Hume Still Pushing “Definition” Of Torture Rejected By Administration A Year Ago
Hume Still Pushing “Definition” Of Torture Rejected By Administration A Year Ago
Last night on Fox News, Brit Hume argued that waterboarding – an interrogation technique dating back to the Inquisition in which the prisoner “has water poured over him to make him think he is about to drown†– does not constitute torture:
Torture has an actual definition, and it means extreme physical pain, it also means the kind of thing associated with the failure of your organs. Now waterboarding is hair-raising and frightening, terrifying as it obviously is, would not appear to fit that category.
The Justice Department has explicitly rejected Hume’s “definition” of torture. In a 2002 memo, then White House counsel Alberto Gonzales argued that to be defined as torture, punishments “must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.” The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel later revised this definition, but Hume apparently never got the memo.
Also, former torture victim Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) disagrees:
For instance, there has been considerable press attention to a tactic called “waterboarding” … In my view, to make someone believe that you are killing him by drowning is no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank. I believe that it is torture, very exquisite torture.
To send a signal to Hume and right-wingers that this kind of “exquisite torture” should stop, take action.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Let’s waterboard Brit and his kind first, then ask them if it’s torture. I’d love to watch!
December 14th, 2005 at 1:03 pmGreat idea, Grim!
December 14th, 2005 at 1:11 pmNo, actually, we are against torture. But can we make him uncomfortable?
December 14th, 2005 at 1:13 pmWe could run a contest to see who is the worst anchor on Fox news. It could run every week, with published results.
#1 – that makes alot of perfect sense for the radical, far-left pushing this anti-torture nonsense – TORTURE conservatives who oppose your ideas, but have committed no crime, but sympathize with vicious murderers and suspected terrorists.
Under your rules Grim – I should wish torture on you because your far-left. It’s sickening how low the left will stoop with their ideological opponents.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:15 pm[Comment Deleted by Admin]
December 14th, 2005 at 1:22 pmMay he should subject himself to this form of torture . I am sure there are many agencies i.e cia , fbi , pentagon and private armies who would oblige and perhaps gives us a true account of his emotions and judgement.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:23 pmAnd perhaps O’reillylilly would sublect as well and we would like to kow wich one would give up first . I bet U bucks on O’Lilly .Any takers?
December 14th, 2005 at 1:27 pmHey, Hitler,
Ease up, buddy.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:32 pmIt was OVIOUSLY tongue and cheek.
Not everything has to become a major fight between left and right.
Chill.
FAUX NEWS anchor continues to propagate disinform
FAUX NEWS: We distort. You comply. Think Progress reports on the latest distortion:
December 14th, 2005 at 1:34 pmNow, where were we? …
December 14th, 2005 at 1:34 pmI sent in my message. All of you?
I can’t believe that in this day and age we are even talking about this.
We are heading BACK in time, not forward. It really sickens me.
#4, that’s “you’re far left” and Hitler was right wing, look it up.
I say if these morons think this is no big deal, let one of them volunteer to undergo the procedure and tell us it was no big deal.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:34 pmDoes FORCING people to watch Fox News violate
December 14th, 2005 at 1:34 pmthe Geneva convention?
Just asking….
It’d be torture for me, afterthought!
December 14th, 2005 at 1:35 pm#4. But Brit Hume doesn’t think that WaterBoarding is torture, so if he were water boarded he would not think he is being tortured. He would consider himself merely to be subjected to a little legal unpleasantness.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:37 pmThat was the point of #1 post. The people who think water boarding is not torture should be subject to it to see if first hand experience would change their mind. It would be irresponsible of me to advocated three day fasts to lose weight unless I had tried it myself with no ill affects.
Sorry for the grammar, I don’t know a clear method of trying to explain a possible future action through another possible viewpoint.
God!
So now torture equates only to “do extreme physical pain”? I remember the movies of Chuck Norris saving captured (Missing In Action) soldiers in Viet Nam. They where captive in underwater cages, with water upto his necks. So that wasn’t torture? After all, the water was under their heads, not “poured over them”. Why, then, Chucky killed bloodly every single Vietnamite in the encampment? After all, the captured soldiers were not tortured. And, btw, I think USA never declared a formal war, so following the actual GOP “Mein Kampf” doctrine, they were “Enemy Combatants”, with no right of protection from Geneva nor their country, legally.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:37 pmHume was great as the lead zombie in Land of the Dead.
A more cadaverous looking skeeve on cablethere is not, perhaps with the exception of Bob ‘Crypt Keeper’ Novak.
Hume, Karl Rove called and said the Kool-Aid is in the fridge. Drink liberally
-GSD
December 14th, 2005 at 1:40 pmWow, my comment got deleted.
