The Mukasey nomination in jeopardy: Why appeasing Democrats gets you nowhere; Update: Bush defends Mukasey, Teddy Kennedy on the attack; Update: Democrat scalp-hunters salivate, Schumer “agitated”
Update 9:16pm Eastern. The Hill files a report tonight on the growing Democrat scalp-hunting party:
Opposition in the Senate to President Bush’s attorney general nominee continued to grow Thursday, and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) signaled the Senate would not consider the nomination if it does not clear a crucial vote next week in the Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Edward Kennedy (Mass.), a senior Democrat on the committee, said he would oppose the choice of Michael Mukasey to succeed Alberto Gonzales. “This is a nomination I hoped to support,” Kennedy said on the floor Thursday.
Kennedy now joins three other Judiciary Committee Democrats — Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Dick Durbin (Ill.) and Joseph Biden (Del.) — who have announced their opposition to Mukasey. The nominee has seen his support evaporate after he declined to state whether he believes waterboarding constitutes torture, saying that he had not been briefed on U.S. interrogation techniques.
The Judiciary Committee meets next Tuesday to consider the nomination, which will need 10 votes to advance to the floor.
Kennedy’s opposition puts more pressure on Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) to decide whether to join the chorus of Democratic opposition or vote for Mukasey, whom he recommended and endorsed for the position. On Thursday, Schumer faced a barrage of questions about his intentions, but repeatedly refused to discuss how he will vote at the Nov. 6 Judiciary Committee meeting.“When I make a decision, I will let you know,” an agitated Schumer said. “I’m not going to have a public discussion on it.”
Update 3:00pm Eastern. Here are Bush’s remarks on the Mukasey nomination in Q&A this morning before a speech at the Heritage Foundation…
I’ve submitted a highly competent, smart, independent nominee in Judge Mukasey to the Senate. I am disappointed that the process is taking so long to get his name to the floor.
I believe that the questions he’s been asked are unfair; he’s not been read into a program — he has been asked to give opinions of a program or techniques of a program on which he has not been briefed. I will make the case — and I strongly believe this is true — that Judge Mukasey is not being treated fairly. He’s made the rounds on Capitol Hill, he’s answered questions, he’s been to hearings. I do thank the Senate for setting up what I hope will be an opportunity to move him out of Judiciary Committee to the floor on Tuesday. It is time to get his nomination to the floor so the Senate can vote him up or down.
Q Judge Mukasey is experienced in terrorism trials, he’s been around. Why is it wrong for him — or why will you not let him say whether he thinks that waterboarding is illegal torture?
THE PRESIDENT: He has not been read in — first of all, let me put this in perspective. The Congress did pass a law, the Detainee Detention Act [sic]*, that I signed into law. The techniques we use informed that law and members of the Senate and House — select members of the Senate and House, both parties, have been briefed on the law.
Secondly, he doesn’t know whether we use that technique or not. And thirdly, it doesn’t make any sense to tell an enemy what we’re doing. One of the fundamental questions that the American people have got to know is that in order to protect America, if we capture somebody who may have data about whether or not he’s going to — he is ordering an attack or there’s an impending attack or there’s a threat, we need to know that. And the techniques we use by highly trained professionals are within the law. That’s what’s important for America to know.
Q Mr. President, is legal liability in U.S. or foreign courts a concern when it comes to this issue of waterboarding and –
THE PRESIDENT: The main concern is, is that the American people must know that whatever techniques we use are within the law. And secondly, it doesn’t make any sense — unless, of course, you don’t think there’s an enemy that’s dangerous — it doesn’t make any sense to broadcast to the enemy what they ought to prepare for and not prepare for.
Q Are these concerns legitimate that are being raised, or is it playing politics?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it’s — I think this is — I’m just extremely disappointed that a good man with a good reputation, who has met with a lot of senators, his nomination is being held up. You can listen to the voices that are out there talking as to whether or not this is politics or not. My point is, is that it’s creating a — to have the Attorney General seat vacant for this long — there’s an Acting Attorney General, of course, but not to have a confirmed Attorney General is not good for the country.
Update 1:41pm Eastern. Rich Lowry says everything is “fine.”
Update 1:00pm Eastern. President Bush tries to salvage the Mukasey nomination. Teddy Kennedy–shocked, shocked, aren’t you–will announce his opposition. McCain and Grahamnesty will support it:
President Bush, seeking to salvage the embattled nomination of Michael Mukasey as attorney general, on Thursday defended the former judge’s refusal to say whether he considers waterboarding as illegal torture. But the nomination was headed for another setback in the Senate.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., planned to announce his opposition to Mukasey in a speech on the Senate floor.
On the upside for the administration, Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, announced they would support Bush’s nominee.
