That headline made me hurt as I laughed.

Weaver95: That headline made me hurt as I laughed.

I SAID I'M BUSY! I NEED SOME PRIVACY!

DAAAAAAAAAAAAD!

Son of God: If these tapes got out, the terrorists would know what techniques we use in interrogation. That obviously would be detrimental to our security.

They can already assume our interrogation techniques. They don't need video confirmation of it. All this video would have done is shown in graphic detail how far America is from the beacon of light its purported to be.

fark the White House. I want an impartial investigation, or as close as one can be with some of the information already destroyed. Anything to tarnish this administration.

I had to go read the article just to make sure that the administration hadn't actually said what was in the headline. Some days, I just feel so cynical.

Also, everyone in the WH who doesn't dust, take out the trash, or cook is a farking moron who deserves to be thrown in prison for life.

/They're evil, just pure evil.

The administration argued it was not obligated to preserve the videotapes and told U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy that demanding information about them "could potentially complicate the ongoing efforts to arrive at a full factual understanding of the matter."

yes, because getting more information about something is detrimental to understanding the facts. wtf?

Contempt of court is a court ruling which, in the context of a court trial or hearing, deems an individual as holding contempt for the court, its process, and its invested powers. Often stated simply as "in contempt", or a person "held in contempt", it is the highest remedy of a judge to impose sanctions on an individual for acts which excessively or in a wanton manner disrupt the normal process of a court hearing.

A finding of contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial. A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of contempt of court.

And this isn't that...because?

Destroyed? Are you sure? I mean, have you checked John Boehner's pr0n folder? Because I'm damned sure he kills kittens to a copy, given his obsession with promoting the use of torture.

Where's the "Duh!" tag?

Can the White House stop an investigation by asking them to stop? Is that the "don't investigate me dude" defense?

rush_limbaugh_sent_me: Another liberal conspiracy theory via our unbiased mainstream media.

How does it feel to live with so much contempt for your fellow countrymen? I honestly want to know if you check under your bed for evil liberals before you go to sleep.

Can the White House stop an investigation by asking them to stop? Is that the "don't investigate me dude" defense?

Yes. It's encompassed in the already established Because I Said So doctrine.

sunlion: Can the White House stop an investigation by asking them to stop? Is that the "don't investigate me dude" defense?

Yes. It's encompassed in the already established Because I Said So doctrine.

Which is categorized under the Trust Us...... We would never lie to you and will always keep you safe policy.

Son of God: That's legitimate. We're talking national security here. If these tapes got out, the terrorists would know what techniques we use in interrogation. That obviously would be detrimental to our security.

we have already told everyone.

Son of God: Why do you hate America?

Because it hates us.

sunlion: Yes. It's encompassed in the already established Because I Said So doctrine.

That's "quia ego sit dico", may it please the court.

rush_limbaugh_sent_me: Another liberal conspiracy theory via our unbiased mainstream media.

It's not a conspiracy theory if the theory is true. Then it's a plain old conspiracy.

There is no level of corruption and pure Satanism than that showed by the Republican Party.

This isn't a government, it's a criminal enterprise that's taken over, profiteered, imprisoned it's foes, let it's friends stay out of jail, and spent all the money and then some.

with any luck, the bush administration and its neoconservative minions will have so utterly destroyed the republican party by '08 that it can be rebuilt on its former tenets of individual liberty, personal responsibility and fiscal/diplomatic conservatism.

/blame reagan for beginning the slide
//blame bush jr.for ending it

eqtworld:

13 more months.


Is there a site set up yet with a by-the-second countdown ticker? Because if there isn't, there should be. It would also make a great widget.

"When you say "radical right" today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."

[to the right wing,] "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican Party much more than the Democrats have."

-- Barry Goldwater

FlashHarry: Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican Party much more than the Democrats have."

-- Barry Goldwater

Funny that it was his defeat that originally planted the seeds of what the GOP has turned into. Maybe America should have let him nuke flower picking little girls. Might have done some good in the long run.

Aarontology: FlashHarry: Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican Party much more than the Democrats have."

-- Barry Goldwater

Funny that it was his defeat that originally planted the seeds of what the GOP has turned into. Maybe America should have let him nuke flower picking little girls. Might have done some good in the long run.

i've often thought the same thing.

i wonder what the current iteration of the GOP would make of president eisenhower...

FlashHarry: i wonder what the current iteration of the GOP would make of president eisenhower...
What do you think they lade of President Lincoln?
The fellow's spinning so fast in his grave, it's altering the earth's rotation.

