It’s hard to imagine a high-profile death-penalty case without a New York Times editorial denouncing executions. And sure enough, no sooner had the Oklahoma City bombing jury pronounced Timothy McVeigh guilty than the Sages of Times Square weighed in with their ritual denunciation, a lead editorial titled “Death and Timothy McVeigh.”
“We see capital punishment . . . as morally wrong and against the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments,” the Times declared. Now, the death penalty surely isn’t unusual, so the Times must think that its exceptional cruelty is what makes execution unconstitutional. But the editorial then proceeds to recommend life without parole, since for a 29-year- old like McVeigh “that would be the most excruciating punishment of all.” Huh?
About as excruciating as trying to parse the logic of the Times editorial.
