Bush Torture Memo Slapped Down by Court

[Heracles 417]

I see we are going to go down this path again. I am not interested in what the rules or laws say.

It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them. On a smaller scale, the same thing happens in America where the criminals and organized crime have about 1001 amendments, laws, rights protecting their criminal acts. All while the police have a mountain of rules to follow.

Edited November 3, 2008 by Aficionado

[HAL 9000 96]

I see we are going to go down this path again. I am not interested in what the rules or laws say.

It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them. On a smaller scale, the same thing happens in America where the criminals, organized crime, have about 1001 amendments, laws, rights protecting their criminal acts. All while the police have a mountain of rules to follow.

Yes it looks like the path of lawfulness is a hard one to fathom at times. It also looks like the path of not distinguishing what the laws cover and what their targets are as well is one we may be visiting here again.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

I see we are going to go down this path again. I am not interested in what the rules or laws say.

It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them.

And he is one of the first that complain about "illegal" immigration, yours truly is seeing double standards right now. Based on your own reasoning, i agree with you this time. "It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them", this is based on the NAFTA agreement that has enriched just a few on both sides of the border, taken advantage of cheap labor and hurt the american work force all together.

Mighty HAL, do you reckon?

Edited November 3, 2008 by GueraYTavo

[HAL 9000 96]

[IAMX 3,055]

I see we are going to go down this path again. I am not interested in what the rules or laws say.

It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them. On a smaller scale, the same thing happens in America where the criminals and organized crime have about 1001 amendments, laws, rights protecting their criminal acts. All while the police have a mountain of rules to follow.

If you want chaos or anarchy away from the rule of law, may I suggest another country.

We have laws and rules for a reason, and these give us credibility and oversight. If you don't like this and think we should just do whatever the hell we want, and disregard law, this country isn't for you.

I see we are going to go down this path again. I am not interested in what the rules or laws say.

It is ridiculous to expect one side to play by the rules while the other has absolutely no regard for them.

And he is one of the first that complain about "illegal" immigration, yours truly is seeing double standards right now.

Isn't that ironic?

Only follow the laws you like. Sounds mighty religious.

Edited November 4, 2008 by SRVT

[joelunchbox 0]

For an administration that is largely seen as being pro military--I am flumuxed by how everything they have done, has been done without regard to the military! You want to know about torture? Ask the Miitary!!! They already have it written down for heaven's sake!!

This administration is an embarrassment and will go down as the worst in our history. Gen Grant can sleep soundly.

[NickD 203]

I don't care how close it is to January. Impeach the mother ######, and jail the people who engage in this.

The problem with impeachment is that it results in President Cheney.

Filing charges after Jan 20 has no such downside, though. And a presidential pardon would perhaps be less likely, regardless of who wins tomorrow (can you see McCain pardoning someone for a policy of ordering torture?).

If McCain does win, hard to see where he would pardon George after this, written by Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager,

"Having run Senator John McCain's campaign for president, I can recount a textbook example of a smear made against McCain in South Carolina during the 2000 presidential primary. We had just swept into the state from New Hampshire, where we had racked up a shocking, 19-point win over the heavily favored George W. Bush. What followed was a primary campaign that would make history for its negativity.

In South Carolina, Bush Republicans were facing an opponent who was popular for his straight talk and Vietnam war record. They knew that if McCain won in South Carolina, he would likely win the nomination. With few substantive differences between Bush and McCain, the campaign was bound to turn personal. The situation was ripe for a smear.

It didn't take much research to turn up a seemingly innocuous fact about the McCains: John and his wife, Cindy, have an adopted daughter named Bridget. Cindy found Bridget at Mother Theresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, brought her to the United States for medical treatment, and the family ultimately adopted her. Bridget has dark skin.

Anonymous opponents used "push polling" to suggest that McCain's Bangladeshi born daughter was his own, illegitimate black child. In push polling, a voter gets a call, ostensibly from a polling company, asking which candidate the voter supports. In this case, if the "pollster" determined that the person was a McCain supporter, he made statements designed to create doubt about the senator.

Thus, the "pollsters" asked McCain supporters if they would be more or less likely to vote for McCain if they knew he had fathered an illegitimate child who was black. In the conservative, race-conscious South, that's not a minor charge. We had no idea who made the phone calls, who paid for them, or how many calls were made. Effective and anonymous: the perfect smear campaign.

Some aspects of this smear were hardly so subtle. Bob Jones University professor Richard Hand sent an e-mail to "fellow South Carolinians" stating that McCain had "chosen to sire children without marriage." It didn't take long for mainstream media to carry the charge. CNN interviewed Hand and put him on the spot: "Professor, you say that this man had children out of wedlock. He did not have children out of wedlock." Hand replied, "Wait a minute, that's a universal negative. Can you prove that there aren't any?"

Campaigns have various ways of dealing with smears. They can refute the lies, or they can ignore them and run the risk of the smear spreading. But "if you're responding, you're losing." Rebutting tawdry attacks focuses public attention on them, and prevents the campaign from talking issues.

We chose to address the attacks by trying to get the media to focus on the dishonesty of the allegations and to find out who was making them. We also pledged to raise the level of debate by refusing to run any further negative ads -- a promise we kept, though it probably cost us the race. We never did find out who perpetrated these smears, but they worked: We lost South Carolina by a wide margin."

From:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/presid...smear_campaign/

This last two weeks, have been overburdened with smear tactics by the republican party with brochures and those annoying prerecorded phone messages, would feel, John wouldn't stoop this low himself. But how can I vote for a guy that permits lies to be told for the presidency of the United States? Sure worked with my wife's co-workers, they are buying that Obama is an illegal immigrant.

Certainly would be a different world today if McCain was elected in 2000, not really much competition from the likes of Gore and Kerry, now we have one heck of a mess. Would be wonderful if George W. Bush is brought to justice, not only for torture, but for 750 other questions where he is alleged to break the laws of the US Constitution. We need leaders that can be trusted.