The discussion over waterboarding is tortuous

Evan Perez in the Wall Street Journal reports that Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey won’t go on the record as condemning waterboarding until he has the facts – like a judge should say in public;

Though the support of several important senators is on the line, Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey declined to say if he considers an interrogation technique that simulates drowning to be torture and therefore illegal, though he called the procedure “repugnant.”

In a letter responding to questions from Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Mukasey promised to review the interrogation methods used by the government to ensure they comply with the law, adding that if he finds anything illegal he would “rescind or correct any legal opinion of the Department of Justice that supports use of the technique.”

A White House official defended the response provided by Mr. Mukasey because “he has not been briefed on classified programs. He’s a judge — and as any good judge knows, you need to have facts to make determinations.”

Of course, this has sent the Left into hyperspace. The Washington Post reports Congressional reaction in Mukasey Losing Democrats’ Backing;

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has so far refused to schedule a vote on Mukasey’s nomination. All four Democratic senators running for president said before the release of Mukasey’s letter yesterday evening that they will vote against him because of his handling of the waterboarding issue.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), the Democratic front-runner, said yesterday that “we cannot send a signal that the next attorney general in any way condones torture or believes that the president is unconstrained by law.” Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), a member of the Judiciary panel, issued similar statements.

Technorati will lead you to one-line posts like “If it’s repugnant, it’s torture,…” and “Looks like torture to me.” Deep thoughts all. I think that sucking the brains out of a child who is 3/4 birthed is repugnant, too, but I’m pretty sure the Left wouldn’t let me call it torture. Watching The View or Keith Olberman “looks” like torture to me.

Trolling the “my brother waterboarded me” post at the Democratic Underground yesterday, I stumbled over this nugget;

PearliePoo2 (258 posts)

Mon Oct-29-07 06:58 AM Response to Original message

is that it’s a little “head dunking” Bullshit Apparently heart attacks DO happen and the victim is revived (sometimes) only to be subjected to it again and again. I think read that the head is inclined down and arms and legs are strapped tight.

I’d be interested to learn where this particular member got the information that torturees have actually had heart attacks while being waterboarded – I’m pretty certain there’s no information available to the public that would support that contention. Reviving a person from a heart attack should be so easy that a potentially valuable asset can go through the process repeatedly – completely immature. It’s probably more of a fantasy he/she had during a bout of the Bush Derangement Syndrome – or saw in a movie once. 

I’m not sure what, exactly the Left is trying to accomplish by even having this discussion. I’d like to think they’re just blinded by their own guilt-ridden consciences, but unfortunately, that’s probably not the answer.

The answer is probably closer to the fact that waterboarding is a painless way to extract information from recalcitrant thugs who want to kill, or facilitate the killing, of innocent people – it works, and it’s leading us to victory over the blood-drenched thugs. That’s as good a reason as any for the Left to call for ending it. They haven’t had many victories against the people who are fighting and winning this war, so I guess they’re happy when they can score little victories that hamstring that thin red line that stands between us and the thugs.

I’d like to know what the Left considers acceptable by the Bush Administration to extract information that saves American lives from hardcases. A stern expression? Witholding their daily ration of lowfat mocca latte? Making them read the Washington Times instead of the Washington Post?

Just as in every other discussion we have with the Left, we can be sure their answer to the question would begin with “I don’t know, but….” They’ve got plenty of ideas about what the Bush administration CAN’T do, but none that are helpful.

I predicted two months ago that President Bush will finish his term without an actual fulltime Attorney General because the Left will make it too hard for him to get one through the advice and consent process. That prediction is coming true.

Category: Politics, Terror War