I did not think it was that bad, was it?
I didn’t even use profanity.
Oh well.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:42 pmThe Khmer Rouge used waterboarding on its prisoners during their purge in the 1950’s. We are now in the same league.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:46 pmI’d still like to waterboard Hume though.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:46 pm{SHRUG} Well, it’s a good thing the right wing isn’t hypocritical…”we’re pro-life until the second the baby is born, then we don’t care if it starves to death or dies of disease, but we actually hope that them poor-folk babies grow up so we can send them off to fight the wars that we couldn’t be bothered to suit up for…” etc.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:48 pmDid McCain mean to say “explicit”?
His calling torture exquisite makes me wonder whether he started to get off on it…
December 14th, 2005 at 1:49 pm#20 – at least the left isn’t hypocritical. They attacked Terri supporters in March because we thought starvation was wrong and disgusting. We were accused of trying to break the law to suit our radical agenda. Then, comes Tookie – a vicious murderer who judge after judge and jury after jury sentenced him to death. Yet, the left suddenly thinks it’s ok to undermine the rule of the law (and of the people) in the name of COLD-BLOODED killer.
Liberals are the hypocrites!!! They only care about life when it’s for killers and terrorists.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:53 pm#8
Hey, Hitler,
Ease up, buddy.
Boy, how history would be different if somebody had said that 70-80 years ago!
December 14th, 2005 at 1:55 pmIf we pooled our money and bought everyone that subscribes to cable a dish, would that put fox out of business?
December 14th, 2005 at 1:57 pmThere just has to be a way.
Five on Torture
Rumsfeld’s Epiphany
December 6, 2005
Rumsfeld usually spit out bromides for his excuses for failures but since last Wednesday Rumsfeld been choking back on some. In “Rumsfeld calls for clear rules on U.S. troops lacing Iraq torture†by the Washington Post describes Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is ready to flail about in a fog of his own making called the Iraq war. Last Wednesday (Nov. 30), Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace, publicly contradict Rumsfeld’s allowing U.S. backed Iraq forces to torture Sunnis and others with impunity. Now Rumsfeld ordered military commanders to come up with rules in what should our troops do when they witness the mistreatment of detainees. This is typical of Rumsfeld: it’s his job to come up with that answer. That’s what he’s paid for. Apparently, passing the buck is the only technique he had perfected as Secretary of Defense and then have the consequences of it dumped on our troops in the battlefield. Thus it’s no surprise that Rumsfeld hasn’t opposed the campaign of torture and murder against the Sunnis by the U.S. trained Shiite militia. Again, the consequence of failure isn’t in Rumsfeld’s universe, but the price of war is ours.
Condi’s Comfort
December 9, 2005
The Bush administration’s addiction to torture on this holiday season may end and the “cold turkey†shakes begins. In “British court rejects evidence obtained through torture†by the Press Democrat News Services spelled that Britain’s highest court have ruled that evidences obtained through torture in other countries cannot be used in the British courts. British Law Lords question the detention of a group of foreigners whose rights to hear the evidences against them were never told. The Law Lords found this unacceptable; especially those abuses involved which are popular in Guantanamo Bay. As expected, Amnesty International declared the decision as victory for human rights. Meanwhile, in Belgium, Condoleezza Rice objected, stating that the U.S. can’t guarantee that detainees won’t be abused. Aside from offering assurances that violators of the detainees will be punished Rice’s plead is as empty as President Bush’s denial that he had no knowledge that extraordinary retention involved torture. Bad as Bush’s denials are what’s worse are Rice’s reassurances that everything is going to be okay. At this moment that okay offers little comfort for someone who is being torture in some spider hole in Russia, courtesy of the U.S. of A.
No Fair Peeking
December 10, 2005
Bush’s secret backyard fence is crumbling as the international Red Cross demanding to visit all of the detainees in “undisclosed locations.†International Red Cross President Jakob Kellenberger has been pushing the U.S. for access to all detainees. Although the Red Cross had visit detainees in Guantanamo, Afghanistan and Iraq but access to secret U.S. detainees in Europe were denied. The excuse is that U.S. has the authority to say no, stating that members of al-Qaeda are not cover by the Geneva Convention. All this begs the question: Has the overall revelation of detainee abuse convince the U.S. that rendering the Geneva Conventions “quaint” is the source of our government’s discontent in its widespread abuse at U.S. prisons? The answer is yes. Although the Geneva Conventions, signed and ratified by the United States to protect those involved in international armed conflicts a January 2002 memorandum issued by the Bush administration claims the war on terrorism renders obsolete Geneva’s strict limitations on questioning of al Qaeda detainees, exempting them from the provisions on the legal treatment of prisoners. Thus opened the door for widespread abuse of detainees which Bush would rather have it shut.
