The more I see this 'discussion' in the media, the more I cringe. Are we really a nation that thinks this kind of discourse is appropriate? Are there actually two sides to this issue, or is the media simply legitimizing torture as an issue by giving the other side a forum to articulate their radical viewpoints?

What Carla said.

Yup. "They" aim at "us" because we seem different. Or is that so? Could it be that First Law of Thermodynamics again? Equal and opposite forces and all...

For once, Carla, we see eye to eye.

Are we really a nation that thinks this kind of discourse is appropriate?

Yes, of course. What a silly question.

The lovely thing about this country is that people with different ideas, no matter how absurd, can discuss them openly.

You and I might feel that any sort of torture is wrong. Many other people feel differently about the issue and have logical arguments to back up their position, regardless of how convincing you might happen to find it.

When one side starts dictating to the other what kind of discourse is "appropriate", then we no longer live in a society characterized by free speech.

And who gets to decide what's "appropriate", anyways?

Oh come on. No one supports real torture.

The only reason there's a debate is because the left has redefined torture to include any and all uncomfortable interogation. And they have seen it as an opportunity to trash Bush and Cheney as if they ordered what most everyone used to know was real torture.

Yet you insist on pretending the Bush Cheney regime were evil torturers from the middle ages.

Never stopping to think that every one of you would easily do what they did if it meant saving your own child.

Think and be honest.

While I agree that some people are debating whether we should torture, I certainly think the bigger debate is whether we should prosecute those who do torture.

Have watched all the Sunday talk shows over the past couple of weeks, the focus is whether we prosecute CIA officials or those in the Bush administration for OK'ing the torture.

Since we already know the US is required to investigate possible torture and prosecute actual torture because of international treaties, the only real debate is whether we want to support a president who refuses to investigate torture.

I rarely agree with Steve Maurer, but I'm with him on his comments above. I thank him and Jamais Vu for slowing me down and causing me to reflect on my first reaction to Richard's bullshit. By comparison Jamais Vu's "you're full of shit" was mild.

One of the interesting points in this torture debate is one that has rarely been made. Let's take a look at some history. (Richard: You may have to look that word up in a dictionary to get a clue as to what it means.) Specifically, let's look at the Nuremberg Trials. Many Germans who committed acts that America and its allies found criminal, including torture, tried to use the excuse that they were just obeying orders. The judges at Nuremberg decided, and all people who were offended by these acts agreed, that orders from higher authorities were no excuse for committing immoral acts.

The Geneva Convention on Torture was written in response to heinous acts of torture being committed with such flagrancy. The United States, through approval by the U.S. Senate, became a signatory to the Geneva Conventions and is bound therefor to abide by them. That means the United States government through the justice (?) department is obligated to investigate reports of torture by its citizens. The only alternative is to expose the arrant capacity for hypocrisy and ignorance that this nation has repeatedly proved itself capable.

Eric Holder, current occupant of the previously defiled attorney general's office, made a remark a few weeks ago about other people being cowards. Well, let's see if Mr. Holder has the moral courage, himself, to do what is right in this case.

President Obama, members of his administration, and all members of Congress took an oath to uphold the Constitution and the nation's laws. Ipso facto, they are all obliged to obey the laws and see they are enforced. If crimes have been alleged, then their duty requires they investigate.

And when it comes to investigations, let's not settle for another 9/11 commission whitewash or other "bi-partisan" commission that means its members come from the ruling duopoly. We should accept nothing inferior to a special counsel led by someone who is truly independent with the courage to do what is right in the Atticus Finch mold.

For more thorough opinions check Paul Krugman's recent article on the subject and this week's postings to counterpunch dot com.

Heck, if Shepard Smith of Fox News gets it, why are we debating it. “This is America! We do not f---ing torture!”

Deliberate torture. Should clarify. For the record, living in this country is exquisite torture.

Given that the right considers Reagan "the second coming" and the model of conservatism by which they should operating, how ironic is the following:

U.S. signs UN convention against torture

Following are the President's message to the Senate and the text of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment signed on behalf of the United States by Deputy Secretary of State John C. Whitehead on April 18, 1988, at the United Nations. The United States became the 63d nation to sign the convention, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1984 and entered into force on June 26, 198 7, after it was ratified by 20 nations.

MESSAGE TO THE SENATE, MAY 20, 1988.sup.1

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, subject to certain reservations, understandings, and declarations, I transmit herewith the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Convention was adopted by unanimous agreement of the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1984, and entered into force on June 26, 1987. The United States signed it on April 18, 1988. 1 also transmit, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State on the Convention.

The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called "universal jurisdiction." Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution.

In view of the large number of States concerned, it was not possible to negotiate a treaty that was acceptable to the United States in all respects. Accordingly, certain reservations, understandings, and declarations have been drafted, which are discussed in the report of the Department of State. With the inclusion of these reservations, understandings, and declarations, I believe there are no constitutional or other legal obstacles to United States ratification, The recommended legislation necessary to implement the Convention will be submitted to the Congress separately.

Should the Senate give its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention, I intend at the time of deposit of United States ratification to make a declaration pursuant to Article 28 that the United States does not recognize the competence of the Committee against Torture under Article 20 to make confidential investigations of charges that torture is being systematically practiced in the United States. In addition, I intend not to make declarations, pursuant to Articles 21 and 22 of the Convention, recognizing the competence of the Committee against Torture to receive and consider communications from States and individuals alleging that the United States is violating the Convention. I believe that a final United States decision as to whether to accept such competence of the Committee should be withheld until we have had an opportunity to assess the Committee's work. It would be possible for the United States in the future to accept the competence of the Committee pursuant to Articles 20, 21, and 22, should experience with the Committee prove satisfactory and should the United States consider this step desirable.

By giving its advice and consent to ratification of this Convention, the Senate of the United States will demonstrate unequivocally our desire to bring an end to the abhorrent practice of torture.

RONALD REAGAN

THe debate is not about should we torture. The discussion is on about whether to reach backwards and hold the American torturers accountable. I find it exceedingly disingenuous for the media commentators to field the concept that the CIA and others were merely "acting on orders from above", therefore should not be held to account. Since when did we march to the orders of a higher authority? Since George Bush. I understand that the ONLY reason we are still steps away from military coup detat is because we have a military beholden to what The Chief says. HOwever: these orders from Bush/Cheney were specifically against Geneva Conventions and other social contracts we hold as America the Symbol. They fucking well knew what they were up to: they simply were offered the go-ahead to do it in plain view rather than at Black Sites only.

This is a bullshit discussion in my view. Wrong is wrong. Torture is torture. And, yes, let's bring up the Nazis (I NEVER use them, but this time it might fit) - they were following orders, folks. And we held them to account....... and still do. Beyond the legal venue there exists an agreed upon moral venue, that of the social contract.

