Shhh: Obama may create “classified loophole” for enhanced interrogations
posted at 4:12 pm on January 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The news here is that this isn’t news. Less than a week after the election, rumors were already swirling that he was going to retain the option “in certain cases” to use procedures not authorized by the Army Field Manual. Then the left got him to back down on appointing John Brennan, who’d defended some of Bush’s interrogation policies, as director of the CIA. I thought that signaled the end of heart-ache for Andrew Sullivan, but no: Not only might Brennan end up being placed in a supervisory role, evidently The One’s still flirting with a little presidential prerogative when it comes to especially “difficult” subjects.
For Obama, who repeatedly insisted during the 2008 presidential campaign and the transition period that “America doesn’t torture,” a classified loophole would allow him to back up his vow to end harsh interrogations while retaining a full range of presidential options in conducting the war against terrorism.
The proposed loophole, which could come in the form of a classified annex to the manual, would satisfy intelligence experts who fear that an outright ban of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques would limit the government in obtaining threat information that could save American lives. It would also preserve Obama’s flexibility to authorize any interrogation tactics he might deem necessary for national security.
However, such a move would frustrate Senate Democrats and human rights, retired military and religious groups that have pressed for a government-wide prohibition on methods they describe as torture…
“That would not be good,” said the Rev. Richard Killmer, executive director of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture. “We don’t need to be able to torture and we don’t need to engage in any interrogation techniques that are not humane. And unless we have absolute clarity that these interrogation techniques will not be used, they are not going to be able to say that.”
Indeed. How is Obama upholding his vow to end harsh interrogations if he’s not ending harsh interrogations? All he’s doing is scaling it down from the level of official policy to an ad hoc contingency, which makes it even more arbitrary and potentially abused. Exit question: The left won’t cut him a break on this the way they will on, say, TARP; absolutist opposition to harsh interrogation in whatever form, from barking dogs on up, is now as central to “progressive” identity as support for abortion is. How can he make them happy while still preserving the option he needs for emergencies? He’s not going to risk his reelection on being caught short-handed in a ticking-bomb scenario.
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: 1 2 Next »
Wow. I guess this means that Obama is a war criminal who should be tried for war crimes. I’m sure everyone at Kos, DU, and HuffPo completely agree, right?
Right?
Anyone?
MadisonConservative on January 16, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Change we can believe in.
malclave on January 16, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Once again, the reality of the office interferes with “The One”s ideals.
Kind of like having to go tho bed before the end of the movie…when you’re six.
BobMbx on January 16, 2009 at 4:17 PM
“Classified” = We aren’t telling anyone!
Now there’s hope & change transparency for ya. We’ll take what’s public and make it secret. Ask yourself, would George Bush have gotten away with that?
Christian Conservative on January 16, 2009 at 4:19 PM
i knew this would happen, even Obama knows you have to do what you have to do to get these thugs to talk. This is little to no suprise.
lavell12 on January 16, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Huh.
HornetSting on January 16, 2009 at 4:20 PM
“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
the_nile on January 16, 2009 at 4:20 PM
This isn’t going to make all the rop countries happy. What to do now bho?
L
letget on January 16, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Kind of an interesting dynamic around here. The mockery and snarkiness increases proportionally with every centrist/right of center action Obama takes. I would think folks would be happy with Obama’s less liberal actions.
dakine on January 16, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Easy enough AP: We don’t torture prisoners; we interrogate them.
What He is proposing is an Enhanced Interview Procedure. It’s whole different chapter that has nothing to do with interrogations.
BobMbx on January 16, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Is this a case of the more things change, the more they stay the same?
backwoods conservative on January 16, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Wouldn’t this make Obama worse than Bush? St. Barack knows this is wrong and chooses to do it anyways….
rw on January 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM
If the changes of heart by Obaminator weren’t in the direction they are, our comments wouldn’t qualify as “snarky”. It would be a very different conversation.
BobMbx on January 16, 2009 at 4:24 PM
You don’t know what you’re talking about anymore than he does.
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Strike 2.
Or is that strike 3? (bailout funds, supports wiretapping, supports waterboarding… what makes him different from Bush’ positions now?!)
