Statutes for Dummies
 

Maybe he told her to go back and actually read the words of Geneva Convention, and not the NYT cliff notes.

Idiots on parade
 

I am surprised that you, of all people, are -- like Bush -- pretending that we don't "actually" torture people. I would have thought that you'd be proud of it, instead of pretending we aren't doing it.

Statutes for Dummies
 

Do you think Bush has ever bothered to read the Geneva Convention? Do you think he cares what it says?

Idiots on parade
 

Oh yes. The "belly slap" and the waterboard.

The horror. The. Horror.

Idiots on parade
 

There we go -- that's the Slave we know and love. Stop pretending that we don't torture people, and stand up for the sort of brutality you want to see.

Idiots on parade
 

If said this before. I'll say it again now. I'll probably need to say it again in the future.


You'd have a lot more support both on this Board and in the public as a whole for a universal ban of "torture" when and if the left would stop being a bunch of naifs, sissies and/or weasels and stop branding things that are clearly not torture as "Torture".

What's the matter with Georgia?
 

Absolutely, especially w/r/t the death penalty.

Idiots on parade
 

What does constitute torture, in your eyes? Need it result in death? Is loss of a limb sufficient? Removal of fingernails (via pliers, etc.)? Induced hypothermia?

Where's the line and does it move depending on the subject?

Idiots on parade
 

If the Khmer Rouge did it, how bad could it be?

Idiots on parade
 

They were ostensibly Communist, so the Left didn't really care.

Idiots on parade
 

How quickly you pass from defending torture to what interests you even more, attacking the left.

Idiots on parade
 

Since the left sees fit to proclaim over and over again that anything less than 3 meals a day - perhaps a Taco Bell fourthmeal on weekends? - and a stay at Camp Cupcake is "torture", why shouldn't they be attacked?

Waterboard the Democrats
 

Boy, you talk about the left being soft little sissy girls and look at you! Tell it to them straight you soft-bellied little reptile - those unAmerican Yankees deserve nothing less than a good waterboarding, and if they want to call that torture, well, then I say we really give them some real, old fashioned Southern style "hospitality" and see what they say.

These no-good do-gooders remind me of that Lincoln fellow and his complaints about good Southern Gentlemen.

Idiots on parade
 

If you had a good defense for torture, you wouldn't stoop to this crap.

good news
 

• ATLANTA — A man convicted of killing a police officer won a reprieve a day before his scheduled execution, after his lawyers argued that several witnesses had recanted or changed their testimony.
  
  The state Board of Pardons and Paroles on Monday granted a stay of execution of up to 90 days to Troy Davis, 38, who was convicted of killing a Savannah police officer in 1989.
  
  He had faced a Tuesday execution date before the board's decision, which came after less than an hour of deliberation. The stay means the execution will be on hold while the board weighs the evidence presented as part of Davis' request for clemency. The board must rule by Oct. 14.

linko

good news
 

Does this work out any better for him than commutation to a __-to-life sentence? Doesn't seem likely. And once he's off death row, does anyone spend the time and money to try to get him released?

good news
 

He gets a chance to show them his evidence. If they're convinced, I assume he can be pardoned. If not, I assume he gets another date with the executioner.

good news
 

I always had the cynical thought that in these cases where there's some evidence of innocence (or procedural error), the governor or whoever should commute the death sentence to life in prison. At that point, all the amnesty int'l types and the press become bored and the guy stays in the hole for the rest of his life.

good news
 

Sure, he can be pardoned, but he's a convicted cop killer--never a favorable position. Maybe the Board thinks that there is enough doubt to commute the sentence, but not overturn the conviction--that's essentially what happened to most of the Illinois death row inmates who had their sentences commuted by ex-Gov. George Ryan. Now they have life sentences in gen. pop.

From what I know about Troy Davis (just a little), I hope that his pro bono counsel (from Arnold & Porter) sticks with the case if his sentence is commuted, but if he doesn't, it wouldn't be the first time that a case gets dropped once the convict is off death row.

I crack me up
 

President Bush likes to second-guess judges' decisions - maybe he should do so in this case, where there is actually some evidence to support doing so.

