From what I heard on NPR, DoJ will punt. There will be no prosecutions, they're passing the responsibility to deal with this to the ABA and state bar associations. The most anyone has to worry about is disbarment - any bets on that ever happening?

One of the final steps is to allow the probe's targets to comment on the findings - an almost unheard of thing.

What percentage would approve of these techniques being used on a terrorist....

...if their child was kidnapped and it was possible to obtain information leading to the resuce of that child?

And what has that got to do with anything? Or are you advocating the use of torture in criminal investigations here in the US as well?

The fun thing about your scenario is that you can never "know" in advance if you've chosen the right victim for the rack, but torture them long enough, they'll tell you just what you want to hear, regardless.

That the Republicans in Congress really believe that government-run, single payer healthcare is evil, inefficient, nasty, and kills little puppies when they walk away from theirs. Not something I see happening anytime soon.

My family and I had some of the best healthcare we've ever received when I was in the USAF. It was, of course, government-run and single-payer. Currently, I get to buy my own health insurance, it's not provided by my employer. It runs about $600/month just for me. It's OK, I can afford it, but I know that a hell of a lot of other people can't. But I'd much prefer to pay that $600 to the Feds to help them expand Medicare to everyone.

Given the figures that I've seen, about 30%, or $180/month goes to administrative overhead. I think that the difference between the 3-5% administrative that the government takes and the 30% that the private insurance seems to require (somebody has to pay the people that tell me "no"), would help buy a fair amount of coverage for someone who can't afford it. Or, it can go to help my insurance company's CEO a bigger boat. I know which one I'd prefer.

"I'm sure Obama meant a subtle point when he talked about empathy ..."

I'm sure that you're quite correct. I'm also sure that Obama could have said that he was looking for a strict constructionist member of the radical right (sorry, nothing conservative about them) in the mold of Scalia and the Republicans would still be unhappy.

I believe that the memo went out this morning and the GOP is deliberately misconstruing the word. Steele is about the ninety-leventh Republican talking head I've heard today going on about "empathy" - all singing from the same page of the hymnal.

All I read into "empathy" is that Obama is looking for someone who realizes that ultimately SCOTUS decisions do affect real people and that the intent of a law shouldn't be sacrificed to its letter.

For the record, all of this isn't to say that Steele wasn't right -- he was.

And the base will never forgive him for being right in public.

Of course - she's read all of them, dontcha know.

Moreover, I fear the publication of these photos may only have a chilling effect on future investigations of detainee abuse.

It's pretty obvious that any "future investigations" will be in spite of Obama's efforts rather than because of them. So I wonder just what in the hell is he talking about?

Empathy sides with the little guy, not with big corporations. Conservatives like big corporations.

I'm going to have to quibble with this. I don't think that empathy necessarily means siding with the little guy, or anybody for that matter - that would be "sympathy". But it certainly means understanding where the little guy is coming from and that, as Martha would say, is a good thing. And while a big part of me cringes to say it - the big guy has the same right to empathy as the little guy. But certainly no more of a right, which is what the "conservatives" would like. I use "conservative" because you did, to my mind, the Republicans have passed through conservative and have become full-fledged reactionaries.

Can't argue for an instant with the second sentence, though. It's spot-on.

In all, 57 percent of respondents said Cheney has hurt the GOP, while 33 percent said he's helped it.

I guess they'd be that 33%. Eventually, the GOP will be three bitter old men meeting in Rush Limbaugh's garage. But man, will they be pure.

... when you're going around in circles.

Are you sure that we haven't already reached that point?

They* have already established that the can all we're waiting for is for them to want to do it and it will happen. The lack of accountability to the law has been established and now we're at their mercy.

It can even happen at 1st & Pike.

* - we all know who "they" are, but it seems to be a different "they" for each of us.

I'd like to add an amendment to that Bill, making Republican marriage illegal in DC and denying recognition of those performed elsewhere. After all, it is a destructive lifestyle choice that weakens the nation's core values.

As a non-combat veteran I have a lot of respect for anybody who actually gets in harm's way, something that I never had to do. That doesn't mean that they're all-knowing, but I do respect them for what they had to do. But this man has serious cojones and a whole lot of class (so does the photog, who didn't have to be anywhere within miles of the place).

Q - what kind of underwear does a real man wear?

A - Whatever kind he likes.

The nominee has serious problems.

The most serious being that she was nominated by Obama.

Given the choice between having the GOP as an oppressed minority or an oppressing majority, I vote for oppressed minority.