Skywise on January 16, 2009 at 4:25 PM
“More of the same we can believe in!”
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 4:25 PM
I will state it again and again…Obama is just “mopping” up what President Bush put into place and used…Obama is basically President Bush’s janitor.
right2bright on January 16, 2009 at 4:27 PM
I think it has to do with the fact that Obama spent the campaign harshly criticizing the ideas he now embraces. If he had been more willing to treat the president’s policies with polite disagreement instead of withering contempt, his changes of heart would not seem so ridiculously sudden.
Slublog on January 16, 2009 at 4:27 PM
why didn’t bush try some bs like this?
jp on January 16, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Two reasons -
1> If THE ONE does it, the bulk of the leftists (including the media) will all say how he’s so smart and wise to make these *hard* decisions. Bush will still be seen as a trampler of civil rights and violating the constitution and perpetrating war crimes.
2> “Fool me twice shame on… uh…” Until he actually says/does these things this is just speculation. But if he’s so willing to sell out his own party (after running as a hard leftist) what can you trust him on? I certainly wouldn’t.
Skywise on January 16, 2009 at 4:28 PM
Is anybody keeping a running tally of Obama’s broken promises from the election? It would be really interesting to see them all together.
Ferris on January 16, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Obama’s proving what we’ve all been saying, in short:
1) Democrat Voters are gullible fools
2) the Dems lie to these fools to get elected
3) the dems aren’t against alot of what they claim to be and are only politicizing them when out of power, once in power they need to actually govern.
jp on January 16, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Wouldn’t you have been happier if he was honest to you liberals and actually told you what he was going to do, rather then lie and state one thing to you gullible fools, and then do another after the election.
So we take the posture, he whored you, he will whore us. He is just showing he as no scruples…you accept and embrace that, conservative reject it.
Thus the difference between liberals and conservatives.
right2bright on January 16, 2009 at 4:30 PM
You mean the outreach for assured dialog concept?
the_nile on January 16, 2009 at 4:30 PM
R2B, this is brilliant. You can use this with equal effect at a VFW meeting or at Rev. Wrights church. Just change where the emphasis is, and you can completely change the meaning.
BobMbx on January 16, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Because Bush believed in an open government. Say what you will do and do what you say. And people crucified him for it.
Now Obama will claim to be for an “open and transparent” government but he’ll say one thing and do another…
Skywise on January 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM
The thing is that the Left never had a problem with harsh interrogations themselves. Making a big stink about it was always politically motivated and designed to hurt Republicans/conservatives. But by being so &*(%^%^ petty, the Left didn’t just put the Right in political danger; it put all of us in mortal danger.
Mockery is the mildest response that I’m inclined to inflict on the Left right now.
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM
I will state it again and again…Obama is just “mopping” up what President Bush put into place and used…Obama is basically President Bush’s janitor.
right2bright on January 16, 2009 at 4:27 PM
You know it’s got Hillary seething that she can’t keep using the, “It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush” line.
anniekc on January 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Gee, how close can two posts be, but not even using the same words…
right2bright on January 16, 2009 at 4:31 PM
+1 for you
jp on January 16, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Maybe Obama should get Bush to pardon him for his future war crimes.
RedSoxNation on January 16, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Somewhere Dick Chaney is laughing his ass off….
RedSoxNation on January 16, 2009 at 4:34 PM
So, our smart power is now dumb again?
locomotivebreath1901 on January 16, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Nah, he just wants to justify using these methods on people who voted for prop 8…or whichever way it was that made the gays go mad.
joeindc44 on January 16, 2009 at 4:35 PM
this is all why I wonder, how in the age of the Internet, bloggers and youtube, the Dems can continue to get away with this stuff with their voters?
Imagine the compare/constrast between campaign positions and actions.
and if Obama does go off the deep end on National Security and we are attacked again, he and the Dems are toast politically. It’ll be the ulitmate gift to the GOP that he could give. I just hope something worse than 9/11 doesn’t happen
jp on January 16, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Actually, I think Obama and his cabinet are all classified loopholes.
