Howard Dean: Partisan or Stupid?
April 9th, 2008 at 06:33pm Matt Margolis
Howard Dean can’t seem to open his mouth without saying something nonsensical… Earlier this week he said that John McCain isn’t a strong candidate … yet both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are “extraordinary.”
Howard Dean is as partisan as they come, but for him to make both those claims is just plain stupidity. John McCain has more experience than Hillary and Obama combined. Four years ago, Democrats claimed that John Kerry’s four months in Vietnam made him more qualified to be commander-in-chief, but today they say that John McCain, who served far longer and endured far more than John Kerry did, is a weaker candidate than both Hillary and Obama, neither of whom served in the military. Hillary and Obama support disastrous policies…. They both want to cut and run from Iraq. They both want to raise taxes. They both want socialized health care. Yet, Howard Dean calls them extraordinary…
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats
80 Comments
1. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Oh, my gosh! Matt has made an astounding and unexpected discovery! The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee is a Democratic partisan! Who would have ever guessed that?
Hmm, experience. Number of days that Senator Obama has been the President of the United States. Zero. Number of days that Senator Clinton has been President of the United States. Zero. Number of days Senator McCain has been President of the United States. Zero.
Senator McCain’s experience at being a flip-flopper? Extensive. Senator McCain’s experience in violating the campaign-finance law that bears his name? Ongoing. Number of times that Senator McCain won’t be able to correctly identify Shi’a and Sunni Muslims? Who knows.
2. James | April 9th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Wow, Diana, that’s a great comeback… All three candidates have never served as president so their experiences are all equal! Good one!
3. Herman | April 9th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
So John McCain’s been around a while. BIG DEAL!!! How did he finish at the Naval Academy, like sixth or so from the BOTTOM of his class??? Both Democratic candidates have Ivy-League, post-baccalaureate collegiate experience, with Barack Obama graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School. For all his “experience” McCain can’t even keep straight in his mind the difference between Sunnis and Shiites (hey, he’s a conservative, and conservatives don’t do nuance).
John McCain’s simple fiscal policy — keep taxes low, who cares that we’re paying INTEREST on the growing deficit — is as tired and old as he is. McCain’s been lucky so far with Rudy G. self-destructing in scandal, but McCain’s luck will run out when he has to debate Obama.
4. FmrMarine | April 9th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
“McCain can’t even keep straight in his mind the difference between Sunnis and Shiites ”
seems most of us cant
which is berry HUSSEIN obama, again?
5. Barack Obama » Howa&hellip | April 9th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
[…] The Swamp wrote an interesting post today on Howard Dean: Partisan or Stupid?Here’s a quick excerptEarlier this week he said that John McCain isn’t a strong candidate … yet both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are “extraordinary. […]
6. James | April 9th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Wow, the trolls really have to stretch far in order to spin Hillbama’s inexperience into something positive.
7. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
FmrMarine,
Senator Obama is a Christian as even the most casually-informed partisan ideologues on the right have acknowledged.
8. Rich | April 9th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Diana just said that I have as much experience to be President as Obama does! Wait, according to her so does every single person that has never been President. I guess I’m a little confused.
9. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Rich,
That would be correct. You also have as much experience to be President as Senator McCain does. Isn’t that special?
One of the best ways to gain experience at a job is to shadow someone who is in that position. Based on that criterion, Senator Clinton has Senator McCain thoroughly beaten. So, are you going to vote for Senator Clinton should she be the Democratic nominee? I predict the answer is “no”.
10. Jonathan | April 9th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
The chairman of the DNC is a partisan? Gee, what a shocker. Jesus, I’m seventeen, and even I could point that out to you, idiot.
Furthermore, if Ken Melman were still the chairman of the RNC, I’d bet you $500.00 that he would come out and proclaim McCain as an extraordinary candidate and say that Obama and Hillary are insignificant. I’ll go even further and say that you would boast and brag from the highest mountain top, yelling at the top of your lungs that the Democrats will be creamed come November.