I crack me up
 

Bush didn't second guess a judge's decision. Walton sentenced Libby to the lower end of the Guidelines range.

What Bush second-guessed was legislation passed by Congress and implemented by the sentencing commission, and advocated strenuously by his own AG.

good news
 

In Illinois, I thought Ryan's problems went to the entire scheme involving their prosecution, defense, trial and conviction. Here, the questions are pretty specific to the evidence (or lack thereof) of his guilt -- most crucially, that the witnesses against him have all recanted.

good news
 

Absolutely, different underlynig facts. There's little comparison as to the basis for commutation. I was, perhaps inartfully, comparing the potential outcome for Troy Davis to the outcome for the beneficiaries of Ryan's mass commutation.

Burger's point about cynical commutation has been raised once or twice in reference to the Illinois guys (numbering 156), who now will not benefit from the attention or more substantial review afforded to death row inmates. They're just regular old lifers now (all but 3 were commuted to life w/o parole; the other 3 are 40 to life)--no one much cares about them.

Republican socks and trolls -- here's your business opportunity!
 

http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/9...tatrollmu5.jpg

more

etft

Republican socks and trolls -- here's your business opportunity!
 

Gee - aren't you the one always claiming that you don't read Kos?

Republican socks and trolls -- here's your business opportunity!
 

If someone else links to a page there, I'll go check it out.

Odd
 

Bill Kristol in the WaPo:

• What it comes down to is this: If Petraeus succeeds in Iraq, and a Republican wins in 2008, Bush will be viewed as a successful president.
  
  I like the odds.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...d=opinionsbox1


What odds is he giving? I'd like some of that action.

Odd
 

I like Kristol. He strikes me as an honest straight shooter who is sincere for someone in Washington - however, he is almost always wrong.

Odd
 

Bullshit. He's a neocon shitbag in the same bukkake circle with Wolfowitz and Perle. His father's loony policies, which he pushed in the Iraq run-up, are the bible for the pre-emptive war shuckers.

Fuck Bill Kristol. If I believed in hell I'd wish him eternity treading water in a public toilet.

good news
 

Like. A. Stone.

Idiots on parade
 

I'll back you up on this when you develop an even-handed view and stop beating this torture story to death. Yeh, we know, Ty - the US is torturing people.

Here's a tip - It isn't a central issue in the debate over anything we're doing in the world. It's small issue liberals have glommed onto so they can give themselves a moral pedestal. It's a lot like the dumbass liberals who immediately after 9/11 started crying loudest about how we had to be careful not to become prejudiced toward foreigners.

No. Shit. Those points are implied and obvious. I don't like the torture we're using, but I'm not losing sleep over it. Nor am I cynically using it to give me platform moral gravitas the way so many liberals have.

It's a secondary issue. When you treat it with the limited attention it deserves and stop milking it, I'm sure Slave will play nice.

A bright, shining city on a hill.
 

Ah, but that's where you are wrong, cynical sebby with the cash register heart. We are different, and even if we haven't always lived up to the promises of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we've always tried to. Or we at least had the decency to pretend to.

A bright, shining city on a hill.
 

You're killing me, you know that... I'd say you found a weak spot, but I've what - 15, 16 Achilles Heels? I have some principles, goddammit.

You're right that we do need to follow those documents, and I won't parse them to suggest some verbiage allows what we're doing, even if it did (I also won't parse them because Ty will, and I'm lazy). I think that's a lousy argument. I think the spirit of those documents, read in total, supported a lot of things we find inhuman these days (how many of the authors kept slaves?) and don't find very persuasive the suggestion they ban outright the waterboarding of an enemy combatant who aims to kill American civilians. Or waterboarding a suspect we have decent reason to believe might be involved in such acts. There's no way I can buy into that notion, and any plain language you could offer from a founder suggesting the proper way to handle enemy combatants would be woefully outdated and dealing with a style of war seen as comical since the mid-19th century.

I think the torture thing is the spot where considerations of law crumble in the face of the need to survive and succeed against an enemy. It's not right, but neither is any killing for benefit of your country over someone else. If we're going to kill a lot of people to protect ourselves, we might as well do it full bore and be over with it.