FlashHarry: i wonder what the current iteration of the GOP would make of president eisenhower...

They would hate him. His military-industrial complex speech is the antithesis of everything the GOP these days operates. They would slander him mercilessly as being soft on terror, hating America, downplay his military service and accomplishments.

Aarontology: FlashHarry: i wonder what the current iteration of the GOP would make of president eisenhower...

They would hate him. His military-industrial complex speech is the antithesis of everything the GOP these days operates. They would slander him mercilessly as being soft on terror, hating America, downplay his military service and accomplishments.

hell, rove would go after his military service. that's their strategy: don't go after the weakness - go after the perceived strength.

FlashHarry: hell, rove would go after his military service. that's their strategy: don't go after the weakness - go after the perceived strength.

Indeed. I'm sure they would not focus on the success at Normandy, but rather the meat grinder that was Omaha beach. His being raised a Jehovah's Witness would probably have the fundie's screaming as well.

Afternoon_Delight: FTFA: Zubaydah was the first high-value detainee taken by the CIA in 2002. He told his interrogators about alleged Sept. 11 accomplice Ramzi Binalshibh, and the two men's confessions also led to the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who the U.S. government said was the mastermind behind the terrorist attacks.

Al-Nashiri is the alleged coordinator of the 2000 suicide attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, which killed 17 sailors. Like Zubaydah, he is now at Guantanamo.


Naturally, this pisses liberals off.

don't you ever get bored hating america, Afternoon_Delight?

You'd think sleep deprivation would be enough to torment someone in to talking.

DrBenway: Is there a site set up yet with a by-the-second countdown ticker? Because if there isn't, there should be. It would also make a great widget.

http://www.freedomcounter.com/

FlashHarry:

don't you ever get bored hating america, Afternoon_Delight?

Only when wrestling and NASCAR isn't on. I'm sure he would be happier if all the cars didn't continually turn left. After all, everyone needs to believe in something.

Now, sing along with me Aeonic Blue...
Mr. Limpwrist sucked a dick,
do dah, do dah,

well, there's two that are another story altogether.

FlashHarry: with any luck, the bush administration and its neoconservative minions will have so utterly destroyed the republican party by '08 that it can be rebuilt on its former tenets of individual liberty, personal responsibility and fiscal/diplomatic conservatism.

/blame reagan for beginning the slide
//blame bush jr.for ending it

I for one would like to see actual Conservative values in my party for a change. The blending of the GOP with so called Southern Conservatives, and their cash, has led to a lot of contradictory policies, that undermine the principles of the party. Sadly, they've pushed the line well over the line, in order to appeal to radicals, who happen to have cash in pocket and agendas that push the party away from Conservative values.

hubiestubert: I for one would like to see actual Conservative values in my party for a change. The blending of the GOP with so called Southern Conservatives, and their cash, has led to a lot of contradictory policies, that undermine the principles of the party. Sadly, they've pushed the line well over the line, in order to appeal to radicals, who happen to have cash in pocket and agendas that push the party away from Conservative values.

This isn't addressed to you specifically, but every time I see someone complain about those who have hi-jacked the GOP I always wonder if they will continue to vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

Aarontology: This isn't addressed to you specifically, but every time I see someone complain about those who have hi-jacked the GOP I always wonder if they will continue to vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

I vote in the primaries--have to try to get good folks into office and send a message to the party leaders. You have to vote for the best candidate, in any office. And while the Party may decide to run a scoundrel, it's up to the voter to decide who to support.

You constantly vote entirely on Party lines without thought for the individual, you're part of the problem.

Each election, you have to choose the best individual for the job, not just who they roll with. In the end, it always breaks down to individuals. You call asshats, asshats, and move on. Be that asshat Teddy Kennedy or Dick Cheney.

I am a registered Republican, but in the end, I have to vote for the person I think will do the best job--and try to keep folks out that I think will do damage. Be they Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or who ever. In the end, you have to look at who will do the best job, period.

eqtworld: 13 more months.

Are we honestly to believe that a Clinton, Obama, Huckabee, or Romney Administration will take grasp of the overwhelming power the Bush Administration has carved out for the executive branch and simply set things straight?

Sorry, I don't believe it.

Impeachment of the President and Vice President is now more necessary than ever.

hubiestubert: Aarontology: This isn't addressed to you specifically, but every time I see someone complain about those who have hi-jacked the GOP I always wonder if they will continue to vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

I vote in the primaries--have to try to get good folks into office and send a message to the party leaders. You have to vote for the best candidate, in any office. And while the Party may decide to run a scoundrel, it's up to the voter to decide who to support.

