Death-Penalty Debate: Honesty Needed

When Mike Dukakis was asked by CNN’s blunt Bernard Shaw during the 1988 presidential debates whether he would support the death penalty if his wife, Kitty, had been raped and murdered, the Massachusetts governor famously responded, “No, I don’t, Bernard, and I think you know that I’ve opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don’t see any evidence that it’s a deterrent and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime.”

Given the kind of coddling Democrats receive from the press these days, Shaw’s question sounds especially jarring. But Dukakis’s automaton-like response to a query about the theoretical slaying of his dear wife did not go over well with the American public at the time. The candidate did not seem to genuinely grapple with the complex moral implications of murder and punishment.

About the Author

David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner.

Featured Tags

When Mike Dukakis was asked by CNN’s blunt Bernard Shaw during the 1988 presidential debates whether he would support the death penalty if his wife, Kitty, had been raped and murdered, the Massachusetts governor famously responded, “No, I don’t, Bernard, and I think you know that I’ve opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don’t see any evidence that it’s a deterrent and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime.”

Given the kind of coddling Democrats receive from the press these days, Shaw’s question sounds especially jarring. But Dukakis’s automaton-like response to a query about the theoretical slaying of his dear wife did not go over well with the American public at the time. The candidate did not seem to genuinely grapple with the complex moral implications of murder and punishment.