In one of the most perverse moments yet in the torture debate, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice took time to explain the need for torture to a fourth grader who was a bit curious why his country tortured people. The question of Misha was considerably more reassuring than Rice’s answers.
Rice was given a lecture at the Sixth & I Historic Synagogue when she ran into Misha Lerner who asked her to explain why the Bush administration tortured people. Rice responded:
“Let me just say that President Bush was very clear that he wanted to do everything he could to protect the country. After September 11, we wanted to protect the country. But he was also very clear that we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally. So the president was only willing to authorize policies that were legal in order to protect the country. . . .I hope you understand that it was a very difficult time. We were all so terrified of another attack on the country. September 11 was the worst day of my life in government, watching 3,000 Americans die. . . . Even under those most difficult circumstances, the president was not prepared to do something illegal, and I hope people understand that we were trying to protect the country.”
This is close to the Nixonian response that Rice gave Stanford students last week..
I find it interesting that Rice is falling back on the exceptional circumstances of the time — a defense expressly rejected under the Convention Against Torture. Article 2 states: “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”
There is also the claim for a type of constitutional Mulligan for officials who are terrified after 911. It is pretty disconcerting to hear about officials living in terror of a group of terrorists. I live in Washington and the plane hit the Pentagon literally in my rear view mirror as I passed the Pentagon. A friend died on that flight. Yet, I was not “terrified” to Al Qaeda. I was angry and vengeful, but I would never have approved torture. We expect adults (let alone high-ranking officials) to act soberly and lawfully and humanely. Rice and the rest make it sound like they participated in a form of organized panic — where their little transgressions can be excused.
According to Misha’s mother, the boy originally wanted to ask “If you would work for Obama’s administration, would you push for torture?” His parents made him change the question. With all due respect to the parents (who clearly have raised a bright child), I liked Misha’s original question a bit more.
The failure of the Obama administration to select a special prosecutor is why officials like Rice can hold these impromptu torture for tots classes. Rice should be meeting with defense counsel, not holding forth on why torture is more excusable when your leaders are “terrified.” By the way, Al Qaeda must be loving the moment: what greater success is there for a terrorist than to know that you terrified the President of the United States and his National Security Adviser.
I say let them state their case in the press and then hang em out, high and dry. I do believe that they believe the lies that they spread. I do not think that they understand that they are not in control of the press any longer. It may take some time but I believe that in my lifetime that they will be prosecuted for war crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors. Yes I do.
Is refusing to investigate and/or prosecute torture reason enough to impeach either Eric Holder and/or Barack Obama?
How many US laws and international treaties that the US signed that REQUIRE allegations of torture be investigated and, if necessary, prosecuted must this administration continue to ignore?
I voted for change – from a previous administration that ignored international law, the Geneva Convention, that tortured people in my name – and I’m not seeing anything change so far.
The previous poster said ” It may take some time but I believe that in my lifetime that they will be prosecuted for war crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors. Yes I do.”
I’m beginning to think that will NOT happen – I hope I’m wrong
BUT given Eric Holder’s past I’m not that sure
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-kovalik/lawyer-for-chiquita-in-co_b_141919.html
Eric Holder would have a troubling conflict of interest in carrying out this work in light of his current work as defense lawyer for Chiquita Brands international in a case in which Colombian plaintiffs seek damages for the murders carried out by the AUC paramilitaries – a designated terrorist organization. Chiquita has already admitted in a criminal case that it paid the AUC around $1.7 million in a 7-year period and that it further provided the AUC with a cache of machine guns as well.
Indeed, Holder himself, using his influence as former deputy attorney general under the Clinton Administration, helped to negotiate Chiquita’s sweeheart deal with the Justice Department in the criminal case against Chiquita. Under this deal, no Chiquita official received any jail time. Indeed, the identity of the key officials involved in the assistance to the paramilitaries were kept under seal and confidential. In the end, Chiquita was fined a mere $25 million which it has been allowed to pay over a 5-year period. This is incredible given the havoc wreaked by Chiquita’s aid to these Colombian death squards.
According to Mario Iguaran, the Attorney General of Colombia, Chiquita’s payments to the AUC paramilitaries led to the murder of 4000 civilians in the banana region of Colombia and furthered the growth of the paramilitaries throughout Colombia and their violent takeover of numerous Colombian regions. Iguaran, in response to the claims of both Chiquita and Eric Holder himself that Chiquita was somehow forced to pay “protection” to the paramilitaries (see, Washington Post and Conde Nast Portfolio), stated unequivocally that “[t]his was not payment of extortion money. It was support for an illegal armed group whose methods included murder.” See, Christian Science Monitor, “Chiquita Case Puts Big Firms on Notice.”
One former paramilitary leader who is in federal custody in the U.S., Salvatore Mancuso, has stated that he has more knowledge about Chiquita’s relationship with the paramilitary death squads in Colombia. Mancuso further claims that Dole and Del Monte also made payments to the paramilitaries, just as Chiquita did. Yet, Dole and Del Monte remain un-indicted. Query whether, as Human Rights Watch recommends, a Justice Department under Holder would be interested in pursuing this and other similar leads. This is a serious matter given the fact that the Justice Department has already come under great scrutiny for turning a blind eye to what appears to be rampant corporate support for terrorist groups in Colombia. See, L.A. Times, “U.S. accused of bending rules on Colombian Terror.”
From the second here above, the CNN site:
“President Obama has banned the use of techniques such as waterboarding, which he called torture. His administration released the Justice Department memos in response to a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union, and he called the legal reasoning behind the memos “a mistake.”
I cannot think of a better statement than Obama calling the “legal reasoning behind the memos a mistake.”
A short video on the torture debate (featuring Mr. Turley) that you may want to see:
Obama and The War Criminals
The people from bushco have made plenty of statements in the press. Last week the Obama DOJ argured the followin in the 4th circut:
“In its first filing on detention and torture under the Obama administration, the Department of Justice filed briefs in March urging the Court of Appeals to reject any constitutional or statutory rights for detainees. The Obama Justice Department further argued that even if such rights were recognized, the Court should rule that the previous administration’s officials who ordered and approved torture and abuse of the plaintiffs should be immune from liability for their actions.”
Holder runs the DOJ. It makes no sense to argue that bushco is immune from “liability for their actions” if they claim to believe no one is above the law. Those two actions/statements are mutually contradictory.
Again, it was not because of the largess of Obama that we saw the memos. It was the hard work of the ACLU filing court motion after motion. There is nothing lost by Obama in following the court order to release and then ignoring, once again, the crimes contained in the memos.
Bill, that video lays it out in a very straightforward manner.
http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/court-appeals-rules-detainees-are-not-%E2%80%9Cpersons%E2%80%9D-guant%C3%A1namo-torture-suit
Bill J.
Good video!
Torture for tots courtesy of Condi Rice. So this is how the United States of America is “moving forward”? It’s as if the current administration is ignoring a gaping hole in the basement, allowing the vermin to come and go as they please. For crying out loud, fix the foundation of this establishment!
Bill Jablonski, that’s a very effective video.
All that human pain and indignity, and the Bush administration still failed to establish a link between Sadam and Al Qaeda.
“Is refusing to investigate and/or prosecute torture reason enough to impeach either Eric Holder and/or Barack Obama?”
Right you all are, what are we waiting for, 100 days are enough! We have had it. It’s time to call for impeaching them both! We’re not going to take this anymore! This suspense is killing me and I don’t react well to it emotionally. My needs must be met immediately, despite anything else going on, they take precedence. If these guys won’t meet my needs then off with their heads! (Metaphorically I mean, since I’m against capital punishment)
By the way I never liked that guy Obama anyway, never trusted him and so I can read into everything he does a reaffirmation of my distrust. I can even quote people who always felt the same way I do. I know they’re right because they agree with me!
Whew! now that I’ve gotten that off my chest the tension has subsided and I feel so politically pure. Much more important than getting any real change done, don’t you know.
What a sad thing it is that the former Secretary of State can’t even give a lecture at a local Synagogue, without besmirching herself.
Mike S.
All sarcasm aside. How do you put togther the fact that the Holder/Obama DOJ just asked in a court filing last week that bush officials should be given freedom from liablity for torture and your belief that Obama means to prosecute? Why would the Obama DOJ ask for this immunity in court for bush and friends if their intent is to actually hold bush people accountable?
Jill,
My sarcasm was employed just for questions such as the one you asked. Did you watch President’s Obama’s press conference last week. Particularly his answer regarding picking up ongoing justice department case that required present action. The President made it quite clear, to me at least, that some of these actions are in the process of review. His metaphor also about the US being an Ocean Liner was apt, you can’t just change the direction of a bureaucracy that quickly, especially when Bush/Cheney left a lot of DOJ “poison pills” in the form of lawyers given civil service status.
When I retired from the City of New york I had more than 300 people working for me in about 12 or 13 offices around the City. Some of them didn’t follow my clear, written directions, finding those and then disciplining or removing them took time and yet I sometimes faced the embarrassment of someone presumably acting on my authority, who wasn’t. My job didn’t compare even minimally in scope to either Mr. Holder’s, or the President’s. I am being purposely sarcastic because the anti-Obama positions represent people being either purposely obtuse, or engaging in self fulfilling prophecy.