C-SPAN’s Mukasey resources page is here.
Andrew McCarthy on the waterboarding issue here.
***
Judge Michael Mukasey was supposed to be a “consensus” attorney general candidate. In September, he was touted as a “safe bet,” in part due to the supposedly warm feelings he engendered in rabid liberals Charles Schumer and Nan Aron.
Staunch conservative attorney and former solicitor general Ted Olson was reportedly passed up to avoid a long, bitter partisan fight. Paul Mirengoff rightly called it a “an act of preemptive surrender.”
So, what has offering a “consensus” candidate gotten the Republicans?
Nothing.
Nothing except, well, a long, bitter partisan fight. Just like I predicted.
The WaPo reports this morning:
Democratic support for attorney general nominee Michael B. Mukasey dwindled further yesterday over his refusal to comment on the legality of a harsh CIA interrogation technique, setting the stage for an unexpectedly close vote next week by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) announced that they will join Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) in voting against Mukasey on the Judiciary panel, after the nominee said in a four-page letter to Senate Democrats that he does not know whether a type of simulated drowning called waterboarding constitutes illegal torture under U.S. law.
Other Democrats on the Judiciary panel have pointedly refused to disclose how they will vote during a special meeting to consider Mukasey’s nomination, which has been scheduled for Tuesday. Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) also declined to say whether he will allow the nomination go to the full Senate with a negative recommendation, which occurred with some past nominations.
White House officials said yesterday that they remain confident Mukasey will be confirmed, and Republicans again accused the Democrats of attempting to hold the nomination hostage to score political points. “No one is ready to declare it DOA,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
The nomination has become a particularly thorny problem for Mukasey’s original Senate patron, Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). He had suggested Mukasey as a consensus nominee to the White House and declared two weeks ago that he should be confirmed, but he was noncommittal yesterday.
“I’m reading the letter, I’m going over it,” Schumer told reporters. “That’s all I’m going to say.”
I repeat: With the nutroots-ifed Democrats, there’s no such thing as a “consensus candidate” and “safe bet.”
Will the Republicans ever learn?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Bloodthirsty Liberal » Is Gordon Liddy Available?
- Don’t worry, the Democrats will cave « Cowardly political musings…
- Torturous questions on torture: Any excuse to oppose A.G. nomination « Seeing Red AZ
- Bill's Bites
- Michelle Malkin » The Mukasey nomination in jeopardy, Pt. II
- November, 2007 Archive « Right Minded Online
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: GOP
Riehl World View
» Bet: Ratings Fail - Oprah/Obama Christmas Special
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year planNewsBusters.org
» Oprah To Do Primetime Christmas Special With The ObamasRiehl World View
» Dowd: Dem Elites Displeased With Obama As Palin RisesStop The ACLU
» SEALs Charged With Assault for Arresting Top TerroristPundit & Pundette
» How much did that "tent" cost?
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t the Attorney General supposed to enforce the law rather than decide if water boarding is considered torture?
But then again, every time I hear a democrat spout the terms ‘consensus’,or ‘bipartisanship’, I cringe, because they are really saying ‘do it my way.’
Inside the beltway GOPers never learn.
The Dems can’t bring the troops home as they promised. So, they withhold funding for the troops.
They can’t get the S-CHIP expansion, tuition for illegals, etc… Yet Republicans think they are going “play nice” and allow them to appoint a new AG without a fight?
Things to make you go hmmmmm.
Being a threat to the United State’s has consequences, waterboarding is one of them.
How soon they have forgotten 9/11…. it makes me sick.
George W Bush would go a long way toward regaining the respect of conservatives if he were to wait until Congress recesses for the December holidays and appoint Bolton as AG. The ‘Stache’s term would be up at the same time as W’s and then the new Republican President and Congress could confirm him in that post for the next Administration. Far-fetched? Not that far.
Yep, they picked “waterboarding” as the excuse to oppose the nomination, but it could have been anything.
I’m suppose to be concerned that some terrorist suspect might be uncomfortable for a while in order to potentially save the lives of thousands of Americans….sorry, that doesn’t work with me.
Maybe the Dems are so opposed to waterboarding because they know it could justifiably be used on them?
It is for this very reason that I wish we didn’t know about these tactics. Let the military handle military issues.
Trying enemy combatants in our judicial system versus a millitary tribunal…because it isn’t fair. If you want the terrorists to get off scott free just say so. We all know our judicial system is a joke (few exceptions).
Yes, there are consequences to every action. Waterboarding is more humane than what I think they deserve. Especially when I think of what those people on 9/11 had to deal with. We are at WAR, people!!
Bush’s legacy of Compassionate Conservatism adds another scalp.
