Conservative Donnybrook

Inmates are suing the Missouri Department of Correction, seeking the disclosure of the members of execution teams. It seems that some prior executions were conducted with members of the execution team having been accused of stalking or, in another case, on probation.

Are death row inmates afraid that they will be stalked after their deaths? This seems to be a lot of hoo-ha over a non-issue. What possible difference could it make to death row inmates who is going to push the plunger?

The complaint raises the issue of “temperament and suitability.” All that really seems to matter is competence. It would be bad if a doctor were to measure out the wrong dose and botch an execution. However, the fact that a nurse in the room once stalked an ex after a bad breakup matters not at all as it has nothing to do with his competence to swab the incision site.

I’ve been reading a fantastic book by science writer Gary Taubes called Good Calories, Bad Calories. I intend to write up a review and have it posted here in the next week or two. But I have also just come across this NYMag article by Taubes from back in September entitled “The Scientist and the Stairmaster: Why most of us believe that exercise makes us thinner—and why we’re wrong.” The article covers a little bit of the ground he goes over in the book as well. Highly recommended!

Perhaps because of my distaste for John McCain and media storylines, this is what I like to see: someone throwing cold water on the McCain hype, bucking the emerging conventional wisdom of McCain-as-frontrunner. The Corner’s Michael Graham:

In 2000, running against George W. Bush and the entire Carroll Campbell machine in South Carolina, John McCain got 42% of the vote, and 240,000 votes out of 573,000 or so cast.

Tonight, he got 33% of the vote in a field where his top challengers—Romney and Giuliani—aren’t even running [aren't you forgetting someone?], and 135,000 actual votes. If just the same people who voted for McCain in 2000 had voted for him today, he would have won 50+% of the South Carolina vote. That would have been truly impressive.

Instead, John McCain LOST the support of 100,000 people—and he’s the winner?

Unfortunately, this analysis isn’t all that convincing. I mean, I don’t get it–SC 2000 was basically a two-way race, and this year he won in a field with a guy who does very well among evangelicals, and a strong establishment type in Romney. I don’t see the decline in absolute votes as a glaring sign of weakness. Graham continues: Continue Reading »