Regardless of what Cheney and his posse orchestrated, those men and women who carried it out and those who were close enough to relay the orders to them: KNEW what they were doing.

I would like to take this conversation one step further and discuss the Obama administration's recent about face on the issue of prosecuting Bush administration lawyers for their role in advising on the legalities of enhanced interrogation techniques. To put this in perspective, we now have a president who has repeatedly gone on record stating that he opposes the prosecution of a war on terrorism, in fact he wont even use the phrase. This same president, with his second executive act, order the closure of the detention facility where the US houses hundreds of terrorists, including those who planned the 9/11 attacks. For a president with such shockingly weak credentials on the issue of national security, to then authorize the prosecution of US government officials for their interrogations of terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind khalid sheik mohammed, directly aligns our president with the interests of terrorist organizations in a way I never though imaginable by a US president. Should such prosecutions be carried out with his authorization, his actions would rise beyond simply atrocious policy..its quite possible treason.

I understand that for many on the left, your blind hatred of George Bush often leads you to formulate blind and intellectually bankrupt policy positions..but this time, even I am shocked. Whether or not you think waterboarding of terrorists is torture, and whether or not you care that it has apparently saved thousands of American lives (according to the CIA), if you support the prosecution of US government officials for engaging these crucially important interrogations because you are far more concerned with reading terrorists their rights than you are with securing this nation, you have lost whatever rational or intellectual honesty you may have ever had. It is the number one obligation of the POTUS to secure this country to the best of his/her ability. So far, this president is heading down a path towards remarkable and never before seen failure on that front..do us all a favor, and stop cheerleading him along the way.

My goodness, JJ. YOu are all-knowing. THank you for joining the discussion! Your blind distrust of a President with "shockingly weak" credentials (Ummmmmm, did Geo B have ANY international creds? Ummm noooooo) - c'mon fella. You are just as partisan as most of the rest of them up here. Try again, try a little harder.

I am glad Obama is in, but I too find that perhaps there is a lack of commitment to going forward. Yet, one must respect that he is now dealing with REALITY, not the wishlist of his base. And now we get to see character in action. If he stomps over the tops of all in his administration, we get a reverse-W for our troubles, and the outcomes will just be a different kind of awful.

Would you mind enlightening us, magic 8 ball, as to the details of this remarkable and never before witnessed horror Mister Obama is already creating before 150 days have passed? I'm itching to hear the catechism.

IN your own words, if you don't mind. No fair trotting out trite slogans.

To put this in perspective, we now have a president who has repeatedly gone on record stating that he opposes the prosecution of a war on terrorism, in fact he wont even use the phrase.

This is either a case of selective memory or parroting of hogwash from the right-wing media. The Bush mafia finally got around to abandoning the nonsensical phrase about a global war on terror. Obama has sensibly not revived that phrase but he does continue to address the issue of terrorism.

This same president, with his second executive act, order the closure of the detention facility where the US houses hundreds of terrorists, including those who planned the 9/11 attacks.

Closure of Guantanamo does not mean release of the few people imprisoned and tortured in that facility who were genuinely guilty of terrorist acts to walk down Main Street, USA and choose the next location for a terrorist act. They will be imprisoned elsewhere. There is a risk that the innocent prisoners who were abused will seek some of revenge when they are let free, but you can thank the Bush administration and their wretched thugs at Gitmo for making them our enemies if that should occur. Guantanamo is to America's shame and an inspiration to people around the world to despise and hate this nation.

... directly aligns our president with the interests of terrorist organizations ...

This is utter bullshit that suggests to me JJ is listening too often to Fox News Supreme Idiot, Glenn Beck, without the sense to realize what a fool he is.

I understand that for many on the left, your blind hatred of George Bush often leads you to formulate blind and intellectually bankrupt policy positions...

Hatred is an emotional indulgence that serves little purpose. It would be more accurate to say of George Bush's critics that they despise him because they have reasons to do so - such as lying to get the nation into an illegal war that evolved into a crime against humanity - and torturing people to drag the nation's reputation into a moral gutter.

Whether or not you think waterboarding of terrorists is torture, and whether or not you care that it has apparently saved thousands of American lives (according to the CIA), if you support the prosecution of US government officials for engaging these crucially important interrogations because you are far more concerned with reading terrorists their rights than you are with securing this nation, you have lost whatever rational or intellectual honesty you may have ever had. It is the number one obligation of the POTUS to secure this country to the best of his/her ability.

Can you provide a quote that supports your claim of thousands of American lives being saved by torture-enhanced interrogations? This quote from the NY Times is attributed to Admiral Blair, the new Director of National Intelligence: “The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. “The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security." (My emphasis in bold)

It is the number one obligation of the POTUS to secure this country to the best of his/her ability.

The number one obligation of the POTUS is to live up to his oath to defend the Constitution and uphold the nation's laws. If he does that our national security will be fine. If George Bush and Dick Cheney had done that our nation wouldn't have so many enemies.

Now, JJ, why don't you get together with your soul mate, Richard, and take a hike?

I share in the disbelief that we're even having this discussion. Let's call Dick Cheney what he really is: A psychopath.

 Shepard Smith of FOX News got it right - so good luck to him in whatever career he chooses next.

Here's one point that's always got me: Governments have to make a case for going to war. They need witnesses to back up their reasoning. If they are allowed to torture, they will always have witnesses who will back them up on anything. So ignoring the moral side of it, we can't afford to let our government torture people if we want to make informed decisions. It's too easy for government to claim anything it wants and present an endless list of witnesses who swear the reports are true.

Steve Maurer Apr 24, 2009 2:08:34 PM,

Thanks for making my point by misrepresenting my side's view on torture.

I'll repeat, no one supports real torture.

Then you cooked that to mean I meant "torture is OK unless the victim ends up dead".

If I meant that I would have said it. But that's where these debates go. You want the oppostion to mean something more or different so you make it up.

That wasn't clever, it was 2 cent distortion.

Torture is what was not allowed in the use of waterboarding, sleep deprivation etc. Strict controls were enforced and a doctor was presense.

But you have twisted the use of limited enhanced interogation into widespread traditonal torture.

Because that' what you want it to be.

It fits your group accusation of Cheney being a psychopath.

I'm sure you think Cheney liked to watch videos of torture?

And of course Pelosi and Reid were breifed repeatedly on what was being used. Just as they were with the wiretapping.

All of this has been like bamboo shoots under yor nails.

Your rabid thurst for revenge for what you fabricated is pretty sick. And I don't think you really care where it takes us as a country. But as you keep pushing harder and harder the push back grows. Perhaps you should consider how you are making this battle progress.

Richard, Do you think this is the first generation who ever had anything to be afraid of? My parents both served in France during World War 2 - Do you think that was a stroll through the park?

  Did they say, "Sorry we can't do this because we have a need to feel safe"?

  Lots of good people died on foreign shores, to make this country what it is. I don't think it's fair to them to throw our values out just because we're scared and we need Uncle Dicky to protect us.

  If you want to sit in Dick Cheney's lap, do it on your own time, but the rest of us have an obligation to maintain America for the next generation.

  By adopting policies used by the Chinese army on our soldiers in Korea, we are letting down what this country stands for. And we are trampling on the graves of a lot of brave people who faced a lot more than we have.

   Oh, and by the way: Once we give governments this kind of power, none of us are safe anyway. So in addition to being cowardly, advocating waterboarding and the like is counterproductive to freedom.

   You do believe in freedom don't you?

Torture is what was not allowed in the use of waterboarding, sleep deprivation etc.

What the hell are you talking about, Richard? This may be the most atrocious piece of nonsense in all your ramblings.

Strict controls were enforced and a doctor was presense.

Any member of the medical or psychological professions who participated in this torture was a disgrace to his or her profession.

Bodden: yes. Thank you.

Rebecca

Here's a little phrase that may help remind you where you are:

The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Not the Home of the Safe.

You have to love it as the "hard guys" of the right prove what mewling puking pussies they are, so afraid that any means are fine, including the capital crime of waterboarding - ask a certain Japanese dead guy about the capital part. Somehow not being willing to trade honor for their version of security is weakness, how odd...

I slept well not thanks to BushCo but thanks to having opposed those cretins at virtually every turn - thanks anyhow.

Richard - you are fundamentally anti-American down to your very core. You oppose the very moral foundation on which nation was built. And there really isn't much more to be said of you.

I thought questioning peoples' patriotism was something only nasty RethugliKKKans did.

Or did the rules change on 01/20/09?

And, of course, it should be clear to anyone that the Obama Administration is tip-toeing around the idea of prosecuting previous administrations for following policies they disagree with because they know full well that the tables might well be turned on them in 4 or 8 years.

Unlike a great many progressives who've been out for blood since the moment they got a modicum power, the Obama Administration clearly realizes that pursuing political vendettas against previous administrations may very well come back to haunt them.

While it doesn't diminish the fundamental wrongness (in the eyes of many, though not all) of "harsh interrogation techniques", it's clear that Obama is taking a pragmatic approach to this, knowing full well that future administrations could very well choose to go after Democrats for the perceived wrongs that will undoubtedly be committed by this administration.

Precedent is precedent, after all, and the tables can be turned very easily.

It'd be wise to remember that the next time you recommend stringing up some Republican for something they did that you happen to find reprehensible.

But then again, there is a certain visceral satisfaction in pounding one's chest and denouncing the "mewling, puking pussies" on the right, isn't there? Then again, change a couple of words and you might as well have a post on Free Republic... but who's keeping score, after all?

So carry on, carry on.

Also, I just thought I'd point out that it's somewhat bizarre to see people casually dropping Nazi comparisons on a blog that, within the last couple of weeks has dismissed outright the tactic of employing Nazi references by certain attendees of the "Tea Parties".

It seems Blue Oregon posters abide by a "Nazi comparisons for me, but not for thee" standard.

Curious, to say the least.

Hey Vinnie - read the disclaimer I made before hefting up the reference. I thought twice before using it, and you can plainly read that, you dopey guy. The parallel is not perfect down to the last hair, but the applcication was quite specific.

The Nazi era was one of the more significant episodes in history and clearly should be studied by more people involved in politics. There is nothing wrong with making reference to that period to indicate some lesson learned from it or using it as a benchmark. It is, however, wrong to toss it around indiscriminately and accuse others of being Nazis when such behavior would be inappropriate. If others emulate some practice identified with Nazis there should be nothing wrong with saying so, but that doesn't necessarily make them Nazis.

While it doesn't diminish the fundamental wrongness (in the eyes of many, though not all) of "harsh interrogation techniques", it's clear that Obama is taking a pragmatic approach to this, knowing full well that future administrations could very well choose to go after Democrats for the perceived wrongs that will undoubtedly be committed by this administration.

Precedent is precedent, after all, and the tables can be turned very easily.

In other words the new precedent should set a policy of essentially ignoring any egregious and criminal behavior practiced by a preceding administration. That could lead to a future incumbent making GWB look like an enlightened philosopher prince.

Oh spare me the history lesson.

Every war including WWII had countess instances of far worse than water boarding involved by all sides. But the real torture you're trying to equate Bush and Cheney to was perpetrated by the Nazis, Imperial Japan, and the many other brutal regimes in history.

Honestly you're just making up things left and right. NO I don't think this is the first generation who ever had anything to be afraid of. NO I don't think WWII was a stroll through the park.

Fortunately you all weren't there picking apart and tarnishing every effort made to fight that battle.

Yeah, lots of good people died on foreign shores, to make this country what it is. And it wasn't always pretty. Your phony pretense that Cheney threw out our values is just your bizarre group imagination. left winged out just because we're scared and we need Uncle Dicky to protect us.

Your chronic embellishment, exaggeration and fabrications are painting our country to be what it never was under Bush and Cheney. Ooooo, "policies used by the Chinese army on our soldiers in Korea". "we are trampling on the graves of a lot of brave people who faced a lot more than we have" Oh bullshit, deep too. Your convenient emotional obsession with water boarding is simply foolish. Troops in every battle we have fought used all sort of pressure on the enemy. Again they did not have YOU ALL seeking to tarnish every step of the way. That's the difference. Not Cheney. You people have been using every conceivable angle to degrade our military, their battles, their commander in chief and our country. Your accusations throughout the Bush Administration have been relentless, egregious and undermining. From claims of carpet bombing civilians to rampant torture of the worst kinds to the 650,000 civilians supposedly slaughterd by our military you love to attack you own country because you hate Bush, Cheney and Republicans.

Any member of the left who participated in this denigrating of our own country was and is a disgrace.

The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

You're not brave and you don't want our freedom protected.

Yet you fill in the blanks in your minds with "mewling puking pussies" gibberish. Great. Impress each other.

Your opposition to the "cretins" has been thoughtless fanaticism at every turn. None of you should be preaching about who is fundamentally anti-American down to your very core. Look in the mirror.

Obama's military/CIA will use water boarding, or similar methods, and wire tapping to defend the country. He won't sending you the memos though. But your obsession with crushing Bush and Cheney is only surpassed by your hypocrisy so any similar actions Obama you'll be remarkably silent and find convenient justifications. Just as many of you conveniently supported the death penalty the black man was dragged to his death in Texas.

May day is coming up.
What an intellectual sight you'll make that. I can imagine the fresh dose of thoughtful signage.

"If conservatives were intellectually honest then they'd be progressives" Hey put that on a sign. You're brethren will think it's clever.

As a conservative, I see it as the nonsense it is.

Ironically, in the context of the debate over justice and the alleged sins of the mercifully departed Bush Administration, President Obama has given us a principle that could ease our state, county and local budget problems.

When President Obama explained his reason for not pursuing criminal cases against members of the Bush regime for torturing people he said, "Nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past." Eureka! That's it. We just have to apply that principle locally and, Bingo!, the schools have all the funding they need.

First we start with the county courthouses. Close them down. All they do is look at past events. Then we look at law enforcement - police departments and the sheriff. Lay off personnel spending "time and energy laying blame for the past." Keep the police and sheriffs engaged in prevention, but dump those investigating crimes that are over and done with. Give the money saved to the schools.

Now I can just hear some woman say, "What happens if I'm raped?" Or, some guy complains about getting his flat screen TV stolen and can't watch the next episode of some survivor show or American Idol and asks what's to be done about it. Simple, listen to the president, "Nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

Sorry, Richard, but the diatribes don't hurt anymore. The conservative movement sounded reasonable at times, but in practice it turned into a bowel movement and history has given you a courtesy flush.

   So rant on. It's really spectacular to behold.

 The conservative movement just gave us 8 years of the worst government in the history of the planet, and all you can do is brag about how well it went.

  Or you say if we ever get some real conservatives everything will be different this time.
  (I love when they try and distance themselves from themselves.)

  You had your chance, Richard, and after decades of bragging about how superior you were at foreign policy and business, the economy is trashed and the best you can say about Iraq is that you were wrong about the intelligence.

   But go ahead and be smug anyway.

   You've already marginalized yourselves out of power. 
   Siding with Bush and Cheney now seems so ridiculous, that it's becoming entertaining.

   I just wish we had more time to enjoy it, but we're really busy right now trying to clear the wreckage of your disastrous incompetence.

  And all you can say to each other is, "Heck of a job."

RW: THe debate is not about should we torture.

ME: Correct. Nobody thinks we should torture anyone of any nation.

RW: The discussion is on about whether to reach backwards and hold the American torturers accountable.

ME: Wrong. The discussion is what constitutes torture. The released interrogation memos provide a legal opinion on what non-torture methods can be used - where to draw the line between torture and non-torture. That's it.

Progressive now draw the line at a different location, to include uncomfortable situations, re-defining torture. Pelosi has also changed her tune.

Funny that Obama re-defines torture to include uncomfortable situations and then he orders drones to bomb and kill Taliban and civilian Pakistan citizen. The result, hand wringing and apologies from Progressives on "torture" while silent on the killing...

If you need a towel and not a band-aid when you are done, you haven't been tortured.

The Dems are criminalizing people who disagree with their policies.

talk all you like... but from outside of america you lot look like a sad, sorry, twisted little bunch of people.

its simple...

you don't march into other people's countries - in the name of freedom - and then torture people.

you don't then spend hours debating what does - or doesn't - constitute torture (your basic moral compass should tell you what torture is)

and you don't have the right to lecture the rest of the world as to what's right and wrong.

you're a spent force. yesterdays superpower. get used to it.

Oh spare me the history lesson.

Therein, Richard, lies one of your problems. You fail to appreciate history and are unable to learn any of the lessons it teaches. Another problem you appear to have is an inability to admit to being wrong, a condition that condemns its practitioners to perpetual ignorance.

You apparently have decided to be a conservative in the current mold instead of a citizen. Such a pity.

Bill, Why do you do this?

The conservative movement sounded reasonable at times, but in practice only surfaces occasionally for relatively brief moments.

Yet you claim, fabricate, that the Bush 8 years was a conservative movement? What are you doing?

You have to admit that's nonsense and news to conservatives.

I know many conservatives and not a one would view the last 8 years as a conservative "movement". Far from it. Far from it. Not even close.

So what does it take for you to grasp the conservative perspective? Telling you what it is doesn't work.

In reality, from the genuine conservative perspective, it was a disappointing 8 years of government expansion and grotesque fiscal irresponsibility. From NCLB to prescription drug entitlement to a total absence of the veto pen on spending there was little conservatism at work.

Hardly an 8 year movement.
If we just got 8 years of the worst government in the history of the planet, then liberalism (congress) shares the blame. That was "shares".

Bill, why do you say "all you can do is brag about how well it went"

You must get a grip. Where did you get that?

It's just swell for you to object to genuine conservative issues and positions but why make up ones that don't exist?

Yes I'd say if we ever get some real conservatives things would be better. But not "everything" and not your version of what a conservative is.

This shouldn't be tough for you. If a genuine conservative element were present in Portland for instance many of the fiscal schemes and boondoggles you rail against would be reeled in and disallowed.

"(I love when they try and distance themselves from themselves.)"

That's beyond explanation.

I don';t know what you're measuring as "Siding with Bush and Cheney". There's plenty of non siding with them in the conservative camp.;

The wreckage is from the disastrous incompetence of oversized government at most levels. Just as Portland's fiascos go so does the country on a grand scale. California blooms with blunders

Heck of a job?

Far from it.

If you and yours hadn't been so caught up in Bush maybe Portland and our own State would be better off.

Wow, I though you liberals were supposed to be an "open minded", "tolerant" bunch...but as soon as you hear a different point of view..your throw out the "hitler" and "psychopath" card...i guess your tolerance only extends to terrorists.

Look, if you all want to bury your heads in your leftist cyber echo chamber and keep telling each other that these "terrorist threats" are just "hogwash of the right wing media" and that the only real threat we face is from CO2 in the atmosphere and dying polar bears..ill leave you clowns to it. But before you get too carried away, perhaps you should think for a second about the thousands of Americans who died (and the loved ones they left behind) at the hands of the terrorists on 9/11, at the US Embassy in Kenya, on the USS Cole, in the first WTC attack, at Khobar Towers (the list goes on and on)...why don't you go tell them that this terrorist threat is all just some George Bush/GOP/Fox News fake political tool? How many more thousands of Americans will have to die before you actually take this at least as seriously as you take CO2 emissions and melting polar ice caps??

