Amy Goodman of Democracy Now? Yeesh. What's next, links to posts over at Portland Indymedia?

This was the vote. All Republicans, Lieberman, and six Democrats: Bayh (D-IN), Carper (D-DE), Feinstein (D-CA), Landrieu (D-LA), Nelson (D-NE) and Schumer (D-NY).

Those like McCain who spoke against waterboarding still supported Mukasey.

McCain's mind is warped by his obsession with the presidency, so he can probably plead insanity.

Smith needs to be held accountable on this issue and asked how he squares waterboarding with his strong moral values. Is his loyalty to President Bush once again greater than his loyalty to the citizens of Oregon?

What moral values? The answer to the question is, "Yes." Don't forget that fundraiser in Portland where Bush bought Smith from his well-coiffed head to his expensive shoes.

This was the vote. All Republicans, Lieberman, and six Democrats: Bayh (D-IN), Carper (D-DE), Feinstein (D-CA), Landrieu (D-LA), Nelson (D-NE) and Schumer (D-NY).

Those like McCain who spoke against waterboarding still supported Mukasey.

McCain's mind is warped by his obsession with the presidency, so he can probably plead insanity.

Smith needs to be held accountable on this issue and asked how he squares waterboarding with his strong moral values. Is his loyalty to President Bush once again greater than his loyalty to the citizens of Oregon?

What moral values? The answer to the question is, "Yes." Don't forget that fundraiser in Portland where Bush bought Smith from his well-coiffed head to his expensive shoes.

You guys are remarkable. I see a few of you gathering a head of righteous indignation for one or your former fellows. Any wonder why a Democrat as fine as Joe Leiberman left?

“Since retaking Congress in November 2006, the top foreign policy priority of the Democratic Party has not been to expand the size of our military for the war on terror or to strengthen our democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East or to prevail in Afghanistan. It has been to pull our troops out of Iraq, to abandon the democratically-elected government there, and to hand a defeat to President Bush.

“Iraq has become the singular litmus test for Democratic candidates. No Democratic presidential primary candidate today speaks of America’s moral or strategic responsibility to stand with the Iraqi people against the totalitarian forces of radical Islam, or of the consequences of handing a victory in Iraq to al Qaeda and Iran. And if they did, their campaign would be as unsuccessful as mine was in 2006. Even as evidence has mounted that General Petraeus’ new counterinsurgency strategy is succeeding, Democrats have remained emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq, reluctant to acknowledge the progress we are now achieving, or even that that progress has enabled us to begin drawing down our troops there.”

Senator Lieberman also indicated, “…there is something profoundly wrong—something that should trouble all of us—when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran’s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops.

There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base—even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime.”

Your priorities reveal the depth of your sense, you have none. It's clear Democrats can not be trusted with power....not any more. Go Joe.

Sounds like Joe Lieberman doing what he's been doing since November of 2000 -- shilling for the Bush administration and sticking the shiv into his Democratic colleagues and anyone else who believes that the best way to support the troops in a war that was built upon lies and manipulation is to bring them home.

In this case I don't think so. It was pretty much focused on what the Democrats are doing wrong, their wrong thinking perspective, their willingness...no eagerness to subvert America in a transparent effort to win any election and their dubious (at a very minimum) intentions for Americas fight in the war on terror....not so much on what the Republicans are doing right.
There's that.

aside: I don't think his views allow for 'colleagues' among the mutts tending the democrat party presently. Probably suits him just fine, I know it does me. .....shiv......pfft (lol) shilling: a unit of currency in Great Britain and various African nations. ...maybe you meant acting as a shill?

democrats and socialists: not to be trusted with power, not now, not ever.

You guys are remarkable. I see a few of you gathering a head of righteous indignation for one or your former fellows. Any wonder why a Democrat as fine as Joe Leiberman left?

Ah, yes. The fineness of of Joe Lieberman. The stillness of the Pacific Ocean. The cooling effect of the sun in August.

The correct answer to your question is, because he lost his primary.

Bill wonder why a military hawk like James Webb left the Republicans, why a conservative Southern state elected him over an incumbent Republican, and why Senator Webb voted against Musakey? Correct answer: No, he probably don't.

democrats and socialists: not to be trusted with power, not now, not ever.

Even better. The party that voted (not quite all of them, unfortunately) against government abuse of power is not to be trusted with it; the party where they all voted for abuse of power--no problem.