These Democrats and a few wayward RINOs need to experience waterboarding first hand in order to get a real feel for the procedure.
As one poster mentioned earlier, I just don’t see why the question is so hard to answer. If I were Mukasey I’d tell the Senators that it is you who pass the laws and it would be me enforcing the laws. You tell me, is waterboarding legal or illegal? If illegal, I’ll enforce the law.
Nope, the new tone stuff is a total disaster. The base is about to throw away a vote on Giuliani because “he is the only one who can beat Clinton.” Nope again.
Say what you will about the Democrats, they respect & serve their base much better than the Republicans do. They pursue their agenda without compromise and using all means at their disposal.
If only that agenda wasn’t completely insane I’d have to respect them.
As someone said above if I wasn’t waterboarding it would be something else like pulling at a thread in a sweater. If anyone thought after all the time and energy spent trying to BBQ Gonzolas they would magically play nice here they need a 2×4 sharply applied to either or both sides of the head while someone screams WAKE UP CALL.
More important is no matter which issue they tried to use as a shiny target to shoot at and a get tough gravitas therapy session for the nutroots they are trying to draw attention away from the fundamental wrong they are trying to commit.
What they are trying to force is getting a new AG to agree to enforce something that has never specifically passed in legislation. In effect they are asking him to do something very similar to activist judges. Make it up out of whole cloth. The only difference is this lasts only as long as the AG is in office.
Forget the particular sticking point go read this excellent review of the larger picture of why this is an afront to seperation of powers and how our government is supposed to work.
That’s because the Democrats have no shame and telling a lie is as natural to them as a breathing.
Then I would suggest that Bush just throw Olsen back into the equation.
That would teach those crazed libs.
One thing for sure Olsen would have schooled them on how much their position offended the Constitution in what they were trying to accomplish.
“I repeat: With the nutroots-ifed Democrats, there’s no such thing as a “consensus candidate” and “safe bet.”
Will the Republicans ever learn?”
Ummm, probably not, Michelle.
The GOP keeps bringing sticks to a gun fight with these lying liberals. They never learn. Perhaps it’s time to broom the whole lot of them?
I would have loved to see the liberals dance around the question of water boarding and torture by us “mean” Americans with Ted Olsen. It was the liberal attitude towards terrorism during the Clinton years that brought on the 9/11 attack that took his wife’s life at the Pentagon. The truth is, is that this technique saved the country from future attacks. The liberals hand wringing is pathetic. The Constitution is not a suicide note that we wave in the faces of our committed enemies.
Doubtful. They don’t call it the “Stupid Party” for nothing. And I say this as a registered Republican! (It’s just so I can vote in the primary. Honest!)
At this point, I can’t believe that there are still people stupid enough to accept an appointment from Dubya. They’ll just be shredded by the Dems and thrown overboard by Team Dubya and it’s not worth the grief for a gig that’ll be ending in a year. They should just say, “Thanks for asking, but I’ve got some housework to do and I’m trying to catch up some DVD box sets. Good luck finding someone.”
Mukasey did not appease Democrats. They asked him whether, in his professional opinion, waterboarding is torture. He refused to answer. Oh he danced around the question back and forth, but he never said yes or no.
]The Democrats’ position (I hope) will be what McCain claims his position is: the US does not torture, waterboarding is torture, the US does not waterboard.
Know that many people tortured turn out to be innocent. This was true in the Salem witch trials and the Spanish inquisition. More recently, US agents shipped an innocent Canadian to Syria to be tortured.
Congress has been rendered “closed for business”. They’re playing so many partisan games with our country, they can’t even appoint an AG. Imagine what will happen the next time a Supreme Court vacancy opens.
They wonder why their approval rating is 11%. Only voting out all encumbents will solve this problem. The people in New York, Mass., California, and PA especially need to wake up and stop sending the same career political hacks back to Washington. In return, I promise to vote against all encumbents in Florida.
lgm
Hate to burst your bubble but McCain came out yesterday and said the support him for AG.
lgm #20 Just gave the reasons McCain will never be President.
I wonder why W goes out of his way to try to appease these idiots? That is one thing that has annoyed me from the very beginning.
LGM, a question for you if you are not too busy on your dissing of Republicans-would you rather have people die, or KSM waterboarded? I would prefer for him to be waterboarded and for people to live. However, if you feel that waterboarding KSM was wrong, would you be willing to sacrifice your loved ones so that he wouldn’t be waterboarded? Not yourself, your loved ones but when it’s others who die, for you it’s probably no big deal.
Heck, they can’t even get budget bills out the door – the most fundamental job of Congress. Too busy trying to lose the war without accepting responsibility for it and playing whack-the-Pinata on the administration with pointless “investigations” that invariably lead nowhere.