The Big Fat Denial
December 11, 2005
The thing that keeps cropping up in government as well as in the media is the denial of wrong doing. In “A new—and tedious—defense against torture allegations†by THE ECONOMIST throws a new twist in justifying the existence of torture by the U.S. THE ECONOMIST waste no time in bailing out Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice of all culpability in supporting CIA’s secret prisons in Eastern Europe. For some reason, President Bush and Condi Rice expect Europe to believe everything they say about the U.S. deniability concerning torture. Then they get miff if they’re disbelieved. But for the THE ECONOMIST to call Europeans “Americanophobes†just because they can see right through Rice’s lies isn’t ust another lie but manipulative tack; an unconvincing tack, at least with me. Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghriab, and “extraordinary rendition,†just to name a few, make liars of the entire Bush administration in the issue of torture and then the disparaging attack at Europe for seeing through Bush’s deception. There is one Big Fat Lie (beside the Iraq war) that when exposed the U.S. determination for torture will be undeniable and unjustifiable: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
Condi’s fairy Dust
December 12, 2005
Why torture is still a headliner? Because the Bush administration still haven’t come to terms with it. This time I’m going to editorialize two articles at the same time: “13 cases of torture found at Iraq prison†by Ellen Knickmeyer, and “Furor over torture charges may cloud U.S. image†by Tom Raum. In Knickmayer’s, 13 prisoners were discovered in a Baghdad detention center. The prisoners were in a sorry condition, requiring mediate medical care. Predictably, of the 625 prisoners found to date, 56 automatically were freed. Is there any question that the U. S. is aware that the Shiite Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution is behind these secret tortures? As for Raum’s article, we and Europe have finally seen who’s behind the curtain, torturing suspects in the dark. Both Condi Rice, while at Europe and that buffoon, Michael Mandelbaum, of Johns Hopkins, tried desperately to sprinkle fairy dust on the public’s eyes, treating us like idiots and hoping we won’t catch wise to secret torture detentions that the U.S. are behind in Eastern Europe. So why is all this is happening? Because the Bush administration have thumbed its nose at the Geneva Convention and International Law. Condi, shut up and come home.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:58 pm#25 – no, there’s not. Silencing your opponents is what fascists do, not those in a democracy. Why do hate democracy and freedom of ideas?
December 14th, 2005 at 1:58 pmI’ve been out of the loop for the last few days.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:01 pmDoes anyone know how long the new troll has been
around?
It there more to him/her than the rather old-hat
straw-man and liberal bashing that has been displayed so far?
Just wondered, but not much, since with a nickname that
is historically inaccurate as well as TRIES
to be offense (but lands more in the so stupid it is funny
category.)
Worfeus,
December 14th, 2005 at 2:03 pmI read it before it was deleted. I saw nothing wrong with it.
I’m more offended by our “Hitler” troll. His handle alone is offensive.
hmm…perhaps the “new” troll isn’t so new…
December 14th, 2005 at 2:04 pm#28 – the American left are the new fascists. They lynch their ideological opponents and wish water torture on them. Why is the left so scared of free ideas? Why do you hate freedom?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:06 pmIs it my imagination or is the troll quality
December 14th, 2005 at 2:10 pmfalling rapidly?
We used to have much higher quality trolls.
These days the arguments are so dumb it
isn’t even fun teasing them anymore.
This: the American left are the new fascists
, is just nonsense as is the rest of that post.
The troll does have the “we control everything, but
are still powerness victims” bit down though.
Once more for those who do not understand: “Democracy” is nothing more than how a people chooses its leaders. It has nothing to do with any of the freedoms the citizens enjoy. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech or worship, and it has nothing to do with capitalism. We should all make an effort to learn what terms mean before we throw them out there unchecked.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:10 pmSee my spoof on how the Bush administration views torture:
http://whatamockery.com/2005/11/we-dont-torture-well-ok-maybe-we-do.html
Mr. Mocker
December 14th, 2005 at 2:13 pmhttp://whatamockery.com
You were asking for a basic glossary, weren’t
December 14th, 2005 at 2:14 pmyou Wayne?
I still think that was a good idea.
One could take it straight out of a respected
dictionary to avoid any bias and one could
link to it in posts to keeps things clear.
I suppose we could do that anyway, right?
Well True Blue, I’m glad that someone saw it’s pertinence.
It maybe was a cruel thing to say, but not near as cruel as someone saying waterboarding is not torture.
Hume is calling the night day, and the day night. He is saying up is down, and down is up.
And in my mind, he deserved nothing more.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:15 pmBut I’m not complaining. I’m surprised they let me post half the stuff I post in here, LoL.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:15 pmLiberals are the hypocrites!!! They only care about life when it’s for killers and terrorists.
Comment by Hitler was a Liberal
A hypocrite generally knows when he’s acting under a double standard. Very seldom is a hypocrite unaware of the fault. Some of these people though are not hypocrites. They believe that the killers and terrorists are the good guys and the poor victims are deserving of their fate. Ask almost any American Leftist or Zeropean if the USA deserved 9-11 and they will tell you why it is so. These aren’t hypocrites, these are those who call evil good and good evil. The problem goes much deeper than the convenience or expediency of someone simply doing or saying something they know is wrong. Their hearts have turned to stone their conscience seared.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:17 pmMaybe you need a history book. Hitler and his political party / militia buddies were not “liberals”. They were extreme right wing types. They denied everyone their civil liberties and imprisoned anyone who dared voice opposition.
Go back to school, maybe you’ll learn something.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:18 pmthe American left are the new fascists.
Comment by Hitler was a Liberal — December 14, 2005 @ 2:06 pm
Historically inaccurate strawman argument.
They lynch their ideological opponents and wish water torture on them.
I believe it was the Bush administration that redefined torture, and later rejected that “new” definition. This is a thread about Fox’s Brit Hume still pushing that rejected definition.
The rejected definition said waterboarding was not torture, and it was ok to apply to the administration’s opponents.
Care to comment on that?
Why is the left so scared of free ideas? Why do you hate freedom?
More logical fallacies that beg the question. This is akin to us asking you: “So, HWAL, when will you stop beating your wife?”
December 14th, 2005 at 2:19 pmIRI– meet cracker
cracker– meet IRI
December 14th, 2005 at 2:19 pmStrike two, #22. The reasons include an illegal bill of attainder and seeking redress through a court system that is regularly denegrated by the right.
If waterboarding isn’t torture, maybe someone should revive the Scared Straight program. All the kids of these pundits can get first-hand experience in protecting our freedoms.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:20 pmSee, even I-R-I makes better silly arguments
December 14th, 2005 at 2:23 pmthat the new troll.
Much better straw-man than the other troll.
They believe that the killers and terrorists are the good guys and the poor victims are deserving of their fate.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 14, 2005 @ 2:17 pm
The problem with this idea, is it is not our idea, but your idea. This is how you see us. It has no basis in reality.
Don’t kid yourself genius. I think they’re bad guys, just like I think you are.
Both of you are stupid, low brow knuckleheads and both of you can find no other way to solve problems other than killing each other, and anyone else who happens to get in the way.
As for going after the terrorists? Sounds like a plan.
When are you guys going to start doing that?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:25 pmWaterboard IRI and Brit Hume.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:27 pmauto transport
torture “definitions” are worthless unless they detail which specific acts are prohibited and which are not… this administration won’t, er, bind itself by giving any specifics on torture…
December 14th, 2005 at 2:29 pm#43 – answer the question? Why are liberals threatened by conservative media such as Fox? Don’t you believe in free speech?
I might be a troll, but I am on to something. Unless it’s an echo chamber of their ideas, LIBERALS HATE the person or entity pushing that agenda. Why?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:30 pmHitler was a CONservative, so your posting of the opposite lie merely shows you are a lunatic retard…
December 14th, 2005 at 2:32 pmLet me clear this up … I’m conservative … waterboarding is torture … what else can you call it when you make someone believe they are drowning? Now, maybe some might say that it’s “acceptable” (I don’t) because no one dies, and no permanent physical damage is done … but it’s clearly, cut and dried, torture.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:33 pmHWAL:
“Why are liberals threatened by conservative media such as Fox?”
Not threatened here…offended. You see, liberals are interested in facts. After the facts are in place, then there might be room for someone other than a reporter to offer an opinion. FNC views opinion and fact as one in the same.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:33 pmMizzWrong, you really shouldn’t read the reader’s digest version of the bible, it’s made your retarded and foolish.
But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil.
But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also;
and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well;
and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. (Matthew 5:39-41)
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Matthew 5:9)
Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! But now they are hid from your eyes. (Luke 19:42)
December 14th, 2005 at 2:37 pm(…) waterboarding is torture (…) it’s clearly, cut and dried, torture.
Comment by Giacomo — December 14, 2005 @ 2:33 pm
Thank you Giacomo.
