This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 4, 2008 8:38 AM. The previous post in this blog was City of Portland paying $6.75 a gallon for biodiesel. The next post in this blog is New music format at our house. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Wyden disappoints again

The Republican from New York is now changing his tune on CIA torture.

Comments (14)

And here I was thinking they wore the white hats. Ha! Will calm down before I call their offices. This constant vigilance is wearing me out.

Might as well be represented by Lieberman.

The election is over. It's now time to stop with the pleasantries that get people elected, and get back to the standard business of government, doing whatever is best for government.

Still getting to know these Oregon pols but broadly speaking, is Wyden really conservative enough to even joke that he's a Republican? I ask in all seriousness, because when I look at his voting record, I don't see that.

The right-wing Family Research Council gives him a zero in their most recent ratings; the left-wing Children's Defense Fund gives him a 90.

Right-wing ACT! for America gives him a zero, lefty Concil for a Liveable World gives him 100.

Righty Citizens Against Government Waste gives him a zero, lefty Public Interest Research Countil gives him 95.

AFL-CIO gives him 94.

The Drum Major Institute for Public Policy ("progressive public policy for social and economic fairness") gives him consistently top ratings.

Alliance for Retired Americans consistently scores him 100 percent.

Gun Owners of America gives him zero, Brady Campaign gives him 100.

Source: Project Vote Smart (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=27036)

Election rhetoric time is over and done with. I bet you'll see even Obama changing his toon shortly on torture.

"toon"? I'll tell you one 'toon that's torture - "Cathy". Man, I'd rather get waterboarded then be made to read that one every day.


God I love 30 Rock.

The was a great article in the Washington Post on Tuesday, i think, regarding the successes that interrogators had only using hte Army Field Manual methodology.

From a policy perspective, I agree that sometimes it is in our national interest to engage in more than those methods. The problem, of course, is limiting those circumstances to the truly unique circumstance (the hypothetical always used is the sole terrorist who know the location of a nuclear weapon in a major metro area on a 24 hour countdown). In that situation, it may be warranted to use more than the field manual techniques.

At this level, I think that a balance approach would be to require a "torture warrant" (a la Dersowitz). If a sufficiently highly placed public official (I'd say President, others will argue lower) is willing to publicly ratify the decision and its scope, then the balance is there. Of course, this means that these "extreme" measures will be rarely, if ever, used. Which, I think is the common ground: the security>rights crowd has the access to the means necessary to protect, while the rights>security crowd has, IMO, sufficient procedure safeguards.

The entire security game is not a zero-sum game. You can have both an approach which can provide the necessary tools for the unique cases and a system which provides protection for individual rights (e.g. basic human rights).

You can have both an approach which can provide the necessary tools for the unique cases and a system which provides protection for individual rights (e.g. basic human rights).

No, you can't. You either subscribe to basic moral principles, or you don't.

Where do "basic moral principles" come into play when the Indian government is interogating the remaining Bombay "militant" as to whether there are more "militants" waiting to go to work?

So...Are the Democrats going to put up a Democratic candidate to run against our newest Republican Senator?

Marrying money sure gives a man a new perspective on the world, now doesn't it?

Pdxjim if you can't figure out the answer to your own question, mine isn't going to help you much. Here are some elements to consider: (a) the Indian government is notoriously fallible when it comes to identifying and detaining actual criminals; (b) studies make it utterly clear that "enhanced interrogation" yields unreliable responses; and (c) people who maim and kill, other than in self defense (in other words, doing harm to their captives who are disarmed and defenseless) are themselves terrorists.

Just wait until Merkley checks in. I'm sure he's gonna do everything he said he would, and not backpedal on anything.

Moral of the story: once elected, all politicians suck. It's just a matter of how long they only suck a little bit, and when they make the transition to full-on suckitude.

The day of the statesmen is over.

Love me some waterboarding.

Clicky Web Analytics