I agree that the donkeys are superior at playing to their base; but that’s the essence of their problem. When your whole agenda boils down to “My Party Uber Alles” to the exclusion of doing your job – and when you think that “advancing your party’s interests” is indistinguishable from screwing your opposition – then no cooperation, no noteworthy accomplishments and an 11% approval ratings aren’t so much unsurprising as a logical outcome.
As for the Republicans, what can one say but, “S-U-C-K-E-R-S”? That the Democrats will act in bad faith, every time, is about as revelatory an observation as “Night will follow day.” And yet the Republicans still find themselves getting blind-sided. It’s impossible to be sympathetic at this point.
In Homer’s time, the word of caution was, “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.” Today, it’s “Beware of Democrats preaching ‘bipartisanship.’”
Ignore the warning at your own peril.
If there is such a thing as a Less Than Do Nothing Congress we have it and nobody is surprised by this news.
You can’t tell a Socialist Democrat the sky is blue without them challenging it.
First they’d have to conduct a series of polls to see how many voters agree the sky is blue and then they would blame Bush for not creating a new entitlement program to guarantee blue skies for all Americans and the poor illegal immigrants lurking in the shadows.
quote I’d like to see,
“We waterboard, get over it.”
Well, torture is very much against the law. So his refusal to define waterboarding as such is incredibly important and there should be no room for compromise.
America’s dedication to human rights is what separates us from the Islamic fundamentalists that wish to destroy us.
I understand the higher road is a tough path to swallow. But it’s a path we must follow. Waterboarding is a sick form of torture and must be treated as such.
My rendition:
We waterboard, surf’s up!
The waterboarding debate compared to many other forms of torture is hardly a reason to prevent a qualified candidate from serving our country. POLITICS! That’s all this is. Socialist Democrats playing politics at the expense of the American people and our safety.
Not with pandering losers like Specter still holding office.
As for the hateful, yellow-bellied sap-sucking democraps, they had their chance to declare waterboarding illegal months ago. But, being the cowards they are, they punted. Now they want a republican to do their bidding. How much more cowardly can they get?
You’re either misinformed or you’re lying. What he said was that the information he needed to base a decision on is classified and he hasn’t seen it, and that once he has seen it he’ll be able to give an answer.
Which, if you’ll take the partisan blinders off for just one moment, you’ll realize is exactly the answer any responsible AG should give.
Now, if it’s dancing around a simple, direct question you want to talk about I’ll meet you over at the “Clinton’s performance in the debate” thread.
For those who think water boarding is torture if you feel so strongly that it is true than do the right thing and get a law passed to forbid it.
But as long as no law exists that defines it that way and no treaty we are signed up for defines it that way, it is in fact a permitted option.
Your or my opinion on the matter don’t amount to a hill of beans in a court of law on this. This is for the job of AG who is the chief law enforcement officer, it’s not a place you improvise and promise to enforce something that does not have power of law. If you did try to do such a thing you are on shaky constitutional grounds.
Let’s say you, as President of the United States, know that a nuclear bomb has been placed somewhere in Chicago and that it will go off in an hour. Let’s also say that you have captured one of the bomb conspirators. What are you going to do? If you are a liberal, you will probably talk sweatly to the terrorist and sacrifice the lives of tens of thousands of Chicago’s citizenry to uphold some illusion of legality. You will, of course, be able to weep and morn with the victims. If, on the other hand, you are a conservative, you will take any action necessary to break the will of the terrorist because that terrorist is the only person you have to use to get information before the bomb goes off in less than an hour. If waterboarding is even a minimally effective information gathering tool under these circumstances, you are morally required to use it. The terrorist, unlike the tens of thousands of Chicagoan who will die a horrible death if you can’t get information on the bomb, will be left a bit scared and maybe have a nightmare or two, but you, as President, will have done everything possible to save American lives and uphold your oath of office.
John McCain was tortured. His bones were broken on numerous occasions. He was abused on an almost daily base for sport even though he was of no further information value to his captors. The terrorists at Gitmo were captured, interrogated over time with minimal physical abuse, and are now serving prison terms in conditions better than those in prisons in the USA.
One thing I now know. No Democrat is worthy of the Presidency or, for that matter, an elected position in the national legislature.
#34 publiuswarmac9999:
Amen.
Why do liberals always bring these instances up when discussing man’s barbaric treatment of other men? Could it be that there was Christians involved? These things happened a long time ago and all the people involved are long dead.
A more recent example would be the Soviet Union and its extensive system of secret police, prisons and slave labor. Literally millions of people were falsley accused of crimes and either imprisoned or outright executed. There are numerous survivors of this barbaric system that can attest to the horrors of torture. Liberals never mention this. Could it because there were fellow leftists involved? More likely they aren’t even aware of the carnage caused by this attempt to create a Workers Paradise because it is never mentioned in our schools.
The problem is that far too many think “it’s the game of politics” instead of “it’s the war for our very culture”
#36 jsr:
“… Soviet Union and its extensive system of secret police, prisons and slave labor….Could it because there were fellow leftists involved?”
(With tongue firmly in cheek):
Naaaaahhhhhhhh!
What WERE you thinking?
“More likely they aren’t even aware of the carnage caused by this attempt to create a Workers Paradise because it is never mentioned in our schools.”
Correct again.
I’m still waiting for the movie(s) that tells the truth about Lenin, and Stalin, and Beria, and Kruschev, and Brezhnev, and Mao, and other Communist dictrators, killers, and butchers.
‘Course, I’m still waiting for my hair to stop leaving me, and to start growing back.
Dinesh D’Souza
Robert Spencer
Comment Guy, you are wrong. The Military specifically forbids waterboarding and defines it as an act of torture. This debate is not about what the military can and cannot do. This debate is about what the CIA thinks it can do. If the DOJ cannot keep the CIA in line, we are all in trouble.
Um, torture is against the law. Waterboarding is torture. Just because we don’t have a law that specifically defines placing electrodes on some dude’s testicles torture doesn’t make it a legal way to obtain information.
Ticking time bomb scenarios are, frankly, stupid. Just because torture works on 24 doesn’t mean it works in real life. Hell, I’d admit to being a terrorist if it meant I didn’t have to go through another simulated drowning. And if you don’t have the information authorities are looking for, then what? More torture?
And there’s always the risk of this.
#28 Rusty: Waterboarding or any other “coercive” forms of getting information is somehow beneath us. I recommend you think long and hard that not everybody wants to play nice nice. To the current terrorist thinking – you are an infidel, you deserve to die, they get bonus points if they send you to hell earlier. Have a nice time pondering that.
You cite an example of a mistake that was made but this man lived to tell about it. It is unfortunate that it occurred but mistakes happen.
Waterboarding did work “in real life.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/09/cia-bans-water-.html
Here’s what the terrorists think about us, if you care…
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2306E1FD-A88C-4C24-A9B1-34BB2847F9F4
Coyte
The military is free to add whatever more restrictive guidance they choose to but not less restrictive.
Everybody wants to fall into the trap here of putting all the emphasis on the hot button issue of water boarding which is not the point of the issue at hand, only the symptom.
What the Dems are demanding is unconstitutional on the face of it. All are you are being distracted by the shiny toy now matter how worthy of debate that toy is.
Set aside the toy and look at the bigger issue that is much more far reaching than picking at each other over the toy the fools are dangling in front of you that seems to have you mesmerized so much you are not seeing the larger picture.
No
Harsh forms of interrogation like waterboarding and rape rooms do not do any permanent organ damage.
Rusty – I’m sure glad that you (?alone?) can define what torture is or isn’t. Since you claim to know – please enlighten us on what is your definition of torture.
James Felix said: (#32)
It’s true. Mukasey said that. But doesn’t this guy have a security clearance? This is a very important issue. The fact that he didn’t bother to look into it does not speak well of him. Either he doesn’t care or he doesn’t want to know.
I’d say beheading innocents should be considered torture too. Where’s the moral outrage from our liberal friends on that?
They are more concerned with a technique that does not lead to death or physical mutilation than the atrocities our enemies commit.
They are more concerned with detainees who are humiliated or embarrassed then obtaining valuable information to save our citizens by using a technique like waterboarding.
They are more concerned with the government eavesdropping on phone and internet conversations by potential terrorists than they are about the personal information Google collects on everyone who uses their service every day.
By the way liberal Rusty, why do you troll these waters?
This stupid example sounds like it was taken right out of the liberal, Democratic, culture of death’s playbook where they site the rare, if ever, example of the “health of the mother is at stake” for partial birth abortion.
When your bending over kissing your ass goodbye, say that. and it does work in real life, buy a clue.
Raise your hand – who was expecting the dems to be fair with a GW Bush nominee?
Note that my hand is not up
The new tone is still the old tone from the veteran Republican leadership who somehow get their warm fuzzies by cozying up to the Dems.
And as long as Trent “Teddie’s lapdog” Lott, Spector and htheir cronies remains in leadership, never rely on them to fight. They rarely do.
Also, We don’t have to have Giuliani forced on us by the elitists int the RNC. That is why the primary season is so important if the Republican base does not want Giuliani, then prove it by making another choice in the primaries.
My hand is not up. And if the democrats succeed in blocking the confirmation of this “concensus” candidate they wanted, then Bush should nominate Ted Olsen in his place and go on TV telling the public loudly how futile it is to try to work with the democrats.
That’s exactly it, Michelle. Tch, tch, they never learn.
I have no reason to doubt the story of the Canadian citizen sent to Syria for interrogation. But why would we send anybody to Syria? We don’t like the Syrians. We have serious issues with the Syrians. Why do we think anything they would tell us would be valid? Something just doesn’t pass the sniff test here.
Rusty: May you live in Chicago in interesting times. By the way, just in case you don’t know, a Chinese curse goes something like this – “May you live in interesting times”.
Your response demeaning a realistic scenario confronting a future President is quite typical of the left. When confronted with a horrific decision that has to be made in a short period of time, the left switches subjects and makes snide comments about those who do not provide a convenient escape from reality. (I must admit that it is great fun to live in a fantasy world of philosophy and to play computer games where everything can be reset and nobody is actually harmed. But the murder of large numbers of people on American soil by terrorists is not a game or a philosophical debating point. We have already arrested and detained a US citizen for trying to do the very thing that the scenario describes.)
The issue isn’t waterboarding, the issue is usurping of one branch of government(presidential power) by a radical group from another branch of the government (leftwing Dems in congress). Borking of nominees is clearly unconstitutional but no one has the b–ls to use the bully pulpit to call them on it. Our founding fathers had the solution to a government run amuck and I won’t repeat which amendment it involves here again.
Ok, well, raise your hand if you live in a city where a terrorist attack is a realistic threat.
I was in DC when the plane hit the Pentagon and was waiting patiently for another to hit the White House (less than a block from my current office) or the Capitol (where I interned for a semester). On top of that I take public transporation every single day. Trains (like in Spain) and buses (like in England). So let’s not get all high and mighty and pretend that since I’m a liberal that I don’t understand the threat of terrorism. I understand it better than the majority of people leaving comments on this blog. Just because you talk a good game doesn’t mean you have the faintest idea.
I’m all for preventing terrorism. But I have two fair conditions. One is that we don’t sell our souls as patriotic Americans by trashing human rights to save a few lives. America should be a morally superior force in the world. I want that position of power when dealing with corrupt and in some cases evil countries like Russia, China, Iran, whatever. We are losing that by becoming tortures willing to send innocent people to foreign prisons to be abused. If America is truly the greatest country in the world, then, yes, we should be held to a better standard.
The other is that our preventive measure actually work. Waterboarding and other forms of physical and psychological torture fail that condition as well. Obviously there are no studies of this since torture is so barbaric and wrong, but plenty of military personnel will tell you that torture is completely ineffective. It didn’t work on heroes like McCain and Stockdale. Why do we expect it to work on others?
I want an AG that will aggressively prevent illegal tactics like waterboarding. I don’t think that’s too much to ask. Hell, I recognize Olsen as a great legal mind. If he classifies, as any sensible person should, waterboarding as torture, I would have no problem with him as an AG.
NO! The Republican Party will never learn. The R.Party never wants to engage in the important battles that will ensure the continued greatness of this country.
That is why I no longer give $$ directly to the R.P. only to worthy, individual candidates.
No it’s not. I mean, obviously, no it’s not. Read Article II, Section 2:
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States…
The Senate doesn’t consent.
You’re talking about scenarios that play out on television shows, and it’s the liberals who are trying to divert everyone from reality?
This is a question of basic human rights, pure and simple. I realize we’re up against some pretty attrocious people here, but since when do we let the bad guys set the rules? We’re the good guys here and we’re supposed to be setting an example for the rest of the world. I can’t even believe we have to debate this.
I can’t believe we even have to debate this either. The reality is that we have already been threatened with a dirty bomb attack and we got lucky in catching Jose Padilla coming across the border through Chicago’s O’Hare airport. The human rights argument is philosophical and idealistic – and when idealism meets reality, then things not only change but they are forced to change.
No philosophy that exists in the world today believes that you should never defend yourself. That kind of pacifist silliness has been tried time and time again, and the result is that the bad guys and gals take advantage of those who will not defend themselves.
Do I like waterboarding – absolutely not in an idealized world. But if the reality is that I need to get information now to save a 100,000 Chicagoans, then as President I will authorize whatever it takes. To do any less is an abdication of my oath of office and it is morally repugnant as well.
What do you think Teddy?
It didn’t work on heroes like McCain and Stockdale.
—————————————
Let’s be honest here. McCain and Stockdale had little or no relevant information. Whatever they divulged was rapidly dated and, in many cases, already know by the torturers. These American heros were tortured for sport and to demean.