So please, spare us your false outrage, Matt. Your party would pull the same kind of stunt that Howard Dean pulled and you wouldn’t care a bit.
11. Rico's ghost | April 9th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Matt: Howard Dean: Partisan or Stupid?
I suppose we could ask the same question of Matt. And I further suppose we should keep in mind that Dean has a certain amount of experience whereas Matt has… um… none. So to believe Matt one would have to rely on the superiority of his judgement rather than his experience. And that, I would say, is a bit of a problem.
12. Matt Margolis | April 9th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Rico’s ghost, I would be a better president than Obama or Hillary.
13. Rico's ghost | April 9th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Matt: Rico’s ghost, I would be a better president than Obama or Hillary.
Your opinion of yourself matters little. You need to demonstrate your worth to those that, well… vote. So put your running shoes on and get out there on the trail, if you’re really that confident.
14. William Teach | April 9th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Hmm, it seems Rico seems to be telling you that you cannot exercise you Constitutionally given Free Speech rights. Why am I not surprised?
15. Freedom1 | April 9th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Obama is NOT a Christian.
Obama attended Trinity for 20 years worshipping under “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright who preaches Black Liberation Theology which is NOT Christianity (as any REAL CHRISTIAN knows)…
Black Liberation Theology:
_____________________________________
Teacher Blows Whistle on Minnesota Madrassa (Apr 9, 2008)
“Katherine Kersten exposes a publicly funded K-8 charter school in Minnesota that’s indoctrinating children into Islam, while pretending to be non-religious to keep receiving the infidel’s money” - (via Lgf): “Teacher Breaks Wall Of Silence At State’s Muslim Public School.” - Star Tribune
16. Freedom1 | April 9th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Pure Antisemitism at Official Obama Site
(Via Lgf), “Hosted at the official Barack Obama campaign web site, this blog post has been public since March 1, 2008“: “IKEY G-KHAN GALACTICCA’s Support Senator Barack Obama For US President Blog: Jews Cannot Afford Not To Support Obama.”
It goes on in this vein for a long time, concluding with:
UPDATE at 4/9/08 10:23:19 am: That didn’t take long — the page has now been removed. (Click link for screen capture.)
This threatening, anti-Semitic, extortion was posted on Obama’s official campaign website for over a month. A month! Outrageous!
17. SEW | April 9th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Oh, my gosh! Matt has made an astounding and unexpected discovery! The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee is STUPID. Who would have ever guessed that?
18. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Freedom1,
Guess what? You can go put up a page at the Obama website as well and say anything you please. It’s almost the equivalent of a third party quoting me and saying that Mark and Matt must agree with me because my words were on their site.
So, when you actually can provide some “outrageous” examples of speeches that Senator Obama has made or actions that he has taken that reflect his being an anti-Semite or being anti-Christian then you’ll have something substantive.
I note with interest your lack of enthusiasm for disputing the fact that Senator McCain is a serial flip-flopper. (Let’s hear those GOP convention delegates!)
19. Casper | April 9th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
“Rico’s ghost, I would be a better president than Obama or Hillary.”
No you wouldn’t. Considering how much of a big deal you and Mark have made of the different levels of experience between McCain and Obama and Hillary, I’m surprised you would even try to make such of an argument.
20. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Another penetratingly intellectual comment from SEW. Impressive.
21. Casper | April 9th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
“Oh, my gosh! Matt has made an astounding and unexpected discovery! The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee is STUPID.”
I would say he is every bit as stupid as Bush, and I have never considered Bush stupid.
22. Diana Powe | April 9th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
I suppose being “STUPID” is what enabled Howard Dean to graduate from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, run a medical practice, get elected governor of Vermont and become chairman of the DNC. He must be so-o-o-o stupid.
23. FoolYouTwice | April 10th, 2008 at 12:05 am
Matt,
Casper just embarrassed you. Damn I feel sorry for you.
So Matt, what experience do you have that makes you more qualified than obama or hillary?