You and I disagree on most issues, but I think that, regardless of one’s political leanings, certain things (like torture) are definitely always off-limits because they are against basic human values.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:37 pmRyan … I’m not used to you using scripture as validity for your arguments … I like the change though.
If Jesus were here he likely would be able to find a peaceful solution to many of the “wars” we are now engaged in … also noteworthy is that while many of the early Christians were slaughtered for their beliefs … I can’t recall a single story of them “brining the war to” the Romans, so to speak.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:41 pmGiacomo,
Unfortunately your republican troll friends disagree with you. You must be proud of your political party and your co-conservatives. They’re the culmination of the mental retardation that always follows conservative thought.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:41 pmanswer the question? Why are liberals threatened by conservative media such as Fox? Don’t you believe in free speech?
I might be a troll, but I am on to something. Unless it’s an echo chamber of their ideas, LIBERALS HATE the person or entity pushing that agenda. Why?
Comment by Hitler was a Liberal — December 14, 2005 @ 2:30 pm
No need to answer the questions because they are strawman fallacies
Back to the topic of the thread: Is waterboarding torture? Is it ok to apply it to someone, anyone? What do you make of Hume pushing a rejected definition of what torture is?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:41 pmNo problem with Fox here either–until they start making crap up and calling it news (f’rinstance Bill O’Really’s “war on Christmas” claptrap).
Oh, by the way–I ain’t a liberal. I’m an old-school Eisenhower-style conservative who believes in limited government and staying out of other peoples’ business. Not sure how the modern right-wing zealots hijacked the conservative label but it’s a damned shame. Just more proof of their disingenuous, propagandistic methods.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:41 pmI agree Gregor,
I thought torture was so un-American that
December 14th, 2005 at 2:43 pmwe could all agree, as defenders of American
value, to denounce it.
I was shocked that anyone would come to
the defense of torture.
Giacomo,
You miss the point of Christianity, Jesus is here in everyone that lives a christian life. Since so few do, that’s why so many ‘christian’ warmongers exist…
And make no mistake that ‘WE’ are the romans in this war and this world, and that’s the problem.
FYI, I attended seminary earlier in my life, but now I’m a hindu. That makes me a hindu that knows more about Christianity than most christians I’ve met – funny huh?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:43 pmThanks, afterthought, for the support of my idea. I believe that many people who post here could benefit from it.
When i went to a website called http://www.politicalcompass.org , I learned that there are more sides to people and issues than just left/right = liberal/conservative. There are also the Libertarian and Authoritarian sides reflecting, generally speaking, how much government authority over your life you are willing to accept. If I remember correctly, according to them, Hitler was neither very liberal nor conservative, but he rated very high on the Authoritarian scale. I don’t believe he would have cared whether you were liberal or conservative as long as you did what he told you to.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:44 pmUnfortunately your republican troll friends disagree with you. You must be proud of your political party and your co-conservatives.
The ones (trolls) here may, but not all Republicans support torture … heck, even a majority of the Republican Senators are against it.
I am often not proud of my party … in the same way that I am often not proud of those that claim to share my beliefs (Christians). Just the same, the failings and shortcomings of individuals shouldn’t change my faith, and only, sometimes, change my politics.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:45 pmStrapping someone to a chair and hooking up their nuts to a car battery would not be considered torture under the current administration.
Anything that doesn’t cause “massive organ failure and/or death” certainly leaves a lot of options for an interrogator.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:48 pmWhy are liberals threatened by conservative media such as Fox?
Comment by Hitler was a Liberal
Who said I feel threatened?
This is free speech genius.
He is free to spew his crap, and we are free to retort it.
So what’s your point?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:48 pmYou miss the point of Christianity, Jesus is here in everyone that lives a christian life.
I’m not gonna touch that one, Ryan (way too long a discussion).
FYI, I attended seminary earlier in my life, but now I’m a hindu. That makes me a hindu that knows more about Christianity than most christians I’ve met – funny huh?
While I’m careful to not equate book knowledge with depth of understanding, it is indeed funny that there are those that would attempt to wield the Bible that know less of it than you. Those Christians try to use religion as a weapon … clearly missing the point.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:49 pmStrapping someone to a chair and hooking up their nuts to a car battery would not be considered torture under the current administration.
Anything that doesn’t cause “massive organ failure and/or death†certainly leaves a lot of options for an interrogator.
I think most men would disagree … “organ” failure would be inevitable.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:51 pmafterthought said
That’s the entire point.
We should not even have to have this discussion.
It should be evident. Anyone supporting torture, has already sold America out, and joined forces with the enemies of freedom and democracy.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:52 pmI was shocked that anyone would come to the defense of torture.