You constantly vote entirely on Party lines without thought for the individual, you're part of the problem.

Each election, you have to choose the best individual for the job, not just who they roll with. In the end, it always breaks down to individuals. You call asshats, asshats, and move on. Be that asshat Teddy Kennedy or Dick Cheney.

I am a registered Republican, but in the end, I have to vote for the person I think will do the best job--and try to keep folks out that I think will do damage. Be they Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or who ever. In the end, you have to look at who will do the best job, period.

Newsletter, etc...

The problem is that most people do not think the way you do. They could be disgusted at the state of your party, but will constantly vote for whomever the party puts up because of the R or D next to their name.

I'm a registered Green, but I have voted for Democrats, Republicans, Independents as well as Greens.

Aarontology: The problem is that most people do not think the way you do. They could be disgusted at the state of your party, but will constantly vote for whomever the party puts up because of the R or D next to their name.

I'm a registered Green, but I have voted for Democrats, Republicans, Independents as well as Greens.

I do think that most people want pretty much the same things. Decent schools. Vibrant economy. Justice. Fair and equitable government.

What folks tend to differ on is how to achieve these goals. The problems show up is when you start to demonize folks because they differ on how to get there.

Let's take gun control as a for instance: that debate boils down to less crime and safety. They come from a very similar place, and remembering that you should be able to have a civilized debate.

Instead, you get a whole can of bitter, because instead of talking about that common ground, it gets sliced up into a divisive debate, because it's a non issue. Instead of talking about how to reduce crime, folks have gotten led down the garden path to wasting time and effort into a red herring issue. And it does the folks in office a service, because it allows them NOT actually do much to reduce crime, because the debate is derailed into non-issues.

Easier to maintain a problem, than actually fix it. So long as a problem is maintained, it can get funding. You solve an issue, then funds disappear, and our representative equate the amount of funds they control to power, as opposed to the problems they solve. This is a problem, and it's one that the voters need to address.

FTA: "...the Bush administration telling its constitutional coequals to stay out of the investigation."
It sucks about the demise of democracy and transparency and all, but won't someone think of the words? WTF is the difference between constitutional 'coequals' and just plain constitutional equals? Isn't the 'co' inherent in equal? How baked do you have to be to come up with a brand new word that's like equal, but, you know, equally equal?

hubiestubert: I do think that most people want pretty much the same things. Decent schools. Vibrant economy. Justice. Fair and equitable government.

What folks tend to differ on is how to achieve these goals. The problems show up is when you start to demonize folks because they differ on how to get there.

Let's take gun control as a for instance: that debate boils down to less crime and safety. They come from a very similar place, and remembering that you should be able to have a civilized debate.

Indeed. I think another problem is that certain issues become dominated by a single party. Your example for gun control is a perfect one. I personally, know very few self described liberals who would advocate some of the more extreme anti-gun measures that have come out. In fact, most of the ones I would call my friends are very in favor of gun rights, myself included.

Instead, you get people thinking that a person automatically opposes them on all issues just because they belong to a different political party. If people would think out their political ideas logically, they would find that not all them fit within the confines of one political party.

I think it was Al Franken who wrote something like "Are you in favor of gun control? Congratulations, you also support abortion on demand and gay marriage. Like low taxes? Now you want to privatise Social Security and ban stem cell research"

Aarontology: This isn't addressed to you specifically, but every time I see someone complain about those who have hi-jacked the GOP I always wonder if they will continue to vote for whomever the GOP puts up.

i changed from registered republican to registered no party affiliation in 2004 before the election and voted against bush. the only republican candidate i would take a second look at if he got the nomination is ron paul... i don't know that i'd vote for him, but he's the only one that i wouldn't dismiss outright.

if they nominate anyone else, i will not vote republican under any circumstances.

when they decide to start putting conservatives up for election and stop putting forth theocrats and authoritarians who pander to theocrats, i'll start paying attention to the republican party again.

burndtdan: i changed from registered republican to registered no party affiliation in 2004 before the election and voted against bush. the only republican candidate i would take a second look at if he got the nomination is ron paul... i don't know that i'd vote for him, but he's the only one that i wouldn't dismiss outright.

if they nominate anyone else, i will not vote republican under any circumstances.

when they decide to start putting conservatives up for election and stop putting forth theocrats and authoritarians who pander to theocrats, i'll start paying attention to the republican party again.

Much the same way I feel, save that I think that it's important to actually try to get decent folks on the ticket.

Alex Sanders:

http://www.freedomcounter.com/


Nice! Thanks.