Another Erstwhile Conservative Exclusive: The Devil On Oklahoma’s Death Penalty Debacle

The devil was kind enough to take time away from his busy schedule to sit down with me for a short discussion on Oklahoma’s hurry-up-and-kill-’em execution fiasco. Here’s the unedited transcript:

THE ERSTWHILE CONSERVATIVE: Thanks again for making time to talk about this important topic.

SATAN: No problem. I was here in your state anyway.

TEC: Oh, yeah? Why?

SATAN: I had some work to do in Jefferson City. Here, let me read to you what I got done yesterday: “Missouri senators have passed legislation that seeks to nullify some federal gun laws and punish federal agents who enforce them.” Isn’t that awesome? I’m pretty proud of that.

TEC: I bet it was hard to get—

SATAN: —Hard? Hardly. I thought it would take a real pro, which is why I came to Missouri, but it turned out that getting Republicans in your state to pass nullification legislation was so damned easy that I probably could have left it for them to do all by themselves. If we devils ever start thinking about starting another civil war, next to Texas Republicans, I can’t think of a more solid group of folks we could count on to fire the first shot.

TEC: That’s fascinating, but I really want to talk to you about that botched execution in Oklahoma on Tuesday.

SATAN: Botched? Did you say botched? It wasn’t botched, my man. The guy is dead, isn’t he? I checked myself and believe me, he’s dead. So Oklahoma didn’t botch a damn thing. They killed him as sure as I’m sitting here. In fact, they essentially tormented him before he had that heart attack, so I say kudos to Oklahoma! We should have more executions like that one! My only problem with what they did was they waited too long to close the blinds.

TEC: What do you mean?

SATAN: They waited 16 minutes. Look, people don’t need to know what their government is doing, especially when what their government is doing is so messy. When the government does good things like killing people, citizens shouldn’t be able to watch what is being done in their names. That’ll just make them a little squirmish about it all. Let’s say that this execution had been on television. (What a show that would have been!) People could have seen Clayton Lockett’s body struggle against the drugs he was given; they could have heard him moan and groan as he was writhing on the table. From my perspective, who wouldn’t want to see that? Forty-three minutes of sheer joy as far as I’m concerned. But I know what those do-goody liberals would do with those images. They’d make a big propaganda war against the death penalty and before you know it juicy killings like this one would stop. So, dammit, they should have closed those beige blinds sooner, or better yet, done it all behind closed doors.

TEC: But even if they couldn’t see what is going on, don’t people who support the death penalty just want it done humanely? Even for convicted killers like Clayton Lockett?

SATAN: Humanely? Are you kidding me? There ain’t no way for the state to kill someone humanely, son. However it’s done, it is killing plain and simple. And I love it. You can cut their heads off, hang ’em from a tree, shoot ’em in the heart, gas ’em, or you can stick needles in ’em and do it that way. I don’t care as long as death is the result. But there ain’t no such thing as the government humanely killing a prisoner, a guy they have locked up. All I’m saying is the stuff should be done out of sight of the public, lest the public start thinking, “Man, we tortured that guy like he tortured his victim. Aren’t we better than that?” You did know that Lockett put his 18-year-old victim through hell before he shot her and had her buried alive, right? And if the people start thinking that the state’s killing of Lockett looked more like revenge for his crimes than justice, then they might get all wobbly-kneed on the death penalty. And that would be a shame.

TEC: Well, I don’t know—

SATAN: And, look, besides all that, the truth is starting to seep out that more than 4% of people sentenced to death in America are actually innocent. I have a legion of demons assigned to the task of keeping that information from getting wide distribution to the public, because there ain’t nothing better than the state killing an innocent man! I get all goose-pimply just thinking about it. But it so happens that the latest study by liberal do-gooders came out in conjunction with the killing of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma (and don’t think demonic heads won’t roll over not preventing that). So, that makes it all the more disturbing that those damn officials in Oklahoma left the blinds open long enough so that those liberal journalists could write sensational stories about what went on in that prison death chamber and make a lot of noise about how “inhumane” killing a prisoner is. Now we’ve really got our work cut out for us, dammit!

TEC: I have one more—

SATAN: Sorry, but I’ve got to go. I’m due at a meeting with my top advisers on how to keep pushing the Benghazi scandal even when there is no evidence. ABC and Fox “News” here we come!



  1. Robert J Roberts

     /  May 1, 2014

    I think I saw Satan this morning. I was in a donut shop BSing with my fellow geezers. The teevee was on, as it always is (I still can’t understand the omnipresence of teevee, but that’s another bone to chew) and it was tuned to Faux “News.” A House of Representatives committee hearing was being shown live. The subject: Benghazi. One of the people testifying, a retired general, was saying the armed forces should have “tried” to attack, among other should haves. Out of the corner of my eye I’d swear he shape-shifted a couple of times while he was talking. He seemed to turn red and show fangs. I have contended for years there was no actual “Devil” but maybe I have been wrong. Maybe the Republican Radical Religious Right has enlisted his services.


    • That was an amazing appearance, no? At least the guy was eventually shot down by a Republican chairman not named Issa.


  2. Isn’t one of the names for Satan “The Father of Lies”? That sounds like the Mission Statement for Faux News, so I would guess that Satan has one of his avatars pretty much continuously present there. Probably looks like Hannity. I wonder, could we arrange to “spill” some Holy Water on Hannity just to see what happens? It works in the movies……


    • Satan told me his favorite program on Fox was the morning show, “Fox and Friends.” He said, “Some of our best work is done on that show. I’m very proud of it.”


  3. St. Rachael spent most of her show on the botched execution last night, and did a bang-up job of it. It included a large dollop of history on the death penalty – I wish the Faux News audience could have seen it. Ha, ha, ha. I kill myself sometimes.

    I did pick up on one peculiar word in the commentary, one that is always bandied about when the discussion is about doing lethal-injection executions. The drug(s) must not only be effective, but “humane” and, this is the one, “safe”. Huh? Yep, they always say it. Safe. It’s a puzzlement.


    • That reminds me of something. William F. Buckley once said he supported the morning after pill because he reasoned that if someone were going to abort their pregnancy that it ought to be done as humanely as possible. And since waiting seems to increase the inhumanity of abortion, it appeared reasonable to him to do it earlier than later. Needless to say, his humane argument failed to convince the already convinced that all abortion was inhumane.


      • The “miracle” of life, supposedly, occurs when sperm penetrates the ovum. Is the process heaven-guided? How then to explain the human intervention of in vitro fertilization? Are “test-tube babies” also God’s creations? I haven’t heard any of the religious say they aren’t.

        Fetal growth is a continuum, of course, and therefore the conundrum. As far as I am concerned, though, it ought to be a sin, if not a crime, to bring a known-defective child into the world when science is capable of assessing a fetus in the first trimester. A 6-inch-long fetus does not have a capable brain at that point.


  4. Yes. To the devil’s point, John pointed out that “… the light has come into the world, but men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen…” — why else would there be such resistance to disclosing who donates to PAC’s?


%d bloggers like this: