Mukasey gets through the Senate Judiciary Committee
posted at 11:40 am on November 6, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
This’ll have Keith Olbermann spitting flames tonight.
Nomination passes, 11-8. Sen. Leahy scolds disruptive members of the public. Sen. Kennedy is giving a statement lambasting Mukasey. He actually fumed about the “reckless disregard of the rule of law.” Yes, Teddy Kennedy did.
He’ll get a floor vote, and unless there’s a meteoric change, he’ll get confirmed.
This whole waterboarding brouhaha has been an obvious exercise in political gotchas. The Democrats tried to either drive a wedge between the nominee and the administration or to get him to say something that they could use to derail him. Mukasey didn’t fall into their trap.
As for waterboarding, it’s been used a total of three times, and at least one of those was as close to the ticking time bomb scenario as we’re likely to see. It was also banned in 2003, so it’s not only not relevant to the current state of the war, it didn’t lead to the slippery slope of torture that liberals from Andrew Sullivan to Olbermann to Patrick Leahy whine about. It didn’t. That’s a hard fact that they really ought to deal with at some point.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
What will the Dems do now about the waterboarding? They will try to have it outlawed, yes?
shooter on November 6, 2007 at 11:47 AM
so waterboarding isn’t as big a crime/concern as these libs make it out to be.
mfnorman on November 6, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Waterboarding has been used more than 3 times.
It’s been used in our own SERE training, probably tens of thousands of times over several decades.
benjamin on November 6, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Right, but the liberals don’t care what we do to our own troops. They just care about what’s done to captured terrorists.
Bryan on November 6, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Shouldn’t torture be defined to include physical pain. Although water boarding I’m sure may induce mass quantities of fear I don’t think it is actually painful. It seems to be more psycological than physical. I thought it was a stroke of genius when I first learned about it. I mean it sure beats boiling oil boarding or draino boarding.
sonnyspats1 on November 6, 2007 at 11:56 AM
That’s my same question with regard to waterboarding. It seems even less like torture than light and sound deprivation. The fact that our own special forces guys go through it in training should be enough to end the discussion.
Of course, learning that it hasn’t been used at all in 4 years should end the discussion anyways, but it won’t.
BadgerHawk on November 6, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Nora Ephron must be crushed.
JammieWearingFool on November 6, 2007 at 12:12 PM
How about waterboarding Ted Kennedy? I understand he is very good in the water…..
robo on November 6, 2007 at 12:13 PM
I think liberals shudder whenever they consider the practice/sport of snowboarding… after all, just add a few more degrees and voila!
D2Boston on November 6, 2007 at 12:13 PM
To be sure, volunteering for it makes a significant difference.
But I don’t think Congress really wants to define it as ‘torture’ per se, which would be a de facto admission of complicity in torturing tens of thousands of our own troops and open the government up to billions of dollars in lawsuit settlements.
benjamin on November 6, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Yup. That’s among the reasons that Mukasey didn’t want to answer one way or another — doing so opens up a whole lot of consequences that the short-sighted liberals haven’t anticipated.
Bryan on November 6, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Robo,
How about waterboarding Ted Kennedy? I understand he is very good in the water…..
I’d like to see that, reallly would like to see that.
Best one yet !!
2theright on November 6, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Facts? Surely you’re not that naive, Bryan.
To them, facts are nuanced innuendo, sprinkled with a surgically excised phrase quoted out of context.
BacaDog on November 6, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Why do conservative blogs and radio hosts keep providing this douche with free advertising? You’re only legitimizing him and increasing his viewership.
AlexB on November 6, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Clearly, our Republic now hangs by a thread.
Seriously, I share the above commenters views on waterboarding. It seems to me that a method that can put the fear of God in to a person without causing them any actual physical harm is the perfect balance you are looking for. There is a great article by Bret Stephens today in the WSJ taking on the argument that by methods like this we are “sinking to the level of our adversaries.” A rather ridiculous argument in light of the Allies conduct in the “Good War” of WWII where we indiscriminantly fire-bombed about 1.2 million civilians to death in Germany and Japan.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bstephens/?id=110010827
I also don’t understand the “torture never gets accurate information” argument. It’s not like we are inquisitors trying to get confessions to heresy out of these people. If you are asking them open ended questions (e.g.: where is the bomb, who have you worked with, etc), you’re either going to get information that checks out or it doesn’t. If it’s the latter, then you are no worse off than before. I also think that in a state of true panic, a person’s ability to effectively lie, or tell somebody “what they want to hear” is going to be greatly reduced.
Dudley Smith on November 6, 2007 at 1:17 PM
“That’s a hard fact that they really ought to deal with at some point.”
So many snarky one-liners. So little time………..
How ’bout a Jim Mora impression? “Hard facts? HARD FACTS??!!!! Don’t talk to me about hard facts!!!!”
Hawkins1701 on November 6, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Comment pages: