Karl Rove On Hannity Responds To Obama

[freein2339]

Karl Rove along with Dickhead Cheney should be in fucking jail for all the crimes against the country they committed...rove should just shut the fuck up and hope the Feds don't lock his ass up....

[4u2b1ib12]

Carl, "Chucky," Rove. Why are you stumbling your words? Your listless neigh harks a retched past. What is the matter, Chucky?

Let me guess...

Highchair crybaby, sitting on a lie.

Somebody's asking made you cry.

Changing laws, you will deny?

Take your turn, and say goodbye.

Sean Hannity, change the hair.

Straight back, movie star.

It is not about policy disagreement, the law takes precedent. Chucky, is acknowledging the Bush administration circumvented, and undermined our laws.

No-Way!

[klegster]

Lies, Lies, ouch the torture of the lies, please I give up, I will talk!

[neilrpf]

Hell yes.. let's jail all those evil nazis. Who needs em anyway; especially now that our fashionable president goes all over the world apologizing for our sins and sucking up to lunatic dictators. No more secrets and yes, treat the peace loving freedom fighters with dignity. Let's release them all now and hey, if they plow into another building or blow up a major American city, we can puff out our chest and proclaim by God, at least we didn't torture anybody. That's what is important.

[turdmonster]

1. Are we a country of laws or not? Torture is against the law (thats why the GOP has been claiming waterboarding is NOT torture), so shouldnt the guilty be prosecuted?  If we are NOT a country of laws, then yes, we are a banana republic, Mr. Rove.

2. If it's wrong to prosecute over "policy differences", then why does Fox give so much air time to the teabaggers who want to impeach Obama? What impeachable offense has Obama done? Seems to be they want to impeach him over policy differences.

[LukeEricRowdy]

So shall we go back and prosecute Bill Clinton for not killing Bin Laden in one of the 9 chances he had to do so. How about Woodrow Wilson for false imprisonment of 175,000 American's. How about FDR for doing the same to Japanize American citizens.

As for Obama, try the first amendment, Article 1 section 10 and if I had a about 10,000 more lines of to explain his trashing of the Constitution it still would not be enough.

[turdmonster]

These "9 chances" are a fabrication, and the one time Clinton fired missiles at Bin Laden, the GOP criticized him for it.

I don't see what part of the 1st amendment, or the states rights clause Obama has broken. I suspect if you look hard enough you can find evidence that Bush did similar things to what you claim Obama is doing.

Torture is wrong. The Soviets did it, the Khmer Rouge did it, etc. How can we claim any kind of moral superiority if we do the same evil deeds?

[machalot]

1. It's not settled law that waterboarding is torture. To prosecute people now for holding that opinion in the past is unconstitutional.

2. For the same reason all the networks have given airtime to people who want to impeach Bush and Cheney for war crimes: speech is free and important. Neither Bush nor Obama should be impeached, so let's air the reasons people think they should be, and then defeat them in a debate.

[turdmonster]

The memos imply that the Bush administration knew it was torture (thus the attempts by various members of his staff to destroy them all).

Seems to me all physical coercion other than imprisonment and questioning is torture. In other words, if it causes physical pain it is torture. I guess it's not settled law that electric shock is torture, so. . . you're cool with that too?

[machalot]

"Seems to me"? That's hardly a robust legal argument. You are only diluting the definition of torture so to trivialize true torture. That's like Warren Sapp calling a football game "war"--remember how silly he felt in light of the real deadly violence going on overseas?

And who said anything about electric shock?

[turdmonster]

Waterboarding isn't torture? Then it would be OK for local law enforcement to use it, and it'll streamline our legal system: all trials will be reduced to confessions by the accused.

You have nothing to fear if you are innocent? The torturers don't know you're innocent-- they think you're guilty, and will keep waterboarding (183 times?) until you give them what they already know must be the truth.

If it's not torture, WHY did we prosecute the Japanese for doing it as a war crime in WW2?

[machalot]

That's just silly--it's an enhanced interrogation technique, reserved for the only a handful of the most important prisoners.

By the way, it's also used as part of the training of some US soldiers to teach them resistance against interrogation.  Should the training officers be indicted for torture?

You're certainly entitled to argue that it's torture, but it's not *obvious* or universally accepted as such. So don't act like it is.