Comment by afterthought — December 14, 2005 @ 2:43 pm
I am equally shocked to find the US -the nation that for so long denounced filthy, brutal, repressive, opressive regimes all over the world– engaging in the very same practices it critised for so long. Actually, not just engaging, but defending and rationalising.
The US keeps now some enviable company: Syria, China, USSR, Hussein’s Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, etc., etc.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:53 pmwell said Afterthought.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:53 pmHitler Boy,
There is a difference between complaining, protesting, bitching and offering different opinions. The left does not have the levers of political power available to them to “lynch” opponants. The Bush/Rove spin machine is now in the process of trying to silence one of the few “liberal” voices at the Washington Post.
When the government uses it’s power against people to suppress opinion that is called censorship and it is a VERY authoritarian tactic.
Ann Coulter recommended that “liberals” be killed to prevent them from gaining power. Michael Reagan, the chubby unloved by his daddy one, said that Howard Dean should be ‘hung for treason’. Michael Savage said that the left and liberals should be charged with treason and executed or jailed.
That my sweet little Hitler is some oppression.
-GSD
December 14th, 2005 at 2:54 pmGSD, or Dirty Kringle,
I think they already started killing democrats. What happened to Paul Wellstone? Or how about Mel Carnahan?
Oh yea, their deaths were investigated by the NTSB, and since the NTSB is under the direction and jurisdiction of the Executive Office we know they’re findings were not skewed. :|
December 14th, 2005 at 3:00 pm#22
at least the left isn’t hypocritical. They attacked Terri supporters in March because we thought starvation was wrong and disgusting.
Liberals that I know spoke up about the Schiavo situation because it was none of the federal governement’s business. When people make personal legal decisions about life, it isn’t the federal government’s place to step in and force a decision more in tune with their ideology. Let’s not even mention Frist’s idiotic assertion that he could diagnose Mrs. Schiavo by looking at a videotape.
We were accused of trying to break the law to suit our radical agenda. And you were. The law doesn’t stop being the law simply because you don’t agree with it.
Then, comes Tookie – a vicious murderer who judge after judge and jury after jury sentenced him to death. Yet, the left suddenly thinks it’s ok to undermine the rule of the law (and of the people) in the name of COLD-BLOODED killer.
First, I didn’t see “liberals” attempting to undermine the rule of law. Granting clemency is not undermining the rule of law. How can you be sure of the political affiliation of Mr. William’s supporters? It amazes me that all it takes is one person to make a statement and it immediately gets attributed to all liberals. If a conservative blows up an abortion clinic, am I to assume that all conservatives are bomb making murderers? I think not. If I use your logic, then you should be on the side of granting clemency. What happened to the culture of life? Isn’t Mr. William’s life just as sacred as the lives of babies on ultrasounds?
Liberals are the hypocrites!!! They only care about life when it’s for killers and terrorists.
Comment by Hitler was a Liberal — December 14, 2005 @ 1:53 pm
Are you really saying that ALL liberals support killers and terrorists? Are you really sticking to that statement? I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you will retract that.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:17 pmWell, only a foot note:
The equation conservative=good used by many in these threads are really funny. Iran mullahs are conservatives, Bin Laden is a conservative, talibans are conservatives…
December 14th, 2005 at 3:33 pmThe equation conservative=good used by many in these threads are really funny
You are slightly incorrect … many assert conservative = better than the alternatives (at least that’s what I think they’re asserting). To call a political leaning good or bad like calling an emotion good or bad … depends on what you do with it.
You are correct that most of the hyper-religious are indeed conservative (thereby proving my previous point).