Republicans are an idea whose time has passed.

Bill: how do you feel then about waterboarding? Do you believe it is torture? Do you think it was right of Lieberman to confirm Mukasey when he blatantly ignored a hundred years of legal precedent showing that waterboarding is torture? Are the democrats not to be trusted with power because they oppose torture?

Reasonable questions Nick. What the heck, I'll bite…

Waterboarding is one of those backwater issues democrats puff up to try to show in some twisted way that they ‘truly understand the enemy but that we are 'better than that'’....at the willing expense of their fellows. I truly don't get it.

Do I support the policy of allowing waterboarding? Absolutely if the man on site believes it will provide critical info.
I will not second guess our fighting men and women. 'You' are way off base for several reasons.

The 'torture' as I understand it does no physical harm, causes no physical damage, will not kill. It removes no limbs, breaks no bones, sheds no blood, and causes no bruising. It instills a sense of panic…that’s it. That’s your big “torture” technique.

You believe we should tie our soldier hands when lives may be at stake by disallowing this, by not simply asking nicely for information, by granting Geneva Convention status to terrorists who, by my understanding are outside the scope of the Conventions...I think your understanding of war is highly suspect.
I think you don’t understand we are even AT war. But perhaps, even more ominously, you do.

A United States Senator should have little to nothing to say about war tactics and war policy...politicians and civilians should at least have the decency to back off and shut up while standing behind the skirts of a military fighting and dying for us.
I believed they were confirming or denying a man for the Attorney General slot were they not? Leave it to a Democrat to make it about torture. Although, in some sense the stretching/torture of traditional logic could be seen as at least minimally congruent…so kudos to youz guyz. Short answer: Yes Senator Lieberman, Independent Democrat, should have voted his conscience. He did and I’m glad he still has one.

Democrats are not to be trusted with power because, presently, they are not Democrats (DINO’s?)…they are not a separate American party. They are socialists. If you haven’t been paying attention…the party that still has a little bit of backbone, the party that will stand for America in some small sense, the party that spends money it doesn’t have like a drunken sailor and who doles out tax supported charity, who will support any ill considered and unconstitutional social program….they have an elephant and a big R.

They donkeys are, well they are just asses…barely disguised socialists. May they fall off the left end of the spectrum and be forgotten to death. What really tickles my funny bone is that democrats have but to show a little backbone…show a little aggression in prosecuting the war on terror and they could have it all. Yeah yeah…you say it’s about higher standards, I say you just don’t get it.

Plainly stated: Democrats can not be trusted with power because the first duty of those in power is to defend our nation. Todays democrats do not even understand the concept, let alone prosecution, of a war.

Load your misery boys, lets rock.

Ah, yes. The fineness of of Joe Lieberman. The stillness of the Pacific Ocean. The cooling effect of the sun in August.

The correct answer to your question is, because he lost his primary.

Bill wonder why a military hawk like James Webb left the Republicans, why a conservative Southern state elected him over an incumbent Republican, and why Senator Webb voted against Musakey? Correct answer: No, he probably don't.

Well gee...no I don't wonder. My concern for Joe is not his party affiliation...really couldn't care less. My concern is for numbskulls presently running the democrats...and apparently their supporters.

The windmill I tilt at is more about the sense and the grounding displayed by the former democrat Senator admiral. It was more about why he found it necessary to leave the party he loved and believed in admiral.
It was really more about the implications for that party admiral.

I'm a little surprised you didn't pick up on that admiral.

Although broken bones may not be on the list of possible outcomes from waterboarding, asphyxiation and brain damage are.

The United States prosecuted Japanese soldiers for water boarding American POW's.

The US Military court martialed US soldiers in Viet Nam for water boarding prisoners.

Water boarding has been described as torture by the US State Department, and the US army.

As to the rest of your comment ...

Folks like yourself -- and I don't include most conservatives in this category, since most would disavow your extremist views -- certainly cannot be trusted with any basic aspect of our liberty.

If you don't believe in basic human rights, then you can't possibly believe in the US Constitution or any of the values that contributed to making the United States a great nation.

Brownshirts like yourself are a tremendous threat to what remains of our Republic -- or you would be if anyone outside of the far right fringe took your views seriously.

Cheers.

PS - "Shilling" is the present continuous or participle form of shill. So I can either say that "Bill is a pro-torture shill for the Bush administration" or "Bill is shilling for torture on behalf of the Bush administration".