Waterboarding is not physical torture. It is quick and the information obtained has proven to be useful contrary to the statements that torture is not effectived. Is waterboarding psychologically upsetting and scary. Yes it is. But to equate waterboarding to obtain access to information to what was done to McCain and Stockdale is just plain silly.
Once again, this is the problem with the left. When it suits them, they retreat to their version of an idealized world not realizing that the right joins them on that journey. Where the difference takes place is that the right recognizes the importance of reality. And the reality here is that waterboarding is but an information gathering technique when combined with a variety of other cross check techniques.
“I’m reading the letter, I’m going over it,” Schumer told reporters. “That’s all I’m going to say.”
Translated to english:
I have to call moveon.org; CodePink and The daily kooks to see what “I think”
I havn’t been keeping up with this. Does anyone know just what Kennedy’s objections are?
Liberalism only works in fantasy land. This is why Liberals cannot be trusted with ANY Constitutional issue in the real world.
The objections of the Democrats are that Mukasey is Bush’s choice for AG. They would have trumped up some other question to trip up the nominee if it hadn’t been the one about waterboarding.
I am pleased that the senate wishes to further waste their time on this stuff. This means that instead of sticking their hand in my pocket and trying to stiffle my initiative, they are doing something truly meaningless. I just hope Bush keeps the nominees going until he gets to Donald Duck. Let’s see the Democrats try to block Donald because he talks funny (politically incorrect to demean someones affliction).
Hear is the Kennedy argument on why he opposes Mukasey.
————————————-
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said that Muksaey’s unwillingness to answer definitively on the legality of the interrogation method that simulates drowning increases chances that it could be used against U.S. troops.
“I therefore intend to oppose this nomination,” Kennedy said in remarks prepared for the Senate floor. “Judge Mukasey appears to be a careful, conscientious and intelligent lawyer, and he has served our country honorably for many years. But those qualities are not enough for this critical position at this critical time.”
———————————–
As far a waterboarding being used on US troops, you really ought to take a close look at the torture handbook being used by terrorists. It can be viewed on line and, I believe, that Michelle at one time posted it.
Rusty – I asked you a very direct question: What is and is not torture? I might have missed your anwswer but I might have. If you did, could you kindly give it again or point me to it? If you didn’t, please answer or I’ll have to make my own assumption on your position.
On November 1st, 2007 at 1:42 pm, publiuswarmac9999 said:
Hear is the Kennedy argument on why he opposes Mukasey.
————————————-
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said that Muksaey’s unwillingness to answer definitively on the legality of the interrogation method that simulates drowning increases chances that it could be used against U.S. troops.
He is awfully sensitive about simulated DROWNING!
Waterboarding does not physically harm or kill the subject. A fear of drowning is a very basic fear, it cannot be avoided as pain induced by pulling out fingernails, etc. can be ignored in a trained and dedicated subject.
I personally would prefer causing extreme pain in the subject ( yes, a person ) but it is counterproductive.
Payback does not always get the info you want.
It’s funny that there are people on this thread still using the “waterboarding doesn’t work” line when we have proof that it worked on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. We know for a fact that it’s helped us prevent terroist attacks.
But go ahead and google “waterboarding.” You will find article after article from liberals and the MSM (redundant?) either speculating that the prisioners would have broken anyway, that the things they said weren’t that important, or that the fact that it did work doesn’t really matter.
Waterboarding does work. It has been proven to. And to say that it “brings us down to the level of our enemies” is a non-argument in that it doesn’t even bring us anywhere near the level that our enemies are willing to stoop to. I could also say that imprisionment itself “brings us down to the level of our enemies” and is torture. Don’t our enemies imprision?
Our enemies cut people’s heads off, our enemies pull off fingers, our enemies drill through hands and gouge out eyes (Warning: Graphic) and commit other atrocities. Waterboarding doesn’t even come close.
I’m sorry if war offends some liberal’s sensitivities. I’m sorry if actually defending the country makes y’all a bit squeamish. Good thing the folks in charge of keeping us safe have a bit more perspective.
I’m afraid I’ll have to re-evaluate my support for the man then…
Republican, Democrat, whatever. I fall farther and farther out of wanting to engage in politics because of the “partisan divide”.
What are the chances of cleaning house in D.C. and starting over with elected representatives with common sense that will act as a “delegate” of the people by whom they are elected, rather than a “trustee” of the people by whom they are elected, because they think us too stupid to know what is best for us?
Yes. I already know the answer to my own questions – when Hell freezes over. *sigh*
I keep hearing that waterboarding does work using Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as an example. I did “google” him as 29Victor suggested and all I found were articles stating he lasted 2.5 minutes before confessing. And that he confessed to being responsible for 30 or more crimes. But no story actually states that his confessions were timely or prevented anything.