Mike S.,
I’d appreciate you laying off the psychoanaylsis and personal attacks. I did hear Obama’s statements last week. I disagree with your intepretation of them. As JT said they were suprising. Obama is not a victim. He has kept on people who tortured and who authorized torture in the DOJ and the DOD. In fact he has already immunized some of these people. I do not agree that leaving people in place who committed/authoirzed torture is good govt. policy. It may take time to retire people at the lowest levels, but it doesn’t take time to fire people like Jim Brennen. It was an affirmative action to keep him as an advisor. It was an affirmative action to keep on Bill Gates. It is an affirmative action to keep on Larry Summers and Tim Geithner. The ruling I spoke about was something, as JT pointed out in other cases, the govt. could have asked for an extension to argue. They did not ask for the extension, therefore I must conclude they agreed with the argument they put forth. In fact this argument matches their actions in a very consistent way. I can’t ignore so many actions that move along the same pathway. My question cannot be dismissed by turnng the ship of state claims. The fact that anyone likes or dislikes Obama is also irrelevant. Did you like bush and cheney. If not, should I ignore your criticism of them out of hand? If you did like them for a while, was that the brief window in which what you had to say about them could be counted and anything after that was invalid? Looking at a series of decisions, or lack of actions and coming to a conclusion that obama and holder do not intent to prosecute is a reasonalbe conclusion. It may not be your conclusion but it isn’t fair to dismiss it with psychoanaylsis, claims that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is being obtuse or is trying for a self-fulfilling prophecy. I would like to keep things in argument, not personal attack form.
“I’d appreciate you laying off the psychoanaylsis and personal attacks.”
Jill,
When I attack you directly…I will attack you directly. My sarcasm was a broad perspective on many previous posts and that is proven by the fact that the comment I quoted initially was not yours. By trying to make my attacks into being personal your are trying to play the sympathy card, in light of your problems with Patty. She speaks for herself and I would you think that you would understand by now that I speak for myself alone. By throwing in this unfounded allegation of a “personal attack,” you aim to avoid my direct answer to your question.
“I disagree with your intepretation of them.”
You have every right to disagree with my interpretation of President Obama’s remarks, but remember I was only responding to your direct question.
“Obama is not a victim. He has kept on people who tortured and who authorized torture in the DOJ and the DOD. In fact he has already immunized some of these people.”
This does nothing to refute my interpretation of his remarks and your comment re:”immunizing” is contextually unresponsive. Also while I’ve certainly expressed my admiration and affection for JT, I reserve the right to disagree with him also. I’ve made no secret of the fact that I am an iconoclast at heart and trust my vision over others. Call me conceited and that may be, but at least I’m honest about it and don’t hide behind citing others views to bolster my own pre-judgments.
Regarding JT though, I’ve made it clear in other posts that JT holds a different position on this then the average TV pundit. JT is an advocate for constitutionality, just like the ACLU, MoveOn, etc. and as such is fulfilling his mission by providing criticism that is non-politically based. The role that he, the ACLU and others fulfill is as gadfly’s stinging whoever is in power to ensure that they meet their constitutional burdens.
I, on the other hand am unashamedly political, which is why I can support JT in his mission, while at the same time understanding the realities faced by our President.
“It may not be your conclusion but it isn’t fair to dismiss it with psychoanaylsis, claims that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is being obtuse or is trying for a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
You open with a plea for sympathy and close with one as well.
First of all I am not, nor never would be a psychoanalyst. I am an institute trained/formerly licensed psychotherapist from an existentialist perspective, which is antithetical to psychoanalysis and I’ve also made that clear in other posts.
Secondly, you give yourself too much credit in feeling that I was specifically pointing out your obtuseness, since I already made it clear in my “sarcastic” comment that I was speaking about a group, not just you.
Thirdly, since you cared to interject yourself into this I will say to you directly that you do seem to me to be obtuse when it comes to this issue and it does seem that you are in search of self fulfilling prophecies in your pursuit of the President. These are statements that are contentless from a psychological/psychotherapeutic perspective, but yes sharply pointed from a political and/or logical perspective. they are disagreements with your positions, rather than accusations of your mental status. As such they are just as fair game as you telling me that:
“I disagree with your intepretation of them.”
Jill I disagree with your interpretations of the Administration’s positions on this issue and I do think that there is nothing that President Obama could do to gain your trust. This is not speculative, nor is it a denigration of you personally (though you choose to make it such) but based on your continued statements during the campaign that you didn’t trust the man. After the election you had continual posts up criticizing him before he had taken office and this barrage continued right after the inauguration. I get it very clearly, you don’t like him and like the Republicans you will never like him. That is your right, but it is also my right to criticize your viewpoint, without injecting personalities or calling you a bad person, which is what I’ve done. You seem to be the one trying to escalate this into a personality contest, when none was implied, nor intended on my part.
Mike Spindell,
I consider you the closest cyper-friend I know within this blawg, largely because we both experienced the same societal/cultural evolutions during our 60+ years of life and we grew up with very similar value systems.
I think that President Obama is giving ambiguous and mixed signals. I have an altogether different interpretation of Obama’s stance during his news conference than you did. I want to trust and like Obama because he appears to be a decent human being. However, with King-like pardon powers and his penchant for looking forward instead of backward, others and I do not want to allow, even the appearance of, a similar pardon as was granted to Mr. Nixon by Mr. Ford; a real tragedy for the rule of law and justice. That one action was the prelude to what we are experiencing now. No one of import was ever held legally accountable. The world is paying the price with death and destruction now, in part, because of that compassionate, saint-like–although thoroughly ill conceived–pardon. That act notified corrupt political operatives that the Office of the Presidency of the U.S.A. is immune from the rule of law and violations of the U.S. Constitution. Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld et al. learned the lesson well and perpetuated the—President is King and his court jesters are untouchable—corrupt political theory to the fullest.
We, the people, must ensure that such occurrences never reoccur. If Obama does not quickly steer his ocean liner—at least, for now, towards the correct legal waters—he will lose control, his moral compass headings will become askew, and we citizens will be scrambling for the lifeboats to distance ourselves from his not yet sinking, but aimlessly drifting, Ship of State. AG Holder must—not should— appoint an independent prosecutor immediately. The Independent Prosecutor is the metaphoric equivalent of the Navy Seals rescuing our Ship of State from corrupt pirates, namely, GW Bush, D. Cheney et al. and the legal staff of Bybee, Yoo et al. who issued corrupt legal opinions with ‘the end justifies the means’ legalese.
Jill and Mike, please do continue the rigorous debate because all views—pro, con, and impassioned—are essential to help resolve this confusing, divisive, although critical issue facing our Democracy.
FFLEO
FFLEO,
I enjoy a good debate. I think that Mike S. gave his impression just like you and Jill and well hell everyone else. I understand where Mike is coming from and it takes a while when you work within the system to “change stupid.” It is hard to get rid of career employees.
I have worked within the system and if you do too much work sometimes, you gotta go because you make everyone look bad. There are the rare exceptions and essential government departments that have to work and work hard.
I understand the analogy of the Ship. The direction can be changed but it takes time. I have heard on this list parellel to shore, I had to ask what they means.
He can’t categorically change the policy of the DOJ and DOD, without mass problems. It sounds just like some people want Obama to run in without all of the information and be just like Bush and bomb Iraq, damn the consequences. Obama is not that way, he is too narcissistic for that.
Jill:
Not to sound churlish, but how many times and how many ways can we all say:
1. Torture is bad.
2. Bush was bad to order it.
3. Obama is not moving with enough deliberate speed, in the view of some including JT, to repudiate this practice and prosecute the offenders.
The Republic will likely withstand this test and justice, however slowly, will be satisfied. Let’s talk about something new like judges “hooking up” with prosecutors to send people to death row!
Messpo727272,
I think we all agree, that it could move faster. The fact is Obama is not acting as quickly as he should in a lot of peoples books. However, what is that saying the government that governs least governs best.
That Collin County case will be fun once all of the facts come out.
Mike S:
“Jill I disagree with your interpretations of the Administration’s positions on this issue and I do think that there is nothing that President Obama could do to gain your trust. This is not speculative, nor is it a denigration of you personally (though you choose to make it such) but based on your continued statements during the campaign that you didn’t trust the man. After the election you had continual posts up criticizing him before he had taken office and this barrage continued right after the inauguration. I get it very clearly, you don’t like him and like the Republicans you will never like him. That is your right, but it is also my right to criticize your viewpoint, without injecting personalities or calling you a bad person, which is what I’ve done. You seem to be the one trying to escalate this into a personality contest, when none was implied, nor intended on my part.”
*******************
I consider this a fair summary of Patty C’s criticisms of Jill as well.
“Let’s talk about something new like judges “hooking up” with prosecutors to send people to death row!”
___________
Salacious headlines/topics do grow less stale, less quickly…
This site is one dynamic enterprise and a lot of fun, while exuding legal discussions par excellence
Mike S.,
I agree that your sacrastic post was directed at all of the above and I knew this. I also knew, and you acknowledged, that it applied to mine along with others. In your post above you just again, as you have many times in the past. attacked me personally. I gave you the reasons why I did not agree that Obama was a victim: 1. if he had wanted more time for his DOJ to change postitions there is no way that any defendent would not have given it to him and 2. when you are starting out to change and organization it makes no sense to bring on board, affirmatively, people who engaged in unlawful activity both in the national security and financial fronts. It isn’t necessary for me to trust obama. Trust is earned, not given. Trust of political leaders in the face of contrary evidence is not necessary or even a good idea in a democracy. I can just as easily say that you want to believe in Obama. No matter what he acturally does or doesn’t do, it will have no effect on how you see him. I wasn’t playing for sympathy because of Patty (that is psychoanalysis again). You have called me a bunch of names whenever I criticize obama. That is wrong. I am asking you, not Patty, to stop the personal attacks and the psychoanalysis.
AY:
“I think we all agree, that it could move faster. The fact is Obama is not acting as quickly as he should in a lot of peoples books. However, what is that saying the government that governs least governs best.”
**************
I think we only disagree on the timetable, but duty delayed is not like justice delayed. We give those charged with great duties great discretion on how and when to fulfill their duties and 100 days or so doesn’t seem like so awfully long a time to act when the President had almost as much on his plate as Abraham Lincoln did in March 1861.
mespo,
I truly cannot agree with that statement. What part of “jill is trash” is an argument?
Messpo727272,
Do you mean that Northern Aggression? we still Remember and are still waiting for the right time to settle the score. We started out by sending W to upset everything. It is a strategical decision that so far is working well.
Oh, I hear the nurse it must be medicine time again. lol.
I’m going to add one last thing. The statement that I never liked and don’t like Obama is a personal attack. It is not a response to an argument. I have been dismayed that people now believe this is a relevant way to dismiss a point of disagreement. I never liked bush and cheney either and I don’t remember too many regulars who did. The only people who said our points of contention with dick and george were invalid, based on the “you don’t like them defense” were trolls. What has changed now? It was a personal attack then and it’s a personal attack now.
Jill,
Ma’am, please continue with your protestations against Mr. Obama, as your First Amendment rights allow, and simply realize that good people of all stripes might condemn or appear to condemn you or your viewpoint. You, others, and I must accept that sometimes—and most often—any perceived or real attacks are unintentional.
I have been misjudged, misconstrued, misquoted, and many more mis-whatever’s in my life while being kicked from pillar to post and then back again—that is just part of the drill. You have many well-versed, scholarly lawyers in your worldwide court of opinion, including Professor Turley and Mr. Greenwald et al. so state your case with direct rebuttals and refutations while continuing reasoned debate.
The best interrogation method is to put them all in a room with microphones and let them talk among themselves.
I think we are seeing that unfold in the media.
If a case were to be brought forward it would be best to let them make statements that presently they would not have to answer for, but later of course, they would.
Give them the microphone. Let them talk. It will not be to their benefit.
Jill:
“I truly cannot agree with that statement. What part of “jill is trash” is an argument?”
*********
Missed that line. No argument there I agree.
AY:
“We started out by sending W to upset everything. It is a strategical decision that so far is working well.”
**************************
Ah, worthy of a Wild, Wild, West” episode, me thinks.
Former federal prosecutor and U.S. attorney’s chief Elizabeth De La Vega explains to Olbermann why Attorney General Eric Holder should not immediately appoint a special prosecutor to investigate those members of the Bush administration responsible for torture.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/30356123#30356123
Bill Jablonski, thank you for the link.
I think it’s this simple.
The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights are the core of the legal system. If they are not upheld strictly and applied to ALL citizens, then they are worthless as a basis for legal decisions for or against anyone.
In none of these documents does it guarantee a political party the right to exist. The GOP and the DNC would be well served to remember that they are just an organization subject to law. Law like RICO. If both parties were disbanded, I’d shed nary a tear.
Partisanship is pure obfuscation in this instance. The question at bar is not political. It’s criminal. However, letting a criminal go free for political reasons is pure politics, pure bullshit and won’t stand in this instance. The scope of the crimes is just too large let slide. Only partisan hacks are playing this game and anyone paying attention knows that mostly R and some D need to go to prison over the torture issue. You boys in Washington don’t like that? Tough. Should have thought about that before you followed Herr Cheney.
Since the threat of the crimes Cheney and Bush committed strike at the core of our legal system, letting them have a pass is not an option unless you want to void the rest of the legal system. If the President can violate the Constitution and Federal law, why should a citizen pay taxes or obey any laws that they find inconvenient? They shouldn’t is the only correct answer.
Either Holder has the spine to do what is REQUIRED by LAW to restore the Rule of Law or he ushers in the quasi-revolutionary anarchy that is certain to follow. And I don’t mean those moronic teabaggers either. I mean ordinary citizens just simply ceasing to cooperate with government. Then it will escalate as the jackboots become more aggressive. Someone at a demonstration will get hurt by some state agent overstepping the bounds. Possibly even killed. This may even happen to citizens in their own homes if the “government” decides they aren’t towing the fascist line well enough and are too critical of the special treatment corporations get. Take my private property under guise of public use and then sell it to someone like Wal-Mart for private development? You’d get a blown up, poisoned, burned cinder if you tried that with me. Put my brown skinned kid in jail for 6 mos. because he smoked a joint, but the white kids who beat the immigrant to death gets a walk? I don’t think so. I’d make sure you never found him. Every neighborhood will cease to cooperate and become by default distrustful of the police. THAT is already happening. Wait until you start sending them out to evict the millions you just screwed over by letting the banks keep their fraudulent and criminal lending practices in place, Congress. That’s gas on the fire, but aren’t you glad you got to pay back those lobbyists and graft merchants favors at the expense of million’s of families security and well-being? But then again, it was all about you getting money to get re-elected wasn’t it? Bribery is bribery and anyone watching KNOWS that’s what just happened. Compounded injustices. It will happen more than once. It’s going on right now. But it won’t go on unchallenged forever. And at that point, when it’s clear the Pres and VP and others in government have placed themselves above the law, it will simply be open season on politicians of any stripe.
Enjoy the bed you are making, Holder. That or you could do your damn job and appoint a special prosecutor and to Hell with the consequences to people like Pelosi just as much as to Hell with the consequences for the Neocon GOP in general. When criminals rule openly and without consequence, the government ceases to be legitimate and should be openly resisted. That’s the game you’re playing, sport, whether you realize it or not, AG Holder. Your decision to prosecute means this is a country of laws, but failure to do so means the laws of this country aren’t worth squat because the government has ceased to be a government by and for the people.
So what’s it going to be, Eric? Protect the criminals or protect the law? You can’t do both. And if you decide to protect the criminals, be ready for what happens when people realize the law is lawless and no longer valid. A decision in favor of letting these war criminals go is simply a decision in favor of fascism and authoritarianism. No man is my king, no corporation is my master.
I, for one, will not obey. I will openly resist such a system as it is contrary to the principles upon which this country was founded, the very principles found in the the Declaration and the Bill of Rights that many members of my family died protecting.
However, AG Holder, should you choose the do the right thing and restore the Rule of Law and the Constitution, I’ll back you in any way you need. I’ll also do my best to make sure the most historically important man of color in this administration ISN’T Obama, but rather the man who had the guts to save the country from the enemies within and protect the Constitution.
You want to make a mark on history? Then be the black man who rose from America’s shameful past to become her defending knight in her time of need. Prove the invalidity of divisiveness and slavery by showing that character is indeed the defining essence of a man and not the color of his skin. Show that not only can triumph come from adversity, but that excellence and wisdom can rise as well.
This isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about crimes that have their elements intertwined with the very taproot of American jurisprudence. Save the Tree of Liberty, Mr. Holder, or be ready to accept your part in the blame when she burns to the ground. Do your job of protecting the Constitution and do it well? You just may just end up being mentioned with the likes of Jefferson if future history books. Tow the line and let them go with a wink and a nudge? Do the names Mussolini or Nero ring a bell?
Make your choice. Do it soon.
CCD & Bill J.
Thanks for the link. Former federal prosecutor and U.S. attorney’s chief Elizabeth De La Vega calls a Special (Independent) Prosecutor an “illusion”.
Professor Turley should rebut this mischaracterization and explain why the law is more important than willy-nilly public opinion.
Mike S. and mespo, with one ‘S’ 727272
- thanks…
Remember this classic?
Now, don’t make it ‘mean’ anything, but I always see the ‘ugly
old woman’ last, no matter how often I see this drawing.
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~cfs/305_html/Gestalt/Woman.html
And how about this scenario?
Say we release all Guantanamo prisoners into the United States
- today. They’re free because it’s the ‘right’ thing to do.
Tomorrow, now armed with rights galore, they get lawyered-up, civilly, and then proceed to sue the United States by joining together in a giant bllion-dollar Class Action lawsuit seeking punitive damages, as well.
Assuming we can, EVER again, readily absorb series of steep multi-million dollar sized settlements, at what point do we become the tiniest bit concerned about how these particular plaintiffs may be planning to use all that fresh new capital
-minus any input from us?
‘Nobody’s business’, you might say.
Really…?
And would any proponents of the ‘Get ‘er Done’ approach to dealing with these detainees, be willing to swallow it when Obama is forced to say, in his own lame defense, “Look, I tried to tell you guys this was not a good idea, but you wouldn’t hear it.
I’m really sorry about the recent round of terrorist bombings in all of your neighborhoods, but you should probably be more careful about what you wish for, you know?”
While an unlikely combined set of future events, allow me to reiterate, yet again, that this is a colossal mess for this new president and our country to deal with, especially now, and on more than one level and still without any easy and quick solutions in the rear view, unfortunately.
I for one, remain comfortable having Obama and Holder sitting in their positions rather than somebody else whom I could name, but will pass.
p.s. Jill, you’ve called yourself ‘trailer-trash’. I didn’t invent that moniker – you did. And, honestly, I do think you lack a certain amount of sophistication.
Reading your posts, for me, is no different than listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh or BillO’. I can’t stand their ‘trash’, either.
Frankly, it gets on my nerves.
Mespo727272 not Messpo727272.
The Spelling is duly noted. I apologize for any inconvenience that this sir has caused you. If you have lost sleep, sir again I apologize. If it has caused you other angst that I am not aware of please consider that I did not do this intentionally.
Agreed FF LEO:
The Independent Council Law expired in 1999? JT has expressed numerous times that a Independent Council should be named to investigate torture.
Per Ms. De La Vega the flow of information ends once a Grand Jury is convened, why would we want that?
Per the Beast: “Give them the microphone. Let them talk.”
Yes indeed, give them all the rope they need!
While we the people remain patient and attentive.
CCD,
I am in the Amen corner on that. You can say, Roger that. It can also be said, thats a big 10-4 big buddy.
“The statement that I never liked and don’t like Obama is a personal attack.”
Jill,
That is not a personal attack it is a statement of fact based on your numerous writings. That you try to characterize it as an attack is absurd given the literally hundreds of posts you’ve written to that effect.
“It is not a response to an argument.”
It is an argument in itself in that my point is that you would find fault in every thing he does. Incidentally, I loathe Bush/Cheney to the extent that I would find fault in everything they do. It would be reasonable to criticize me for that because it is a subject that I treat subjectively. The difference is I’m honest about my pre-judgment and you aren’t. Citing trolls using this line is specious, because if that was the only critique they’d use, given the way that people here feel about Bush/Cheney, they would at least have a valid point. As do I.
“In your post above you just again, as you have many times in the past. attacked me personally.”
“You have called me a bunch of names whenever I criticize obama.”
This is a flat out lie. Quote me one instance where I personally attacked you, or that I called you names. What you’ve described above is not a personal attack. A personal attack would be if I called you a bad person, or implied that you did bad things. My disagreements with you have not been personal, up until now, where you have attacked me personally. Nevertheless, I don’t have to, nor will I attack you personally, but I will disagree with you openly and I reserve the right to characterize your statements for what they are. In these last two posts it seems to me that you are conflating disagreement, with personal attacks and I’m not buying it. As you know in the past if I have been proven wrong, or have inadvertently hurt someone’s feelings I’ve made sincere apologies. In this instance no apology is needed because I haven’t attacked you personally, nor called you names.
Mike S.,
I just did. Saying that I don’t like obama and thus my argument is not valid is a form of personal attack, not a counter argument. You just said you were honest but I am not–that’s personally quite insulting and certainly is a personal attack. You have said many times that you are annoyed by my criticism of Obama–that is a personal attack. There is something very creepy about having to “like” obama. I believe you are not remembering the times I did speak up in agreement with obama’s postitions on this blog such as his reversal on stem cell use and his original position on not going after the medical use of marijuana (a position he has changed, so I no longer agree with him on it). You have continued to use personal attacks instead of arguments. You are lumping me with “Republicans” which is absurb. First of all there are many Republicans who like obama’s financial/pro capital postition quite well. Secondly, the “Republicans” you are refering to are the ones who don’t like obama becuase they think he is a socialist. I don’t like obama because of his stand on civi liberties, his warmongering, and his treatment of detainees. I am not asking you to apologize. I am asking you to make a clean argument or ignore my posts. Either way, you need to stop making statments such as you are honest and I am not and to stop attacking me for not liking “dear leader”. They’re both uncalled for and the one is creepy. This is a democracy. I’m not required to “like” my president as a condition of posting on this blog.
CCD,
I do not think the people should just be patient and attentive. While that is happening the fact that we are not upholding our own laws is being used as a recruitment tool for people who fight against our troops. We are also losing what little credibility we have left to the rest of the world. We are also making a strong statement at home that we will not hold the wealthy, powerful and connected accountable. These three things seem quite dangerous to me.
“I consider this a fair summary of Patty C’s criticisms of Jill as well”
Mespo/Patty,
I think it is also. Where Patty and I part company is that I prefer not to call names, but given this recent exchange with Jill, I am more understanding of Patty’s wrath given her longer time here and thus having lived through history I only have heard anecdotally. I must admit though that the broken record is beginning to wear on me, as is the constant resorting to other people, like Glenn Greenwald, that I also read. Your summary below also strikes a chord:
“1. Torture is bad.
2. Bush was bad to order it.
3. Obama is not moving with enough deliberate speed, in the view of some including JT, to repudiate this practice and prosecute the offenders.”
Now interestingly FFLEO and Buddha, sometimes now AY also
are impatient with President Obama. I don’t find that annoying because they cite their own ideas and feelings rather than providing punditry as sources. As we know Buddha can get hyperbolic, but in that state he says much I agree with, even though we may disagree on when the hammer comes down.
FFLEO and I, as he puts it, share much closeness due to our age and life experiences. Yet he remains a conservative and I remain radical. We come from different venues, but we are both old souls (even if we don’t believe in them)and despite politics our values are close. He’s pissed with the President and at times has said he feels betrayed by him.
He’s again giving his thoughts and feelings and not simply citing authority. I respect him all the more for it.
We are all an intelligent group here and while in certain instances case law has to be cited to clarify positions, the beauty of this site is that we’re all opinionated and can articulate our opinions. When in making a point I feel I have to keep explaining that I’m against torture, over and again, because of the plethora of posts that keep making the same point endlessly it gets old to deal with.
Most people know that I am a proud Jew with a deep connection to my people’s history. Guess what, I don’t go to see Holocaust movies anymore, not because I don’t want to be reminded, but because I know all there is to know and carry it inside me. I don’t need to keep being convinced as well that water boarding is torture and that all torture is evil, I know that in my gut and the latest story about it is not going to change my feelings.
As a conservative might I remind everyone that if the RNC were to read these posts they would think you all to be mad as hatters arguing over how long this will take or if one person has been insulted or not.
The ultimate goal is justice, how long it takes is not up to anyone on this blog/blawg.
I thought you were all on the same side ultimately. Internecine warfare is counter productive, “a house divided…….”
“I’m not required to “like” my president as a condition of posting on”
“Saying that I don’t like obama and thus my argument is not valid is a form of personal attack,”
Jill,
Your second statement is absurd and that is not a personal attack, it is a description of my thoughts on your logic. I’ve never said you were a bad person, never called you names, but I see clearly that you really don’t understand the concept I am stating. By your logic you have continually been attacking me because I am a supporter of the President you don’t trust and who you think is doing bad things. By your logic, which to me is faulty, every time you attack the man I support you are then attacking me. Don’t you see how specious that is an an argument of personal attack?
I guess you don’t, so I do believe there is no way to reach you, or reach out to you. From the tone of your posts there seems to be a self-righteous anger behind it and yes that does recall to me my experiences in the 60′s. To me people who came from that place had a “holier than thou” attitude politically and were startlingly ineffectual in getting their political agenda working. This is, by the way a characterization of you and so yes you can consider it a personal attack. I don’t like people lying about me, or who use self righteousness as a defense to cover their simmering angry natures. You have exhibited this tendency on this thread today and yes it does annoy me.
“I consider you the closest cyper-friend I know within this blawg, largely because we both experienced the same societal/cultural evolutions during our 60+ years of life and we grew up with very similar value systems.”
FFLEO,
Back at you old guy.
Jill:
Your asking when does our country live closer to the “ideals” set forth in the constitution, I don’t know? However when a former federal prosecutor and U.S. attorney asks publicly did you like the results of the V. Plame investigation and prosecution? Because naming a SP right now will end the flow of information to the public as it did then.
I’m learning to be patient. Let people elected and appointed to high office tell their story to the media. Let’s allow military current and former, along with current and former government employees to share their version of events.
“We are also losing what little credibility we have left to the rest of the world.” Perhaps in the near term you are accurate, but with out a statue of limitations this will get investigated.
Jill we/I dearly need the rat bastards responsible for governing outside the laws of our country’s constitution investigated and prosecuted.
Mike Spindell,
Two LL’s I hope? I have worked in the Government for the Attorney Generals Office. I realize that the wheels of Justice turn slow. I think I understand what Obama is doing and is being very careful and deliberate in his actions. He would like to “Hang em All” but must get through congress what are the essentials to get this country back on track. Too much Corporate welfare for too long. It is time Corp which are a legal fiction of the government are responsible to its creator, so to speak.
Once the Special Prosecutor is called, the investigative side will cease and all information is then presented to the Grand Jury for indictment or not. If this side of the administrations task was the sole issue for them to deal with, well heck, it would still run slow. Things will happen and Obama has 2 years and 11 months before he has to worry about the next 4 years.
Bron98 stated:
“As a conservative might I remind everyone that if the RNC were to read these posts they would think you all to be mad as hatters arguing over how long this will take or if one person has been insulted or not.”