First, let me thank you for getting it right so when things go downhill you won't think ill of me. No physical damage...we agree.
I didn’t really expect you to get it. I speak to those out there who have a toe in your tepid water. To show them the entire world is not crazy. If you view me as an extreme conservative I think I see your problem. You have no perspective. (…hang on while I add that to the list of ‘Reasons Why’, not new, just forgot to add it).

Bush is the enemy! Conservatives are the enemy! Allsuions to Naziism…pfft. We need to uphold human rights! Talking out both sides of your mouth a little….uphold human rights when the very people fighting the true abusers of human rights; the ones dying for them are your countrymen.

Really , it’s tired, boring, and predictable but hang in there champ.
Who knows maybe you can catch me in a Cleveland Brown shirt and have ‘real evidence’! Waterboarding: We should stop it's use based on the possibility that we might hurt somone....in the middle of a war? I think you're nuts. I think most Americans in their private thoughts, think you're nuts. But, thank you for the history of the “torture”…perhaps you have a list of those so afflicted? When you post it, please also post the intel gathered by it’s use. Death is a possible outcome of driving, death is a possible outcome in war…brain damage is a possible outcome following your logic. I’m sorry, I can’t help that.

PS Good pull on the whole shilling thing…you must be a genius!

Question for Gordon Smith:

If an Oregon guardsman is captured by Al Qaeda and waterboarded, has our guardsman been tortured? Yes or no?

Why do otherwise intelligent people on Blue Oregon try to debate others locked into patently absurd positions even though they have made these positions glaringly obvious by their third or fourth post and have shown they have no intention of admitting to being wrong no matter the evidence stacked against them?

Question for Gordon Smith:

If an Oregon guardsman is captured by Al Qaeda and waterboarded, has our guardsman been tortured? Yes or no?

I dislike the Senator but let me put words in his mouth. Disregard if you really think Smith cares what you think. I disregard Wyden incessantly.

Yes, he has been 'tortured'. I can only add that I'm glad Al Queda have sided with Americas democrats and considered waterboarding 'torture'...not stoning, not throwing him off a building, not dragging his body thru the streets and hanging him from a bridge, not sawing his head off. My apologies my Guardsman, my brother. I stand with you and know your sacrifice even though I can not know what it was like for you. I'm glad you made it thru.

Why do otherwise intelligent people on Blue Oregon try to debate others locked into patently absurd positions even though they have made these positions glaringly obvious by their third or fourth post and have shown they have no intention of admitting to being wrong no matter the evidence stacked against them?

Makes ya wonder doesn't it?

Attention Oregon Guardsmen:

Bill thinks it's ok for Al Qaeda to waterboard you. He has no objection to that - it's not torture. It's also ok with Gordon Smith if you get waterboarded.

Wanna bet Bill didn't have the guts to go to Vietnam? Wanna bet Bill didn't have the moral FIBRE to oppose the VN War?
Wanna bet Bill is a spineless piece of garbage? He is.
Hey Bill why not be waterboarded so you can experience, first hand, what it is really all about? You won't because you are both a coward AND a liar.
Oh wanna bet Bill has NO relatives in Iraq or Afghanistan? You see, cowards like Bill shoot off their big mouths but when it comes to THEM going to war and fighting and dying...awwwww well ya see like their heroes, cokehead drunken Bush, 5-deferrment Cheney, drug addict Limbaugh, loser Qualye, LiarO'Reilly and on and on, forget service. They will dodge and weave a hide behind whoever is available to avoid serving this country. In fact they happily let low income people of all races fight their dirty wars as long as they are safe. Guys like Bill sit there, suck their thumbs and whine about people who attack the neo-fascist drift of our country. But then what can you expect from Bill when his drunken buffoon hero, GWB describes the US Constitution as "a god damn piece of paper..."????????????

Yes, Bill is a proud member of the Chairforce. Yet he purports to speak for military interests. And he wonders why we don't give his rantings any credibility.

You are really in the thick of things, anonymous behind your keyboard in Oregon. What bravery and sacrifice you are showing!

Why do otherwise intelligent people on Blue Oregon try to debate others locked into patently absurd positions even though they have made these positions glaringly obvious by their third or fourth post and have shown they have no intention of admitting to being wrong no matter the evidence stacked against them?

Can I make a second run at this? ...it's rhetorical.

