds feel cheated that they couldn't put him on trial and sentence him to death, too?
Is The JS arguing that the Kurds should have had that opportunity?
That's a pretty stupid argument, considering the board is against the death penalty.
The gallows have seen a step-up in traffic in Iraq this year. Some 53 people took the one-way trip there in 2006. Yes, Iraq has horrible problems with lawlessness. But the executions only add to the cycle of violence.
Fifty-three?
How does that compare to decades of atrocities and death under Saddam?
It's not in the same league, not even close.
The government has a tough time teaching the lesson that the people must stop settling scores with beheadings and other violence if the government itself is settling scores with hangings.
How stupid!
An alleged criminal being put on trial, found guilty, and being sentenced to die is not the same as an innocent person being taken hostage, tortured, and beheaded.
The Editorial Board's inability to distinguish the differences are an embarrassment to The JS.
Hussein said he prefers to die at the end of a rope rather than to waste away in prison. Will his execution make him a martyr?
One thing is certain. An execution diminishes those who enable it.
What's certain is that the Editorial Board prefers to bash Bush rather than highlight the tyrant Saddam's crimes against humanity.
I think the Editorial Board is more comfortable with the mindset of these protesters:
Activists from the Communist Party of India (Marxist) hold a burning doll symbolizing U.S. President George Bush during a protest against the execution of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, in Srinagar December 30, 2006. REUTERS/Yawar Nazir (INDIAN ADMINISTERED KASHMIR)
A demonstrator condemns the hanging of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein in Bangalore. (AFP/Dibyangshu Sarkar)
An activist from the Communist Party of India (Marxist) writes on a doll symbolizing U.S. President George Bush during a protest against the execution of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, in Srinagar December 30, 2006. REUTERS/Yawar Nazir (INDIAN ADMINISTERED KASHMIR)