BigD on January 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM
It’s good to be king.
a capella on January 16, 2009 at 4:38 PM
It’s going to be funny as hell with Obama changes his party affiliation. I mean he already fancies himself a Lincoln and evokes Reaganism.
Texas Gal on January 16, 2009 at 4:38 PM
No shit!!!!
Texas Gal on January 16, 2009 at 4:39 PM
I’m just wondering if the magic negro has ever had an original thought in his entire life? Because, so far, I see clinton and Bush policies continuing.
Andy in Agoura Hills on January 16, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Where is the heartbreak and outrage by Sullivan. When McCain said similar things, Sullivan made him out to be head of the Gestapo. Is Obama going to get a pass?
I guess Jeremiah Wright was not kidding when he said Obama was a typical politican and he would call him on it when it happened.
Mr. Joe on January 16, 2009 at 4:40 PM
I am, but I’m also upset at the double standard and the BS he spewed while running for president.
It’s still a net gain for me. I’d much rather have a president who refuses to take “enhance interrogation” off the table when dealing with someone like KSM.
Esthier on January 16, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Exactly – Obama may be smart enough to realize that those options are needed but he campaigned to the sheep that he was so much better/ so much more honorable than Pres Bush that no one should be happy that he’s walking away from his lies.
IMO everytime he does something the vermin on the Left bashed Pres Bush for he should be called the lying waste of space he is.
katiejane on January 16, 2009 at 4:41 PM
how is this restoring our standing the world?
jp on January 16, 2009 at 4:44 PM
He’ll need some Sucrets, too.
BobMbx on January 16, 2009 at 4:44 PM
This is Obama being Obama. The filthy bastard keeps leaving options open. Gitmo is closing (sometime in the next four years), The US will not torture the terrorists we capture (except under the following circumstances), and so forth.
Don’t you people get it? The man is still running in campaign mode where he is trying to be all things to everybody. The time for that is over. After January 20th he even loses the “one President at a time” excuse for refusing to take a DEFINITIVE opinion on substantive issues. The filthy bastard is such a waffler he probably even ordered both beef and chicken last night when he was dissing GWB’s address.
The man signed up to lead America and he can’t get away with this continued refusing to take a position or the likely tactic of blaming whatever Clinton-era appointee as not being the “secretary he had come to know.” It’s up to Americans to demand that the filthy bastard lead and not follow the dictates of poll numbers and the special interests that bought his office.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 4:47 PM
So the Chicago organizer gets schooled! Who would of thunk it!
grapeknutz on January 16, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Please. The only reason the Left objected to harsh interrogation was because they thought Bush was doing it. Expect concern to evaporate.
Count to 10 on January 16, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Amazing how getting the Daily Intelligence Briefings changes your perspective . . . Last thing he wants is a successful terrorist attack on America in 2010. That would be a disaster for mid-term elections. Therefore, now that he’s reading the briefings, he realizes the imminence of the danger and the need for extraordinary means of intelligence gathering.
It may be the one right thing The One does.
PastorJon on January 16, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Obama can try to be as “centrist” as he wants but it won’t work for me. He will never get my vote.
The idiots on the left will stay silent because they got the black, cool liberal politician they wanted. Most of the people that voted for Obama is due to race and celebrity. The hard left is not going to be angry about this. That reasoning is a myth.
The left will allow torture if it’s done by a democrat. Also, Obama is as left as he can be on the economy, “climate change” and social issues. Gay marriage and abortions are going to make a huge comeback. Gird your loins.
jencab on January 16, 2009 at 4:49 PM
I don’t blame you. I really don’t. Though I wonder if Obama really meant what he said and has just been given the most eye opening experiences of his life time in those meetings with Bush.
Esthier on January 16, 2009 at 4:50 PM
He’s shutting down the “undisclosed location” since it is clear that Biden will have zero responsibilities or influence in the filthy bastard’s administration. Unlike Bush/Cheney, Biden’s role will be limited to state funerals and making sure he doesn’t speak in public.
As for the undisclosed location- just hang a sign “closed due to lack of leadership.”