At the risk of falling on my own sword here; we both know why. Libs/socialists/democrats consider themsleves above the fray...unquestionable rightness. The only place they can stand the light is the dim light from the inside; huddled together slapping themsleves on the back and giving the thumbs up or 'right on' fist. When you shine an outside light on them many scurry. It's embarrassing for the leaders.

Now I have to hand it to some...they can be pretty clever at twisting, redefinition, and redirection. Arguments must be watching carefully for these tactics and held to the original precept. ....kinda like your post here.

But in the end, they are all just tactics of evasion. Their bedrock, the thought and structure of their dogma is fundamnetally wrong, it's vapor. ...and when confronted with the hard won and hard fought superiority of conservative thought ( a foundation based on the tried and true over centuries) they simply can not stand in that light. I know you don't see it that way...you couldn't possibly and still look in the mirror.

During WWII, we tried Japanese troops who waterboarded our troops.

You know, the real point here is the George Bush is too stupid to figure out how to win this war. He can't do it while upholding American ideals - he's too weak and lazy to find a way.

Plus, all studies show that torture does not work.

Can someone shine some light here?

Why are we lost in a debate about how much fear, terror, or pain constitutes torture?

Because of the national political implications due to the context of that torture. NOT because of our inherent revulsion at interpersonal violence.

Consider this: the Oregon legislature passed on the opportunity to recognize strangulation as a more serious offense (felony vs. misdemeanor) in the last legislative session because of the higher costs to the prison system if we incarcerated all those people who use the terror and near suffocation to control their (often but not always) female partners. Strangulation is a recognized tactic for gaining control over the victim by threat of imminent death. By placing one's hands on another's throat, the message is clear: I might not kill you now, but I can.

What are the implications of that legislative decision? Perhaps one step closer to accountability for those who use terror to gain control. But, also facing up to the fact that our tax system doesn't support the government services required to implement programs reflecting our civic values.

Clearly what we accept abroad isn't so different from what we accept locally.

I'd like to see more outrage over domestic violence and child abuse legislation and controversies among progressives. These are far more pervasive and destructive to our social fabric than torture abroad. Scan the academic literature for the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study (ACES) for evidence. Foreign and domestic violence and inextricably linked. Can we examine how participating in acts of torture abroad does to the young men and women who return to their families here?

But we aren't really talking about that, are we?

Even though I do think we should enforce the ban on torture, isn't this debate really about two parties jockeying for power, using real pain and suffering for shock value? How does that further our society?

Yes, Bill is a proud member of the Chairforce. Yet he purports to speak for military interests. And he wonders why we don't give his rantings any credibility.

You are really in the thick of things, anonymous behind your keyboard in Oregon. What bravery and sacrifice you are showing!

Wanna bet Bill didn't have the guts to go to Vietnam? Wanna bet Bill didn't have the moral FIBRE to oppose the VN War? Wanna bet Bill is a spineless piece of garbage? He is. Hey Bill why not be waterboarded so you can experience, first hand, what it is really all about? You won't because you are both a coward AND a liar. Oh wanna bet Bill has NO relatives in Iraq or Afghanistan?

geez...the whole "you didn't serve so your voice doesn't count and has no weight" argument? (g)

TELL me democrats...especially portland/oregon democrats don't want to go down that road. sheesh, you guys should check with you handlers before you speak ya know...it's embarrassing for them.

George Bush does not want to use torture as a last resort.

He wants to use that option first, make it the showpiece of his war on terror, brag about. I personally believe he gets off sexually when he thinks about it. I think any man who goes out of his way to advocate for torture gets sexual gratification from thinking about torturing other men. I truly believe this is what this is all really about - sexual perverts unable to control themselves. Naked pyramids, sodomy of handcuffed prisoners, forced masturbation, waterboarding...it's all sick.

Maybe we could focus on actually winning the war on terror if our tactics weren't being dictated by neocons' sexual fettishes and perversions.

No Bill it is the REASON(S) you didn't serve in any war that are important. Typical right wing coward...tries to obfuscate the real issue. People like you, as stated above, are more than happy to have low income ethnic groups fight wars while you sit back and call people socialists or commies if you disagree with them. The point is you WON'T go through waterboarding because you are a coward. And of course NO ONE from your family is serving in the military (or probably ever has unless it was some goofy pseudo phony Grenada type "war"). Send your son /daughter to the Middle East. Demand to be waterboarded (and invite ALL Portland TV and print, radio media to cover the "event"). Then maybe (tho I doubt it) you'll "get it."