When people like myself express outrage over the president of the united states takings steps that undermine and weaken our nation's efforts to combat this terrorist threat, it's not b/c we want to take a few political shots at a president that i happened not to vote for, but because I actually care about doing everything we can to make sure we don't get hit again. And before anyone starts spewing the "obama is 'restoring our image in the world' and therefore making us safer" bullshit...save your breath for someone who will buy into that. When Bill Clinton was president, Democrats in particular lauded how he enhanced our "image in the world"...how he guided us through years of "peace and prosperity". Well it was during those 8 years of "peace and prosperity" that 9/11 was planned, the WTC was bombed..as was the embassy in Kenya, the USS Cole and Khobar towers....so much for the "image in the world" national defense system..its complete bullshit and you all know it. Compare that to the post 9/11 approach to national security..the PATRIOT Act, enhanced interrogation, GITMO, direct engagement of the Taliban...the fight is far from over, but during those 7 1/2 years under Bush's approach...not a single attack on this country...the facts speak for themselves.

As for Obama, yes I think he is destroying whatever credibility he ever had on the issue of national security...and at an unbelievable pace. In the same week that North Korea launched an ICBM, Obama decides to shut down our missile defense shield program. When his own CIA director asked him not to release our classified interrogation memos as a matter of national security, he turns around and releases them. After initially opposing the prosecution of US officials for their involvement in interrogating terrorists, he caves in to the "netroots" community and does an about face. When he is presented with ample evidence that former GITMO detainees have returned to their terrorist organizations, he orders the closure of GITMO, streamlining the release of a vast majority of those who remain there now. He spent his first overseas trip apologizing to foreign leaders who repeatedly bash this county, rather than standing up to them. And while we have thousands and thousands of members of our armed services as well as law enforcement fighting a dieing around the world in the fight against terrorism, he assumes office and says that he doesn't even believe in prosecuting a war on terrorism. And this is only the first 100 days.

To sum this up, perhaps there is some alternative universe that you all live in (apparently with mr. obama) where all of these threats only exist of Fox News and that if we just get everyone in France and Belgium to like us again..everything will be just fine. That universe sounds like a lovely place..unfortunately it doesn't exist. Obama and the Democratic party run this country from top to bottom now...you've had the congress since 2006 (which hasnt worked out so well as we've all seen) and now you have the white house too...as badly as i want to see your party swept out and the adults put back in charge..more than that i just want to see this country kept safe....and I hope to god the next 100 days of his presidency are vastly different from the first.

Lordee... JJ, this is Hitler Lady - I am the one berating ppl for vaguely mentioning Hitler when it does not fit, when there is a much BETTER fascist to choose. Have you bothered to READ, or are you merely reacting in a rush? The point here, you moron, is that people know what is right and wrong. And we have it encoded in our domestic AND internationally-agreed upon law. Just because one power-crazy wounded person abrogated these does not mean folks should just DO it and blame it on "i was told to".... for eight long years. THAT was the point to the little bit I put in there. THe fact, JJ, is that they tortured people. The real fact, I have a feeling, is that Americans cannot bear to face teh fact that WE (the US) ALWAYS HAVE tortured. We just did not have the moxy to do it right out in the open and talk about it. THat might actually be the REAL point if we engage, dig in and read what there is to see.

... also, I DO know about the murderous impulse of self on the larger level. Indeed, a smaller version of this is exhibited in a fine way daily here on this "blog". People attacking, venting, raging, excoriating -- THIS is the spirit of murder and war that Osama and company enact on a larger scale, and yes, the threat is real. It starts here at home, in YOUR heart and mine.

Kevin - hehehehehe... yah... you KNOW I'm the original nastyk-gram writer when people trot out ol' Adolph without context or thought... and especially since we as Americans really seem not to know our fascists! I'm tellin' ya, life is rich in color and context when you Know Your Fascists. I would suggest Oriana Fallaci's "Interview with History" for anyone wanting a good, grounded, scarily entertaining read. This tigress of journalism flirts in sinewy style wtih the greats: the Shah of Iran, Pol Pot.... :)....

Hey Johnnie Pot: waterboarding is not toruture? Sorry - that was established as torture yonks ago. We simply have always used proxies and black sites and done our business out of view, that is my guess. We are NOT discussing "what is torture" unless you've been asleep for about three years. The discussion has moved back to, "We abandoned the Geneva Convention and did these particular acts specifically countermanded in those Conventions - what do we do about it now? Hold torturers accountable even IF their President and VP explicitly told them to do it?"

Wellllllllll.... there WAS Nuremberg, as I recall. And tho this did not exterminate millions in plain view, a good start has been made on simulating drowning, beating to death, etc potentially innocent ppl - in plain view. There is a species of relatedness in this. Will we ignore it, or will be be philosophically robust, and follow the relatedness?

Remember Camus, folks.

I thought twice before using it

Oh, well that makes it okay then.

I love the way conservatives are now saying Dick Cheney isn't a true conservative. I'd love to see you tell him that.

 By the way, my opinion that he's a psychopath was formed long before this recent criticism. I think the man enjoys killing be it people or little birds. He's sadistic.

  Another way to look at all this is the results. The Global War on Terror was one of the best things that ever happened to terrorism. The data confirm that terrorism has grown rather than shrunk as a result. And there's millions of kids out there coming of age who'd just love to hurt this country - not because of religion - but because of what we did to them and their families.

  The response to terrorism from the GOP was a disaster. It's actually made the world a much more dangerous place, just as their disastrous economic policies have damaged our national security.

  Yet, the right wing insists it wasn't really them. After years of spinning away everyone else they're now desperately trying to spin away themselves. It's the right-wing version of the Circle of Life. It's like watching a snake eat its tail.

  The world is a much more dangerous place, thanks to their efforts to make it safe, and the damage the GOP did to America is beyond the terrorists' wildest dreams.

   The only thing the terrorists regret about Bush and Cheney is that they can't serve a third term.

The build of this site really sucks! Entire threads are playing hide and seek. I click on JV's comment and that is ALL I get to read here on this thread. And so forth. Guess that's Gawd telling me to go back to packing my house and preparing my giveaway for after lodge tomorrow, eh? :)... before I begin to wax moronic in the heat of the moment on BO.

But before you get too carried away, perhaps you should think for a second about the thousands of Americans who died (and the loved ones they left behind) at the hands of the terrorists on 9/11, at the US Embassy in Kenya, on the USS Cole, in the first WTC attack, at Khobar Towers (the list goes on and on)...why don't you go tell them that this terrorist threat is all just some George Bush/GOP/Fox News fake political tool? How many more thousands of Americans will have to die before you actually take this at least as seriously as you take CO2 emissions and melting polar ice caps??

There are very few Americans who are indifferent to the attacks you (JJ) referenced, but did you ever think they were "blowback" for actions taken by the United States or supported or condoned by the United States in the past?

Reference blowback: Check the trilogy on this record of events that came back to haunt the United States written by Chalmers Johnson if you can stand facing reality.