December 14th, 2005 at 3:46 pm37 I-RIGHT-I & 26 Hitler was a Liberal: Both of you are either extremely confused or suffering a case of terminal denial. True liberals are pro-people, even you two are consider among them. But to cut the chase here’s a letter I once sent to a radio host. Please read it with an open mind. Thank you for the opportunity. Armando
Mr. Ward,
My name is Armando Gomez, an ardent listener to your nightly radio spot. Right now I’m putting together this email for you as I’m listening to your program, and I may have the answer to the confusing question why Americans are voting against their own self interests. And the basic answer is that their (White America) sense of history and self-worth has come into question. To them this is unacceptable—at any and all cost; which is what’s happening at this moment. Realistically, all this began to manifest when Ronald Reagan was elected as president. But in all honestly, I believe it really started with the Vietnam War and its shocking and unacceptable conclusion: we lost. And it wasn’t just the war we lost—we also lost our president, Richard Nixon. This sent a shock wave, border to border and coast to coast of White America. This proved that the war was a phony and President Nixon a liar. This forced Americans to question the very core of their moral foundation and their sense of purpose—their purpose of self-righteous, which they believe is their destiny and guided by the Light from above. All this imploded when Nixon tanked. But within a couple of years a new and up coming Right Wing movement (the neo-conservatives) went to work, scoring one victory after another in their religious sectors, in their communities. And I believe all this was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation. The Foundation’s tactics: Accuse the liberals of anti-family, anti-God, anti-America, anti-mother, anti-marriage, anti-fetus and in short: anti-liberal all around. With the help of the “liberal†media they made the word liberal an expletive (remember the “L†word?). And all this was funded by the multi-right wing millionaires and corporations. And I believe you know who and what they are. What this movement accomplishes was to exonerate America of its failures, and blame “The Fall†on the dirty, rotten, and back-stabbing liberals. And these Americans went for it, hook, line, and sinker. They had no choice: To accept otherwise, they would have to question their entire “white†history. Without this history—or myth—they will have to accept a more realistic one—according to Ward Churchill. White Americans found that to be totally unacceptable. And for these Americans they are ready to accept any politician, any judge, and any president—any lie—that’ll tell them what they want to hear, especially when Jesus Christ is now considered as part of their American history. That’s why they are more than ready to believe such phonies as Reagan, the first Bush, and this latest disgrace, Bush, Jr. But with the present Americans, it gets worse: they are willing to sacrifice their children’s and their grandchildren’s future, just so they can either be swept up by the Rapture in time or die in their sleep; the complete misery of others had become their sinful and foremost pleasure. Mr. Ward, to me these are the worst and the most rotten cowards any nation unfortunately is straddled with; stinking vermin who aren’t fit to be scurrying about. Their malicious intentions toward Social Security, Medicare, pensions, childcare, the Iraq War and the support for the bankruptcy bill are but short examples of how far these Americans have sunk. The talk I hear is that these Americans are the dumbest pile of rocks on the planet. Wrong: It’s worse. Sept. 11 and the Iraq War only provide further excuses for these self-proclaimed “patriots†to stab their fellow neighbors in the back by trying to dismantle our civil rights—and are the first to turn against our war heroes like John McCain and Max Cleland in a second; a knife behind the door. To them, this further justifies the degradation to our veterans, the hacking away at their medical and financial benefits while allowing fantastic tax breaks go to the rich and corporate America who wouldn’t lift a finger to help our veterans or our nation. So, for these pro-veteran and pro-morality Americans to believe in this new White Direction, provided by the ultra-extreme Republicans, it all proves that they have gone soft between the ears and soft between the legs. In short, STARK, RAVING PSYHOCITICS, not stupid. It’s important to understand this. This is the very core why they can’t or won’t be reached. For any animal can be “educated†—even a flatworm. And that is the answer why these Americans are voting against their own self-interest as they are steering yours, mine, and theirs—and our country—into the toilet.
Armando Gomez
December 14th, 2005 at 4:23 pmApril 23, 2005 12: 50 am
“To call a political leaning good or bad like calling an emotion good or bad … depends on what you do with it.” GeoMetro
So you consider anxiety, hatred, envy and jealousy good emotions?
Wow, no wonder so many conservatives are so screwed up emotionally and psychologically. Many emotions are unhealthy, and yet if someone’s ‘psyche’ is healthy, they learn how to turn those destructive and unhealthy impulses into something more productive.
Conservatives as a whole would benefit from counseling, you guys are screwed up idiots.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:36 pm“I am often not proud of my party … in the same way that I am often not proud of those that claim to share my beliefs (Christians). Just the same, the failings and shortcomings of individuals shouldn’t change my faith, and only, sometimes, change my politics.
Comment by Giacomo”
Really? Then you’re a fool. Only a fool doesn’t recognize that in the face of failure there’s something wrong with the path.
The problem with republicans and conservatives alike is that you rarely take the time to discern between a failure of implementation, and a failure of philosophy. You instead have ‘faith’ in a philosophy that continues to fail. That’s called a cognitive dissonance, and a psychotic break with reality. And that’s the NORM with conservatives unfortunately.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:39 pmI think all the right wing “news” folks and pundits should experience firsthand all the examples of torture they regard as hazing, or simply as “terrifying, but not torture.
Let them experience Abu Graib “fun” for one day – just one day. And after they have pissed themselves, ask them if they still think it is all just a frat-boy craze.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:01 pmSo you consider anxiety, hatred, envy and jealousy good emotions
No … what you’ve listed are secondary factors/feelings to primary emotions (fear, anger, love, sadness, etc.). They are responses to emotions (hatred = misplaced anger and fear, jealousy = misplaced love (of things)). Emotions are normal and neutral … but that’s not the point of this thread.