24. FoolYouTwice | April 10th, 2008 at 12:06 am
Casper,
I think we all now know why Matt normally stays out of the conversations.
25. Casper | April 10th, 2008 at 12:15 am
FoolYouTwice,
I’m not out to embarrass anyone. I don’t think I’m as qualified as any of the candidates and I’m a lot older than Matt and have a lot more management experience and education than he does.
26. Xango Annie | April 10th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Re The Howler..nah…there is just a fine line between genius and insanity….and I lean toward the latter.
27. Freedom1 | April 10th, 2008 at 12:18 am
12. Matt Margolis | April 9th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
“Rico’s ghost, I would be a better president than Obama or Hillary.”
Yes, you would. You are an AMERICAN PATRIOT. Your judgment is lightyears better than either Obama or Hillary. Matt, if you were running against Obama or Hillary, I’d vote for YOU in a heartbeat!
SEW, that was really funny.
“Howard Dean: Partisan AND Stupid”
Heh.
28. Freedom1 | April 10th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Obama’s Spiritual Woes Continue - Glenn Beck
(Video) Barack Obama’s Latest Pastor Problem: Chicago’s Rev. James T. Meeks Transcript -
REPORTER: Senator James Meeks used some tough language in the pulpit attacking the mayor and others including African-Americans who are allies. Meeks tries to generate some new issue on the funding for public schools. He led a March through downtown Chicago to call attention to inequalities of education. We report on his language and his rough words.
MEEKS: We don’t have slave masters. We’ve got mayors but they are still the same white people who have presided over systems where black people are not able or to be educated.
REPORTER: That was only one part of the tough talk state senator James Meeks delivered on Sunday’s sermon at the south side church where he is pastor. It was broadcast twice on WJYS, channel 62. Today he stood by every word of it.
VOICE: Is it fair of a mayor to compare him and the governor to slave masters?
MEEKS: They do the same thing. They preside over systems where they have the control of the lives of African-American and Hispanic people.
REPORTER: While Meeks is a potential challenger to Daley in this winter city election, he is hoping others will run against members of the African-American city council who have been close, paging them with the N word, a racial slur that CBS news chooses to cover with a –
MEEKS: You got some preachers that are house [BLEEP], you got some elected officials that are house [BLEEP] and rather than them trying to break this up, they are going to fight you to protect that white man.
REPORTER: So why do you use that word?
MEEKS: The word [BLEEP] is not in the African-American community a bad word.
MEEKS: It’s a term of endearment and I don’t see it as derogatory or offensive.
29. SEW | April 10th, 2008 at 5:17 am
What’s up with the CultObama followers? Perpetually off topic, all on topic! And only one mention of Bush! [so far].
DNC is doing a good job of hiding Screaming Intellectually Superior Howie. And Howie has done a great job of disenfranchising voters in only 2 insignificant states. And he stepped right up and solved the problem when it became controversial. Uh, lets see, didn’t he suggest all superdelegates cast their preference before the convention, to save his hide and the Democrat illusion of “count every vote.
Howie, you are truly a genius! How is that superdelegate count going? And how is the count every vote in Florida and Michigan thingy going? In fact, what is the superdelegate thingy about anyway, Howie, in terms we morons might be able to understand. I was thinking it was to determine a choice in a closely contested election. Silly me.
Thanks you Howie.
30. SEW | April 10th, 2008 at 5:44 am
Howie, I forgot to mention. Running the USA will be sooo simple compared to the difficulties forced on you in running the DNC. And you have found such success with your Chavez like policies at the DNC, the USA will be much easier. That Einstein M.D. degree will be so handy. Congratulations for that and being Governor of Venezuela, uh, I mean Vermont. Be sure to take the heat off the streets first, there are a few neocons out there. America is ready for Chavez and other Change. And Hope.
Oh, can you smell the Change? Peace, No War! Just say no, cut and run! Yehaw.
31. Freedom1 | April 10th, 2008 at 5:58 am
“A surprise: Oprah pays a real cost for supporting Barack Obama” - LA Times
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/oprahobama.html
Ouch!