In his book "Imperial Hubris" Michael Scheuer, former head of the bin Laden unit at the CIA, suggested that the U.S.-sponsored United Nations sanctions on Iraq that was alleged to have cost a half a million Iraqi children their lives were a motivation for al-Qa'eda's attacks. Same for the United States collaboration with the Israeli government's attacks on Palestinians. And there were other grievances. They were not justifications for these attacks but motivations.

I'm inclined to believe you and your soulmate, Richard, think abuses of human rights are okay if the United States does them, but others disagree. Maybe some day you will grow up and understand we are as capable of error as the next group of human beings. That will be less likely if you believe there is some god who has chosen us to be his spoiled brats and prodigal children and it is okay for us to do what the hell we feel like. It is clear you are not likely to get much sense in the short term so I'll drop out of this "debate" and put my time into something more productive.

Compelling argument you make there TJ, why don't you go find another flag to burn or soldier to spit on until you come up with something intelligent to say.

Bill, Bill, Bill,

What conservatives are now saying Dick Cheney isn't a true conservative?

I sure didn't. I said you were ridiculously wrong in suggesting there had been a conservative movement the last 8 years. Bush and Cheney, obviously both being primarily conservative, swayed mightily from conservative principals. (And they got burdened by war) That's the nature of BIG government DC the last 40 years. It happened to Reagan too. His revolution was short lived.

You see Bill you think Cheney enjoys killing people, and "little birds". Well that's just swell.

Pretty hard to debate your position on that.

Yeah Bush did it to those families. All of those suicide, roadside, and market bombings by insurgent terrorists were really Bush/Cheney operatives.

The killing of the enemy has made things worse?
Tell that to the Iraqis and their new government, military and police force. .

Yet, the right wing insists it wasn't really them. Huh? After years of spinning away everyone else they're now desperately trying to spin away themselves. Huh? the damage the GOP did to America is beyond the terrorists' wildest dreams. Huh?

The only thing the terrorists regret about Bush and Cheney is that they can't serve a third term. ?

That must mean they are afraid of Obama? Wow, that's good.

Now what about that 8 years of a conservsative movement?

I missed it. Can you give me even the slightest outline of the conservative policies congress enacted and Bush signed. You're appear to be certain of this.

Heck even our supposed right wing SCOTUS gave us KELO which essentially gave the PDC the right to force you to sell them your house at their price so they can give it to Homer Williams for condos. Now there's some conservative movement stuff. Conservative like adopting a prescription drug entitlement program without means testing. etc etc.

I get what's going on here. There's no percentage in attaching the conservative movement to Bush and Cheney anymore because their approval ratings are just below swine flu.

 But it would have been much more believable if Rush and company were saying all this at the time. If they were complaining back then.

Instead they were acting as cheerleaders for these losers as they trashed the Constitution and dismantled our system of checks and balances in favor of all-powerful executive rule.

  Now that the music has stopped and it's safe to criticize them, you scurry out to denounce the lack of true conservatism the last 8 years.

 Rush and the gang are even portraying themselves as....wait for it....defenders of the Constitution. Suddenly they're against tyranny. Suddenly it's all about our liberty.

    But where were they bravely making a stand during the 8 years?

   It's just another marketing effort, but it's not working. The American People know who screwed this up. They know who you said you were then, and the fact that you're trying to rebrand your image now, is more pathetic than anything else.

   But go ahead. It's safe now to speak out, and isn't it all about being safe?

  Let me help: You had Congress, the Supreme Court and the White House but the reason you screwed everything up is you were....victims of big government?

  You were the government.

  In effect, you're saying, "The reason we failed was because we were in charge, but it's okay because we weren't really us."

 Richard, you're sinking in your own BS.

JJ: flag burning? Spitting on soldier? You are a real cheap suit, sweetheart.

Good lord.

The problem with the "world changed" talk is that none (Yes, none) of the "high-values" people produced any information that stopped an attack.

Bush applogized to the WHOLE world for the torture in Iraq.

The water boarding torture was done for politics. Get into a war with Iraq so we could control that part of the world.

Now we have

around 4,000 US People dead, 100,000 dead Iraqis .. 2,000,000 refuges hiding in countries close to Iraq.

So much for your Reagan's last hope and light in the night.

I wonder where McCain is in all this? He says don't look into it or go after people. Why did he help writing laws? Was it just political? Or being a coward?

Torture? It probably killed more Americans than 9/11

I don't know what is going on with typepad, but it keeps dropping coding for bold, italics and links.

Here is the link for "Torture? It probably killed more Americans than 9/11."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/torture-it-probably-killed-more-americans-than-911-1674396.html

I take issue with that lame-ass assertion that "the world changed on 9-11". I was mortified that Americans as a group ate that Hallmark card garbage up.

The world did not change one little bit. It is only that Americans were suddenly face to face with it, with more dimensions of reality than ever before (the same with our stupid shock that election irregularities are part of the US election reality too - yaaaaaaaaawwwwn... wake up children. Wake up! This is reality: nothing new!)

And for a VERY brief moment in time, Americans could not deny it, this expanded view of reality. They did, however, spin most unfortunate and narcissistic national confabulations around it as to meaning, attributions and zeitgeist.

Again: mortified. This nation really, really missed it. All of it.

Frank Rich and Pierre Tristam have excellent articles on the torture issue on CommonDreams dot org today (04/26/09).

RW - Redefining waterboarding or any of the enhanced interrogation methods as torture (it's not) to criminalize politicians you disagree with is something leftist regimes like the USSR and banana republics like Venezuela do.

The debate isn't the definition or redefinition of what torture is, but how close to the torture line we should go. After debating, Congress decided (yonks ago) waterboarding as outlined in the memos, was too close to the line, unless in extremely special cases at the direction of President. Pelosi and other Dems certainly didn't have objections when briefed in the few years after 9/11.

Be intellectually honest.

While I'm against the Death Penalty, I won't advocate charging judges, politicians, and prison wardens for murder who provided legal opinions, votes, and conducted the procedures for the prior 8 years when it eventually becomes overturned (and it eventually will). Will you?

Jonnie, People died during these torture sessions. Is that enhanced enough for you?

   It also now appears that the ticking bomb excuse isn't applicable here. The torture was not done to save American lives as much as to drum up phony testimony to tie Iraq with al Qaeda. Cheney and Bush knew Iraq was not behind 9/11 so  the torture was to create phony support. It was manufactured evidence around the policy just as the Downing Street memo claimed.

 Stop me if you find any of this wrong.

 Your death penalty analogy is also flawed. Let's say the death penalty was illegal and judges imposed it anyway. Would you charge judges with violating the law or would you buy their BS story that death is just an enhanced incarceration technique?

Remember Camus, folks.

Yeah. He fell out with Sarte about it being worth even trying- he thought it was- and was then killed young and Sartre lived to a ripe old age. Sisyphus isn't a myth. It's life in America. The good finish last and Cheney has everything he ever wanted.

So, could you point me to just what four years of outrage have accomplished? Does it make a difference to those tortured in the meantime, or those still being renditioned under the Obama admin?

Jonnie - Whuddever. I hear the screaming of hair splitting apart.

One thing about which the Far-Right (RP) is correct: there's a shitload of hypocrisy going on with the Right (DP).

Obama is guilty of the train of criminality inherited from Bushco as well as of his own crimes in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. Choosing to fail to prosecute war criminals ("Looking to the future rather than the past") is another war crime.

"President Obama, by declaring that his administration will protect those who committed or conspired to commit torture despite the U.S. obligation under both domestic and international law to prosecute such individuals, is effectively reaffirming that same interpretation of Executive power adopted under the Bush administration." (Obama, American Ideals, and Torture as ‘a useful tool’)

"The fact is that the president already did incredible damage to the accountability movement, and possibly acted unconstitutionally and in contravention of international law, by publicly—and repeatedly—stating that he will not allow prosecution of the CIA torturers because they were 'in good faith' following evil orders." (A Closer Look at Obama's 'New' Position on Torture Prosecutions)

"Its one thing to anticipate Obama's many nauseating accommodations with - and advance (under new 'liberal' cover) of - Empire and Inequality, Incorporated. It's another thing to watch the worst aspects of the predictable ugliness unfold." (Barack Obama, Torture, and Habeas Corpus: Unsurprised but Shocked Nonetheless)

Jonnie - You are very mixed up. Waterboarding was redefined as NOT torture after it was deemed an off-limits practice by the international community for a long time. THEN your guys redefined it as NOT torture. DId you miss that Memo? The disgraced DOJ of Bush did not... waterboarding has been deemed torture for a very long time. Then was classified as a useful bathtime pleasure per Bush / Cheney.

THe current administration, you idiot, is simply restoring the order that has been internationally recognized: waterboarding is torture. This is nto being restored so someone can go do jail. Jesus Christ you talk in circles.

However, someone may end up in their own version of Spandau for what they did in the name of "following orders". O, yes: I slipped a Nazi reference in. Make sure you rant about that in your next post. Ack.

You have not yet taken a piss on my belief that we have always tortured. America is no better than any other nation: just more secret. We simply brought it out of the hidden places - that's why we are even having this discussion. That is my little two cents. We either hired it out, sent our operatives out to special places to do it... or eventually became bold enough to do it in the light of day as in the last years of Bush.

Kershner - tho I frequently feel irritated with your railing tone - I have to say I'm not wholly unaligned with you, cf my last post regarding my belief that Amerika has always tortured. We just only brought it out to light and into our law during Bush's reign. It is disingenuous to believe we have not sponsored torture by proxy hands, or at proxy sites. So just HOW much better are we than everyone else?

That thought leaves me mixed up and confused. Sometimes yes, oftimes no.

Please, Richard, read Darius Rejali's excellent (2007) book on torture entitled "Torture and Democracy."

The good finish last and Cheney has everything he ever wanted.

So, could you point me to just what four years of outrage have accomplished? Does it make a difference to those tortured in the meantime, or those still being renditioned under the Obama admin?

This is another example of simplistic nonsense that we get all too often on this web site. Cheney may have gotten all he wanted, but the final chapter is not yet written on his life.

As for four years of outrage net getting results, history is replete with examples of outrage getting even - and then some. Consider just two examples - the French and Russian revolutions - after the the French and Russian aristocracies appeared to have gotten all or most of what they ever wanted.

Then there was the outrage of the Algerians in Camus' homeland. They brought an end to part of France's empire. And Cheney's empire will be no more someday. Perhaps, later than sooner. On the other hand, if Obama lives up to his oath to defend the Constitution and enforce the laws of the land then Cheney's day of reckoning might be over the horizon.

Crimes of this magnitude should be punished. I am much less concerned about imprisoning the majority in the pen who are drug offenders than I am in standing up for our national honor.

We should jail the tortures and those who torture the truth and our language. Cheney would be in irons now were this a just nation.

Fireslayer: or at least made to answer, with documents and protected key informants to ban his every twist and lie.

David Corn makes an interesting point in Mother Jones about The Problem With a Special Prosecutor in this torture debate.

The link coding for Corn's article was dropped, perhaps temporarily, but here it is for copy and paste: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/04/no-special-prosecutor-torture

Paul G - yes.

Saddam tortured. Bush tortured. Ergo Saddam = Bush

Saddam was tried and executed for his crimes against humanity.............

BTW, before any of you right wing sadists try and call me a Bush hater, I voted for the SOB. Supporting the rule of law doesn't end at the ballot box. If you supported the prosecution of Clinton for lying, you damn well better support an investigation of Bush et al. for War crimes unless you are nothing more than a useless hypocritical piece of sh*t.

TJ

An irony no doubt lost on the sadists of the GOP.

Billy - who died from these enhanced interrogations? No one. Take off the tin hat.

Paul G.- We did not kill Japanese soldiers who performed waterboarding. That's a myth propagated by loons. Those soldiers tortured, killed, and maimed US Soldiers along with waterboarding US Soliders. It's a significant distinction WITH a significant different. Nice you cherry pick lines from history and jumble them to fit your political beliefs. Be intellectually honest please.

You want IRONY? Progressive defend partial birth abortion and are outraged about enhanced interrogation methods that most of the world agrees, isn't torture. Pro-Abortion and Anti-Interrogation, eh?

Sorry, there is no such thing as PBA, rather it's "partly extracting an intact fetus from a woman's uterus and killing it by collapsing and removing the brain from the skull so that the fetus can pass through the birth canal."

This is faux outrage about a faux subject with lies and distortions abound. What's next are the Progressives going to convene a show trial about the lawyers who interned US citizens who were Japanese? How about the Truman Justice Dept for dropping the A-bomb, or FDR's Justice Dept for authorizing the Manhattan Project. At least those legal opinions actually killed people.

Would the Progressives support a President Palin investigating war crimes against Obama for endless drone attack in Afghanistan and Pakistan killing the Taliban and innocent civilians?

Oh, and Trig isn't Palin's grandson. But then again, don't let facts get in the way of your GOP derangement syndrome.

Would the Progressives support a President Palin investigating war crimes against Obama for endless drone attack in Afghanistan and Pakistan killing the Taliban and innocent civilians?

So you admit Bush, who did the very same thing, should be investigated for war crimes.

Could you stay focused please? I think it is time to discuss LNG now - this has run its course and devolved to monkeys in a cage stuff.

Here's a non-ideological, pragmatic opinion article from someone who knows this topic, not the rantings of politicians or ideological driven progressives.

