Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I don't know what she did to change things, and neither do you.

one difference between us, I'm willing to bet on what she did, and you aren't.

of course now that this is public well have the chance for her to show what she did.

I just don't get how you can be so forgiving Ty, people are having their rights taken away by being tortured, how can she ignore that?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
one difference between us, I'm willing to bet on what she did, and you aren't.

You're not betting, you're making shit up and pretending that you know it.

I don't particularly want to defend Pelosi, but I think you've got an indictment without any evidence.

If Democrats in Congress did what you said, it doesn't mean that they're hypocrites. It means that they're particularly ineffective. Which wouldn't surprise me none, alas. You're after Pelosi, but it wouldn't take much to persuade me that Jay Rockefeller is a feckless disaster.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You're not betting, you're making shit up and pretending that you know it.

I don't particularly want to defend Pelosi, but I think you've got an indictment without any evidence.

If Democrats in Congress did what you said, it doesn't mean that they're hypocrites. It means that they're particularly ineffective. Which wouldn't surprise me none, alas. You're after Pelosi, but it wouldn't take much to persuade me that Jay Rockefeller is a feckless disaster.

beg pardon, and i appreciate your admission they did fuck all in 2, but if you want off you have to admit what they've done in the last year or so is complete grandstanding. you admit that and I'll take just a half win per dem congreesmen on the relevant committees.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you have to admit what they've done in the last year or so is complete grandstanding.

Blaming the Democrats on the Hill for getting nothing done while ignoring all of the Republican filibusters -- they're breaking all sorts of records -- and the White House's vetos and veto threats is kind of like blaming the Brits for not getting a breakthrough at Ypres. It's muddy and ugly and a stalemate, and that's the nature of the conflict. If a simple majority was all it took, you'd have seen more done.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Blaming the Democrats on the Hill for getting nothing done while ignoring all of the Republican filibusters -- they're breaking all sorts of records -- and the White House's vetos and veto threats is kind of like blaming the Brits for not getting a breakthrough at Ypres. It's muddy and ugly and a stalemate, and that's the nature of the conflict. If a simple majority was all it took, you'd have seen more done.

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, and that's my fault. Do you admit that when they had hearings about how bad torture is, it was complete horseshit?

would you agree that congressmen be guilty of trason when they fuck with the country and it turns out it is only for some limited political gain?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
would you agree that congressmen be guilty of trason when they fuck with the country and it turns out it is only for some limited political gain?

Ask this man.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, and that's my fault. Do you admit that when they had hearings about how bad torture is, it was complete horseshit?

No, and I think this is pretty stupid, even by your standards.

would you agree that congressmen be guilty of trason when they fuck with the country and it turns out it is only for some limited political gain?

Just Congressmen?

You were never upset with Scooter Libby and Karl Rove, and they actually leaked stuff. Here you're feigning outrage that Nancy Pelosi didn't leak stuff.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
No, and I think this is pretty stupid, even by your standards.

Why? that is what the WSJ said too. why is it stupid?

Here you're feigning outrage that Nancy Pelosi didn't leak stuff.

No, and I think this is pretty stupid, even by your standards.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
No, and I think this is pretty stupid, even by your standards.

Just Congressmen?

You were never upset with Scooter Libby and Karl Rove, and they actually leaked stuff. Here you're feigning outrage that Nancy Pelosi didn't leak stuff.

Actually, TY, being centrist on these matters and not thinking that there is anything wrong with Pelosi being a hypocrite for political gain considering the dirty tricks nature of politics right now, I would have to agree that if she did know about waterboarding but didn't do anything about it until she was able to use it for political grandstanding, she is a hypocrite. And a pretty low one. But like I said, they all are, and for the WSJ or the GOP to point the finger at her and "tsk tsk" might be even bigger hypocrisy.

You seem to be taking the position that Pelosi had no options but to leak the waterboarding. I know you're doing that to trap Hank from a debate standpoint, but we both know she had many more options to address the issue other than an illegal leak.