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Geez, I suppose it might have something to do with hypocracy. Hypocracy from Obama, the media and the left. For 8 yrs the left and the press have actively undermined and demonized Bush by latching on to specific policies as evidence of his anti-democratic impulses, his greed and general disqualification for the job. In fact Obama specifically ran against “the failed policies of the last 8 years,” frequently pointed to these very same policies as evidence.
So pardon the cheeky comments if we don’t roll over and play lap dog when Obama suddenly has a road to Gitmo conversion and no one in the fawning media mutters a critical word.
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 4:51 PM
This is OK, MSM will tell us so…
Wade on January 16, 2009 at 4:53 PM
The word is “hypocrisy,” not “hypocracy.”
BigD on January 16, 2009 at 4:54 PM
I guess Che and Chavez and other darlings of the left just skipped the harsh interegation phase.
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Since I have adopted the policy of always agreeing with any trial balloon launched by the Obama administration it would be helpful to clarify what it is exactly that is being tested here.
So…The Obama administration will not torture prisoners, unless they do torture prisoners, in which case that torture will be classified military information, and no one will ever know about it.
It will never appear in the NYTimes, nor will it ever be leaked by anyone in the administration, and any prisoner who claims to having been tortured will obviously be lying.
Ok, I can agree with that.. Gopherit Obama. Reap the rewards.
Skandia Recluse on January 16, 2009 at 4:55 PM
The fun part is that the House and Senate could have passed legislation defining and outlawing “torture”. Instead, they chose to use the issue as a cudgel and hammer the Bush Administration with. Now with their guy in office, will they own the issue, or punt?
landshark on January 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Seriously. Obama is such a poseur. No wonder they won’t release any of his college papers, he probably plagerized everything he ever wrote.
anniekc on January 16, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Regardless of where anybody stands on torture, I want America’s enemies to think that we will damn well torture them or do whatever the hell we please if we catch them.
I want our enemies to fear us.
redshirt on January 16, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Scene from season 8 of “24″, winter 2010 season:
JACK BAUER: One way or the other, Peter, you’re going to tell me where you hit your mattress full of money. This government cannot survive if people below the rank of cabinet secretary refuse to pay their taxes.
PETER WILSON (a gun-loving Mormon tax resister who is currently duct-taped to his dining room chair): No… I’ll never give up my life savings… your precious government will just waste it on Pepsi bailout…
JACK BAUER: We don’t have time for this! You’ve got ten seconds to pay your fair share of this government’s expenses, or I WILL use this DVD of Rosie O’Donnell’s variety show on you!
PETER WILSON (numb with horror): No… no, you wouldn’t… you couldn’t… I thought President Obama outlawed torture!
JACK BAUER: He did. Forceful interrogation is no longer the policy of the United States government. This is strictly an ad hoc contingency that President Obama would disavow in the strongest possible terms, if he knew about it.
PETER WILSON: Oh… well, that’s okay then…
JACK BAUER: THERE IS NO TIME! (grabs DVD player, ignoring Mr. Wilson’s anguished screams.)
Doctor Zero on January 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Cherry or Grape?
Fact of the matter is that the filthy bastard will take this nation as far left as he can given the fact that most Americans (your crowd excepted) don’t want to live in the USSR circa 1960 or modern day Cuba. The filthy bastard and the Politburo formed in the Congress, will plot and scheme ways to get their agenda done without having to answer to American voters.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
I think that this new form of government–”Hypocracy”–should be added to the dictionary. ;)
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Excuse me while I go shopping…
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 5:07 PM
His primary consideration is going to be getting re-elected, which works to our advantage in today’s world. He won’t risk a screw up in Iraq, Afghanistan, or with a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and maybe not with Iran getting nukes.
exhelodrvr on January 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
You still have money?
BigD on January 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Obama will be the 3rd Term of Bush.
justinok on January 16, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Right out of the box.
He can go from the inauguration/coronation to his impeachment trial. John Conjures will be waiting.
Jaibones on January 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Just tell his lefty friends what they wanna hear.
Kini on January 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM
You obviously don’t know us very well. The more obvious it becomes that Obama is completely full of shit and has lied his way from being some leftwing Hyde Park nitwit in the Illinois State Senate, pushing infanticide in committee hearings, all the way to the White House (on the strength of imbeciles like you who actually believed his BS), the funnier this all becomes.
You lefty clowns wouldn’t recognize one of his policies if it walked up and pissed on you, which is very likely to happen soon.
Jaibones on January 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM
ROFLMAO
That was really good moxie!
Texas Gal on January 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM
To spend on important things, yes.
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Jailbones, I voted for McCain (been a supporter since before 2000). It was simply an observation, but thanks for the kind words anyway. The guy is a politician. Politicians of all stripes do what politicians do…not sure what all the fuss is about. I, for one, am happy to see Obama “piss off” the far left. Hopefully, he’ll keep doing so.
dakine on January 16, 2009 at 5:21 PM
The Bill Clinton of 1995-2000 who compromised with Republicans on things like welfare reform in order to keep his poll numbers high showed that at least 75-80 percent of the Democrats don’t really give a damn what their elected leader does, as long as he does it with a ‘D’ in front of his name.
There are a certain number out there who couldn’t stand Clinton v2.0, following the Dick Morris triangulation strategy — they’re the ones behind the WTO riots in Seattle in 1999. But those riots were met mostly with disdain by the big media outlets, who can show contempt for the far left when they’re going after a Democrat who’s considered at least nominally liberal.
If Obama keeps triangulating towards Bush, you can expect the same thing — maybe 20-25 percent of his pre-election supporters will be angry and feel betrayed because Barack hasn’t closed Gitmo, outlawed tough interrogations and investigated Bush and Cheney for war crimes, while the others will just follow along and act as if all their criticisms of Bush for doing the same things Obama is now doing either never occurred, or they’ll condescendingly try to claim the differences are too nuanced for the troglodytes on the right to comprehend.
jon1979 on January 16, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Barry is a loophole. Well, it rhymes with loophole, anyway.
Vashta.Nerada on January 16, 2009 at 5:26 PM
+1.
This wouldn’t bother me so much if that when Bush triangulated towards leftist policies he was villified even more. It’s obvious they’re strictly after that “D” after the name rather than an ideology.
Skywise on January 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Man, I just can’t WAIT to see the giant papier mache heads of Obama and Hillary at the next war protest! And when Code Pink gets all up in Hillary’s face, waving bloody hands at her… I’m SO going to enjoy it.
/yeah, right
//but I can dream, can’t I?
Laura on January 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM
What do you mean no torture? I just had to look at another pro The One mag cover while buying food at the supermarket. Talk about losing your lunch! I wanted to yell out “can’t I just buy my waffles?”
RalphyBoy on January 16, 2009 at 5:34 PM
I remember, shortly after the election, Bill Kristol commenting on numerous people he knew personally that had attended National Security Briefings for the first time, and their reactions to those briefings. He stated that (paraphrasing here), to the man, they all said the hairs on the back of their necks stood up once they heard the details of the threats the US faces daily.
Likewise Vice President Cheney has expressed concerns about Obama’s naiveté on national security issues.
The One has been attending those briefs for a couple of months now.
I suspect the hairs on the back of his neck are now standing up as well.
pain train on January 16, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Looks like Boo Boo is finally growing up and living in the real world…..
Hog Wild on January 16, 2009 at 5:51 PM
I’ve never understood the “ticking bomb” scenario. If torture doesn’t work, why does it suddenly work if there is a ticking bomb somewhere?
sleepy-beans on January 16, 2009 at 5:57 PM
pain train on January 16, 2009 at 6:01 PM
TWWEEETTT!!!!!!! Flag on the field. Revisionism.
Bill Clinton didn’t “compromise” with Republicans on welfare reform. He opposed it and made it clear when he signed it that his veto would have been overturned in Congress. That isn’t compromise or even cooperation. It was only after those reforms were successful that Clinton took credit.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:05 PM
“Cheney is more optimistic about the long-term prospects for those Bush administration national security policies that have kept the country safe for more than seven years. He believes that the incoming president might quickly come to appreciate the value of the Terrorist Surveillance Program and the special interrogation program for high-value detainees–the two Cheney cites as most important.
CHENEY: I hope that what will happen is they sit down every day now and avail themselves of the same intelligence information the president and I have been looking at for eight years; that they will come to understand the enormous importance of continuing to collect that intelligence; and that they will resist the temptation to automatically take their campaign rhetoric and make that policy. Now, will they do that? I don’t know.
TWS: Was the campaign rhetoric then something born of naïveté?
CHENEY: Absolutely–or, well, I can’t say it was malicious; it was the stuff that a lot of Democrats and a lot of people in the press have hammered us with for years. And I think on the left wing of the Democratic party, there are some people who believe that we really tortured and–then in the course of the Democratic primary process, he rode that issue pretty hard.
He’s now going to be President of the United States, and two weeks from today we swear him in. And it would be a tragedy if he let his policies be founded on nothing more than the rhetoric of his campaign. It’s got to be based on knowledge and experience. “
the_nile on January 16, 2009 at 6:09 PM
You’ve got it backwards. Done correctly, torture or threat of torture works. The ticking bomb scenario is all about whether the interrogator is willing and able to engage in torture techniques in the first place.
Under the filthy bastard’s regime, field commanders who apprehend suspected terrorists with the blood of their victims on their robers will still have to inform them of their right for legal counsel before making any statement.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:11 PM
I’d rather have us honestly admit that we torture certain terrorists than have us hide under beaurocratic evasions. Especially when the torture takes the form of humiliation and intimidation, not of physical injury. It should be clear that this is applied only to people who are attempting to take down the US government or to influence the electorate by terror, and honest reports of the number of people subjected to this, and for how long, should be given to Congress. If it ever exceeds 100 in a year, or the total time exceeds about 16 man-years, the reasons should be made known, at least to Congress.
njcommuter on January 16, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Title
Copy
Extraordinary cases? Firstly, as it has been used exactly THREE times, how the frak does this change a damn thing?
Second, how does the title jibe with the copy? You’re either ending it or you’re not.
Liberalism IS not just a disease, it’s an impairment.
drjohn on January 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM
All that triangulation shizam is fine when people’s lives aren’t at stake.
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 6:21 PM
We should really be Thanking Obama loudly for continuing Bush’s policies and making it ok to defend our country again.
Now if we could get them to admit their objection to these policies previous was PURELY political.
lwssdd on January 16, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Mwa ha ha.
Loving it.
Put your money where your mouth is, Barry boy.
And watch the radical Left that you lied to turn on you when you betray them.
Sure would be nice to be able to vote “present” wouldn’t it?
Hawkins1701 on January 16, 2009 at 7:14 PM
All in favor of including ”Hypocracy” in the political dictionary of modern lexicon and geneal hot air message postings…say yea.
Those against say neigh.
Motion passes.
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 7:25 PM
What happens when the Bush Regime confronts terrorism.
Bad: “enhanced interrogation”
An unconstitutional torture technique used indiscriminately against innocent goat herders and terrorists alike.
What happens when sweetness and light confronts terrorism.
Good: “enhanced interview process”
A constitutionally protected interview process used only with the assistance and cooperation of known terrorists when the possibility of a ticking bomb scenario may exist.
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Aye!
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM
A CIC who wouldn’t waterboard KSM should be impeached – after it (sic) is drawn and quartered.
Basilsbest on January 16, 2009 at 8:00 PM
These same liberals who are so concerned about the comfort of terrorists have no qualms about drills being used to penetrate the skulls of innocent human beings – so long as they are located in the real Gitmograib: THE WOMB.
Their concern for the protection of human beings is inversely proportional to their innocence.
Basilsbest on January 16, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Aye.
Cindy Munford on January 16, 2009 at 8:28 PM
On a serious note; thank you Mr. Bush. As a nation we were well served by your capacity to clearly delineate between right and wrong, good and evil rather than lingering in the vast wasteland of paralyzing gray.
Many Americans will go to bed tonight safer and more secure having had you as our President and Commander and Chief. Thank you sir. God’s speed toward a well deserved rest.
moxie_neanderthal on January 16, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »