Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

double-post -- sorry

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
P.S. Sen. Graham's questions are for political purposes, of course....

What do you mean when you say this? Does Lindsey Graham have to worry that he's going to face a serious challenge, ever? Does he think the way to please South Carolina voters is to take this position? Neither of those notions seem plausible to me. He's taking that position because he served in the armed forces and he thinks that what the Administration is doing is bad for the armed forces.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
You're not making any sense. Either the Democrats see political gains in exploiting the torture issue or they don't. Either they really care or they don't. You and I see different realities on both points.

OK, here you go - Dems (like Pelosi, that don't care) think they can manipulate people that do by exploiting the issue for political gain.

Saying a platitude like "I am against torture" is a hollow statement. Other than psychopaths, who isn't? The statement is comparable to saying "I like a sunny day"

The difference is in the fine points.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Nothing I've seen suggests that the "they" included Democrats. Have you seen anything to the contrary?

No. To be clear, a bipartisan group was given a demonstation. No one complained. 2 basically asked "is there more?" But the party affiliation of the reacting parties has not been disclosed.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Where are you seeing this?

Everything I've read to date suggests exactly the opposite - that they wanted to see more excessive techniques.

In the article I linked to in my original post (and elsewhere): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801664_pf.html

• Harman, who replaced Pelosi as the committee's top Democrat in January 2003, disclosed Friday that she filed a classified letter to the CIA in February of that year as an official protest about the interrogation program. Harman said she had been prevented from publicly discussing the letter or the CIA's program because of strict rules of secrecy.
  
  "When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath -- one of secrecy," she said. "I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
OK, here you go - Dems (like Pelosi, that don't care) think they can manipulate people that do by exploiting the issue for political gain.

Saying a platitude like "I am against torture" is a hollow statement. Other than psychopaths, who isn't? The statement is comparable to saying "I like a sunny day"

The difference is in the fine points.

If you think that, on the whole, Democrats are exploiting the issue, I think you're crazy. They're in a defensive crouch, afraid to push too hard on it for fear that another terrorist attack will happen and Republicans will accuse them of not having the stones to do what it takes to protect the country. Obviously, there are exceptions. Also, the word "exploiting" suggests that you think they're really pro-torture. (Pro-waterboarding, if you prefer.) It's hard for me to believe that anyone really thinks this.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
No one complained.

That is incorrect, as Not Bob pointed out.

eta: stp

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you think that, on the whole, Democrats are exploiting the issue, I think you're crazy. They're in a defensive crouch, afraid to push too hard on it for fear that another terrorist attack will happen and Republicans will accuse them of not having the stones to do what it takes to protect the country. Obviously, there are exceptions. Also, the word "exploiting" suggests that you think they're really pro-torture. (Pro-waterboarding, if you prefer.) It's hard for me to believe that anyone really thinks this.

Your first point is reasonable here. You have cited a difference in perceptions between you and Slave.

It's the second point where you veer into "lawyer" territory, again trying to repackage someone's point to create a strawman position you can easily knock down to look like you've "won" the point. For the record, no one could ever read what he wrote as a suggestion the Dems are pro-torture.


ETA: You've seen "Outfoxed," haven't you?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Your first point is reasonable here. You have cited a difference in perceptions between you and Slave.

It's the second point where you veer into "lawyer" territory, again trying to repackage someone's point to create a strawman position you can easily knock down to look like you've "won" the point. For the record, no one could ever read what he wrote as a suggestion the Dems are pro-torture.


ETA: You've seen "Outfoxed," haven't you?

Haven't seen "Outfoxed." Maybe the word "exploit" means something different to each of us. I took Hank and Slave -- especially Hank -- to be saying that Pelosi (e.g.) doesn't have a problem with waterboarding but is pretending in public that she, for political advantage.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Haven't seen "Outfoxed." Maybe the word "exploit" means something different to each of us. I took Hank and Slave -- especially Hank -- to be saying that Pelosi (e.g.) doesn't have a problem with waterboarding but is pretending in public that she, for political advantage.

I don't agree with either of you. I think she's against it, but doesn't really care all that much and is pretending to care a lot more than she does for political advantage. That's the fine point being made here about the Democrats.

I don't think "exploit" has a widely varying definition. I think its clear the word means "using something in an opportunistic fashion." I see the the issue as the degree to which something is being used in that fashion.

If it's your position that Pelosi is not exploiting the torture issue to any degree, I couldn't disagree more.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I don't agree with either of you. I think she's against it, but doesn't really care all that much and is pretending to care a lot more than she does for political advantage. That's the fine point being made here about the Democrats.

I don't think "exploit" has a widely varying definition. I think its clear the word means "using something in an opportunistic fashion." I see the the issue as the degree to which something is being used in that fashion.

If it's your position that Pelosi is not exploiting the torture issue to any degree, I couldn't disagree more.

I think she, and most people who have some idea of what waterboarding is about, are disgusted by it, and are raising the issue not for political advantage, though some may be incidental, but because they are disgusted by it. I would not call that exploitation. It's possible that Pelosi in particular is not disgusted -- I don't know her that well and am not her biggest fan -- but Hank's proof that she's a hypocrite strikes me as beyond thin, and more in the way of a routine effort by the WSJ editorial to soften up a favorite punching bag. I will not pretend that Dems are universally principled, but on this issue I believe most are acting out of good faith.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Where are you seeing this?

Everything I've read to date suggests exactly the opposite - that they wanted to see more excessive techniques.

Not bob, are you sure that wasn;t the objection in the letter?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Bob
In the article I linked to in my original post (and elsewhere): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...801664_pf.html

• Harman, who replaced Pelosi as the committee's top Democrat in January 2003, disclosed Friday that she filed a classified letter to the CIA in February of that year as an official protest about the interrogation program. Harman said she had been prevented from publicly discussing the letter or the CIA's program because of strict rules of secrecy.
  
  "When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath -- one of secrecy," she said. "I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything."

not bob, you have more gravitas than to make this argument, that's right, gravitas.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Hank, do you think waterboarding is torture?

me personally? doesn't matter. i trust my governement. the executive branch proposed using it, and my elected congress had no objection, so I'm okay with it.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I keep thinking that someone shot Barak Obama when I read headlines like "Mother of Omaha mall shooter apologizes".

Howard Stern said "Osama" the other day referring to him, not on purpose. bad luck name.