Also, let’s not forget the CIA was holding his two young sons as a way of making him talk:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/09/walqa09.xml
As far as I can tell the only conclusion I can draw from #76 concludes is that waterboarding does work in helping extract information. If the “counter-argument” is that the information wasn’t timely – that only makes me conclude that we spent too much time wringing our hands before do what we should have done almost immediately when he didn’t talk.
oops – subtract the 1st line “concludes”
Hey Rusty: As an old infantry soldier, I can tell you water boarding is not torture, it’s a silly frat prank. Anything and I mean anything that will make an enemy spill his guts, and save American lives, (including skinning him alive, an inch at a time),should be used, if nesassary. If you think torture doesn’t work, give me 10 min. alone with one of them. Never believe what John McCain said about torture, he spilled his guts pretty quick to the NVA just ask him.BTW I think the commies brain washed the damn fool while they were at it. It’s fools like you who would lose this war, by being PC to an enemy who would sooner torture, and cut your head off, as look at you.
Agree. Legally, we are in the clear here. As long as beheading remains standard practice on the terrorists side, I wouldn’t sweat the moral underpinnings of the argument against what we are doing to save American lives.
The issue here IS torture, but let’s leave the decision as to whether we were right or not to the historians and focus on winning this thing already.
One of our professional military interrogators has come out against using waterboarding for questioning.
From what I’ve read, the pros (and we don’t have enough of them) are disdainful of “stress” techniques, believing that a real interrogator can get much more information by forming a relationship and getting close to the subject than they could if they treated them harshly.
Our guys in WW II found the same thing. In fact, the early success we had at Gitmo was not the result of these stress techniques but due to the professionalism of those army interrogators.
Now the question is waterboarding torture is a tricky one. I don’t necessarily think it is nor are other stress techniques like sleep deprivation and standing for hours. The very word “torture” has, as usual, been hijacked by the left and all manner of things that aren’t torture are designated as such for political reasons.
But I would listen to the pros on this. They were extremely successful in the early part of the war – until they were overwhelmed by the sheer number of prisoners and were forced to use less trained and knowledgeable people as interrogators.
Yes, I am sure that T. Kennedy knows a lot about drowning.
Actually the President made a pretty good response – why on earth would we want to open our playbook to the enemy? What techniques we use or don’t use to get information should not be known.
Ha. ZING!
Geez to much going on cspan other channel has crapweasel reid speaking now with a vote coming up in 10 minutes for them, good grief he’s a turd burper.
Read up on techniques used in the Korean war on American captives. They had less need for intel and more need for propaganda victories.
Same goes for today. Clintonistas in the USGovernment leak enough intel to keep the jihadis rolling. And the beheading and executions are the propaganda victories the jihadis need to keep their currency high in the Arab world. That seems to be changing though.
In my opinion, the Dhimmicrat obsession with Mukasey’s views on torture to keep this non-issue (which they could easily control if they truly cared about it)as a controversy, is a part of their full frontal assault on the Presidency.
What will it matter when they bend over and offer Bush his money to finish the fight in Iraq and support Israel’s war against Hamas and Hezbollah.
Pyrrhic victories might be entertaining.
PS: Kaled Sheikh Mohammed’s confessions led to some arrests in Pakistan. Maybe it wasn’t newsworthy. The point is that al Qaeda has been weakened by killing their men and squeezing intel out of captives. Does anyone here in this discussion expect the military and the CIA to disclose what they found out from captives and how they found it out?
Can anyone here in this discussion speak with certainty about what the military and the CIA are doing to get human intel?
Bigger picture indeed.
#86 ajmontana
LOL! Your description of Reid’s belches was a little on the crude side but I couldn’t agree more. I’ll have to remember that one!
sorry backwoods but he brings out the poor taste.
No apology necessary AJ. You could have done worse and refrained from doing so. Which is a lot more than I can say for Harry Reid.
And these “TBs” are concerned about their legacies.
voting now on the s chip fiasco.
hey thats good we can just use TB’s
wtg bear. lol
“will the Republicans ever L E A R N ???
no
less crude, more fulfilling.
These Dhimmis are so disingenous about the Presidency.
It is widely accepted, though still debatable as to how virtuous or effective, that VP Cheney has been instrumental in expanding the powers of the Presidency under Bush.
The Dhimmis love this underneath their public blustering. They believe they will win the WH in 08- and they will have no intention of giving back any of the expanded powers. It is all for show.
Mukasey is not the issue.
Why is it that everytime I hear waterboarding I get a visual pic of Kerry in his wet suit and on his wind board surfing.