Waterboarding was not at the "top of the list" no matter what McCain or Begala say. They are entitled to their own opinions not facts.

An upcoming article by Judge Evan Wallach states: "The prosecution of members of the Japanese military for their treatment of Americans during World War II. Seitara Hata was just one Japanese soldier charged with a war crime for waterboarding; Hatara was sentenced to 25 years hard labor."

No executions for just waterboarding. Period. It's the intellectual honesty thing again.

Also, Pentagon investigations into US treatment of detainees by the military is now being propagated as the Pentagon promoting criminal activities because of a couple memos to the CIA? Seriously, go to school and learn basic logic.

What a insane world we live in when it's crime to simulate drowning of a few people who'd kill innocent civilian's and a right to kill botched abortions because we can't "second guess" the woman's choice despite the fact the baby is no longer attached to a umbilical cord and is viable.

I say let's keep enhanced interrogation safe, legal and rare.

One more thing, which proves this is just political theater and the loony left is having their misplaced raged allowing politicians to play them like a fiddle.

If members of Congress still insist that waterboarding is a war crime, maybe they could explain to the American people why they don't just go ahead and outlaw it.

If members of Congress still insist that waterboarding is a war crime, maybe they could explain to the American people why they don't just go ahead and outlaw it.

It has been against the law for many years - the Geneva Convention on Torture and the proscription against "cruel and unusual punishment." The problem is the hypocrites in government and law enforcement who for political reasons or a lack of moral courage fail to live up to and enforce the law.

We might usefully add morally bankrupt members of the public who support or condone the aforementioned hypocrites.

Re: "Would the Progressives support a President Palin investigating war crimes against Obama for endless drone attack in Afghanistan and Pakistan killing the Taliban and innocent civilians?"

All progressives would. DP elites and their hypocritical apologists would not.

But there's another issue here that never gets discussed by DP/RP religionists: Torture is being defined here in far too limited a manner. If Russia were to announce that it was going to commit a shock and awe attack against us, and then invade, occupy and dominate us, claiming that they couldn't leave because it wouldn't be in our interests, we would consider their aggressive war to be the supreme international crime (as in the Nuremberg Principles), and it would all be considered torture.

Since bird flu and swine flu outbreak everyone is looking to buy tamiflu. Tamiflu is known to relief flu like symptoms in patients. Manny are looking north of the border to order Tamiflu from canadian pharmacy and save money. It is even cheaper to buy Tamiflu online then buying it at a local pharmacy. You can also get Relenza (zanamivir) is also known to be used to treat influenza.

Rob is an online pharmacy spammer.

Hey Rob, how come YOU did not go to prison for the FDA/DOJ Viagra wars? Get a spellchecker and USE it, boy.

Sincerely, one of the original veterans of the viagra wars, who LOBBIED so YOU could still be making six figures peddling online.

Dear Harry Kershner: what angry and spiteful planet are you from? I'm not a DP religionist, not the political kind anyway; but I talked / talk a LOT about the criminality of what is being done in our name overseas. Maybe I'm taking personally an attack you are aiming at someone who is not me? But the fact that you rant like that up here so laboriously makes it feel like you are aiming it at folks who come here. Maybe you could be more specific in the future so that I can tell if you are personally blaming me and whomever else up on Blue Oregon, and so I could stop reacting to your broadbrush ranting. Maybe that would help. I keep trying to figure out why you make me get so mad, and I think it's because you are so unspecific about who you are blaming for the ills of the world and the fact tha it does not conform in any way to what you know to be right and just, the only way to be. It might help if I know who precisely you are wishing dead.

In fact, I get pretty riled up at what I perceive to be uncaring shallowness at times - nobody gives a good goddamn that now our elders cannot afford the tobacco to make their prayers - people up here did not even think that was interesting enough to PRETEND to be interested! And there have been other, more-"important" things I wanted to discuss up here, but because it has nothing to do with the narrow interests of the specific cadre who attend here, there is no discussion.

For me, I get angry because people I love and who are continuously left out of dialogue adn consideration would directly benefit if Blue Oregon habitues would consent to give a shit - for then the next level down of readers, the media, some politicos, would be treated to some small level of awareness.

But, alas, after two years of posting and ;more than two other years of lurking, I can see this will never be. There is a narrow and specific culture of expression here, and somehow those things that I bring to the table wring zero interest from those here. I still get mad! I know how much it would help some others that I am compelled to care about. And I feel at times that posters here are perhaps less than what they purport to be because they don't even TRY to care! :)....

So in this way I could share your ire. And have often fallen to your unspecific brand of raging. Yet I'd like to get out of that. And I'd really like to figure out how to stop being pricked, unnecessarily, by you. :)

Whaddaya think? Could you perhaps name names next time you want to exercise your murderous rage in word? It would be a breath of fresh air for many, no doubt. And I might actually be able to listen to you instead of just wanting you to shut the hell up with the ugliness of your expression. I think it goes to the heart of effective communication - are you even interested in reaching folks, or are you more interested in venting your rage?

THIS IS A MUST - LISTEN: Fresh Air today, two powerful and well-researched interviews founded well in historical research. Speaks to the SERE program, Pol Pot, the Inquisition etc and their documented hx of waterboarding...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103604852

THAT is the company we have decided to keep. I find it impossible to believe that the asshole who sold SERE prog techniques to the CIA and Congress did NOT know the hx of waterboarding etc. For god's sake, Pol Pot's waterboard has been saved in a torture museum!

THIS IS A MUST - LISTEN: Fresh Air today, two powerful and well-researched interviews founded well in historical research. Speaks to the SERE program, Pol Pot, the Inquisition etc and their documented hx of waterboarding...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103604852

THAT is the company we have decided to keep. I find it impossible to believe that the asshole who sold SERE prog techniques to the CIA and Congress did NOT know the hx of waterboarding etc. For god's sake, Pol Pot's waterboard has been saved in a torture museum!

Rebecca: I NEVER (except this once) am responding personally to you.

What I have said here on BO has not tortured, maimed or killed anyone (unlike the daily actions of the DP/RP elites). Your belief that my rants are "murderous" and directed toward you is delusional in a way that requires some kind of treatment, and I sincerely hope that you get some.

Actually, Kersh', the energy you put into your diatribe is exactly the kind of focused rage that informs the spirit of murder in this world. You are always so angry, vexed and pugilistic. Rarely are you seeking converse or commerce of minds.

We can agree to disagree that the depth and continuousness of your dark rage is indeed part of the terrible spirit of the times. Never mind that you are righteous, your rage is merely more rage.

I do appreciate that you indicate you are ranting to rant only, and never ranting directly at anyone up here. It does not feel that way.... but if you say so, then I must take you at your word that it is generic rage.

<h2>I will try to keep that in mind going forward.</h2>