Can someone shine some light here? Why are we lost in a debate about how much fear, terror, or pain constitutes torture? Because of the national political implications due to the context of that torture. NOT because of our inherent revulsion at interpersonal violence. Consider this: the Oregon legislature passed on the opportunity to recognize strangulation as a more serious offense (felony vs. misdemeanor) in the last legislative session because of the higher costs to the prison system if we incarcerated all those people who use the terror and near suffocation to control their (often but not always) female partners. Strangulation is a recognized tactic for gaining control over the victim by threat of imminent death. By placing one's hands on another's throat, the message is clear: I might not kill you now, but I can. What are the implications of that legislative decision? Perhaps one step closer to accountability for those who use terror to gain control. But, also facing up to the fact that our tax system doesn't support the government services required to implement programs reflecting our civic values. Clearly what we accept abroad isn't so different from what we accept locally. I'd like to see more outrage over domestic violence and child abuse legislation and controversies among progressives. These are far more pervasive and destructive to our social fabric than torture abroad. Scan the academic literature for the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study (ACES) for evidence. Foreign and domestic violence and inextricably linked. Can we examine how participating in acts of torture abroad does to the young men and women who return to their families here? But we aren't really talking about that, are we? Even though I do think we should enforce the ban on torture, isn't this debate really about two parties jockeying for power, using real pain and suffering for shock value? How does that further our society?

Could NOT agree more. Why did Democrats make a standard effective nonlife threatening practice for retrieving (and yes Gertrude..it does work) intle which could save the lives of our contrymen or our defenders…why did they make it a political implication?

DEMOCRATS are the ones who made a big deal of it…not because they care about who it might be practiced on…but because it provided some political mileage.

Even though I do think we should enforce the ban on torture, isn't this debate really about two parties jockeying for power, using real pain and suffering for shock value? How does that further our society?

Could NOT agree more!

. .

PS You are really in the thick of things, anonymous behind your keyboard in Oregon. What bravery and sacrifice you are showing!

This, a posting who goes by the name "anon" You guys are funny.

All studies show, and the true experts say, torture does not work.

Interrogation tactics that do work take time, skill, training and intelligence to use. Things Bush lacks, so he doesn't understand.

Bush understands simple, basic things like sucker punch. He understands cheating. He does not possess the mental acumen to understand things that are difficult to accomplish, that require skill and training, will actually get the right results.

I mean, Bush brags about blowing up frogs with firecrackers. This is his mentality. This is what he enjoys. This is where he wants to go.

The weak minded, black hearted and the perverted follow him. It's Lord of Flies.

I guess we should consider ourselves lucky Bush was a draft dodger. Who would want that crazy perverted sociopath in his unit?

Using torture to get information, including the proverbial time and place of the ticking bomb, is to make a Faustian bargain. The torturer sells his soul and the chief executive who orders the torture sells the nation's soul to get what may very likely be dubious information.

How can we define torture? Simple. It is inflicting physical or psychological pain on an individual and denying him or her relief when requested.

Bill,

Why don't we use torture within the United States? Why don't cops waterboard drug suspects? If it's not torture, they should, to get all of their information.

Let's train American cops to waterboard American citizens who they suspect of illegal activities.

In order to be consistent, you must agree this is what must now be done. In fact, cops should be able to beat information out of suspects, as long as they don't kill them or do permanent damage.

Bill, can you think of any examples in history where second-guessing a leader gone astray may have been a good idea and actually saved lives?

I can.

Oregon Guardsmen - Bill wants to make sure that we destroy here at home of the ideals you are over there fighting for and dying for. He wants your sacrifice to mean nothing, and to stand for nothing. In fact, he wants to use you to help him destroy our country from the inside out.

I will not second guess our fighting men and women.

That is an intellectually vacuous philosophy. Human history is chock full of example after example of profound inhumanity by a military force unanswerable to civilians.

More to the point, it's an inherently anti-American philosophy. The founders of this great nation deliberately subjected our military forces to strict, total control by civilians.

Very well said.

Why don't we use torture within the United States?

Unfortunately, some people in law enforcement do and our military in Guantanamo does. Guantanamo may not be in the United States, but it is controlled by the U.S. so we are not in a position to be self-righteous.

Sal,

I believe that Senator Lieberman shills for AIPAC. That puts him in agreement with Shrub most of the time on issues concerning the Middle East and the War on Terror[sic], but that is a secondary circumstance.

