wrote:

I disagree that torture can never be justified.

I think there are instances where it can be justified, just as we justify the drone attacks.

But we have signed an agreement stating that we will not, requiring the prosecution of those who have.

So you are advocating criminal acts. But even if they were not criminal acts, when you advocate them, you make yourself less than human.

wrote:

After having a pretty good look at Obama's behavior and his appointments at DOJ and this disastrous "economic team," I think there is now reason to be very concerned, if not outright alarmed, that even this baseline expectation of Obama is unfounded.

That occurred to me this morning, too. Maybe it is time to encourage people to start thinking about Supreme Court nominees in general, and a few good people in particular.

If an administration as popular as pond scum on the menu of your favorite French bistro can get away with it, then Obama can do anything he wants on this issue unless he is severely and relentlessly attacked every day in a manner that attracts MSM coverage. Sorry, that is the way it works.

Mike Sulzer

If an administration as popular as pond scum on the menu of your favorite French bistro can get away with it, then Obama can do anything he wants on this issue unless he is severely and relentlessly attacked every day in a manner that attracts MSM coverage. Sorry, that is the way it works.

Whose responsibility is it to find a way to make that happen?

-- GlennGreenwald

All of ours.

That's beautiful, but not helpful. I don't care if every single able-bodied adult sent a letter to the editor of every single MSM outlet, this issue would not get the media attention it deserves.

MichaelS.

...but if the problem is to find a way around the MSM, then maybe getting the school children involved is not such a bad idea. Suppose one directed a campaign to improve the teaching of civil liberties in our nation's schools to school parent organizations, such as PTAs. It could highlight the record of the current and previous administrations. This could attract the attention of nearly every parent with children in school, whether democrat or republican. You might even get those who think owning guns is their only right to realize that they have others as well. And the pressure would be on the current administration to respond in some way to the MSM coverage that this campaign would generate.

Even in areas of the country where home prices have declined precipitously, the collateral behind mortgage-related assets still retains substantial value.

Surely the highest possible current value to consider "reasonable" is what somebody has just payed for a "similar" house in that market. If one wants to increase the sales rate in that market, the price will drop further. Without knowing what the report means, it is all smoke and mirrors.

wrote:

Kamiya attacking Churchill for his bogus academic credentials is just like the far right attacking MLK for his peccadilloes.

No it is not the same thing at all. Academics should be challenged on their knowledge of their fields. It is part of the job. Churchill has not done done well when so challenged. He has no reason to expect to have a job in his field, certainly not tenure and a department head.

wrote:

I have lots of jobs and one of them is not letting people who are writing deluded shit get away with it.

Yes, you need to work at home more often.

Maybe the codepinkers are smarter than you think. Summers's reaction was their victory as was yours.

It is not easy to fight something like this when one is confused about motives. Consider the completion of this sentence: Obama is doing this because.....

There are several answers that could finish the sentence, some even mutually exclusive. Some folks who comment here think they know the answer, are even sure they do. I am not so sure at all.

How does this:

The Obama administration fights harder for the power to abduct people and imprison them with no charges."

stop the facade from crumbling? Do those people we are locking up in Bagram know some secret that would destroy "the establishment"? If so, why are they alive?

He is fighting for the power to seize people outside the US and keep them in prisons outside the US. Why?

Isn't it way past your bed time, young lady? Bernbart will read you a tall tale.

Sorry Bamage, I just cannot figure out what the "it" before "demands" refers to. So I guess I have to take my toys home, too.

Bush really did not want those powers either. And he thought the best way not to get them was to use them after his crew wrote those memos pretending that they wanted them. It is just that he got voted out of office before the courts had time to take charge, and give him what he really wanted, that is, to not have those powers at all. He was even more subtle than Obama. He was pretending that he did not want the courts to rule, so the decision would have more impact when it finally happened. So a few people got tortured and killed? That would have been a small price to pay for really getting a definitive ruling.

Waterboarding is torture when "they" do it to "us". (WWII) Why is it not torture when "we" do to to "them".

And in any case, no one with any sense of morality buys this argument: We can do anything we want as long as it is not as bad as what someone else is doing. Who say that is OK?