[turdmonster]

Again, why did we prosecute Japanese soldiers for waterboarding as a war crime?

"Enhanced interrogation" is a wonderful euphemism, but torture is torture. When did "interrogation" involve holding someone down and trying to drown them?

US soldiers who were waterboarded at the hands of the Japanese called it torture. US soldiers who undergo it as part of training do so voluntarily, that's a big difference (and for you to use that as a strawman argument is truly silly.)

[machalot]

The details of how and why it is administered are important in determining whether it is torture.

Your personal opinion of what is torture is far more broad than most people's.

[turdmonster]

Ahhhh. . . I get it, when the US does it, it's not torture (but if when Soviets or Japan did it, THEN it was torture).

Your personal opinion of what constitutes torture is far more forgiving than most people. Most people with morals anyway.

I suggest you have someone waterboard you and see how you feel. I bet they can get you to admit to all sorts of crimes you didn't commit.

Inasmuch as ye have done unto the least of these, my bretheren, ye have done it unto me. -- Matthew 25:40

[machalot]

Yep, that's exactly what I said--anything the US does is automatically right. Psh.

That's how to win a debate: "Anyone who disagrees with me has no morals."

[turdmonster]

I never said anyone who disagrees with me has no morals, but I do question your morals, and with good reason: calling waterboarding "enhanced interrogation" is like calling a bloody brawl "exercise", or a leg amputation "weight loss."

Administering torture under close supervision is still torture. Strict rules of how/when to do it don't somehow make it "humane"; the act itself remains brutally the same, with rules or without.

[machalot]

You clearly implied it. It's very unbecoming of you to turn policy disagreements into questioning the personal character and morals of people you have never met.

Your obsession with analogies to euphemism only begs the question.

I didn't say the presence of supervision means it's not torture. I said there are various ways to implement the procedure of waterboarding, and the details of why and how are important in determining whether it is torture.

[turdmonster]

"the details of why and how are important in determining whether it is torture. "

Like I said, either it's torture or it's not, and you are admitting here that in some circumstances it IS torture, so I don't see how "circumstances" suddenly make it NOT torture; the water doesn't know the circumstances. You can dress it up in double-speak but in the end the act is the same whether you follow some invented protocol or not.

If you want the US to torture, just admit it and stop playing games.

[machalot]

Your false dichotomy is undermining your argument. The procedure can be applied for different durations, different intensity, for different reasons, at different angles, with different effects on the subject.

[turdmonster]

You seem to be thinking of this as some esoteric concept, rather than as a real physical act. I suggest you imagine yourself being held down by unknown men in a prison, shackled, and with water being forced down your throat.

Put yourself there.

I don't see any intensity or duration where that isn't torture, with the exception of them using a squirt gun instead of a bucket or hose.

"Different reasons"? Like. . . instead of for extracting information, for punishment or revenge?

[machalot]

This must be discussed that way because torture is a legal and philosophical concept with vague boundaries.

Yes, those are some examples of different reasons. American interrogators were prohibited from using it for punishment or revenge. They were only allowed to use it to extract information of the highest value from the most resistant captives.

[turdmonster]

I can't see waterboarding working unless it crosses a threshold of terror, a suspect isn't going to give info unless he's in real pain and mortal fear; that is torture.

I think torture is morally wrong under any circumstance. You disagree.

It is also unconstitutional. If we give the govt that power, and deny that it IS torture, who's next? Rove maybe? No thanks.

I don't want any president to have that power. Ironically THAT is the real road to the dictatorship that Rove is afraid of.

[chilliard81]

Karl Rove: Idiot.

How can you compare the authorization of torture as merely a "policy difference". Yes Karl, how dare they investigate potential illegal action that you denied the entire time you were in office. If it wasn't wrong why didn't you just tell the public you were in fact torturing people? If it's okay, don't hide it right?

[jprithvi]

lol geesh

[ODDMANtheone]

Word is they have to back the camera up about ten feet from Karl's nose whenever he appears on television.

[AwarEtec]

Its not just a Policy decision of the previous adminit is an abomination that must be corrected immediately nazi Karl Rove wants to own all his dirty little secrets but he will not allow anyone to be held responsible their circumvention of the law. In other words, if he says its ok to break the law for a good reason, then you can continue to torture people to hell and you are fine. This will not stop until someone is brought to account.