32. Plantation Owner | April 10th, 2008 at 8:10 am
“Hmm, experience. Number of days that Senator Obama has been the President of the United States. Zero.”
Number of times, that Obama has voted “PRESENT” on important legislation without taking a stance. 100+.
Number of times voting PRESENT indicates that you are a leader…..ZERO!
With that, you Diana are just as much qualified as a non-leader as Obama. As evidenced by your numerous parroting posts of talking points of the day.
33. Sunny | April 10th, 2008 at 11:42 am
11. Rico’s ghost | April 9th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Matt: Howard Dean: Partisan or Stupid?
I suppose we could ask the same question of Matt. And I further suppose we should keep in mind that Dean has a certain amount of experience whereas Matt has… um… none.
Gosh Rico’s ghost, you seem to forget that Matt and Mark wrote that best selling book “Caucus of Corruption”. Please refresh our memories Matt, how many copies did that sell Matt?
34. SEW | April 10th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
“Matt: Howard Dean: Partisan or Stupid?
I suppose we could ask the same question of Matt” Sunny
Asking the same question of Sunny is not necessary.
35. InDaVa | April 10th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Dean is Partisan towards the Democrats? No? Say it isn’t so. I bet you stayed up all night thinking about this thread.
Funny how the hateful copy and paste king Freedom1 can post waaaaay off topic and his posts remain. He rarely adds anything to the discussion other than OT articles.
36. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
shhh InDaVa… I’ve brought taht up over and over about Senor Cut’n'Paste being off topic. I’ve been told they ARE on topic.
Anyway… this whole thread was just filler. There were was nothing that they could lob out about Obama’s friend’s cousin’s gardner’s buddy who happened to know somebody that has a friend whose uncle knew a guy who was a suicide bomber. So therefore Obama is a suicide bomber.
As for the post…
John McCain has more experience than Hillary and Obama combined.
Based on what? Military experience?
Four years ago, Democrats claimed that John Kerry’s four months in Vietnam made him more qualified to be commander-in-chief, but today they say that John McCain, who served far longer and endured far more than John Kerry did, is a weaker candidate than both Hillary and Obama, neither of whom served in the military.
First… way to discount someone’s Vietnam service Matt. I don’t care if it was 4 months, 4 years or 4 minutes.
Second, Kerry’s 4 months was 4 months more combat experience than the combined experience of the current Pres and Veep. So I guess Kerry was truly the better candidate.
They both want to cut and run from Iraq. They both want to raise taxes. They both want socialized health care.
They don’t want to “cut and run”, that is your bumpersticker mentality. They want to draw down and end this debacle since there is no military solution and 5 years of the same ain’t working. Another 6 months and it still won’t be working.
They don’t want to “raise taxes”, that is you scaring your wealthy friends. They want to expire the tax cuts to the wealthy. So sorry if they are going to “raise taxes” on those making in the top 5%. I don’t think the other 95% really care.
They do want universal health care since there are so many people without it. Call it “socialist health care” all you want. Of course if you say it a certain way, you could certainly make it sound anti-American, but that would be foolish if you did something like that…. oops. already done.
37. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
I wish liberals would quit whining about posting OT. They change the subject on every single thread.
Should I remind you leftys that you are guests on this conservative blog? If you’d prefer, Mark/Matt can treat you the same way the kooks over on dailykos and other far left blogs treat conservatives (ie, deleting every single post or banning completely).
As far as Dean, he won’t be remembered as the DNC chairman, a graduate of Albert Einstein College of Medicine, etc. Most people will always remember him for his idiotic “scream”. Type in “Howard Dean” on Google … the first page has more entries for his scream than anything else. LOL!
As far as McCain’s flipflops (another post trying to change the subject), do we REALLY have to go into this? I never based my opinion of Kerry on his flipflops because EVERY SINGLE politican has done it. Seems like a waste of time to me.
38. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
k4v:
Type in “Howard Dean” on Google … the first page has more entries for his scream than anything else.