__________________
While I prefer direct debate with no hurt or wounded pride exuding from the prose, consider the discussion as a brain-storming session. Since our–yours and my–conservative Republican congresspersons are currently missing, or have misplaced, their collective brains, they must resort to mouth-storming sessions, as we have seen in recent news.
I have never been a Democrat, nor will I ever; however, I think that this sort of “in fighting” is part ‘n parcel of their liberal, political genes.
Onward with good, contentious, reasoned debate without further mention of personalities, is my plea.
FFLEO:
I think you are right.
Not a big fan of abuse guys. Good luck and best wishes to many.
Jill,
I did not nor did anyone else ask you not to state your point of view. I will miss you, I like anothers point of view, even though I may disagree with the same.
AY:
“The Spelling is duly noted. I apologize for any inconvenience that this sir has caused you. If you have lost sleep, sir again I apologize. If it has caused you other angst that I am not aware of please consider that I did not do this intentionally.”
************
I don’t remember ever complaining about it, and given my residence in a glass house I bet I never would.
Mespo727272,
It was pointed out to me in another email. I thought it was rather comical. I considered the source and thought I’d fun ya.
So, Former Dem is back at it again. A Troll, is it a He, She, it or is it more appropriately to name them androgynous?
Jill:
“Saying that I don’t like obama and thus my argument is not valid is a form of personal attack, not a counter argument.”
**********
Sorry Jill but pointing up the bias or prejudice of the speaker is valid criticism and not personal attack. If I complain that the tort system is out of control and then tell you I work for Peanut Corporation of America, it is clearly relevant but I have not attacked you personally. I merely pointed out your bias. Everyone has biases, and it’s not a sign of weakness nor personal flaws.
AY:
Good I thought I was griping for no good reason–as I am wont to do sometimes.
Mike S:
“When in making a point I feel I have to keep explaining that I’m against torture, over and again, because of the plethora of posts that keep making the same point endlessly it gets old to deal with.”
****************
Had you never posted on this topic, but given your previous postings on a wide range of other topics, I would still have no doubt you are against any form of torture. It’s as obvious to me as a bowling ball in a ping pong shipment.
Oops! Mike, I think you stepped in it just about here:
Mike Spindell: “I am being purposely sarcastic because the anti-Obama positions represent people being either purposely obtuse, or engaging in self fulfilling prophecy”
Really? When are those of us with ‘anti-Obama positions’ going to have it said that surely we hate America also. This is old-think and old rhetoric, this is the same dismissive attitude I endured from Bush supporters for 8 years under Bush. My proclivity to criticize an Administration’s position does not end with the changing of the guard. A bad position is a bad position regardless of it’s author. I’m going to assume you didn’t mean that in the manner those of us familiar with the Bush era rhetoric could predictably take it.
Obama has a number of policies that require criticism. While many of us like him, voted for him and have high hopes for the country under his Administration, that he gives every objective appearance of being set on the wrong path in a number of areas requires criticism. It’s our duty to be pi***d about it.
Jill, I’m thinking this jab of Mike’s was what pissed you off because I’m not sure if anything else he said in that posting could be taken personally. Maybe I’m wrong but I assume that listening to the Bush Apparatchiks rhetoric has programmed us all to be hyper-sensitive to the neo-con resonance. Feel free to tell me to STFU. You too Mike. Like it will do either of you any good
The ugly part of this posting:
Regarding the agreement expressed in this thread that Patty C’s opinion of Jill is correct and Patty C’s statement in this thread:
“p.s. Jill, you’ve called yourself ‘trailer-trash’. I didn’t invent that moniker – you did. And, honestly, I do think you lack a certain amount of sophistication.
Reading your posts, for me, is no different than listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh or BillO’. I can’t stand their ‘trash’, either.
Frankly, it gets on my nerves”
Sophistication in what area’s one may ask Patty, she at least maintains some measure of common courtesy regarding name calling and personal attacks which you do not. I went back on this site several months, to September 0f ’08 to see if I could ferret out the beginning of this feud and I didn’t find it. It isn’t a feud, You picked a fight, or attempted to by being outrageously rude and vicious by both talking about Jill with others and making gross personal attacks without provocation. Truly vicious attacks. November seems to be the month that you got off and running and it wasn’t a response to something posted or an invitation to debate, they were vituperative, personal attacks and nothing more.
There was in November one of the most funny, inventive multi-party humor threads I have ever read- The Happy Goat. Funny, literate and silly in the capital ‘S’, Pythonesque style. Even in that gem of a thread you could not resist making a couple of snarky and distracting comments to or about Jill. One was subtle (the other was not) but they were there. You are acting like a troll and the man that runs the blog has asked you twice to stop. What is it about “stop” that is not understandable? I am sick of the snark from you and I suggest everyone on this blog go back to November and read the archive- it is revelatory. This started in November and you Patty started it.
I’ve been here a couple of months if that. I’m not credentialed, vested on or invested in this blog beyond enjoying a lively debate even if I’m only reading one and not participating. I’ve seen more than enough in the past 6-8 weeks though to see (right off the bat) a bullying posture from you Patty, regarding Jill. I don’t know Jill and Jill is of little importance to me regarding this issue beyond that she is the current target of yours. I am amazed that a bully is given such leeway on a blog as universally sophisticated as this one. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Patty, I have held my tongue in the past against my better judgment. I came early to the knowledge that you never give a bully a second chance; back them up and off immediately. You are a bully and I’m going to call you, and those that agree with your unfair, unprovoked and viciously stated personal assessment about Jill (or anyone else) on it every time.
Really, take the time to go back and read the November archive. Revelatory.
You can ask me leave but you can no longer expect the courtesy of my forbearance in this matter.
lottakatz,
You can ask me leave but you can no longer expect the courtesy of my forbearance in this matter.
**************************************************
If you want some more interesting read, go last Saturday where everyone but 2 ot 3 were asked to not post by the person you reference here. It may not be apparent but when I am told not to do something its more of an open invitation to do it.
I have been scolded for entering a debate where the person you are referring to was casitgated by me for doing what it is you comapln about that person about.
Wow, I go to the woods for a weekend and look what happens! This crew is in need of an all-hands shakedown with both leave and movies canceled.
Seriously, I am enormously proud of the community that has formed around this blog. I have never seen the equal to the insights and passion of our regulars. Civility, however, remains one of the few hardcore rules and long-standing concerns on this blog. Name calling in any form is simply not acceptable and not welcomed here. I think everyone has tried hard to stop with the personal attacks. There remains some obvious sensitivity over the past attacks and it has only worsened on this thread. Since I am the freshest from a retreat in the woods, I will claim the spiritual (and rapidly vanishing) elevation to call an end to this thread. Let’s exchange ideas and views without the poisonous habit of questioning the motivations or qualifications of the poster.
I happen to have tremendous respect for everyone who has written on this thread. Let’s not have a second tragedy of the commons by killing our common resource with personal animus and attacks. We are going to continue to have a passionate debate over Obama’s moral and legal responsibility on the torture investigation. That is a subject that transcends our (and even Obama’s) personal inclinations. It is worth fighting over — just not on a personal level.
Thanks everyone,
Jonathan
Best,
Jonathan
JT:
“Wow, I go to the woods for a weekend and look what happens!”
***********
Wondrous things happen when you venture out into the woods, Thoreau went out to the woods one summer and look what happened. Everyone’s fine I think. Just a little sap rising. BTW I am not giving up movie privileges, nor “Springtime for Hitler and Germany,” no matter what you say. It’s provides more than any bucolic weekend can render; it’s inspirational!
Well sir,
If you could respond to the ones that continue to do so personally it would be a nice gesture. I for one am appreciate of this site and intend to utilize the referencing as much as possible. For whatever reason it seems like a classroom setting with those that have more experience educating people like me. I can always learn and for what I do not know or have a feeling for I peek at what others are thinking.
Everyone brings to this “List Serve” experience. Some of that experience being brought is actual, practical, classroom, literaly or figuratively.
One thing I learn in college by a pretty sharp professor, was this: “Once you fail to be able to communicate with the people that you are talking to, your education is lost.” We all have something to share with the other person and it could be patience.
But then again there are two types of people in this world and they both bring you happiness, those when they come and those when they go. I see myself as the latter.
.
c
Ok, Mespo, but if I find my strawberries missing, there will be hell to pay. As Lt. Keith said in the Caine Mutiny “Situation quiet; the Captain’s been put away for the night.”
JT:
“Ok, Mespo, but if I find my strawberries missing, there will be hell to pay.”
*****
And if see you with any ball bearings in your hands, I’m off to Empirical Legal Studies.
I am constantly amazed at your ability to remain so affable and maintain your sanity in the midst of this torture/prosecutions debate. I recently saw your appearances on Chris Matthew’s show and the conversation could have easily dissolved (as it usually does with Pat Buchanan’s borderline lunacy and Matthew’s misguided enthusiasm) without the laser-like consistency and logic of your arguments on behalf of our Constitution.
I’m only sad to see that once the undeniable truth of our current situation and the inevitable conclusions that it leads to seemed to dawn upon Mr. Matthews’ brain he attempted to question your motivations and asked questions like “Why do you have this absolute attitude here?” It’s truly sad when a real student of history, as Chris Matthews surely is, has to bring up such a ridiculous notion. Not only that, Chris Matthews has stated many times that his personal idol is Churchill. So…doubly embarrassing, and the extent of his denial is mindblowing.