If she did what Hank accuses her of doing I say "So what?" This debate has always been a very obvious political game engineered by the Democrats. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I understand your wanting to believe the Democrats are above that, but come on, dude. They're no better or worse than the GOP (well, recently I'd have to say the GOP has been worse, but that will balance in the future). This is what these people do, and the sooner we admit that to ourselves, the sooner we have sensible debates about this stuff, and, as you described yeaterday, might "take this board seriously."

You realize no one in this country outside the Beltway, Berkeley and blogosphere care about this issue, don't you? That tells you a little bit about the generally perceived credibility of the "controversy."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Actually, TY, being centrist on these matters and not thinking that there is anything wrong with Pelosi being a hypocrite for political gain considering the dirty tricks nature of politics right now, I would have to agree that if she did know about waterboarding but didn't do anything about it until she was able to use it for political grandstanding, she is a hypocrite. And a pretty low one. But like I said, they all are, and for the WSJ or the GOP to point the finger at her and "tsk tsk" might be even bigger hypocrisy.

You seem to be taking the position that Pelosi had no options but to leak the waterboarding. I know you're doing that to trap Hank from a debate standpoint, but we both know she had many more options to address the issue other than an illegal leak.

he almost got me too. is it just slave, club and me that really care about the substnative issues?

If she did what Hank accuses her of doing I say "So what?" This debate has always been a very obvious political game engineered by the Democrats. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I understand you're wanting to believe the Democrats are above that, but come on, dude. They're no better or worse than the GOP (well, recently I'd have to say the GOP has been worse, but that will balance in the future). This is what these people do, and the sooner we admit that to ourselves, the sooner we have sensible debates about this stuff, and, as you described yeaterday, might "take this board seriously."

You realize no one in this country outside the Beltway, Berkeley and blogosphere care about this issue, don't you?

the problem is the moral outrage that torture carries for those guys. now I'm wondering it maybe it isn't just a bit, a tiney tiny little bit, contrived.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Why? that is what the WSJ said too. why is it stupid?

No, and I think this is pretty stupid, even by your standards.

I wouldn't take the WSJ's reporting as much more than opinion these days. And just wait until next week, when Rupert has control of it.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
beg pardon, and i appreciate your admission they did fuck all in 2, but if you want off you have to admit what they've done in the last year or so is complete grandstanding. you admit that and I'll take just a half win per dem congreesmen on the relevant committees.

I'm not following this story (and I'm willing to believe that just about any politician -- D or R -- is grandstanding at any given point in time), but how does the secret letter Jane Harman sent to the CIA when she was in the so-called Gang of 4 (objecting to the interrogation techniques that she was briefed on) fit into your theory?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801664_pf.html

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
he almost got me too. is it just slave, club and me that really care about the substnative issues?

the problem is the moral outrage that torture carries for those guys. now I'm wondering it maybe it isn't just a bit, a tiney tiny little bit, contrived.

No, I think to his credit, Ty views torture as a real substantive issue, which it is. Politically, however, it is being used for leverage, which robs it of any credibility in the national discourse. I think his moral outrage is real. I just don't think the politicians using the issue for gain have any real moral outrage.

He has a point. Torture is something we ought to debate, for obvious reasons. the problem is, as you've cited, the people bringing that debate are not serious about it and everyone knows it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Not Bob
I'm not following this story (and I'm willing to believe that just about any politician -- D or R -- is grandstanding at any given point in time), but how does the secret letter Jane Harman sent to the CIA when she was in the so-called Gang of 4 (objecting to the interrogation techniques that she was briefed on) fit into your theory?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801664_pf.html

Why didn't Pelosi send it? And why only one?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Actually, TY, being centrist on these matters and not thinking that there is anything wrong with Pelosi being a hypocrite for political gain considering the dirty tricks nature of politics right now, I would have to agree that if she did know about waterboarding but didn't do anything about it until she was able to use it for political grandstanding, she is a hypocrite.

Since I don't think the Democrats are doing enough on torture, out of fear of being painted as weak on terrorists, I'm not seeing the grandstanding here. The basic problem is not that Democrats don't think torture is wrong but are pretending that it is for political gain. It's that they think torture is wrong but are not doing enough to stop it for fear of political losses.