BUT, I am with you on feeling troubled that some of Bush's attitude toward foreign combatants' rights could trickle into domestic policy. So far, however, based in the John Walker Lind case, it seems the proper safeguards are working. If he's only doing 20 yrs, we're still protecting our own liberties sufficiently.

A bright, shining city on a hill.
 

Who are "we"?

The "we" that allow former Klansmen to be named "the heart and soul of the party"?

the "we" that elect a crazy Nation of Islam fanatic to publicly align himself with the 9/11 "Truthers" and compare the WTC bombing to the Reichstag?

The "we" that would fight tooth and nail (Bush, watch your base disappear) for amnesty - for illegals crawling over the wall?

The "we" that usurped the power of the Senate "filibuster", and now whines and complains that the GOP is using this means as a supermajority?

That "we" cannot control the media, so as much as we try to smile a Katie or another simp, or put a Franken on the airwaves, no one really cares to watch/listen to us.

---

I think I speak for most of "my" people here - pick a fiscally conservative, un-PC and militant (re foreign policy) candidate for the DNC 2008 election, and I honestly think you might get Sebby's, Club's, Less's, Bilmore's, Hank's, Temp Sock's, Penske's, Spanky's and MY vote.

You know that none of us stand by the religious wing of our party.

[And honestly, I might start debating GGG again on how his wannabe liberal faith jibes with his strict Catholism, since Atticus left and stopped busting balls]

So - here's the rub.

Where do you really want to go? A strong centrist leader like Rudy, or some leftist, defeatist simp like Hillary or Obama?

PS- People in NY should consider this equation even stronger.

Fillibuster?
 

I'm actually watching this nonsense (and getting yelled out to go to bed by Darcy- loudly)

Anyway, here are my thoughts:

1) Cantwell (D) is far more of a conservative on foreign policy than the woman who immediately followed her Snowe (Rino), who is not only a disgrace to the GOP, but to the Senate as a whole. Her speech bordered on the odious.

2) I've always hated McCain (R) as an ostensible party leader, but as a Senator on international policy, he is a gem. And on that platform, he drops the "persona" and goes for it. And I love that.

3) After Jim Sessions (R) virulent speeches against the Shamesty law, and after his speech tonight (pro US, wary Iraqi gov't) I'm ready to cut a check.* Why can't one of our "populist" GOP leaders [see Rudy, Mitt, Fred] speak this plainly on F and D policy?

*Ty or GGG sock - Please send me a link why he's a southern racist, crook, thief, etc.?

Well, they can use the beat-up car to run over some minks
 

Why the radical environmental movement will never be take seriously:

Hummer vandalized

A bright, shining city on a hill.
 

Bitch, bitch, bitch.

I think he's talking about the "we" who have tired of this war, with all the attendant double talk and all the little tragedies that litter not just the front page each day, but almost every page of those first two sections. As well as the "we" who never bought into the war to begin with.

As for the remaining handful (you, Penske, Hank and whatever socks you can muster) who just like to complain about straw men, whether by the name of McGovern, Kennedy or Dean, and bitch and whine endlessly, who knows what "they" really think. But you hope they're not too far from Sebby's position.

Well, they can use the beat-up car to run over some minks
 

He ought to use the insurance money to make a down payment on a real truck.

Fucking munghead... Nobody who's ever owned a real truck would buy one of those overpriced pieces of shit.

As a person who's driven trucks his whole life, there is nothing I find more embarrassing than a Hummer H2. It's like wearing a great big "Tool" sign around your neck.

ETA: I was with a buddy this weekend who just bought a Lexus GS 450 hybrid. We got a little screwed up and took it for a jaunt through the woods. Amazing car. About a mile into the ride I said "Hey, I didn't know you were an environmental guy." He looked at me and said "What? I bought it because it's really fucking fast. The kick when the electric motor gives way to the gas engine is huge, and it's hell on the highway." There are good people in this country who still do things for all the right reasons... I wanted to hug him for a second.

Idiots on parade
 

It really offends me.

Fillibuster?
 

Maybe if she said "come to bed" rather than "go to bed"? It would save us all a lot of grief.