Type in IDIOT into Google. Look at what 4 of the top 6 results are.
Flip flops… maybe you haven’t judged any politician on this but the collective right-wing sure as hell did in 2004. You absoluetly can not deny that.
As for changing the subject… sure, everyone may deviate somewhat. I would hardly say it is a liberal thing or a conservative thing… but every post has Freedom1 with some anti-Islam cut and paste from some other blog (as if that is actual news).
39. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
kimberly4victory,
So, since you acknowledge the very painful GOP reality that John McCain flip-flops (as in saying on The View that he wants to enhance post-service educational opportunities for veterans but refusing to co-sponsor Sen. Webb’s proposed enhancements to the G.I. Bill of Rights), which Senator McCain do you imagine that you would get as President or do you think he might take the oath of office and just go off in some completely new direction?
(Let’s hear some more of that “flip-flop” chant from the assembled 2004 Republican delegates.)
40. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Joe: Freedom1 has been posting about extremists for years. Mark has allowed him/her to do so, which is MARK/MATT’S right since it is THEIR blog.
As far as the flip flops, I can post dozens from each side of the aisle. It’s like promising something in a campaign and not fullfilling that promise, every politician does it. I can’t deny others judged Kerry in that way … so I guess you leftys will do the same thing. Oh well, to each his own. I’m not going to do it.
41. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
So, in other words, all campaign promises are utterly meaningless, but does that include moral stances such as what does or does not count as torture or whether or not Roe v. Wade should be overturned or not? Does that include choosing to obey or not obey a campaign finance law that bears your own name?
42. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
The answer to the flip-flop accusation: Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Show me a politician who has stuck to his position through thick and thin, and I will show you a politician who cannot be trusted to represent our interests in a changing world.
DP: I did not say “EVERY” promise. Get some glasses.
43. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
I hear you k4v. It shouldn’t be such an issue, but after 2004 McCain is going to get deluged with it.
Matt and Mark can most certainly allow Freedom to make those posts. I accept the fact that opposing views are the only ones that get deleted. I’m ok with it. Doesn’t hurt to point out hypocracy though, does it. I can’t speak for kos because I never go over there.
44. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
See Joe, liberals change the subject all the time.
Take for instance, DP … she’s just itching to talk about flipflops so EVERY thread, she mentions it. Look for it on ALL the threads …
Flipflops? I have a few pair in my closet. Love ‘em.
45. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I had a feeling you weren’t the kind of liberal to go to kos.
Glad to hear it.
46. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
k4v,
Diana brings them up when McCain is being discussed. Just like the other day I complained because the topic was Obama “lying” about McCain’s 100 years comment and others started bringing up Rev Wright.
I’m waiting for the days to actually start being warm enough around here so flip flops can be worn. 70 today, 40 on Saturday.
47. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Which is exactly the claim made to support George W. Bush’s superiority. Oops.
I note with interest that kimberly4victory doesn’t essay an answer as to Senator McCain’s flip-flops on issues of fundamental morality.
48. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I drove up to Flagstaff yesterday and it was snowing! Left Phoenix - 77 - arrived in Flag - low 20s. Glad I didn’t have my flipflops on! LOL!
49. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Apparently, waterboarding changed from being clearly torture in December 2007 to clearly not being torture in February 2008. Yup, a “changing world” (read - “burning desire to be President no matter what”) does require flexibility. But, that’s okay, kimberly4victory doesn’t need to worry about torture since it’s not happening to her.
50. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Bush has held his position through thick and thin regarding who our enemy is (AQ, Islamic Extremists) and how we need to fight them over there and not here in the US. Glad he changed his position regarding how to fight them in Iraq (ie, surge).
51. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
And, yet, ANOTHER change of subject from DP! No surprise there!
Did you know waterboarding during interrogation to extract information has only been used on three terrorists?
Torture is normally defined as the infliction of severe pain. You know, like cutting off fingers. Waterboarding induces fear because it simulates drowning. It does not inflict pain.
This is my last post to you, DP, on this thread, unless you want to GO BACK TO THE SUBJECT.
52. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
k4v,
I can’t stand that saying… “Fight them over there so we don’t fight them over here”
That is like saying “If we leave they will follow us home”.
They are fighting us right now BECAUSE we are over there.
You know what else… we weren’t fighting AQ by going into Iraq. Didn’t you get the memo? We went into Iraq to give them freedom and democracy.
AQ was in Afghanastan. You know… the country that we invaded, then ignored?
53. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Did you know waterboarding during interrogation to extract information has only been used on three terrorists?
You left off….. “that we know about”.
54. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Well, President Bush has been consistently wrong on that score, that’s true and he’s been consistently in favor of denying that we torture even though we do.
Now, if Senator McCain could just figure out what he thinks torture is considering that he’s been tortured. Of course, what he really wants to know is which position will get him elected because that’s what truly matters to him.
55. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
kimberly4victory,
The point of this thread are Senator McCain’s “qualifications” to be President relative to those of Senators Clinton and Obama. Now, unless you think the ability to forthrightly and consistently state fundamental moral principles, such as what constitutes torture, is not a necessary qualification to be President, then I would submit that I am precisely on topic.
56. Joe | April 10th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Diana,
I should have posted the list of flip-flops here instead of the “November on our mind” thread!
k4v,
I have to agree that this thread started with Matt saying how much better McCain is than Obama or Hillary. If Rev Wright is a reason why people won’t vote Obama, then flip-flops are most certainly a reason to not vote McCain… and actually on topic here.
57. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Joe: I don’t know how many times I’ve posted this, but Obama’s association/friendship with Wright, is not the reason why I will not be voting for him. His stance on partial birth abortions, creating a much larger government, and other issues are the reason(s).
P.S. I’ve got a nice flip-flop list on Obama, but I choose not to go there. Of course, I reserve the right to flip flop on that statement in the future. LOL.
“Well, President Bush has been consistently wrong on that score, that’s true and he’s been consistently in favor of denying that we torture even though we do.”
OMG! Slapping, pushing, depriving of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding … how awful!! /sarc
You honestly believe THAT is torture?
58. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
kimberly4victory,
Yes, it is torture. It is an extremely sad commentary on the grotesquely twisted and debased morality of you and other members of the authoritarian-worshiping right-wing that, speaking from your privileged position of assuming that only bad people are ever treated in that manner, that “slapping, pushing, depriving of sleep or [being] subjected to simulated drowning” is something other than what it is - clear violations of international law and fundamental human decency.
You obviously think it’s morally justifiable to use techniques that the police could never use with criminal suspects because, after all, it’s not any of the clearly good people, like you or anyone in your family, that’s being treated in this manner. It’s only “terrorists” or “the worst of the worst” that are getting the sort of treatment that was routinely used by the KGB. How do you know that they’re terrorists? Was it because any truly independent review was made of facts that would determine that they had committed acts defined as terrorism? No, it’s because the government instructed you to believe they’re terrorists which is precisely what authoritarian governments always do. Every tyrant the world has ever seen has always justified their actions as being for the good of their nation, including Saddam Hussein.
America has always tried to stand, however imperfectly, for fundamental liberties and decency. That’s the underlying appeal to stories of American service members engaging in acts of personal and collective charity in combat zones. However, in following the truly and deeply stupid notion that torture does anything but elicit statements that the torturer wants to hear, you and your fellows have dragged America through the mud.
Plainly, you are smugly pleased with yourself and for that I feel great regret.
59. Matt Margolis | April 10th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
No, Diana, waterboarding is not torture
60. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Screw you, DP. You are the one who seems “smugly pleased” with yourself each and every time you post. I am fine with debating you, however, if you continue to assume your morals are higher than mine, I will ignore you.
You have your opinion and I have mine. Just because my opinion differs from yours, then I am wrong and you are right?
From an earlier thread on this blog:
In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.
Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.
“The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough,” said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.
With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).
Individual lawmakers’ recollections of the early briefings varied dramatically, but officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support. “Among those being briefed, there was a pretty full understanding of what the CIA was doing,” said Goss, who chaired the House intelligence committee from 1997 to 2004 and then served as CIA director from 2004 to 2006. “And the reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement.”
So much for your “authoritarian-worshiping right-wing” theory. Ooops.
BTW, just how do YOU know they are NOT terrorists?
61. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Matt,
Only in your twisted and perverse version of morality is it not. For Senator McCain, at least as recently as last November, there wasn’t even a question. He said, “It is torture.” Speaking as someone who was brutally tortured, I thought that was pretty credible. However, since then, he’s found that statement to be inconvenient.
In your case, you can keep working to drag America down to the level of the KGB and the Stasi, it’s your choice.
62. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
The question for your perverse torture-justification is not what I know or don’t know. The question is what was the independent body that reviewed the facts that said they were? There is none.
It’s plain that you are satisfied with whatever the authorities wish to do to people who are safely outside your direct experience and that the government instructs you to believe are “the worst of the worst” so long as you can continue your life uninformed about what is being done in your name as an American. After all, the government is only here to Protect You because they’re Good and only want What’s Best For You. They told you so, so it must be true.
The fact that any individual Democrat didn’t forthrightly stand up against torture, as Senator McCain used to, doesn’t do away with the fact that certain practices are inconsistent with international law, human decency and long-held American values. To the extent that anyone, Republican or Democrat, has enabled this Administration’s use of torture, then they deserve to be roundly criticized. No American soldier ever died face down in the mud so someone could be waterboarded. Those who think so are spitting on their memories.
63. Matt Margolis | April 10th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Diana, instead of being ignorant read the link to the earlier blog entry where I actually quote someone who has experienced waterboarding. I’ll trust his opinion over any bleeding heart’s misguided beliefs.
64. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
So, let me get this straight. You don’t know if these people are terrorists or not. The reason: because no independent body reviewed the facts.
You’re a laugh a minute, DP.
If an independent body reviewed the facts of the interrogation, how would you know? Should their findings be reported in the NY Times? the Internet? Blogs for Victory? How about on Al Jazerra? Perhaps we should just send their “facts” straight to OBL?
What if waterboarding could have prevented the soldier you described above from dying?
65. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Matt,
I read it when it was originally posted. Why don’t you ask former-acting assistant attorney general Daniel Levin about what waterboarding is? I’m very sorry that you don’t believe in American values and think that we should behave in the same way as totalitarian regimes such as Cambodia under Pol Pot and in the former Soviet Union and East Germany, but some of us don’t want to be pulled down to that level. We have more pride and hope for our country than that.
66. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
kimberly4victory,
Yes, an independent body. They’re called courts and they belong to the Judicial Branch. That’s why it’s called a separation of powers. I’m sure that will be more comedy gold for you.
Your question about “what if the soldier could have been saved” is just another example of the fake scenarios that defenders of torture want to create to justify the unjustifiable. It supposes that the torturer knew prior to commencing the torture that the torture would have a specific life-saving result.
The reality is that torture is the morally-bankrupt and deeply stupid shortcut that people want to have for discerning truth from lies. As Senator McCain rightly observed a few months ago to Mitt Romney during the debate on November 27th:
67. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
So, how do you suggest we get information about potential terrorist attacks? By tickling their feet?
68. Matt Margolis | April 10th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
kimberly, she probably thinks we’re suppose just say, “Please Mr. Terrorist, give us the information we want,” and put them up in five star hotels until they agree to give us the information…
69. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
kimberly4victory and Matt,
Yes, you’re right! That IS a problem. After all, if they’re in our custody, then they absolutely must be terrorists. There is no possibility that they could be anything but. Therefore, we get a free pass to do anything we want with them. Hooray!
I note with interest your lack of response to your presumptive candidate’s views on this question or are you sending similar torture-inspired drollery to his campaign via separate email?
70. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
There goes DP, smugly pleased with her post. I wonder if she pats herself on the back as she presses the “post” button?
DP: How would YOU determine if the prisoner is a terrorist or not a terrorist?
If you knew he was a terrorist, how would YOU get information from him on a potential terrorist attack?
You agree with McCain, which is surprising. And, I don’t. We all have our own opinion. It doesn’t mean you’re right and I’m wrong or I’m right and you’re wrong.
71. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
kimberly4victory,
What exactly do you mean by establishing that someone is or is not a terrorist? What’s the standard of proof for deciding we get to torture somebody? What standard would you want before someone decided to torture you?
If someone has committed a crime on American soil and you have evidence to prove that fact, you charge them and put them on trial. That’s why we have courts. If they’ve committed a crime on another country’s soil then it is up that country to try them consistent with their own laws. Clearly, there is ample room for improvement in international law on the issue of dealing with non-state actors who commit politically-motivated violence, however, none of that justifies moving beyond those techniques which are allowed under the United States Army’s FM 34-52, Intelligence Interrogation, which states, in part (emphasis added):
72. Xango Annie | April 10th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Debased morality and torture..
Only if you happen to have looked at DP’s blog….
niiiiiiiiiiice!!! talk about an attention w**re!!!
73. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
DP: Quit answering my questions with questions! If you don’t have an answer to my questions, just say so. It’s really not that difficult.
74. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
kimberly4victory,
Since there are any number of ways in which people throw around the word “terrorist” and especially as you’re in favor of torturing those who are terrorists, then it’s rather critical that we agree on who gets that label applied to them. However, regardless of whether or not they meet whatever unnamed criteria you have for being a terrorist, Americans have no business being in the business of torture in any case. As the Army already knows, it’s both illegal and ineffective.
75. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
You don’t know how to determine if one is a terrorist or not. You don’t know how you would gain useful information on a future terrorist act.
Thanks for giving me my answers. BTW, it would have been perfectly okay for you to say, I don’t know.
76. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Well, since you can’t articulate when a human being can be assigned to the category of terrorist then I can only assume that you don’t know how to “determine” it, either. You gain information about potential acts of politically-motivated violence by non-state-actors by engaging in ongoing intelligence gathering which will often mean you engage in the processes of interview and interrogation of possible suspects. We do it all the time.
There’s no rational basis for America to lower itself to using torture in the manner of totalitarian regimes. That impulse is just fearful people grasping at imagined shortcuts to accurate information. As Senator McCain has noted, life is not 24, no matter how entertaining they think it might be if it was.
77. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Dean told reporters today that swing voters are worried about John McCain’s age and health. And then he maintained that the Democratic Party was unlikely to invoke McCain’s age in the fall campaign.
I guess it was okay to invoke it now, but not in the fall.
What a jerk.
Anyone have bets that the Democratic Party does indeed invoke McCain’s age into the fall campaign?
78. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
I agree. That is being a jerk and trying to have it both ways. If the voters are “worried” about Senator McCain’s age or health, they’re more than smart enough to worry about that on their own.
79. kimberly4victory | April 10th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
I had to sit down when I read your last post, DP. LOL! I’m glad you agree.
Wouldn’t you also agree that our military is engaging in ongoing intelligence gathering with the prisoners at GP? I would hope so anyway.
As far as giving criminals to the country in which they were commiting the crime, I would be worried the prisoner wouldn’t receive a fair trial or be subjected to far more brutal interrogation techniques than they would if they were in our custody. Who knows?
80. Diana Powe | April 10th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
kimberly4victory,
If someone’s being a jerk then being a Democrat doesn’t make it okay.
I’m guessing that by “GP” you mean the detention camps in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. How can anyone say anything meaningful given the secrecy? However, I would rather doubt that even truthful statements made by people at Guantanamo, years after their seizure, has much relevance to anything that is happening today.
I would agree that sending prisoners to other countries does pose the risks you describe. That is why this country’s policy of rendition is such an abomination. It also points out the need for a better international framework to deal with non-state-actors.