Forbidden Donut

The attacks on September 11th cost hundreds of thousands of lives. As a consequence of the initial drop in the bucket, we responded by killing hundreds of thousands. It's a good thing because Saddam killed at least a fraction of that amount!

I would like to point out that if we were at war with a major power and lost, all of our most powerful politicians would be executed for the atrocities they've committed. We, however, choose to give them soap boxes on prime-time television.

Heh, your comment reminds me of the Celebra commercials (or maybe it was something else). It's a drug that helps with cholesterol while warning about the dangers of high cholesterol (Heart disease, heart attack, stroke, etc), it simultaneously warned of the side effects of the drug (Heart disease, heart attack, stroke, etc)

Apparently that's what Iraq was like.

Democracy works best when two sides are presented and the best solutions of each can be adopted, right? So thank you Cheney for challenging Obama so that the sheeple at least have a chance to hear another side even if it is not totally coherent.

The thing I love about Cheney and those that support the idea that torture is justified and should be use because it works to save American lives and keep the country safe is the failure to recognize how dangerous this mentality is. What I mean is using his logic (I use the term useless, ideology would be more appropriate) that it is in the interest of National security to torture people for information, if taken far enough, is a the same rational that is used in every instance of genocide.

The National security demands that we remove these people, or so the story goes. I am not saying the next step is genocide, or comparing water boarding and ethnic cleansing, I am merely comparing the thought process and blind adherence to the idea of national security trumping principles.

As American I think it is important that we recognize this. Is National security (aside from the issue of water boarding working or not because in this context it’s a mute point) worth the complete abandonment of our values as a democracy and how far are we willing to take this? I want people to stop kidding themselves and have a serious discussion about what this means, where is the line in the sand and are we willing to cross it and admit it to ourseleves?

i like that, jedd. what's it from?

Cheney is doing no service to democracy. Democracy works best when the party in power is challenged with ideas and action.

But that's not what Cheney is doing. He's covering his own ass, and those of his crew of lovable miscreants, so if charges are filed maybe the entirety of public opinion isn't "yeah fuck that guy".

It's revisionist history and it's disgusting. And he's a disgusting man for engaging in it.

---------

I'd love a viable opposition to the Democrats. By no means do I love them all to death... But opposition for the sake of opposition is stupid. And opposition to the opposition to torture is not solid ground on which to lay the foundation of a party-revival...

I saw it posted somewhere else on the web. I'm not sure if the conversation actually took place, but William Roper was Sir Thomas More's biographer and Son-in-Law. I wouldn't be surprised if it did take place. More was a great thinker.

A Man for All Seasons (1966)

Awesome. I'm going to look for that one now.