Professor Turley,
Thank you for your calls for professionalism and decorum. I have to admit that the trolls do get under my skin, but I have also been upset to see the personal attacks on this site between regular posters. If we can’t get along with people who are truly attempting to air their opinions, the trolls have done their job. By the way, your reference to the Caine Mutiny brought back memories of that fine movie. Kind of a scary one, but great acting.
Condi’s Multi-Tiered But Infantile Defense(Parsing Condi):
1. No one who was not in a position of power and responsibility immediately after the horrendous attacks of 9-11, as I was, or who wasn’t present at our secret meetings where we decided on our policies, has any right whatsoever to in any way question the legality or morality of any of the decisions we made or the actions we took – regardless of the morality or legality of those policies.
2. Everything we did was by our own judgement for the good of the country and thus we are exempt from accountability, regardless of the criminality of our actions.
3. After 9-11 (and for the next eight years) all bush administration officials including myself were in such a state of continuous mindless terror and rage that we cannot be held accountable for any of our actions over the entire eight years of the bush regime, again regardless of the illegality or immorality of those actions (the ‘eight-year temporary insanity defense’)
4. In any case, everything we did was completely legal.
5. If what we did was NOT legal, then why didn’t anyone stop us??
6. OK, if it was illegal, I wasn’t responsible because I was only following orders. I only ‘conveyed’ the orders written by others. And that’s my final answer!
Master Slater:
It would have been unethical or immoral not to torture.
Good synopsis, Gregory. Prof. Rice has simply regurgitated a different version of the old “dog bite” defense. You may remember how it goes:
1. I don’t own a dog.
2. If I do own a dog, it didn’t bite your kid.
3. If I do own a dog and it did bite your kid, your kid wasn’t injured.
4. If I do own a dog and it did bit your kid and your kid was injured, my dog acted in self-defense because your kid provoked it.
Mike A,
I fergit about that ole tort defense. That is exactly what it is.
That is similar to the old “He needed killing” defense!
Reminds me of the “goat and cabbages” defense and I think the illustration more fitting for this gang of cloven-footed scoundrels.
(1) You never had any cabbages.
(2) If you did have cabbages, they were rotten and worthless.
(3) Besides, I don’t own a goat.
(4) If I did own a goat, it didn’t eat your cabbages.
(5) If I did own a goat and it did eat your cabbages, it was insane at the time.
The last line of defenses is, however, plausible with this crowd.
mespo,
Don’t defame goats!
Lottakatz,
Thank you for what you said and the perspective you offered on this situation. I truly appreciate it.
Man, those strawberries were sure good. lol Just kidding! And I’ll thank you to leave my insane goat out of this. It wasn’t him because cabbage makes him gassy.
On Point:
Condi is only semi-stupid. She knows the trick is to “get ‘em young”.
Just like the Hitler Youth.
This is a woman who not only should be barred from breeding, but she shouldn’t be allowed around other’s children either. Next she’ll be teaching them that W is a modern Jesus, persecuted for trying to protect his oil profits, er, um, the American Way and the Constitution.
“Mike Spindell: “I am being purposely sarcastic because the anti-Obama positions represent people being either purposely obtuse, or engaging in self fulfilling prophecy”
“Really? When are those of us with ‘anti-Obama positions’ going to have it said that surely we hate America also.”
lottakatz,
Context when trying to analyze or dispute a comment is everything. Your quote came from the lower part of my admittedly sarcastic post. The thrust of what I was stating was not that no one has the right to either criticize or dislike President Obama, but that this is far too early in his administration to make blanket assessments of the man’s direction. However, in context a part of the problem is that writing here as much as I do, I have to go on the assumption that many have read my other comments and thus know where I’m coming from, or else I being a reasonably careful person about making what I mean clear, would have to write tomes qualifying everything I wrote.
There are perhaps fifty comments that I have made here where I clearly stated that people should protest now and continue to protest everything that either the President, or Congress have done that they disagree with. I have also shown support for JT’s continued lambasting of the Administration’s torture position, as I have done in signing various petitions from the ACLU, etc. also protesting these policies. I see no dichotomy in this position since I have stated it is my belief that the President’s strategy mirrors that of FDR’s in asking proponents of issues to have the people make him do it. That is my point and in that lies my sole disagreement with people who are unhappy with, distrust, or dislike the President. This point has been clearly, in my opinion, made by me in numerous posts.
Given that it is frustrating to me to be characterized as someone who would stifle dissent. By the same token it is also to annoying to be characterized as an “Obamaniac” (I am using shorthand here) who will support the President no matter what his policies. Indeed I have now called the White House more than a dozen times to protest various Administration positions and have demanded the dismissal of Geithner and Summers. I have also written posts describing this, called Congress and written letters, so this is a matter of record and not my just stating something is so.
As to the rest of your comment you might be quite surprised on how much I agree with you. There are also posts from me scolding Patty C. for personal attacks upon Jill and decrying the internecine warfare. There are also expressions of gratitude from me to Jill for being the first to welcome my comments here. That is also context and exists despite the fact that Patty C. and I share a general agreement on most issues of this sort.
That being said, for me to be accused of making “personal attacks” and “calling names” does upset me. Doubly so because I am not guilty as charged. There is also context there. If you see some of the attacks I’ve launched on trolls at this site you will see that I am fully capable of being vitriolic in a “personal” way and that I do not suffer fools gladly. I also as the old umpire said:”Calls em as I sees em.” This has been a feature of my personality since grade school and that I’ve succeeded career wise to any degree comes from my ability to outwork most in my field and certainly not from any bosses pleasure in my critiques of some of their decisions, or unwillingness to obey illegal orders. For better, or worse, given my age and personal wont it is who I am. However, I have too much empathy for others pain and suffering to try to purposely degrade them or hurt their feelings personally. when I have done so on this site, to non-trolls, I have immediately apologized sincerely and without equivocation, openly admitting my error. In this instance I perceive no need to do so, since the “attacks” I’ve been accused of were not of a “personal” nature.
Gregory Slater,
Despite those who would cut to the chase in the point you made, I appreciate yours because I think it has the correct flavor of the thought of those involved.
JT & Mespo,
Bogie was and remains my favorite actor. his role though in The Caine Mutiny was I think his greatest performance and the movie itself was thrilling to watch.
LK:
You probably should have stuck with your original ‘instinct’, but by all means, continue on with your in depth ‘research’
- now that you’re back online with a new computer.
FYI, our current menagerie of livestock includes the bull I see outdoors right now, in fact, that we affectionately named ‘Bullie’! :p
I know BS when I see it.
The difference is yours reeks!
LOL
Mike:
I agree that “Richard Blaine” gets all the press, but “Queeg” is the better role for this talented anti-hero. It’s my favorite too. I also like him as drifter Duke Mantee in the “Petrified Forest,” with Bette Davis and Leslie Howard.
I think Professor Turley or John as some call him asked everyone last night to play nice. No personal attacks on any ones posts other than disagreements.
I was thinking about this the other day….when did we find it okay to become purposefully rude?
I don’t mean everyone all the time, even thought it does seem that more often than not — I mean rudeness posing entertainment.
Does anyone here remember the McLauglin Group? Was that the first political show to feature otherwise normal, reasonable folks turn into screaming maniacs? Is that when it happened? Add to that the Jerry Springer phenomenon and road rage and we begin to act like too many rats crammed into a shoebox.
I’ve been posting to message boards for years, well over a decade and stopped a few years ago because I can’t stand the rudeness, the purposeful unkindness that ultimately weakens our points of view and dilutes our ideas and gives the internet the reputation of being inhabited by Muu-muu wearing, Parliament chain-smoking, escapees from The Cukoo’s Nest to paraphrase Aaron Sorkin.
I’m on travel for the rest of this week, taking a few days to hang with my old surfer friends in Malibu and then next week will be visiting other friends at Tulane. I am sure to fall way behind. I hope when I get back that the discourse is as fresh and stimulating as ever.
GWLawSchoolMom,
I was thinking about this the other day….when did we find it okay to become purposefully rude?
**********************************
(Cheating from Mespo727272)
Mame, I for one am pleased that you are here as well, I can probably say this for most everyone, it is a pleasure to read well thought out ideals.
I will again thank you for being here.
Mike,
“My sarcasm was employed just for questions such as the one you asked.” was how your posting began, whatever was in the middle was lost on me and your final sentence was the one I concentrated on. I apologize for attributing to you and replying to you over a message that similarly insults YOUR motive, posting history and oft-revealed intellectual acuity. I apologize sincerely.
As I said, I am probably hyper-sensitive to such statements based on their POTENTIAL implications. That’s a failing of mine and in fact I found the statement (as I perceived them) to be totally uncharacteristic of your postings. I am too familiar with ‘traitor’ as an epithet applied to one that dissents. Maybe I need to get over that.
I normally agree with your postings at about a 99% frequency. So much so there’s seldom anything to add to, or debate, in them so I reply to you seldom because ‘right, what Mike said.’ is kinda boring for readers. That’s likely a failure of disclosure of my attitudes or points of view on my part.