Really? Then you’re a fool. Only a fool doesn’t recognize that in the face of failure there’s something wrong with the path.
You are confusing the wrong path with crappy people on the right path (or crappy people falling off the right path) … this is a theoretical argument anyway.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:46 pmGiacomo,
What do you make of the fact that FoxNews has not one, not two, but three shows that have been founds -right here at ThinkProgress- to be either untrustworthy, smearing, or openly advocating a repugnant practice?
Do you think these are isolated cases, or are they indicative a corporate culture?
December 14th, 2005 at 6:54 pm“No … what you’ve listed are secondary factors/feelings to primary emotions (fear, anger, love, sadness, etc.). They are responses to emotions (hatred = misplaced anger and fear, jealousy = misplaced love (of things)). Emotions are normal and neutral … but that’s not the point of this thread.”GeoMetro
Feelings are emotions you retard. No wonder you’re a republican, you don’t even speak english well enough to understand basic facts. What an idiot!
“You are confusing the wrong path with crappy people on the right path (or crappy people falling off the right path) … this is a theoretical argument anyway.”GeoMetro
And yet the path fails, so were the people right, or did they just drink the koolaid? Clearly you’ve had a bucket of koolaid.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:29 pmGeoMetro,
The APA considers anxiety an ‘unhealthy emotion’, did you get your MD while you were working on your MBA that suddenly made your expertise greater than that of psychiatry?
You’re such a typical republican fool.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:36 pmLook … for you to assign good or bad values to normal human emotions means that either a) you discount evolutionary theory and the adaptation of emotions as part of “mans” changes to survive or b) you believe in a higher power that has assigned such values to human emotions and are following in that stead. As an example, to call anxiety bad is to a) ignore that evolutionarily speaking, anxiety helped man to avoid pratfalls of his own doing or b) to believe that God believes anxiety to be a sin becuase the person isn’t trusting God and is thus anxious. Neither of these situations sounds like you … more likely, you didn’t actually think about what I was saying when I said “emotions are neutral” and just spouted some angry answer … I assure you that I didn’t say as much about emotions casually and there is a great deal of psychological theory to back me up.
ALL emotions have a purpose … to call them good or bad is poor science. Also note that unhealthy (at this point of human development) does not mean “bad” … perhaps we have outgrown the purpose of anxiety in the APAs view (I find it hard to believe that they said that, but maybe). Specifically, anxiety is what tells us that we’ve left something undone, that an area we’re entering is unsafe, that a course of action is unwise … to call this bad is juvenile.
But, again, this entire subject is off topic … you keep mentioning it so I felt it necessary to respond in more detail … maybe you understand now … even if you do, I’ll assume you won’t admit it.
December 14th, 2005 at 10:58 pmThat’s why you’re so drawn to a ‘fear based’ approach to politics and religion… It’s a psychosis, and you’ve just proven my point…
That’s about what I expected Ryan … If you don’t understand the concept, just say so. Creating your own talking point has nothing to do with it.
December 15th, 2005 at 8:20 amTwo useful links about torture:
McCain, victim of torture, makes case for a ban
TORTURE DOUBLE-SPEAK LEAVES QUESTIONS YET UNANSWERED
December 15th, 2005 at 9:55 amthe administration is talking out of both sides of its mouth on the torture issue – and the press aren’t challenging them on it!
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/2005/12/few-painful-facts.html
December 15th, 2005 at 9:56 amtorture is not solely that which causes physical pain! for example, someone could make you watch as they hurt your family… you’re not in any physical pain, but you sure enough are being tortured!
December 15th, 2005 at 9:57 ambtw, for a depiction of waterboarding, watch the movie Quills
December 15th, 2005 at 9:58 amI saw this segment. One of Hume’s biggest points was that “we have a legal definition of what torture is.” Yeah, we do and it was authored recently by Al Gonzales, not that they mentioned this point.
I personally believe that if anyone is going to say that waterboarding or any of these other torture techniques are not torture, they should be willing to have the experience themselves.
December 15th, 2005 at 11:44 amI agree with another poster who suggested that we should water-board Britt Hume. If he doesn’t think it’s torture, than he shouldn’t object to a demonstration. It would do wonders for FOX’s ratings, and it might even improve his own dry, dull delivery of the news.
December 23rd, 2005 at 3:19 amWater Boarding brings results within seconds, the sources said. A prisoner is tied onto a board with his feet higher than his head, and dipped in whater upsidedown, to stop water entering the lungs. witnessed by a doctor present .the victim is sometime passes out and is revived by a doctor and often the process is repeated
January 4th, 2006 at 8:32 am