In a very short time, most people in this counrty are going to look at waterboarding (and "stress positions" and "enhanced environmental and physical stressors") and consider them similarly to Jim Crow Laws, Interning Japanese Americans, and racial deed restrictions.

I will not second guess our fighting men and women. That is an intellectually vacuous philosophy. Human history is chock full of example after example of profound inhumanity by a military force unanswerable to civilians.

More to the point, it's an inherently anti-American philosophy. The founders of this great nation deliberately subjected our military forces to strict, total control by civilians.

Intellectually vacuous...ouch.

Human history IS “chock full of example after example of profound inhumanity by a military force unanswerable to civilians.”….is that what you accuse our military of?

I thought was pretty clear; I was referencing small specifically targeted use under extremely limited circumstances. Is it a battlefront tactic now? We teach our troops in AIT? Didn’t think so. When the distinction goes over your head you shouldn't try and buffalo with big words. They can be dual edged swords....believe me, I 've been burned many times. Try and frame your argument correctly and set it in the proper context will ya.

I will even grant you that torturing is un American. I don’t like it any more than you do and wish as strongly and probably more so that we did not need it. However we are fighting an enemy that worships death…it is a thing to celebrate and look forward to. Their main driver, radical Islam, tells them it is acceptable to lie to infidels…that any subterfuge in the war for Allah is holy.

This is not a conventional war or a conventional enemy…but they are every bit as dedicated to our destruction as the kamikaze.

Look at the socialist tying the hands of our military preaching the Founding Fathers. (g) What happened to your ‘living document’?

All studies show, and the true experts say, torture does not work.

Interrogation tactics that do work take time, skill, training and intelligence to use. Things Bush lacks, so he doesn't understand.

Bush understands simple, basic things like sucker punch. He understands cheating. He does not possess the mental acumen to understand things that are difficult to accomplish, that require skill and training, will actually get the right results.

I mean, Bush brags about blowing up frogs with firecrackers. This is his mentality. This is what he enjoys. This is where he wants to go.

The weak minded, black hearted and the perverted follow him. It's Lord of Flies.

I guess we should consider ourselves lucky Bush was a draft dodger. Who would want that crazy perverted sociopath in his unit?

anon....is that you man? Phew you scared me for a sec...I thought you knew something.

Human history IS “chock full of example after example of profound inhumanity by a military force unanswerable to civilians.”….is that what you accuse our military of? Do you need an interpreter?

More to the point, it's an inherently anti-American philosophy. The founders of this great nation deliberately subjected our military forces to strict, total control by civilians.

You surely do not need an interpreter Kevin….then again. Maybe I do. I just wanted all to be clear is all. I want to make sure everyone else is aware what kind of thought goes on here at BO. ……..(g)

How can you go from your original tenet that “The founders of this great nation deliberately subjected our military forces to strict, total control by civilians”…just pretty as you please, as if you’d actually know what the Founders said or meant.
to the implication that you consider Americas military of "profound inhumanity…unanswerable to civilians"

….Your “words” not mine.

You see no dichotomy, no inconsistency?….it sounds like squealing. It does not follow from reasoned solid thinking. Beyond the blunt thought is the stunted perspective of our military. I’m right. You, little buddy, are wrong. I think your thinking smells bad.

Nice description of the Imperial Japanese we faced in WWII. We didn't resort to torture then and there's no reason for us to resort to torture now.

At the risk of going tangent….Are you sure? Are you POSitive? You should check your facts again. While you’re searching your soul (and your little internet connection from which all liberal brains flow) you might try looking at big bombs and consider the implication for REAL long term torture.
War is a tough pill and is not taken lightly by those who understand what it’s about. Not saying it is not a tool in our arsenal…only that it should be handled by grown ups…not you or yours.

BTW: Why is it you guys are always off ‘reflecting on something’ or ‘finding things odd’…you’re funny. I think you wear panties. I’m not about being nice…there is no being nice to liberals. They mock you and use it against you. You guys are sooo French. (g)

Anyway mini…it’s been real nice chatting with you. If you can come up with another point, perhaps one framed in proper context, relevant, AND out of your own head. Well…I’m here to help.

"Make no mistake about it: Waterboarding is already illegal under United States law. It is illegal under the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit 'outrages upon personal dignity,' including cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment."- Sen. Ted Kennedy

<h2>Not exactly the best spokesperson against waterboarding. . .</h2>