“By the same token it is also to annoying to be characterized as an “Obamaniac”…” I don’t consider you as such.
“I have now called the White House more than a dozen times to protest various Administration positions and have demanded the dismissal of Geithner and Summers.” Tell me about it
I don’t call (congressperson or the WH) anymore, I was having to buy too many ‘extra’ minutes. I just e-mail now and buy Bailey’s Irish Cream with the money I would spend on extra minutes. Bailey’s, malt powder and a good Vanilla ice cream makes the best malted milk EVER. Forget the milk and just let the ice cream soften before blending for best results. A dash of chocolate syrup guilds the lily but hey, who says no to chocolate?
Under the best circumstances I am a cynic when it comes to politicians and their motives. I expected no retreat on the concept of the Unitary Executive philosophy and little to nothing on the torture front. I have not been proved wrong after a 90 day probationary period for the President. I’m not surprised by this. I’m not so much disappointed that this Administration has not lived up to what I wanted to see done on these and similar issues regarding the ‘soul of the nation’ but I am greatly unhappy that this Administration has lived DOWN to my reflexive expectations. Would I trade Obama for McCaine? H*** NO! A Dennis Kucinich? Yes. Yes I would.
Lotta
Oooh ! a Cocktail moment!!
you wrote: I just e-mail now and buy Bailey’s Irish Cream with the money I would spend on extra minutes. Bailey’s, malt powder and a good Vanilla ice cream makes the best malted milk EVER. Forget the milk and just let the ice cream soften before blending for best results. A dash of chocolate syrup guilds the lily but hey, who says no to chocolate?
There is this marvelous restaurant with the most fabulous bar in D.C.’s Foggy Bottom neighborhood called “Founding Farmers.” As you might imagine, the food is mainly from area organic growers and everything is good, but the cocktail menu is equally fresh and exciting. They have a drink there called “Death in the Afternoon” and the bartender taught me to prepare it.
Chill a champagne flute with crushed ice. In a shaker, add a scoop of ice and then a generous jigger of Absinthe. Shake. Dump the ice from the flute and strain the chilled Absinthe into the flute. Top with champagne and garnish with a long thin strip of lemon zest.
Be careful It’s easy to get really hammered.
GWLawSchoolMom:
Oooh ! a Cocktail moment!!
——————-
I love the ‘cocktail moment’ segments on the Maddow show. They are so refreshing.
A ‘Death in the Afternoon’ cocktail sounds interesting. I have wanted to try Absinthe since I was about 12. I had read various books that had mention of it like ‘Of Human Bondage’ so at about the age of 14 I inquired of the neighborhood barkeep if he stocked it. My plan was to have one of my parents buy a bottle so I could see what the fuss was all about. Man, did I get a lecture on it’s illegal status as a poisonous drug etc. Well that plan didn’t go very far. LIL.
I’ll see if the local spirit/tobacconist shop (the vice-o-matic as it were) stocks absinthe and give it a try. Any cocktail with champagne is a winner.
“I’ve been posting to message boards for years, well over a decade and stopped a few years ago because I can’t stand the rudeness, the purposeful unkindness that ultimately weakens our points of view and dilutes our ideas and gives the internet the reputation of being inhabited by Muu-muu wearing, Parliament chain-smoking, escapees from The Cukoo’s Nest to paraphrase Aaron Sorkin.”
GWLSM,
I also have had that experience. I personally support Israel’s right to exist, though clearly neither its right wing, nor its’ recent governments. I finally left Democracy.com, because when in trying to provide historical context I talked about the Grand Mufti. Someone replied to me:
“I couldn’t care less about some “mufti,” the Israeli’s are the same as Nazi’s.”
At that point I realized that I was spinning my wheels and also stopped posting on message boards. I discovered this site perhaps a year ago and about 8 months ago I ventured to comment. This is a breath of fresh air with intelligent discussions/people representing a wide range on the political spectrum. The debate, in rare instance uncivil, represents a quality of content that one sees rarely on the net. Jonathan, our peerless leader/ringmaster not only distinguishes himself daily in the quest of constitutional justice, but presides here with a mordant humor that infects all our spirits, for the better.
While you probably aren’t as old as me, or our other resident codgers FFLEO & Mike Appleton, having a child in law
school does mean you’re of an age that remembers civility in public discourse. While then, people like Malcolm X were not always treated fairly on show like Meet The Press, they were also not subject to vituperative attacks masked as questions.
My sense is that once the MSM news was taken over by the networks entertainment departments, we have seen a steady degradation of product that has now permeated all media.
On another topic I didn’t know that Absinthe was now legal in the US. I’ve always wanted to try it from my Hippie days.
lottakatz,
Thank you for your reply. One failing I have, as my wife among others keeps telling me, is that I am over wordy in my writing. Then too, when I start to write there is much I want to say and that vies with a need to be clearly understood. As in this case sometimes my ability to get peoples attention with opening and closing sentences, loses the qualifications of the thoughts I put in between. In many instances I guess my ability to stultify people, leads them to skim through my words and that is more my fault than anyone’s error.
As I just wrote GWLSM, I too have been fascinated with Absinthe for years. My only qualm is that of late I have stopped drinking alcohol of any sort. This is not for health or addictive reasons, but the fact that I’ve found a second drink gives me severe heartburn and one drink doesn’t give me the requisite buzz. Damn though, if its’ legal I’m going to buy a bottle and take an antacid before I drink. I wonder though, per your recipe, if Bailey’s, given its lactic content, might solve my heartburn problem?
Mike Spindell,
It is always a pleasure to hear sage advise.
Lotta & Mike
In no particular order
You can get absinthe at any good liquor store. If there is something like Beverages and More where you live they have it there … several brands, in fact,usually behind the locked glass doors with the really expensive stuff. It is made from wormwood and the myth of its addictive qualities was begun and perpetuated by the wine industry who were careful to protect their interests from the growing popularity of cocktails.
Try not drinking on an empty stomach. Cocktail hour always should include some foodie stuff, but if you don’t want to go to the trouble a half piece of buttered bread should do the trick. I, personally and happily, do not suffer from acid reflux. One of my surfer friends thinks 1/2 a banana is a good preventative.
Mike, I’m staring at 60. This means I remember a time before highways, when if you wanted a Coke you put a nickel into a machine and a bottle came out and it was not diet, when we began each school day with the lord’s prayer, when there were zero african americans in our neighborhood unless they took at least 3 busses from Watts to our neighborhood to clean houses and the guys who did your landscape were Japanese and not Latino. Airplanes had propellers and you could walk out into the tarmac to greet arriving relatives but most of them took the train from “back East” when they visited.
Sometimes we get into these conversations with the uneducable or with those who simply are so in love with the opinions that they have collected like bottle caps or bits of colored string that talking to them is like talking to furniture. I’ve tried talking to people whose minds are sealed shut for years and found that it was like talking to my chair and trying to convince it to turn into a table. I don’t care how bigoted people are. Well, I do care, but I know that I don’t have that magic set of words that can overcome their bias and besides I have areas of bias myself. We all do. I do hope that something in their experience leads them to see things differently. Maybe it will come from a conversation with me or you or from having a gay child or a child who falls in love with a Jew or a latino or from someone who shows them a kindness. Maybe not.
There is a documentary film made by Alexandra Pelosi for HBO about the McCain/Palin campaign. I can’t recall the exact name….America Right: Feelng Wronged, I think…. anyway, there is this guy, this Southern White average guy who sobs because the world he was promised, one that was always supposed to favor his, uh,demographic, failed him. He was forced to attend to the results of diversity, plurality, and he felt betrayed, lost, unsure of his place in the grander scheme of things and cried for the future of the white christian male whose supremacy had been challenged and whose dominance will soon be ended. It’s kind of heart breaking, actually. And so what he has to teach his children and grandchildren is not a message of love, but one of hatred based on his disappointment and what he thinks of as a huge failed social experiment that began with voter’s rights for african americans and school integration.
anyway.
I’m on my way for a spiritual retreat of my own…. at the best little surfing beach in the world.
hang 10
kowabunga
GWLSM,
I’ve got 5 years on you, but you are in the right demographic to understand the changes of the last 50 some odd years.
Wow…if the kid even understood her answer, I would be very impressed with that 4th grader.
I did a Google and here’s the straight dope for we old hippies:
Para:
“Absinthe in its modern-day incarnation may be hallucination-free because the levels of thujone, the active ingredient derived from dried wormwood, are far lower than they were a hundred years ago.
The absinthe consumed by Van Gogh and Co. had levels of thujone of about 260 parts per million; today’s version is required by law to have no more than 10 ppm. …
From http://www.foxnews.com
By Adam Pasick.
2:00 a.m. ET (0600 GMT)
May 10, 2000 ”
I’m afraid it’s not going to make “Dark Star” sparkle as much as we oldsters might hope. Still, if you put Champagne with something (anything) stuff can still get pretty sparkly
I’ve never had a tummy problem from any booze I’ve mixed with ice cream Mike, and I tend to have tummy problems. Good malts can also be made with Franjelico, Kahula, and Amaretto.
1 heaping Tablespoon of Malt mix, 1 pint of ice cream, 1/4 cup booze and a blender + success. Tamper w/the ratio as you like. I suspect a real drinker would tamper with the ratio until there was nothing in the glass but a couple of ice cubes and the booze
Mike S
I would not normally inject myself at this point nor in such a way so as to alarm, but I would run the absinthe idea past your doc, as well as the reflux problem – just to be safe.
You can also ask about trying digestive enzymes. Don’t pop Rolaids or Tums, whatever else.
I grow artemesias for their pest-repellent properties for use in my organic companionate gardens and because the gray foliage is pretty – even at night. Tarragon, a relative, is one of my herb perennial kitchen-favorites. I adore anise flavor in food as well as in the many popular aperitifs.
I also grow fennel, though not near my tomatoes, but have never once considered making my own absinthe even though the current concoctions have greatly reduced the amount of wormwood oil added. The alcohol content in absinthe is very high and, in excess, has been linked to unusual heart rhythm disturbance in the young with no previous cardiac history.
Probably no biggie, but I would ask…
Patty C.,
Thank you for your concern. I know most physicians are loath to give advice outside of their practice, so your doing so made me feel good. In addition your advice is excellent. I’m already dealing with my Internist re: these issues. My cardiologist checked me out and says my heart, such as it is, isn’t the cause of my heartburn. There will be no doubt some GI work coming up soon, etc. Until I get clarity I’m not about to drink any alcohol, but it is nice too imagine. In truth I much preferred herbal buzzes all through my life, but at my age I’m not about to go through the effort and process of obtaining anything illegal.
In truth, retired, living in a beautiful clime and happily feeling no pressures other than the petty annoyances of life, getting buzzed is not really of the similar need for it I had when the pressures of career and child rearing consumed me. Still, maintaining the fantasy is nice. Thanks also for the info re: absinthe and heart rhythm. This is part of my cardiac conditions area of concerns. In that respect, following through with your kindness let me pass on a tip from someone who had his first MI at 37 and whose life expectancy was not great due to subsequent incidents.
Always have a loved one, preferably intelligent, attend all your medical checkups. I’ve found, perhaps it’s that I’m a guy, that my wife always hears much more than I do from the Doctor and asks the pertinent questions. As a patient, the most intelligent of us, because of the internal dialogue that arises on hearing adverse medical news, tends to tune out much of what the Doctor is trying to convey. My sharp earred and sharp witted wife has played a major role in keeping me alive this long. This in addition to the fact that she won’t let me eat my favorite food, fried duck.
Thank you for caring Patty.
Mike
lottakatz,
Thank you for the absinthe info, it doesn’t look promising, because I’m a thujone ingesting kind of guy and therein lay my attraction.
Mike,
More of us than just Patty care about your health. Just some of us aren’t medical doctors.
MikeS:
Fried duck? Does it taste like fried chicken?
and ditto what Buddha said.
Bron,
The fried duck I’m talking about is called something like “Wor Shu Opp” in most NYC chinese restaurants. I also like the ubiquitous Peking Duck. While good fried chicken, not fast food, is a taste treat, I find it easily avoidable by my own baked version, which is low in fat. However, in my mind chicken can’t compare to duck in taste. Duck unfortunately is a very fatty fowl and therefore foul for me.
Mike,
I always have to chime in when booze comes up. I prefer Ouzo to Absinthe taste wise. There is something vaguely mystic about the ceremony surrounding drinking a glass of absinthe that I could see being appealing. It strikes me as a hold-overs from when fermentation was considered magical.
While we’re on the subject of mixing booze and ice-cream I have two words: Stout float. I recommend using Left Hand’s Milk Stout if you can find it. I have friends who swear by Guinness, but that always struck me as excessive.
The latest craze is ‘Belgian Fries’ cooked in duck fat and served with several choices of clever dipping sauces…
Our Maine version can be had at a place called ‘Duck Fat’
in Portland.
I’ve managed to duck the ‘duck fries’, so far!
But, like you, Mike, I do think about it!
One’s history always catches up with them. Here I was a dissipated Hippie throughout the 60′s and 70′s, with sex, drugs and rock n’ roll my prime motivations, known for obvious reasons as either “The Old Tripper, or “Flash.” Saved in the 80′s by the love of a good woman and wonderful daughters. Now three decades later, while innocently meandering through cyberspace I’ve fallen in with a pack of tipplers, tokers and cholesterol consumers. They’re led by someone preaching freedom of thought, the end of tyranny and who yet can see the comic irony that characterizes life in these United States.
Every time I try to crawl out of this radical hole I’ve been trapped in, they draw me back in. Oh the ignominy!
Gyges: “Stout float. I recommend using Left Hand’s Milk Stout if you can find it. I have friends who swear by Guinness, but that always struck me as excessive.”
I have actually heard of a stout float but never tried one. The only time I ever drank Guinness I had to find a discrete way to abandon the glass after one drink- after I had to find a way to actually get that one drink out of my mouth and down my throat.
A stout float would certainly test the limits of my ‘ice cream pretty well makes all booze better’ theory. I’ll keep it in mind but I’ll have to be in a brave mood to try it. The great failure of my root beer floats is that If I get enough ice cream melted in them to get the texture I like the root beer taste is too diminished- the edge is gone. Stout is probably the next logical step in that taste/texture progression. I will keep it in mind. Thanks.
Lotta,
I’d recommend you stick to sweet stouts (also called cream or Milk stouts), Mackesen’s XXX is the most famous.
They were/are more interesting than the the fundi/conservative alternative, no?
Be well Mike. The bad news with a thorough GI exam is that it’s an ugly and unpleasant bit of work. The good news is they put you to sleep. Also, according to my Dr. the problem is most often and (commonly in the population) a deterioration of the esophageal and stomach lining. You can take a pill daily and watch your diet to control it and if you take the pills here’s w i d e latitude in the diet. Get the tests done, you’ll thank yourself.
The thujone attraction is definitely there. I have long believed that the aspect of the war on drugs that classifies the hypnotics and hallucinogens with the addictive has little to do with the stated health reasons or law enforcement concerns publicly stated. Some drugs have the ability to change your mind or facilitate the ability of people to change their world view IMO. Governments’ don’t want that because a lot of those changed viewpoints have little respect for or investment in what a government considers the appropriate business as usual of the citizenry.
Some drugs are downright subversive. And fun. You just can’t have people getting used to a high fun quotient. Or an elevated quotient of fun. They get all uppity about BS distractions and rules being imposed. They just stop worrying about coloring within the lines.
They realize that if curtains are expected in a room they may as well make a curtain of chandelier prisms so their living room (about all of the world anyone actually has any control over) is filled with rainbows. They understand that if the volume knob wasn’t meant to be put at the 11 o-clock position there wouldn’t be an 11 o-clock position. They put ice cream in good booze because really, how could that go wrong? They recognize that if a fatty bird tastes good because of the fat the best way to cook it is to cook it in more fat. They understand that life is short and not a dress rehearsal so when some fool says ‘grab your weapon we’re invading *fill in the blank*’ for no good reason they say ‘hell no, we won’t go.’
Subversive b******s.
Gyges,
Stout float, eh?
After a bit of consideration, I can see that working with vanilla possibly chocolate. I was looking for a new way to combine vices in an attempt to spice up my life. Doctor’s orders. I was considering parachutes and prostitutes but the insurance liability and shortage of sky-diving hookers made this impractical. Thank you for an alternative that is both affordable and within easy reach.
Do I ever have a way with words.
Subject: FW: Mathematical Logic
How to get ahead in life.
Greg
Subject: Fw: Mathematical Logic
This is a strictly mathematical viewpoint…it goes like this:
What Makes 100%? What does it mean to give MORE than 100%? Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%? We have all been to those meetings where someone wants you to give over 100%. How about achieving 103%? What makes up 100% in life?
Here’s a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:
If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M
N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26.
Then:
H-A -R -D-W-O -R -K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
and
K -N -O -W-L -E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5
= 96%
But ,
A-T -T -I -T -U -D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
And,
B -U -L -L -S -H-I -T
2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
AND, look how far ass kissing
will take you..
A-S -S -K -I -S-S -I -N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7
= 118%
So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty, that While Hard work and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there, its the Bullshit and Ass kissing that will put you over the top.
“REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM”
Buddha,
If it’s reveling in vices you want…
Ommegang’s Chocolate Indulgence, and the richest chocolate and cherry desert you can find. http://www.ommegang.com/index.php?mcat=1&scat=7&ssnl=1
You’ll want to take some friends along for the ride though.
Lest you think Condi is merely the torture tutor to timorous tots, here’s a classic lead from an article in The Calgary Sun by Bill Kaufman:
” At first glance, the press release appeared as if plagiarized from The Onion, that publication of satirical record.
“Condoleezza Rice launches School of Public Policy,” trumpeted the University of Calgary.
Should we expect Bernie Madoff christening a school of business ethics? Still fresh from passing on the ashes of her administration’s foreign policy, Rice made the now traditional pilgrimage to Calgary so well trod by her disgraced GOP brethren.”
Could any of you provide me a reference for my application??
Mike Spindell, in early May, suggested the Justice Department was arguing in court for immunity for mistreatment of detainees because it was an “ongoing justice department case that required present action.” Last month, in another Circuit Court, the Justice Department made the same argument. How long must we wait for your favorite administration to “change the direction of [the] bureaucracy”? Or how long will it take for you to open your eyes?